Somalia: America’s Next “Afghanistan?”

Source: 1945.com | Edward Chang

On March 3, 1994, the United States military accomplished what has become unthinkable today – complete a total withdrawal from an ongoing conflict.

After the political fiasco wrought by the Battle of Mogadishu on October 3 the year prior – immortalized in the book and motion picture adaptation Black Hawk Down – President Bill Clinton ordered an end to the American military intervention in Somalia, which began late in the George H.W. Bush administration as a part of an international humanitarian effort. Somalia had been wracked by civil war since the fall of the incumbent Communist military dictatorship in 1991, leading to a state of near-anarchy and brutal civil war to fill the power vacuum.

27 years later, it is deja vu all over again as U.S. troops once again find themselves leaving Somalia at the orders of outgoing President Donald Trump. Only this time, it is not a withdrawal, but a relocation. Most of the approximately 700 troops in Somalia are being re-deployed to friendlier countries in the region, including Africa Command’s in-theater forward headquarters, Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti. Meanwhile, a small number of troops will remain in Somalia to continue a mission begun in the mid-2000s, during one of the most intense cycles of the War on Terror.

In other words, America’s military posture in the Horn of Africa remains largely unchanged.

Though the public is less aware of U.S. military involvement in Somalia versus Afghanistan and Iraq, it is no less emblematic of America’s difficulty in ending the “endless wars.” The humanitarian intervention, which began in December 1992, was ultimately the first foray into a country the U.S. still cannot quit. Less than 10 years after the ’94 withdrawal, Somalia was again being eyed as a target in the War on Terror. Through three administrations, covert military actions were taken through the intelligence community, special operations forces, and mostly unmanned airstrikes, an effort that dramatically escalated during the Trump administration.

The ultimate benefit of these operations remains in doubt. In December, the Justice Department announced it had charged Cholo Abdi Abdullah, an operative for Somalia-based jihadist militant group al-Shabaab, an al-Qaeda affiliate. Abdullah had been arrested in 2019 in the Philippines for plotting a 9/11-style terror attack on the U.S., using a hijacking and a commercial airliner as a missile. Some commentators cited the plot to criticize Pres. Trump’s decision to withdraw from Somalia.

However, the plot not only ensued despite the military offensive against al-Shabaab in Somalia, but much of it was also orchestrated far from the group’s “safe haven.” It is not clear how authorities were alerted to and thwarted the plot, but the fact it went as far as it did despite such intense counter-terrorism efforts is troubling. Anecdotal evidence from one journalist suggests the offensive approach to terror in Somalia is actually having a counter-intuitive effect, making al-Shabaab more capable of implementing terrorism overseas.

There is plenty of room for debate on these questions. However, there exists something of a consensus that al-Shabaab constitutes the next big terror threat to the U.S. This consensus first publicly emerged during the Obama administration, when the group carried out the Westgate mall attack in Nairobi, Kenya on September 21, 2013. During the next few years, concerns increased that al-Shabaab could strike the American homeland, possibly through sympathizers in places like Minnesota, where a large Somali-American community exists. In early 2015, the Mall of America was specifically cited as a target of attack by the group, and numerous Americans have been arrested and charged with aiding al-Shabaab.

More recently, Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute compared threats against the U.S. made by Hassan Dahir Aweys, an Islamist leader associated with al-Shabaab, to statements made by Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, culminating in the devastation of 9/11. The group has racked up quite the death toll, attempting an airline bombing in 2016, executing a dual truck bombing in October 2017 that killed over 500, a January 2020 attack that killed three Americans and destroyed multiple aircraft and ground vehicles, and numerous other deadly incidents, including one already in 2021.

What this all points to is a jihadist group that is becoming increasingly dangerous and as active as al-Qaeda, Hamas, and ISIS. Like the former, but not the latter two, al-Shabaab clearly has global designs and appears to possess the fundamental capacity necessary to attempt such attacks, along with potential insiders in the U.S.

Judging the likelihood of a devastating terrorist attack by al-Shabaab on U.S. soil is something of a fool’s errand since nobody wants an attack to happen and such a likelihood can only be assessed in the event an actual plot is put into play. What has become clear is that if a major terror attack were to occur on U.S. soil that can be traced back to al-Shabaab, then this would make Somalia a primary focus of American foreign policy once more. The withdrawal of troops from the country would appear, in retrospect, to have been a serious mistake and military intervention in the country would again escalate.

In fact, a war in Somalia is virtually assured in response to a successful al-Shabaab operation. Unlike Afghanistan 2001, U.S. forces are already in-theater and would have the support of a friendly regime in Mogadishu. This makes military retaliation much easier to facilitate. A massive ground intervention, like the one seen in Afghanistan and Iraq, or even Somalia back in the days of George H.W. Bush, is unlikely and unnecessary, given the existing footprint, the non-necessity of regime change, and the lack of a conventional military threat. This war will instead involve larger numbers of intelligence operatives and special operations forces on the ground, accompanied by precision airstrikes, a sophisticated approach that has become the choice of policymakers seeking to fight terror at as low a cost as possible with as great an impact as possible.

But this also means the U.S. will find itself fighting in Somalia for a long time. The bitter experience of the last 20 years has proven that insurgency, militancy, and terrorism are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate and the cost of waging endless war adds up over time. It seems a small price to pay for safety, but as memory of the last terror attack recedes amongst the public, questions about the mission will surely rise. Meanwhile, that same memory of the last attack will make policymakers reticent about withdrawing troops from Somalia, just as they are unwilling to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Iraq today, even with public sentiment firmly in the “withdrawal” camp.

For now, the U.S. should proceed with its Somalia exit. Meanwhile, it ought to be hoped the fight will continue successfully in the cloak-and-dagger world to avoid terrorists from drawing America back into another endless war.

Edward Chang is a defense, military, and foreign policy writer. His writing has most prominently appeared in The American Conservative, The Federalist, The National Interest, and Spectator USA. Follow him on Twitter at @Edward_Chang_8.

 

China Has Been Spying on the African Union Headquarters

Beijing has gone out of its way to gain information on African leaders in order to compel and coerce them into supporting China’s international goals.

Last week, a report emerged that hackers, probably from China, had been filching security camera footage from inside the African Union headquarters building in Ethiopia. Several years ago, AU technicians discovered that the building’s Huawei-provided servers were daily exporting their data to Shanghai, and that the walls of the Chinese-built headquarters were peppered with listening devices.

It is a strange way for Beijing to treat a continent whose rulers have emerged as key backers of its international agenda. Yet the Chinese government’s spying, which almost certainly extends far beyond the African Union headquarters, may in fact be one of the reasons why African rulers are willing to defend Beijing’s increasingly indefensible actions.

Beijing’s opportunities for eavesdropping in Africa are vast. Chinese companies—many of which are state-owned, all of which are legally obliged to cooperate with the Chinese Communist Party on intelligence matters—have built at least 186 government buildings in Africa, including presidential residences, ministries of foreign affairs, and parliament buildings. Huawei has built more than 70 percent of the continent’s 4G networks and at least fourteen intra-governmental ICT networks, including a data center in Zambia that houses the entirety of the government’s records.

The report—now confirmed by two other media outlets—that broke the original story of the Chinese government’s AU spying demonstrates what Beijing can do with a structure one of its company builds. The AU’s compromised ICT system was also provided by Huawei, whose equipment is often swiss chees-ed with security vulnerabilities that make them easily exploitable. Given Huawei’s links to China’s Ministry of State Security, it beggars belief that Beijing lacks anything less than an excellent idea of how to access those backdoors.

Beijing has many reasons to take advantage of the spying opportunities its companies’ activities in Africa provides. It can eavesdrop on the sensitive conversations they have with their non-African counterparts, and the Chinese government might be able to gather useful economic information it can pass to its many companies operating on the continent.

