PART TWO
Section I: Civil Disobedience and the Formation of Political Parties
Introduction
Now, before anything else, I would like to
state the fact that I am unable to keep pace with the fast political
developments taking place moment to moment in Ethiopia. When I
started writing this essay as part of my �Ethiopicus �� essay,
there was no boycott or the subsequent barbaric violence against the
Ethiopian public by Meles Zenawi and his rogue military forces. Too
often, events taking place in Ethiopia seem to outrun those of us
writing and commenting on Ethiopian politics as part of our civic
responsibilities. It has become exceedingly difficult for a person
in my existential condition, surviving in Babylon, to catch up in a
timely fashion with such dramatic changes taking place in Ethiopia.
I feel often out of sink/step with what is
going on in Ethiopia not being there in person. I have to add to my
original idea for this Part Two article a new portion dealing with
civil disobedience in general and in the Ethiopian context because
of the horrendous activities of the Government of Ethiopia that
continued to ravage the people of Ethiopia since November 1, 2005.
And then, appears on November 17, 2005 an article by Professor
Getatchew Haile (�Criticism without Substance,� November 17
�05, Ethiomedia), an article as stupefying as it is most
unfortunate; nevertheless, need be commented upon or criticized,
which meant further expansion of my original layout for the article.
The more articles and essays of hate and division I read the more I
am concerned that the Ethiopia of my childhood and youth�a
wonderful nation with fabulous history�is an endangered species on
the brink of extinction. At this moment of our long history, we are
falling apart, and what we need the most is a unifying force. We
need leaders who heal our wounds and give us hope as a people and a
nation not people who insert wedges of disharmony and animosity
tearing us apart. It is not the time for brothers and sisters to
tear at each other.
The current situation in Ethiopia is as
hopeful as it is horrible. The killing of innocent Ethiopians and
the detention of opposition leaders and thousands of Ethiopians
under inhuman conditions is the worst act perpetrated by Meles
Zenawi against the infant Ethiopian democracy.
If there was any doubt about the dictatorial characteristics
of the Government of Meles Zenawi, there is no doubt now to what
extent such a leader would sink to hang on to power. His members of
the security and armed forces unleashed on the civilian population
in Addis Ababa and through out Ethiopia atrocities not much
different from the thugs of Mengistu Hailemariam unleashed during
the Red Terror atrocities. Their individual barbarism murdering
unarmed men, stabbing young boys and girls, torturing thousands of
people young and old women and children cannot be so easily
forgotten or forgiven. These monsters must be brought to justice.
Such individual acts of barbarity are not forced moment to moment on
the foot-soldiers by their commanders per se. Each man in uniform
who acted with such shameful violence need not have acted in such
disgraceful manner. Nevertheless, let us not be deluded by the
painted surface glorification or rationalization of the activities
of Meles Zenawi and company by individuals like Paul Henze who
sounds more and more a paid piper than an objective intellectual or
historian in pursuit of high quality analytical body of work.
1) Civil Disobedience in Context
What is civil
in civil disobedience? There is more to this question than a play on
words. Civil disobedience is not some thing new to Ethiopians. I
lived with a perpetual state of strife all of my adult life, as did
my contemporaries. We are a nation of rebellious people who cherish
freedom and justice and pursued that ideal in every generation all
the way back to the time of Adam and Eve, figuratively speaking. We
also preferred our own homegrown dictators, tyrants, emperors, or
strongmen than any imposed from the outside. How could we live with
such two contradictory states of mind? Does this mean we are either
anarchists or very confused people? I prefer to think we are of the
later type than the former but purposeful. This overall perception
of our community will not ender me very many friends.
I have expressed my views that the call for
boycott as well as other forms of civil disobedience, such as the
staging of demonstrations, expressing oneself through horn blowing,
even if it might breach local ordinance or regulations, is within
the constitutionally mandated fundamental rights clearly stated in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Charter of the United
Nations, the Covenants on Civil and Economic Rights, and the
Constitution of Ethiopia itself not to mention numerous Resolutions
of the General Assembly of the United Nations. In fact, there is no
point in arguing about civil and political rights, we have beaten
the subject to a pulp. There can be no excuse for the activities of
the Ethiopian government and the barbaric individual acts of some of
the members of the Ethiopian armed forces who inflicted such
indefensible violence against children and mothers.
I am not trying to redefine what constitutes
civil disobedience or the scope covered by such acceptable form of
civil disobedience. The literature dealing with these issues is vast
and deep.[1] Starting with the Crito
of Plato/Socrates[2] from the dawn of human civilization to the Theory
of Justice of John Rawls[3] of our own time, we have quite a
range of diverse views on the question of civil disobedience. In Crito
Socrates is laying out the principle why an individual should obey
the law of the state even if that law might be unjust. This may be
considered the first coherent view in defense of the �acts� of a
state and the organic nature of law. What Crito
seems to teach us is that the inevitable conflict between an
individual�s moral value (his or her autonomy) with the
conventions of society and the law of the land is best resolved by
the submission of the individual to the demands of the state. In our
time, such approach would be considered not a very healthy
relationship between the state and the individual, especially in a
situation where the state is presumed to be a result of contractual
arrangement (constitution, charter et cetera). A responsive
government is measured by the extent and ways it handles acts of
civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is one case where a rolling
stone gathers/grows mosses.
Thoreau, due to his seminal work, Civil
Disobedience,[4] may
be credited as the first philosopher who articulated the concept of
civil disobedience for the modern world. His influence was far and
wide reaching some of
the world�s most renowned thinkers and leaders including Tolstoy (A
Circle of Reading)[5],
Gandhi (Non-Violent
Resistance)[6], and King (Why
We Can�t Wait) [7]. Even in Gandhi, there is a great
dependence on the existing political environment in order for his
non-violent movement to succeed. In other words, we have to be
realistic about our struggle in terms of its effectiveness in a
particular time period. It is also important that we appraise the
enemy and our own strength and ability to maintain any such
resistance and struggle.
