May 19, 2026
The upcoming Ethiopian election, led by Abiy Ahmed’s Prosperity Party, should not be accepted as a democratic exercise. It must be rejected and boycotted by all citizens, political organizations, civic institutions, and international observers who believe in democracy, justice, peace, and the rule of law. An election is held amid war, repression, mass displacement, censorship, imprisonment, and fear cannot be free or fair. Instead, it becomes a tool to manufacture legitimacy for a government already accused by many critics of severe human rights violations and authoritarian rule.
The issue is not simply whether ballot boxes are placed in towns and cities. The deeper question is whether Ethiopians are free to organize, speak, criticize, campaign, vote, and decide their future without intimidation or violence. Today, millions live under military occupation, emergency restrictions, and political uncertainty. Entire regions are devastated by conflict. Communities have suffered massacres, displacement, famine, arbitrary arrests, and destruction of infrastructure. In these conditions, participating in a state-run election risk normalizing oppression.
The ruling establishment wants opposition groups and political actors to participate in this predetermined election because participation itself becomes a political trophy. Once opposition parties join the process, the government can present the election internationally as “inclusive,” regardless of the actual conditions on the ground. This manufactured legitimacy then becomes a shield against criticism and accountability. It allows the government to claim a democratic mandate even while continuing military campaigns and suppressing dissent.
Many Ethiopians remember the devastating war that erupted in November 2020 between the federal government and the Tigray regional authorities. That conflict eventually expanded far beyond Tigray and caused immense destruction across northern Ethiopia, including Wollo, Gondar, and North Shewa. Hundreds of thousands of civilians suffered displacement, starvation, killings, and economic collapse. Critics of the government argue that the administration repeatedly justified its actions by claiming it had constitutional authority and political legitimacy to conduct military operations in the name of preserving the state. After the controversial 2021 election, the government portrayed itself as having a renewed public mandate, despite many regions being unable to participate meaningfully due to insecurity and conflict.
Now, many fear history is repeating itself
Opponents of the current political trajectory believe that another heavily controlled election could provide the ruling government with a renewed justification for expanded military campaigns. They fear that the election’s outcome may be used to intensify the war in the Amhara region, reopen confrontation with Tigrayan forces, and deepen instability across the Horn of Africa. Some analysts and activists have also expressed concern over rising tensions involving Eritrea and broader regional geopolitical rivalries. Whether one agrees fully with these fears or not, it is undeniable that Ethiopia today stands at a dangerous crossroads where war rhetoric increasingly overshadows dialogue and reconciliation.
A genuine democratic election requires peace. It requires freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, judicial independence, and equal opportunity for political competition. None of these conditions meaningfully exists today across large parts of Ethiopia. Journalists continue to face intimidation and detention. Independent media outlets operate under enormous pressure. Opposition figures are frequently arrested or harassed. Internet shutdowns and communication restrictions have become recurring tools of political control. In several regions, ordinary citizens fear discussing politics openly.
In these conditions, the election is a ceremony with a foregone result
Ethiopians have seen similar politics before. In modern history, authoritarian governments used elections not for democratic transition, but to strengthen power. Elections become public relations campaigns to please foreign donors, silence criticism, and divide the opposition. The current situation risks repeating that pattern.
Boycott supporters argue that participating would send the wrong message domestically and internationally. It would suggest conditions are acceptable, though many people remain excluded from real political participation. Millions of displaced citizens cannot return home safely. Entire communities remain traumatized by war. Families mourn loved ones lost in ongoing conflicts. In many places, drones and artillery have replaced daily civilian life.
Is it possible to conduct a meaningful election under these circumstances?
Moreover, many Ethiopians question whether national institutions are sufficiently independent to oversee a credible election. Critics widely see electoral commissions, courts, security forces, and state media as heavily influenced and controlled by the executive. When these bodies are politicized, public trust collapses.
