Sirak Zena
April 16, 2025
Abstract:
This two-part analysis critically examines the role of Ethiopia’s political elites, mainly those in the diaspora, in the context of the nation’s deepening crisis. Part One dissects the historical roots and theoretical underpinnings of elite behavior in Ethiopia’s divided society, highlighting how ethnic federalism, political fragmentation, and the disengagement of veteran intellectuals have contributed to the current impasse. It argues that the failure of political elites to unite and create a common front has enabled autocratic governance and significantly escalated national crises.
Part Two builds on this critique by exploring the potential consequences of continued elite inaction, including state collapse and civil war scenarios. It then presents an urgent call to action, proposing strategies for elite cooperation grounded in political science and conflict resolution theory. The analysis emphasizes diaspora elites’ unique position and responsibility to leverage their freedom and resources to impact Ethiopia’s trajectory.
The article contends that Ethiopia’s political elites must transcend ethnic and ideological divisions to form a united front against authoritarianism and state fragmentation. It calls for a shift from identity-based politics to idea-centered discourse, from elite messianism to people’s empowerment. The conclusion underscores the moral imperative for diaspora elites to act decisively, arguing that their unity and engagement are critical to preventing national collapse and fostering democratic renewal in Ethiopia.
This comprehensive analysis offers a stark warning about the consequences of continued elite paralysis and provides a roadmap for constructive engagement and national salvation.
Table of Contents – Part One
The Paralysis of Ethiopian Political Elites
- Introduction
- Theoretical Framework
III. Historical Context
- The Role of Political Elites in Ethiopia’s Current Crisis
- Ideas Over Identities: Rejecting Name-Calling and Historical Scapegoating
- From Political Messiahship to People’s Power: Rethinking the Role of Elites
VII. The Imperative for Elite Unity and Dialogue
I. Introduction
Ethiopia, a nation of profound history and diversity, now faces the gravest political crisis in its modern existence—ethnic fragmentation, autocracy, and the real threat of state collapse. Since implementing ethnic federalism in 1995, Ethiopia has grappled with the complexities of balancing ethnic autonomy with national unity. The post-2018 era, under Abiy Ahmed, has seen a dramatic deterioration of the once-promising economic growth and relative stability that characterized the preceding years.
The current state of affairs in Ethiopia is dire. The Tigray conflict has resulted in over a million deaths, with the government facing accusations of committing war crimes. The ongoing conflicts in the Oromia and Amhara regions, involving the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) and Fano against the government, highlight the fragility of the nation’s political fabric and the struggle for rights and survival. For the past seven years, the Ethiopian economy, once a beacon of hope, has been teetering on the brink of collapse, causing widespread economic hardship for millions.
Amidst this turmoil, the role of Ethiopia’s political elites has come under intense scrutiny. These individuals, principally claiming to represent their respective ethnic groups and hold significant influence, have failed to provide the leadership necessary in a time of national peril. Instead of providing much-needed leadership and direction, many have retreated to the sidelines, becoming mere spectators to the unfolding crisis. Others have exacerbated tensions by narrowly focusing on ethnic interests, perpetuating historical grievances rather than seeking common ground.
This article argues that the failure of Ethiopian political elites to unite and create a common front has not only enabled the continuation of autocratic governance but has also significantly contributed to the escalation of national crises. By abdicating their responsibility to bridge differences and form a cohesive opposition, these elites have inadvertently become enablers of a system that continues to inflict suffering on the Ethiopian people.
The potential consequences of this continued inaction are severe. Ethiopia faces several alarming scenarios, including governmental collapse leading to chaos, the success of armed ethnic groups potentially triggering widespread civil war, or the disintegration of the nation itself. The gravity of these potential outcomes underscores the urgent need for a paradigm shift among Ethiopia’s political elites.
This analysis will examine the theoretical underpinnings of elite behavior in divided societies, explore the historical context that has shaped current dynamics, and critically assess the role of political elites in Ethiopia’s ongoing crisis. It aims to critique elite inaction comprehensively and its far-reaching consequences while offering a roadmap for constructive engagement and unity.
The central thesis of this article is clear: Ethiopian political elites must transcend their differences, engage in meaningful dialogue, and form a united front to address the nation’s pressing challenges. Only through such concerted action can they hope to provide a viable alternative to the current regime, steer Ethiopia away from the brink of disaster, and fulfill their fundamental responsibility to the Ethiopian people.
This article argues that the failure of Ethiopian political elites to unite and create a common front has not only enabled the continuation of autocratic governance but has also significantly contributed to the escalation of national crises. Beyond this fragmentation lies a deeper challenge: the marginalization of seasoned intellectuals through historical and ethnic scapegoating, and the dangerous persistence of a political culture that treats the people as passive observers rather than as the rightful agents of change. These problems must be confronted head-on if Ethiopia is to avoid collapse and reclaim the democratic potential of both its leadership and its citizenry.
