Interview “Why is Tigray kept out of the loop?”
October 19, 2024
Next month will mark two years since the Pretoria agreement ended the northern war. The terms of the peace deal, however, remain largely unmet and the Tigray Regional State still finds itself in a mire of political and socio-economic problems as it struggles to claw its way out of a bleak post-war environment.
In recent weeks, a high-profile political feud within the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the interim administration set up as part of the peace agreement have added to the list of crises burdening the region.
Salsay Weyane Tigray, an opposition party, issued a statement last week criticizing the handling of some of these crises, including the disputed territories on the border with the Amhara Regional State.
Berhan Atsbeha, communications head for Salsay Weyane Tigray, spoke to Nardos Yoseph of The Reporter to clarify his party’s stance on the pressing issues facing the region. He shed some light on the inconsistent return of IDPs, the impacts of recent economic reforms on an economy struggling to recover from two years of conflict, the federal government’s role in regional politics, and the political schism threatening to undo what little progress has been made in Tigray. EXCERPTS:
The Reporter: Last week, your political party issued a press release concerning recent publications about the disputed areas between the Amhara and Tigray regional states (what you call Western Tigray), shared by official federal government communications sites. What pushed you to issue the statement? What is your assessment of how the federal government and the Tigray Interim Administration have handled matters surrounding the disputed regions?
Berhan Atsbeha: For the past four years, the people of Tigray, particularly those from Western Tigray, have been internally displaced while others have migrated to neighboring countries. The data we have on hand show that more than a million have become IDPs and more than 70,000 Tigrayans have fled to Sudan. Our people have gone through immense suffering and pain and are now dispersed all around the country and the region. They have been without their homes and going through endless struggle for the last four rainy seasons.
As a Tigrayan political party, we believe the Pretoria agreement is against the interests of our people. However, since it’s already done, we demand that the terms of the agreement are realized on the ground. This agreement was made two years ago, and its primary objectives, among others, include a permanent ceasefire, the return of all IDPs to their homes, and rehabilitation and reconstruction works.
Of these core issues, especially when it comes to making the arrangements of getting our people back to their homes, only some efforts to return those from southern Tigray and some villages in Tselemt have succeeded. The people who returned were not provided with anything that would enable them to revive their old livelihoods. When they left their homes fearing the repercussions of war, their residences and infrastructure were destroyed. They have returned without the reconstruction of either of these things.
To add salt to their wounds, there was no one to protect them when they returned despite all odds. Certainly, the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) has some activity in the area, but it could not protect their rights to safety and security. As a result, even those that have gone back are now returning to IDP shelters located in Shire Indaselassie and in northwestern Tigray. In our recent statement, we wanted to make it crystal clear that the terms of the Pretoria agreement have not been applied to the extent that they can reach the lives of the people they were designed to reach. Furthermore, to make matters more grave, the federal government is amplifying rhetoric and propaganda from the Amhara Regional State that claims the disputed regions as its own.
The agreement with the federal government states that it will ensure peace and security within the regional state and bring back all structures listed under the constitution. Our question emanates from this. If the deal made was to bring back the constitutional structure, there is no zone named Welkait, Tsegede, Setit, or Humera; there is only the Western Tigray Zone. That is what is stated in the constitution. Why is the federal communications office re-publicizing the issue of a non-existent zone? We believe that they are doing this as part of their intentions to prevent the people of Western Tigray from returning to their homes. We view this as if they are preparing for another invasion and proclaiming a war.
What is your party’s view on holding a referendum on these disputed areas?
We do not accept any move towards a referendum, and I dare say it is even unthinkable. However, if they still want to conduct it anyway, some preconditions must be fulfilled. The first is that all IDPs must return to their homes. Following that, the Amhara regional administration established following the war and currently settled in the region should be dismantled and moved out of the Zone. A referendum can only take place after the federal government institutes a stable and safe environment for our people, and with the realization of rehabilitation and reconstruction works. Any referendum conducted without meeting these preconditions is a move to guarantee the Amhara Regional State’s interests in these disputed areas.
Reports from the Tigray Disaster and Risk Management Commission show that the number of IDPs within the region is growing by the day, up to 1.2 million currently. The regional office has also admitted that it provides no support, financial or otherwise, to those who have returned to their homes willingly. How do you evaluate this?
Our data match the regional office’s figures. For instance, the IDP center in Shire Indaselassie is filled with those who had gone back to Tselemt but have been forced to return. These people aren’t the only ones going back to IDP centers. People who had gone to their homes are once again fleeing as a result of safety and security issues, robberies, hate crimes, and violence committed by unidentified armed groups, including abductions. People are once again flooding into the centers in fear of all these things. We have repeatedly pleaded with the Tigray interim administration to guarantee people’s right to safety. The entire notion of government is essentially based on the need for security. But, be it the federal government or the interim administration, they have been unable to provide even that. Instead, they are busy with politics. If ensuring peace is a duty assigned to ENDF, it must do that. If it cannot do it, it must leave these disputed regions.
You mentioned your party believes that the Pretoria agreement is against the interests of the people of Tigray. What led you to draw this conclusion?
