Dalliance in the approval of gene editing projects is delaying research and arresting desperately needed improvements in agricultural productivity, say experts at the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR).

Ethiopia adopted a guideline on the regulation of genome-edited products nearly six months ago, permitting research and active gene editing for the first time in the country’s history, adding to legislation that opened the door to genetically modified organisms a decade ago.

Research institutions and investors have been awaiting approval to embark on gene editing projects, but it has yet to transpire.

“Following the ratification of the guideline, specific approval letters have to be issued by the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). We have been awaiting approval letters from the Authority to embark on a number of gene editing projects that are very crucial for Ethiopia’s agriculture. But the Authority is taking time for some unknown reason,” said one EIAR expert who spoke to The Reporter on condition of anonymity.

The EPA is the authority charged with regulating biosafety and genome editing. Its tasks include granting permits, conducting risk assessments, and overseeing compliance. On the other hand, the Bio and Emerging Technology Institute (BETin) supports policy, coordination, and public communication.

A National Biosafety Advisory Committee consisting of representatives from various ministries, the Customs Commission, universities, and research centers (all appointed by the Prime Minister) is also involved in regulation.

EIAR and universities play central roles in R&D and capacity building, while the Ethiopian Food and Drug Authority (EFDA) is relevant for safety assessments.

A director at EIAR confirmed the wait for approval, and noted that Ethiopia is signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Cartagena Protocol, which regulate GMO-related activity worldwide.

“So far, we have been working on genetic engineering, because Ethiopia’s laws allow that. A guideline that allows gene editing has been introduced, but the guideline is not enough. Approval and go-ahead is required to start activity. We are awaiting it from the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority. We will also have a new facility for gene editing once it is approved,” said another director at EIAR.

One gene editing project involving teff has already yielded results, but cannot be implemented on a larger scale for lack of approval from more senior authorities.

The director explained the thinking behind the gene editing project.

“When teff bears more seeds, the plant gets heavy and its stem can no longer support it. Teff is thin and long, meaning it can fall over even during light wind. Hence, a short but strong-statured variety of teff is important. Using gene editing, the gene that gives teff its height was removed, and a field test is being finalized in Bishoftu,” he told The Reporter.

A recent report from the African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) highlighted Ethiopia’s nascent venture into gene editing.

“Genome editing in Ethiopia is moving from policy design to early implementation. Momentum increased in 2023-2024 with the acceleration of teff Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) collaborations, supported by external regulatory experiences that clarified non-transgenic pathways and informed Ethiopia’s domestic approach. Culminating in 2025, Ethiopia officially published its Guideline on the Regulation of Genome-Edited Products, which is now being applied in dossier scoping and preparing the ground for the country’s first confined field trials of gene-edited crops,” reads the report.

The guideline introduces a risk-proportionate, case-by-case pathway for evaluating gene-edited organisms distinct from transgenic GMOs, according to the AU agency.

The report details that a number of private companies have expressed interest in investing in genome editing. The list includes MIDROC Investment Group, Luna Group (owner of the Fresh Corner grocery chain), Corteva Agriscience (a US-based agri-tech giant), and BASF (Germany).

These companies want to partner with EIAR to invest and commercialize gene-edited biotech seed varieties and supply them to farmers. However, absence of gene edited products so far remains a challenge, states the report.

Funding for genome editing projects is also another challenge, according to the AU document.

It details that Ethiopia has three ongoing gene editing projects involving teff, Ethiopian mustard, and sorghum. These are being funded by SIDA, Corteva, Feed the Future, and the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center.

Enset, cotton, and coffee are also included in plans for future gene editing projects, according to the report. 

A ‘Bioeconomy Strategy’ approved by the Bio and Emerging Technology Research Institute (BETin) and the Ministry of Innovation and Technology aims to commercialize at least one genome-edited plant variety every year starting from 2028.

Sources close to the issue claim the government is undertaking gene-editing projects without official approval to avoid opposition related to GMOs and gene editing, particularly from conservative stakeholders.

Officials of the EPA did not respond to The Reporter’s requests for comment.

A lobby group representing soap and detergent manufacturers says forex-related issues burdening a foreign-owned supplier of essential chemical inputs have forced production cuts and closures, warning of higher prices for consumers.

The managers of the Ethiopian Chemical Products Manufacturers Association (ECPMA), which represents basic chemicals, soap and detergent, and paint and adhesive factories, say their pleas for government intervention have gone unanswered for months.

An assessment conducted by The Reporter found that countless small-scale soap and detergent manufacturers, as well as large factories like Repi Soap and Detergent PLC, have been forced to shrink their output as they struggle to access key raw materials.

Assessments conducted by a team of experts at the Chemical and Construction Inputs Industry Research and Development Center Ministry of Industry also confirm that a number of soap and detergent factories have been forced to shut down production lines and cut back employee work hours.

The chemicals in short supply are linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid (LABSA) and sodium lauryl ether sulfate (SLES) —both crucial components in the production of bar soap, powder soap, liquid soap as well as shampoos, body washes, dishwashing liquids, and detergents. 

Allied Chemicals, a firm established in 2008 with backing from Indian investors, is the primary importer of SLES and LABSA in Ethiopia. The firm processes the imported chemicals at one of several plants it operates in the country before supplying them to soap and detergent manufacturers. 

Manufacturers say the chemicals have been unavailable for months.

“For several past months, Allied stopped supplying these inputs. Since July, we’ve been tabling the problem to the Ministry of Industry, but there’s still no solution. Meanwhile, factories are closing their production lines,” a manager at a detergent production plant told The Reporter.

A manager at Allied who spoke to The Reporter anonymously confirmed the firm faced supply issues between September and last month in light of forex shortages, but contends things are now back to normal.

“Our supply stopped for a brief time due to forex shortages. But we didn’t interrupt distribution as we had adequate stock. Our factories are back in operation now. Challenges like forex shortages happen sometimes. It’s normal,” said the manager.

However, he also claimed this interruption in supply was the first since Allied began processing SLES and LABSA a decade ago.

“We have 300 employees at our factories, we are paying them salaries. Why would we stop supply, seeing as it is our own business and benefit? The benefit of the business is not only for the factories but also for us. We also don’t want interruptions and we are sure it won’t occur again,” he told The Reporter.

The manager argues that fluctuations in supply emanate from the soap and detergent factories themselves.

“They never send us their projected annual demand for SLES and LABSA, so we can’t precisely allocate the forex needed to import the raw materials,” he said.

Allied supplies manufacturers with up to 30,000 tons of LABSA and around half as much SLES each year.

“There’s a shift in the domestic market from bar and powdered soap towards liquid soap. So it’s difficult for us to know which raw material is in greater demand unless factories tell us,” said the manager.

The Ministry of Industry’s report says otherwise.

Over a 16-month period, Allied provided 12,888 tons of LABSA. More than two-thirds of the total volume was supplied to four major detergent companies: Zac, Bekas, Unilever, and Repi. Large manufacturers accounted for the lion’s share of 6,300 tons of SLES supplied by Allied as well.

The report concludes that Allied does not possess the production capacity to meet growing demand from manufacturers.

The total installed capacity of Ethiopia’s soap and detergent factories stands at over 535,000 tons. The report indicates they need at least 80,000 tons of SLES, much higher than the 57,000 tons Allied has the capacity to supply, according to Ministry documents obtained by The Reporter.

In reality, Allied is covering just half of demand from manufacturers.

“Factories manufacturing liquid, powder and bar detergents, have huge manufacturing capacity. However, due to lack of raw material supply, inadequate forex supply to import the inputs, inadequate working capital, security issues, local market fluctuations and growing cost of living; they are unable to manufacture at full capacity. The raw material supply from Allied Chemical is covering only half of their demand,” reads the Ministry’s report.

It indicates that while detergent industries’ demand for SLES and LABSA has been surging substantially, Allied’s supply has remained stagnant for two years. The report also showcases fluctuations in the supply of SLES and LABSA in the months since July 2025.

Allied also managed to generate USD 1.2 million in recent months through the export of SLES and LABSA, according to official documents.

However, the lobby group contends the problem goes deeper than forex shortages and production capacity.

Allied is the beneficiary of an exemption from the 15 percent duty levied on the commercial import of SLES and LABSA. Other importers are not exempted, giving Allied what the lobby group describes as an unfair advantage that has allowed it to corner the market.

“The duty free policy is designed to serve only one supplier. It was designed to serve Allied, not the sector. As a result, the whole sector is on the verge of collapse because one company stopped supplying inputs,” said a senior member of ECPMA, which represents more than two dozen large-scale manufacturers.

He alleges Allied is using its superior bargaining power unfairly.

“Allied typically collects payments upfront before supplying the SLES and LABSA. It takes 50 million or 100 million Birr in upfront payments and holds on to the money before eventually supplying the inputs after five or six months. Several factories have their capital tied up before they even get the inputs,” said the senior Association member.

Because other importers do not enjoy the same duty-free privileges that Allied does, buying SLES or LABSA from them carries a 15-percent markup.

