Ethiopia: Geopolitical Airspace Paradox – How Landlocked Ethiopia Faces Airspace Lock, Seeks Sea and Sky Access

Addis Abeba — Ethiopia, the oldest independent nation in Africa, faces a unique geopolitical challenge: beyond being landlocked, it is functionally airspace-locked due to dependence on neighboring countries for international air transit. While Ethiopia historically had direct access to the Red Sea via the Massawa and Assab ports, Eritrea’s independence in 1993 cut off this maritime connection, pushing Ethiopia into complete dependence on neighboring nations for trade and international mobility. Of the two ports, Assab port, which includes an oil refinery, had served as a major and vital entry point for trade for several years.

Following Eritrea’s secession, initial cooperation between the two states allowed Ethiopian Airlines, the national flag carrier of Ethiopia, to operate through Eritrean airspace and Ethiopia to utilize both the Massawa and Assab ports for trade. However, the 1998-2000 Ethiopia-Eritrea Border War resulted in a breakdown of relations, causing Ethiopia to lose direct access to the open sea and reduce its sovereign northern airspace to a purely land-based corridor, increasing its dependence on neighboring countries.

Currently, Ethiopia’s land and airspace are surrounded by the land and airspace of other sovereign nations, namely Eritrea, Djibouti, Sudan, South Sudan, Kenya, and Somalia. Any geopolitical conflict, diplomatic fallout, or instability could result in airspace restrictions, dramatically impacting Ethiopia’s aviation network.

International aviation law dictates that every sovereign nation has exclusive control over its airspace. Airspace is the portion of the atmosphere controlled by a country above its territory, including land and territorial waters. The notion that a landlocked country is by default an airspace-locked country pertains to international law, sovereignty, and access rights. Ethiopian flights must obtain overflight rights from neighboring states to access global air routes. According to international law, particularly the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation (1944), every country has complete and exclusive sovereignty over airspace above its territory, and no foreign aircraft can enter a country’s airspace without permission.

Although landlocked states are not coastal, the Convention on Transit Trade of Land-Locked States (1965) and the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) also recognize countries’ rights of access to and from the sea, including via air transit. However, participation and enforcement are limited and vary by country and primarily depend on bilateral Air Services Agreements; countries cannot access international air routes without first securing overflight permissions from their neighbors. This dependency creates strategic vulnerabilities in Ethiopia’s ability to conduct aviation activities efficiently, affecting national security, economic growth, and regional influence.

To reach international airspace (e.g., over international waters), aircraft from Ethiopia must pass through the airspace of one or more neighboring countries after obtaining overflight rights from the countries that could be passed over. These rights are typically granted via bilateral or multilateral agreements, such as the International Air Services Transit Agreement (IASTA) and specific air services agreements between neighboring states. This indicates that Ethiopia relies on the goodwill and cooperation of its neighbors for aerial access to the rest of the world.

In times of conflict, diplomatic tensions, or economic sanctions, neighboring countries could restrict or deny overflight rights, further isolating Ethiopia. For instance, during and after the Ethio-Eritrean War, Eritrea denied Ethiopia overflight rights, forcing Ethiopian airlines to take longer routes. This is particularly problematic because Eritrea occupies a strategic position along the Red Sea, which would otherwise provide the shortest path to Europe and the Middle East. Last year, Eritrea suspended flights to and from Asmara. Sudan’s airspace has been periodically closed or restricted due to ongoing conflicts and instability (e.g., civil war since 2023), creating unpredictability and forcing Ethiopian flights to detour. Enduring security concerns in Somalia (e.g., risks of miscommunication with military operations and territorial fragmentation) make it a less viable option.

In times of conflict, diplomatic tensions, or economic sanctions, neighboring countries could restrict or deny overflight rights, further isolating Ethiopia.”

Djibouti is a key ally hosting Ethiopia’s main trade port, but its small airspace does not fully compensate, for example, for Eritrea’s blockade. Such overflight restrictions by neighboring countries may severely limit Ethiopia’s access to efficient international air routes, increasing flight costs and longer travel times. Technologies such as High-Altitude Pseudo-Satellites (HAPS), drones, and space-based communications may offer limited workarounds in the future. However, for commercial aviation and military logistics, the sovereignty of airspace remains a fundamental legal barrier.

Implications of airspace lock

Ethiopian Airlines (Africa’s largest and most profitable carrier) would be the biggest victim of Ethiopia’s airspace constraints due to possible circuitous routes to avoid restricted airspace, resulting in longer flight times, higher aviation fuel consumption, increased maintenance costs, and a reduced fleet lifespan. This situation would make Ethiopian Airlines, also known as ‘New Spirit of Africa,’ the most vulnerable organization in the paradox surrounding costly detours. For instance, flights to Europe could detour south around Eritrea, adding 30-60 minutes (300-500 km) compared to a direct route over Eritrea. Middle Eastern routes would also be impacted, increasing operational costs. These factors significantly have the potential to raise the costs of trade and tourism, leading to higher ticket prices for passengers and cargo transport, which reduces demand and profitability.

