Fano Fighting to Overthrow Government Not Separate Amhara

The Fano militia plays a central role in the ongoing conflict in Ethiopia’s Amhara region, battling the Ethiopian government with intensified fervor rather than aiming for the secession of Amhara. This struggle, amid accusations of the government committing acts of oppression against the Amhara people, has garnered significant attention and stirred considerable debate. The Fano — deeply rooted in the Amhara cultural ethos as mobilizers against perceived threats — emerged as key players through historical protests beginning in 2015 against leadership seen as oppressive.

Initially allies of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s administration against the Tigray forces, the Fano found themselves marginalized in subsequent peace negotiations, particularly after the Pretoria Agreement. This exclusion, along with the federal move to dissolve regional forces like the Amhara Special Force, has fueled friction, contributing to the current conflict.

As tensions between the Fano and Ethiopian forces escalate, humanitarian concerns come to the forefront, with widespread civilian casualties reported. These dynamics underscore the monumental challenges facing Ethiopia as it grapples with internal strife and complex, ethnic-driven tensions.

Introduction and Historical Context

Origins of the Fano Movement

The Fano movement traces its roots deep into Ethiopia’s history, with several sources explaining that Fano began as a symbol of resistance and freedom fighting. The term initially described the Ethiopian patriots who fought the Italian occupiers between 1936 and 1941. In those years, Fano referred to a spirit of rebellion and local defense groups that stood against foreign intervention. Over time, especially by the 1960s, “Fano” was also used by student activists and became a general symbol for militant resistance.

More recently, the modern Fano movement gained new momentum during the 2016–2018 anti-government protests. These protests brought young people, especially in the Amhara region, together to challenge what they saw as the political domination of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and marginalization of their own community. The new Fano is not a single organized group but rather a loosely networked militia, drawing on that older tradition of Amhara self-defense and pride. Their historical narrative claims continuity with Ethiopia’s anti-colonial fighters and traditional warriors, positioning Fano as both a protector and a force for change.

Historical Political Role of the Amhara

The political story of the Amhara people is tightly interwoven with the broader history of Ethiopia. For centuries, the Amhara have been one of the core groups in the formation and rule of the Ethiopian state, especially through the highland Christian monarchies. Historically, many Ethiopian emperors and nobles were of Amhara descent, and the Amharic language became the language of government and administration.

From the late 19th century, with leaders like Emperor Menelik II, Amhara elites expanded the Ethiopian empire and spread their administration across the highlands and beyond. This history led to both influence and controversy, as Amhara dominance in the bureaucracy and the church created ethnic tensions, especially with groups like the Oromo.

After the fall of Emperor Haile Selassie and the socialist Derg regime, Amhara influence lessened under the TPLF-led government (1991–2018), which favored ethnic federalism and shifted power. Many Amhara now feel politically marginalized, fueling narratives of injustice and resistance that groups like Fano have embraced.

Ethiopia’s Ethnic Federalism System

Ethiopia’s current system of government, known as ethnic federalism, was introduced in 1991 by the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF). This federalism divided the country into regions based largely on ethnicity, giving each major group its own official region, language rights, and considerable autonomy over education and culture.

The 1995 Constitution explicitly gives ethnic groups the right to self-determination, including the possibility of secession. In effect, this system was meant to answer old “nationalities questions” and reduce ethnic tensions. In practice, though, it has sometimes deepened divisions by encouraging politicians to mobilize along ethnic lines and by making regional borders contentious.

While some praise ethnic federalism for recognizing Ethiopia’s diversity and empowering minorities, critics argue that it has exacerbated ethnic conflicts, created rivalries over land and resources, and weakened national unity. The Amhara and other groups have sometimes complained of discrimination or unfair treatment under this system, especially as local politics increasingly focus on regional identity and historical grievances.

In summary, the Fano movement, older Amhara political power, and Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism are all tightly connected in shaping the country’s current crisis. Understanding each piece helps explain why conflict has again erupted in the Amhara region.

Objectives Beyond Amhara Regionalism

The political motivations of Fano go well beyond simple Amhara regionalism. While Fano started as an Amhara self-defense group, its objectives have grown larger over the years. Many Fano leaders and factions say their cause is to stop what they call the “oppression” and “marginalization” of the Amhara under Ethiopia’s current system. However, their goals are not only about local Amhara issues.