II. Theoretical Framework
To fully comprehend the role and responsibilities of political elites in Ethiopia’s complex socio-political landscape, we must ground our analysis in relevant theoretical frameworks. This section explores key theories that provide insight into elite behavior, ethnic politics, and governance in divided societies.
These frameworks help illuminate the responsibilities and failures of elites inside Ethiopia and abroad, who possess greater freedom yet remain divided.
A. Elite Theory in Political Science
Elite theory, pioneered by sociologists like Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca, propounds that in every society, a small minority holds significant power and influence over the majority (Bottomore, 1993). In Ethiopian politics, this theory helps explain the outsized impact of political elites on national affairs.
Contemporary elite theory, as developed by scholars such as C. Wright Mills, emphasizes the interconnectedness of political, economic, and military elites (Mills, 1956). In Ethiopia, this interconnection is evident in the overlap between political power, ethnic representation, and control over economic resources. Understanding this dynamic is crucial for analyzing the motivations and actions of Ethiopian political elites.
B. Ethnic Entrepreneurship and Its Role in Divided Societies
The concept of ethnic entrepreneurship, as discussed by scholars like Paul Brass and Donald Horowitz, is relevant to Ethiopia’s ethnic federal system. Ethnic entrepreneurs are political actors who mobilize ethnic identities for political gain (Brass, 1991; Horowitz, 1985). Many political elites have assumed this role in Ethiopia, capitalizing on historical narratives and grievances to maintain their power base within their ethnic groups.
This framework helps explain why some Ethiopian political elites may resist cross-ethnic cooperation. Their power derives from their ability to champion specific ethnic interests. It also illuminates the challenges of building national consensus in a system where political capital is often tied to ethnic loyalty.
C. Consociationalism and Power-sharing in Multi-ethnic States
Arend Lijphart’s theory of consociationalism offers a model for governance in deeply divided societies (Lijphart, 1977). This approach advocates for power-sharing arrangements that ensure representation for all significant groups. While Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism incorporates some elements of consociationalism, the theory’s emphasis on elite cooperation and grand coalitions provides a valuable benchmark against which to evaluate the current behavior of Ethiopian political elites.
Consociational theory suggests that in divided societies, stability depends on the willingness of elites to cooperate across group lines (Lijphart, 2002). Ethiopian elites’ ineffectiveness highlights a critical disconnect between theoretical best practices and current realities.
D. The Concept of Political Responsibility in Times of Crisis
Drawing on the work of political philosophers like Hannah Arendt (1987) and contemporary transitional justice scholars (Leebaw, 2008), we can explore the concept of political responsibility during periods of national crisis. This framework emphasizes political leaders’ moral and practical obligations to act in the interests of the broader populace, especially when faced with threats to national stability and human rights.
In Ethiopia, this concept of responsibility compels political elites to set aside narrow ethnic or personal interests for national unity and well-being. It provides a theoretical basis for critiquing elite inaction and calls for a more engaged and unified approach to addressing the country’s challenges.
By applying these theoretical frameworks to the Ethiopian case, we can develop a more nuanced understanding of elite behavior, the challenges of governance in a multi-ethnic state, and the critical importance of elite cooperation in times of national crisis. This theoretical grounding will inform our subsequent analysis of Ethiopian politics’ historical context and current dynamics and our recommendations for future action.
III. Historical Context
To fully grasp the current dynamics of Ethiopian politics and the role of political elites, it is crucial to examine the historical context that has shaped the nation’s political landscape. This section summarizes key events and developments that have led to the present situation.
A. The Implementation of Ethnic Federalism (1995)
The year 1995 represented a pivotal moment in Ethiopian politics. The nation implemented a new constitution that established ethnic federalism. This system, intended to address the nation’s ethnic diversity and historical grievances, partitioned Ethiopia into regions predominantly along ethnolinguistic lines.
The Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), under Meles Zenawi’s leadership, instituted this system to guarantee self-determination for Ethiopia’s diverse ethnic groups. Many contend that ethnic federalism has entrenched ethnic divides and generated new obstacles to national unity.
B. Evolution of Ethnic-Based Politics in Ethiopia
The adoption of ethnic federalism has significantly shaped the development of Ethiopian politics. Political organizations and movements are progressively structured along ethnic lines, with elites frequently presenting themselves as advocates for the interests of their specific ethnic groups.
This shift has intensified ethnic-based competition for resources and power at regional and national levels. It has also contributed to the fragmentation of opposition forces, making it challenging to form a united front against the ruling party (Záhořík, 2017).
