Prosperity Party Ethiopia Abiy Ahmed One Man Rule

What does a genuine political party look like in practice?

This introduction sets the scene to examine the party’s origin, structure, and decision-making. We will look at who nominates whom, how criticism is handled, and whether members shape policy or simply echo the leader. The goal is to test claims about democratic integrity, accountability, and inclusiveness inside the Prosperity Party of Ethiopia.

Historical Background of Ethiopia’s Political Parties

The EPRDF Era and Governance Structure

The Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) dominated Ethiopia’s political scene for almost three decades, starting from 1991. The EPRDF was a coalition of four ethnically based parties: the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), Amhara National Democratic Movement (ANDM), Oromo People’s Democratic Organization (OPDO), and the Southern Ethiopian People’s Democratic Movement (SEPDM). Together, these groups claimed to represent Ethiopia’s major regions and ethnic groups.

EPRDF’s governance structure was rooted in a system called “ethnic federalism.” Under this system, the country was divided into regions, each largely based on ethnicity, and these regions had their own regional parliaments and some autonomy. The Constitution allowed for self-rule, languages, and local institutions. But in practice, the EPRDF kept tight central control. Major decisions were made at the top by a small circle of party elites, often following the guidance of the TPLF, which was the strongest group in the coalition. This meant that, while Ethiopia appeared federal on paper, authority usually flowed from the center.

Life under EPRDF rule saw both stability and repression. On one hand, they brought major development projects, expanded infrastructure, and economic growth. On the other, they were harsh on political rivals, restricted free speech, and controlled the press. The EPRDF’s focus on collective decision-making, at least outwardly, gave the structure a sense of unity, but real debates or opposition inside the coalition were rare. Instead, loyalty to the party’s core ideology and top leadership was demanded.

Collapse of Coalition Politics

Collapse of coalition politics began after years of growing tension within the EPRDF, mainly sparked by demands for reform and resentment over the TPLF’s dominance. Following mass protests in the Oromia and Amhara regions (2014-2018), the coalition was shaken to its core. Younger leaders, especially from Oromia, pushed for political change, transparency, and an end to elite control.

When Abiy Ahmed became Prime Minister in 2018, the rifts inside the EPRDF deepened. Abiy promised change, opened up political space, released prisoners, and made peace with Eritrea. However, these moves alienated hardliners, especially from the TPLF, who felt sidelined. Disputes over power sharing and the direction of reforms made working together inside the coalition harder every day.

By late 2019, it became clear the old coalition could not survive. The TPLF refused to join a new unified party proposed by Abiy, fearing further loss of influence. This led to the official dissolution of the EPRDF as a coalition, ending Ethiopia’s era of ethnic coalition politics. The new ruling party, the Prosperity Party, replaced it. The collapse of coalition politics removed the balancing act between different groups and paved the way for new struggles over who should rule Ethiopia and how power should be shared.

Dissolution of EPRDF and Emergence of PP

The dissolution of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) happened in late 2019, marking a major turning point in Ethiopian politics. For nearly 30 years, the EPRDF was Ethiopia’s dominant coalition. It united several ethnic-based political parties, serving as the backbone of the country’s ruling structure since 1991.

However, increasing internal divisions, especially between Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), led to a breaking point. In November and December 2019, Abiy Ahmed and his allies officially dissolved the coalition structure and announced the formation of a new single party: the Prosperity Party (PP). This transition aimed to replace the EPRDF’s collective, consensus-based approach with a centralized, unified party that would reduce ethnic division and promote Ethiopian unity.

The new Prosperity Party absorbed most EPRDF members except for the TPLF, which refused to join. This move was controversial, as some viewed it as an attempt to streamline governance, while others saw it as marginalizing certain ethnic groups and reducing local autonomy. The creation of the Prosperity Party instantly shifted the country’s political landscape, ending the era of coalition politics that had defined Ethiopia for decades.

Party Structure and Leadership Composition

The Prosperity Party’s structure is built around a centralized system that aims to coordinate national policies more effectively than the old EPRDF coalition. The party maintains offices at federal, regional, and lower administrative levels. There are structures at the regional, zone, woreda (district), and kebele (neighborhood) levels, with central leadership overseeing activities throughout the country.