Fano groups often talk about fighting against Ethiopia’s ethnic federal system. They say it has led to the “balkanisation” of the country, dividing Ethiopians along ethnic lines and causing violence. Some Fano statements and outreach—even at a diplomatic level—frame their struggle as a fight not only for the Amhara, but for all Ethiopians seeking justice, human rights, and a more unified, fair system. Their messaging shows visions of national change, not just greater rights or autonomy within the Amhara region.

Claims of National Reform and Government Overthrow

Fano’s political motivations include clear demands for national reform. In recent years, the movement and its allies have openly called for ending Ethiopia’s current federal order, and some groups talk about the overthrow of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government. These claims are not just rhetoric—they have taken up arms and seized control of many areas in the Amhara region as a way of challenging the federal state’s power.

Fano points to issues like government disarmament campaigns and lack of Amhara protection as threats that need a complete change in Ethiopia’s leadership and system. Many Fano leaders and communicators argue that only structural change at the national level—not just changes in Amhara—can protect their community and stabilize the country. This includes calls for writing a new constitution or moving away from ethnic federalism toward a system where ethnic identity is less central to government and politics.

Distinction Between Secession and National Ambition

It is critical to note that Fano’s ambitions are generally not aimed at secession. Most Fano groups and their spokespeople do not call for breaking away from Ethiopia or creating a new Amhara state. Instead, they see themselves as “saving” Ethiopia from a system they view as broken. Their language is about preserving Ethiopian unity—but under a new, reformed national system.

This sets Fano apart from some militant groups in other parts of Ethiopia. The ambition is not to form an Amhara-only republic, but to lead or inspire a bigger movement for national reform and change. This may explain why Fano has, at times, tried to reach out beyond the Amhara community, even though its base is heavily Amhara. There are different factions and disagreements about priorities, but most public positions are about changing Ethiopia, not dissolving it.

In summary, Fano’s political motivations are deeply tied to larger questions about Ethiopia’s identity, constitutional order, and future. They seek national change, not just regional power—and their fight is as much about the shape of the Ethiopian state as it is about Amhara rights.

Timeline of the Amhara Conflict

Precursor Movements and Protests (2016–2020)

Precursor movements and protests set the stage for the Amhara conflict between 2016 and 2020. During this time, Amhara youth organizations and local activists began voicing grievances over land, identity, and political exclusion. The Amhara people felt marginalized under Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism. Protests erupted in areas such as Gondar and Bahir Dar, demanding the return of disputed territories like Welkait and Raya, which they claimed had been annexed into the Tigray region in the 1990s.

Protesters also opposed what they saw as government neglect and abuse, including unlawful arrests and extrajudicial killings of Amharas. Many young people became frustrated with local and federal authorities, which led to the rise of informal armed groups. The state’s heavy-handed response further fueled Amhara nationalism. While the protests were initially peaceful, crackdowns drove some activists and youth to join emerging militias, sowing the seeds for later armed insurgency.

Fallout from the Tigray War

The fallout from the Tigray War (2020–2022) deeply affected the Amhara region. When the conflict erupted between the Ethiopian federal government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), Amhara special forces and militia, including Fano, fought alongside federal troops. This intensified the dispute over territories like Welkait and Raya, which Amhara forces seized from Tigray during the war.

The aftermath created new tensions. Amhara saw their involvement in the war as a chance to reclaim lost lands and improve their regional influence. However, as peace negotiations began, many Amharas feared the government would return these territories to Tigray. The region witnessed displacement, mass violence, and deepening resentments between communities. Fighters who had taken up arms felt betrayed, and Amhara militias resisted disarmament, feeling that their gains and security were at risk.

Government Moves to Disband Regional Special Forces

Government moves to disband regional special forces in early 2023 escalated the situation. The federal government announced a nationwide policy to dissolve all regional paramilitary forces, including the Amhara special force, integrating them into the national army or police. Officials claimed this was necessary for national unity and to prevent regional power rivalries.

This move sparked heavy backlash in Amhara. Many feared it would leave them vulnerable to TPLF resurgence and attacks in disputed border zones. Large protests swept through Amhara cities, and many special force members refused to disband or surrender their weapons. Fano militias and other informal armed groups expanded recruitment, vowing not to give up their arms or autonomy. Attempts at forced disarmament led to clashes between federal and local forces, signaling a shift toward open rebellion.

