The Fear of Ethiopia’s Disintegration Is Short-Sighted: A Path Toward Amhara Liberation

By Mekuria 

Ethiopia stands on the brink of fragmentation. While many analysts, diplomats, and Ethiopians fear that disintegration will unleash uncontrollable chaos, this fear often stems from a limited understanding—especially when viewed from the perspective of the Amhara people. For the Amhara, Ethiopia’s current political system is not a shield against instability but the very mechanism of their oppression. Under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, the Ethiopian state has become the primary agent of violence against Amhara civilians. Every arm of federal power—military, financial, bureaucratic, and diplomatic—has been mobilized against the Amhara with near-total impunity. In this context, fears of Ethiopia’s collapse are misplaced. For the Amhara, the disintegration of the Ethiopian state may not be a national catastrophe but a necessary step toward survival, self-determination, and eventual justice.

Ethiopia now faces a critical crossroads, marked by escalating violence, deepening political fragmentation, and a rapid erosion of legitimacy. While many warn that state collapse would bring chaos, such warnings ignore a fundamental truth: for millions of Amharas, Ethiopia—as a functioning, legitimate state—already no longer exists. Under Abiy Ahmed’s leadership, the government has turned violently against its own citizens. For the Amhara, it offers neither protection nor opportunity; it has become a system of targeted repression and existential threat. In this reality, the disintegration of Ethiopia is not a danger to Amhara survival—it may be the only viable path to liberation.

Historical Parallels: Collapse Can Lead to Justice

Many fear that Ethiopia’s collapse would mimic the chaos of Somalia or the violence of the Balkans. Yet history reveals a more complex picture. The breakup of Yugoslavia eventually produced several nations that have achieved relative peace and stability. The Baltic states, once considered volatile after the Soviet Union’s fall, emerged as functioning democracies. South Sudan, despite ongoing struggles, stands as a testament to the power of self-determination following oppressive unions. Collapse is not always an end; it can mark the beginning of something new. The disintegration of unjust states has often paved the way for more just, self-governing, and resilient entities. While examples like Yugoslavia, Somalia, or Sudan caution us against naiveté, they also show that forced, coercive unity without justice only postpones inevitable conflict.

Yes, state collapse carries risk. But for a people facing existential threat, the greater danger lies in inaction—waiting for a violent regime to reform while it continues its campaign of destruction. For the Amhara, remaining bound within a violently imposed union guarantees only further death, displacement, and degradation. Disintegration, with all its uncertainties, opens a critical path toward survival, sovereignty, and justice.

Abiy’s War Machine Rests on the Ethiopian State

Since open war erupted in the Amhara region in April 2023, the Ethiopian state has unleashed its full institutional power—military, bureaucratic, financial—against the Amhara people. Security forces, many drawn from outside Amhara lands, have been implicated in widespread atrocities: extrajudicial killings, mass arrests, sexual violence, and destruction of civilian infrastructure. The violence extends beyond the battlefield. Amharas suffer systemic economic warfare: punitive taxation, restricted banking, deliberate blockades of food and humanitarian aid. The federal bureaucracy, far from neutral, has become a weapon. Core institutions—banks, courts, media, schools—are mobilized to criminalize Amhara identity and delegitimize resistance. To speak of “preserving the state” under these conditions ignores a brutal reality: for millions of Amharas, the Ethiopian state functions not as a government, but as an occupying force.

Ethiopia’s post-1991 ethnic federalist constitution, introduced by the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), institutionalized ethnic division, mistrust, and zero-sum politics. While some groups gained limited autonomy, the Amhara were scapegoated, marginalized, and subjected to state-enabled violence. When Abiy Ahmed rose to power, hopes for democratic reform gave way to authoritarian entrenchment, with the Amhara emerging as a central target. His government has:

• Militarized the federal state against its own citizens.
• Disarmed and criminalized Amhara special forces while allowing others to remain intact.
• Enabled massacres and displacement of Amharas in Oromia, Benishangul-Gumuz, and southern regions. 
• Turned federal institutions—financial, judicial, bureaucratic—into tools of collective punishment.

