It is proper to congratulate President Obama on his re-election to a second term. He put up a masterful campaign to earn the votes of the majority of American voters. Mitt Romney also deserves commendation for a hard fought campaign. In his concession speech Romney was supremely gracious: “At a time like this we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work, and we citizens also have to rise to occasion.”
There has been a bit of finger-wagging, teeth-gnashing, eye-rolling and bellyaching among some Ethiopian Americans in the run up to the U.S. presidential election held last week. Some were angry at President Obama and actively campaigned in support of his opponent. They felt betrayed by the President’s inability or unwillingness to give effect to his lofty rhetoric on human rights in Africa and Ethiopia. Others were disappointed by what they believed to be active support for and aid to brutal African dictators. Many tried to be empathetic of the President’s difficult circumstances. He had to formulate American foreign policy to maximize achievement of American global national interests. Terrorism in the Horn of Africa was a critical issue for the U.S. and Obama had to necessarily subordinate human rights to global counter-terrorism issues.
I was quite disappointed by the President’s failure to implement even a rudimentary human rights agenda in Ethiopia and the rest of Africa. But I also understood that he had some fierce battles to fight domestically trying to shore up the American economy, pushing some basic social policies, fighting two wars and putting out brushfires in a conflict-ridden world. I gave the President credit for a major diplomatic achievement in the South Sudan referendum which led to the creation of Africa’s newest state. President Obama authorized the deployment of a small contingent of U.S. troops to capture or kill the bloodthirsty thug Joseph Kony and his criminal partners. He launched the kleptocracy project which I thought was a great idea. As I argued in my column “Africorruption, Inc.“, the “business of African governments in the main is corruption. The majority of African ‘leaders’ seize political power to operate sophisticated criminal enterprises to loot their national treasuries and resources.” I felt the kleptocracy project could effectively prevent illicit money transfer from Ethiopia to the U.S. According to Global Financial Integrity, Ethiopia lost US$11.7 billion to illicit financial outflows between 2000 and 2009. I gave the president high marks for working through the U.N. to pass U.N. Resolution 1973 which endorsed the effort to protect Libyan civilians and his use of NATO partners to shoulder much of the military responsibility to rid Gadhafi from Libya after 41 years of brutal dictatorship. More broadly, I give him credit for closing secret C.I.A. prisons, ending extraordinary renditions and enhanced interrogations (torture), trying to close down the detention camp in Guantánamo Bay and move trials from military tribunals into civilian courts and abide by international laws of human rights. No doubt, he has much more to do in the area of global human rights.
I believe he could have done a lot more in Africa and Ethiopia to promote human rights, but did not. I have written numerous columns over the past couple of years that have been very critical of U.S. policy. In the “The Moral Hazard of U.S. Policy in Africa“, I argued that neither the U.S. nor the West could afford to sacrifice democracy and human rights in Africa to curry favor with incorrigible African dictators whose sole interest is in clinging to power to enrich themselves and their cronies. In my column, “Thugtatorship: The Highest Stage of African Dictatorship”, I argued Africa’s thugtatorships have longstanding and profitable partnerships with the West. Through aid and trade, the West and particularly the U.S. has enabled these thugocracies to flourish in Africa. A few months ago, in my column “Ethiopia in Bond Aid,” I argued that international aid is negatively affecting Africa’s development. “Before much of Africa became ‘independent’ in the 1960s, Africans were held under the yoke of “colonial bondage”. ‘International aid’ addiction has transformed Africa’s colonial bondage into neo-colonial bondaid.” In another recent column “Ethiopia: Food for Famine and Thought!”, I criticized the G8 Food Security Summit held in Washington, D.C. this past June as a reinvention of the old colonialism: “The G-8’s ‘New Alliance’ smacks of the old Scramble for Africa. The G-8 wants to liberate Africa from hunger, famine and starvation by facilitating the handover of millions of hectares of Africa’s best land to global multinationals…”
But despite disappointments, misgivings, apprehensions and concern over the Obama Administration’s failure to actively promote human rights in Ethiopia and Africa, I have supported President Obama. For all his faults, he has been an inspiring leader to me. Like many Americans, I was awed by state Senator Obama’s keynote speech at the Democratic national Convention in 2004 when he unapologetically declared: “There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America. There is not a liberal America. There is not a conservative America. There is a United States of America.” These words continue to inspire me to dream of the day when young Ethiopian men and women shall come together from all parts of the country and shout out and sing the words, “There is not an Oromo Ethiopia, Amhara Ethiopia, Tigrai Ethiopia, Gurage Ethiopia, Ogadeni Ethiopia, Anuak Ethiopia… There is only a united Ethiopia where ‘justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.’”
