Sharing a border has never been more conflict-ridden than for Ethiopia and Eritrea. Land disputes, nationalist sentiments and historical clashes have besieged the African region. The persistent disagreements have been shaped by Eritrea's dynamic political landscape as well as its culturally diverse population. The beginning of the conflict dates back to the Italian occupation of the Eritrean region in 1882.
Eritrean territory had not yet gained a sense of autonomy, as it was still considered an Ethiopian-controlled region before the arrival of the Italians. After the Italian conquest reached the Eritrean region, the colonizers had major plans to gain a foothold over the rest of Ethiopia.
Nevertheless, in 1889, the Treaty of Wichale was signed by the Italians and Menelik II in Ethiopia to set clear boundaries between Italian-owned protectorates and Ethiopian territory. The purpose of the treaty was to promote cooperation between the two nations as well. Furthermore, the treaty provided that Italy got Bogos, Hamas and Akale-Guzai, which are modern Eritrea and Northern Tigray. Under the terms of the treaty, Italy would then give a sum of money, as well as deliver a large quantity of weapons (30,000 28 musketeers and XNUMX cannons).
Eritrean nationalist consciousness
Speculation may arise about the reasons for giving Eritrea to Italy. Under the domination of the Amhara king, Menelik, the capital of Ethiopian territory had moved south away from the Tigray region, where modern Eritrea is located. The Amharic area ruled by Menilek had been subject to codified law, bureaucracy and growing market opportunities. The ruling monarchy had a great influence and order in the southern region when it came to culture, for example to expose the mother tongue to become Amharic, and thus hinder the nation's linguistic diversity. In addition, the Italian occupation of Eritrea had strengthened the centralized Ethiopian economic and military sector.
Many studies have observed whether the Italian colonization in Eritrea triggered nationalist outbursts, but researchers have indicated that two conditions must be met to reach that conclusion. The first theme would delve into the development of the settlements under Italian rule, whether proper social and economic development prevails. Nationalist tendencies would be stimulated by a united working class group. The second condition would be the presence of intellectual elitism, in which the colonized Eritreans would have significant educational systems.
The two preconditions for nationalist upheaval have been lacking due to the economic weakness in the region has been messed with. The absence of a settlement colonization policy has capitalized on Eritrea's political and economic shortcomings. One of the main reasons why Italy had decided to colonize the area was due to its strategic importance as a station to expand Italy's economic reach to neighboring countries, as well as a way to expand its colonial army's recruitment tactics in Somalia, Libya and Ethiopia. Moreover, Italian colonialism failed to initiate intellectual elitism as a result of the declining educational opportunities. Tekeste Negash, author of "Italian Colonialism in Eritrea", has substantiated this argument through statements made by Ferdinando Martini, the colonial governor from 1897-1907. Martini's remarks have insisted that education for the natives would hinder the colonial foundations built in Eritrea.
The main priority of the Italian rule was to exploit the region's natural resources. Although the above preconditions for developing a nationalist consciousness among the Eritrean natives have proved insufficient, another factor must be considered. Utilization of the resources of the place as well as inducing an apartheid regime with inequality among the natives and the colonizers will be a probable assessment against the increase in nationalism.
Several sectors in the nation have shown growth, for example the transport sector, where around 3,600 kilometers of road were built that extend to many villages. Other sectors such as agriculture, mining and building divisions had also seen remarkable stability. Despite the newly established establishments and the economic awakening, inequality was widespread. For example, in 1906, the average daily wage of a native Eritrean was between 0.95-1.50 lire, while the Italians earned between 5.65-10 lire. In order to become financially self-sufficient, according to Italian orders, Eritrean natives were subject to property taxation, such as owning land, salable goods, and even cattle.
Although there was ill-treatment caused by the Italian occupation and the introduction of an apartheid system, it is worth noting the increase in the standard of living of the indigenous peoples.
