SUPPORT ETHIOPIA INSIGHT
How Ethiopia’s leaders weaponize population math to justify mass violence.
A troubling political calculus is resurfacing in the Horn of Africa, one that uses distorted demography to justify, first, mass death, and now, threats of war.
The recent declaration by Ethiopia’s military chief, Field Marshal Berhanu Jula, that the “fate of 200 million” Ethiopians cannot be decided by “2 million” Eritreans over Red Sea access is more than mere saber-rattling.
It reflects the continued use of a strategy previously deployed with genocidal consequences in Tigray: the weaponization of population numbers.
This “inflation-deflation calculus”—inflating one’s own numbers to claim an existential crisis while minimizing those of an adversary to undercut their sovereignty—remains a deeply harmful political tool. We have seen this playbook before.
A landmark legal report from the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy concludes there is a “reasonable basis to believe” the violence in Tigray amounts to genocide. The path to that catastrophe was paved with the same numerical dehumanization now being directed at Eritrea.
Act One: Numerical Justification
The war on Tigray was preceded by a persistent campaign of verbal and numerical dehumanization. The region’s population, approximately 5.7 million, was systematically framed as a “cancer” and “weeds” that needed excision. As scholar Teklehaymanot Weldemichel argues, this rhetoric was an epistemic tactic to normalize violence.
But the dehumanization was also arithmetic. The narrative of a small, troublesome minority of “5 million” obstructing the unity of a “100 million-strong” Ethiopia created a pseudo-mathematical rationale for atrocity.
By deflating Tigrayans’ numbers, the state stripped them of political weight and humanity. This rhetoric was then reinforced through “contextual invisibility,” a communication blackout, and a siege that turned Tigray into what one analyst called a “death-world.”
In this environment, severe atrocities followed. The New Lines Institute report documents a starvation campaign that killed hundreds of thousands, mass killings, and the destruction of the healthcare system.
Most disturbingly, sexual violence was weaponized with genocidal intent. In a 2024 study, Ethiopian researchers Alemu and Berhe recorded perpetrators telling victims, “Your womb is our enemy” and “We will destroy your womb so you can’t give birth to a Tigrayan.”
This was not an isolated atrocity; it was “genocidal rape,” designed to impact the reproductive health of the population in ways consistent with the legal definition of genocide.
Act Two: Red Sea Gambit
Today, the same approach is reappearing, with only the figures altered. Ethiopian war rhetoric toward Eritrea relies on a similar manipulation of data.
Strategic Inflation: The Field Marshal’s claim uses Ethiopia’s legitimate long-term projection—reaching 200 million by 2050—to create a sense of immediate crisis. This is not a good-faith demographic observation; it is a strategic inflation of immediacy. By framing a 25-year horizon as a pressing, immediate imperative, the rhetoric creates a “demographic necessity” for expansionist policies today.
Rhetorical Deflation: Simultaneously, Eritrea’s population is reduced to a “mere 2 million,” erasing nearly half of its actual population of almost 4 million. This rhetorical deflation diminishes the sovereignty and future of a nation projected to reach 5.7 million by 2050. The goal is to portray a country of millions as an insignificant obstacle whose rights can be overridden by the inflated “needs” of its neighbor.
The core argument mirrors that used against Tigrayans: the needs of our (inflated) many negate the rights of your (deflated) few. It is a logic that sidelines international law and the humanity of the target population.
Crucially, this is not naive innumeracy. It is a deliberate strategy. Djibouti’s offer of full port access to Ethiopia amid Somali-Ethiopian tension demonstrates that peaceful, diplomatic solutions exist.
The threat to take Assab by force is therefore not about logistics; it is about domination, justified by a demographic narrative shaped to mislead.
Finale: Breaking the Calculator
The path from the rhetoric that enabled genocide in Tigray to the threats echoing over the Red Sea is clear and continuous. It is a path marked by the declaration that “Your womb is our enemy” and the claim that millions of people are a negligible statistic.
As the New Lines Institute report stresses, the international community must find “the means to stay the course” and not pivot away from justice.
This requires recognizing the “inflation-deflation calculus” for what it is: a dangerous strategy that has already fueled one of the deadliest conflicts of the 21st century.
Allowing this demographic manipulation to stand unchallenged sets a troubling precedent: that in the Horn of Africa, might—supported by distorted numbers—makes right.
A more constructive future for the region must rest on accurate data, cooperation, and the principle that a people’s right to exist is not determined by population size.
Query or correction? Email us
While this commentary contains the author’s opinions, Ethiopia Insight will correct factual errors.
