Ethiopia and Eritrea

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they are monitoring the escalating tension between Ethiopia and Eritrea, and what steps they are taking to reduce the risk of renewed cross-border conflict and protect civilians in the region.

My Lords, the UK does not support actions by any party that would bring conflict or instability to the region. Alongside partners, we continue to monitor the situation closely, to warn both countries about the risk of inflammatory action and to urge constructive dialogue.

My Lords, with the leave of the House, before I ask my supplementary question, I congratulate my noble friend the Minister on his deserved promotion and welcome him to his place on the Front Bench.

My noble friend will be aware that, in the Tigray war between 2020 and 2022, the Ethiopian federal Government and the Eritrean regime, with others, fought together against the TPLF in a war that caused between 160,000 and 600,000 civilian deaths. What assessment have His Majesty’s Government made of the reason for, and the implications of, a new and unthinkable unholy alliance between Eritrea and the TPLF, apparently formed with the aim of facing Ethiopia? What lies ahead?

I thank my noble friend for his question and his congratulations; his vast experience and expertise make me feel considerable humility standing here.

We cannot speculate at this time about what position either Government will take in relation to the tensions within Tigray. However, we have been clear that, for sustainable peace, the full implementation of the cessation of hostilities agreement is required, including the withdrawal of forces other than the Ethiopian National Defense Force from Ethiopian territory. Both Government Ministers and senior officials have made clear that we do not support inflammatory action, by either side, to both the Ethiopian and Eritrean Governments.

My Lords, I join in welcoming the Minister to the Front Bench; I well remember my first Question many years ago and I am sure it is a difficult experience.

Ethiopia’s ambition of gaining access to the Red Sea is one of the core driving factors behind tensions in the region, so what discussions have Ministers or UK diplomats had with both Eritrean and Ethiopian counterparts about a fair, equitable and peaceful agreement that could solve this problem between the two parties?

I thank the noble Lord for that question and for his kind words. The Government’s position is that countries must pursue commercial access to the sea through peaceful, negotiated means. The UK does not support aggressive action or rhetoric that threatens a country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The previous Foreign Secretary spoke to Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister Gedion in August, when he warned against the risk of miscalculation and encouraged dialogue with Eritrea. Similar points have been made to the Eritrean Government by our officials there.

My Lords, I also welcome the noble Lord to his place, but does he recognise that the UK’s influence in the Horn of Africa and across the continent has been greatly diminished by a lack of consistent political leadership in the FCDO, exemplified by having no fewer than eight different Foreign Secretaries and nine different Ministers for Africa since 2016? Does he share my dismay that, despite promises of a new partnership with Africa, the current Government have acted like their predecessor in moving aside a highly regarded Africa Minister just over a year into his post and further diminishing our already waning influence on the continent?

I thank the noble Lord for that question. The Government recognise that we need a new approach to Africa to reflect that the world and Africa have changed. We must progress beyond the paternalistic approach of previous Governments, which too often saw relationships through the lens of old-fashioned aid and short-term deals. In June, a summary was published of a wide-ranging consultation undertaken with African Governments, multilateral institutions, businesses, civil society, creatives, academia and diaspora organisations. Led by the Foreign Secretary, this Government are drawing on the evidence to shape and inform the new approach. We believe the UK can be a partner to Africa to boost sustainable growth, combat the climate crisis, tackle insecurity and address our migration priorities, drawing on our shared cultural and people-to-people links. That will remain the Government’s view despite ministerial changes. That is our plan, and that is what we shall seek.

My Lords, this conflict is another example of the UK’s reduced influence in the world as a result of our reduction in overseas development money. The previous Government took it down from 0.7% to 0.5% and the present one have taken it down from 0.5% to 0.3%—okay, we have increased our defence expenditure, but defence, diplomacy and development are the three cores of our influence. This conflict is another example of our diminished influence in the world. Would the Minister like to comment?

I thank the noble Lord for that question. We are reducing ODA to the equivalent of 0.3% of GNI in order, as I think everyone knows, to fund defence spending at 2.5% of GDP by 2027. We remain committed to the 0.7% target when fiscal circumstances allow, as set out in the International Development Act. Reducing ODA now is a difficult but necessary decision to respond to the pressing security challenges. With regard to Ethiopia specifically, Ethiopia is a long-standing and important development partner to the UK and one of the largest recipients of UK ODA. Ensuring the protection of civilians is our top priority. Our ODA budget for Ethiopia is £161.7 million this year, making us one of the top three donors, and that gives us a great deal of influence with Ethiopia and in the wider region.

My Lords, while I welcome the Minister to his position, I too align myself with the disappointment at the removal of the Minister for Africa. The noble Lord, Lord Collins, was doing a sterling job, and I express the disappointment from all sides of the House.

The Question is focused on the important issue of preventing sexual violence in conflict; for well over a decade, the UK showed leadership on that. We established an international alliance. Tigray was an area of key focus on the issue of accountability for acts of sexual violence, particularly against girls and women. In one clinic alone, over 100 victims of rape and sexual violence are being reported in Tigray. What assurance can the Minister give me that this will remain a priority and that, with high-level week at the UN upon us, the UK will use its long legacy and recognition of leadership on this issue in convening a meeting at a high level with Ministers during high-level week in New York?

I thank the noble Lord. I too pay tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Collins, for his work and commitment. His commitment was extended to helping me with the answers to these questions, so I have benefited from his enormous experience and loyalty.

On the question of protecting women and girls from violence caused by conflict, the conflict in Tigray, as the noble Lord says, has left deep emotional and psychological wounds, particularly among women who have survived conflict-related sexual violence. Recognising the urgent need for trauma healing, the UK is providing direct funding to CARE International to support locally-led initiatives addressing this crisis. We are also working with partners to provide support to survivors of gender-based violence and provide humanitarian cash to the most vulnerable households in Amhara. Last year, we reached over 776,000 people in the region. We continue to encourage Eritrea to endorse the declaration of commitment to end sexual violence in conflict.

My Lords, I welcome the Minister and thank him for his Answer. A recent report from Physicians for Human Rights and the Organization for Justice and Accountability on the Horn of Africa documents mass rape, sexual slavery and forced pregnancy in Tigray, allegedly committed by Eritrean and Ethiopian soldiers. It calls for an international investigation into a possible crime of genocide. What steps are the Government taking to support such investigations?

I thank the noble Baroness for that question. I have set out the Government’s concerns about these issues and the priority that we attach to them. With regard to the wider claims of genocide, the noble Baroness will be aware that there are international protocols on this which this Government follow.

My Lords, further to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Browne, who referred to the Tigray peace agreement, also known as the Pretoria agreement, the Minister will be aware that the US Government led those diplomatic initiatives and played a key role in making it happen. However, the Trump Administration have said that they do not want to get involved in any diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the current Ethiopian-Eritrean crisis. Given that the two European countries with the closest ties to Ethiopia and Eritrea, with active embassies and missions in both countries, are Italy and the UK, does it not behove the Government to play a key role in trying to de-escalate this potential crisis? Will the Minister visit both those capitals and make an effort to play his part as well?

I thank the noble Lord; I would be delighted to play my part. I put that on record now. The question of working with international partners is central to this Government’s approach. The approach to any tensions should be about dialogue. We have helped to identify suitable facilitators for that dialogue. To pursue co-operation with our international partners, in March the UK issued a joint statement with the EU and 23 countries emphasising our support for the cessation of hostilities agreement, to which the noble Lord refers, urging all parties to refrain from violence and engage in urgent dialogue. We regularly engage with all parties and the African Union guarantors to reiterate the importance of implementation and to encourage political dialogue.