Reimagining Governance in Tigray: Addressing Fragility and Fostering Resilience

 

The political, social, and administrative collapse in Tigray is a deeply complex issue, requiring an expansive and multi-dimensional exploration. How has this collapse occurred? Why has it persisted? What strategies might contribute to both short-term stabilization and long-term recovery? By examining the region through the theoretical lenses of state fragility, governance, and public administration, we can unravel the root causes of Tigray’s current condition while proposing comprehensive solutions that address authority, state capacity, and legitimacy.

 

In this extended discussion, I will expand on the intersection of theoretical frameworks like Gravingholt and Carment’s definitions of fragility, the unique historical and political conditions that have influenced the governance structure of Tigray, the urgent need to differentiate between the state and the ruling party, and the importance of adopting a multi-party political system. I will also explore how restoring public services and rebuilding state capacity are essential for the region's recovery, alongside a nuanced look at the role of legitimacy in a post-conflict environment. The discussion will conclude by offering policy suggestions grounded in public administration theory, adaptive governance, and transitional justice.

 

Defining Fragility in Tigray Through Theoretical Lenses

 

To expand upon Gravingholt’s and Carment’s frameworks for understanding state fragility, it is important to situate Tigray’s unique circumstances within these definitions. Both scholars emphasize key components of state stability: authority, capacity, and legitimacy, which are essential pillars for maintaining governance. In the case of Tigray, these pillars have been severely compromised.

 

Authority

 

Gravingholt’s definition of fragility starts with state authority—the ability of a government to enforce laws and maintain security across its territory. In Tigray, the state’s ability to maintain authority has virtually collapsed. One of the most visible indicators of this collapse is the pervasive insecurity that makes travel unsafe even in broad daylight. This breakdown in law and order not only affects the safety of civilians but also disrupts commerce and the basic functioning of society. At its core, authority is about the state's monopoly on the legitimate use of force, which has been deeply compromised in Tigray. This lack of authority is not merely a question of policing or military control, but it speaks to deeper governance failures, including the inability to uphold social contracts and maintain public order.

 

Capacity

 

The second component of Gravingholt’s framework, state capacity, refers to the ability of the state to provide essential public goods and services such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, and social welfare. In Tigray, capacity has been severely degraded due to the genocidal war, compounded by resource constraints and the destruction of infrastructure. Hospitals have been raided, schools destroyed, and essential government functions have ground to a halt. Carment's definition of fragility emphasizes the state’s capacity to provide public goods, and Tigray’s inability to do so is a clear indicator of fragility.

 

Provision of services has been impossible due to both budget constraints and the negligence of the local government. In many cases, international humanitarian organizations have stepped in to fill the vacuum left by the state, but even these efforts have been hindered by security concerns and the logistical challenges posed by the genocidal war. Without state capacity, the region faces not only an immediate humanitarian crisis but also the long-term challenges of rebuilding institutions, restoring trust, and fostering economic recovery.

 

Legitimacy

 

Finally, legitimacy is the third critical dimension of state fragility. Legitimacy refers to the extent to which the population believes the state has the right to govern. In Tigray, legitimacy has been eroded by a combination of factors, including the conflation of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) with the state itself. For years, the TPLF governed with little regard for political pluralism, creating a situation where public loyalty has become mixed at best. Recently, there has been an increasing disillusionment with the TPLF’s role in government as the party has become synonymous with state repression.

 

This conflation of the party and the state is a critical issue. In many fragile states, the dominance of a single party leads to a blurring of the lines between political power and state authority. This creates a governance model in which the interests of the ruling party take precedence over the needs of the broader population. In Tigray, this has been particularly problematic, as the TPLF has maintained tight control over political and administrative institutions, stifling dissent and marginalizing alternative political voices.

 

The erosion of legitimacy is further compounded by the lack of accountability and transparency in governance. Legitimacy is tied to the public’s perception of the state’s fairness, justice, and ability to meet its citizens’ needs. When these factors are absent, the state loses its legitimacy in the eyes of the public, creating a fertile ground for war, rebellion, and societal breakdown.

 

Differentiating Between Party and State: The Path Forward

 

One of the most pressing challenges in Tigray is the need to differentiate between the TPLF as a political party and the state itself. This distinction is crucial for restoring governance in the region. The conflation of the two has not only undermined the legitimacy of the state but has also created a political environment in which public loyalty to the state is eroded by disillusionment with the ruling party.

