Mekelle/Tel Aviv/Nairobi/Pretoria/London
Somaliland and Tigray: A Comparative State-Building Analysis
By HAGR
In the Horn of Africa, the contrasting trajectories of Somaliland and Tigray present a stark juxtaposition in terms of state-building, post-liberation politics, and institutional resilience. Both regions emerged from liberation struggles, but their paths diverged dramatically in terms of political organization, military involvement in governance, and economic governance. This comparative analysis of Somaliland’s state-building and Tigray under the TPLF offers critical lessons for the future of Tigray, particularly as it navigates the challenges of post-conflict recovery and institutional reconstruction.
Liberation Movement Transition
Somaliland’s transition from liberation movement to statehood serves as a model of voluntary relinquishment of power. The Somali National Movement (SNM), after liberating the region from the central government of Somalia, did not entrench itself in power. Instead, it dissolved as a ruling force, focusing on building inclusive state institutions. This self-restraint allowed for the emergence of governance structures that could survive beyond the movement’s initial revolutionary goals.
In contrast, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) entrenched itself as a permanent ruling authority after its victory in the Ethiopian Civil War. The TPLF maintained a monopoly over state power, presenting itself as both the moral and political authority of the region. This consolidation of power obstructed the establishment of independent state institutions, creating a system where governance was deeply intertwined with party control.
Strategic Lesson: For Tigray, the lesson is clear: liberation movements must transition out of power to create space for institutions that can outlive them. A state must be built on institutions that are not bound to the fate of the liberation movement itself.
Military–Politics Relationship
In Somaliland, the military was subordinated to civilian authority, ensuring that there were no armed wings of political parties. This civilian supremacy over military affairs is considered foundational to the legitimacy and sustainability of the state. On the other hand, the TPLF politicized its military, embedding it into the state structure and economy. This politicization created a factionalized and militarized system, where the military was not only a tool of power but a central player in political decision-making.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must demilitarize its politics. Institutional legitimacy is only possible when the military serves the state and its citizens, rather than a specific faction or party.
Post-Conflict Reconciliation
Somaliland’s reconciliation efforts were driven by a bottom-up approach, where clan-led peace conferences played a crucial role in reconciling communities and securing social legitimacy. The process was inclusive and socially owned, allowing for a sense of shared responsibility and commitment to peace.
In stark contrast, Tigray’s post-war reconciliation has been monopolized by elite political leaders, with dissent being criminalized. This top-down approach has severely undermined the credibility of the reconciliation process, as it has often been perceived as being managed for political gain rather than genuine peacebuilding.
Strategic Lesson: Reconciliation must be a socially owned process. Tigray should prioritize community-based reconciliation efforts that include all social groups, rather than relying solely on elite-driven political negotiations.
Constitution-Making and Political Pluralism
Somaliland’s constitution was developed after widespread reconciliation and elite consensus, resulting in a document that represents a balance of interests and constrains political power. By contrast, the TPLF made its constitution subordinate to party supremacy, effectively limiting political pluralism and constraining the development of independent democratic institutions. While Somaliland’s political system includes a controlled pluralism, the TPLF’s model suppressed competition and diversity of political expression.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must create a political environment where competition and pluralism are allowed to flourish. A strong constitution must limit the concentration of power and ensure that governance structures are independent of political parties.
State Identity and Social Integration
Somaliland has built a civic-national identity that has gradually evolved over time, incorporating various social groups and stakeholders. This inclusive approach has contributed to Somaliland’s stability and resilience as a de facto state. In contrast, the TPLF conflated party identity with national identity, which alienated many Tigrayans and exacerbated divisions within the state.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must focus on building a civic-national identity that transcends party lines. A state’s identity must be inclusive and capable of uniting all its people, not just the supporters of one faction or movement.
Economic Governance and Aid Dependence
Somaliland’s economy is driven by market forces, with a reliance on diaspora capital and the innovative use of mobile money. This economic autonomy has allowed Somaliland to avoid the pitfalls of aid dependence, which often hampers state sovereignty. Tigray, under the TPLF, developed a war economy that was heavily dependent on external aid and factional control of economic resources. This created a system where economic decisions were tied to party loyalty rather than broad-based development.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must prioritize the development of a market-driven economy and reduce its reliance on aid. Economic autonomy is crucial for building a resilient state that can withstand external pressures.
Security Provision and Civilian Control
In Somaliland, security forces are locally recruited, and their legitimacy is derived from their service to the community. This ensures that the security sector serves the people rather than factional interests. In Tigray, the security apparatus has been militarized and embedded within the political structure, leading to a system where security forces often serve political interests rather than the public good.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray should focus on creating a security sector that is independent, professional, and serves the needs of all citizens, not just one faction or party.
Elite Behavior and Civil Society Space
Somaliland’s political elites exercised restraint, avoiding a winner-takes-all mentality that can destabilize post-war societies. In contrast, the TPLF’s political culture was marked by a winner-takes-all mindset, which has fueled ongoing political polarization. Moreover, in Somaliland, civil society is respected, and independent media and civic actors are tolerated, whereas in Tigray, civil society has been securitized and dissent criminalized.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must foster an environment of political restraint and respect for civil society. Independent media and civic actors are essential for preventing authoritarian relapse and ensuring that power remains accountable to the people.
Geostrategic Leverage and Foreign Relations
Somaliland has been able to leverage its geostrategic location after achieving stability, turning its geographic assets into diplomatic and economic advantages. In contrast, Tigray’s international relations were driven primarily by survival politics, with the region’s leadership seeking recognition at any cost, rather than focusing on building credibility and effective governance.
Strategic Lesson: Tigray must focus on building credible institutions before pursuing foreign recognition. Diplomatic leverage stems from internal stability and the effective functioning of state institutions.
Strategic Meta-Lessons:
- Sequencing Determines Survival: The sequence of state-building efforts is critical. Somaliland prioritized peace, institution-building, and economic development, followed by diplomatic engagement. Tigray, by contrast, focused on consolidating power, militarization, and ideological control, which led to institutional collapse.
- The Central Divergence: Somaliland’s leaders asked, “How do we restrain ourselves after victory?” Tigray’s leaders, by contrast, asked, “How do we retain power forever?” This fundamental difference explains the contrasting outcomes of their state-building efforts.
- What This Means for Tigray’s Future: If Tigray seeks to build a resilient state akin to Somaliland, it must:
Demilitarize politics
Dismantle the fusion of party and state
Restore civilian supremacy
Build institutions that can endure leadership changes
Accept delayed gratification over immediate political gain
Final Strategic Warning
Tigray cannot build sustainable institutions while operating under a TPLF-style system. One must be dismantled for the other to thrive. Only by letting go of the dominance of the party-state fusion and adopting a more inclusive, civilian-led governance approach can Tigray hope to secure long-term stability and legitimacy.
Editor’s Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in articles published by Horn News Hub are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position or editorial stance of Horn News Hub. Publication does not imply endorsement.