Yet as the Chinese government becomes more aggressive internationally, it likely increasingly values the information it gathers in Africa for its use in maintaining and expanding African decisionmakers’ support for Beijing’s global agenda. African states are consistent apologists for the Chinese regime’s oppression of its ethnic and religious minorities, vote frequently with Beijing at the United Nations (often in opposition to the United States), and usually back Chinese candidates vying for leadership of important international agencies.

Recent bombshell revelations demonstrate Beijing’s commitment to influencing foreign leaders. A Chinese spy named Christine Fang spent years developing personal ties with local politicians primarily from California. Fang arranged donations for, and even managed to place at least one intern with, U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, who is now a current member of the sensitive House Intelligence Committee (Swalwell cut ties with Fang after receiving an FBI briefing about her spying).

In early December, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe wrote of a Chinese influence campaign aimed at “several dozen“ Congressmen and Congressional aides. China, in fact, targets Congress six times more frequently than does Russia, according to Ratcliffe. Meanwhile, a branch of the Chinese Communist Party known as the International Department, which is responsible for cultivating sympathy for the CCP with foreign politicians, claims to have ties with over 600 political groups in more than 160 countries.

African leaders, of course, do not need to be persuaded to accommodate China on certain issues. Many of their countries face a massive infrastructure gap, and Beijing is often happy to open its wallet for infrastructure projects. Affordable Chinese products, especially tech such as smartphones, are popular on the continent as well.

Yet the Chinese government spends a lot of time and energy trying to influence African leaders to support Beijing’s agenda at a level beyond what simple concern for their countries’ national interests would prompt. These charm campaigns include everything from bribery to throwing up flashy infrastructure projects during election times to lavishing “no-strings-attached” aid on rulers to feed their patronage networks.

The information that Beijing appears to be hoovering up daily is of obvious use for those kinds of influence operations. It could offer insights into an official’s habits, personality, and proclivities that would help Beijing effectively cajole or coerce him or her. A key element of Christina Fang’s approach was to get as close as possible to her targets; electronic surveillance access to a target’s most sensitive haunts would offer the sort of extensive surveillance a human spy could only dream of.

China has built access to African leaders that will be impossible to roll back in the immediate term. Washington, however, can begin building a response that is as patient and far-seeing as China’s strategy has been. One element of that must be complicating what is currently Beijing’s almost unfettered surveillance access to Africa.

Joshua Meservey is a Senior Policy Analyst specializing in Africa and the Middle East at The Heritage Foundation.

U.S. Military Base Penetrated By Somali Militants

Military Watch | Dash-8 Spy Plane and C-146 Transport Destroyed

The Somali militant group Al Shabab launched a successful attack on a U.S. military base in Kenya, the Manda Bay Airfield, on January 5th. The attack follows longstanding tensions between the group and American forces in the region, and amid at time when the U.S. is expanding its military presence in East Africa. A spokesman for U.S. Africa Command stayed regarding the attack: “U.S. Africa Command acknowledges there was an attack at Manda Bay Airfield, Kenya and is monitoring the situation.” The attack was eventually repelled with four militants killed, but they succeeded in neutralising multiple American aircraft on the ground including a C-146A Wolfhound tactical transport and a Dash-8 spy plane. The Dash-8 is equipped with synthetic aperture radar capable detecting ground targets across an area nearly two miles wide, depending on its fight altitude, and also deploys a sensor turret with electro-optical and infrared cameras. Al Shabab claimed it had inflicted heavy casualties on U.S. and Kenyan forces, but this has yet to be confirmed. Al Shabab has been designated a terrorist organisation by a number of Western states, including, Australia, Canada, the United States, New Zealand and Britain, as well was by the United Arab Emirates and Singapore.

Situation Report EEPA HORN No. 47 – 07 January 2021

Europe External Programme with Africa is a Belgium-based Centre of Expertise with in-depth knowledge, publications, and networks, specialised in issues of peace building, refugee protection and resilience in the Horn of Africa. EEPA has published extensively on issues related to movement and/or human trafficking of refugees in the Horn of Africa and on the Central Mediterranean Route. It cooperates with a wide network of Universities, research organisations, civil society and experts from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Uganda and across Africa. Key in-depth publications can be accessed on the website.

Military situation (as confirmed per 6 January 2021)

  • A video has emerged of the head of the Ethiopian Northern Command, General Belay, saying that the Eritrean Soldiers in Tigray had not been invited and were undesirable. It is the latest statement by an Ethiopian Federal official which confirms the presence of Eritrean troops in Tigray.
  • The General Belay is blaming the TPLF for starting the conflict and stopping the ENDF from guarding the border against Eritrean intrusion. Eritrea has provided major support to ENDF forces during the invasion of Tigray. This has been confirmed by the Ethiopian government as well.
  • Satellite images have spotted fires near Hitsats refugee camp in central Tigray. Fighting has been reported in the area, including between Tigrayan and Eritrean forces.
  • Fighting between ENDF-allied forces and Tigray regional forces has also been reported near Inda Aba Guna, near Shire, Tigray.
  • Further fighting between the ENDF and Tigrayan forces has closed the road between Mekoni and Mekelle. According to reports, several buses filled with ENDF soldiers were ambushed.
  • Sudanese and Ethiopian forces have clashed in the contested border region again. The Sudanese army says it repulsed two attacks carried out by Ethiopian forces. They specifically praised Sudanese paratroopers for repelling the attack.
  • The Sudanese army says that the attacks were carried out by the regular Ethiopian army. They say heavy weaponry was used during the attacks and so they have ruled out miliamen as the assailants. Sudan also says it has captured an Ethiopian soldier.

Regional situation (as confirmed per 6 January 2021)

  • The Ethiopian boundary commission has accused Sudan of breaching the agreement. Both countries have also accused each other of beginning the conflict. Both have also said that they want a peaceful resolution of the conflict.
  • The new round of GERD dam negotiations seem to have failed. The first meeting on Sunday 3 Jan has so far been the only one that has taken place. Sudan has demanded a greater role for AU experts.
  • Egypt has reaffirmed the need to reach an agreement before the summer.

Situation in Tigray (as confirmed per 6 January 2021)

  • The interim mayor of Mekelle, who recently made comments about Eritrean soldiers having to leave Tigray, has said that he was merely repeating the comments of General Belay. Another official, Mulu Nega, has said that the interim mayor did not have the authority to discuss the situation and that “corrective measures” had been taken.
  • The BBC reported that the government had pledged to repair the shelled Al Negash mosque. It was recently restored by Turkey and severely damaged in December by artillery shelling.
  • A convoy transporting 35 tons of relief supplies arrived in Mekelle on Friday.
  • Photos have emerged of the looted hospital in Adwa. Hospitals in Tigray are running out of supplies.
  • January 7th is Christmas according to the coptic calendar. Prime Minister Abiy, and many religious leaders have been holding speeches to celebrate the holiday.

Situation in refugees (as confirmed per 6 January 2021)

  • Eritrean opposition broadcast, Radio Erena, is reporting that Ethiopian authorities are refusing permits to leave (exit permits) for hundreds of Eritrean refugees. These refugees are mostly part of family reunion programmes and have been approved by the IOM. It is not clear why the exit is being refused.
  • The International Rescue Committee (IRC) has said that many new refugees are arriving in Sudan. The many more refugees has resulted in overcrowding in Um Rakuba. They require more resources to ensure proper health standards and avoid epidemics of diseases, including Covid-19.
  • The IRC says that there are an unusually high number of unaccompanied children among the refugees. The IRC is enacting better protection programmes to take care of them. Children are especially at high risk of exploitation. They are often severely traumatized as well.
  • The SudanTribune reported that the ENDF has deployed more troops to the Sudanese border to prevent refugees from crossing over into Sudan. Ethiopian refugees in Sudan currently exceed 63 thousand.
  • The Norwegian Refugee Council Director in Sudan, William Carter, corroborates this and says that Ethiopia is also pushing Sudan for immediate repatriation of civilians that did manage to get to Sudan.
  • The Ethiopian minister of foreign affairs spokesman has said that the last details are being worked on with regards to repatriation of refugees from Sudan to Ethiopia. The spokesman said that it will start soon. Many refugees in Sudan have stated to media that they will not go back and will not feel safe.