These concerns go beyond local politics. Critics say Ethiopia’s internal conflicts are now linked to foreign interests. Many believed and accuse the government of Abiy Ahmed aligning too closely with external factors, such as the United Arab Emirates, putting geopolitical goals ahead of Ethiopian welfare. Many are anxious that Ethiopia’s sovereignty and stability are being traded for military partnerships, economic gain, and regional power.
Whether these claims are accurate or speculative, they show a truth: many Ethiopians no longer trust the genocide machinery called Abiy Ahmed intentions. If a government loses public confidence, it cannot restore legitimacy through elections conducted under coercion.
Democracy is not just voting. It is a culture of accountability, transparency, tolerance, and equal citizenship. It requires governments that accept criticism and opposition parties that can compete without fear. An independent press must be able to investigate abuse. Courts must protect rights, not just political power. Most importantly, citizens must believe their voices count.
Ethiopia once inspired hope. When Abiy Ahmed came to power in 2018, many Ethiopians and international observers believed the country was entering a new democratic era. However, this writer was not among those hopeful voices who praised Abiy Ahmed; for expressing skepticism, he faced harsh criticism and condemnation from close friends and associates.
Political prisoners were released, exiled opposition groups returned home, and peace efforts with Eritrea earned Abiy international acclaim, including the Nobel Peace Prize. Optimism grew that Ethiopia might finally overcome decades of authoritarian rule and move toward reconciliation, democracy, and meaningful reform.
For a brief moment, the country appeared to stand at a historic crossroads. Citizens who had endured years of repression under previous governments saw signs of political opening and national healing. Independent media outlets began operating with greater freedom, public discussions became more vibrant, and many young Ethiopians believed they finally had a chance to participate in shaping their country’s future. International leaders celebrated Ethiopia as a model for democratic transition in Africa, while foreign investors and diplomats rushed to embrace the new administration.
Yet beneath the excitement, troubling signs were already emerging. Ethnic tensions intensified across several regions, and violence displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Critics argued that these ethnic hostilities were aggravated by political groups allied with Abiy Ahmed, including factions associated with the “Qeerroo” movement and other nationalist networks that played a significant role in the political transition. At the same time, political reforms often appeared selective and inconsistent. Critics warned that the government’s rhetoric of unity masked deeper structural problems that remained unresolved. Those who questioned the direction of the reforms were frequently dismissed as pessimists, enemies of change, or supporters of the old political order.
This writer remained cautious from the beginning. The rapid concentration of power around one individual, combined with growing political polarization, suggested that Ethiopia’s transition might not be as democratic as many hoped. While supporters celebrated Abiy Ahmed as a visionary reformer, skeptics feared that the institutions necessary to sustain genuine democracy—an independent judiciary, free media, strong opposition parties, and respect for constitutional order—were still weak or absent.
Over time, those fears appeared increasingly justified. Political arrests resumed, conflicts expanded in different parts of the country, and the devastating war in Tigray shattered the image of Ethiopia as a nation moving toward peace and reconciliation. Reports of human rights abuses, restrictions on journalists, and deepening divisions raised serious concerns both domestically and internationally.
Today, many Ethiopians look back on the optimism of 2018 with disappointment and sorrow. What once seemed like the beginning of democratic transformation has, for many, become a painful reminder that political change without strong institutions, accountability, and national consensus can quickly give way to instability and conflict.
However, that hope faded into polarization, conflict, ethnic violence, and militarization. The promise of democratic change gave way to war, emergency rule, and growing distrust among Ethiopian communities. Many now feel the country has moved farther from peace and democracy than it has in years.
Many opposition voices see a boycott not as an act against democracy, but as a defense of it. They say refusing to take part denies the government symbolic legitimacy. Boycotting a rigged process is a statement: democracy cannot exist without justice, peace, and freedom.
History offers many examples where authoritarian systems organized elections while suppressing genuine opposition. Such elections often produced overwhelming victories for ruling parties but failed to create long-term stability. In fact, manipulated electoral processes frequently deepen political crises by closing peaceful avenues for dissent and reform. When citizens lose faith in the ballot box, societies become vulnerable to deeper instability and conflict.
