August 15, 2025
Reports that General Abebaw Tadesse faces charges by Abiy’s administration for disclosing confidential information to adversaries, and is barred from classified meetings, worry many Ethiopians. If true, this signals a serious breakdown in trust at the top and raises urgent questions: who controls access to national security talks, and on what grounds?
Have we seen this before? Many recall claims that people from Tigray were sidelined—removed from posts and kept out of highly classified meetings—in recent years. Today, critics warn that such meetings are held mainly among the Oromo leadership, deepening ethnic divisions and weakening national cohesion. This article looks at the pattern, the risks, and what accountability should mean in the case of General Abebaw Tadesse.
Note: Allegations are contested and still unfolding.
Overview of the Accusations Against General Abebaw Tadesse
Background of the Charges
The accusations against General Abebaw Tadesse are serious and have become a hot topic in Ethiopia. The main charges relate to alleged involvement in activities that threaten national security and unity. The government claims that General Abebaw engaged in high-level discussions and operations without proper authorization. These meetings were said to be secretive, and the authorities suspect that they aimed to undermine state security or challenge the current administration.
Many Ethiopian news sources stress the sensitive nature of the case. Government officials argue that Abebaw’s behavior showed disloyalty to the state, while some opposition voices insist the process may be politically motivated. Critics worry that these accusations may be linked to internal power struggles, especially given Ethiopia’s tense political climate and recent history of purging top security officials based on ethnic and political grounds.
Profile of General Abebaw Tadesse
General Abebaw Tadesse is a well-known figure within the Ethiopian military. He previously served as the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF). Abebaw gained a reputation for being a strong leader during critical times, especially during conflicts in northern Ethiopia. He was one of the highest-ranking ethnic Tigrayans in the military before being sidelined during the Tigray conflict and later brought back by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in 2021 to help lead the fight against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).
General Abebaw’s military career spans several decades. He is recognized for his discipline, battlefield experience, and loyalty to national unity. He is also seen as a bridge between different regions of Ethiopia, although his recent troubles show the difficulty of balancing military leadership with political tension in the country.
Timeline of Key Events
- 2018: Abiy Ahmed becomes Prime Minister, starts major changes in top government and military leadership. General Abebaw is removed from key roles as part of a broad military shakeup, especially among Tigrayan officials.
- Early 2021: Amid the Tigray conflict, Abebaw is recalled to active duty and appointed Deputy Chief of Staff of the ENDF, underlining the desperate need for experienced military leaders.
- Late 2022: Sources inside Ethiopia report secret meetings and growing rifts within the military leadership. Reports begin to surface accusing some generals of acting outside their mandates.
- Early 2024: Ethiopian government officials formally accuse several high-ranking officers, including General Abebaw, of participating in unauthorized operations and secret meetings that allegedly threaten the state.
- Mid-2024: Investigations are launched. General Abebaw is relieved of his post and placed under questioning or house arrest, depending on the latest government statements.
- 2025: The case remains under investigation, with Ethiopian and international observers closely watching. The accusations have drawn concerns about fairness, the rule of law, and the underlying ethnic politics within Ethiopia’s military and ruling elite.
The situation is still developing, with many Ethiopians worried about what these accusations mean for the country’s stability and future.
Structure and Purpose of Classified Meetings
Abiy Ahmed’s secret meetings are structured as high-level committees or groups that operate away from public and parliament oversight. The core purpose behind these classified meetings is to make quick and impactful decisions about security, military actions, and political strategy. According to investigative reports, such as the one from Reuters, these meetings often focus on how to deal with opposition and rebel groups, and have the authority to order arrests or even killings to crush resistance. These confidential gatherings allow the Prime Minister and his close allies to bypass more transparent or formal government structures, centralizing power in the executive branch. The aim, as reported, is to consolidate control and respond rapidly to emerging threats, often disregarding normal checks and balances.
