A book chapter by Beza Dessalegn entitled “Federalism, Insecurity, and the Pursuit of an Own Ethnic Region in Southern Ethiopia” in the book Ethiopia’s Insecurity Complex: Protest, Transition and War, published in 2025 examines the under researched direct relationship between federalism and security in Ethiopia. The chapter analyses the pre- and post-2018 quest for regional statehood and the securitized responses of the federal and regional governments to these demands. It situates its analysis within the framework of “emerging anarchy,” exploring the relationship between Ethiopia’s federal structure and security in the context of rising demands for autonomy. Given the book chapter addresses the historical-comparative political development of the pre-and post-2018 regional statehood claims and state response, and the national dialogue process that might rethink the whole state structure arrangement, the review would contribute to an ongoing discussion on federal structure, social cohesions and state building.
Using the former Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ (SNNP) Region as a case study, the chapter argues that both the creation and disintegration of the region were driven by political competition among dominant ethnic groups, as well as the pursuit of identity, self-determination, and regional autonomy by constituent ethnic communities. The main argument of the chapter is that the federal system, which was supposed to advocate for ensuring self-rule, has been challenged by the rising demands for self-rule. This is further challenged by the inconsistent granting of regional status and the securitized responses of the federal and regional governments. These demands in turn came to be perceived as threats to regime security and the continuity of the federation as a whole. The government’s perception of such demands as threats to regime security and national unity was evident both before and after the 2018 political development. This perception is not an isolated scene rather it is grounded in the broken promises, historical grievances, and the longstanding historical relationship among groups and with the state. The book chapter also raise the fact that these demands are rooted in the historical relationship and power dynamics, manifesting as both horizontal and vertical insecurity.
The chapter further claims the lack of institutional mechanisms that can sufficiently tackle differences without it leading to violence. However, the formation of the regional state appears to have excluded minorities within regions from political rights perpetuating erosion of societal cohesion. On the other hand, the chapter frames the role played by political elites in weaponising ethnicity to materialize displacements, without any accountability, within the layers of security threats and insecurity patterns.
However, the book chapter gave less emphasis to the discussion of institutional responses especially in their lack of capacity, tokenistic approach and domino effect. The institutional response inadequacy can be attested by the Administrative Boundaries and Identity Issues Commission’s conclusion that the majority of residents preferred the continuity of the SNNP region despite the widespread violence, and reports of threats and calls for the expulsion of the region’s ethnic minorities from their regions. This can also be taken as a lesson for institutions/commission with defect in their nature or performance.
Finally, the chapter is being reviewed amid the convening of the National Dialogue, which has proposed shifting the authorship of the FDRE constitution to “the people of multinational Ethiopia” and granting the federal government a broader mandate to intervene in regions experiencing conflicts presumed to constitute emergencies. This context adds another dimension to the chapter’s analysis: a legalized unsolicited federal intervention could produce unintended consequences for the balance between regional autonomy and state consolidation particularly if what constitutes “internal conflict of an emergency nature” is not clearly predefined. This is especially relevant to the chapter’s conclusion on the need for a proactive response, inclusive governance, and a human-centered approach.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this Insight reflect the perspectives of the contributor and do not necessarily represent the official position of Institute for Peace and Security Studies.
 |
Contributed by Haymanot Kassahun Programme Officer |