C. Pre-2018 Economic Growth and Stability
Despite criticisms of its political system, Ethiopia experienced significant economic growth in the years leading up to 2018. Under the leadership of Meles Zenawi and his successor, Hailemariam Desalegn, Ethiopia pursued a state-led developmental model that resulted in double-digit GDP growth rates for much of the 2004-2018 period (World Bank, 2019).
These economic achievements, which are frequently referred to as the “Ethiopian miracle,” were followed by a relatively stable political environment despite continuing concerns over human rights and political freedoms.
D. Post-2018 Political and Economic Turmoil
In 2018, with Abiy Ahmed’s election as prime minister, many initially hoped for potential reforms and democratization, although some remained dubious. The preliminary measures implemented by Abiy, encompassing the release of political detainees and diplomatic gestures toward Eritrea, were positively embraced by the general population.
However, the initial optimism quickly gave way to renewed tensions and conflicts. The nation soon fell under violence and war, rather than being governed by legitimate political authority. The relationship between the federal government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), once a dominant force in Ethiopian politics, deteriorated rapidly. This culmination led to the devastating Tigray War in November 2020, resulting in widespread loss of life, displacement, and allegations of human rights abuses (International Crisis Group, 2021).
Simultaneously, conflicts in other regions, particularly Oromia and Amhara, have intensified. These developments have threatened the country’s stability and severely impacted its economy, reversing many of the gains made in previous years (World Bank, 2022).
The current regime has slashed the economy to its core, prioritizing war, palace, and city beautification over the well-being of its citizens. As a result, it lacks the resources to provide salaries that keep pace with the rising cost of living. Factories are shutting down, and the prices of essential fertilizers are skyrocketing. This reckless mismanagement threatens not only our economy but the livelihoods of countless families. It is time for a profound reckoning—our communities deserve better than this shortsighted approach.
The post-2018 period has also seen increased polarization among political elites, with many retreating into ethno-nationalist positions rather than working toward national consensus. This fragmentation has left Ethiopia without a coherent opposition capable of providing an alternative to the current government or a unifying vision for the country’s future.
This historical context sets the stage for our analysis of Ethiopian political elites’ current roles and responsibilities. It underscores the complex interplay between ethnic politics, economic development, and national unity that continues to shape Ethiopia’s political landscape.
The Moral Abyss: Political Elites Amidst Civilian Suffering
In the heartlands of Ethiopia, particularly within the Amhara and Oromia regions, civilians endure relentless suffering. To mention very few of them: Drone strikes have decimated towns like Finote Selam, where at least 30 civilians perished in a single attack, and Ambasel, where three children and their aunt lost their lives. In the West Wollega area town of Bila, following a drone attack by the government, 11 were executed and many civilians were wounded. Farmlands, once the backbone of rural livelihoods, have transformed into battlegrounds, with crops burned and homes destroyed. In Oromia, ethnic minorities face expulsions and abductions, often with little to no intervention from authorities. Amidst this devastation, grieving parents, having lost their children to indiscriminate violence, express a harrowing wish for death, feeling that life has become an unbearable burden.
However, Ethiopia’s political elites remain conspicuously silent amidst this humanitarian crisis. Their inaction represents not just a strategic misstep, but a significant abdication of moral responsibility. By choosing political expediency over principled advocacy, they have allowed atrocities to persist unchecked. Their silence not only fails the victims but also undermines the foundations of Ethiopia’s social fabric.
The role of political elites in any society is to lead with integrity, voice the concerns, and act as a bulwark against tyranny. In Ethiopia, however, many have abdicated this responsibility, opting for passive observation or tacit endorsement. This lack of engagement has inadvertently strengthened the regime’s position, exacerbated societal divisions, and complicated prospects for reconciliation.
History will not judge these elites kindly. Their failure to act in the face of evident injustice will be remembered as a dark chapter in Ethiopia’s journey. For the nation to heal and progress, its leaders must confront these atrocities head-on, champion the rights of all citizens, and work tirelessly to restore peace and dignity to every corner of the country.
It is essential to acknowledge that not all political elites succumbed to ethnic fragmentation. Some voices, both within the country and in the diaspora, attempted to promote cross-ethnic cooperation and national unity. However, these efforts were often marginalized, under-funded, or met with suspicion by communities entrenched in historical grievances. Without broad institutional support or a coordinated platform, these moderate elites struggled to gain traction in a political landscape dominated by zero-sum ethnic competition.
IV. The Role of Political Elites in Ethiopia’s Current Crisis
The ongoing crisis in Ethiopia is deeply intertwined with its political elites’ actions and inactions. While they possess the experience, platforms, and social capital to lead the country toward reconciliation and renewal, they have contributed to its unraveling instead. This section explores five interlinked dynamics: the underutilized potential of elites, their detachment, the dominance of ethnocentric advocacy, internal rivalries, and the retreat of veteran intellectuals. Collectively, these factors indicate a class that has not fulfilled the obligations of national leadership. Yet despite these failures, the possibility for elite redemption remains—if they can recognize the urgency of the moment.