Key Participants and Ethnic Composition
Key participants in Abiy Ahmed’s classified meetings are carefully selected, with a strong focus on loyalty. Multiple sources, including Tell Africa, highlight that the main members are usually top officials from the Prime Minister’s inner circle. Notably, many of these key figures are Oromo, the same ethnic group as Abiy Ahmed himself. Reports point out that others, such as the leader of the Prosperity Party in Oromiya, also play prominent roles. Meanwhile, other major ethnic groups, including Amharas and especially Tigrayans, have become increasingly excluded from these critical discussions. This limited ethnic mix reflects and reinforces the broader pattern of power shifts within the administration, raising concerns over fairness and fueling ethnic tensions across Ethiopia.
Security Measures and Confidentiality Protocols
Security measures and confidentiality protocols for Abiy Ahmed’s secret meetings are extremely strict. Meeting locations are carefully chosen for privacy, often within secured government compounds or even military sites. Entry is tightly restricted, with checks on identities and backgrounds of attendees. Sometimes, participants must leave mobile phones and electronic devices outside to prevent leaks or recordings. Only those explicitly invited by the prime minister or his most trusted advisers are allowed entry. The secrecy is so intense that even high-ranking officials outside the circle are kept in the dark about the agenda and decisions. There is also a well-established hierarchy in information flow: only those who attend are given full details, while others get vague or delayed updates, if any at all. This environment reduces transparency and accountability, increasing the potential for misuse of power.
Evolution of Meeting Access Since 2018
Since 2018, the access and structure of Abiy Ahmed’s high-level meetings have changed dramatically. In the early days of his leadership, there were widespread hopes for increased openness. Internet access was expanded, media restrictions were lifted, and opposition parties were welcomed back into the political process. However, as unrest and challenges from rival regions and ethnic groups mounted, Abiy’s approach shifted. The meetings grew smaller and more exclusive, and the number of people with access to the real decision-making circle shrank. Previously, top officials from various ethnic backgrounds and regions had seats at the table, but today only a trusted, loyal group—mainly Oromo—are regularly involved at the highest level. Transparency is declining and classified circles are controlling critical state decisions with minimal oversight, making it harder for the general public or other government bodies to know what is really happening inside Ethiopia’s leadership.
Ethnic Divisions and Power Dynamics
Historical Context of Ethnic Representation in Ethiopian Government
Ethnic representation in the Ethiopian government has shaped the country’s politics for decades. Ethiopia is home to over 80 ethnic groups, but power has often remained with a handful of the largest ones. In the past, the Amhara held a dominant role during imperial times. This changed after the fall of the Derg regime, when the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) gained influence, leading the ruling coalition known as EPRDF for nearly 30 years. During this period, Tigrayan figures were prominent in federal and military leadership, despite Tigray being a relatively small region.
After 2018, when Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed came to power, there was a shift toward what was described as more inclusive governance. However, many observed that this shift often meant increased representation for Abiy’s own ethnic group, the Oromo, and a sharp reduction in influence from Tigrayan leaders. The transition revealed the sensitive balance of ethnic politics, with representation seen as both a source of hope and a point of tension for different communities. The government’s attempts to balance or rebalance ethnic power have caused friction, especially as old leaders were removed and new faces appointed along ethnic lines.
Removal of Tigrayan Officials and Military Purge
The removal of Tigrayan officials marked one of the most dramatic changes in Ethiopian politics since 2018. The government, under Abiy Ahmed, accused several Tigrayan political and military figures of corruption, plotting against the state, or supporting opposition movements. High-profile purges saw many senior Tigrayan officers dismissed from the army, police, and intelligence agencies.
This process intensified after fighting erupted in Tigray in late 2020. Many Tigrayan officers were detained, forced into retirement, or disappeared from public roles. The official reasoning often focused on security concerns and allegations of disloyalty. But for many observers, it was clear that ethnicity played a major role in these removals. Critics argued that the purge weakened institutional capacity and drove further divisions, making reconciliation and national unity more difficult to achieve.
Impact on Military and Security Institutions
The impact on Ethiopia’s military and security institutions has been severe. With the sudden removal of a large number of experienced Tigrayan officers, the military lost decades of institutional memory. These purges created distrust and left gaps in command, forcing the quick promotion of less experienced officers, often chosen for their background rather than their proven skills.
Morale in the security services has suffered, as some officers fear they could be targeted for their ethnicity. This has reportedly affected the Ethiopian National Defense Force’s ability to coordinate effectively, especially during active conflicts. The sense of insecurity has also spilled into civilian government structures, where ethnic background can now influence career prospects more than ever before.
