1 1. Introduction 1.1. General Background of the Study Ethnic unrest and tension are prevalent in today’s world. Newspapers and television are rife with stories about ethnic violence among the people of Africa, the Middle East, India, China, Srilanka, Ireland, etc. ‘Many other societies in little danger of civil wars---such as the United States, Britain, Canada, most of the Western Europe, and Japan---are nevertheless torn by ethnic strife. In many ways they are more seriously divided along ethnic lines, marked by racial, linguistic, religious, and national differences, than they were a generation ago’(Yinger,1997:325). It has been noted that violent conflicts around the globe are increasingly based on ethnic divisions. Only a tiny proportion of wars now occur between states; the vast majorities are civil wars with ethnic dimensions. If we are to make a contrast between the pre and post WWII period conflicts, the post WWII conflicts are intra-state rather than the traditional inter-state conflicts which characterize the pre WWII era. Erikson (2002:2) depicted 35 of the 37 bloody armed conflicts across the world in 1991 as internal conflicts, which could be described as ‘ethnic conflicts. According to Scherrer (1994a:74), in three-quarters of all wars worldwide between 1985 and 1992 ethno-nationalist factors predominated; Guri (1994: 369–74) lists a total of forty-nine fields of ethno-political conflict for the 1993–4 period alone, when the trend reached its peak. ‘Most intra-state conflicts are the consequence of either claims for recognition of certain level of distinctiveness or ethnic domination as the case of Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Sudan, etc.,’ (Yishak, 2008:4). To explain why ethnic conflicts have become more pervasive now than ever before, many scholars point to the end of the cold war, which also ended what we might call the
Transcript
1
1. Introduction
1.1. General Background of the Study
Ethnic unrest and tension are prevalent in today’s world. Newspapers and television are
rife with stories about ethnic violence among the people of Africa, the Middle East, India,
China, Srilanka, Ireland, etc. ‘Many other societies in little danger of civil wars---such as
the United States, Britain, Canada, most of the Western Europe, and Japan---are
nevertheless torn by ethnic strife. In many ways they are more seriously divided along
ethnic lines, marked by racial, linguistic, religious, and national differences, than they
were a generation ago’(Yinger,1997:325). It has been noted that violent conflicts around
the globe are increasingly based on ethnic divisions. Only a tiny proportion of wars now
occur between states; the vast majorities are civil wars with ethnic dimensions.
If we are to make a contrast between the pre and post WWII period conflicts, the post
WWII conflicts are intra-state rather than the traditional inter-state conflicts which
characterize the pre WWII era. Erikson (2002:2) depicted 35 of the 37 bloody armed
conflicts across the world in 1991 as internal conflicts, which could be described as
‘ethnic conflicts. According to Scherrer (1994a:74), in three-quarters of all wars
worldwide between 1985 and 1992 ethno-nationalist factors predominated; Guri (1994:
369–74) lists a total of forty-nine fields of ethno-political conflict for the 1993–4 period
alone, when the trend reached its peak. ‘Most intra-state conflicts are the consequence of
either claims for recognition of certain level of distinctiveness or ethnic domination as the
case of Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Sudan, etc.,’ (Yishak, 2008:4).
To explain why ethnic conflicts have become more pervasive now than ever before,
many scholars point to the end of the cold war, which also ended what we might call the
2
“ cold war order” (Keller,1995; Stavenhagen,1996). During the cold war hostilities of
the 1970s and 1980s, the two super-powers, namely, the United States and the Soviet
Union, were major actors on African scene, intervening either directly or indirectly in
many Africa’s conflicts. However, with waning of adversarial relations between the two
superpowers and their allies, in the late 1990s, the situation dramatically changed. At
that point, the superpowers and their allies, with enormous political, economic and
military resources at their disposal, were in an advantageous position to cooperate in
setting regional conflicts. However, after the demise of the cold war, that cooperation
too has waned, as Russia sees less reason for interaction with Africa, and lost some of its
interest as well (Okoth,2002:1). Hence, the end of cold war brought new issues and new
conflict lines in international relations, of which ethnic and identity issues figure most
prominently. Indeed, the end of cold war witnessed the proliferation of internal conflicts
based on identity (Huntington, 1996). Some characterize ethnic conflicts to the wave of
democratization that has become, to some extent, the post-cold war phenomenon. But
this is not universally true: there are a number of ethnic conflict which predate the end
of the cold war (Horn of Africa, Rwanda, India, Nigeria) and in certain cases the end of
the cold war merely added fuel to an already blazing fire(Merera,2003: 26-27).
