Despite repeated assurances from Ethiopia’s political and military elite, the country stands at a critical inflection point. Sporadic conflicts in #Oromia and the other regions, and the continued use of military force continue to persist, and the potential unraveling of the Pretoria peace agreement is real. All of them have pushed the country to the edge. Ending these wars is not a matter of political preference, it is a matter of national survival. The question now is not whether peace is necessary, but whether there is enough collective will to demand and build it.
Peace is not simply the absence of war; it requires inclusive, functioning institutions that mediate conflict and foster justice. Unfortunately, Ethiopia’s institutions have shown little of the integrity or impartiality needed to fulfill this role.The Caucus of Ethiopian Opposition Parties has made clear, in a recent statement, the serious concerns regarding the legitimacy and conduct of two key national bodies: the National Dialogue Commission (NDC) and the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE). In the past, this publication argued that the NDC was established through a process that ignored vital contributions and amendments proposed by the opposition which will lead it to operate with exclusionary and partisan intent. Its failure to correct course and redeem its legitimacy in the eyes of all is symptomatic of a deeper malaise: the erosion of trust in its independence.
As the Caucus rightly warns, to proceed with elections under current conditions may invite not political resolution but further chaos.These failings underscore a broader national crisis: the entanglement of so-called independent institutions with the ruling party, and the transformation of public mechanisms into conduits of state control. When oversight bodies and civic processes are hollowed out, the state loses its moral legitimacy.
Political theorist Benedict Anderson argued that nations are imagined communities – social constructs held together by shared narratives, symbols, and collective memory. Nationhood, in his view, is not a fixed inheritance but an ongoing project of imagination and inclusion. This is especially true in societies where multiple histories, languages, and identities coexist in tension.In Ethiopia, however, the state continues to assert a singular national narrative, branding dissenting voices as threats to “unity.” But there is no sustainable unity that excludes.
Anderson reminds us that the most dangerous illusion is to confuse state authority with national identity. The nation is not the property of a party, a government, or even a historical myth. It is a space of negotiation, imagined and reimagined by all who belong to it. Today’s Ethiopia is fragmented not just by war but by a crisis of imagination. What vision binds its people together? What common future can be claimed in a nation where independent dialogue is suppressed, branded as a threat to national security, and elections are feared rather than welcomed?
Ethiopia’s future cannot be built on the ruins of its present. Every community has suffered. Every child kept from school, every mother who mourns a son, every family displaced by violence is part of this country’s unraveling. And yet, each of them also represents the possibility of rebuilding. Calls for peace are not acts of neutrality; in today’s Ethiopia, they are acts of patriotism. Ending war is no longer optional, it is the only path forward; it is a national interest. Let us silence the guns. Not in repression, but as the first step toward reconciliation. Let us reclaim Ethiopia as a shared, imagined community, one that belongs to all its people, not a privileged few.
#Justice #Freedom #democracy