Escalation to Full-scale Insurgency (2023–2025)

Escalation to full-scale insurgency took place from mid-2023 onwards. Fano militias launched attacks on federal army convoys, police stations, and government offices. The fighting quickly spread beyond rural areas into major cities like Gondar, Bahir Dar, and Debre Markos. The government declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews, and deployed the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) with heavy weaponry and drones.

Despite intense government crackdowns, Fano adopted guerrilla tactics, using decentralized commands and blending with the local population. Rural highways became unsafe, and vital supply routes were repeatedly cut. Civilian casualties and mass displacement soared, with basic services disrupted across the region. Federal forces regained control of some urban centers, but much of Amhara’s countryside remained contested.

By 2025, the conflict showed no sign of abating. Hundreds of thousands were displaced, and economic life in Amhara was severely damaged. Fano declared it would fight not only for regional autonomy but also for broader national reforms, making the insurgency a serious challenge to Ethiopia’s central government and stability.

Key Actors and Factions

The Ethiopian Federal Government

The Ethiopian Federal Government plays a central role in the Amhara conflict. Federal authorities, led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, are responsible for setting national policy and maintaining order across all regions. The government oversees the federal military, known as the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF), which has been at the forefront of operations against the Fano militia and other armed groups.

The federal government is often seen as both a mediator and an opponent in the conflict. While it claims to act in the interest of national unity and security, it has faced accusations of heavy-handed tactics, human rights violations, and the use of advanced military hardware like drones against its own citizens. The government’s campaigns to disband regional special forces in the Amhara Region in 2023 were a key trigger for the current escalation. Its response has included imposing a state of emergency, internet shutdowns, and deploying troops throughout the region.

Amhara Regional Authorities

Amhara Regional Authorities represent the official government of the Amhara Region within Ethiopia’s federal system. They are supposed to manage local governance and protect the interests of Amhara people. However, their position is often complicated. On one hand, they must align with the federal government’s directives; on the other, they face pressure from the local population and groups like Fano, who demand stronger action on Amhara grievances and disputed territories.

Regional officials have sometimes tried to act as mediators, but these efforts have often failed due to mistrust from both the federal center and local militias. The Amhara regional government has experienced frequent changes in leadership since 2020, and some former officials have even faced arrest or accusations of tolerating or collaborating with Fano elements.

Fano Militia—Organization and Leadership

The Fano Militia is one of the most important and unique actors in the conflict. Fano began as a loosely-organized grassroots movement composed mainly of young Amhara men. It was initially formed to defend Amhara interests and territories, especially during the earlier years of unrest in 2016–2020. Over the years, Fano has grown in size and influence, especially following the fallout from the Tigray War.

Fano’s structure is decentralized, with various commanders overseeing local units. This means there is no single central leader, but rather a network of influential figures who coordinate tactics and strategy. Some well-known Fano leaders have emerged, but the group still lacks formal political representation and a unified command. Fano uses guerrilla tactics, blending into rural populations, and relying on local support. Their aims include protecting Amhara communities, challenging federal policies, and in some cases, calling for a broader overhaul of Ethiopia’s government.

Other Militia and Rebel Groups

Apart from Fano, several other militia and rebel groups operate in and around the Amhara Region. Some of these are ethnic militias organized on a local basis, aiming to either defend their communities or to assert territorial claims. There are also remnants of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and other forces that participated in Ethiopia’s recent wars.

In certain cases, these groups have clashed with Fano or the federal army, but at other times, they have taken advantage of the chaos to push their own agendas. Some groups work purely on a local level, while others have broader political ambitions tied to Ethiopia’s complex system of ethnic federalism. The interaction between all these militias makes the situation on the ground extremely unpredictable and dangerous for civilians.

These key actors and factions all influence the trajectory of the conflict, shaping both its causes and potential solutions. Understanding each role is vital for anyone trying to make sense of the crisis unfolding in the Amhara Region.

Causes and Drivers of the Conflict

Political Marginalization of the Amhara

Political marginalization of the Amhara is one of the main reasons behind the current conflict in the Amhara region. For many years, the Amhara community has raised concerns about being left out of political decision-making and national power, especially since the start of Ethiopia’s ethnic federal system. Many Amhara people believe that, despite their region’s large population, they lack real influence in the federal government. This marginalization became clearer under the current government, with complaints of unfair political representation, government crackdowns, and arbitrary detentions targeting Amhara civilians and leaders. According to sources, this sense of exclusion has fueled strong resentment and inspired the rise of movements like the Fano militia, which claim to protect Amhara interests against what they see as policies of oppression and neglect.

