The Gamification of Ethnicity in Ethiopia

The gamification of ethnicity through Ethiopia’s system of ethnic federalism has been a point of intense debate and criticism. This framework, officially implemented under the 1995 constitution, reorganizes the country along ethnic lines, with each region representing a predominant ethnic group. While intended to promote self-determination and cultural autonomy, this structure has arguably incentivized ethnic competition rather than unity, leading to fragmentation, identity-based tension, and potential instability.

1. Ethnic Federalism Encourages Zero-Sum Competition

The ethnic federalist system essentially incentivizes competition by aligning political power with ethnic identity. Under this arrangement, power and resources are distributed based on the demographic and political strength of ethnic groups. As a result, political discourse is often dominated by questions of which ethnic group has more control or access to state resources, creating a zero-sum game where ethnic groups feel they must “win” to protect their interests. This fosters an “us vs. them” mentality, where competition for political power can lead to conflict, even among groups that historically coexisted peacefully.

Instead of fostering a shared Ethiopian identity, ethnic federalism encourages people to prioritize ethnic identity over national unity. The system has positioned different ethnic groups as rivals competing for limited state resources, rather than as cooperative partners working towards shared national goals.

2. Erosion of Civic National Identity

Ethnic federalism has created a landscape where ethnic identity is prioritized above civic or national identity. The emphasis on ethnicity as the primary determinant of political representation and resource allocation has contributed to the fragmentation of Ethiopian society. Rather than building a unified civic identity, where individuals see themselves as Ethiopians first and foremost, the system entrenches ethnic divisions by institutionalizing them. 

As a result, people identify more closely with their ethnic group than with Ethiopia as a whole, not only undermining efforts to foster national unity and a collective sense of purpose but also foregoing an unshakeable national fact- none of the ethnicities concerned would even exist without the mutual-defence pact signed in blood. A pact that repelled several invasions that birthed the nation of Ethiopia since the 1700s.

This effect has been exacerbated by education and media policies that highlight ethnic identity, often at the expense of promoting a pan-Ethiopian ethos. Children growing up under this system may be more aware of ethnic differences than shared cultural or historical legacies that unite Ethiopians.

Map of the inhumane Ethnic Federalism system

4. Marginalization of Minorities Within Ethnic Regions

Ethnic federalism also marginalizes minority groups within ethnic regions. Ethiopia’s regions are organized based on predominant ethnic groups, leaving smaller ethnic groups within these regions vulnerable to exclusion. For example, the Somali Region is designated for the Somali ethnic group, but it includes non-Somali minorities who have limited say in the regional administration and fewer rights under the current federalist structure.

This form of marginalization can lead to tensions and complaints from minorities within each region, as they often feel alienated or even suppressed by the dominant ethnic group in the region. Therefore, while ethnic federalism theoretically promotes autonomy, it risks exacerbating tensions within regions by failing to protect the rights of intra-regional minorities.

5. Weakening of National Institutions and Governance

Ethnic federalism weakens national institutions by decentralizing authority based on ethnic identity rather than administrative efficiency. While decentralization can be beneficial, the ethnic basis for Ethiopia’s federalism makes it challenging to establish strong national institutions that can mediate and govern fairly across ethnic lines. National institutions risk being seen as biased towards certain ethnic groups, particularly if political factions representing these groups are in power.

This undermines trust in national governance, as regional administrations become more loyal to their ethnic constituencies than to national priorities. The result is a weakened central government that struggles to provide cohesive governance, security, and development. Furthermore, the ethnicized nature of local governments can make it difficult to implement uniform policies across the country, as each region prioritizes its own ethnic interests.

6. Institutionalizing Ethnic Boundaries Reinforces Historic Disputes

By institutionalizing ethnic territories, ethnic federalism enshrines dismissed cases and conflicts into the national political structure. Historical territorial claims are given new relevance, and unresolved issues are institutionalized through ethnic boundaries. The system formalizes differences rather than bridging them, making it harder to address historical grievances in a way that benefits all Ethiopians. For example, inter-ethnic disputes that might otherwise fade over time are given renewed significance, as control over territory and resources becomes a tangible and ongoing political issue. Ethnic federalism also legitimizes separatist sentiments by granting groups the right to self-determination, including secession, as stated in the Ethiopian constitution (Article 39) disregarding the blood pact signed by the peoples. 

The Ethiopian experiment with ethnic federalism, while intended to empower ethnic groups and address historical marginalization, has had extremely negative consequences. By structuring politics around ethnic identity, Ethiopia’s federal system has created a landscape where ethnic groups are incentivized to vie for power, resources, and territorial control. This has led to fragmentation, vulnerability to conflict, and lack of national dialogue or even narrative. Since the implementation of Ethiopia's ethnic federalism in 1995, there have been several incidents and political speeches that illustrate how the system has "gamified" ethnicity, encouraging competition and rivalry between different ethnic groups. Here are a few notable examples:

1. The Sidama Referendum (2019)

• In November 2019, Ethiopia held a referendum in the Sidama Zone (in the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region, SNNPR) to determine whether Sidama would become a standalone regional state. The Sidama referendum came after years of activism by the Sidama ethnic group, who sought greater autonomy under the constitutional right of "self-determination" enshrined in Article 39 of the Ethiopian Constitution.

• The push for a Sidama state was framed as an assertion of ethnic pride and autonomy. However, the referendum also fueled ethnic tensions, as it was accompanied by violence and displacement of ethnic minorities in the region. For example, non-Sidama communities, especially the Wolayta, were concerned about potential marginalization and reported intimidation in the lead-up to the referendum. The creation of the Sidama region created a precedent, encouraging other ethnic groups in SNNPR to demand their own states.

