Egypt Views Ethiopia’s Rise as Strategic Threat, Says Political Scientist Al Mariam

Addis Ababa, October 17, 2026 (ENA) —Egypt’s opposition to Ethiopia’s quest for sovereign Red Sea access and its position on Abay (Nile) waters reflect a broader strategy to constrain Ethiopia’s economic development and regional influence, Ethiopian American scholar Emeritus Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam, underscored.

Speaking The Pulse of Africa, Al Mariam, who taught at California State University, San Bernardino, said Egypt’s strategic concerns extend beyond water security to the wider balance of power in the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea region.

He traced Egypt’s ambitions concerning Ethiopia and the Nile Basin to the 1820s, when Egyptian forces advanced through Sudan in an unsuccessful attempt to extend control over the Nile region.

Egypt subsequently launched military expeditions against Ethiopia in 1875 and 1876, suffering defeats at the battles of Gundet and Gura, respectively.

These historical confrontations reflect a longstanding pattern of Egyptian efforts to secure strategic advantages over Ethiopia, particularly regarding the Nile waters originating in the Ethiopian highlands, he stated.

He argued that successive Egyptian governments have sought to preserve their country’s dominant position in Nile water utilization, while colonial-era agreements and subsequent diplomatic initiatives have been used to reinforce arrangements that Ethiopia considers restrictive.

The professor maintained that Ethiopia’s right to use its natural resources for development has long been at odds with Egypt’s efforts to preserve its historical position on the Nile.

He further argued that Egypt’s strategic calculations extend beyond the river, with Ethiopia’s potential economic transformation and growing regional influence increasingly central to the geopolitical rivalry.

In his assessment, a stronger Ethiopia could emerge as an economic engine for the Horn of Africa, expand its international commercial connections and become a major regional power.

Al Mariam contended that securing reliable access to the Red Sea would strengthen Ethiopia’s economic prospects by expanding trade opportunities, improving access to international markets and supporting the development of commercial corridors.

He argued that Egypt’s opposition to Ethiopia’s maritime ambitions reflects concerns that greater economic and commercial connectivity could enhance Ethiopia’s geopolitical influence.

The professor characterized this opposition as part of an effort to keep Ethiopia economically constrained and limit its emergence as a more influential regional actor.

He also argued that Egypt has increasingly sought to advance its regional interests through political alliances and relationships, particularly involving Eritrea and Sudan, rather than direct military confrontation.

According to Al Mariam, such regional maneuvering risks increasing pressure on Ethiopia and complicating its efforts to achieve domestic stability, economic growth and greater regional influence.

Turning specifically to maritime access, he emphasized that Ethiopia’s landlocked status affects more than its geography, imposing economic costs and limiting its options for international trade.

He pointed to Ethiopia’s historical connection with the Red Sea, including its federation with Eritrea in 1952, to underscore that maritime access has long been a significant issue in the country’s political and economic history.

Al Mariam further noted  that reliable access to a seaport could help Ethiopia expand imports and exports, strengthen regional trade and increase its economic weight across the Horn of Africa and the wider Red Sea region.

He also highlighted what he considers a contradiction in Egypt’s position: while Egypt emphasizes its dependence on Nile waters originating largely in Ethiopia, he argued, it opposes Ethiopia’s efforts to secure maritime access.

The professor cited the presence of military bases operated by multiple countries in Djibouti as evidence of the Red Sea region’s strategic importance and the geopolitical interests surrounding maritime routes.

Al Mariam stressed, however, that his criticism is directed at the policies and strategic ambitions of Egypt’s political leadership, not the Egyptian people.

His assessment frames the disputes over Nile waters and Ethiopia’s access to the Red Sea as interconnected dimensions of a broader regional competition involving economic development, resource utilization and geopolitical influence.