Addis Reporter – The recent Reuters report alleging Ethiopian training of RSF (Rapid Support Forces) fighters presents a narrative of unprecedented escalation, but this framing demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of international relations in the Horn of Africa. What Reuters characterizes as “secret” and “dangerous” represents instead a continuation of standard regional security practices employed by nations worldwide when facing instability on their borders.
Throughout modern history, global powers have consistently utilized proxy engagement as a tool of statecraft. From U.S. support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan during the Cold War to contemporary “train and equip” programs in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, nations have regularly provided sanctuary, training, or material support to foreign movements to advance security interests without direct interstate confrontation.
Within Africa, Ethiopia itself has a documented history of such engagements—most notably during the Derg regime when it provided military support to John Garang’s Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) as a calculated response to Sudanese support for Ethiopian insurgents.
The Critical Context of Reciprocal Hostility
The Reuters report commits a fundamental error of omission by portraying Ethiopia’s alleged actions as unprovoked while ignoring sustained hostile actions against Ethiopia by neighboring states. While Reuters focuses on alleged Ethiopian support for the RSF, it completely omits General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s Sudanese government support for TPLF-affiliated armed factions, such as Samri (or Samrie) —responsible for documented atrocities, reported by Reuters itself, Al-Jazeera, France 24, The Gurdian, Human Rights Watch and others, of the Mia Cadra, Chenna and Kobo massacre. Sudan has actively supported forces seeking to destabilize Ethiopia from within while harboring armed opposition groups.
Similarly ignored is Eritrea’s, a strong ally of Al-Burhan forces, decades-long role as sanctuary and training ground for numerous Ethiopian opposition forces, including Fano, the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA), remnants of TPLF (Weyane), Afar opposition forces, and others. Eritrea’s involvement extends beyond Ethiopian groups to include Somali forces and even engagements with extremist elements. This reciprocal, multi-directional pattern of regional security engagement represents the complex reality of Horn of Africa politics—a reality Reuters selectively excludes to craft a narrative of unilateral Ethiopian aggression.
The Problematic Cairo Connection
The report’s provenance raises serious questions about its objectivity. The article lists “Additional reporting by Alexander Dziadosz, Nafisa Eltahir and Ahmed Shalaby in Cairo”—the capital of Egypt, Ethiopia’s primary regional adversary which is in active proxy conflict with Ethiopia via al-Burhan and Eritrea. Given the ongoing tensions over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and Egypt’s documented efforts to diplomatically isolate Ethiopia, reliance on reporting from this location constitutes a fundamental conflict of interesting.
Egyptian state media and diplomatic channels have consistently portrayed Ethiopia as a destabilizing regional actor, suggesting the Reuters report may serve broader information warfare objectives rather than objective journalism. This geographical bias is particularly significant considering Egypt’s vested interest in portraying Ethiopia as a regional aggressor, the historical pattern of Egyptian media campaigns against Ethiopian interests, and the strategic timing coinciding with heightened tensions over Nile waters.
Selective Evidence and Lack of Corroboration
Despite extensive references to satellite imagery and anonymous sources, critical gaps remain in Reuters’ evidentiary chain. While imagery shows construction activity, definitively linking this to RSF training relies heavily on unnamed sources. Reuters acknowledges it “could not independently verify… the purpose of the camp.” The report fails to adequately consider legitimate alternative explanations for security infrastructure in a border region experiencing conflict spillover, refugee flows, and threats to critical infrastructure like the GERD. Furthermore, the report mentions but downplays, by trivializing it as “celebrating ties,” the January 6 UAE-Ethiopia joint statement calling for a ceasefire in Sudan—a fact inconsistent with the narrative of clandestine war expansion.
Understanding Domestic Reactions
The reported “delight” among some Ethiopians at these allegations requires contextual understanding rather than simplistic characterization as “betrayal.” Ethiopia’s complex internal politics following recent conflicts has created a fractured national discourse where some opposition elements might leverage any criticism of the government for domestic political advantage.
Many citizens receive incomplete information through social media channels and opposition outlets that may frame these allegations differently than international readers. Some reactions may represent legitimate concerns about foreign policy directions rather than endorsement of Reuters’ specific allegations. A sovereign nation’s citizens can simultaneously criticize their government’s actions while rejecting foreign media bias.
The True Betrayal: External Manipulation of Internal Divisions
The greater betrayal lies not in domestic criticism but in how external actors—including media outlets and regional adversaries—exploit Ethiopia’s internal diversity of opinion to advance geopolitical agendas. Reuters’ selective reporting, combined with its Cairo-based contributors, suggests participation in a pattern of information warfare that amplifies internal divisions, provides diplomatic ammunition to regional adversaries, and distracts from the reciprocal nature of regional security challenges.
Ethiopia’s Legitimate Security Imperatives
Any balanced analysis must acknowledge Ethiopia’s legitimate security concerns. The GERD represents a vital national development project requiring security against potential threats from multiple directions. With Sudan collapsing into civil war, Ethiopia faces legitimate threats from refugee flows, arms proliferation, and potential cross-border attacks. Ethiopia’s actions exist within a regional context where all neighboring states engage in similar security practices—a fact systematically omitted from Reuters’ analysis.
Toward Responsible Journalism on Complex Conflicts
Accurate reporting on the Horn of Africa requires acknowledging the multi-directional nature of regional proxy engagements, disclosing potential conflicts of interest especially when reporting from adversarial capitals, providing historical context for contemporary security practices, and balancing allegations with legitimate sovereign security considerations.
Conclusion
The Reuters report, while containing specific allegations, frames them within a deceptive vacuum that serves neither truth nor understanding. By ignoring universal practices of statecraft, omitting the aggressive actions of Sudan and Eritrea against Ethiopia, relying on reporting from an adversarial capital, and exploiting internal political divisions, the article represents advocacy journalism rather than balanced reporting.
Ethiopia’s security decisions—like those of all nations—must be understood within the complex reality of reciprocal regional hostilities and legitimate sovereign defense imperatives. The true scandal is not any single alleged training camp, but rather the persistent failure of international media to provide balanced coverage of African conflicts that acknowledges the agency, strategic calculus, and legitimate security concerns of sovereign states facing multifaceted threats.
As Ethiopia navigates an exceptionally challenging regional environment, it will continue to take necessary measures to protect its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and critical national infrastructure—as any nation would when confronting similar threats on multiple fronts.
Mekbib Mammo
ዌብሳይት፡ https://addisreporter.com/
ኢሜል፡ info@addisreporter.com
ቴሌግራም፡ https://t.me/addisreporter2
X፡ https://x.com/amejuju?s=21
https://web.facebook.com/addisreporternews
ስልክ ቁጥር፡ +251981866434 / +251116393393
