Ethiopians Can Indeed Unite if they Choose, Six (a) of Six

Aklog Birara, PhD

The road ahead calls for sea changes in mindset

I should like to set the framework for the set of specific suggestions promised in Part Five (b) of Six. Unity does not occur by chance. It takes commitment, hard work, a sense of belonging; and cooperation from each of us. We cannot hate the ‘other’ and expect unity. The core principle in a multiethnic society is that one cannot possibly love one’s country without recognizing, accepting and welcoming the interests of others as part of the whole. The missing link in advancing national unity and cohesion is finding common ground and moving from rhetoric to action. What do I mean by that? I will be specific and give this a human dimension.

A child in the Afar, Somali or Gambella area should have the same rights and privileges of access to economic, social and political opportunities as a child in the so-called Tigray, Amhara or Oromia Region.

Good governance enables each to succeed. Discriminatory and tribal governance offers special privileges to its ethnic group disproportionately and steals from every Ethiopian child. It thus invites disaster for itself and its beneficiaries in the long-run. It cannot advance equity or unity. On the contrary, it makes everyone vulnerable and insecure. Ethiopians who wish to reverse this disaster that comes from political and economic capture by narrow ethnic-based elite no longer need additional material evidence.

These narrow elites have become enormously affluent by capturing the state and its institutions to advance and protect their interests. The governing party designs and shapes public policies, laws, rules and regulations to its narrow advantage. It selects who wins and who loses systematically. Parliament, political parties, the executive branch, security, police, defense, the judiciary and ministries all operate in tandem at the exclusion of the vast majority. It bars civil society from influencing policies and investments. For growth to be meaningful, it must be accompanied by public policies that reduce poverty, eliminate hunger, reduce inequality, raise individual incomes and raise individual capabilities to enhance wellbeing. What does the current system do?

The TPLF/EPRDF developmental state’s growth and eventual fair distribution of individual incomes and capabilities after–hundreds of thousands of children and females have perished; thousands have immigrated; and billions of American dollars stolen and taken out of the country illegally will not help the vast majority. By definition, it is discriminatory and inequitable.

The December 5, 2011 Financial Integrity and Economic Development press release says it all. “Illicit outflow (that I had highlighted in Waves last year,” from Ethiopia “nearly doubled in 2009 to US$3.26 billion” from 2008. This “African nation lost US$11.7 billion in illegal capital flight from 2000 to 2009” alone. How did this happen? It happened through “corruption, kickbacks, bribery and trade mispricing.” Remember that Ethiopia is one of the “hungriest, unhealthiest and un-freest” countries in the world, with GDP per capita of US$365. What is really lost? And why should we care?

What are lost are scarce resources that should go to education, health, sanitation, factories, agriculture, private sector development, infrastructure, youth employment and so on. The illicit outflow in 2009 exceeds all export earnings of US$2 billion and net Official Development Assistance of US$829 million combined. This is what led to the conclusion by the co-leader of the investigation, Sarah Freitas, that “The people of Ethiopia are being bled dry.” You dry resources; you deny opportunities to this and the coming generation of Ethiopians. The system is so corrupt that only direct participation and engagement by the vast majority of the Ethiopian people will reverse this morally bankrupt downward spiral for decades to come. Civic engagement is thus urgent and a matter of survival.

The country and its resources must be shared fairly, equitably and justly. This is why, for unity to take deep roots,” humanity is more powerful than ethnicity.” Unity without justice and equity is only a wish. Those of us in the Diaspora should ask simple questions and answer them ourselves. Why are Ethiopians forced to immigrate in droves? Why so much corruption and illicit outflow? There are two principal causes: poverty and repression.

In my view, the destiny of any Ethiopian should not be forced immigration because of lack of opportunities at home and because of government repression, period. No one should accept this verdict of the TPLF/EPRDF core as an acceptable and normal fate. The leadership and its supporters demean, brutalize and character assassinate each of us–even abroad–for a strategic reason: they are the lead beneficiaries of an oppressive system that steals billions. They like the way things are. Look at Burma and how long it took for the Burmese to gain a modicum of freedom that compelled the Obama administration to send Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Burma for the first time in half a century. It is freedom. It is common Burmese people and their political and civic leaders who did it; and no one else. Activists were jailed, murdered and forced to leave their homeland for decades.

By the same token, Ethiopians and people of Ethiopian origin must reject imprisonment and forced immigration as a fate and challenge the system that causes it. They must be bold enough to say that no child should go hungry and no one who advocates social justice should be arrested and jailed or forced to leave his/her country. Getting upset and reacting only when a relative is hungry or arrested does not advance unity. This is why empathy for and sustained support to those who fight for social justice and civil liberties, and for unity that embraces diversity in Ethiopia is critical. This is why it would make enormous sense to set aside differences and focus on commonalities. Those differences can be ironed out in public space once democratic change becomes real.

For the person who wrote a rejoinder to my series instead of the usual insult and innuendo that is typical of the TPLF and its kind (to which I am used), I say that Ethiopia must belong to all of Ethiopians. We must be courageous enough to say that plunder, illicit outflow, discrimination, corruption, and repression is not the way to advance national unity, sustainable and equitable development that will put a brake on forced immigration. Sustained, coordinated and unified peaceful resistance is the key. What do I suggest?

The best strategy to save this and the coming generation for every Ethiopian child in the country is to do the unthinkable: to accept one another; to listen to one another; to cooperate and collaborate with one another; to work with one another as citizens. How hard is this to do if we are open and willing? There is another reason why cooperation is vital. The strongest guarantee for peace, stability, security and unity for all ethnic and religious groups in Ethiopia– that has many traditional enemies that wish to keep it divided, poor and weak–is internal unity and sustainable and equitable development. Every Ethiopian child deserves a chance to succeed within his/her country. No government can afford to leave any child or group out, as is the case with the TPLF/EPRDF ethnic policy.

What can the Diaspora do?

I am fully aware that those of us within the opposition camp agree on one thing and one thing only. That is, we oppose the TPLF/EPRDF. This is not enough. Do we agree on the alternatives going forward except on generalities? I am not convinced we do. Those of us who lived through the Imperial and Socialist Military Dictatorship should know. We opposed; we helped depose. Where did we end up? Ethiopia lost its entire sea cost and became land-locked for the first time in its long history. This is the reason for my thesis that there is yet no shared understanding of the problem among opposition groups. This leads me directly to my first suggestion to the Diaspora community that, in large measure, enjoys freedom. This community has no excuse not to appreciate, promote and nurture life beyond ethnicity and parochialism. In other words, it has no reason not to cooperate across ethnic, religious, professional, gender and demographic lines. Yet, behaviors and actions counter cooperation and collaboration. Narrow mindedness reduces the effectiveness of the community in advancing social justice and freedom back home. It undermines social cohesion as Ethiopians, and deters human potential. It makes us less credible globally.

It goes without saying that as individuals and families, Ethiopians and people of Ethiopian origin are highly successful. In my own extended family, I counted six medical doctors and two PhDs in one event alone. We can build on our successes and advance social justice; and leave a legacy for this and the coming generation.

This success is not the same thing as community and country social capital formation and mindset. We are largely aliens to one another, if we diagnose how we relate to one another as people from different language and religious groups. We go to the extent of establishing different churches within the same religious group; and seem to be proud of it. We tend to exclude. This kind of division is exactly what the TPLF/EPRDF strategists want us to do. We do it for them for free, at a cost to the country. We play political theatrics on the country and its hungry and poor population and do not even acknowledge it.

Division that undermines cooperation is selfish. We can do the division debate once the country is free from repression and oppression. I am not convinced we can afford such luxury now. We need to pull together and advance the democratization cause first and provide sustained and coordinated support to those who struggle for peaceful democratic transformation within the country as the Burmese are doing. It goes without saying that support should be based on clarity of alternatives.

