tecle hagos

The revolutionary struggle of the Eritrean people. The history of the Ethiopian invaders and their powerful helpers, is a permanent history. And how successful the offender is is a lesson.

Audacity of Potemkin Party minions and their hired apologists is indeed beyond the pale. The PP regime's delusional policies continue to foment, beyond any shred of doubt, unnecessary tension in the region: - Exhibit 1: the illicit MOU that the PP regime signed stealthily with Somaliland in January 2024; - Exhibit 2: the relentless media and diplomatic campaigns, accompanied by incessant saber-rattling, that the regime has unleashed since December 2023 to invade Assab in pursuit of its pipedream of "sovereign access to the sea"; - Exhibit 3: PP's widely reported (Yale University findings etc.) involvement in the conflict in the Sudan whose tentacles and dangerous ramifications (link below) are multi-layered and grave indeed. Still, PP minions and their apologists accuse Eritrea and other countries in the region for "conspiracies... for forming an axis of powers" against Ethiopia. These false flags are too transparent and cannot camouflage the real source and incubator of unnecessary and avoidable tension in the Horn of Africa region. The lofty aspirations of the peoples of the region remain enduring peace and cooperation anchored on respect of each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity; not perennial conflicts to mollify elusive ambitions of hegemony and domination. x.com/AfriMEOSINT/st…

#Eritrea has raised potable water coverage from under 7% (1991) to over 85% (2026) through 125 billion #Nakfa in domestic investment. More than 8,300 schools and health facilities now benefit. This demonstrates that long-term national planning can deliver meaningful results & a development worth acknowledging. 🇪🇷💧#Eritrea @UN_Water @FAO @UNEP @WorldBankGroup @AfDB_Group

I will leave this video clip out here. The current National Security Advisor of Abiy Ahmed Ali, @RedwanHussien arguing perfectly under the last regime, why a landlocked #Ethiopia is not affected economically for not owning ports. And it was Menelik's signed treaties that left Ethiopia without sea access, so go and blame Menelik and give the Horn of #Africa some peace. @AsstSecStateAF @US_SrAdvisorAF

Statement by #Eritrea's Delegation at 87th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' rights; 13 May 2026, Banjul (The Gambia) *"...Few days from now, on 24th of May, Eritrea will celebrate the 35th Anniversary of its Independence, under the theme ‘Our Resilience: Our Guarantee’. In celebrating this momentous occasion, Eritreans renew their oath to fulfill the Martyrs’ vision by building a peaceful and prosperous nation". *"...Eritrea’s achievements in the promotion of human rights are deeply rooted in the principles of social justice, and strong community participation. Community-led infrastructure development and public mobilization campaigns continue to serve as important mechanisms for advancing sustainable development and ensuring local ownership of national programs". shabait.com/2026/05/13/796…

The defamation campaign against Eritrea has spiked in the past few weeks for rather obvious and predictable reasons and underlying motives. This campaign, which has been going on for almost two decades now in the aftermath of the border conflict with Ethiopia, could not have gained traction in the first place without the support of certain countries. The playbook is boringly the same; utilize, for reasons of outward credibility, spurious and coordinated "testimonies" of handpicked Special Rapporteurs within the UNHRC platform; some obscure NGO's; and other narrow interest groups who have never set foot and are generally clueless about the country. As intimated above, the defamatory agenda is being resuscitated these days with more outlandish accusations and manufactured narratives. Obvious aim is to continue the unwarranted harassment of Eritrea through the UNHRC and its ilk. "እቶም ኣኽላባት ይነብሑ፥ ገመል ይመርሽ!" እዩ እቲ ነገሩ። x.com/ERMedia91/stat…

Amb.Sophia Eritrea’s defense of sovereignty is not “insecurity”it is rooted in history,international law,&the sacrifices of a long liberation struggle Sovereignty&territorial integrity are non-negotiable principles,especially in a region shaped by war,annexation&external pressure

