Unmasking Western Media, Academia, and Governments Whitewashing of Amhara Genocide

Amsal Woreta 
November 21, 2024

Introduction

An image that symbolically captures the struggles of marginalized voices striving for recognition, highlighting the distortion of narratives and the enduring resilience in the pursuit of justice.

Ethiopian history holds a paradoxical place in global narratives. Despite its status as one of the few African nations to resist colonization, Ethiopia has not escaped the distortions and misrepresentations fostered by colonial and imperial narratives. Among these distortions is the whitewashing of the Amhara genocide, a historical atrocity that remains insufficiently acknowledged in both domestic and global discourse. Through the combined lenses of colonial rhetoric, imperial propaganda, and modern ethnic politics, this article examines how colonial-era narratives have been weaponized to obscure the systemic violence against the Amhara.

Drawing on seminal works such as Mary Louise Pratt’s Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation, Alberto Scacchi’s Legacy of Bitterness, and  Insights from the CEPR study on the Scramble for Africa, this article investigates the mechanisms through which colonial frameworks perpetuate erasure and distortion. From Fascist Italy’s targeted violence to the ideological residue embedded in Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism, the whitewashing of the Amhara genocide exemplifies the enduring legacy of colonial narratives.

Colonial Narratives and Ethiopian Exceptionalism

In the colonial imagination, Ethiopia represented a paradox. It was both a symbol of African independence and an object of imperial fascination. As Mary Louise Pratt notes, colonial travel writing often depicted non-European societies through a lens of exoticism and condescension, framing them as chaotic and inherently inferior (Pratt, 9). Writers like Evelyn Waugh, in Waugh in Abyssinia, oscillated between admiration for Ethiopian resilience and disdain for its governance, reinforcing the notion that Ethiopia needed European intervention to “modernize” (Waugh, 40–41).

Roman Procházka’s Abyssinia: The Powder Barrel reflects this framing, describing Ethiopia as a land fraught with unsolvable contradictions (Procházka, 87). This depiction justified European imperial ambitions under the guise of bringing order to a fractured society, laying the groundwork for subsequent misrepresentations of Ethiopia’s internal dynamics.

The impact of Prochazka’s ideology on Western policies toward Ethiopia, particularly its target of the Amhara ethnic group.

Prochazka advocated for portraying the Amhara as oppressive and encouraging other ethnic groups to rebel against them. His goal was to weaken Ethiopia internally and prevent its unification, fearing a strong, cohesive Ethiopia could challenge Western dominance. These ideas resonated with Western policymakers, particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom, as neocolonial strategies shifted toward destabilizing Ethiopia from within. A good example is Herman Cohen tweet right after Amhara region leaders were viciously murdered in Bahr Dar on June 22, 2019, in a “Failed coup in #Ethiopia’s Amhara state was an attempt by ethnic nationalists to restore Amhara hegemony over all of Ethiopia that existed for several centuries prior to 1991. That dream is now permanently dead.” (Herman Cohen, Twitter, June 24, 2019)

The narrative draws a direct connection between Prochazka’s vision and the actions of Herman Cohen, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. Cohen criticized “Amhara hegemony” and played a significant role in supporting Ethiopia’s federal restructuring under the TPLF in 1991. His involvement in facilitating the TPLF’s ascension through the “London Peace Talks” is presented as a continuation of the strategy to fragment Ethiopia along ethnic lines, closely aligning with Prochazka’s ideas. This policy framework, centered on the demonization of the Amhara, is portrayed as a recurring theme in Western foreign policy toward Ethiopia.

The Scramble for Africa: Long-Run Impacts on Ethiopia

Although Ethiopia was not partitioned during the Scramble for Africa, its socio-political landscape was deeply influenced by the colonial project. The CEPR report on the Scramble highlights the devastating impact of artificially imposed boundaries, which exacerbated ethnic fragmentation and fueled prolonged civil conflicts across the continent (CEPR). Ethiopia, while sovereign, was not immune to these pressures. Its internal ethnic hierarchies became a focal point for imperial powers seeking to exploit divisions.

Edward Gibbon’s analysis of imperial decline offers a pertinent observation: internal discord, particularly when exacerbated by external manipulation, often accelerates systemic instability (Gibbon, 281). This framework helps contextualize the long-term effects of colonial narratives on Ethiopia, where ethnic tensions were magnified by both external imperial ambitions and internal governance structures.

Fascist Italy and the Amhara Genocide

The Italian invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 under Benito Mussolini marked a critical juncture in Ethiopia’s modern history. Fascist Italy employed propaganda that framed its aggression as a civilizing mission, masking its systemic violence against the Amhara people. Alberto Scacchi’s Legacy of Bitterness documents how Fascist policies deliberately targeted the Amhara, employing mass killings, forced sterilizations, and cultural erasure to weaken Ethiopian unity (Scacchi, 22–23). This targeted violence was framed in colonial rhetoric, as necessary.

stabilization, perpetuating the myth that ethnic violence was endemic to Ethiopian society.

David Spurr’s the Rhetoric of Empire identifies this rhetorical strategy as a hallmark of colonial discourse, wherein atrocities are aestheticized or trivialized to justify imperial domination (Spurr, 28f). Italian propaganda painted the Amhara as oppressive elites, a narrative that excused Fascist atrocities as corrective measures. This framing has persisted, contributing to the broader erasure of the Amhara genocide.

