Bisrat Lemessa Kabeta
February 4, 2025
Donald Trump’s return to the White House entails a significant shift in America’s foreign policy, setting a new course in the dynamics of U.S.-Africa relations. His “America First” agenda, animated by a renewed focus on driving strategic competition with China and Russia, presents both opportunities and challenges for the continent, including Ethiopia’s ties with the U.S.
Ethiopia holds a key position in U.S.-Africa relations due to its geopolitical influence, leadership in the African Union, and track record in peacekeeping and counterterrorism. Over the years, the country has partnered with the U.S. on a range of initiatives, from health and trade to security, education, and governance. Their partnership, however, has ebbed and flowed, mirroring the changing tides of their respective needs and objectives.
Building on this historical pattern, Trump’s first term brought a significant shift in U.S. priorities, deeply affecting its relationship with Ethiopia. His second term is shaping up to be just as impactful, if not more. Within his first two weeks back in the White House, he has already made major foreign policy moves, signalling even greater changes in how the U.S. will engage with the world.
How can Ethiopia make the most of its strategic position in U.S.-Africa relations to align its policies with the evolving U.S. interests, while protecting its sovereignty and pushing forward its development agenda? What key lessons can Ethiopian policymakers draw from the first term of the Trump administration to craft a clear and effective strategy for navigating these shifting dynamics?
First term: misalignment of priorities and missed opportunities
Trump’s Africa policy during his first term was driven by a competitive global mindset that focused on securing dominance through trade and security agreements. In his 2018 Africa Strategy, he cast the continent as a battleground for influence between the U.S. on one side and China and Russia on the other, urging African nations to choose either the U.S. or its rivals. However, by focusing solely on countering the East, he overlooked the realities of Africa’s broader economic landscape, where many countries had already established strong financial, trade, and investment ties with China, making his ambitious policy misaligned with their real priorities.
A clear example of the disconnect between U.S. and African interests under Trump’s Africa strategy was seen in trade and investment. His plan to expand economic partnerships by shifting from aid to private sector-driven growth through bold initiatives like Prosper Africa failed to account for the deep structural challenges African nations faced, ultimately preventing them from coming on board.
Similarly, Trump’s commitment to countering terrorism in Africa fell short of being a success story. His plan to scale back U.S. troop presence and transfer more responsibility to African nations ignored the fact that many of them lacked the capacity to bear the burden. This misalignment of priorities created a security vacuum that allowed rival powers like Russia to quickly step in and increase their political and military influence across the continent.
Trump’s deal-focused approach to Africa, fixated on curbing Chinese and Russian sway via economic pressure, also clashed with Ethiopia’s national interests. This tension defined Ethiopia-U.S. relations during his first term, moving through three key stages—beginning with limited engagement, growing into a stronger partnership, and ultimately declining into strained ties. In 2017, as the TPLF-led EPRDF regime weakened amid political unrest and economic decline, the Trump administration scaled back its diplomatic engagement while maintaining counterterrorism ties, likely anticipating a leadership change in Ethiopia and reflecting Trump’s broader disengagement from Africa.
In early 2018, when a reformist faction led by PM Abiy Ahmed finally took power, launching sweeping political and economic reforms, the Trump administration swiftly expressed its support, leading to a notable improvement in diplomatic relations between the two countries. Apparently the support stemmed from expectations that the new leadership would align its reforms with U.S. priorities, primarily countering China’s influence, promoting economic liberalization, strengthening U.S. trade ties, and tackling regional security challenges.
However, tensions quickly rose as Ethiopia put its national and regional objectives ahead of U.S. expectations, standing firm when the two clashed. One of the key points of contention was Ethiopia’s approach to its economic reforms. While the U.S. expected swift liberalization moves, including the privatization of highly profitable state-owned enterprises, the Ethiopian government chose a more cautious path, insisting on structural stability before opening up its economy.