I prefer the approach taken by John Rawls on
topic of civil disobedience. Other than his perceptive system of the
distribution of privileges �under the veil of ignorance,� Rawls
has narrowed down the circumstances and the social dynamic wherein
the reasons and conditions, in cases of civil disobedience, are
clearly understood. It is worth our time to understand clearly,
especially under our present circumstances, what Rawls identified as
the three important conditions under which civil disobedience is
warranted:
a) �Exhaustion of available means of appeal
to the majority or ruling party for redress; serious breakdown of
justice.�
b) �Restricting civil disobedience to
violations of the first principle of justice, the principle of equal
liberty, and to barriers which contravene the second principle, the
principle of open offices which protects equality of opportunity.�
c) �Civil
disobedience should be restricted to those cases where the dissenter
is willing to affirm that everyone else similarly subjected to the
same degree of injustice has the right to protest in a similar
way.� [8]
Once we have established that there is
justifiable reason for staging a civil disobedience, it still
remains on the organizers and the individual participants to
consider a couple of other important points. Just because we are
justified and constitutionally supported, and universally applauded
to carry out or stage our civil disobedience, we need not do so
under certain circumstances. It is important to quote Rawls on this
issue: �Having established one�s right to protest one is then
free to consider these tactical questions. We may be acting within
our rights but still foolishly, if our action only serves to provoke
the harsh retaliation of the majority; and it is likely to do so if
the majority lacks a sense of justice or if the action is poorly
timed or not well designed to make the appeal to the sense of
justice effective. It is easy to think of instances of this sort,
and in each case, these practical questions have to be faced. From
the standpoint of the theory of political obligation, we can only
say that the exercise of the right should be rational and reasonably
designed to advance the protester�s aims. And that weighing
tactical questions presupposes
that one has already established one�s right, since
tactical advantages in themselves do not support it.�[9]
2) Walking Through the Ethiopian �Intellectual� Gauntlet
The correct evaluation of our current
political situation is necessary before making any kind of
suggestion as a solution to our crises. It is quite disconcerting
and even down right depressing when I read articles supporting
either Meles Zenawi and his political organization or the Opposition
[CUD] by casting the current political situation as a fight between
�Tygreans� and �Amharas.� When confronted with such scene,
my first reaction is to shout out, �What about the other ethnic
groups? How about class struggle? How about ideological conflict?
How about selfish individual ambition?� My criticism and
opposition to Meles Zenawi and his Government has nothing to do with
his identity as a member of a particular ethnic group. I criticize
the policy of the Government of Meles Zenawi and Meles Zenawi as an
individual for being responsible for initiating and implementing
policies that negatively affected the independence and sovereignty
of Ethiopia and the welfare of Ethiopians. When it comes to the
Opposition leaders or other public individuals also, my criticism
was never aimed at their ethnic identity, but rather on their
exclusiveness, poor judgment in evaluating political events, et
cetera.
It is absolutely irresponsible for anyone to
attack Meles Zenawi or members of the ruling coalition by
identifying them as �Tygreans� focusing on their Tygrean
identity as the evil that need be eradicated and replaced by
�Amharas� and more so if possible by �Shoa/Addis Ababeans.�
Whether it is Professor Tilahun Yilma earlier or Professor Getatchew
Haile currently, the attack of such people on the current Ethiopian
Government and its leadership seem to be focused more on the
identity of the current political leaders rather than the evil of
ethnicism, exclusivity, lopsided development, and method of
governance. Of course, such criticism is offered camouflaged in
words that seem to convey universal concerns. However, taking their
entire opus in to account, it is not that difficult to find the
coiled snake of chauvinism, and narrow ethnicism of the worst kind
at the core of such kinds of �patriotism� and criticisms.
Nevertheless, I also believe that the activities of Meles
Zenawi compromising the territorial integrity and sovereignty of
Ethiopia, putting in place a constitution that further fractures a
nation across ethnic lines, and being authoritarian secluded in his
own cocoon have contributed why such reasonable, well educated, and
experienced seniors take untenable positions.
Professor Getatchew Haile is my senior in
every aspect of the word; he is the foremost
Ethiopian scholar of Ethiopian languages and classical works
of Ethiopian writers, a great cataloguer of precious Ethiopian
manuscripts, and author of an exceptional book (Bahre
Hassab) that is on its way to becoming a great monument to
Ethiopian scholarship. For his unique contribution of scholarly
work, I could even nominate him for the Nobel Prize. Having said
that it makes my task of censoring the political views of such an
august scholar, and a person I greatly honor and respect. It
certainly is a lot harder than dealing with my own contemporaries.
Simply put, his current political view on what he recently
identified as �TPLFities� but all along meaning �Tygreans�
is revolting, for there is no other term that best describes his
deteriorating perception of our current situation. I prefer to think
that he had suffered momentary laps of rational thinking when
writing his latest pieces. [I did receive some e-mails of protest
earlier because I wrote in a previous article about the great
contribution of Professor Getatchew Haile. My admiration of
Professor Getatchew scholarly work and my sincere respect to his
person remains despite my criticism of his political views in this
article. Let us avoid the common error of demonizing an individual
just because we may disagree on certain aspects of his or her views
overlooking completely his or her other great insights and
contribution to society.]
I would have simply overlooked Professor
Getatchew�s recent statements on the current Ethiopian government
leadership, which he had identified repeatedly as some kind of a
alien government with a connotation of being an exclusively
�Tygrean� ethnic government. His rhetoric gets even more terse
and reckless, and is often riddled with fallacious reasoning when he
tried to explain himself in his last article �Criticism without
Substance,� (November 17 �05, Ethiomedia). [10]
In trying to explain his earlier essay, due to the sever
criticism directed at him by a number of Ethiopians in Websites and
in discussions, he created more problems and division among us by
writing a sequel. The language of the Amharic essay is far worse
than that of the translations or his last essay in English. He even
set himself up as the authority to determine who is going to be
accepted as an Ethiopian. Professor Getatchew wrote, �I doubt if
there would be any resentment toward Tigreans, if they act as, and
feel, Ethiopians�� Who dare challenge any individual�s
Ethiopian identity because he or she may have a distinct ethnic
background? Who is going to be foolish enough to set some kind of a
machine to measure the action and feeling that affirms
Ethiopianness? Not the Getatchew Haile I have always admired as a
great Ethiopian, maybe now the conflicted Getatchew Haile completely
new and unknown to me!