At the top of the structure sits the party leader, currently Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, who was re-elected during the party’s recent congress. Supporting him are a deputy leader and a group of senior officials who oversee day-to-day operations and strategy (examples include Temesgen Tiruneh as deputy and Adem Mohammed in a key leadership role).

The leadership is chosen through party congresses, where members elect a central committee and an executive committee. These bodies are responsible for policymaking, discipline, and major strategic decisions. The Prosperity Party stresses the values of member discipline, organizational unity, and performance-based advancement, often rewarding local party leaders for mobilization efforts and policy success.

Generally, while the Prosperity Party includes representatives from across Ethiopia, its structure gives substantial power to central leadership, limiting the independence of regional branches.

Legal and Institutional Foundations

The legal and institutional foundations of the Prosperity Party are based on Ethiopia’s electoral laws and the country’s constitution. To be registered as a legal political party, PP fulfilled the requirements set out in Article 67 of Ethiopia’s Electoral Law, including membership thresholds, adherence to the constitution, and internal democratic procedures.

The party introduced its own bylaws, which establish federal and regional councils, set mechanisms for leadership elections, and outline rules for party discipline and performance evaluation. These bylaws are central to how decisions are made and enforced, allowing the central party council to wield broad oversight across all regions.

Institutionally, the Prosperity Party dominates the state apparatus, with its members holding a majority in parliament and leading most executive organs. The merger into one unified party has allowed for greater coordination and control over government institutions from the national level down to the local, but it has also raised concerns about democratic checks and balances. While the PP claims to champion federalism and economic reform, critics argue that its foundations give too much power to the party elite, reducing space for opposition parties and weakening institutional independence.

In summary, the Prosperity Party was founded on the promise of unity and efficiency, but its legal and institutional frameworks have created both new hopes and new debates about the future of democracy in Ethiopia.

The Shift from Collective to Personalized Rule

Under Abiy Ahmed, Ethiopia has seen a clear shift from collective governance to personalized rule. During the EPRDF era, leadership was marked by consensus-based decision-making within a coalition structure. However, after the formation of the Prosperity Party, power became increasingly concentrated in the hands of Abiy Ahmed himself. Articles from Borkena and PeaceRep explain how decision-making authority, once shared among party leaders, is now closely controlled by the Prime Minister. This transition weakened formal institutions, making government direction dependent on Abiy’s personal agenda. Analysts have described this change as a move toward “big man rule,” where individual leadership style overshadows party systems or national consensus.

Decision-Making in the Prosperity Party

Decision-making in the Prosperity Party reflects this centralized approach. While official party documents and public statements talk about strengthening internal democracy, the reality is quite different. According to BTI reports and expert analyses, central committees rarely debate policies openly. Most major decisions are shaped by Abiy and a loyal inner circle rather than collective dialog. There is little evidence of transparent or participatory processes inside the party. Instead, policies and major strategies are handed down from the top, often leaving lower-level officials and ordinary party members uninformed until after the fact. Former EPRDF traditions of coalition bargaining or regional input have mostly disappeared.

Patronage Networks and Political Loyalty

Patronage networks now play a crucial role in Ethiopian politics under the Prosperity Party. Reports from Freedom House and academic studies highlight how loyalty to Abiy Ahmed has become a key factor in government appointments and access to resources. Rather than formal qualifications or professional achievements, personal connections and demonstrated loyalty to the leadership are often decisive. These patronage networks are complex and, in many cases, based on ethnic, regional, or even familial ties. This system promotes a political culture where individuals seek favor and protection from powerful figures in the ruling elite, further solidifying Abiy’s authority. Critics argue that this undermines meritocracy and increases corruption and inefficiency within state structures.

Suppression of Internal Dissent

Suppression of internal dissent has become commonplace in Ethiopia’s political system under Abiy Ahmed and the Prosperity Party. According to Freedom House and The Habesha, mechanisms to control the narrative include leveraging public accusations of corruption or links to “enemies of the state” as tools to silence party critics. Officials who question party policies or show independent thinking risk losing their positions, facing public smear campaigns, or even arrest. BTI and Ethiopia Insight stress that these practices are not limited to opposition politicians; even members of the Prosperity Party itself have dealt with reprisals for internal criticism.

