The Horn of Africa stands precariously at the edge of escalating chaos amid a complex web of conflict, political strife, and external interference. With Somalia embroiled in conflict, Sudan in turmoil, South Sudan teetering on the brink of all-out war, and Yemen engulfed in a protracted conflict, the region faces a crisis that threatens its stability and future. In this volatile context, Ethiopia’s role takes on critical significance. How Ethiopia navigates its territorial defense, diplomatic engagements, and regional relationships will shape peace or further destabilization in the Horn of Africa.
Ethiopia finds itself in a highly sensitive and strategic position. It is the largest country in the region, with a historical sense of territorial sovereignty deeply ingrained in its national identity. The recent official inauguration of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) has not only asserted Ethiopia’s right to harness its natural resources but has also become a flashpoint in its relations with Egypt. Ethiopia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently delivered a scathing diplomatic rebuke to Cairo, accusing Egypt of destabilizing the region by clinging to a “colonial” monopoly over the Nile waters.
This rhetoric highlights the underlying tension between Ethiopia and Egypt, and by extension, the broader Horn of Africa. Ethiopia portrays Egypt’s stance on the Nile as anchored in an outdated “colonial era mentality,” reflecting Cairo’s insistence on “historical rights” to the river, which runs through multiple sovereign states. Ethiopia argues that this mentality seeks to keep its neighbors fragmented and submissive, effectively prolonging regional underdevelopment and conflict to serve Cairo’s interests.
This harsh diplomatic exchange comes amid fears that the situation could spiral into outright conflict. The Horn is already a powder keg, with multiple ongoing conflicts allowing room for external powers to meddle, complicating peace efforts. Ethiopia must tread carefully: while it must adamantly defend its sovereign rights and territorial integrity, it cannot afford to escalate tensions into war with neighbors like Eritrea or Egypt. Such a war would only deepen regional instability and offer no winners.
Instead, Ethiopia should adopt a firm but measured approach, balancing territorial defense with proactive diplomacy. It should harness the leverage of the GERD as a symbol of national pride and progress but remain open to sincere, inclusive dialogue that respects the rights and concerns of all Nile basin countries. Facilitating equitable Nile water sharing is essential, not only to avoid conflict but also to foster regional cooperation.
Moreover, Ethiopia’s handling of its relationships with its neighbors must be informed by strategic patience and realism. Historical grievances and political rivalries should not escalate into open conflict. Eritrea’s own challenges and the fragile political landscape of the region require that Ethiopia avoid unnecessary aggression, focusing instead on building confidence-building measures and preventing armed confrontations.
The role of external actors is equally vital. The involvement of global powers like the United States, China, Russia, and the European Union can influence the Horn’s trajectory, for better or worse. These powers often pursue their interests under the guise of regional stability, but their interventions can inflame local tensions or exacerbate divisions.
To stabilize the region, external players should act as impartial mediators supporting dialogue and cooperation based on mutual benefit and respect. Their efforts should focus on conflict resolution, infrastructure development, and economic integration rather than power projection or proxy conflicts. For Ethiopia and its neighbors, partnerships with these global powers should be pursued with caution and sovereignty firmly in mind to avoid becoming pawns in larger geopolitical rivalries.
Ethiopia’s ability to maintain peace while asserting itself as a regional power is crucial not only for its own future but for the Horn of Africa at large. If Ethiopia stands firm in defending its territorial and developmental rights without triggering new wars, it can become a stabilizing force amid regional upheaval. This would send a powerful message that sovereignty and progress can coexist with peace and cooperative diplomacy.
In this light, the future of the Horn of Africa hinges on Ethiopia’s strategic choices: to choose a path of responsible assertiveness, prioritizing dialogue over conflict; to resist the colonial-era approaches of dominance over natural resources; and to encourage inclusive regional cooperation while cautiously managing external involvement.
The Horn of Africa could either slip into deeper chaos or move toward a new horizon of stability and shared prosperity. Ethiopia’s stance in the coming months and years will be pivotal. It must remain vigilant yet diplomatic, strong yet measured, defending its land and rights without igniting war. Failure to do so risks perpetuating a cycle of conflict that will engulf not just Ethiopia but the entire fragile region. The opportunity for peace is within reach, but it demands courage, wisdom, and strategic restraint from all Horn of Africa nations—above all from Ethiopia, the region’s cornerstone.
