By Worku Aberra
(For the convenience of readers, the article is presented in installments)
In recent weeks, Jawar Mohammed has given a series of interviews to promote his new book, I Have No Regrets. In these interviews, he has also called for unity in the struggle against Abiy Ahmed’s authoritarian rule and signaled his willingness to play a leading role in this effort. He has expressed his readiness, indirectly but assertively, to assume his role in bringing about fundamental political changes in Ethiopia. Whether Ethiopians beyond his Oromo supporters will accept his offer of leadership remains uncertain. This essay examines the potential contributions he could make to systemic reform, while addressing doubts about his capability.
Jawar has declared himself duty-bound to defend Ethiopia, but critics question the sincerity of this claim. Given his past political activities, skepticism about his intentions is understandable. Interpreting someone’s intentions accurately ex ante is inherently difficult, as intentions can only be judged ex post, after actions have been taken. Until his actions reveal otherwise, accepting his stated intentions cautiously is reasonable, considering the potential positive role he could play, albeit tempered with skepticism about political declarations.
Since his release from prison, Jawar has shown certain noticeable changes, though skeptics question their authenticity. His rhetoric is less fiery than before, with a clear effort to avoid inflammatory statements, particularly anti-Amhara remarks that marked his earlier discourse. He has abandoned his support for Oromia’s independence, arguing that independence for any ethnic group in Ethiopia would have devastating consequences for all. Instead, he advocates for resolving Ethiopia’s political problems through an inclusive approach that maintains the integrity of the Ethiopian state. This stands in stark contrast to his earlier position, where he called for the dismantling of the Ethiopian state.
To be sure, he continues to hold many of his beliefs about ethnic politics and ethnic federalism, but the evolution in his thinking should not be dismissed lightly. It suggests a readiness to engage in dialogue about broader collaboration.
Until evidence suggests otherwise, he should be given the benefit of the doubt regarding his transformation, even if some consider it insignificant. Individuals reassess their views because of changes in objective conditions or shifts in their understanding of the realities they face. They may even adopt ideologies they once opposed. Dismissing the possibility of a change in one’s political outlook is shortsighted; political beliefs can sometimes evolve profoundly, shaped by new experiences, circumstances, and insights.
The Need for Unity
Jawar’s call for unity warrants thoughtful consideration. Ethiopia’s urgent problems demand collective solutions, as a fragmented opposition lacks the strength to achieve meaningful political change. Disjointed efforts by opposition groups fail to deliver the systemic transformation the country desperately needs. Cooperation among diverse groups is essential, not only to navigate the challenges of political transition but also to establish a stable, democratic, and inclusive future for Ethiopia.
The importance of unity is universally acknowledged, yet achieving it in Ethiopia has proven elusive. At the risk of stating the obvious, to highlight its significance, I will draw on some economic concepts that provide valuable insights—collective action problems, economies of scale, increasing returns to scale, and the prisoner’s dilemma. The collective action problem demonstrates how individuals, driven by narrow self-interest, may fail to achieve a shared goal, even when the outcome would clearly benefit everyone.
The collective action problem arises when individuals face a conflict between incurring personal costs and achieving collective benefits. Although everyone stands to benefit from the success of a collective effort, the cost of participation may deter some individuals from contributing, resulting in suboptimal outcomes. This dynamic creates a free-rider problem, in which some individuals choose not to participate. Their non-participation weakens cooperation, erodes trust, and undermines achieving shared objectives. However, when the costs of non-participation outweigh the benefits of participation, engaging in collective efforts becomes a logical, strategic, and rational choice for all.
Collective action becomes a rational choice, from an individual’s perspective, in situations where costs are equally borne by all. Examples include natural disasters such as droughts, floods, earthquakes, or forest fires; economic crises like hyperinflation; public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic; and political struggles against oppressive regimes like Apartheid.
In situations such as these, universally shared costs make cooperation more attainable. In Ethiopia, where hyperinflation, lawlessness, and an authoritarian regime exist, the costs of inaction for all individuals are exceptionally high. These conditions have created an ideal environment conducive to cooperation for transforming the political system. Even when individual costs are uniformly distributed, isolated actions by individuals achieve far less than collective action.
The concept of economies of scale highlights the advantages of large groups working together. Just as economies of scale lower production costs in economics, broad participation by organized groups reduces the cost of achieving systemic changes in politics. It minimizes sacrifices, shortens the time needed to remove a dictator, and establishes better conditions for collaboration after the dictatorship ends. Pooling resources, expanding the reach of the struggle, coordinating efforts, and enhancing international recognition are among the advantages of large-scale collaboration that strengthen the fight against authoritarianism. Large alliances also foster long-term stability and mutual understanding, cultivated through shared sacrifices.
Another economic concept that offers insight into cooperation is increasing returns to scale. This concept is particularly relevant in effecting systemic changes. In economics, increasing returns to scale refers to a situation where a proportional increase in inputs results in a greater proportional increase in output. Applied to politics, resistance to authoritarianism exhibits a similar dynamic where greater participation produces qualitatively better political outcomes; it can change the system.