Silencing Critics and Persecution of Experts

Silencing critics and the persecution of experts are particularly concerning trends. The Prosperity Party has orchestrated campaigns to marginalize independent voices within both the government and society. Academic experts, journalists, and technical professionals who express independent opinions or highlight policy failures have encountered intimidation, dismissal from their jobs, or even prosecution. Citing the Ethiopia Insight and Borkena, observers point to a striking decline in open policy debate, especially on sensitive issues such as ethnic conflict, economic problems, or human rights abuses. Instead of being valued as sources of advice, specialists are often branded as “troublemakers” or accused of working against national interests.

Cult of Personality and Leadership Image

Cult of personality around Abiy Ahmed is one of the most visible features of the current political landscape. The term “Abiymania” has even been coined to describe the widespread image-building campaigns centered on the Prime Minister. Media reports and academic blogs (such as Omna Tigray, BBC, and World Peace Foundation) describe how Abiy’s leadership is promoted through massive public rallies, emotionally charged speeches, and the careful orchestration of photographs and symbolic gestures. His personal achievements and vision are showcased as synonymous with national progress, often overshadowing structural challenges or dissenting views. These efforts, combined with the repression of critical voices, encourage a political environment where support for the leader is seen as a sign of patriotism, while questioning his authority is labeled as a threat to the nation.

Overall, centralization of power under Abiy Ahmed has changed the face of Ethiopian politics. Decision-making is confined to a narrow circle, patronage loyalty is rewarded above merit, dissent is punished, and personal loyalty to the leader is celebrated. This has sparked debate inside and outside Ethiopia about the direction and sustainability of the country’s governance system.

Federalism vs. Recentralization

Ethiopia’s federalism was designed to give power and self-rule to the country’s many ethnic groups. Under the previous EPRDF system, regions were created along ethnic lines, and each had significant autonomy. However, since the rise of the Prosperity Party, many analysts note a strong move toward recentralization. The new governance model, led by the Prosperity Party, has shifted power back to the federal center. This change has increased distrust among ethnic groups who now feel their voices and interests are less protected. The shift is seen by critics as rolling back Ethiopia’s unique brand of ethnic federalism toward a model where loyalty is owed more to the central government and party leadership than to regional identity. Some supporters argue this promotes unity and fights fragmentation, but others say it undermines the original purpose of Ethiopia’s federal arrangement.

Disappearance of Ethnic-Based Representation

The disappearance of ethnic-based representation is one of the biggest changes under the Prosperity Party. The EPRDF coalition previously allowed multiple parties to represent Ethiopia’s major ethnic groups directly. With the creation of the Prosperity Party, these parties were merged into a single entity. This move was described by officials as necessary to promote national unity and move away from what they called “division and ethnic politics.” However, many critics and some ethnic group leaders argue that this reduces meaningful representation for minorities. Regional leaders now often belong to the same central party, sometimes at the expense of championing local interests. This change has caused frustration, especially in regions like Oromia and Tigray, where people feel their unique voices are drowned out by the new party system.

Politicization of Government Institutions

Politicization of government institutions has become more visible since the Prosperity Party took over. Under the current system, observers and watchdogs report that democratic institutions — from local councils to federal bodies — are often dominated by party loyalists. These institutions tend to reflect the party’s objectives rather than serve as neutral guardians of the constitution or regional interests. The shift has made it harder for opposition parties and independent groups to participate in governance. Critics describe this as a move away from checks and balances, with many appointments and policies tailored to benefit the party rather than the wider population. As a result, public trust in government bodies has declined, with people viewing them as arms of the Prosperity Party rather than institutions serving all Ethiopians.

The “Prosperity Federalism” Controversy

The “Prosperity Federalism” controversy is a hot topic across policy circles and public debates in Ethiopia. Prime Minister Abiy and his party have promoted this new idea as a way of overcoming ethnic division, shifting emphasis from group identity toward individual citizenship and national prosperity. Supporters suggest that this vision can unify Ethiopia and drive economic growth. Critics, however, argue that “Prosperity Federalism” is simply another name for centralization, which sidelines ethnic minorities and local governments. Some say it tries to erase Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism without addressing historic grievances and the need for real local representation. The lack of clear legal guidelines or public debate around the new model has only increased skepticism, with some labeling it an experiment that threatens peace and stability.

