SUPPORT ETHIOPIA INSIGHT .wpedon-container .wpedon-select, .wpedon-container .wpedon-input { width: 200px; min-width: 200px; max-width: 200px; } Federal complicity in irredentism threatens the nation’s fragile foundationIn November 2020, war engulfed Ethiopia’s northern Tigray region, pitting the federal government and its allies against Tigray Forces. Amid the nationwide war, one territory—Western Tigray—emerged as the epicenter of conquest, occupation, and humanitarian catastrophe.From the earliest days of the war, Amhara regional forces, backed by the Ethiopian military, seized the area and imposed a campaign of ethnic cleansing marked by mass expulsions, systematic sexual violence, and forced demographic reordering.These crimes are not matters of dispute. They have been rigorously documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch in a landmark joint investigation, and they form part of the official record of the U.S. Department of State.The Pretoria Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA), signed on 2 November 2022, promised a different future. It pledged to end hostilities, restore Ethiopia’s constitutional order, and enable the safe and dignified return of millions displaced by the war, including those driven from Western Tigray. Nearly three years on, those promises remain largely unfulfilled.Western Tigray is no longer just a contested strip of land. It has become the fault line that will decide whether Ethiopia holds together as a federal state, or fractures under the weight of force and impunity.What happens in Western Tigray today is inseparable from how its past has been told, mapped, and remembered. History, long contested, is now being weaponized on the battlefield.Historical VerdictDebates over Western Tigray are often mired in competing historical claims. Amhara nationalist narratives insist that Welkait (former name of Western Tigray) “was always part of Begemdir” (a historical province roughly corresponding to today’s North Gondar in Amhara region). Tigrayan narratives, conversely, point to centuries of cultural, political, and social ties binding the area to the heartland of Tigray.A sober review of the evidence suggests the latter position is far more consistent with historical reality. A rigorous meta-analysis of 117 historical maps produced by European and Ethiopian cartographers between 1607 and 1967—conducted by Professor Jan Nyssen of Ghent University, Belgium—offers a systematic window into patterns of territorial control over three centuries.Of these maps, 71 clearly delineate internal boundaries. The overwhelming majority—particularly from the late 17th to the mid-20th century—consistently place Welkait within Tigray, often as part of a larger Tigrayan confederation (notably during the periods 1707–1794, 1831–1886, and 1939–1941).Periods where the area is shown under non-Tigrayan control are brief and exceptional: notably from 1891–1894 and, more durably, from 1944 until the fall of the Derg in 1991. This later period of incorporation coincided with the highly centralized governments of Emperor Haile Selassie and the Derg, which actively suppressed regional identities and imposed administrative reorganizations for political ends.This evidence—combined with the fact that Gondar, despite its significant Amhara population, was never recognized as an exclusively Amhara administrative unit until the creation of the Amhara Region in 1991—demonstrates that claims of uninterrupted, ancestral Amhara ownership are not supported by the historical record. The long-term pattern overwhelmingly supports Tigrayan jurisdiction, with the area falling outside Tigrayan control being the exception rather than the rule.Census SpeakThe cartographic record aligns closely with demographic and ethno-linguistic evidence. Both the 1994 and 2007 Ethiopian national censuses confirmed that Tigrinya-speakers constituted a decisive majority in the contested districts.Oral histories and 20th-century ethno-linguistic maps reinforce this picture, tracing the continuous presence of established Tigrayan communities in Western Tigray across generations. The Amhara narrative of a lost ancestral homeland is therefore undercut not only by historical maps but also by the lived continuity of local Tigrinya-speaking populations.Modern census data further consolidates this constitutional settlement. The 1994 Population and Housing Census, the first of the federal era, recorded 87.9 percent of residents in the Welkait–Tsegede area as ethnically Tigrayan. By 2007, that share had risen to 92.3 percent. By contrast, the Amhara share of the population was relatively small: 7.1 percent in 1994, rising only slightly to 8 percent in 2007.Contrary to assertions of past ethnic cleansing, the absolute number of Amhara residents nearly doubled during this period. This growth is widely attributed to state-sponsored labor migration linked to large-scale agricultural schemes in the fertile lowlands, rather than to a longstanding demographic presence. Far from proving displacement, these figures point to population infusion, undermining claims of historic demographic engineering against Amhara communities.Amhara activists sometimes invoke the 1984 Derg-era census to claim an Amhara majority in Western Tigray. This argument does not withstand scrutiny. As shown in earlier analyses, the census did not cover significant portions of present-day Western Tigray.Moreover, it reported data for the vast Gondar region as a whole, which has an overwhelmingly Amhara population. Welkait, by contrast, was only a small part of this region. Even if Welkait itself had a Tigrayan majority, its demographic profile would be statistically overwhelmed by the larger Gondar population.Constitutional CriteriaModern