The importance of ethnic conflict, as a force shaping human affairs, as a phenomenon
to be understood, as a threat to be controlled, can no longer be denied. By one
computation, ethnic violence since the second world war has estimated to claim more
than ten million lives (Isaacs,1975), and in the last two decades ethnic conflict has
become especially wide spread(Horowitz, 1985: Xi). Ethnicity is at the core of politics in
country after country, a strong source of challenges to the cohesion of states and of
3
international relations. However, the nature of conflicts in the world has been
experiencing significant changes. Conflicts have shifted to the ‘third world’ and they
have become more intra-state than the traditional inter-state wars (Khanna and Kueck,
eds., 2003:202). According to Horowitz
the movements that sought independence from the colonial powers were not always wholly representative of all ethnic groups in their territories. Some groups that were not so well represented attempted, with varying degrees of success, to slow down the march to independence or to gain special concessions or even a separate state. But, with some exceptions, ethnic differences tended to be muted until independence was achieved. Following independence, however, the context and the issues changed. No longer was the struggle against external powers paramount. No longer was colonial domination the issue. Self-determination had been implemented only to the level of preexisting colonial boundaries. Within these boundaries, the question was to whom the new states belonged. As some groups moved to succeed to the power of the former colonialists, others were heard to claim that self-determination was still incomplete; for they had not achieved their own independence…. In a large number of ex-colonial states, the independence rally gave way to the ethnic riot (Horowitz, 1985:4-5).
Comprising the largest share of ex-colonial states of the world, Africa is caught up in a
range of intra- to inter-state conflicts. According to one recent study, 16 wars took place
between 1990 and 1997 in Africa. Of these, 14 were intrastate conflicts (Algeria, Angola,
Chad, Ethiopia, Liberia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa,
Sudan, Uganda, Western Sahara, and the Republic of Congo). Only 2 were interstate
(Chad/Libya and Rwanda/Uganda) (ISS, 2009). Even it is reported that ‘Since
independence, about one-third of the countries of Africa have experienced large-scale
political violence or war’ (Ali, 2004:5). But not all African countries are affected to the
same degree. In some African countries, a whole generation has never experienced peace
since independence and has internalized war as a legitimate part of life (Nhema,
2004:11). For instance, over the last four decades (i.e., between the 1960s and the 1990s),
approximately 80 violent changes in government in the 48 sub-Saharan African countries
took place (Adedeje, 1999:2). Strangely enough, Africa has seen over seventy coups in
4
the last quarter of the 20thC (Ali, 2004:9). Roughly in the same period, Africa has
suffered the greatest number of armed conflicts in the world” (Andreas, 2003: i).
The report of OSSREA(Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and
Southern Africa) states that in the 1990s alone, numerous fatal conflicts raged in
different parts of Africa, ‘with a continent watching, horrified but powerless to act’
(OSSREA, 2002:3). The situations in Burundi, the DRC (Democratic Republic of
Congo), Liberia, Rwanda, Sierraleone, Somalia and Sudan, among others, have presented
a spectacle of unimagined atrocities. This picture of ‘a continent in turmoil’, with a
snapshot of explosive conflicts, presents a horrifying threat to development and human
experience (Bujira, 2000).
The situation has not significantly altered in this early period of the new millennium.
Currently there are a number of overt violent conflicts as testified by current civil war
incidence in Somalia, Sudan, Egypt, Libya, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Burundi and the DRC.
There is no doubt that conflict has become a unique feature of Africa. ‘Apart from HIV
/AIDS plague, the outbreak of war is the other most devastating challenge to the African
people’ (Olango, 2000). African societies are intertwined in very horrible conflicts that
have devastating consequences on their societies and the environment. The conflicts have
had significant adverse effects on the continent, deflating many of the resources including
human resources. It is now accepted that without durable peace, there can be no
meaningful development in Africa. The search for novel and nuanced peace initiatives
must, therefore, be put high on the agenda. Africa cannot claim its place among the stable
and prosperous nations, if the issues of civil strife and conflict resolution mechanisms are
not addressed in holistic manner (Nhema, 2004:11).
5
If we see the situation by region, the Horn of Africa region (which comprises
Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya and Sudan) is regarded as highly susceptible
to conflicts, and is one of the most conflict-prone areas in the continent. The Horn is the
sub-region of protracted conflict and instability (Weyesa, 2011; Medhine, 2003; Zartman,
1996). Over the past six decades there was no single year when the sub region was free
from conflict (Tafesse, 2011:4). In the Horn, the conflicts that have occurred since 1960s
have largely been internal. Border conflicts have been rare (Sriram and Nielsen, eds.,
2006:36), and most of the wars in the Horn during the last decades of the 20th century
have been described in terms of ethnic conflicts (Befekadu and Diribssa, 2005:77). For
example, the civic war in Darfur, the protracted war between Ethiopia and Eritrea (before
its independence in 1993), ethnic violence in Kenya after the 2007 presidential election,
among other, are some to mention.