During the advocacy effort to pass H.R. 2003 (“Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007”), we had opportunities to meet with U.S. Senator Obama’s staffers in his district office and on the Hill on a number of occasions. Our meetings were encouraging and there was little doubt that Senator Obama would support H.R. 2003 if the bill had made it to the Senate floor after it passed the House of Representatives in October 2007. In February 2008, our advocacy group, the Coalition for H.R. 2003, formally endorsed Barack Obama’s presidential bid. We declared that “it is time for the U.S. to abandon its support of African dictators, and pursue policies that uplift and advance the people of Africa. It is time for an American president who will stand up for human rights in Ethiopia, and demand of those who violate human rights to stand down!”
Over the last four years, our enthusiasm and support for the President flagged and waned significantly as Africa remained on the fringes of U.S. foreign policy agenda. During the recent presidential “foreign policy debate” Africa was barely mentioned. There was only passing reference to Al Qaeda’s presence in Mali, the third poorest country on the planet. (According to the Economist Magazine, Ethiopia is the poorest country on the planet.) But not to make excuses, the President had a lot on his foreign policy plate. The Arab Spring was spreading like wildfire sweeping out longtime dictators. Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East remains a critical issue. The global economic meltdown threatens certain European countries with total economic collapse.
Hope Springs Eternal in Ethiopia and the Rest of Africa
I am hopeful that human rights in Africa will occupy a prominent role in the foreign policy agenda of President Obama’s second term. An indication of such a trend may be evident in the announcement two days after President Obama’s reelection that he will be visiting Myanmar (Burma) in a couple of weeks. After five decades of ruthless military dictatorship, Myanmar is gradually transforming itself into a democracy. President Thein Sein has released political prisoners, lifted media bans and implemented economic and political reforms. Amazingly, pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is the acknowledged opposition leader in parliament after two decades of house arrest. Last week, a State Department spokesperson underscored the need for human rights improvement in Ethiopia according to a Voice of America report. There are favorable signs the Obama Administration will pursue a more aggressive human rights agenda in Africa.
President Obama Would Like to Leave a Legacy of Democracy and Freedom in Africa
Historically, second-term presidents become increasingly focused on foreign policy. They also become acutely aware of the legacy they would like to leave after they complete their second term. I believe President Obama would like to leave a memorable and monumental legacy of human rights in Africa. I cannot believe that he is so indifferent to Africa that he would leave it in worse condition than he found it. When he became president, much of Africa was dominated by dictators who shot their way to power or rigged elections to get into power. In much of Africa today, the absence of the rule of law is shocking to the conscience. Massive human rights violations are commonplace. In Ethiopia, journalists, dissidents, opposition leaders, peaceful demonstrators, civil society and human rights advocates are jailed, harassed and persecuted every day.
Needless to say, for President Obama Africa is the land of his father even though he was born and raised in America. I believe President Obama, like most immigrant Ethiopian Americans, would like to help the continent not only escape poverty but also achieve better governance and greater respect for the rule of law. He would like to see Africa having free and fair elections and improved human rights conditions. In his book Dreams From My Father, he wrote, “… It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela. And if later I saw that the black men I knew – Frank or Ray or Will or Rafiq – fell short of such lofty standards; if I had learned to respect these men for the struggles they went through, recognizing them as my own – my father’s voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people’s struggle. Wake up, black man!” A man whose life’s inspiration comes from Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, W.E. B. DuBois and Nelson Mandela cannot ignore or remain indifferent to the suffering of African peoples. I think he will help Africans in their struggle for dignity in his second term.
U.S. Human Rights Policy in the Post Arab Spring Period
In the post-Arab Spring world, the U.S. has come to realize that its formula of subordinating its human rights policy to security and economic interests in dealing with dictators needs reexamination, recalibration and reformulation. By relying on dictators to maintain domestic and regional stability, the U.S. has historically ignored and remained indifferent to the needs, aspirations and suffering of the Arab masses. When the Arab masses exploded in anger, the U.S. was perplexed and did not know what to do.