Disputed Territories and Ethnic Grievances

Disputed territories and ethnic grievances have been at the heart of many clashes in Ethiopia, especially between Amhara and neighboring regions like Tigray and Oromia. Some of the most contested areas are in Western and Southern Tigray, such as Welkait, Tsegede, Humera, and Raya. Both Tigray and Amhara communities claim a historical right to these lands. After the Tigray War, Amhara forces took control of many disputed territories, leading to population displacement, new rounds of violence, and harsh feelings between ethnic groups. Meanwhile, along the borders with Oromia, both Amhara and Oromo communities accuse each other of attacks and land grabs. These deep grievances have made it difficult to find a lasting peace, as local populations continually feel threatened and demand justice for past and present abuses.

Federal Disarmament Campaigns

Federal disarmament campaigns have sparked major conflict in the Amhara region since 2023. The central government aimed to disband the regional special forces, including the powerful Amhara militias, and integrate them into national security structures. However, many in Amhara saw this as removing their only means of defending themselves, especially after years of insecurity and ethnic violence. The disarmament announcement led to violent protests, clashes, and a general feeling of mistrust toward the federal government. Many Amhara groups consider these campaigns unfair, believing they leave them exposed to attacks from neighboring groups and those who dispute their territorial claims. As a result, instead of calming tensions, these federal moves have actually deepened the crisis in Amhara, with local fighters refusing to give up their weapons and many communities choosing armed resistance.

Failure of Peace and Reconciliation Initiatives

Failure of peace and reconciliation initiatives is another key factor fueling the conflict in the Amhara region. Peace talks and mediation efforts by both domestic and international actors have so far failed to create a meaningful dialogue between the warring sides. The National Dialogue Commission and similar efforts could not convince major groups—like the Fano militia—to lay down their arms or enter political negotiations. Many Amhara activists say the peace process ignores their main concerns, including territorial disputes and protection from ethnic attacks. According to reports, the lack of trust, disappointment with previous agreements, and ongoing violence have made these peace attempts ineffective. Until these issues are truly addressed, and both local voices and core grievances are included in negotiations, reconciliation in the region is unlikely to succeed.

Casualties and Displacement Figures

Casualties and displacement in the Amhara conflict have reached staggering levels in 2024–2025. Fighting between the Fano militia and Ethiopian federal forces, especially since mid-2023, has led to thousands of deaths and injuries. Reports from the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission noted at least 115 civilian deaths between September and December 2024. State forces have reportedly suffered tens of thousands of casualties, with some figures suggesting over 30,000 state force members killed and several hundred Fano fighters. Reliable numbers are hard to confirm because of media restrictions and the fluid nature of frontlines, but there is broad agreement among NGOs and news agencies that civilian deaths have risen sharply during airstrikes and urban fighting.

Displacement is another major humanitarian concern. As of early 2024, around 670,000 people were internally displaced within Amhara, forced to flee due to persistent violence and insecurity. Many more have become newly displaced throughout 2024 and 2025 as fresh clashes erupt, particularly after major offensives and government crackdowns on suspected sympathizers. These large-scale movements put enormous pressure on local resources, with displaced families often finding shelter in schools, unfinished buildings, or makeshift camps with little access to aid.

Human Rights Violations by All Parties

Human rights violations are rampant and have been widely reported by groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. The conflict in Amhara is marked by war crimes and abuses from both the federal military and the Fano militia. Ethiopian security forces have been accused of attacking health workers, hospitals, and detaining thousands in makeshift camps without legal process. Arbitrary detention is widespread, with thousands rounded up in late 2024 and 2025 under sweeping security laws.

Fano militias have also engaged in acts of violence, including abductions and summary executions of those they suspect of collaborating with state authorities. Village raids have resulted in violence against local residents, destruction of property, and targeted ethnic attacks. Both parties have shown little regard for civilian life during major clashes, and there are disturbing reports of children, women, and the elderly among the dead and injured.

Impact on Civilians and Infrastructure

The impact on civilians and infrastructure in Amhara has been severe throughout the conflict. Heavy fighting in urban areas, drone strikes, and artillery shelling have left hundreds dead and thousands more injured, including children and refugees. Frequent attacks on populated centers often destroy homes, markets, and public spaces.

