May 2, 2026
Amanuel D.
There is a pattern forming, and it is no longer subtle.
The United States Embassy in Ethiopia is pushing for negotiations that bring Fano and OLA into the process. At the same time, the British Embassy Addis Ababa continues to reinforce engagement frameworks that keep TPLF central, extending the logic of the Pretoria Agreement.
This is being presented as inclusive dialogue.
But let’s be clear—this is not about solving Ethiopia’s crisis. This is about managing it.
That distinction matters.
What is being pushed is familiar. Bring armed actors to the table, reduce the level of violence, create a workable calm, and call it progress. This is standard practice for institutions like the U.S. Department of State and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. From their standpoint, it makes perfect sense. Ethiopia is too important to fail, too central to the region to destabilize. So the priority becomes containment.
But containment is not resolution.
Inside the country, people are starting to see the pattern for what it is. Every time the process is built around armed actors, the message is reinforced—power comes from force, not legitimacy. Violence becomes a negotiating tool. Meanwhile, the real issues—how the state is structured, who holds legitimate authority, how institutions function—are postponed again.
This is not peace. This is a cycle.
And the resentment growing across the country is not emotional—it is rational. People understand when a process is designed to hold things together temporarily rather than fix them properly.
Now, to be precise, the United States Embassy in Ethiopia and the British Embassy Addis Ababa are not freelancing. They are executing policy. The objective is straightforward: prevent escalation, avoid collapse, maintain regional balance. On that level, they are doing exactly what they are designed to do.
The problem is that Ethiopia’s crisis is deeper than what that framework is built to handle.
Negotiation is not the issue. Negotiation without purpose is.
If the end goal is just to reduce violence, then this approach will keep repeating itself. If the goal is to build a stable state, then the conversation has to move beyond who is sitting at the table and focus on what is being rebuilt. That means institutions, legitimacy, and a clear political direction—not temporary arrangements between armed actors.
For those seeking a real outcome, the approach has to change. Engagement cannot be passive. Entering these processes without defined objectives only locks in the same cycle. The question should not be whether to negotiate, but under what terms and toward what end.
Because if that is not defined, the trajectory is already clear: Conflict. Negotiation. Calm. Conflict again.
The current diplomatic push led by the United States Embassy in Ethiopia and the British Embassy Addis Ababa is built for stability. That serves external priorities.
But Ethiopia does not need to be managed.
It needs to be resolved.
Editor’s Note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com
__
Join our Telegram Channel : t.me/borkena
To Support Borkena : https://borkena.com/subscribe-borkena/ – one time support or small monthly options available. Inquire information about it : info@borkena.com
Like borkena on Facebook
To submit Press Release, send submission to info@borkena.com