There has been a lot written about Eritrea in the last few weeks, and I have decided to respond to one of the many pieces coming out of Ethiopia...The IFA article titled “Eritrea’s Sovereignty Claim and the Insecurity It Conceals”. This article rests on a selective interpretation of international law, an incomplete account of the history of the #Horn of #Africa, and a troubling attempt to recast legitimate concerns regarding #sovereignty and territorial integrity as evidence of political insecurity rather than lawful state responsibility. It is therefore necessary to address several of the issues raised in this selectively framed piece. The title itself is particularly revealing. It reflects an increasingly common tendency in certain Prosperity Party (PP) political and intellectual circles to delegitimize Eritrea’s invocation of sovereignty by portraying it not as a foundational principle of international law, but as a form of concealment, obstruction, or paranoia. That framing is deeply problematic. Sovereignty is not something #Eritrea must “hide behind.” Sovereignty is the cornerstone of the modern international legal order, enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitutive Act of the African Union. For African states in particular, many of which emerged from colonial partition, territorial disputes, occupation, and prolonged external interference, the defense of sovereignty and territorial integrity cannot be dismissed as rhetorical posturing; these are existential legal principles rooted in painful historical experience. For #Eritrea, these concerns are not theoretical. Eritrea emerged from a long anti-colonial and anti-annexation struggle following federation, annexation, and decades of war. #Ethiopia was not merely a neighboring state in #Eritrean historical memory; it was Eritrea’s former colonizer. That historical experience inevitably shapes Eritrea’s understanding of sovereignty, borders, and national survival. As the Amharic proverb aptly states: “የወጋ ቢረሳ የተወጋ አይረሳም” — “The one who inflicted the wound may forget, but the one who was wounded never does.” The proverb captures an essential reality often ignored in external analyses of #Eritrea: historical memory shapes national security consciousness. States and peoples that endured annexation, war, occupation, territorial disputes, sanctions, and prolonged external pressure do not, and cannot, approach questions of sovereignty lightly or abstractly. From an #Eritrean perspective, sovereignty is therefore not an abstract diplomatic slogan or tactical political shield. It is inseparable from the sacrifices made during one of Africa’s longest liberation struggles and from the determination to prevent any return, direct or indirect, to arrangements perceived as compromising Eritrea’s hard-won independence and territorial integrity. To suggest that Eritrea’s insistence on sovereignty somehow masks illegitimate motives effectively reverses the legal burden. It implies that smaller states defending internationally recognized borders must justify their concerns, while larger regional powers, advancing inflammatory hegemonistic ambitions and openly invoking “historical rights,” “natural entitlement,” or “strategic necessity” regarding maritime access, are treated as merely pursuing economic pragmatism. From Eritrea’s perspective, the issue has never been whether Ethiopia, as a landlocked state, possesses legitimate developmental interests in commercial maritime access. Eritrea has never disputed that principle. International law already recognizes the rights of landlocked states to negotiated access and freedom of transit. The issue is whether such ambitions are being articulated and pursued in a manner consistent with the UN Charter, sovereign equality, and the prohibition against the threat or use of force. Article 2(4) of the @UN Charter prohibits not only the use of force, but also the threat of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of states. International law does not require states to wait for military invasion before taking seriously rhetoric, strategic signaling, or political discourse carrying coercive implications. Preventive vigilance regarding credible coercive signaling is fully consistent with the sovereign right of states to safeguard their territorial integrity and political independence. Against this backdrop, Eritrea’s concerns regarding Ethiopia’s increasingly assertive discourse on Red Sea access are neither irrational nor propagandistic. Senior Prosperity Party (PP) officials, including Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, have repeatedly framed maritime access in existential and revisionist terms, invoking notions of “historical rights,” “natural entitlement,” and strategic inevitability. #Ethiopia|n political discourse surrounding Red Sea access has at times gone even further, with prominent figures openly declaring that Ethiopia would obtain maritime access “peacefully if possible and militarily if necessary.” This rhetoric has not emerged in isolation. It has been accompanied by a broader climate of increasingly normalized irredentist discourse on Ethiopian social and political media platforms, including circulation of altered maps depicting Assab and portions of sovereign Eritrean territory as part of Ethiopia. Independent fact-checking organizations documented multiple instances in which maps were digitally manipulated to incorporate Assab into Ethiopian territory amid heightened public debate surrounding #RedSea access. Equally troubling were images and videos circulated from military-linked events and social media accounts showing #Ethiopia|n military figures displaying maps incorporating portions of southern #Eritrea into #Ethiopia during public ceremonies associated with special forces mobilization and nationalist messaging. Whether officially sanctioned or not, the widespread dissemination of such imagery contributed to a political environment in which revisionist territorial narratives increasingly entered mainstream discourse. Taken together, these developments cannot reasonably be dismissed as harmless nationalist symbolism. In a region with a long history of interstate war, contested borders, and unresolved territorial grievances, such rhetoric and imagery carry legal and security implications that responsible states are entitled to take seriously under the precautionary logic embedded within Article 2(4) of the @UN Charter. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed himself publicly characterized Red Sea access as an existential issue for Ethiopia and suggested that the matter could not remain unresolved indefinitely. International media and regional analysts increasingly warned that such rhetoric, combined with military mobilization and nationalist agitation surrounding Assab, risked contributing to renewed regional instability and fears of interstate confrontation. The 2024 Memorandum of Understanding between Ethiopia and #Somaliland further heightened tensions, particularly as Somalia formally rejected the arrangement as an infringement upon its sovereignty and territorial integrity. These developments underscore precisely why questions of maritime access in the Horn cannot be divorced from wider legal and security considerations. Equally problematic is the article’s selective treatment of the 1998–2000 Eritrea–Ethiopia border conflict. Eritrea’s borders were not undefined or ambiguous constructs. They were established through the 1900, 1902, and 1908 treaties concluded between imperial Italy and imperial Ethiopia. These treaties formed the legal basis upon which the Eritrea–Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC), established under the Algiers Agreement, based its delimitation ruling. Critically, the EEBC’s final and binding decision awarded Badme, the principal flashpoint and casus belli of the 1998–2000 conflict, unequivocally to #Eritrea. That fact is legally fundamental. It demonstrates that the territorial dispute centered on areas ultimately determined by the competent international arbitral body to fall within Eritrean sovereignty. The article also misrepresents the role of the Eritrea–Ethiopia Claims Commission by implying that it definitively adjudicated the broader origins of the war. As legal scholars, including analyses published in the European Journal of International Law, have noted, the Claims Commission was not specifically mandated to comprehensively determine the origins of the conflict. The independent investigative mechanism envisaged under Article 3 of the Algiers Agreement for that purpose was never constituted. Thus, no authoritative international process ever fully examined the broader antecedents of the conflict, including tensions arising from contested administration, local clashes, militia activity, mapping disputes, and allegations of encroachments into sovereign Eritrean territory during the 1990s, as well as the unprovoked assault by Ethiopian troops against an #Eritrean army unit in the Badme area on 5 May 1998. What was conclusively determined, however, was the territorial issue itself. And on that question, the #EEBC ruled in #Eritrea’s favor. The defining legal and political crisis of the post-war period therefore was not Eritrea’s rejection of international law, but Ethiopia’s refusal, for nearly two decades, to implement a binding arbitral ruling it had expressly agreed would be “final and binding.” This remains one of the most consequential contradictions in discussions surrounding the rule of law in the Horn of Africa. At stake was not merely a bilateral border dispute, but the integrity of international arbitration itself. If states may disregard binding arbitral rulings when politically inconvenient, the credibility of peaceful dispute resolution mechanisms under international law is fundamentally undermined. The article’s treatment of the 2009 sanctions regime is similarly incomplete. From #Eritrea’s perspective, the sanctions imposed under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1907 emerged from a highly politicized process shaped by Ethiopia’s manipulation of #IGAD and the @AfricanUnion. The allegations underpinning the sanctions were strongly contested and were never established through an independent judicial process meeting accepted evidentiary standards. For many Eritreans, the sanctions episode remains a troubling example of the instrumentalization of multilateral institutions for geopolitical purposes. Indeed, many #Africa|n observers viewed the process with deep discomfort, recognizing the damaging precedent of one #Africa|n state mobilizing punitive international measures against another amid contested allegations. The eventual lifting of sanctions in 2018 further underscored the fundamentally political nature of the process. The article also presents Eritrea’s National Service Program in a highly reductionist manner. While external narratives often portray the program solely through a militarized lens, Eritrea’s national service system has long included substantial civic and developmental components. National Service graduates contribute across ministries, schools, colleges, hospitals, infrastructure projects, local administrations, and diplomatic missions abroad. More importantly, the statutory 18-month duration of National Service was prolonged largely as a consequence of the prolonged no-war-no-peace environment and continued security threats emanating from unresolved tensions with successive Ethiopian governments. At the same time, Ethiopia itself has, in recent years, undergone extensive military mobilization, major arms acquisitions, and repeated internal armed conflicts across multiple regions. Numerous international organizations, media investigations, and even #Ethiopian institutions have documented serious abuses in regions such as Amhara and Oromia, including extrajudicial killings, drone strikes affecting civilians, arbitrary detentions, mass displacement, and attacks on civilian infrastructure. A balanced and credible analysis cannot selectively invoke human rights concerns only where they reinforce preferred geopolitical narratives while minimizing or contextualizing large-scale violence elsewhere. More broadly, #Eritrea’s foreign policy has consistently emphasized sovereign equality, non-interference, regional ownership, and resistance to hegemonic arrangements in the Horn of Africa. #Eritrea’s invocation of sovereignty is not “camouflage”; it reflects the historical experience of a state that emerged from one of Africa’s longest liberation struggles and subsequently endured war, sanctions, prolonged territorial occupation, and sustained external pressure. Regional integration and economic cooperation in the Horn are both necessary and achievable. Eritrea has never opposed negotiated frameworks for trade, connectivity, or maritime access grounded in mutual consent and international law. What Eritrea rejects, correctly, is the normalization of rhetoric implying that the strategic ambitions or demographic weight of larger states entitle them to exceptional arrangements at the expense of the sovereignty and security concerns of smaller neighbors. Ultimately, the issue is not opposition to Ethiopia’s development. It is the insistence that all regional ambitions remain firmly anchored within the principles of international law: sovereign equality, territorial integrity, non-interference, pacta sunt servanda, and the prohibition against coercion enshrined in the Charter of the @UN. As for future Eritrea–Ethiopia relations, or “settlement,” as the author characterizes it, prudence, realism, and historical experience counsel patience rather than premature and unrealistic optimism. Genuine peace and stable relations between neighboring states cannot be manufactured through diplomatic slogans, external pressure, or intellectual wishful thinking. They must emerge organically, gradually, and on the basis of mutual respect, consistency, reciprocity, and trust built over time. Lasting peace cannot be rushed, especially after the considerable goodwill and historic opportunity extended in 2018 were ultimately undermined by a leadership in Ethiopia that failed to consolidate reconciliation internally, regionally, and institutionally. Sustainable peace in the Horn of Africa will require seriousness, strategic patience, and above all, an #Ethiopia that is first at peace with itself.