Most grievously, heavily armed federal forces recruited from outside the Amhara region have been deployed en masse to suppress and terrorize local populations. This is not law enforcement; it is occupation. For many Amharas, Ethiopia is no longer a homeland—it is a hostile structure.

Abiy’s Power Is Structural, Not Personal

Abiy Ahmed’s war on the Amhara derives not from charisma but from control over state machinery. Every act of repression—military assaults, mass arrests, blockades, propaganda—is executed through federal institutions:

• ENDF troops bombing Amhara towns and villages are federally commanded.
• Banks freezing accounts and blocking aid are federally operated.
• Courts prosecuting resistance fighters as terrorists are federal.
• Propaganda dehumanizing Amharas is state-run.
• Tax systems extract wealth from Amhara farmers to finance their subjugation.

Abiy’s war machine is inseparable from the Ethiopian state. His power is institutional, rooted in federal authority. As long as this structure survives, so does his capacity to dominate the Amhara people.

Ethiopia’s Disintegration as a Collapse of the Repression Infrastructure

If the Ethiopian state collapses, so too does the system sustaining Abiy’s war:

• Military command and logistics disintegrate.
• Intelligence agencies lose reach and funding.
• Legal frameworks for persecution collapse.
• Collaborators lose state protection and face local justice.
• The chain of command breaks down.

Abiy’s strength ends with the Ethiopian state. This is not a call for chaos but for a strategic break from a system that no longer serves its people.

Disintegration as a Strategic Reset and Weakening of Oppression

The fear of disintegration rests on the assumption that disorder is worse than the status quo. But for the Amhara, the current status quo is fatal. The Ethiopian state is not a guarantor of stability or justice—it is a system of systematic repression. Collapse should not be feared as a disaster but viewed as a strategic reset—an interruption of violent subjugation.

If Ethiopia disintegrates:

• The federal regime’s war on the Amhara is severely weakened or ended.
• Centralized military control enabling cross-regional deployment collapses.
• Resistance forces like Fano can control the Amhara region without federal interference.
• Amhara collaborators lose protection and face accountability locally.
• Bureaucratic tools punishing Amhara identity cease functioning.

This power vacuum creates space for territorial defense, local justice, and, most importantly, self-rule—rights systematically denied despite the Amhara’s foundational role in Ethiopia’s formation.

Disintegration allows reimagining political order. It offers the Amhara people a path to:

• Break free from an imposed, weaponized federal bureaucracy.
• Establish autonomous governance under Amhara-led forces such as Fano.
• Dismantle internal betrayal networks and rebuild legitimacy.
• Prevent cross-regional interference in the region’s political future.
• Construct a new political compact based on voluntary association, not coercion.

The collapse of centralized repression opens the door to true Amhara autonomy, where justice is local, democracy is possible, and survival no longer depends on submission to a hostile regime. For the Amhara, disintegration is not anarchy—it is the first real chance for freedom, justice, and self-determination.

Abiy’s Ability to Wage War Ends When Ethiopia Ends

Disintegration must be reconsidered—not as reckless but as a necessary liberation tool. For the Amhara, preserving Ethiopia means preserving the system that displaces, imprisons, and exterminates them. Preserving Ethiopia as it stands is not patriotism—it is endorsing a regime at war with its people. For the Amhara, survival depends not on Ethiopia’s unity but on its disintegration.

Why Regime Change Alone Is Not Enough

Some advocate patience, hoping removing Abiy Ahmed might restore justice without dismantling Ethiopia. This overlooks a deeper truth: Amhara repression predates Abiy and is embedded in Ethiopia’s post-1991 ethnic federalist system. This system rewards division and punishes unity. Even a new leader within it would wield the same coercive tools. Abiy is merely the latest executor of a marginalizing structure. Only dismantling this system through disintegration can achieve true justice. Reforming a regime built on ethnic hierarchy is not just naive—it is impossible.

Disintegration Gives the Amhara Resistance a Breather

The Fano resistance, vilified by the regime, stands as the primary force protecting Amhara civilians. Yet Fano’s strength is limited by the state’s hostility and access to unlimited resource.