Ethiopia must not enter another war justified by elections
The nation urgently needs a different path — one centered on dialogue, transitional justice, ceasefires, constitutional reform, and national reconciliation. Rather than rushing into another divisive election, Ethiopia needs an inclusive political process that involves all major stakeholders, including opposition movements, civic organizations, religious institutions, elders, and regional representatives. Lasting peace cannot be imposed through military victory or electoral theater. It must emerge from honest negotiations that address the fears, grievances, and aspirations of all communities.
The suffering endured by ordinary Ethiopians over the past several years should serve as a warning. Mothers have buried children. Farmers have lost livelihoods. Students have seen their schools destroyed. Entire towns have been emptied by violence. Millions struggle daily with hunger, displacement, and insecurity. Under these conditions, political elites who speak the language of elections while war continue risk appearing detached from the population’s pain.
The international community also bears responsibility. Foreign governments and institutions should avoid endorsing elections that fail to meet minimum democratic standards. Stability built upon repression is temporary and dangerous. Genuine peace requires accountability and inclusive governance, not symbolic electoral ceremonies conducted under the shadow of war.
Ultimately, the future of Ethiopia will not be secured through propaganda, forced legitimacy, or military escalation. It will depend on whether Ethiopians can rebuild trust, create institutions that serve all citizens equally, and establish a political culture rooted in justice rather than domination.
For many critics of the current system, boycotting the upcoming election is therefore not simply a political tactic. It is a moral and historical statement. It is a refusal to legitimize war, repression, and predetermined outcomes. It is a demand that democracy mean more than ballots cast under fear and uncertainty.
An election held while citizens are silenced, regions burn, journalists are jailed, and opposition voices are marginalized cannot heal Ethiopia’s wounds. It risks deepening them. The Ethiopian people deserve more than symbolic participation in a controlled political process. They deserve genuine peace, accountable leadership, freedom of expression, and the opportunity to determine their future without coercion or violence.
Only then can an election truly belong to the people rather than to those already determined to rule.
Summary
In conclusion, the solution for Ethiopia lies not in another manipulated election, but in a fundamental, radical political transformation similar to the transition in South Africa. Ethiopia must confront the deep political, ethnic, and human rights crises created by successive regimes over the past three to four decades. Without honestly addressing the crimes, injustices, displacement, massacres, repression, and political exclusions committed under different governments, sustainable peace and national reconciliation will remain impossible.
The country urgently needs a comprehensive transitional process aimed at ending cycles of violence and establishing democratic and just governance. This requires the formation of an inclusive transitional government that represents all segments of Ethiopian society, alongside an independent transitional justice commission tasked with investigating past crimes, promoting accountability, compensating victims, and laying the foundation for reconciliation and institutional reform. Such a process should draw lessons from international experiences, particularly the Truth and Reconciliation framework implemented in post-apartheid South Africa, while adapting those principles to Ethiopia’s unique historical and political realities.
Attempting to impose elections under conditions of war, repression, fear, mass displacement, censorship, and political exclusion will only deepen the national crisis. Elections conducted without freedom of speech, freedom of the press, independent institutions, political participation, and security for citizens cannot produce legitimacy or peace. Instead, participation in such process’s risks prolonging the suffering of the Ethiopian people, intensifying conflict, and accelerating the destruction of the country’s social, political, and economic fabric.
Therefore, rather than interfering in or legitimizing flawed electoral processes organized under authoritarian conditions, the priority should be national dialogue, transitional justice, accountability, constitutional reform, and the creation of a democratic environment where all Ethiopians can freely determine their future through genuinely free and fair political participation.
The author can be reached at : mmusie2@gmail.com
Editor’s Note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com
__
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) @zborkenato get the latest Ethiopian News updates regularly.
To Support Borkena : https://borkena.com/subscribe-borkena/ – one time support or small monthly options available. Inquire information about it : info@borkena.com