The ruling Prosperity Party has formally submitted a 30-page proposal to the National Dialogue Commission, outlining sweeping changes to Ethiopia’s constitution and national symbols. Framed as a necessary step toward reform, the proposal calls for a dramatic overhaul of the current ethnic federalism model in favor of a more centralized, geographic federalism — a move that has already triggered fierce criticism for its implications on minority rights and national cohesion.
The proposal, which also seeks revisions to the national flag and other foundational democratic symbols, aims to reshape the identity of the Ethiopian state. Most controversially, it challenges Article 39 of the constitution, which guarantees the right of “Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples” to self-determination — including the right to secession. Critics argue that dismantling such provisions would strip historically marginalized groups of hard-won autonomy and exacerbate existing ethnic tensions.
The National Dialogue Commission, the body receiving the proposal, has itself come under fire for lacking broad inclusivity and representation, especially from opposition groups and ethnically diverse voices. Many see this as emblematic of a broader effort by the Prosperity Party to consolidate power and marginalize dissent under the guise of reform.
“The push for geographic federalism is not just administrative — it is a political project aimed at erasing decades of struggle by Ethiopia’s diverse communities,” said a constitutional expert who asked to remain anonymous for security reasons. “You cannot overwrite history and deep-seated grievances with a new map.”
The dangers of centralizing power have already been laid bare. In 2023, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s administration attempted to dismantle and integrate the Amhara region’s special forces into the federal military structure — a move that sparked fierce resistance and ignited a conflict that continues to ravage the region. What began as a policy shift has escalated into a protracted war, displacing millions and leading to widespread humanitarian suffering.
Observers warn that the government’s current trajectory risks repeating such outcomes on a national scale. The attempt to abandon a federal structure that, despite its flaws, has governed Ethiopia for over three decades, is seen by many as reckless and ill-conceived.
“It is simply unrealistic to expect a top-down imposition of geographic federalism to work in a country where ethnic identity is so deeply intertwined with political representation,” said a political analyst in Addis Ababa. “This will not erase ethnic divisions; it may well inflame them.”
Critics also emphasize that ethnic federalism, for all its critics, was the result of long and painful struggles by oppressed groups for recognition and self-rule. Any reform that disregards this legacy risks reversing the few democratic gains Ethiopia has made since the early 1990s.
As the debate intensifies, so too does the anxiety among Ethiopia’s many nationalities — fearful that the promised “unity” may come at the cost of their identity and self-determination.
Whether the Prosperity Party can navigate this fraught terrain without deepening the country’s crises remains an open and pressing question.
