The Ethiopian Red Terror: A Sociological Perspective

The Ethiopian Red Terror took place in the 1970’s after the aristocracy was overthrown. The violent actions were a result of a political power struggle between the Provisional Military Administrative council (Derg), and the Ethiopia People’s Revolutionary Party (EPRP). The Derg began mass killings and imprisonments for anyone they deemed to be counter-revolutionary, to which the EPRP responded with their own violence, which escalated to genocide. This case proves individual in its analysis as the violence was between two groups who came from the same political side that could not agree on the democratic rule of the country. The uniqueness of this case calls for the identification of different aspects of sociological framework in order to understand how it ensued. I will explore this understanding through the political violence between the parties and their relations as both perpetrators and victims of violence. Furthermore, sociological theory of genocide will be adapted to the Ethiopian case in order to gain an understanding of how it occurred. This case illustrates one motivated by political means that spiraled toward mass violence, and therefore exploration into political violence is necessary both as separate entities and how politics and violence interrelate to reproduce each other. The case of the Ethiopian Red Terror provides important framework in the theory of political violence and the civilising process of society in order to understand how this society did not stop before genocide occurred.

The Ethiopian Red Terror occurred throughout the 1970’s under the military regime of Colonel Megnistu Haile Mariam in an attempt to eradicate any political opposition to his reign (Tegegn 2012, p.250). The aristocracy has previously been overthrown with very little violence, however the rise of a social order and government proved more difficult. The Derg and the EPRP began their conflict over how the democracy should be governed. In order to maintain his power, Mengistu instated a ‘shoot to kill’ policy which marks a shifting point in Ethiopian history where hundreds of people who were suspected to be part of the EPRP were killed, tortured and imprisoned (Tegegn 2012, p.253). The instigation of this policy proves a significant point in the analysis of the Terror as it displays that the Derg were willing to do anything in order to maintain power (Tegegn 2012, p.252). The executions that took place were public figures and activists, where reasonings such as ‘reactionary politics’ and ‘sabotaging the revolution’ were made by the Derg (Tegegn 2012, p.252). The escalation of violence continued and the EPRP began a violent campaign as a response. Understanding of the difficult political struggle that ensued at this time is evident, as the autocracy had already been overthrown and the distinction between the remaining parties was blurred, particularly when distinguishing the ‘counter-revolutionaries’ and the ‘revolutionaries’ of the Derg. The pivotal moment in the Red Terror I argue to be due to the need Mengitsu had to maintain power at all costs. Tareke further concurs with this notion as he believes that Mengitsu would do anything to keep his rule over the masses (Tareke 2008, p.259) and argues this to be fundamental in this case, claiming the Red Terror could have been avoided.

Political violence is a key aspect of the escalation of violence that ensued in Ethiopia. One of the defining features in this case is the justifications that both sides provided as a response to the killing, torturing and imprisonment of others. Not only was there a political struggle between the Derg and the EPRP, but as Toggia (2012, p.266) illustrates, there was instability within the Derg as well, fragmenting the party and the political power it attempted to maintain. The progression of violence was able to happen because of the way the perpetrators justified the violence to themselves and to others. Both the Derg and the EPRP stated that they were acting as ‘revolutionary justice’ and that each of their attacks was only a counter attack as self-defense from the other (Toggia 2012, p.272,274). This legitimisation of violence adds to the understanding of the escalation of violence, however it begs the question of when and how does morality step in. In the present case this is not seen, instead, the Derg responded to the political struggle by altering laws and adding new measures to justify executions and imprisonment to aid their position (Toggia 2012, p.269), thus giving further justification for their violence in a judicial manner. Jalata expands on the alteration of the law to allow violence as a tactic that goes against what should be present in a civilised and humane society (Jalata 2012, p.323).

Extending on this concept, the legalisation of inhumane methods as a tactic to maintain power further produces violence, and in this case, led to the genocide by the Red Terror. Toggia (2010, p.334) uses this case of political violence and expands on it, naming it no different from state terrorism. In this way, he claims that the legitimising aspects used throughout the Red Terror campaign is a common way in which state terror is inflicted, and that these justifications only solidify that the Ethiopian case is one of state terrorism through the goal of eradicating any opposition to maintain hold on the state. Politics and violence are something which can be theoretically assessed as separate entities, however as Ayyash asserts, the separation of these two entities rather creates a ‘paradox of political violence’ (Ayyash 2013, p.342) where the aim of one is to destroy the other, however as seen in our case, the two remain interconnected and can be used as a vessel to heighten the other, not destroy it. In the theorising of political violence, Ayyash (2013, p.344) acknowledges Arendt’s (1969) assertion that violence can only reproduce itself, and that the emergence of the political cannot procure through violence. However, the complexity of this argument is explored when the work of Fanon (2004) is examined, where organised and well led violence can assist in the creation of a political body aligned with the masses (cited by Ayyash 2013, p.345). Through the Red Terror, the peculiar aspect of politics is again emphasised, as the distinction between ‘productive’ violence and ‘destructive’ violence (Ayyash 2013, p.345) is a distinction which is valuable when understanding the escalation of violence, where the political goal was blurred. Through this research, Ayyash argues that the exploration of politics and violence should be looked at as a continuum that is constantly altering and resisting power and domination relations (Ayyash 2013, p.354). As Ahmad states, ‘state terror very often breeds collective terror’ (Ahmad 1998, p.5 cited by Jalata 2010, p.321), which allows us to explore the civilising process in our understanding of how genocide can be present in modern societies.