The main point of contention in the
controversy about the essays of Professor Getatchew Haile is that he
seems to be advocating the views of narrow ethnicism and
�Amhara� chauvinism. [It is ironic that he should take such a
position since his background is as Ethiopian as mine is with
�Oromos,� �Amharas� (maybe even Tygreans in his case, and
definitely with mine et cetera ancestry).] It seems that his beef is
with the identity of a dictator and not with the form of power
structure. It seems, as long as Ethiopia is run by someone other
than a Tygrean, no matter how such a government is run, would be
acceptable to him. Though he denies ever stating �Tigre Aygezanim�
(A Tygrean will never rule us), the fact remains that the sum total
of his writing and the analogy he gave about the hypothetical rules
of the Irish in UK, the Kurds in Turkey, the Arabs in Israel et
cetera all representing the tyranny of minorities did not make
matters any better. He would have defused the controversy
surrounding his writing by simply letting go his error rather sink
further into a quagmire of ethnicism and hate politics trying to
salvage statements that need basic rethinking in the mind/brain than
changing syntax and meaning of words on paper or in Websites.
It does not help our cause for equitable
distribution of Ethiopia�s resources, which would have been the
glue that would have reinforced our unity, when Professor Getatchew
Haile accused the current government leaders as Tygreans engaged in
looting away the national wealth to their region. He stated, �To
my mind, it is downright criminal for the TPLFites to expect
Ethiopians to be grateful to them for their domination of the
country. It is like asking Peter to rejoice when his greedy brother
Paul enriches himself by forcibly taking property that was to have
been inherited by all the siblings.�[11] Writing in such hate
filled and derogatory manner is not to be expected from a scholar or
an octogenarian of any worth. Greedy? This type of characterization
goes beyond criticizing the economic policy of a government and
becomes a slur of a group. Who is the Gargantuan who devoured the
lives of millions and millions of Ethiopians from Wollo, Tygrie,
Begemder, Afar region, Harar Somali region et cetera through famine,
and through general underdevelopment all over Ethiopia for over
fifty years, in the singular effort to aggrandize and develop Addis
Ababa and vicinity?
I have not read a single statement by
Professor Getatchew Haile or other bleeding hearts questioning the
deformed and distorted and much more destructive exclusive
�development� of Addis Ababa and vicinity. Emperor Haile
Selassie and his Mehal Sefaris commandeered the wealth of the nation
into Addis Ababa and vicinity for over fifty years leaving the rest
of the nation to starve, suffer massive famine, live through the
most backward conditions in the world to this day. It does not
require the mind of a neurosurgeon to read the simple Ethiopian
Budget yearly outlay for the last forty or fifty years to see where
almost hundred percent of Ethiopia�s wealth was expended. Over 95%
of all investment in Ethiopia was invested in Addis Ababa and
vicinity. Over 95% of all hospitals in Ethiopia are to be found in
Addis Ababa. Almost all of the higher education institutions were
concentrated in Addis Ababa. Over 90% of the budgetary expenditure
was spent in Addis Ababa and vicinity.
It is tragic that in recent times the
statement of Professor Getatchew Haile is becoming representative of
the type of propaganda spread around when in 1991 the EPRDF forces
overrun Mengistu�s caretaker government left behind. The claim
then was that factories were being dismantled and taken to Tygrie,
or trucks were being high jacked by EPRDF forces et cetera. Such
incidents were absolutely insignificant acts at a time of life and
death struggle with a brutal government where every scrap of
assistance was absolutely necessary for the successful execution of
the struggle. On the other hand, people who are ready to cast stones
and more at one ethnic group, do not tell the whole story on how
EPRDF fighters brought food, fuel, medicine even while fighting and
dodging the war plans and ground forces of Mengistu�s military. Do
people understand that tens of thousands of young men and women died
in such effort to bring some degree of civilized life to that
northern region of Ethiopia? This form of sophistry of Professor
Getatchew Haile and others is not helpful for the unity of Ethiopia
or for the development of Ethiopia. To keep making irresponsible and
unconscionable statements complaining about lopsided economic
distribution in Tygraei tells us how far Ethiopian elites from Addis
Ababa and vicinity have to purify themselves in order to realize the
degree of harm that was caused by developing exclusively Addis Ababa
and vicinity at the cost of the rest of Ethiopia.
The true legacy of �greedy� looters and
abusive leaders is staring us every day in the form of extremely
expensive multistoried buildings, telephone services, utility
spread, schools, colleges, hospitals, four star hotels, expensive
vehicles on and on in one concentrated single area called Addis
Ababa when the rest of Ethiopia is still struggling eking a
sub-human existence eating dirt, drinking dirt, and sleeping in
dirt. With the exception of those lucky few living in towns fixing
old systems left by the Italian occupiers, Ethiopians all over
Ethiopia lead one of the most degraded lives on the planet. What is
so outrageous for opening a couple of schools, improve the airport
and install a handful of projects in Tygreai and other areas such as
Bah Dar. The one significant investment long overdue is the building
of power source for the Northern regions of Ethiopia, which is now
being carried out on the Tekeze River. What is so awful about such
national project to supply electric power to a region that was
deprived of such power for over fifty years. Mind you, a single
extension construction of Bole Airport and few planes was carried
out at the cost of a couple of hundred million dollars just
recently. It is absolutely shameful for any one to point finger at
any development carried out by the current government in Tygraei or
elsewhere outside of Addis Ababa.