International Situation (as confirmed per 6 January 2021)

  • US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin has met with Prime Minister Hamdok, the Chairman of the Sovereign Council General al-Burham and various other ministers. They discussed economic opportunities for Sudan through the Abraham Accords, Sudanese debt repayment and the GERD dam negotiations.
  • The Abraham accords were signed between Israel, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and other arabic countries in the region. Sudan officially joined the accords on 6 January, paving the way for normalisation of relations between Israel and Sudan.

Disclaimer:

All information in this situation report is presented as a fluid update report, as to the best knowledge and understanding of the authors at the moment of publication. EEPA does not claim that the information is correct but verifies to the best of ability within the circumstances. Publication is weighed on the basis of interest to understand potential impacts of events (or perceptions of these) on the situation. Check all information against updates and other media. EEPA does not take responsibility for the use of the information or impact thereof. All information reported originates from third parties and the content of all reported and linked information remains the sole responsibility of these third parties. Report to info@eepa.be any additional information and corrections.

Links of interest

https://addisstandard.com/news-analysis-we-dont-want-it-north-command-chief-on-eritrean-army-in-tigray-says-army-didnt-let-alienforces-in-full-speech/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-55530355
https://www.rescue.org/press-release/thousands-more-fleeing-conflict-ethiopia-arrive-eastern-sudan-irc-scales-emergency
https://sudantribune.com/spip.php?article70296

Situation Report EEPA HORN No. 47 – 6 January 2021

Europe External Programme with Africa is a Belgium-based Centre of Expertise with in-depth knowledge, publications, and networks, specialised in issues of peace building, refugee protection and resilience in the Horn of Africa. EEPA has published extensively on issues related to movement and/or human trafficking of refugees in the Horn of Africa and on the Central Mediterranean Route. It cooperates with a wide network of Universities, research organisations, civil society and experts from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Uganda and across Africa. Key in-depth publications can be accessed on the website.

Military situation (as confirmed per 5 January 2021)

  • The Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) claims that it has killed 100 ENDF soldiers near Abraha Atsbeha, North of Mekelle. It also claims to have destroyed 2 tanks.
  • A source reports that heavy fighting is taking place between TPLF and Eritrean combatants near Endabaguna and Kisadgaba. Reportedly TPLF forces launched an attack on looting Eritrean soldiers. Endabaguna is the location of the reception center for refugees from Eritrea in Central Tigray.
  • Tigray Media House reported that a senior ENDF officer died of his wounds in Hospital. Colonel Dejene was ambushed by TPLF while traveling from Maychew to Korem two weeks ago.
  • Additional ENDF forces moving to Tigray reportedly consist of 8 tanks and troops in vehicles.
  • Pictures have appeared online, identified as Eritrean soldiers in Idaga Hamus (allegedly).

Regional situation (as confirmed per 5 January 2021)

  • The Prosperity Party Chair of Tigray, the ruling party of Ethiopia, has become the second official to confirm that there are Eritrean troops in Tigray. In a statement on Tigray Television, the regional broadcast, Nebeye Sehul said that Eritrean soldiers fighting in Tigray were probably deserters seeking better lives in Ethiopia. Nebeye says that the government is investigating.
  • Reported that on the 38th Extraordinary Assembly by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) there was an expectation that Ethiopian PM Abiy would invite the AU Commission Chair Moussa Faki Mahamat to visit Tigray. The trip, however, had to be erased from the final communique. Ethiopia rejects “any foreign intervention” in a crisis that it says is purely domestic.
  • The Communique of the IGAD 38th Assembly welcomed the agreement by Ethiopia of 29th November 2020 allowing “unimpeded, sustained and secure access” for humanitarian support. Such “unimpeded access” has not yet been realised, despite UN and humanitarian organisations urging they need access.
  • The United Nations says that access to Tigray has improved slightly, but it remains critically challenged. Insecurity and bureaucracy are constraining the aid that can be provided. It has been able to access the main cities, but cannot access rural areas and Hitsats and Shimelba refugee camps.
  • The UN reports that in East Sudan the first refugees have been transferred from the Village 8 reception centre to the new camp in Tunaydbah, Sudan. Um Rakuba camp has approached full capacity.
  • UNHCR spokesperson, Andrej Mahedic, states that more than 30% of the refugees arriving from Ethiopia are minors, younger than 18, whilst 5% are elderly, older than 60.
  • The head of Egypt’s intelligence service has met with the Sudanese Prime Minister Hamdok as well as the Head of Sudan’s Sovereign Council, General Al-Burhan. They discussed regional developments and the GERD dam negotiations. President Al-Sisi of Egypt and Al-Burhan also spoke on the phone on Monday.
  • Eritrean Minister of Information, Yemane Meskel, informs that Minister of Foreign Affairs, Osman Saleh and Presidential Adviser, Yemane Ghebreab, met Sudan’s Head of the Sovereign Council, General Al-Burhan, delivering a message of President Afewerki.
  • In a press conference Ethiopian Foreign Affairs Minister and Vice President Demeke has said that Ethiopia wants to resolve the conflict with Sudan peacefully. According to him, the clashes in November and December have not changed the strong relationship between both countries.
  • The status of the GERD dam negotiations remains unclear. Sudan has not yet returned to the negotiation table.

Situation in Ethiopia (as confirmed per 5 January 2021)

  • Ethiopian police have released the Reuters cameraman that was arrested a couple weeks ago. No charges have been filed against him.
  • VP Demeke said that the government is currently taking measures to provide food and other supplies to Tigray. He also said that reconstruction efforts are on the way and that telecommunication lines are being restored to the whole region. Telecom, electricity, and full banking access will soon start again.
  • VP Demeke has also said that planning for a 6th general election is on the way in TIgray. The federally appointed interim government has been tasked with organizing it. Opposition parties have been invited to participate.
  • The Ethiopian National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) has arrested 21 individuals for issuing travel documents illegally. Most of them worked at the Bole Airport.

Situation in Tigray (as confirmed per 5 January 2021)

  • A witness has told federal broadcaster ETV that Amanuel Church was shelled. Civilians were seeking shelter inside and were killed as a result of the attack. Amanuel is near the UNESCO site Negash Mosque, Africa’s oldest mosque, which was severely damaged in December as a result of shelling.
  • A list has been published on-line, claiming to contain the names of civilian victims of the war in Tigray. The list has 440 entries and has been assembled using information from different sources. Many of the deaths have not been (officially) confirmed.

International Situation (as confirmed per 5 January 2021)

  • The US Secretary of the Treasury Mnuchin is due to visit Khartoum on 6 January. The aim of the visit is to review the economic situation, as well as the US assistance to Sudan. Mnuchin will also visit other countries in the region such as Egypt, Qatar and Israel.
  • The UN estimates that more than 322 thousand people are Internally Displaced (IDP). The provisional Tigrayan government reported yesterday that it believed there were 2.2 million IDPs.
  • The UN says health facilities outside cities are not operational, while those in cities are in critical need of supplies.
  • The UNHCR has stated that it needs 156 million US$ to meet immediate needs of refugees in Ethiopia, but only US$ 40 million has been pledged.

