Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has begun a new term, adhering to his expansionist project in the Red Sea and the country’s unity in the face of what he considers “external threats,” with the loss of his most prominent ally in the previous term, the state of Eritrea, and its transformation into an adversary.
The new mandate will focus on responding to the needs of the people and regions, and proposing peaceful solutions to any conflicts, while opening a dialogue with neighboring countries for mutual benefit and giving, especially in the Red Sea port, according to two Ethiopian researchers who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat believe.
Abiy Ahmed (50 years old) took the constitutional oath, on Monday, to officially begin his second term, and the government formation session charted a new chapter in his country’s political and institutional march, following the seventh general elections that took place on the first of last June, in which more than 54 million Ethiopians participated.
The Ethiopian News Agency said on Tuesday that the new government “inherits a set of reforms and development programs that were implemented in various sectors of the economy and the public sector during recent years.”
Internal issues
Abiy Ahmed took office for the first time in April 2018 as a transitional mandate in which he completed the term of his resigned predecessor, Hailemariam Desalegn, as explained by the Ethiopian researcher in Ethiopian-Arab relations, Zahid Zeidan.
The first official term was in direct elections in October 2021 for a period of five years, after his “Prosperity” party won the legislative elections, and the second was this October after the party also won a majority.
Zidane says: “There are internal issues that impose themselves after naming the government headed by Abiy Ahmed again, such as fighting high prices and supporting the needs of the regions, with the repercussions of global crises that affect Ethiopia directly, such as the crisis in the Straits of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab with the rise in oil prices.”
But he points out that Abiy Ahmed “did not lose all of yesterday’s allies, because there are splits within those movements, and there is a part of them that supports the government.”
As for the Ethiopian writer and political researcher, Abdel Shakur Abdel Samad, he says that the new government “recalls the weight and responsibility of the trust given by the Ethiopian people,” and that it “will continue the process of comprehensive reforms.”
He points out that addressing internal challenges and turning them into opportunities is one of the most important tasks facing the next government, while continuing to implement economic reforms and address the resulting social and political impacts.
Red Sea port
Abiy Ahmed's map for the next five years is clear from his first statements after assuming office, as he expressed his adherence to unity and completing the path to reaching the Red Sea outlet, despite significant Egyptian-Eritrean opposition to this path.
Ethiopia has been a landlocked country with no sea access since Eritrea's independence from it in 1993.
Abiy Ahmed affirmed before Parliament, on Monday, that his country is “fully prepared to confront and repel the threats directed against it,” pledging that “the leadership of the newly established State of Synergy and Unity will remain firmly committed to protecting Ethiopia’s national interests and moving forward in achieving its aspirations.”
He also pointed out that his administration “will actively seek to secure access to the sea through dialogue, mutual benefit, and give and take, while continuing to advance national development and major infrastructure projects.”
Tensions and accusations
This comes about a week after the battles that broke out between the Tigray People's Liberation Front and federal forces on September 23, raising fears of a return to the devastating civil war that Ethiopia witnessed between 2020 and 2022, and of the expansion of the scope of the conflict.
Meanwhile, Eritrea fears that Ethiopia will invade its territory to gain access to the waters and control the port of Assab overlooking the Red Sea.
Ethiopia accuses Eritrea, Egypt, and the Sudanese army of supporting the Tigray People's Liberation Front, despite these parties' denials. Meanwhile, relations between Ethiopia and Egypt are witnessing tension against the backdrop of Addis Ababa’s construction of the “Renaissance Dam” on the Nile River, which Egypt fears will affect its water share.
Abdel Samad believes that Abiy Ahmed’s priorities externally “will include completing the strengthening of relations with neighboring countries, and transforming the sea port project by consensus into a reality that meets Ethiopia’s needs and requirements.”
For his part, Zidane believes that Abiy Ahmed’s government “will turn to peaceful solutions externally, and will pursue dialogue with Egypt, Eritrea and others, and will reject any political and media pressure because it will not affect the Ethiopian reality or change the rights of Addis Ababa.”
