“Hunger is actually the worst of all weapons of mass destruction, claiming millions of victims every year. Fighting hunger and poverty and promoting development are the truly sustainable way to achieve world peace. There will be no peace without development, and there will be neither peace nor development without justice.” – Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva
“In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed wealth is something to be ashamed of.” – Confucius, Chinese Philosopher
Whether it is a country that is well governed such as the United States where the middle class is squeezed by the one percent rich in whose hands incomes and wealth are concentrated; or in a poorly governed country such as Ethiopia, where corruption and illicit outflow from one of the two poorest countries in Africa, is now endemic, the impacts are the same. Repressive and corrupt governance entails injustice and shame for those who are left out. Poverty and injustice are sources of shame and agony, especially when these are induced by minority ethnic elite that extract billions of dollars each year from the poor, the society and country. Economic plunder is injustice; and where it exists, peace is inconceivable in the long-run. The Oxford University Multidimensional Index identifies Ethiopia as among the two poorest countries in Africa. If one gauges poverty using the African Development measurement of US$2 dollars per capita per day, ninety percent of the Ethiopian people are poor. Poverty affects all segments of society. It is perhaps the one shame that all ethnic and religious groups have in common.
Over the past several months, I offered compelling reasons backed by concrete evidence why Ethiopians must unite; and why they can indeed unite if they are willing. I admit that it is easier to diagnose problems from all sides and suggest alternatives going forward. There must be social forces on the ground and support outside that are bold enough to implement alternatives that would embolden ordinary people to free themselves from the shame of injustice, poverty and destitution. It is within the realm of possibilities.
In my 2010 book Waves; I analyzed the evolution of ethno-nationalism, and the socioeconomic and political architecture of the current government. I strengthened the arguments of its pitfalls and the vulnerabilities it poses to national cohesion, stability, democratic interactions, equitable and inclusive growth and development, and the threats ethno-nationalism poses to the country and to its diverse population. The single most worrisome source of these vulnerabilities that the vast majority of Ethiopians share is endemic poverty. Another is continuous exodus out of the country to escape injustice and poverty. Wide spread and recurring hunger is a glaring example of injustice. Increasingly, poverty is compounded by rising inequality. This emanates from the plunder of national incomes and resources and its concentration in a few at the top of the policy, decision making and resource allocation process. It is a pyramid. Corruption, illicit outflow, gross human rights violations, nepotism and discrimination are a consequence of a system; and the system happens to be ethnic, repressive and corrupt.
For this reason, I concur with President Lula of Brazil that hunger is “actually the worst of all weapons of mass destruction.” I agree that “there will be no peace” without resolving Ethiopia’s endemic corruption and hunger crises. Regardless of one’s political stand with regard to Ethiopia’s future, the urgent need for social justice is embedded in this vicious cycle that is akin to a national tragedy. When a governing party uses humanitarian aid to punish opponents and reward supporters, you know that the governance is not only unjust; but cruel. Those who are left out, unemployed and hungry have no stake in the stability a system that denies them a chance to eat and earn decent living. I share the notion that overcoming hunger is a collective, and not solely, a government responsibility. However, lead accountability and responsibility for destitution, hopelessness and hunger reside with the top leadership of the governing party. It is this leadership that created the ethnic federal political and socioeconomic system that serves it and its allies well while keeping the poor where they are.
No matter how one diagnoses it, ethno-nationalism and ethnic-federalism now contribute to the lack of a level playing field in social and economic life. It is legitimate for the reader to ask a simple question and try to answer it honesty. How did the current income and wealth concentration arise? Why are billions of dollars stolen each year and not recycled within the country to build factories, schools and hospitals and to boost agricultural productivity? Stolen wealth was not inherited or granted by forces from the heavens. It is manmade; and it is only humans who can reverse this corrosive and corrupt economic system that makes poor people even poorer. I keep suggesting that, if things persist as they are, a person born poor in Ethiopia has a higher chance of dying poor. Poor parents cannot transfer real assets; they transfer poverty to their children and the cycle continues. They have no assets that will free them from this vicious cycle.
Capital accumulation and concentration in a few is never accidental. It is systemic and arises from a system that allows it. In their provocative and well researched paper, “Rethinking business and politics in Ethiopia: the role of EFFORT, the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray,” Mesfin Gebremichael and Sarah Vaughan make a direct correlation between Tigrean elite political capture at the top and capture and plunder of economic and financial resources throughout the country. They show public “frustration at persistence of a non-competitive, moribund and oligopolistic market, based on low levels of productivity, and regularly delivering high levels of opportunistic rents.” These “opportunistic rents” emanate from procurement deals and commissions; government sponsored and financed construction of roads, bridges, schools, health facilities, dams, offices; dominant roles in the transport and export and import business; generous and non-collateralized access to and provision of urban and rural lands, credits and loans; biased permits; accesses to foreign exchange and so on. Keep asking what type of system allows this to happen? You will be in a position to unravel the mystery of capital in Ethiopia and the success of EFFORT and other monopolies.
So what is wrong with the EFFORT monopoly story? This monopoly has a specific ethnic designation and conveys the perception that its lead and primary role is the “rehabilitation” of the Tigray region. Instead, it more than rehabs a selected few party officials and their extended families. It is owned by and benefits a specific ethnic elite group, Tigrean. I have consistently made the distinction between Tigrean elite at the top and the rest of the population. Let us be fair and objective.
As much as one cannot associate ‘past ills and mistakes’ on the entire Amhara or any specific group of people that the TPLF ethnic core designates by ethnicity rather than citizenship, it is not justified to attribute the horrendous injustice, plunder, repression, genocide, crimes against humanity, corruption, illicit outflow, transfer of real resources to domestic ethnic elite allies, foreign governments and firms on the entire Tigrean population. Similar to previous regimes, this repressive and plunder-prone system draws support from members of other ethnic elites. It is a ‘Scratch my back and I will scratch yours’ model. The system would not survive for long without providing material and financial incentives to individuals and elites from other ethnic groups. This gives a semblance of shared benefit and shared stake in the future. It is done without devolving real policy and decision making authority from a core Tigrean ethnic elite at the top. In my view, it is among the weakest links in the system.
As one anonymous author put it, the other weakest links in the system are embodied in the personification of social, political and economic ills identified earlier in the top leadership, especially “the Prime Minister and the security and defense establishment” that ethnic Tigrean officers lead and command. In light of this, the vast majority of Tigrean people on whose name and on whose behalf these ills are perpetrated need to wake-up in unison with the rest of the population. By the same token, the rest of the population that wishes to advance justice and political pluralism must reach out and join forces with them. As the African proverb says, “It takes a village to raise a child.” It takes all of the Ethiopian people to restore justice and establish a genuine and lasting foundation of democratic governance.
The extraction of rents is national and the beneficiaries are principally Tigrean elites and persons. The bulk of the sources of internal riches and illicit outflow of funds is either funded largely by a central or federal government that is dominated by the same ethnic elite or condoned by it. This unjust system punishes the vast majority of the population while amassing incomes and wealth assets that are simply grotesque and unjust. One should not dismiss the public perception that the Tigrean population as a whole benefits from the largesse of the federal state dominated by the TPLF core. Tigrean nationals who oppose the system must recognize this unfortunate perception and the collateral damage the minority ethnic elite has caused in the short run and will cause in the medium and long term. This collateral damage by association without gaining benefits compels them to side solidly with the rest of the Ethiopian population and abandon the divide and rule strategy of the TPLF core and its allies.
Income redistribution to “us” from “them” through narrow ethnic-based political power has the effect of limiting economic and social opportunities for the rest, including ordinary Tigrean. There is no legitimate or valid argument that any Ethiopian could make that the socioeconomic and political system should result in a zero-sum game. If ethno-nationalism and ethnic-federalism prove to be impediments to shared growth and development, it behooves all political and social leaders to reexamine the model of crony capitalism itself. In the medium and long-term, Ethiopia cannot afford an economic and social model which rewards those with political power and punishes those without one. The system keeps the entire society on a low productivity path. This is why it is labeled as “moribund” and the lead reason why I wanted to tie the hunger issue with ethno-nationalism, and ethnic-federalism. Both are impediments to equitable, inclusive and rapid growth and development for all Ethiopians.
If the current ethnic federal system is a barrier to equitable growth and development; and if it is the lead source of repression and corruption (double whammy), is it at all sensible to propagate ethnic politics as a virtue and a corner stone for democratization? I am afraid to report that there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Studies show that ethnic politics, organization and leadership will not advance justice, equitable accesses to economic and social opportunities. It will not advance political pluralism and the rule of law. It is conflict and instability ridden. Ethnic politics will not lead to the sovereignty of the people. Sovereignty is gained when each person has the right to voice her/his opinion and has the chance to participate in the political, policy and decision-making process freely.
In light of this, I welcomed the recent monumental decision by one wing of the Oromo Liberation Front to abandon narrow ethnic politics and secession and to join other Pan-Ethiopian democratic forces in the quest for political and social justice for all Ethiopians. This is a most welcome development and should encourage others who believe in the independence and territorial integrity of the country and in the unity and sovereignty of the Ethiopian people to coalesce, collaborate and struggle for the same cause. Dissidents must seize the opportunity now. It is among the prime reasons why I am writing this series.
This latest positive development notwithstanding, I am not entirely convinced that, as yet, Ethiopian political and social elites appreciate the economic, social and political forces that are shaping the new world of this century. This unfolding world places enormous emphasis on educated workforces and national cohesion on the one hand and flexibility to manage the risks and harness the benefits from an increasingly integrated world. Globalization is mean unless one has a nationalist government that places singular emphasis on national ownership of assets and on productivity and equity. Globalization is mean for the weak and for those countries whose leaders are not nationalistic. Globalization identifies and exploits opportunistic leaders who place a premium on their wealth and power. The recent recommendation to the Ethiopian government by Access Capital to sell some of the most profitable and national icons such as Ethiopian Airlines to the private sector is not an isolated phenomenon. Access Capital did not say anything about the US$12 billion that was stolen and taken out of the country; and the billions of Birr squandered and diverted internally. Ethiopia does not suffer from shortage of financial capital. It suffers from poor, repressive and corrupt governance. This, Access Capital, the World Bank or IMF do not say. Why?