Disclaimer:

All information in this situation report is presented as a fluid update report, as to the best knowledge and understanding of the authors at the moment of publication. EEPA does not claim that the information is correct but verifies to the best of ability within the circumstances. Publication is weighed on the basis of interest to understand potential impacts of events (or perceptions of these) on the situation. Check all information against updates and other media. EEPA does not take responsibility for the use of the information or impact thereof. All information reported originates from third parties and the content of all reported and linked information remains the sole responsibility of these third parties. Report to info@eepa.be any additional information and corrections.

Links of interest

https://www.tghat.com/victim-list/
https://www.facebook.com/MFAEthiopia/posts/4313919665301910
https://www.unocha.org/story/daily-noon-briefing-highlights-ethiopia-niger-yemen
https://dailynewsegypt.com/2021/01/04/egypts-intelligence-chief-abbas-kamel-met-with-hamdok-al-burhan-hamidati-in-khartoum/

What is next for Abiy Ahmed?

Source: Global Risk Insight | Anthony Morris

The apparent culmination of the Ethiopian government’s ‘law enforcement operation’ in Tigray poses a number of new questions for the future of Africa’s second-most populous country.

The crisis in Ethiopia, which erupted at the start of November, is the culmination of a period of rising tensions between Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

The TPLF, who headed the ruling coalition in Ethiopia from 1991 to 2017, had grown increasingly frustrated with Abiy’s federalist brand of politics and their subsequent alienation from power. Tensions reached a boiling point when the TPLF refused to follow the federal government’s order to postpone elections in September. This prompted the Prime Minister to launch an army offensive against Tigray in order to ‘enforce the rule of law’ – a decision which reverberated around the Horn of Africa.

As war ensued, many analysts feared the worst. In particular, there was a belief that Tigray – a highly militarised region hardened by years of war – would be extremely difficult to defeat by force, leading to a drawn-out conflict. There were also concerns that the war would exacerbate deepening ethnic divisions throughout the nation, precipitating a ‘Yugoslavia-style’ breakup of the nation.

On the surface at least, the conflict has defied many of these more fatalistic forecasts. The apparent takeover of Mekelle on the 7 December, came as a surprise to many. But what does this latest development in the conflict mean? Despite the apparent victory for the government, violence and instability will continue to plague Ethiopia – both on the Tigrayan front and elsewhere.

The Tigrayan Front

While the conquest of Mekelle is a significant victory for the government, hostility and violence continue to cast a shadow over Tigray. TPLF leader Debretsion Gebremichael claims that fighting is still taking place ‘in three directions’, including near Mekelle. No TPLF leaders have been captured, and no large-scale disarmament has taken place. The renegade forces may be wounded – but they are still very much alive.

The early forecasts that a war with Tigray would be protracted, therefore, may yet prove to be prescient. Guerrilla-style warfare will likely continue in the region until either a negotiated settlement or a military victory.

Though the Ethiopian government has ridiculed the narrative pushed by a number of experts that there would be a ‘protracted insurgency in the rugged mountains of Tigray’, the region’s terrain is unquestionably a boon for rebel forces. The difficulty of pursuing these rebels through the treacherous relief of the region means that a comprehensive military victory for the government’s forces is most likely out of reach, at least in the near future.

The TPLF have remained resolute, despite the setback of losing Mekelle. According to Gebremichael, they ‘are ready to die in defence of [their] right to administer the region’. Northern Ethiopia will thus likely be mired by sporadic, targeted violence for the foreseeable future unless a negotiated solution is reached. This conflict is far from over.

Deepening National Divisions

The Tigrayan crisis is not the only source of violence or ethno-regional division in Ethiopia. The nation, which has a population of over 100 million people, has a long history of domestic tension.

Ethiopia’s disparate peoples are governed by an ethnic federalist system. While in one respect, this system does alleviate ethnic demands for autonomy, it has a corrosive flipside. The regions created are deeply exclusionary, which creates ‘hard’ borders that incite friction.

These borders have historically been flashpoints for conflict, and over the last year, violence along these borders, and elsewhere, has begun to increase.

This map highlights areas that The New Humanitarian has identified as recent ‘flashpoints’ for internecine violence. The widespread nature of these flashpoints paints a picture of the growing instability that has plagued Ethiopia in recent years. The death of an estimated 222 civilians in Benishangul-Gumuz on 23 December is another devastating instance of the impact of this violence.

The Tigray conflict, alongside this violence and ethno-regional strife, has led to some suggestions that Ethiopia could undergo a Yugoslavia-like collapse. The underlying, unresolved grievances around the country that have built up from years of government domination are an undeniable threat to national unity.

However, these fears of collapse have been somewhat overblown. The risk that Ethiopia undergoes any kind of breakup, or is forced to deal with secessionist wars, is very low. Calls for the maintenance of autonomy are not equivalent to clamours for independence. As Adam Adebe, an Ethiopian constitutional scholar points out, ‘secession is not a popular sentiment, even in Tigray’.

There is also a sense that if secession movements were viable, then they would have launched a military campaign at the height of the Tigray conflict, when the Ethiopian army was most vulnerable.

Violence and instability, therefore, will likely continue. Full-scale ‘Balkanisation’ however, is not on the immediate horizon.

How will the situation evolve?

The critical question for Ethiopia’s future, therefore, seems to be whether Abiy will concentrate yet more power in Addis Ababa, and pursue a more authoritarian system of governance, or whether he will seek a negotiated inclusive settlement with regional leaders. Such a compromise is unlikely to be influenced by external forces; Abiy is firmly within the Ethiopian state tradition that abhors foreign intervention in their internal affairs.

Abiy’s relative youth, both as a politician and a Prime Minister, make forecasting somewhat challenging. There are two realistic paths for Ethiopia’s future, which essentially hinge upon Abiy’s political will and willingness to compromise.

Scenario 1: Inclusive Dialogue

Violence and human rights abuses have lost Abiy a huge amount of support internationally, marking a stunning fall from grace since being made a Nobel Peace Laureate in 2019. While the brutality of his response, particularly the way in which it has caused harm to civilians, should be roundly condemned, the role of the TPLF in creating this conflict cannot be dismissed. The Tigrayan leadership persistently undermined Abiy’s government, and knowingly angled for conflict.

Without exculpating this violence, the general thrust of this argument is that at heart, Abiy is not intent on consolidating his authority through force, and even if he were, his power is not established enough for him to survive as a leader by employing these methods. Though some have argued that Abiy is a unitarian, he has never directly disavowed the system, merely pleaded for its reform.

It is in Abiy’s interest, therefore, to broaden his political base by seeking a negotiated settlement with the disparate ethno-regional factions that dominate Ethiopian politics. The elections, which Abiy has said will be held on 5 June 2021, set a clear calendar for any such negotiations.

If the current instability which plagues the country is to settle down, some form of settlement with opposition groups must be reached before these elections. If not, their results will not be recognised by opposition factions or their supporters, which would likely spark mass protest and violence.

It does, therefore, seem likely that talks will be initiated. A satisfactory settlement is certainly a realistic possibility, but will doubtless be complicated.

Scenario 2: Increased Authoritarianism

Alternatively, buoyed by a symbolic victory in Tigray, or frustrated by unproductive dialogue, Abiy could ignore the growing necessity to compromise, and instead tighten his authoritarian grip over the nation, forcing forward an agenda of political centralisation.

This could have devastating effects for Ethiopia, where political authority relies on some degree of regional autonomy and compromise. Internecine violence, which has gradually grown throughout Abiy’s tenure, will likely spiral out of control.

The longer dialogue is delayed, the greater the potential for violence and instability in Ethiopia. The country’s size and significance means that this is not merely a domestic issue. The fallout of the violence and displacement of the Tigray conflict has already had significant regional consequences. Eritrea has sent troops into Tigray in support of Ethiopia, and has been shelled by the TPLF in retaliation. Tens of thousands of refugees have fled into Sudan, creating the conditions for rising tensions on their border with Ethiopia. Finally, the withdrawal of Ethiopian troops in Somalia could sow the seeds for a resurgence of al-Shabaab.