Two major incidents stand out as defining moments in the fallout between the two administrations, each leaving a profound mark on Ethiopia-U.S. relations. The first case centred around Ethiopia’s growing relationship with China, particularly its continued reliance on Chinese financing, which raised concerns in Trump’s U.S. A striking example of Ethiopia’s commitment to its strong ties with China, despite Western interests, emerged when Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed quickly hosted the groundbreaking ceremony for the Africa CDC headquarters in Addis Ababa. This happened despite U.S. efforts to move the project to Morocco in an attempt to counter China’s influence within the African Union. By proceeding with the project, Ethiopia not only reinforced its partnership with China but also directly challenged U.S. expectations that did not align with its priorities.
In another key moment, which could be seen as the most significant clash between Trump’s policies and Ethiopia’s strategic goals, his strong support for Egypt during the GERD negotiations, despite his role as a neutral mediator, escalated tensions between Ethiopia and the U.S. Drawing on the U.S.’s long-standing reliance on Cairo for backing in Israeli and Middle East issues, and influenced by his personal relationship with Al-Sisi, Trump openly supported Egypt’s traditional interest in controlling the Nile, sidelining Ethiopia’s sovereign interests. When Ethiopia rightly rejected the U.S.-proposed deal, which was unusually crafted by the Treasury following Egypt’s successful lobbying to bypass the State Department, Trump’s administration resorted to cutting U.S. foreign assistance slated for Ethiopia, highlighting his transactional approach to diplomacy. Tensions deepened even further when he remarked that Egypt might “blow up” the dam, a statement that not only alienated Ethiopia but also symbolised the growing mistrust between the two governments.
Despite these tensions, however, Trump’s first term also saw two notable decisions that could be viewed as principled and supportive of the Ethiopian government’s ability to operate independently. First, he stepped back from the usual direct U.S. political interference, allowing the new government more space to operate without the traditional State Department overreach. Second, his administration was quick to condemn the TPLF’s pre-emptive attack on Ethiopia’s National Defence Forces (ENDF), a principled move that stood in stark contrast to the Biden administration’s reversal once in office. (TPLF’s interpretation of the Trump Administration’s stance toward the Ethiopian government, and how that influenced its leaders’ decision to start the war at that particular time, could be an interesting topic for future study.)
Second term: navigating shifting tides
Trump returned to office while Ethiopia and the U.S. were still mending their relationship, which had been strained further by Biden’s early policies characterised by a tough stance and heavy-handed interference in Ethiopia. Under Biden, Washington refused to recognize the government’s response to the TPLF-led war as legitimate or necessary, potentially prolonging the conflict and deepening its human and economic toll. His unfavourable stance was further reflected in an undeclared arms embargo on Ethiopia, the country’s removal from AGOA, and delays in securing agreements with the World Bank and IMF. These actions weakened the government’s ability to manage conflicts and control inflation.
Although Ethiopia and the U.S. have recently been making progress in repairing their relationship, trust has not yet been fully restored, and their strategic alliance remains vulnerable. As they continue rebuilding ties, both countries should focus on their shared policy priorities, where cooperation can benefit their mutual strategic interests. For the U.S., a partnership with Ethiopia can help advance its key foreign policy goals—prosperity, security, and global influence. At the same time, Ethiopia can leverage its ties with the U.S. not only to strengthen its economy and enhance regional security, but also to avoid potential setbacks from strained relations. With this in mind, the following key points could shape Ethiopia’s policy as it works to strengthen its relationship with the U.S.
Priorities for trade and investment: Trump’s “America First” agenda is likely to reintroduce a sharper focus on U.S. economic interests in Africa, with global competition taking the frontline. Countering China’s growing influence and the emergence of BRICS+ as a rival economic bloc will largely define America’s policy toward the continent. For Ethiopia, this dynamic will impact three critical areas of its economic relationship with the US:
First, Trump is already moving away from the traditional U.S. approach of providing aid as a key part of its international relations. In line with this, he has suspended the USAID, along with new obligations and disbursements in U.S. foreign development assistance, pending reviews. Similarly, he is reducing U.S. involvement in multilateral platforms, such as the WHO and the UNHRC, by withdrawing membership and cutting financial support.