A. Constructive Potential of Political Elites
Many Ethiopian political elites possess the technical expertise, institutional experience, and international networks to help navigate the country through its most profound crisis in generations. These include former diplomats, bureaucrats, academics, and movement leaders whose understanding of Ethiopia’s complex political terrain and its place in global politics could be invaluable.
However, much of this human capital remains dormant or sidelined. Elites with the skills to broker negotiations, develop governance frameworks, or offer transitional blueprints have been absent from meaningful political processes. Their potential to act as bridge-builders between ethnic communities, to foster inter-elite dialogue, and to reimagine national unity remains underutilized.
To rectify this failing, political leaders must proactively reengage in Ethiopia’s public sphere—not via spectacle or partisanship, but via the purposeful establishment of cross-ethnic, solution-focused platforms. This could involve forming inclusive think tanks, initiating elite dialogue forums, or offering formal advisory roles in peacebuilding and institutional design. Their silence is not neutral—it is an abdication of responsibility. The time has come to translate potential into participation.
B. Detachment and Spectator Syndrome
Despite their capacity to lead, many elites have chosen detachment—opting to observe from the margins rather than intervene in the nation’s political freefall. This disengagement stems from multiple sources: fear of state retaliation, exhaustion from decades of political struggle, ideological disillusionment, or personal self-interest, particularly among those in exile.
The consequences are severe. In their absence, authoritarian actors consolidate power, extremist voices gain prominence, and civil society is left without credible advocates. The vacuum of elite leadership has emboldened autocracy and reduced the possibilities for negotiated outcomes.
Elites must confront this retreat and recognize that disengagement, especially in moments of crisis, is not a form of caution—it is complicity. Political leaders and intellectuals must re-enter public discourse through strategic re-engagement. This requires international advocacy to pressure political space inside Ethiopia and building mechanisms outside the country, particularly within the diaspora, to organize and project alternative governance visions. While fear is understandable, when it prevents those most capable of shaping peace from acting, it becomes a significant obstacle to progress.
C. Ethnocentric Advocacy
One of the most damaging patterns among Ethiopia’s political elites is the prioritization of narrow ethnic interests over national cohesion. What began as necessary ethnic advocacy has, over the decades, hardened into zero-sum identity politics that now threaten the republic’s very integrity. This tendency is both a product and a perpetrator of the ethnic federalist system, where political survival is often tied to defending group-specific grievances.
Elites frequently deepen this divide by invoking historical victimhood, fueling distrust, and framing all political debate through the lens of ethnic exceptionalism. Instead of engaging in difficult but necessary coalition-building, many elites double down on ethnocentric narratives that stall national dialogue.
Political elites must begin reshaping their platforms toward national problem-solving—not by denying ethnic realities, but by transcending them in practice. They must promote multi-ethnic coalitions, address shared concerns such as economic justice and governance reform, and support reconciliation initiatives that acknowledge grievances while building common futures. The survival of Ethiopia depends not on the elimination of identity but on the ability of its leaders to move beyond identity as the sole axis of political legitimacy.
D. Horizontal Conflicts Among Elites
Beyond ethnic allegiance, another debilitating force is the proliferation of horizontal conflicts—rivalry, suspicion, and competition among elites. These intra-elite battles, whether over ideological purity, historical positioning, or influence in the diaspora, have fractured any possibility of coordinated opposition to authoritarian rule.
While the regime centralizes power and suppresses dissent, elites expend valuable energy on rivalries and mistrust, often accusing rivals of betrayal or impurity rather than forging consensus. This weakens resistance efforts and fosters public cynicism, eroding confidence that political change will lead to national renewal rather than another round of elite fragmentation.
Political elites must establish internal accountability and cooperation mechanisms to break this cycle. They should convene cross-group councils, develop shared codes of conduct, and prioritize collective interests over personal ambitions. Collaboration across ethnic and ideological lines is no longer idealistic—it is urgent. Without it, Ethiopia’s political class will remain part of the crisis rather than part of the solution.
E. Political Fatigue Among Veteran Intellectuals
A final, underexplored dimension of elite failure is the political fatigue of the generation that once stood at the forefront of the democratic struggle. These veteran intellectuals—scholars, activists, and thinkers—helped shape Ethiopia’s revolutionary and reformist movements in the 1970s and 1980s. Many of them now live in exile, retired or withdrawn, disillusioned by the recurring cycles of authoritarianism and ethnic conflict.
