Getahun Assefa
There is no harmonized position or coherent policy approach to end the war raging in the Amhara region. The Amhara regional administration and army officials are publicly calling for unconditional peace talks with the Amhara Resistance Army (henceforth Fanos). However, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmedi Ali (henceforth Abiy) and the Oromia regional administration are vying to “crush any armed resistance to the authority of the central government”, the ruling Oromo government. Irrespective of the lack of coherent policy or position, there is growing pressure from the international community to urgently resume peace talks to end hostilities and reduce the suffering of the Amhara people.
This article is intended to provide a fresh perspective on critical issues that should be considered if there were credible and genuine proposals to launch peace talks. It highlights elite behaviors that could act as stumbling blocks for potential negotiations to end the war in the Amhara region. However, the opinion expressed in this article should not be viewed as an overture to negotiations. Nor should it be seen as suggesting or proposing peace negotiations. The article concludes that any negotiation with Abiy’s regime, while Amaras are under constant threat of extermination, brute aggression, and naked marginalization, could be even more fatal with irreversible consequences to the Amhara ethnic group.
Why should Fanos cautiously analyze a peace deal with Abiy’s regime?
The history of nations including Ethiopia teaches us that battles can be won or lost. Winning battles can also lead to or be accompanied by losing a war. Winning both requires a well-thought-out strategy and clearly defined objective(s). From this author’s perspective, the key objectives of Fanos are three: first is to undo ethnic apartheid and fascism in Ethiopia that subjected Amharas to life in permanent isolation, marginalization, intimidation, harassment, constant fear, and never-ending grief. Second, to ensure the protection of the rights of Amharas to exist with dignity and freedom as well as full respect of their fundamental human rights as citizens. And, finally, to revere the combination of ethnic cleansing and cultural, linguistic, and historical genocide being perpetrated on Amharas by Abiy’s regime. There is no difference among the true Amharas on these pressing priorities let alone within the Fano fighting forces given that Amharas are fighting the war for survival. An Amhara doubting the urgency of these key objectives must be from the government’s side or has other ulterior motives to pursue.
Although peace negotiations are not mandatory for all conflicts or wars, they are the best options. Fair, credible, and carefully negotiated settlements of differences reduce human tragedies, and the devastation of physical infrastructure, the economy, and the environment. Therefore, even if battles and wars are won, a final negotiated settlement avoids a repeat of similar disagreements and conflicts in the future. It also lays the foundation for the rehabilitation of war-torn regions and facilitates the arduous task of post-conflict recovery and reconstruction. This means that even if one accepts the idea that war is a solution to end tyranny, dictatorship, marginalization, and genocide, it is certainly not the best option.
In the dangerous situation to which Amharas are currently subjected, peace negotiations with the enemy are not straightforward, either. This is because the risks are evident, the existential threats against Amharas are imminent, the stakes are very high, and the political leadership is not trustworthy enough to make a peace deal with it. Nor is it genuinely committed to peace and reconciliation. Abiy’s regime is incapable of promptly responding to grievances and discontentment of citizens. Nor is the regime interested in reversing the course of its deliberate policy of isolation and marginalization of Amharas in the political, social, and economic landscapes of Ethiopia.
Fanos has undoubtedly been winning the series of battles since the war began a year ago. I am convinced that the battles won will eventually lead to winning the war. The achievements thus far have put Fanos in an advantageous position to dictate their terms and conditions for potential peace talks. However, the decision to negotiate must be carefully weighed based on a critical assessment of the situation and the gravity of the threats. Situation analysis should particularly consider if (a) the time for negotiations is ripe; (b) Amharas’ socio political conditions are opportune; (c) the risks are downgraded, or the threats against Amharas are subsided; and (d) if there are credible, impartial, and neutral third parties to mediate. This notwithstanding, the government has a primary responsibility to facilitate peace processes. This includes laying the foundation for confidence-building. The government should also demonstrate flexibility in accepting terms and conditions for peace talks. It should refrain from attempting to gain popularity and political point scoring. Instead, it should realize that there is no “zero-sum game” in peace negotiations. As such, it must focus on “give-and-take” negotiations and “win-win” solutions. In all circumstances, Fanos agenda and operational strategy to defend Amharas’ legitimate quests for survival should not be dictated by the agenda of the government.