The exchange between extremist Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Egyptians topped the scene on social media, coinciding with Cairo’s celebrations of the 53rd anniversary of the victory of the October 1973 war against Israel, which took place on Tuesday.
This dispute affected Sinai, which was under Israeli occupation in 1967, and was liberated in the 1973 October War, and is currently living in close proximity to threats as it is adjacent to the Gaza Strip, which is witnessing Israeli aggression and escalating tensions with Egypt.
In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Dr. Ahmed Fouad Anwar, a member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs and an academic specializing in Israeli affairs, believes that the recent hostile statements issued by Smotrich regarding Sinai and the October War cannot be treated as an individual or passing comment, but rather express a position consistent with the directions of the occupation government and with a green light from its president, Benjamin Netanyahu.
He pointed out that these statements reflect a state of detachment from reality and an attempt to outplay ahead of the elections scheduled for this month in Israel at the expense of the region's security and stability.
Egyptian-Israeli clash
On the eve of Egypt’s celebration of the 53rd anniversary of the October victory, Smotrich said during an interview with the ultra-Orthodox website “Hashtiblach”: “What will make Egypt not attack us? If they attack us, there will be no Sinai, at least, but no, it will not happen again.”
This threat from Smotrich against Sinai sparked a wave of anger among Egyptians on social media platforms and media figures close to the Egyptian authorities.
In his evening program on “Sada El Balad” satellite channel (private) in Egypt, journalist Ahmed Moussa denounced Smotrich’s statements regarding Sinai, adding: “If Israel is reckless, there will be no Israeli entity. The matter is over. You are talking (talking) about Egypt and Sinai. You are talking about war.”
Moussa explained: “Our armed forces are ready to defend the homeland at all times and under any circumstances. If the Zionist entity is reckless, it will be its end. If you are reckless, there will be no Israel. You cannot approach an inch of Sinai, and what happened in 1967 will not be repeated again with Egypt.”
He stressed that Egypt “is an advocate of peace, but some extremists in Israel do not want peace,” considering that Smotrich’s talk about obtaining the Sinai represents “harassment” and a threat to Egypt.
For his part, Parliamentarian in the House of Representatives and media personality, Mustafa Bakri, said that the extremist Zionist Smotrich is threatening Egypt by taking control of Sinai... Poor this thug, he thinks that Egypt is a permissible arena... I hope you read how we crushed your army, you ignorant one. Those who did it once are capable of repeating it again.
Bakri added: “The Egyptian army is ready to confront and crush anyone who dares to harm national security... You will definitely be a prisoner and we will throw you in the insane hospital in Khanka... Don’t insult yourself again, you crazy person.”
The Egyptian influencer, Louay Al-Khatib, in a tweet on the “X” platform, accused Smotrich of being “an example of political madness” and “does not have political understanding.”
Egyptian influencer Mohamed Nour sent a sharp message, saying: “To the Minister of Finance of the Zionist entity, the murderer of children, the usurper of lands, and the war criminal: Egypt is too pure and sacred for its name to come out of your mouth. Sinai, as it is a treasure for us, will also be your grave if you try to approach it,” he added, adding: “Believe me: if you want in the next battle, it will be in the streets of Israel - and it will never be in Sinai.”
The option of peace and confrontation
Prior to the Israeli official’s statement, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said, during a meeting of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, that “on this immortal day (October 6, 1973), the Egyptians wrote a bright page in the record of national glory, when the Egyptian will rose up to confirm to the whole world that Egypt is not giving up its land.” He stressed that “the Egyptian Armed Forces stand ready to defend Egypt, its capabilities, and its national security, at all times and under any circumstances.”
On March 26, 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty between the two countries in Washington, following the Camp David Accords between the two sides in 1978. Among its most prominent provisions were the cessation of the state of war, the normalization of relations, Israel’s complete withdrawal of its armed forces and civilians from the Sinai Peninsula, and keeping the zone demilitarized.