The U.S. has been timid in raising human rights issues with Africa’s dictators fearing lack of cooperation in the war on terror and other strategic objectives. The U.S. effort has been limited to issuing empty verbal exhortations and practicing “quite diplomacy” which has produced very little to advance an American human rights agenda. I believe the President understands that America’s long term global interests cannot be advanced or achieved merely through moral exhortations and condemnations. We know that the President’s style is to exhaust diplomacy before taking more drastic measures. As he explained, “The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach–and condemnation without discussion–can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.” For the past four years, few African dictators have walked through the door that leads to democracy and human rights. Many of them have kicked it shut. I am hopeful that in the second term, the President will go beyond “exhortation” to concrete action in dealing with African dictators since he holds their aid purse strings.
President Obama is Not Just a President But Also a Constitutional Lawyer and…
I believe President Obama’s experiences before he became a national leader continue to have great influence on his thinking and actions. As a constitutional and civil rights lawyer, I believe he has an innate sense of moral distaste and repugnance for injustice and arbitrariness. President Obama cut his teeth as a lawyer representing individuals in civil and voting rights litigation and wrongful terminations in employment though he could have joined any one of the most prestigious law firms in America. He spent his early years doing grassroots organizing and advocacy working with churches and community groups to help the poor and disadvantaged. To be sure, he has spent more time doing community work than serving on the national political stage. As a constitutional and civil rights lawyer, law professor and advocate for the poor, I believe President Obama understands the immense importance of the rule of law, protection of civil liberties and human rights and the need to restrain those who abuse their powers and sneer at the rule of law. I think the community activist side of him will be more visible in his second term.
Ask Not What Obama Can Do for Ethiopia, But…
Some of us make the mistake of asking what President Obama can do for us. The right question is what we can do for Ethiopia by organizing, mobilizing and lobbying the Obama Administration to establish and pursue a firm human rights agenda. In his victory speech on election night President Obama said, “The role of citizen in our democracy does not end with your vote. America’s never been about what can be done for us. It’s about what can be done by us together through the hard and frustrating, but necessary work of self-government.” Governor Romney in his concession speech said, “At a time like this we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work, and we citizens also have to rise to occasion.” These are the principles Ethiopian Americans, and others in the Diaspora and at home, should embrace and practice. It should be time for a fresh start. We should learn from past mistakes and begin to organize and reach out in earnest to the Obama Administration. Many groups have had success with the Administration in advancing their causes including Arab Americans, Iranian Americans, Armenian Americans, Macedonian Americans, Serbian Americans and many others. As human rights activists and advocates, we should demand engagement by senior U.S. officials and diplomats on human rights issues.
The U.S. knows how to apply pressure on dictators who have been “friends”. In the 1980s, the U.S. played a central role in the transition of the Philippines, Chile, Taiwan, and South Korea from dictatorship to democracy. The United States also kept human rights agenda front and center when it conducted negotiations with the Soviet Union and other Soviet-bloc countries. The question is not whether the U.S. can advance a vigorous human rights agenda in Ethiopia or Africa, but if it has the political will to do so. I am hopeful that will will manifest itself in President Obama’s second term.
Amharic translations of recent commentaries by the author may be found at:
Did President Obama deliver on the promises he made for Africa to promote good governance, democracy and human rights? Did he deliver on human rights in Ethiopia? No. Are Ethiopian Americans disappointed over the unfulfilled promises President Obama made in Accra, Ghana in 2009 and his Administration’s support for a dictatorship in Ethiopia? Yes. We remember when President Obama talked about the need to develop robust democratic institutions, uphold the rule of law and the necessity of maintaining open political space and protecting human rights in Africa. We all remember what he said: “Africa does not need strong men but strong institutions.” “Development depends on good governance.” “No nation will create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy.” Was he just saying these words or did he truly believe them?
I also argued that in all fairness there is plenty of blame to go around. I cautioned those of us who are quick to point an accusatory index finger at President Obama for what he has not done in Ethiopia and Africa to beware that three fingers are pointing directly at them.
Truth be told, what the President has done or not done to promote good governance, democracy and human rights in Ethiopia is no different than what we, the vast majority of Ethiopian Americans, have done or not done to promote the same values in Ethiopia. That is the painful truth we must face. The President’s actions or lack of actions mirror our own. Just like the President, we profess our belief in democracy, good governance and human rights in Ethiopia and elsewhere in Africa. But we have also failed to put our values in action. President Obama was constrained in his actions by factors of U.S. national security and national interest. We were constrained by factors of personal interest and personal security…
But there are other hard questions we should ask ourselves: What did we do to bring pressure on the Obama Administration to promote human rights, good governance and democracy in Africa over the past 4 years? Did we organize to have our voices heard by the Administration? Did we exercise our constitutional rights to hold the Administration accountable?
