On January 7, when Ethiopia celebrated Orthodox Christmas, the government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced an amnesty to some of the most well-known political prisoners in the country, in an attempt, he said, to promote “national reconciliation”.
This is in line with Parliament ‘s decision to establish a “Commission for National Dialogue” to “open the door to national unity” and to end the civil war.
The Ethiopian war in Tigray began in November 2020, months after a dispute between Abiy’s government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), which controls the Tigray region in the north of the country. During the war, Tigrayan troops greatly benefited the neighboring Amhara and Afar regions and later began marching on the capital, Addis Ababa.
The war, however, changed in November 2021 after a drone-powered army blocked the Tigrayan route to Addis Ababa. Tigrayan troops withdrew from their area and government agencies said they could not evict them from Tigray. Abiy quickly declared victorybut he also stressed his government’s willingness to intervene in “the affairs of the world” in order to settle the dispute.
As Abiy has been ignoring the call for an end to the war in question, his newfound interest in “national dialogue” was received by the international community and the Ethiopians tired of the war.
But is the Ethiopian government really ready to take part in real-world dialogue and negotiations on an alliance that can bring lasting peace to the country?
Pali good reasons for doubt.
‘National Dialogue’ in name only
In their most recent victory over the Tigrayan army, Ethiopian officials have repeatedly stated that the TPLF and the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) – a militant group that has been fighting in the Oromia region since late 2018 – could not be included. each future “discussing the world”.
While several lawmakers opposed the announcement of the establishment of the Commission for National Dialogue, claiming that this sparked “negotiations” with the TPLF and OLA, for example, the chairman of the Legal and Administrative Affairs Committee, Tsegenet Mengistu, said the announcement was not forthcoming. all of the “conversations”. He warned of undermining the purpose of the process and insisted that “there are no issues or words” in the transaction document.
But what is the purpose of the “international dialogue” without any dialogue between the warring parties?
In his view, international dialogue should be a participatory, participatory, and participatory dialogue aimed at resolving political conflicts and deep-rooted conflicts, and leading countries to change politics. According to the United Nations, international dialogue often involves the heads of state, including governments and major opposition parties (armed or unarmed), and sometimes the military. Other participating groups are those that represent many sectors such as government agencies, women, youth, business, religious or religious. Population growth is often combined through multiple communication channels. ”
In this context, it is impossible to describe the current process in Ethiopia as a “national dialogue”. By removing the TPLF and OLA from the so-called “national dialogue”, the Abiy government made it clear that its goal was not to achieve lasting peace and lead the country to political dialogue, but to achieve a short-term agenda. goals.
Abiy’s short-term goals
Abiy’s main focus of the “global” dialogue seems to be alleviating the growing problems in his state.
Since the Ethiopian war in November 2020, foreign powers have called for an international dialogue to end the killing spree. This call went out in my ears for several months. But soon, concrete measures the actions taken especially by the United States against the Abiy government have caused economic and diplomatic turmoil in Addis Ababa. Establishing a “Commission for National Dialogue”, which is not responsible for initiating dialogue between warring factions, Abiy is now trying to create the illusion that he is taking action to end violence in order to convince the US to lift its sanctions. against his government.
The second purpose of the “negotiation” is to buy military preparation time in anticipation of the deepening of the civil war. Sources at the Abiy’s Prosperity Party say in just a few months thousands of young people have been drafted into the military and are now being trained in camps across the country.
Earlier, Abiy had called on civilians to take up arms against Tigrayan forces. A government that is planning to enter into genuine national dialogue and end all violence will have no reason to actively train many new recruits. Thus, the country’s dialogue process, however, seems to be the government’s way of buying time to prepare its troops start another plot on his enemies in Tigray and beyond.
And perhaps the most important purpose of Abiy’s “national dialogue” is to deceive the Ethiopian people and increase the legitimacy of his government before them. With this, Abiy shows that he is in talks with all the Ethiopian legitimate groups as he moves forward with his national vision. Indeed, without the inclusion of the TPLF, OLA and other democratic powers such as Qeerroo (the Oromo Youth group that encouraged Abiy to rule), the “national dialogue” they want can be nothing but clever magic.
The Abiy government began drafting a new law that would reform the notices and territories of the region two years ago, before the war began. I know this because I was once a senior member of the Oromia government. Abiy officials have used “international dialogue” to create the illusion that there is a proliferation, a reported backdrop on the new law. Apart from that, those who strongly oppose Abiy’s vision for Ethiopia, and thus his legal plans, are left out of the negotiations.
Undoubtedly Ethiopia is facing an unprecedented crisis in this country. However, a more inclusive, broad and participatory approach can still bring about a peaceful alliance that will bring stability and development to the country. Unfortunately, so-called Abiy’s “Commission for National Dialogue” cannot provide such a platform.
Many saw the formation of the council and the pardoning of political prisoners at Christmas as a sign that Abiy was ready for peace. But Abiy is not yet ready to take his place at the negotiating table – he is trying to pull the trigger in front of the nations, and the Ethiopian people. He is still confident that he can win the war, stop all his enemies, and build a new Ethiopia without any ideas from the many Ethiopians who disagree with his vision.
The international community needs to take action to end the crisis, and force the government to allow a non-partisan person to lead the national dialogue. Otherwise, lasting peace will remain elusive in Ethiopia for years to come.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Al Jazeera.
