Ethiopia’s AU Chairmanship: A Stark Example of Institutional Incompetence and Irresponsibility

By Sirak Kifle

There are decisions so glaringly indefensible that they do not merely reflect poor judgment, they expose the collapse of the very institutions entrusted with responsibility. The African Union’s decision to place Ethiopia at the helm of its Peace and Security Council is one such decision. It is not a miscalculation. It is an indictment.

At a moment when Ethiopia is engulfed in internal conflict, struggling to maintain basic security across vast portions of its territory, and failing to protect its own citizens, the African Union has chosen not caution, not competence, but contradiction. It has entrusted continental peace to a state that cannot secure its own borders; it has elevated symbolism over substance, optics over reality, and political convenience over institutional integrity. This is not simply ironic, it is dangerous.

Because the Peace and Security Council is not ceremonial. It is the African Union’s most critical organ, tasked with preventing conflict, managing crises, and safeguarding stability across a continent that has paid dearly for institutional failure. Leadership of such a body demands credibility, capacity, and demonstrated control over one’s own affairs. Yet in this case, the AU has abandoned those standards entirely.

What this decision reveals is not Ethiopia’s strength, but the African Union’s weakness. It exposes an organization increasingly driven by political favoritism, internal bargaining, and performative consensus rather than measurable competence or accountability. It sends a message that governance failures, internal instability, and human suffering are not disqualifications—but inconveniences to be overlooked.

In doing so, the African Union has not merely made a poor choice. It has compromised its own mission.

The African Union, an organization ostensibly tasked with promoting peace, security, and stability across Africa, has once again demonstrated an alarming disregard for reality by entrusting leadership of its most critical security organ to a country consumed by internal chaos, violence, and instability. This decision exposes not only the corruption and mismanagement within the AU but also highlights Ethiopia’s failure to address its own profound internal crises before taking on a role of continental responsibility.

Ethiopia is a nation in turmoil. The border with Sudan remains engulfed in armed conflict, unrest, and criminal activity, where ongoing clashes have caused devastating loss of life and displacement. The Afar Region similarly suffers from armed confrontations and civil disorder, leaving civilians vulnerable and local authorities struggling to maintain even minimal security. In the Amhara Region, armed conflict and unrest continue unabated, disrupting communities, destroying infrastructure, and fueling cycles of fear and instability. Meanwhile, Gambella and Benishangul Gumuz face an alarming combination of criminality, kidnapping, armed conflict, and unrest, making these regions particularly dangerous and virtually ungovernable.

Other parts of the country are no safer. Specific areas in Oromia, Sidama, Central, South, and Southwest Ethiopia are marked by armed conflict, ethnically motivated violence, and widespread civil unrest. These regions face a volatile mix of local disputes and politically charged conflicts that regularly escalate into deadly confrontations. The government’s response has been largely reactive, relying on militarized enforcement and temporary crackdowns rather than long-term solutions or reconciliation efforts. Civilians are left caught in the crossfire, unable to access basic services, and constantly at risk of harm.

The insecurity is not confined to internal regions. Ethiopia’s borders are hotbeds of instability. Along the border with Somalia, terrorism, kidnapping, landmines, and armed conflict create extreme hazards for anyone attempting to traverse or inhabit these areas. The borders with Sudan and South Sudan are plagued by similar risks, including violent crime, kidnapping, sporadic armed clashes, and ongoing unrest, often exacerbated by cross-border tensions and the movement of armed groups. Even the border with Kenya presents a high-risk environment, marked by terrorism, armed conflict, and political instability, with militant organizations like Al-Shabaab active in the region. These conditions collectively render large portions of the country effectively ungovernable and highly dangerous for both citizens and outsiders.

Despite these glaring realities, the African Union has irresponsibly elevated Ethiopia to a position of continental leadership. The AU’s decision reflects systemic failures within the organization, which has long been plagued by corruption, nepotism, and political favoritism. Leadership appointments within the AU are often determined not by competence or the ability to achieve tangible results but by political maneuvering and the desire to appease certain member states. In this case, the AU has prioritized appearances over practicality, symbolism over substance, and political expedience over accountability. By giving Ethiopia the chairmanship of the Peace and Security Council while the country is still embroiled in multiple conflicts, the AU undermines its own mission, sending a dangerous signal that internal instability is irrelevant when it comes to continental governance.