With a GNP of $110 dollars, it is criminal to
maintain an economic system in Ethiopia that reinforces the lopsided
economic structure of bygone era. We can witness now how some Addis
Ababeans are venting their hate for Tygreans and other Ethiopians,
using the internet. They have degraded, insulted, make fun of the
rest of Ethiopians for their accent, their poverty, their human
needs, their rural manner based on the idea that the hyphenated
lives of people living in Addis Ababa is somehow the pinnacle of the
expression of high culture. Shame on you all Addis Ababeans who
exposed such views or harbored such resentment, and dare complain
about any other part of Ethiopia being developed now! Even for the
majority of the people living in Addis Ababa, life is not that rosy
and free from degradation. Addis Ababa itself is stretched beyond
its capacity with the inflow of Ethiopians who seek some of the
benefits of drinking clean water and getting some job or begging.
Such is the expansive problem that comes from pouring the wealth of
a nation for grandiose and selfish
�greedy� purpose in one concentrated area. With such
appalling Ethiopian reality staring us in the face, it is tragic
that all such negative publicity against Tygreans as looters of the
wealth of the nation is allowed to reach such high pitch. It is due
to the ineptness of the current Ethiopian Government and its leader
Meles Zenawi, who are tied up in their own web of secrecy and
intrigue, that they could not even report the true picture of
development expenditure and investment activities of the country.
They are busy murdering peaceful demonstrators, detaining Opposition
leaders and other Ethiopians.
The concern of Professor Getatchew and other
similarly disposed �intellectuals� should have contained an
explicit expression of approval for the development taking place in
Mekele and vicinity and a demand that the same degree of
developmental effort should be exerted to develop other urban magnet
centers in Wollo, Begemder, Gojjam, Illubabour, Bale, Harar et
cetera rather than engage in brow-beating, lamenting, and accusing
the Government of Meles Zenawi of taking property away from the rest
of Ethiopia. Even for logical consistency sake, if one claims
developing Addis Ababa is tantamount to developing Ethiopia, then
developing Mekele is also tantamount to developing Ethiopia. Such
intellectuals are either deliberately confusing existential identity
with a metaphysical entity or are not aware that they are committing
a gross logical error, for there is no such thing that is called
Ethiopia without its constituting parts. That is why it is fallacy
to think of Addis Ababa to be equivalent to Ethiopia, for Ethiopia
consists of very many parts, and those parts are equally important
to the reading of properly identifying what Ethiopia is. Of course,
one can argue that Addis Ababa is unique in that Ethiopians from all
over Ethiopia are to be found there. However, that will not remedy
the fallacy and the ills of lopsided development.
I have criticized the economic policy and
programs of Meles Zenawi repeatedly for years. Unlike Professor
Getatchew and others, I have addressed the issue of the development
effort in Tygreai not with grudge and to curb such effort, but in
order to demand that similar degree of effort and resource should
also be directed to other parts of Ethiopia a lot more than what was
being done. I wanted to see Baher Dar and Gondar developed as
alternative capital cities of the North and Arba Minch and the lake
regions as the South urban centers to trigger development in far
more larger area than Addis Ababa and vicinity. I am not against the
development of Addis Ababa and vicinity in principle, but such
development must take account of the state of the economy of the
entire nation. No economic development should be undertaken in Addis
Ababa and vicinity on the basis of a fallacy claiming that such
development is for the whole of Ethiopia. If any development program
for Addis Ababa and vicinity is not part of a program that takes
into account the fifty years exclusive development of Addis Ababa
and vicinity at the cost of the lives of millions of Ethiopians in
the rest of Ethiopia, then such program is exploitative and
divisive, and far worse than any development undertaken in Mekele or
else where. Are we so blind that we cannot see the evil in having
such a contrasting life style in one nation where the majority are
living in sub-human condition and a few living in ostentatious
fanciful buildings with modern utility and luxury as well as
debauched life style.
Professor Getatchew has cited as authority
the article of Professor Minasse Haile [�Comparing human
rights in two Ethiopian constitutions: the Emperor's and the
�Republic's�--cucullus non facit monachum,� 13 CARDOZO
J. INT'L & COMP. L. 1-59 (2005)]
to support his views on a number of issues he raised. Even though
Professor Minasse�s article is very interesting that displays
impressive skills of legal research and lucidity, it is only
tangentially relevant to many of Professor Haile�s assertions and
inferences maintained in his recent article. The main thesis of that
article is to assert that Ethiopians had a more democratic life vis-�-vis
the government of Haile Selassie compared to their lives under the
TPLF, meaning the Government of Ethiopia under Meles Zenawi and his
political organization. I have no problem in any evaluation that
asserts Haile Selassie was better in governing Ethiopia than Meles
Zenawi, but to claim his Regime was democratic is another matter.
The article by Professor Minasse seems to be further development of
the theme he introduced in his earlier article of ten years ago
dealing with the 1995 Constitution ["The New Ethiopian
Constitution: Its Impact Upon Unity, Human Rights, and
Development," 20
SUFFOLK TRANSNAT'l l. REV. 1 (1996).]
No matter how crudely, the current EPRDF
government structure has established more autonomy to diverse ethnic
groups than the more monolithic and hegemonic government structure
of Haile Selassie that had promoted the welfare and of a particular
region. My criticism of the Government of Meles Zenawi is on that
very fact that the autonomy given to subdivisions and ethnic groups
is far too much that will lead Ethiopia to fracture across ethnic
lines. Both Professors Getatchew and Minasse seem to argue in
similar ways, but also hold the contradictory view that there is no
autonomy of the different federal entities. We cannot argue both
ways of supporting democracy and arguing that democracy is gone too
far. Such confusion comes from not identifying properly issues. In
fact, the one defect in Professor Minasse�s article is his lack of
properly framing his trajectory by taking into account that Haile
Selassie�s Government was indeed a hegemonic government geared
toward benefiting a certain group of people in a discrete region.
The article, though well researched and well written as a piece of
scholarly work, nevertheless, was essentially an apologist article.