Their silence, however, comes at a cost. These figures hold historical memory, ideological evolution, and critical insight into past failures and future possibilities. Their retreat deprives the current political discourse of depth, caution, and perspective, creating space for shallow populism and reactive politics.
Ethiopia’s political renewal requires intergenerational collaboration. Veteran intellectuals must be re-engaged, not as figureheads, but as strategic mentors, advisors, and public educators. Their participation can anchor new movements in historical awareness, preventing repeated mistakes and offering a compass in moments of moral ambiguity.
The role of political elites in Ethiopia’s current crisis is not singular—it is multifaceted, rooted in missed opportunities, strategic silence, ethnocentric rigidity, factional strife, and intellectual fatigue. These failures have not only impeded national progress—they have endangered the state itself. However, the path forward is not closed. If political elites commit to re-engagement, ethical leadership, and coalition-building, their redemption remains possible. The following section explores precisely that imperative: how elites can—and must—forge unity and dialogue as the foundation of national rescue.
The Imperative of a United Political Front: Beyond Armed Struggle
While the armed struggles in Amhara and Oromia have gained momentum, their isolated nature reveals a critical shortcoming: the lack of a cohesive political strategy that extends beyond military gains. This fragmentation limits their effectiveness against the regime and jeopardizes Ethiopia’s future stability. The time has come for these groups, along with other resistance movements and political actors across Ethiopia, to recognize that actual change demands more than individual military victories—it requires a united political vision for the nation’s future.
The rush to Addis Ababa, whether by OLA, Fano, or any other group, is not a solution but a potential catalyst for further chaos. Instead, Ethiopia desperately needs a broad-based political dialogue that brings together all fighting groups, opposition parties, civil society leaders, and diaspora intellectuals. This dialogue must aim to draft a comprehensive political roadmap that addresses the immediate goal of regime change and the long-term challenges of governance, reconciliation, and national rebuilding.
This united front must prioritize the following:
- Inclusive Representation: Ensure all regions, ethnicities, and political perspectives have a voice in shaping Ethiopia’s future.
- Constitutional Reform: Address the shortcomings of ethnic federalism while safeguarding the rights of all ethnic groups.
- Transitional Justice: Develop mechanisms to address past grievances without perpetuating cycles of revenge.
- Economic Vision: Craft strategies for equitable development that benefit all regions and combat the root causes of conflict.
- Security Sector Reform: Formulate a plan to integrate various armed groups into a national force serving Ethiopians or returning them to their respective occupations.
Failure to create this united political front, particularly by armed groups, is a tactical error and a betrayal of the ideals these groups claim to fight for. Every day that passes without such coordination strengthens the regime’s hand and weakens the potential for genuine democratic change.
To the leaders of OLA, Fano, and all other resistance movements: Your courage in standing against oppression is commendable, but it is not enough. The actual test of leadership lies not in military prowess alone but in the ability to build coalitions, negotiate differences, and articulate a shared vision that can unite a fractured nation.
To political elites and ethnic group leaders, especially those in the diaspora: Your role is crucial. You must facilitate this dialogue, leveraging your international platforms and resources to unite these diverse groups. Your neutrality and broader perspective can help bridge the divides that have isolated these movements.
The stakes could not be higher. Failure to unite now and create a common political front and roadmap risks plunging Ethiopia into a cycle of conflict in which today’s liberators become tomorrow’s oppressors. The opportunity for transformative change is within grasp but demands immediate, concerted action.
Let it be clear: The path to a democratic, stable Ethiopia does not lie in a race to the capital, but in the painstaking work of building consensus, drafting shared principles, and creating a political framework that can withstand the pressures of a diverse nation in transition.
The call to action is unequivocal: Set aside narrow agendas. Engage in the difficult but essential task of political negotiation and planning. Create a united front that offers resistance to the current regime and a viable, inclusive alternative for Ethiopia’s future. The nation’s fate hangs in the balance, awaiting leadership to rise above the fray and chart a course toward true national renewal.
This is not just a political imperative—it is a moral obligation to the millions of Ethiopians who have suffered under authoritarian rule and ethnic conflict. The time for fragmented struggle is over. The era of united, visionary political action must begin now.
V. Ideas Over Identities: Rejecting Defaming and Historical Scapegoating in Elite Discourse
One of the most corrosive habits in Ethiopian political culture—especially within opposition and diaspora circles—is the tendency to dismiss ideas based on an individual’s past affiliations or ethnic background. Instead of engaging with the substance of an argument, critics often resort to name-calling, guilt by association, or ethnic profiling to discredit political actors, particularly those involved in earlier ideological struggles or from specific groups. This behavior, often cloaked in the language of justice or vigilance, is not only intellectually lazy; it is politically destructive.