If he goes down this road, therefore, Abiy would not only threaten the stability of his own country, but his actions could plunge the entire Horn of Africa into chaos.

 

All Is Not Quiet on Ethiopia’s Western Front

How Addis Ababa deals with ethnic violence in the region of Benishangul-Gumuz will determine the country’s future.

BY Foreign PolicyTOM GARDNER  

On Dec. 22, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed visited the vast lowland territory of Metekel in Ethiopia’s far western region of Benishangul-Gumuz, the so-called homeland of five indigenous ethnic groups of which the most populous are the Berta and the Gumuz. It was his first known visit to Metekel, a strategically important area that includes the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and which has been afflicted by an endless string of gruesome, ethnically targeted massacres in recent months. “The desire by enemies to divide Ethiopia along ethnic & religious lines still exists,” Abiy tweeted following a meeting with local residents and officials. “This desire will remain unfulfilled.”

The next day, more than 200 people—ethnic Amharas, Oromos, and Shinasha—in the village of Bekoji were slaughtered by heavily armed men from the local Gumuz ethnic group in a devastating raid that began at dawn. “No value added,” an angry resident of Assosa, the regional capital, told me over the phone after Abiy’s visit. “He came for nothing.”

The trip to Metekel came a little less than a month after Abiy declared victory in the northern region of Tigray, where Ethiopia’s armed forces have been battling the country’s erstwhile ruling party, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), which dominated Ethiopian politics for decades before it was sidelined by Abiy. Yet that war is not over: Fighting persists in several places, and more than 50,000 people have so far fled to Sudan. The TPLF, whose leadership withdrew to the mountains on Nov. 28, continues assaults against a coalition of Ethiopian federal troops, militiamen from the neighboring Amhara region, as well as an unconfirmed number of soldiers from Eritrea to the north.

While the Tigray war rumbles on, violence elsewhere is spreading to an extent the central government cannot ignore.

But the visit to Metekel was a sign that while the Tigray war rumbles on, violence elsewhere is spreading to an extent the central government cannot ignore. Numerous civilians in Wollega, the far west of Oromia, Abiy’s home region, were killed last month, amid fighting between government forces and Oromo insurgents (who have also suffered hundreds of casualties in recent weeks). The government blamed the rebels for carrying out a massacre of at least 19 civilians. As in Metekel, many of these victims were ethnic Amhara living as minorities in the region.

In both territories, the army has been deployed to restore order: The government of Benishangul-Gumuz called for federal assistance four months ago, following a series of killings that began on Sept. 6. (Federal troops were first sent to Wollega in early 2019.) Prefiguring an approach that would soon be taken on a much larger scale in Tigray, security operations reportedly have also involved Amhara regional security forces, which crossed over the border into Metekel.

The deployment of such regional forces—well armed and ethnically exclusive—is a troubling feature of recent conflicts throughout Ethiopia, but Abiy’s extensive reliance on Amhara troops in Tigray, and to a still limited extent in Benishangul-Gumuz, highlights their growing importance to his security strategy, a development viewed with skepticism by some, including those in his own Oromo camp, who resent their ascendancy.

The fighting in Benishangul-Gumuz has since fragmented, with elements of the local regional security apparatus siding with Gumuz militiamen against the federal army and the line between Gumuz combatants and civilians blurring. “The response of the federal army is to take action on all Gumuz because they can’t identify terrorists from civilians,” a driver working for the regional government forces in Metekel told me.

The bloodshed is also increasingly grisly. Witnesses in Metekel report summary executions, the slaughtering of babies, and the disemboweling of corpses by Gumuz militias. Calls for stronger military measures, particularly from Amhara, are growing louder. In early December, Amhara’s chief of police said he had requested permission from the federal government to intervene in Benishangul-Gumuz. A few days later, a spokesperson for the Amhara regional government warned that if massacres continued, then the state would begin a “second chapter” of the war in Tigray—this time in Benishangul-Gumuz. In October, the country’s deputy prime minister, who is ethnic Amhara, called for Amharas in Benishangul-Gumuz to arm themselves. On Dec. 24, Abiy said he was sending even more troops to the region.

Formally incorporated into the Ethiopian Empire in the late 19th century, Benishangul-Gumuz has long been a frontier space between more powerful neighbors: the Sudanese to the west, highland Ethiopians to the northeast, Oromos to the south. Its indigenous populations—of which the Gumuz, Berta, and Shinasha ethnic groups are the largest—were prey to slave-raiding from all three for centuries and treated as racial inferiors for many years after.

Under Ethiopia’s 1995 constitution, which was largely devised by the TPLF, Benishangul-Gumuz was granted a degree of formal autonomy, with leaders drawn from the local elites. The Benishangul-Gumuz constitution, revised in 2002, designated five ethnic groups as “owners” but excluded the many Amharas, Oromos, Tigrayans, and Agaws who are deemed residents, not citizens.

The Benishangul-Gumuz constitution, revised in 2002, designated five ethnic groups as “owners” but excluded the many Amharas, Oromos, Tigrayans, and Agaws who are deemed residents, not citizens.

They are permitted to vote but cannot, in effect, run for elected office—though they are represented to varying degrees in the local bureaucracy. This makes explicit what is only implicit in the federal constitution: a division between “natives” and “outsiders” whose formal rights, in particular to land, are unequal.

Some of these so-called outsiders were settled in the region in the 1980s, as part of the then-military government’s response to the droughts and famines of that decade. But recently their ranks have swelled, with migrants from the densely populated highlands looking for untouched land or work on commercial plantations; Benishangul-Gumuz is one of the few places in Ethiopia where it is still possible to acquire sizable tracts.

In Metekel, this typically meant Gumuz being pushed out by Amharas and Agaws, many of whom were later evicted in turn; in Kamashi, in southern Benishangul-Gumuz, the pressure came from the Oromos of Wollega. The construction of the GERD in Metekel, close to the border with Sudan, has created new jobs and resources that largely benefit non-Gumuz groups; at the same time, though, it has accelerated the scramble for preeminence in the region.

Seen from a longer view, low-intensity violence is less the exception than the norm. Benishangul-Gumuz was also plagued by rebellion and communal conflict in the early 1990s, an era that shares similarities with the messy shift that began in 2018.

Typically, violence was between so-called settlers (known locally as qey, or “light-skinned”) and the indigenous groups, but it also occurred among the so-called outsiders—Oromos, Amharas, Tigrayans, Agaws—too: The brief occupation of Assosa in 1988 by the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) resulted in a massacre of around 300 Amhara peasants. In 2018, after the OLF returned from exile at Abiy’s invitation, there was a renewed bout of violence between the Oromos and Gumuz over land and resources in Kamashi, which includes rich gold deposits. Scores of people died, and some 150,000 were driven from their homes.

But now the violence is a matter of national importance and not only because of its exceptional scale and intensity. It is also an essential part of the arsenal of allegations deployed by the federal government to justify military intervention in Tigray. This was spelled out in a Nov. 12 statement from the prime minister’s office, which claimed that the “hidden hands of the TPLF” were behind killings of civilians in all corners of the country as part of a plot to destabilize the new administration.

TV documentary produced by the federal police and broadcast on state-owned channels four days earlier was more specific. It claimed that individuals including a Tigrayan businessman in Metekel had been paid by one of the TPLF’s founders, Abay Tsehaye, to organize Gumuz militias and attack Amhara civilians in the region. At other times, the federal government has claimed that the violence has been orchestrated to interrupt the construction of the GERD, a source of tension between Ethiopia and downstream Egypt that Abiy believes the TPLF has tried to exacerbate.

