A National Dialogue is due In Ethiopia – “an important milestone in our collective efforts to bring about understanding on contested issues” – PM Abiy Ahmed said today, after meeting the National Dialogue Commission. Regardless of one’s opinion regarding the Prime Minister’s administration, the urgency of this endeavor, the necessity of addressing, as he aptly states, the ‘contested issues,’ most of which lie at the heart of the conflicts that have plagued the northern parts of the country, the previous one originating in Tigray and now from the Amhara region, cannot be overstated.
Some from the Amhara region might argue that conducting such a dialogue at this stage is too late, that it will only be a gimmick, a charade for the PM to score political capital. But another could argue that it was never too late to sign the Pretoria Agreement, which ended the previous war originating in neighboring Tigray.
Still, of course, we must acknowledge, if only to express empathy, that given the loss of lives and destruction already experienced in the Amhara region, such suspicion and skepticism toward the PM’s intentions are natural. Regardless, the undeniable truth remains that only National Dialogue can sustainably resolve the Amhara conflict and address latent conflicts in other regions, for which the ‘contested issues’ are potential triggers.
Avoiding the Zero-sum Option
Anything to the contrary, whether from the side of the Amhara or the PM’s government, is zero-sum thinking – the reckless presumption of complete victory for one side and total loss for the other. In this context, the possible implied alternative to the National Dialogue from the warring Amhara side would be an escalation, of the conflict with the intention to oust PM Abiy Ahmed and enthrone one of their own. The second implied alternative, hypothetically from the PM’s side, and which some have feared until now was the case, is the continuation of the same conflict until the Amhara region is subdued, and the federal government can unquestionably enforce its will.
However, none of these two alternatives is viable. The ouster of PM Abiy is impractical in today’s context as one could point out that the military optics of war don’t necessarily put the federal government at a disadvantage outright. Abiy Ahmed’s Premiership in any circumstance is further entrenched by the legitimate claim to a constitutional mandate to govern bestowed through elections. He can legitimately act to avoid any such attempt to overthrow the government, by any means necessary.
On the other hand, subduing the Amhara is also impractical in today’s context, as one could argue that the optics of war in an ethnically polarized context such as the current one, don’t necessarily disadvantage the Amhara, as it risks further escalation and unrest, creating an even more complex and unstable situation teetering on the implosion of the country.
Choosing National Dialogue
What then, is the way forward? National Dialogue as planned by the Prime Minister. This is the only way forward for whosoever is genuinely interested in unity, peace, and progress for Ethiopia. For all intents and purposes, if this National Dialogue is broadly participatory, conducted transparently, and its resolutions conscientiously implemented, it could be the best thing to happen to the country, equally significant as the Pretoria Agreement, perhaps even more significant.
The Pretoria Agreement had limited participation from all the major stakeholders in Ethiopia, which, given the ethnic rivalries, raised suspicions. It also involved non-Ethiopian third parties, which, for some, made it appear less domestically oriented. The National Dialogue, however, represents an opportunity for Ethiopians to engage in dialogue as fellow citizens, within their own country.
Speaking about the planned dialogue earlier today, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed aptly spoke of the opportunity to “bring about understanding on contested issues. One of the most contentious issues is the status of the contested land area between the Tigray and Amhara regions. This National Dialogue presents an opportunity to amicably resolve it once and for all. Will it be designated as part of the Tigray region or the Amhara region, both of which lay claims to it? Or could it be jointly administered by the two regions? Alternatively, a completely new administrative entity or arrangement could be considered.
The other equally contentious issue pertains to the integration of regional forces, in line with the federal government’s initiative to establish a unified and robust army to safeguard the country’s interests and ensure its security. This represents one of the major flashpoints in the Amhara conflict, with the Amhara region expressing concerns about not having its own regional force for self-defense. Given Ethiopia’s recent history, this concern is justified, particularly for the Amhara region. The federal government must be willing to consider the plausibility of such concerns, and hopefully, the national dialogue will address them.
Some Caveats
There is no denying that the upcoming national dialogue, occurring in the aftermath of the 2020–2022 war, despite its conclusion through the Pretoria Agreement, and in the midst of the ongoing Amhara conflict, will take place within an exceptionally volatile political and military context. This heightened volatility could significantly affect the prospects of the dialogue’s success. It is crucial that various political, federal, and regional stakeholders take the initiative to first reconcile their differences and foster a climate of trust. Such reconciliation and trust-building are essential prerequisites for engaging in constructive and meaningful discussions during the planned national dialogue.
They must also be willing to confront and reconcile with past wrongdoings, while simultaneously embracing a shift away from the divisive lens through which Ethiopian politics has traditionally been viewed. This lens, characterized by notions of ‘the dominant’ and ‘the dominated,’ ‘the oppressor’ and ‘the oppressed,’ has been deeply ingrained in Ethiopian political culture until now. For the planned national dialogue to succeed, it’s imperative that they work towards transcending this historical perspective and fostering a more inclusive and progressive political environment.
The Bottom Line
Regardless of what one thinks of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, both supporter and opponent must acknowledge that his planned National Dialogue is an opportunity to candidly discuss contentious issues and for everyone to make concessions, offer compromises, and, in the spirit of unity, peace, and progress, collectively move forward with clarity as a country.
