Is Federalism the Source of Ethnic Identity-Based Conflict in Ethiopia?

Though statehood nature traced back to ancient times, modern Ethiopia came into being in the second half of the nineteenth century under the military expansion of King Menelik II. Since then subsequent political systems in the country have failed to recognise and accommodate the country’s ethnolinguistic diversity. However, in 1991 the new government constitutionally recognised and institutionally accommodated the country’s diversity. While solving old problems of ethnic inequality and injustice, ethnic federalism has created new problems of ethnic tensions and conflict across Ethiopia. The article aims at investigating how and why ethnic federalism ended up being a source of ethnic conflicts in Ethiopia and suggests the way out. The article employed a qualitative research design and methods of data analysis and interpretation. The finding of the study shows the notion and implementation of federalism has to be blamed, which left unclear administration boundary, overlooked cross-cutting variables, Majority versus minority and Titular versus Settler problem, politicised ethnicity by transformed cultural communities into political communities, produced mega ethnic syndrome within the Ethiopian society, for the country’s ethnic troubles and conflicts. Reforming the federal system and its constitutions is the way forwarded to reduce ethnic tensions and create an inclusive society in Ethiopia.

Ethnic conflict in Ethiopia: Federalism as a cause and solution

Adopted in 1991, ethnic federalism indeed paved the way for the recognition, accommodation, and institutionalization of ethnocultural diversity for the first time in the country’s history since its modern existence. What is equally important is, the practice of ethnic federalism complicated state-society and inter-group relationships creating a favorable environment for ethnic confrontation and conflict to take place in the country threatening national unity, eroded century-old values of coexistence, a hard ethnic boundary where administrative boundaries are served as political and ethnic differentiators like the Oromo and Somali conflict over contested boundaries. Territorial recognition, and institutionalization of ethnicity gave room for the emergence of ‘ethnic like and ethnic others’ thinking, made minorities in different regions victims of politics and failed to provide sound accommodation mechanisms from them, severely restricted people’s constitutional rights including the right to mobility and right to work, created room for the re-emergence of secessionist tendency. Hence, ethnic federalism while solving old problems of ethnic inequality and injustice; has created new problems of ethnic tensions and conflict across Ethiopia. It is the purpose of this study to investigate how and why federalism is being considered as the source of ethnic conflicts in the Ethiopian context. The study adopted a qualitative comparative approach while FGDs and key informant interviews were used to gather data. The finding of the study shows that though multinational federation plays an irreplaceable role to accommodate and institutionalize ethnocultural diversity, the notion and implementation of federalism instigate ethnic conflict in the Ethiopian context.

Ethnic Federalism in Ethiopia: Reflecting on Diversity and Ethnic Identity

Ethiopia formed an ethnic federal system in 1991, which recognized ethnic autonomy entirely while ensuring the country’s unity. The new Constitution established a federal structure focused primarily on ethnic territorial units. The constitution ambitions to achieve ethnic freedom and equality by maintaining the state. Ethiopian politics has shifted to a federal liberal and plural system since the military dictatorship ended, as ethnic groups sought to exist under a federal structure that could preserve the country’s stability and diversity. The federal arrangement is noteworthy because its Constitution allows for the inheritance of every ethnic group. It supports an ethicised federal state with a secession mechanism and allows political parties to unite along ethnic lines. It is a worthwhile case study because it is an exception to the general trend in Africa. This paper examines how ethnic Federalism is a vital part of the Ethiopian Constitution and gives ethnic autonomy and identity in Ethiopian politics. Theoretical understanding of Federalism and ethnic Federalism in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia: the Victory of the Sidama in the Longer Than a Century’s Struggle for the Self-determination

For the first time in the history of domestic Ethiopian studies, the article analyzes in detail the successful struggle of one of the Ethiopian peoples’, the Sidama, for self-determination. On the 20th of November, 2019 a truly historic event took place in Ethiopia: one of the country’s many ethnic communities, the Sidama, achieved self-government. At a referendum about 98% voted in favor of the creation of the Sidama state. This provoked a chain reaction in the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Region: already 13 ethnic communities – Wolaita, Gamo, Gurage, Kaffa and others – are demanding the creation of their own states. Centrifugal processes in the country have become noticeably more active. The present paper is divided in four sections. The first section, “Who are the Sidama?”, offers a detailed description of the Sidama and emphasizes the vitality of traditional social and cultural institutions, including ethnic stratification and the continued presence of castes of artisans. At the same time, it is noted that globalization and urbanization are introducing significant changes in the life of the Sidama. The second section, “The Sidama under ethnic federalism”, analyzes the positive and negative aspects of ethnic federalism and the reasons for the discontent of the Sidama, as well as the causes of Sidama’s grievances and conflicts over power and resources with other ethnic communities, which ultimately led to their struggle for self-government. The third section, “The Sidama’s struggle for self-government”, provides a detailed account of the Sidama’s struggle against the policy of Amharization during the imperial period, the discrimination in Derg rule (1974–1991) and, since 1991, during the period of ethnic federalism. The fourth section, “Referendum”, is devoted to a detailed description of this important event in the life of the Sidama and their victory: the difficulties and obstacles to organizing the referendum, the attitude of the federal government, the referendum itself and victory. Finally, in the fifth section, “The impact of the creation of the Sidama state on the situation in the region”, the author analyzes the Constitution of the new state. The creation of the new 10th state on the ethnic basis means the strengthening of ethnic federalism in Ethiopia. It is important to stress that the author has conducted several e-mail interviews with Sidama scholars and journalists – active participants in the Sidama movement for self-determination – on the topic of post-referendum events.

Russian Ethnofederalism: Evolution and Development Prospects

Introduction. The authors analyze the peculiarities of the formation, evolution and prospects of Russian ethnofederalism, based on the achievements of Russian and Western researchers. Methods and materials. Along with classical approaches to the nature of ethnofederalism, the authors proceed from the concept that relations between the elites of the center and the regions in the Russian Federation are based on the so-called “incomplete contract”, which is characterized by the absence of guarantees for its implementation. Analysis. This political practice comes as a source of the elites desire to change the distribution of power and resources in their favor while the Constitution remains unchanged, the “pendulum” nature of relations along the “federal center – regions” line. In modern Russia federalism does not have a value dimension, both for the elites of the center and the elites of most regions, and it remains a purely instrumental concept. The authors build their analysis of interethnic relations and the prospects of ethnic federalism in Russia, proceeding not from any ideal model, but starting from the existing ethnic political reality with its already existing imperfect institutions of ethnic federalism. At the same time, a differentiated approach is used to assess the correlation between federalism and ethnicity. Results. The authors come to the conclusion that, despite the numerous shortcomings of the ethnic model of federalism (organizational complexity, special requirements for political elites, asymmetry with its inherent “injustice”, etc.), there is no real alternative to it in Russia.