The African Union’s Selective Conscience: Silence on Ethiopia, Outrage on Trump
When the African Union (AU) released a full-page statement from Addis Ababa this week condemning a comment made by Donald Trump about Nigeria, it was more than just an exercise in diplomacy — it was a mirror reflecting the organization’s moral bankruptcy.
The AU can apparently find its voice when an American president utters a few careless words about a member state. Yet when Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed repeatedly threatens a sovereign African nation — Eritrea — with military aggression, the same AU that preaches “non-interference” and “sovereignty” loses its tongue.
For over a two years, Ethiopia’s leadership has engaged in a dangerous rhetoric of expansionism, publicly declaring intentions to secure “access to the sea and take back Assab port” by force if diplomacy fails. This is not rumor. It is on record — said in parliament, broadcast on state media, and echoed by senior officials. Such words violate the very principles enshrined in the AU Constitutive Act: respect for borders, non-aggression, and peaceful coexistence.
But from the AU? Not a whisper.
No reminder of the Algiers Agreement — the AU-witnessed, UN-guaranteed treaty that settled the Eritrea-Ethiopia border dispute as final and binding. No statement affirming Eritrea’s sovereignty. No condemnation of Addis Ababa’s war threats and propaganda. Nothing.
Instead, the Union, headquartered in Ethiopia, continues to look away as its host government undermines the peace architecture it once swore to uphold.
President Isaias Afwerki summed it up bluntly in his recent interview with Egyptian media:
“To be frank — there is no African Union in the real sense. I don’t say this to undermine it, but to describe reality. The AU has failed to meet the continent’s challenges — partly because of internal failures of member states, and partly because of external interference.”
He is right. What we have today is an organization allergic to truth and addicted to hypocrisy — an institution that rushes to defend Nigeria’s “sovereignty” from a soundbite but ignores an actual, ongoing threat and war preparations to Eritrea’s sovereignty from its own backyard.
When Ethiopia refused for nearly two decades to implement the Eritrea–Ethiopia Boundary Commission ruling — a ruling that ended a brutal war and was guaranteed by the AU itself — where was the outrage? Where were the press releases then?
The AU’s silence speaks volumes. It has become a club of convenience for the few elites, a platform for moral posturing rather than principled leadership. Its selective outrage exposes a pattern: defend certain states, ignore others, and never, ever challenge Addis Ababa — the host city of the AU headquarters, now imploding under multiple civil wars and the state violence of its own making.
How can the AU claim to defend African dignity when it cannot defend African justice? How can it demand respect from the world when it refuses to respect its own founding charter?
This double standard corrodes not only trust but the very soul of Pan-Africanism. Eritrea’s struggle — for independence, for justice, for sovereignty — embodies the ideals the AU claims to represent. And yet, Eritrea stands alone, its rights trampled by hypocrisy and silence.
If the African Union cannot defend the principle of sovereignty when it matters most, it has no authority to speak of “unity” or “integration.” Its recent statement on Nigeria proves one thing only: the AU can raise its voice — it simply chooses not to when truth is inconvenient.
Africa deserves an organization that serves its people, not its politics. One that confronts aggression, not conceals it. Until that day comes, the AU will remain, as President Isaias said, “no African Union in the real sense” — only a name, a building, and an echo chamber of empty words.