Some even contend the Horn of Africa region as highly complicated because politics
and ethnicity are deeply interwoven. Similarly, the region is known for the pastoralist
movement from place to place leading to almost continuous local warfare and frequent
forced migration. In general, the sub-region is often considered as the most volatile area
in the world despite some progress made in ending long lasting regional wars (Dereje,
2010; Medhine, 2003). Being a country comprised in the Horn of Africa, situations in
Ethiopia are not exception to what is prevailing in the region. ‘Ethiopia has been
consumed by strife for most of the 19thC and more than a third of the 20thC’ (Andreas,
2003: i).
Ethiopia is a highly complex and colorful social mosaic, comprising a number of
ethnic, linguistic and national groups characterized by an immense cultural diversity and
The EPRDF’s government has played a decisive role in shaping the country’s political
landscape. The ruling party made radical changes to the unitary structure of the state and
introduced federalism based upon the principle of self-determination including the right
to secession with a view to addressing the claims of ethnic groups (ethnic or national
question1) in the country of historic discrimination and inequality, and to build a multi-
ethnic democracy. This was followed by the creation of constituent units of the multi-
national federation along ethnic lines.
The restructuring of the state along ethnic lines and the resulting decentralization of
powers was expected to mitigate, if not eradicate, of the hitherto ethnic-based armed
conflicts among the various ethnic-based national liberation movements and also is
expected to prevent violent inter-ethnic conflicts in the future (Alemayehu, 2009; Asebe,
2007; Asnake, 2004). However, serious issues emerged soon after it was implemented.
Even in the post-1991 period inter-ethnic tensions and conflicts have accompanied the
1 ’Ethnic or National Question’ in Ethiopian context refers to the quests by representatives of ethno-
national groups and political forces and /or movements to abolish ethnic domination and oppression, as well as their struggle to promote political right, freedom, equality and respect of identity of the respective ethnic group. It was articulated by Ethiopian Students’ Movement (ESM) and eventually emerged as a political agenda during the 1974 Ethiopian revolution and even since (Bahiru, 1991).
9
federalization process. For instance, violent conflicts took place between Guji and
Sidama peoples in the borders of Oromia and SNNPR (MoFA, 2010); between Konso
and Derashe peoples in SNNPR (Yideneckachew,2011); between Afar and Karrayu-
Oromo (Asnake, 2010); between the Afar and Issa peoples (Muuz,2010); between Borana
and Guji Oromos (Weyesa,2011); between karayu Oromo and the neighboring
Amhara(Betelehem, 2010); between Oromos in the areas of Eastern Wellega and Gumuz
peoples in Benishangul-Gumuz Region (Alemayehu, 2009, Yishak, 2008; Peter, 1997 );
and Gedeo of SNNPR and Guji of Oromia region (Girum, 2011; Asebe, 2007). This
research focuses on the 1995 and 1998 violent ethnic conflicts between the Gedeo and
Guji-Oromo peoples of the SNNPR and Oromia region respectively.
1.2. Statement of the problem
As conflicts drag on and escalate, they cause widespread violations of human rights and
worsen famine conditions as productive activities are disrupted and farms are abandoned.
Wars divert scarce resources away from development undertakings, disrupt trade,
discourage tourism and contribute to the breakdown of family structures. The
pervasiveness and persistence of conflict will also contribute to psychological issues as
children are traumatized or become accustomed to a culture of violence. If we see cases
in the Horn of Africa, for example, the war in Darfur Sudan, other than its economic,
cultural and environmental crises, claimed the lives of over 400,000, and displaced over
2,500,000 people. More than 100 people continue to die each day; 5000 die every month
(http://www.darfurscores.org/). As of the obliteration of government in Somalia, the
violent conflict among people in different clans claimed the life of over a million citizens
10
of that country. ‘In the course of two years (1998-2000) Ethio-Eritrea war, it is estimated
that 70,000--100,000 lives were lost; many more were either wounded or displaced’
(Sriram and Nielsen, ed. 2006:46). It is now becoming increasingly recognized that many
of the developmental ‘failures’ of recent years cannot be traced merely to technical,
financial, or economic inadequacy, but are due to the cultural and ethnic complexities
involved in ‘nation-building’ (Howard, 1989: vii).