The roles and responsibilities of mediators
As a matter of principle and part of confidence-building measures, the parties in armed conflicts must agree on mediators or a single mediator. They must also agree on the modality, terms, and conditions including the timeframe for the involvement of mediator(s). In any peace process, mediators play a critical role in bringing the opposing parties to a negotiating table. Mediators not only are facilitators, but they are also key in confidence building, and creating the right conditions for negotiations. They must also guarantee that the negotiation process is reliable, inclusive, transparent, and trustworthy. In essence, the parties in the conflicts are the ones to determine whether the time for negotiations is ripe and if the conditions are propitious. However, the impartiality, neutrality, and experience of mediators play a vital role in bridging the stalemate and reducing the impasses between contending parties. Therefore, assuming that there is a decision to negotiate, the parties in any conflict need to agree on a neutral, impartial, and credible mediator(s). It is equally important to note that initial talks can be informal with a focus on basic issues such as the agenda, objectives (goals), timeframe, location, etc., for the talks.
Since 2022, multiple mediators have been involved in the Pretoria Peace process. These include the United States of America (USA), the African Union, and some African countries in the peace process, which led to a partial cessation of hostilities in the Tigray war. The Pretoria negotiations were purported as “African solutions for Africa’s problems”. However, the USA’s role was critical in providing political, financial, and technical support. The USA’s continuing engagement with the peace process is equally vital for implementing the Pretoria Agreement given its economic power, geopolitical cleavage in Ethiopia, and experience in dealing with internal conflicts in the region.
However, Amharas were utterly disappointed and dismayed by the Pretoria process. This is because the process excluded them and Afars. The two regions were as devastated, brutalized, vandalized, and victimized as the Tigray region. There has been a serious concern that the exclusionary and discriminatory process signed in Pretoria may lead to more problems than solutions. Moreover, Amharas were of the view that externally imposed (incomplete) solutions can fail to deliver promises of reconciliation, stability, and lasting peace. This is because the conflicts in Ethiopia are complex and have multidimensional causes. The recurring tension between the Amhara and Tigray regions on Amharas’ ancestral lands notably Wolkait and Tegede, Raya, and Kobo is the consequence of excluding Amharas from the peace process that culminated with the Pretoria Agreement.
Any mediation, henceforth, should be transparent, and all-inclusive. Otherwise, the sustainability and durability of peace would be compromised, making relapses to conflicts inevitable. For any peace effort to be result-oriented, durable, and credible, it is also vital to ensure that there are clearly defined rules of engagement and agreed terms and conditions. Mediators should also understand the complexity and typology of the causative factors in conflicts in poor and ethnically diverse countries such as Ethiopia. This is key to forging consensus on viable approaches, identifying key gaps, designing workable solutions, and mapping available options and intervention strategies. An understanding of each of the causes of conflicts requires careful assessment of risks and pitfalls through a broad-based, participatory, and inclusive process. It also requires the collaboration of the political elites and closer cooperation between mediators and key players (actors). Moreover, success in any peace process needs learning from past mistakes and avoiding potential causes of failures right from the beginning.
The complexity of the Ethiopian conflicts/wars
The Ethiopian internal wars/conflicts are diverse-ethnically, geographically, and linguistically. They are also complex in scope, causes, and main actors or players. In each conflict situation, the central government of Ethiopia (no longer federal) intentionally orchestrates ethnic divisions. It foments fragmentation and polarization instead of mediating differences among the diverse ethnic groups. Currently, there are at least four open wars and conflicts raging in the country. Although the consequences of these armed conflicts are similar, the root causes are diverse with different objectives. For instance, as indicated above, the ongoing war in the Amhara region is a war for survival. It is a war against ethnic apartheid and fascism that subjected Amharas to untold suffering, tragedies, and devastation. On the other hand, the main cause of the war in Tigray was entrenched interests in political power. It was fought between the Tigray Liberation Front (TPLF) vying to re-establish itself and regain lost dominance on the one hand, and the Oromo government (led by Abiy) determined to consolidate central political power at all costs on the other hand.