The next decades call on a new generation of educated people who use science and technology to create and recreate their own societies. The old way of organizing and managing is increasingly out of place. This new and demanding world requires fresh and outside the box rethinking of how Ethiopian society ought to be organized and governed in meeting new challenges. Ethnic governance is not it. The TPLF/EPRDF model of ethnic governance is not suited to respond to this demanding world of change. A few examples from past practice will illustrate this point. The leadership conspired and turned over Eritrea in general and the port of Assab in particular and made the country landlocked. A landlocked economy is a dependent economy. Import and export costs are astronomical because of the regime’s unforgettable and deliberate policy mistake. It offered 1,600 square km of some of the country’s fertile lands, waters, flora and fauna to the North Sudanese government as dividend for Sudanese support when the TPLF was a liberation front. Having failed to achieve food self-sufficiency and security for the Ethiopian people, it embarked on one of the most disastrous policies of any government. It offered millions of ha of the most fertile farmlands and water basins to companies and persons from 36 countries; and to Tigrean elites that are loyal to the TPLF. It is therefore not equipped to deal with the intricacies of managing a society in the 21st century that calls for national cohesion.
Without going much further than the later part of the 20th and the early part of the 21st century, governance in Ethiopia has been based on the principle of political and economic capture by narrow ethnic and ideological elite. This was done through non-peaceful and non-democratic means. Political and economic capture has been about punishments and rewards. In coming to power, successive regimes had to inflict sufficient pain on their enemies so that they will never resurrect. Since the gains realized from continued political capture are substantial, the ruling group must reward itself and its supporters in order to solidify its power base. Correspondingly, it had to deprive its competitors of political and economic roles. In a poor country, financial, budgetary and other economic resources are very limited and are thus strategic tools. The TPLF core is a master at marrying ethnic governance, including ethnic federalism with economic capture.
Traditionally, an ethnic-based regime does not see the duration of its governance as finite and as subject to public consent. Political capture has always been a win-lose strategy. The biggest losers in this strategy are the poor, the society and succeeding generations. Political leaders do not wish to lose with grace through free, fair, open, transparent and competitive elections. The political tradition is for the ruling group to win big by any means necessary, including electoral fraud, intimidation, killings, imprisonment or persecution of adversaries. The TPLF/EPRDF top leadership has perfected this instrument of control at substantial costs for the country, and the vast majority of the population, including the vast majority of Tigrean.
Ethnic-governance and ethnic-federalism embed drawbacks in social, economic and political terms. Elections are always contested and are directly affected by them. Accesses to social and economic opportunities are influenced and directed deliberately. Land leases and allocations are decided through ethnic elite lenses. The concentration and uncontested nature of political and economic power at the executive level has offered the ruling-party the institutional and material means to hold on to power and to refrain from initiating needed socioeconomic and political reforms. Reform would mean sharing power and resources with the rest.
In an effort to appease nations, nationalities and people, the system allows the minimum required. It promotes and allows cultural, linguistic and other forms of freedoms while exercising monopoly over institutions, policies, decision-making and capture of their natural resources. Regional ethnic elites and personalities act as modern vassals and ‘lords’ and are often blamed and sacrificed when things go astray. The succession of Regional Presidents in the Gambella region who have been sucked is a case in point. Their primary role is not to serve the people and region they represent. It is to be loyal to and serve the party in power. Regional ethnic officials are never free or independent to enjoy freedom of choice. I do not underestimate the perceived emotional and real benefits associated with ethnic federalism. I contest its democratic content. Ordinary people on whose behalf pretensions of ethnic amity and freedom are exercised are paying a huge price now; and their children will bear the brunt of exploitation and plunder at play. The system will not initiate radical reforms that will make them masters of their own national resources.
In my assessment, radical reforms are needed urgently to empower Ethiopian society as a whole and to feed the millions who depend on international emergency food aid, hundreds of thousands who leave the country, and millions who are unemployed. Even if one were to ignore the developmental reasons, this back drop is vital for humanitarian causes. To ignore this injustice of recurrent and massive hunger is to deny justice to the affected millions. I do not know of a single Ethiopian who is not ashamed and saddened by the level of destitution, hunger and recurring famine in Ethiopia. While leaders of donor institutions and non-governmental organizations empathize with the hungry or send food or money or both and feed millions, it is a matter of dignity and honor for Ethiopians regardless of ethnic affiliation to reject the system that allows these to occur in the first place.
Ethiopians cannot go on depending on food aid for ever. For those in the Diaspora, it is about a recurrent human tragedy of a country with which they identify and they love. For them, and for millions of concerned people around the globe, the hunger of a child, a mother or a father waiting for emergency food aid is an affront to conscience and human dignity. It is a lead indicator of failed leadership. This failed leadership is fundamentally flawed because it is based on ethnic domination and divide and rule.
For government officials who live in what an Indian economist, Khanna, calls “mansion villas,” destitution has become a normal and acceptable part of life. Someone just wrote a note and told me that this person must have visited Mekele. I said yes; he has. He also visited Gondar, Bahir Dar, and Awassa, Addis Ababa and other cities and towns where ‘villas and mansions’ dot slums. For this reason alone, I will highlight critical policy issues, as a prelude to this series on the devastating impacts of ethnic political and economic capture.
While children, girls, boys, mothers and fathers are starving and dying, the ruling-party continues business as usual. It is more concerned about regime continuity, and less about the bigger and most immediate issues of hunger, famine, starvation, unemployment, slum-like shelters, dependency and endemic poverty. In this sense too, the ruling party’s values are worrisome to most Ethiopians across the ideological and ethnic spectrum. They feel that the regime focuses much more on rewards and punishments to keep itself in power and to extract more wealth and incomes from a broken system. It inflicts punishments on those who dissent and disagree with or oppose its policies and programs. Many Ethiopians say that the ruling-party rewards its members, affiliates and supporters handsomely. In doing this the leadership has elevated the punishment and reward equation to a new and dangerous level. This has the unsettling ingredients of collapse and civil unrest that is unpredictable. In light of this, I conclude that the TPLF/EPRDF socioeconomic and political conception, design, policies and programs have proven to be totally ethnic political elite-based, self-serving, dictatorial, corrupt and dangerous. The executive branch has replaced all institutions with regard to policies and decisions.
The conception of ‘victories I win or defeats me lose’ formula has strengthened the proclivity to hold on to power by all means necessary. Historically, political power in Ethiopia was characterized by a macho culture of defeating enemies. Battling out policies and programs through peaceful and democratic means, with the intent of letting voters decide, has never been the norm. Devaluing and limiting the formation of political pluralism and advancements toward a democratic culture of voter preferences and choices, the ruling-party uses public funds to recruit and mobilize members. It incentivizes and guides voter patterns to its own advantage. It punishes those who challenge the system in any way. It rewards those who support it. Affiliated ethnic parties and elites who lead them facilitate this phenomenon. This way, the political culture of exclusion continues indefinitely regardless of social injustice.
The reader would say that such a punishment and reward route to political power is not unique to Ethiopia. It has been a pattern throughout post-colonial Africa. I agree. My lead argument is that the primary motivating factor in this century as in the past behind the same model continues to be acquisition of wealth assets. On October 16, 2009, the Financial Times (FT) put this succinctly in an article entitled “Affluent Africa: The most reliable route to riches in Africa once lay via politics and “public” service.” No surprise, since “the state in many of Sub-Saharan Africa’s 48 countries controlled the principal levers (pillars) of the economy in the decades following independence.” The article cited numerous examples of extraction of riches by and for political elites using “absolute power.” Most African government leaders and elites were famous–many still are–not so much for public trust or public services but for extracting wealth at the cost of the vast majority. While there have been changes in a number of Sub-Saharan African countries, Ethiopia remains among the exceptions in not expanding opportunities and tackling endemic poverty. Many African intellectuals rightly ask why the country is unable to feed itself.
Ethiopia is also among the exceptions in prolonging and sustaining direct links between the party in power, the state and ethnicity. I shall show that these links promote and show corrupt practices and allow massive illicit outflow of funds. Similar to other Sub-Saharan African regimes that have not yet changed, those in power are not sole gainers from political and economic capture. They create foreign and domestic alliances and partners to justify their grip. The Ethiopian case mimics such partnerships in globalization as well.
One example might illustrate the point. In the same FT article quoted above, Mohammed Hussein Al-Amoudi, one of Africa’s wealthiest men is identified as one of the movers and shakers of Ethiopia’s political economy. An Ethiopian newspaper had identified the relationships between Al-Amoudi’s large business empire and monopoly and the ruling-party as a “state within a state”. A capitalist has found a lucrative alliance in a country where there are hardly any large scale domestic or national competitors. “Al-Amoudi is close to the ruling regime and partly funded Ethiopia’s millennium celebrations in September 2000. Al-Amoudi’s business empire centers on the Midroc Global Group, a conglomerate that owns more than 30 enterprises; and employs 24,000 people in four continents. Having leased vast tracts of land for commercial farming, the Sheikh also owns the Legadembi gold mine, which produces roughly 3.5 tons of fine gold a year.” I do not know of many governments that turn over a precious source of foreign exchange for the country to a foreign monopoly. The TPLF does.
The point of the quotation from the FT article is to suggest that the ruling-party allows unrestricted investments and operations, including leases of “vast tracts of land for commercial farming” to foreigners and domestic allies as long as such investments and partnerships pay dividends financially, politically and diplomatically. “Absolute” state political and economic power allows virtual centrally driven investments and economic monopolies to thrive. They crowd-out and undermine national firms and domestic entrepreneurs. In short, the system perpetuates dependency; and suffocates domestic private sector development. How can deserving Ethiopian nationals enter and sustain businesses if monopolies are given special privileges? The gold mine owned and run by Al-Amoudi was once state owned and profitable. Privatization proved to be lucrative for ethnic folks and ethnic endowments that are close to the ruling-party. Massive asset transfers associated with privatization show the dilemma. Among other factors, privatization has not expanded domestic and nationally owned and managed and merit based enterprises. It has not generated large employment. It has not produced a vigorous middle class. There is little benefit for Ethiopian youth, especially girls. Contrast and compare this condition with the Asian Miracle where privatization and indigenous development took advantage of globalization in general and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in particular; and offered enormous employment and incomes opportunities for millions.