My tagging does not in any way diminish the contribution of
Professor Minasse to the ongoing discourse on development of
constitutional law and civil society in the future Ethiopia.
However, by necessity, since I see the article as an apology, it is
organically limited by its subject matter; thus, we did not get in
the article the full benefit of Professor Minasse�s formidable
scholarship, insight, and wisdom.
Professor Minasse was one of the architects
who influenced the Emperor to change the then existing traditional
foreign policy of �uneasy� support of Israel to that of a policy
that focused mainly on Africa and the Arabs. The Ethiopian
government closed its Embassy to Israel, and also ejected Israel�s
Embassy, cultural and trade center in Addis Ababa. We gained nothing
from such unilateral change of allegiance, for Haile Selassie�s
government acted without having exacted first some comparable
expensive concessions from the Arabs. The Arabs continued to
undermine the integrity of Ethiopia by financing liberation
organizations, and their belligerency is still with us to this day.
The effort to hold the OAU conference in Ethiopia and to establish
the Headquarters of the OAU was all done with an eye to glorify the
Emperor and satisfy his almost childish appetite for recognition as
a world leader.
We all remember how Professor Minasse Haile
as Foreign Minister then, representing Ethiopia at that OAU
gathering of Africa�s Governments, responded chocking with emotion
to the Representative of Somalia who made insulting claim of
territory and irreverence to his host, the Emperor. My own personal
view is that we made a terrible disservice to the interest of
Ethiopia in discontinuing our relationship with Israel at that time.
I also believe our participation in such ostentatious manner in
international politics was far beyond our means. As a consequence of
our adventurism, we are
in a mess at the present time. It is also appropriate to mention
here that Professor Minasse was imprisoned in Mengistu�s dungeon
along with other High Ethiopian Government Officials most of whom
were massacred by Mengistu in 1975. In other words, his criticism of
the dictatorial regime of Meles Zenawi is understandable and
credible along with his skepticism of totalitarianism in general
because of his own life�s experience.
Of course, there is more to Ethiopia�s
international relations after World War II. Such process was
evolving since the time the capable and the finest international law
jurist Aklilu Habtewold was promoting Ethiopia�s interest and
claims at different international forums including the United
Nations. It was definitely far more complex than the linear process
of focusing on Africa and appeasement of the Arabs mentioned
here�Ethiopia�s foreign service personnel and the Emperor were
busy then with behind the scene deals for support of Ethiopia�s
claim to recover Eritrea and Somalia, and even Djibouti after the
defeat of Italy and Germany in World War II, and to position
Ethiopia with a better bargaining power vis-�-vis the European
Powers in the aftermath of the end of the War. On the other hand,
the change of policy and focus on Africa and the Arabs, a poorly
designed and ill-conceived foreign policy brought into Ethiopia an
abomination that has now created a sub culture of corruption and
debauchery that is destroying the very fabric of Ethiopia�s
culture and tradition by making Addis Ababa the Headquarters of the
OAU and other international organizations or their branch offices.
People have argued honestly and at times emotionally subscribing to
the view that form of foreign policy was a great move that opened
gates of opportunities for the leaders of Ethiopia (Ethiopians) to
move into the modern world and to be international political
players, and earn some hard currency along the way. Exposing a
traditional society with limited resources to such international
game of power, money, and intrigue only succeeded in accelerating
the downfall of Haile Selassie, and the deformity of Ethiopia�s
economy and social relationships.
Having worked briefly at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs as a senior advisor in 1991, an interrupted career
with twenty years from 1976, I know first hand that policy making
and implementing such policy is invariably very complex. It is like
opening a Chinese doll where you find another doll within a doll
endlessly. Moreover, in the same time period of my involvement, I
was exposed to the fact how far we Ethiopians were marginalized vis-�-vis
foreigners, as second-class citizens in our own country. I also
witnessed the corruption that was permeating life in Addis Ababa of
money laundering, illegal currency exchanges, selling duty free
goods (booth, household items, textile et cetera) due to the massive
presence of very rich foreigners (compared to Ethiopians) and most
with diplomatic privileges and immunities, living in their
fenced-in-villas and fortified mansions among destitute locals. To
this day, Ethiopia is burdened with unquenchable drain to its modest
development aspirations with the presence of international
organizations and their personnel.
No nation is going to develop based on the
rental income in hard currency received by a few thousand Ethiopians
from international personnel stationed in Addis Ababa, or from some
personal services provided to such foreigners, and from eshkrina and geredina. Do
not forget for a second that Ethiopia is a big country with over
seventy million people. Yes, Ethiopia did open to the outside world,
not to paradise but to Hell. Moreover, to continue such dehumanizing
situation is not only immoral but also criminal. I am not being
xenophobic; rather I do not believe white-collar office workers are
the types of foreign infusion that will help us develop. I prefer
foreigners who farm, build dams and highways, construct
manufacturing factories, teach school boys and girls and adults
technical skills et cetera to come to Ethiopia to help us develop
our resources.
3) Formation of Political Parties
It has become obvious to me that condemning
one group and completely ostracizing such group from the political
and/or economic life of Ethiopia in perpetuity is an approach that
did not work to advance our democratic aspirations.
I have in the past, specifically in a position paper I wrote
in 1991, condemned Mengistu�s Workers Party of Ethiopia (WPE) as a
criminal organization and advocated the banning of all of its
leaders from participating as leaders in the political life of
Ethiopia. In the aftermath of the fall of Mengistu�s Government,
the most brutal Ethiopian government, it was only logical and
expedient to censor the leaders of that government and the leaders
of the support structure to that government. Organizations like the
WPE were the very power base of Mengistu�s dictatorship. The
position I took was proper and fully justifiable. However, after
taking into account the changing political atmosphere in Ethiopia, I
have already adjusted my initial approach toward former officials
and political party leaders who were former leaders during the
dictatorship of Mengistu. Nevertheless, there are some political
players from that era that I still hold criminally responsible, thus
not acceptable to me as leaders or members of current Ethiopian
political organizations. Such leaders are few in numbers and my
attitude toward such individuals can be ignored.