At a press conference ex #RSF fighter confirms what the world knows that #UAE and #Ethiopia have turned #Sudan into killing field. #UAE doing it for Sudan's gold and #Ethiopia is enslaved to #UAE since #US is no longer its patron and will do anything UAE asks of it.

ERITREA’S AGRICULTURAL TRANSFORMATION As Eritrea Marks 35 Years of Independence, its Agricultural Transformation Stands as One of Its Greatest Achievements …In a region long defined by drought, food insecurity, and external dependency, Eritrea has charted a different path. Through resilience, community mobilization, and a long-term national vision, the country has built the foundations of a food system that is increasingly self-reliant, climate-resilient, and locally driven. … One of the most profound achievements of Eritrea’s independence era has been the construction of dams, micro-dams, reservoirs, and water diversion structures across the country. These projects — from Gerset to Fanko, Kerkebet to Logo — have reshaped entire landscapes and livelihoods. Read more: redseabeacon.com/eritreas-agric… by Aaron Abraha #EritreaAt35 #AfricanUnion #HornofAfrica #Eritrea #Ethiopia #Sudan #Somalia #Egypt @hawelti @shabait @EmbassyEritrea @hadnetkeleta @SirakBahlbi @Ghidewon @PMEthiopia @MFAEthiopia @MofaSudan @MOFASomalia @MfaEGYPT @_AfricanUnion @StateDept @AJEnglish @BBCWorld @AFP @TheEconomist @thenation @PressTV @Telegraph @nytimes @UN @dwnews @tesfanews @TheReporterET @gulf_news

⛔️Breaking news ‼️ ⛔️ One of the commanders who defected from the Rapid Support Forces supported by UAE who terrorised Sudan drops a bombshell and confesses: “We receive direct support from the UAE, and I personally trained in camps in the city of Al Ain, and the terrorist drones being used come from Ethiopia under UAE supervision‼️”

This letter was exposed by #Wikileaks, that How Eritrea was targeted in a sanction conspiracy, which is politically motivated.