Many analysts blame the colonial legacy for most of the major conflicts in Africa,
while others blame Africans themselves, considering the conflicts as the product of the
failure of their governments (Israel, 2009:1; Murithi, 2006:11). Although Ethiopia
remained as a sovereign state free from external colonial conquest, except the short
period (1936-’41) occupation by Italy, it had much in common with the colonial
experiences in other parts of the continent. The empire-building process launched by the
Abyssinian kingdom in late 19thC against the autonomous states of southern, south
western and eastern parts of today’s Ethiopia through relentless campaigns of conquest
enables one to draw parallels with colonialism (Teshale, 1995: xv; McClellan, 1998). The
conquest led to the birth of an empire under Amhara ethnic hegemony, land appropriation
from the indigenous peoples, political domination, cultural marginalization and economic
exploitation of the subjected groups. Thus, the root of ethnic questions in the country is
based on the creation of the empire and the subsequent dynamics of its evolution
(Merera, 2003:1). Situations in the successive regimes (during Haile-Silassie-I and the
Military rules) were not improved, rather deteriorated.
Upon coming to power in May1991 the recent (EPRDF) government formally
recognized ethnicity as a fundamental instrument to protect the rights and respond to the
11
past injustices of nations, nationalities and peoples of the country. To this effect,
constitutionally, the country’s political map was reengineered by ethnic-based federal
arrangement which ostensibly provided ‘autonomous’ rights to regional states. Despite
such rhetoric from the government policy in formalizing ethnicity as a basic framework
and political agenda of the country’s political and economic system, and as a mechanism
of building a ‘new Ethiopia’, inter-ethnic conflicts have become more frequent since
1991 than ever before (Asebe, 2007; Asnake, 2004; Merera, 2003). The Gedeo and Guji
ethnic groups are some of the victims of this new government restructuring.
These two ethnic groups had experienced peaceful co-existence for long period in the
southern part of Ethiopia. Historically, the two ethnic groups were engaged in different
but complementary economic activities, the Gedeo as settled agriculturalists and the Guji
as pastoralists. Their economic activities and inhabiting separate ecological niches,
among others, enabled them to create symbiotic relations (Tadesse K., 2002; Tadesse B.,
2009; McClellan, 1988:27; Abiyot, 2005; Girum, 2011:5). Despite this, in recent times
they have experienced unprecedented conflicts first in 1995 and again in 1998 which
negatively impacted the image of long-standing cooperative relations. In these conflicts
neither their historical interdependence nor origin stories of a ‘common ancestry’
prevented the violence from happening (Asebe, 2007; Girum, 2011). Although the causes
of the conflicts are contentious, it led to the loss of lives and injuries of a large number of
people (chapter 5) and had dramatic economic, psychological and sociocultural
repercussions. Though the physical conflicts ‘ended’ with the intervention of federal
defense force (in the 1995 case) and with the ‘collaborated’ effort between government
and local elders (in1998), ‘the root causes of the conflicts are not yet resolved’ (Tadesse
12
B., 2009:197; Girum, 2011:91; interview with Gedeo and Guji key informants at Gedeb,
and Bulre-Hora respectively, May 2012).
This brings about critical questions, which need thorough investigation: How and why
did the long time of mutual cooperation, interdependence and co-existence between these
ethnic groups crack? What are the perceptions of the conflicting parties regarding the
conflicts? What were the root causes and proximate factors of the conflicts? Who were
the major actors in the conflicts? What significant roles were played by different
government structures (federal, regional, and local governments) in the conflict and
conflict resolution endeavors? What are the conflict management mechanisms /processes
used? How do the Gedeo and Guji customary conflict resolution institutions work with
the existing formal (state-run) political systems in resolving the conficts? What roles did
Gedeo and Guji women play in the conflict and conflict resolution? What is the current
peace and security situation, and what are the future prospects for peace in the area?
What are the major theoretical explanations relevant to ethnic conflicts, and how do they
explain it? What should be done to reduce the severity of ethnic conflict and maximize
the likelihood of interethnic cooperation?
13
1.3. Objectives of the study
The overall objective of this research is to assess the causes of 1995 and 1998 Gedeo-
Guji ethnic conflicts and to examine the factors that contributed to the outbreak of violent
conflicts between the groups. To achieve this goal, therefore, the study specifically
attempts to assess the historical relationship of the Gedeo and Guji so as to better
understand the current relationship; the study also investigates the impacts of national
government policies upon local communities. In connection with this, the study gives due
emphasis to disclose how the current (EPRDF) government’s policy of ethnic federalism
affected the cordial interrelation among different ethnic groups in the country in general
and between Gedeo and Guji peoples in particular. The study uncovers proximate factors
of the conflict; identifies the major actors in the conflicts, discusses the efforts made by
government bodies at different levels (federal, regional and local) to manage the
conflicts; examines the roles played by the local customary institutions and mechanisms
of conflict resolution; discusses the status and roles of Gedeo and Guji women in conflict
and conflict resolution; and finally assesses the post conflict or current inter-ethnic
relations as well as prospect of future relation between the groups.