Have you ever wondered, as I have, why Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people are caught in a vicious cycle of disillusionment, dispossession and disempowerment? Have you pondered, as I have, the simple truth that the vast majority of the Ethiopian people have less say and thus less power over their political and economic affairs in their own country compared to a few ethnic elites and foreign investors such as Saudi Star and Karuturi? Have reflected on the implications for this and the coming generation of the virtual control of the pillars of the Ethiopian economy by foreign entities, and a few ethnic elites allied to TPLF Inc.? Have you taken one second of your time to ponder the destruction of the environment by unscrupulous investors and the regime that encourages them? Have you taken a few minutes of your time to reflect why Ethiopian Christians working in Saudi Arabia find themselves in a predicament for praying in a Muslim State while Saudis are free to build mosques and to pray as they wish anywhere in Ethiopia?
Anywhere one looks, Ethiopians within and outside the country cry for a government leadership to protect theirs and their country’s national interests. These and other core policy related questions on Ethiopia and Ethiopians suggest an enormous gap in organization and leadership that is purpose-driven. What we see in every global indicator is a country where there is growth without improvement in wellbeing for the majority. In fact, data shows that the poor are getting poorer; and the no of those in absolute poverty is growing at or above the rate of economic growth that benefits only a few. This is the reason why I suggest consistently that Ethiopia and all Ethiopians are crying for a caring and inclusive alternative in governance.
I would argue that the urgent gap in responsive governance is ethnicity, religious and demography neutral. All Ethiopians feel it in some form or another. So, division makes no sense. Only a strong and prosperous multiethnic state that responds to all stakeholders can survive and thrive. Accordingly, we need to recognize that all Ethiopians have a stake; and are thus responsible in filling the vacuum. In light of this, it is time that we expand and embrace the definition and action steps that will lead the entire society to a better and more promising alternative than the current one. We cannot do this as long as we are guided by the ethnic and divisive script imposed on us by TPLF Inc. This system survives and gains from growth that does not improve the lives of people.
We need to consider the higher moral ground that the same way “families and friends need leaders who model purpose-driven lives,” Ethiopian society and communities anywhere and everywhere should expect to defend their human rights; improve their lot; and chart a more promising future for their children. Can this really be done? Can Ethiopian political, civic and faith leaders and intellectuals surmount their own narrow interests and prejudices for the sake of the country and its diverse population? The simple answer is that there is no other choice. If those who oppose the current system are genuine, they must discard old animosities and forge ahead with renewed optimism and cooperate with one another. Otherwise, we should stop the entire business of protest politics and politics as a business enterprise: the model TPLF Inc. has imposed on each of us.
I suggest in this piece that Ethiopians who wish to be treated with respect and dignity anywhere in the world and who wish a better future for this and the coming generation stop the none sense of ethnic and religious or demographic divisions. What TPLF Inc. has and is doing is enough as it is. They can start with baby steps: stop demeaning and undermining one another. Stop the culture of revenge and innuendos. Reach-out to and talk to one another as adults. Work with and collaborate with one another. Campaign against all forms of injustice collaboratively. Treat individual dissenters as Ethiopians and not as members of this or that tribe. Accept our diversity as a source of strength and celebrate one another. Demand and promote innovative, inclusive, smart and wiser alternative organization and leadership–with demonstrated capability of grasping what is at stake (the bigger picture of the country and its people; and committing self to set aside minor differences; and practicing the discipline and consistency of forging a unity of purpose among all ethnic, religious and demographic groups. Here, it is commitment to the common good that matters most. If we fail to do this fast, we have no one to blame but ourselves. These baby steps will not be easy; but can be done.
In the Ethiopian context, a unity of purpose must affirm failures of the past without being trapped in it. It must affirm commitment to justice, the rule of law, passion for unfettered and equitable access to economic and social opportunities, and representative governance based on free and fair elections. A child in Gambella must believe that he/she is an Ethiopian and deserves the same rights as a child in Tigray or Oromia or Addis Ababa and so on. We must decide and work day and night to create favorable conditions that embrace each child regardless of ethnic or religious affiliation. This has the best chance of safeguarding past gains while advancing a more promising future for the vast majority of Ethiopians that the current system is unable to deliver. This will not happen unless adults show commitment that transcends ethnicity and partisanship. This is not a world for the weak, timid and partisan. A strong, just, inclusive, fair and prosperous Ethiopia will be good for everyone. This is why I suggest that it is not just the so-called “unity crowd” that will benefit from a just, fair and inclusive system. It is all Ethiopians.
The acid test of alternative organization and leadership is readiness and ability of political, civic, religious and other elites to mobilize the country’s mosaic and establish a brighter and more inclusive alternative that restores faith and confidence in the political process of the future. This will not be as easy as it seems. If it were; it would have been achieved by now. Take a look back at political history that is still fresh. MEISONE and EPRPP decided to fight one another rather than to advance the common goals of the Ethiopian people and the sacred interests of the country. I do not have to tell you what happened and who paid a huge price. Division for the sake of power and narrow ideology or ego or tribe is disastrous. Hypocrisy is the mantra of those who are afraid to take a principled stand for a bigger and larger cause.
How does one explain divisions among Ethiopian Orthodox Church leaders and followers? I believe that, within the Ethiopian Orthodox faith, we need one creed and leadership as we need one country. I reject factionalism and tribalism within the Ethiopian Orthodox faith as much as I reject narrow nationalism and big nation chauvinism in political doctrine. Divisions reinforce hypocrisy and cynicism. I will give you a simple example on hypocrisy of faith. A group of activists tried to mobilize the Ethiopian Diaspora in the Washington Metropolitan Area for a protest against Saudi Government mistreatment and human rights violations of Ethiopian Christians. Religious leaders failed to participate and give moral support. How do they explain this to their followers?
Given the formidable forces we face as people , any alternative organization and leadership would have little chance of success unless and until we unlearn the debilitating impacts of divisive ethnic politics: the ‘silent killer.’ How can we do this? Why not embrace and practice such fundamental principles as integrity, purity of heart, spirit of cooperation with one another, commitment to serve the entire population and the country in our day to day lives? Why not show capacity to reject all forms of ethnic, religious, gender and age based bigotry, prejudice, corruption, nepotism and discrimination ourselves? Why not subordinate narrow, personal and group agendas to the common good of saving the country and serving the Ethiopian people as a whole? How difficult are these to do? How would we triumph over TPLF Inc. without dramatic changes in our own mindset, values and how we treat one another as Ethiopians? What form of coalition or transition are we after if we do not answer these and other fundamental questions? I suggest that discussing alternatives without demonstrating real change in our own mindsets and in our dealings with one another will not be credible in the eyes of the Ethiopian people or the global community. The London Conference of 1991 took place without sober analysis and discussion of similar questions. This is a real challenge for all activists and opponents to TPLF Inc.
Seventy Five to Eighty percent reject TPLF Inc.
At the risk of repeating, those of us who wish to pursue a more promising future for all Ethiopians must appreciate that our own bickering and division are the most constraining contributors to the strength of TPLF Inc. By all accounts, less than a quarter of Ethiopians accept the legitimacy of the current governing party (Gallop). It is thus an understatement to say that regardless of ethnic, religious or demographic affiliation, close to 80 percent of the Ethiopian people reject TPLF Inc. and want change. Western powers would want an alternative that would serve their interests best as was the case in London in 1991. The root causes of disillusionment, disempowerment, dispossession, abject poverty, hunger and intellectual and financial capital flight out of Ethiopia is deliberate ethnicization of politics and economics by TPLF Inc., a monopoly.
Almost everyone is reduced to subservient status. If you cannot count in your own homeland; you cannot expect to count anywhere else in the world. This is why nation states that are strong and defend your interests overseas have a voice. Almost everyone anywhere in the world is forced to fear the system that keeps them entrapped and powerless. People know this but cannot contest that the primary motive of ethnicization is to run the country purely as a business monopoly. The formation of political parties on the basis of ethnic affiliation serves the ultimate purpose of command and control over local, regional and national politics, resources and markets. Your rights mean nothing at all. This is by no means to suggest that there are no second class type beneficiaries. Some prefer second class status because they have not experienced a better system; and are suspicious of change. TPLF Inc. is smart enough to remind secondary beneficiaries that they should guard against restoration of the old system. The hidden message is specific to one so called dominant ethnic group. The tragedy is not so much that this camouflage persists; but that the rest of us fall into the trap. The result is a reinforcement of ethnic division and disempowerment that serve TPLF Inc.
Duality of ‘silent violence or killing’
Ethnicization of politics and economics serves two strategic objectives: divide and rule and extract as much rent as possible from the national economy. Please note that division serves TPLF Inc. most. The greater the division among Ethiopians; the larger is the opportunity to extract rents in different forms; and to make people believe that they are beneficiaries. Where have you seen growth that expands poverty? Extraction is hard to do in a multiethnic society unless some of the benefits go to supporters and ethnic elites who serve as intermediaries. If you want to justify a system, hire small beneficiaries who believe that the sky is blue. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) operates within this environment and serves TPLF Inc. best. Whether we accept it or not, it is, largely intermediaries (middle management) who facilitate the policy and decision-making authority of TPLF Inc. When you are a subordinate, the likelihood of dissenting against the dictates of the merged state is negligible. The Constitution, laws and regulations are bendable and changeable in accordance with the demands of TPLF Inc. Anyone who threatens TPLF Inc. risks the possibility of losing his or her private property or citizenship at any time. There is nowhere to hide except fleeing the country. More intellectual flight, especially those who are national leaning means more domestic vacuum that can compete and safeguard national resources and markets. Ethiopia is void of this asset.
What do regulations and laws do?