Impact on Judiciary and Local Governments

The impact of the Prosperity Party on the judiciary and local governments has been significant. Reports suggest that courts and legal systems have faced growing political influence. Instead of operating independently, there are increased instances of judicial decisions favoring party interests. The Prosperity Party has also pushed tight control over local governments, undermining the previous autonomy regional leaders once enjoyed. Many local officials are now picked based on their loyalty to the party, not their service to the people. Critics say this change leads to a lack of accountability, as local leaders prioritize party directives over public needs. Some analysts worry this undermines democracy at the grassroots level and could spark more social unrest if people feel they have no voice in local affairs.

In summary, the Prosperity Party’s governance model has reshaped Ethiopia’s federal system, reduced ethnic-based representation, and led to greater party influence in public institutions, fueling both hopes for unity and fears of increased centralization and political unrest.

Use of Violence and Intimidation

Use of violence and intimidation by the Prosperity Party has been a key feature in Ethiopia’s recent political landscape. Reports from respected sources like NPR and Vice have documented frequent harassment, threats, and actual violence against opposition figures and their supporters. During elections, especially in places like Oromia and Amhara, intimidation creates a climate of fear and reduces real competition. Freedom House notes a decline in basic rights, including protection against illegitimate force. Local and international observers, as cited by Al Jazeera and Human Rights Reports, highlight widespread interference—ranging from threats to arbitrary detention and even forced displacement of communities. Instead of resolving disputes peacefully, the party and associated security forces have often relied on the use of force to quash dissent. This harsh approach undermines Ethiopia’s democratic processes and silences critical voices across the country.

Misinformation, Propaganda, and “Bullshitting”

Misinformation and propaganda have become essential tools for the Prosperity Party to shape public opinion and protect its position. While direct studies on “bullshitting” are less common in mainstream journalism, analysts and independent writers highlight a pattern where truth becomes negotiable and inconvenient facts are glossed over or spun for political gain. The government and affiliated media outlets release statements and news designed to present the Prosperity Party as the sole path to unity and prosperity, often downplaying challenges or critics. Opposition groups and critical journalists are targeted as purveyors of “fake news,” making it hard for citizens to access neutral information. This environment encourages confusion, erodes trust in public institutions, and divides communities with competing versions of events. These tactics also make it difficult for reformers and watchdogs to hold those in power accountable.

Popular Resistance Movements and Defections

Popular resistance movements and defections from the Prosperity Party have increased as disillusionment has grown. As highlighted by Borkena and Ethiopia Insight, the party’s harsh methods have not gone unopposed. Various regions—including Tigray, Oromia, and Amhara—have seen the rise of armed and unarmed resistance movements demanding a more inclusive future. High-profile defections from within the Prosperity Party signal cracks in its unity. Many former members have joined opposition groups or gone public with their criticisms. According to analysts, this trend accelerates when the government fails to deliver on promises of reform and national dialogue. Elite cooptation and the break-up of opposition groups sometimes work in the short term to shore up power, but over time, the climate of repression fuels deeper resistance across society. As defectors and activists find common ground, they put more pressure on the party’s leadership—raising the possibility of major political shifts ahead.

The Prosperity Party Gospel (PPG) Ideology

The Prosperity Party Gospel (PPG) ideology is a core part of the Prosperity Party’s identity in Ethiopia. Under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, this ideology blends politics with strong religious messages, especially using language from evangelical Christianity. According to analyses from Ethiopia Insight and Zehabesha, the Prosperity Party uses the “prosperity gospel” not just as a religious belief but as a political tool. This approach promises economic growth and national renewal but links these goals with themes like faith, destiny, and moral superiority.

The PPG ideology often presents Abiy Ahmed and his party as chosen agents who will lead Ethiopia to a bright, united future. Their speeches and rallies commonly feature religious symbolism and encourage faith in the party’s vision. Critics argue this ideology can be exclusionary, labeling critics, rival religious groups, and ethnic minorities as obstacles to God’s or the Party’s mission. Such messaging raises leaders as almost messianic figures and mixes optimism with strong moral language, which shapes the tone of public debate and national politics.

