By- Kassahun Melesse
Reports of mass protests and violent clashes between the Ethiopian federal army and local militia have emerged from the Amhara region, the second-largest regional state in the East African country. The widespread opposition was triggered by Prime Minister Abiy’s decision to dissolve the regional force and deploy the federal army to enforce the integration of regional forces into the federal army and police. The Prime Minister has vowed to enforce the decision at any cost for the sake of ‘national unity and peace.’ Observers fear the confrontation may escalate further and destabilize a country that is still reeling from a two-year bloody civil war, which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the displacement of millions of people.
‘Illegal’ regional forces
Signifying the gravity of the situation, the deputy chief of the federal army, General Abebaw Tadesse, made a rare appearance on national TV, echoing Abiy’s statement and expressing the readiness and capacity of the federal army to crush any forces resisting the integration of what he called “illegal” regional forces into the federal army or police.
The general’s characterization of the regional forces as illegal is curious, not only because several regional forces, including the Amhara special forces, fought alongside the Ethiopian army against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) at the request of the federal government, but also because it represents an overt interference by the military in settling a controversial legal issue.
Unlike the US Constitution, which explicitly prohibits states from maintaining their own armies without the consent of Congress, the Ethiopian constitution does not have a provision which precludes states from establishing their armed forces should they deem it necessary to exercise their constitutionally mandated power of securing public order and peace in their own states. And the Amhara special forces are currently operating within the confines of the state’s borders, following the federal government’s order for their withdrawal from Tigray in January 2023.
In addition, it is an unsettled legal question whether the states, by agreeing to establish a common national army tasked with protecting the sovereignty of the country, have renounced the power to establish their own armed forces to maintain security within their borders, other than through their expressly granted power of maintaining a police force. The constitution gives all residual powers that are not exclusively given to the federal government to the regional states.
It is also important to note that a state can legally form a de facto armed force through the militarization of its police force, as the Constitution does not restrict the size, type, training, weapons, and equipment of a state police force. Thus, regional forces can be effectively defended as special types of regional police force operating under a different command structure. Alternatively, states can circumvent the federal government’s efforts to disarm them by incorporating their armed forces into regional police forces with all their weapons and military equipment intact.
.
Illegal deployment of federal army
If the legality of the regional forces is dubious, what is not dubious is the fact that the constitution does not grant the federal government the authority to disband them or deploy its army into the regional states without the request of the regional administration. The Amhara regional government had not made such a request to the federal government when the latter deployed its army into the region. While some draw parallels to the federal government’s involvement in Tigray, where the federal army intervened after the declaration of State of Emergency after Tigray’s regional forces attacked federal army bases in the region, the Amhara regional forces had not engaged the federal army prior to federal army deployment in the region nor has the federal government invoked its Statement of Emergency Power. Therefore, there is no legal basis for the deploying of federal armed forces into Amhara region.
Regional disputes, security concerns
Notwithstanding the validity of legal challenges against the deployment of the federal army into Amhara, the lack of transparency in the negotiation and implementation of the cessation of hostilities agreement between the federal government and the TPLF, which was signed in Pretoria, South Africa, in November 2022, played a more prominent role in triggering the opposition against the decision to integrate regional forces into the federal army and police.
Protesters argue that the TPLF, which launched several offensives into neighboring regions of Amhara and Afar during the civil war, has not been fully disarmed and demobilized as required by the agreement. They cite a statement made by Abiy’s national security advisor, Redwan Hussien, to Ethiopia’s parliament in which he conceded that the TPLF had not been fully disarmed and argued that the inclusion of the article requiring the TPLF to fully disarm in the Pretoria agreement was impractical and merely symbolic of the federal government’s victory over the TPLF.
This fueled the widely held belief that the federal government is planning to cede disputed areas between the Tigray and Amhara regions, which have been under the de facto administration of the Amhara region since the civil war started but were controversially incorporated into Tigray when the TPLF came to power in 1991.
Protesters also argue that disbanding the regional forces leaves the Amhara people defenseless. They point out that during the civil war, the federal army retreated from Amhara cities when the TPLF launched offensive attacks. Furthermore, protesters highlight the failure of the federal government to address the serious security risks faced by the Amhara people from armed groups such as the Oromo Liberation Army, which has repeatedly attacked Amhara cities and massacred Amhara civilians in Oromia.
