Religious Legitimization of Retributive Genocide: The Case of Tigray
By Theodros Assefa Teklu (Ph.D.)
The war waged by Ethiopia against Tigray exemplifies how religion legitimizes a retributive genocide. By retributive genocide, I mean the intentional massacre of people belonging to a politically or economically ‘dominant’ ethnic group or nation. In this article, I will offer my opinion on the religious legitimization of retributive genocide in Ethiopia, limiting my discussion to the war on Tigray.
As seen in the literature on genocide, religion can legitimize genocide in three ways:
It can promote the othering of the group targeted for retributive genocide, constructing the Other as an essential enemy destined to be annihilated.
It can justify exterminating the perceived enemy so that killing can be made without moral restraint and genocidal practice to be seen as a cosmic struggle between good and evil.
Religion can authorize retributive genocide through authoritative texts and religious figures or ecclesiastic representatives, grounding retributive genocide in the divine mind or will.
In what follows, I will present the Tigrayan case as a religiously legitimized retributive genocide.
Othering
The othering of Tigray has a longstanding history. For the sake of brevity, let me limit my reflection to the most recent developments. The so-called political reforms that materialized in 2018 saw a shift in the dynamics of the then ruling coalition the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Party (EPRDF). Primarily one member of the coalition, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) was sidelined and ultimately dislodged in the process of transforming EPRDF into the now ruling Prosperity Party (PP). This process of political realignment was accompanied by the circulation of images of hostility that depict TPLF leaders and members as a collection of the most corrupt and evil personalities. This depiction was extended to Tigrayans in general in the popular imaginary through coordinated campaigns utilizing public speeches, documentaries on mainstream media, and social media posts all utilizing dehumanizing and othering labels.
Here, I wish to draw attention to three social groups in Ethiopia who have had a significant contribution to the othering of Tigrayans in Ethiopia. First, Protestant/evangelical Christians, historically marginalized and/or alienated in the Ethiopian public space, deeply welcomed the appointment of evangelical Abiy Ahmed as Prime Minister in 2018 and remain his strongest base with few outspoken exceptions. In relation to the war on Tigray, this group seems to also be motivated to support the federal assault for evangelical/missional purposes.
This mainly arises from the general belief that because Tigray is portrayed as an Orthodox stronghold it is anti-Gospel whose inhabitants can efficiently serve as agents of the devil. As a result, the occupation of Mekelle by the Ethiopian Defense Forces was seen as an opportunity that would open up Tigray for the Gospel. Following that and even when the gruesome atrocities committed by Ethiopian and allied forces in Tigray were revealed many protestants, including the Prime Minister himself, continued to depict the ongoing conflict in terms of a holy war; good vs evil.
Second, within the context of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, longstanding rivalries within the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the church made it easy to support the war efforts of the federal government. Such ecclesial feud seems to be one of the motivations for othering Tigrayans (as was the case in Rwanda). Both the late Patriarch Abune Paulos and his successor Abune Mathias I, are Tigrayans. The controversy between the diaspora-based Patriarch Abune Merkorios and his co-Patriarchate with Patriarch Mathias reveals the ethnic othering of Tigrayans.
Third, secular elites deployed quasi-religious ideas. For example, the PM repeatedly interprets the nativity narrative of the gospels in light of contemporary political differences and the ongoing conflict in the country. In one instance, for example, he used the gospel to explain political differences between his newly (illegally) established Prosperity Party (PP) and the TPLF. Accordingly, he depicted the latter as Herodians determined to kill the Messiah, in this case representing the newly born party. The intended moral of the story is that the Herodians (TPLF) will destroy young lives with the view of eliminating PP, but at the same time, PP must be determined to fight against the Herodians by all means.
In another context, he referenced the episode of Jesus in the boat with his disciples to castigate people for not trusting in his leadership in the war. He depicts himself as the supernaturally empowered messiah figure, the people listening to him as the faithless disciples, and the war (along with those on the other side) as malevolent forces represented by the storm.
Continue to watch video etc https://tghat.com/2022/04/04/religious- ... of-tigray/