Under this system, regulations, laws, banks and other financial intermediaries serve political purposes: the staying power of TPLF Inc. They are therefore not value neutral. How else would you explain the phenomenon that generals and high officers–paid modest salaries to defend the country–are among the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country? Their powerful and wealth status resembles corrupt governance in Egypt and Pakistan than Ghana, Mauritius or Brazil. These generals and high officials are coopted through financial and economic incentives the same way as ethnic elites who belong to the EPRDF and who serve as intermediaries (middle men). Both are among the lead proponents of TPLF Inc. This phenomenon leads me to assert that the business of ethnic politics in Ethiopia today is financial and economic reward. It is the notion of “what is in it for me” that seems to prevail throughout the entire system. Some in the Diaspora reflect the same values. This is why the Diaspora’s role in prolonging the system that divides and disempowers is coming under increasing scrutiny by activists. In any case, it is fair to conclude that the system does not encourage commitment to and service to ordinary citizens, communities and the country.
In this sense, the Ethiopian Prime Minister is absolutely right when he said to business leaders last year that if people are not careful they will more or less lose their country. Why did he say this? Increasingly, foreign firms are assuming the pillars of the economy while Ethiopians with wealth are either investing in consumption oriented ventures or taking their monies out of the country at an alarming rate. They have no confidence in the government or the future of the country. How sad? Contrast this with Indonesian corruption that emphasized growing the economy and benefitting Indonesians as a commitment.
The Prime Minister is right and wrong. The problem is that it is the system he set up that created selfishness, greed, capital flight and unbelievable income inequality. His extended family and ethnic elites are the lead beneficiaries. This phenomenon does not surprise me a bit. It takes an enabling social, economic and political environment to encourage saving and investment in productive sectors that will change the system radically. It takes national leadership to motivate the private sector to do what is right for the country and its diverse population. Some of the most corrupt nations in the world, Indonesia for one, were and are still led by nationalist groups. At least, what is stolen is invested domestically in factories that generate jobs; raise incomes; and expand the middle class. This is not the case in Ethiopia. It seems that the system has created a culture of greed, fear of the future and total disregard for this and the coming generation and the overall development of the country. The current motto is “What is in it for me?” and not “what am I doing for the country and its people while enriching myself?” There is a huge difference between the two.
In this reward and punishment type of arrangement that serves TPLF Inc. and its allies well, the real and potential losses for communities, the society and the country are self-evident. They are everywhere for anyone willing to see. Sad but true, some in the Diaspora who run back and forth on a visit to the country as tourists or to manage their assets or to access opportunities fail to reflect on how the vast majority of the population lives. It is glitz of villas, apartments, eating places, hotels, roads and other physical infrastructure– that needs to be maintained and paid for—that catch their fancy and immediate attention. I often wonder whether Diaspora tourists ask the prudent question of how road infrastructure that lasts an average of five years will be maintained. Who will pay the maintenance costs? Dig deep into the artificial economy; and you will find that most Ethiopians are poorer today than they were 21 years ago. They barely eat one meal a day.
A properly and well integrated and planned economy stimulates productivity and raises individual incomes from large numbers of people. Investments in industry, agro-industry, agriculture and so on trigger structural changes in dramatic and sustainable ways. Infrastructure alone will not do that. The Ethiopian economy is import dependent. Industry accounts for about 4 percent of exports. By structural changes I have in mind factories that offer job opportunities to millions. Factories that produce fertilizers that feed agriculture. I have in mind a smallholder farming revolution that is supported by low cost inputs such as fertilizers, better seeds, access to credits and markets and so on. A smallholder farming revolution would do wonders for the country and the rural and urban population than land giveaways to Saudi Star to feed rich consumers in the Gulf or to Karuturi to supply cheap foods to Indian consumers. For citizens to benefit, Ethiopian smallholders deserve tenure security and freedom to produce and market and gain higher incomes so that they can send their children to school and so on. In short, I suggest that glitz alone does not contribute to sustainable and equitable growth and development regardless of the number of high-rises, condominiums, hotels, eating places for the few well-to-do, including Diaspora tourists, villas etc. Ask a simple question. Who, among the Ethiopian poor or low level civil servants or soldiers or factory workers or Saudi Star employee can afford to live in a condo in Addis Ababa, Mekele or Gondar? Who can afford food that Diaspora visitors or donors or high level government officials can afford? This is among the reasons why the system is a ‘silent killer.”
Portrayal of ‘silent violence or killing’
The Socialist military dictatorship killed innocent people in public and boasted about it. It triggered domestic and global outrage. In contrast, TPLF Inc. learned from this mistake and ‘kills quietly or silently’ than its predecessor. This makes it more dangerous and sinister. We see this vividly in the brutal beating of Andualem Aragie in jail. Given this most recent example, dissidents and reasonable people in the Diaspora cannot afford to forget and neglect enormous losses for the society and the country under TPLF Inc. Loses occur on a recurring basis. The concern I have is that we seem to be in a mode of just accepting loses as normal; and go on as if nothing has happened. Here are clear and harmful examples with devastating impacts. Ethiopia lost its sea ports for which the society pays billions of dollars for services. This loss took place without the consent of the Ethiopian people. No voice.
In a secret deal with the now northern Sudanese government led by President Bashir, Prime Minister Meles’ government granted substantial pieces of Ethiopian territory to Bashir’s regime. During the initial period if TPLF Inc. lands from Gondar, Wollo and other regions, were carved out and reconfigured for the benefit of what is commonly known as “Greater Tigray,” a condition that will not serve the greater good. This ethnic based reconfiguration and incorporation will create animosity among the population for generations to come. The regime will no doubt go; but the animosity will persist for generations.
TPLF Inc. granted millions of ha of the most fertile farmlands and water basins to businesses and individuals from 36 countries and to Tigrean elites. Oakland Institute reported that 75 percent of domestic owners in Gambella are Tigrean. This comes across as internal ‘land colonization.’ Tigreans should not blame other Ethiopians why they perceive that they are part of the problem. The medicine is to contest this outright; and to join others in rejecting TPLF Inc. Like the reset, they should accept the notion that Ethiopians suffer silently from a double whammy: foreign large-scale commercial farm colonization by invitation and real natural resource transfers to ethnic allies. Karuturi, Saudi Star and other foreign owned large-scale commercial farms are the new landlords in the country. These new land lords gain profits by dispossessing Ethiopians. How would an Anuak child feel about a condition that displaces and dispossess her/him? What are the rest of us doing about it? Transparency International, Global Financial Integrity and UNDP all confirm that billions of dollars of scarce foreign exchange is stolen from Ethiopian society each year. Corruption is a net cost to this and the coming generation in multiple ways. It is the current and future generations who will pay a huge price for this.
Ironically, foreign owned large-scale commercial farms are protected by branches of Ethiopia’s police, security and defense forces. In Central America and Pakistan, Special Forces paid for by investors protected such establishment against the population. Those who struggle for alternative organization and leadership ought to ask, “Whose interests do police, security and armed forces protect in Gambella or the Ogaden or anywhere?” It certainly is not the interests of the people who are forced out of their lands or the long-term interests of the country.
Opponents have a moral responsibility to educate ordinary soldiers, police and others that their repressive roles on behalf of TPLF Inc. or foreign investors will alienate them from their own extended families and communities. We cannot do this in meaningful ways if we are detached from the Ethiopian reality on the ground.
‘Silent violence or killing’ does not discriminate
Regardless of ethnic or religious affiliation, those who dissent against the above and other social, political and economic injustices are subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment without any let up. Andualem Aragie, an individual who hails from Gondar, was beaten up in his cell by an inmate because he stood for justice, democratic freedom and the rule of law. He did not dare to challenge the system because of his ethnic affiliation. He did this as an Ethiopian. His is a prime example of ‘silent killing’ by TPLF Inc. I do not have any proof to suggest that the inmate who assaulted him was planted by the governing party. However, I challenge the notion that anyone imprisoned by the one party state cannot and should not expect safety and security even in jail. It is a travesty that says more about the cruel and unjust system than about the inmate. The system does not tolerate dissent or symbols of dissent whether in jail, in the Diaspora or within the country. It does its job silently and methodically.
This takes me back to the formation and acceptability of ethnic-based political parties under TPLF Inc. I argue that this is part of the strategy of divide and rule; and a clever mechanism to coopt and subordinate the majority by using ethnic elite and other self-serving intermediaries. The more division there is; the less challenge to and dissent against TPLF Inc. Aspiring elites are recruited to the club on the basis of their submission, commitment to defend and serve the system while advancing self-interest. The business of ethnic politics is therefore to ensure that narrow band of-largely ethnic elites- are well served. Those of us who want a better future for all Ethiopians need to accept the truth that ethnic division and narrow self-interest entail enormous costs for the majority of people; and for the long-term viability and security of the country. The economic and financial incentives that accrue from this system are so critical for the beneficiaries that they become both pawns and the most avid supporters of ethnicization of politics and economics. At one level, it is hard to blame secondary beneficiaries. It is a matter of survival. What other option do they have? Those of us who oppose the system do not show consistent commitment to come to the aid of those who suffer within the country. We just react or protest for a day and stop. Secondary beneficiaries who may resent the system know our weakness, namely, our inability to mobilize resources and aid those who advance justice and fair treatment. The challenge for us is to make distinctions between the top leadership of TPLF Inc. and the rest and determine to expose this cruel and repressive system consistently. We can plant seeds of separation among constituent parts that sustain TPLF Inc.
Focus on the system that sustains ‘silent violence and killing’
I suggest that our singular focus should be less on our division and more on the system that sustains repression through division; and breeds social and economic inequality. I further suggest that the real political and social foundation of the struggle for a better and more inclusive society is in Ethiopia and not overseas. TPLF Inc. created the EPRDF to mobilize dissatisfied ethnic-based political elites in order to enlarge the party’s narrow political power base. To some, this strategy gave ethnic politics a democratic façade. This façade has no human face. However, it is, ultimately, the Ethiopian people who should judge in a free and fair election. The system now uses this ethnic architecture against those it perceives inimical to its well-designed political, social, financial and economic goals and interests. This is why Andualem and others are paying with their lives. Like other patriotic and nationalist individuals who stand for justice, the rule of law and political pluralism, he represents the hopes and aspirations we all share. He is thus a symbol of a brighter future for all Ethiopians and must be treated as such. TPLF Inc. applies the same methodology of punishing him, his family and friends and his community by making life totally intolerable. The intent is to make sure that others fear the brutality of the regime. This happens to Anuak, Somali, Amhara, Oromo, Gurage, and Tigray alike. Why can’t we recognize this and collaborate?