I have no personal aspirations or ambition to
lead Ethiopia; mind you, it is not because that I would not have
done marvelous things better than its present or past leaders, but
simply I acknowledge my time and opportunity is long expended.
Rather, I would like to see young Ethiopian men and women, not some
old battered individuals already set in their ways, from our past,
taking responsibility for our survival. After all, I must remind my
fellow Ethiopians that becoming an �emperor� or a �dictator�
over Ethiopians is not such an honorable �big deal� when
evaluated in context of our recent history of the last hundred fifty
years, and examining closely the identity of those who became our
leaders and what they did with their exulted positions. I am not
enamored or experience any degree of ennui for Ethiopia�s
aristocratic form of government nor for our past emperors. I am
mentioning them here simply to restate their legacy as our painful
reality. Since the time
of Sehul Michael, the Ethiopian Throne has been soiled and its
sanctity breached, its dignity trashed, and its mystic power
degraded, wherein a series of rebellious warlords have taken control
of the Ethiopian Court system. To a great extent, past Ethiopian
leaders, before Sehul Michael rode into Gondar, had weakened their
own institution of the Crown. They failed to be �Emperors� and
spent most of their time waging wars, terrorizing, and looting their
own people. In the last
two hundred years, we have had leaders from the bottom of the
barrel, who had aspired and sat on the Ethiopian Throne by sheer
force of their individual ambition and the conspiratorial support of
a new type of supporters surrounding them. Ethiopia was at the mercy
of a new breed of elites, whom I have identified in my numerous
articles as the Mehal Sefaris, who become the new courtiers, the new
king makers, the new administration heads, the new military
commanders of the Ethiopian Empire. Their legacy is the current
Ethiopian mess, except for the tortured
and an enlightenment of sort as stated below.
In the past thirty years, Ethiopia has
changed in a number of profound ways. Ethnic identity has taken both
negative and positive steps. Individuals are a lot more aware of
their civil association with the State and the government of
Ethiopia. It is not possible to use the rhetoric of old to convince
new political followers. We are a people with multi ethnic
background, linguistic diversity, and layers of social status, none
of which should be used to break us apart. Despite all such facets
to our Ethiopianness, there is our shared history and common
humanity that must override any attempt to divide and dehumanize us
as a people�a people with incredible survival skills and tenacity.
I fight for all of us, so that we may have some semblance of a civil
society, and not for the purpose to bring into power some morally
handicapped individual, who stepped over the innocent blood of
fellow Ethiopians to get to his high Government Office during the
height of the Red Terror. Need I remind you that in a span of a
couple of months over a hundred thousand innocent Ethiopians
including the very young and the very old were butchered during the
Red Terror? Why would I care whether Engineer Hailu Shawel is
charismatic or not? Alternatively, for that matter, why would it be
that important to any of us that a particular individual be our
leader especially when we have such a pool of possible leaders with
all kinds of questionable background? In other words, one leader is
as good as the next if we insist on focusing on personalities rather
than focusing our energy on structuring democratic institutions.
The proper question we ought to ask is what
is to be done now. No amount of regret as to what should have been
done or should have not been done per se will solve the problem.
Since I am not a Calvinist, I do not believe everything is
predetermined, nor that human beings are simply floating on a river
of life without being able to control where they are flowing and/or
how long they float without sinking. I
am of the mind, if we accept the analogy of a river as the flow of
life, it is within our individual power to choose to swim across
toward the banks to what ever spot we fancied. I firmly believe in
the idea that we determine what we can do, and that aspect of our
lives can only be surrendered when we accept some imagined
inevitability. Even that determination is an aspect of our
exercising our choice or imposing on history our will. With that in
mind, the most important and pressing issue is the survival of
Ethiopia and not the formation of a democratic polity.
The very continued existence of Ethiopia is
the primary issue that we need to resolve and make certain before we
really can tackle the problem of democracy. This may pause the
chicken-egg circular dilemma. It is with the hope of resolving both
issues that I am suggesting herein below some form of rearrangement
of all political organizations in the Ethiopian context. This is not
meant to divert attention or breakdown the existing solidarity of
the opposition, but to move forward with what had been achieved
already. Other wise, the possibility of being stuck in the current
limbo by diverting our energy fighting to have the detained
opposition leaders freed would be our political reality. Of course,
the Opposition leaders have to be freed unconditionally, and one way
of insuring their release is having a strategy and a program that
would attract all political organizations. There is an incentive for
EPRDF to get rid of its polarizing leader Meles Zenawi, but also
allows the party to remain a partner in the building of the new
Ethiopia�a win-win situation to all.
I have identified three basic trends and
characteristics in our current Ethiopian political players. Those
who are exceedingly patriotic seem to have ease in identification
with the common person and democratic principles. They emphasize the
welfare of the common person as a primary concern, and economic
development subordinate to such effort. The second general group
having as much patriotic disposition but emphasizes economic
development as the single most vehicle for achieving democratic
rights. And the third .group emphasize the role of government as the
most important vehicle for economic development with state run major
enterprises, and vast plantations, individual rights are
subordinated to such developmental aspirations. I have accepted all
the players except a handful whether they are leaders of EPRDF, CUD,
or any of the other political organizations, not because of their
exceptional abilities to lead Ethiopia or their strength of moral
character, but for the simple reason that they are the ones who have
offered themselves to serve the Ethiopian people, and willing to
risk all kinds of danger in their pursuit.