The consequences of this decision are profound. Ethiopia’s internal conflicts and security failures are well documented and affect millions of people. Civilians face constant threats from armed actors, kidnappers, and criminal networks, and essential services are disrupted by ongoing violence. Communications infrastructure is unreliable, further complicating emergency response and leaving communities isolated during crises. Roadways are often impassable or unsafe due to armed groups, and the risk of landmines in border regions adds another layer of danger. These conditions reveal the Ethiopian government’s inability to exercise effective control over its territory and provide basic security for its population.

Entrusting Ethiopia with the leadership of Africa’s primary peace and security organ while it grapples with such instability is not merely ironic; it is reckless. The AU’s decision demonstrates a lack of foresight and an alarming disregard for the principle that competence should precede authority. By placing a country in charge of guiding peace efforts across the continent while it cannot maintain stability within its own borders, the AU exposes both Ethiopia and the organization itself to ridicule, criticism, and potential failure. The chairmanship should be reserved for a state that demonstrates the capacity to govern effectively, manage conflict responsibly, and provide a model for other criteria that Ethiopia currently fails to meet.

Ethiopia’s own responsibility cannot be ignored. The government has repeatedly failed to resolve the root causes of unrest, including ethnic tensions, political exclusion, and systemic governance failures. Instead of implementing comprehensive reforms, addressing grievances, and investing in long-term stability, authorities have relied on militarized responses, crackdowns, and temporary security measures that fail to produce lasting solutions. Humanitarian crises, widespread displacement, and civilian suffering persist across the country, yet the government continues to prioritize political symbolism over practical governance. Assuming the AU chairmanship under these circumstances reflects a fundamental misalignment of priorities and a dangerous overestimation of Ethiopia’s capacity to exercise effective leadership.

The African Union itself bears equal responsibility. Its chronic corruption, mismanagement, and lack of accountability have allowed politically expedient decisions to override practical competence. The AU’s leadership has consistently failed to enforce standards, requiring little more than symbolic gestures from member states while ignoring real-world performance and governance. By elevating Ethiopia at this time, the AU is signaling that internal instability, human suffering, and insecurity are secondary to political optics, further eroding the organization’s credibility. Such decisions undermine public confidence, weaken the AU’s authority, and risk turning it into a forum for political theater rather than an effective instrument of continental peace and security.

The irony of Ethiopia’s position is stark. The nation is expected to lead Africa on issues of peace and security while simultaneously struggling to provide safety and stability for its own citizens. The contrast is a sobering reminder of the disconnect between political ambition and practical governance, between the appearance of authority and its actual exercise. Entrusting Ethiopia with this responsibility not only jeopardizes the AU’s credibility but also risks further destabilizing the continent, as member states and citizens alike may question the organization’s capacity to make sound, responsible decisions.

In conclusion, Ethiopia’s assumption of the African Union’s Peace and Security Council chairmanship represents an extraordinary lapse of judgment, both on the part of the AU and the Ethiopian government itself. The country’s ongoing internal conflicts, widespread violence, criminality, and border insecurity render it unfit to lead the body tasked with overseeing Africa’s peace and stability. The AU’s decision exposes the organization’s corruption, incompetence, and disregard for practical responsibility, while Ethiopia’s failure to address its internal crises demonstrates a troubling misalignment of priorities and leadership capability. Until Ethiopia stabilizes its internal regions including the Tigray Region and Eritrea border, the Afar and Amhara Regions, Gambella and Benishangul Gumuz, specific areas of Oromia, Sidama, Central, South, and Southwest Ethiopia, and its borders with Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, and Kenya, it should not hold a position that demands the highest standards of competence and accountability. The current arrangement is not only illogical; it is dangerous, eroding both the credibility of the African Union and Ethiopia while highlighting the profound need for real governance, reform, and stability before leadership positions are granted.