Horn of Africa (HoA) region has long been a theatre of instability and persistent conflicts, often exacerbated by expansionist policies of Ethiopia and unwarranted external influences. It is, by all measures, agreed though that HoA is, more than any time before, entangled in a tapestry web of insecurity where a multiple of intrastate conflicts are simultaneously raging with an unprecedented intensity and scope, in addition to the impending interstate wars and/or political crises threatening the already fragile peace in the region and beyond. As a someone intimately involved from the initial stages of the 2018 Tripartite Agreement between Somalia-Eritrea-Ethiopia, which, to my view, held significant promises to address these issues, I am reminded of the crucial opportunity we missed with the tripartite agreement. This accord, which could have fostered cooperation and mitigate conflicts stands as a stark reminder of what could have been, implying that the failure of the international community to fully grasp the significance of the tripartite agreement and provide full support was an epic historical mistake.
However, this oversight could be partly attributed to the misinformation and/or the disinformation reaching the capitals of the big and middle powers about the agreement by the so-called regional experts and their Think-tank enablers and/or agencies, leading to the misunderstandings about the agreement’s rewards and benefits to the region and beyond. The missed opportunity underscores the importance of respecting home-grown diplomatic ideas and solutions to address local problems as these solutions are deeply rooted in the cultural, social and historical contexts of the countries involved. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that the necessity, which brought about the tripartite agreement stemmed from the fact that the sub-regional organization of IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development) had evolved into an instrument serving the interest of specific member states within the region, rather than functioning as an impartial mediator. This bias undermined IGAD’s credibility and effectiveness in resolving conflicts and fostering cooperation. Consequentially, countries involved in the tripartite agreement were left no option but to try and forge a new mechanism to find an everlasting solution for their problems. Therefore, the tripartite agreement was deemed essential to re-establish a balanced and equitable framework for addressing sub-regional issues, ensuring that all parties’ concern were fairly represented and collaborative efforts were genuinely geared towards stability and development rather than the dominance of particular national agenda.
In September 2018, the leaders of Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia have signed a tripartite agreement aiming at fostering lasting peace and stability through a framework of regional cooperation in the HoA countries. Although this initiative was originated by the then Somali government under the leadership of President Mohamed A. Farmaajo, at a time when Ethiopia was under the EPRDF rule, envisioning the necessity of cooperative framework between the HoA countries as the sole mechanism to address and resolve the persistent conflicts and instability in the HoA, yet the agreement come into being following the ground breaking peace agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea after two decades of conflict. Hopes were high in the HoA region as the tripartite agreement was initially considered to mark a new era of a genuine regional cooperation and collective security with the potential to significantly mitigate the risk of conflicts and instability perpetuating. This was particularly significant because it is initiated by Somali, Eritrea and Ethiopia – three countries with the most complex histories and strained relationships in the region. The leaders—Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, Eritrea’s President Isaias Afwerki, and Somalia’s President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed—envisioned a new chapter of cooperation that could transform the region’s geopolitical landscape and beyond.
The overarching goal of the tripartite agreement was to serve as a foundational step towards a broader regional integration encompassing all of HoA states, boldly aiming to transcend the perpetuated security and economic challenges facing the entire region by fostering a united front that could effectively address and mitigate conflicts across the entire region. hence, the objectives of the agreement included to facilitate trade, investment, and infrastructure development between the HoA countries to boost the economies of these countries; to jointly combat terrorism, inter-state and intra-state conflicts, piracy, political instability, humanitarian crises and human trafficking, and enhancing regional security. However, despite the early optimism about the tripartite agreement, two main challenges hindered the realization of agreement’s goals including divergent political agendas by, for example, the Ethiopian leadership, which made it difficult to sustain the spirit of cooperation envisioned by the three leaders and the HoA’s strategic location, which has attracted the interests of various external world powers, each with its own agendas and interest, complicating efforts at genuine cooperation.
the foresaw benefits of the tripartite agreement included the potential for mitigating both intrastate and interstate conflicts stretching from Sudan to Somalia and anything in between. The agreement was aimed at establishing coherent-home-grown strategies with the goal to diplomatically and economically cooperate between the HoA nations to create a more cohesive regional bloc capable of mediating warring parties and also preventing future conflicts in the region. Had this agreement successfully implemented, it is believed that this inclusive vision hold the potential to prevent the then looming conflict in Sudan before it blown up into civil war. Even if the war in Sudan couldn’t have been prevented, a timely implementation of this agreement prior to the Sudan’s civil war broke out, the joint effort of the countries in the region could have played a pivotal role in lessening the spill over effect of the war on South Sudan by providing structured and supportive regional framework that could help to better manage the economic and security challenges posed by its northern neighbour’s instability. Another important potential benefit of this agreement could have been to resolutely try in resolving the bloody multiple- intrastate conflicts currently raging in Ethiopia, as well as dissuading Ethiopian government in violating the.