Africa demands its seat at the table. Will it get one?
By Jackson Okata
During the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September, African leaders revived the call for reforming the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to grant Africa a permanent seat on the UN’s top decision-making body. Voices by African leaders are backed by the Global South, the Caribbean, and Eastern European nations, which observe that the UNSC’s current structure is not only outdated but is also marginalizing a continent at the center of today’s global challenges.
In his address, Kenyan President William Ruto called for an end to what he termed an indefensible historical imbalance, stating that the much-needed reforms should guarantee Africa at least two permanent seats on the UNSC.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa warned that the current UNSC structure was entrenching inequality at the expense of global justice. At the same time, Nigerian President Bola Tinubu termed Africa’s exclusion as a credibility crisis for the UN itself.
The US, Russia, China, France, and the UK are the only permanent members of the UNSC, with Africa currently having rotating members on the council in a non-permanent position.
“The stakes are high”
According to Prof. David Kikaya, an international relations expert and council member of the South Eastern Kenya University, a permanent seat on the UNSC would not only amplify Africa’s voice on global security issues but also give the continent leverage in shaping responses to conflicts, climate change, and pandemics.
However, Kikaya warns that Africa cannot push for reforms in the UN on its own.
“The stakes are high for African leaders, and for their quest to succeed, they will need the political and diplomatic goodwill and support of Russia and China’,’ Kikaya told RT.
He notes that China and Russia enjoy huge negotiating powers and global diplomatic influence that African leaders can bank on to push for a permanent seat on the UNSC.
“In the recent past, both China and Russia have shown a soft spot for Africa through investments, and they have proven to be true friends of the continent. They will have no problems with Africa having a permanent seat on the UNSC,” he believes.
“Global body that should grant equal rights to all members”
Dr. Constance Gikonyo, a researcher and senior lecturer at the University of Nairobi, School of Law, argues that “the exclusion of Africa from the UN’s top decision-making body is not just an oversight but structural racism baked into global governance.”
“Since 1945, the UNSC power-sharing model has excluded Africa, home to over 1.4 billion people and a key contributor to global peacekeeping missions,” she told RT.
Dr. Gikonyo says that the UN cannot continue to indulge what she terms as “an outdated system of exclusion”.
“The UN is a global body that should grant equal rights to all members and stop treating African states as visitors or bystanders”, she said.
However, even as Africa seeks greater influence on the UNSC, some analysts argue that internal divisions within the African Union (AU) and conflicts among member states may undermine the continent’s collective effort to present a unified front.
Africa should stop “fighting from within”
Denis Muniu, a policy analyst at the Global Centre for Policy and Strategy, told RT that competing national interests, regional rivalries, and differing alignments with global powers are likely to derail consensus on who would represent Africa on the UNSC if permanent seats were granted.
“We have the Ezulwini Consensus, which is considered Africa’s official position calling for two permanent seats and five non-permanent ones on the UNSC, but AU member states have never agreed on its implementation’‘, noted Muniu.
The Ezulwini Consensus is the African Union’s (AU) common position dating back to 2005, and demands that Africa should be given at least two permanent seats with veto power and five non-permanent seats. It’s named after Ezulwini, a valley in central Eswatini, where the agreement was first made.
Muniu argues that Africa’s quest for more influence on the UNSC will remain largely aspirational unless the continent “stops fighting from within.”
At the same time, Muniu notes that the shifting geopolitical configurations present Africa with new opportunities. He says that with the shrinking Western influence and China and Russia expanding their political and economic footprint in Africa, the global balance of power is tilting toward multipolarity, a dynamic which could strengthen Africa’s bargaining power at the UN, especially if the continent speaks with one voice.
For Africa to succeed in its quest for a permanent place on the UNSC, the continent must first fix its fragmented unity and invest in strategic diplomacy, and then its leaders will be able move from mere rhetoric to coordinated action. Allies such as China and Russia can only step in to help Africa’s push if the continent’s leaders speak in one voice by agreeing on who should represent the continent on the key UN body.
“Both Moscow and Beijing have been consistent in their criticism of the Western powers’ dominance over the UN. Africa has formidable and reliable allies in these two because they will likely push for the restructuring of the UNSC as a strategic win for their own global interests,” Muniu concluded.
