In this guide, we’ll look at:
- The timeline of key events and peace efforts
- The main controversies and security changes
- Regional risks and what they mean for civilians
- The economy, aid access, and what to watch next
These issues shape today’s debate around leadership, stability, and accountability in Ethiopia—and why many feel so alarmed about Abiy Ahmed.
Path to Premiership
Path to premiership for Abiy Ahmed was unexpected but vital for Ethiopia’s history. By 2010, Abiy had already become a member of Ethiopia’s parliament, representing the Agaro region. He had a background in the military and intelligence, giving him crucial experience in national security matters. When mass protests shook Ethiopia in 2016–2018, demanding more democratic rights and inclusion for the Oromo and Amhara peoples, the long-dominant Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) faced deep crisis. The previous prime minister, Hailemariam Desalegn, resigned under pressure.
Abiy Ahmed rose quickly through the EPRDF ranks as a reformist voice, and in April 2018, at age 42, he became Ethiopia’s first Oromo prime minister. Many ordinary Ethiopians and global watchers hoped this would mark a new, more open era. Abiy’s political rise was seen as breaking through Ethiopia’s tense, ethnically divided politics, and his appointment was widely welcomed both at home and abroad.
Reformist Image and International Acclaim
Reformist image and international acclaim came swiftly for Abiy Ahmed during his first year in office. He freed thousands of political prisoners, lifted bans on opposition groups, and welcomed exiled media outlets to return home. Ethnic diversity started to be celebrated, with new openings for previously sidelined groups in government and civic life.
Abiy introduced sweeping reforms, such as loosening controls on the economy and media, promising free and fair elections, and acknowledging past state abuses. He received praise from international leaders and organizations, who saw him as turning Ethiopia toward democracy after years of tight authoritarian rule. Abiy’s leadership style was seen as bold and dynamic, and he was celebrated in world media for his mediation skills in regional conflicts.
However, beneath the acclaim, some Ethiopians began to worry about the speed and depth of changes, and unresolved ethnic tensions simmered in the background. Still, Abiy’s vision for a new Ethiopia received a warm global welcome, and his charisma fueled optimism inside and outside the country.
Nobel Peace Prize and Diplomatic Achievements
Nobel Peace Prize and diplomatic achievements marked the peak of Abiy Ahmed’s positive reputation. In October 2019, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize “for his efforts to achieve peace and international cooperation,” especially for resolving Ethiopia’s long, bloody conflict with Eritrea. Abiy’s historic move to re-open diplomatic ties, unblocking borders and families long split by war, brought tears and hope to millions in both countries.
The Nobel Committee also recognized Abiy’s domestic reforms—releasing political prisoners, empowering women, and ending harsh censorship. Regionally, Abiy played a key role in mediating between neighboring states like Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, and South Sudan, further boosting Ethiopia’s image as a peacemaker.
Abiy’s Nobel Prize was seen around the world as a symbol of hope for both Ethiopia and Africa. At that time, many believed he would guide Ethiopia into a new, more peaceful and democratic future.
But, as the coming years would show, early optimism did not guarantee lasting peace or unity.
Growing Ethnic Tensions
Growing ethnic tensions have become a defining feature of Abiy Ahmed’s time as Prime Minister. When Abiy first took office, many hoped his leadership would unite Ethiopia’s diverse peoples and heal old wounds. However, as reported by the Council on Foreign Relations and other international sources, his government has witnessed a surge in ethnic-based violence, especially in the Tigray, Oromia, and Amhara regions. The hope for a unified, peaceful Ethiopia faded as rival groups clashed, and grievances rooted in the country’s history of ethnic federalism reemerged.
Under Abiy Ahmed, disputes escalated between local groups like the Oromo, Amhara, and Tigrayans. Tensions boiled over in places such as Oromia and Tigray, where political rivalry, contested boundaries, and demands for autonomy led to violence and mass displacement of civilians. Instead of easing old rivalries, some experts argue that rapid reforms and weakened state controls destabilized the situation, unleashing long-suppressed grievances and fueling fresh conflict. The consequences have been devastating for many ordinary Ethiopians who face insecurity and, in some regions, outright warfare.
Dissolution of Old Power Structures
Dissolution of old power structures became central to Abiy Ahmed’s rule in Ethiopia after 2018. Historically, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) held control for decades, with a coalition of regional parties, including the powerful Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), shaping national politics. Abiy moved quickly to break with this legacy, and in 2019, he formally dissolved the EPRDF, replacing it with a new pan-Ethiopian coalition—the Prosperity Party.