In the long term, this policy shift can help build self-reliance and stimulate growth by encouraging Ethiopia’s public and civil society sectors to adopt innovative solutions to address the financial gaps it may create. However, in the short term, it could lead to a significant reduction in critically needed resources, creating serious challenges for both governmental and non-governmental organizations in implementing humanitarian and sectoral programs. It will also impact thousands of U.S.-funded jobs, including those within USAID, international NGOs, multilateral entities, and their partner organizations.
Second, the task of aligning with U.S. interests in boosting trade and investment could push Ethiopian policymakers to adopt swift and sweeping economic reforms. While such reforms could catalyse modernizing the economy, they may risk being imposed, directly or indirectly, at a pace or in a manner that may not align with Ethiopia’s contextual realities.
Third, as part of Trump’s broader economic orientation, his administration is likely to prioritize countering China’s entrenched influence in Ethiopia, a nation regarded as Beijing’s economic stronghold and a strategic gateway to Africa. Subsequently, Ethiopia’s tradition of balanced diplomacy may face a test as geopolitical rivalry intensifies, with Washington likely pressuring Addis Ababa to reconsider its reliance on China in critical sectors like infrastructure, finance, trade, and investment.
Similarly, the U.S. government may escalate trade wars by imposing higher taxes, tariffs, and quotas on BRICS+ members, particularly as a means to counter efforts that could challenge the dominance of the U.S. dollar in global trade. As a member of BRICS+ and having successfully negotiated agreements with several countries to conduct international transactions in its local currency, Ethiopia could also become a target for retaliation.
With careful strategy, however, Ethiopia can turn these shifting dynamics into tangible economic gains. A U.S. committed to advancing stronger trade and investment partnerships offers Ethiopia a powerful ally, provided Ethiopia carefully navigates global economic rivalries, maintains its sovereignty in economic planning, and addresses structural constraints. Expanding trade partnerships, especially through regional economic integration, can help Ethiopia offset reduced aid and create more sustainable market opportunities, enabling it to withstand drastic shifts in the global economic system.
This aspect of Trump’s policy is of great significance, as trade and investment lie at the heart of Ethiopia’s Homegrown Economic Reform Initiative, which aims to transform the economy through market-driven strategies. By aligning its priorities with U.S. strategic economic interests, such as attracting U.S. investments in vital sectors like mining, manufacturing, technology, and agriculture, Ethiopia can secure concessions that support its economic program and accelerate growth. Increasing imports of key American goods, such as aircraft, technology, and military equipment, could further strengthen Ethiopia’s position as a valuable trading partner. These steps make a compelling case for Ethiopia’s re-entry into AGOA, which would help expand exports to American markets, boost manufacturing growth, and attract more FDI.
Regional security and geopolitical positioning: Trump’s Africa policy emphasizes resolving conflict hotspots, particularly those threatening U.S. interests, by building partnerships and shifting more responsibility to local stakeholders. Ethiopia’s strategic location in the Horn of Africa, combined with its constructive role in regional security, will likely continue drawing U.S. interest.
In line with this, Washington may keep seeking to utilise Ethiopia’s diplomatic and peacekeeping capabilities to combat terrorism and promote stability, including in the fight against Al-Shabaab in Somalia and addressing Sudan’s civil war. Ethiopia can seize this opportunity to secure material, technical, and diplomatic support to further strengthen its own security capabilities, maintain its role as a key player in regional peace efforts, and safeguard its strategic interests at home and abroad.
However, although Ethiopia has a well-established track record of supporting peace initiatives in the Horn of Africa and beyond, it should not rest on its reputation. Instead, the government must adopt a strategy to actively strengthen and defend its position as a reliable security actor in the highly competitive regional landscape. As other nations compete for the West’s favour to challenge Ethiopia’s regional influence, Ethiopia’s continued role as a key peace player depends on its ability to assert its unique strategic importance and commitment to regional stability.
In this case, effectively managing the dynamics between Ethiopia and Egypt, along with Egypt’s regional proxies, must take centre stage. For instance, Cairo’s growing military presence in Somalia signals its intent to challenge Ethiopia’s strategic ambitions and compete with it as a regional security partner in the Horn of Africa. This may mean that, without a proactively assertive strategy, Trump’s previous tendency to support Egypt’s regional interests at the expense of Ethiopia’s could resurface, complicating the Ethiopia-U.S. partnership once again.
