By Yinager Tibebu
The philosopher George Santayana said, “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” This saying emphasizes the importance of understanding and wisdom gained from past experiences in order to avoid making the same mistakes in the future. In the current Ethiopian context, Abiy made a huge diplomatic error when he signed an MOU with a semi-autonomous region called Somaliland without involving the internationally recognized, but weak government of Somalia, of which Somaliland is a part of its international border. Let us make it clear from the outset: Somalia is a country that has been divided for decades with a crippled central government. However, diplomatically, it does not mean that you can go and trespass the sovereignty of the country without some kind of reaction from the country or other players. Others who want you to fail will take advantage of that grave error to act against you. Such actions can create disorder across the globe.
“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction,” is Newton’s first law shaping nature. Therefore, an equal reaction is inevitable. Due to Abiy’s failed foreign policy, Egypt, the historical enemy of Ethiopia, seized the opportunity to intervene in Somalia and restrict Ethiopia’s influence in the southern region. Egypt’s pretext for involvement in Somalia includes training and assisting the Somali army to stabilize the country, defending its borders, and supporting the union of Somalia. In this role, the international order may support Egypt’s actions, as Ethiopia has failed to play that role due to the conflict of interest created by the failed policy. During Meles’ time, the international order allowed Ethiopia to go to Somali, but now Egypt may have gained that blessing. However, Egypt’s main motive for swift action is to diminish Ethiopia’s influence and, if possible, destabilize the country to secure its Nile-related benefits.
Now, the Abiy government is panicking and has started beating the war drums. It is rumored that they have mobilized their military along the southern border. Many are saying that Abiy is hoping to rally the Ethiopian people behind him. He succeeded in doing so when he went to war with the TPLF during the two-year conflict between November 2020 and November 2022. Usually, it is very difficult to unite people during internal conflicts, but he managed to do so because no one truly knew who he was or what kind of reckless person he could be at that time. He believes that he can repeat this by bringing the people together if there is a war with an external enemy like Egypt. Many are saying that he wants to distract people’s attention from the ongoing conflict with Fano. Fano controls most of the Amhara region and it is widely supported by the people. It is worth noting that Abiy attempted to go to war with Eritrea after the Pretoria agreement with TPLF, but the people ignored him. However, now that Egypt is in Somalia, he believes that the people will jump into the war. It is important to look back at the country’s history to gain insight into how the people react in such circumstances. In this piece only four instances are selected among many, so that we see the four different reactions of the people for their leaders at different times.
1.Mengistu Hailemariam and his war with Somalia. Mengistu was the head of the Derg regime after Emperor Haileselassie ruled the country, including Eritrea as part of it. When Somalia invaded the Ogaden region of Ethiopia between 1977–1978, led by Somali Major General Mohamed Siad Barre, Chairman of the Supreme Revolutionary Council, Mengistu mobilized both Ethiopians and foreign forces like the Soviet Union and Cuba to crush the aggressor. During that time, Mengistu faced problems with separatists in the north, including Shabiya and TPLF, as well as other factions and opposition parties across the country. However, the majority, approximately 80-90 percent of the population, were galvanized to defend the country from the invasion in the southeast. It is reported that Cuba’s involvement with 12,000 soldiers equipped with heavy artillery and military supplies worth $1 billion, along with 1,500 Soviet advisors led by General Vasily Petrov, played an important role in systematically pushing the Somalis out of the Ogaden. Most importantly, the Ethiopian people put aside their differences for a while and helped Mengistu achieve victory. Afterward, Mengistu turned his attention to the north to fight against the Northerners, which he ultimately lost.
