The Potemkin Party Formula: Propaganda, Deception, and Manufactured Narratives

Minister Yemane Gebremeskel (@hawelti) on X

PP Propaganda = Lies + Deception + Delusion + Disinformation + “Dazzling” Optics

By David Yeh

This formula aptly captures what many observers see as the defining trademark of Ethiopia’s Potemkin Party (PP). It is a political style characterized by carefully crafted narratives, selective presentation of facts, and dramatic optics designed to obscure uncomfortable realities. The recent article published by Al Jazeera on 11 June 2026 by Getachew Reda, Advisor for East African Affairs, and Redwan Hussein, Director General of the National Intelligence and Security Service, provides a vivid illustration of this tendency.

The article attempts to frame current tensions in the Horn of Africa through a narrative that places blame on external actors while overlooking the deeper causes of the region’s challenges. Yet any serious examination of recent history must begin with a simple acknowledgment: the devastating war that engulfed Ethiopia between November 2020 and November 2022 was fundamentally an Ethiopian conflict rooted in Ethiopia’s own internal political and ethnic contradictions.

The conflict did not originate in Eritrea. It emerged from long standing disputes over power, governance, and competing visions of the Ethiopian state. Eritrea became involved only after the conflict had already begun and after the Ethiopian Federal Government sought assistance. Moreover, Eritrea’s security concerns were far from hypothetical. Throughout the conflict, public statements by senior figures made it clear that Eritrea itself was viewed as part of the broader military and political agenda.

These facts are neither disputed nor hidden. They are part of the public record. Indeed, Getachew Reda himself was among the most prominent voices during the conflict. His numerous public statements, interviews, and social media posts from that period demonstrate a detailed understanding of the war’s origins and objectives. Any attempt today to portray Eritrea as the source of Ethiopia’s internal conflict requires a significant departure from the historical record.

Equally absent from current narratives is the reality that, at the conclusion of the war, senior Potemkin Party political and military leaders repeatedly expressed gratitude toward Eritrea. These statements were made publicly and without hesitation. At the time, federal officials openly acknowledged Eritrea’s role and contribution. Yet as political priorities have shifted, those expressions of appreciation have gradually disappeared from official discourse, replaced instead by accusations and suspicion.

This dramatic reversal raises important questions. Has history changed, or have political needs changed?

The answer becomes even clearer when examining the story now being told about the Pretoria peace negotiations. Getachew Reda and Redwan Hussein describe a situation in which negotiators from the opposing Ethiopian sides were allegedly so hostile toward one another that South African mediators had to prevent them from coming to blows. While such a story may provide compelling political theatre, it becomes difficult to reconcile with documented events.

Months before Pretoria, representatives of the opposing sides had already participated in discreet meetings in Djibouti and Seychelles under the sponsorship of international peace facilitators. Communication channels were already open. Discussions regarding reconciliation were already underway. Subsequent disclosures suggested that influential figures on both sides were exploring possibilities for future cooperation despite the ongoing conflict.

Reports that emerged during that period indicated that Eritrea was increasingly viewed by both parties as a common strategic concern. Observers noted a growing convergence of views among formerly opposing Ethiopian actors regarding regional security issues. Against this backdrop, the image of negotiators barely restrained from physical confrontation appears more theatrical than factual.

The Pretoria Agreement itself was fundamentally what it remains today: a peace agreement between Ethiopian parties designed to end an Ethiopian conflict. It was not an agreement concerning Eritrea, nor was it intended to address Eritrean domestic or foreign policy interests. Eritrea’s support for the agreement stemmed from its broader commitment to regional peace and stability. After years of devastating conflict in neighboring Ethiopia, any genuine opportunity for peace naturally served the interests of the entire region.

For this reason, claims that Eritrea seeks to undermine the Pretoria Agreement appear inconsistent with both Eritrea’s stated positions and its broader strategic interests. Stability in Ethiopia benefits the entire Horn of Africa. Instability benefits no one.

Viewed from this perspective, the current propaganda campaign promoted by elements within the Potemkin Party appears less concerned with historical accuracy than with political justification. Since late 2023, increasing emphasis has been placed on the concept of sovereign access to the sea, often accompanied by rhetoric that frames regional tensions in terms of self defense. Critics argue that such messaging seeks to repackage policies of confrontation and pressure as defensive necessities.

Yet changing the language used to describe a policy does not change the nature of the policy itself. Ambitions do not become defensive simply because they are presented as matters of national necessity.

The unfortunate reality is that many of the tensions currently affecting the Horn of Africa arise from choices made by political leaders themselves. The controversial memorandum of understanding with Somaliland, allegations regarding involvement in external conflicts, and repeated public statements concerning Assab and other Eritrean coastal territories have all contributed to growing uncertainty throughout the region. Particularly troubling have been declarations suggesting that such objectives could be achieved through negotiations if possible and force if necessary.

Words matter. When senior officials repeatedly discuss acquiring another country’s territory, neighboring states inevitably take notice. When such statements are accompanied by military rhetoric and persistent saber rattling, concerns about regional stability naturally increase.

