How Ethiopia’s ruling coalition created a playbook for disinformation · Global Voices
A young man in Ethiopia works at a desktop computer. Photo taken on November 28, 2011, via UNICEF on Flickr.
This story is the first in a two-part series on online disinformation and politics in Ethiopia. You can read the second part here.
A deep split that exists within Ethiopia's ruling coalition — the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (the EPRDF) —was made evident over the last few weeks when a Facebook row broke out between two major political party members who disagreed on the historical accounts of Ethiopia as a modern state.
The row revealed how party members within the EPRDF use social media — through posts and memes — to manipulate public opinion and spread misinformation and incendiary content.
The EPRDF is a coalition of four ethnically-based parties. Members from these four parties: Amhara Democratic Party (ADP), Oromo Democratic Party (ODP), Southern Ethiopian People's Democratic Movement (SEPDM) and Tigrayan People's Liberation Front (TPLF), currently make up Ethiopia’s top leadership.
Until 2018, the TPLF was the dominant party in the coalition, holding absolute power for over 25 years. ADP and ODP have joined forces to put an end to the supremacy of TPLF, yet its members continue their rivalry, with infighting that usually goes under the radar. 960
Tensions have risen steadily since April 2018, when <PERSON> of the ODP was sworn in as prime minister.
On October 4, ODP-ADP infighting burst out into the open when members and supporters of ADP and ODP started to bicker over a remark made by the vice president of Oromia Regional State, <PERSON>, in Addis Ababa, on the eve of Irreecha (an annual celebration marking the beginning of spring).
In his remarks, <PERSON> hailed the Irreecha celebration in Addis Ababa, which he described as the very place where Oromos were defeated and humiliated by the old regime:
The Oromo people were defeated right here, our humiliation started right here.
In his speech, <PERSON> struck a triumphant tone and marked the day's celebration in Addis as a turning point in the struggle of the Oromo people. He used the Amharic word neftegna (“riflemen” in English) to refer to the ruling class established in the wake of Emperor <PERSON>'s conquest in southern Ethiopia in the late 19th century.
Today, many ethnic Amahras view Emperor <PERSON> as a symbol of triumph and defiance of European colonialism, while many Oromos consider him the root cause of their social and cultural subjugation.
<PERSON>’s use of the term neftegna prompted backlash given that it is often used to refer to members of Emperor <PERSON>’s army after TPLF came to power in 1991.
The following day, in a Facebook post, <PERSON>, a top ADP member, accused <PERSON> of employing coded language to intimidate the Amhara people and, in turn, drew the ire of <PERSON>, a top ODP member, who saw <PERSON>’s accusation as a denial of the historical social and cultural subjugation the Oromos suffered.
Dueling statements made by <PERSON> and <PERSON> exemplify the differences in interpretations of Ethiopia’s historical events among the country’s elites. While the ADP considers the formation of a modern Ethiopian state as faultless and virtuous, the ODP understands its formation as a process that led to the subjugation and humiliation of Oromos at the hands of Ethiopian emperors.
<PERSON> and <PERSON> have several things in common: They are young politicians who aspire to long political careers and whose parties, the ADP and ODP, — have banded together to bring down the supremacy of TPLF in April 2018.
Their row on Facebook bolstered their popularity and ushered an intense wave of political polarization freighted with misinformation.
A screenshot of <PERSON>'s post on Facebook. Screenshot taken on October 16.
Their spat led to an outpouring of support on their respective Facebook pages, feverishly gathering up reactions, comments, and shares.
A screenshot of <PERSON>'s Facebook post. Screenshot taken on October 16.
<PERSON>’s page, with 56,432 followers, racked up about 5,000 shares and generated 3,500 comments, while <PERSON>’s page, with 45,565 followers, mustered about 3,000 shares and 2,500 comments — just within 24 hours of their posts. 960