Mulugeta Gebregziabher, PhD

Rejoinder to “Renewed Tigray tensions raise fears of Ethiopia-Eritrea war”.  1/2 The DW Africa article “Renewed Tigray tensions raise fears of Ethiopia-Eritrea war” by Nicolas Fischer presents a familiar narrative that leans heavily on selective sourcing, questionable “expert” voices, and a tendency to frame complex political dynamics in Ethiopia through a narrow, alarmist lens. While the Horn of Africa unquestionably remains fragile, the piece risks misinforming readers by overstating the causes of the immediacy of war against Tigray/Eritrea and under-examining the regional and internal dynamics shaping the actions of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government. First, the credibility and balance of sources are troubling. The article relies in part on commentary from a “former VOA journalist” who has been widely criticized for partisan positioning and whose YouTube media platform has faced allegations of financial ties to political actors affiliated with the ousted Tigray Interim Regional Administration led by Tadesse Worede (TIRA#2). I believe that responsible journalism demands transparency and balance when presenting politically entangled voices as neutral analysts. Instead, DW amplifies these perspectives without sufficient scrutiny, allowing speculative claims, particularly regarding imminent escalation to war caused by the reinstatement of the Tigray government, to pass as informed assessment. This risks turning analysis into advocacy. Second, the article exaggerates the likelihood of near-term war between Ethiopia and Eritrea by overlooking the significant domestic, regional and international constraints facing Addis Ababa. Abiy Ahmed’s government has indeed used nationalist rhetoric and, moved his troops to the boarders of Tigray, signaling militaristic postures several months ago. However, rhetoric must be distinguished from capacity and intent. Ethiopia today is deeply constrained. The federal government is grappling with persistent armed conflict in the Amhara region, where Fano militias continue to challenge federal authority. Opening a new front against Eritrea or Tigray would stretch security forces far beyond sustainable limits. Moreover, the looming June elections, widely criticized as lacking inclusivity and seen as sham to get legitimacy, further complicate any appetite for more conflict. Even if these elections are characterized as “sham” by critics, they require a minimum level of domestic stability and administrative focus. War with Eritrea or Tigray would undermine both. Regional pressures also act as a deterrent. Ethiopia’s relations with Sudan remain tense amid border disputes, and while conflict has not escalated into full-scale war, the situation remains volatile. Simultaneously, the broader geopolitical environment, particularly the economic fallout from the Middle East crisis, has worsened Ethiopia’s already fragile fiscal position. Inflation, debt distress, and foreign currency shortages make large-scale military engagement economically untenable. Third, the U.S.–Ethiopia relationship is currently marked by significant tension, with Washington prioritizing the prevention of any new conflict that could further inflame an already unstable region. Any escalation that might draw in Egypt or Middle Eastern actors would run counter to core U.S. strategic interests, which are focused on de‑escalation and regional stability. Recent signs of U.S. rapprochement with Eritrea, alongside the summoning of Ethiopia’s foreign minister to Washington to underscore concerns over potential conflict, reflect a clear policy stance: further militarization is unacceptable. Taken together, these developments suggest that Ethiopia is in no realistic position to initiate another war, unless, of course, its leadership were willing to engage in profoundly self-destructive decision-making. regime! @dwnews @dw_amharic @Yonigussie @addisstandardam @addisstandard @DawitSeyoum14 @TiborPNagyJr Source: amp.dw.com/en/renewed-tigray…