“Then soap and detergent companies have to add 15 percent to the price when they sell their products to the public,” said one plant manager.

The lobby group wants to see an immediate solution to the problems.

Melaku Alebel, minister of Industry, convened industry players to discuss their misgivings and review a study on the problems plaguing the sector.

Manufacturers called on the Minister to push Allied to resume imports, and requested that the company’s duty-free privileges be removed. Melaku promised to table the issue to the Ministry of Finance and get back to them with a solution swiftly, but that has yet to happen, according to people who took part in the meeting.

“If importers were also allowed to import the inputs duty-free like Allied, supply could have been secured and the problem would have been solved,” said one industry executive. “The solution is to grant the privilege to all importers so that the policy works for the sector rather than a single company.”

Industry players say the situation has left them in a state of indecision.

“Factories now have to decide whether they should await a solution or buy the inputs from commercial importers with the 15 percent markup,” said one plant manager. “If we buy from the commercial importers, then we have to add the cost to our products, which would affect end consumers. If we keep waiting for Allied to resume imports, we may be forced to close our factories.”

Ethiopia imported soap and polish valued at seven billion Birr in 2024/5, up from five billion in the previous year, according to data from the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE). Import volumes have also surged in recent years, nearly doubling to 110,000 metric tons since 2022.

A substantial volume of soap and detergent was imported through the franco valuta scheme, according to the NBE.

While Ethiopia sources most of its SLES and LABSA from suppliers in the UAE, Egypt, Turkey, India, or China, suppliers in many of these countries rely heavily on manufacturers in Iran, whose operations have been affected by Tehran’s feud with Israel and the US, industry insiders say.

“The remaining options are India and China. Importing from China can take up to four months. We hope other countries might resume manufacturing the ingredients after January,” said an Association member.

Importing a ton of these chemicals can cost up to USD 3,000.

“SLES and LABSA are dollar-intensive. The NBE says there is no forex problem, but banks do not allocate when importers ask for more,” said one manager.

Experts at the Industry Ministry recommend that soap and detergent manufacturers be allowed to import their own SLES and LABSA at a reduced import duty of five percent as a short-term solution. They urged the manufacturers be granted priority in forex allocation and called for the establishment of a ‘LABSA-SLES Taskforce’ to oversee Allied Chemicals’ import and distribution process.

However, the experts cautioned that Ethiopia can not afford to depend on imported SLES and LABSA. They see attracting able investors to enable the domestic production of these materials as the only sustainable way forward.

“The shortage of SLES and LABSA emanates mainly from deep-rooted problems of forex shortage, distorted tariff systems, and dependency on imported raw materials. To solve these issues permanently, introducing strategic intervention and ensuring sustainable value chain supply for the sector, and attracting domestic investors in the domestication of the raw materials is critical,” reads the report.

The new expiration date for AUSSOM, which was supposed to be a one-year mission, is December 2026. Ethiopia has agreed to keep its peacekeeping troops in Somalia under the revised schedule.

As per the latest decision, troop contributing countries (TCCs) including Ethiopia and Egypt, “continue to deploy up to 11,826 uniformed personnel, inclusive of 680 police personnel, to AUSSOM until that date. The additional support to AUSSOM and the Somali Security Forces is necessary to enable Somalia to bolster its fight against Al-Shabaab and improve peace and security in the country and the region.”

The AU Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) also welcomed the readiness of Egypt to finalize the deployment of contingents in Somalia, while requesting troops from Burundi, Ghana, and Sierra Leone to remain in place until Egyptian troops are deployed to avoid a “security vacuum.”

Uganda and Ethiopia have deployed additional troops in Somalia on a bilateral arrangement basis, as a short-term measure, continuing their commitment and sacrifices in addressing the prevailing security situation in Somalia.

Last year, after Ethiopia disclosed potential plans to recognize Somaliland, Mogadishu threatened to expel Ethiopia from AUSSOM. It remains unclear whether Ethiopia will follow through in light of Israel’s decision to recognize Somaliland this week.

Some analysts fear the circumstances could renew tensions between Mogadishu and Addis Ababa.

AUPSC also commended Somalia’s reaffirmed commitment and progress made towards one-person-one vote elections in December 2026; and encouraged continued inclusive political engagements in the country.

The AU also underscored the need to cultivate local security forces as a critical step in informing the exit strategy.

Meanwhile, AUPSC reiterated its deep concern over the persistent financial gaps to support the operations of AUSSOM, which it deems critical for the peace, security and stability in Somalia, the region and the continent at large.

A statement issued by the Council this week indicates the AU Commission has allocated USD 20 million from the AU Peace Fund towards peacekeeping efforts in Somalia, but notes the funding has not yet been released.

On the other hand, the UNSC decided that the United Nations Transitional Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNTMIS) shall cease all operations on 31 October 2026 after completing the second phase of its transition.

During its meeting on December 23, 2025, members of the UNSC raised strong concerns regarding the funding shortfalls of AUSSOM.

Sierra Leone’s delegate, also speaking for Algeria, Guyana and Somalia, stated “Regrettably, some of our core concerns were not reflected in the text,” adding that the financing of AUSSOM had not been a central issue throughout the negotiations despite being the core concern.

Nevertheless, his group voted in favour of the text, recognizing the need for Council authorization “as the basis for continued support to AUSSOM by international donors.” The chronic underfunding of AUSSOM seriously impedes its objectives and risks reversing the progress achieved, he warned.

Several speakers echoed that, with the representative of France saying: “It is now more urgent than ever that new donors mobilize in support of security in Somalia.”

Denmark’s delegate highlighted AUSSOM’s role in providing logistical support to UNSOS in Somalia’s fight against Al Shabaab and in strengthening stabilization efforts. “Further progress must be made on the national level for Somalia to assume full responsibility for its security,” he emphasized.

The speaker for Pakistan said that while Al-Shabaab and its affiliates threaten peace in Somalia, sustainable and predictable financing for the Mission remains vital. AUSSOM, operating under the principles of national ownership and in full respect of national sovereignty, has a critical role to play.

The Russian Federation’s delegate stressed that the focus of the resolution should continue to be the security issue and support for AUSSOM. Domestic political issues in Somalia and the activities of the transition assistance mission and the relevant reports of the UN Secretary-General are “secondary in nature” and not a mandatory precondition for the Council to authorize the work of African peacekeepers in Somalia.

Stressing the need to listen to Somalia, he added: “We fail to understand the attempts by some delegations to defend the expansion of the UN Secretary General’s reporting on Somalia.”

 The United Kingdom’s representative, however, said the text creates a process to enable an informed review of the logistical support provided by the UN. This adoption follows the recent extension of the Al-Shabaab sanctions regime, he said, adding: “Taken together, these decisions demonstrate the Council’s continued determination to support Somalia in its fight against Al-Shabaab.”

China’s delegate said the funding gap facing AUSSOM is unsustainable and the liquidity shortfall confronting UNSOS merits concern. He called on donors to honour their funding commitments, paying their assessed peacekeeping contributions to UNSOS in full and on time. Further, the Secretary-General must present practical proposals on adjusting support for AUSSOM and bridging the funding gap, he said, calling on UNTMIS to ensure a smooth second phase of the transition.

As the largest contributor to the UN peacekeeping budget, “China shoulders nearly one quarter of the unsourced budget and has made significant contributions to the logistical support of AUSSOM over the years”, he said.

The United States, that country’s delegate said, has contributed billions of dollars to various missions in Somalia. Expressing concern that the “transfer of most security functions to Somalia has been elusive”, he said the responsibility for combating Al-Shabaab and other terrorism threats must shift “primarily to those who have the most at stake.”

Researchers at the NABRC laboratory complex sprawled on a vast tract of land in Holeta, 40 kilometers west of Addis Ababa, have since been busy with work on agricultural innovations like heat- and disease-resistant crop varieties, efficient cattle feed, and microbial research.

A decade down the road, Leta Tulu (PhD), NABRC director, says the Center’s contributions to Ethiopian agriculture have been immense. He sat down with The Reporter’s Ashenafi Endale to describe the work being done at NABRC and discuss researchers’ ambitions for the future. EXCERPTS:

What does Ethiopia envision achieving in terms of agricultural biotechnology? Can Ethiopian agriculture, which remains largely traditional, keep pace with global progress in biotech, or even leapfrog advances?

Contextualizing the Ethiopian scenario versus the global high-end biotechnology trend is critical. With nearly 130 million people, Ethiopia is the second largest population in Africa, next to Nigeria. The projection is we will have between 170 million and 200 million people by 2050.

The FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization] projected that in order to feed this fast-growing population, we must increase food production by 70 percent. Because of climate change, which is inducing additional biotic and abiotic challenges, additional solutions are required. Plus, because traditional agriculture methods in Ethiopia are hindering productivity increment efforts, it has become difficult to achieve the projected production increment with the business-as-usual approach.

The conventional agricultural research we have been doing has contributed to agricultural growth in Ethiopia. But it is not sufficient compared to the skyrocketing population and demand. We cannot continue depending on conventional research to develop. To cope with the problems stemming from population growth and climate change, additional technologies are necessary..