2.Emperor Menilik II and the Italians in Adewa. The victory of Adwa is a historical phenomenon known to all Ethiopians and Africans, even beyond the global stage. “The defeat of the Italians was a major blow to the industrial world because it heralded the beginning of resistance against the industrial powers and the struggle for independence by the colonized African nations.” A well-equipped colonial force was defeated by an ill-equipped African force. This was mainly due to the leadership of Menelik II, who galvanized 97% of the people to join him in fighting the external aggressor. There was some resentment toward the emperor as he tried to unite the country following Emperor Teodros and Emperor Yohannes, who started “the struggle for the unification of all the provinces which were divided and the balkanised country as a result of the Battle of Gragne during the period of his father Emperor Lebne Dengel.” However, at that particular time in history, most of the people followed the leader. The Emperor is well recognized for his galvanizing speech to call all Ethiopians to meet him… to fight the Italians. The people responded in good numbers from all the provinces and ethnic groups. The victory became the ultimatum for the Emperor and all Ethiopian people.
3.Empereor Yohannes and Derbush. Emperor Yohannes followed the vision of his professor Emperor Tewodros to unite the country. He had several victories against the Egyptian, and other external aggressors several times in several places. The likes of Ras Alula, under his leadership were excellent warriors who fought a noble fight against enemies of the country courageously. The emperor had gained dominance internally, even the king of Shewa, Menelik II, recognized his leadership and subdued him at last. However, when the Sudan Mahdists took Gondar by surprise in 1889, he tried to call for help but he did not get the help he needed at the right time. He was killed by the Mahdits at the Battle of Gallabat near Metemma. Emperor Yohannes had internal conflict. He crushed the Gojjam rebellion, and he was on his way to Shewa to do the same right before he went to fight the Sudan Mahdists. By the time he went to war, many were not by his side. It is rumored that when he sent the call, people were reluctant to act swiftly to follow him to fight the Mahdists. Even if the Ethiopian side effectively dismantled the Sudan Mahdists, it cost his life.
4.Emperor Tewodros and The British. Emperor Tewodros was one of the modern Ethiopian leaders who brought an end to the decentralized era of the Princes (Zemene Mesafint), which had lasted for over two centuries in the land. During his 13-year reign, he engaged in battles with different lords, princes, and disloyal leaders, successfully subduing many areas under his imperial leadership. He also moved the capital city of his Empire from Gondar to Debre Tabor, and later to Magdala. However, these actions created many enemies within the country. After a conflict of interest with the British, in which Queen Victoria ignored his request, Tewodros imprisoned some British men, including Captain Charles Duncan Cameron. In response, the British sent an army to fight against him. Those who held grievances against Tewodros assisted the foreigners by providing guides and food as the expeditionary force marched towards Magdala. Ultimately, Tewodros’s army was defeated by the British Army, led by Robert Napier, which consisted of over 30,000 personnel. In a final act of defiance against the foreigner’s victory, the emperor took his own life. This act became an inspiring symbol for future generations, demonstrating defiance and independence.
What do we learn from the four Historical Evidence?
First and foremost, foreign forces have shown interest in our country in almost every generation. Hence solid and sound foreign policy is key for the country. Egypt, Somalia, Sudan, Ottoman Turk, Italians and British are among these foreign forces. The West, BRICS, UAE, and others have huge interest in Ethiopia, as it is the largest of all in the Horn as well as in Eastern Africa. Through centuries, Ethiopians have managed to build a solid foreign policy philosophy and have become an Icon for Africans on this front. No wonder Addis Ababa is the fourth diplomatic city on the planet, behind New York (for the world), Brussels (European Union) and Cairo (Arab league). It is vital to underscore the diplomatic leverage Ethiopia has built through its history. It is a gross error to undermine such a status.
