Ethiopian federalism manifested unity among nations, nationalities
Gemechu Tussa
Federalization appears to be one of the most effective methods for conflict management and lists several ways of this method implementation. The first one is a decentralization of a state. The second mechanism is centralization on the federalism basis of a state which is about to collapse, that practically very often results in the emergence of numerous conflicts.
The third mechanism supposes integration of several conflicting territories into a united federal state. It is necessary to stress that a complicated system of international relations and the high level of democracy make political scientists and diplomats elaborate no less sophisticated and more and more asymmetric many-stage schemes of political and territorial structure, which surely should be based on the philosophy of federalism.
The regional asymmetry can be of several types and the most typical ones are: geographical, historical, ethnic, linguistic, religious, economic and sociopolitical. So with the regional asymmetry as a key characteristic, limiting the tendency of a state to take a federal form considerably extends the number of states potentially favorable to federalism, and correspondingly strengthens its peacemaking potential.
Many countries create their own federal system depending on their socioeconomic and political conditions. As many researchers in the field indicate, countries of similar culture, language and religion create homogeneous federation while those with different cultures, languages, religions and values propose multi-ethnic federalism under which the Ethiopian Ethnic Federalism is categorized.
Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism, is sought to ensure peace, harmony, equality, democracy, development and fair distribution of resources among nations, nationalities and peoples which were burning questions of people during the unitary and totalitarian systems.
These have been answered in the last two decades. It has respected democratic unity in diversity through entertaining the multi ethnicity and assured that diversity cannot be the cause of conflict. Conflict resolution, as refers to a process of transforming violent conflicts into more constructive relations between states, peoples and groups. However, researchers on conflict resolution have mentioned that the resolution of a conflict does not end with the end of violence.
Federalism as a theory refers to the ideology of shared-rule and self-rule, to the connection of territorial autonomy and joined decision-making in central institutions at the same time. Its values focus on the celebration of diversity, mutual respect, reciprocity and a general will to cooperate and live together. Federalism can offer a solution to conflicts, in which territoriality concentrated minority nations demand recognition, autonomy and representation in central institutions.
These conflicts usually evolve as a result of a history of neglect by the majority population and they can take many different forms, either as a struggle for independence, as was the case in Kosovo in the 1990s, as a fight for recognition and autonomy, or as an asymmetrical form of warfare through terrorist and guerrilla acts. What all of these conflicts have in common is the clash of different identities and indeed the clash of different nation-building projects.
Those who advocate multi-ethnic federalism, like the writer of this article, supplement many reasons which indicate federalism is a successful strategy in ethnic conflict resolutions. By enabling local and regional authorities to wield a degree of autonomous power, elites at the political center can promote confidence among local leaders. Federalism’s more attractiveness as a device of conflict controlling lies in its promise of making ethnically heterogeneous states more homogeneous through the creation of sub-units.
As used in Asnake Kefale, federalism could also be used to reduce ethnic pressures and battles by ‘proliferating the points of power so as to take the heat of fofa single focal point’, encouraging inter-ethnic electoral cooperation, promoting alignments based on interests other than ethnicity and reducing economic and social disparities between groups (Horowitz 1985: 598–599).
If one goes more than these generalized propositions, some of the advantages of federalism in handling a multi ethnic society could be inspected from a number of viewpoints, Asnake Kefale added. For instance, the creation of democratic self-government for minority ethnic groups through a federal arrangement is expected to increase their sense of security and positive identification with the multi-ethnic state and thereby reduce conflicts.
Considering the Ethiopian case from this point of view provides tremendous signals. Although the political power greedy opposition parties claim the ruling party’s unwillingness to share power, democracy and self- administration, so far, these remain empty promises , the Ethiopian Peoples have trusted the system and gave their will to its continuance as they have benefited from the democracy, peace and development. Unlike that of the unitary and totalitarian government system lovers of the Ethiopian opposition parties’ members and supporters, the ethnic federalism system is not the cause of conflict, rather a solution. After the institutionalization of ethnic federalism, many previously undermined minority ethnic groups have been given representations at both federal and regional levels. Now they can negotiate democratically equally without any violence to autonomy and self rule.
Depending on their constitutional federalism, the Ethiopian peoples have shared-rule and self-rule. In different words, they have the connection of self- government and joined decision-making in federal government through their representatives at the house of federation and parliament. The ethnic federalism of Ethiopia has made the celebration of diversity, mutual respect, reciprocity and a general will to cooperate and live together its value. It has been offering solutions to conflicts, in which territoriality concentrated minority nations demand recognition, autonomy and representation in central institutions.
To elaborate, the Oromia and Somali regions territorial boundary conflict was solved through peoples will in election which is one of the major outputs of the system. Similarly, the South Ethiopian Nation, Nationalities and Peoples territorial boundary conflict with Oromia is solved once and for all though it existed throughout the indefinite past. So, the ethnically diverse people of the country do not cherish the old sentiment any more as they are considering their democratic unity as strength and diversity the source of their strength.
Moreover, the federalism has contributed to the protection and development of minority cultures and languages, and has pacified inter-ethnic relationships by avoiding the discrimination used to exist in the previous systems that lead to ethnic conflict. As the ethnic federalism abandons the sources of ethnic conflict, there is no better alternative to ethnic conflict resolution than federalism-ethnic in the case of Ethiopia. At last, the Ethiopian Ethnic Federalism has become a device of conflict resolution and is promising the making of ethnically heterogeneous to more homogeneous through the creation of mutual respect, reciprocity and a general will to cooperate and live together.