Colonel Abiy Ahmed Ali the Failure

The Rise and Fall from Grace of Ethiopia’s Prime Minister

By David Yeh

In 2018, Ethiopia appeared to stand on the threshold of renewal. A nation long burdened by political repression, economic stagnation, and deep ethnic division seemed poised for transformation under a new leader who promised reform, reconciliation, and unity. The ascent of Abiy Ahmed was met with widespread optimism both domestically and internationally. His early decisions releasing political prisoners, welcoming exiled dissidents, liberalizing parts of the political space, and signaling openness suggested a dramatic break from the authoritarian tendencies of the past.

For many Ethiopians, particularly the youth, this moment felt historic. It was not merely a change in leadership; it was the promise of a new political culture. The rhetoric of unity, medemer (synergy), and national renewal resonated deeply in a country fractured along ethnic and political lines.

By 2019, this optimism reached its peak when Abiy stood in Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize for ending the long standing border conflict with Eritrea. At that moment, he was celebrated as a visionary reformer and peacemaker, a symbol of hope not only for Ethiopia but for the Horn of Africa. Yet, within just a few years, this carefully cultivated image unraveled. What emerged instead was a deeply polarizing figure whose leadership, critics argue, has steered Ethiopia toward conflict, economic instability, and authoritarian rule.

The Pivot to Power

Beneath the early reforms, structural tensions were already forming. Ethiopia’s political system, built on ethnic federalism, was inherently fragile. In an effort to consolidate authority, Abiy dissolved the ethnically based ruling coalition and replaced it with a centralized political entity the Prosperity Party. While presented as a step toward national unity, many perceived it as an attempt to dismantle Ethiopia’s federalist arrangement.

This move was not merely administrative, it was ideological. It signaled a shift from a decentralized, multiethnic political structure toward a more centralized vision of the Ethiopian state. For some, this was necessary for national cohesion; for others, it represented an existential threat to regional autonomy.

This tension became particularly acute in Tigray, where regional leaders resisted what they viewed as the erosion of constitutional order. When the Tigray People’s Liberation Front defied federal directives and held regional elections in 2020, the political crisis escalated into open conflict.

War and National Fragmentation

The federal government’s response to a military offensive framed as a limited law enforcement operation quickly spiraled into a full-scale war. What was initially portrayed as swift and decisive instead became a prolonged and devastating conflict lasting two years.

The human cost was staggering. Hundreds of thousands lost their lives, millions were displaced, and entire communities were devastated. Infrastructure collapsed, food systems were disrupted, and famine-like conditions emerged in several regions. The war left deep scars that continue to shape Ethiopia’s political and social landscape. But the Tigray war was not an isolated occurrence. It marked the beginning of a broader pattern of militarized responses to political challenges. Conflicts spread to other regions, particularly Amhara, Oromia, Afar, Benshangul, and Somali creating a cycle of violence that has proven difficult to contain.

Governance by Conflict

A central critique of Abiy Ahmed’s leadership is that it has become defined by conflict rather than resolution. Since 2018, Ethiopia has experienced multiple overlapping crises, many of which have escalated into armed confrontations.

The administration has prioritized the interests of specific political actors and power structures rather than the broader needs of society. This approach, they contend, has resulted in a governance model where conflict becomes a recurring and out of control.

Abiy Ahmed and his regime appear primarily concerned with maintaining power and advancing the interests of select groups rather than serving the collective good. The repeated resort to military solutions has reinforced this perception, creating an environment in which war is normalized as a political strategy. The consequences have been devastating. Millions have been displaced, economic systems disrupted, and social cohesion severely weakened. The country has endured what many describe as a series of man made catastrophes driven by political decisions.

Accountability and the Cost of War

The scale of destruction has raised urgent questions about accountability. Critics argue that those responsible for orchestrating and executing these conflicts including state authorities and their agents must be held accountable for the immense human and economic losses.

The deaths of vast numbers of civilians, the destruction of infrastructure, and the loss of billions of dollars in national wealth represent not only a humanitarian tragedy but also a profound failure of governance. At the same time, public resources have been heavily directed toward military expenditure. Funds that could have supported development, healthcare, education, and poverty alleviation have instead been consumed by warfare. This diversion of resources has left millions struggling to survive under increasingly difficult conditions.

Human Cost and Social Breakdown

The human consequences of these policies are visible across the country. Millions face displacement, food insecurity, and rising poverty. The cost of living has surged, placing basic necessities out of reach for many households.

Reports of unlawful killings, kidnappings, and arbitrary detentions have become widespread. Opposition figures, journalists, professionals, and activists are frequently targeted, with many held without formal charges for extended periods. This erosion of legal protections has undermined confidence in the justice system. Even the judiciary, critics argue, lacks independence, raising concerns about the rule of law. When courts cannot operate freely, the foundation of democratic governance begins to erode.

In urban areas such as Addis Ababa, large scale demolitions have displaced thousands. Entire neighborhoods have been cleared under redevelopment projects, leaving families homeless and vulnerable. Critics claim that such actions disproportionately affect specific ethnic groups, particularly Amhara communities.