The conflicts in the Oromia region are completely different from the Tigray war and the one raging in the Amhara region. The Oromia conflicts were deliberately created by the central government led by Abiy. These are between the government and a faction within the government but with different mindsets, objectives, and strategies. The political wing of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) is part of the government of Abiy. Whereas, its military wing, the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) is fighting the same Oromo-led central government. The government calls OLA “Shené ”, which is a cover name for “Gaachana Sirnaa, which roughly translates into “Defenders of the System”. The group is created, financed, armed, and indoctrinated by the government of Abiy. Its members include high-level government, army, and security officials. This ethnically organized syndicate is a replica of the Rwandan Interahamwe. Its targets are Amharas which are viewed not only as rivals but also as strategic and historical enemies. The main objectives of the Oromia conflicts are to ensure the political, linguistic, economic, military, and security supremacy of the Oromo people, and to superimpose these on other ethnic groups of the country.
There are also interregional conflicts between the Afar and Somali regions. In these conflicts, the main causes are territorial disputes between the Afar and the Somali regions. The conflicts which began in 2014, are centered around three special Kebeles inhabited by ethnic Somalis from the Issa Clan where the Afars have claims. Unlike the war in Tigray and the conflicts in Oromia, these have both interclan and interregional dimensions. The central government including the ethnic militia is not a bystander in these conflicts. It is the main instigator and active player on both sides of the aisle, manipulating and pitching one ethnic group against the other. If mediators are naïve and ambivalent about the typology of wars and their root causes, any peace process will be doomed to fail.
What is next?
Learning from the mistakes of the Pretoria process, any ensuing peace processes must address the indignation of the Amharas and the Afars. In implementing the Pretoria Agreement, the mediators should particularly avoid imposing solutions on Amharas living on their ancestral lands (Wolqait & Tegede, Raya Kobo). It is equally important to ensure full accountability and responsibility for atrocities and gross violations of human rights committed during the Tigray war against all civilians including those in Amhara and Afar regions. There must be an independent and broadly representative verification (monitoring) mechanism to assess local developments including the security situation. These are critically important for reaching a comprehensive peace agreement that is inclusive, transparent, and sustainable. In the Ethiopian context, how the implementation of the Pretoria Agreement proceeds can determine how the current armed conflicts will end. That is, whether there is a need for peace talks to end the war on Amharas will depend on how the glaring mistakes of the Pretoria Peace Agreement are addressed.
Another vital factor in successful peace negotiations is the credibility and trustworthiness of the political leadership. In the case of the war waged on Amharas, there is a huge credibility deficit. Ethnocratic elites and the army who intend to subjugate, dominate, and marginalize Amharas are not trustworthy enough to make a peace deal. Their warmongering attitudes and biased political narratives will continue to pose daunting challenges to any future peace processes. Moreover, pathological lies and deceptive behaviors of the elites are key reasons for the lack of trust and loss of confidence. Prospective third-party mediators must understand the behaviors and characteristics of the leadership, particularly Abiy. They must request the disbanding of diverse armed groups created and sponsored by the government to exterminate the Amharas and quell dissenting voices.
Why is Abiy not a reliable and genuine peacemaker?
Abiy’s only interest is to stay in power at all costs. His national and international standings have quickly deteriorated from one touted as “a reformer” to a megalomaniac, dictator, kleptocrat, and anarchist. Besides his worst system of governance, over the last six years, Abiy has demonstrated worrisome structural inadequacies in resolving complex crises facing the country. Development partners such as the USA, international financial institutions, and regional organizations must understand the behaviors and characteristics of Abiy. In a country where one man’s decision is viewed as the only “best decision” to solve all the major problems, clearly understanding Abiy’s behavior becomes more important than understanding the government and its institutions. Without addressing the trust deficit, it is impossible to foster a reliable partnership to ensure durable peace, political stability, and social harmony in Ethiopia. The following are key elite behaviors responsible for the credibility gap or trust deficit in Ethiopia’s political leadership. These must be effectively addressed before being involved in any peace negotiations with the regime.
- Abiy appears to suffer from hallucination, arbitrariness, stubbornness, and perpetual wildness of the mind. He does not listen to any advice and considers himself the sole custodian of the country. He lectures his ministers, senior officials, and experts on any issue under the sky. He insults everyone like schoolchildren of his time. His ministers and senior officials have portfolios with no decision-making power or authority. Why should mediators spend time and resources negotiating with people with no decision-making powers? Last week, the US Special Envoy to the Horn of Africa, Mike Hammer, and the US Ambassador to Ethiopia, Ervin Jose Massinga were seen sitting with officials of the National Rehabilitation Commission who are inconsequential or immaterial to the peace process. They have no power or authority to participate in a give-and-take process. How is it possible to reach a consensus on key issues or a negotiated settlement with such individuals whose minds are severely constrained by the wildness and unruly characteristics of Abiy?