So long as Ethiopia endures:

• Fano will be  treated as an enemy.
• Its leaders will be targeted.
• Its supply lines cut.
• Its supporters labeled extremists.
• Amhara autonomy will remain unreachable.

If the state collapses, even temporarily, Fano can organize, govern, defend, and punish collaborators. It evolves beyond resistance into a proto-government, the nucleus of a liberated Amhara homeland.

Justice Begins at Home: Ending the Rule of Collaborators

Disintegration also creates space for the Amhara to hold their own collaborators accountable. Some of the worst harm comes from within: Amhara elites—federal ministers, generals, media figures, local officials—who have enabled Abiy’s regime in exchange for power and wealth.

As long as Ethiopia’s federal system remains intact:

• Collaborators enjoy immunity.
• They access state and federal resources.
• They are protected by hostile legal and security institutions.

Only with disintegration—when centralized federal control collapses—can local justice prevail. The Ethiopian state’s fall will:

• Strip collaborators of power and protection.
• Expose them to local accountability.
• Allow traditional justice to function freely.

Liberation requires dismantling internal betrayal as much as fighting external oppression.

Amhara Self-Sufficiency: Disintegration Does Not Mean Economic Isolation

Contrary to fears, the Amhara region is well-positioned to thrive independently: 

• It includes Wolkayit, Raya, Metekel, Shewa—historical lands rich in agriculture and strategic value. 

• Controls over 60% of Ethiopia’s water resources, including the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam.
• Hosts cultural heritage sites attracting tourism.
• Has industrious,  productive farmers.
• As a sovereign republic or self-governing entity, Amhara can stand economically, strategically, and politically on its own.

What Can Be Achieved After Disintegration?

Disintegration is not the end of diplomacy or order; it opens a door to a new political structure based on voluntary association, mutual respect, accountability, and consent. If Ethiopia has a future, it must be reborn—not through force or domination but through dialogue among equals. That future cannot be built atop the graves of Amhara civilians sacrificed for “national unity.” The old Ethiopia is dying. Clinging to it is denial, not patriotism. For the Amhara, dignity and peace may come not from preserving a failed union but from ending it—and planting the seeds of justice, inclusion, and sustainability. Disintegration need not mean permanent fragmentation. It can be a necessary reset—a rupture from a broken order from which new political possibilities arise. 

Amhara-led forces, securing their homeland, could shape a post-collapse landscape—helping form a confederation of self-governing states or establishing an independent Amhara Republic aligned with those respecting its sovereignty. Whatever the future holds, survival and security come first. Only then can dialogue, reconstruction, and reconciliation begin.

Conclusion

The Ethiopian state has become an instrument of repression—most visibly and tragically for the Amhara population. Under Abiy Ahmed’s rule, the machinery of the state has been turned against its own citizens. To insist that national unity must be preserved at all costs is to ignore the daily toll of blood, hunger, and humiliation paid by millions. The state, as it stands today, has lost legitimacy in the eyes of many. It no longer functions as a guarantor of peace or justice, but as a system of sustained violence and control. For those living under its boot, fearing its collapse is no different than fearing the end of their own chains.

Disintegration is not an easy path—nor is it without consequences. But for those facing existential threat, it may be the only path left that offers the possibility of dignity, autonomy, and lasting justice. 

The world must stop pretending that “national unity” is inherently virtuous when it is built on the suffering of a people. If the preservation of the Ethiopian state requires the ongoing destruction of its own citizens, then its fall is not a tragedy—it is a necessity.

Yes, the disintegration of Ethiopia carries risk. But to argue that these risks outweigh the current reality is to turn a blind eye to a slow-burning crisis—a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in real time. Freedom will not be delivered through hollow dialogues, cosmetic reforms, or delayed elections. It will come only when the machinery of repression—the centralized state that enables it—is dismantled. History shows us that nations built on injustice do not endure. The only question is whether they fall in time to save those still fighting for the right to exist. For the Amhara and for others suffering under this regime, survival is no longer tied to the unity of Ethiopia. It may well depend on its disintegration.

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

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.