The Issue of Access to Sea in Ethiopia: A False Dichotomy

The Bitter or Perhaps Not So Bitter Reality

Let us face it boldly. Ethiopia has no access to sea. We are a land-locked nation. This status will definitely have bearings on our economic development. Various studies have concluded that land-locked nations’ economic growth is, more or less, negatively impacted by their very status. Cognizant of this condition, the community of nations has legally addressed the issue. Part X, especially Article 125 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), is devoted to addressing that very concern.

The Legal Framework

Article 125 recognizes the right of land-locked countries access to the sea, (Sub-Article 1, good for us Ethiopians). It stipulates that such access should be governed by legal agreements, (Sub-Article 2, fair enough for all parties). Whatever the agreements, the sovereignty and interest of the transit nation should not be infringed, (Sub-Article 3, an international obligation to be met). If the Convention adopted by the international community, is starkly crystal clear on how nations, both transit and landlocked, should conduct their affairs, we should develop our strategies and tactics based on this objective reality.

What is at Stake?

But let us set the scene at the beginning. Access to sea is a tradable service. Its price is determined by the age old relationship between demand and supply. Ethiopia is blessed with the neighborliness of five maritime nations with more than a dozen established ports and hundreds of deep water spots that can be developed into ports. This gives us the opportunity to develop robust strategies which could guide us in our efforts to formulate viable options. Competition is good for buyers, and the more the competition is fierce, the less the price.

Options for Developing Strategies for Ethiopia to Gain Access to Sea

There can be many win-win approaches on how to mitigate for this geographic curse. The cornerstone of any approach should be targeting minimally possible lower dollar cost. This could include, yes, paying no dollar at all for port services. Let me elaborate. The World is rebelling against the tyranny of the mighty Dollar. If we could set the right political and economic environments, we can, at least partly, join the fray. Various approaches could be chosen vis-à-vis various maritime or transit nations, by which we can minimize our dollar bills for port services. We can sign preferential trade agreements in which the signatories could agree to settle transactions without involving the dollar, fully or partly. Let us evaluate some examples.
Bartering goods and services can be one such approach. We can pump potable water, supply electricity, export goods like livestock, coffee, oil seeds, and sugar; offer airlines tickets and services, etc. to settle at least partial payments for port services rendered. We can establish preferential trade agreements which can reduce the foreign exchange burden in our economies. Various forms of bilateral and regional trading blocs, the holy grail of regional economic integration, could be envisioned here.
We can aim for trade involving local currencies. We can develop our friendly ties to such an extent that, the other parties, could see the wisdom of giving grace time to Ethiopia in nominally free or discounted price for the use of their ports could be, overtime, beneficial to them too. An old clip that resurfaced recently depicts President Isaias espousing this very approach.
We can encourage our neighbors to develop their ports in such a way that, they are, without
compromising their sovereignty, run as commercial corporations in which we can commercially
invest and have a say. We can work for an invigorated IGAD that can play crucial roles in creating the right politico- economic venues where such sensitive issues can be debated, with the aim of formulating
mutually beneficial policies.. I am sure economics gurus will come out with far better and impressive lists. But what is not advisable is to construe a false dichotomy around the issue, and then opt for myopically
disastrous options. By dichotomy I mean the dichotomy of << If you sovereignly own ports, you
prosper; if not, you don’t.

Multiple Customers with Multiple Interests

Various maritime nations may have various levels of inclination towards cooperating on the issue of Ethiopia’s quest for legitimately beneficial access to the sea. For example, Djibouti, given its dependence on port services related revenues, will be less positively disposed to the arguments presented above. Eritrea, thanks to the blunder of our former leaders, have long acclimatized themselves, to such an extent that they seem to have removed port related revenues from their economic calculus. And yet, in pursuit of peace or to avoid multi-dimensional war of attrition with a bigger neighbour, they may be susceptible to financial compromises without impacting their maritime and territorial sovereignty. For the Somalis, any arrangement that does not infringe upon their sovereignty is halal. For the Sudanese and the Kenyans, Ethiopia using their sea outlets, would simply be added bonanza. Thus, the more we diversify our port service options, the better bargaining power we attain, and the less our economy is negatively impacted for being land-locked.
Our diversification plan could possibly be influenced by many factors. Physical geographic proximity is one. Massawa is the natural port of choice for Tigray and North Western Amhara. Berbera will be the same to Jigjiga. Lamu would be relatively ideal to southern most regions of the country. We could go on, correlating Ethiopian cities and proximity wise preferable ports of call. The following table summarizes the gist of my argument.

Table : Distance, in kilometers, between randomly selected Ethiopian cities, and some ports in
the Greater Horn of Africa. The shortest possible routes have are in bold.

Avoiding the Chronic Pitfalls

What is not feasible and unsustainable, is to relate our quest for sea outlets with sovereign ownership of a port that we could call as ours. That would necessitate irredentist or revanchist aggressions, because no country, in our modern times, will sell a piece of its country and a piece of its soul for shares in Ethiopian Airlines or Ethio-Telecom. They would not even barter land for land. Let us remember the uproar we stirred when our PM unwisely and prematurely broadcasted his intentions, resulting in surprisingly swift realignment of alliances in the region and beyond. And yes, let us remember that not a single country or international entity stood by us to justify the PM’s arguments. If any, it is to the contrary. By doing so, the PM has set the country in confrontational trajectory with Somalia and Eritrea. As things stand we cannot use their ports. Sisterly Djibouti is now apprehensive for reasons more than one. The TB2 nation has signed up to protect Somalia, thereby enabling a symbiotic naval presence off Somalia shores. Egypt has now found a chance to strengthen its presence in Somalia, with all its attending repercussions for us. The litany of issues that followed, and could follow, cannot be simply shrugged off as temporary tantrums. They will have repercussions, predictable or other-wise.
Let us boldly face our situation and let us come with sustainable strategies and policies that can, while safeguarding our national interests, promote peaceful coexistence with our neighbors. Our region has had more than its share of conflicts. In this part of the world, when you fight, you fight it out to the end. Past conflicts have sown the atmosphere of trust deficit, thereby creating an environment that compromise the opportunities for regional integration, Let us not exacerbate it further. And let us remember that of the old adage: “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.” Sadly ours is a country where social fragmentations abound. In this part of the world, proxy war has been refined into sophisticated art. Our motto, in my humble opinion, should be: An Ethiopia at peace with itself and with its neighbors. As someone has said in relation to a different set of situations, ‘the alternative would be too ghastly to contemplate.’

Read more..

Countries congratulate Ethiopia on controversial National Day

Somaliland tells how potential conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea can be prevented

Ethiopia to divert its fuel imports to Berbera port of Somaliland