Post-Colonial Ethiopia: The Burden of Ethnic Federalism

The ideological residue of colonial narratives found new expression in post-colonial Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism. Enshrined in the 1995 Constitution, this system institutionalized ethnic divisions, mirroring colonial categorizations of African societies. While intended to promote self-determination, ethnic federalism exacerbated historical grievances and deepened structural inequalities. The Amhara, once targeted by Fascist Italy, became victims of renewed systemic violence under a federal framework that prioritized ethnic identity over national unity.

This political structure amplified the challenges highlighted in the CEPR report, which documented how fragmented governance systems increase the likelihood of prolonged ethnic conflict (CEPR). The Amhara genocide—including forced displacements, killings, and cultural erasure—has been minimized in contemporary discourse, dismissed as collateral damage in broader ethnic conflicts. This erasure reflects a colonial logic that naturalizes violence against certain groups as inevitable rather than acknowledging it as orchestrated genocide.

Academia and the Gatekeeping of Truth

Western academia has long been a gatekeeper of narratives about Africa, often perpetuating biases and erasing marginalized voices. In Ethiopia’s case, many scholars have failed to critically examine the role of ethnic federalism in enabling systemic violence against the Amhara.

Denial and Minimization

Certain academicians dismiss claims of genocide against the Amhara as exaggerated or politically motivated. This denial undermines the credibility of survivors and perpetuates narratives that absolve the Ethiopian state of accountability.

Bias in Ethnic Federalism Discourse

Academic works often romanticize Ethiopia’s ethnic federalism as a model for managing diversity, ignoring its role in institutionalizing ethnic hierarchies and enabling violence. This selective analysis reflects a broader colonial tendency to frame fragmentation as a solution to Africa’s challenges, rather than addressing systemic issues.

Impact on Policy and Advocacy

Academic narratives shape policy decisions and humanitarian priorities. When scholars fail to highlight the Amhara genocide, they contribute to a lack of international pressure on the Ethiopian government to address these atrocities. This complicity reinforces global apathy and inaction.

Policy Makers and Western Governments Strategic Interests Over Justice Western governments, particularly the United States and European Union, have played a significant role in shaping Ethiopia’s political landscape. However, their engagement often prioritizes strategic interests over human rights.

Ethiopia’s strategic importance as a regional power in the Horn of Africa has led Western governments to maintain close ties with its leadership, even in the face of credible reports of genocide. Financial aid and diplomatic support continue to flow despite mounting evidence of atrocities against the Amhara, reflecting a broader pattern of complicity.                                               

Case Study: U.S. Support for Ethnic Federalism

The U.S. has historically supported Ethiopia’s ethnic federal system, viewing it as a means of managing diversity. However, this system has institutionalized divisions and fueled violence, including the Amhara genocide. Western policymakers have been slow to acknowledge this failure, prioritizing stability    over accountability.

The Impact on Global Perceptions

The erasure of the Amhara genocide from international discourse shapes global perceptions of Ethiopia, hindering efforts for justice and reconciliation. By framing the violence as an inevitable consequence of ethnic tensions, Western policymakers evade responsibility for their role in perpetuating systemic oppression.

Unmasking the Whitewashing of Genocide

The whitewashing of the Amhara genocide exemplifies how colonial narratives continue to shape historical understanding. By framing Ethiopian society as inherently fractured and violent, these narratives obscure the agency of its people and the systemic nature of their suffering. Evelyn Waugh’s dismissive descriptions of Ethiopian governance and Roman Procházka’s reductive analysis of its ethnic dynamics both contributed to this misrepresentation (Waugh, 45; Procházka, 2).

Addressing these historical distortions requires a critical reassessment of the narratives that underpin them. Mary Louise Pratt’s concept of “contact zones” offers a framework for reexamining colonial histories, highlighting how these narratives were constructed and how they can be deconstructed (Pratt, 9).

Conclusion: Toward Narrative Justice and National Renewal

The Scramble for Africa deeply impacted Ethiopia—not through direct colonization, but through the insidious weaponization of narratives designed to fracture its unity and sovereignty. The Amhara, as historical stewards of Ethiopian statehood, became the focal point of these distortions, falsely cast as imperialists and oppressors. Rooted in colonial and racist ideologies, these narratives have not only obscured the genocide of the Amhara but have also perpetuated ethnic divisions that continue to undermine Ethiopia’s cohesion and stability.

Reclaiming Ethiopia’s historical narrative is essential to dismantling these colonial legacies. This begins with an honest reckoning with the past—acknowledging the Amhara genocide and confronting the broader colonial frameworks that distort Ethiopia’s identity. Beyond recognition, Ethiopia must actively pursue a path that fosters unity while celebrating its rich diversity, ensuring that its national identity transcends ethnic and historical divides.

Page 6

Ultimately, achieving narrative justice for Ethiopia requires not only confronting the shadows of colonial distortions but also committing to building a nation where every citizen—regardless of ethnicity—feels represented, respected, and unified in their shared heritage and collective future. Addressing historical erasure and embracing inclusive governance are foundational steps to healing past wounds and fostering a more equitable society.

The Impact of Whitewashing

The whitewashing of the Amhara genocide has profound consequences for global understanding, justice efforts, and survivors’ experiences.

• Distorted Global Perceptions: Simplistic narratives obscure the systemic nature of the genocide, framing it as ethnic conflict rather than targeted violence.
• Undermined Justice Efforts: The lack of international recognition emboldens perpetrators and hinders accountability.
• Marginalized Survivors: The denial of their suffering compounds the trauma experienced by survivors and their communities.