The Moral Asymmetry Argument: Why Fano Cannot Be Judged by the Standards of Those Who Abandoned All Standards 

Astatke

This fact-based analysis addresses the Prosperity Party’s sustained campaign across all media platforms accusing Fano of betrayal through alleged alliances with the party’s enemies. The evidence demonstrates that Prosperity Party has forfeited any moral authority to level such accusations 

Moral judgment cannot be applied equally to those operating under fundamentally asymmetric conditions of power, information, and survival imperatives. 

Part I: The Architecture of Abiy’s Deception 

The Manufactured War (2020-2022) 

Based on the evidence presented, particularly by Taye Dendea and Dr. Milkessa (Taye’s December 11, 2023 Facebook post and the famous Horn Conversation interviews), we must reckon with a disturbing reality: 

Abiy didn’t stumble into the Tigray war—he engineered it with calculated malice. The strategic purpose was multi-layered: 

1. Consolidate personal power by eliminating TPLF as a political threat 2. Manipulate Amhara sentiment by positioning himself as defender of Ethiopian unity 3. Create fratricidal conflict between Amhara and Tigray that would weaken both groups permanently 

4. Establish precedent for using overwhelming force against any regional resistance 

Fano’s 2020 involvement wasn’t naïve—it was based on reasonable interpretation of available information. When: 

● TPLF explicitly threatened Ethiopia’s territorial integrity (Getachew Reda’s statements of dismantling Ethiopia) 

● The Prime Minister invoked national unity and constitutional order ● The federal government requested support against what appeared to be secessionist rebellion 

…Fano made a principled decision based on the information available to a non-state actor operating in good faith.

The Confession: Taye Dendea’s Revelation 

When a sitting minister and inner circle testifies that Abiy: 

● Admitted to instigating the war 
● Expressed intent to “vanish Amharas” – አማራን ላጠፋ ነው 

This isn’t mere political disagreement—this is confession of genocidal intent and systematic deception. This fundamentally reframes everything that followed. 

Part II: The Moral Inversion—Who Bears the Burden of Judgment? Traditional Framework (Inadequate) 

Conventional analysis would judge Fano’s alleged cooperation with TPLF/Eritrea as moral inconsistency: 

● “You fought against them, now you’re with them—you have no principles” ● “You’ve become what you opposed” 

This framework is morally bankrupt because it ignores power asymmetry and the architecture of manipulation. 

Corrected Framework (Morally Coherent) 

When a state actor with monopoly on violence systematically deceives, manipulates, and then turns that violence against those who believed its stated principles, the moral burden shifts entirely. 

Here’s why: 

1. The Doctrine of Changed Circumstances Through Deception 

Fano’s 2020 decision was predicated on specific representations: 

● The war was about preserving Ethiopian unity 
● TPLF represented existential threat to Ethiopia 
● The government opposed ethnic fragmentation 
● Amhara participation was temporary, necessary, and would be honored Every single premise was a calculated lie. 

In contract law, this is called “fraud in the inducement”—when one party enters an agreement based on material misrepresentations by another party, the agreement is voidable. The deceived party has no moral obligation to honor terms built on lies. 

Applied to Fano: They were induced into conflict through systematic deception. When that deception was revealed—not through paranoia but through ministerial

confession—their original moral framework dissolved. They are not bound by the implications of decisions made under false pretenses. 

2. The Hierarchy of Survival vs. Ideological Purity 

States have the luxury of ideological consistency because they control the machinery of survival—military, police, courts, bureaucracy. 

Resistance movements face binary choices: adapt or be annihilated. 

When Abiy admitted intent to “vanish Amharas,” he transformed the moral calculus entirely: 

● Before the revelation: Fano’s morale was “defend Ethiopia from ethnic fragmentation” 
● After the revelation: Fano’s morale became “prevent Amhara genocide by any means necessary” 

This isn’t abandoning principles—it’s applying the ultimate principle (survival) when all other principles were revealed to be manipulated frameworks. 

Consider the parallel: If someone tells you to help them fight a home invader, you do so, and then they reveal they lied about the invasion and now intend to murder your family, you are morally justified in allying with anyone, including the alleged “home invader,” to protect your family. 

3. The Abiy Standard: Moralitylessness as State Policy 

Abiy operates in a realm beyond principles. 

His documented pattern: 

● Allied with Eritrea’s Isaias (commonly referred to as “historic enemy” by twisted EPRDF) to attack TPLF 
● Allied with Amhara Fano to defeat TPLF 
● Made peace with TPLF (Pretoria Agreement) to isolate Amhara 
● Now cooperates with disgruntled TPLF faction led by Getachew Reda against Amhara 

This isn’t pragmatic flexibility—it’s principled unprincipledness. Each alliance is discarded the moment it no longer serves personal power consolidation. 

The Moral Asymmetry: 

How can Fano be judged for seeking survival alliances when the government: 

● Has no consistent principles beyond power retention 
● Demonstrated willingness to sacrifice entire ethnic groups 
● Admitted to manipulating Fano into fratricidal war 
● Controls all state resources, international recognition, and narrative machinery

To hold Fano to higher standards of alliance consistency than the state that manufactured their predicament is morally perverse. 