When it comes to galvanizing the people for war when a foreign aggressor approaches the country, the response of the people is not always uniform. All four cases mentioned above prove this claim. In the cases of Mengistu and Menelik, as mentioned above, the people came out in masses and defended their country and leaders. During Mengistu’s rule, there was internal division, but people recognized the patriotic nature of the leader and followed him. On the other hand, Menelik was wise enough to bring all factions and kings together to fight the Italians. However, in the cases of Yohannes, a vital group of people sabotaged him, resulting in the defeat of the emperor. Similarly, in the case of Tewodros, some people even helped the foreign aggressor. This teaches us a vital lesson: internal coherence and perception of the people towards the leader plays a significant role in resisting and defeating an external aggressor. This is simple logic that anyone can understand. However, leaders often deceive themselves and expect that internal problems will be overlooked by the people when an external aggressor threatens the country. This is a grave mistake that leaders can make. They should know that the people will give them their own medicine when the right time comes. Leaders may try to deceive people into war once or twice, but eventually, people will see their true motives and image. When the leaders are exposed before everyone’s eyes, with no place to hide their motives, ambitions, and priorities, it is difficult to persuade anyone again. It is like the proverb, “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”
For political reasons, the central government may act as if it is in control of the country. But in reality, this is one of the most difficult times in history for most Ethiopians. The country is divided along ethnic lines due to the 33-year ethnic-based administration and system. The internal coherence among the elites of the ethnic groups has decreased significantly, creating constant conflict across the country. As a consequence, in the past three years, the country has been in constant conflict in the three biggest regions, resulting in the deaths of over 1.5 million people. The government may try to gamble and galvanize support to fight an external force instead of engaging in reducing the internal conflict. It seems it is trying to copy from the TPLF’s recent experience when war broke out between the TPLF and Shabia of Eritrea in 1998. Within two years, most Ethiopians aligned with TPLFites and stopped the Eritrean aggression from the North. Abiy might be trying to repeat this history. In fact, he himself has participated in that war. He might remember how people were galvanized in a very short period of time. However, the contexts are different, and the times have changed. Trying to recruit an external enemy using foreign policy to galvanize the people is fatal! Creating a foreign policy that will irritate neighbors and put the country into direct conflict is wrong. Ethiopians are wise to avoid such problems using diplomatic wisdom accumulated from experiences throughout several centuries. Come to your senses. Take responsible small diplomatic steps that do not have huge consequences. Do not create a recipe for disaster for the people in the region. The existing pain, agony, and poverty in the country are already enough. Use resources to build the nation, not destroy it. As it is said, “Let he who has ears let him hear.”
Editor’s note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com
__
To Publish an Article On borkena , please send submission to info@borkena.com for consideration.
Join our Telegram Channel : t.me/borkena
Like borkena on Facebook
Add your business to Borkena Business Listing/Business Directory Jobs
Join the conversation. Follow us on X (formerly Twitter ) @zborkena to get the latest Ethiopian news updates regularly. Ethiopia To share information or for submission, send e-mail to info@borkena.com
This is, to say the least confusing; ETH is not “recruiting” enemies or “creating” foreign policies which “irritate” neighbors. Read back ur text and it should be clear that in all cases the enemies were there waiting to grab a piece of the country, of course pretexts, historical or otherwise, can always be fabricated. Barre was armed to the teeth by Washington, which, prior to the Somali incursion into Ogaden, declined a pre-existing agreement to supply armaments etc. vexed by radical changes undertaken by the new rulers in AA. Ethiopians are and will always be thankful for all the friends who came to their help, particularly the Commandate and his soldiers who sacrificed their lives to save the crumbling country. Somalia as a state doesn’t exist for decades now, and the govt. in Mogadishu is propped to sort of existence by the AU with the active support by AA, Meles beginning.