This move, according to sources like Wikipedia and Al Jazeera, was supposed to modernize and unify Ethiopia’s political system. However, it also marginalized entrenched regional elites, especially TPLF leaders, who refused to join the Prosperity Party. This dramatic restructuring undermined the balance that had kept Ethiopia stable, at least on the surface, for many years. Critics argue that while the dissolution was meant to sweep away authoritarian, corrupt practices of the old guard, it also created a power vacuum, deepened mistrust, and set the stage for bloody political contests.
Centralization of Power
Centralization of power has defined Abiy Ahmed’s government, even as he promised to build a more inclusive democracy. According to Al Jazeera and multiple analysts, Abiy attempted to bring Ethiopia’s regions and ethnic groups together under a strong central authority. Forming the Prosperity Party was one way to weaken local autonomy and increase central oversight—but it also angered many regional leaders and citizens who feared losing their influence and identity.
Reports of crackdowns on dissent, arrests of opposition figures, and aggressive government control in “peripheral” states have become common. Some observers fear Ethiopia is sliding toward ‘big man’ politics, where power concentrates in one leader’s hands at the expense of pluralism and genuine federalism. Critics liken this to a dangerous gamble—rather than healing national rifts, centralization risks driving the country to even deeper divisions and possibly more conflict.
The “Medemer” Political Philosophy
The “Medemer” political philosophy is the guiding idea behind Abiy Ahmed’s vision for Ethiopia. Medemer—an Amharic word meaning “synergy” or “coming together”—aims to harmonize Ethiopia’s fractured politics and encourage unity. Abiy has described Medemer as a blend of liberal, socialist, and traditional ideas, hoping to inspire Ethiopians to rise above ethnic and political rivalries for the greater good.
Abiy’s books and speeches explain Medemer as a “homegrown” solution, uniquely Ethiopian, drawing on traditions of collaboration and forgiveness. However, despite its hopeful message, critics highlight that Medemer remains vague in practice and has struggled to overcome realities on the ground. Many citizens see a gap between the philosophy of coming together and the increasing polarization, violence, and state control they actually experience. As Ethiopia’s crisis has deepened, faith in Medemer’s healing potential has steadily declined.
Onset and Escalation of Civil Conflict
Origins of the Tigray War
The origins of the Tigray War are deep and complicated. Tensions between Ethiopia’s central government and the leaders of Tigray grew sharply after Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed took office in 2018. Abiy began removing the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) from the top positions it held since the fall of the Derg regime, which fueled anger within Tigray (BBC, CFR). In November 2020, the situation exploded after Tigrayan forces attacked a federal military base in the region. The Ethiopian government responded with a full-scale military offensive. The roots of the war also involve long-standing land disputes, historical mistrust, ethnic nationalism, and competition over resources and power (Jurist, Accord).
Role of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF)
The TPLF played a major role both before and during the war. For nearly three decades, the TPLF was the dominant political force in Ethiopia, ruling as part of a coalition. However, after heavy anti-government protests led to Abiy’s rise, the TPLF felt sidelined and threatened. Tensions escalated, and by November 2020, the TPLF had control over Tigray’s government and military assets (Wikipedia, CFR, BBC). When TPLF forces attacked a federal army base, they claimed this was a “pre-emptive” strike. After this, they engaged in guerrilla tactics, missile attacks, and formed alliances with local groups, resisting federal intervention and seeking to maintain Tigrayan autonomy.
Federal Government Strategies
The federal government’s response to the Tigray insurgency was forceful and uncompromising. Federal forces quickly moved in, backed by troops from the neighboring Amhara region and later by Eritrean soldiers. The government cut off communications, blocked roads, and restricted access for media and aid groups, making it difficult to get reliable information. The stated aims were to disarm the TPLF, restore “law and order,” and later, to install an “interim administration” in Tigray loyal to Addis Ababa (CFR, Wikipedia). Throughout the conflict, the government has been accused of using food as a weapon, carrying out airstrikes on civilian areas, and forcibly relocating populations.
Eritrea’s Involvement and Regional Implications
Eritrea’s involvement in the Tigray War has made the conflict even more dangerous for the region. Eritrean troops, longtime enemies of the TPLF, entered Tigray early in the war, reportedly invited by the Ethiopian government. They played a direct combat role and have been accused of war crimes and atrocities against civilians (Chatham House, CFR, NY Times). Eritrea’s presence increased tension with both Tigray and the wider Horn of Africa, making peace talks harder and risking more international fallout. In 2025, reports indicate Eritrean forces remained near or inside Tigray, and a fresh war between Ethiopia and Eritrea is feared by many observers.