Additionally, it will limit its competitive edge against Gulf carriers and other airlines that enjoy more efficient (shorter and cheaper) routes. Alternative routes over some unstable neighboring countries may incur higher insurance premiums due to perceived flight safety risks related to security concerns. Despite being Africa’s largest and most profitable airline, Ethiopian Airlines would face artificial growth barriers due to limited route optimization (it cannot use the most fuel-efficient paths), reduced fleet utilization (aircraft spend more time in transit, which reduces daily flight rotations), and hindering pan-African connectivity, weakening Addis Abeba’s potential as an aviation hub due to inefficient routing.

This inefficiency will also significantly constrain Ethiopian Airlines’ $6 billion new mega-airport construction around Bishoftu city and prevent it from benefiting from the regional air integration plan known as the African Single Air Transport Market (SAATM). This huge project aims to position Ethiopia as one of the leading aviation hubs in the world, surpassing the current capacity of Bole International Airport and accommodating up to 100 million passengers annually.

Ethiopia’s reliance on Djibouti for trade–more than 90% of its imports–and its restricted airspace weaken its strategic mobility, leaving it with few alternatives and rendering it largely a geopolitically vulnerable state. Airspace blockages may pose security risks by limiting military and emergency response capabilities, such as search and rescue, as limited airspace complicates military and civil defense mobility. Since the Horn of Africa is a region of high strategic importance for trade and security, several influential and developed nations maintain military bases there. Consequently, emergency military flights or peacekeeping operations may be delayed if overflight permissions are not prearranged, which directly affects military operations and risks the national sovereignty of Ethiopia.

In the case of humanitarian crises (human-made or natural disasters), aid delivery flights become slower and costlier due to inefficient flight paths or delays, which can postpone the inflow of critical supplies or necessitate rerouting at a greater cost.

Furthermore, millions of Ethiopians reside abroad (e.g., in the USA, Europe, and the Middle East), and higher prices coupled with longer flights may discourage them from home visits. There might also be visible consequences for tourists planning to visit Ethiopia, negatively affecting economic and cultural exchanges, as Ethiopia has several United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites. Moreover, foreign investors may hesitate if a country’s air access is vulnerable to political disputes or disruptions.

Collectively, these challenges impose severe economic inflation, logistics, security, sovereignty, trade, investment, and geopolitical costs, undermining Ethiopia’s aviation industry, tourism hub, and regional influence, thus weakening Addis Abeba’s status as one of Africa’s diplomatic hubs. This also dilutes Ethiopia’s political influence.

Although Ethiopian Airlines continues to ensure its global network across all continents, including expansion into new destinations, as well as fleet expansion and modernization, and strengthening partnerships by placing a major order of several Boeing and Airbus aircraft, airspace-lock burdens hinder these plans.

The long-term geopolitical objective is clear–securing an independent maritime corridor to eliminate both land and airspace dependency.”

Moreover, with Addis Abeba hosting the African Union (AU) and Boeing Africa Office headquarters and functioning as one of the major United Nations (UN) centers, any increase in flight costs or inconveniences may prompt diplomats and organizations to shift their meetings to other cities or relocate regional offices, ultimately costing the country millions in lost revenue.

Strategies for overcoming airspace lock

One potential strategy to maintain access and mitigate the adverse effects of an airspace lock is to strengthen bilateral or multilateral diplomatic engagement with strategic neighboring countries, while also exploring alternative regional agreements.

A second approach involves applying diplomatic pressure through regional organizations such as the African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

Another viable strategy is to actively engage with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC) to help facilitate air corridors and provide technical support.

Offering economic or strategic incentives to neighboring countries–in exchange for stable and predictable access to the sea–can also be effective. This may include investing in shared infrastructure, establishing free trade zones, or promoting regional energy cooperation.

A final strategy would be to advocate for the implementation of standardized African open-skies policies under the framework of the Single African Air Transport Market (SAATM).

However, beyond these strategies–which largely rely on the goodwill and cooperation of neighboring countries–Ethiopians are actively pursuing permanent access to the sea. This pursuit is not a luxury; rather, it is unequivocally a matter of survival. As the second most populous country in Africa and the world’s most populous landlocked nation, with an estimated population exceeding 120 million, Ethiopia must secure its own access to maritime routes by all possible means.