Imagine a powder keg, primed to explode. That's the current situation between Ethiopia and Eritrea. The risk of renewed conflict in this already volatile region is shockingly high, and the potential consequences are devastating. The Global Peace Index (GPI) consistently flags this relationship as one of the most dangerous in the world, and recent events suggest that peace is hanging by a thread.
Why is this happening? Renewed aggressive rhetoric, geopolitical positioning, and, most importantly, unresolved underlying issues are reigniting old tensions. Ethiopia's desperate push for direct access to the Red Sea is the main catalyst. Ethiopian leaders are framing this access as an “existential matter,” even hinting at military action to secure the southern port of Assab if diplomacy fails. A war over this could severely disrupt global maritime traffic, put Red Sea port infrastructure at risk, and potentially involve outside powers with vested interests in the region. And this is the part most people miss: It could further destabilize an area already struggling with multiple crises.
To understand the current danger, we need to look at the history. The recent tensions are rooted in the aftermath of the northern Ethiopia war (2020–2022) and Ethiopia’s long-held desire for sea access. Ethiopia has even formally accused Eritrea at the UN of actively preparing for war and collaborating with non-state actors to destabilize the country. These accusations have only intensified tensions and led to renewed military mobilization along the border.
These factors – frustration over sea access, unresolved border disputes, and the lingering effects of internal Ethiopian conflicts – are creating a dangerous environment. Even a miscalculation, an unintended escalation, could trigger renewed hostilities. The GPI 2025 highlights Ethiopia and Eritrea as one of the top four global dyads at the highest risk of rapid and severe escalation. This assessment is based on structural factors like historical grievances, unresolved border demarcation, persistent militarization, and the legacy of past wars.
But here's where it gets controversial: Ethiopia's internal instability is a major risk multiplier. The GPI 2025 emphasizes that Ethiopia's internal conflicts significantly increase the overall risk profile. While the conflict in the northern region ended with a peace agreement, violence continues in other parts of the country, such as Amhara and Oromia, resulting in loss of life, displacement, and disruption of essential services. Ethiopia ranks 138th out of 163 countries in the GPI 2025, making it one of the least peaceful nations globally and the lowest-ranked in Africa. This reflects deteriorations across multiple indicators, including ongoing conflict, safety and security concerns, and heightened political instability.
Domestic conflict can weaken state institutions, strain security forces, and create opportunities for armed groups to operate more freely. In such situations, border management becomes more difficult, and political attention shifts inward, increasing the likelihood that unresolved issues with neighboring states will resurface. The Ethiopia–Eritrea relationship is particularly prone to these dynamics. Eritrea, while experiencing less internal armed conflict, still faces challenges related to militarization, political stability, and relations with surrounding states. The combination of two low-ranking states sharing a long and historically contested border contributes to the dyad’s fragility.
The GPI's risk assessment doesn't reflect active hostilities, but highlights the vulnerability of relationships where peace heavily depends on political decisions, external pressures, and the capacity of institutions to manage tensions. These developments significantly increase the probability of miscalculation and destabilizing escalation.
If tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea were to escalate further, the consequences would be severe and far-reaching:
- Humanitarian risk: Given the history of mass displacement, destruction, and civilian harm during past wars, especially the 2020–2022 conflict in northern Ethiopia, renewed conflict could trigger a large-scale humanitarian crisis, with displacement, food insecurity, and refugee flows across borders. For instance, a new conflict could overwhelm existing refugee camps in neighboring countries, creating a regional humanitarian disaster.
- Regional instability: Conflict over access to the Red Sea could draw in external actors, including neighboring countries and Gulf and Red Sea powers with strategic interests in maritime routes, trade, and security. This could lead to a proxy war, further destabilizing the entire Horn of Africa.
- Economic disruption: A conflict around major seaports such as Assab would jeopardize maritime trade lanes, impacting not only Ethiopia but global shipping, imports, and regional economies dependent on stable trade flows. Imagine the impact on global supply chains if a major Red Sea port is shut down due to conflict!
- Peace-building setbacks: Renewed war would risk unraveling fragile gains made since the 2018 rapprochement and the 2022 peace accord, setting back efforts for reconciliation, regional cooperation, and long-term stability. The progress made in recent years would be completely erased, leaving the region even more vulnerable.
This is a complex situation with no easy answers. But what do you think? Is Ethiopia justified in seeking access to the Red Sea, even if it means risking conflict? Can Eritrea be blamed for the tensions, or is Ethiopia the aggressor? And what role should the international community play in preventing a war between these two nations? Share your thoughts and opinions in the comments below!