Within the above context, below are a set of twelve suggestions for all Ethiopians in general and political and civic groups in the Diaspora in particular. All are action and results oriented.

1. Let us stop demonizing and name-calling one another:

All opponents of the TPLF/EPRDF agree that its governance must go. I am not convinced that they recognize that their own divisions are agreeing are among the lead causes of why it survives. They spend as much time demonizing, demeaning and undermining one another as they do condemning the governing party. The first priority is therefore to look at one self in the mirror and stop insulting, undermining and badmouthing one another. I suggest strongly that we stop this disastrous behavior and practice now. It only helps the governing party. We should listen to one another; work with one another; and focus on the bigger picture of saving the country and supporting its diverse population. The struggle for Ethiopia’s future is not in the Diaspora. It is in Ethiopia. Singular focus on Ethiopia and all of the Ethiopian people strengthens mutual trust and confidence; and contributes to national unity.

There are numerous practical things activists and others in the Diaspora can do. Websites and radio stations can collaborate with one another; civic groups can pull their talent and financial resources and advance the common cause; political groups can set their feuds aside and move in the same direction, urging their supporters to do the same. The rest will follow; and those who struggle back home and the Ethiopian people will have confidence in the Diaspora. TPLF/EPRDF’s agents and paid detractors will have no place to go. They can no longer divide us. It is our division that offers them space to operate abroad as they do at home. Each of us can say no to badmouthing, character assassinations and undermining within the opposition camp if we are willing and daring. Say no to division now and you will see a dramatic shift both abroad and at home.

2. Let us leave a legacy and support the home front:

All Ethiopian activists who struggle for national unity of a diverse population, inclusive social justice and the rule of law–and suffer as a consequence–deserve our undivided attention, financial, moral, technical, diplomatic and intellectual support. If we stop demeaning one another and cooperate in these and other areas, we can leverage our resources and make a huge difference in advancing a peaceful democratic transition. Is it not conceivable for as few as 200,000 members of the Diaspora to contribute just one American dollar per month and channel it to those who advance the democratization process peacefully? It is then that they can influence vision and direction. This will help build capacity and capability.

3. Let us debunk ethnic antagonism:

Priority number one in my book is to debunk the TPLF/EPRDF alien philosophy and debilitating (incapacitating) strategy of irreconcilable differences among Ethiopia’s 80 nationality groups. Ethnic-based political formation, and organization works against national cohesion, optimal economic performance and sustainable and equitable development. Among other things, it deters capital and labor mobility and raises the cost of doing business. It nurtures elite based corruption and nepotism. It undermines national unity and keeps the country in constant suspense. It serves political elites at the cost of constituents. Ethnic-based thinking, political formation and economic mismanagement, civil conflict and wars are among the most devastating episodes in African history: Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo illustrate the human and economic costs. Yugoslavia fractured into tiny states.

In light of these and more, let us start with what each one of us can do; instead of blaming the regime for all our ills. That the regime is corrupt and repressive is well documented. It is what we each can do that is not. We each can take baby steps and reach-out to one another as Ethiopians and agree to disagree in a civil manner. We can stop demonizing other ethnic groups including Tigrean nationals. Why would we, for instance, suspect those who reject TPLF governance? There is evidence to suggest that some of us in the Diaspora who oppose the regime manifest such behaviors. We can stop the toxic like transmission of information to our children and urge them to accept one another as people of Ethiopian origin (humans and individual citizens). We can tell them that we speak different languages and dialects but have something much stronger in common: we hail from one country, Ethiopia, and we are all Ethiopians. We want to save Ethiopia. How hard is this to do?

The Ethiopian Diaspora is a model in some areas and a disaster in others. As individuals and families, we excel. We are almost all educated and owe this education and individual and family success to Ethiopian society, especially the poor. With a tiny exception, a majority of us in the Diaspora who enjoy freedom are cynical and are detached from the agonies of the people we left behind. Political actors are among the causes of this detachment and cynicism. Those who can afford to travel to the country as the ‘new tourists’ return and report the glitz they see as development. They do not engage themselves in a conversation with unemployed youth, beggars in the streets, the homeless next to the Sheraton, the farmer outside Addis Ababa whose land is too small to support a family, the small business person whose shop was just demolished to make room for a high rise owned by a member of the new elite. Some are not conscious of the fact that the mansion they build as a retirement home may contribute to escalating prices. Someone put this paradox of a Diaspora that is detached from the agonizing reality of the Ethiopian people not too long ago thus. “It is a great day in paradise in hell,” so to speak. All these and more are within our control to change. It takes will and determination. We can stop being part of the problem.

2. Let us embrace Ethiopia’s diversity as a national asset.

The premium I place on national unity of thinking as Ethiopians over ethnic-political and economic formation should not be interpreted as a proposal for homogeneity or the supremacy of one ethnic group over others. What I have in mind is the principle and value that my compatriot, Obang Metho lives by: “Humanity over ethnicity.” Ethiopia’s diversity is one of its greatest strengths. Those of us who believe in national unity must recognize, defend, preserve, strengthen and promote the institutionalization of genuine diversity of the unique cultural heritage, identity and interests of each and every nationality group in the country.

If we wish for the country to be strong and prosperous and for all Ethiopians to move out of hunger and poverty, we must safeguard the economic, cultural, social and political interests of all ethnic groups; and make a compelling case of the ultimate benefits of national cohesion over ethnic-fragmentation. Each of us can build on the positive traditions of the country’s diverse culture.

Here is the good news that debunks “irreconcilability of nationality groups.” Ordinary Ethiopians are not inimical to one another. If they were the country would have experienced social turmoil by now. Those who are hungry will go house to house and rob their neighbors. Those angry with repression would go out and kill or murder members of the governing party and ethnic elites who benefit from their misery. Those whose lands are given out to foreigners would go out and destroy large commercial farms and make the lives of the new landlords untenable and so on. Their refrain comes from a strong culture of peaceful coexistence; despite the seeds of animosity the regime tries to sow. I find no substantial evidence of major ethnic hatred or conflict among the country’s mosaic. It is ethnic elites who form ethnic based parties that cause mutual suspicion, mistrust and antagonism. It serves their narrow interests.

The governing party and allied ethnic-elites fuel ethnic and religious conflicts as part of its strategy of ‘divide and rule.’ Throughout Ethiopia’s long and proud history, different ethnic and religious groups have co-existed side by side peacefully for thousands of years; and will in the future. What they need is good, participatory and inclusive governance. Opposition parties, civic groups and individuals who love the country and its diverse population must resolve not to contribute or be party to ethnic-based political organization, leadership and attitudes. They can build on their commonalties.

The Diaspora can and should play a constructive role by promoting multiethnic and religious harmony. Weddings, holiday celebrations, graduation ceremonies, religious services and other social events can bridge relations; promote mutual confidence and trust; break taboos that come from our individual and group ignorance and so on. Those of us who live in the most diverse country (USA) on this planet but cannot even acknowledge and celebrate events with one another as Ethiopians and as people of Ethiopian origin. How difficult is it for us to sit together and to talk to one another in the same event whether we are Afar, Annuak, Somali, Oromo, Tigrean, Amhara or any other? I do not believe that Prime Minister Meles’ government can dictate to us how we behave toward one another; how we can embrace our diversity while contributing to our collective and individual identity as Ethiopians who speak different languages but belong to the same geopolitical space that is Ethiopia. It is our own choice to include or to exclude. Inclusion is fundamental to sustainable and equitable development. The Diaspora can and should take the higher road of social capital formation beyond ethnic, religious, gender, professional and demographic affiliation. I genuinely believe that such change in mindset will contribute to meaningful national unity; while retaining diversity. It will undermine the regime.

