Tigrayan nationalism: a progressive movement

By Shewit Wudassie

Post-war Tigray politics mainly swings between the quest for independence and Ethiopianism. Almost all of the Tigray-based political forces/parties situate themselves either in the pro-independence (mainly TIP and SAWeT) or federation (e.g., TPLF, SIMRET and TDP) blocks. Baytona had been pushing for a con-federal arrangement before the outbreak of the genocidal war, but now suffers intra-party cracks and remains cloudy on its path. The two political arrangement ranges are becoming the core of Tigray’s political discourse. It is never a problem to take a side or have a clear political position on the future of Tigray and argue for what one believes is the right way forward for the people. The problem arises from the way these two political blocs mis-characterise the substance of the claims on both sides, which spoils the entire conversation. To be specific, I see the Tigrayans in the Ethiopianism block easily buy the mainstream Ethiopia narratives that see the nationalist aspirations arise from Tigray as hostile and built upon false consciousness. That I don’t agree with and I argue here why. 

Tigrayan nationalism is often misunderstood as a backward-looking, ultra-nationalist secessionist reaction. On the contrary, it is a forward-looking project – a political, cultural, and social effort to create the conditions for a just, dignified, and modern future for Tigrayans, especially in light of the immense suffering and destruction they have endured recently. It is not supposed to be merely about escaping from the past, but about catching up with the future. That, I believe, is what the abiding motive behind the nationalist aspiration in Tigray is and should be. That is the shape it should take and the way it should present itself. Thus, this nationalism is not about clinging to the past or rejecting Ethiopia out of spite – it is about claiming the right to shape a viable future after betrayal, genocide, and broken federal promises. 

Framing it as extremism, narrow, irredentist, or anger-driven sentiment is either misleading or a cynical understanding of its motive. When they aspire to be a nation, Tigrayans envision a different future, not just scratching at old wounds. The discussion, therefore, centres on what the future holds for the community in either direction: staying in the federation or pursuing another path. Thus, when I come across someone asserting that Tigray is destined to stay in the federation, I simply ask how that is going to advance any of Tigray’s interests. What is it going to be like to stay in the old hut? What is in it for me? How is that federal arrangement going to serve my interests, in tangible ways? Can I live a fair, secure, and a worth-living life in that long-standing compound? In the end, that is all that matters. Politics is all about interests – personal or collective, not just conviction. That is the calculation almost every rational-nationalist movement should make, Tigray included.  As Greenfeld (1992) observed:

Nationalism is inherently future-oriented: it aims at the creation of a new political reality, a better and more dignified existence for the people who constitute the nation.

Redefining the narrative of Tigrayan nationalism 

The dominant narrative that depicts Tigrayan nationalism as an act of a petulant boy, a sense of mass-irritation driven by historical grievances and past miseries, is a cynical misrepresentation of Tigrayans’ aspiration to nationhood. Tigrayan nationalism principally relies on the future in its calculations. It makes its assessments principally based on the cost-benefit analysis of staying and leaving the federation scenarios, not just the amount of accumulated resentment resulting from the past deeds of the “mother” state. Affirming that, Kjetil Tronvoll (2020) wrote that “most Tigrayans are not separatists. But they may be pushed into separatism if the instability, marginalisation and persecution continues”. Besides, this is clearly indicated in the party programs and policy documents of the two political parties leading the Tigrayan nationalist camp, TIP and SAWeT. Consistent with what Chatterjee (1986) said, the project of Tigrayan nationalism “is not the recovery of a pristine past but the creation of a modern community capable of autonomy in the present and the future”. 

Unfortunately, many of the grand claims made against the movement fail – or decide not to – to grasp its future orientation. To mention some, Getachew Gebrekiros Temare claims that “the political, economic, and socio-cultural promises provided by hot-blooded secessionist groups are short-sighted, and fail to acknowledge the massive risks involved”. Prominent pro-Ethiopian commentator and regime critic Tewodros Tsegay, cited in the same article, dubbed the Tigrayan nationalism movement as “political insanity”. Gebreyesus Bahta, another pro-Ethiopian academic based at Mekelle University, called it “a fascist and irredentalist movement founded on false narratives of historic marginalization and misery”. They all tried to underrate the most important elements, including political agency, economic viability, modern governance, dignity, and sovereignty.

Its core substance is not about hurting or taking revenge on Ethiopia, but rather about creating a better, more secure, peaceful and flourishing tomorrow. It is more about wishing to follow a different path that enables us to achieve the collective aspirations of the nation in better ways. Therefore, the goal of Tigrayan nationalism is, and should be, owning a national agency that enables us; 1) to lay the foundation for a setting that enables Tigrayans to be more protected from the routines of atrocities we have been experiencing (including the 2020-2022 genocide) for centuries and build better defence mechanisms against threats, i.e., security. 2) Better utilise our natural resources, human capital, catalyze industrialization, innovation and technology – i.e., economy. 3) Maximize the geopolitical advantages of the nation and build a more powerful presence in the region, i.e., politics and diplomacy. And 4) preserve and cultivate its core historical legacies, cultural continuity and moral values. Tigray cannot possess these capabilities being trapped in the federal arrangement. 

The historical weight 

Of course, what happened in the past cannot stay in the past unspoken – history must be acknowledged properly, but without anchoring on it. The physical wounds may heal easily, but the mental and spiritual scars do not. We will live with the traumatic memories for a long time; these do not fade easily. It is vital to recognise the legacy of betrayal, marginalisation, and genocide, without being consumed by it. 