Anti-Intellectualism and Pseudoscience

Anti-intellectualism and pseudoscience are widely reported traits of the Prosperity Party’s political environment. Observers on platforms like Ethiopia Insight note that PPG ideology actively normalizes skepticism of scientific reasoning and expert analysis. The party has shown a strong tendency to dismiss intellectual debate, research, and even basic scientific facts, replacing these with simplistic slogans and religious teachings.

This anti-intellectual approach often leads to policy decisions made without genuine evidence or expert advice. Instead, the Prosperity Party prefers to use motivational language, anecdotes, and charismatic speeches that devalue dissenting voices. For example, the government has promoted untested or exaggerated health remedies, dismissed academic critics, and even suggested that Ethiopia’s challenges can be solved by faith and optimism alone rather than sound planning or technical solutions. Critics point out that this culture of pseudoscience can harm public policy, weaken education, and contribute to national decline as complex issues are met with simple, emotionally charged answers rather than careful thinking.

Nationalism, Religious Zeal, and Social Division

Nationalism, religious zeal, and social division have all deepened under the Prosperity Party. According to reports from Foreign Policy, New Lines Magazine, and Ethiopia Insight, PP’s focus on “civic nationalism” tries to unite Ethiopians under a single national vision, but often excludes or dismisses ethnic and religious diversity.

The Prosperity Party’s use of religious language intensifies this problem. Evangelical pastors and leaders are not just spiritual figures; they are now deeply integrated into politics, supporting the party and shaping its message. This fusion increases religious zeal among supporters but also divides society. Rival religious groups, especially the old Ethiopian Orthodox Church and segments of the Muslim community, feel marginalized. Ethnic divisions are also more visible as the Prosperity Party’s vision seems to demand conformity while often ignoring local identities.

By using both nationalism and religious fervor, the party strengthens loyalty among its base but creates deep rifts across Ethiopian society. Many feel they must accept the “official” vision or risk being branded as traitors to Ethiopia’s future. This environment can fuel resentment and social conflict, making real national unity harder to achieve.

In summary, the Prosperity Party’s unique mix of prosperity gospel ideology, anti-intellectualism, and strong religious nationalism creates both enthusiasm and anxiety in modern Ethiopia. It stirs hope for some, but for many, it is a source of exclusion and social tension.

The Tigray War and Related Humanitarian Crises

The Tigray War triggered one of the largest modern humanitarian crises in Ethiopia. After the conflict began in late 2020, the region faced widespread destruction and suffering. According to recent reports and sources like Human Rights Watch and the BBC, millions of Tigrayans struggled with a severe lack of food and basic services. Hospitals, schools, and factories were shelled or looted, leaving families without support. The economy in Tigray was devastated.

By 2024, starvation had become a daily threat for many, with UN and aid agencies struggling to reach all those in desperate need. The United Nations estimates that around 4.5 million people in Tigray currently need humanitarian assistance, and about 3 million have been displaced since the conflict started. Drought and ongoing insecurity after the main fighting only deepened the crisis, leading to more hunger and suffering. Despite a peace deal signed in 2022, humanitarian access remains inconsistent and food insecurity is still a major problem.

The Tigray War also caused almost 600,000 deaths and left visible scars on the region’s population. The psychological trauma, the breakdown of families, and the economic loss will take years to heal. The threat of renewed fighting with both Eritrea and other Ethiopian regions continues to haunt daily life and efforts at rebuilding.

Intercommunal Violence and State Security

Intercommunal violence is another big source of suffering in Ethiopia. According to sources like Freedom House and the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, fighting between different groups and communities continues in regions like Amhara, Oromia, and the border areas. State and non-state groups—sometimes backed by local militias or security forces—regularly clash, leading to deaths, injuries, and the destruction of homes.

In 2024, violence in the periphery of Ethiopia remained high. ACLED data showed that in March alone, there were 156 recorded political violence events and almost 500 deaths related to these clashes. Conflicts are often fueled by both ethnic and political grievances, as well as disputes over farmland and water, which are made worse by climate shocks like droughts and floods. Regional border disputes and disputes over identity and autonomy have created hotbeds for violence.