The resulting tensions are not inevitable. They are political choices, and different choices could produce different outcomes.

Ultimately, the peoples of the Horn of Africa deserve better than propaganda, selective memory, and manufactured grievances. They deserve a future built on truth, mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and respect for sovereignty. The war that devastated Ethiopia emerged from Ethiopia’s own internal contradictions. The Pretoria Agreement was designed to resolve an Ethiopian conflict. Eritrea’s support for regional peace and stability remains consistent with its long standing position on sovereignty and non-interference.

The politics of propaganda thrives on selective memory, theatrical narratives, and the constant repetition of convenient half truths. Yet no amount of dazzling optics can permanently obscure historical realities. The war that devastated Ethiopia was born from Ethiopia’s own internal political contradictions, not from Eritrea. The Pretoria Agreement was conceived as a mechanism to end an Ethiopian conflict, and Eritrea’s support for regional peace has remained consistent with its long standing principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and peaceful coexistence.

The current attempts to recast history, manufacture external enemies, and portray aggressive ambitions as defensive necessities reveal more about the insecurities of those promoting such narratives than about the realities on the ground. Lasting peace in the Horn of Africa will not be achieved through propaganda campaigns, historical revisionism, or threats disguised as diplomacy. It will be achieved through mutual respect, adherence to international law, and a genuine commitment to regional cooperation.

In the end, facts matter. They remain unchanged regardless of how often they are ignored, distorted, or repackaged for political consumption. The peoples of the Horn of Africa deserve a future built on truth rather than fiction, partnership rather than confrontation, and stability rather than manufactured crises.

As the Tigrinya proverb wisely reminds us, ‘ጭጉራፍ’ሲ ሃሪማ ተእዊ’ those who wield the whip should not be surprised when the consequences of their own actions eventually return to confront them.

Here’s Minister Yemane G. Meskel’s statement posted on X from 6/12/2026

Potemkin Party’s signature trademark has been aptly described by the formula: PP Propaganda = Lies + Deception + Delusion + Disinformation + “Dazzling” Optics.

Indeed, the article (Al Jazeera, 11 June 2026) by mercurial Getachew Reda (PP’s Advisor for East African Affairs); and Redwan Hussein, (PP’s Director General for National Intelligence and Security Services) accentuates, in more graphic terms, this poignant reality.

Let us revert to the facts:

1. The tragic war that ravaged Ethiopia for two years from 4 November 2020 until 2 November 2022 with devastating consequences stemmed from, and has its roots in, Ethiopia’s internal and perennial ethnic cleavages. Eritrea was dragged into the imposed conflict at the behest of the Federal Government, and more importantly, due to the broad objectives of the war agenda that explicitly included and targeted Eritrea itself. This is on the public record. As one of the principal architects and fervent advocates of the war, Getachew Redda is intimately aware of all these facts; a matter that is easily validated by his numerous posts under his X handle in those tragic times.
2. At the end of the war, PP political and military leaders from the Prime Minister downwards, profusely expressed their profound gratitude to Eritrea. Again, this is on the public record.
3. Getachew Reda and Redwan Hussein weave a theatrical and fictitious story about the consternation of their South African Hosts in Pretoria as the “negotiating team from the two warring parties would get into a fist fight in the middle of the Conference Hall if not shepherded to steer clear of one another”.
4. Problem with this fictitious and romanticized story is the Parties had, in fact, held secret meetings in Djibouti and Seychelles months back under the sponsorship of US and EU “Peace Facilitators”. And as it was later divulged by Getachew Redda himself, the two Teams had contemplated prompt reconciliation, reportedly under the prodding of the PP Party, to join forces and wage a war of aggression against Eritrea that they both agreed was, in their contorted views, “the ultimate threat to them”. These meetings took place in August 2022; when the war was still raging ferociously. A Confidential EU Report issued in September 2022 further corroborated this “imminent trend”.
5. The Pretoria Agreement is essentially a peace-pact between warring sides in Ethiopia. It is, and remains, an Ethiopian affair; purely and exclusively. Eritrea’s stance and support to the Pretoria Agreement stems from its principled desire and commitment to promote regional peace and stability. In this sense, Eritrea has neither the political appetite nor the interest to scuttle an agreement between Ethiopian political forces if all the parties indeed implement the provisions of the agreement in good faith.
6. In this perspective, PP’s current propaganda and transparent disinformation campaigns, as epitomized by the article in question, are designed to re-package the unprovoked agenda of conflict and hostility that it has unleashed against Eritrea since December 2023 in the quest of what it calls “sovereign access to the sea”, in “self-defense” terms.
7. The unfortunate fact is: it is PP’s delusional agendas (illicit MOU with Somali-land; logistical and other military support to RSF under the bidding of other external forces; and provocative pronouncement, accompanied by unremitting saber-rattling, for acquiring Assab and other Eritrean coastal lands “through negotiations if possible and force if necessary” ) that are stoking unnecessary and avoidable tensions in the Horn. “ጭጉራፍ’ሲ ሃሪማ ተእዊ” ፥ ከም ዝበሃል።