Eritrea Goes From Pariah State to Regional Powerbroker

Eritrea Goes From Pariah State to Regional Powerbroker
Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki, center, with Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, president of the Sudanese Transitional Council, at the Khartoum airport in Sudan, May 4, 2021 (AP photo by Marwan Ali).
In early May, when Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki visited Sudan, the official objective of the trip was to strengthen bilateral ties within a regional framework. The visit nevertheless raised eyebrows. It came on the heels of Eritrea’s military participation in Ethiopia’s civil war in Tigray region, and also at a time of rising tensions between Ethiopia and Sudan over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and a border dispute involving areas near Tigray, among other issues. Unofficially, local observers have suggested that Eritrea may seek a role in mediating between Ethiopia and Sudan.

Whatever the actual purpose of Isaias’ visit, it highlighted the degree to which, in the past three years, Eritrea has gone from being an international pariah state to an increasingly visible and influential regional powerbroker in the Horn of Africa. Beginning in 2018, with its normalization of diplomatic relations with Ethiopia and Somalia, and more recently with its military assistance to Ethiopia in Tigray, the secretive, dictatorial state has broken out of the isolation it previously faced.

What does Eritrea seek from its newfound position? To understand that, one must begin with a look at the country’s history since it declared its statehood in May 1993, after a 30-year war for independence from Ethiopia. During that struggle, Isaias’ Eritrean People’s Liberation Front, or EPLF, had made common cause with Meles Zenawi’s fighters from the northern Tigray region, which borders Eritrea, to oust the Ethiopian dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam. At the ceremony celebrating Eritrea’s independence, Isaias and Meles—who had become the prime minister of Ethiopia—both spoke about a future of collaboration, foregrounding the two countries’ commonalities and their shared desire to heal the wounds of the past.

But the two leaders’ statements of unity belied the many differences between Eritrea and Ethiopia regarding their conceptions of the state and what their future relations should look like. They also ignored an important lesson that Eritrea had learned from a history of betrayal: that it could only trust itself, and that any alliance was only to be entered into from a position of strength.

Keep reading for free!

Get instant access to the rest of this article by submitting your email address below. You'll also get access to three articles of your choice each month and our free newsletter:

Or, Subscribe now to get full access.

Already a subscriber? Log in here .

What you’ll get with an All-Access subscription to World Politics Review:

A WPR subscription is like no other resource — it’s like having a personal curator and expert analyst of global affairs news. Subscribe now, and you’ll get:

  • Immediate and instant access to the full searchable library of tens of thousands of articles.
  • Daily articles with original analysis, written by leading topic experts, delivered to you every weekday.
  • Regular in-depth articles with deep dives into important issues and countries.
  • The Daily Review email, with our take on the day’s most important news, the latest WPR analysis, what’s on our radar, and more.
  • The Weekly Review email, with quick summaries of the week’s most important coverage, and what’s to come.
  • Completely ad-free reading.

And all of this is available to you when you subscribe today.

More World Politics Review