Critical infrastructure like hospitals, schools, water systems, and roads has also sustained serious damage. Healthcare services are disrupted; medical facilities have been bombed or occupied; many face a shortage of doctors and supplies. Educational infrastructure is hit as well—many schools now house displaced people instead of students, contributing to a sharp drop in school enrollment. Water delivery systems are failing or damaged, leading to increased disease and hardship. The overall effect is a devastating reduction in the quality of life for millions, pushing many to the brink of survival.

Restrictions on Humanitarian Aid

Restrictions on humanitarian aid are a major obstacle in the Amhara region. Since 2024, the international humanitarian presence has faced extreme constraints due to insecurity, bureaucratic hurdles, and targeted violence against aid workers. United Nations agencies report that Amhara has some of the highest rates of violence against humanitarian staff in Ethiopia, often forcing agencies to withdraw or operate at limited capacity.

State-imposed restrictions, including roadblocks, curfews, and communication blackouts, make aid delivery unpredictable and dangerous. Only a small fraction of the people in need receive regular assistance, while many more face interrupted food, health, and water supplies. Humanitarian access is described as “highly unpredictable,” and the situation is worsening as ongoing hostilities force even more people to rely on external support. This relentless set of challenges leaves the most vulnerable—especially children, women, and the elderly—at serious risk of hunger, disease, and abuse.

Guerrilla Warfare and Decentralized Command

Guerrilla warfare shapes the heart of the Amhara conflict. Fano militants use classic guerrilla tactics because they cannot match the Ethiopian federal military’s heavy weapons and formal structure. Fighting as local groups, Fano avoids large set-piece battles and formal hierarchies. Instead, they rely on decentralized command, where local leaders make tactical decisions based on their own knowledge of the landscape and community support.

This approach lets them launch hit-and-run attacks on military convoys or government facilities. They often stage ambushes on rural roads, sabotage key communications infrastructure, and melt away into the countryside before the army can retaliate. After federal offensives, Fano fighters retreat into the mountains and forests of Amhara, regroup, and strike again when the conditions favor them. Decentralized command allows for rapid movement and resistance even when leaders in one area are captured or neutralized.

Guerrilla tactics have helped Fano survive and operate across much of Amhara, even as the federal military controls the big towns. These groups depend on popular support in rural areas, collecting intelligence from sympathetic locals and drawing fighters from the region’s youth. Their adaptability is a major reason the conflict has become prolonged and hard to resolve.

Federal Military Tactics (Drones and Airstrikes)

Federal military tactics in the Amhara conflict have shifted strongly toward the use of advanced technology. The Ethiopian government relies heavily on drone strikes and targeted airstrikes to hit what they describe as Fano “strongholds” in both rural and urban locations.

According to international reports, the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) have launched dozens of drone strikes since 2023, including over 50 airstrikes in late 2024 alone. Drones and aircraft offer the government the ability to strike remote or fortified areas that ground troops can’t reach easily. These air attacks are designed to disrupt Fano operations, eliminate leadership targets, and force militants out of rural hideouts.

However, drone and airstrikes have caused hundreds of civilian casualties and extensive damage to infrastructure. Many of these strikes hit towns, markets, and villages where Fano allegedly hide among the population. Humanitarian groups have raised serious concerns about the accuracy and proportionality of these attacks. Still, the federal military continues to use air power as a primary tactic, especially as their ground advances often face fierce resistance.

This focus on drones and airstrikes gives the federal government the ability to project force quickly, but it also deepens local mistrust and makes lasting stability even harder to achieve.

Control of Major Towns and Rural Zones

Control of territory in the Amhara conflict is sharply divided. Fano claims to control more than 80% of the rural areas in the Amhara region, according to their own reports and some independent sources. In contrast, the federal military mostly holds the region’s major towns and highways.

This division is the result of the different strategies used by each side. Fano’s guerrilla fighters operate freely in the countryside where they rely on deep local knowledge and community support. They have seized, and sometimes briefly controlled, several smaller towns during offensives—only to withdraw once government forces counterattack.

The ENDF and federal police concentrate their power in big towns and along critical roadways. These urban centers serve as military bases and administrative hubs. However, federal control often ends at the outskirts, and supply routes are vulnerable to Fano ambushes or sabotage in surrounding rural zones.

This patchwork of control has led to ongoing instability. In the countryside, Fano mobilizes, recruits, and launches attacks, while civilians often find themselves caught between shifting frontlines. In towns, strict checkpoints and a heavy security presence restrict movement and limit Fano’s influence. This pattern of contested control shows why the conflict remains active and why any solutions will require addressing both rural grievances and urban security.