4. Let us be courageous enough to defend national unity.

National unity contributes to national cohesion and is the cornerstone for sustainable and equitable development. It is a matter of survival in a hostile world of competing national and group interests. In my view, national cohesion whose institutional foundation is human freedom and political pluralism is critical for durable peace, stability, sustainable and equitable development and prosperity. A new, promising, all inclusive, just and fair and forward looking society will open up enormous possibilities for everyone, especially for the country’s bulging young generation.

The party in power will not advance sustainable and equitable development. Its model works against national unity and cohesion. This is the reason why I suggest that only national leaning political and civic formation, organization and leadership would pose a challenge to the TPLF formulae of ethnic divide and conquer and establish the foundation for national unity that is based on genuine freedom for each member.

Those of us in the Diaspora who enjoy freedom can and should reject narrow self-interest, elite power grab, egos and hidden agendas wherever they emanate. Success can only come from cooperation and collaboration and not from brutal rivalry. There are no substitutes to cooperation across ethnic, religious, gender, demographic and professional lines. If one rejects fragmentation, it goes without saying that cooperation–while embracing Ethiopia’s diversity–is critical if we wish to preserve the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and long-term interests of the country and its population. If we all do this, Ethiopians will overcome poverty and hunger.

Here is the first step that we can take. Let us try to imagine that genuine cooperation and collaboration among political and civic groups and the rest will go a long way in understanding the problem we are trying to fix and in arriving at probable solutions. This will not happen if we do not trust one another; if we do not listen to one another; if we do not talk to one another as ‘adults’ with wisdom. Suppose we all agree that national unity is essential for sustainable and equitable development; and to change the current system. Suppose we endorse a vision of a democratic, just, fair, equitable and inclusive and rule of law based Ethiopia.

What would it take to get there? How do we get there without reaching out and talking to one another? The preoccupation with “Only my vision, my program and my party” will lead us nowhere. Independent thinkers and civil society groups and others in the Diaspora can and must insist that political and civic groups–at least in the Diaspora– must break this silo mentality of “my way or the highway” if they wish to be relevant to those who struggle daily in Ethiopia.

I have had the privilege of listening to and conversing with a new generation of Ethiopians, who possess courage and stamina; who believe in advancing the democratization process regardless of the human cost. It is this new generation that is willing to sacrifice; collaborate among one another; learn from and work with their elders that should give all of us hope. This leads me to the question of relevance opposition groups within the Diaspora.

I suggest that, if they wish to contribute as catalysts to the democratization process–that should be anchored within Ethiopia among Ethiopians–political and civic groups and individuals in the Diaspora should dare to be bold and advocate Ethiopian national unity and identity, always embracing diversity and the rights of all citizens. They should all be comfortable with the notion of one country with a diverse population; and one destiny. They must have the courage, wisdom, perseverance, patriotism and discipline to reject nationality or tribe based political formation, as Ghana has done in its constitution. They must have the courage to apply moral and material pressure on all political parties and civil society organizations such that they recognize the notion that the TPLF/EPRDF formula leads only to a dead end in which no one, except the governing party wins. Unity comes when the rights, social and economic interests of every citizen are recognized and protected under the law.

To be continued.

Why Ethiopians Must Unite, Part Five (a) of Five

Aklog Birara, PhD

“Give a man a fish and he will eat it for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a life time.”

Confucius

In the previous five commentaries, I provided compelling evidence that Ethiopia’s governance is repressive, exclusionary, discriminatory and essentially rent-seeking. The system reinforces itself and keeps most Ethiopians among the poorest people on the planet. Their country possesses natural endowments such as mighty rivers and streams, ample rainfall, irrigable and other arable lands and a huge hardworking population that only seeks opportunities to thrive and not just to survive.

The Chinese have lived up to their creeds, history and cultures and have transformed their national economy, especially agriculture, so that no Chinese national suffers from the humiliation of needing food to eat and a decent place to live. They have regained their national pride as people and gone further. Nothing is more dehumanizing and degrading to a person than the lack of food to eat. Lack of food has become so ingrained in our culture that we take hunger among millions as a natural phenomenon in this century. The minority-ethnic governing party explains it away in a variety of ways: population explosion, part of the process of rapid growth, no starvation but just hunger and so on. It justifies the unjustifiable. Access to adequate food is a fundamental human right. The vast majority of the Ethiopian people are deprived of this fundamental human right in a country that now feeds Indian and Middle Eastern consumers.

Ethiopia’s hunger and poverty statistics are staggering and defy the imagination. They illustrate disempowerment, marginalization and destitution at their worst. The heart-wrenching story of an estimated 100,000 hungry and homeless children in Addis Ababa is a disgrace not only for the governing party and to its apologists; but for all of us. It is an acid test of our collective and individual humanity as Ethiopians and persons of Ethiopian origin wherever we live. The life of a hungry child or mother or elderly person should inform the global community that poverty is deep and takes a human toll each and every day. As one of these children put it, a hungry child “cannot even talk to anyone” about his or her condition. It is not just shame that constrains normal conversation. The individual is almost emaciated to the point of being just a “skeleton.” An Ethiopian expert on the subject noted with sadness that the environment in the country’s capital of 10 million people where these children live “is like a zoo” where the strongest prey on the weakest. This is the reason why I call the Ethiopian developmental state’s claim of high growth sheer glitz that harbors misery. Glitz serves members of the governing elite and allies.

The BBC and others portrayed the ugly face of poverty with the intent of raising global and domestic awareness. While domestic and international Non-governmental and humanitarian agencies, spiritual leaders and individuals have responded with passion and dedication to improve the lives of these children and adults, it is clear that the problem is bigger and national. It requires the attention of a caring and empathetic government leadership that is bold enough to tackle the fundamental roots of poverty that lead children into this form of destitution. Most of these children come from rural families where conditions are as bad as in urban areas.

Documentary evidence shows that Addis Ababa is a world of two societies: the superrich elites who are cordoned off from the poor and live lavish lives on the back of the poor; and an estimated one million Ethiopians who are hungry and homeless. The rich and super rich do not see that they shame is theirs. The BBC documentary calls the environment in which the one million live and die “filthy, a no man’s land on the banks of Addis Ababa’s rivers.” These Ethiopians are at the bottom of humanity in the sixth dirtiest city in the world. They die from filth and water borne disease, with no end in sight. How do they survive while elites thrive?

Thousands of children, mothers and the elderly survive by accessing anything edible from trash dumps. An untold number die from disease in addition to hunger. This is the reason why the documentary noted that the eyes of hungry children “show emptiness” in the same way that victims of famine do. Hunger is hunger whether caused by drought and famine or by government neglect and poverty. The environment in which these children and the rest of the one million live resembles “A tale of two cities” that is ignored completely by those who control the instruments of power and command the national economy. It is not enough to report on the conditions of the 100,000 so called “street children” and the one million at the bottom of humanity, most of whom are “children, women and the elderly.” Far more important is to understand and diagnose the causes that drive them there in the first place. On this, we all have a moral obligation not just to talk but to act.

What is the first priority of any government?

I suggest that the first priority of any government is to create favorable economic, social and political conditions and to ensure that no citizen goes hungry. I find no substitute to this development paradigm that has transformed poor and famine stricken societies into prosperous ones. The one million in Addis Ababa and the millions across the country who either go hungry each day or rely on international emergency food aid to survive deserve to demand accountability from their government. Ethiopia has been and continues to be the world’s laboratory in poverty alleviation and hunger management, more so under the current regime than previous ones. This is so because, population increase aside (source of excuses for the regime and the donor community), the current government is the biggest beneficiary of humanitarian and development assistance in the country’s history. It has received tens of billions of dollars and is currently the largest aid recipient in Africa and among four or five in the world. If aid alone could help move a country from abject hunger and poverty, millions of Ethiopians would not go hungry; millions would not be homeless or live under conditions that defy human conscience; and hundreds of thousands would not die of malnutrition and hunger each year.