Integrated Organic Agriculture in Eritrea (MoA Newsletter; May, 2026) Eritrea has made significant progress over the past five years in promoting integrated organic agriculture through coordinated national efforts and support from development partners. The initiative has focused on reducing dependence on synthetic agricultural inputs while encouraging environmentally friendly and locally adaptable alternatives. Through research, training, and field-level implementation, the program has established a strong foundation for transforming agricultural systems into more resilient, productive, and health conscious models. shabait.com/2026/05/07/moa…

False and baseless accusations leveled against #Eritrea regarding its support for Al-Shabaab 4 over 2 decades were aimed at tarnishing its image and isolating it to serve malicious geopolitical and regional agendas. It's time for accountability and for Eritrea to be compensated.

BADME: A TEST OF RESOLVE; On May 6, 1998, TPLF forces murdered 8 innocent Eritrean delegates around Badme, sparking the Eritrean-Ethiopian War & challenging Eritrea's sovereignty. The attack wasn't just on individuals, but on peace itself. Their sacrifice will never be forgotten.

Press Statement The Backdrop of Unwarranted Sanctions Ministry of Information Asmara, 6 May 2026 "There are reports these days that the illegal and unilateral US sanctions will soon be lifted. We earnestly hope that this act will indeed herald an enduring rectification of misguided policies to ensure justice, legality and fairness". shabait.com/2026/05/06/the…

Excellent Read: #Eritrea and the Legacy of Archaeological Research; by Dr. Tsegai Medin *"...The Eritrean portion of the Rift Valley has provided unparalleled evidence of our ancestors. The now-harsh Danakil Depression was a hospitable home to our predecessors roughly 1 million years ago". *"...Launched in 1994 as a joint Eritrean-Italian venture, the Buia Project achieved a massive scientific breakthrough in 1995 with the discovery of a nearly complete human cranium near Mountain Aalad. The ‘Buia Lady’ (nicknamed Mis Buia or Hawa) is approximately 1 million years old. This human fossil is exceptionally significant because it fills a ‘morphological gap’ in the fossil record between Homo erectus (1.4 million years ago) and Homo heidelbergensis (0.65 million years ago). The site revealed that humans lived alongside diverse wildlife in a lush, savannah-like environment, despite the era’s unstable climate". shabait.com/2026/05/05/eri…

The Problem with Ethiopia’s “Maritime Imperative” Ministry of Foreign Affairs Research and Documentation Division 4 May 2026 *"...The Horn of Africa does not require new doctrines of inevitability. It requires a reaffirmation of the principles that have sustained it thus far: respect for sovereignty, adherence to international law, and a commitment to cooperation based on equality rather than coercion". *"...The 'maritime imperative' is not an unavoidable consequence of geography or geopolitics. It is a constructed narrative designed to shift the boundaries of what is considered acceptable in regional discourse. It must be recognized for what it is: a revisionist doctrine that seeks to legitimize ambition at the expense of law. And it must be rejected accordingly". shabait.com/2026/05/04/the…

Modern colonial missionary of colective loosers! Who, FAILED IN ERITREA 🐪🇪🇷

RUBIN’S ERITREA THESIS: OUTDATED, INACCURATE, AND STRATEGICALLY HOLLOW Incompetent Michael Rubin’s latest warning about U.S. engagement with Eritrea is not simply flawed; it is emblematic of a long-standing pattern in his public work, a pattern defined by sensationalism, selective memory, and a remarkable immunity to the consequences of his own past predictions. … Rubin’s argument depends on portraying Eritrea as uniquely dangerous, uniquely untrustworthy, and uniquely beyond the reach of diplomacy. This framing is familiar because it mirrors the way he has described other states in his long record of commentary. … Rubin’s rhetorical style further undermines his credibility. His commentary is filled with ad hominem attacks, exaggerated metaphors, and language designed to provoke emotional reactions rather than facilitate understanding. Read more: redseabeacon.com/rubins-eritrea… by David Yeh #AfricanUnion #HornofAfrica #Eritrea #Ethiopia #Sudan #Somalia #Egypt @hawelti @shabait @EmbassyEritrea @hadnetkeleta @SirakBahlbi @Ghidewon @PMEthiopia @MFAEthiopia @MofaSudan @MOFASomalia @MfaEGYPT @_AfricanUnion @StateDept @AJEnglish @BBCWorld @AFP @TheEconomist @thenation @PressTV @Telegraph @nytimes @UN @dwnews @tesfanews @TheReporterET @gulf_news