Ahmed Fouad Anwar believes that Egypt’s renewal of its emphasis on peace as a strategic option, and readiness for any confrontation, is an awareness of the dimensions of these Israeli ambitions, and early preparation for all scenarios to protect its sovereignty, stressing that history has proven Egypt’s ability to deter any aggression even in the most difficult circumstances.
Anwar pointed out that Israeli attempts to evade the effects of these aggressive statements by the extremist minister or reduce their repercussions will not erase their seriousness. It reflects a deep and hidden tension in official relations currently, and it may extend after the next elections.
An escalating controversy in Egypt resulted in the arrest of 6 journalists affiliated with the “Mtsadeqsh” electronic platform, which the Egyptian authorities accuse of belonging to the banned “Muslim Brotherhood” group. This was followed by exchanges of statements between the Egyptian Journalists Syndicate and the Ministry of Interior regarding the nature of the progress of the investigations, with varying reactions regarding how all parties dealt with the case.
On September 28 and 29, security forces arrested six journalists from the “Don’t Believe” platform, which is concerned with verifying data and news sources. At that time, the platform said that the journalists “represent the entire editorial team in the newsroom.”
At the beginning of this month, the Interior Ministry accused these journalists of belonging to the Brotherhood group, which is classified as a “terrorist” group in Egypt, noting that “its investigations found that the platform is among the media committees affiliated with the terrorist Brotherhood group, and is run by a fugitive Brotherhood member abroad called Abdul Rahman Mansour, and is assisted inside the country by a number of Brotherhood members who prepare false and fabricated news.”
On Monday evening, the Egyptian Ministry of Interior responded to a statement issued by the Journalists Syndicate that talked about journalists being subjected to “physical violations” during investigations. However, the Ministry of Interior denied the validity of “those allegations” and said that they were “unfounded and come within the framework of the attempt of those mentioned to evade the charges against them.”
The Journalists Syndicate Council decided on Monday to “submit a report to the Public Prosecutor regarding what was raised about the detainees being subjected to physical abuse during their period of detention, and being forced to make statements or recordings that were not true, while proving the invalidity of any confessions taken under duress,” according to the Syndicate’s statement.
The union formed a permanent committee headed by the captain to follow up on the case, demanding their release with the union’s guarantee, or any other guarantees that take into account the young age of some of them and their lack of experience, indicating that the committee “is in permanent session to follow up on the colleagues’ case.”
The union indicated in its statement that “journalists are not responsible for verifying the funding sources of the institution they work for, and that state authorities are responsible for that, as it is a matter that is impossible for ordinary people to know,” noting that “the arrested colleagues took legal measures to prove their work and legalize their status.”
The union’s position, which some considered “adopting the defendants’ defense narratives,” faced criticism from some journalists who called on it to “dialogue with the security authorities and respond to the accusations stated in the Ministry of Interior’s statement without entering into a dispute with state agencies,” while others denounced “placing the Ministry of Interior’s statement, the union’s position, and what pages affiliated with the Brotherhood organization publish in one trench,” calling on the ministry to “differentiate between defending the freedom of journalists and adopting the group’s positions.” Banned. This is in reference to the text of the Interior Ministry’s statement, which denied “entirely and in detail the authenticity of the repetitions referred to in the statement of the Journalists Syndicate and some pages affiliated with the terrorist Brotherhood on social networking sites.”
The Public Prosecution decided to complete investigations into the journalist registered with the Journalists Syndicate, while continuing his imprisonment, and charged him with “joining a terrorist group, committing crimes of financing a terrorist group, using a website to promote the ideas and beliefs of an extremist terrorist group and receiving and broadcasting its ideas, and broadcasting and publishing news with the aim of disturbing public peace and security,” according to what Journalists Syndicate Council member Mahmoud Kamel said on his Facebook page, Tuesday.