Control of Territory and Administrative Areas

Control of territory and administrative areas in the Amhara conflict has become extremely fragmented by mid-2025. The Fano militia and allied groups maintain strongholds in many rural zones and some major towns. Reports from both Wiki sources on the War in Amhara and recent summaries note that federal and regional government forces have managed to retake central administrative areas, but their grip remains weak outside larger cities.

Fano has at different times claimed to control up to 80% of the Amhara region’s territory, especially in difficult-to-access mountainous regions where guerrilla tactics are most effective. However, this control is unstable and falls when government offensives intensify. Strategic towns experience regular shifts in power, resulting in fluctuating administration and disruption for civilians. The result is that no single authority has stable, undisputed control over the majority of Amhara’s land.

Local governance is heavily affected: administrative functions break down in contested zones, tax collection is irregular, schools and health offices often close, and rival armed actors attempt to collect local “fees” and wield authority.

State of Emergency and Military Presence

The state of emergency in the Amhara region remains in place as of August 2025, having been extended multiple times since its initial declaration in August 2023. According to both Human Rights Watch and ACLED, emergency powers have meant mass arrests, curfews, military checkpoints, and restrictions on assembly.

Military presence is heavy in almost all urban centers, with federal troops, Amhara special forces (where not disbanded or integrated), and regional police all operating jointly. Rural areas see periodic operations with drones and heavy weaponry but are often inaccessible for long periods, allowing Fano to regroup.

Armed clashes between government forces and militias occur regularly—over 150 battles were recorded in one month alone earlier in 2025. The emergency’s impact is also social, with daily life governed by soldiers, checks on transportation routes, and the threat of arbitrary detention.

Information Blackouts and Media Access

Information blackouts and media access restrictions are key features of the Amhara conflict in 2025. The federal government uses the state of emergency to justify severe limitations on telecommunications, internet, and independent media. Entire areas have experienced total internet and mobile phone outages, sometimes lasting for months.

International human rights groups, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have repeatedly highlighted how these blackouts conceal human rights abuses and prevent the documentation of war crimes. Journalists face detention, harassment, and even prosecution under emergency laws for reporting on sensitive security issues.

Reliable coverage is almost impossible from the most contested regions, forcing many organizations to rely on eyewitness accounts relayed through unofficial channels, which complicates verification. As a result, news about the conflict is often delayed, incomplete, or contradictory, and local populations suffer from social isolation.

Effect on Neighboring Regions and National Stability

The effect of the Amhara conflict on neighboring regions and overall national stability is profound. First, the ongoing violence tends to spill across administrative boundaries, especially into Tigray and Oromia, who have their own complex conflicts. There have been increases in displacement, armed incursions, and a rise in interethnic tensions.

According to Crisis Group reports and global conflict trackers, the instability has weakened federal authority across northern Ethiopia and encouraged other regions to resist central oversight or pursue greater autonomy. Tensions have surged at the borders with Tigray and Benishangul-Gumuz. In some cases, breakaway rebel factions and armed actors from Eritrea have reportedly entered the scene, raising fears of a broader, regionalized conflict in the Horn of Africa.

Nationally, the Ethiopian state faces a legitimacy crisis as it struggles to ensure even basic governance in large areas outside the capital. Food insecurity, mass displacement, and weak infrastructure have all grown worse, and Ethiopia’s long-term political unity seems more fragile than ever.

Ethiopian Government’s Official Statements

Ethiopian government official statements about the Amhara conflict and Fano have consistently described the military campaign as necessary to restore law and order. Since July 2023, officials have labeled Fano as an “illegal armed group” and justified crackdowns by referring to the need to protect civilians and maintain national unity. In October 2024, the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) and the Amhara regional government jointly announced new large-scale operations against Fano, emphasizing success in “freeing” thousands of subdistricts across the region. The central government claimed its actions target “terrorist elements,” aiming to reassure citizens and the international community that it is in control and committed to stability.

However, these statements often dismiss local grievances, such as the disbanding of regional special forces and concerns about ethnic representation. The government also continues to declare states of emergency, extending military rule in restive areas. Official media blame the ongoing violence on outside interference and misinformation campaigns, urging “unity against division.” Press releases highlight alleged progress, but independent sources report continued fighting, arrests, and human rights abuses.