Other Regional Conflicts: Amhara and Oromia
Violence is not limited to Tigray. Other regions, especially Amhara and Oromia, have seen dangerous escalations. In Amhara, the Fano militia fought against federal and regional forces, capturing key towns in 2024 and leading to a new state of emergency (Wikipedia, ACLED, CFR). Grievances here include disputes over territory, government repression, and autonomy demands. In Oromia, the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) clashed with federal troops for years, with high fatality rates and continuous unrest in 2024 (Wikipedia, ACLED, State.gov). Although a peace deal was signed with the OLA in late 2024, violence and instability remain high as smaller insurgent groups continue to fight. These overlapping conflicts show how Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism can turn local grievances into national crises.
Human Rights Violations and Atrocities
Human rights violations have been widespread and shocking during these wars. All sides—federal forces, the TPLF, the OLA, Fano militia, and Eritrean soldiers—have been accused of grave abuses (HRW, Amnesty, State.gov). Crimes include massacres of civilians, mass rapes, forced displacement, ethnic cleansing, arbitrary detention, and destruction of vital infrastructure. In Tigray, many international organizations and governments have accused forces of possible war crimes and even crimes against humanity (GlobalR2P, OHCHR). In Amhara and Oromia, reports continue of summary executions, mass detentions, and targeting of journalists and activists. The UN, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International all call for stronger international action, saying Ethiopian civilians remain at great risk unless abuses end and accountability is pursued.
Crackdown on Media and Suppression of Opposition
Repression of Domestic Journalists
Repression of domestic journalists in Ethiopia has become a major concern since the civil conflict began. Government authorities have arrested many journalists without formal charges, especially those reporting on sensitive topics like the Tigray war or ethnic violence. Newsrooms have been raided, and editorial teams often face threats or are forced to close. The government accuses them of spreading misinformation or supporting rebels, but in reality, most journalists are simply trying to tell the real story.
Families of detained journalists sometimes don’t know where their loved ones are held. Human rights groups have documented cases of torture and intimidation. Female reporters are at special risk for harassment. This atmosphere of fear limits the ability of the press to work freely. As a result, important stories about abuse or corruption often go untold, and citizens lose their right to trustworthy news.
Targeting Journalists Abroad
Targeting journalists abroad has also become common. Ethiopian authorities and loyalist groups have threatened, harassed, and tried to silence exiled reporters working in the United States, Europe, and Africa. These journalists, often forced to leave for their safety, face online harassment campaigns, coordinated smear attacks, and even hacking attempts.
Their families back in Ethiopia are sometimes harassed or interrogated as a way to put pressure on the journalists. International human rights organizations have warned about this growing trend. It shows that Ethiopia’s crackdown on media freedom is not just domestic, but now reaches those reporting from exile, creating an atmosphere of fear far beyond its borders.
Censorship and Control of Information
Censorship and control of information have rapidly increased since the conflict started. The government frequently shuts down the internet, especially during protests or times of tension. This limits not only media but also people’s ability to share information and stay informed. Social media platforms and news websites are blocked or filtered, making it very hard for Ethiopians to access uncensored news.
State-controlled broadcasters push an official narrative, while independent and opposition sources are accused of fake news or inciting violence. Even peaceful criticism can result in bans or arrests. These strict censorship policies mean there’s little transparency, making it difficult for both Ethiopians and the rest of the world to understand what is really happening inside the country.
Many journalists now practice self-censorship, avoiding stories that might get them punished, which only worsens the situation. Overall, the clampdown on media and opposition voices is deepening the country’s political crisis and risking long-term damage to press freedom.
Humanitarian Fallout and Socioeconomic Crisis
Mass Displacement and Refugee Flows
Mass displacement and refugee flows are among the most severe results of Ethiopia’s recent conflicts. Since the start of the Tigray war, millions of Ethiopians have been driven from their homes. Many had to flee violence in the Tigray, Amhara, and Oromia regions, often with few belongings or none at all. Families were separated, with children and elders especially vulnerable.
The United Nations estimated that more than 2 million people were internally displaced just in the Tigray region. Thousands more fled across borders into Sudan and other neighboring countries. Refugee camps quickly became overcrowded. These camps lacked enough clean water, food, and medical aid. Conditions were dire, with people sleeping in overcrowded tents and facing severe weather. Many new arrivals were traumatized and desperate for help, but humanitarian agencies faced access challenges because of ongoing fighting and government restrictions.
