In Ethiopia, there is a clear tension between civic nationalism and ethnocentrism, two competing ideologies that shape the country’s political and social landscape. While civil nationalism was the predominant ideology in the country, from late 1960s and 1970s, with the advent of the student movement which brought up the issue of self-determination of nations and nationalities along with the slogan of land to the tiller, ethnocentrism took root in the country with the proliferation of ethnic based liberation movements like the EPLF, TPLF, OLF, ONLF and other liberation movements.
The declaration of the Tigray Manifesto in 1975 clearly indicated the irredentist nature of some of the liberation movements attempting to replace civil nationalism based on Ethiopian citizenship into ethnic based configuration which was later codified in the TPLF sponsored current constitution of the country.
Civic nationalism emphasizes a shared identity based on citizenship, common political values, and a collective sense of national unity through the promotion of common narratives which are crucial or national development, peace and stability. It promotes the idea that all citizens, regardless of ethnic background, belong to the same nation and contribute to its development. In Ethiopia, this ideology seeks to build a unified state by promoting equal rights, national unity, and inclusive governance that transcends ethnic divisions. Disparities between regional constitutions and the federal constitution as well as visible irregularities between the legal and political relations between regional and federal governments explain deeper conceptual and legal contradictions that have caused ethnic conflicts and unrests in the country for almost four decades.
However, previous regimes that were ruling the country tried to present the social-cultural and legal values of the dominant ethnic group as it represents the entire population generating grievances and cultural inequalities among the ethnic groups in the country. The promulgation of a state religion (1935 constitution) and official discriminatory measures brought up dissentions among a number of ethnic groups in the country.
On the other hand, ethnocentrism in Ethiopia is closely linked to the country’s ethnic federalism—a system of governance where power is largely devolved to ethnically defined regions. Ethnocentrism prioritizes the interests and identity of a particular ethnic group above others, often resulting in regional and ethnic divisions. This approach has at times led to tensions, competition for resources, and a sense of exclusion among different ethnic groups, undermining national unity.
Since the institutionalization and legal introduction of ethnic based decentralized state structure in 1992 and its effective formation of the federal system in 1995, the Ethiopian federal order has been rocked with inter-ethnic tensions and conflicts that continued unabated. The author of this article is not trying to argue whether ethnic federalism is good or bad but takes it as a viable alternative for resolving age old dissatisfactions and challenges that the people of Ethiopia have continued to face.
Some armed groups that have posed in the name of struggling for democracy, human and economic rights are currently engaged in armed battles with the ENDF in view of “fighting for survival” with no mandate from the ethnic group they claim to represent but are in reality working against the interest of their own people in blocking transportation systems and closing down schools. This has been the reality in the war that broke out in the northern part of the country two years ago and has now continued to prevail in Amhara and Oromia regions with relative stability in Tigray. The point is, has this, ethno-territorial federalism helped to resolve the basic political problems in the country or did it exacerbate the already existing problems. Suffice it to mention issues related to the Ethiopian tricolor, the question of identity and issues of internal boundaries. Issues of minority rights are not clearly recognized by the regional constitutions while they provide economic and socio-cultural and legal rights of the ethnic majority in the respective regional states. The federal constitution treats this issue in a more general way referring to the rights of the nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia with no specific reference to ethnic minorities.
Civic nationalism advocates for a national identity that includes all Ethiopians, regardless of their ethnicity, while ethnocentrism fosters an exclusive identity based on ethnic affiliation. This can lead to contradictions in political discourse, as ethnocentrism often drives demands for autonomy and self-determination, whereas civic nationalism emphasizes collective national sovereignty with emphasis on a united multi-ethnic state.
Civic nationalism seeks to unify the diverse population under a common political framework, promoting national cohesion. Ethnocentrism, however, can lead to fragmentation along ethnic lines, causing conflicts and weakening the national fabric. Ethiopia has witnessed this in the form of ethnic-based clashes and competing claims for political dominance.
Ethnic federalism in Ethiopia is meant to empower ethnic groups, but it has sometimes deepened divisions and caused tensions around issues like land, language, and political representation. Civic nationalism, on the other hand, aims for a broader form of representation that includes all ethnicities without focusing solely on ethnic identity.
The rise of ethnocentric ideologies has contributed to increased ethnic-based conflicts. Ethnic groups, driven by a desire for greater autonomy or resources, often clash with the ideals of national unity promoted by civic nationalism. The ongoing challenge is how to balance these competing interests without leading to further instability.
BY SOLOMON DIBABA
THE ETHIOPIAN HERALD SATURDAY 26 OCTOBER 2024
