More than two years after a cessation of hostilities ended a brutal civil war, Ethiopia’s Tigray region should be well along the road to recovery. Instead, its ruling Tigray People’s Liberation Front Party (TPLF) is embroiled in a bitter internal spat that has paralysed politics and sparked fears of fresh conflict.
The dispute pits a faction led by TPLF chairman and wartime leader Debretsion Gebremichael against another helmed by TPLF deputy chairman, Getachew Reda, who signed the November 2022 cessation of hostilities in Pretoria and now leads the interim regional administration created by the deal.
Debretsion’s side accuses Getachew’s interim administration of selling out Tigray’s interests and mishandling the implementation of the peace deal, which was meant to see the return of displaced people, the full withdrawal of Eritrean and Amhara forces from Tigray’s territory, and fresh elections. None of these things have happened.
Getachew and his allies, on the other hand, portray themselves as democratisers – on a mission to open up Tigray’s politics and implement the ceasefire deal – and accuse Debretsion’s group of thwarting them at every turn.
“Getachew aspires to better democracy, whereas Debretsion represents the status quo,” said Woldeselassie Woldemichael, one of Getachew’s senior advisors. “Getachew is consistently on the side of the Pretoria agreement. Debretsion wants to suspend Pretoria and use it as a political tool by placing obstacles to implementation and then saying it’s Getachew’s fault.”
Debretsion’s faction, which controls the party apparatus, firmly denies this.
To outsiders, the dispute can appear esoteric, featuring a soup of acronyms and internal party procedures. But its consequences are far-reaching. Nearly one million people in Tigray remain stuck in improvised displacement camps, sustained by ever-diminishing trickles of aid. Although Tigray is peaceful, malnutrition rates are at emergency levels, hundreds of thousands of children are out of school, and much of its health system still lies in tatters.
“The schism has crippled the whole bureaucracy, and that’s impacting aid delivery, health, education, infrastructure, and the overall well-being of the Tigray society,” said Abel Abate, a researcher at Chatham House.
When a group of senior military commanders denounced the interim administration and called for its overhaul in late January, Getachew called it a coup d'état. The sharp escalation prompted panic among Tigray’s population.
Last month, Getachew warned, “we are heading towards a cliff edge” and conflict could erupt “any minute”. A broad range of mediators – from Tigray’s clergy to Western diplomats – has attempted to heal the rift, without success, as competition to control Tigray’s gold mines and state-owned enterprises heats up.
“The genesis of the split”
The Pretoria agreement sits at the heart of the dispute. At his heavily guarded compound in Mekelle, Tigray’s capital, Debretsion describes it as “the genesis of the split”.
Getachew’s negotiating team was dispatched to Pretoria as fierce battles raged in Tigray with one assignment: “To just stop the fighting – no more, no less”, Debretsion told The New Humanitarian.
Instead, under pressure from the federal government, the team agreed to a much broader deal that dissolved Tigray’s regional government, outlined an unrealistically fast timeline for Tigray’s disarmament, and described parts of Tigray occupied by Amhara forces as “contested territories”.
“The whole terms were dictated by the federal government. We told our team, ‘You are simply accepting orders, not negotiating,’” said Debretsion.
Shortly after the deal was signed, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed said he got “100%” of what he wanted, while other members of the TPLF have said that Tigray was losing the war and had no option other than to accept subservient terms.
Although his opponents accuse him of seeking to undermine the Pretoria deal, which he describes as “good and bad”, Debretsion insisted he is committed to its implementation: “Once you have an agreement, you execute the spirit and words of the agreement. We should still honour it.”
Whether or not Tigray’s negotiators could have secured a better deal, the main sticking point now driving the TPLF apart is the failure to return home nearly one million displaced people – a key part of the Pretoria agreement.
Most of these displaced people come from western Tigray, a fertile area known for its gold and sesame production that was seized by forces from the neighbouring Amhara region, who have long claimed it as their own.
The Pretoria agreement did not deal directly with the fate of western Tigray and other areas but committed the parties to “resolving issues of contested areas in accordance with the Constitution”. Abiy has said this means a referendum. But the TPLF insists the displaced people must return before any vote.
The TPLF also insists, in line with the peace deal, that Amhara forces – and Eritrean soldiers in border areas – must withdraw before Tigray’s fighting force disarms, and on the creation of a safe environment for IDP returns. The same applies for elections, another key Pretoria clause, the TPLF says.
Debretsion’s TPLF faction blames Getachew’s interim administration for failing to pressure the federal government into ordering the withdrawal of Amhara forces. “If PM [Abiy] wanted to, he could place a call and it's done,” said Abraham Tekeste, a Debretsion ally who is on the TPLF executive committee.
Yet the continued presence of Amhara forces in western Tigray probably benefits Abiy, who is battling another insurgency in the Amhara region. This conflict would be inflamed further if he returned the territory to Tigray. The failure to send the displaced people home also keeps Tigray divided and thus easier to control, some analysts suggest.