Who is to threaten whom of Derecognition?

by Sirak Kifle

Derecognition of a sovereign state is an unusual practice in international relations. Once recognition is granted, it is rarely withdrawn, because recognition carries with it an acknowledgment of sovereignty and legitimacy that is not lightly undone.

Still, history records specific situations where derecognition has occurred. This has happened, for instance, when a state was created through force, as in the case of South Ossetia—recognized by Russia but challenged and rejected by Georgia and much of the international community.

It has also occurred when a state ceased to exist altogether, making recognition meaningless. The United States’ derecognition of Armenia in 1920, after it was absorbed into the Soviet Union, or the derecognition of Yugoslavia following its disintegration, are clear examples.

Against this backdrop, it is astonishing to hear recent talk from some circles in Ethiopia suggesting the derecognition of Eritrea.

Such rhetoric reflects not only a profound misunderstanding of international law and precedent but also a delusional disregard for Ethiopia’s own precarious situation.

If there is any state in Africa today whose recognition might come under question, it is Ethiopia itself, which finds itself on the fast track to fragmentation due to unrelenting ethnic conflicts and recurrent wars.

To those confused voices who casually invoke derecognition against Eritrea, we say: beware of what you wish upon others. As the old saying goes, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Eritrea’s independence was not a gift handed down by others, nor a construct born of external imposition. It was earned—through the blood of its people, through decades of sacrifice, and ultimately through a legal and internationally recognized process.

No threat, however misguided, can erase that fact.

ዓወት ንሓፋሽ