Local Peace Talks and Government Initiatives

Local peace talks have been attempted by both federal and regional governments to de-escalate the Amhara conflict. In June 2024, the Amhara regional government and the ENDF convened multiple “peace conferences.” These meetings aimed to promote dialogue with community elders and local leaders, hoping to convince Fano-affiliated fighters to disarm and reintegrate. The Amhara Regional Peace Council was established specifically to mediate between government forces and Fano militias.

Despite these efforts, the peace talks have faced many hurdles. Local initiatives have been overshadowed by continuing military operations and the distrust between Fano fighters and the authorities. The government’s disarmament campaigns are often seen by Fano supporters as attempts to weaken Amhara self-defense, making them reluctant to participate. Pressure from the government for quick peace settlements has sometimes alienated local negotiators, while persistent violence disrupts dialogue.

Overall, while local peace talks and government initiatives show that there is some willingness for reconciliation, the lack of trust and ongoing clashes have made them less effective so far.

Mediation Efforts by the African Union and International Bodies

Mediation efforts by the African Union (AU) and other international bodies have been limited and cautious. The AU, headquartered in Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa, has released statements expressing concern about escalating violence and human rights abuses in Amhara. However, the AU has generally refrained from direct intervention, instead calling on “all parties to deescalate” and respect humanitarian law.

International Crisis Group and other observers have urged the Ethiopian government to enter broader talks with armed groups, including Fano. The United Nations and European Union have made similar calls but have tended toward statements rather than direct mediation. In 2024, the AU’s Peace and Security Council discussed the situation, but clear action or mediation proposals remain rare.

So far, there is no major AU-brokered peace process for the Amhara conflict, unlike during the Tigray war. Local actors and outside diplomatic missions have complained about the “muted stance” of international organizations.

International Sanctions and Humanitarian Appeals

International sanctions and humanitarian appeals have focused on the humanitarian crisis and alleged rights abuses. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented civilian casualties, forced displacements, and attacks on health infrastructure by both the Ethiopian military and Fano. These reports have led to calls for investigations and urged donor countries to press for accountability.

Some Western governments have threatened targeted sanctions against officials or entities implicated in atrocities, but direct measures remain limited. The United States, European Union, and United Nations have repeatedly appealed for unrestricted humanitarian access to Amhara, warning of dire needs for food, shelter, and medical care as the conflict displaces more people.

The overall response has been humanitarian in tone, with less emphasis on punitive sanctions than on relief and political pressure to halt abuses and restore aid. Humanitarian organizations continue to demand safe access to affected communities, as insecurity and government restrictions have hampered aid throughout 2024 and into 2025.

Obstacles to an Inclusive Peace Process

Obstacles to an inclusive peace process in Ethiopia around the Fano-Amhara conflict are both political and structural. According to recent updates from sources like ACLED and ReliefWeb, there are difficulties in ensuring political inclusivity because many Fano factions do not trust the federal government’s intentions. Both sides accuse each other of betrayal and ethnic favoritism. A recent report by The Conversation points out that ongoing violence, deep mistrust, and the unresolved status of disputed areas make it hard to bring all groups to the table.

Another key obstacle is the fragmentation of armed groups. Fano is not a single movement but a collection of different militias, each with its own leaders and goals. There are divisions over territorial questions and the future of Ethiopia’s federal system. Ethnic grievances make negotiations volatile, as does continued fighting on the ground. Security concerns and recurring violence make it challenging for mediators to initiate talks without fear of reprisals.

International efforts for mediation also face challenges. The state of emergency, frequent information blackouts, and restrictions on humanitarian activities further complicate dialogue. Many local actors feel unrepresented in current talks, and some reject negotiation altogether until they see tangible reforms and security guarantees.

Constitutional and Structural Reform Proposals

Constitutional and structural reform proposals are central to what many Fano factions and their supporters demand. Reports from The Conversation and Modern Diplomacy stress that calls for amending the 1995 Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) constitution are widespread. Fano groups see the constitution, which defines Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism, as a source of ongoing discrimination and vulnerability for the Amhara population.

Key proposals include:

• Amendments to the constitution to ensure greater protection of Amhara interests.
• Ending or revising the ethnic federalism system, possibly moving toward a more civic or nationally unified structure.
• Laws to protect the Amhara from violence and forced displacement.
• Guaranteeing Amhara administrative control over disputed territories like Wolkait and Raya.

There is debate within Fano and Amhara political circles about how far reforms should go. Some want a complete overhaul of federal arrangements, while others seek regional autonomy with stronger safeguards for communities. However, any reform proposals must also consider the interests of other ethnic groups and regions to avoid igniting new tensions.