We have to work with what we have, and there
is no point in wasting time seeking an ideal leader. In the
following three general categories, the whole of the political and
economic ideologies entertained by the majority of the registered
and unregistered political organizations of Ethiopians within and
outside of the country can be incased with some degree of give and
take and overlapping. I see the possible creation of a �Democratic Party,� a
�Republican Party� and a �Socialist Party.� The purpose of
realignment and reorganization is to move from the current political
blockage to a stage where we may be able to explore real
alternatives. We may also discourage all kinds of nefarious little
liberation organizations, ethnic based political movements and
parties, religion based political organizations et cetera that have
become a hindrance to the political and economic development of
Ethiopia.
a) The Democrat Party of Ethiopia (DPE)
- The EPRDF leaders after shading Meles Zenawi and his tiny clique,
need to work with the leaders of the OLF,
Ledetu and his organization that seem to have internal
fracture, Beyene Petros and his organization to form the DPE.
Although some of the members of the OLF enjoy the label of
�revolutionary� they are essentially democrats in the more
liberal sense of the word. OLF leaders are better situated in
participating to form the Democratic Party organization better than
either the Republican or Socialist Parties. Ex-President Negasso and
his group are also best situated in the Democratic Party even though
there may be some friction with OLF leaders. The rural population
may be better organized under the Democratic Party than in any other
party. Ethiopian teachers, the jewel of Ethiopian politics, will
probably be split in three groups and each group having affiliations
to each of the parties. Ethiopian workers, other than farmers and
teachers, may gravitate to the Democratic and Socialist groups.
What is most significant about the Democratic
Party is its diversity of ethnic identity. The rural population of
Ethiopia seems to me to be culturally conservative, thus its outlook
toward economic matters is tainted by such disposition. On economic
matters the issue of land ownership is the core of its conservatism,
which is not at all compatible with republican ideal of free market
economy, which means also that �rural Ethiopia� will not fit
that well in a group with either a socialist or republican type
ideology. All minority
groups of the nations boundaries are best represented in the
Democratic Party with allowance that as many my split between the
Republican and Socialist Parties.
b) The Republican Party of Ethiopia (RPE)
- The Republican Party represents what is most progressive in the
pursuit of individual economic development, which form of ideology
is considered as the core principle by many well respected
economists and political scientists of development in general. This
is a Party that will advance individual enterprising spirit and
protect the freedom of business and individual ownership. The
development of industry and trade is its basic emphasis. Individual
human rights issues especially those that interfere with the
development aspiration of the party will be subordinated or
curtailed in certain situations in order to advance the development
program of the nation. It is not a Fascist ideology but more akin to
the Republican Party of the United States. The current leaders of
CUD best illustrate the types of leadership to be provided by such a
group. These are highly trained professionals whom I have identified
at times as �elitists� not in the derogatory sense but to
emphasize their exclusivity or partiality to classes that could be
identified as management or proprietor group.
Gudina�s Group is best included in this group than in the
Democratic or Socialist Parties.
The current opposition movement was finally
given some shape due to the leadership of the Rainbow group and that
of Hailu Shawel. Ledetu did not truly fit within that structure due
to his youthful enthusiasm and type of professional education. On
the other hand, Ledetu seems to me the very best political
expression of the common person. He is extremely talented and
ambitious tempered with unusual degree of self discipline.
His true calling should be with the new Democratic Party of
Ethiopia along with the members of the EPRDF, Beyene Petros and
Group, OLF et cetera. There, he will bloom as a formidable political
leader as a democrat. He may need to shade some residual narrow
ethnicism and enrich his think more as a national leader.
The Republican Party can do tremendous work
in the development of Ethiopia whether leading the Ethiopian
government or as loyal opposition. The party may have as its
constituents the members of the many chambers of commerce
around the country, management of enterprises, business leaders,
property owners including rental properties, professionals of all
kinds including some teachers et cetera. The Republican Party can
have a formidable stronghold in Addis Ababa and vicinity and other
urban centers around the country.
c) The Socialist Party of Ethiopia (SPR)
- EPRP, Meison, and all
other political organizations that emphasize in their political
programs, secession, state run economy as opposed to market economy,
emphasis on planned economic development may be grouped under a
socialist party. An alternative name may be formed by inserting the
word �labor� somewhere in the name thus: �The Ethiopian
Socialist Labor Party.� However, I do not encourage such
designation because it will end up confusing a number of Ethiopians.
It is important that political parties be
easily identifiable through their political and economic programs.
Having a hotchpotch ideology is not helpful to anyone. It will
simply be a hideout for ambitious individuals who want political
power not on the merit of their ideas or abilities but through cheap
propaganda and confusion. Unclear or ambiguous political ideology
and its exposition will simply deteriorate into religion or
ethnic based political ideology. We already have witnessed
the problem in the Opposition in having ideologically opposed
political organizations as part of one organization. It is helpful
to all if the leaders of EPRP and Meison members that they must
realize that fact and stay in their course of political and economic
ideology, otherwise they will be impediments if they try to insert
themselves in either the Democratic or Republican Parties.
The �socialist� ideology has noble goals,
and it is not as black as painted by ideologues of the capitalist
world. It is true that the inhumanity of the Soviet Union leaders,
such as Stalin, to their own citizens; the experience of the
Taineman Square in China; the greed of Castro, who has been hanging
to power for over thirty years et cetera, perpetuated all forms of
deformities thereby giving the socialist ideology a bad name. In
short, if either the EPRP or Meison leaders do have a change of
ideological point of views away from socialism, they need to state
clearly of any such change of ideology. They need not confuse
upcoming young Ethiopian politicians by straddling such core
socialist principles. I am not saying that they should not change
their political views, political ideology, or economic programs. On
the other hand, I believe that there would come a point where one
may move from the red political corner to such an extent that the
ideological color change is such that the basic ideological
socialist color is no more identifiable. If such a stage of
compromise and watering down of ideology is reached, it is time to
call a spade a spade and fully and visibly embrace the capitalist
ideology and join the Democratic or Republican Parties without any
hidden socialist agenda.