• In a 2019 speech, Sidama Youth leaders argued that "this is the time for Sidama to finally secure its rightful place," emphasizing the ethnic pride and need for autonomy. This rhetoric heightened the competitive nature of ethnic self-determination and fueled tensions with other ethnic groups who also sought recognition.

2. Ethnic Tensions in Oromia and Amhara Regions (Multiple Incidents, 2010s-2020s)

• Ethnic-based conflicts between the Oromo and Amhara communities have escalated in recent years. The competition for control of land, resources, and political power has intensified in these regions, often leading to violent clashes. For example, in the 2018-2020 period, there were numerous incidents of violence between Amhara and Oromo groups in regions like Wollega and Shewa, often rooted in disputed borders and territorial claims.

• In some cases, political leaders have stoked these tensions, reinforcing ethnic allegiances over national unity. Ethnic-based political parties, like the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and the Amhara National Movement (now known as the Amhara Popular Front), have used language emphasizing ethnic pride and grievances.

• Jawar Mohammed, a prominent Oromo activist and former member of the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC), made various statements in 2019 and 2020 that emphasized Oromo nationalism. For instance, in a 2019 interview, he highlighted the idea of Oromo autonomy and pride, stating, “Oromos must take control of their destiny.” These statements, combined with his influence, fueled ethnic competition and, at times, contributed to escalating tensions.

3. Ethnic-based Violence in Gedeo-Guji Zone (2018)

• In 2018, the Gedeo and Guji communities in southern Ethiopia were embroiled in violent clashes, leading to one of the largest instances of internal displacement in the world at the time. The Gedeo and Guji groups, both of which were part of the SNNPR, fought over land rights and control.

• The ethnic federalist system created a framework where regions are defined by ethnic identity, intensifying the sense of “ownership” that each ethnic group feels over specific territories. The violence resulted in thousands being displaced and heightened mistrust between ethnic groups in the area.

• Local Gedeo leaders called for government intervention to protect their people, portraying the conflict as an existential threat to their ethnic group. Statements from both Gedeo and Guji leaders focused on ethnic identity and the perceived need to "defend" their territories, reinforcing the competitive dynamic.

4. Oromo Protests and Calls for Greater Autonomy (2014-2018)

• The Oromo protests, which began around 2014 and intensified over the following years, were largely fueled by grievances over land rights, economic marginalization, and calls for autonomy within the Oromo region. Protestors demanded an end to the perceived domination of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which they viewed as biased against the Oromo population.

• These protests ultimately played a role in bringing Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, himself an Oromo, to power in 2018. The protests underscored the depth of ethnic-based discontent and the extent to which ethnic identity had become a tool for political mobilization.

• During these protests, many Oromo activists, including prominent leaders, used rhetoric that emphasized Oromo identity and pride. For example, activist Jawar Mohammed stated in 2018, “The Oromo struggle is not just for Oromos but for all Ethiopians,” yet he also underscored the need for Oromo self-determination. Such rhetoric reflects how ethnic grievances were leveraged to mobilize a significant political movement.

5. The Creation of Ethnic Political Parties under the Prosperity Party (2019)

• After dissolving the EPRDF coalition, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed formed the Prosperity Party in 2019 to create a unified national party that would ostensibly bridge ethnic divides. However, several regional ethnic-based parties declined to join the new Prosperity Party, viewing it as an attempt to weaken regional autonomy.

• For example, the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) refused to join and framed the Prosperity Party as an attempt to dilute ethnic rights. This eventually contributed to the Tigray conflict, as the TPLF argued that it was being marginalized and that its ethnic identity was under threat.

• In response to the formation of the Prosperity Party, TPLF officials stated that they would "never relinquish Tigray’s autonomy," underscoring the ethnic-based tensions within Ethiopian politics. The rhetoric and subsequent actions demonstrate the entrenched competitive dynamic fostered by ethnic federalism.

6. Amhara and Oromo Conflicts and the Rise of Fano Militias (2020s)

• In recent years, tensions between Amhara and Oromo groups have intensified, particularly with the rise of armed freedom figthers like the Amhara Fano. These groups often justify their actions as protecting their ethnic territories from encroachment by other groups or from central government intervention.

• The militarization of ethnic strife, with groups like Fano in the Amhara region, reflects how ethnic federalism has failed ethnic groups by pitching them against each other to compete for control over territories and resources, sometimes resorting to violence. This dynamic has made it difficult to establish a stable, unified national government, as each group perceives itself as a separate entity with its own interests.

• In 2021, Amhara regional leaders called on “all Amhara youth to defend their land,” emphasizing ethnic pride and the need to protect Amhara territories. Such calls highlight the gamification of ethnicity, as regions prepare to defend themselves as if they were separate, competing entities.

Such a vast array of speeches and incidents over the years clearly illustrate how the system has made ethnic identity a central aspect of political mobilization, often leading to violence and instability. The unprecedented Ethnicity-based rhetoric, the rise of ethnic militias, territorial claims, and the constant assertion of ethnic autonomy all underscore how ethnic federalism has turned Ethiopia’s political landscape into a dangerous “game” of ethnic competition that has already claimed the lives of millions through war and lower intensity conflicts, where each group strives to secure its interests, often at the expense of the nation. Those who don’t appreciate how this speaks to the eventual disintegration of Ethiopia via the ensuing genocides can only be the same people who believe in the existence of Ethnicities in Ethiopia without Ethiopia itself.