1.4. Significance of the study
The problems related with Ethnicity and ethnic conflicts are sensitive and complex
political issue which require profound understanding, close follow-up, and well-designed
strategy to handle them. Understanding root causes of conflict enables planners and
policy makers at local level to suggest realistic intervention strategies of conflict
prevention, resolution and post conflict relations to the groups in conflict. Therefore, the
14
result of this research will assist local level planners and policy makers to address the
conflict under study on the basis of compromise and accommodations that may ensure
mutual benefits of the parties in conflict. Besides, the lessons learnt from Gedeo-Guji
conflict and how they are ‘ended’ (the strength and weak parts) can be taken as a lesson
or input in resolution of similar conflicts in southern Ethiopia.
I believe the findings of this research will help social scientists and students who want
to conduct studies on ethnicity, conflict and conflict resolution mechanism. The study
will add to the better understanding of the nature, causes and repercussions of ethnic
conflicts in Ethiopian contexts with a view to deliberating on possible measures to be
taken towards conflict prevention and /or resolution, as well as post conflict relations. I
hope this research will also contribute to the existing theoretical debates in ethnicity and
ethnic conflict, and to the broadening of existing literature and knowledge on peace and
conflict studies in the context of the Horn of Africa in general and in Ethiopia in
particular from anthropological perspectives.
5. Methodology of the study
This study utilizes qualitative methods because they are holistic. In contrast to
quantitative research where data are collected through survey, questionnaires, qualitative
research methodologies help in divulging experiences, perceptions and meanings of
research participants. The approach pays attention to meanings, notably, how people
make sense out of their lives and experiences. Moreover, “qualitative research is of
specific relevance to the study of social relations owing to the fact of polarization of life
worlds” (Flick, 2002:27).
15
1.5.1. Field work in Gedeo and Guji localities
The ethnographic field work for the research was carried out within fourteen months
(July 2011 to August 2012) time. This research is limited both in time and space. It
focuses mainly on the 1995 and 1998 Gedeo-Guji conflicts. It would not provide
exhaustive accounts of conflicts between the two groups. Rather, it looks into and
analyses the specific conflicts which happened during the abovementioned years by
taking some rural kebeles and towns directly affected by the conflicts and see through the
impacts of the conflicts upon the current interethnic relationship among the groups.
To collect data from Gedeo and Guji informants, first of all, I made a link with the Gedeo
zone, and Borana zone administrations where the Gedeo and Guji people predominantly
live. Bule-Hora and Gedeb are the two major woredas selected for the study. These
woredas are selected simply because they are adjoining woredas where the Gedeo and
Guji live close by and get together for different social, cultural, as well as economic
purposes. Of these two woredas, eight rural kebeles (four from each woreda) and the
capital towns of the two woredas (Gedeb and Bule-Hora towns) were drawn as specific
target areas of the study. The rural kebeles include: Kilenso-Mekonisa, Kilenso-Ressa,
Gerba and Hera-Lipitu from Bule-Hora woreda, and Banko-Gotiti, Banko-Chelchele,
Hallo-Beriti, and Gedeb-Gelcha from Gedeb woreda. I chose these kebeles for two
reasons. Though these kebeles are administratively located in different woredas and
regions, the Gedeo and Guji live together in these communities, and these were some of
the kebeles experienced substantial violent conflict in 1995 and 1998. Apart from this, I
spent four weeks in Dilla zuria and Bule woredas from Gedeo zone, and another four
weeks in Abaya and Gelana woredas from Borena zone to gather additional information.
16
The informant selection technique was mainly based on purposive sampling. This is
simply because purposive sampling is much more helpful to get in touch with
knowledgeable persons with the desired expertise. The other reason for choosing this
technique emanated from some pertinent factors such as physical settings of the study
areas, the nature of the problem under study and the purpose of the study. Most
importantly, the research was conducted amongst a large and scattered rural population
where it was difficult either to obtain or establish lists (sample frame) of all members of
the disputant communities.
I like to emphasize that field work is an important part of research in social sciences,
particularly in anthropology. It enables researchers to get life experiences of the subjects
to be researched rather than only reading about ‘imagined’ groups. Fieldwork acquaints
researchers with the knowledge and challenges underlying in it, methods to be adopted,
strategies to be employed and mechanisms to approach the study groups without violating
their social values, norms and customs.