The prisoner’s dilemma, a concept from economics, can be adapted to political contexts. Consider two opponents of a dictator imprisoned on false charges. During interrogation, each faces a choice: remain loyal to their principles by staying silent or betray the other by collaborating with the dictator in exchange for leniency.
If one prisoner defects, the defector gains leniency at the cost of harsher punishment for the other, but both suffer. Mutual defection results in severe penalties for both, which strengthens the dictator’s position. If both adhere to principles, both prisoners increase their chances of securing release. This dynamic demonstrates that betrayal harms both parties, while principled actions provide mutual benefit.
Jawar as a Bridge Builder?
The need for unity is widely recognized, but questions remain about Jawar’s capacity to contribute to a united struggle against the regime, given his divisive history, polarizing rhetoric, and controversial alliances. Jawar has supported ethnic politics, defended ethnic federalism, and engaged in anti-Amhara rhetoric—though less prominently in recent years. His expressed admiration for Meles Zenawi, the architect of Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism, raises further doubts. Critics argue that these views, actions, and affiliations undermine his ability to promote unity. Whether someone with such history can play a constructive role in uniting the opposition is open to debate.
Critics argue that Jawar, almost singlehandedly, dismantled the cooperation between members of the Amhara and Oromo ethnic groups, the so-called “Oromara alliance”, a collaboration that had emerged partly through his efforts during the struggle against the TPLF-controlled government. This budding alliance, viewed by many as a step toward eventual reconciliation, was later undermined by Jawar, along with other Oromo nationalists. Between April and September 2018, a brief period of rapprochement offered the potential for lasting cooperation between the two communities. Some suggest that this growing unity conflicted with the vision of certain Oromo activists and the cooperation was deliberately suppressed.
Reports suggest that Jawar and three other prominent Oromo nationalists launched a campaign to dismantle the emerging unity, often using groundless claims, divisive rhetoric, and misleading narratives. They dismissed the alliance as merely tactical. Their actions, critics argue, eroded trust, fractured cooperation, and weakened solidarity between the Amhara and Oromo communities. Following the dissolution of the alliance, Jawar and the other Oromo activists aligned with the TPLF the so-called “federalist forces”, a diverse g separatists ethnic groups created by the TPLF. Jawar’s media network, OMN, has been cited as a key tool for spreading discord, amplifying grievances, and undermining collaboration. He also publicly rejected proposals, invitations, and overtures from Amhara community members to work together.
Jawar’s role in undermining the unity between the Amhara and Oromo groups—communities that together represent nearly two-thirds of Ethiopia’s population—cannot be overlooked. His actions eroded trust, damaged cooperation, and hindered prospects for meaningful political change. Recognizing this role is not a rejection of his current call for unity but a necessary step toward accountability, rebuilding trust, and laying the groundwork for a durable alliance.
Jawar may have reconsidered his divisive actions in his book, though this remains unclear without reviewing the book. Concerns about his past actions persist. His recent calls for unity could indicate a shift in perspective, but these require careful examination. Accepting his overtures for unity should involve addressing past transgressions to prevent repeating history.
Examining Jawar’s past activities is essential for creating unity. Addressing his actions openly ensures transparency, acknowledges transgressions, and builds trust among those concerned. Transparency reassures all parties that their grievances are recognized, their concerns are validated, and their voices are heard, creating a foundation for reconciliation.
Transparency also establishes accountability, a cornerstone of any lasting alliance. Accountability holds individuals responsible for their actions, ensures justice is upheld, and prevents past mistakes from being repeated. It signals that unity must be built on fairness, shared commitment, and integrity, rather than superficial agreements.
With accountability in place, moving forward becomes possible. Individuals who take responsibility for their actions demonstrate a commitment to individual integrity, collective goals, rebuild trust, and restore cooperation. These steps enhance reconciliation, strengthen alliances, and pave the way for systemic reform.
Despite his divisive history, dismissing Jawar outright would be shortsighted, as he remains a significant figure in Ethiopian politics. His influence within the Oromo community and the attention his statements attract, whether supported or opposed, underline his prominence. As a self-described political influencer, he has the potential to bridge divides between communities. If used constructively, his influence could help build alliances essential for addressing Ethiopia’s political challenges.
Ultimately, unity does not depend on any single individual but on the willingness of leaders across factions, groups, and communities to cooperate, coordinate, and compromise. Without this collective commitment, no individual—not even someone as revered as Nelson Mandela—could achieve unity among divided groups. Individuals may act as catalysts for unity, inspire collaboration, and facilitate dialogue, but broader alliances require shared accountability, mutual trust, and genuine reconciliation. Jawar’s contributions, if guided by these principles, could help establish the foundations for advancing shared goals, strengthening cooperation, and achieving political objectives.
Worku Aberra is a professor of economics at Dawson College, Montreal, Canada.