This phenomenon is evident in how individuals active in the 1970s and 1980s Marxist movements are treated. Many former members of organizations such as the EPRP, Meison, and the former Workers’ Party of Ethiopia have moved beyond their ideological pasts. Many of these individuals, now scholars and veteran political thinkers, have publicly revised their views, embraced democratic values, and continue to advocate for the unity and survival of the Ethiopian state. However, they are routinely derided or sidelined—not for what they currently stand for, but for what they once believed.
This approach is not only unfair; it is profoundly counterproductive. Ethiopia is in an existential crisis. Disregarding the insights of those with deep political experience due to past affiliations risks losing valuable institutional memory and strategic understanding. In moments of national emergency, nations must draw from the full breadth of their human capital, not shrink their leadership pool through ideological purges or character assassinations.
Worse still is the weaponization of ethnic identity in political debates, a trend that has intensified since the implementation of ethnic federalism in 1995. In this framework, the credibility of one’s opinion or writing is judged by the speaker’s or writer’s ethnic background rather than the content of their thought. Intellectuals are dismissed not because their arguments are weak but because they belong to a group perceived as politically dominant, victimized, or suspect.
This has had chilling consequences: many capable, experienced individuals now choose silence over engagement, knowing that any public statement risks triggering an avalanche of ethnic suspicion or historical vilification. The result is a vacuum of principled leadership, filled not by visionaries or unifiers but loud partisans who gain traction through division.
There’s an urgent need to move beyond this culture of scapegoating.
If Ethiopia is to survive, let alone flourish, we must shift from attacking messengers to evaluating messages. The country needs all its intellectual resources, regardless of ethnicity, past ideology, or institutional affiliation. We must welcome critique and debate—but those debates must be based on ideas, not identity. We cannot afford to alienate thoughtful voices at the precise moment when cross-generational, cross-ideological, and cross-ethnic cooperation is essential.
The imperative is clear: Respect the idea, regardless of who speaks and writes it. Engage in principled disagreement. Challenge arguments with better arguments—not with slurs, labels, or insinuations. Ethiopia’s future will not be secured by those who shout the loudest but by those willing to reason, listen, and lead with integrity—no matter where they come from.
VI. From Political Messiahship to People’s Power: Rethinking the Role of Elites
In the long arc of Ethiopian political history, one pattern has persisted: the belief that political elites—not the people—are the primary agents of change. From the revolutionary upheavals of the 1970s to the ethnic federalist restructuring of the 1990s, elites have fought, negotiated, and ruled in the name of the people—often without their actual participation or consent. In the process, the masses have been cast not as sovereign actors but as spectators, beneficiaries, or casualties of elite maneuvers.
Nevertheless, this approach has repeatedly and tragically failed. The country’s descent into recurring authoritarianism, chronic underdevelopment, and ethnic polarization is not just the fault of autocrats—it is the result of a political culture that marginalizes the people themselves.
In a powerful critique titled “Elites’ Power Grab Contra People’s Empowerment,” (Messay, 2024), Professor Messay Kebede offers a bold and necessary challenge to this elite-centric model. He argues that political elites, especially those who claim to champion democracy, must abandon the illusion of messiahship and instead redirect their energies toward empowering ordinary Ethiopians to take control of their destiny. I echo Messay’s insights, and since they remain profoundly relevant today, I emphasize their urgency here. His propositions are not simply academic—they are prescriptions for survival in a country where disempowerment has become normalized.
Messay outlines several critical strategies:
- Dismantle the myth of the savior elite and cultivate political consciousness and agency among the people.
- Help people organize in neighborhoods, religious groups, and civic spaces, fostering grassroots institutions independent of state or elite control.
- Create political movements rooted in popular empowerment, not just elite competition for power.
- Demystify the elite through public education and civic dialogue, reinforcing that sovereignty lies with the people—not with a ruling class.
- To build resilient democratic participation structures from the ground up, start where people live—within ethnic communities and local networks.
Messay reminds us of a fundamental democratic principle: the state does not grant rights—it protects rights that already belong to the people. The people are not tools for elite agendas—they are the rightful authors of Ethiopia’s political future.
This critique is not only theoretical—it is painfully relevant today.
While drones kill children and the elderly, while hunger forces millions to eat only once a day, while youth unemployment soars and military conscription becomes the only viable income source, the people’s collective response has been minimal. Freedom of speech is criminalized, ethnic profiling abounds, and political prisoners fill the jails. However, mass resistance is muted—not because Ethiopians are passive or indifferent, but because decades of authoritarian rule have crushed the infrastructure of civic power. Elites have filled the vacuum, often speaking for the people but rarely standing with them.