Ethnic Tensions and Targeted Violence

Ethnic polarization has intensified significantly under Abiy’s leadership. Despite early promises of unity, the political environment has become increasingly fragmented and hostile.

Serious allegations have emerged regarding widespread abuses against ethnic Amhara populations, including claims of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and even genocide. These allegations are deeply contested but reflect the intensity of grievances and the depth of mistrust among communities.

Government security forces have been accused of abuses in multiple regions, further fueling tensions. Instead of fostering reconciliation, the current approach has, in many cases, deepened divisions.

Being identified with certain ethnic groups, critics argue, has become a source of vulnerability rather than identity, an indication of how far the country has drifted from its earlier aspirations of unity.

Escalation and Armed Resistance

In response to perceived threats and state actions, armed resistance movements have emerged. Among them, Fano groups in the Amhara region have taken on increasing prominence.

These groups argue that they were forced into armed struggle to defend their communities against existential threats. Their emergence reflects a broader breakdown of trust between the state and segments of the population. The government has responded with large scale military operations, framing them as efforts to restore order. However, critics argue that these actions have instead intensified conflict and prolonged instability.

Despite deploying significant military resources, including advanced weaponry such as drones, the government has struggled to assert full control over contested regions. This reality underscores the limits of force as a tool for achieving lasting political solutions.

Economic Crisis and Policy Failures

Parallel to political instability, Ethiopia’s economy has entered a period of severe disaster. Inflation has surged, currency values have declined, and unemployment has increased.

The government’s decision to devalue the national currency was intended to attract foreign investment and stabilize the economy. However, implementing such policies during active conflict was ill advised. Instead of boosting investment, the reforms coincided with rising living costs and declining confidence. Both domestic and international investors have been deterred by ongoing instability.

The construction sector illustrates these challenges clearly. Rising material costs and limited access to markets have caused projects to stall. Workers have lost jobs, incomes have declined, and economic activity has slowed. Large scale government spending on ambitious projects such as palace developments and urban corridors has further fueled criticism. Many see these initiatives as disconnected from the urgent needs of a population facing widespread hardship.

A Cycle of Crisis

A recurring theme in critiques of Abiy’s leadership is the idea that crises are not merely incidental but structural. The government, critics argue, sustains a cycle in which conflict leads to instability, instability justifies centralized control, and centralized control perpetuates further conflict. This cycle has had devastating consequences for ordinary Ethiopians. People are struggling to survive amid soaring living costs, disrupted livelihoods, and constant insecurity.

The persistence of conflict has also prevented meaningful economic recovery. Investment remains low, industries struggle to operate, and development projects are delayed or abandoned.

Authoritarian Drift

As these challenges have intensified, governance has increasingly relied on coercion. Civil liberties have been restricted, dissent suppressed, and opposition marginalized. Internet shutdowns, media restrictions, and surveillance have limited the flow of information. Journalists operate under constant pressure, and independent reporting has become increasingly difficult.

The political system has shifted away from pluralism toward a more centralized and personalized model of authority. Critics argue that loyalty to leadership has become more important than institutional accountability. This transformation represents a significant departure from the promises of 2018. The vision of a democratic, inclusive Ethiopia has given way to concerns about authoritarian consolidation.

Leadership and Responsibility

The contrast with alternative models of leadership highlights what many see as a missed opportunity. Former Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn’s voluntary resignation is often cited as an example of humility and accountability in governance.

Philosopher Hannah Arendt argued that true authority rests on legitimacy and public trust rather than coercion. Leadership, in this view, requires not only power but responsibility and the willingness to act in the interest of the collective good, even at personal cost. Stepping down, Arendt suggested, can be a profound act of political courage. It demonstrates an understanding that power is not an end in itself but a means to serve society.

A Nation at a Crossroads

Ethiopia’s current condition reflects the consequences of choices made at a critical historical moment. In 2018, the country stood at a crossroads between inclusive governance and centralized authority. The path taken has led to deepening crises political, economic, and social. Yet, the possibility of change remains.

Ethiopia requires a comprehensive and inclusive approach to address its challenges. Surface level reforms are insufficient; what is needed is structural transformation rooted in accountability, dialogue, and institutional strength.

A Call for Change

Calls for political transition have grown louder as conditions deteriorate. Advocates argue that the current system is unable to resolve the country’s crises and that a new framework is necessary. Such a transition, they suggest, should prioritize inclusivity, bringing together diverse political actors, civil society, and affected communities. Only through genuine dialogue can lasting solutions be achieved. Without such change, Ethiopia risks further fragmentation and prolonged instability.

Conclusion: Power as Responsibility

The story of Abiy Ahmed is one of dramatic rise and profound controversy. It is a narrative that begins with hope and ends, at least for now, in crisis. It illustrates the dangers of concentrating power without sufficient institutional safeguards. It shows how quickly reform can give way to repression, and how promises of unity can dissolve into division.

If Ethiopia is to move forward, it must redefine its approach to power. Leadership must be grounded in service, accountability, and respect for human dignity.

Political power, like fire, can illuminate or destroy. In Ethiopia’s case, the challenge is to ensure that it is contained, guided, and used for the benefit of all before the damage becomes irreversible.