In examining the case of the Ethiopian Red Terror, the sociological framework towards genocide provides a space for further exploration. Shaw (2009, p.102) identifies that generally, genocide is seen as actions that are inflicted upon a group of people that are unarmed by a powerful group such as the military. Through this perception, genocide is portrayed as one-sided and therefore not based on conflict. This illustration is problematic through this case as the Ethiopian genocide stemmed from and escalated due to mass conflict on both sides. This asymmetry seen through dual sided genocide opens up exploration of the relations between the victims and perpetrators, or the attackers and the attacked, but it is evident to analyse the instance of genocide through the relations between two groups who are resisting becoming the victim through further violence, and in such instances propels violence toward the genocide discussed.

Powell (2013, p.62) refers to the importance of relations between groups through the reference of Elias’ work that society is based on social relations which shape our actions and how society develops. Through his explanation, genocide is deemed able to happen through the advancement of the civilisation process, where ‘the civilising process... met an obstruction and went into reverse’ (Powell 2013, p.64). This understanding of genocide is in accordance with Freedman’s work as he states that ‘power relations are obviously at the core of genocide’ (Freedman 1995, p.214). However, his understanding claims that for genocide to happen the extermination of a group must be an explicit motivation. In the Ethiopian case, I believe that such a motivation was not initially held, and that there were other aspects at play that caused the escalation of political violence to turn into genocide. The civilising process relies on the self-constraint of citizens toward the sovereign state to maintain social order in accordance with an overarching power. However, as we see in the Ethiopian case, the aristocracy was overthrown and there was an immediate lack of an organised structure and body to govern the people. The social-constraint of citizens is argued through this way to be dependent on the power of the sovereign state (Powell 2013, p.65), and without this state in tact, the social and self-constraint was dispelled and violence ensued on both sides to gain power.

This theory is revised by Powell in a ‘deconstructive’ manner (Powell 2011, p.11). His argument analyses the notion of Elias that genocide stems from the advancement of civilisation and redefines it as an act of barbarism. He argues that greater social distance creates a space in which violence and genocide can emerge on the basis of the following three dimensions: identity-difference, impunity-interdependence, and interest-indifference (Powell 2011, p.12). However, Shaw (2012, p.991) highlights the shortcomings of this basis on how genocide and violence is transformed from the former identity. In our case, this deconstructive method is difficult to apply in terms of social difference that Powell uses. The Red Terror escalated between parties that were originally fighting on the same side, meaning they had very little identity-difference that Powell uses for his theory.

The Ethiopian Red Terror and ensuing genocide provides an important example to how a society could escalate to such violence when the two sides originally fought together. We can understand the Red Terror as a barbaric case of violence which was masked by political ideology and agenda. As Freedman (1995) notes, the ideology of a group creates a justification for violence that the ‘civilizing process has set out to neutralise’ (Freedman 1995 p. 208). The failings of the Derg and the EPRP to neutralise this violence stems from the need for power and domination over moral conscious, using legitimising means discussed to use violence as a reactionary and dominating method. As illustrated through the work of Ayyash (2013), the notion that politics and violence seek to destroy the other is blurred in our case, where the endpoint only resulted in further violence. Furthermore, the civilising process ‘diverts our attention from the persistence of the alternative, destructive potential of the civilising process’ (Bauman 1989 p.28 cited by Freedman 1995 p.208)

References:

Ayyash, M.M., (2013). The paradox of political violence. European journal of social theory, 16(3), p.342-356

Freeman, M., (1995). Genocide, civilization and modernity. British Journal of Sociology, p.207-223.

Jalata, A. (2010). Conceptualizing and Theorizing Terrorism in the Historical and Global Context. Humanity & Society, 34(4), p.317-349.

Powell, C., 2011. Barbaric civilization: a critical sociology of genocide. McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP.

Powell, C., (2013). Building a Non-Genocidal Society. Global Dialogue (Online), 15(1), p.59.

Shaw, M., 2012. Book Review: Christopher Powell, Barbaric Civilization: A Critical Sociology of Genocide. Sociology, 46(5), p.990-992.

Shaw, M. (2009) ‘Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks for Organised Violence’ International Journal of Conflict and Violence 3 (1), p.97-106.

Tareke, G. (2008). The Red Terror in Ethiopia A Historical Aberration. Journal of developing societies, 24(2), 183-206.

Tegegn, M. (2012). Mengistu's ‘Red Terror’. African Identities, 10(3), 249-263.

Toggia, P. (2012). The revolutionary endgame of political power: the genealogy of ‘Red Terror’ in Ethiopia. African Identities, 10(3), 265-280.