Moreover, the rushed implementation of the integration of regional forces with the federal army, without proper consultation with the public, has been met with skepticism by many who perceive it to have malicious political motives. In particular, the decision to carry out the implementation in Amhara, not in other regions, such as Oromia, which has the largest regional force, has raised suspicions. While the prime minister argues that the integration of security forces applies to all regional forces, the fact remains that no other region has started to implement the plan.
Deficit of trust in federal institutions
The recurring theme underlying all these concerns is a lack of trust in the political leadership of the federal government and its army, as they are widely perceived to be dominated by politicians and generals from the Oromo ethnic group, the largest in the country, from which Abiy hails.
Although the deficit of trust fundamentally emanates from the ethnic-based nature of the federation and political organization in the country, it cannot fully explain the opposition against Abiy Ahmed. In fact, his patriotic rhetoric and the widespread public opposition to the TPLF in the Amhara region helped him enjoy popular support in the region when he came to power.
The current atmosphere of distrust and opposition towards Abiy and his ruling party is largely due to the misdeeds and glaring failures of his government. These include the inability or lack of political will to halt the relentless massacre and mass displacement of ethnic Amharas in the Oromia region, the frequent arrest Amhara journalists and political activists, targeted demolition of houses in Addis and its environs, and the restriction of freedom of movement for residents of the Amhara region to the capital city. The Ethiopian Human Rights Council have opposed the demolition of houses and the restriction of freedom of movement as they constitute a violation of the civic rights of citizens.
In fact, critics characterize the government’s demolition of homes in Addis Ababa and Sheger city— a newly established city formed by incorporating some areas formerly in Addis Ababa into Oromia region— as a social engineering project aimed changing the demography of the capital city— a multiethnic city in which ethnic Amharas form a majority but is regarded by Abiy’s party as the capital city of Oromia.
The belief that Abiy and his party are either reconstructing Ethiopia or attempting to establish a new Oromo republic by dismantling the Ethiopian state has become so prevalent that a member of parliament from his own party recently asked him to address the issue. A parliament member of the National Movement of Amhara Party has gone as far as to request the prime minister’s resignation and that he accept charges of genocide against the Amhara people.
In addition, the government has been accused of meddling in the country’s religious institutions for political ends, including its backing of a splinter group from the Ethiopian Orthodox Church —the dominant religion in the country and the Amhara region—and orchestrating the change of leadership in the Ethiopian Islamic Affairs Supreme Council by removing the former leader Haji Omar Idris who is from the Amhara ethnic group.
Abiy’s reckless military adventure
Therefore, the deployment of the federal army into Amhara against a backdrop of palpable political tensions is not only illegal but also reckless. The situation is unfolding in a region with a population nearly five times larger than that of Tigray, and the ethnic dimension of the confrontation also has the potential to incite conflict between the two largest ethnic groups in the country, with catastrophic consequences for both the country and the region. Furthermore, the country’s economy is crippled by severe strains from rampant inflation and high unemployment, coupled with the daunting task of providing immediate food assistance to over twenty million people who have been displaced by drought and conflict.
The decision to deploy the federal army against protesters—who are primarily made up of civilians with legitimate concerns and grievances —is not only ill-conceived but also counterproductive for it exacerbates the very problem fueling the protest: the people’s distrust of the government.
Hence, it is imperative that Prime Minister Abiy reverses his decision, orders the federal army to return to their barracks, engages in a sincere dialogue with the protesters to address their justified grievances, and most importantly takes concrete actions to build trust and alleviate their concerns. The fate of regional forces should be determined after consensus is reached through the national dialogue commission that parliament has established.
The international community and friends of Ethiopia must put pressure on the Nobel Peace Prize winning Prime Minister, who brought guns to a battle for hearts and minds that his government lost, to immediately abandon the catastrophic path he is on which risks plunging the country into another civil war. Political and armed groups throughout the country who may hope to emerge politically victorious from the escalation of a dangerous confrontation, which will hasten the downfall of the Prime Minister and weaken their rival political forces in the Amhara region, must realize that they are only half-right. No doubt, Abiy will not survive another civil war. But neither will the country.
