Addis Abeba — Nearly six years since the outbreak of the war in Tigray, the federal government's narrative of a "law enforcement operation" has collapsed under the weight of a singular, undeniable reality: the state-sponsored occupation of Western Tigray. While the guns of the formal conflict have largely fallen silent, the constitutional order in the occupied Western Tigrayan territories has not been restored. Instead, it has been replaced by a federally funded, paramilitary-backed administration that represents the ultimate betrayal of the 1995 Constitution and the Pretoria Agreement.
Discover moreDigital news archiveAddis Ababa city guideInvestigative journalism reports The role of the "Welkait Tegede Amhara Identity Committee" and the "Tekeze Zeb" (ተከዜ ዘብ / Tekeze Guard) militia is the smoking gun that proves the occupation is not just a leftover of war, but a deliberate, federally funded political project. If the military campaign launched in November 2020 was truly intended to "enforce federal law," why has the federal government handed over the administration of Western Tigray to this committee--an entity with no constitutional standing? Why is the federal government directly arming and supporting the Tekeze Zeb to enforce this occupation? The contradiction is no longer an administrative oversight; it is a deliberate policy of territorial engineering.
Collapse of constitutional neutrality
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
The current situation in Western Tigray exposes a staggering hypocrisy in the administration of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. The federal government's support for this claimant-led body, even as it conducts a large-scale military operation to disarm non-state actors in the Amhara region, reveals a profound contradiction: the state is demanding a monopoly on the use of force in one area while simultaneously funding and arming an armed proxy to maintain its grip on Western Tigray.
Ethiopian political analysis Once the federal government declared its military objectives achieved and the Pretoria Agreement was signed, the constitutional status quo should have been the immediate default. Instead, while other parts of Tigray were returned to regional administration, Western Tigray remains under an exceptional, extra-constitutional administration. By allowing this exception to persist, the federal government has effectively admitted that the war was not about "enforcing the law," but about redrawing internal borders through the barrel of a gun.
Discover moreGeographic ReferenceAfricans & DiasporaAdvertising space The continued reliance on the "identity question" as a justification for delaying a constitutional resolution raises serious concerns about whether the issue is being addressed as a genuine legal process or being used to legitimize an already established political reality. Ethiopia's Constitution does not provide any role for unelected committees or armed groups to administer contested territories while constitutional procedures remain unresolved. Instead, Articles 46(2) and 48(1) provide a clear framework: state boundaries must be determined based on settlement patterns, language, identity, and the consent of the peoples concerned, while unresolved disputes must be settled through agreement between the concerned states or, failing that, through a decision by the House of Federation.
However, no legitimate determination of identity, consent, or territorial status can take place while the very people whose rights are at stake remain forcibly displaced from their homes and excluded from the process. A constitutional solution requires first creating the conditions for the safe and dignified return of displaced communities, allowing all affected peoples to participate freely and meaningfully. Only through such an inclusive process, consistent with both the Constitution and the Pretoria Agreement, can the dispute be resolved in a credible and lasting manner. Until then, no committee or armed group possesses the constitutional authority to determine the future of a disputed territory or establish irreversible facts on the ground.
The federal government is not arbitrating a dispute; it is predetermining its outcome."Social affairs analysis Discover morePoliticalTigray travel advisorygovernment'sBusiness newsNewspapersnewsAddis Ababa tourismEthiopian election analysisNews subscriptionSocial affairs analysis
The Pretoria Agreement, specifically Article 10(4), commits the parties to resolve "contested areas" through constitutional means. A contested area is, by definition, one where a final determination has not yet been made. While this designation implies that the territory should remain in a state of administrative neutrality until a legal resolution is reached, the reality since the outbreak of the war is that Western Tigray remains under the control of federally backed security elements. In such a scenario, the federal government has a moral and legal obligation to act as a neutral arbiter. Neutrality would require the restoration of the status quo ante--the administrative and demographic reality that existed before the illegal outbreak of hostilities. This alliance reveals that the federal government is not a neutral arbiter of a territorial dispute but an active participant in it. It is using these extra-constitutional actors as a buffer to keep the Tigray Regional State weakened, effectively holding Western Tigray hostage to federal political whims.