Starvation, Violence, and Public Health Emergencies
Starvation and malnutrition became widespread as a direct impact of the war and blockades that cut off supplies. The World Food Programme and other international organizations repeatedly warned of famine conditions in some areas of Tigray and other conflict zones. Whole communities lost access to markets, farmland, and humanitarian deliveries.
Violence against civilians made things much worse. There were many reports of attacks against villages, sexual violence, and the destruction of health and food infrastructure. Hospitals and clinics were looted or destroyed. Health services almost collapsed, resulting in deadly outbreaks of disease and increased maternal and child deaths. COVID-19, cholera, and measles spread through displaced communities lacking even the most basic health care. ☹️
Medical professionals sounded the alarm about sharp increases in malnutrition among children, widespread lack of medicine, and growing numbers of people dying from preventable illnesses. Humanitarian agencies struggled to access those most in need, and the dangerous conditions for aid workers caused more suffering.
Economic Decline and Infrastructure Damage
Economic decline and infrastructure damage have plagued Ethiopia since the conflict intensified. Large parts of Tigray, Amhara, and Oromia saw factories, schools, utilities, and farms wiped out. Major roads and bridges were destroyed, making it nearly impossible to transport goods. Farmers abandoned their land, contributing to food shortages. The cost of repairing just the damaged infrastructure runs into billions of dollars.
Ethiopia’s economy, once seen as one of the fastest-growing in Africa, entered a period of crisis. The birr currency fell, inflation soared, and unemployment spiked. Major investors backed away, and foreign aid was reduced because of the instability.
With banking facilities closed and telecommunications often cut in parts of the country, families struggled to access money, buy food, or contact relatives. Many students lost years of education as schools closed. The long-term social and economic consequences of this conflict are likely to be felt for years, making recovery even more difficult for ordinary Ethiopians.
Initial Western Backing and Aid
Initial Western backing and aid for Abiy Ahmed was very strong after he became Prime Minister in 2018. The West saw Abiy as a hopeful reformer. He was praised for freeing political prisoners, opening up political space, and making peace with Eritrea after years of hostility. Countries like the United States, European Union, and UK were quick to offer support through aid, diplomatic recognition, and development agreements. Abiy’s Nobel Peace Prize in 2019 was also backed by strong Western endorsement. For a time, Ethiopia was seen as a positive story in the troubled Horn of Africa. Many nations increased funding for humanitarian work and long-term projects, believing Abiy would guide Ethiopia towards democracy and stability.
Waning International Support
Waning international support came soon after the Tigray conflict erupted in late 2020. Once the war began, the West grew concerned about human rights abuses, reports of famine, and media repression in Ethiopia. News outlets like the Guardian and CNN documented the country’s rapid shift from a favored Western partner to a focal point of crisis. The US, EU, and some UN agencies started to withhold aid or place conditions on assistance, requiring an end to hostilities and full humanitarian access. Sanctions or suspensions were announced against some Ethiopian officials. Abiy’s former image as a reformer was now replaced by skepticism and warnings. Ethiopia’s relationship with the US, in particular, cooled, with increased diplomatic pressure and sharp condemnation of the government’s military tactics.
Impact on Relations with Foreign Governments
Impact on relations with foreign governments has been significant and mostly negative for Ethiopia. The conflict damaged ties with key Western partners, leading to less investment and strained communication. The EU, for example, cut direct budget support. Relationships with neighboring countries have also suffered. The Gulf states and Turkey, once seen as pragmatic partners, have become cautious toward Ethiopian affairs. Tension with Sudan increased over border disputes, especially around the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Eritrea’s involvement in the Tigray conflict added another layer of regional complexity.
Abiy’s push for Red Sea access caused further anxieties with Eritrea and Djibouti in 2024 and 2025, as reported by international trackers like the Council on Foreign Relations. As trust eroded, Ethiopia found itself more isolated diplomatically, needing to diversify its allies and find new ways to deal with foreign investment and criticism. Many foreign governments now hesitate to fully support Abiy’s government, waiting to see if Ethiopia can return to peace and stability. This diplomatic uncertainty casts a long shadow over the country’s economic and security prospects.