The Ethiopian government, meanwhile, struggles to maintain control and responds with its own security operations, sometimes abusing its powers. Reports of arbitrary arrests, attacks on civilians, and retaliation are common, according to Human Rights Watch and OHCHR. The result is a vicious cycle: fear, mistrust, and more violence, making it hard for peace to take root in many rural and border areas.

Claims of Ethnic Cleansing and Displacement

Claims of ethnic cleansing and mass displacement are some of the most serious issues faced by Ethiopia today. Throughout the Tigray conflict, strong evidence has emerged from organizations like Human Rights Watch and Al Jazeera that parties to the conflict—government forces, allied militias, and non-state armed groups—carried out campaigns meant to drive out or destroy certain ethnic populations.

Tigrayans were the main victims, but violence also targeted people in Amhara, Oromia, and Benishangul-Gumuz. Many families were forcibly removed, faced mass killings, or had their homes destroyed. In some cases, reports described intent to “destroy Tigrayans as an ethnic group,” with calls for trials at the International Court of Justice.

By 2024, nearly two and a half million Ethiopians were considered Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), living in camps or with host communities. The UN and ACLED both report continued political violence and displacements. Humanitarian agencies warn that without better protection and accountability, displacement and suffering will continue, risking long-term damage to Ethiopia’s social fabric and hopes for national unity.

These episodes of violence, forced movement, and trauma have left deep wounds in Ethiopian society. Healing and real reconciliation will need recognition of the harm done, justice for victims, and real efforts to end policies that divide people along ethnic lines.

Critique of Democratic Integrity

Democratic integrity in Ethiopia has faced strong criticism since the rise of the Prosperity Party. According to reports, the Prosperity Party dominates all levels of government, creating an environment where real opposition is almost impossible. Many critics highlight the suppression of opposition voices and independent media. Allegations of links to rebel groups are often used by the government to target critics, as detailed by Freedom House. The “winner-takes-all” system has led to a political monopoly, eroding trust in Ethiopia’s democratic process and institutions. As a result, many Ethiopians no longer have faith in elections or in their ability to bring about real change. Moreover, concerns about moral integrity and accountability are frequently raised. Experts like those writing for The Conversation and The Reporter Ethiopia point out that not only is integrity lacking among politicians, but state power is routinely leveraged to silence those with different views. This environment, critics say, threatens the country’s hopes for genuine democracy.

Prospects for National Dialogue

The prospects for national dialogue in Ethiopia are often described as both essential and uncertain. National dialogue is seen by many analysts and international organizations as necessary for transforming Ethiopia’s political landscape. However, according to sources like SWP-Berlin, Clingendael, and Ethiopia Insight, the main challenges are a lack of inclusivity, transparency, and genuine political will. Current national dialogue efforts have struggled because they do not always include all stakeholders, and major groups feel their voices are ignored. Policymakers note that for the dialogue to succeed, it must involve wide participation and seek genuine consensus on Ethiopia’s most difficult political issues. Some recent policy briefs warn that the present format may not be able to resolve Ethiopia’s deepest crises if it continues as a top-down process controlled by the ruling party. Still, there is hope among many observers that with the right changes, national dialogue could open a new path to peace and reconciliation.

Resistance Movements and Calls for Transition

Resistance movements and calls for political transition in Ethiopia have increased due to frustrations over lack of reform and ongoing conflicts. Historic transitions, such as those seen in 2018-19, offered hope but ended in disappointment for many groups pushing for change. According to analysis from international sources and researchers, youth protest movements were major drivers of the initial transition but have since been fragmented or repressed. Tensions between the government and armed opposition, especially in regions like Tigray and Oromia, remain high. Public protests, political boycotts, and armed resistance reflect the anger of communities who feel excluded from the political process. Many movements now call for a national transitional government that would oversee new reforms and a more open negotiating process. Analysts at ISS Africa and Crisis Group argue that only broad-based participation and a break from authoritarian practices can address the root causes of unrest and offer a real path forward.