Establishment of Eritrean political parties
However, the occupation had experienced its death in 1941, when the battle of Keren began. In the heat of World War II, British allied forces had besieged a stronghold over the Eritrean city of Keren. The invasion took place during the East African campaign in which allied forces had attacked the Italian armed forces. Keren was strategically chosen as an interference site due to its geopolitical significance. The city provides a main route to the capital of the Italian Eritrean fortress, Asmara, as well as Massawa, a port on the Red Sea.
After the withdrawal of the Italian occupation, Eritrea had developed several political parties. One of the political parties, originally called the Society for the Love of the Land of Eritrea, then called the Unionist Party in 1944, had been a deep advocate of Ethiopian intervention in Eritrea. The members of the party had the firm belief that Italy had strongly influenced the inhabitants in terms of cultural, linguistic and religious areas. Therefore, the Unionist Party sought to rejoin Ethiopia in order to preserve its former historical background and identity. Furthermore, questions of joy over Eritrea to Ethiopia had arisen and begun to challenge the Unionist Party.
Other political parties had formed, such as the Muslim League which was formed in Keren. The party had been formed by individuals from the Islamic-dominated districts of Massawa and the Red Sea. After the formation of the Muslim League, in 1947, a smaller group was organized from the Muslim League to become the National Muslim Party of Massawa. A newly developed party had soon after also been created called the New Eritrean Pro-Italy Party. This party has given great support to the Italian society that was created in Eritrea. They believed that with Rome's satisfaction with a land restoration, they would receive assistance from Italy to give the region independence. The party had also assumed that if Eritrea were ruled by the Ethiopian crown, it would lose what was once a successful economic growth rate given by Italian rule.
Another party called the Eritrean Liberal Progressive Party was formed shortly after by a predominantly Christian membership. The Muslim League, New Eritrean Pro-Italy Party, as well as the Eritrean Liberal Progressive Party, all share similar disapproval of Eritrea joining Ethiopia.
It has become clear that Eritrea had developed a political voice after the departure of the Italians. Although many Eritrean political parties had formed, it was formally established that the British Military Administration (BMA) was a functioning government. The BMA was believed to be impartial with regard to the newly formed Eritrean political parties, but a particular party had challenged that view. The popularity of the Unionist Party had lied in the face of corruption. The party was heavily funded, not surprisingly, but not publicly, by the Ethiopian monarchy.
Trade union violence
But that was not the only cause for concern where the money is received from. Terrorism and public harassment had shown the true colors of the Unionist Party. In 1947, several bombings threatened the stability of Asmara (the capital of Eritrea). The party motivated by violence also resorted to attempted murder. Muslim League leader Dejatch Hassan Ali had almost fallen victim to the Unionist Party's aggressive streak. Therefore, the Eritrean public, which had not shown its full support for the unionist cause, had complained of harassment and violence inflicted on the party.
The violence has not been seen by the BMA. The administration had raided the Andinet party (a subdivision of the youth of the unionist party) to find various compromising documents suggesting the assassination of the anti-disciplinary leader, Abdul Kadir Kabire. Ethiopian nationalist propaganda grew another party called 'The Society for the Unification of Ethiopia and Eritrea'. The founders and leaders of the Ethiopian government - funded party had, as predicted, relations with the Ethiopian government. For example, one of the founders, Dawit Ogbazgi, was the Deputy Governor of Addis Ababa (the capital of Ethiopia). It was widely known that the organization's main goal was to support the joy of Ethiopia and Eritrea, but the party's public goal was to support the poor Eritreans living in Addis Ababa through employment or repatriation to Eritrea.
The newly formed party has also gone so far as to present demonstrations, promoting the unification of Eritrea and Ethiopia, to the international community, especially at British, French, American and Russian consulates in Ethiopia's capital. The Ethiopian government had even issued a day off for government employees to demonstrate.
