Western Tigray: Ethnic Cleansing, Historical Belonging and the Right to Return
Ethinic cleansing happening in western Tigray, Western Tigray has longstanding historical ties to Tigray that predate Ethiopia’s modern federal system. Haile Selassie’s imperial reorganisation placed western territories under Begemder/Gondar, while punitive boundary changes following the 1943 Woyane rebellion detached southern territories from Tigray. These changes challenge claims that the areas have always been Amhara land. During the war beginning in 2020, human rights organisations documented ethnic cleansing, forced displacement and pillage against Tigrayans in Western Tigray. The Pretoria agreement did not settle the territorial question; lasting peace requires recognition of history, accountability and the safe return of displaced communities.
Western Tigray: Historical Roots, Imperial Boundary Changes and Displacement
_The struggle over Western Tigray concerns historical belonging, livelihoods and the rights of displaced communities._
Adyabo Times · Revised article
Western Tigray—including Welkait, Tsegede and Humera—cannot accurately be portrayed as historically Amhara territory whose connection to Tigray began only under the post-1991 federal system. Historical and ethnolinguistic research documents longstanding connections to Tigray. A study examining 66 historical maps identifies several extended periods when Welkait and surrounding territories were represented as part of Tigray, while also recording periods of different administration. This evidence challenges the assertion that the area has “always been Amhara.”
Emperor Haile Selassie’s territorial reorganisation is essential to understanding this history. During the 1940s, western territories were incorporated into Begemder/Gondar. Following the suppression of the 1943 Woyane rebellion, southern territories, including Raya and Azebo, were detached from Tigray in punitive boundary changes. These were exercises of imperial authority, rather than proof that the affected communities lacked historical ties to Tigray. Historical scholarship describes the southern changes as punishment and the wider reorganisation as a means of consolidating power and rewarding allies.
These changes can therefore be understood as part of the political weakening of Tigray. The loss of territory and agricultural resources also had economic implications. However, the specific assertion that every transfer was deliberately designed to force Tigrayan surrender through economic deprivation requires additional documentary evidence.
During the war that began in 2020, Amhara regional forces and militias took control of Western Tigray. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch subsequently documented a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Tigrayans, involving forcible expulsion, killings, detention and pillage. Responsibility rests with the officials and forces implicated in these abuses. Territorial claims cannot justify dispossession or erase the history of the communities driven from their homes.
The November 2022 Pretoria agreement committed the parties to resolving contested areas through constitutional processes and facilitating the return and reintegration of displaced people. It did not itself settle Western Tigray’s territorial question.
For communities in neighbouring Adyabo, this concerns family ties, farmland, trade routes and the possibility of returning home. A lasting settlement must confront both the historical record and documented dispossession, protect every community’s rights, and ensure that forced displacement does not determine the outcome.