Ethiopia is organized as an ethnic federation. Its 1995 FDRE Constitution, drafted after the fall of the Derg regime, was designed to redress centuries of imperial centralization and the suppression of local identities. At its core lies an explicit recognition of the right of “Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples” to self-determination, including the right to secession.A pivotal clause, Article 46(2), stipulates that “State boundaries shall be determined on the basis of the settlement patterns, language, identity, and consent of the peoples concerned.” In practice, when Ethiopia’s federal map was drawn in the early 1990s, administrative regions were created around the dominant ethno-linguistic communities of each territory.On this basis, Western Tigray—comprising the woredas of Kafta Humera, Welkait, and Tsegede—was incorporated into the Tigray National Regional State. At the same time, Tigray ceded the larger territory of Kilbet Rasu to the Afar Region under the same principles. Both decisions reflected broad local consent and were consistent with the foundational principle of ethno-linguistic federalism underpinning the Ethiopian state.The constitutional principle of self-determination outweighs selective historical references. The 1995 Constitution was intended as a deliberate break from the imperial and Derg-era past, anchoring legitimacy in the identity and will of present-day populations, not in the shifting territorial reorganizations of earlier centralized regimes.While history provides valuable context—and, as shown earlier, overwhelmingly favors Tigray’s claim—the legitimacy of modern federalism ultimately rests on the consent of the governed.Taken together, the historical, demographic, and constitutional records converge unequivocally: Western Tigray’s inclusion within Tigray is both legally sound and historically justified. The Amhara nationalist counter-narrative rests on selective memory and political aspiration rather than sustained evidence.However, this constitutional settlement was overturned in 2020.Wartime ErasuresThe long-simmering territorial dispute over Western Tigray turned violently concrete during the 2020–2022 war. The zone was among the first areas seized by Amhara Regional Special Forces and Fano militias, operating in coordination with the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) and Eritrean troops.Occupation was swiftly followed by a systematic administrative and demographic overhaul. Elected and constitutionally recognized local authorities were forcibly removed and replaced with Amhara appointees.Land, homes, and businesses belonging to displaced Tigrayans were confiscated and redistributed to incoming Amhara settlers. This was enforced through extreme violence: extrajudicial killings, widespread sexual violence, torture, arbitrary detention, and the destruction of property. The objective was unmistakable: to terrorize the Tigrayan population into flight, erase their presence, and consolidate Amhara control through systematic demographic engineering.The scope and systematic nature of these abuses have been extensively documented. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, in their landmark joint report of 6 April 2022, concluded that Amhara authorities and security forces, alongside federal actors, were responsible for crimes against humanity and acts of ethnic cleansing against Tigrayan civilians. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, a year earlier, had already described the atrocities in Western Tigray as “ethnic cleansing.”Independent media investigations corroborate these findings. A September 2021 CNN documentary revealed mass torture, detentions, and executions of Tigrayans in Humera, concluding that these atrocities formed part of a deliberate campaign to create an ethnically homogeneous Amhara territory.Far from ending with the Pretoria Agreement, the campaign has accelerated. A 2023 report documented that 436,000 ethnic Amharas were resettled into Western Tigray between January and July, a process facilitated by the ongoing expulsion of Tigrayan residents.At the same time, repression of those who remain has intensified: over 4,200 ethnic Tigrayans were held across five known detention sites, while others face harassment, intimidation, and dispossession designed to extinguish their community’s presence.This is more than a humanitarian catastrophe; it is a deliberate rupture of Ethiopia’s federal legal foundations. By forcibly altering the demographic composition of a federal region and dismantling its lawful administration, Amhara regional actors and their federal allies have committed not only grave violations of international law but also a direct assault on the foundations of Ethiopia’s statehood.A system meant to guarantee self-rule, equality, and coexistence has instead been weaponized to entrench domination. The result is not merely local injustice but a structural threat to Ethiopia’s federal pact and to the prospects of any durable peace.Pretoria PromisesThe Pretoria Agreement was signed amid significant international attention and cautious optimism. Its provisions directly addressed the situation in Western Tigray: the withdrawal of all non-federal forces—specifically Amhara and Eritrean troops—the restoration of constitutional order, which would entail returning the area to Tigrayan administration followed by a lawful process to resolve any disputes, and the safe, dignified return of displaced persons to their homes.Yet, none of these commitments have been realized. The agreement has largely been ignored in practice, leaving Western Tigray under the de facto control of Amhara forces. Human Rights Watch has documented ongoing acts of ethnic cleansing and systematic