Just War and the Fano Struggle: A Brief Moral Evaluation

 Moral judgments about war are among the most consequential determinations scholars and societies make. They shape legitimacy, responsibility, and the boundaries of acceptable political action. In Ethiopia today, the armed struggle involving Fano in the Amhara region has increasingly been subjected to such judgments, often rendered with striking certainty. This essay offers a reflective moral evaluation of that struggle through the lens of Just War Theory, not to deliver a definitive verdict, but to deepen and discipline the debate. This essay was prompted by a recent interview on Andemta Media with Dr. Dagnachew Assefa, in which he concluded that Fano’s armed struggle does not meet the criteria of Just War Theory. His remarks have contributed to ongoing public debate about the moral evaluation of the conflict. This essay engages the broader ethical question he raised, rather than any single conclusion, by offering an independent moral reflection grounded in historical context and ethical reasoning. 

My purpose here is not to challenge his conclusion polemically or to substitute one judgment for another. Rather, I offer my own reflections on the moral nature of the conflict, informed by historical context, lived experience, and ethical reasoning. Conflicts of this magnitude demand more than summary moral verdicts; they require sustained, context-sensitive analysis. I hope this essay encourages scholars, ethicists, and policy analysts to engage the Ethiopian conflict with greater moral seriousness and intellectual humility.

Just War Theory as a Moral Framework

Just War Theory, classically articulated by Augustine of Hippo and later systematized by Thomas Aquinas, seeks to impose moral limits on war by specifying when the resort to force may be justified. In its modern form, particularly as developed by Michael Walzer, the theory has been extended to address internal wars, resistance movements, and cases where the moral authority of the state itself is contested (Walzer, 1977). The six commonly accepted criteria (just cause, legitimate authority, right intention, last resort, proportionality, and probability of success) provide the structure for the analysis that follows.

Just Cause

A war may be morally justified only if it responds to a grave and ongoing injustice. Classical theorists grounded just cause in the redress of serious wrongs; modern theorists extend it to include defense against systematic persecution and the collapse of state protection (Walzer, 1977).

The emergence of Fano as an armed movement must be understood against a broader pattern of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, property destruction, and ethnically targeted violence affecting Amharas across multiple regions of Ethiopia. These patterns have been documented by Amnesty International (2023, 2024), which reported repeated failures of authorities to prevent or investigate abuses, and by Human Rights Watch (2024), which highlighted persistent impunity for violence against civilians. The Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC), a state-mandated body, has also acknowledged widespread human rights violations, including unlawful killings and arbitrary detentions, in reports released between 2022 and 2024.

Within this context, Fano’s armed resistance is widely framed by its participants as defensive rather than expansionist. As I have argued elsewhere (Abate, 2023; Abate, 2025), the struggle is locally understood as a response to sustained injustice and exposure to lethal threat. Under Just War Theory, resistance aimed at protecting a community from grave and unaddressed harm constitutes a morally plausible just cause.

Legitimate Authority

Classical Just War Theory privileges sovereign authority, yet modern moral scholarship recognizes that legitimacy may arise from communal consent, particularly where the state fails in its basic duty to protect its citizens (Walzer, 1977; Buchanan, 2004).

Fano has historically operated through decentralized, community-based structures, drawing authority from local consent and long-standing traditions of communal defense. This decentralization has not implied the absence of leadership. Many Fano commanders are experienced, trained, and socially embedded figures with recognized local legitimacy.

Importantly, in early 2026, the Amhara Fano National Movement was publicly announced as the single, unified leadership structure of Fano (Zehabesha, 2026), a development widely described as the most significant organizational achievement since the conflict began. Independent analytical work by the Rift Valley Institute similarly characterizes Fano as a socially embedded insurgency that has evolved from fragmented local formations toward greater organizational coherence (Rift Valley Institute, 2024). This evolution strengthens the moral case for legitimate authority by enhancing coordination, accountability, and the capacity to enforce restraint.

Right Intention

For Aquinas, a just war must be fought with the right intention: the pursuit of justice and peace rather than vengeance, domination, or material gain. Fano’s articulated aspiration centers on a demand that Amharas be treated as equal citizens, free from selective persecution, arbitrary detention, confiscation of property, and ethnically targeted killings.

This aspiration does not amount to a claim of supremacy, but rather to equal protection under law, a foundational principle of any just political order. While no armed movement is morally uniform, the dominant intention expressed within Fano discourse aligns with defensive protection rather than predatory ambition (Abate, 2023; Abate, 2025). Under Just War Theory, such intention satisfies the moral requirement, provided it continues to discipline conduct over time.