Given this recurring history of gross human rights violations against the innocent and the dispossession of the Ethiopian people as a whole, and acknowledging those who stand firm for justice and freedom, I am saddened to note that even Andualem’s dire and deplorable condition does not move and revolt those of us in the Diaspora in meaningful and sustainable ways. We seem to possess souls that do not move; hearts that do not empathize; minds that do not distinguish; and actions that do not make a dent. These are not Ethiopians values. I opine that we can no longer see people such as Andualem or others like him just as another individual activist individual in trouble. Rather, we must see him as a symbol of resistance and defiance from a new generation of potential leaders who represent hope and promise: “purpose-driven lives.”
It is time that we wake up and reject ‘silent violence and killing’ against any Ethiopian such as Andualem who stands for justice and freedom.
2/21/2012
This paper is third of a series on Ethiopian fascinations concerning the “Arab Spring.” Beyond these current fascinations, there are strategic economic and diplomatic dimensions that require deeper analysis and understanding with regard to relations between Ethiopia on the one hand, and Egypt on the other. I refer to the future development and use of the waters of the Nile River. I know of no other topic in the 21st century that evokes strong emotions and national {www:sentiment}s in Egypt and Ethiopia than the development and use of the River Nile and its tributaries. These sentiments {www:emanate} from the fact that water is among the most precious natural resource assets in the world. It is the source of life, identity, civilization, food self-sufficiency and security, industrialization, potential wealth and security for those who possess it and a source of jealousy for those who do not. People need water to survive. They need fertile or irrigable land to procreate and to produce food. Water meets basic needs. As populations increase and infrastructural and economic demand intensify, governments are obliged to respond to the needs of their societies as a matter of urgency. They have little choice but to harness their water resources for the betterment of their respective societies. Understandably, government officials, experts, academics, and members of civil society from both sides express views that reflect competing national interests. Elementary school children in both countries find themselves growing up with the belief that their respective perception- that is single country-focused – is the most critical; and it is. Ethiopian history, resistances to foreign aggression, honor, and identity emanate largely from its coveted position as the source of the Blue Nile or Abay. When viewed regionally and multilaterally, perceptions on both sides often underestimate the interdependence of {www:riparian} nations in general, Ethiopia, and Egypt in particular. For peace to prevail, mutuality must govern relations and the future.
Seifu Metaferia Firew, a well-known Ethiopian poet, expresses the widely held view among Ethiopians that, as the “origin of the Nile, Ethiopia, continues to suffer from water scarcity” and from recurring famine. He suggests that this “shameful” condition continues not because Ethiopia does not possess water; but because its government is unable to “develop, harness, and use” the country’s “vast water resources and silt to dam, irrigate, produce and feed its large and growing population. Ethiopia, he says, loses two ways: “The waters of the massive Abay River (the Blue Nile) flow into the Greater Nile; and that this river takes away millions of tons of fertile soils from the Ethiopian highlands” year after year and provides the material foundation for Egyptian agriculture. At the same time, Ethiopia faces chronic drought, famine, skyrocketing food prices, and hunger. Today, more than 4.5 million Ethiopians endure the worst famine since the 1980s. In light of this, the author suggests that “Someday, I (meaning government), will be held accountable for gross negligence to develop the Abay River” so that Ethiopians will no longer go through the humiliation of hunger, destitution and international food aid dependency. The lack of prioritization in the agricultural sector in general and irrigated farming in particular is now a “national crisis.” The thesis of this chapter is that no current or future government in Ethiopia will survive unless it addresses this fundamental national crisis. To-date, successive Egyptian governments have managed to marginalize Ethiopia and bar it from exploiting its major rivers including the Abay. The fact that Ethiopia is “the water tower of Africa” has meant practically nothing when measured against the food self-sufficiency and security and modernization needs of the country. In contrast, Nile-centered and dependent Egypt has succeeded to meet domestic food demand and to create a strong agric-based industry that employs millions. Egypt has done this by invoking the principle of acquired or “historic rights” while denying Ethiopia fair and equitable share of the Nile. 1/
These two seemingly irreconcilable perspectives and principles lead me to the second thesis of the article. On the Egyptian side is the principle of acquired or “historic rights,” a principle inherited from the colonial era that gives Egypt total hegemony over the Nile. This hegemony clashes with the principles of equitable and fair share, principles that most Sub-Saharan African riparian states now embrace. On the Ethiopian side is the history-based and growing recognition that “historic rights” claimed by Egypt and to some extent Northern Sudan are unjust and unfair, and that colonial and foreign interference-based treaties and legal arrangements are no longer viable or acceptable. One cannot appreciate the depth and breadth of these two contending views unless and until one goes back and examines history. Ethiopia’s claim for fair and equitable allocation is not new at all, and predates pre- Aksumite Empire and the height of Egyptian civilization. The country’s history shows that King Lalibela wanted to build a dam long before dams had become an economic necessity. Emperors such as Zara Yaqob, Yohannes, Teodros, Menelik, Haile Selassie, and leaders such as Mengistu Haile Mariam and Meles Zenawi manifest visions and perspectives that defend Ethiopia’s national interests over its water resources. Emperor Yohannes IV died defending this sacrosanct principle, as did Emperor Teodros. Regardless of regime, Ethiopia and Egypt will remain adversaries over the use of the Nile. At best, they will remain keen competitors in the decades ahead.
Demography may now be destiny
The Nile River has been a major source of contention, rivalry, and animosity between Egypt and Ethiopia since time immemorial. The fundamental role of the Nile in shaping Egyptian life is incontestable. Egyptian civilization is a gift of the Nile six sevenths of the waters of which originate from the Ethiopian highlands. The battle for control and for influence of countries around it predates Egypt’s Pharos. From time to time, it has involved powers beyond riparian states for more than 7,000 years. This tradition to exercise monopoly continued under British imperial rule that imposed binding agreements on riparian nations on behalf of Egypt, a British colony at the time. Egypt signed a Nile Agreement in 1929 that offered it natural and exclusive rights over the Nile. This arrangement begun to unravel only after Sub-Saharan African states gained independence. Until then, Ethiopia stood as the sole voice in defense of the principle of fair and equitable share without success. This Egyptian inherited “historic right” and preponderance has virtually undermined Ethiopia’s legitimate rights to advance its national development by building hydroelectric and irrigation dams. Ethiopian and other independent experts contend that Egypt does not contribute a drop of rain or water to the Nile. Ethiopia contributes 86 percent of the water and uses only 1 percent for irrigation. Thirty percent of Ethiopia’s land mass that covers 385,400 square kilometers is within the Abay River Basin and its tributaries. This provides potential of 3,500,000 hectares of irrigable land, more than sufficient to meet Ethiopia’s food demand for decades. From 1990 to present, the country used only 90,000 hectares of the available potential within this land mass. Given geographic spread, population, and size, Ethiopia possesses geopolitical and demographic advantage unmatched by other riparian states. This enormous potential suggests urgency. Ethiopia’s population of 90 million–the second largest in Africa– will reach 278 million by 2050, the tenth largest in the world. This dramatic demographic shift will have profound economic and political impact not only in the Horn but also in the rest of Africa and the Middle East. This in itself foretells the need for change in the governance of Nile waters. Ethiopia’s legitimacy is firmer than ever before. There is no doubt in my mind that Ethiopia will emerge as a leading economy over the coming 25 to 50 years; if it resolves its current political crisis and establishes inclusive and participatory governance.
Colonial powers and especially Britain tried to tie Ethiopia’s hands at a time when the country was relatively weak. The May 15 1902 Treaty between Britain and so-called “Abyssinia” regulated the frontier between Ethiopia and the Sudan, a British colony. Article III of this treaty states that “The Emperor Menelik engages not to construct or to allow being constructed any work across the Blue Nile, Lake Tana or the Sobat which would arrest the flow of their waters into the Nile, except in agreement with the governments of Great Britain and the Sudan. “ This and the 1929 agreement weakened Ethiopia’s position in that both set a precedent used by Egypt subsequently to justify unfair and unjust arrangements. The Nile Waters Agreement of 1959 between the Republic of the Sudan and the United Arab Republic of Egypt benefitted from colonial precedents to which Ethiopia is not a party. At the center of all these agreements, the economic principles that the River “needs projects for its full control and for increasing its yield for the full utilization of its waters” are under-scored. It is unthinkable to realize development without a project or program. This same principle of project applies to Ethiopia. “Acquired or historic rights” trace their origins to these types of arrangements that conferred on Egypt and the Sudan exclusive rights to develop and use the Nile. Both countries continue to adhere to these outdated agreements as if the world remains static. “The absurdity of the land of the Blue Nile dying of thirst (during the Great Famine of the 1980s in which 1 million lives were lost; and today in which close to five million Ethiopians face death) was combined with fact that Egypt at that time (l980s) was about to face a similar catastrophe,” had rains not started in Ethiopia. This nature-driven interdependence between Egypt and Ethiopia virtually defines the acrimonious links between two competing societies that depend on the same river to achieve the same goals. “The intensive Egyptian-Ethiopian efforts to reach understanding that resumed in the early 1990s have not been facilitated by old legacies of mutual suspicion…Egypt was not only born of the Nile, it also lives by it, and its dependence increases with the pace of modernization and population growth.” The same forces that deepen Egypt’s dependence on the Nile are shaping Ethiopian society at speeds that no one had anticipated in the last century. I am not referring only to demographic change. Ethiopians aspire to achieve rapid and inclusive modernization, and possess the requisite talent pool and material resources to achieve these goals over the coming decades. The various dams built and proposed reflect this achievable goal. 2/
Ethiopian interest in harnessing and developing its water resources for development are not new. Successive Ethiopian governments tried to persuade the Egyptian and Sudanese governments of Ethiopia’s right to invest in its waters to meet changing needs. In 1960, the Imperial government under Emperor Haile Selassie sponsored a hydroelectric and irrigation feasibility study led by the US Bureau of Reclamation. In July 1964, the group identified 71 locations, 31 water, and 19 specific hydroelectric sites on the Abay River. It recommended the construction of hydroelectric dams that would produce 87 billion kilowatt electricity per year, more than sufficient to meet domestic demand. Irrigation dams of varied sizes would irrigate 430, 000 hectares of land and would meet the food security needs of the country for decades. Breakdowns of the proposals suggest the seriousness of the thinking and the sizes of the projects. One such hydroelectric dam would have been bigger than the Aswan Dam that contains 51 million cubic meters of water; and would generate more electricity than the Aswan Dam. The primary locations identified included Lake Tana, Mendassa near the Sudanese border and Makile. The government was able to realize only the Fincha Dam. The newly proposed Millennium Dam is not radically different in dimension or in location from earlier proposals.3/
Why did the other projects fail to come to fruition? The primary reason is Egyptian intransigence and rejection of any move by Ethiopia to develop its waters. The Tana Beles hydroelectric and irrigation project involving five dams near Lake Tana proposed in 1958–that would have benefitted 200,000 farmers under financing from the African Development Bank– was rejected outright by Egypt. The feasibility study conducted by the US Bureau of Reclamation and the Tana Beles project would have effectively transformed the Abay Gorge and Lake Tana into the “primary all-Nile reservoir to supply electricity and irrigation for Ethiopia while significantly enlarging and regulating the amount of water flowing into the Sudan and Egypt. “ The scheme would have benefited Egypt too. Egypt rejected all of the projects and persuaded multilateral financial institutions not to support Ethiopia’s ambitions. This rejection curtailed Ethiopia’s potential in developing its water resources to meet its food demands and to reduce poverty. In 1977, a World Bank study of the Nile concluded that the “Waters of the Nile probably constitute Ethiopia’s greatest natural asset for development. The development of the River Nile in Ethiopia has the potential to contribute significantly to poverty reduction, meet domestic power and food demands, and become a cornerstone of a future export strategy.” 4/
How do riparian states move from intransigence to commonality?