Globally, biotechnology is a proven tool to address challenges of climate change and population pressure. It is the decision of the Ethiopian government that we have to complement conventional research with modern biotechnology tools.

Ethiopia envisions the exploitation of the potential of modern biotechnology in agriculture research to generate information, data, and technology that enables the achievement of food security, export promotion, industrialization, employment generation, and natural resources conservation.

Other than agriculture, biotech’s contribution to drugs and vaccines is also substantial, and its commercialization is helping resolve many diseases. Industrial biotech—like enzymes, essential amino acids, and catalysts—has also become a big industry today.

Biotechnology efforts in Ethiopia are already paying off.  Our labs are working on several enzymes and catalysts that are essential in manufacturing and agro-processing, among others. We are at the stage of commercializing the enzymes and catalysts we have identified and developed through years of research.

Ethiopia can definitely leapfrog in biotechnology. Even in the 10 years since NABRC was established, we have seen immense contributions and identified immense potentials.

How does NABRC prioritize its mandates in achieving those national targets?

Mandates are not conditional. They are foundational commands that must be accomplished. The first mandate is becoming a center of excellence for agricultural biotechnology. Second is research and generating innovative and competent technologies in botanical, animal, and microbial [fields]. We are accomplishing our mandates.

NABRC is mandated to research and generate data and improve agricultural biotechnological solutions to enable Ethiopia to achieve food security. Our work includes generating knowledge that enhances conventional breeding, research on biotechnology, genetic engineering, livestock breeding, and microbial biotechnology, among others.

NABRC has three major national research programs: plant biotechnology, livestock biotechnology and microbial biotechnology. Each of these thematic areas have their own directions.

So, the critical role of NABRC is formulating and introducing protocols for such procedures. We have developed protocols for countless plants. All other research centers in the country take these protocols from us and distribute them to farmers. We work intensively on tissue culture and molecular research works.

In general, we embarked on biotechnology works to introduce new and important varieties like hybrids, and to provide solutions for problems that cannot be resolved through conventional research and breeding systems. We produce new varieties after studying DNA at the molecular level, and then we give the new variety or breed to the multipliers or breeders.

We introduce heat-tolerant, disease/pest-resistant, and highly productive varieties. Genetic engineering has revolutionized agriculture globally, unlike any other factor in agricultural history. Currently, over 200 million hectare farmed land globally is covered with GMOs.

Our mandate is to evaluate the leading agricultural technologies in the world, domesticate and introduce them to farms. We have introduced GMO maize and cotton. We also developed a new, disease-tolerant variety of Enset [false banana].

How do you asses the capacity of NABRC?

We are running a lot of research programs on microbial, animal feed, agro-industry, and environmental protection. We have already introduced a lactic acid bacteria that helps dairy processing industries. Ethiopia spends over USD 40 million annually to import chemicals for dairy processing industries. Our finding substitutes the import. We identified that bacteria, developed the technology, and are currently commercializing it in collaboration with dairy industries.

NABRC has substantially developed its capacity. This is the first well equipped, advanced, well-organized facility and center of excellence in Africa. Researchers across Africa, including AUDA-NEPAD, send their researchers here. We have over 50 researchers, all with graduate degrees or above.

When COVID-19 broke out, Ethiopia used to send samples for testing in South Africa. Then the WHO and Ministry of Health approved the EPHI [Ethiopian Public Health Institute] and our Center to test for COVID-19. Our lab contributed a lot to the pandemic response. 

NABRC also contributes highly to the Ethiopian export sector. Agricultural commodity exporters test their samples at our labs. Buyers across the world, especially in Europe, have stringent requirements regarding agricultural imports. They do not import if a single trace of unwanted chemicals, microbial, pests, diseases, weeds, or anything is identified in the export commodity. So we check for all that at our lab before the commodity is shipped. Shipping only takes place after we confirm to the Ministry of Agriculture that the commodity is free from these contaminants.

NABRC is a center of excellence. Regarding anything related to biotechnology, genes, and productivity of plants, livestock and microbial; the center generates and disseminates knowledge, data, and solutions. We provide critical support and capacity building support to regional agriculture bureaus, other research centers across the country, and universities.

Ethiopian and foreign researchers do their graduate and postgraduate work at our labs, because this is the only facility [that can accommodate them]. Regulators and experts at the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority and other institutions receive training at our Center.

Creating a national biotechnology capacity across the board is our mandate, and we have succeeded. Currently, 13 universities are graduating biotech experts at the graduate and postgraduate levels. We have several technology breakthroughs in the pipeline for commercialization. Biotech is key to transforming Ethiopia’s economy.

Do biotech interventions prioritize commodities meant for household consumption, or industrial inputs and export crops?

All are priorities. For instance, we introduced Bt cotton because the existing local cotton variety is poor in productivity and could not satisfy demand. We addressed both the industrial input demand and also exports by introducing cotton biotechnology.

For food security, we are working on several commodities including wheat, maize, teff, rice, and barley, among others. We work intensively on coffee hybrids, which is for export. At Wondogenet, the Aromatic and Medicinal Plants Center is also working on medicinal plants. We work on vaccines, tissue culture protocols, etc. So our research programs are aligned with all sectors, and national needs.

We also formulated the national research strategy. We build national biotech capacity. We support regional states to build their own biotech labs. 

NABRC is not mandated to introduce a biotechnology policy. Crafting a policy is not a mandate of our center. In a report, the Office of the Federal Auditor General [OFAG] stated that NABRC introduced a strategy before introducing a policy first. That is a mistake. OFAG does not know the biotechnology sector and most of what it reported as findings is wrong. The mandate to introduce a biotechnology policy is given to the Ethiopian Bio and Emerging Technologies Institute, not to NABRC. We have introduced the biotechnology strategy based on Ethiopia’s existing agricultural policies, roadmaps, and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs]. Whatever we do, should align with the 17 goals of SDG. EIAR has a stringent internal control mechanism that aligns research with SDGs.

Each and every research program and project under our center and EIAR passes through a stringent process before approval. There are layers where each research proposal is scrutinized by other researchers, internal and external, and at EIAR director levels. Each project is launched after the technical as well as economic contribution is evaluated exhaustively at each step. Once it is approved at EIAR level, then the institute applies for a budget from the Ministry of Finance. Hence, OFAG’s claims that research works are not prioritized is baseless. We don’t just waste taxpayers money and our system does not allow that.

Could you give us examples of successful work at the Center?

We have state-of-the-art labs each for plant, livestock, and microbial research. Our tissue culture lab is especially advanced. We extract DNA from plants, identify their genotypes, then DNA analysis is done from different perspectives. Gene documentation is also done.

Before our DNA lab was built, Ethiopia was forced to send samples abroad for testing. That used to cost the country a lot in foreign currency, and the test results were almost never on time. But now, we can provide DNA testing for exports, for example, within two days. This is a huge capacity for Ethiopia. The facility also has a huge library. Some of these facilities were built with the World Bank’s support.

In Ethiopia, the germplasm of many indigenous varieties are stored at gene banks. But unless the genotypes are mapped and analyzed; we cannot utilize them. To know which gene of which variety is required for what purpose, all the genetic analysis and mapping of existing domestic varieties in Ethiopia must be done. We are doing that.

At our tissue culture lab facility, genes of plants selected at the DNA labs are turned into plant shoots in a highly controlled environment. Air components, temperature, light, power, nutrition, and everything in the tissue culture facility is controlled and monitored. Several sophisticated machines are deployed to regulate each of these factors, until the tissue shoot is multiplied and distributed to farmers as first generation seeds.

Since it takes years to produce a single improved variety of a crop, then we use the leaves of the first generation of that improved variety to duplicate it. Once we produce the F1, then we introduce the protocol. Tissue culture helps to expel certain disease causing genes, and breed disease-free, highly productive varieties. Our job is introducing the new selected variety, delivering them to seed multiplying stakeholders, and providing the initial materials. If the new varieties we release are multiplied in millions, and delivered to farmers, Ethiopia’s agriculture could reach a new height in the history of agricultural revolutions.

We have introduced hybrid improved varieties for many specialty coffee varieties in Ethiopia, be it Harar, Sidama, Wolega, Jimma, or Illubabor. We’ve also introduced disease-free and productive banana varieties.

Coffee is typically cultivated only in the southern and western parts of Ethiopia. Now, it is being adopted in the highlands in central and other parts of Ethiopia following the introduction of improved new varieties by our Center. In the near future, coffee will be grown in all parts of the country.

Unlike maize, coffee varieties cannot be generated easily. A number of limiting factors exist, hampering multiplication of a selective produced variety. In several parts of Shewa, including Ejere, Woliso, Metarobi, Girar Jarso, and in the surroundings Addis Ababa; we are supplying improved coffee varieties. Coffee is trending in the highland areas of Ethiopia now. We have promoted the improved varieties and demand is huge now.