I opine that no Ethiopian should die of hunger and no Ethiopian child should grow stunted due to malnutrition. The country possesses rivers and can scale-up irrigated farming. It has ample arable lands for crop and animal farming. Almost 87 percent of the country’s population relies on farming and related agricultural activities to sustain their lives and to support millions. Only 17 percent of the country is urbanized. Dwindling supplies of farm land, soil erosion and environmental degradation and deforestation drive about 2 million Ethiopians from rural to urban areas with no prospect of finding alternative employment or shelter. By the government’s own estimation, 21 percent of Ethiopians are unemployed and some will never hold a job in their life time. Increasingly, elementary, high school and college graduates find it virtually impossible to find jobs. The limited jobs are handed to those who belong and are loyal to the governing party. The small middle class is getting poorer because of hyperinflation and low incomes. Given dismal prospects, Ethiopia’s youth and the educated immigrate to all corners of the world in search of opportunities. This is the reason why human capital is the largest Ethiopian export today.

The economy is unable to cope with the needs of the population, especially the employment requirements of the country’s growing youth. Ethiopia is still poor and its population hungry and unhealthy for a reason. Some experts argue that Ethiopia’s poverty can be explained by the persistence of subsistence agriculture and recurring drought. Subsistence agriculture may explain part of the problem. Other countries were in the same situation but transformed their “biblical” like mode of production to a high level of productivity and produced enough food and in some cases generated surplus for export in our lifetime. They did this through deliberate government policies and structural changes. Natural phenomenon did not deter them in achieving food-sufficiency and security for their citizens. The Indian government mobilized all of its financial, technical and intellectual resources; and used global aid effectively to initiate the “Green Revolution” and; made famine but all history. Among other changes, it boosted the capabilities of smallholder commercial farmers; empowered them to be owners of assets; and transformed their lives. They became owners, producers and consumers at the same time. Many were persuaded to produce foods rather than cash crops. The agriculture sector was increasingly monetized and produce was marketed domestically to meet demand.

Vietnam offers a most recent example in agriculture transformation under a socialist market economy. After the devastating war with the United States, the Vietnamese leadership focused singularly on the growth and transformation of the entire society for the better. My intent in this commentary is not so much to make laudatory remarks about the Vietnamese nationalist oriented developmental state but to identify and share features that reduce poverty and create a solid foundation for sustainable and equitable development for the entire population. I recall when I was with the World Bank the remarkable expansion and intensification of coffee production that took off in a short time in Vietnam and was surprised about the emphasis on cash rather than food crops, livestock and other consumables. The system was led by flexible and imaginative leadership that recognized domestic needs as well as the need to integrate the Vietnamese economy with a competitive global economy.

Former President Bill Clinton visited Vietnam in 1995 and opened economic and cultural relations between the former protagonists as the late President Nixon did with China, always keeping American interests in mind. The Vietnamese government knew that it needed to open-up its economy but with Vietnamese interests in mind. This is where I make a distinction between the TPLF core led ethnic oriented government that rules Ethiopia and that of Vietnam that is nationalist and keeps national interest always in mind. In Ethiopia, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is free to do what it wishes. In Vietnam, it must contribute to national or domestic capacity. Here is a concrete example of how FDI operates in Vietnam and boosts domestic capabilities while making profits. Subsequently, I will discuss how it operates in Ethiopia as I have done extensively in my newly released book, “The Great Land Giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirimit.”

The conglomerate, Cargill, is “today Vietnam’s largest domestic producer of livestock feed and a central player in Vietnam’s fast-moving shift from a state-controlled agricultural economy to one where small farmers (smallholders) are encouraged to work private plots for private gain.” These smallholders own the plots and receive consistent government support and encouragement to market their produce competitively, in some cases to Cargill. Here is what astounds me and will astound you. There is no substitute to domestic capacity building.

A few years ago, Vietnam was a net importer of rice, the staple crop or grain for the population as teff or other grain might be for Ethiopians. It imported one million tons of rice each year to feed its population. Last year, Ethiopia imported or received food aid at a cost of over US$1 billion to feed its population. In 2010, Vietnam became the second largest exporter or rice in the world. It met domestic demand by encouraging its own small and large farmers to produce; and it began to export. Here is what a Vietnamese official said that should give you food for thought. It is the “Same people, same land.” What changed then? It is not Saudi, Pakistani or Indian or other foreign investors that transformed Vietnamese agriculture. It is Vietnamese farmers. Where FDI is allowed, it is obliged to transfer know-how directly to Vietnamese farmers and others. Vietnamese producers are encouraged to produce and sell to domestic consumers and to multinationals such Cargill at competitive prices. FDI makes economic and social sense for any country when it strengthens domestic or national capabilities. Otherwise, it serves only political elites and foreign investors.

This is the essence of shared benefit from FDI that distinguishes the Ethiopian developmental state which does not encourage let alone insist that FDI must promote shared prosperity or is not welcome. Private and FDI partnership can work if government leadership is dedicated to citizens whether they are peasant and subsistence farmers or small entrepreneurs in small towns and large cities. This is why Vietnam is different, “The same people and the same land.” Why should Ethiopia and Ethiopian farmers be any different?

One distinguishing factor that makes FDI in Vietnam different from Ethiopia is transparency. In Vietnam, the population knows why Cargill is in the country and what it does. In Ethiopia, citizens do not have a clue why Saudi Star owns hundreds of thousands of ha of fertile farmlands and water basins and whose interests it serves. The people of Gambella do not know why Karuturi is granted lands the size of Luxemburg and what the value added is for the local population or for the country. Unlike Ethiopia where Saudi Star and Karuturi operate insulated from the rest of the community and the country and produce food and other produce for export while Ethiopians starve, Cargill does something entirely different. It “built a network of more than 100 demonstration farms” where local growers can learn. This is genuine technological and knowledge transfer to the population. Can you imagine Karuturi that is importing Indian farmers and workers from Punjab or Saudi Star doing the same in Ethiopia? They do not and they will not. The government does not force them to do so; there is nothing in the agreement that obliges them.

The Ethiopian government tells the world that FDI will build schools, hospitals, community centers and will stimulate agriculture-based factories. I have reviewed several agreements and find no evidence whatsoever that forces foreign investors to do so. They are free to produce what they can sell and sell where they could get the highest prices. They are free to use as much water as they want and clear as many forests and trees as they want. FDI in Ethiopia is therefore bad for the hungry and poor; bad for the economy and bad for the environment. It does not meet any of the criteria announced by the governing party. The typical Saudi Star and Karuturi commercial farm employs 0.005 persons per ha. Imagine what 300,000 ha given to Karuturi can do for the local population and for the country. The average farmer owns half ha of land and supports an average family of 6. Three hundred thousand ha can potentially support 1.8 million Ethiopians. The government accepts the fact that it has, so far granted 3 million ha to foreign investors. My own estimate is double this number. Three million ha will support 18 million Ethiopians.

Just imagine what would happen if the Ethiopian government provides 18 million Ethiopians with the requisite technical, professional and management support they need and empowers them to own their small plots or large farms; and or motive them to form producer cooperatives and produce and market foods for the domestic and surplus for the global market? Imagine too if the Ethiopian government encouraged public and FDI and private FDI joint ventures and scale-up sustainable commercial farming? What would happen? It will modernize and transform the rural economy in a short time; eliminate hunger altogether; reduce poverty; and create sustainable and equitable development. Ethiopian farmers will be in a position to sell to Karuturi and Saudi Star instead of the other way around.