Nationalism is not about being trapped in that trauma – it is about not letting it define the future. The past should be used as a learning space that helps us to do better, to be better, not to determine our fate or dictate our future. To borrow Smith’s (1991) words “national identity… is not a static inheritance but a dynamic process of reinterpretation and renewal in the light of present needs and future goals.” Thus, through the Tigrayan nationalism glasses, what we see is our destiny, not our scares mainly. The gravity that unites us as Tigrayans is “intrinsic and greater than the superimposed influences that keep us apart, the mission is to create “the new society, our own society”.

We carry the past with us, but we walk toward something greater.  We have seen what walking on the highways of the federation means for Tigray. That trip is not for us. A cup of water is not a good place for salt to be situated long-term and dance around; the only possible outcome is melting away. For salt, staying or leaving the area is a choice of “to be or not to be”. That is how I see the decision on the future of Tigray in the Ethiopian federation. A choice of “to be or not to be”. And this is a subject matter categorised under the forward-looking interest-based reckoning department. 

Post-war reality and the need for re-imagination 

Post-war Tigray faces existential questions – rebuilding, governing, securing, and sustaining itself. The war almost broke the region in every aspect. Therefore, surviving the aftermath of the war requires immense effort, mobilization, and coordination. In this context, Tigrayan nationalism offers a vehicle for rebuilding with dignity, rather than dependency. It functions as a dynamic  framework of nation-building project which focuses more on building a better Tigray that reclaims its national agency. Rather than rebuilding as a federally enforced agenda, it positioned it on a self-ruled journey where Tigrayans take their fate onto their hands and effectively determine priorities. The war revealed the limits and failures of Ethiopian federalism for Tigrayans. Ethiopia has failed Tigray in cosmic terms. The war has enabled us to see the Ethiopian state for what it is. We witnessed when all of the Ethiopian state laws, principles and institutions/machinery were repurposed immediately into deadly weapons of mass atrocity. It was shocking, for example, to see how the principle of state sovereignty was used as a legal justification for the federal government to invite foreign forces (mainly Eritrean troops) to come and commit heinous crimes within its own territory, and against “its own people”. The flame and energy of the country’s core establishments in declaring and doing the war against Tigray is frozen now, in the post-war rebuilding normalising period. Ethiopia is not invested in healing the gruesome wound it caused. Normalcy is not the priority; chaos is. So, it is time to imagine alternatives. In search of alternatives that work better for Tigray in this context, independence comes into play. 

Nationalism as a progressive and modern pursuit 

Nationalism, especially anti-colonial or post-genocide nationalism, is not inherently outdated or ethnic. As Gellner (1983) said “it is nationalism which engenders nations, and not the other way round… nationalism is a product of the modern age.” So, it is not a new discovery Tigray is trying to experiment with; there are a lot of post-Westphalian Scheme (1648) modern world states that emerged from similar post-emperialism, anti-colonial and anti-oppression nationalist movements, including India, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Burma (1947-48), most African countries like Ghana (1960s), Israel in the Middle East, and Eritrea, South Sudan, Kosovo, and Bangladesh. Even though some have failed to build a better nation after independence, most of them achieved comparatively better stability, peace and development afterwards. Thus, modern nationalism is about creating a functional, inclusive, and just polity. It is about claiming a better deal that serves one’s collective aspirations. That is literally what modernity means: finding the best arrangement that fits one’s real demands and unapologetically going for it, individual or collective. Transformation from obsolete socio-political and economic arrangements into more dynamic and better functioning ones. As Otto von Bismarck said, “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best”.

Hope, not hatred, drives the movement 

The call for independence or external self-determination is not borne out of hatred, but out of love for what Tigray can potentially become. The Tigrayan nationalism movement is hopeful, rational, and people-driven, not extremist or fringe as portrayed by bad-faith detractors. That, I believe, is boldly reflected in our engagements, writings, music, poetry and other cultural artefacts. As Benedict Anderson (2006) states it rather charmingly, nations inspire love, and often profoundly self-sacrificing love. The cultural products of nationalism; poetry, prose, music, imagine futures not yet born, binding people together in a shared destiny.” The Tigrayan artistic landscape is entrenched with such cultural products. A popular song by the Tigrayan pop star Timnit Welday says it all: ክ ንነብብር ኢና (We will live on and flourish) is a tribute to the resilience of the Tigrayan people and their resolve to withstand and rebuild. Tigrayans’ resilience, collective hope and aspiration for a better future is also reflected in our paintings, poems and writings. For instance, art works like the “The Tigray Art Collective” convey a similar message.  It is about “what is best for Tigray” not “how we make Ethiopia angry”. We chant our aspirations, self-love and respect, not hate and a call for revenge on others. To name but a few iconic Tigrayan songs that extol Tigrayanness: “ዓድዲ ኣልላትኒ (I have a country), ሃገር እይየ ዝ እደልልይ (What I want is a country), ትግራዋይንነት (The essence of being a Tigrayan), ትግራይ ዓድደይ (Tigray my nation), ትግራይ ኵሕልሎ (the gorgeous Tigray), and ትግራይ ምልባማ (Tigray land of the wise).

Tigrayan nationalism is not an antiquity of the past. It is a compass for the future – one forged through pain but pointed toward possibility. The people of Tigray deserve not just survival, but a future on their terms.

Bibliography

1. Greenfeld, L. (1992). Nationalism: Five roads to modernity. Harvard University Press.
2. Chatterjee, P. (1986). Nationalist thought and the colonial world: A derivative discourse? Zed Books.
3. Smith, A. D. (1991). National identity. University of Nevada Press.
4. Nkrumah, K. (1963). Africa must unite. Heinemann.
5. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and nationalism. Blackwell.
6. Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Rev. ed.). Verso.

_________________________________

Shewit Wudassie is lecturer of human rights at Mekelle University.