Two Ethiopian political figures from opposite sides of their spectrum, both warning about armed opposition coalitions, and both citing us as the cautionary tale.
Efrem Madebo, a politician active since 1990 and formerly of Ginbot 7, said this: “I remember the time Somalia became a state without government. The damage that came from it, they still haven’t recovered from it to this day. Somalis are small in number, roughly the size of Addis Ababa’s population, one religion, one language. We are hundreds of different ethnic groups. If statelessness comes, our refugees will occupy everywhere. What is the plan of the TPLF, FANA, and OLA alliance if they throw Abiy out of power? Let them clarify now. Rather than them fighting afterward and the country being destroyed, Abiy staying is better.”
Jawhar Mohamed, from the other side, said: “Abiy Ahmed is a problem for Ethiopia, but how do you remove him? Someone causing damage inside a house, if that house is Ethiopia, the solution cannot be to demolish the house on top of him. You have to remove him from within. I do not believe armed groups can bring democracy through their coalition.”
Two men who agree on nothing else, landing in the same place.
And here’s what got me. What is the plan after you remove him is exactly the question nobody asked in 1990.
USC, SNM, SSDF and the rest were united by one thing, removing the regime. Ask what came next and there was no answer, or several competing ones that became thirty-five years of war. The alliance existed to break something, not build something. Once it broke, everything they’d armed themselves with turned inward.
What strikes me most is Madebo’s humility. He looks at us and sees a country far more homogeneous than his own, one language, one faith, small population, and thinks if that couldn’t hold, what chance does Ethiopia have.
And let me be clear, Ethiopia is still our adversary. That hasn’t changed. But their collapse wouldn’t help us either. A hundred and thirty million people breaking apart next door means armed groups, weapons flooding across the border, and refugee flows we simply cannot handle. We’re still rebuilding from our own collapse. We’re in no position to absorb theirs.
The lesson isn’t that regimes should never be removed. It’s that removing is the easy part, and if you can’t answer what replaces it before you start, you’re
not planning a transition, you’re planning a collapse.
Thirty-five years later we’re still living in the answer we never had.