Precedents in Ethiopian Political History
There are several precedents in Ethiopian history for the exclusion of ethnic groups from power. Under Emperor Haile Selassie, the Amhara elite dominated governance. When the Derg took power in the 1970s, they also centralized authority and suppressed regional competitors. The rise of the TPLF/EPRDF coalition in the 1990s brought a long period where Tigrayans held key roles in federal government, but this was often resented by other groups.
What makes the current period unique is the speed and scale of the ongoing purges, and the fact that they took place during an active civil war. This has raised concerns not just about fairness, but about the long-term stability of the country’s institutions. Previous episodes of exclusion almost always led to further conflict, and so there is widespread anxiety that history could repeat itself.
Rise of Oromo Leadership within the Administration
The rise of Oromo leadership within the Ethiopian administration started with Abiy Ahmed’s ascent to power in 2018. For the first time in modern history, an Oromo became prime minister, inspiring hope among millions of Oromos who had long felt marginalized. Abiy’s government replaced many Tigrayan officials with new appointees, many of whom were Oromo or allied ethnic groups.
Under Abiy’s leadership, Oromo politicians and officials gained unprecedented influence at national and regional levels. This shift has changed public dialogue in Ethiopia. Supporters argue this is a necessary correction after years of underrepresentation. Critics, however, say it has led to new imbalances, with power now concentrated in different hands but still decided by ethnic loyalties rather than merit or national unity.
Perspectives from Other Ethnic Groups
Perspectives from other ethnic groups are mixed and sometimes tense. Many Amharas feel they are losing influence or being sidelined under the new order. Smaller ethnic groups often worry their own concerns are being ignored by both the old and new elites.
Tigrayans, after years of political influence, now feel especially targeted and excluded. For them, the changes represent not just a shift of power, but also a reversal of status and, in many cases, a direct threat to their personal safety and livelihoods. Ethnic Somalis, Afars, and Sidamas have their own nuanced views, often shaped by local experiences with federal authority and conflict.
Public and Political Reactions
Public and political reactions to these changes have been highly polarized. Many Oromos view the rise of their leaders as a historic opportunity to address long-standing grievances. In contrast, critics across Ethiopia warn that the new power dynamics are deepening suspicion between groups and making inter-ethnic dialogue harder.
Public protests, political parties’ statements, and social media debates all illustrate how sensitive and complicated ethnic power sharing remains in Ethiopia. Some people call for moving beyond ethnic politics altogether, but for now, ethnicity remains a key factor in who gets power and who loses it. The challenge for Ethiopia is whether it can build new systems that include all groups, rather than shifting exclusion from one group to another.
Past Precedents for Exclusion from Power
Dismissals During the Tigray Conflict
Dismissals during the Tigray conflict have shaped Ethiopia’s recent political landscape. The federal government under Abiy Ahmed took drastic steps as fighting escalated in late 2020. Senior officials who were suspected of sympathizing with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) or showing even mild dissent were quickly relieved from their posts. High-profile Tigrayan military leaders and political figures faced abrupt suspension or arrest, increasing suspicions among the public. These actions sent a strong message that disagreement or perceived disloyalty, especially from the Tigrayan community, would not be tolerated in any state institution.
At that time, news outlets like Reuters and BBC reported the removal and detention of ethnic Tigrayan officers from the military, police, and intelligence services. The official justification was usually framed around national security. Yet, the broader effect led to a rapid shrinking of Tigrayan representation in every field of government. Families of those dismissed complained about lack of information and legal process, leading to further worry among Tigrayans outside the government as well.
Similar Cases of Security Officials’ Removal
Similar cases of security officials’ removal are not limited to the Tigray conflict. Throughout Ethiopia’s modern history, the central government has often responded to perceived threats by purging key individuals from the military and security sectors. Under past regimes, such as the Derg and EPRDF, changes in political direction or periods of crisis saw waves of dismissals based on rumored loyalties or ethnic suspicions.