In my view, and as the World Bank study suggests, past arrangements are no longer viable and or acceptable to changing Ethiopian development needs. Governments must recognize the importance of averting the inevitability of war over the Nile. As a step forward, there must be willingness and readiness on all sides to build mutual confidence and trust. Ethiopians feel that the lead responsibility must come from Egypt. In the past and today, Egypt finances(d) and provides()d armaments and safe harbor to secessionist movements such as the Eritrean Peoples’ Liberation Front, the Oromo Liberation Front, the Ogaden Liberation Front, and the Tigray Peoples’ Liberation Front. These and similar activities must cease. The evolving consensus among riparian states and the world community suggests an urgent need for radical shifts in policy and covenants among all parties. Threats and suspicions must give way to win-win options that would serve all parties fairly and equitably. The alternative could be catastrophic for Egypt and Ethiopia in particular. War will have no boundaries; and no one will emerge victorious. Ethiopia is vast enough to develop its water resources without much danger. Those that tried to encircle and weaken it in the past failed because of the unity and patriotism of the population. The key point is that the threat of war is not a viable option. No one including Egypt can win a war that will engulf the entire region. Egypt and Ethiopia need one another not only to survive but also to thrive. Egypt’s priority is to ensure that it has adequate water flow. Ethiopia’s first priority is to achieve food self-sufficiency and security for its growing population. It cannot cope with demand until and unless it harnesses and develops its water resources as optimally as possible without affecting Egypt adversely. Hydroelectric and irrigation infrastructure at a massive-scale is a prerequisite in achieving this urgent goal for Ethiopia. This is a matter of survival, sovereignty, and national security for Ethiopia and Ethiopians.
In light of the above, Ethiopians within and outside the country agree that fair and equitable allocation and use of the Nile is a necessity. The vast majority of 11 riparian states, including South Sudan, endorse this fundamental principle. The Ethiopian government, other riparian states, and independent experts point out to successful examples in the rest of the world where riparian nations negotiated fair and equitable allocation and use of major rivers such as the Mekong, the Amazon, Indus/Ganges, and Okavango. Ethiopian experts suggest that the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) of 1999 provides an institutional framework for genuine negotiations and program implementation that will lead to cooperative development of the Nile. Egypt places numerous conditions on NBI to undermine its effectiveness. Professor Majeed Rahman recognizes that Ethiopia has needs too and points out that “Egypt’s defiance of the NBI and its lack of participation in the NBI’s initial attempt to convene such a cooperative agreement is a crucial aspect of the NBI’s objective to consolidate through cooperation in the negotiation for equitable distribution.” This lack of engagement from and inflexibility by Egypt leads Rahman to conclude that Egypt “has denied other riparian countries complete access to water resources along the Nile and for that matter has exercised her hegemonic power over the development and control of water resources in the Nile River Basin for decades.” 5/
Tesfaye Tadesse believes that Egyptian government attitude in maintaining the status quo began to change slightly for three fundamental reasons:
I)”Pressure” from the global community including the World Bank and UNDP;
ii) “Threats” from riparian states that they will go ahead and develop their waters with or without Egyptian consent; and,
iii) “Changes in Egyptian public and political” sentiments. 6/
This turned out to be an optimistic view in that the Egyptian government has dragged its feet with the hope that other riparian states will be willing to wait for decades more patiently. Egypt continues to adhere to its hard-line policy of maintaining the status-quo. Against this, Ethiopia pursues its ambitious water infrastructure project at a pace never witnessed in the country’s history. This includes “the controversial multibillion-dollar Nile River (Millennium) Dam that could supply 5,000 megawatt of electricity for itself and its neighbors including newcomer South Sudan. “ Ethiopia plans to build four additional dams, “together, 20 dams either built or planned– the largest number in Africa.” Concerns include the environment and the political and diplomatic fallout that could ensue. “Egypt and North Sudan have expressed concern that the mega dam project could seriously reduce the downstream water flow of the Nile River to their countries. “ As worrisome is the lack of a proper environmental and social assessment by the Ethiopian government. In my mind, the Ethiopian government did not consider smaller irrigation and hydroelectric dams that are more cost effective and less costly to maintain. Further, the government initiated these mammoth projects at a time when it is granting millions of hectares of irrigable farmlands to foreign investors from 36 foreign countries. 7/
Is there a way out?
In my view, the most sensible way forward is to accommodate the needs and aspirations of all riparian nations in a fair, equitable and balanced manner. The World Bank, the Canadian Development Agency (CIDA) and the UNDP tried to promote shared, fair and equitable use of the Nile through the auspices of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI). It is clear that no single state should have monopoly over the Nile. Article 5 of the UN General Assembly Convention A/51/869, 1997 on the Law of Non-navigational uses of International watercourses recognizes the need for “equitable and reasonable utilization and participation” explicitly. “Watercourse states shall in their respective territories utilize an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner,” with the intent of serving their social, economic, hydraulic, ecological, conservation, and development needs. NBI is consistent with this UN mandate. This first multilateral initiative provides a solid framework for the 11 riparian states: Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, North Sudan, South Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda representing more than 300 million people that depend on the Nile to pursue a shared vision and set of programs along the following lines:
• “Develop the Nile in a sustainable and equitable manner to ensure prosperity, security, and peace for all its peoples;
• “Ensure cooperation and joint action between riparian countries seeking win-win gains;
• “Target poverty eradication and promote economic integration; and
• “Ensure the program results in a move from planning to action.” 8/
These objectives are noble but require political will. Many years after NBI, there are yet no clear commitments and or political will to advance a cooperative approach. The current impasse on the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) curtailed by Egypt and North Sudan has not been helpful in moving from rhetoric to action. My own view is that it is tantamount to madness for anyone to use force or the threat of force against any African state that assets its right to use its waters to dam, irrigate and feed its starving population. The Egyptian position “We want historical use of the Nile water to be recognized by other Nile Basin countries because this is the only source of water we have,” before it would sign the agreement is irresponsible and restrains MBI. Egypt insists on the three preconditions:
1) Maintain its share of 55.5 billion m3 of water” per the 1959 Treaty;
2) Prior notification by upstream states before they can construct hydroelectric and other projects; and
3) Basin decisions to be mad by consensus not majority vote” giving Egypt veto power. 9/
These three preconditions prevent an otherwise promising agreement from bearing fruit. The spring 2011 high level Egyptian delegation to Ethiopia mirrors the emerging reality on the Nile that requires compromise rather than confrontation. All sides must recognize that fair and equitable allocation of the waters of the Nile is here to stay. Although controversial, the proposed Millennium Dam has galvanized a cross-section of the Ethiopian population. Ethiopia is going ahead with this mammoth project without prior notification thereby reinforcing its sovereignty over waters within its own borders. This is a position many Ethiopian experts defend. Ethiopians may disagree on many political and ideological issues. Disagreement concerning the legitimate right of Ethiopia to use its water resources for the betterment of its people and for its national security should not be among them. 10/
I should like to conclude this article with an optimistic note that riparian nations can derive substantial benefits from a cooperative rather than from unilateral approaches in the use of the Nile River. I am convinced that meaningful dialogue, negotiation and confidence-building rather than destructive and costly confrontation should usher in a new era of cooperative development and shared benefits for the populations of member countries. Within this spirit, governments have an obligation to their respective people to draw upon the state of the art technical, hydraulic, environmental and water resource knowledge and experience that will ensure sustainability and peace, avail waters, protect long-term security, reduce un-necessary sedimentation and loss and promote greater regional economic integration. This is the only legacy that makes sense. It is natural that Ethiopians admire the Egyptian people’s revolution on its own merit. They cannot afford to ignore the adversarial and contentious relations between the two countries that predate Egypt’s Pharos and the Aksumite Empire.