Both EPRP and Meison need to spell out their
socialist political and economic agenda clearly and go for it. There
is no need to practice Bolshevik penetration of already existing
political groups only to implode them from within in order to gain
some political power. We cannot afford to play such games of dirty
tactics and methods to gain political power in Ethiopia. We are worn
from conflicts and civil strife for decades. It is only in honesty
and clearly stated political and economic program that we can
advance our individual ambitions to serve the needs of the people of
Ethiopia. If political organizations and their leaders represent
themselves with honesty and respect the people of Ethiopia, then and
only then the Ethiopian public will have a clear idea to choose the
political Party that best reflects its interest. If I lived in
Ethiopia, I probably would have chosen either the Democratic Party
or the Socialist Party under current conditions. I am a liberal
democrat when it comes to fundamental human rights, and Fabian
socialist when it comes to managing the economy of the country.
Conclusion
There is a latent danger in trying to build a
government based on protest vote. I have identified the May 15, 2005
election as a protest vote for the Opposition. It is helpful to the
extent of moving us toward forming a transitional government to
carry out new election after a preparatory two years period in order
to give sufficient time for the three political groups to
recalibrate the new structure of their respective parties as
suggested herein. Here is where great statesmanship, diplomacy,
courage, selflessness, and vision are expected of every political
player. It is not the kind of landmark situation where you have a
clear expression of the need of Ethiopians spelt out in no uncertain
terms. There are millions of Ethiopians who appreciate being
recognized in far more meaningful manner as forming the constitutive
part of Ethiopia than ever before, who are part of the EPRDF.
Denying such facts will not help us move from the present political
bottleneck to a meaningful engagement with each other in order to
develop further the democratic aspirations of all Ethiopians.
Both Engineer Hailu Sahwel (in several of his
public addresses, at
times quite belligerent too) and Professor Getatchew Haile (in his
recent article) speak the language of violence in suggesting that
they will wrestle power from the hands of �TPLF� or �Woyane�
by force forgetting the fact that the Opposition is built on the
ideology of peaceful struggle. Professor Getatchew stated in his
recent article �Blood or no blood, the TPLF will go sooner than
later.� Winning a political election does not entail the
vanquishing of the defeated political party, but listening and
reading the words of some of the leaders of the Opposition and their
supporters, I could not help but wonder that there seems to be some
very serious misunderstanding of the role of democratic elections.
National elections are held not for the purpose of liberation from
an occupation force, but in order to establish peacefully,
periodically and systematically a government that would reflect the
needs and aspirations of citizens who hold the majority vote with
constitutional protection of the minority. Elections are not
substitutes or other forms of violent combats with destructive
aftermath, where election results entitle the winning group to
annihilate the losing party by either expelling such losers from the
political life of a nation or by killing them off.
All the euphoria and occasional tantrum I
observed expressed in Websites run by some Ethiopians are signs of
immaturity maybe even symptomatic of alienation. It is a fact that
new immigrants suffer the most marginalized life, thus venting out
pent-up frustration against the closed doors of this society could
be a form of protest. Politics is a game for grownups; it does not
work well in the hands of amateurs and juveniles. There is much we
all can learn from the way politicians handle themselves, and how
they conduct their peaceful fight with each other in the West. For
example, our Website has been at the forefront fighting all kinds of
injustices from imperialism to Arab corruption, from the
resurrection of Mengistu and his thugs to Meles Zenawi and his
Clique. Even though we are not happy with its hotchpotch
composition, we supported the Opposition�s right to function
without being molested by Meles Zenawi or his government. We have
condemned the murder of innocent demonstrators and the detention of
Opposition leaders and others since November 1, 2005 et cetera et
cetera. We have posted more original articles more than any other
website dealing with Ethiopia. We do not hide our stand on the
territorial integrity of Ethiopia. Rather than hiding behind
non-committal hoisting of the Ethiopian flag, which is neither here
or there, as some Websites do, we have the glory of the whole of
Ethiopia in a map as part of our Website logo. However, our Website
is shunned by the opposition and its intellectuals, which fact
confirms to me how amateurish and childish they are. It is their
duty to send us pictures of demonstrations and other crucial
information that could only promote the cause of democracy in
Ethiopia.
It is not without reason why I have said
previously and repeatedly that most of our political players are
unsophisticated provincials, amateurs, and downright childish, and
do not seem to know how to be politicians. In their more sinister
dimension, some of such individuals are busy labeling people �Tygrean�,
�Oromo�, this and that, creating and promoting narrow ethnicism,
division, and conflict rather than winning supporters from every
corner of Ethiopia. How on Earth would such approach help the
political process for good government and responsible citizens? For
example, I have to struggle everywhere against being labeled
�Tygrean intellectual,� not because I am ashamed of my Tygrean,
Oromo, or Amhara background, but because the truth of the matter is
that I am more Ethiopian in my little finger (in terms of
representing the dominant ethnic groups) than any one of my
detractors who probably hail from some little village. At any rate,
such labeling serves no positive purpose. Those people who sow such
seeds of conflict are incapable of looking beyond the edge of their
ethnic wells and suffer acutely from the kupamanduck syndrome, as I have indicated several times over the
years. For them the whole of Ethiopia is contained in their ethnic
enclave. How could we be expected to be lead by individuals who
could not even overcome such pettiness?
It is also worth our effort to evaluate
precisely the impact on Ethiopia the involvement of foreign
governments in the internal affairs of Ethiopia. It is very easy to
say that no outside force should be allowed to meddle in our effort
to reorganize ourselves as political players in a meaningful
national reorganization. The real problem is how we are going to
carry out such wishful thinking. Especially the United States
Government and its counterparts in Europe must be informed to curb
their pathological urge to interfere in our domestic affairs. I
think the best effort by Ethiopians living abroad is to make
concerted and periodic appeals to different section of the local
population and influential people in those countries laying out the
problems clearly, for such gentle protest may have far more effect
than a confrontational approach.
I do not believe I just said that, a person who had made it
his second nature to sting, at least with words, the blotted bodies
of those foreign governments interfering in the internal affairs of
Ethiopia. END
Tecola W. Hagos
Washington DC
November 24, 2005
Next:
Section II: Theories of Verification and
Truth
Section III: Human Rights � The Case for
Universalism
|