 

From a theoretical standpoint, the separation of party and state is essential for maintaining democratic governance. Scholars of public administration and political theory have long argued that a healthy democracy requires political competition and the separation of political power from the administrative functions of the state. In Tigray, this has not been the case, as the TPLF has maintained control over both the political and administrative apparatus, leaving little room for alternative voices or political competition.

 

To address this issue, it is imperative that Tigray move toward a multi-party political system. A multi-party system would not only create a more competitive political environment but would also increase accountability and transparency in governance. Political pluralism would allow for greater public participation in decision-making and would provide a platform for marginalized groups to have their voices heard. This, in turn, would help restore public trust in the state and increase the legitimacy of the government.

 

The process of building a multi-party system, however, is not without challenges. In a region as divided as Tigray, political competition can sometimes exacerbate existing tensions. To mitigate this risk, the establishment of a multi-party system must be accompanied by strong institutions that can mediate tensions and ensure that political competition takes place within a framework of rules and norms that prioritize the public interest.

 

Restoring State Capacity and Public Services

 

Restoring state capacity is one of the most urgent challenges facing Tigray. As mentioned earlier, capacity refers to the ability of the state to provide essential public goods and services, such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure. The genocidal war has severely undermined the region’s capacity to deliver these services, and rebuilding this capacity will require a multi-faceted approach.

 

First and foremost, there must be significant investment in rebuilding infrastructure. The war has destroyed roads, schools, hospitals, and administrative offices, all of which are essential for the functioning of a modern state. Without these basic physical structures, it will be impossible for the government to provide the services needed to meet the population’s needs.

 

Second, rebuilding state capacity will require a focus on human capital. The war has displaced thousands of civil servants, doctors, teachers, and other professionals, leaving the region without the skilled workforce needed to manage its institutions. A concerted effort must be made to recruit, train, and retain civil servants who can administer public services effectively. This will require not only investment in education and training but also the creation of a stable and secure working environment that encourages professionals to return to the region.

 

Third, improving administrative systems and processes is crucial for restoring capacity. In many fragile states, bureaucratic inefficiency and corruption undermine the state’s ability to provide services effectively. Reforms should focus on improving the transparency, efficiency, and accountability of state institutions. This includes developing clear lines of authority, streamlining decision-making processes, and implementing systems of accountability that ensure that public resources are used for their intended purposes.

 

Legitimacy and the Social Contract

 

At the heart of the issue of legitimacy is the question of the social contract between the state and its citizens. In Tigray, the social contract has been broken, as the state has failed to meet its obligations to provide security, public goods, and a voice for its citizens in governance. Rebuilding legitimacy will require not only addressing the immediate consequences of the war but also repairing this broken social contract

 

One of the ways to rebuild the social contract is through participatory governance. Public participation in decision-making processes is important. By involving citizens in the design and implementation of governance reforms, the state can begin to rebuild trust and restore its legitimacy in the eyes of the population.

 

Another important aspect of rebuilding legitimacy is the promotion of transparency and accountability in governance. Corruption, lack of accountability, and opaque decision-making processes have contributed to the erosion of legitimacy in Tigray. Addressing these issues will require reforms that promote transparency in public administration, strengthen oversight mechanisms, and ensure that public officials are held accountable for their actions.

 

Finally, legitimacy will also be strengthened by improving the delivery of public services. As mentioned earlier, the failure to provide basic services has been a key driver of political discontent in Tigray. By improving the state’s capacity to deliver these services, the government can demonstrate its commitment to the welfare of its citizens, thereby rebuilding its legitimacy.

 

The breakdown of governance in Tigray is a profound and multifaceted issue, rooted in the failure of the state to maintain authority, capacity, and legitimacy. These three pillars are essential for the stability and functioning of any state. To address the fragility of Tigray, it will be necessary to implement a range of reforms that restore authority, rebuild state capacity, and restore the legitimacy of the government.

 

The path to recovery for Tigray will not be easy, but it is possible. Political reforms that promote transparency, accountability, and the inclusion of multiple political parties will help to rebuild public trust in the political system. Investments in infrastructure and human capital will improve the state’s capacity to deliver public services.