- Abiy is a divisive, manipulative, and pathological liar. Consequently, he has lost the last drop of remaining credibility principally due to his utter, disgraceful, and shameful lies. He became a con artist and laughingstock at social functions, diplomatic corridors, academic meetings, and national and international conferences. In as ethnically and linguistically diverse countries as Ethiopia, the primary responsibility of political elites is to foster interethnic collaboration and forge political alliances. However, the ability of Abiy to understand the challenges of ethnic cleavage to augment development outcomes with equally shared benefits is extremely low or non-existent. These combined with the pathological lies of Abiy led to a lack of credibility in the political governance, and institutional, legal, and regulatory frameworks of the country.
- Abiy behaves like village chiefs of bygone times. He strongly believes in a permanent hierarchy and centralized authority. He publicly argued that he is the sole decision-maker on issues that concern a 130 million population with more than 80 ethnic groups and languages. Instead of mediating interethnic conflicts early on, the Army, the security and the political entourage continue to be subservient to Abiy’s power-mongering behaviors. They systematically and relentlessly stir social and ethnic fragmentation, polarization, and conflicts. The main conflicts and open wars raging in Ethiopia result not only from a lack of ability to defuse the tensions. They are largely from deliberate gaslighting by ethnic entrepreneurs and the ethno-apartheid system emerging in Ethiopia. As with all dictators, Abiy’s regime subsists on interethnic conflicts as a means of survival and continuity. That is, Abiy’s mental framework is centered on ethnicity, which like a rabis, quickly and widely engulfs the entire nation with colossal collateral damage to the society, the country, and the Horn of Africa sub-region. How can genuine partnerships and deals for durable peace be concluded or formalized under such a divisive and power-mongering mentality?
- Abiy shows all the characteristics of an extroverted personality. These include low or inadequate analytical capability, lack of problem-solving skills, self-love, and excessive attention-seeking behaviors. Extroverts by nature also exhibit arbitrariness, and a glaring inability to focus on solutions. Consequently, although Abiy tries hard to portray that he is calm and confident, one can easily spot his panicking and nervous behaviors. These are vivid, particularly during cabinet meetings or while addressing rubber-stamped parliament. He has often demonstrated unbelievable levels of nervousness in public which led to taking uncalculated risks with non-determined or devastating outcomes. His inability to understand the details and lack of analytical capabilities are discernible from his arrogance, abuses, and mistreatment of individuals or groups he considers rival or superior in intelligence and aptness. Abiy’s leadership is quick to create myriad problems, most of which are failed tactics of survivalists. But unsurprisingly, he is either too slow to seek solutions or proposes arbitrary solutions with negative externalities. He lacks capabilities and interest in devoting time and energy to addressing political grievances and socioeconomic distress resulting from failed policies. Instead of addressing rampant corruption, generalized poverty, unemployment, and lack of economic opportunities, he invests in propagating these. Instead of bridging interethnic differences, he keeps erecting barriers and obstacles between dominant ethnic groups. These behaviors are antisocial, anti-collaborative, and anti-developmental, making any partnership for negotiation increasingly difficult and costly. The man is an autocrat who has complete disregard for the country’s institutions and officials leading them.
- Abiy is an “ethno-populist”, beyond any stretch of the imagination. He portrays himself as “a people person” who understands society’s problems and devotes time, energy, and resources to addressing them. He thinks that Ethiopia’s survival (as a nation) rests on his staying in power, although he consistently demonstrates inherent biases toward his ethnic group-the Oromo. He incessantly attacks individual and collective freedoms, and fundamental human rights of citizens, including the right to live or exist, freedom of expression, property rights, and rights to access capital and land. Ethiopia ranks among the worst African countries on freedom, respect for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Worst of all, the denial of rights and freedom primarily targets the Amhara ethnic group. Ethnic differentiation based on real or perceived distributive injustice can easily lead to persistent conflict situations and socioeconomic collapse as is the case in present-day Ethiopia. Due primarily to bad governance and manipulation, the country has quickly descended from an ethnic-based dictatorship to an ethnic apartheid-based autocracy, anarchy, and lawlessness. These phenomena led to hardened positions, lost trust, and a total lack of credibility in the regime to come up with balanced solutions to the poly-crises facing Ethiopia.
