The present system in Ethiopia embraced ethnic federalism and overhauled the nation along ethnic lines when it took political power in 1991. The point of this article is to look at the predominance of ethnic clash in Ethiopia and to assess the potential reasons for the contentions that followed in the previous a quarter-century. There are contending claims, for and against federalism. Also, however it might be exact to express that the establishing standards of federalism have a couple of ideological deficiencies, it might be that detail issues (types and structures) may hamper the forced government framework in Ethiopian. In this manner, ethnic clashes winning in Ethiopia might be brought about by such detail issues and the ethnic government course of action in Ethiopia needs a dire reevaluation before the case moves to the most noticeably terrible scenario. Federalism as a belief system, similar to communism, socialism and progressivism, is a down to business term which alludes to the sharing of intensity among self-sufficient units and is considered to advocate the estimations of 'solidarity in decent variety' or 'shared guideline and self-rule' (Watts 2008:1) and to give districts some expert of their own. In his meaning of federalism, Watts (2008:9) recommends that a bureaucratic arrangement of government is one in which there is a division of intensity between one general and a few provincial experts, every one of which acts legitimately through his own managerial organizations. From a hypothetical angle, the significance of a government framework, as shared by every single political hypothesis of federalism, is the sharing of intensity among provincial states. This division of intensity may prompt the termination of oppressive systems.