Main photo: Ethiopian National Defense Forces soldiers marching in formation, November 2025. Source: ENDF Facebook page.
Published under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
A response to Manny. TPLF did not deliberately divide Ethiopia along ethnic lines. Ethnic federalism was a direct result, an inevitable and unavoidable outcome, because of the various ethnic uprising: Oromos, Ogaden Somalis, Tigray, and others. Wallelign’s famous political observation “On the Question of Nationalities” had come full force.
Ethiopia was politically fractured, the center could not hold, ethnic federalism was seen as a necessary political settlement to hold the country together. The Amharas have always opposed it, on the other hand the Oromos and Ogaden Somalis endorsed it and have not rejected it.
In the matter of TPLF support for EPLF in making Ethiopia landlocked. As part of its campaign against Eritrea’s war of secession, it was in fact the Derg’s violence and cruelty against Tigray that became the reason for TPLF to rise up to defend Tigray, and for TPLF to seek assistance from EPLF as a matter of survival. There would have been no need for TPLF as a liberation movement without the Derg lumping Tigray people with Eritrea as the enemies and causing all the bloodshed.
In the end, with or without TPLF, Eritrea was determined to secede. Eritrea’s war of independence had started long before the creation of TPLF. When the Derg collapsed, and TPLF was trying to hold the country together, it became clear that Eritrea’s secession was inevitable and irreversible. It was not TPLF that made Ethiopia landlocked. It was Eritrea’s years of struggle and determination to be independent that made Ethiopia landlocked.
Being landlocked is not a total disadvantage, because Ethiopia does have “access to the sea” for maritime commerce. However, demanding a port for a military naval base is an aggressive encroachment on neighboring countries sovereignty.
Response to Nimintail.
Ethnic politics in Ethiopia and in the world was frist introduced and exercised by TpLF secessionist group in 1995, by writing and ratifing Ethnic constitution.
TPLF and it’s friends had been successful denaying Ethiopian citizen, their representaion and election rights.notably, Ethiopian militery service man and other prominent and educated figures by black lashing, You are (Esepa ) Ethiopia labour party and militery service men.
Thanks to PP
In his penchant for glory and warfare, Mussolini used to go on the balcony in Rome and tell people that Italy must expand or exploded, thus justifying Italian invasion of Ethiopia. For Abiy and his army general, their inflation-deflation calculus of population size is turning Ethiopia into a war prone country, first in Tigray and now possibly in the Eritrean port of Assab.
When the MOU for Ethiopia to get a port in Somaliland was revealed, Somalia immediately sought help and started receiving weapons from Egypt. Then, Egypt’s foreign minister made an emphatic statement saying, Egypt will “impose” Somalia’s will of sovereignty and territorial integrity in the dispute. Thereafter, the MOU fizzled out and collapsed.
In the calculus of population size, and in the event of Ethiopia’s incursion into Assab, Eritrea is going to need help from its Red Sea neighbors. And again, Egypt becomes paramount in this matter as well. Eritrea is a member of the Red Sea Council of coastal states, it has observer status in The Arab League. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Sudan, and other Arab states would very likely not tolerate Ethiopia using force to insert itself into the Red Sea. And these countries will not be impressed by Ethiopia’s questionable claims about the Red Sea.
Eritrea is small, but not alone. Isaias spent a week in Cairo early this month, perhaps an indication that Eritrea is possibly preparing itself for self-defense and help from its Red Sea neighbors. One possibility as a deterrence, Eritrea might obtain security protection if Egypt starts using its naval force to patrol Assab at the request of Eritrea.
Abiy wants a port for the military prestige of having a naval base. Invading a neighboring country and annexing its port is an act of aggression, which would turn the southern end of the Red Sea into a crisis zone, a war zone. Besides, Ethiopia does not have the industrial capabilities to build a naval port and a viable navy. Ethiopia has been offered “access to the sea for peaceful maritime commerce”, but its neighbors refuse to surrender their sovereignty by handing over their port to Ethiopia
that is seeking military grandeur.
This is very biased article. Why not start from the reasons for both Tigray war and Red sea potential war? To me the unfair TPLF decision to divide Ethiopia along Ethnic lines and its support of EPLF in making Ethiopia landlocked are the main reasons. When TPLF lost power in 2018 all the power shifted from a minority Ethnocentric party to Plurality Ethnocentric party. What should we expect? The remedy is to apologize for past mistakes and change the course from Tribal politics to that of Civic one.
Tplf, and secessionist were motivated and supported by esat African experts led by martin plaut, Alex dewaal kajitil and the like , this group is responsible for the sudanese civil war in 1980s, 1990s .peace loving individuals should say enough is enough to them.