National Dialogue Initiative
National Dialogue in Ethiopia has become a key effort to address the country’s deep political and ethnic divisions. Since 2022, the Ethiopian government set up the National Dialogue Commission (ENDC) to create a platform where all Ethiopians could confront and discuss core national issues. This process aims to encourage peaceful solutions, bring communities together, and find answers to decades-long grievances. The National Dialogue has been described by many as critical for the country’s future, hoping to break the cycle of violence and mistrust.
By 2024 and 2025, Ethiopia’s National Dialogue had drawn mixed reactions. On the positive side, people saw hope for addressing painful histories, reducing violence, and strengthening unity. The initiative is supported by international organizations like IGAD and the African Union, which hope it will foster a “whole-of-society” approach for peace. However, there have also been strong criticisms over the process, especially regarding how open and transparent it really is. Skepticism grows when some key groups and regions feel left out or distrust the government’s intentions. Despite these concerns, many agree that the dialogue could have a huge impact if managed well and if all essential voices are included.
Challenges of Inclusion and Representation
Challenges of inclusion have become the main threat to Ethiopia’s national dialogue. Critics and researchers warn that real peace cannot be achieved if major opposition figures, civil society, women, or marginalized ethnic groups are not part of the conversation. Key opposition parties and some ethnic leaders have refused to join the process, arguing the commission is too close to the government and questions its impartiality. Many also fear that disagreements about Ethiopia’s system of ethnic federalism and the status of some regions are not fully represented.
Disparities in who participates greatly affect the dialogue’s legitimacy. Lack of trust in the commission’s independence is a big problem. Some communities feel that their grievances are not acknowledged or that outcomes are predetermined. Reports highlight that unless the process becomes more open and transparent, the dialogue may actually widen the gap between groups and fuel further hostility. Effective national dialogue must also deal with representation disparities, ambiguous definitions of “inclusivity,” and growing calls for more direct grassroots input. Without urgent reforms, there’s a real risk that the initiative could do more harm than good.
Current State of National Unity
Current state of national unity in Ethiopia is fragile and often very uncertain. Decades of ethnic-based politics and ongoing violence have damaged trust between communities. While the government under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed promotes national unity and calls for moving beyond ethnic divisions, the reality is more complicated on the ground. Clashes in regions like Amhara, Tigray, and Oromia continue, and there is little agreement on basic issues like resource-sharing, political power, and historical grievances.
Many studies and reports in 2024 highlight that national unity remains more an aspiration than a reality. Ethiopia is still struggling to find harmony among its many ethnicities and regions. Laws support the right to assemble and express ideas, but real opportunities for inclusive participation are often limited. Efforts to bring about transformation through dialogue face tough obstacles. Confidence in the government, the dialogue commission, and the fairness of the process has been shaken by complaints about exclusion and favoritism. National unity is further strained by poverty, displacement, and post-conflict trauma.
Yet, hope persists among ordinary Ethiopians for a more united and peaceful country. If the National Dialogue can become truly inclusive, acknowledge pain on all sides, and foster genuine reconciliation, there may be a way forward. But right now, Ethiopia is standing at a crossroads between renewed hope and continued division.
Supporters’ Perspective: Reform and Development
Supporters of Abiy Ahmed often highlight his strong push for reform and development across Ethiopia. For many, his most visible achievement is the ambitious “Green Legacy” program, which seeks to combat climate change and improve the environment by planting billions of trees throughout the country. According to various reports, Abiy’s government claims to have planted over 40 billion trees since the program started. 🌳
Supporters also credit Abiy with opening up political space after decades of repression. When he first took office, he released thousands of political prisoners and welcomed exiled opposition groups back to Ethiopia. Many celebrate his early economic and structural reforms, such as efforts to liberalize the state-controlled economy, encourage foreign investment, and initiate state enterprise privatizations.
For those who once saw Ethiopia as paralyzed by ethnic division and stagnant politics, Abiy seemed to bring energy, hope, and a genuine desire for unity and progress. Some point to his peace deal with Eritrea as proof of his diplomatic skills and willingness to end long-standing hostilities.
Critics’ Perspective: Authoritarianism and Division
Critics, however, view Abiy Ahmed’s legacy very differently. They argue his time in office has been marked more by rising authoritarianism and deepening ethnic divisions than by true reform or unity. According to many opinion pieces and analysis, his methods quickly shifted from opening the political sphere to suppressing dissent and opposition.
Many critics describe Abiy Ahmed as a modern authoritarian who uses popular messages and propaganda, but centralizes power and undermines democratic institutions. Several sources point to clampdowns on free media, jailing of opposition leaders, and election delays as signs of growing authoritarianism. Some even accuse Abiy of ruling with increasing brutality, cracking down on protests and using state security against rivals.