Reconciliation Commissions and Transitional Justice

Reconciliation commissions and transitional justice are considered vital for Ethiopia’s long-term peace. According to Accord and ISS Africa, Ethiopia has started working on transitional justice policies and even established a Reconciliation Commission in 2018. However, ongoing conflict has greatly hindered progress.

The main goals of such commissions are to investigate and document human rights abuses by all sides, help communities heal through truth-telling, and promote accountability. There is strong demand from civil society and international observers for transparent processes that involve all affected populations, including Amhara civilians and other marginalized groups.

However, challenges persist. Ongoing violence often blocks access for investigators, while political will for deep truth and reconciliation is sometimes lacking. According to CIVICUS Lens and African Transitional Justice Hub, many victims and their families still wait for justice for crimes going back several years. Building robust mechanisms for accountability and support is seen as essential if reconciliation is to be more than just a political slogan.

Potential Scenarios for the Future

Potential scenarios for the future of the Fano-Amhara conflict fall into several general paths, as outlined by African Narratives and The New Humanitarian:

1. Military Solution: The government continues its efforts to defeat Fano militarily, which could lead to heavy casualties, humanitarian crises, and further regional instability.
2. Negotiated Settlement: With successful mediation, there could be a ceasefire and the beginning of national dialogue. This would open the way for constitutional reform, representation of the Amhara, and the promise of local autonomy for disputed zones.
3. Prolonged Stalemate: Armed conflict may persist on and off, with neither side able to win. This would deepen civilian suffering and risk spreading violence to other regions.
4. Fragmentation and Wider Instability: If the conflict escalates and spreads, it could threaten the unity of the Ethiopian state, possibly prompting interventions from abroad or encouraging other armed insurrections.
5. Successful Reconciliation and Reform: In a best-case scenario, broad-based dialogue leads to real reconciliation, structural reforms, and effective transitional justice, allowing Ethiopia to rebuild civic trust.

Most analysts agree that the current path looks difficult but not hopeless. A sustainable peace depends on genuine power-sharing, reforms that address root causes, and international support for inclusive political processes. ✌️

Conclusion

Summary of Fano’s National Ambitions

Fano’s national ambitions have grown significantly since their early role as a local militia. Today, Fano is not just seeking to defend the Amhara region. Instead, they are pushing for major changes in Ethiopian politics. Fano leaders call for a new government system that gives more rights and recognition to the Amhara people. Their ambitions go beyond local autonomy; they want national reforms, changes to the ethnic federalist system, and at times, even a complete overhaul of the current leadership. This broader agenda has made Fano a force with influence far outside its regional base.

Fano presents itself as a defender of national unity. They reject accusations of seeking Amhara secession. Instead, they argue that only a stronger, more inclusive Ethiopia can protect all its peoples. Their message attracts support from many who are dissatisfied with the federal government’s approach to ethnic politics.

Implications for Ethiopia’s Statehood and Territorial Integrity

The rise of Fano brings serious questions about Ethiopia’s statehood and territorial integrity. When a powerful regional group no longer trusts the central government, national stability is at risk. The Fano conflict has already weakened federal authority in parts of the Amhara region. It has disrupted local administration, forced many people to flee, and created social and political uncertainty.

If the crisis continues, there is a real danger that Ethiopia could break apart along ethnic lines. A successful rebellion or ongoing war could inspire similar movements in other regions. The country’s complex ethnic map makes it vulnerable to further division. Preserving territorial integrity may depend on how well the government, Fano, and other actors can compromise for a more inclusive vision of Ethiopia.

Critical Steps for Lasting Peace

Lasting peace in Ethiopia will require a few essential steps. First, open and honest dialogue is needed between Fano, the federal government, and other regional groups. Both sides must address root grievances, share power, and agree on new rules for governing Ethiopia. International mediation could help build trust and keep talks on track.

Second, humanitarian needs must be met urgently. Millions require food, shelter, and medical care. The government and Fano must guarantee safe access for aid organizations. Protecting civilians and investigating human rights abuses is also key to building future trust.

Third, Ethiopia may need to consider constitutional and structural reforms. The ethnic federalist system remains controversial. Finding a balance between regional autonomy and national unity could help prevent future conflicts.

Finally, justice and reconciliation initiatives will be important. A peaceful future relies on accountability and healing. Only then can all Ethiopians feel secure in their country’s borders—no matter which group holds power.