By Samuel Habtu Belay
The last few weeks have shed more light on the shady dealings that are going on between the TPLF government and the US Administration (primarily through the State Department and the nominally independent USAID) and the unprincipled stand of a few people in these two institutions. Here are examples.
One of the interesting developments is a Request for Applications (RFA 663-A-08-002) that USAID advertised last Friday (9 November) to fund a programme called “Human Rights Technical Assistance in Ethiopia”. Under this programme, USAID intends to provide approx. $1,028,000 USAID funding to be allocated over a two-year period.
According to the RFA, the purpose of the programme is “improved independent monitoring, investigation, and reporting of human rights abuses and violations with the objective of deterring human rights violations. This will be achieved through a package of interventions primarily targeted at the EHRC [Ethiopian Human Rights Commission] and EHRCO [Ethiopian Human Rights Council]. In addition, other NGOs will have access to capacity building activities, primarily through training, as the occasion arises”.
By USAID’s own admission, the EHRC has done little since its establishment by Parliament in 2000. EHRCO is an organisation that the TPLF would love to see disappear from the face of the earth!
One may ask, so what is the problem if USAID decides to make funds available to support human rights in Ethiopia? Is it not good news? Would not most Ethiopians like to see human rights violations independently monitored, investigated and reported? Well, at face value, we should rejoice that the US Administration has finally come to its senses and it is going to support human rights in Ethiopia. But, hang on, is it not the case that HR 2003 (Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007) was prepared by Congressmen Payne and Smith to support human rights in Ethiopia? Is it not true that the HR 2003 Bill actually offers a lot more money to support human rights protection in Ethiopia, not just US$1 million? Did not the State Department publicly oppose that Bill? It does not take a genius to understand the plot behind this “gesture” – the US Administration is doing everything including provision of a Human Rights Technical Assistance fund to support human rights in Ethiopia in order to avoid a Bill which highlights the lack of progress Ethiopia is making in this area.
The RFA blames the opposition for the post-election violence and tries to appease the TPLF government by arguing that it inherited weak institutions from the Derg and it is “some governmental institutions [that] have been accused of compromising the spirit and letter of the constitution when faced with threats, either in the form of active insurgencies or the unwillingness of some opposition parties to accept election results”. Are they trying to tell us that the top leaders are angels and bear no responsibilities for the execution of hundreds of people on the streets of Addis Ababa and up and down the country? This is completely unacceptable.
Furthermore, according to the RFA, “The Ethiopian Government has made strong constitutional, legal and rhetorical commitments to improve the human rights situation”. Indeed, the TPLF government is full of hollow rhetoric and very clever in pulling the wool over the eyes of the international community in this way. The RFA does not stop there. It tells us that “In the post-May 2005 election environment, some opposition parties and leaders allegedly used inflammatory rhetoric and even called for the overthrow of the Government, willingly or unwillingly contributing to the street violence and human rights abuses that followed the national elections of May 2005”. Conspicuous by its omission from the RFA is whether the said violence and human rights abuses were independently investigated and what the conclusions of the inquiry commission were! Who was responsible for the violence and abuses? Who carried out the violent acts and abuses? May be Mr Michael Rossman (the Agreement Officer) and Ato Belay Teame (the Agreement Specialist) could enlighten us more.
Having said the above, the architects of the RFA could not have timed the announcement better. When the HR 2003 Bill goes to the Senate floor in the coming few weeks, we should not be surprised if the Oklahoma Senator (R) James Inhofe (despite latest denials from his office that he has not put a hold on the Bill) argues that the US Administration is already doing what the Bill sets out to achieve and there is no need for the Bill. The ideas of Senator Inhofe and Jendayi Frazer are nauseating not only to Ethiopians who would like to see human rights respected in Ethiopia but also to their own citizens. I was having a conversation with two American colleagues from Washington DC (originally from New Hampshire) and San Diego areas a few days ago. Our conversation led us to politics and the foreign policy of the current US Administration. Their conclusion that the current US Administration is the worst that they have seen in their lives (they are in their late 40s) says it all. They commented the Administration completely ignores the world reality and lives in its own “invented reality”. I hope this will help them to understand the Ethiopian reality, and that what they are doing is not based on the facts.