Last Resort

Just War Theory requires that war be undertaken only after reasonable non-violent options have been exhausted. Prior to the outbreak of large-scale hostilities in 2023, Amhara communities engaged in years of protests, petitions, and appeals through traditional mediation mechanisms, including elders (shimagles). International media and human rights reporting indicate that these efforts failed to yield meaningful protection or political redress (Amnesty International, 2023; Reuters, 2023).

The decisive turn to armed resistance followed the government’s attempt to impose selective disarmament through force. From a moral perspective, the relevant question is not whether every conceivable alternative was attempted, but whether good-faith avenues for peaceful resolution were effectively closed. On the available evidence, the criterion of last resort is plausibly met.

Proportionality

Proportionality requires that the expected good of war outweigh the harm it causes and that force be used with restraint relative to the aims pursued. From 2023 through 2025, international media outlets such as Reuters reported the federal government’s extensive use of drones, fighter jets, and heavy artillery in the Amhara region, often in or near civilian areas, contributing to displacement and infrastructure damage (Reuters, 2023; Reuters, 2024). Human rights organizations similarly warned of the civilian impact of aerial warfare and large-scale military operations (Amnesty International, 2024; Human Rights Watch, 2024).

Supporters of Fano emphasize efforts to avoid sustained urban warfare and to limit damage to public infrastructure. Under Just War analysis, proportionality is comparative rather than absolute: the moral burden increases where overwhelming force is deployed against civilian environments. While no party to war is free from harm, the asymmetry in means and methods remains ethically significant.

Probability of Success

Just War Theory rejects wars that are manifestly futile. Importantly, “success” does not require rapid military victory, but a reasonable chance of achieving morally defensible ends, such as protection of civilians, political recognition, or negotiated settlement.

Several developments between 2024 and 2026 are relevant here: the establishment of a single Fano leadership, sustained influence over large areas of the Amhara region, recognition by international organizations and media as a central actor in the conflict, and growing interest from other armed groups in coordination or alignment (Abate, 2025; Reuters, 2024; Zehabesha, 2026). Taken together, these indicators suggest that the struggle is not futile and that the probability-of-success criterion can be considered provisionally satisfied.

 

Concluding Reflection

This essay does not claim that the Fano struggle is beyond moral criticism, nor that it will remain just regardless of future conduct. Rather, it argues that when evaluated carefully through the criteria of Just War Theory, the conflict can plausibly be understood as a morally defensible war of self-defense, grounded in just cause, emergent communal authority, protective intention, exhausted peaceful alternatives, proportional aims, and a realistic prospect of success.

The purpose of this reflection is not to close the debate, but to elevate it. Ethical judgments about war should not be rendered hastily or abstracted from lived realities. If this essay succeeds, it will have done so by encouraging scholars, ethicists, and policy analysts to engage Ethiopia’s internal conflicts with the depth, rigor, and humility that such grave moral questions demand.

Sources Consulted

Abate, T. (2023, September). The Fano uprising. Abyss Blog.
https://tekluabate.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-fano-uprising.html

Abate, T. (2025, June). Who will win the war: Fano or the government? Zehabesha, https://zehabesha.com/who-will-win-the-war-in-ethiopia-fano-or-the-government/, or     Borkena, https://borkena.com/2025/06/10/ethiopia-who-will-win-the-war-fano-or-the-government/.

Amnesty International. (2023). Beyond law enforcement: Human rights violations and crimes against humanity in Oromia. Amnesty International.

Amnesty International. (2024). Ethiopia: Armed conflict and civilian protection concerns. Amnesty International.

Augustine of Hippo. (426/1998). The city of God (H. Bettenson, Trans.). Penguin Classics.

Aquinas, T. (1265–1274/1988). Summa theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Christian Classics.

Buchanan, A. (2004). Justice, legitimacy, and self-determination: Moral foundations for international law. Oxford University Press.

Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. (2022). Investigation report on human rights violations in multiple regions of Ethiopia. EHRC.

Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. (2023). Human rights situation monitoring reports. EHRC.

Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. (2024). Reports on civilian protection and internal conflict in Ethiopia. EHRC.

Human Rights Watch. (2024). “We are like dead people”: Abuses against civilians in Ethiopia’s internal conflicts. Human Rights Watch.

Reuters. (2023). Ethiopia’s Amhara region rocked by clashes after government disarmament order. Reuters.

Reuters. (2024). Air strikes and drones deepen Ethiopia’s Amhara conflict. Reuters.

Rift Valley Institute. (2024). Understanding the Fano insurgency in Ethiopia’s Amhara region. Rift Valley Institute. https://riftvalley.net

Walzer, M. (1977). Just and unjust wars: A moral argument with historical illustrations. Basic Books.

Zehabesha. (2026, January). Breaking: Amhara Fano National Movement announces new leadership structure. Zehabesha.
https://zehabesha.com/breaking-amhara-fano-national-movement-announces-new-leadership-structure/