Vietnam illustrates the fundamental principle that FDI can be persuaded to boost the capabilities of smallholders by making them partners instead of laborers. Smallholders become wealthier when they are in a position to own their plots and are able to sell their produce to Karuturi not when they forced to give up their land and work as day laborers for less than poverty wages. In Vietnam, a peasant farmer who now owns four acres of land is now in a position to send his daughters to school.

Capacity building is not the same as political education and loyalty building, a phenomenon endemic as an instrument of control. The Vietnamese government provides extensive quality extension programs to boost the capabilities of smallholders and others in the rural economy. It does not politicize the rural or urban economy to be dependent on the governing party or foreign aid. It is realistic enough to appreciate that FDI does good only if a government does good.

For this reason, the single most important variable that explains hunger and poverty is not nature or subsistence agriculture. It is unrepresentative, unaccountable, repressive, exclusionary and discriminatory governance. The minority-ethnic based single party state decided to maintain state (and increasingly, single party) ownership of natural resources, including waters, lands and mines for strategic reasons: command and control of the pillars of the economy.

The agriculture sector is a case in mind. A poor and vulnerable peasantry that depends on the dominant party to secure critical inputs such as better seeds, fertilizers, credits and lands is easier to control and subordinate than a land owning, independent, self-reliant and well-to-do smallholder community. This is the reason why the wise saying “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a life time” is so powerful and meaningful.

State (party) ownership of all urban and rural lands is a major hurdle not only for peasant farmers but also aspiring national entrepreneurs who wish to pursue private commercial farming, and for the Diaspora. The irony in government policy is the fact that the governing party has literally given up on smallholders and considers pastoralists and others as “primitive.” Instead of empowering them and providing them with all the requisite support, it invites and grants foreign investors from 36 countries and domestic allies millions of ha and water basins for periods ranging from 50 to 99 years. This amounts to effective transfer of natural resource assets from Ethiopians to foreigners. There is no evidence anywhere in the world that FDI would do the altruistic thing of providing good jobs and raising incomes or of enabling the hungry to eat or of paving the way for Ethiopia to be food secure or of safeguarding the environment for sustainability. In fact, these transfers undermine the very essence of citizenship and ownership. This is why the Guardian called these transfers the “Deal of the century.” Investors are free to produce and market all or a substantial portion to foreign consumers. This is what Karuturi of India; one of the new land lords is doing. This is what Saudi Star is doing.

The governing party has effectively privatized farmlands by selling or leasing them for decades at the lowest rents possible. It does this while denying Ethiopians the same privileges and rights. Its developmental argument that foreign investors in large-scale commercial agriculture will jump start the rural economy is a mirage; because the population is not involved in the growth and development process. It propagates the incredible notion that the country’s agriculture is growing at a rapid pace and has kept with population growth. In a research paper, “In Search of a Strategy: re-thinking agriculture-led growth in Ethiopia,” Dercon, Vargas and Zeitin of the World Bank inform us that “Some economists note that the country’s reported increase in cereal production during the past decade are not plausible unless Ethiopia has seen the “fastest green revolution in history.” I leave it to the reader to conclude the integrity of the regime. The Ethiopian government failed to pursue a balanced land reform program that will accelerate agricultural intensification and diversification while keeping the priority of feeding the hungry and food self-sufficiency in mind, as India, China, Vietnam and others have done and are doing. Commercial agriculture that is owned by Ethiopian entrepreneurs and by smallholders does not seem to be its priority. Its emphasis on control rather than empowerment leads to the high probability of a country where a person born poor will be condemned to die poor.

In conclusion, Ethiopia’s double digit growth has not materially changed the lives of the majority. The beneficiaries of growth are elites associated with the governing party. Uneven development and income inequality are more pronounced today than ever before in Ethiopian history. I showed in previous articles that party owned, endowed and favored domestic and foreign firms dominate the national economy and crowd-out and squeeze the tiny domestic private sector. Access to land, credit, permits, information and foreign exchange depends solely on loyalty to the governing party. The government uses development and humanitarian aid as an instrument to reward supporters and to punish opponents. This dysfunction in the management of the national economy and natural resources prompted even conservative and market oriented institutions such as the IMF to conclude recently that the “macroeconomic situation will remain under stress for the foreseeable future.” The World Bank, another donor that has lent billions of dollars, notes this. “Even if donor support is increased, using aid effectively will require Ethiopia to improve governance.” It is easy for the Fund and the Bank to state the obvious; but harder for them to impose conditions on the governing party. Only Ethiopians can do that.

Whether rural or urban, capitalization of assets cannot take national roots without radical reform. The entire system and its intricate linkages need to be overhauled for Ethiopia to alleviate hunger and poverty and to create a solid foundation for sustainable and equitable growth and development. In light of this, I suggest that the lead cause of hunger and poverty is poor, repressive and discriminatory socioeconomic and political governance. Voice, participation and empowerment offer people, including rural smallholders and others, the ability to hold their government officials at all levels accountable for results. Without freedom and participation, economic and social opportunity is closed.

In light of these glaring gaps in good governance, civic and political groups as well as individuals need to recognize that they cannot do anything as solo players. If they wish to be credible and make a difference, they must cooperate, collaborate and partner with one another today. The Ethiopian people will take us more seriously if and only if we strengthen our own capacity by leveraging our talents, monies and diplomatic skills together to serve a common good. My last article in this series will identify and present key areas of opportunity that I believe are practical and doable.
 

Aklog Birara, PhD

“Ethiopia’s long-awaited democracy has stalled over the last half decade…Today; there are fewer constraints on the EPRDF’s power than at any time in its 20 year rule.”

Leonardo Arriola, Countries at the Cross-roads, 2011

The above sums up the status of political and economic power in today’s Ethiopia. For long, experts presented convincing evidence linking political, economic, and social capture through a web of state, party and endowment enterprises as well as favored individuals strengthened by administrative and official (state corruption) in one of the least developed and poorest countries on the planet. Those who are disempowered and disenfranchised need no additional proof than those provided by ordinary Ethiopians who live with the system each day and by global indices each year for more than a decade. They endure hunger, hyperinflation, low incomes, unemployment, the indignity of dependency on international emergency food aid, immigration out of the country for lack of opportunities at home and so on. Here are indices that the top leaders of the TPLF/EPRDF cannot deny. The 2011 UN Human Development Index places Ethiopia 174th out of 184 countries. The Legatum Prosperity 2011 Index places Ethiopia at the bottom of five poorest countries in the world. The 2011 Global Hunger Index with IFPRI identifies Ethiopia as one of five countries with extremely alarming hunger indices. The 2011 Foreign Policy of Failed States Index places Ethiopia 20th of 60 countries in terms of de-legitimacy of state, gross human and economic rights violations and the like. Transparency International confirms that Ethiopia as one of the most corrupt among the least developed and poorest countries in the world.

As I suggested in my book, Waves last year, Global Financial Integrity (GFI) in Washington disclosed massive illicit outflow of funds in excess of US$11 billion that the UNDP validated this year. Corruption and illicit outflow of monies from one of the poorest, hungriest and aid dependent countries on this planet could not have taken place without official collusion and knowledge. Corruption and illicit outflow penalize the current and future generations. Ethiopia cannot afford theft amidst hunger, destitution and technological backwardness. Imagine that these stolen monies could build factories that would produce fertilizer, for instance, to boost smallholder agricultural productivity; textile and other industries that would employ hundreds of thousands of Ethiopian youth and put the economy on a sustainable basis. Corruption and illicit outflow is loss of precious financial capital the country needs.

