Module: HST5359 Freedom and Nation: The State in Post-Colonial Africa, 1956-2006
By: Megan Saunders
In recent media, there has been an overwhelming amount of positivity in regard to Ethiopia, as opposed to the media coverage it usually receives as a war-stricken country of ethnic and land disputes. Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is the 100th person to win the Nobel Peace Prize, after merely a year of being in office- being elected in April 2018. In my opinion, the Peace Committee have been far too blasé in regard to giving Ahmed this award so early on in his premiership. Despite the liberal reforms that he has put in place and his democratising mission, with his intention to hold a democratic election in 2020, he still has a long way to go in achieving peace within Ethiopia itself and maintaining the Algiers Peace Agreement[1].
Context
Ethiopia has been known due to the war that has lasted over 20 years now, with the peak of the tensions occurring between 1998-2000[2]. This is commonly assumed to only be because of the disputed land border in the region of Badme, which despite it being ruled and occupied by Ethiopians, Eritreans also feel that they have a stake in the territory. Although, historians such as Leenco Lata have explained that the border dispute is ignoring the bigger picture of the tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea. An example of one of the tensions is the ambitions of the Tigray group in Ethiopia, wanting to conquer land in Eritrea. The Tigray community is present both in Ethiopia and Eritrea (known as the Kebesa in Eritrea). However, there are tensions as they have conflicting interests. The Kebesas want to unite with the Tigray community in Ethiopia to form a greater united Ethiopia. As Chester Crocker put it “It’s really Tigrayans and Eritreans going at each other”[3]. This is only one example of the ethnic and inter-ethnic tensions that plague Ethiopia and Eritrea and are the roots of the border crisis. This act of brushing over history helps to simplify these catastrophise and ease the minds of those who do not actually have to witness the events, much like the articles that have been written in praise of Ahmed. This is majorly troubling, as Ahmed may become much like the typical African leaders that we have seen previously who do not upkeep on their promises.
Ahmed’s Praise
This is not to discredit Ahmed in any way. Ahmed adopted a country where the government is described as ruling with an “iron fist”[4]. This was due to the control the government had over the population, such as censoring the news. It appears that his primary concern besides the peace treaty with Eritrea is liberating the country and creating democratic elections. He has demonstrated his keenness to do this through encouraging more women into senior positions and allowing opposition parties to be present in politics once again. Moreover, until 1991, Ethiopia was ruled as a dictatorship under President Mengistu Haile. Even post-Mengistu, democracy has not functioned in Ethiopia under Zenawi or Desalegn. Whether this be through the dominance of Prime Ministers or the undermining of minority groups, such as most of the Gedeo population who have now fled the Oromia region due to ethnic violence[5], the political field is in no regards an even playing field. Therefore, Ahmed’s efforts to legitimise the Ethiopian government and make democracy a reality is a big leap.
The Faults
To speak plainly, one could say that this achievement of Ahmed is monumental. I agree that Ahmed has achieved great things, and I hope will continue to achieve great things, but I believe the Peace Committee were too eager in awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize, not considering the ethnic disputes arising in Ethiopia due to his reforms.
Figure 1[6]
As demonstrated in Figure 1 above, Ethiopia is made up of a vast number of ethnic groups. Furthermore, after the fall of the dictatorship in 1991, a constitution was created in 1995[7], with the overarching feature being the right for the people to govern their own affairs[8]. Each of these ethnic groups shown in Figure 1 has representatives who are in government for 5 years. However, due to this system, the larger ethnic groups have far greater authority in their states, often disregarding the ethnic minorities within those states. Furthermore, due to the government not shifting from its autocratic roots despite the change in government, the supposed representatives were not actually elected by the people or representing the people correctly. This has affected Ahmed’s premiership already since through his work to reform the government, for example, giving people more liberty and allowing opposition forces to be part of politics once again, he has disrupted the old political climate that has been in place since the fall of the dictatorship in 1991. In plain terms, this is not a bad thing. His intention is to reform the government and turn Ethiopia into a functional democracy with elections. However, the haste that he is working at has changed Ethiopian politics far too quickly for a system that has been so rigid and firm for so long. This poses the threat that it will not be long-lasting, and may result in a collapse in the new system altogether.
Has the Peace Committee been too eager?
To conclude, in no way do I believe that Ahmed has not made great leaps for the future of Ethiopia. Even if he does not entirely change the fate of the country, he has definitely got the ball rolling for future Ethiopian Prime Ministers to build upon. However, I do believe the Peace Committee has been far too eager to award Ahmed this prize as his policies have no evidence of resilience as of yet. Therefore, I believe that the Peace Committee should have waited for a few years to see the effect of the policies. I also think that they have been ignorant of the fact that there are major ethnic tensions due to the new liberal reforms that are yet to be controlled by Ahmed. Meaning that these reforms may not be resilient and could even lead to greater future issues.
Footnotes
[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/nominated-abiy-ahmed-nobel-peace-prize-191013072339962.html
3] Lata,Leenco. "The Ethiopia-Eritrea War."Review of African Political Economy30, no. 97(2003): 369-88. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4006982.
[4] https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-ethiopia-politics/ethiopias-2020-vote-will-be-free-wont-be-delayed-by-reforms-pm-idUKKCN1LA0O7
[5] https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/may/15/go-and-we-die-stay-and-we-starve-the-ethiopians-facing-a-deadly-dilemma
[6] Ethiopia Population Census 2007, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-48803815
[7] https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/ethiopia-stick-ethnic-federalism-190401092837981.html
[8] Aalen, Lovise. The Politics of Ethnicity in Ethiopia, Actors, Power Mobilisation under Ethnic Federalism, BRILL (June 2011), pg.2
Bibliography
Books
Aalen, Lovise. The Politics of Ethnicity in Ethiopia, Actors, Power Mobilisation under Ethnic Federalism, BRILL (June 2011)
Journals
Lata, Leenco. "The Ethiopia-Eritrea War." Review of African Political Economy 30, no. 97(2003): 369-88. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4006982.
Websites/Articles
Media
Ethiopia Population Census 2007, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-48803815
Comments