The fear under authoritarianism is real—but fear alone does not explain everything. A deeper issue is the absence of a culture and system that affirms people’s power, dignity, and organizational capacity. When elites treat the public as followers, not as equals, the result is paralysis—not just among the elite class, but throughout the nation. This must change.
The current crisis demands not just elite unity, but elite humility. Political actors must see themselves not as liberators, but as facilitators of people’s self-liberation. They must begin building institutions and platforms that return political agency to the millions who have been ignored, manipulated, or sacrificed in the name of power struggles.
This is not an argument against leadership—but a call for a different kind of leadership that respects the people’s right to rise, organize, and act—even when that means resisting government repression and elite complacency. As history shows, true transformation does not come from above. It comes when people believe that the future belongs to them—and are given the space, tools, and solidarity to fight for it.
VII. The Imperative for Elite Unity and Dialogue
The current state of Ethiopia demands an immediate and drastic shift in the behavior and priorities of its political elites. Their continued fragmentation and self-focused actions go beyond disappointment—they represent a profound disservice to the Ethiopian people. This section will critically examine the urgent need for elite unity and dialogue, highlighting the catastrophic consequences of their continued failure to act.
A. Narrowing Historical Narratives and Political Differences
The obsession of Ethiopia’s political elites with parochial ethnic narratives and historical grievances has caused a cancerous growth in the body of the nation’s politics. These elites, who purport to be leaders, have instead become prisoners of the past, perpetuating cycles of resentment and retaliation that threaten to tear the country apart.
It is high time for these so-called leaders to demonstrate authentic leadership by:
- Critically examining and challenging their own ethnic biases and historical assumptions.
- Engaging in honest, uncomfortable dialogues with elites from other ethnic groups to find common ground.
- Developing a shared narrative of Ethiopian history that acknowledges past injustices while focusing on a collective future.
The alternative—a continued retreat into ethnic enclaves—is a recipe for national disintegration.
Dialogue does not erase historical wounds—it makes healing possible. Through genuine and often difficult conversations, elites can move from mutual suspicion to shared commitment. This is the only path to halt the fragmentation threatening the very foundations of the Ethiopian state.
The ethnicization of politics has reached a point where it threatens the very fabric of the Ethiopian state.
B. Forming a Cohesive Opposition to Autocratic Rule
The failure of Ethiopian political elites to form a united front against creeping authoritarianism is not only a missed strategic opportunity, but a failure to uphold a vital moral obligation. While these elites squabble over ethnic fiefdoms, the government continues to consolidate power, suppress dissent, and violate human rights with impunity.
This fragmentation of opposition forces has been a gift to autocratic tendencies. Arriola and Lyons (2016) note, “The inability of opposition elites to coordinate has repeatedly undermined their capacity to serve as a check on the ruling party’s power.”
The imperative for these elites is clear:
- Set aside ethnic and personal rivalries to focus on the more significant threat of autocratic rule.
- Develop a common platform of democratic principles and national reforms.
- Create mechanisms for joint decision-making and resource-sharing among opposition groups.
C. Providing a Viable Alternative for the Ethiopian People
The Ethiopian people are crying out for leadership, yet their political elites have too often relied on rhetoric that reinforces ethnic divisions rather than presenting viable national solutions. This leadership vacuum has left millions of Ethiopians disillusioned and vulnerable to manipulation by extremist elements.
To address this critical shortcoming, political elites must:
- Articulate a transparent, inclusive vision for Ethiopia’s future that transcends ethnic boundaries.
- Develop concrete policy proposals to address pressing national issues such as economic development, social justice, and political reform.
- Demonstrate their commitment to national unity through visible acts of cross-ethnic cooperation and solidarity.
The Ethiopian population has been robbed of a meaningful political choice as a result of the absence of a legitimate and unified opposition, which has practically resulted in millions of people losing their democratic voting rights, freedom of speech, press, and assembly, and the right to petition the government.
D. Addressing the Fear of National Disintegration
The specter of national disintegration looms large over Ethiopia, yet many political elites seem content to fiddle while Rome burns. Their narrow focus on ethnic interests and inability to compromise push the country toward the abyss.
To avert this catastrophe, political elites must:
- Publicly acknowledge the existential threat facing the Ethiopian state and take responsibility for their role in exacerbating it.
- Engage in serious, sustained dialogue on how to balance ethnic autonomy with national unity.
- Develop and promote a new social contract that reaffirms the shared destiny of all Ethiopians.
The stakes could not be higher. As Tronvoll (2010) warns, “The centrifugal forces unleashed by ethnic federalism, if left unchecked, could lead to the Balkanization of Ethiopia.”