Since 2018, there have been documented examples of senior generals, intelligence chiefs, and police officials being forced out or imprisoned. Sometimes charges were vague or related to “participation in coups” or “undermining national security.” Often, those affected belonged to ethnic groups viewed by the ruling party as a challenge—whether Tigrayans, Amharas, or others. In each period, the public perception was that these removals weakened the depth and unity of Ethiopia’s security forces, especially when experienced professionals were dismissed on grounds other than actual misconduct.
Ethnic-Based Exclusion and Its Implications
Ethnic-based exclusion and its implications for Ethiopia are wide-reaching and deeply concerning. Removing people from positions of power primarily because of their ethnic background sows distrust among the population. For many Ethiopians, it signals a policy of ethnic favoritism rather than merit or loyalty. This practice can also fuel resentment, fear, and feelings of marginalization among excluded groups.
In the military and government, ethnic-based exclusion makes it harder to build a unified, national identity. Instead, it can drive officials to see their roles through the lens of group loyalty rather than national service. Such divisions have contributed to repeated cycles of political instability in Ethiopia. When entire groups perceive themselves as targeted, the risk of civil unrest, rebellion, or even conflict rises sharply. This outcome has been evident not just during the Tigray conflict, but throughout the country’s modern history.
Experts and human rights organizations have warned that these exclusionary policies undermine both security and the prospects of national reconciliation. For Ethiopia to move forward peacefully, reforms must address these patterns and promote true inclusiveness regardless of ethnicity.
Consequences and National Impact
Public Trust in Government Institutions
Public trust in government institutions in Ethiopia has suffered further following the accusations against General Abebaw Tadesse. Many Ethiopians have begun to question the transparency and fairness of the government under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. The removal and accusations against high-ranking military officials like Abebaw have fueled allegations of bias, secrecy, and the lack of due process. Several sources highlight an urgent need for accountability and transparency, with many citizens perceiving these actions as targeting specific ethnic groups rather than a commitment to justice. As a result, confidence in the integrity of military leadership and broader government institutions appears to be at a low point, especially among minority communities. Rumors, disinformation, and altered interviews circulating on social media have also added confusion, further weakening public faith in official narratives.
Reactions from Human Rights Organizations
Reactions from human rights organizations have been sharp and concerned. Reports by Human Rights Watch and others point to continued violence in regions such as Amhara and Oromia, often involving government forces. While direct statements on the Abebaw Tadesse case from major organizations are limited, recent human rights reports note enforced disappearances, political polarization, and harsh crackdowns on dissent. These groups underscore the gravity of removing senior officials like Abebaw without clear public evidence, warning that such moves heighten the risk of abuses and undermine already fragile human rights protections. Concerns have been raised regarding perceived ethnic targeting and the chilling effect this has had on non-Oromo and non-Tigrayan officers and communities.
Internal Security and Civil-Military Relations
Internal security in Ethiopia has become even more fragile as a result of the controversies around General Abebaw Tadesse’s exclusion and similar dismissals. Some analysts argue that such purges disrupt the unity and professionalism of the armed forces. The military, already affected by earlier purges of Tigrayan officers after the Tigray conflict, now faces further distrust and division. Civilians and military members alike worry that political and ethnic loyalties are taking precedence over competence and allegiance to the nation. According to detailed reports, while the government claims to have stabilized the security landscape, the loss of trusted figures like Abebaw Tadesse causes anxiety and mistrust, potentially weakening both internal security and civil-military cooperation.
International Perception and Diplomatic Ramifications
International perception of Ethiopia has been deeply affected by these events. Key partners and observers, including international organizations and foreign governments, have cited widespread concern over ethnic-based exclusions and the shrinking of political space. As seen in multiple recent country reports, Ethiopia’s image has shifted from that of a reforming nation to one increasingly associated with internal strife, political repression, and instability. Diplomatic relationships have been strained as Western countries, the UN, and African institutions demand better human rights protections and inclusive governance. Some have warned that ongoing purges and exclusions could jeopardize much-needed international aid and investment, already reduced due to war and humanitarian crises.
