Understanding the TDF Commanders’ Pragmatism: A Response to Misguided Critics

Certain academic elites and factions aligned with Getachew Reda have criticized the Tigray Defense Forces (TDF) following the TDF commanders’ declaration of recognizing one TPLF after its 14th congress. These critics accuse the TDF of militarizing politics and failing to grasp the realities of Tigray’s dire circumstances and the existential threats it faces—particularly from Abiy Ahmed’s regime.

This critique reflects a troubling detachment from the practicalities of survival. The formation of the TDF was not driven by political ambition but by the necessity to defend Tigray from an existential threat. Confronted with a genocidal campaign and a regime determined to crush Tigray’s constitutional rights, the TDF had no choice but to align military efforts with political guidance to ensure survival.

The Role of Abiy Ahmed in Tigray’s Struggle
Many critics fail to acknowledge the deeper strategy behind Abiy Ahmed’s actions. His government’s agenda is not merely denying Tigray its constitutional rights but is a calculated political strategy to weaken the region through long-term conflicts. By fostering divisions between Tigray and neighboring regions—specifically with Amhara and Eritrea—Abiy seeks to dismantle what the Oromo political narrative refers to as ‘Semitic dominance’ in Ethiopian politics.

This strategy is evident in his encouragement of disgruntled Amhara factions, particularly from Begemider (Gondar), to occupy Tigray’s legitimate lands in the West and “Oromize” parts of southern Tigray. These moves are designed to create enduring hostility and instability, further weakening Tigray’s position. The TDF commanders, more than many politicians, have understood this dynamic and have responded with unity and pragmatism, recognizing the existential stakes for Tigray.

As Wodi Medid, one of the TDF commanders, recently explained, even those commanders who had previously disagreed on TDF resolutions united in their shared commitment to defend Tigray. This unity, as he noted, caused panic within the enemy ranks and demonstrated the strength of a collective promise to fight until Tigray regains its constitutional rights.

Why the Critics Are Wrong
Critics like Professor Medhane Tadesse have characterized the TDF’s recognition of one TPLF as a degradation of politics, claiming it signals the dominance of AK-47 politics. Such arguments misrepresent the TDF’s intentions and ignore the realities of a region under siege. Military efforts risk becoming fragmented and ineffective without political guidance, leaving Tigray vulnerable to further destruction.

Furthermore, the TDF’s call to reorganize the TIRA to reflect the outcomes of the TPLF’s democratic processes is not a militarization of governance but a practical step toward ensuring legitimate political leadership. By proposing replacing TIRA members whose party membership has been revoked, the TDF advocates for a stronger, more unified political framework.

A Call for Constructive Engagement
Academic elites’ criticisms reveal a detachment from Tigray’s ground realities. In my opinion, their theoretical arguments fail to address the complexities of defending a region facing existential threats.  Rather than perpetuating division, these intellectuals should engage constructively, recognizing the necessity of unity and pragmatism in the fight for Tigray’s survival and recovery.

The TDF commanders’ recognition of one TPLF does not militarize politics but commits them to aligning military action with a unified political vision. While the TPLF holds a crucial stake in the TIRA, it is important to recognize that TIRA itself is not a governing body but an interim administration born out of the Pretoria Agreement. Its primary task is to fulfill the terms of the agreement in full, ensuring a peaceful implementation process while addressing the critical and burning strategic questions of the Tigrayan people.

TIRA’s restructuring must ensure the inclusion of other political forces that were initially hesitant to join. During its formation, most political organizations in Tigray chose not to participate, with only Baitona sending a delegation. As TIRA undergoes restructuring, it is crucial for those parties to represent themselves and take an active role. Their involvement would strengthen TIRA’s legitimacy and effectiveness in achieving its objectives, ensuring that key political and strategic questions are addressed more inclusively.

In my earlier opinion piece, I discussed why and how TIRA needs comprehensive restructuring. This alignment is critical for restoring legitimacy and strengthening the collective resolve necessary to navigate Tigray’s recovery and future aspirations.

Conclusion
Tigray’s struggle requires unity, pragmatism, and recognition of the existential challenges posed by Abiy Ahmed’s regime. The TDF commanders have shown remarkable foresight in navigating these challenges, prioritizing Tigray’s survival and future above factionalism and theoretical debates. It is time for critics to move beyond detached intellectualism and contribute to the collective effort to rebuild and restore Tigray.