Ethiopia’s declaration of war against Eritrea – Legal Fallacy and Strategic Miscalculation

Semere Azazi

On October 9, 2026, Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister addressed a letter to the UN Security Council, asserting that Ethiopia—pursuant to Article 51 of the UN Charter—is “taking measures in the exercise of its inherent right of self-defense in response to the armed attack and continuing acts of aggression against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of Ethiopia committed by the State of Eritrea.”

Responding to Ethiopia’s allegations, on October 10, Eritrea’s Foreign Minister communicated to the Security Council that Ethiopia’s intended measures represent the implementation of a long-standing “war of aggression” declared against Eritrea years prior. This ambition persists in pursuit of Ethiopia’s unprovoked push for “sovereign access to the sea,” in flagrant violation of Eritrea’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Citing recent public remarks by Ethiopia’s Deputy Chief of Staff, General Abebaw Tadesse—who explicitly stated that the ultimate objective of military operations was to invade Assab and that Mekelle served merely as a stepping stone—Eritrea underscored the imminent threat it faces by Ethiopia. Consequently, it urged the UN Security Council to “forcefully condemn Ethiopia’s declaration of war and enact requisite deterrent measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.”

Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter enshrines the general prohibition on the threat or use of force in international relations. Ethiopia’s persistent threat of force against Eritrea violates both the UN Charter and fundamental principles of international law.

This posture has been publicly orchestrated by senior leadership, including the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, who likened Ethiopia’s quest for “sea access” to Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights, declaring it as an existential issue. Such assertions are not only factually erroneous but legally perilous. Israel’s occupation and its subsequent annexation measures of the Syrian Golan Heights were explicitly declared “null and void and without international legal effect” by the UN Security Council.

The Ethiopian Prime Minister is also on the public record contesting Eritrea’s internationally recognized independence and sovereignty, claiming that his government “couldn’t find any supporting document”.

The blatant assertions of the Ethiopian leadership undermine Eritrea’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and unity and must be unequivocally denounced.

Facing persistent threats of force and explicit declarations of war, Eritrea retains its inherent right to self-defense under the UN Charter. Nevertheless, it has exercised maximum restraint, avoiding the escalation ladder deliberately set by Ethiopia.

Eritrea’s strategic composure places the Ethiopian government in a legally indefensible and operationally precarious position. Confronted with intricate domestic crises and the manufactured “self-defense” claims tied to the ambitions of “sea access”, the Ethiopian regime is risking to initiate a war of aggression against Eritrea, thereby breaching the foundational prohibition on the use of force.

Ultimately, regardless of the manufactured pretexts, Ethiopia’s war of choice will neither resolve its self-inflicted internal conflicts nor will secure it “sovereign sea access.”

Semere Azazi

Political Officer

Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the UN

11 October 2026