In short, all the “enemies” of ETH are out there waiting for a chance to destroy its basic nature and fabric as a multiethnic society now for over hundreds even thousand years. The PM and all others in the govt. should focus on keeping the country together and most acutely induce a keep-up a strategy of economic progress and relative prosperity; one way is via the BRICS, of which Ethiopia is already a member. Attempt to open a reliable and direct access to the sea is part of the plan, this is an issue all Ethiopians wishing the betterment of the country should agree upon, same as the GERD, which, for well-known reasons Sisi and spol. have proved aren’t happy about and tried to sabotage it. Egypt is ruled by what is the epitome of a corrupt elite, as elsewhere in the ME, crazed with western aid and petrodollars. No wander Cairo cares more about creating trouble for ETH; a keen observer would say there is a more acute issue like meaningfully supporting Palestine and its suffering population; it is profundity of indignity over sixteen thousand Palestinian children dead, and Egypt now show eagerness to open war front in South Ethiopia, …
As the saying goes, “You don’t till land with old cows,” meaning that relying on outdated or ineffective methods will not produce the desired results.
Yinager Tibebu’s use of George Santayana’s quote about learning from history is misplaced and fails to recognize the nuances of modern geopolitics. His analysis is stuck in the past, disconnected from the challenges and opportunities Ethiopia faces today.
Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is not a relic of history, but a forward-thinking leader a combination of Thomas Sankara and Che Guevara whose vision extends beyond Ethiopia’s borders. His decision to engage with Somaliland reflects a bold, strategic move that is essential for securing Ethiopia’s access to key maritime routes. Somaliland has been a peaceful, self-governing entity for nearly 30 years, yet global powers particularly the West have withheld recognition. Had Somaliland’s independence been in the interests of the West, it would have been granted, just like South Sudan or Eritrea. Abiy’s engagement with Somaliland is about safeguarding Ethiopia’s long-term economic needs, not catering to outdated diplomatic constraints.
The claim that Abiy’s dealings with Somaliland violate Somalia’s sovereignty is misleading. Somalia’s central government has depended on Ethiopia for years to help fight threats like Al-Shabaab. Ethiopia has provided the critical security support that has kept Somalia from further collapse. Engaging with Somaliland doesn’t weaken Somalia, it strengthens Ethiopia’s regional standing and influence in the Horn of Africa.
Tibebu’s suggestion that Egypt’s recent deployment of troops in Somalia is a result of Abiy’s failed foreign policy also misses the mark. Egypt’s involvement is driven by its desire to undermine Ethiopia’s progress, particularly regarding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Egypt has long sought to diminish Ethiopia’s regional influence to maintain its dominance over the Nile. Abiy’s leadership, however, transcends these distractions. His focus is on building Ethiopia’s economic power and securing its rightful place as a regional leader. Egypt’s maneuvers are a reflection of its insecurities, not a sign of Ethiopia’s diplomatic failures.
Unlike many African leaders, PM Abiy does not submit to the pressures of economic hitmen (CIA) or Western interests that seek to undermine African sovereignty. He refuses to sell Ethiopia’s independence in exchange for foreign support to cling to power. This sets him apart from other subservient leaders across the continent who trade their nation’s autonomy for personal political survival. Abiy’s refusal to bow to these forces is a testament to his commitment to Ethiopia’s sovereignty and long-term prosperity.
Abiy’s vision for Ethiopia, and Africa as a whole, is far larger than the immediate challenges posed by Egypt or Somalia. He is laying the groundwork for long-term stability and economic development, and in doing so, he is providing a model for other African nations to follow. Sadly, rather than uniting behind this transformative vision, some critics are quick to undermine it. Where are the Pan-Africanists when it comes to defending a leader who stands for African unity and self-reliance?
Ethiopia’s past conflicts whether under Mengistu, Menelik, Yohannes, or Tewodros offer little in the way of lessons for today’s challenges. The world has changed, and so have the dynamics of power. Abiy’s legacy, with its focus on economic growth, peace, and regional cooperation, holds far more relevance for Ethiopia’s future than any outdated historical playbook.
Ethiopia doesn’t need to repeat the mistakes of the past. Abiy is charting a new course, one that breaks from the old ways of thinking and offers Africa a path toward true sovereignty and prosperity. Rather than tearing down his vision, we should celebrate his leadership and support his efforts to reshape not only Ethiopia but the continent. His leadership is a gift not just to Ethiopia but to all of Africa.