Border Tensions and Proxy Dynamics: Assessing the Eritrea-Ethiopia Security Threat

By African Security Analysis (ASA)

Recent developments indicate that tensions between Eritrea and Ethiopia are escalating, raising concerns over the potential for renewed hostilities in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia’s ruling Prosperity Party recently accused unspecified external actors of attempting to provoke conflict—a charge it has frequently levelled in ways that implicitly implicate Eritrea. These tensions are rooted in the unresolved dynamics following the conclusion of the Tigray conflict, a devastating war in which Ethiopia and Eritrea fought as allies despite a historically fraught bilateral relationship.

Eritrea’s Exclusion and Bilateral Frictions

Eritrea was not included in the peace agreement that formally ended the Tigray conflict, a sidelining that Asmara interpreted as an attempt by Ethiopia to diminish Eritrea’s regional influence. Since then, both states have reportedly engaged in asymmetric tactics to destabilize one another, supporting opposition and dissident factions across borders. Compounding these tensions, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s public statements asserting Addis Ababa’s historical claims to Eritrea’s port city of Assab, coupled with a stated strategic need for sea access, have further inflamed bilateral relations.

Internal Fragmentation and Proxy Alignments

Adding complexity to the Eritrea-Ethiopia dynamic is the fragmentation of the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF). The once-cohesive organization has divided into two primary factions, one reportedly aligned with Addis Ababa and the other with Asmara. ASA sources indicate that this internal Tigrayan power struggle has the potential to catalyse direct confrontation between Ethiopia and Eritrea, particularly if local factions seek external support from their respective state sponsors.

Military Posturing and Regional Risk

Both nations have reportedly accelerated military preparations along the Eritrea-Ethiopia border near Assab, deploying armed drones, missile systems, air defence units, armoured vehicles, and other modern military assets. ASA analysis notes that the deterioration in the relationship between Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and President Isaias Afwerki appears “beyond repair,” raising the spectre of rapid escalation.

Despite these alarming indicators, sources suggest that the likelihood of full-scale war remains uncertain. Ethiopia’s military continues to face significant operational strain due to ongoing insurgencies in the Amhara and Oromo regions, which limit its capacity for a sustained large-scale conflict. Similarly, Eritrean and Tigrayan stakeholders may lack either the strategic will or capability to engage in a protracted war, though the precarious convergence of internal and cross-border tensions creates a high-risk environment.

Strategic Implications

ASA assessment identifies several potential outcomes and risks:

1. High Miscalculation Risk: The combination of territorial disputes, proxy alignments, and militarized borders significantly increases the probability that a misstep—intentional or accidental—could trigger broader hostilities.

2. Regional Instability: Renewed Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict could destabilize the Horn of Africa, impacting Sudan, Djibouti, and the wider Red Sea corridor, with significant implications for regional trade and maritime security.

3. Humanitarian Considerations: Escalation would exacerbate an already fragile humanitarian situation, particularly in border areas and Tigray, where civilians remain highly vulnerable.

4. International Mediation Prospects: ASA notes that external actors, including IGAD, the African Union, and Gulf states, will face significant challenges in conflict prevention due to entrenched mistrust between Addis Ababa and Asmara.

Conclusion

While the probability of immediate large-scale war between Eritrea and Ethiopia remains debated, ASA analysis underscores that the strategic environment is exceptionally volatile. Historical grievances, internal factionalism, and military posturing combine to create a scenario in which miscalculation could rapidly escalate into armed confrontation. Close monitoring and preventive diplomacy remain critical to mitigate the risk of destabilization in the Horn of Africa.