Part III: The Positive Argument for Fano’s Moral Legitimacy Argument 1: Fano’s Morale Matured Rather Than Disappeared 

2020-2022: Principled Naïveté 

● Belief in Ethiopian unity under constitutional order 
● Trust in federal government’s stated objectives 
● Willingness to sacrifice for pan-Ethiopian identity 

2023-Present: Principled Realism 

● Recognition that “Ethiopian unity” was weaponized rhetoric 
● Understanding that survival requires resisting state violence 
● Acceptance that former enemies may be situational allies against genocidal government 

This evolution demonstrates morale’s resilience, not its absence. They didn’t become nihilists or opportunists—they learned that their original principle (Ethiopian unity) was being weaponized against them and adjusted to protect the underlying value: preventing ethnic annihilation. 

Argument 2: Selective Memory and the Eritrea Question 

The government’s accusation of Fano-Eritrea cooperation is particularly hypocritical given: 

● Abiy brought Eritrean forces into Tigray where they allegedly committed atrocities ● Eritrea was Abiy’s primary military ally in 2020-2021 

● The same government now condemning Fano-Eritrea links built its entire Tigray strategy on Eritrean military support 

If Eritrean cooperation was legitimate when serving Abiy’s interests, on what moral grounds is it illegitimate when serving Amhara survival? 

The answer: There are no moral grounds—only power politics. 

Argument 3: TPLF Cooperation as Evidence of Mature Political Calculation 

If Fano and TPLF have indeed found common ground, this represents sophisticated political evolution, not betrayal. 

Both groups independently discovered that: 

● Abiy manipulated them into conflict 
● Abiy’s regime represents authoritarian consolidation threatening all regional autonomy
● Their previous enmity served Abiy’s divide-and-rule strategy 

Recognizing a common enemy after being manipulated into fighting each other is wisdom, not inconsistency. 

Historical parallel: After WWII, French and German leaders who had been mortal enemies cooperated to build the European Union because they recognized their previous conflicts had been exploited by totalitarian regimes. 

Part IV: The Burden of Truth and Judgment 

Who Should Be Judged? 

The burden of moral scrutiny belongs on the party with power, information, and agency: Abiy’s Government: 

● Controls intelligence services 
● Shapes public narrative through state media 
● Has international diplomatic recognition 
● Commands military and financial resources 
● Admitted to manufacturing war and genocidal intent 

Fano: 

● Operates in information scarcity 
● Faces systematic demonization 
● Lacks institutional resources 
● Responds to existential threat 
● Made decisions based on what they were told, later revealed as lies 

In any moral framework, we judge the deceiver more harshly than the deceived; we judge the powerful more harshly than the desperate; we judge the aggressor more harshly than those fighting for survival. 

The Impossibility of Fano Betrayal 

Here’s the philosophical crux: You cannot betray someone who first betrayed you through systematic deception. 

Abiy’s government: 

1. Solicited Fano support under false pretenses 
2. Used their sacrifice to achieve military objectives 
3. Admitted the entire framework was manipulative 
4. Turned state violence against them 
5. Now claims moral injury because they seek survival

This is moral incoherence. Fano owes nothing to a social contract that never existed—they were conscripted through lies into a manufactured conflict. 

Conclusion 

In a political environment where the state operates without any fixed moral principles, systematically deceives populations into fratricidal conflict, and admits genocidal intent, resistance movements cannot be judged for seeking survival alliances from any available source. The moral burden rests entirely on the state actor who: 

1. Created the conditions of moral impossibility through systematic deception 2. Holds monopoly on legitimate violence yet uses it for ethnic persecution 3. Controls narrative machinery while operating in complete bad faith 4. Admitted to the manipulation through ministerial testimony 

Fano’s potential cooperation with TPLF or Eritrea—whether real or alleged—represents rational response to genocidal threat, not moral failure. 

When the Prime Minister of a country admits to: 

● Manufacturing war 
● Desiring to “vanish” an entire ethnic group – አማራን ላጠፋ ነው 
● Operating with no principles beyond power retention 

…then those facing annihilation are morally justified in accepting help from anyone willing to provide it. 

The question is not “How can Fano work with former enemies?” but rather “How can anyone expect Fano to die for principles that were always lies?” 

Those who lie their way into power, manipulate ethnic groups into killing each other, and then turn state machinery toward genocide have forfeited any standing to judge the survival strategies of their victims. 

The morale Fano possesses now is harder, clearer, and more honest than what they had in 2020—it’s the morale of those who’ve learned that survival in the face of state-sponsored annihilation requires seeing the world as it is, not as deceptive leaders claim it to be. 

The writer can be reached at astatke@gmail.com

Editor’s Note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com  

__

Support Borkena  : https://borkena.com/subscribe-borkena/

Join our Telegram Channel : t.me/borkena

Like borkena on Facebook

Borkena Ethiopian News Youtube Channel

To submit Press Release, send submission to info@borkena.com

Add your business to Ethiopian Business Listing / Ethiopian Business Directory  

Join the conversation. Follow us on X (Formerly Twitter)  @zborkena to get the latest Ethiopian News updates regularly.