I lived and learnt my primary and junior secondary, and high school education at
Yirgachaffee and Dilla---the two biggest towns of Gedeo zone. Besides, I have worked as
a government employee for over three years in a Gedeo locality (in the then Fiseha-Genet
woreda) before I joined Addis Ababa University for my first degree education. I did my
first and second degree researches on Gedeo people. On top of these, some eight years
ago, I have participated in Ethiopian village study---a research that was carried out by
Addis Ababa University in collaboration with Oxford University, UK. In that study I took
part in studying the Gedeo. As a result of these experiences I had in Gedeo localities, I
got an opportunity to have acquaintances with the Gedeo literates, influential individuals,
17
government and NGO employees, and experts in zonal and woreda bureaus. Therefore,
the field work in Gedeo was easier as compared to the time I spent in Guji areas. Owing
to my previous background, it was not difficult for me to establish rapport among the
Gedeo as compared with the Guji where I was seen as a stranger.
This doesn’t mean that I am completely unfamiliar with the Guji communities. I have
prior acquaintances with Guji areas such as Solamo, Hagere-Mariam (now Bule-Hora)
and Yabelo. Thus, in Borana zone also experts and chiefs of zonal and woreda
administrative councils, culture and tourism, as well as agricultural development offices
helped me to the extent beyond my expectations. At the beginning the Guji rural people
in my specific research sites suspected me as government spy or cadre and saw me with
suspicion. But later, after I developed rapport and after they understood the objectives of
the research and my being purely an academic, they cooperated and helped me as a guest
of honor and with great respect. Therefore, I can say, the time I spent in Guji localities
was also friendly. However, what I noticed in Guji localities is their doors are not open
for strangers. It takes a long time to develop rapport and secure the trust of the people.
One has to answer quite a lot of questions before securing their trust. I was asked, among
others, the following questions: Who are you? Why did you come here? Why did you
choose to study us? What are you trying to accomplish? Who do you know from our
community? What is the relevance of this study to us? I was upfront about the purpose of
the study and answered their questions in detail. Thereafter, I was able to obtain their
turst and they opened up. Most of my informants later became extremely willing to share
their culture, history and perception about themselves and others. Some even invited me
to their homes.
18
Above all, in this politically sensitive subject of research, all research participants took
part in the research of their own free will. The way of life of the research subjects (the
Gedeo and the Guji peoples) was respected and appreciated. Research participants were
told about the objectives of the research before they took part in the interview process.
Moreover, photography and tape recordings were done with the consent of the
participants. Although all participants in the interview and discussions gave permission
for their comments to be recorded and used, and many expressed their willingness for
quotations to be attributed, willingness to be named was not uniform. In view of the
political sensitivity of many of the issues under discussion, this came as no surprise. I
have therefore adopted a policy throughout of not naming interviewees, attempting
instead to contextualize their remarks by providing some relevant indication of the status
of the person quoted, without compromising their anonymity where necessary.
1.5.2. Methods of inquiry
Before I went to the field work, I examined my area of study or problem of the research
with review of related literatures from secondary sources. The method is helpful because
it enables one to have a broad understanding of the subject under investigation. Books,
journals, Articles, and archives as well as internet sources are exhaustively referred.
These sources are used to obtain basic information on the geographic setting, socio-
economic background, political history and interethnic relations of the Gedeo and Guji.
Through this method documents on ethnic relations, conflict, causes of conflict,
repercussions of conflict, conflict resolution and socio-political dynamics in Ethiopia are
also collected so as to comprehend the general historical, political and cultural conditions
19
in the country at large. It is also from these sources of information that conceptual
clarification and theoretical framework on the subject is molded.
I have collected most of the materials on the topic of ethnicity and ethnic conflict in
African and Ethiopia in general, and on Gedeo-Guji peoples in particular from the library
of the Institute for Ethiopian Studies (IES), Institute of Peace and Security Studies
(IPSS), Organization for Social Science Research in East and Southern Africa
(OSSREA), J. F. Kennedy memorial library, and Institute of Federalism (IoF) that are
centered at Addis Ababa University. Apart from these, I obtained some materials from
the libraries of Hawassa University (my home base), Dilla University, and Andhra
University in India. The 1994 federal constitution and proclamations pertinent to the
issue under investigation were referred to, and studies that were made by culture and
tourism offices, population and statics offices, agricultural development bureaus, and
Institute of Nationalities’ Study are also referred.
In addition, through the primary data collection method, I have attempted to get as
much information and insight as possible on the Gedeo-Guji relations and conflict and
how it ‘ended’ as expressed in their own terms and concepts (emic perspective). Since I
do not speak either Gedeufa / Gede’inke affo (the language of Gedeo), or Affan Oromo
(the language of Guji-Oromo), I got Gedeo and Guji native speaker research assistants
who helped me in translating their respective language into Amharic, the national
language of Ethiopia. I am well aware that since I do not speak either language, I may
have created some communication barriers between me and my informants. However,
this limitation was overcome by triangulation; that is, by raising most important issues in
20
different discussion sessions, particularly in focus group discussion (FGD), with the
informants.