Ordinary Ethiopians know that this massive illicit outflow of precious resources is a consequence of poor, authoritarian and unrepresentative governance. The minority ethnic elite that rules Ethiopia has been relentless and un-bashful in using state power to amass and to transfer resources within the country and to channel monies out of the country. These elites cannot deny the fact that Ethiopia lost US$ 16 million worth of gold bullion. Persons stole it from the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE) in 2008. Under a chapter entitled “Should the route to wealth creation and asset accumulation (at the national level) be state capture,” I documented the sudden formation of at least 58 Tigrean owned enterprises between the period 1991 and 1995. This was the height of TPLF initiated and sponsored privatization. Among the major beneficiaries it is appropriate to include TPLF endowment firms such as EFFORT, family owned enterprises such as Mesfin Engineering. These and numerous party owned, endowed and favored enterprises are now dominant players in national transport, cement, textile and pharmaceutical production, road and other public sector construction, export and domestic trade. Where did the initial capital come from? It cannot come from the sky.

Initial capital for these and similar enterprises that are now worth billions of Ethiopian Birr came from the proceeds of nationalized firms, the banking system, foreign aid and other transfers. The political culture of shifting national resources for private gain began in earnest during this formative period. Mega construction projects such as roads, schools, dams, telecommunications and other public projects served and still serve as conduits in amassing and shifting national resources for private gain. Among the inevitable consequences is uneven development and concentration of wealth and incomes into a few hands. I assert with full confidence that the primary sources of corruption, shift of monetary and other resources and illicit outflow are primarily administrative management and state (official) manipulation and control of the sources of wealth and asset creation. Merger of ethnicity, party and state reinforce resource capture, misallocation, diversion and capital flight.

Opponents of the governing party may think that the top leadership of the TPLF/EPRDF does not know the disastrous nature of its socioeconomic and political governance including corruption and illicit outflow of funds. Prime Minister Meles’s open dialogue with the business community last year says it all. Like the gold bullion stolen three years ago, 10,000 tons of coffee slated for export just disappeared without a trace under the watch of TPLF leadership. Galling is what the Prime Minister said to his audience. “We all have our hands in the disappearance of the coffee.” His regime failed to make anyone accountable for this multimillion US dollar theft. Why is that? Admission suggests that top party and government officials and allies benefit directly from this continued plunder of the national economy.

My sense is that the top leadership knows what it is doing and does it intentionally and strategically by focusing on a nation-wide network of beneficiaries, mostly ethnic elites at the top of the political and economic power pyramid. To make the system work effectively, the single minority ethnic party must provide financial and economic incentives in order to survive. Mobilization of millions, especially youth, and the spread of a network of spies across the country at all levels suggest a determination on the part of the governing elite to amass more and to prolong single party governance. This is the reason for expert assertions that in Ethiopia, political power is business; and the business of political power is to amass wealth and assets. One cannot sustain it without incentives. Granting jobs and other sources of income is part of the story. How else would one explain the phenomenon that policy and decision making, including resource allocation, is done by a small Tigrean elite at the center and the rest simply follow? How else would ethnic elites propagate the notion that ethnic-federalism has devolved policy and decision making to regions and localities when the center is the decisive force in the country? Who at the regional or local level has policy and decision making authority. Concrete evidence I would offer is the visible difference between the level of investment and growth of towns and cities in Tigray within a short time compared to towns and cities in other regions. Compare Harrar with Mekele and Jijiga with small towns in Tigray and assess. Another is the predominance of party owned, endowed and favored individuals all over the country. Ask yourself who really owns what and where and you will arrive at the same conclusion. Preponderance must be assessed in its totality.

It is not only the democratization process that “has stalled,” it is also the capacity of the national economy to produce and supply goods and services to the vast majority of the population. This condition emanates from closure of access to economic and social opportunities that would offer ordinary people to move from hunger, poverty and dependency to prosperity and the freedom this entails that have literally stopped. This is the essential message from the UN Human Development Index. Poverty and freedom have direct correlations. Without freedom, ordinary people cannot assert their rights. Discrimination and favoritism are taking huge tolls on the majority of people and regions. The fortunate thing is that the vast majority of the Ethiopian people are politically sophisticated enough to understand that these relationships between a system that differentiates and discriminates against them; and holds them back suggest the urgent need for a new, peaceful and democratic alternative that will empower them. Divided and weak, opposition groups cannot do much except shout. This is why the Ethiopian people are literally fed-up with opposition political and civic groups that make it a life time chore to quarrel among one another ad infinitum rather than respond to the need of the population by collaborating and by working together.

Only 21 percent of Ethiopia’s 90 million people have faith and confidence in the TPLF/EPRDF. What about the 80 percent? Who represents their urgent needs? If the 93 mostly ethnic-based political parties within and outside the country represented the hopes and aspirations of the Ethiopian people as a whole, things would have been different by now. I wonder if these ethnic-based political parties and their extended civic arms are, in content, any different from the ethnic-based TPLF and the largely ethic oriented umbrella organization that it dominates, the EPRDF? It is they who should answer the question; and it is time that well-meaning Ethiopians within and outside the country poses this question directly to them? It is for this reason that I suggest that civic movements in the Diaspora can no longer act as extensions of ethnic-based political parties. They need to distance themselves from ethnic-based political organization and behaviors that keep the Ethiopian people disempowered, marginalized, poor, dependent, disillusioned and increasingly dispossessed. Let us reflect on inequality and impact.

Anyone and everyone who has patience and determination to learn the reality on the ground within Ethiopia has ample opportunity to do so. The Ethiopian people see and witness the growing and alarming gap or chasm between the few rich and the vast majority poor whether it is Addis Ababa or Mekele. The physical manifestations are all over: condominiums, villas and palatial homes bestowed by the governing party. The difference in wealth and incomes concentration in a few individuals and families, and destitution among the vast majority in Mekele alone is telling about this growing gap. The same is true in other parts of the country.

Political power and the determination to maintain it by any means necessary is a function of this economic and natural resource capture within the 20 percent party membership and support base of the governing party. Within this cluster are huge differences in incomes, assets and power that will eventually surface and push those who are less well to do and vulnerable toward the 80 percent of the population that is not getting any benefit from the system. There is nothing permanent and durable about this discriminatory and exclusionary system that survives by ‘bribing’ innocent people, especially youth, and forcing them to be loyal in order to survive. The poor, youth and the small middle class are essentially stuck in a vicious cycle of coping with hyperinflation, hunger and unemployment because they do not have the political power to influence public policy and to claim resources and gain accesses to opportunities. Believe it or not, young women and men are postponing marriage because they cannot afford the marriage itself, and more important to have children. Family is the social foundation of Ethiopian society regardless of ethnic and religious affiliation. It is an Ethiopian and not an ethnic problem. These types of incidents suggest that ethnic-based political organization and leadership are, today, barriers to rapid, cohesive and national transformation to achieve peace, national reconciliation, justice, human and economic rights and democratic governance. These aspirations are indivisible.

The 93 largely ethnic based parties and the numerous civic groups that advocate democratic change have wasted and continue to waste their political and social capital without making any meaningful contribution in support of the Ethiopian people, especially activist youth within the country. It is they who demand a change in vision and political organization and leadership. My overall sense from the post 2005 general elections that the governing party refused to accept is this. Ethiopia’s’ diverse population accepts and shares the fundamental principle and value inherent in a common country—Ethiopia—and, demands fair, just and equitable access to opportunities to improve their own livelihoods and the status of their country. I accept this fundamental principle and believe that the Ethiopian people would share a common destiny.