The time for half-measures and ethnic politicking is long past. Ethiopia’s political elites face a stark choice: rise to the occasion and forge a new path of unity and dialogue or bear responsibility for the potential collapse of one of Africa’s oldest nations. The Ethiopian people deserve leaders who prioritize national interests over ethnic fiefdoms, offer hope instead of division, and have the courage to build bridges rather than walls. Anything less is a dereliction of duty that history will judge harshly.
Conclusion:
As we conclude this first part of our analysis, the gravity of Ethiopia’s situation becomes painfully clear. The nation stands at a perilous crossroads, teetering on the edge of disintegration. However, this crisis is not merely a state failure—it is fundamentally a failure of its political elite—a failure of responsibility, vision, and moral courage.
Throughout this section, we have witnessed how political fragmentation, entrenched historical grievances, and identity-based rivalries have paralyzed the very leadership Ethiopia desperately needs. The implementation of ethnic federalism, while intended to address historical injustices, has deepened divisions. The post-2018 era, far from ushering in promised reforms, has seen a dramatic erosion of stability and human rights.
In this volatile landscape, political elites—particularly those in the diaspora—have retreated mainly into ethnic enclaves or remained silent, abdicating their responsibility to lead. The consequences of this inaction are severe: unchecked autocratic rule, economic collapse, and escalating regional conflicts that threaten the nation’s fabric.
We have also seen how the marginalization of veteran intellectuals and the persistence of a political culture that treats citizens as passive observers rather than agents of change have further complicated Ethiopia’s path to democracy. The tendency to discredit voices based on past affiliations or ethnic background has silenced crucial perspectives needed for national dialogue.
However, within this bleak picture lies potential for redemption. By transcending their divisions, rejecting the politics of ethnic entrepreneurship, and embracing collective responsibility, Ethiopian elites—especially those in the diaspora—can still become agents of national renewal. Their unique position, free from the immediate constraints of state repression, grants them both the opportunity and the moral obligation to act.
As we move into the second part of this analysis, we will explore the stakes of continued inaction in detail. We will chart a bold path forward, outlining the catastrophic consequences of elite paralysis and proposing urgent reforms and coalitions to rescue Ethiopia from the brink. The road ahead is challenging, but not impossible. It demands a fundamental shift in how politics is conducted and perceived—from ethnic loyalty to national unity, historical grievances to shared future, and elite messianism to people’s empowerment.
The time for incremental changes and ethnic-based politics has passed. As we will see in the following sections, Ethiopia’s political elites face a stark choice: rise to the occasion and forge a new path of unity and dialogue, or bear responsibility for the potential collapse of one of Africa’s oldest nations. The fate of millions hangs in the balance, awaiting their decision.
“Those who love peace must learn to organize as effectively as those who love war.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.
NB: The second part of the article is coming
References
Aalen, L. (2020). The Politics of Ethnicity in Ethiopia: Actors, Power and Mobilisation under Ethnic Federalism. Brill.
Bottomore, T. (1993). Elites and Society (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Clapham, C. (2018). The Ethiopian developmental state. Third World Quarterly, 39(6), 1151–1165.
Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Horowitz, D. L. (2000). Ethnic Groups in Conflict (2nd ed.). University of California Press.
Human Rights Watch. (2021). Ethiopia: Events of 2020. World Report 2021.
International Crisis Group. (2021). Ethiopia’s civil war: Cutting a deal to stop the bloodshed. Crisis Group Africa Briefing No. 171.
International Crisis Group. (2021). Ethiopia’s Tigray war: A deadly, dangerous stalemate. Crisis Group Africa Briefing No. 171.
Leebaw, B. A. (2008). The irreconcilable goals of transitional justice. Human Rights Quarterly, 30(1), 95–118.
Lefort, R. (2021). Ethiopia’s war in Tigray: The transformation of a century-old political order. African Affairs, 120(480), 435–449.
Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, A. (2002). The wave of power-sharing democracy. In A. Reynolds (Ed.), The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy (pp. 37–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lijphart, A. (2004). Constitutional design for divided societies. Journal of Democracy, 15(2), 96–109.
Messay, K. (2018, August 3). On transitional government and ethnic federalism. Ethiopia Observer. https://www.ethiopiaobserver.com/2018/08/03/on-transitional-government-and-ethnic-federalism/
Messay, K. (2024). Elites’ power grab contra people’s empowerment. The Habesha. https://zehabesha.com/elites-power-grab-contra-peoples-empowerment
Mills, C. W. (1956). The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
World Bank. (2019). The World Bank in Ethiopia: Overview. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ethiopia/overview
World Bank. (2022). Ethiopia Economic Update: Ensuring Resilient Recovery from COVID-19. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ethiopia/publication/ethiopia-economic-update
Záhořík, J. (2017). Reconsidering Ethiopia’s ethnic politics in the light of the Addis Ababa Master Plan and anti-governmental protests. The Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 8(3), 257–272.
