Abiy Ahmed today governs a country where his public approval is arguably at its lowest point since taking power. This is not speculation. It is visible daily across social media platforms where anger, frustration, and despair dominate public conversation. From business owners to students, from urban residents to rural communities, dissatisfaction cuts across class and ethnicity. If legitimacy were measured by public consent alone, Abiy Ahmed would already be politically finished.
Ethiopians are not merely unhappy. They are materially punished. Heavy and unpredictable taxation has turned survival into a struggle for small businesses and ordinary citizens. Inflation has eroded purchasing power to the point where salaries lose value before they are spent. Home demolitions have displaced families with little warning or compensation. Unemployment continues to rise, particularly among the youth, leaving millions without purpose or opportunity.
The situation is further inflamed by ongoing conflict, especially the war in Amhara, which has deepened mistrust between the state and the population. Instead of dialogue, the response has been militarization and repression. Journalists are arrested. TikTokers are detained for speech. Criticism is criminalized. When a government jails voices rather than addressing grievances, it signals weakness, not strength.
If political survival depended solely on the will of the Ethiopian people, this government would not endure. History is clear on this point. Regimes collapse when they lose legitimacy at home unless they are sustained by forces outside their borders. Abiy Ahmed’s continued rule cannot be explained by domestic support. It must be understood through external backing.
Abiy Ahmed has positioned himself as a reliable partner for global elites and international institutions. Digital ID systems are being rolled out under the banner of modernization, raising concerns about surveillance and centralized control. Economic reforms are framed as liberalization but often mean privatization that benefits foreign capital more than local enterprise. These policies align closely with global governance models promoted by powerful actors.
Safaricom’s entry into Ethiopia, the opening of the telecom sector, and the promise of foreign banks operating domestically are not accidents. They are signals to international markets that Ethiopia is open for business on global terms. Close cooperation with the IMF, adherence to its reform packages, and compliance with donor expectations provide financial lifelines that substitute for public consent.
Public health initiatives, including large scale vaccination programs, further reinforce Ethiopia’s image as a cooperative state within global systems. For international actors, stability and compliance matter more than democracy. As long as Abiy Ahmed delivers reforms, secures investments, and maintains alignment with global agendas, internal repression is tolerated or ignored.
This is the uncomfortable truth. In today’s world, dictators do not fall simply because their people suffer. They fall when external support is withdrawn. Abiy Ahmed may stay for a while not because Ethiopians want him to, but because global elites find him useful. Until that calculation changes, the suffering of the people alone will not decide Ethiopia’s political future.
Comments
Post a Comment