The agreement was supposed to reinstate constitutional governance, which did not happen. That agreement is against the people because it creates a transitional administration that does not hold any representation either in the federal House of Peoples’ Representatives or in the House of Federation. Where is the constitutional order it is supposed to bring back? Two years have elapsed since it was signed and the people of Tigray have no say in what is happening in the country. We have no representation. We have no shares in any federal institutions. Getting a budget subsidy is our right; a right the federal government is weaponizing as a tool to manipulate our regional state according to its own interests. There are no rehabilitation or reconstruction works on the ground. Investment opportunities remain hanging in the air.
Amidst this chaos, all proclamations ratified by Parliament are adopted by the interim administration. The administration is passing laws that are not applicable in the current socio-economic conditions. Lacking representation within the federal structure is impacting the people’s lives in so many ways. I can mention the recent economic reform as the perfect example. This reform does not consider our post-war environment still struggling to get back on its feet. Decisions over the lives of our people are made by others. The Pretoria agreement has given away the people’s right to self determination.
Another point is that it has failed to push Eritrean forces out of Tigray. They are still here. It has not pushed out the Amhara forces in the western, south western and southern parts of the regional state, which have now created a whole administrative structure and taken over our territory.
The only benefit of that agreement is the cessation of hostilities. Aside from that it has borne no fruit.
Can you expand on the impacts of the recent economic reforms in Tigray?
Almost all people in the country, with the exception of Tigray, had the opportunity to review the proposed reforms beforehand and hold discussions to help include their say in them. The region is in a post-war environment. Its economy has been damaged. The money deposited in banks prior to the war has been devalued and inflation has increased exponentially. Investors who took on huge loans are at risk as they have no way to repay them. The introduction of economic reforms in this regional state must be preceded by rehabilitation and reconstruction. Reforms should only be enacted after the region gets back to pre-war economic status.
What is your take on the rift in the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the fate of the interim administration?
The power make-up of the interim administration was erroneous from the get go. We had informed the committee established to study, propose and facilitate ways towards the formation of an interim regional administration to be more inclusive and not hand over all the power to TPLF. We even provided them with a proposal on what kind of structure the administration should have. They declined our offer, and we abstained from any further involvement.
We asked for the involvement of all Tigrayan political parties, civil societies and intellectuals. The structure we laid out for them was to form some kind of a council similar to the regional parliament which could hold the president responsible, assess individual bureaus under it, assign budgets and such. We warned that any form of administration that deviates from this would be authoritative, where the president could just iterate whatever it sees fit. They refused, and what Tigray got was a president assigned by the federal government.
We wanted the aforementioned structure because we feared that such a rift would take place and birth even more complications and challenges for the regional state. Their power struggle has caused the suspension of consistently managed rehabilitation and reconstruction works.
In what ways does the TPLF split impact the interim administration?
Both the TPLF group within the interim administration and the other outside of it are squabbling over power, not over who can actually bring any sort of relevant change for the people. Their public bickering never includes issues of policies or projects. The talk of the split and the back door politics has burdened the administration.
When do you think we will next see region-wide elections?
Our party has not called for elections thus far. It is difficult to dream of an election while people are struggling to survive and economic challenges have them by the scruff of their necks. We do not believe that elections will be conducted any time soon as there are no arrangements underway. Yes, we want a strong regional government but we estimate that elections will be conducted alongside the nationwide elections scheduled to take place two years from now. We can only hope the interim administration will make all the necessary preparations.
Political analysts and commentators often insinuate that the federal government has a hand in both the interim administration and in Tigray’s politics, maneuvering them from the shadows. Do you agree?
Indeed, the federal government is doing just that. There is much evidence to show that. It is not forcing invading forces out from the territories, and that is one of its cards it leaves intentionally undone so it can pressure Tigray whenever it sees fit. The federal government still retains a say in the interim administration through the way it is structured. We even believe that the ongoing spat between the two wings of the TPLF was designed by the federal government. The structure of the interim administration was ratified by the nod of the federal government, which, as I said, is a structure that falls short in providing the region with representation in either of the houses of Parliament. We are excluded from countrywide initiatives such as the work under the Reconciliation Commission. The Commission is holding public discussions all over the country; why is Tigray kept out of the loop? This is also one way to suppress the voice of the people.
There is no ground transportation, roads to the Amhara Regional State are still closed and those to the Afar Regional State are not consistently open. Air transport is unaffordable for most. They can remedy these issues but they’ve kept it dragging. This is why we firmly assert that whether it is directly or indirectly, the federal government is deciding Tigray’s providence from behind, imposing many challenges on people’s livelihoods.
Do you support disarming the Tigray Defense Forces (TDF)? And what’s your stance regarding the rehabilitation of former combatants?
The Pretoria agreement clearly states that the disarmament of combatants must be done in parallel with other matters. TDF should only be demilitarized after all invading forces leave our territory and when safety and security conditions are stable and return back to normalcy. The informal information we gather indicates that there are centers of rehabilitation being established and that the force is going to lay down its arms. If that is true, we strongly oppose the move. TDF must stay until the peace in the regional state is stabilized. As a party, we do not accept the rushed and hushed move to disarm the force, while most of the questions that birthed it remain unanswered.