[ad_1]
The humanitarian agencies and the international community rightly condemned the growing conflict in Ethiopia as a Humanitarian disasterIn November last year, conflict broke out between the federal government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), which is the governor of the Northern Tigray Region. The party, the party dominated Ethiopian politics until it was marginalized by Abiy.Nearly 10 months later, the conflict turned into a De facto civil warAs the fighting spread throughout the country, famine, mass refugees, civilian deaths and sexual assaults, and fear of ethnic cleansing followed.
Because the Tigray crisis caused so much death and destruction, people paid too little attention to the possibility of the second deadly conflict engulfing Ethiopia, which originated from Increasing tension With neighboring Sudan. Although the details are sometimes complicated and technical, at its core, the brewing conflict between Sudan and Ethiopia has one of the most basic motives: control of land and water.
The land dispute between the two countries can be traced back to more than a century, and the boundary delimitation agreement between the two countries was a colonial era agreement. The biggest dispute occurred on a piece of land called al-Fashqa, which both countries claimed to be their own land. The most recent settlement of a territorial dispute was in 2008, when Ethiopia, led by TPLF, agreed to recognize Sudan’s formal sovereignty over the region in exchange for Sudan, led by long-time dictator Omar al-Bashir, to allow Ethiopian settlers to stay in the region. . However, since then, both governments have collapsed and an agreement has been reached with them.When the Ethiopian army moved from defending al-Fashqa to fighting in Tigray, the Sudanese army Move back Enter the area.
The risk of war against al-Fashqa is serious. Twenty years ago, a similar dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea over the border areas of low commercial value led to a bloody war between the two countries. The resolution of this conflict is what allowed Abi to win the Nobel Peace Prize, and many people now regret awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize. Even if Abi is inclined to enter into similar negotiations on al-Fashqa-so far, he has not shown any sign that he will do so-he may not have much say in easing tensions. The Ethiopian settlers of al-Fashqa mainly belong to the Amhara ethnic group, and their militia is one of the most fierce pro-Abi forces opposed to TPLF in the current Ethiopian crisis. The Amharans, who have long complained about their land being occupied by other groups, are trying to use the Tigray War to reclaim the territory in Ethiopia and along the border with Sudan. They are dissatisfied with past agreements on land without their consent.
The Sudanese military has always insisted on defending its control of the territory. Sudan’s Interim Prime Minister Abdullah Hamdok was recently quoted during a visit to al-Fashqa: “We hope that we have good relations with Ethiopia, but we I will not give up an inch of Sudan’s land.” Tens of thousands of refugees poured into Sudan from Tigray, and many of them arrived at al-Fashqa, which exacerbated tensions. The border dispute remains unstable, and a deadly clash between the Sudanese army and the Ethiopian militia broke out earlier this year.
At the same time, a so far non-violent but possibly larger conflict is brewing, vying for control of the Nile. After 10 years of construction, Ethiopia has begun to fill the reservoir of the Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Ethiopia claims that the GERD project is one of the largest hydroelectric power generation facilities in the world and is necessary to meet the country’s growing energy needs. On the other hand, the downstream countries Sudan and Egypt warned that the interruption of the flow of the Nile would be devastating. Khartoum and Cairo asked Ethiopia to share information with them and coordinate the control of the dam operation, which Ethiopia regarded as a request that violated its sovereignty.
Abiy is still difficult to resolve, and the Tigray crisis seems to only strengthen his determination to refuse to negotiate or compromise on GERD. Sudan and Egypt have formally sought political and legal ways to resolve their disputes, calling on the UN Security Council and the African Union to intervene.However, even more ominous is that both countries hint If a peaceful solution cannot be achieved, military actions may be on the table. Earlier this year, Sudan and Egypt held a joint military exercise, naming the exercise “Guardians of the Nile.” Although Egypt may lose more due to the interruption of access to the Nile, which supplies almost all of the country’s water, Sudan is close to Ethiopia, so any fight over GERD may occur between the Sudanese and Ethiopian forces, especially considering the other The source of tension along the border of one party.
So far, there are signs that the relationship between Khartoum and Addis Ababa is deteriorating.Hamdok Provide mediation The negotiations between TPLF and the Abi government were rejected by Ethiopian officials as “untrustworthy”, which led to Sudan’s second recall of its ambassador to Ethiopia this year. Although the two sides seem to be reluctant to compromise on GERD or al-Fashqa, with the confrontation between the two countries, war is far from inevitable. Recently, Sudan reported that the Ethiopian dam did not have a negative impact on the annual flooding of the Nile River in Sudan. This is good news for Sudanese and those who are committed to maintaining peace between the two countries, because it allows more time to negotiate a permanent solution. And, at least in theory, an agreement can be reached on al-Fashqa to restore the status quo of the “soft” border in 2008, allowing residents of Sudan and Ethiopia to use the land.
More generally, every country is in a precarious situation, creating mixed motives for conflict.Abiy is responding to the Tigray crisis that is steadily out of control, and Hamdok’s transitional government is trying to Rebuilding Sudan’s political institutions Before the elections scheduled for 2024. Although the leaders of every country may want to view the weakness of their opponents as an opportunity to launch an attack, the leaders of Khartoum and Addis Ababa are likely to view their precarious position as avoiding new large-scale conflicts. Reasons, if possible. Turkey has been strengthening relations with Sudan and Ethiopia, and it has become the latest country to act as the mediator between the two countries in the al-Fashqa dispute. Ethiopia has invited Algeria to play a role in the GERD negotiations.
The two sides are far apart. So far, neither Ethiopia nor Sudan has offered many ways to compromise, but the two countries may soon realize that neither party can afford the risks involved in a major conflict between them. Although it is not clear whether the Ethiopian and Sudanese governments are aware of this, whether it is with the assistance of Turkey, Algeria, the African Union or other entities, it is the best and the safest to resolve the issue through negotiation. s Choice.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
[ad_2]
Source link