In addition, tensions had developed between the BMA and the Unionist Party. The party had accused the administration of acquiring imperialist motives towards Eritrea in addition to being non-democratic. However, no other Eritrean political party had similar complaints against the BMA. The Ethiopian-backed party had also pointed a finger at BMA due to press barriers and lack of freedom of expression. This accusation is unfounded, as the British had relaxed the regulations on pre-censorship over time.
Political stability in Eritrea had been particularly weakened after a report published by the Four Power Commission (FPC) composed of the United States, France, Britain and the Soviet Union stated that the Unionist Party had not been widely accepted by Eritreans. The party has become increasingly belligerent against those who opposed the goals of unification. Thus, many parties that had opposed the propaganda of the Unionist Party had formed the bloc of independence. The main party that led the bloc was none other than the Muslim League.
The future of Eritrea
When the time came to decide on Eritrea's fate, the FPC failed to reach a proper agreement, which resulted in UN intervention. Apart from the UN intervention, many communities and parties had gathered in Keren in 1947 to reach a verdict on Eritrea's ruling future.
Eritrea had a flourishing number of tribes and groups that had mixed opinions. Groups such as Tigrai and Baria believed that it would be best to remain under British rule, while other groups such as Beni Amer chiefs and elders had sought a path to complete independence. The Jiberti, Kunama, Saho and Afar groups had been strongly opposed to the British administration for various reasons. For example, Saho believed that the BMA was responsible for the lack of proper security when the Unionist Party had harassed opposition groups. Afar believed that the BMA should criticize the lack of security measures against the Ethiopian government's assassination attempt on their unofficial leader, the Sultan of the Aussa in 1944.
Consequently, the Muslim League has chosen to continue its course towards Eritrean independence. The councilors at the Keren conference believed that Eritrea could become fully self-sufficient in the future after receiving foreign aid and effective governance from a possible British position of trust. Therefore, after the Unionist Party became aware of the new discussions formed by conflicting leaders, they had accused the BMA of appearing in the Muslim League. However, the League had shared its views on the Ethiopian regime, which questioned:"Is it just that a still barbaric and primitive nation like the Ethiopians - whose government is unable to improve the lot of its own people - should come in possession of a territory far more disciplined, advanced and civilized than Abyssinia (Ethiopian Empire) ”.
Between 1949 and 1950, the unit of the independence bloc had shifted due to continuous violence from irredentist groups. Several major parties had been weakened by the threats, such as a splinter group from the Muslim League, called the Independent Muslim League. The UN Commission had presented itself in 1950 to monitor the stability of Eritrean future policy. Nevertheless, several Eritreans had lost some confidence in the independence bloc, believing that the party had favored Italian society. Therefore, the lack of organization caused by disagreements between opposing parties has resulted in the Ethiopian government consulting with the UN Commission. The Ethiopian crown had managed to convince the commission to border Eritrea on Ethiopian territory. The Commission's resolution was that:
"Eritrea shall constitute an autonomous unit of Ethiopia under the sovereignty of the Ethiopian crown."
Nevertheless, in 1962, the Eritrean Assembly saw a cautious takeover of Eritrean power by Ethiopian officials. Thus, the assembly had unanimously voted for Eritrea to become a province in Ethiopia. The events that followed showed Eritrean protest and disagreement. Ethiopian actions have sown the seeds of future conflict between the two nations.
Implications of Eritrean and Ethiopian conditions in the future
Although past relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea have been destroyed by conflict, the future has brought another wave of alliance. The two nations have joined a common cause. The Tigray region between the two borders has become the center of conflict. Both Eritrean and Ethiopian troops have been on hand to take down the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), due to civil strife.
Despite Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's peace-making reputation, his current actions have been investigated internationally as he sends troops to battle in the Tigray region where several civilian lives are threatened. Eritrean troops are also deployed since the region (Badme) was promised tp Eritrea earlier in 2000. Therefore, both nations have their own advantages as to why they have become allies. Nevertheless, the international community has condemned the countries' brutality since the United States imposed sanctions on Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Horn of Africa has remained in conflict.