Mereja.Forum

We Ethiopians don't wish the brotherly people of Eritrea any bad omen like the spread of the Marburg virus, may God protect them (and all other people of the world) from the danger. There are many citizens who shared many things with us Ethiopians and now ended up by being held hostage in the Gulag land ruled by Shabia, a cancer to them and the rest of the region.

Our permanent Enemy is the one and only one that was created and sustained to damage Ethiopia and it is named Shabia. Let Shabia get debilitated by the effect of Marburg or any other calamity of the world and remove this cancer from the face of the earth. A world without Shabia is only a better place

How are you dealing with the devastating interview of hod ader getachew. You are trying to divert the agenda. Weraxda

News
THE KISS OF JUDAS: GETACHEW REDA’S AL JAZEERA MELTDOWN

By Sirak Kifle

https://redseabeacon.com/the-kiss-of-ju ... -meltdown/

November 26, 2025

How an Attempt to Dodge Genocide Questions Turned Into an Unintended Confession on Live Television.

The world, and most stingingly Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, has now witnessed Getachew Reda’s interview with Al Jazeera. For Abiy, who had nurtured high expectations for Getachew’s loyalty, the appearance must have felt like a

kiss of Judas;

gentle enough in tone, but carrying the cold edge of betrayal only a former comrade can deliver.

Abiy had reportedly assumed Getachew would dutifully amplify the government’s grand narrative about Ethiopia’s so-called “existential” need for sea access – the national survival story that critics insist is more political theater than geopolitical reality.

But the interviewer had no interest in starring in Abiy’s script. Instead, he marched straight into the shadows of the Tigray war atrocities, and the word Abiy least wanted to hear echoed on international airwaves – genocide.

During the 2020–2022 conflict, Getachew Reda had accused Abiy of genocide with the ease of a man stating the weather. But on this day, under the bright studio lights, a strange new phenomenon emerged; hesitation.

The interviewer, detecting the wobble, cut straight to the point:

Did genocide occur or not?

Getachew swallowed, then answered:

Yes, genocide occurred.

Then came the dagger:

Did Abiy Ahmed commit the genocide?

Suddenly, the once-fiery wartime spokesman morphed into a cautious legalist.

I am a lawyer… I cannot answer that.

The interviewer’s eyebrows practically said, Really? That’s the best you’ve got?

Out loud, he added:

Were you not a lawyer during the war, when you did make these accusations?

Getachew confirmed that he was.

Hence the next blow:

What changed? Why can’t you repeat what you said before?

Getachew froze, cornered by the echo of his own past declarations. The silence was heavy enough to count as an answer.

But then came the part of the interview that will likely haunt Getachew for years.

Desperate to escape the tightening noose around the genocide question, he tried to pivot:

Abiy was my friend before he became Prime Minister.

It was a clumsy detour – and the interviewer seized it like a gift.

Ah. He was your friend before he committed genocide?

Getachew blinked. The studio air thinned.

The interviewer pressed on, relentless:

And is he your friend now?

Getachew, astonishingly, replied:

Yes.

What followed was a line that will be replayed in political circles for years:

So Abiy was your friend before the genocide, during the genocide, and after committing genocide?

Getachew stumbled, reaching for a lifeline:

We were fighting each other during the war…

And with those words – halting, evasive, and painfully revealing – Getachew Reda managed to do the one thing he was clearly trying to avoid, he indirectly affirmed the very allegation he refused to repeat directly.

The moment was excruciating.

A political circle closed around him.

A narrative he tried to outrun, snapped right back into place.

For viewers, the exchange was a masterclass in unintended confession.

Because no matter how tightly one tries to manage the storyline, no matter how carefully alliances shift and memories blur, there is a stubborn truth that resurfaces at the worst possible moment:

Lies have limits; and those limits arrive the instant a simple question cuts through the fog.

If a “Nobel War Prize” actually existed, I would nominate Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to win it…

Not just once, but multiple times, and it would probably be pinned to his chest as a permanent medal.

Under his name in the winners’ register we would write:

To the man who turned the Nobel Peace Prize into the biggest joke in the history of awards, then turned his country into three active internal war fronts in less than four years, ignited the Tigray war that killed hundreds of thousands, signed a peace agreement in Pretoria only to break it in practice in Amhara, opened a new front with Eritrea, and now threatens Somalia over a port deal with Somaliland…

I promise his picture will top every media outlet on Earth, including Egypt’s.

The Nobel Peace Prize he received in 2019 was the Norwegian Committee’s biggest mistake, since they gave it to Henry Kissinger.

Today, Abiy Ahmed is living proof that “peace” can simply be a warrior’s rest stop between two wars.

If a real “Nobel War Prize” were ever created, there would be no need for a jury…

They could just FedEx the trophy straight to Addis Ababa,
with free tank delivery included. khaled mahmoued: @khaledmahmoued1

Listen to this highly revealing exchange between two Ethiopians discussing the measures—and the madness—the PP government is pursuing in its irredentist push toward Eritrea’s Assab coastline, along with the flowery phrases Prosperity Party (PP) are using to mask a barren foreign-policy vision.

[Question Tsedal Lemma]

I’m not sure how closely you’ve been following Ethiopian media, especially the claims about “sovereign access” to Assab and the growing denial—or outright erasure—of Eritrea’s history and existence. The Foreign Minister says we shouldn’t be captives of history, yet everything Prosperity Party is doing shows the opposite: they are completely captive to history. The contradiction is glaring. If you watch Ethiopian national television, the massive, industrial-scale media machine funded by PP is producing documentary after documentary, every hour of the day, all aimed at denying Eritrea’s history—while the minister repeats that we must not be prisoners of the past. Can you explain the contradiction?

[Answer — Prof. Ezekiel Gabbisa]

PP officials love using catchphrases like

prisoners of geography

and

captives of history,

for reasons only they understand.

But it is clear these slogans produce no results. What I see in the Foreign Minister’s speech is a complete lack of a coherent foreign-policy framework. They love words and expressions, but they are careless with them. He even used objectionable, repugnant, and undiplomatic language such as “congenital defect.” They are describing Eritrea as a congenital defect — and if that is not being captive to history, what is?

They are essentially saying Eritrea has been a defective state from birth. That kind of language is not diplomatic, especially if one claims to seek peaceful resolution. As far as I’m concerned, PP’s diplomats are operating within a foreign-policy wasteland — a doctrine barren and directionless. It is ad-hocracy that governs Ethiopian foreign policy today.

Slow to catch on but the Pee Pee's are begining to realize how bad this interview is for Abiy's credibility that even his advisor Getachew calls him a genocider, that is obsessed with his image and hasn't proved his worth.