Ethnic tensions, many argue, have only gotten worse during his leadership. Abiy’s push to dissolve old federal power structures and unite the country behind his philosophy, “Medemer,” has sometimes resulted in more division—not less. Some blame his leadership style for fueling or failing to prevent the deadly conflicts that have erupted across several regions, such as Tigray, Amhara, and Oromia.
Assessment of Nobel Peace Prize and Reform Promises
Abiy Ahmed received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2019 for his bold initiative to end the border conflict with Eritrea and for early reforms that brought new hope to many Ethiopians. At first, the international community praised him as a peacemaker and a refreshing new leader for Africa.
However, recent assessments from both Ethiopian and international observers have become much more critical. The Norwegian Nobel Committee has even issued public reminders that as a Laureate, Abiy has a “special responsibility” to seek peace and protect human rights—troubling words, given the violence and humanitarian crises that followed his prize.
Many analysts agree that while Abiy did make important symbolic moves—freeing prisoners, allowing opposition parties, making peace with Eritrea—he has struggled, or perhaps even failed, to turn early promises into lasting, meaningful reform. The outbreak of civil war in Tigray and ongoing violence elsewhere have made his legacy more controversial. Some writers and commentators even call his Peace Prize “bittersweet,” or say it was awarded too early, before the effects of his choices became clear.
In summary, while supporters and critics sharply disagree about Abiy Ahmed’s true legacy, there is clear concern across the board over whether his initial promise of reform has been fulfilled, or replaced by deeper conflict and disappointment.
Risks of Renewed Civil War
Risks of renewed civil war in Ethiopia are real and serious in 2025. Sources highlight deep tensions following the Tigray conflict, with a fragile peace after the Pretoria agreement. The Tigray region is again volatile, with rival political leaders and recent escalations by Ethiopian and Eritrean forces causing civilians to flee. Many analysts agree that divisions between federal and regional governments mask much deeper ethnic, political, and economic grievances that have not been resolved.
Risks are not limited to Tigray. The Amhara and Oromia regions also show worrying instability. Militias and regional forces continue to challenge the authority of the federal government. Armed actors, including the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), and volatile regional alliances could easily ignite another cycle of violence. Cross-border tensions, especially with Eritrea, add another layer of danger that could turn a local dispute into a wider regional conflict. The human rights situation remains precarious, with thousands at risk of renewed atrocities if civil war returns.
Ethnic Federalism vs. Centralization
Ethnic federalism vs centralization is at the heart of Ethiopia’s political crisis. The federal constitution divides the country into regions based on ethnicity, giving each region the power to govern itself and even the theoretical right to secede. This system was designed to give Ethiopia’s diverse peoples a fair share of power, especially after years of historical centralization and ethnic marginalization.
Currently, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government is pushing for more centralization. This means less power for local regions and more control for the federal government, with the goal of creating a single Ethiopian identity. Supporters of centralization argue it could help strengthen national unity and make government more efficient. However, critics say that moving away from ethnic federalism is a move toward authoritarianism. They warn this could fuel more resentment and conflict, as local groups fear losing their voice and self-rule.
At the same time, critics of ethnic federalism say it has actually increased tensions by making ethnicity the main way to get power and benefits. Some say it has led to discrimination, civil rights abuses, and competition between regions. Recent efforts to deny certain ethnic groups, like the Gurage and Wolaita, their own regional status have only increased these fears. The struggle between these two systems is one of Ethiopia’s biggest unresolved challenges.
Scenarios for Peace and Stability
Scenarios for peace and stability in Ethiopia focus on the outcomes of national dialogue, reforms, and respect for diversity. One scenario is an inclusive national dialogue, where all regions and groups participate honestly. This could lead to a new political agreement and more shared power. The national demobilization process for armed groups, if successful and fair, could further lower the risks of violence.
Another possible scenario is gradual improvement in human rights and local self-government. If the government respects civil liberties and allows regions more autonomy, trust could slowly be rebuilt. International support and successful demobilization could help consolidate peace.
However, there is also a negative scenario. If reforms stall or only one side controls the process, Ethiopia could return to open conflict. The failure of the peace process or deepening ethnic or regional divisions might end in renewed civil war. Extreme centralization without community consent could increase political violence and break down fragile coexistence.
The road ahead for Ethiopia is uncertain. The country’s fate will depend on meaningful dialogue, respect for diversity, and leadership that includes all voices—otherwise, tension could turn into tragedy once again.