Solomon Gebremichael
In a recent interview with UMD Media, the former president of Tigray Getachew Reda offered a rare glimpse into the inner workings of Tigray’s interim administration and the mounting pressures he faced from within his own political camp. His revelations painted a troubling picture of fragmentation, sabotage, and ideological compromise—most notably alluding to what he described as a “strategic depth” that Eritrea is now developing within Tigray. That phrase, while brief, encapsulates a broader and more cynical realignment that deserves closer attention.
After the signing of the Pretoria Agreement, both the TPLF and the federal government of Ethiopia dragged their feet in implementing its provisions. Western Tigray remains occupied by the Amhara region, and the federal government has shown little willingness to reinstate the pre-war status quo ante. Meanwhile, Eritrean forces have entrenched themselves in parts of Tigray, including the strategic town of Zalambessa and areas in Erob, signaling de facto annexation.
The president of the Tigray Interim Administration, Getachew Reda, was almost ousted and reportedly forced to leave the region fearing for his life. His recent appointment as Advisor on East African Affairs by the Ethiopian Prime Minister has raised eyebrows. Many believe the hardcore TPLF establishment made it nearly impossible for Getachew to govern effectively, yet managed to install a new president of their choosing—General Tadesse Worede. Tadesse, formerly the commander of the Tigray Defense Forces and vice president of the previous administration, now leads despite open accusations by his former superior of undermining governance efforts. The former president, a frequent guest on UMD Media, has openly stated that the TPLF’s inner circle, including General Tadesse, blocked attempts at genuine administration and reconciliation.
This reflection borrows the phrase “strategic depth” to explore what may be a deliberate and cynical effort by Eritrea to insert itself not only militarily but politically into Tigrayan affairs. Eritrea’s long-term strategic interest has always been to prevent the re-emergence of a strong and unified Tigrayan leadership. By leveraging internal divisions and fostering dependency through backchannel alignments, Eritrea appears to be deepening its influence in the region.
Tigrayan elites, particularly those embedded in the old guard of the TPLF, have not only failed to check this growing influence but may also be complicit in enabling it. Political survival and internal rivalries seem to have taken precedence over the region’s long-term strategic autonomy. This moment calls for sober reflection—not just from the political class but also from Tigray’s civil society and diaspora, who must resist the temptation to romanticize a fractured and compromised leadership.
If Eritrea’s cynical realignment within Tigray continues unchecked, the region risks becoming a pawn in a broader geopolitical chessboard where its agency is determined not by its people but by foreign and internal power brokers. The idea of “strategic depth” should provoke alarm, not acceptance.
Tigray needs a new generation of leadership—one that prioritizes the people over party, transparency over secrecy, and unity over factionalism. This is not a time for silence or complicity. It is a time for clarity, courage, and a renewed commitment to the ideals that once defined the Tigrayan struggle.
Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in the articles published on UMD Media are solely those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the editorial team or UMD Media as an organization. The publication of any opinion piece does not imply endorsement or agreement by UMD Media. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the content and form their own conclusions. Leave your comments below. Send us your thoughts and reflections to umd.media.2020 at gmail dot com.
Guidelines for contributors All contributions and comments submitted to UMD Media must adhere to the following guidelines. Respectful Language: Avoid using ethnic adjectives that generalize or portray an entire ethnic group in a negative light. Such language is harmful, divisive, and contrary to our commitment to fostering a respectful and inclusive environment. No Incitement: Content that incites hatred, violence, or discrimination against any individual or group based on ethnicity, race, religion, etc will not be tolerated. Constructive Dialogue: We encourage constructive dialogue and the sharing of diverse perspectives. However, it is essential to express opinions in a manner that respects the dignity and humanity of all individuals and groups. Moderation and Enforcement: Our editorial team reserves the right to moderate and, if necessary, remove any content that violates these guidelines. Repeat offenders may be subject to account suspension or banning. By contributing to our platform, you agree to abide by these guidelines and help us maintain a respectful and inclusive community.
Subscribe to UMD Media channel. Join UMD Media Telegram Channel: https://t.me/UMDMedia