Effects on Ongoing Regional Conflicts (Oromiya, Amhara, Tigray)
The effects of Abebaw Tadesse’s removal stretch deeply into ongoing regional conflicts. In Amhara, his exclusion has added to a sense of marginalization, feeding local grievances and energizing resistance groups like the Fano militia. The same pattern of discontent is visible in other flashpoints such as Oromiya and Tigray, where recent history of armed conflict and targeted government actions against regional interests have left the population wary and distrustful. Human rights assessments show increased violence, attacks on civilians, and harsh military operations in these regions in 2024. The government continues counterinsurgency campaigns against multiple armed groups, but public anger and suspicion remain high, complicating any hope for peaceful resolution. Analysts worry that such moves not only intensify current conflicts but also set dangerous precedents for future political and military crises.
Stated Government Reform Goals and Realities
Stated government reform goals for Ethiopia in 2024 are ambitious. The administration has highlighted economic transformation, increased inclusiveness, peacebuilding, and better governance as main priorities. Launched as the “Homegrown Economic Reform” agenda, the government aims to boost sustainable growth, create jobs, liberalize the banking sector, strengthen the stock exchange, and move Ethiopia toward lower middle-income status by 2025. Authorities also promise resilience to shocks, such as climate disasters and conflict, while inviting global partners like the World Bank to assist.
However, the realities on the ground paint a different picture. Many reform promises have been lost amid economic hardship, widespread inflation, and ongoing violence. Reports show continued restrictions on academic and political freedoms. Although the government invests in macroeconomic reforms, critics say the benefits rarely reach rural and low-income families. Human rights organizations argue that real reform in areas like justice, transparency, and political openness remains limited, fueling distrust among the public. Overall, while Ethiopian government reform goals sound impressive, the progress and positive impact often lag behind the public’s expectations.
Calls for Truth, Reconciliation, and Inclusiveness
Calls for truth, reconciliation, and inclusiveness have become louder in Ethiopia throughout 2024. Civil society, religious leaders, and international organizations urge the government to address past atrocities and foster social healing after years of ethnic violence and war. In response, the government introduced a Transitional Justice Policy aiming to create new mechanisms for truth-seeking, criminal accountability, and national reconciliation. Human Rights Watch and the UN Human Rights Chief have pushed for more genuine measures, warning that without these steps, cycles of abuses and mistrust will continue.
Yet, many experts and local advocates see the effort as insufficient so far. Some describe the government’s actions as “hollow calls” for peace without honest dialogue or accountability for war crimes. There’s concern over a lack of inclusiveness—key ethnic and political groups feel sidelined from the process. Skepticism remains about whether the current policies can deliver true reconciliation, especially with the fragmentation and polarization that still exist in society. The public and international actors demand a more independent, open, and robust truth and reconciliation approach for lasting peace.
The Path Forward for Ethiopian Unity and Stability
The path forward for Ethiopian unity and stability remains complicated. Leaders often use patriotic messages of national healing and unity, but the reality is tougher. Recent speeches and policy briefings stress the need to balance Ethiopia’s incredible ethnic diversity with a shared sense of nationhood. Some suggest rethinking political party rules and representation standards to ensure all groups see themselves reflected in the state.
However, maintaining unity requires more than words. Civil unrest, local grievances, and regional disputes still challenge the idea of one Ethiopia. Researchers suggest that meaningful unity will depend on honest and inclusive dialogue, economic opportunity for all, respect for minority rights, and strong legal protections. Without these, social divisions and instability may deepen instead of improve. The government must work not only on delivering reform but also on building trust across communities if it genuinely wants to build a stable, united country.
Potential for Political Dialogue and Reform
Potential for political dialogue and reform in Ethiopia is still present, but fragile. The government began an official National Dialogue project to bring together stakeholders and address the root causes of Ethiopia’s deepening political crisis. The stated goal is to resolve ethnic conflict, promote consensus, and secure the country’s future. However, independent observers and analysts have noted “high expectations and criticism” surrounding inclusivity and transparency of the process.
Reform experts warn that unless the dialogue is open, sincere, and represents all segments of society, it could worsen instability. Opposition leaders, civil society activists, and marginalized groups must feel safe and empowered to participate. The future of political reform may depend on Ethiopia’s ability to reform the process itself—making it less state-controlled and more responsive to popular demands. Only by building true inclusiveness, accountability, and compromise can the country hope to leave cycles of conflict behind and move toward peace and sustainable growth.