Nuances: potential opportunities and challenges: While aligning strategic interests, especially in economy and security, is important, there are several other factors that will influence the relationship between the two countries during Trump’s second term. Many of these factors arise from Trump’s approach, which is shaped by his limited focus on diplomatic traditions and his lack of genuine commitment to building ties with African nations. With this in view, here are some additional factors the Ethiopian government should consider as it shapes its approach:
First, the transactional and selective approaches that the U.S. is likely to pursue will require Ethiopia to clearly outline the strategic advantages it is willing to offer in exchange for favourable deals from the U.S. Given Trump’s selective approach to building trade and security alliances, as demonstrated by the 2020 U.S.-Kenya Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership, Ethiopia must be prepared to actively compete with other regional players for a meaningful share of U.S. engagement on the continent.
Second, Ethiopia needs to actively cultivate a warmer relationship with Trump and his inner circle, in addition to maintaining strong engagement with the State Department. This is especially crucial given that Ethiopia-U.S. relations are still shaped, to some degree, by lingering tensions from both Trump’s and Biden’s presidencies. Ethiopia must also make concerted diplomatic efforts to familiarize Trump’s inner circle with its rationale in pursuing sea access, framing it as a vital, mutually beneficial opportunity to protect global trade by addressing piracy and terrorism in the Red Sea, which is increasingly threatened by militants from Yemen and Somalia.
Third, the Ethiopian government’s ability to maintain domestic stability is essential for strengthening trade, investment, and security partnerships not only with the U.S. but also with other global actors. This requires strengthening efforts to counter local insurgency through both political and military actions, while also cultivating peace and stability through new and existing initiatives, such as the Transitional Justice and National Dialogue programs. Since the Trump administration is likely to avoid direct interference in Ethiopia’s domestic affairs, the government should take advantage of this opportunity to focus on its peacebuilding efforts without concerns with U.S. overreach.
Fourth, Ethiopia must closely monitor shifts in U.S. policies toward neighbouring countries and be prepared to mitigate their potential impact on its economy and security. For instance, the Trump administration may adopt a harsher stance toward the regimes in Asmara and Mogadishu while seeking to deepen ties with Somaliland, potentially through a stronger diplomatic presence or a military base. Recognizing the significance of such events, the Ethiopian government should leverage its bilateral relationships and its influential role in regional and continental organizations to safeguard its strategic interests.
Finally, Ethiopia’s success in this competitive region hinges on its ability to work closely with key regional and global players while ensuring mutual respect, upholding neutrality, and safeguarding its sovereignty. To achieve this, the government must remain faithful to Ethiopia’s diplomatic tradition, skilfully navigating complex international dynamics while steering clear of entanglement in conflicts such as the U.S.-China/Russia rivalry, the Israeli/U.S.-Iranian standoff, the Israeli-Palestinian issue, or tensions in the Gulf.
This point is especially important now, as Trump’s foreign policy, including U.S. relations with Ethiopia, seems to be heavily influenced by his focus on advancing Israeli geopolitical priorities. This could affect Ethiopia’s national and regional interests, particularly in terms of the ongoing tensions between Addis Ababa and Cairo or partnerships between Addis Ababa and Tehran.
For reference in APSA:
Kabeta, Bisrat Lemessa. 2014. “Ethiopia and Trump 2.0: Navigating the New U.S. Policy Landscape.” Nexus Forum for Research and Dialogue. Geopolitics Commentary, February 04. https://nexuspolicyforum.org/.
Author
Bisrat Lemessa Kabeta (PhD), Executive Director of the Nexus Forum for Research and Dialogue (NeFRaD), where he leads initiatives that promote policy research, advocacy, education, and capacity building in Ethiopian politics, economy, and society. He is also the owner and director of Headway Partners, a consultancy firm that specialises in research, management, and training services across development, relief, and public sectors.