Trump’s Letter to Eritrea: Diplomatic Gesture or Political Calculation?

On July 30, 2025, former U.S. President Donald J. Trump sent a letter to Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki, sparking widespread discourse and intrigue across the Horn of Africa and within the global Eritrean diaspora. For a country long misrepresented and marginalized in Western foreign policy, this letter was more than just ink on paper—it was a geopolitical tremor that challenged narratives, disrupted regional dynamics, and left many asking: Why now?

A Gesture of Recognition Amid a History of Silence

The letter, which pledged to reverse the “negative, harmful damage” inflicted by the Biden Administration, arrived as an unexpected yet welcome shift in tone from Washington. For decades, Eritrea has been portrayed by many in the West through a lens of suspicion, its independence and self-reliance often mischaracterized as defiance or hostility.

Trump’s message, by contrast, seemed to acknowledge Eritrea’s sovereignty and the legitimacy of its leadership, offering an olive branch framed in terms of “honesty, respect, and mutual opportunity.” For Eritreans who have endured years of isolation, sanctions, and media vilification, the letter offered a rare instance of recognition from a former U.S. head of state—one that may signal a shift in Eritrea’s diplomatic positioning.

However, this optimistic reading must be balanced by a critical lens. During his presidency from 2017 to 2021, Trump made no such overtures to Eritrea. Despite his reputation for unconventional diplomacy, Eritrea remained off his radar, and no public efforts were made to engage its leadership or revisit U.S. policy toward the nation. Why, then, has this letter emerged now, nearly four years after his presidency ended?

Timing and Political Motives: A Calculated Move?

The timing of Trump’s letter coincides with the escalation of his 2025 presidential campaign, leading many to question whether the gesture is more political than diplomatic. The pointed criticism of the Biden Administration—while popular among his base—oversimplifies the historical roots of U.S.–Eritrea tensions. These policies did not originate with Biden; rather, they reflect a bipartisan legacy of strategic neglect and interference in Africa.

Trump’s attempt to isolate Biden as the sole culprit behind Eritrea’s diplomatic marginalization risks undermining the sincerity of his message. Still, his willingness to acknowledge Eritrea as a respected partner—regardless of motive—stands in contrast to previous administrations and deserves critical analysis, not wholesale dismissal.

Ethiopian Disquiet: A Narrative Disrupted

Perhaps the most striking consequence of Trump’s letter has been its psychological impact on Ethiopia’s ruling elites. For years, Ethiopian leadership has employed mental warfare through carefully curated diplomatic letters, strategic meetings with Western powers, and disinformation campaigns to weaken Eritrea’s global standing. These efforts have aimed not only to isolate Eritrea politically but also to demoralize Eritreans abroad by presenting their government as friendless and embattled.

Trump’s letter disrupted that strategy.

By offering diplomatic recognition and signaling a potential partnership with Eritrea, Trump shattered the illusion of Eritrea’s isolation. The Ethiopian government’s discomfort has been palpable, with regional analysts noting increased urgency in Addis Ababa’s efforts to reaffirm its own alliances and control the narrative. The idea that Eritrea might be courted by a former U.S. president undermines years of Ethiopian efforts to position Eritrea as a pariah state.

This is where the beauty—and power—of Trump’s letter lies. Whether politically motivated or not, it has reframed the conversation around Eritrea. No longer confined to the margins, Eritrea is suddenly at the center of geopolitical speculation, with its sovereignty acknowledged on an international stage.

A Crack in the Wall or a Mirage?

While Trump’s letter may not lead to immediate policy changes, its symbolic value cannot be overstated. For Eritreans who have long endured economic hardship, media distortion, and geopolitical exclusion, such gestures can re-energize a global community yearning for recognition and dignity.

However, Eritreans are no strangers to political maneuvering. This is a people forged through resilience, skeptical of flattery and cautious of promises. The real test will be in what follows: Will Trump—or any future U.S. leader—translate words into actions? Will this letter spark genuine re-engagement, or will it remain a one-time political ploy?

Only time will tell. For now, the letter remains a poignant reminder that in geopolitics, perception is power—and Eritrea, long sidelined, is once again at the center of the stage.