Manufacturing Division: Isaias Afwerki’s Weaponization of Ethiopian Identities.

Manufacturing Division: Isaias Afwerki’s Weaponization of Ethiopian Identities

In a recent speech, Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki made reference to the “Oromummaa ideology,” a term central to contemporary Oromo political and cultural identity. While the term itself has been the subject of vibrant debate within Ethiopia, Afwerki’s invocation was anything but innocent. It continued its longstanding strategy: manipulating Ethiopia's complex ethno-political landscape to stoke division, weaken national unity, and maintain regional influence through disorder.

Isaias is not a passive observer of Ethiopia’s internal politics. His regime has consistently inserted itself into Ethiopian affairs—not for peace or regional solidarity, but to exploit fault lines and undermine collective sovereignty. His tactic is as old as authoritarian politics itself: divide and rule.

The Manipulation of “Oromummaa”

“Oromummaa” refers to a sense of Oromo identity, cultural revival, and political self-determination. It has multiple meanings and interpretations among Oromo scholars, activists, and citizens. Some have used it to push for equality and recognition in a historically centralised Ethiopian state. Others have co-opted it into exclusivist political rhetoric.

Referencing “Oromummaa ideology,” Afwerki is not contributing to intellectual dialogue; he is framing it as a threat to national unity or his preferred allies. This is a deliberate distortion. His goal is not to understand Oromummaa but to weaponise it: turning Oromo nationalism against Amhara interests and Oromweaponisealliances against Tigrayan identity—depending on what division serves him best at a given time.

Pitting Identities Against Each Other

Isaias’s broader strategy is built on triangulation. He encourages Oromo and Tigrayan nationalists to oppose a perceived “Amhara ideology”—a phrase that lacks clarity but is often used by critics to refer to centralist or imperial legacies. At the same time, he stokes fear of Tigrayan nationalism among Oromo and Amhara nationalists alike. This is not a strategy of peace or principled diplomacy but a cynical manipulation to keep Ethiopia fragmented and distracted.

This pattern was evident during the Tigray War when Eritrean forces actively participated in Ethiopia’s internal conflict. Rather than promoting stability, Afwerki used the chaos to settle scores with the TPLF and deepen Ethiopia’s internal fracture.

Undermining Regional Sovereignty

Isaias's interventions must be understood in the context of regional authoritarianism. Eritrea has become one of the world’s most repressive states, with no free press, no elections, and indefinite military conscription. Unable to project soft power or inspire regional leadership, Afwerki turns to brutal tactics—covert influence, militarised alliances, and rhetorical manipulation.

By exploiting Ethiopia’s ethnic politics, Isaias undermines the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people to solve their own problems through dialogue, reform, or democratic processes. His involvement does not lead to reconciliation but to more profound suspicion between groups—especially among youth who increasingly experience identity through exclusion rather than solidarity.

The Danger of Ethnic Triangulation

Ethnic identity in Ethiopia is complex, historical, and real—but it is also vulnerable to political abuse. When external actors like Isaias exploit these identities, they amplify distrust and polarise communities. Terms like "Amhara ideology," "Oromummaa," or "Tegaru nationalism" become caricatured and weaponised, stripped of their original meanings and reloaded with political toxicity.

This form of ethnic triangulation destabilises Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa. It disrupts efforts for peace, democratic reform, and economic integration. It also obscures the real issues—inequality, poverty, authoritarianism, and a lack of national reconciliation.

A Call for Ethical Leadership and Pan-Ethiopian Solidarity

Ethiopia must not allow its future to be shaped by those who thrive on division. The antidote to Isaias Afwerki’s strategy is not reactive ethnonationalism but principled unity rooted in justice, pluralism, and mutual respect. Oromummaa, Amhara identity, Tegaru pride—all must coexist within a framework that recognises difference as a strength, not a weakness.

Religious leaders, scholars, artists, youth movements, and political parties must resist the temptation to echo divisive rhetoric and promote dialogue transcending tribal lines. Ethiopia’s dignity will not be restored by foreign strongmen or internal scapegoating—it will be restored by Ethiopians together.