Ethiopian travel guide Instead, by facilitating the administration of the territory by one claimant while hundreds of thousands of Tigrayans remain in IDP camps, the federal government is not arbitrating a dispute; it is predetermining its outcome. It is presiding over a process of demographic engineering where the very people whose rights are central to the constitutional process are physically excluded from participating in it. The continued presence of the Tekeze Zeb ensures that the "contested" nature of the land is maintained by force, rather than by constitutional debate.
The Pretoria Agreement was sold to the world as a return to constitutionalism, but the continued existence of this armed proxy and claimant-backed administration represents a direct violation of that mandate. The federal government's role as the guardian of the federation requires it to ensure that no regional claimant secures a permanent advantage through force. By funding and politically shielding this militia, the federal government has abandoned this duty. It is no longer a guardian; it has become a patron of one side. This sends a dangerous message to the rest of Ethiopia: that the Constitution can be suspended indefinitely if a group has enough federal support and a well-armed, federally backed force at its disposal.
Beyond the legal arguments lies a profound human tragedy. Hundreds of thousands of Tigrayans displaced from Western Tigray have now spent years in IDP camps, watching from afar as their farms, homes, and communities are administered by an unelected committee and guarded by a militia that views them as enemies. For these citizens, "peace" is a hollow word. A citizen's right to live in their home should not be a bargaining chip in a post-war negotiation. The continued status of Western Tigray is no longer just a Tigrayan issue or a border dispute between two regions. It has evolved into the ultimate test of Ethiopia's commitment to equal citizenship. If Ethiopia is truly one country under one law, then a Tigrayan from Humera must enjoy the same constitutional protections as an Amhara from Bahir Dar or an Oromo from Jimma.
Tigray health system report Conclusion
Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed faces a defining choice. He can continue to arm the Tekeze Zeb and support the Welkait Identity Committee, maintaining a fragile and illegal status quo that rewards the use of force. Or, he can demonstrate true leadership by restoring the constitutional administration of Western Tigray, facilitating the safe and dignified return of all internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees, and allowing the constitutional process to proceed in a neutral environment.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Ultimately, the continued disregard for the constitutional order and the Pretoria Agreement--evidenced by siding with one claimant while keeping Western Tigray beyond its rightful administration--is not a path toward peace but a catalyst for further devastation. State-sponsored exclusion, combined with a failure to protect Tigrayan civilians under occupation, threatens to drag the people of Tigray back into a catastrophic war.
To prevent renewed conflict from consuming Ethiopia once again, the federal government must take concrete action to restore constitutional order and uphold the principles of the Pretoria Agreement through a definitive roadmap:
The immediate disarmament of the Tekeze Zeb militia must be secured. The extra-constitutional administration currently governing Western Tigray needs to be replaced with a lawful, constitutionally recognised process. Property rights must be restored and displacement-related grievances addressed, particularly regarding the occupation of homes belonging to displaced residents. Conditions must be established to ensure the safe, voluntary, and dignified return of displaced communities to their homes. Finally, the government must demonstrate a firm commitment to ensuring that all Tigrayans enjoy equal protection, dignity, and rights under the Ethiopian Constitution.
Social affairs analysis Those displaced from Western Tigray are not seeking special treatment; they are asking only for the fundamental right to return to their homes, rebuild their lives, and live as equal citizens within the Ethiopian federation. AS
Editor's Note: Merih Welay Welesilassie, PhD, is a scholar specializing in language policy and educational science, and serves as the Chairman and Executive Director of Tsilal - Civil Society of Western Tigray. He can be reached at atnasmer@gmail.com
