Skip to content

Ethiopian Civil War

Ethiopia Humanitarian Negotiation Analysis — Husquinet Case Study

MSHA-520 · Humanitarian negotiation case study analysis

Ethiopia civil war: stakeholder network & Island of Agreements

Source: Presentation 4.2 — Spotlight interview with Bruno Husquinet · University of San Diego, Kroc School of Peace Studies

Conflict parties Federal gov. EDF forces TPLF / TDF Tigray regional gov. Amhara forces Eritrean forces OLA / OLF conflict Humanitarian actors UN agencies UNFPA, OCHA INGOs MSF, etc. REST negotiation Mediators & int’l community AU / Obasanjo Kenya / Kenyatta Turkey, US, UK Convergent norms Contested norms Divergent norms Island of Agreements zones
Federal coalition
TPLF coalition
Humanitarian actors
Mediators
Armed opposition

Island of Agreements — norm dynamics from transcript

Convergent norms
• People in need should receive humanitarian assistance
• Host government has the right to know what is being brought in
• Accountability to affected populations is a shared obligation
• Humanitarian principles (neutrality, impartiality, independence) are understood
Contested norms (convergent in principle → divergent in practice)
• Accountability: government invoked this norm to justify extreme bureaucratic restrictions (health kit inspections, “dual-use” medicine claims) that functionally blocked access
• Humanitarian access: government acknowledged need for aid but imposed conditions (manifests, cash limits, travel approvals) amounting to a de facto blockade
• Fuel access: denied fuel entry into Tigray; eventually allowed 2M liters after extended negotiation
Divergent norms / red lines
• Government framed all aid as potential support for the enemy (aid diversion suspicion)
• Expulsion of 7 senior UN staff (including OCHA head) when perceived push-back was too strong
• Government cut electricity, water, internet, commercial activity — collective punishment vs. security framing
Federal government Ethiopian Defense Forces Amhara forces Eritrean forces allied TPLF / TDF Tigray regional gov. OLA / OLF allied armed conflict territorial claim UN system UNFPA, OCHA, WFP INGOs MSF, ICRC REST Local NGO negotiates with both sides AU (Obasanjo) Kenya (Kenyatta) Turkey, US, UK mediation Key events Nov 2020: conflict begins Mar 2022: unilateral truce Aug 2022: fighting resumes Nov 2022: cessation of hostilities agreement
Federal coalition
TPLF coalition
Humanitarian actors
Mediators
Armed opposition
Key events
Convergent People deserve aid · accountability is shared · humanitarian mandates understood Host government right to know what enters the region Contested Accountability weaponized: health kit inspections, “dual-use” medicine claims Bureaucratic restrictions as de facto blockade (manifests, cash limits, travel) Fuel denial → 2M liters allowed after lengthy negotiation Divergent Aid diversion suspicion — all assistance framed as potential enemy support Expulsion of 7 senior UN staff when push-back perceived as too strong Collective service cuts (electricity, water, internet) as siege instrument

The Island of Agreements framework maps where norms are shared, where they’re contested, and where they break down — identifying the negotiable space.

Actor Primary interest Position on aid Leverage held Key negotiation friction
Federal gov. Defeat TPLF, maintain sovereignty, restore authority over Tigray Aid allowed but tightly controlled; feared diversion to enemy Controls all access routes, airspace, communications, services Accountability weaponized as bureaucratic obstruction; expelled UN staff
Amhara forces Reclaim Western Tigray territory Secondary concern; focused on territorial control Control of Western Tigray displacing populations Mass displacement created bulk of IDP needs
Eritrean forces Settle old scores with TPLF Not a primary interlocutor for humanitarians Military force; loose chain of command → exactions Violence against civilians; limited accountability
TPLF / TDF Survival of Tigray region & population; legitimacy Aid is a critical lifeline — wanted control over distribution Controls access within Tigray; airport shutdown power Airport fees; advocacy/denunciation conflation; aid distribution control
OLA / OLF Oromo self-determination; grievances against central gov. Not a primary humanitarian interlocutor Military disruption in central Ethiopia Conflict spillover creating additional displacement
Humanitarian orgs Deliver aid based on need; uphold principles Needs-based, impartial distribution; no substitution for state International visibility; donor funding; essential services Navigating restrictions from both sides while maintaining neutrality
AU / Kenya / Turkey Regional stability; mediation credibility Supportive of humanitarian access as part of peace process Diplomatic relationships with both parties Brokered the Nov 2022 Cessation of Hostilities Agreement

This matrix maps each actor’s interests against their stance on humanitarian aid, their leverage, and the key points of friction in negotiations.

Source: Presentation 4.2 Spotlight Interview with Bruno Husquinet — Case Study of Humanitarian Negotiation in Ethiopia. USD Kroc School, MSHA-520. · Analysis produced March 2026.