Risks and Opportunities for Reform

Risks and opportunities for political reform in Ethiopia are both significant and interwoven. On the one hand, Ethiopia faces real dangers, including instability, continued ethnic conflict, and crackdowns on civil society. Experts note that new legal measures threaten to undo recent reforms by imposing vague bans on “political advocacy” and increasing government control over NGOs and dissenters. Reports from the Carnegie Endowment and BTI Index describe a fragile situation where civil conflict can quickly dismantle gains in democracy and peace. On the other hand, there are genuine opportunities for positive change if reforms are made carefully. ASF African and academic reviews highlight that reconciliation, economic reform, regional cooperation, and international support could help Ethiopia build more resilient institutions. If civil society, local governments, and new political coalitions are allowed to play a greater role, Ethiopia could see renewed momentum towards lasting democracy and stability.

The Role of the Intellectual and Political Class

The role of Ethiopia’s intellectual and political class is highly debated in the country’s future. Intellectuals have a long tradition of shaping political change in Ethiopia—sometimes as champions of freedom, other times as supporters of authoritarian regimes. Recent opinion pieces from East African Review and Borkena argue that Ethiopian intellectuals frequently fall into the trap of echoing the narratives of those in power, failing to challenge ethnic divisions or advocate for a more inclusive national identity. Historic examples, both positive and negative, show that the intellectual community can help bridge divides, foster debate, and encourage informed decision-making. However, critics say that many in the present-day elite are trapped in cycles of political performance and division. There is a growing call for intellectuals and the political class to take responsibility, promote critical thinking, and foster national dialogue instead of remaining silent or complacent. By doing so, they can play a key role in Ethiopia’s move toward democracy, peace, and equitable development.

The Fate of the Prosperity Party

The Prosperity Party remains the dominant political force in Ethiopia as of 2025. It continues to control most parliamentary seats and asserts its mandate over the country’s political direction. Recent reports, such as those by Freedom House and the BTI Transformation Index, confirm that the Prosperity Party secured a significant victory in the latest elections, holding hundreds of parliamentary constituencies. The party’s leadership, including Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, regularly reiterates their commitment to reform and national interests, as seen in public statements as recent as August 2025. However, some sources, like Borkena, highlight fractures and declining influence in conflict-ridden regions like Tigray and Amhara. There are also growing concerns that the party’s power is propped up more by military strength than by broad political consensus. While the Prosperity Party celebrates its fifth anniversary, critics argue its long-term fate depends heavily on whether it can adapt to rising demands for inclusiveness, peace, and genuine federalism within Ethiopia.

Risks to National Unity and Stability

Risks to Ethiopia’s national unity and stability are now greater than ever. Various studies and reports in 2024 point to deepening ethnic tensions, unresolved grievances, and ongoing civil conflicts that have reversed many recent reforms. According to BTI and multiple academic analyses, clashes between federal forces and regional militias, as well as inter-communal violence, have led to mass displacement, economic decline, and weakened central authority. Ethiopia’s quest for a seaport and growing border tensions add further instability. Security concerns are not just internal; external threats from neighbors and involvement in the politics of the Horn of Africa amplify instability. The persistence of old wounds, marginalization of ethnic groups, and the use of heavy-handed government measures all threaten to unravel the fragile sense of Ethiopian identity. People increasingly worry the country’s future could see either a dangerous fragmentation or a return to authoritarian centralization, unless urgent inclusive dialogue takes place.

Pathways to Genuine Political Representation and Democratic Governance

Pathways to genuine political representation and democratic governance in Ethiopia remain hard but necessary. In 2024, numerous observers, such as Freedom House and Ethiopia Insight, conclude that Ethiopia has not yet achieved representative government, with ongoing instability and restrictions on freedoms undermining democracy. However, positive routes are still available. Researchers and civil society groups stress the importance of open national dialogue, facilitated by tolerance and willingness to compromise. Some experts suggest transitional structures—such as caretaker governments, temporary coalitions, or even transitional justice mechanisms—could pave the way for new elections and reforms. Reports stress that any solution must address the roots of ethnic division, protect civil liberties, strengthen government accountability, and encourage active involvement from youth, women, and marginalized voices. For real democratic progress, Ethiopia must move beyond superficial reforms towards a system that values legitimate competition, local representation, and the rule of law. The role of committed intellectuals, reform-minded politicians, and a strong civil society will be essential to move the country toward lasting peace and meaningful democracy.