Multiplying the new improved varieties and technologies introduced by NABRC requires private investment. NABRC’s role is researching and releasing new varieties, but not multiplying the improved varieties and supplying to farmers. This role is for private investors, state enterprises, and seed sector actors.

Regarding microbial research programs, we have also done a tremendous job. Under this program, we are running five thematic areas; food, agro-industry, livestock feed, bio-organic fertilizer, and environmental microbial technology.

In food microbial, we identified and introduced probiotic lactic acid bacteria technology. In highland parts of Ethiopia, fermenting milk into yogurt takes up to four days. Our technology reduced the time to six hours. It is in the commercialization process currently, in cooperation with large dairy industries in the country. We have also identified and introduced a microbe that turns fruit and food wastes into biofuel, bio-fertilizer and other products.

We developed technology that enables us to produce animal feed rich with protein, from single-celled microbes. The feed includes essential amino acids that are critical for poultry and fishery farms. We are supplying it.

We also produced new feed for cattle. Usually, when cattle consume legumes and grasses, it takes longer for the animals to digest it. This means it can take a long time to produce milk, and it can also have an effect on the health of the cattle.

We are field-testing organic fertilizers that work with nitrogen fixing, and can increase soil fertility. We are introducing new technology to the textile and leather industries. So far, they have been using chemicals and heavy metals for bleaching of textile and tanning. But these chemicals have been destroying the environment in Ethiopia. They use chemicals like chromium and lead. These are very toxic. We’ve extracted an enzyme from a microbe to replace these chemicals. It is environmentally safe and affordable.

Currently, the global enzyme industry is growing fast, with huge demand and transaction. In the future, our Center will also capitalize on this, so that Ethiopia can rely on this sector economically.

Multiplying single celled microbes in the lab and producing them en masse for high-protein animal feed is also a great breakthrough. It will completely change the current lack of feed in poultry, fishery and other livestock, which soared prices currently. We also developed a microbe that can shorten the time needed to bake injera from three days to 24 hours, as well as one that can shorten the time it takes to prepare food from enset from three months to one month.

We also developed technology that eliminates cyanide concentration from cassava. Cassava has cyanide concentration naturally, but a lactic acid bacteria we identified can reduce the content so that cassava can be consumed safely.

We are also working on mushrooms, including finalizations of optimization of substrates. We are training youth and supplying them with new products.

Regarding animal biotechnology, we are working on four thematic areas: animal reproduction, health, and breeding. Livestock health biotechnology uses molecular agents to diagnose disease in hours, once the DNA is extracted. Without the PCR at this lab, which enables diagnosis within hours, the livestock might die.

We produce productive livestock breeds, but the feed supply in the country is not good. We recently introduced technology that enables the determination of embryo sex. Dairy farms need female cows, while meat ranches need bulls. So determining the embryo sex on time helps them.

Why does substituting the import of sexed semen remain difficult?

Sexed semen and embryos are currently being imported to Ethiopia from abroad through the facilitation of the Ministry of Agriculture [MoA]. We could simply substitute for it here if additional facilities were fulfilled. To prepare sexed semen, first identifying the X and Y chromosomes of the livestock is critical. But in Ethiopia, there is no machine that helps to identify the X and Y chromosomes. For instance, in Kaliti, they collect conventional semen, but they cannot determine the sex of the chromosome. Therefore, it is difficult to use for a predetermined sex type of animal. This means it is a probability that one gets a female or male calf. This does not help dairy or meat investors who want only certain sex types for better productivity.

So, the machine that sorts out the X and Y chromosomes is essential. As a country, Ethiopia does not have a single sorting machine.

What we have developed now enables us at least to determine the sex of the animal at the embryo stage. So, though we don’t have the sorting machine to determine the sex at the DNA level, at least we managed to determine it at the embryo level. We developed this technology recently, and it also substitutes for imports.

Importing sexed semen from abroad is expensive. But the technology is highly successful. The dairy village established in Bishoftu is highly successful. Over 98 percent of the calves born are heifers, which is good for dairy production. Now the MoA is expanding it to 21,000 dairy villages.

Tell us about the impacts of the interventions taken by your Center in terms of achieving agricultural modernization, productivity, and structural transformation in the economy towards the industrialization aspirations in Ethiopia’s development endeavors.

The major impact of biotech is modernizing Ethiopia’s agriculture. The Bt cotton eliminated the bollworm and reduced herbicide impacts. Many technologies we introduced have saved farmers from traditional back-breaking work like weeding and pesticide spraying. Productivity has significantly improved. Women are relieved of back-breaking agricultural work. Children have time to go to school. Agricultural modernization is simplifying agricultural work so that people have time for other priorities and a quality life.

The Federal Auditor General recently disclosed a report in which it criticized the Center for failures in carrying out its duties. What is your response?

OFAG failed to understand and define NABRC’s success. Having such a state-of-the-art biotech lab and releasing several breakthrough technologies within ten years is a major accomplishment. Succeeding in a single biotechnology program takes several years, but NABRC achieved so many within the first decade of its establishment.

With the nascent biotechnology trend in Africa and in Ethiopia, NABRC has done extraordinary work. Over 50 researchers and biotech scientists have spent day and night in our labs for the past several years. But OFAG says NABRC failed to do anything.

When the officials and experts of OFAG first came, we had meetings with the management of NABRC. They told us their objective and said the audit would take around ten months. They told us at the end there would be an exit conference to reach a consensus on the audit findings. Both OFAG and NARC should have approved the findings before finalizing the report. An exit conference is a legal procedure for OFAG. For several months, we provided all the documents and reports and everything for OFAG. But finally, they left without doing the exit conference. OFAG also did not do the exit conference with EIAR.

OFAG gave us a draft report initially. We found a lot of mistakes. We provided tons of documents and evidence for them to correct their draft report. But they refused to consider any of our evidence. They also refused to do an exit conference. Hence, they proceeded to publish the draft report as a final report without our agreement and approval.

OFAG is a public institution created to check if public institutions are doing the right job. But their report regarding NARC is completely baseless and far from the truth on the ground.

Policy cannot be developed at the Center level but at the government level. We told OFAG that it was not our fault, but they failed to listen. Our reference is the existing rural agricultural development strategy to develop our research strategy. In terms of biotech performance, we are ahead on all our targets.

The Bio and Emerging Technologies Institute has drafted a biotechnology policy for Ethiopia. The draft policy is being scrutinized and reviewed at different stages. Our researchers also participated in the forums to contribute from the aspect of Agri-biotech. That draft is tabled to the Council of Ministers and is awaiting approval.

So, OFAG’s allegation that we did not produce a biotechnology policy is not related to our mandate.

The NABRC strategy is designed for 15 years, up to 2030. There are 100 strategic targets set in Agri-biotech in the strategy. Now we are in 2025, and we have achieved 71 strategic interventions. We are left with 29 strategic interventions and 5 years to accomplish them. But OFAG stated the strategic interventions failed totally and inefficiency has been ongoing for years. That is completely incorrect.

So it was all a misunderstanding?

OFAG did not understand the documents we provided to them. In one specific year, we were handling 62 research projects, but OFAG reported only two. OFAG lacks the willingness to understand what we do. They went on to publish a very substandard audit report on NABRC.

OFAG also stated NABRC mismanaged resources. That is unfounded. Each of the resources we utilize for all these research projects is mobilized based on our strong work and well-understood partnerships. EIAR and all the research wings under it, including NABRC, are among the most efficient public institutions in Ethiopia, and nobody can accuse us of anything. The nature of research disciplines and our sector does not allow us a single mistake. Our Center is the last public institution to be accused of inefficiency and failure, let alone the allegations made by OFAG.

As per the procedure, OFAG should have discussed it with us, with EIAR management, and then presented its findings to Parliament. But OFAG did not do any of this. Yet, it published its unfounded report.

We are not saying there are no challenges in our work. For instance, we need sensitive reagents for lab work. But we don’t access such chemicals in the local markets. We import directly from manufacturers abroad, so we need forex. Such chemicals should be kept at minus 20 degrees Celsius. When the chemicals arrive at Bole Airport,  the temperature rises as we await for Customs clearance. So we are requesting that refrigerating facilities be installed at Bole Airport. But OFAG reported we have a procurement crisis instead of recommending the requests we made to the Customs Commission. We never do a single procurement outside of the government’s procurement guidelines.

OFAG also reported that research students going abroad on scholarships are not coming back. This is also wrong. Every scholarship student is sent after committing collateral to come back and serve the country. Whenever a student remains abroad, the monetary guarantee is submitted to the government. If they fail to come back, they pay a fine to the government, including all expenses for their study. All that is collected if a student fails to come back. We cannot go and bring that student from abroad using force. They pay back all the money to the government treasury, every penny spent for their training. There are even students who have been brought before court to return the money. Some are in the court process currently.

OFAG also accused us of moving funds from project to project and wasting money on research not benefiting society. This is also a very amazing allegation. We would be happy if they could present one piece of evidence. Each project we are running is crucial for our society, the economy, and the national economy. No money is moved from project to project. As per government regulation, public institutions can reallocate funds from one budget code to another based on the priority at hand. In general, the OFAG report is not final until we endorse it.

Given that agricultural biotech is a new frontier for developing economies like Ethiopia, what can you tell us about the challenges your Center is facing, and how you are trying to resolve them?

Biotech is new for Africa and Ethiopia. There are also wrong perceptions regarding biotechnology, including a fear of the unknown. Not only do some segments of society doubt GMO technology, but so do some scientists. In developed countries, over 90 percent of farmland is covered with GMOs. But there are doubtful scientists even in those countries. Awareness creation is important. But in the past several years, the mindset towards biotech has substantially improved.

Research takes time. Nothing can be done overnight. Researching and developing these technologies took us years. Now we are on the verge of commercializing and translating them into economic benefits. They will revolutionize agricultural productivity, industrialization, and the modernization of Ethiopian agricultural practices as well as industries. Now is the time to see the fruits of our years of research.

We are also expanding the lab capacities of our programs under NABRC. We are building additional facilities for microbial, tissue culture, and animal biotechnology and for infection-resistant traits.

Finding a lead researcher is difficult. A lead researcher is a professor who is well-published, seasoned in breakthrough research work, and has contributed to the community and the country. Finding such manpower on the market is difficult. Therefore, we produce them ourselves.

Success in introducing a single improved variety takes several years. OFAG thinks it is something that can be done every year. This is very wrong.

The Center needs electric power 24/7. Especially the tissue culture facility, which needs regulated light for 16 hours and dark for 8 hours every day. If the power goes out for a second, all the genes and samples in machines and specific refrigerators, stored for years, will be lost. Hence, the Center has deployed three generators in case of a power outage. But OFAG reported the Center has no generator.

While commercializing the technologies it introduces, does NABRC enter into benefit-sharing agreements with the private industries?

NABRC releases the technological finding, produces a prototype, and gives it to private developers for large-scale production. For tissue culture, we also give the protocol to private multipliers or labs or developers. For instance, we released a wilt-disease-free ginger variety. Then the Mekelle biotech center multiplied the new variety in large amounts. We also developed a protocol for sugarcane, which the Mekelle biotech center multiplied and gave to all sugar industries across Ethiopia.

Private companies and industries are benefiting a lot from our technologies. In return, NABRC gets no benefit for the research it conducts. NABRC is a non-profit research institute; hence our mandate is just releasing problem-solving technologies.

But currently, a guideline is being developed to guide how such research centers can share benefits with private developers of their prototypes.

What can you tell us about reports of GMO wheat in the lowlands?

There is no GMO wheat in Ethiopia. It is a variety developed by EIAR using conventional breeding.

Bt cotton technology was introduced to farmers in 2019, but productivity has yet to improve. Farmers also report being unable to access Bt cotton seeds. Can you tell us more about this?

There is an independent task force working on cotton under MoA and the Ministry of Industry. We researched, tested and introduced Bt cotton technology. The follow-up work in implementation is mandated to the task force and the seed sector.

How do you evaluate the capacity of firms in the seed sector?

There are private, multinational, and also government enterprises involved in multiplying and supplying certified seeds for farmers.

For instance, Corteva has huge capacity in hybrid seed production in Ethiopia. It is the leading company in taking improved maize seed from research centers, multiplying and supplying it to the farming community. The Ethiopian, Oromia, Amhara and Debub seed enterprises are also major players. These are companies feeding Ethiopian agriculture.

Pioneer, which is currently called Corteva, has reportedly monopolized the supply of hybrid maize for almost all farmers in Ethiopia. A recent management crisis at the multinational prompted reports of supply disruptions in Ethiopia. Farmers also have complaints about the productivity of its improved seeds. Can you tell us more?

I do not think there is a monopoly. The demand for improved maize seed skyrocketed in Ethiopia. Currently, we are satisfying half of the demand. Regarding Corteva, you can ask the company.

Do farmers pay more for improved seeds?

Our improved seed technologies are provided for farmers royalty free. Farmers should not pay for the technology. Companies have the right to receive improved seed technologies from research centers, multiply the seed, and sell it to farmers with their own brand. The company does not incur additional cost regarding the technology. It should not charge farmers for the seed technology.

Intense unrest in the Gambella Regional State over the past couple of weeks has claimed dozens of lives as the region struggles with rising ethnic tensions and a fresh influx of South Sudanese refugees seeking shelter from violence in already overcrowded camps.

Eyewitnesses, local officials, humanitarian workers, and investors in Gambella who spoke to The Reporter over the past week allege a far-reaching web of corruption preying on humanitarian aid meant for refugees is implicated in the violence that has gripped the region.

Sources say the unrest began two weeks ago, following the closure of roads connecting the regional capital—the town of Gambella—to several surrounding woredas. Early this week, a manager of Commercial Bank of Ethiopia (CBE) branch in the area, who was reportedly a member of the Nuer ethnic group, was killed, according to the sources.

This was followed by the killing of a Gambella police commander, who was reportedly a member of the Annuak ethnic group.

Sources say these events eventually led to the widespread violence that had claimed close to 100 lives as of Friday, December 19. Towns like Akedo and Abol have been razed, while areas like Lare, Itang, and Gambella town have also been affected, according to reports. Gunfire was heard in several areas, according to sources.

Gatluak Ruon (PhD), deputy head of the regional administration, said the unnamed attackers targeted ambulances and government vehicles during the first days of the violence, killing at least five people.

Regional president Alemitu Umod declined to provide further details when The Reporter contacted her for comment on Friday. However, the president confirmed to local media that the regional government is working with the federal government to ensure peace and the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) has deployed troops in the region to contain the conflict.

The Gambella Police Commission has also issued statements confirming that regional security forces and the Federal Police Commission are working with the ENDF to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Despite making allusions to a hidden hand orchestrating the unrest in the region, both Alemitu and Gatluak refrained from naming the actual perpetrators while speaking to BBC and local media over the week.

Officials also say that opposition political figures in Gambella have an understanding with the government and are strictly engaged in peaceful politics.

This month’s unrest is not the first incident of its kind in the region, whose security issues stretch back decades and have roots in Juba, Addis Ababa, and Gambella itself.

In recent years, unrest in the region has been linked to tensions between residents and its large refugee population.

Data from UNHCR indicates there are over 483,000 South Sudanese refugees in Ethiopia, comprising nearly half of the one million refugees estimated to be living in the country. The vast majority of South Sudanese refugees, close to 450,000, reside in around half a dozen camps in Gambella.

The camps have long been at capacity, but renewed tensions in South Sudan have caused many more to flee to Gambella for safety over the past year.

In October, the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan cautioned that armed clashes, political detentions, and human rights violations in the country have skyrocketed in recent months.

The violence began to escalate in March, when the government of President Salva Kiir arrested Vice President Riek Machar.

Machar was taken into custody on suspicion of working with the White Army, a militant organization tied to the Nuer ethnic group. At the time, Machar’s Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO) party denied ongoing links with the militia, which it fought alongside during the civil war that had engulfed South Sudan for years following its independence in 2011.

Machar and several other individuals have since been accused of treason, crimes against humanity, terrorism, mass murder, and destruction of property, and a criminal trial is ongoing.

In October, Benjamin Bol Mel, another of South Sudan’s five vice presidents, was taken into military custody under direct orders from the office of President Salva Kiir, heightening fears that the country is slipping back into a state of civil war.

While the armed conflict is concentrated in Upper Nile State and Jonglei State, there are pockets of fighting in other parts of the country, triggering population movements both within South Sudan and across its borders.

The UN estimates at least 370,000 South Sudanese civilians have been displaced by violence since March, with many more fleeing to neighboring countries including Ethiopia.

In April, local officials in Gambella, which shares a long border with South Sudan, told The Reporter they were struggling to cope with the influx of refugees fleeing violence and air strikes.

Reports indicate that at least 50,000 South Sudanese refugees have crossed into Gambella in the months following Machar’s arrest.

They add to the estimated 430,000 South Sudanese refugees already sheltered in the region at a time when funding constraints are forcing humanitarian organizations like the World Food Program (WFP), the sole humanitarian assistance provider for over 1.1 million refugees and millions of IDPs in Ethiopia, to scale back aid programs.

Two months ago, WFP officials announced their decision to cut rations for more than 780,000 refugees in camps across Ethiopia to less than 1,000 calories a day in response to funding shortfalls.

It is against this backdrop that unrest and violence have erupted in Gambella in recent weeks.

Sources say the ethnic tensions in the region often involve refugees.

“Local residents in Gambella fear their land will be taken over by refugees. Ethnic groups point fingers at one another, each accusing the other of purposely hosting more refugees belonging to their own ethnicity. Dominating in numbers often means dominating resources,” said a humanitarian expert with experience working in Gambella.

Officials and humanitarian workers who spoke to The Reporter on condition of anonymity claim that members of armed groups operating in South Sudan are also entering Gambella disguised as refugees. These armed groups include SPLM-IO and the White Army members, sources told The Reporter.

Security concerns notwithstanding, the influx of refugees poses a serious burden for Gambella, which was already buckling under the strain of its large refugee population.

A UNHCR report indicates that 994 upgradable emergency shelters have been built to accommodate new refugees in the region, while an additional 611 shelters are underway.

A joint border monitoring mission, conducted by regional authorities and humanitarian partners, found over 800 makeshift shelters along the Baro River, accommodating an estimated 8,000 individuals in congested and precarious conditions, reveals the report.

It notes that new arrivals were and are being hosted by local communities, but many remain exposed to harsh weather, the risk of cholera, and face serious protection risks.

UNHCR warns that without a political resolution in South Sudan, increased cross-border movement remains very likely. The agency says it is conducting border monitoring to “uphold the civilian character of asylum and prevent the infiltration of armed elements.”

Meanwhile, sources in the region allege the cycle of unrest and violence in Gambella is due in part to a network of corrupt government officials and humanitarian organizations, who benefit by diverting aid resources.

“The reason the refugee crisis and ethnic conflict in Gambella has gone without resolution is because the officials benefit greatly from it. There exists a large and influential network composed of regional and federal officials, and international organizations working in Ethiopia that is involved in diverting aid. Flour, cooking oil, and other resources and materials are siphoned off into commercial markets. A huge amount of resources are embezzled by the officials but nobody, including security forces, dares to intervene because there are real heavyweights behind it,” a well-placed source told The Reporter.

The unrest in Gambella also raises concerns about Ethiopia’s new refugee policy.

The Makatet Roadmap, which translates to ‘inclusion’, was introduced earlier this year as Ethiopia’s country refugee response plan (CRRP) by experts at the Ethiopian Refugees and Returnees Services (RRS) and UNHCR.

Makatet forwards a number of initiatives designed to integrate refugees in Ethiopia, mainly in Gambella but also slated for implementation in Somali, Amhara, and others, to assimilate into local host communities and Ethiopia’s national development programs.

However, its critics argue the plan fails to consider the will of local host communities and argue that refugees should return to their country of origin when the situation allows.

A growing trend of adulteration in the National Bank of Ethiopia’s (NBE) gold supply has prompted regulators to swap out outdated methods for measuring the purity of bullion for new, more reliable technology.

The central bank is the sole entity authorized to buy gold from miners and export the mineral. A massive increase in the volume of gold being supplied to the NBE, particularly from the Tigray Regional State, coupled with record global gold prices have filled the central bank’s coffers over the past couple of years.

However, sources in the industry say adulterated gold has become increasingly common in recent months, threatening the NBE’s supply. They claim most of the adulterated gold in the market originates in Tigray, where the NBE operates a purchasing center in the town of Shire.

To date, the central bank utilized outdated densitometric analysis to determine the purity of gold by measuring its density or by using fire assays, which can be slow, unreliable, or pose risks in the form of toxic fumes.

However, increasingly common adulteration has pushed the NBE to procure spectrometers which utilize X-ray fluorescence (XRF) technology to determine quality and molecular composition with far greater accuracy.

In addition to impurities like copper, the machinery can detect traces of substances like hazardous chemicals that may have been used during the mining process.

The NBE reports it has received nearly 19 tons of gold from its Shire outpost over the first five months of the fiscal year. The figure is the highest on record and is especially striking considering that supply from Tigray was cut off during the northern war.

Still, a portion of volume, according to inside sources, has turned out not to have been gold at all. They say the adulteration problem has impeded Shire’s booming gold trade

“Even large scale gold suppliers from Tigray have recently been implicated in [adulteration]. These large scale suppliers have for years been licensed to collect small volumes of gold from artisanal miners and supply it to NBE. Recently, the NBE accused them of supplying adulterated gold. They use special imported chemicals that make it difficult to tell [the adulterated bullion] from gold. When NBE found out, it froze payments to several suppliers over the past months. As a result, many suppliers in Tigray are awaiting payment despite already supplying gold,” a source close to the issue told The Reporter, speaking anonymously.

Regulators refrained from commenting on issues related to adulteration, large-scale gold mining, or gold smuggling when approached by The Reporter.

During the 2024/5 fiscal year, the central bank received 39 tons of gold—the vast majority from small-scale miners—and generated a record USD 3.5 billion from exports.

The NBE offers a 15 percent premium on bullion and recently opened 10 new gold purchasing centers tied to Commercial Bank of Ethiopia (CBE) branches across the country.

Gold exports accounted for more than a tenth of the country’s total forex revenues last year, which grew to USD 33 billion from 24 billion in 2023/4.

The central bank’s latest report indicates its forex reserves can cover 2.8 months of imports, more than three times the value reported in June 2024. The document also reveals a massive drop in current account deficits, which are down to USD 60 million from USD 6.2 billion the previous year.

“The near elimination of the current account deficit is a monumental shift. This was likely fueled by export incentives, improved forex retention rules, and a formalization of gold exports. Reserves at 2.8 months of import cover, while improved, still sit below the recommended 3-month benchmark,” reads the document.

The report indicates the official exchange rate depreciated by more than 136 percent since last year and says an 85 percentage point drop in the parallel market spread since the liberalization in July 2024 indicates “successful currency unification.”

Zenith’s executives, including the bank’s president and board chairperson, visited Addis Ababa this week for talks with central bank chief Eyob Tekalign (PhD) and officials at the Ethiopian Investment Commission (EIC).

Zinabu Yirga, deputy head of the Commission, stated that Ethiopia is ready to welcome reliable and giant international financial institutions, noting that Ethiopia being the third-largest economy in Sub-Saharan Africa, the expansion of trade relations with other countries, and the existence of grand infrastructure and industrial projects have created a favorable environment to conduct long-term financial sector investment.

Zenith’s head of international market expansion, Olukayode Akinbinu, stated that Zenith Bank has a strong desire to invest in the country’s financial market by utilizing the opportunities created by Ethiopia’s rapidly growing economy, recent sectoral reforms, and the liberalization of banking and financial services.

He added that the bank is currently evaluating investment opportunities in Ethiopia by focusing on digital and technology-based financial solutions as well as financing large government-led projects.

Zenith Bank is headquartered in Lagos, Nigeria, and is a sizable financial institution operating through branches and representative offices in Africa and key international financial centers, providing corporate, retail, digital, and infrastructure financial services.

Zenith is the latest African bank to express interest in the Ethiopian market.

In June, sources at the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE) hinted that Kenya’s KCB Group Limited will be the first foreign banking institution to join the Ethiopian financial sector under the government’s liberalization drive.

The Banking Business Proclamation amended by lawmakers in November 2024 permits foreign banks to enter in one of four ways. They can incorporate a subsidiary in Ethiopia, buy stakes in a domestic bank, establish a local branch office, or open a representative or liaison office. The law caps foreign investment in a bank at 40 percent ownership, while a domestic bank cannot sell more than 49 percent of its authorized shares to foreign investors.

Led by Tigray Interim Administration (TIA) president Lt. General Tadesse Worede, regional officials traveled to Addis Ababa this week for discussions with their federal counterparts. Talks with CBE executives were on the schedule for Friday.

Tadesse reportedly urged the bank to invest in sectors like construction to reduce the region’s high unemployment rate. Tadesse and his deputy, Amanuel Assefa, also requested CBE to provide loans for more than 60,000 people seeking housing in Tigray, according to a statement issued by the bank.

The request came a few days after the federal government notified commercial banks about the lifting of an embargo that had been placed on companies under the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray (EFFORT) during the two-year war.

The conglomerate had been the subject of an intense power struggle between Tigray’s political elite, with the TPLF faction led by Chairman Debretsion Gebremichael on one side and former TIA chief Getachew Reda on the other.

The TPLF has reportedly been attempting to replace EFFORT’s board and management team with loyal supporters since Tadesse replaced Getachew at the helm earlier this year. However, the opposing side, which includes former EFFORT CEO Beyene Mikru, managed to secure a court order to stop TPLF’s intentions for a reshuffle.

As TPLF moved to have the decision repealed, Getachew and his allies managed to secure a freeze on all accounts tied to nearly two dozen subsidiaries under the EFFORT conglomerate.

TPLF leaders and TIA officials have decried the freeze as severely impacting Tigray’s post-conflict recovery efforts. TPLF also has been using the situation as a political instrument to amplify tensions between Tigray and the federal government.

However, this week, as the TIA delegation headed by Tadesse arrived in Addis Ababa, the federal government lifted the injunction on EFFORT bank accounts.

A letter addressed to commercial banks from the Ministry of Justice states that the freeze on the bank accounts of 22 companies including Sur Construction has been lifted.

An official close to the matter expressed hope that the development will help ease tensions.

“The lifting of the ban is also good as several people in Tigray, including Dedebit MFI clients, can now access their accounts. Yet, the board and management of the conglomerate is still on the side of Getachew’s group,” the official told The Reporter.

Ephrem Mekuria, CBE vice president, told Tadesse’s team that the bank has been contributing to Tigray’s reconstruction in terms of rebuilding schools, health facilities and others, and will continue investing in the region.

Other topics the TIA delegation discussed with the federal government were not made public.

The Ministry of Finance has exempted properties in Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa with a value of less than one million Birr from paying property taxes as officials seek to ease the growing tax burden on low-income households. The threshold drops to 250,000 Birr in municipal cities and 100,000 Birr in emerging towns.

Finance Minister Ahmed Shide issued a memo to city and regional administrations this week, attempting to clarify confusion over implementation procedures and rates for the Property Tax Proclamation ratified by Parliament in March this year.

The Ministry defines low-income households as one that is proven to be experiencing economic hardship, determined by local social affairs officials, and whose annual income does not exceed half of the national average per capita income.

The Minister has forwarded sample legislative documents for regional and city administrations to use in formulating their own property tax laws.

The model proclamation dictates the taxable value of a property will be a quarter of its market value, and sets a 0.1 percent floor and 10 percent ceiling for the tax rate, which local governments are to apply under four different categories.

In the first year, the minimum property tax threshold for emerging regions is 0.1 percent, while it is 0.45 for city administrations, according to the Ministry. By the fourth year, the rate goes up to one percent for both regions and city administrations.

Public roads, streets, dams, airports, power/water transmission poles and lines, parks, heritage sites, heritage properties, communal open spaces are exempted. Property owned and used by religious organizations, cemeteries, land used for subsistence agriculture, and property owned and used by organizations that provide free social services to the public are also exempted.

The Algiers Agreement, signed in December 2000, has largely been forgotten, and this week’s reminders come amid fears of a return to conflict as friction between Addis Ababa and Asmara continues to grow more heated.

Ethiopia’s advances towards securing maritime access have triggered alarm in Eritrea, with the administration of Isaias Afwerki accusing Addis Ababa of preparing to annex the port of Assab in its bid to gain a sea outlet. On the other hand, Ethiopia has accused Asmara of providing support to various armed groups and political factions in the country, including Fano militia in the Amhara region and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

The finger-pointing has escalated to the world stage in recent months, with foreign affairs officials from both countries crying foul at the UN on several occasions.

The tensions suggest that another war could be in the offing, leading observers to call for calm and suggest solutions for a peaceful ending to the saga. One analyst proposes a territory swap: the border town of Badme for the port of Assab.

However, a deeper look at relations between the two countries over the past three decades shows the situation is not nearly that simple.

Many political pundits consider the Algiers Agreement and Assab as cardinal mistakes that defined the TPLF-led Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which ruled Ethiopia until relatively recently.

They note the Algiers Agreement birthed the Ethiopia-Eritrea Boundary Commission, which concluded a hotly disputed demarcation process in late 2007 without resolving the issues that had led the two countries to war in 1998.

In hindsight, analysts observe the border dispute, which revolved primarily around the small town of Badme, was not the real cause of the two-year war. They note the Ethiopian military did not advance into Eritrea during the conflict, arguing this was due to a degree of sympathy from the late Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

Pundits argue his strong belief in Eritrea’s secession and independence is rooted in family ties to the country, while others say the conflict was engineered by regional powers who had a vested interest in keeping Ethiopia landlocked.

The negotiations that led up to the Algiers Agreement have also come under scrutiny. Analysts argue EPRDF erroneously assented to the use of colonial-era treaties to demarcate the border. These treaties were enforced by Italy during the reign of Emperor Menelik II in 1900, 1906, and 1910.

Experts note the 1906 treaty in particular, which the Boundary Commission relied on, favored Eritrea, and argue the EPRDF made a grave mistake by omitting the use of other evidence and documents in the negotiations. They note that the treaties in question had been nullified by both Ethiopia and Italy by the mid-20th century and argue that factors like ethnography, local allegiances, trade routes, and political identity were disregarded during the process.

The Boundary Commission was eventually dissolved without completing the physical demarcation process as both Ethiopia and Eritrea continued to dispute its rulings.

More than two decades later, realities along the border have changed markedly, particularly over the past five years.

Today, Eritrean forces control large swathes of Ethiopian territory as a direct result of Asmara’s involvement in the two-year northern war, which ended in November 2022. Areas like Irob, Badme, Tahtay Adiabo, Zelambessa, and others remain under Eritrean military control.

Adding fuel to the fire, renewed tensions between the TPLF and the federal government have escalated the probability of war. Despite the historical enmity and the human rights violations the Eritrean military committed in Tigray during the latest war in the north, the TPLF has abruptly changed its stance and is currently forging an alliance with Asmara.

Some observers argue the Algiers Agreement is no longer binding as Eritrea breached its terms by crossing the border and occupying Ethiopian territory. Others say differently.

“Since the Boundary Commission did not demarcate the exact border, there is no border agreement for Eritrea to breach. Rather, Eritrea breached Ethiopia’s borders, not the border determined by the Commission,” said one researcher who has published a series of papers on the issue.

Nonetheless, experts say Ethiopia can provide sufficient justification for its claims over Assab.

Among them is Yacob Hailemariam (PhD), a former prosecutor of the UN Tribunal on War Crimes in Rwanda and member of the Nigeria-Cameroon Border Commission. Yacob has kept a close eye on developments on the border between Ethiopia and Eritrea, and is the author of the widely read Amharic-language book, ‘Assab: Whose is it?’

In a recent interview, Yacob explained why Ethiopia’s claims over the port are legitimate.

“Historically, Assab was never part of Eritrea. When Eritrea was formed, Assab was under Rubatino. The people of Assab are the people of Afar in Ethiopia. Assab was sold by an Afar landholder to an Italian. Emperor Menelik did not know about the sale at the time, due to [poor] connectivity. Menelik repeatedly announced to the world that Ethiopia is bounded by the Red Sea. There is nothing that relates Assab to Eritrea historically,” said Yacob.

The expert noted that several territorial agreements signed between Emperor Menelik and Italy have all been voided by the UN.

“Even Italy itself nullified the agreements after it lost the Second World War. Ethiopia also nullified the agreements,” said Yacob.

His book argues the Algiers Agreement is also void, with Yacob blaming TPLF and EPRDF for what he describes as a historic failure.

“There were many opportunities to include Assab as Ethiopian territory. The international community was also positive in supporting Ethiopia on this. But EPRDF officials, particularly Prime Minister Meles, were unwilling to do this. Meles was unwilling to retain Assab. This affinity towards Eritrea was nothing short of treason,” said Yacob. 

Hidden Hands: Assab, 2018, and TPLF’s fate

Documents from a UN Security Council Monitoring Group show reports of unusual military activity in and around Assab in 2016. At the time, the port was being used by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Eritrea for the transport of troops and equipment to Aden in the context of the conflict across the Red Sea in Yemen.

Reports from the time indicate the port was a source of concern for Israel, which feared Assab could fall under the control of the Iran-backed Houthis fighting a coalition of forces from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others with the backing of the US and Europe.

The reports suggest that Israel moved to encourage Eritrea to re-integrate with Ethiopia as a way to secure Assab. The port was a key agenda during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2016 visit to Ethiopia and PM Hailemariam Desalegn’s reciprocal visit to Israel the following year, according to the reports.

Israeli diplomats visited both Asmara and Addis Ababa in 2017, and a one-person delegation travelled from Israel to Mekelle on 24 December, 2017 for a meeting with senior officials in the regional capital.

While the visit to Mekelle was framed as a discussion over proposals for collaborations in research, documents and anecdotal sources reveal the key agenda was a political proposal for resetting relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea, including the port of Assab.

Leaders of the TPLF refused the proposal, with the refusal, according to researchers, sealing the party’s fate.

Publications including ‘A Secret Deal to Conceal: The Eritrean Involvement in the Tigray War’ as well as ‘The Ximdo Gamble: TPLF–Eritrea Alliance and the Fragile Peace in Tigray and the Horn of Africa’ also reach the same conclusion.

Reports indicate that Israel’s dissatisfaction with the TPLF/EPRDF’s unwillingness to collaborate led Isaias Afwerki, an archenemy of the TPLF, to utter the phrase “game over, TPLF” in 2018, while other sources say he made the comment as far back as 2016.

The rest is history. The TPLF-led EPRDF was toppled in April 2018, and Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s ascent to power was characterized in its early days by the normalization of relations with Eritrea. In July 2018, the PM visited Asmara and signed the Joint Declaration of Peace and Friendship.

Two months later, Abiy and Isaias signed the Jeddah Agreement, marking the formal end of more than two decades of hostilities between their respective countries.

The reconciliation promised a new era of peace, holistic cooperation, and joint-development aspirations between Ethiopia and Eritrea, and spurred a new wave of investment in the region.

In 2019, the EU and the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS) launched infrastructure projects linking Eritrean ports with the Ethiopian border. The EU Trust Fund for Africa immediately allocated the first tranche of a 20 million euro pledge to finance a road linking Assab with Ethiopia.

The normalization also earned PM Abiy a Nobel Peace Prize.

A few years later, the Eritrean military would serve as a key ally for the two-year war between the federal government and forces loyal to the TPLF.

The Deeper Entanglement

The war, and the cessation of hostilities agreement that ended it in November 2022, would ultimately undo the normalization of relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea—a process that observers criticized for lacking institutionalization from the outset.

The Pretoria Agreement was signed as a result of mounting international pressure surrounding the  conflict and reports of grave rights violations. Reports indicate the peace deal was ill-received in Asmara.

“Isaias was furious because Abiy signed the agreement. They had agreed to annihilate TPLF completely, but TPLF was saved by the peace deal. However, Abiy could not sustain the war due to its economic toll and the pressure from the international community,” said a seasoned geopolitical analyst who spoke to The Reporter anonymously.

Getachew Reda, who was among the signatories on the TPLF side and is currently an advisor to the PM, described the conditions leading up to the agreement in a recent article.

He argued the peace deal was the only option to save Tigray from “a near breakdown,” and revealed the 10-day negotiation process in Pretoria seemed hopeless before PM Abiy and Uhuru Kenyatta salvaged the situation.

“In the final hours, it was the federal side—negotiating from a stronger position—that nearly risked collapse,” stated Getachew, who also chairs Simret, a new political party that seeks to push TPLF out of political power in Tigray.

He explained Tigray was on the verge of collapse, and TPLF representatives went to Pretoria to sign a truce without any preconditions. While he praised the deal for saving Tigray, he argues the faltering implementation of its terms has “created space for spoilers and encouraged selective foot-dragging where cooperation from the federal side was required.”

Like other analysts, Getachew agrees the peace agreement’s exclusion of Eritrea continues to impact the post-war environment.

“Pretoria is largely silent on external actors, above all, Eritrea. Many Tigrayans—and a wide range of independent reports during the war—have alleged grave abuses by Eritrean forces, including killings and widespread sexual violence. Eritrea was not a party to the negotiations and did not sign the agreement. It has also shown no appetite for external scrutiny. No domestic Ethiopian process can credibly adjudicate crimes committed by a foreign military. That creates an accountability asymmetry that continues to poison the peace. Eritrea’s exclusion from Pretoria was not an oversight. It was a diplomatic necessity. Bringing Asmara into the room would have risked collapsing the talks. Leaving it out allowed the ceasefire to be signed. But the cost was obvious: a central actor in the war was left outside the peace architecture,” wrote Getachew.

Eritrean leaders have publicly criticized the agreement, framing it as an external plot and signaling resentment that it halted what they saw as a decisive final push.

A historical researcher and political analyst who spoke to The Reporter anonymously notes that while relations between TPLF and Shabia have been uneasy since they began as part of a mutual struggle against the Derg regime, the real source of the tension is Asmara’s nation-building aspirations and the obstacles that TPLF poses.

Decades after gaining statehood, Eritrea has largely been unable to embark on nation building, says the researcher.

“Eritrea still lacks the ingredients required for nation building and development. The first ingredient is the foundational history and fabric to bond together and brand the nation of Eritrea using its robust history and ‘ancientness.’ The history and civilization of both the people of Eritrea and Tigray is Axum. Axum is in Tigray. So, Eritrea needs Axum to succeed in its nation building. Eritrea tried to draw this from Adulis. But their efforts to bring the nation-building narrative to Adulis did not work because Adulis has neither the religious nor civilization fabric,” he told The Reporter.

The alternatives, according to the researcher, were to either destroy TPLF and integrate with Ethiopia, or to crush Tigray and claim Axum. Asmara opted for the second route.

“Immediately after the TPLF was crushed during the war, Eritrea took control of Axum. It also redrew its borders to include Axum, among other parts of Tigray, in Eritrea,” said the researcher. “Isaias’ plan was to make the TPLF politically irrelevant and use Tigray as an economic and cultural stepping stone for his nation building. Eritrea knows it cannot realize its nation building as well as achieve economic development without dependence on Ethiopia. The TPLF says to Eritrea ‘you can access Ethiopia only through TPLF.’ Eritrea wants to access Ethiopia directly, without the TPLF,” said the researcher.

Nonetheless, the TPLF (or part of it) is currently in the process of forming an alliance with Asmara.

“Now, after the federal  government failed to fully implement the Pretoria Agreement, and the Ethiopian government articulated its interest in sea access, Eritrea and TPLF are forming an alliance against it,” said the researcher.

The strange change in circumstances has been accompanied by increasingly fiery rhetoric between the federal government on one side, and the TPLF and Asmara on the other. And while fear that another war could erupt remain heightened, analysts and insiders who spoke to The Reporter do not believe a major conflict will break out.

“Isaias and Abiy would love to fight, but whether the war happens or not will be decided by foreign powers and not by Addis Ababa or Asmara,” said a military analyst, speaking anonymously.

He warned that if a war were to break out, it would almost certainly be fought in Tigray.

“Although Ethiopia wants Assab, both Ethiopia and Eritrea have a number of reasons not to fight in the lowlands. Eritrea relies on its mechanized forces, but its old USSR tanks and machines cannot function in the searing temperatures of the lowlands. So it prefers the bushy land along the Tigray border. Deploying a fleet of tanks to the lowland plains where there is no forest cover exposes it to Ethiopian drones. For Ethiopia, fighting in the lowlands of Assab leaves it open to a flank. Assab is far from Asmara, and fighting there cannot enable Ethiopia to access the political center of Eritrea. Tigray is closer, so Ethiopia may prefer to fight there; at least in northeastern Tigray,” the analyst told The Reporter.

What’s Next?

The statements issued by the AU, UN, and EU over the past week signal the international community’s growing concern about the potential for another war between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Analysts contend the most serious concern at the moment lies with the TPLF and its frantic efforts to regain political footing both in Ethiopia and regionally, which they warn might spiral to a major conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Some argue the circumstances are more likely to result in minor clashes or engagements through proxies rather than a full-blown conflict.

“Eritrea is already supporting TPLF and Fano forces in Ethiopia. Ethiopia is also working on organizing forces against the Eritrean regime leveraging forces in the Afar region. The Afar ethnic group in Ethiopia is the same as in Assab. On top of these, the two countries might also lean on the Tsimdo forces,” said the military analyst.

Analysts like Costantinos Berhutesfa (PhD), however, worry about the lack of effort toward mediating a resolution between the two countries.

“The absence of a credible and assertive international community is eroding the venue for peaceful resolutions. I am worried about who will initiate credible and strong mediation and peaceful conflict resolution between Ethiopia and Eritrea, if the two countries edge to war with each other? I believe the reason the UN, AU, and EU are issuing statements now is likely because they see the likelihood of an upcoming conflict. The international community must step up, initiate strong mediation, secure peaceful resolution, and avert the possibility of war between Ethiopia and Eritrea,” urged Costantinos.

Eritrea’s willingness to take part in mediation appears to be growing thinner.

Last month, UN Special Envoy to the Horn of Africa, Guang Cong, traveled to Asmara and held discussions with Isaias. The Eritrean president criticized the UN for failures in conflict resolution and decried what he sees as an absence of holistic underlying frameworks, unwarranted external interventions, and external influence in regional organizations.

Last week, Eritrea formally withdrew from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

Over the past few months, Isaias has made official visits to Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, leading analysts to argue he is mobilizing support in the Arab world in case a war were to break out with Ethiopia.

Still, people like Getachew Reda contend there is little chance the tensions will boil over into open conflict. He argued the point during an intense interview on Aljazeera’s Head-to-Head program.

However, the military analyst says the outcome will ultimately be determined not by decisions made in Ethiopia and Eritrea, but in Egypt and Israel.

“Both Egypt and Israel have a growing interest in Ethiopia and Eritrea. Egypt is leveraging domestic forces in Ethiopia and regional forces in neighboring countries. Egypt intends to influence Ethiopia into turning focus away from developing the Abbay River. If Egypt prevails, this might drag Eritrea towards the Arab world. However, Israel has a strong interest in protecting the Red Sea from further infiltration of extremist presences. All in all, the outcome of the tension between Egypt and Israel will also decide the situation of Ethiopia and Eritrea. But the outcome of the tension between Egypt and Israel will be determined by who will get stronger backing from Washington,” he told The Reporter.

Regardless, another war would be devastating for both countries and the wider region, which is already burdened by conflict. Yacob urges both governments to look for a mutually beneficial solution.

“I don’t believe Ethiopia’s interest in Assab is a dead end. But accessing Assab must be peaceful, through negotiation. The ideal way would be for Ethiopia and Eritrea to install a special administration to co-manage Assab,” he said. “As long as Ethiopia has no port, Ethiopia’s existence is always in danger. At the same time, Eritrea needs Ethiopia to utilize its ports for its own development.”

The AU’s statement also urges both countries to opt for peace.

“As we mark this [Algiers Agreement] anniversary, the Chairperson calls upon Ethiopia and Eritrea to renew their commitment to the spirit of the Algiers Agreement, and to embrace dialogue, good neighborliness as the best path to durable good-neighbourliness. The stability of the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea region, and the wellbeing of their peoples, depend on sustained efforts to strengthen trust, deepen cooperation, and prevent escalations that undermine collective security,” it reads.