Logic of division as a solution: The Ethiopia case study

The unrest in Ethiopia threatens to engulf the Horn of Africa, with consequences for the EU as well | Eduardo Soteras/AFP via Getty Images

By Charles Makakala

More by this Author

This time last year I published an article that told the story of Ethiopian economic

transformation in glowing terms. After I had narrated how the 1984 famine brought Ethiopia to its knees, I proudly announced to the world that “that country was no more”. “In its place today,” I declared, “stands an emerging giant, one of the fastest growing economies in the world.”

I wish I shouldn’t have done that.

You see, while our experience has taught us to be as cynical as possible, we are so desperate for good African stories that sometimes we unwittingly dare to stick our necks out that way, only for reality to hit us hard. To be successful as analysts in Africa, the rule of thumb is to praise so sparingly and to critique so unreservedly.

So, when news of the conflict in Tigray broke out, I should have rewritten everything I had to show how Ethiopia was going to collapse because that’s how these stories play out. Usually, you only have one outcome – the hopes of the people get trampled underfoot.

That said, unlike much of sub-Saharan Africa, Ethiopia is actually one of the good ones. Long before the rest of sub-Saharan Africa showed any sign of self-awareness civilisation-wise, Ethiopia was holding that candle high, alongside the Egyptians and the Nubians. As a result, the 80 plus ethnicities that form modern Ethiopia were held together by millennia of shared history. But, sadly, what happened next makes an excellent script on how to destroy a solid national foundation.

Firstly, the monarchy was abolished when Haile Selassie was deposed. This destroyed the primary identity that held the nation together. Secondly, Tigray, one of the small tribes from the north, mounted a rebellion to remove the ruling coalition called DERG. The Tigrayans’ move heightened feelings of ethnic identity across the country. Thirdly, DERG, which attempted to implement communism in Ethiopia, adopted a new constitution modelled on the USSR federalist constitution. This gave ethnic divisions a formal political structure, paving way to the situation as it is today.

When Meles Zenawi, a Tigrayan, came into power in 1991, ethnic federalism was already well ingrained in Ethiopia. So, he instituted that system while Tigray continued to play an outsized role in national politics. But the Oromos and Amharas, who make up almost half of Ethiopia’s population, weren’t happy, leading to the 2016 protests.

The protestors demanded change, including the return of lands Tigray had seized from the Amharas. So, when Abiy Ahmed, from the Oromo tribe, came to power, reform was his main agenda. But the Tigrayans weren’t going to sit idly as their power base was being eroded.

While the details vary, this story is quite familiar to many Africans. We know that many of our nations are sovereign only on paper but can hardly function as one.

Think of DRC. This is a nation the size of Western Europe. However, despite its massive wealth, DRC remains a failed state. Today, DRC is full of mercenaries from other nations stealing its wealth while the Congolese themselves remain in abject poverty.

Think of Nigeria too. Africa’s most populous nation and its biggest economy is also a nation where 40 percent of all people above 15 years of age are illiterate. Nigeria’s history and demographics reveal that it is at best a patched-up nation with no shared identity. The valiant efforts to keep the nation together, such as the quelling of the Igbos’ secessionist aspirations, only masks the government’s failures. Today, the Boko Haram and Fulani insurgency in the northern states continues to take lives and keep the whole northern population in bondage.

Similar stories can be written about Sudan, Angola, Mozambique, Somalia, etc. And there is only one reason for this state of affairs – all these nations inherited arbitrarily drawn borders which didn’t consider the realities on the ground, be it ethnic, religious, political, or linguistic. As a result, you end up with nations with so many internal contradictions that they can’t truly stand. After 60 years of these trials – and mainly failures – it is time Africa adopted the “logic of division” as a solution.

“In much of the world,” wrote Max Fisher in The Atlantic, “national borders have shifted over time to reflect ethnic, linguistic, and sometimes religious divisions. Spain’s borders generally enclose the Spanish-speakers of Europe; Slovenia and Croatia roughly encompass ethnic Slovenes and Croats. Thailand is exactly what its name suggests. But Africa remains different.”

Indeed, in Africa people dream of a united continent and division is considered a step in the wrong direction. As a result, so much time is wasted trying to make bizarre nations work rather than focusing on people’s development. But do people exist to serve nations or do nations exist to serve the people?

Thankfully, we live in an age where it is apparent that being big or small is not a prerequisite for economic success. To put this in perspective, South Korea is a nation that is only slightly bigger than Tabora Region, but has an economy which is as big as the whole of sub-Saharan Africa combined. So, it is time that Africa graduates from those antiquated ideas which hold the continent back.

Probably Ethiopia, and Africa, could use the “logic of division”. Just as separation from Eritrea didn’t end Ethiopia, probably allowing Tigray, or other regions, to secede wouldn’t be that bad either.