Such notions are also pervasive within the region itself. “The TPLF are the ones disturbing everything, everywhere,” a resident of Assosa told me in October. As in other peripheral parts of Ethiopia, including neighboring Gambella, the relative underdevelopment of Benishangul-Gumuz has long accorded outsiders disproportionate economic power and influence.

The TPLF’s dominance of the previous ruling coalition, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front, and its related patronage networks before 2018 meant Tigrayans were particularly prominent. They owned some of the largest agricultural investments, especially in Metekel, while TPLF-owned or affiliated businesses enjoyed a substantial share of subsidiary contracts in, for instance, the construction sector (as they commonly did elsewhere in Ethiopia).

The fact that the region’s president, Ashadli Hasen, a Berta, was appointed in 2016 and has not been replaced gives an illusion of continuity. But in reality TPLF influence in the region has waned since 2018. Several Tigrayan investors have had their licenses revoked for failing to develop their agricultural leases (a pattern seen elsewhere in the country), while others—reportedly including a wealthy hotel owner in Assosa, according to local sources—have been arrested. Tigrayans are also less prominent in the local bureaucracy than they once were. All this suggests that the carnage in Metekel may be less the result of deliberate sabotage by the TPLF than of a chaotic rush to fill the vacuum that it left behind.

There is, however, little doubt that Amhara civilians have borne the brunt of the bloodshed. Gumuz militias have reportedly told their victims that they would be killed for not respecting orders to leave their region.

“In terms of population, the Amhara are the second most populous in Benishangul-Gumuz. In terms of influence, the Amhara are the most influential, especially in the towns. In terms of the economy, they play a leading role. All these factors contributed to the killings. Why? Because the indigenous populations think the resources are controlled by ‘others,’” a senior Amhara official told me in November.

But it is also clear that violence has gone the other way, too. In 2019, some 200 Gumuz (and Shinasha) were allegedly killed by Amhara militias following tit-for-tat clashes on the Amhara side of the disputed border between the regions, which locals in Benishangul-Gumuz complain went unreported and unpunished. “The government kept silent. They didn’t take action against those who committed that crime,” said Zegeye Belew, a student in Assosa. “Nobody speaks about that genocide.”

During Abiy’s visit, a Gumuz participant in the meeting alleged that Amhara militias and youth groups were “blindly invading” the region in order to grab the land. “They want to chase us away. They’re saying the Gumuz are Sudanese,” he said. “The people of Gumuz were belittled in the past. But now we’re told that we should be exterminated.”

So far the federal government appears to have avoided picking sides. In his speech in Metekel, the prime minister implicitly acknowledged that both sides were at fault and advised neither to pursue revenge. But he also warned the Benishangul-Gumuz leadership that he would take further action if they failed to keep order and indicated that they should heed lessons from what happened in Tigray. On Dec. 23, the regional government said it had arrested several senior Gumuz officials for alleged complicity in the conflict, including the region’s deputy police chief. More than 1,000 people have been arrested and will be detained for three to six months without trial, according to the police.

But should the violence go on much longer, Abiy may find it increasingly difficult to resist pressure from Amhara leaders to take firmer action.

Abiy may find it increasingly difficult to resist pressure from Amhara leaders to take firmer action.

This might, in an extreme scenario, mean giving a green light to the Tigray approach: a full-scale intervention by federal troops, supported by further Amhara security forces, with the goal of removing the regional leadership and installing a regime more amenable to them. Alternatively, Amhara nationalists, whose clout has grown since the start of the war in Tigray, might insist on annexation of parts of Metekel, which they regard as historically theirs.

This is already the case in disputed parts of western and southern Tigray, which—following bloody battles, atrocities, and at least one possible war crime (reportedly by a TPLF-linked militia)—are now effectively under Amhara administration. Benishangul-Gumuz leaders have made it clear that they believe this to be their neighbor’s intention in Metekel, too. “The Amhara people are trying to make Metekel their own,” said a local journalist in Assosa. “So the owners are protesting.”

Such an approach might stamp out attacks on Amharas and other minorities in Metekel. But it would create serious political difficulties for Abiy, not least among his Oromo allies who fear he has already ceded too much to Amhara irredentism and worry the next step is a wholesale rewriting of the 1995 federal constitution.

This controversial document has plenty of support in Oromia and other parts of southern Ethiopia, for ostensibly guaranteeing ethnic self-rule after what those supporters regard as a century or more of Ethiopian imperialism with Amharas at the helm. But it is loathed by many Amharas for its perceived failure to guarantee their rights and security in parts of the country where, for historic reasons, they are settled in large numbers.

Equally, should Amharas be seen to acquire too much of an upper hand in Metekel, Oromos within and outside the ruling party may seek to step up their own demands in Kamashi or even give tacit support to the activities of Oromo insurgents in parts of Metekel itself, thereby turning Benishangul-Gumuz into a proxy battleground between Ethiopia’s two largest ethnic groups.

While Abiy might resist the demands of Amhara nationalists over Metekel, that would risk jettisoning increasingly important allies; he is also under pressure from them to take a stronger line in an increasingly bloody dispute with Sudan over its international border with Amhara. In recent days, federal troops are reported to have been redeployed from Tigray to the Sudan front, where they are again alleged to have fought alongside Amhara militias in a string of clashes around the disputed Fashqa triangle.

These developments are straining already stretched military resources and risk bogging the country down further in interethnic warfare. The alternative would be the sort of all-inclusive national dialogue that puts everything on the table: territorial boundaries, rights and access to land, the political representation of minorities, as well as justice for past crimes. Whichever path is taken, the consequences will be profound and lasting.

Tom Gardner is a journalist based in Addis Ababa, covering Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa.

 

The Trouble With Ethiopia’s Ethnic Federalism

The reforms by the country’s new prime minister are clashing with its flawed Constitution and could push the country toward an interethnic conflict.

Source: NYT Opinion | Mahmood Mamdani

Abiy Ahmed, the 42-year-old prime minister of Ethiopia, has dazzled Africa with a volley of political reforms since his appointment in April. Mr. Abiy ended the 20-year border war with Eritrea, released political prisoners, removed bans on dissident groups and allowed their members to return from exile, declared press freedom and granted diverse political groups the freedom to mobilize and organize.

Mr. Abiy has been celebrated as a reformer, but his transformative politics has come up against ethnic federalism enshrined in Ethiopia’s Constitution. The resulting clash threatens to exacerbate competitive ethnic politics further and push the country toward an interethnic conflict.

The 1994 Constitution, introduced by Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front governing coalition, recast the country from a centrally unified republic to a federation of nine regional ethnic states and two federally administered city-states. It bases key rights — to land, government jobs, representation in local and federal bodies — not on Ethiopian citizenship but on being considered ethnically indigenous in constituent ethnic states.

The system of ethnic federalism was troubled with internal inconsistencies because ethnic groups do not live only in a discrete “homeland” territory but are also dispersed across the country. Nonnative ethnic minorities live within every ethnic homeland.

Ethiopia’s census lists more than 90 ethnic groups, but there are only nine ethnically defined regional assemblies with rights for the officially designated majority ethnic group. The nonnative minorities are given special districts and rights of self-administration. But no matter the number of minority regions, the fiction of an ethnic homeland creates endless minorities.

Ethnic mobilization comes from multiple groups, including Ethiopians without an ethnic homeland, and those disenfranchised as minorities in the region of their residence, even if their ethnic group has a homeland in another state.

Ethnic federalism also unleashed a struggle for supremacy among the Big Three: the Tigray, the Amhara and the Oromo. Although the ruling E.P.R.D.F. is a coalition of four parties, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front representing the Tigray minority has been in the driving seat since the 1991 revolution. The Amhara, dominant before 1991, and the Oromo, the largest ethnic group in the country, complained they were being treated as subordinate minorities.

When the government announced plans to expand Addis Ababa, the federally run city-state, into bordering Oromo lands, protests erupted in 2015. The Amhara joined and both groups continued to demand land reform, equal political representation and an end to rights abuses.