What next? May be another USAID programme to build the capacity of the media in Ethiopia announced a day or two before the HR 2003 goes to the Senate floor? It will not come as a surprise if the major beneficiaries of such a programme are going to be the state controlled Ethiopian TV and Ethiopian Radio and the “free press” Walta Information Centre!
Jendayi Frazer, when she retires from public service, may tell why she blindly supported a dictator. Is it not that what Ambassador John Bolton (formerly US Ambassador to the UN) did in his new memoir, “Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad”? He exposed Ms Frazer for informing him that she wanted him to “reopen” the 2002 Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) decision, “which she had concluded was wrong, and award a major piece of disputed territory to Ethiopia”. Ms Frazer may also tell in her memoir pretty soon after the current Administration’s departure who instructed her to ask the Ambassador to consider “reopening” the EEBC decision.
As long as such blind diplomatic, political and financial support is maintained, Meles, Bereket and their comrades will continue abusing the human rights of Ethiopians: the right to life and personal security, to a fair trial, right to participate in the democratic process, and freedom of expression. As Bereket was quoted saying in a recent interview, the death of Ethiopian soldiers in Somalia is a sacrifice but “not that serious in our opinion”. Of course, the death of Ethiopian soldiers is not a matter for Bereket to lose sleep over!
___________________________
Samuel Habtu Belay can be reached at [email protected]
2 thoughts on “State Dept. shenanigans against HR 2003”
Currently there is a trend that is troubling. It is good to have Congress on our side. There is no question about it. However Congress always defers to the Executive when it comes to foreign policies. HR2003 is not an exception. It is bill that gives exclusive power to the Executive (let us face it)
As Ethiopians Americans we have the right to question and challenge the state department. However, confrontational approach is not the right way to bring more friends to Ethiopia. Though the state department is currently on the side of the EPRDF, we still need them. We have no option but to work with them to get the support of the US.
In the hearing at the subcommittee for African Affairs, I have sensed some confrontations with Dr Jendayi Frazer. That may be emotionally gratifying to many of us at that moment. However, in the longer term, it is damaging.
We must recognize the benefit of the smoothing up of relationship with the state department. Let us support HR2003 but let us not bash the state department. As is being done in this article posted on ER.
First- we need to identify the interest of the US. The interest is defeating terrorism. For this they need to avoid as much as possible stateless country. Therefore making sure Ethiopia is stable is their main and major priority.
Second – We need to offer something to them. What do we offer to them that the EPRDF is not offering to get their support ? We need to remember that they do not need us but we need them. Hence we have to be humble and patient in dealing with them. We have to come up with convincing arguments that reflect their immediate priorities. (Human right and democracy is not their priority now). We must somehow align our interest with the US interest.
Third – We must avoid actions that make us at odd with the state department. Would it not be better to engage the state department and get their feedback regarding any ethio-american matters? Why would Dr Jendayi take us seriously when we embarrass her on our websites ? Would it not make sense to tallk to the state department and explain to them the benefit of the bill so that they can support it ?
TRUST ME UNLESS THE STATE DEPARTMENT SUPPORT THIS BILL, ITS IMOACT WILL BE LIMITED.
You can find the official bill at the following link. The bill has 8 sections. Most of the sections are findings and informational. The main sections are :section 4, section 5 and section 8. Section contains the appropriation provision. (That a 20 million dollar be allocated for democracy in Ethiopia).
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:26:./temp/~r11041dHnt:e0:
Allow me now to comment on section 4 and section 5. Many assume this bill as a stick to the EPRDF. (That is why many are working on it vigorously). But is it really a stick ? Does it really have a dent to force the EPRDF back down from their undemocratic practices ?
The listed “sticks” in the bill are the following:
Restricting Assistance/Travel Ban:
Per Section 4 of the bill, nonessential United States assistance shall not be made available to the Government of Ethiopia if the Government of Ethiopia acts to obstruct United States technical assistance to advance human rights, democracy, and independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press, economic development, and economic freedom in Ethiopia.
Humanitarian assistance, food aid programs, assistance to combat HIV/AIDS and other health care assistance, peacekeeping assistance, and counter-terrorism assistance are basically considered as essential assistance.
