Dula Abdu
Mohamud A. Ahmed (Prof.) as an individual or an organization promoting Sustainable programs through the OWS Development Fund, located in the Somali region of Ethiopia suggests that ethnic federalism or tribalism is good. This belief is beyond me and this is a response to his Article.
Tribalism is anathema to individual freedom and sustainable development as it restricts commerce and direct investment and creates higher uncertainty for minorities. It’s not merit-based or leads to more division because the lowest common denominator of humanity, tribe, measures it. Most backward societies in the past were based on tribe or clan, and as they advanced more, they became nonsectarian and merit-based regardless of tribe, religion, or political affiliation.
It’s sad to see a leader of an organization that believes in sustainable development enshrine such a backward belief. If tribalism is good, why not organize on sub clan, familial, or even religious grounds if it provides sustainable development? No country that upholds tribalism has advanced economically or achieved a resounding peace. Countries that support sectarianism like Lebanon, let alone the extreme form of sectarianism, tribalism, continue to suffer instability and a stagnated economic environment. Prof. Mohamud conflates ethnic federalism with apartheid to justify the current system and to help us forget how many Ethiopians lost their lives, treasures and relocated because since the introduction of ethnic federalism.
During the last 30 years, many countries like Rwanda, China, and others that prioritize national unity over tribalism have made significant progress compared to tribally strapped Ethiopia or the Somali region. So, to assume tribalism has helped the Somali region or any other region is highly flawed and lacks economic and intellectual merit.
The Perils of Tribalism and Article 39
Tribalism, with its emphasis on allegiance to ethnic or clan identity over individual freedoms and collective national goals, poses a significant threat to sustainable development, justice, and economic growth. Ethiopia’s Article 39, which enshrines ethnic federalism and the right to self-determination, exemplifies how institutionalized tribalism can fragment a society, weaken its governance, and hinder its progress. While Prof. Mohamud article sees tribalism as an empowerment tool, a closer examination reveals its destructive impact, aligning with concerns raised by civil society organizations promoting sustainable programs for justice, education, and self-independence.
Tribalism as an Obstacle to Individual Freedom and Sustainable Development
Tribalism, by its very nature, restricts the freedoms of individuals who fall outside the dominant group or clique that controls the system. It fosters a climate of exclusion and uncertainty for minorities and even for members within the same clan who do not align with the prevailing power structures. This system stifles innovation, curtails meritocracy, and undermines the foundational principles of justice and equity.
Historically, societies that remained bound by tribal or clan systems were marked by stagnation, oppression, and limited social mobility. In contrast, socioeconomically advanced nations have embraced non-sectarian governance, granting freedom to all individuals to excel in their respective fields without fear or constraints. By institutionalizing tribalism through Article 39, Ethiopia is regressing to a system that perpetuates division and inequality, impeding its ability to foster inclusive growth and sustainable development.
Article 39: A Framework for Division and Control
TPLF designed Article 39 not to empower tribes but to divide and rule. Its provision grants ethnic groups the unconditional right to self-determination, including secession. Although this may appear empowering on the surface, it has entrenched ethnic divisions. It was not designed to serve the people but to fragment opposition, dilute unified resistance to the central government, and maintain the ruling party’s dominance.
This framework prioritizes ethnic identity over national unity, creating a fragmented political landscape where regional loyalty supersedes collective national interests. Such a system undermines the flow of people and goods, disrupts commerce, and fuels conflict over resources and governance. Instead of promoting cohesion, Article 39 has institutionalized disunity, fostering cycles of violence and instability that hinder Ethiopia’s economic and social development.
The Myth of Empowerment
The Article argues that it empowers marginalized ethnic groups by granting them autonomy. Yet, the reality is far different. The central government maintains significant influence over regional states, using ethnic federalism as a façade to consolidate its control. The supposed right to self-determination has only heightened ethnic tensions, encouraging mistrust and competition among groups rather than fostering genuine empowerment or collaboration. Moreover, this system isolates regions from one another, discouraging the free movement of people and goods and creating barriers to national economic growth. It perpetuates a parochial mindset that sees development as a zero-sum game, where the success of one group comes at the expense of another.
The Consequences of Tribalism in Governance
Tribalism, as institutionalized through Article 39, is anathema to the principles of justice and sustainable development. It promotes exclusion and competition rather than inclusivity and cooperation. The suggestion that tribalism could serve as a viable framework for governance or economic advancement is fundamentally flawed. If tribalism were genuinely beneficial, one could extend the logic to even smaller divisions based on religion or clan, yet history shows that such fragmentation only leads to further isolation and regression.
This approach also undermines the nation’s ability to address critical challenges collaboratively. Ethiopia’s development hinges on collective action, national unity, and the ability to leverage its diversity as a strength rather than a weakness. Tribalism, however, fosters divisions that prevent the country from realizing its full potential.
The Path Forward: Unity and Inclusivity
Ethiopia’s future lies in moving beyond tribalism and embracing a governance model prioritizing unity, equity, and shared prosperity. Ethnicity should not be the primary organizing principle of the state. Instead, the country must adopt a system that respects diversity while fostering a cohesive national identity.
A revised federal framework based on geography rather than ethnicity would ensure that shared interests and collective goals drive governance and resource allocation. Such a system would promote the free movement of people and goods, create an environment conducive to investment, and reduce the conflicts and uncertainties plaguing the nation.
Conclusion
The Article reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the destructive nature of institutionalized tribalism. Far from empowering Ethiopia’s people, it has entrenched division, weakened governance, and hindered sustainable development. As history has shown, progress comes from unity and inclusivity, not fragmentation and exclusion. Ethiopia must reject tribalism as a framework for governance and instead embrace a future built on shared values, justice, and collective prosperity.
Dula Abdu, writes on economics, technology and foreign policy. He is based in the United States.
Dula:
Thank you. Tribalism is backward and retrogressive. AS you rightly said, no country has developed under a tribal system. It is sad to see an advocacy for tribalism from a professor.
Great thanks for this beautiful response. As we all know tribalism benefits those who advance it. When the TPLF was on the power those who benefited from ethnic federalism were not the masses in the different regions, but the so-called ethnic leaders. Even in the province of Tigray the majority of the people are still living in abject poverty. Ethnic federalism and the neo-liberal economic policy that the regime had practiced have pauperized the masses in every region. As you put it correctly, tribalism fragments any society that practice it. A fragmented society will not have inner dynamism. Social dynamism can arise when people in any given society are being connected by multiple mechanisms, like production activities, commerce, and other social and economic infrastructures. What Mohamud and co. are advancing is something that negates the law of nature and social systems.
Kindly Regards,
Fekadu