Prime Minister Haile Mariam Desalegn, who took office in 2012 after the death of the long-term premier and Tigray leader Mr. Zenawi, responded brutally to the protests. Security forces killed between 500 and 1,000 protesters in a year. Faced with a spiraling crisis, the ruling E.P.R.D.F. coalition appointed Mr. Abiy, a former military official and a leader of the Oromo People’s Democratic Organization — a constituent of the ruling coalition — as prime minister.

Mr. Abiy’s reforms have been applauded but have also led to greater ethnic mobilization for justice and equality. The E.P.R.D.F.’s achievement since 1991 was equal education for girls and boys, rural and urban, leading to greater prominence of women, Muslims and Pentecostal groups.

The recent reforms of Mr. Abiy, who was born to a Muslim Oromo father and an Orthodox Amhara mother and is a devout Pentecostal Christian, have further broadened political participation to underprivileged groups.

Mobilization of ethnic militias is on the rise. Paramilitaries or ethnic militias known as special police, initially established as counterinsurgency units, are increasingly involved in ethnic conflicts, mainly between neighboring ethnic states. A good example is the role of the Somali Special Force in the border conflict with the Oromia state, according to Yonas Ashine, a historian at Addis Ababa University. These forces are also drawn into conflicts between native and nonnative groups.

Nearly a million Ethiopians have been displaced from their homes by escalating ethnic violence since Mr. Abiy’s appointment, according to Addisu Gebregziabher, who heads the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission.

Fears of Ethiopia suffering Africa’s next interethnic conflict are growing. Prime Minister Abiy himself is constantly invoking religious symbols, especially those linked to American Protestant evangelical megachurches, and has brought a greater number of Pentecostals into the higher ranks of government.

Ethiopians used to think of themselves as Africans of a special kind, who were not colonized, but the country today resembles a quintessential African system, marked by ethnic mobilization for ethnic gains.

In most of Africa, ethnicity was politicized when the British turned the ethnic group into a unit of local administration, which they termed “indirect rule.” Every bit of the colony came to be defined as an ethnic homeland, where an ethnic authority enforced an ethnically defined customary law that conferred privileges on those deemed indigenous at the expense of non-indigenous minorities.

The move was a response to a perennial colonial problem: Racial privilege for whites mobilized those excluded as a racialized nonwhite majority. By creating an additional layer of privilege, this time ethnic, indirect rule fragmented the racially conscious majority into so many ethnic minorities, in every part of the country setting ethnic majorities against ethnic minorities. Wherever this system continued after independence, national belonging gave way to tribal identity as the real meaning of citizenship.

Many thought the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, representing a minority in the dominant coalition, turned to ethnic federalism to dissolve and fragment Ethiopian society into numerous ethnic groups — each a minority — so it could come up with a “national” vision. In a way it replicated the British system.

But led by Mr. Zenawi, the T.P.L.F. was also most likely influenced by Soviet ethno-territorial federalism and the creation of ethnic republics, especially in Central Asia. Ethiopia’s 1994 Constitution evoked the classically Stalinist definition of “nation, nationality and people” and the Soviet solution to “the national question.”

As in the Soviet Union, every piece of land in Ethiopia was inscribed as the ethnic homeland of a particular group, constitutionally dividing the population into a permanent majority alongside permanent minorities with little stake in the system. Mr. Zenawi and his party had both Sovietized and Africanized Ethiopia.

Like much of Africa, Ethiopia is at a crossroads. Neither the centralized republic instituted by the Derg military junta in 1974 nor the ethnic federalism of Mr. Zenawi’s 1994 Constitution points to a way forward.

Mr. Abiy can achieve real progress if Ethiopia embraces a different kind of federation — territorial and not ethnic — where rights in a federal unit are dispensed not on the basis of ethnicity but on residence. Such a federal arrangement will give Ethiopians an even chance of keeping an authoritarian dictatorship at bay.

Mahmood Mamdani is the director of Makerere Institute of Social Research in Uganda, a professor of government at Columbia University and the author of “Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism.”

 

Mr. Mamdani is the director of the Institute of Social Research at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda, and a professor at Columbia University.

Situation Report EEPA HORN No. 46 – 5 January 2021

Europe External Programme with Africa is a Belgium-based Centre of Expertise with in-depth knowledge, publications, and networks, specialised in issues of peace building, refugee protection and resilience in the Horn of Africa. EEPA has published extensively on issues related to movement and/or human trafficking of refugees in the Horn of Africa and on the Central Mediterranean Route. It cooperates with a wide network of Universities, research organisations, civil society and experts from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Uganda and across Africa. Key in-depth publications can be accessed on the website.

Military situation (as confirmed per 4 January 2021)

● Clashes between Ethiopia and Sudan ended last week, after the Ethiopian army withdrew away from the border.

● More sources are saying that the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) is retreating from rural areas in Tigray towards the capital Mekelle. This corroborates earlier sources.

● Fighting continues to take place around Mekelle. Shelling has been observed near Hagere Selam, 50 kilometers from the regional capital.

● Civilians are afraid of ENDF soldiers as they are said to take revenge on civilians after losing a battle.

● Mechanised infantry of the ENDF is being moved to Tigray, and is heading to Mekelle.

● Satellite pictures show that many fields surrounding the ENDF Northern Command HQ have been burned. In total 12 ha of land has been set on fire.

Regional situation (as confirmed per 4 January 2021)

● The negotiations on the GERD dam between Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia have collapsed after Sudan did not attend. Sudan wants to give a greater role to AU experts and observers to facilitate negotiations and reconcile opinions. The EU, US, and AU are observing the talks.

● A Sudanese radio station has reported that Amhara militias kidnapped and killed herders in Sudan. A source told the radio that “the incident is just part of a series of killings and kidnappings carried out by Ethiopian shifta gangs, supported by Ethiopian government forces.”

● The Sudanese government has opened a new refugee camp for Tigrayan refugees. This new camp, in Gedaref state, has a capacity of 30 thousand. 500 refugees are being transferred every day.

● An outbreak of coronavirus in one of the refugee camps has slowed down the transfer of refugees to the new camp.

● Egypt and Sudan have increased cooperation to crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood. It includes training in the tolerance of Islam, promoting anti extremist discourse, and a joint missionary convoy.

Situation in Ethiopia (as confirmed per 4 January 2021)

● FEWSNET, the Famine Early Warning Systems Network, released its outlook for the coming months (up to May 2021), predicting large food insecurity across Ethiopia. Half the territory will be in the stress or crisis phase. Current and programmed international humanitarian aid are already included in the model.

● In Tigray, food security will likely remain at crisis levels until May.

● Swarms of locusts have caused large scale damages between October and December. Up to 60% of crops were lost as a result. Many eggs are now hatching in the Somali region. They will remain a threat in the coming months.

● FEWSNET predicts below average rainfall in most regions. This will likely result in smaller crop yields and have a negative impact on food security. Low rainfall also encourages locust swarm formation.

● The Amhara Chief Commissioner of Police, Abere Adamu, has given a speech on the involvement of Amhara forces in the conflict with Tigray. According to him, Amhara special forces played an important role in positioning ENDF forces prior to the conflict. The President of Amhara was allegedly also aware that a conflict was going to take place.

● Amhara continued playing an important role in coordinating and guiding ENDF forces, he stated.

● The Amhara Commissioner also said that “deployment of forces had taken place in our borders from east to west. The war started that night, after we have already completed our preparations” implying that the involvement of the Amhara special forces had been prepared and was well on the way before the start of military operations on 4 November 2020.