barriers preventing the return of displaced populations well after the COHA’s signing.The Food Security Cluster reported fresh displacement from Humera and surrounding villages as recently as March 2024, driven by continuing clashes and insecurity. A UK Home Office fact-finding mission in December 2024 confirmed that Western Tigray remains firmly under Amhara control and that internally displaced Tigrayans have been unable to return.The political volatility of the issue is further underscored by events in June 2025, when ACLED and local media documented mass protests by displaced Tigrayans demanding their right to return, highlighting the growing urgency and visibility of the crisis.Federal CalculusThe federal response has often combined public expressions of fidelity to the CoHA with underhanded measures ensuring that Western Tigray remains effectively outside Tigray’s control. Evidence indicates that federal complicity in the Western Tigray crisis has been both deliberate and sustained.After 2020, the federal government’s permissive stance toward the Amhara occupation functioned as a strategic lever to weaken both Tigray and Amhara, keeping the only two politically organized northern regions—which could challenge federal supremacy—preoccupied with one another while the center consolidated its own power.By directing Amhara elites’ attention toward Welkait, the federal authorities have also sidestepped the far more politically consequential dispute over Addis Ababa, an issue that pits Oromia and Amhara claims against each other and places the federal government in a politically precarious position.This engineered dynamic has produced a “frozen conflict”: militarized occupation, limited and tightly managed humanitarian access, and stalled returns of displaced populations. As UNHCR’s 2024 Annual Results report for Ethiopia notes, ongoing humanitarian needs are sustained in large part by the deliberate delay in implementing the Pretoria CoHA.In response to criticism, the federal government has reportedly initiated a process to return Tigrayan internally displaced persons (IDPs) without involving the Tigray Interim Regional Administration (TIRA)—a move formally rejected by TIRA. Local media and analysts warn that any return plans bypassing the Tigrayan authorities are not only illegitimate under the federal constitution but also risk reigniting full-scale conflict, further destabilizing the region.Future StakesWestern Tigray is not merely a local boundary dispute; it is the litmus test for the survival of Ethiopia’s constitutional order. Restoring the region to Tigray’s lawful administration is not a concession or a bargaining chip. It is a fundamental constitutional and ethical obligation.Allowing a military conquest and campaign of ethnic cleansing to stand as a legitimate tool of border revision would set a catastrophic precedent. It would signal to every region and community in Ethiopia that force, rather than law, determines territorial claims.By the same logic, Sidama could claim parts of Wolayta; Oromia could extend into Benishangul-Gumuz or Gambella; Amhara could ‘reclaim’ parts of Benishangul-Gumuz and Afar. Even more dangerously, existing territorial disputes—between Afar and Somali, and between Oromia and Somali—could be reignited, as local actors may draw the wrong lessons on how to shift the balance in their favor.The federal government’s complicit stance is laying the groundwork for a future in which, once authoritarian domination weakens, violent irredentism and endless border wars replace constitutional arrangements. In that scenario, the very existence of Ethiopia as a multi-ethnic federation would be imperiled.Resolving the crisis in Western Tigray requires more than rhetorical commitments to the Pretoria Agreement; it demands concrete, verifiable action. This includes the complete withdrawal of non-ENDF forces and politically settled migrants from the territory, the disarmament and dissolution of the illegal administration, and the safe, dignified, and voluntary return of all displaced Tigrayans under international monitoring.It also requires a transparent, constitutional process to address local grievances, alongside a robust transitional justice mechanism, with an international component, to reckon with atrocities, hold perpetrators accountable, and provide reparations to victims.The choice before Ethiopia could not be starker. Either the nation reaffirms its constitutional foundations by restoring Western Tigray to its rightful administration and addressing disputes through lawful and peaceful means, or it embraces a precedent in which violence and ethnic supremacy become the ultimate arbiters of power.The first path offers the possibility of state survival and eventual reconciliation; the second leads inexorably toward anarchy, or worse, full disintegration. The world is watching which path Africa’s second-most populous nation will choose. The fate of Western Tigray will determine the fate of Ethiopia itself. .wpedon-container .wpedon-select, .wpedon-container .wpedon-input { width: 200px; min-width: 200px; max-width: 200px; } Query or correction? Email us window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function(){if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") {sfsi_widget_set();}}); While this commentary contains the author’s opinions, Ethiopia Insight will correct factual errors.Main photo: Federal-backed Amhara militants dancing in T-shirts reading ‘We are the guards of Tekeze.’ Location: Welkait. Source: Social media.Published under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. You may not use the material for commercial purposes.The post Ethiopia’s Federal Future Tested in Western Tigray appeared first on Ethiopia Insight.