sovereignty and terrestrial integrity of Somalia where in violation of international and regional laws and norms, Ethiopia signed an illegal agreement with Somaliland region of Somalia, inadvertently bolstered Al-Shabaab recruitment potential and gave Al-Shabaab with a narrative to exploit disenchanted Somali youth, portraying the MoU as an evidence of external interference and a threat to national sovereignty and territorial integrity, thereby attracting individuals disillusioned by the current shaky political landscape in the country to join their ranks. Obviously, along the Tripartite agreement, there have been bilateral agreements between the nation in region. Nevertheless, these bilateral agreements were meticulously crafted to align with the overarching goals outlined in the tripartite agreement, meant to reflect a unified commitment to fostering enduring peace and stability in the Horn of Africa region. The bilateral agreements, while tailored to address specific bilateral concerns and opportunities, they were designed to complement and reinforce the principles set forth in the tripartite agreement, including but not limited to, economic cooperation – free movement of goods and services, easing travel restriction, developing critical infrastructure (ports and key highways), and jointly tackling security challenges. This strategic alignment was intended not only address the immediate bilateral interests of the countries involved but also to contribute to the broader regional stability. The synchronized efforts to uphold these agreements at the beginning demonstrated a collective dedication to overcoming historical grievances and promoting cooperative relationship, ultimately aiming to create a more secure and prosperous Horn of Africa. This failed attempt to foster an integrated approach underscored the commitment of Somalia and Eritrea to work collaboratively towards a sustainable peace, reflecting their shared vision for a stable and harmonious region.
After the initial stages is grounded, the agreement was intended to establish regional conflict resolution mechanisms, providing a platform for dialogue and mediation and helping to reduce the potential of security and political crises in the HoA region. Most importantly, a strong tripartite alliance could present a unified stance among the HoA states in international affairs, reducing the ability of external powers to exert undue influence on the individual country or to take advantage of the social, economic and/or political weaknesses of these countries. By negotiating as a bloc, HoA countries would have been able to better protect their interests and assert greater control over their political, social and economic destinies, reducing dependency on any single external power by engaging with a broader range of international actors to balance external influences and pursue more independent policies.
Without being simplistic, I believe that in collaboration with other Red Sea littoral states, such as Yemen, this agreement had the potential to significantly enhance the security of the Gulf of Aden maritime route – one of the most important chock points in the world – by facilitating a comprehensive regional security framework with other Red Sea littoral states – particularly Yemen – to synchronize their coastal guard efforts, paving the way for a more secured Bab al-Mandab Strait with which its benefits extend beyond the immediate borders of the Red Sea littoral countries. Additionally, not only the politically unstable countries in the region would have benefitted from the successful implementation of the tripartite agreement but relatively stable countries in the East African countries such as Kenya and Uganda would have also immensely benefited from it as this agreement would have created a more conducive environment for regional trade, hence, increased regional stability would have attracted more foreign investment into East African countries in general, and Kenya and Uganda in particular due to their institutional capacity, further bolstering their economies. In essence, the tripartite agreement would have fostered a more stable, secure and economically vibrant greater HoA region, directly benefiting region’s economic growth and security landscape.
In conclusion, in all measures, it is believed that the failure to implement the tripartite agreement represented a major missed opportunity to address some of the HoA’s most pressing issues – conflicts and economic challenges facing by all countries in the region, hence, the tripartite agreement envisioned to create a more cooperated regional economy to stimulate economic growth, create jobs, and reduce poverty through the development of infrastructure projects, such as roads and ports to improve connectivity and facilitate trade, without violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of any nation. The fact that the tripartite was deliberately derailed by both political miscalculations of one of the initial member states as well as an undue foreign interference have contributed the non-state actors such as Al-Shabaab to take advantage. A coherent-homegrown agreement between the HoA countries undoubtedly holds significant promise for addressing the deep-rooted issues of political instability, insecurity, trust deficit, economic decline, and undue external influences in the HoA. However, it is recognisably clear that in order to realize the potential benefits of such an agreement, all stakeholders must have a genuine interest in the success of such an agreement, requiring a sustained commitment and willingness from all stakeholders to overcome historical grievances, political distortions and undue foreign interferences. If these conditions are met, a coherent and homegrown HoA agreement could mark a turning point in the quest for peace and development in this troubled region.
_______________________________________________________________
Author: Mr. Balal Mohamed Cusman, Former State Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Development of Somalia.
Email: [email protected]
X: @BalalCusman