The major non-essential assistance that the US is currently giving to Ethiopia is the security assistance. The bill specify in Section 5 limitations on security assistance. Security assistance shall not be allowed to Ethiopia until the government fulfills certain demands listed on the bill. Evaluation and certification must be made by the state department affirming that Ethiopia has complied with these demands.
This limitation on security assistance again does not include counter terrorism assistances and assistance for international military education.
The third item I consider as a stick is the travel ban on officials who are responsible for the killing of innocent civilians. It is this provision that have the bill the title of ‘Ethiopian Accountability Act”. (Section 5)
Allow me to explain why I think the above restrictions are not really “sticks”. Other than isolating and embarrassing the regime diplomatically and giving a feel good encouragement to our people, I believe the bill will have no financial impact at all on the EPRDF. Unless the state department itself want to punish the EPRDF, there are many holes that make the bill impact less. (In fact the EPRDF can use this bill for its own advantage if it wants to)
– The EPRDF may commit Ethiopians forces to Darfur. The war of Somalia is ongoing. These are respectively associated with peacekeeping and counter terrorism by the state department. The regime may easily get a lot of money through these loop holes.
As a matter of fact if there is any assistance that the US executive branch is currently giving to the EPRPF, if it chooses to, it can easily classify them as counter terrorism assistance, peacekeeping, or essential assistance.
– Since it is the executive that monitors and certify that demands of the bill are met by the EPRDF, the statement department, if they want to again, can easily report democratic progresses and show to congress that cosmetic and superficial “improvements” from the part of the Regime in Arat Kilo.
– The bill calls for those who are responsible for the killing of civilians be accountable. How ? By denying them entry Visa to the US. First of all not coming to the US is not really a big deal. They can travel to Europe, China …
In the second place how are these people identified ? Unless proven as guilty in the court of law, it would be difficult for the state department to list and deny visa those who are responsible. Therefore the travel ban restriction is not practical.
– Section 5 says that any restriction in this bill shall be waived if the president (i.e. the state department ) thinks that it is against the national interest of the United States. If the State department determines that supporting the EPRDF is in the best interest of the US, Ato Meles and his friends are basically immune from any restrictions of this bill.
The president does not have to veto it. Even if the bill passes and become the law of the land, per section the president can simply say :” We are not touching Ato Meles. He is our guy”. So the implementation of the bill is entirely upon the President (i.e. state department).
Section 5) a) 4) A) says :” IN GENERAL.–The President may waive the application of paragraph (1) or (2) on a case-by-case basis if the President determines that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States. “
So as was described above the state department plays a big role in the implementation of HR2003. The bill has many loop holes that only the state department can close. Without the state department on our side, the bill will have no major impact other than giving us few and short symbolic victories.
That is why I caution the emotional and unbeneficial rethorics from some us that does nothing to benefit Ethiopia but may complicate further our situations.
LET US SUPPORT THE BILL BY ALSO MAKING OUR CASE TO WHY THE BILL IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT. WE NEED FRIENDS NOT ADVERSARIES.
I also see a very troubling trend regarding the interpretation of the success of HR2003. In my opinion, we are mixing up the ‘Verdict’ with the ‘planned pardon’! I think this is a serious blunder and works right into the hands of the TPLF regime and its apologists.
The unanimous bi-partisian Congressional vote is a verdict that has dealt a serious body blow to the TPLF regime. It is immaterial whether the Bush administration pardons this brutal regime.
It would have been a great achievement for the United States to play a significant role in the democratization of Ethiopia by implementing HR2003 to the letter. Unfortunately, the current US administration is not interested in genuine democratization in Ethiopia or elsewhere. Its priorities are different and the way it chose to achieve that priority is seriously short-sighted. It wants to achieve stability in Ethiopia and the Horn by propping up dictators instead of building bridges with the people and their chosen representatives.
In summary, let’s celebrate the beautiful unanimous verdict against the TPLF regime that the US Congress heralded through HR2003. If the Bush administration takes advantage of this bill and sides with the Ethiopian people, it would be a wonderful day for Ethiopia! If the Bush administration prefers to oppose HR2003 to appease their ‘proxy warriors’, we will note this fact but it would not clean the blood-stained hands of Meles & CO!
Don’t forget, with the unanimous passage of HR2003, the Ethiopian people have already won the VERDICT!