Both Bule-Hora and Gedeb woreda administrations provided me with research
assistants who were with me all the time during my stay in the field. I used my research
assistants not only as translators of languages. They also participated in the research as
key informants and program coordinators for each day's discussions / interviews with
informants in their respective area. Thus, their input in this thesis is manifold. Both of my
research assistants are educated individuals. While the Gedeb woreda research assistant is
a diploma holder, my research assistant of Bule-Hora has BA degree in anthropology
(incidentally, this person was my student at Hawassa University and now he works in
Bule-Hora woreda culture, tourism and government information and communication
affairs office).
In other woredas (Dilla zuria, Bule, Guangua, Torre) where I spent relatively minimal
time language translators were found ‘on the spot’. In some sites, I used female
translators or assistants. In big towns (Dilla, Yirgachaffee, Yabello and Bule-Hora) as
most of the people speak Amharic well; nearly all interviews were in Amharic.
I compensated all my research assistants for their kind services and genuine assistances.
Besides, the background and the social acceptance of field assistants among the study
group enable an ethnographer to win the confidence of the groups, to cross to their back-
region information and reduces informants’ attempt to conceal their secrets. To this end,
my research assistants were selected in accordance with their familiarity with their
respective communities, their knowledge of the research sites, and to some extent based
on their knowledge about research.
21
It is becoming a common tradition for informants to demand remuneration for the time
they spend in interviews and group discussions. To meet their demands and in quest of
eliciting valuable information, I have remunerated my key informants in different ways---
by inviting them to breakfast, lunch and/or soft drinks, and sometimes compensating
them in cash.
However, I am well aware that there are challenges in doing anthropological research
as a cultural outsider. Anthropologists recognize that, while being a cultural insider
furnishes the researcher with obvious practical advantages such as command of the local
language, there is also a risk that the insider may take for granted concepts and practices
that would have interested a cultural outsider like me and thus provoked further inquiry.
A cultural insider might consider some aspects to be ‘too obvious’ to follow up in
interviews or discussions. But outsiders like me give due regard to each and every
behavior and activities.
I used note books, a tape recorder, and a camera with an interview checklist in order to
document accurate information through the different methods listed below. The most
important primary data collection instruments I employed include: participant
observation, in-depth interview, and focus group discussion. Interviews are cited in the
thesis text as follows: interview, category or description of interviewee, location of
interview, and date of interview.
It is a common understanding among anthropologists that participant observation is a
common data collection method in the ethnographic research tradition where a researcher
immerses himself in the study setting. The researcher interacts intensively with the
people in the study area over a long period of time, in order to gain understanding of their
22
behaviors, actions and the meaning to each of these actions. The extended interaction
reduces the researcher’s ‘strangeness’ and presumably helps him to establish a good
rapport with the people among whom he or she works. Accordingly, by the virtue of
living among the people, I have got the advantage of observing their behavior and action
in both formal and informal settings. The extended fieldwork is instrumental in gaining a
comprehensive understanding of the cultures under study, and serves as a precursor to
selective and more focused observations. Accordingly, the extended stay with my
research subjects helped me to easily approach them and raise such politically sensitive
issues without harming their interests and feelings. Through participant observation, I
have collected information on the day to day activities of the Gedeo and Guji in relation
to their social life/interaction, cultural events, as well as political and economic activities.
I have participated in several activities and social/political events, such as peasant
association (PA) meetings, elders’ assemblies for dispute resolving in villages, elders and
kebele administration joint meetings to discuss on different social and political affairs in
their localities, church prayers, wedding ceremonies, etc.
In-depth interview was also employed in both rural and urban settings of Gedeo and
Guji. Semi-structured and unstructured interview checklists were developed as a guide
for the interview process. The interviews were administered with selected key
informants. These include well-informed individuals who are believed to have sufficient
knowledge about their people and locality, influential elders, government officials,
religious and clan leaders, kebele PA administrators, teachers, Agricultural development
workers, health extension workers, and young and old people from different villages.
Age, sex, education/ occupation, and social status were given due consideration.
23
Accordingly, 6-8 individual from each rural kebele of the major research sites in
Gedeb and Bule-Hora woredas (a total of 57 persons) took part in the interview. In
addition, in the urban areas (mainly in Gedeb and Bule-Hora, and also in Dilla, Bule,
Yabelo, Guangua, and Torre) 5-7 individuals from each town, a total of 41 individuals
participated in the interview.
Using this method, data on such issues as ethnic origin and history of the society;
religion, customary social organizations, production practices, meaning of peace and
conflict, root causes and proximate factors of the 1990s conflicts, key actors in the
conflict, and repercussions of the conflicts, local conflict resolution mechanisms and
relationship between customary and formal or government-run conflict management
institutions were discussed.