Reference notes
1/ Firew, M. Seifu, Abay: Fengie yekebere wuha. Daraku Publishing Inc. Boston, 2009. The author presents a penetrating notion that, left unaddressed, the Abay River contains the ingredients of a massive “bomb buried in water” and waiting to explode. The Amharic symbolism is not academic. The current famine in the Ogaden and persistent hunger among the Ethiopian population suggest that the demand on the government to respond will be far greater in the future, than it has been over the past 3,000 years of Ethiopian history.
2/ Haggai, Erlic, the Cross-and the River: Ethiopia, Egypt, and the Nile. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder. 2012. Haggai brings to the debate on the Nile a feature often ignored by most experts on the Nile, namely, the broader cultural, historical, religious, and other relationships between Egypt and Ethiopia that reveal commonalities. One commonality is the Coptic faith. Ethiopia is predominantly a Christian country with strong links to the Egyptian population that belongs to the Coptic faith. This long tradition in the evolution of this faith and Ethiopia’s capacity to accommodate all three major faiths: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam portend potential for mutuality that both sides must explore and strengthen.
3/ US Bureau of Reclamation, Land and Water Resources of the Blue Nile. Addis Ababa. July 1964. The Bureau identified that Ethiopia possessed ample irrigable land to meet food self-sufficiency and security for decades to come. Ethiopia would have avoided hunger and would have managed famines on its own if it translated these projects into action.
4/ The World Bank, “The World Bank, Ethiopia and the Nile: a strategy for Ethiopia.” Washington, DC. 1998. Internal draft document. While the Bank endorses Ethiopia’s fundamental rights in the development of the Nile to meet growing demand, it has refrained from financing major hydroelectric and irrigation dam projects. In fact, it role in agricultural development has been disappointing. The Bank continues to present analytical and policy pieces without backing them with real resources.
5/ Rahman, A. Majeed, the Geopolitics of Water in the Nile Basin. Global Research. July 24, 2011. Rahman points out the danger of war in the event that a win-win solution that will serve all parties cannot be reached. In my view, the NBI provides a good framework for further negotiator.
6/ Tafesse, Tesfaye. Water conflict resolution and institution building in the Nile Basin. Monograph 178. Institute for Security Studies.
7/ Than, Ken. Ethiopia: why a massive dam on Nile? National Geography News. July 14, 2011.
8/ International Roundtable: the Nile: sharing experiences, sharing visions. Berlin. 2002
Nine/ Wolde Giorgis, Hailu. Le Abay Wuha Mugit. Addis Ababa University Press. 2001.
“The people occupying the plateau of the Blue Nile are conscious of a glorious past and proudly call themselves Ethiopians.” – Elise Reclus, Philosopher
Ethiopian ethnic-based political elites, most prominently, the champion of ethnic politics and business, TPLF Inc., were always bent on shredding to pieces our commonalities, shared history and common identity as Ethiopians of all shades, colors, languages and faiths, from their {www:inception}. They embraced the {www:Apartheid} like formula of separation and legalized ethnic-federalism. They were determined to de-institutionalize and de-capitalize Ethiopian society by dismantling social relations among the population. This is the thesis of this analytical piece. As a result of their secret and coded arrangements intended solely to serve them financially and economically, they sowed the seeds of revenge and fear among the population. Youth are forced to belong to the governing party if they wish to secure a job, a home or further education. A network of spies has infested the entire society: one spy for 5 people. As a result, the country that stood as symbol of independence, honor, dignity and pride for people of color around the globe is now the center of the grossest human rights violations on this planet. TPLF Inc. is determined to obliterate the past, present and future of all people who call themselves “Ethiopians.” This is happening in front of our eyes. As far as I know, de-institutionalization and social de-capitalization of Ethiopian society started when TPLF Inc. took power 21 years ago, with a plan set ahead of political capture; and continues at a faster pace today. The champions of ethnic politics and business do not do this alone. They recruit other non-Tigreans to do their work for them. What we witness now is implementation of the sinister strategy using land and other economic resources to dispossess and expel.
Wherever one looks, {www:dispossession}, expulsions and human cruelty from government agents are widespread: the Afar, Beni-Shangul Gumuz, Gambella, Gondar, Lower Omo Valley, Oromia and SNNP regions and sub-regions are at the center. In this entire onslaught against the Ethiopian people, there is overwhelming documentary evidence that shows that the Amharic speaking population is singled out as ‘enemy’ number one. Why the differentiation? This group is identified by TPLF Inc. and the country’s traditional adversaries as nationalist, that is, as Ethiopian more than its label as Amhara. I documented this in my book, Waves, two years ago and forewarned that TPLF Inc. will continue its relentless campaign to dislodge this and other nationalist oriented members of society using ethnic-federalism and decentralized decision making as the driver. Using this mode of government arrangements, TPLF Inc. tries to camouflage its misdeeds by using surrogates. We know that, Amharic speaking or other surrogates have little or no power. They submit and follow orders. Authority comes from the top. The continued expulsion of Amharic speaking Ethiopians from the lands they use and from the neighbors with whom they coexist peacefully and amicably reflects this sinister arrangement. TPLF Inc. does this against its own constitution. Article 32 (1) says: “Every Ethiopian citizen or any other person legally in Ethiopia has the right to freedom of movement anywhere within the national territory, to choose freely his place of residence anywhere in the national territory, and to leave the country.” What a joke? People naively wonder why the outside world, especially donors and diplomats with stake in Ethiopia do not react to this façade?
Although this is not the purpose of this piece, I should like to share my take on the matter again. British and American policy makers, the two largest sources of bilateral aid to Ethiopia, know that the TPLF Corporate group is anathema to their own values of the rule of law, human freedom, free enterprise and a semblance of democracy, for example, checks and balances and political pluralism. Why do they support a repressive regime that portends insecurity and instability in the long-run? Why do they refuse a movement toward globally accepted norms of humane institutions, decency, fair play, openness and the like? In my view and the views of other prominent international experts on the subject, democratic reconstruction and reconfiguration are secondary to their national interests of security and stability in the Horn of Africa. In other words, they are willing and ready to sacrifice their core values to serve their own narrow and short-term national interests of averting terrorism and instability in the Horn of Africa as they have done in the rest of the world. This is why Ethiopian opposition groups cannot afford to operate in their own silos. They need to cooperate and show credibility that they stand for a bigger cause than narrow or parochial interests.
Like us, the world community looks at the faces of innocent children and women forcibly expelled from their farmlands and properties where their forefathers worked and lived for 100 years plus, in Benji Maji, Southern Ethiopia. Like us, those whose profession is to monitor the Horn know that theirs is a fresh and ugly testimony and reminder of how far ethnic politics and business in Ethiopia would go to bring havoc to this ancient land. They know that, with a stroke of an order–no doubt emanating from the highest levels of the governing party–children and women and poor farmers were herded like sheep in their own country by their own government and forcibly expelled from their homes. They know that neighbors were awed but could do nothing in the country of fear and revenge. The {www:bewilderment} in the faces of the children and women are graphic and speak louder than my capacity to write about them; and the cruelty and brutality of a regime that has literally gone wild and mad. These Ethiopians could be our children, our sisters, our mothers, our fathers and or relatives. It does not matter. They are, first and foremost human beings and Ethiopians who deserve treatment with honor and dignity. Their expulsion is ours too. Donors and diplomats in Addis Ababa know all of this; but cannot say much because it does not affect their interests. It is up to us to make them understand and to draw them to our side.
TPLF Inc.’s ethnic politics and business robbed these Ethiopians displaced from their homes, of their humanity, dignity and honor. Trust me. Regardless of ethnic, religious, ideological or demographic affiliation, it is our own common humanity, dignity and honor that are robbed and are being undone by tribal elite that have no decency or humanity to speak of. No doubt in my mind that the leaders of the regime would find excuses for this too. They will blame someone else for the mess. I am not entirely clear where this unprecedented assault on the Ethiopian people is heading and where it will lead and to what end? Some in the diplomatic and donor community are weary but are not speaking out. I am wearily reminded of the civil war in Liberia, the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, genocide in Rwanda and the collapse of Somalia. If you are not; you must be either naïve or believe in miracles or support the status quo or do not simply care. I and others witnessed the horrors in Liberia where people were hacked like wild animals or in Rwanda where nearly a million people lost their lives because of their ethnic affiliation should worry that the same could happen in our country. It is not an exaggeration to put the pieces together by connecting the dots of cruelty and inhumanity and by arriving at a larger and ominous picture that seems to emerge. When people’s very survival is at stake, patience is not perpetual. TPLF Inc. and its ethnic elite collaborators seem to be determined to push the entire country into the abyss. Donors and diplomats in Addis Ababa know this but do not see an alternative that gives them confidence and comfort. We need to rise up and show that we can offer an alternative by cooperating once and for all.
In my view, the plight of the Amhara is not a single ethnic dilemma. Amharic speaking people have been suffering ever since TPLF Inc. took power. I contend with full confidence that that the Amhara ‘problem’ is an Ethiopian dilemma. Depopulating areas where Amharic speakers live is a strategic way of weakening this ethnic group and Ethiopia. Why do you think the number of this nationality group shows a decrease from year to year? Some are forced to abandon their national origin and accept a new one. Review the data in the old Arusie region and you will find a decrease. Where did the Amharic speakers go? I like to proceed with the bigger picture though. The plight of the tribes in the Omo Valley being forced out of their ancestral homes is not solely their problem. It is an Ethiopian problem. The eviction of Anuak, Afar and Somali from their lands to make room for a narrow band of emerging ethnic capitalists and foreign governments and firms from 36 countries is not an Anuak or Afar or Somali problem. It is an Ethiopian problem. The rape of Somali girls and women and the destruction of villages and property is not a Somali problem. It is an Ethiopian problem. The transfer of lands in Waldiba on which monks depend, to TPLF Inc. firms and or the state within a state called MIDROC is not a Gondar problem. It is an Ethiopian one. No matter the location or the population, it is Ethiopia and Ethiopians who are under the gun. Thus, it behooves all Ethiopians to respond not as members of this or that ethnic or religious group but as Ethiopians. This is our only salvation as people. We either rise in unison as Ethiopians; or we will all perish together. We can never allow this to occur. It is not the legacy we would want to leave. Is it?