- Abiy has a voracious appetite for money, wealth, and luxury. So do key members of the regime he leads. In the country bread is a luxury for nearly 85 % of the population which is under multiple deprivation. For the majority, having three decent meals a day was forgotten long ago. Malnutrition and hunger are rampant both in urban and rural areas. Yet, the regime spends billions of dollars including aid resources on lavish travels, white elephant programmes, and outlandish vanity projects. None of these progrogrammes or projects are pro-poor or designed to provide decent jobs. Instead of fostering vibrant and inclusive state-community relations, the Ethiopian leadership, particularly Abiy, is bent on elite capture and ethnic rent-seeking behaviors. These all are features of megalomaniac behaviors which are aptly explained in Der Spiegel, a German leading newspaper of 15 July 2024.
- Abiy has no patience or tolerance for dissenting views. Nor has he an appetite for a peaceful settlement of conflicts. His strategy is brutal and relies on extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, and forced disappearances to silence or eliminate rivals and opponents. The army’s call for negotiating settlements is intended only to buy time and portray Abiy as peace-seeking. The regime has also instituted a hidden hit squad. This killing syndicate is believed to be composed of high-ranking government, security, and army officials- called Koree Nageegnya, an Oromo equivalent of the “Secret Security Committee”. Such institutionalized crime syndicates and their genocidal actions against the Amharas are the perfect replicas of the Hutu ethnic army (Interahamwe) and its crimes committed against the Tutsis in 1994. Therefore, negotiations under brute intimidation will not bring lasting solutions.
- Abiy follows extortionist and exploitative policies, particularly towards rival ethnic groups and political opponents. Besides targeted killings, Amharas are systematically purged from public services. Their private properties are confiscated, and entrepreneurs are denied access to capital, land, and business opportunities. Amhara traders and businessmen are obliged to pay exorbitant taxes and huge financial contributions to the war efforts of the government and subsidize the party apparatus. In Oromia and other ethnically divided states, Amhara ethnic groups are excommunicated and deliberately made to live in constant fear, trepidation, isolation, and permanent grief. Amharas are subjected to gross human rights violations, inhuman treatment, and exploitation, predominantly, by state institutions such as the army, ethnic militia, and security services. These ugly situations, if continued, can pose extraordinary challenges and obstacles to any prospects for peaceful settlement of the ongoing devastating war on Amharas and other conflicts raging in the country.
Conclusions
The Ethiopian internal interethnic conflicts and wars are largely from deliberate gaslighting by ethnic entrepreneurs and the ethno-apartheid system emerging in the country. Possible negotiations to end such conflicts can be complex, time-consuming, and frustrating. They require patience, perseverance, and consistency of approaches. It is particularly important to ensure that the ultimate objectives and the means to achieve them do not deviate from the initially agreed priorities, needs, and modalities. The impartiality, neutrality, and credibility of mediators should also remain intact and consistent throughout the process. The government should play a leading role in confidence-building and creating the necessary conditions for the proceedings of negotiations. This also requires changes in attitudes and behaviors of the government because arrogance, ineptitude, and stubbornness can be costly and may lead to a premature collapse of the talks. More importantly, without addressing the growing trust deficit, it is impossible to foster a reliable partnership to ensure durable peace, political stability, and social harmony in Ethiopia. In sum, Fanos should not feel intimidated by outside pressure to begin peace talks without objectively and critically assessing the evolving situations. While Amaras are under constant threat of extermination, brute aggression, and naked marginalization, any peace negotiation could be fatal with irreversible consequences to the Amhara ethnic group.
Editor’s note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com
__
To Publish an Article On borkena , please send submission to info@borkena.com for consideration.
Join our Telegram Channel : t.me/borkena
Like borkena on Facebook
Add your business to Borkena Business Listing/Business Directory Jobs
Join the conversation. Follow us on X (formerly Twitter ) @zborkena to get the latest Ethiopian news updates regularly. Ethiopia To share information or for submission, send e-mail to info@borkena.com