Informal conversations with local elders, teachers, health extension and agricultural
development workers (in their homes, work places, village drink houses, and other
related areas) had also paramount importance to my research. Due to the fact that the use
of small number of key informants and oral traditions do not guarantee the reliability of
the information, I employed several FGDs on selected issues both in Gedeo and Guji
localities. People of different age, sex, occupation, and social status were made to involve
in the discussions. Using this method 3-4 FGD in each rural kebeles of the major research
sites in Gedeb and Bule-Hora woredas (a total of 28FGDs) were carried out. In addition,
in Wochema and Agemsa kebeles of Bule woreda I conducted 3FGDs. In the towns of
Dilla, Bule, Guangua, and Torre also I employed two FGD in each. Each FGD consisted
of 6-8 individuals.
24
Basic information concerning people’s perceptions regarding peace and conflict,
perception towards own groups and others, causes and effects of conflict were discussed.
Besides, this method enabled me in reconciling or validating some disparities that were
encountered in individual interviews and other data collection instruments.
I have used oral historical narratives as one of the most important source data collection
in this study. Gedeo and Guji political history; Gedeo-Guji interethnic relations,
economic, social and cultural issues including their customary social organizations prior
to the incorporation of the area into the Ethiopian empire in the last quarter of the 19thC
was collected through this technique.
As this is qualitative research, ongoing data interpretation and analysis as of the very
first day of the field work was employed. Field notes were used and developed to a full-
fledged research document. Tape recording the interview process and transcribing were
the essential components of the analysis.
However, the tape recording was one methodological challenge I faced in this
research. In some areas while discussing issues related to government policy and how
they were implemented during the 1995 and 1998 Gedeo-Guji conflicts, some key
informants did not want to tell what they saw and felt genuinely when I used a tape-
recorder. This is because they do not want to be recorded for fear of their voices reaching
the ears of the government. Therefore, in some areas I preferred not to tape record the
interview of my informants so that they would feel and talk freely. In the absence of a
tape-recorder, some informants, particularly some government authorities at zone and
woreda levels discussed freely even some times against the policy and programs of the
ruling party in which they are members.
25
1.6. Structure of the study
The study comprises of eight chapters. Chapter one begins by giving a brief background
to the study and stating the research problem; outlining the objectives and significances
and discussing the methodology of the study. In the second chapter concepts pertinent to
the subject of this study (ethnicity, ethnic conflict, causes of conflict, repercussions of
conflict, and conflict resolution) are defined and discussed, and also debates in the
existing theories of ethnicity and ethnic conflict(primordialism, instrumentalism and
constructivism) are presented. The theoretical argument focuses on the instrumentalist
theory of ethnicity and ethnic conflict and its relevance in African context. Much focus is
given on how elite manipulation directs and instigates ethnic conflict. The third chapter is
devoted to the discussion of brief account of Ethiopian political history. This gives a
comprehensive understanding of the historical foundations of the Ethiopian state, from
which the roots causes of most of the present day ethnic conflicts in Ethiopia presumably
emanate. The chapter underscores how different regimes in Ethiopia under the guise of
nation-building and modernization influenced or played significant roles in the changes
of interethnic relation among the Gedeo and Guji communities of southern Ethiopia.
Then chapter four comes. This is where the thesis presents the research setting. In this
section Gedeo and Guji geographic location, language, religion, origin, clan
organizations, production practices, customary systems of administration, and how they
are incorporated into the Ethiopian empire is illustrated. Chapter five portrays the
historical relations of the Gedeo and the Guji peoples, which includes both cordial and
conflictual relations. This is one of the most important parts of the thesis for that it is
there that an assessment about the historical cordial as well as the contemporary
26
conflictual relations of the groups is presented. Chapter six presents the quest for the
resolution of the Gedeo-Guji conflicts of the 1990s. This chapter discusses the conflict
management strategies and institutions involved in the resolution of the aforesaid
conflicts. The attempts made by different level government institutions (federal, regional,
local) to resolve the 1990s Gedeo-Guji conflicts are discussed in this chapter. The status
and roles of Gedeo and Guji women in conflict and conflict resolution are also presented
there. It is also in this chapter that the post conflict relations among the groups which
include the present peace and stability situations in the area, and the future prospects are
portrayed. Chapter seven is a place where the final analysis to the Gedeo-Guji conflict of
1990s in relation to the existing theoretical debates is made. The final chapter, chapter
eight, abridges the major findings of the study and gives some suggestion that need to be
considered in order to bring about lasting peace between the conflicting groups and to