Situation in Tigray (as confirmed per 4 January 2021)

● A preliminary report by the interim Tigray administration has been released on the damages of the conflict in the region. According to their assessment 4.5 million people need humanitarian assistance. Many houses have been completely destroyed, and 2.2 million people have been internally displaced (IDPs). Half of these IDPs come from Western Tigray.

● The status of 78% of the health facilities in Tigray is unknown. Many of the hospitals have been potentially destroyed or pillaged.

● At the start of the conflict Tigray counted 40 hospitals and 296 ambulances. The report assesses that only 31 ambulances, in four hospitals, remain. The remaining ambulances were stolen or destroyed.

● The University of Mekelle has at least partially been looted. Pictures show that the offices of the College of Veterinary Medicine have been destroyed.

● A delegation from Mekelle University is reportedly in Addis Ababa negotiating the future of the university. Discussions are taking place about the functioning of the university and the take over of Adigrat University students and staff. Future international partnerships are also being discussed.

● Many people in Mekelle fear leaving their houses. They fear being forcefully conscripted into the army.

● Checkpoints have been set up in Tigray, complicating movement in the area.

● A source has said that 150 civilians have been killed by Eritrean soldiers near Nebelet town. This would include 4 muslims guarding the local mosque (at Adi Argudi).

International Situation (as confirmed per 4 January 2021)

● The British minister for Africa, James Duddridge, has said that the UK government is deeply worried about the situation in Tigray and the wider region. The British government continues to raise the importance of the respect for human rights with the Ethiopian government. The UK also works with other regional actors to find a peaceful solution.

Disclaimer:

All information in this situation report is presented as a fluid update report, as to the best knowledge and understanding of the authors at the moment of publication. EEPA does not claim that the information is correct but verifies to the best of ability within the circumstances. Publication is weighed on the basis of interest to understand potential impacts of events (or perceptions of these) on the situation. Check all information against updates and other media. EEPA does not take responsibility for the use of the information or impact thereof. All information reported originates from third parties and the content of all reported and linked information remains the sole responsibility of these third parties. Report to info@eepa.be any additional information and corrections.

Links of interest

https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/eastern-sudan-herder-killed-by-ethiopian-militia
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/12/egypt-sudan-train-imam-religious-muslim-brotherhood.html
https://addisstandard.com/news-analysis-amhara-region-police-chief-reveals-how-regions-police-force-guided-federal-steel-clad-mechanized-forces-to-join-war-in-tigray/
https://www.davidalton.net/2021/01/04/in-a-letter-from-the-africa-minister-james-duddridge-mp-he-says-we-are-deeply-worried-about-the-risks-the-conflict-poses-to-civilian-lives-access-to-tigray-remains-restricted/
https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/desert-locust-bulletin-507-4-january-2020

Ethiopia is set to end its $3.6 billion oil deal with a controversial US firm after probe

SourceQuartz Africa | By Zecharias Zelalm

Senior officials at Ethiopia’s Ministry of Mines and Petroleum say the government is set to rescind an agreement with a US-based self-described energy firm after an investigation by Quartz Africa revealed the company had no petroleum industry expertise or technical credentials.

“We are in the process of canceling our agreement with the company,” says Dr. Koang Tutlam, Ethiopia’s state minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas, in a statement sent to Quartz Africa.

GreenComm Technologies, a Virginia-based firm run by an Ethiopian-American former car dealership employee, Nebiyu Getachew, was poised to oversee the construction of a $3.6 billion oil refinery in Ethiopia’s Somali region, after entering into an agreement with the Ethiopian government on April 28.

That agreement had followed at least two years of talks between the entity and the Ethiopian government that included examination of the company’s profile by prominent members of the ministry and an Ethiopian state-run oil firm.

“GreenComm wanted the Ethiopian government to put forward a $100 million letter of credit because they sought to get billions from lenders. But we refused to give in.”

But the investigation revealed the company had made misleading statements about its capabilities and its connections as part of an elaborate scheme. It portrayed itself as an industry leader despite having never completed an oil-related project anywhere, and despite the company being delisted from the Virginia state corporate database when it signed the deal on April 28.

After Quartz Africa’s story was published one local social media user drove to the company’s listed address in Virginia, and found empty office space, with no sign of an extraction company in the area.

Many ordinary Ethiopians at home and in the diaspora were concerned GreenComm had managed to get through the Ethiopian government’s vetting process despite multiple red flags.

Quartz Africa’s Dec. 22 story on the Ethiopia oil deal.

When probed about the agreement earlier this year, Ethiopia’s minister of Mines Takele Uma told Quartz Africa he was unaware of GreenComm’s existence, saying he had “no clue.” His predecessor, Samuel Urkato who has since gone on to become Ethiopia’s minister of Science and Higher Education, acknowledged the existence of the deal when reached by phone, but refused to speak any further, hanging up and ending the call with Quartz Africa.

However, with the revelations made public, ministry representatives have been far more open to addressing press inquiries on the matter. According to Dr. Koang Tutlam, whose office is under minister Takele Uma, there had been resistance to allow GreenComm to operate coming from within the ministry.

“Although the so called GreenComm Technologies project preceded most of us at the ministry, some of us were skeptical about their genuineness from the beginning,” Dr. Koang tells Quartz Africa. “As such, some of us worked hard to prevent the [government] entering into a commitment that would cost the country.”

Koang says the parties agreed to commence with a one-year feasibility study period, before any construction would begin. GreenComm executives, he says, were very keen to pursue a huge advance before delivering any work.

“First, the company wanted the Ethiopian government to put forward a $100 million standby letter of credit, which we learned was because they sought to get billions from lenders. But we refused to give in, despite immense pressure from some heavy quarters.”

Dr. Koang declined to clarify who he meant by “heavy quarters.” However, another official, Mulugeta Damtew Seid, head of state agency Ethiopian Mineral, Petroleum and Biofuel Corporation (EMPB), told Quartz Africa company officials had taken the matter to the Foreign Ministry and even the prime minister’s office. Mulugeta also identified prime minister Abiy’s former chief of staff and Ethiopia’s current ambassador to the US, Fitsum Arega, as having lobbied on GreenComm’s behalf.

Although Fitsum Arega has not previously responded to Quartz Africa’s queries, in  a series of social media postings in response to the story, the ambassador wouldn’t confirm or deny his proximity to GreenComm Technologies, but stated that no deal had been struck to allocate the company with funds. Instead, he claimed, the agreement was solely to assess the feasibility of the project.

“As this study is a private sector foreign direct investment initiative,” Ambassador Fitsum wrote, “no financial resources are committed or promised by the Ethiopian federal or regional government for its implementation.”

Local media reports and statements by the company however, suggest the agreement went beyond a study agreement and that it had actually encompassed the refinery’s construction. Reports stated the American company had recruited Korean construction giant Hyundai Engineering and Construction to assist with its implementation. Hyundai later clarified that this was false and that it had refused an offer to collaborate jointly with GreenComm Technologies after establishing that the company had no active operations.

But Dr. Koang told Quartz Africa that after growing concerns, GreenComm included a clause in their April 28 agreement, obligating the company to deposit a $5 million performance bond as insurance. Something, he says, the company failed to do.

“We are canceling the agreement, but we are also taking legal measures against the company for its failure to release the performance bond,” Dr. Koang explained. “Rest assured, Ethiopia has not lost a penny and wasn’t about to lose anything.”

Greencomm Technologies had first pitched the oil refinery project to the Ethiopian government in 2018, as part of a joint endeavor with the Texas-based Innovative Clear Choice Technologies (ICCT) firm, which similarly had no credentials and was dissolved by February 2020.

Dr. Koang Tutlam was part of the team of officials that studied the joint pitch in 2018. Two years later, there was suddenly no further mention of the existence of ICCT, but this didn’t hinder the remaining company’s ability to hash out a deal.

Sign up to the Quartz Africa Weekly Brief here for news and analysis on African business, tech, and innovation in your inbox