Does the issue of RedSea intended for diverting internal problem via confusion or other hidden agenda?

Mekelle፡ 23 November 2023(Tigray Herald)

Does the issue of RedSea intended for diverting internal problem via confusion or other hidden agenda? Some may argue according to article 3 and article 5 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (though it hasn’t binding effect)
1. ‘Coastal States have the right to establish the breadth of their territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 miles, measured from a normal baseline (the low-water line along the coast). Does this is applicable at this Juncture?

2. What about the argument related to article 125 ‘states that land-locked States shall have the right of access to and from the sea & shall enjoy freedom of transit through the territory of transit’……’States by all means of transport, but the terms & modalities for exercising freedom of transit shall be agreed between the land-locked and transit States’. This inserted without any implementation framework. Neither agreement nor use of force as a matter of experience.

Anyways, my people (above a million) are still in the IDPs, without food, shelter and security. The remained are also in mourning the martyrs of Tigray. No one stands with us in solidarity and honor of their sacrifice. How any of us are expected to come together for this issue? Every Tigrean have human, social, economic, political and legal insecurity in the land who sacrificed more than others. Whether Redsea or international law doesn’t show our reality my fellow.