But I also gave President Obama high marks for many accomplishments over the past four years. Under his watch, over 5 million private sector jobs were created. The U.S. auto industry came roaring back even though some had urged, “Let Detroit go bankrupt!”. President Obama put his presidency on the line by spending all of his political capital in enacting the Affordable Health Care Act which offered health insurance to some 40 million Americans who had none. He established a Consumer Financial and Protection Bureau to oversee crooked financial institutions who had been ripping off consumers for years. He signed a law that secured the rights of women to equal pay for equal work. President Obama ended the war in Iraq. He has promised to end the war in Afghanistan in 2014. He has pursued Al Qaeda relentlessly and ended the criminal career of the most infamous terrorist in a risky military operation, which had it failed, could have doomed his presidency. Last week, Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey described President Obama’s response to “Hurricane Sandy’s” devastation of the east coast of the United States as “outstanding” and his Administration’s handling of the relief operation as “excellent”.
President Obama has proven himself to be a resolute commander in chief and a president open, ready, willing and able to engage in bipartisanship, collaboration and cooperation to get the nation’s business done. But the road he has travelled over the past 4 years has been a hard one. He has faced stiff opposition at every turn. He has been obstructed, blocked, thwarted, vilified and demonized by those who loath him personally than disagree with his policies. The top leader of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate, Mitch McConnell, vowed, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. That’s my single most important political goal, along with every active Republican in the country.” President Obama knows his work is not finished and he has a lot more to do in improving the economy. He needs another term to complete his work. He needs the support and vote of every Ethiopian American.
It is Really About the Right to Vote in America
I write this column not so much to reiterate my support for President Obama but to underscore the enormous importance of the right to vote in America. Perhaps no one knew the importance of the right to vote than the hundreds of our brothers and sisters who were mowed down in cold blood by by troops loyal to the ruling regime in Ethiopia in 2005, and the tens of thousands who were imprisoned for peacefully protesting their stolen votes. While I would urge Ethiopian Americans to vote for President Obama, I believe it is far more important for them to exercise their right to vote for the candidate and issues of their choice.
Those who are not students of American politics and constitutional law may not be aware of the history of struggle and the untold sacrifices and and the high price paid in lost lives to secure, protect and defend this precious of all rights. When the American republic was forged in 1787, only white male property owners had the right to vote. When the first census was taken in 1790, there were 3,893,635 persons in the thirteen colonies and the four other districts and territories which later became states. There were 807,094 free white males, of which 10-16 percent met the property requirement to have the right to vote! The 1,541,263 free white females did not have the right to vote. The 694,280 “persons” (slaves) did not have the right to vote. The 791,850 free white males did not have the right to vote.
The property requirement for the right to vote was gradually dropped; and by 1850 the vast majority of white males could vote without significant obstacles. But some states sought to exclude and suppress the voting rights of disfavored groups. Between 1855-57, Connecticut and Massachusetts adopted a “literacy test” (a test of one’s ability to read and write) to discriminate against Irish-Catholic immigrants. After the American Civil War ended in 1865 and slavery was abolished by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Congressional enactment of various civil rights laws, the former slaves formally gained the right to vote with the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870. “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
But the states were not prepared to allow the former slaves to become their political equals by exercising their ultimate citizenship right. Beginning with Florida in 1889, ten states in southern United States adopted poll taxes (in order to vote, a citizen has to pay a poll tax) to keep African Americans from voting. Large numbers of impoverished African Americans could not afford to pay the poll taxes and were disenfran- chised by this requirement. For decades, many southern states devised various means to keep African Americans from voting. Some used “white primaries” (political parties excluding African Americans from party membership and closing the primaries to everyone except party members). Others complicated the voter registration process by requiring frequent re-registration, long terms of residence in a district before voting, registration at inconvenient times such the planting season, providing inaccurate and misleading information about voting dates, etc. Still others used “gerrymandering” (creating electoral districts by manipulating geographic boundaries to dilute the electoral strength of minority groups and create protected districts) to deny African Americans representatives of their own choosing. