Leadership Without Compass – The Crisis of Governance in Ethiopia
Introduction
Governing a complex, multiethnic country like Ethiopia requires more than occupying a position of power. It requires a deep understanding of constitutionalism, federalism, diplomacy, security, and public administration. Yet Ethiopia has repeatedly suffered from a leadership vacuum, where those in power lack even the "ABCs" of governance. This knowledge deficit has allowed informal networks, militarised actors, foreign interests, and ethnic elites to dominate national decision-making—often with destabilising consequences.
1. The Hollow Throne: Office Without Governance
In Ethiopia, titles like Prime Minister, Minister of Defense, or Speaker of Parliament do not always reflect the capacity to lead effectively. Instead, appointments are often driven by loyalty, ethnic balance, or personal networks, not qualifications or experience. The result is:
Poor policy design and implementation
Incoherent diplomatic strategies
Inability to manage complex inter-regional tensions
Case Example: 2020-2022 Tigray War
Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s administration launched a military operation in Tigray in November 2020, claiming it would be a "law enforcement operation" lasting weeks. However, the war spiralled into one of the most devastating conflicts in Ethiopia's modern history, revealing a lack of crisis planning, a misunderstanding of federal dynamics, and an absence of post-conflict governance frameworks.
International Crisis Group (2021). Finding a Path to Peace in Ethiopia’s Tigray Crisis.
2. Informal Power Brokers and the Deep State
When formal leaders lack knowledge, informal actors step in. In Ethiopia, absolute power is often held by:
Military and intelligence commanders (e.g., INSA, NISS)
Senior party officials behind the scenes
Business elites tied to ruling coalitions
Advisors with no public mandate
These actors operate in opacity, influencing national security, resource allocation, and appointments without oversight or accountability.
Case Example: The Role of INSA and Military Commanders
During the Tigray conflict and subsequent crises in Oromia and Amhara, military generals and intelligence leaders often made strategic decisions, not by parliament or cabinet. Civilian institutions became sidelined as Ethiopia’s governance entered a state of emergency rule and command-based decision-making.
Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International (2022). Investigative Report on War Crimes in Northern Ethiopia.
3. The Party-State Merger: Prosperity Over Democracy
The Prosperity Party (PP), which succeeded the EPRDF in 2019, inherited the old party-state structure. The merging of the party with state institutions means:
Ministers are often party appointees first, professionals second
Decisions are made in party rooms, not public chambers
Loyalty to party leadership outweighs legal or constitutional obligations
Case Example: PP’s Selection of Regional Leaders
In 2021, the Prosperity Party appointed new regional presidents in Oromia and Amhara without genuine local consultation or competitive internal processes. Many appointments were questioned by regional activists for lacking legitimacy or local grounding.
Addis Standard (2021). Prosperity Party Appoints New Leadership Amid Controversy.
4. Ethno-Federalism and De Facto Fragmentation
Ethiopia’s federalism, while designed to empower nations and nationalities, has in practice led to:
Ethnic-based political fragmentation
Regional governments acting as semi-sovereign entities
Local militias and special forces overriding national forces
Case Example: Amhara and Oromia Special Forces
Despite federal restructuring efforts, regional states have retained heavily armed special forces. In Amhara, these forces defied federal orders and clashed with the ENDF in 2023, illustrating the fractured sovereignty of the federal government.
Reuters (2023). Ethiopia's Amhara Conflict Undermines National Security Reform.
5. The Military Ascendancy: Rule by the Gun
In the absence of effective civilian rule, Ethiopia has seen increasing militarisation of governance. Military actors are now major players in internal security, border diplomacy, and even economic planning.
Case Example: Command Posts and State of Emergency
From Tigray to Oromia and Amhara, the federal government has repeatedly declared states of emergency, setting up command posts that bypass local governments. These posts are led by generals who act as de facto governors.
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC, 2021). Monitoring Reports from Conflict Zones.
6. Foreign Influence and Sovereignty Erosion
Weak and uninformed leadership allows foreign actors to shape domestic affairs. Ethiopia’s geostrategic location makes it a target for:
Gulf states seeking influence in the Red Sea region
China investing in infrastructure and debt diplomacy
The U.S. and EU pushing democratic reforms or counterterrorism agendas
Egypt and Eritrea intervening in the Nile and border politics
Case Example: UAE Drone Support
During the Tigray war, the United Arab Emirates reportedly provided drone support to the Ethiopian military[^6]. This military aid was not publicly debated or publicised, showing how foreign powers exploit weak governance structures.
The New York Times (2021). UAE’s Role in Ethiopia’s Conflict Raises Regional Concerns.
7. Populism, Propaganda, and the Illusion of Legitimacy
When competence is absent, leadership often uses populist messaging and propaganda to maintain support. Narratives of:
“Ethiopian unity vs. division”
“Foreign conspiracy vs. sovereignty”
“Development vs. insurgency”
…are commonly used to suppress dissent and avoid accountability.
Case Example: Media Control and Dissent
State media and affiliated outlets have been used to discredit political opposition, civil society, and human rights defenders—rather than foster informed dialogue. This deepens polarisation and isolates leadership from public reality.
Reporters Without Borders (2024). Press Freedom Index – Ethiopia.
Conclusion: The Price of Ignorance
Ethiopia’s governance crisis is not merely political—it is epistemic. A lack of basic knowledge about statecraft has allowed informal power networks, militarised actors, and foreign interests to dominate. It has led to:
Recurrent civil conflict
Erosion of public institutions
Undermining of federal legitimacy
A public increasingly distrustful of both federal and regional elites
To reclaim a stable and sovereign future, Ethiopia must:
Invest in civic and political education
Prioritise merit-based leadership selection
Reform its party-state structure
Empower regional governments within constitutional boundaries
Encourage transparent, inclusive national dialogue
No comments:
Post a Comment