For much of the outside world, Ethiopia and Eritrea are too often understood primarily through the narrow framework of political separation, war, and modern state borders. But for those of us who lived the social, cultural, and historical realities before that rupture, the truth is far deeper and more interconnected.
I grew up in a time when Ethiopians and Eritreans were not viewed as fundamentally separate peoples, but as members of a shared national and civilizational fabric. We lived together, learned together, built families together, traded together, and participated in the same public life without perceiving one another as foreign communities.
Eritreans served in high government offices, military leadership, business, and civil society throughout Ethiopia. Families were interwoven. Friendships crossed all regional lines. The distinction that dominates political discourse today was far less visible in daily life.
Even now, many Ethiopians continue to view Eritreans not as permanent outsiders, but as deeply connected kin whose separation was political, not civilizational. Borders may divide governments, but they do not erase generations of shared identity. This historical reality matters profoundly when considering the future of the city of Assab, the Red Sea, and the broader strategic trajectory of the Horn of Africa.
For Ethiopia, access to the sea is not a luxury. It is a strategic necessity. With a population exceeding 120 million people, one of Africa’s oldest continuous civilizations, and a rapidly expanding economy, Ethiopia’s permanent landlocked condition creates severe economic and geopolitical vulnerabilities.
No major nation of Ethiopia’s demographic scale and regional significance can sustainably depend indefinitely on neighboring governments for maritime sovereignty without risking long-term strategic instability.
Assab deeply integrated with Ethiopia
Historically, Assab was not simply adjacent territory. It was deeply integrated into Ethiopia’s national economic infrastructure. During the late nineteenth century, under Emperor Menelik II, Ethiopia pursued modernization and international engagement that relied heavily on secure maritime corridors.
Although Italian colonial interventions later complicated territorial administration, Ethiopia’s long-standing political and practical connection to Red Sea access remained central to its state development. Assab served for decades as one of Ethiopia’s principal maritime lifelines, essential for trade, security, and national growth.
From a legal perspective, Eritrea’s internationally recognized sovereignty since 1993 must be acknowledged. International law recognizes the outcome of Eritrea’s independence referendum and the formal political separation that followed. However, international law is not static, nor does it prohibit negotiated frameworks that adapt to evolving regional necessities.
Around the world, strategic ports, corridors, and transit zones have been governed through long-term lease agreements, shared sovereignty models, economic unions, and international treaties designed to preserve peace while meeting practical geopolitical realities.
This means Ethiopia’s maritime future need not depend solely on rigid interpretations of current borders, nor on military confrontation. It can and should be pursued through lawful diplomacy, negotiated access, regional confederation models, or shared governance arrangements.
The practical case is equally compelling. Ethiopia’s economic growth, industrialization, export needs, and security concerns require stable and scalable maritime infrastructure. Reliance on Djibouti alone creates excessive strategic dependence.
A stronger Ethiopian role in Assab would diversify regional logistics, reduce economic vulnerability, and significantly improve the prosperity of the broader Horn of Africa.
Moreover, Eritrea itself has not fully realized Assab’s immense economic potential under its current governance structure. While Eritrea deserves recognition for avoiding some of the devastating internal armed fragmentation Ethiopia has suffered in recent decades, its political isolation and authoritarian governance have limited broader regional economic integration.
This should not be interpreted as condemnation of Eritrean citizens, but rather as an acknowledgment that more expansive partnership models could better serve both nations.
The future, therefore, requires bold but peaceful imagination. Rather than viewing Ethiopia and Eritrea as permanently estranged, regional leaders should consider broader possibilities: Economic confederation, Joint maritime governance, Shared infrastructure projects, Federal or special union frameworks, Broader Horn of Africa cooperation potentially involving Somaliland and neighboring strategic actors
Such ideas may sound ambitious, but history offers many examples of former divisions giving way to innovative regional partnerships when mutual prosperity outweighs political fragmentation.
This is not a call for forced reunification or imperial conquest. It is a call to reconsider whether the Horn’s current political architecture best serves its peoples’ long-term interests.
The United States, Europe, and other Western powers also have a critical role to play, not by provoking war, but by supporting lawful, diplomatic frameworks that empower regional stability.
Western interests are deeply tied to Red Sea security, trade corridor reliability, and African development. Supporting negotiated Ethiopian operational authority, legal port agreements, or broader regional economic structures would strengthen global shipping security, Counterterrorism stability, African economic development, Western strategic partnerships, and regional peace.
In this sense, Ethiopia’s lawful pursuit of meaningful Red Sea access is not merely a national issue. It is a matter of broader international strategic importance.
As someone who personally experienced the social unity of Ethiopians and Eritreans before political separation, I believe the deepest lesson of our shared history is this: our peoples’ destinies remain interconnected, whether politics fully acknowledges it or not. The question is not whether Ethiopia and Eritrea once functioned with profound unity. They did.
The future should not be dictated solely by past wars, ideological fractures, or inherited political divisions. It should be shaped by historical honesty, legal creativity, strategic realism, and the courage to imagine unity where fragmentation has too long prevailed.
Because, in the end, the people of Ethiopia and Eritrea share more than contested borders. They share history. They share blood. They share destiny.
The author is a former NYC Supreme Court detective and an investigator and educator in conflict resolution, restorative peace, and a moral diplomacy expert. His upcoming book, Moral Diplomacy for a Broken World, is inspired by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks.