Fact Checks

Blinken called for the withdrawal of the ENDF from the Amhara region

Last week, a claim (link, link) circulated on social media that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called for the withdrawal of the Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) from the Amhara regional state.

On November 2, Blinken issued a statement commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Pretoria Agreement, which ended the two-year war between the Ethiopian government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF). In the statement, Blinken commended both sides for their commitments to the agreement and called on Ethiopia and Eritrea to refrain from provocation and respect the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of all countries in the region.

Blinken also expressed concern about the internal conflicts in Ethiopia and called for dialogue to resolve the conflicts in the Amhara and Oromia regional states.

However, contrary to the claim on social media, Antony Blinken’s statement did not include a specific call for the withdrawal of the Ethiopian military from the Amhara region. While he addressed the internal conflicts in Ethiopia, he did not make any explicit demand for the ENDF to withdraw from the Amhara regional state.

Therefore, the claim that Blinken called for the withdrawal of the ENDF from Amhara is false.

Eritrea is deploying troops to Ethiopian border

HaqCheck has observed a claim on social media that Eritrea is deploying its troops to the Ethiopian border. The posts use two images to support this claim, but both images are old and do not show Eritrean troops recently deployed near the Ethiopian border.

During the conflict between the TPLF and the Ethiopian government, Eritrea played a significant role in supporting the central government. It’s worth noting that Eritrea, despite its involvement in the conflict, did not take part in the negotiations or the subsequent signing of the peace agreement that concluded the war a year ago.

Recent statements from the Ethiopian government emphasized the country’s aspiration to secure its own access to the sea, either through the Red Sea or the Indian Ocean. The Eritrean government has opposed this statement.

In this context, the social media claim that Eritrea is deploying its troops to the Ethiopian border emerged. 

However, the images used in the post were old and did not show Eritrean troops recently deployed near the Ethiopian border.

Chief of Staff Birhanu Jula said ENDF is exhausted by Fano militants

HaqCheck came across a viral TikTok video in which Ethiopian Chief of General Staff Field Marshal Birhanu Jula is heard saying that the Ethiopian military is exhausted and defeated by Fano militants.

The Ethiopian government’s decision to disarm special police forces in regional states and integrate them into regional police, federal police, and the Ethiopian military led to opposition in the Amhara region. This decision sparked armed conflict between Fano militants and the Ethiopian military in the region. Reports indicate that clashes between Fano militants and Ethiopian military forces are ongoing in the Amhara region.

It is against this backdrop that the claim on TikTok emerged, suggesting that Fano militants were prevailing over the Ethiopian army in the Amhara region, with General Birhanu Jula allegedly confirming this.

However, the TikTok clip featuring General Birhanu Jula was manipulated and does not support this claim. It was taken from an original video published on YouTube. The original speech, made by General Birhanu Jula two weeks prior, did not contain a statement about ENDF being overwhelmed by Fano militants. The short TikTok video was created by splicing together phrases from the original video to give the false impression that General Birhanu Jula made such a statement.

Recommendations

It’s important for social media users to approach posts with caution, especially if they come from unfamiliar or unconfirmed sources. They should fact-check claims before reacting.

Social media content creators should act responsibly and refrain from sharing information that is untrue or could mislead others.

Public institutions and other concerned organizations should regularly provide timely and accurate information.

The government should ensure that both the public and the media have the right to access information. Access to information is crucial for combating disinformation.

Claim: Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed (PhD) claimed that Ethiopia’s GDP doubled in five years.

Verdict: Misleading. Ethiopia’s GDP did not double in five years, either in real GDP or US dollars.

On the 116th Ethiopian Military Day on October 26, 2023, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed (PhD) said: “Ethiopia, for the first time in its history, had doubled its GDP within five years, despite challenges due to COVID-19, war, and foreign countries’ pressure. To those who say Ethiopia is not progressing, I am proud to tell you that Ethiopia has doubled its GDP in five years for the first time. Our progress will continue. No challenge will stop us.”

[YouTube video: Fana Television]

Ethiopia was one of the fastest-growing economies in the world from 2004 to 2019. The period spanning 2004 to 2011 saw Ethiopia registering double-digit economic growth, according to data from the National Bank of Ethiopia.

However, since 2016, Ethiopia has been grappling with severe crises, leading to widespread instability. Popular protests and social unrest shook the country to its core, compelling the then-ruling Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) to initiate sweeping reforms. This period of upheaval has led to the appointment of Abiy Ahmed, PhD, as the party’s chairman. Subsequently, the Parliament endorsed him as Prime Minister in April 2018.

Upon his accession, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed pledged to undertake substantial political and economic reforms, a move that garnered him widespread support. Despite these promises, the nation continued to experience turmoil. The political and economic landscape was significantly disrupted by the standoff and eventual conflict with the former dominant Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), culminating in a war in November 2020.

The ensuing armed confrontations, particularly in the Amhara and Oromia regional states, have persisted, often involving the government forces and various insurgent groups. In response to the armed conflict with the TPLF and the ongoing conflict, Western countries, notably the United States and the European Union, have exerted pressure on the Ethiopian government to pursue peaceful resolutions. Some of these efforts have extended to imposing sanctions, citing the government’s failure to address and resolve the conflicts through peaceful means.

The convergence of the war, continuous instability, the COVID-19 pandemic, and sanctions from Western countries have had a detrimental impact on the Ethiopian economy.

It is within this context that Prime Minister Abiy claimed that Ethiopia’s GDP had doubled in five years.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) serves as the overarching measure of a country’s economic activity, representing the total market value of all final goods and services produced within a nation’s borders over a specified period, typically one year.

The significance of GDP lies in its role as a principal indicator of economic health; it provides insights into the pace of economic growth and offers a snapshot of the size and efficiency of economic performance. An ascending GDP trajectory generally denotes a robust economy characterized by increasing income levels and burgeoning employment prospects.

GDP is reported through two primary methods: nominal GDP and real GDP.

Nominal GDP accounts for the aggregate value of all goods and services produced within a country during a particular year, priced at current market rates. However, it only offers an accurate gauge of economic growth over time, as it fails to adjust for price-level fluctuations caused by inflation or deflation. Consequently, even if the actual volume of goods and services produced remains constant year over year, nominal GDP may still report growth simply due to inflationary pressures.

To illustrate, a 10% rise in nominal GDP juxtaposed with a 10% inflation rate within the same time frame implies that real economic growth is effectively nil.

In contrast, real GDP delivers a more refined measure by valuing the total output of goods and services using constant prices from a fixed point in time, thus neutralizing the distortive effects of inflation. For example, if Ethiopia’s nominal GDP escalates from 100 billion USD in 2020 to 150 billion USD in 2023, with inflation running at 50% over this interval, the real GDP for 2023, adjusted for inflation, would equate to 75 billion USD.

Nominal GDP, therefore, can offer a misleading interpretation of economic performance in times of significant price level changes. Real GDP is the superior indicator of economic growth as it incorporates adjustments for inflation, providing a more authentic representation of an economy’s true output.

To achieve a doubling of real GDP within five years, the economy would need to sustain an average annual growth rate of approximately 14%.

Fiscal Year	Real GDP growth rate	Nominal GDP growth rate
2017/18	7.7	20.2
2018/19	9.0	22.4
2019/20	6.1	25.5
2020/21	6.3	28.6
2021/22	6.4	41.8

Nonetheless, Ethiopia has experienced an average annual economic growth rate of 7.1% over the past five years. With this expansion rate, approximately ten years would be necessary to double Ethiopia’s real GDP.

Inflation erodes the purchasing power of money, which can skew the figures for nominal GDP, resulting in potentially deceptive evaluations of an economy’s health and growth. This decrease in currency value signifies that consumers must spend more to obtain the same quantity of goods and services, potentially inflating GDP figures without any corresponding real growth in economic output. To illustrate, a devaluation of the Ethiopian Birr may artificially inflate the nominal GDP, even without any increase in the volume of goods and services produced.

Ethiopia has been facing persistent high inflation, which can be described as chronic and surging, with the inflation rate reaching 33.8% in the fiscal year 2021/22.

Fiscal Year	Nominal GDP in Birr	Inflation Rate	Real GDP in Birr
2017/18	2,202,373,000,000	14.60	1,719,491,000,000
2018/19	2,696,223,000,000	12.60	1,874,689,300,000
2019/20	3,374,747,000,000	19.90	1,989,519,000,000
2020/21	4,341,387,100,000	20.20	2,114,163,000,000
2021/22	6,157,538,000,000	33.80	2,248,571,000,000

As the data above shows, from 2018 to 2022 reveals an average inflation rate of 20.22%. Such a rate suggests that nominal GDP would rise by the same percentage annually, even in a scenario where the production of goods and services remains static.

Furthermore, Ethiopia’s nominal GDP, denominated in Birr, has escalated from 2.2 trillion Birr in the fiscal year 2017/18 to 6.15 trillion Birr in 2021/22.

However, when evaluated in terms of the US dollar, the increase in Ethiopia’s GDP appears more moderate, moving from 84 billion USD in 2017/18 to 126.8 billion USD in 2021/22. This discrepancy is attributable primarily to the depreciation of the Ethiopian Birr relative to the US dollar.

Fiscal Year	Nominal GDP in Birr	Nominal GDP in USD	Exchange rate (USD/ETB)
2017/18	2,202,373,000,000	84,355,600,000	26.1
2018/19	2,696,223,000,000	95,951,0000,000	28.1
2019/20	3,374,747,000,000	107,673,000,000	31.3
2020/21	4,341,387,100,000	111,271,200,000	39
2021/22	6,157,538,000,000	126,783,000,000	48.57

Fact-checking PM Abiy Ahmed’s Claim:

Ethiopian GDP didn’t double in five years in terms of real GDP.

Ethiopia’s real GDP did not double in five years because it only grew from 1.7 trillion Birr in 2018 to 2.2 trillion Birr in 2022.

If Ethiopia’s real GDP had doubled in five years, it would have been 3.4 trillion Birr in 2022.

Ethiopian GDP didn’t double in five years in terms of US dollars.

Ethiopia’s nominal GDP more than doubled in terms of Birr from 2010 to 2014, but it did not double in terms of US dollars. This is because the value of the Ethiopian Birr has decreased significantly over time.

Why did Ethiopia’s GDP double in five years in terms of Birr but not US dollars?

This is because the value of the Ethiopian Birr has decreased significantly over time. In other words, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of the Birr.

For example, in 2018, 26.1 Birr could buy 1 US dollar. This means Ethiopia’s GDP of 2.2 trillion Birr in 2018 was equivalent to 84 billion US dollars.

In 2022, it took 48.57 Birr to buy 1 US dollar. This means Ethiopia’s GDP of 6.16 trillion Birr in 2022 was only equivalent to 126 billion US dollars.

Example 2: Suppose Ethiopia produced 100 cars in 2018 and sold each car for 1 million Birr. Therefore, Ethiopia’s total revenue (GDP) was 100 million Birr, or 3.83 million USD, since the USD to Birr exchange rate was 26.1.

Suppose again that Ethiopia produced 100 cars in 2022 and sold each car for 2 million Birr. Ethiopia’s total revenue (GDP) was 200 million Birr, or 4.1 million USD, since the USD to Birr exchange rate was 48.57.

According to the above premises, in terms of Birr, Ethiopia’s revenue doubled (from 100 million to 200 million). However, in terms of USD, it did not double (it only slightly increased from 3.8 million to 4.1 million).

The same principle applies to Ethiopia’s GDP. The value of the Birr has depreciated significantly over time, which is why Ethiopia’s GDP has not doubled in five years in US dollars, even though it has more than doubled in terms of Birr.

Conclusion:

GDP is the total value of goods and services produced in a country in a year. Economic growth means an increase in the production of goods and services, not in prices. Therefore, real GDP, not nominal GDP, is always the accurate measure of economic growth.

Based on available data, Ethiopia’s GDP did not double in five years in terms of real GDP. While nominal GDP showed substantial growth, this was largely due to inflation. When adjusted for inflation, the real GDP growth did not meet the doubling claim.

In terms of US dollars, the devaluation of the Birr also played a significant role. While nominal GDP dramatically increased in Birr, it did not double when converted to US dollars.

Verdict:

Therefore, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s claim that “Ethiopia’s GDP doubled in five years” is MISLEADING.

Disclaimer: The data used in this article is obtained from the Ethiopian government (National Bank of Ethiopia). HaqCheck does not guarantee the accuracy of this data.

Ethiopia’s government officials and affiliated media have stated that the country requires coastline access or access to the sea. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has emphasized the need for Ethiopia to secure a coastline or access to the sea through the Red Sea or Indian Ocean. The government has also urged neighboring countries to discuss or negotiate the issue.

Claims and themes of the claims

[X post: link]

[YouTube video: link]

Based on its monitoring of state-affiliated media and social media reports, HaqCheck identified four main themes in the Ethiopian government’s claims regarding the issue:

1. Coastline or access to the sea: State media (link) and the government have asserted that Ethiopia needs a coastline (access to the sea) and that it can secure this right under international law.
2. Utilization of maritime resources: HaqCheck also observed claims that international law permits landlocked Ethiopia to utilize maritime resources, such as fishing, on an equal basis with coastal states.
3. Right of transit for imports and exports: State media and government officials have asserted that international law guarantees landlocked countries the right of transit for imports and exports.
4. Freedom of navigation: Government officials, citing international law, have stated that the high seas belong to no one and that Ethiopia has the right to freedom of navigation.

The Ethiopian government’s claims about international law guaranteeing Ethiopia a coastline, transit for imports and exports, freedom of navigation, and resource utilization are primarily based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982.

Ethiopia’s government, state-run media, and officials have claimed that international law allows Ethiopia to obtain coastline or sea access.

What is the law of the sea?

The law of the sea is a body of international law that governs matters related to seas and oceans, issues of navigational rights, sea mineral claims, and coastal waters jurisdiction.

What are the sources of the law of the sea?

The sources of the law of the sea, which is the international law governing maritime issues such as the high seas, transit rights, navigational rights, sea mineral claims, and coastal waters jurisdiction, are primarily international customs, treaties, and agreements.

Evolution of the law of the sea

The Viena Congress of 1815 

In 1815, Austria, Britain, Russia, Prussia (Germany), France, and other European countries signed the Treaty of Vienna. The treaty stated that European rivers, especially the Rhine and Danube, should be open to navigation.

The Congress of Vienna established that all countries should have equal access to navigation on international rivers and their tributaries. This principle was used in all nineteenth-century treaties on seas and navigation.

The Mannheim Act of 1868

In 1868, the present-day German states of Baden, Bavaria, Hesse, and Prussia, as well as France and the Netherlands, signed the Treaty of Mannheim. The treaty made the Rhine River free for all countries to navigate.

The Barcelona Convention and Statute on Freedom of Transit of 1921

The 1921 Barcelona Convention, which followed the Treaty of Versailles, allowed landlocked countries to transport goods across the territory of other countries. The treaty prohibited governments from charging transit fees that exceed the cost of operating or providing transit services.

The Geneva Conventions on the Law of the Sea of 1958

In 1958, the United Nations General Assembly resolved to convene a conference to draft a convention on the law of the sea. The First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was held in Geneva, Switzerland, and resulted in the adoption of four international conventions between United Nations member states:

1. The Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone
2. The Convention on the Continental Shelf
3. The Convention on the High Seas
4. The Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas.

The Convention on Transit Trade of Land-locked States of 1965

This Convention allows landlocked countries to transport goods through the territory of other countries to and from seaports. The convention is based on the principle that landlocked countries need access to the sea to trade and grow their economies.

The Convention states that import and export goods from landlocked countries that pass through the territory of other countries should not be subject to customs duties or excessive transit charges.

The UNCLOS III

In 1982, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) was signed. UNCLOS is a comprehensive convention that supersedes all four of the previous conventions. It is now the main source of international law for international waters.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) entered into force in 1994 after 60 countries had ratified it. However, several countries still need to ratify UNCLOS, including the United States, Eritrea, and Turkey. The United States has argued that UNCLOS could limit its sovereignty and its freedom to act in its own national interest.

Ethiopia and UNCLOS

Ethiopia signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1982, but it has yet to be a party to the convention because it has yet to ratify it.

Ethiopia and access to the sea

Ethiopia maintains a complex and significant relationship with the Red Sea. Although currently landlocked, the country’s historical ties, geopolitical significance, and economic interests render the sea an essential element in both its foreign and domestic policy frameworks.

Tracing back to the Aksumite Empire, Ethiopia’s influence over the Red Sea was once substantial, dominating key sections of the coastline. Throughout different historical periods, the country leveraged this maritime access for trade and geopolitical sway. After Italy colonized Eritrea in the late 19th century, Ethiopia temporarily lost its Red Sea access. However, the incorporation of Eritrea as an Ethiopian province in 1952 restored this access.

During the reign of Emperor Haile Selassie, Ethiopia utilized the Eritrean ports of Massawa and Assab for various maritime activities. These ports assumed increased significance after the Suez Crisis in 1956 and throughout the Cold War, as Ethiopia aligned with Western powers. The conclusion of the Eritrean War of Independence in 1993, however, rendered Ethiopia landlocked and fundamentally changed its relationship with the Red Sea. Between 1991 and the onset of the Ethiopia-Eritrea border war in 1998, Ethiopia continued to rely on Eritrean ports for its import and export needs.

In contemporary times, the Red Sea is a critical conduit for global trade, particularly in oil and natural gas. Despite lacking direct access, Ethiopia still views the Red Sea as a cornerstone in its geopolitical strategies. Its geographical proximity to Red Sea nations like Eritrea, Djibouti, and Yemen means its regional politics and security concerns are deeply interwoven with its interests. Moreover, Ethiopia’s diplomatic and economic ties with global powers such as the United States and China add further layers to its Red Sea considerations.

Economically, the port’s strategic location near the Red Sea renders it indispensable for Ethiopia’s commercial activities. At present, Ethiopia primarily relies on the ports of Djibouti, Berbera in Somaliland, and Sudan for its import and export transit. The port of Djibouti is particularly crucial, handling over 90% of Ethiopia’s international trade.

Claims fact-checked

1. Does UNCLOS guarantee Ethiopia’s quest to have a coastline?

No. UNCLOS does not contain any provisions that guarantee landlocked countries the right to own coastal areas.

However, UNCLOS grants landlocked countries the right to transit through the territory of other states to and from the sea. This means that landlocked countries have the right to pass through other states’ territories in order to reach the sea and transport their imports and exports without infringing on the sovereignty or interests of the transit states.

Put another way, landlocked countries have the right to use other states’ territories as a corridor to the sea, but they do not have the right to claim a coastline of their own.

Article 125 and Article 127 of UNCLOS grant landlocked states the right to transit their imports and exports through the territories of transit states by all means of transport without being subject to unfair payments.

Article 125 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) clarifies that the right of landlocked states to transit imports and exports through coastal states must not in any way violate the sovereignty of the transit states. It also grants transit states the right to take all necessary measures to protect their sovereignty and interests.

2. Does international law guarantee maritime resource utilization?

Yes, to some extent. UNCLOS grants landlocked countries the right to access and exploit the ‘living resources’ of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of their coastal neighbors.

On the other hand, the provision on the right of landlocked states to exploit the living resources of the EEZ of coastal states is subject to certain limitations. First, landlocked states are only entitled to exploit an “appropriate part” of the living resources. Second, they can only exploit the “surplus” of the resources. Third, they must agree with the neighboring coastal states on the terms of exploitation. The coastal state has the final say on the allowable catch of the living resources in its EEZ.

Additionally, the convention does not give landlocked states the right to exploit non-living resources such as minerals and oil within the EEZ of neighboring coastal countries.

3. Does international law guarantee the right to transit?

Yes. UNCLOS guarantees landlocked countries the right of transit through the territory of other states to and from the sea. The convention states that “land-locked States shall have the right of transit through the territory of transit States by all means of transport.” The right of transit allows landlocked states to transport their goods and people through the territories of coastal states to and from the sea. 

However, the right of transit is not absolute and is also subject to certain conditions, such as the need to respect the sovereignty and interests of the transit states.

4. Does international law and freedom of navigation?

Yes. UNCLOS guarantees all states, coastal and landlocked, the right to freedom of navigation on the high seas.

5. Do the right of transit, maritime resource utilization, and free passage mean the right to have a coastline?

No. HaqCheck observed social media posts that referred to provisions of the UNCLOS convention that grant states the right of import-export transit through transit states, maritime resource utilization, and the right of free passage on the high seas to support the claim that Ethiopia has a right to a coastline under international law.

However, this connection between these different topics is false. The right of transit, maritime resource utilization, and free passage are all distinct concepts from the right to a coastline. The right of transit allows landlocked states to transport their goods and people through the territories of other states to and from the sea. Maritime resource utilization will enable states to exploit the natural resources of the sea, such as fish and minerals. Free passage allows all states to navigate freely on the high seas.

The right of transit, maritime resource utilization, and free passage do not imply the right to a coastline.

The right to a coastline, on the other hand, is a territorial claim that gives a state sovereignty over a strip of land along the sea. UNCLOS does not guarantee any state the right to a coastline.

Afar militias fighting the Ethiopian army supporting Fano

HaqCheck encounted Facebook posts (here, here, here, here) sharing a particulat image with a claim that Afar militants joined Amhara Fano militants in waging a fighting against the Ethiopian government.

The Facebook posts use an old image that is out of context to support the claim that Afars are fighting the Ethiopian army and supporting Fano militias.

The image was first published on Facebook in May 2021, and the original description says that it shows armed conflict between Afar and Somali militants.

Additionally, there is no evidence to support the claim that Afars were fighting with the Ethiopian army troops.

The Sitti zone is located in the Somali regional state and borders the Afar and Oromia regions. There have been reports of conflict and violence in the area in recent years, but there is no evidence to suggest that Afars are fighting the Ethiopian army along with Fano militants.

Eritrea deploys troops near the Ethiopian border

Social media posts (here, here) have claimed that Eritrea has massed its troops near the Ethiopian border and made military preparations following controversial statements by the Ethiopian government about access to the Red Sea. The posts used different images to support the claim.

Ethiopian government officials recently made controversial statements about Ethiopia’s right to have access to the Red Sea.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed told members of the Ethiopian parliament that Ethiopia needs to have access to the sea via the Red Sea or the Indian Ocean. The Eritrean government responded by saying that it was not interested in participating in such discussions.

However, the images were old and do not prove the allegation that Eritrea deployed its troops near the Ethiopian border.

The first image in the Facebook post above was originally published on a website in August 2021 with a description that the Ethiopian and Eritrean militaries were preparing for a coordinated offensive using Turkish drones against the forces of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

The second image was first posted on Facebook in February 2021 with a caption that appreciates the support of the Eritrean military for Ethiopia during the war with the TPLF.

Recommendations

HaqCheck recommends social media users to be skeptical of misleading posts, especially those from unknown or unverifiable sources. They should verify claims before reacting.

Social media content creators should be responsible and avoid spreading false or misleading information.

Public institutions and other concerned entities should provide timely and up-to-date information on a regular basis.

To counter disinformation, access to information is key. The government should guarantee the right of the public and the media to access information.

Disinformation in the Amhara region in September was mostly about the war between the Ethiopian government and the Fano militia. The following are the specific themes of disinformation that circulated in the month:

Fighting casualties

Disinformation about ENDF soldiers being killed in fighting and the government transporting troops using planes was common in the Amhara region in September.One specific piece of disinformation was an X (Twitter) post claiming that Ethiopian soldiers were being transported by helicopter to Amhara during the ongoing conflict. The post included an image that was purported to show this.

However, HaqCheck found out that the image is actually from a video clip shared on Facebook in August 2021. The original video clip described Ethiopian Airlines as being involved in ethnic cleansing, transporting soldiers, logistics, and weapons to the war in Tigray.

Fano seizing weapons and capturing soldiers

One of the most prevalent disinformation themes was that Fano militants were seizing weapons and capturing soldiers from the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF).One specific instance that circulated on social media was a video clip that was falsely attributed to Field Marshal Birhanu Jula, the Chief of Staff of the ENDF. The original video showed Field Marshal Jula talking about the armed conflict between the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Ethiopian government in October 2021.

In the video, Field Marshal Jula said that the TPLF forces had taken many weapons from the ENDF, including tanks and artillery. However, the video clip was edited to make it seem like Field Marshal Jula was talking about the current conflict in Amhara and that he had confirmed that Fano militants were seizing ENDF weapons.

Another example that circulated on social media was a Facebook post that shared an image purportedly showing newly graduated Ethiopian commandos captured by the Fano militia. The caption claimed that the commandos were learning the lessons of Fano.

However, the image was not connected to the conflict between Fano and the Ethiopian army. It was actually first published on a website in September 2022, with the claim that it showed Ethiopian army prisoners in southern Tigray. A third piece of disinformation that circulated on social media was a Facebook post that shared two images purporting to show weapons belonging to the Fano militia.

The post claimed that the militia was armed with heavy and light weapons and would not allow the slaughter of Amharas to continue. However, the images were of weapons that had been handed over to the ENDF by the TPLF in accordance with the Pretoria peace agreement.

ENDF troops committing crimes and atrocities in Amhara

Another disinformation theme that was amplified during the month of September was that the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) was committing crimes and atrocities against civilians in the Amhara region.

Specific examples of this disinformation included a Twitter video that falsely claimed that ENDF soldiers were beating people in the Amhara region based on their ethnicity, and a Facebook post that falsely claimed that ENDF soldiers were committing atrocities in the Amhara region.

The Twitter video was old and did not support the claim. The video had been previously posted on Twitter in March 2021, with a description that Ethiopian soldiers were beating people in Tigray.

Another instance was a Facebook post claiming that an image showed Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) soldiers committing atrocities in the Amhara region. The post also described human rights violations that have been committed in the Amhara region.

The image, however, was old and had been circulating online since May 2021. It was originally shared on a website to accompany an article about atrocities committed by federal government soldiers in the Tigray region during the war between the Ethiopian government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

Government bombing in Amhara

One of the disinformation themes that HaqCheck tracked during the month of September was that the Ethiopian government was indiscriminately bombing the Amhara region.

Specific examples of this disinformation included a TikTok video that falsely claimed to show the Ethiopian government bombing the city of Gondar, and a Facebook post that falsely claimed that an image of a missile launch from an MQ-9 Reaper drone shows an Ethiopian government drone attacking civilians in Gojjam.

The TikTok video was actually old and does not support the claim. The original video was shared on Facebook in August 2022.

The Facebook post claiming that the image of a missile launch from an MQ-9 Reaper drone shows an Ethiopian government drone attacking civilians in Gojjam is also false. The image is actually from a Korean website and was published in 2020.

These social media posts were using old and unrelated images to spread false claims about the Ethiopian government bombing the Amhara region.

Arbitrary detention of civilians

One of the trends of disinformation in September 2023 in the Amhara region of Ethiopia was related to the detention of ethnic Amharas. False information about the detention of civilians was debunked by HaqCheck.

On September 13, 2023, a Facebook post shared four images claiming that the people shown in the pictures were ethnic Amharas detained by the government in Tulu Dimtu, a town on the outskirts of Addis Ababa. The post also stated that they were suffering and dying of contagious diseases in the camp.

To discredit the claims, some social media accounts shared a screenshot of an old Facebook post that showed images of homeless people. An old Facebook post from June 2022 was found containing the controversial images.

However, the old Facebook post was edited and the new images were added later.

HaqCheck found that a Facebook post that was originally about five assassinated leaders was edited to claim that the Addis Ababa City administration was providing medical services to homeless people. The post also added five new images that were unrelated to the original post.

Recommendations

HaqCheck recommends social media users to be skeptical of posts that may be misleading and that come from unknown or unverifiable sources. They should look for other sources of information to verify claims before reacting to them.

Social media content creators are advised to be responsible and avoid spreading false or misleading information.

We urge public institutions and other concerned entities to provide timely and up-to-date information on regular basis.

Access to information is key to counter disinformation. The government should guarantee the right of the public and the media to access to information.

Verification of Social Media Accounts and their Implications

In today’s digital world, social media platforms have become powerful tools for public discourse, connecting people across the globe. However, as their influence grows, the need for credibility and authenticity has become increasingly important.

At the heart of this digital evolution lies the process of verification, a mechanism employed by social media networks to establish the legitimacy and authenticity of user accounts belonging to notable figures, celebrities, businesses, and prominent entities. This verification process is encapsulated by the unmistakable blue checkmark, an emblem that signifies an account’s credibility.

The following article delves into the intricacies of the verification process employed by some of the most popular social media platforms. We explore the steps taken to validate the identities of individuals and entities, shedding light on the meticulous scrutiny they undergo to earn that coveted blue badge. But we also confront a growing phenomenon: the confusion and skepticism surrounding these verification badges.

How to Get Verification on these Platforms?

X (formerly known as  Twitter), a platform that numerous influential figures and content creators utilize, has undergone two distinct approaches when it comes to verifying its users. Initially, X granted the coveted blue badge to celebrities, public figures, brands, and organizations that were active and maintained a complete profile.

This completeness included having a profile picture, a display name, a confirmed phone number, and a track record of compliance with X’s rules. Additionally, these accounts needed to represent individuals associated with specific and notable categories, such as government officials, journalists, activists, or prominent personalities. Those who met these criteria could request verification by completing a designated form.

In the past, X employed a team of reviewers responsible for evaluating verification applications. Their role was to verify if the account fulfilled the eligibility criteria and to scrutinize the provided information. This meticulous process was designed to ensure that verified accounts genuinely represented noteworthy individuals or entities.

However, these procedures have faced criticism for various reasons, including a lack of transparency, subjective and inconsistent decision-making, the potential amplification of controversial figures, verification of accounts engaged in hate speech and disinformation, the presence of anonymous accounts, and limited verification opportunities for journalists and activists.

New Eligibility Criteria for the Blue Checkmark at X

Since Elon Musk, the largest shareholder at Tesla and SpaceX, bought the platform, several changes have been implemented, including alterations to its name and the account verification process. Presently, users can verify their accounts.

X Premium (Twitter Blue), represented by the blue checkmark icon, comes at $8 per month and is primarily tailored for individuals, although brands can also enroll in the program, at least for now. On the other hand, verification for organizations, denoted by the gold checkmark, targets larger brands to ensure their recognition and reputation within the platform.

Under the current system, anyone can apply for account verification, provided they have a notable presence, maintain authenticity, remain active, and adhere to X’s rules. To initiate the process, users are required to complete an online form and submit identification documents to substantiate their eligibility.

Meta Accounts  Verification 

Facebook

Facebook is one of the most popular social media platforms worldwide. Facebook undergoes two distinct approaches to verify accounts/pages. Facebook grants verification badges to celebrities, public figures, brands, organizations, and people who have a complete profile and meet certain criteria.

These criteria included having a profile picture, a name that people could recognize, a verified phone number, and a track record of obeying Facebook’s rules. Some social media accounts were reserved for important individuals like government officials, journalists, activists, or famous people. These individuals could ask for their accounts to be verified by filling out a special form. The verification is intended to confirm genuine accounts and to confirm if they belong to the specific person they claimed to be.

In the past, Facebook also had a team of reviewers responsible for evaluating verification applications.

People were having problems with Facebook’s verification process. Even if they provided the information that was required to be eligible for verification, Facebook was not giving them the verification checkmarks they were supposed to receive.

New Eligibility Criteria for the Blue Checkmark on Facebook

In October 2021, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and five other platforms merged to form Meta, a conglomerate that owns these platforms. Meta added a payment system called Meta Verified Subscription to the features of Facebook and other platforms. This allows users to buy and sell goods and services through the platform. This was a major change to the previous verification process, which is now required for users to apply for the blue verification badge.

Meta now requires users to pay a monthly subscription fee in addition to meeting eligibility criteria to be verified. For $11.99 per month, anyone can get a blue verification badge on their account.

Instagram  Blue Checkmark

Instagram is a different platform from Facebook because its main purpose is to enable users to share images or videos with their audience. It was bought by Facebook (now Meta Platforms Inc.) in 2012.

Initially, Instagram used to give verification badges to celebrities, public figures, brands, artists, organizations, and people who had a complete profile and met certain.

These criteria included having a profile picture, a name that people could recognize, a verified phone number, and a track record of obeying Instagram’s rules. Some social media accounts were reserved for important individuals like government officials, journalists, activists, or famous people.

The verification process involves reviewing the activity of the account and engagements and the basic information provided.

New Eligibility Criteria for the Blue Checkmark at Meta (Instagram)

Instagram now requires users to have a Meta Verified Subscription to apply for the blue verification badge. Since October 28, 2021, users have also been required to pay a monthly fee of $11.99 in addition to meeting the eligibility criteria. By verifying their identity and paying the subscription fee, anyone can have a blue verification badge on their Instagram account.

TikTok Account Verification

TikTok, the largest social media platform for sharing short videos, does not have a specific application process for getting verified. Instead, TikTok seeks out creators, brands, and influencers to grant a verification badge.

To be verified, the platform requires an account to be authentic, complete, notable, and secure, and it must have been active for at least 6 months. Additionally, accounts must adhere to community guidelines and terms of service. TikTok does not charge for bestowing the verified badges.

Telegram Verification Process

Telegram verifies public figures and organizations to help users easily identify official sources. To get verified on Telegram, accounts must have an active official channel, bot, or public group on at least two of the following platforms: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, VK, or Snapchat.

Telegram currently uses this method to verify every one. The platform’s terms of service do not specify any clear eligibility criteria.

Impressions given to having verified social media accounts

Having a verified social media account can make a good impression on people because it suggests that the account is credible, authentic, and trustworthy. It also helps to establish the account owner’s authority, expertise, legitimacy, and authenticity. Verified accounts are seen as reliable and knowledgeable sources of information, and they can help to prevent impersonation and identity theft. Additionally, verified accounts are often seen as having a lot of impact and influence.

However, social media platforms may now grant verification based on factors such as payment and other criteria that are not publicly disclosed. This means that not all information provided by verified accounts may be accurate or true. Therefore, it is important to verify information from verified accounts with other trusted sources.

Verification  and D/Misinformation

Just because an account is verified doesn’t mean that the information it shares is accurate. Verification is about confirming the identity of the account holder, not the accuracy of their content. Verified accounts can still make mistakes or spread false information.

To avoid being misled, it’s important to be critical of the information being circulated online, even if it’s from a verified account. Social media users should not blindly trust anything they read. It is crucial to cross-check and verify information from multiple reliable sources.

It’s also important to get information from a variety of sources and perspectives. Relying on just one account or a few sources can give people on social media limited and possibly biased views and false perceptions.

HaqCheck recommends that social media users use fact-checking groups to evaluate the accuracy of information shared on social media, including information from verified accounts. This can help to ensure that social media users are getting accurate and reliable information.

Verification is just one factor to consider when evaluating the credibility of information. Social media users should be critical and cautious, and seek out reliable sources. These are all essential skills for navigating the digital landscape and combating false information dissemination.

The government smuggled stolen artifacts into the UAE

A Telegram channel with over 334,000 members claimed that the Ethiopian government smuggled stolen artifacts from the Amhara and Tigray regions to the UAE and that half of the stolen artifacts were sent to Vatican City, Rome and half of them were given to Emirati President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed. The post was viewed by close to a hundred thousand users and thousands reacted to it.

The claim is false. The images used to support the claim are old and were found published on websites. The one image that shows gold bars was published on a website called the PicLoc. According to the information on the website, the gold bars are for sale. The second image was published on a Turkish website and claimed to belong to a house-to-house transportation service company named Özdurmuşlar in the city of Gaziantep, Turkey. The image shows household items and it was presented to describe the company that it gives household items transportation services.

During the war between the TPLF and the Ethiopian government in 2020, there were allegations of looting of relics after some artifacts appeared for sale on websites including eBay. There were false claims backed with videos and images that stolen artifacts from Tigray were being sold in foreign countries.

However, there is no evidence to support the claim that the Ethiopian government smuggled stolen artifacts to the UAE. The images used to support the claim are false.

Child detention during Demera

A Facebook media post claimed that a child was snatched away from her parents and detained by federal police officers for wearing a dress with a red, green, and yellow color pattern during the Demera celebration. The post was widely shared on different social media.

The government had warned against holding or wearing any unrecognized flags and symbols during the Demera celebration, and the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church had also warned attendants not to carry with them or wear provocative symbols or unrecognized flags except the red-yellow-green flag that has the Church’s symbol.

However, the claim that a child was detained for wearing a dress with a red, green, and yellow color pattern during the Demera celebration is false. The image used to support the claim is old and was published on January 2022 on X.

False Telegram channels: Safaricom and Amhara Bank

Telegram channels and TikTok accounts have been opened in the names of Safaricom and Amhara Bank respectively. These channels are fake and are not affiliated with the real companies.

The Safaricom Telegram channel is offering a challenge promising to reward 3,000 Birr for those who add people to the channel. However, this challenge is a scam. The Telegram account has more followers than the real Safaricom Telegram account, but this is likely due to the fact that the fake channel is promoting a scam.

HaqCheck has confirmed that the Safaricom Telegram channel does not belong to Safaricom. The company’s Telegram account is mentioned on the website and currently has more than 22 thousand followers. Likewise, HaqCheck confirmed that the TikTok account opened in the name of Amhara Bank doesn’t belong to the Bank.

Recommendations

HaqCheck recommends social media users be critical of the information they see on social media and verify it with other sources before sharing it. They should make sure that the information comes from a credible source.

Telegram users are advised to be aware of fake channels and to avoid interacting with them. Scammers may use fake Telegram channels to steal personal information, spread misinformation, or promote scams.

The government should make information available to the public and media in a timely and transparent manner. It should provide information that is accurate and up-to-date.

Social media content creators and outlets should be careful about the information they share and make sure that it is correct. They should be aware of the potential harm that can be caused by spreading false information.