The illusive search for unity

The failed state indicator that I identified earlier suggests enormous dangers for the independence, territorial integrity, stability, security unity within diversity, and prosperity of Ethiopia and its mosaic. No ethnic or religious group can insulate itself from this danger. My continued plea for unconditional unity is none other than the sheer survival of this country that offers enormous promise and possibilities for all Ethiopians. This survival cannot be guaranteed with 93 largely ethnic-based parties operating against one another, competing with one another and bowing to pressures from the governing party and persuaded by external forces that there is a short cut to justice, the rule of law and political pluralism. The foundation for durable peace, national reconciliation, security, stability prosperity is nothing less than the establishment and institutionalization of individual freedom, equality for all stakeholders, human and economic rights anchored in the rule of law. These noble objectives cannot be rooted without unity of purpose and action. Members and supporters of the governing party must feel secure that they have a future in a newly constituted democratic Ethiopia in which the supremacy, power and sovereignty of the electorate is respected. It is this foundation that will avert terrorism; and that will lead to prosperity for all Ethiopians.

The question that we each need to ask then is why opposition groups whether political or civic, whether within the country or abroad, failed over and over again to iron out minor differences and forge unity to advance the common interests of the Ethiopian people as a whole regardless of ethnic or religious affiliation? It is this void in political wisdom and courage that generates mistrust among the Ethiopian people. Critical in this void is lack of mutual trust and confidence among opponents of the regime and among one another and their inability to apply rigor, discipline and consistency in advancing and institutionalizing the interests of the Ethiopian people ahead of self and group interest. It is also their lack of genuine commitment in siding with the people who struggle within the country to unseat a repressive regime peacefully, systematically and in sustainable ways. Freedom, justice, human and economic rights, the rule of law and political pluralism cannot be advanced unless we deal squarely with the voids in trust, confidence, individual and organizational discipline and genuine commitment to what ultimately matter the most: the fate of Ethiopia and the interests of Ethiopia’s diverse population. Otherwise, we will sustain minority ethnic-based single party governance in perpetuity whether we admit it or not.

Back to material arguments that support the above thesis. Last week, I diagnosed Ethiopia’s political economy under the grip of minority-ethnic elite and showed the adverse, and in some areas, devastating impacts on the country’s future and on the wellbeing and incomes of its diverse population.

In this century more than in any other, transformation for the better requires that we equip ourselves with ample knowledge and credible data and information. The era of gossip filled (shimut) based and personalized accusations and mutual suspicions of one another will not work. Activists and ‘talking heads’ must grasp the compelling socioeconomic and political reasons of the whys any meaningful change to affect all of the Ethiopian people in real and positive ways; and the alternative the day after. This is why the social motives for change must be anchored in Ethiopia and solely with the Ethiopian people. The rest of us in the Diaspora can and should contribute consistently and in sustainable ways to advance the causes of political pluralism, freedom, the rule of law, justice and fairness and equitable access to opportunities. This can only be done if we believe in diversity and unity of one country and one society expressed as Ethiopia and Ethiopians. Understanding the adverse consequences of ethnic-based single party governance is therefore not enough. The alternative must be compelling.

One ought to ask the question of why political and civil opponents of the governing party within and outside the country continue to fail in establishing the requisite organizational and leadership response to the problem. I take opposition to the governing party as a given. This opposition and rejection of a system must not be perceived as identical to opposing persons or a specific nationality group.

However and irrespective of how often we convene and shout it is not a solution by and on itself. To call and urge opponents to unite while advancing hidden agendas is a recipe for disaster. For example, one does not typically see an appreciation of external forces that would love to see Ethiopia disintegrate into pieces. For this reason, I suggest that Ethiopia’s long-term interests and the real interests of the Ethiopian people should not, ever again, be subjected to negotiated settlements among political elites with aspirations to take political power at any cost, including the “Balkanization” of Ethiopia. The TPLF has done enough damage to the country and its people. One cannot afford to repeat the same mistake. Opponents have all the information they need to forge unity of purpose and action based on core principles presented earlier, and without preconditions today. The following analysis is intended to offer additional insight why unity now may have a chance in averting disaster later.

The 2011 UN Human Development Index tells us how severe and worrisome the society’s wellbeing and livelihood are; and the vulnerability this and future generations will face. The Legatum Prosperity Index shows that the TPLF/EPRDF led developmental state develops itself and its allies and rewards itself and its allies. It is not the same as Korea or Taiwan or Singapore of China or Vietnam. It suffocates the emergence of a dynamic and competitive domestic (national) entrepreneur class and private sector. The regulatory system is discriminatory, unfair and unjust. Its direct effect is that setting-up private enterprises, choice and mobility of labor and capital, fair and open competition, creativity and innovation are stifled. The economic consequence is low productivity, continued hyperinflation, unemployment, corruption and illicit outflow of resources including foreign exchange, and the erosion of values and morals that emphasize hard work, love of and dedication to country and unreserved service to Ethiopia’s diverse population. Ethnic-based political and socioeconomic organization and allocation of scarce resources reinforces this low productivity path. It reinforces market fragmentation. For this reason alone, it is inefficient and costly for the vast majority of the population. This is why the domestic market cannot expand and middle class is not growing. It is an economy for a few and by a few. It is a form of rent seeking crony capitalism camouflaged as a developmental state.

Take corruption as an example. Corruption, discrimination, favoritism and exclusion associated with administrative and state capture (power) allow manipulations and mismanagement of the entire economy. This has a crippling effect on employment, expanding income generating opportunities, self and societal confidence. Corruption is corrosive and a way of life. A determined and nationalist government would make it a priority to promulgate laws and regulations of zero tolerance at any and all levels. For this to happen, the top leadership and its close allies must be clean. This will be a tall order for the governing party which benefits hugely from state capture. Brazil is a good example of a country that suffered most from corruption, nepotism and discriminatory policies for decades. It is not entirely clean yet. But, there are changes similar to Rwanda which has a zero tolerance policy.

As a developmental state with market orientation, Brazil has managed to transform its society for the better. It is home to the largest population of African origin in the world. Its political leadership is nationalist enough and wise enough to recognize that discrimination and exclusion is costly to the entire society and to businesses. It initiated social (education and health) and economic programs (investments and employment in excluded areas) and created the foundation for social mobility. In the process, it began reducing poverty. More important, the poor and lower classes moved to middle class status in millions: 32 million of them over less than a decade. In 2003, Brazil’s middle class was 45 percent of the population, mostly of European origin. Today, it is more diverse and constitutes 66 percent of the population. Experts agree that it will rise to at least 70 percent by early 2012. The same phenomenon occurred in Malaysia, one of the most diverse countries in the world. Mobility raises domestic demand for locally produced goods and services. Concentration of wealth and assets, discrimination and exclusion do not. This is why I would argue that the current system is punitive. This is why it must change radically.

This leads me to assess the distinctions and linkages between growth and development.

Growth and development

Members of the Diaspora, who travel to and from Ethiopia, and especially those with physical assets such as villas, convey the impression that the country is growing at a rapid pace. The 2011 UN Human Development Index confirms what the Economist said in the summer of 2010 when it reported that “Ethiopia (better yet, Ethiopians) are not better off today than they were a quarter of a century ago.” These temporary visitors fail to see growth from the human side. That is to say, they take visible ‘physical glitz’ in the form of villas, apartments, skyscrapers, eating and dancing places, traffic jams and roads as primary indicators of development and change. As the cases mentioned illustrate, the single most important measurement of positive transformation associated with growth is substantial improvements in the lives of the vast majority of the population. Incomes must rise and benefit as many people as possible. As incomes rise, people buy more; and contribute to the larger economy. The argument of the developmental state that the pie should expand first before it spreads to a larger group of people is self-serving. The pie is being gorged by a small and largely minority ethnic elite at a level that is scandalous and immoral. Top officials of the governing party propagate the notion of trickledown economics in the US which resulted in the concentration of incomes and wealth in the one percent of the population. It is this concentration that triggered the anti-Wall Street movement and youth –led revolts that may reshape economic and social thinking across the globe.