As I saw the video clips of innocent and frightened children, girls and women, I kept thinking that only an invading army would do this to Ethiopians. I am reminded that even invading armies from the colonial era were civilized and humane enough to differentiate the innocent from those who dissent. Children and women and poor farmers who work hard to earn a living are not a threat to the governing party. Their forcible expulsion is a form of ethnic cleansing and therefore a crime against humanity. Only Apartheid conducted an identical system of political and economic capture that expelled blacks and herded and concentrated them in their own “homelands or Bantustans.” This way, it is easier to monitor, subjugate and control them. TPLF Inc. does not have the moral courage or commitment to differentiate between those who dissent against it and those who live and work peacefully and legally in different parts of the country.
Ironically, Tigreans are free to live and work anywhere in Ethiopia. They are state sponsored and can own property anywhere in the country. A recent informal survey from a reliable group shows that in the city of Gondar, close to 50 percent of the population is now Tigrean as are more than 75 percent of major enterprises. Here is the difference. The Amharic speaking population of the city treats them as Ethiopians. No Tigrean national I am aware of has been expelled from the so-called Amhara region. This is the good news and Tigreans should condemn a ruling clique that abuses their name and expels people on the basis of ethnic and or linguistic affinity. For this reason alone, Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people do not deserve Apartheid like system that dispossesses and expels any or one group of people forcibly from any part of the country on the basis of linguistic and or tribal origin. Ethiopians must stand up and reject this regressive policy and the occurrences it triggers. They must recognize and appreciate the notion that inhumanity of man to man is not an Ethiopian popular tradition or value. It is not our heritage. It is the tradition of tyrants and dictators perfected by TPLF Inc. in other words; it is a governance and system’s issue.
Is our history as cruel as TPLF Inc. manifests it?
I should like to take the reader back to a snippet of history to strengthen my argument. TPLF Inc. rejects the evolution of the country it defines as a “prison of nations, nationalities and peoples,” for which it is the proclaimed liberator. These narrow-minded, clubby and family centered minority ethnic elite try to compel innocent and self-serving people alike to believe that our identity should be defined narrowly in tribal and linguistic terms. It uses emotions to drive its political and economic agenda on the rest of us. The reader knows that people enjoy different identities for different reasons. I will identify some of my own: am a professional in development, have a higher degree and was and or is a banker, professor, writer, belong to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, am a father, a husband and my linguistic affiliation is to Amharic and regional origin, Gondar. Of these, which one do you think is the identity that I cherish most and share or have in common with millions? It is this. I am an Ethiopian and have a great deal in common with Ethiopians than other people in the world. I presume most of us who hail from Ethiopia have numerous identities but believe in the notion that we are Ethiopians or people of Ethiopian origin. It is this core value that will save us.
The singular identity that binds us together regardless of different affiliations is that we belong to a country called Ethiopia. Hence, our commonality is expressed as Ethiopians and or as people of Ethiopian origin. TPLF Inc. wants us to sink to the bottom and think and organize ourselves as Amharic speakers or an Amhara ethnic group. I caution my compatriots that this is a tempting trap to which we should not sink. We need to be strategic and take the higher road of our historical and legitimate identity as Ethiopians. Let me elaborate within the context of today’s global community in which the TPLF Inc. formula is totally against the tide.
Who in the world would find it credible if I told (in official travels with the World Bank) a Chinese or a Brazilian or a Nigerian or a Norwegian at their respective airports that I am an Amharic speaking Gondarie? Wouldn’t the person find it incredible if I told him or her that I cannot live and or work in any part of Ethiopia because of my linguistic or ethnic affiliation? TPLF Inc. has reduced us to this low level. It is this emotionally driven and politically motivated identity that TPLF Inc. imposes on most of us. Some accept the new norm because of fear. Some accept it because of greed. Others accept it because of ignorance. Still others accept it because they believe in it. No matter the motive, TPLF Inc. wants us to believe that it is implementing Apartheid like formula on behalf of ‘oppressed nations, nationalities and people.’ The intent is to undermine Ethiopian unity and identity. The acid test of being an Ethiopian is the possibility of living and working in any part of Ethiopia. Otherwise, our commonality becomes meaningless regardless of the propaganda propagated by TPLF Inc. that we should all buy Renaissance Bonds and send our hard earned monies in support of a regime that does not allow us to fulfill our potential in our own country. Just think of this. The governing party that champions Ethiopian nationalism when it suits its interests still calls itself by its origin, Tigray People’s Liberation Front? Liberation from who is now a legitimate question. The reader knows the answer and the purpose.
The Greeks looked up to ancient Ethiopia and called it the common cradle of mankind. Among other things, they contended that ancient Egyptians “derived their civilization and religions from Ethiopia and Ethiopians. Ptolemaic (Greek) writers and philosophers felt and wrote that “Ethiopians were the first men that ever lived.” Martin Bernal’s “Black Athena: the Afro-Asiatic roots of classical civilization,” provides rich data and information on the richness of Ethiopian history; and, more important on the movement and on the interconnectedness of most Ethiopians for thousands of years. Interconnectedness of Ethiopians has now been validated through archaeological findings that confirm that Ethiopia is indeed the origin of humankind. In their highly acclaimed book, “Lucy (Dinknesh): The Beginnings of Humankind,” Donald Johansson and Maitland Edey, document the dramatic discovery of Lucy’s (Dinknesh’s) “completeness in the history of hominid fossil collection.” Dinknesh’s (Lucy’s) discovery did not happen by accident. It is a tribute to the farsightedness of Emperor Haile Selassie, who, in the 1950s–during a visit to Kenya–invited Western Anthropologists to explore fossils in Ethiopia and granted the requisite permits. The Omo valley expedition lasted from 1967 to 1977 and resulted in the finding of Dinknesh (Lucy). “There could no longer be any argument about that, or conjecture over whether a certain leg bone and a certain skull did or did not belong the same individual (Dinknesh). Here they were, together in one unbelievable skeleton.”
Dinknesh refers to a country known for thousands of years as Ethiopia, home of our common humanity as Ethiopians. If we are indeed the origin of mankind, possess an incontestable long history and have served as a home to different ethnic and religious groups for thousands of years, who is responsible for reducing us to identify one another as members of a tribe or a linguistic group rather than as Ethiopians? It is the EPLF, TPLF and other ethnic-based liberation fronts who wish us harm. It is also their foreign sponsors that continue to be inimical to a strong, unified and prosperous Ethiopia. As the champion of ethnic politics and business (the two are linked), TPLF Inc. is determined to obliterate this common humanity that the Ethiopian people have shared for thousands of years. This commonality has been strengthened generation after generation through marriages, economic and religious interactions, migration of people from South to North, from North to South, from East to West and from West to East and many in between. This is why I contend that Ethiopia and Ethiopians are the pace-setters of what is now commonly known as globalization. This phenomenon began as a result of human mobility from Ethiopia and the rest of Africa to the rest of the globe. Before Ethiopians moved across the globe, they spread within Ethiopia. Their linkages are thus incontestable.
Ethiopian identity and globalizing influence that TPLF Inc. wishes to undo by rewriting our entire history and reducing it to just 100 years to suit it, and by spreading the venom of ethnic revenge and hate are not confined to the story of Dinknesh, although hers is the foundation of our humanity. Herodotus, the Greek historian documented that Ethiopians reached out to the rest of the world through trade in spices and ivory far beyond Egypt and the Gulf. Ethiopians are said to have moved to and served in Persian armies. “The Eastern Ethiopians—for there were two sorts of Ethiopians in the army—served in the Indian army.” Here is the key though. “These were just like the Southern Ethiopians, except for their language and their hair; their hair is straight.” Threads that bind Ethiopians among one another through marriages, social and economic interactions, religious practices, localities and regions are rooted in our past. With its ups and downs and imperfections and manifestations of gross injustice, our past is the foundation of our present and future. In light of this, our diversity is nothing new. It has always been there. The trick is to harness it for the better.
Yet, our political leaders and institutions failed to use our diversity creatively and constructively in building an enduring, just and all inclusive society. Experts foreign and domestic recognize our history and diversity as sources of uniqueness and strength rather than as liabilities. Under TPLF Inc., both history and diversity are liabilities. These are used as political tools to create and deepen wedges to divide us, frighten us, exploit us and create animosities among us.
TPLF Inc. forces us to forget the assets and treasures that emanate from our roots and the uniqueness that our forefathers left for us. One additional example cements this point. In the 19th century, M. Le Jean, French, said this. “Ethiopia, even during its state of greatest decadence, offers to the unprejudiced traveler, the elements of an advanced social order. Feudality certainly exists there, but scarcely to a greater extent than in England…the administrative machinery is simple…is property well defined; individual rights are guaranteed by appeal to the Emperor; commerce is protected; and political vengeance and horrors of war in a great measure neutralized…” Can you say the same about the Meles Zenawi Government today? I cannot. The evidence is overwhelmingly oppressive and repressive. This is why revenge, fear and expulsion come naturally to the governing clique.
What can and should we do?
There is a great deal we can and should do. The starting point is for each of us and for our communities to believe and commit to preserving this ancient land and to frame an alternative that will accommodate the needs and interests of all its members. Our individual and collective responsibility is, first and foremost, to halt this frightening phenomenon of fear, ethnic divide and repression that–if not halted now–is likely to destroy all of us. We must determine that we do not wish to witness another Liberia, Rwanda or Somalia in Africa. TPLF Inc. and other surrogate ethnic-based parties use language and or other differences as a criterion to implant fear and revenge; to discriminate and expel as if we are not of the same diverse family; and to undo what has been built by all Ethiopians over thousands of years. Our ability and readiness to embrace one another and to stand for one another; and to reject ethnic divide is the starting point. We can do this wherever we are and in numerous ways.
This is the big picture I should like to implant in the reader’s mind. We need to reject the Apartheid like system that drives little children and mothers, old people and poor farmers from their homes and farms and from their neighbors. In part two of this commentary, I will provide a specific example of the horrors of ethnic cleansing and civil wars that entail irreparable damage regardless of the temporary strength of a ruling group.
4/4/2012
The second in this series will be posted next week