In sum, improvements in the standards of living and wellbeing of ordinary Ethiopians measure whether or not massive investments and deficit financing lifted them from poverty and dependency to self-sufficiency and sustainability. It is this lift that gives ordinary people a sense of pride and self-confidence in them, in their government and its leaders and in state institutions. One measurement is food. Agriculture is fundamental to poverty reduction, sustainable and equitable transformation. People must eat before anything else. The glitz story of growth that shows that eating places in Addis Ababa and other urban areas buzz with activities masks the disconnect in growth between government assertions that there is no famine but only ‘hunger’ and its failure to meet the basic needs of the vast majority of the population. On the other side of this story of two societies is conspicuous consumption by those who can afford to enter eating places in the first place: the governing elite, foreigners and visitors from the Diaspora. The poor, the unemployed, those with low wages and the middle class can only gaze at glitz. One single enjera with wott costs 25 Birr. Believe it or not, the poor and youth buy what Ethiopians call a single gursha for one Birr or more. It is that bad. The Diaspora cannot afford to measure wellbeing and livelihood using its higher incomes and its acquired standards.

Government officials claim that agriculture has actually been growing at rates higher than population growth. Is this credible? It is not. Stephen Dercon, Ruth Vargas and Andrew Zeitin of the World Bank wrote a provocative research paper entitled “In Search of a Strategy: rethinking agriculture-led growth in Ethiopia.” They concluded that the 20 year old TPLF/EPRDF Agriculture Development-Led Industrialization (ADLI) has practically failed; and dispute official claims that agriculture has been growing at a rapid pace. In particular, they point out that cereal production has not kept-up with demand. “Some economists note that the country’s reported increases in cereal production during the past decade are not plausible unless Ethiopia has seen the fastest “green revolution” in history.” This is sheer fantasy as is the government’s contention of life transforming overall growth for the vast majority of the population. In fact, it is this failure and the political need to do something dramatic that forced the governing party to introduce what I call “water and arable land colonization by invitation.”

Ethiopia’s agriculture faces crisis in part because of state (increasingly single party) ownership of lands and other natural resources; and in part because of primitive farming and other land resource management practices. It is not my intent in this short paper to diagnose the policy and structural causes for low productivity, hunger and poverty. What I like to do here is show the systemic reasons as well as linkages to explain “why Ethiopia is still poor.” The country suffers from poor, discriminatory, exclusionary and non-participatory governance in all sectors of the economy.

In summary, the Ethiopian economy suffers from at least seven major hurdles:

a) Hyperinflation that is making poor people even poorer and is driving the middle class into poverty.

b) Legendry hunger, malnourishment and ill-health in urban and rural areas that prompted the 2010 Hunger Index group to conclude that “Ethiopia is one of the hungriest nations in the world” and compelled the UNDP 2011 Human Development Index to report that “Ethiopia’s HDI is 0.363 which gives the country a rank of 174th out of 187 countries with comparable data,” far below the African average.

I suggest again that access to adequate food is a fundamental human right. The first priority of the Ethiopian government is to satisfy the food and other basic needs of the population. Before they did anything else, successful economies transformed the policies and structures of their economies and overcame famine, hunger and malnourishment and averted the deaths of millions of their citizens. Transformation of the agriculture sector by boosting the capabilities of smallholders and others and by promoting Ethiopian owned commercial agriculture is the foundation for sustainable and equitable growth and development. Heavy and sustained investment in the sector, including investments in industries to produce fertilizer and other inputs is thus critical for Ethiopian society. The billions stolen from the poor should have been channeled to raise these capabilities. Who is accountable for this failure? It is the governing party.

c) High unemployment among youth estimated at between 30 to 40 percent. Millions of youth waste their productive lives without meaningful or no employment. The economic, social and psychological costs of this persistent problem are incalculable. This is why only 21 percent of the population is satisfied with the Ethiopian government’s capacity and commitment in addressing the formidable problems they face each day.

d) Glaring income inequality, with a concentration of wealth and income in a few hands. Today, only a handful of party-owned and endowed enterprises such as EFFORT and MIDROC, and a few privileged individuals with political connections command incomes and wealth beyond description. This is among the reasons why only four out of 10 Ethiopians are satisfied with their lives. The glitz economy has not benefitted them.

e) Pervasive corruption that infects the entire society and corrodes traditional national values such as honesty and integrity. Today, Ethiopian society suffers from widespread administrative (permits, licenses, credits, lands) and state capture corruption (abuse of aid resources, land leases, banking and financial instruments, flooding the economy with cheap money, large scale procurements and contracts). The regulatory framework favors state; party owned and endowed enterprises and foreign investors. It crowds out the domestic private sector. The cost of doing business is among the highest in the world. Freedom House and the Wall Street Journal identify the Ethiopian economy as one of the “un-freest.” This happens in a country where there is no rule of law.

f) Illicit outflow of foreign exchange is estimated at US$8.345 billion by UNDP and US$11 billion by Global Financial Integrity. Corruption and illicit outflow of massive amounts of monies from one of the two poorest countries in Africa contributes to persistent poverty. It is discriminatory, repressive, exclusionary and single party governance, systems and linkages that created and sustained corruption and illicit outflow of billions from one of the poorest countries in the world. The system condones and or ignores practices that make high officials in the government and outside; their families and friends super rich.

g) Single party, endowment and foreign dominance of the pillars of the economy are among the greatest risks facing Ethiopian society. This averts, and in fact suffocates opportunities for aspiring national entrepreneurs. It is among the reasons why the domestic market is constricted despite a large potential consumer and productive base. “In addition to its complete dominance of local and national government institutions, a number of large businesses are linked to the ruling party either directly or through family members.” Politics and economics are intertwined and operate in tandem. Human Rights Watch noted that “Party affiliated non-governmental organizations such as the Relief Society of Tigray (REST) are major channels of developing funding,” capturing national resources and investing them in favored firms, persons and regions. A leading expert on Ethiopian political economy, Terrence Lyons, suggests that “Membership in the party is essential for obtaining a civil service job and development assistance and key agricultural inputs are denied to members of the opposition.” In short, both the public and private sectors suffer from ethnic-based single party discrimination and exclusion; and from the preponderance of party owned, endowed and favored enterprises and persons, including foreign firms and individuals. This suggests that convergence of multiple economic, social and political crises is inevitable. Experts and institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF now suggest that “Beyond the question of rates of growth in the past (that are often doctored), the TPLF/EPRDF will face increased political tensions if economic stagnation or high levels of inflation (now among the world’s worst), constrict the regime’s resource base.” Hyperinflation in 2011 has been particularly severe for the urban poor and the middle class, youth and the unemployed; retirees and low wage civil servants.

Command of the pillars of the economy by party owned, endowed and favored enterprises and individuals have direct impact on the hurdles described above. In short, these critical hurdles represent the heart or center of what is wrong with the Ethiopian economy; and illustrate the lead reasons why Ethiopia is still poor.

I believe that opponents cherish the prospect of contributing to the Ethiopian people so that they do not have to live with the indignities of hunger, poverty and international emergency food aid forever. If that is the case, they have another social and human reason as Ethiopians for pursuing unity over unhealthy rivalry among themselves.

Article five of this series will give prominence to one of the largest natural resource transfers in history: “The Great Land Giveaway” or what is commonly known as land grab. I will highlight the major implications for the country, and especially for Ethiopia’s youthful population, and for the rural poor.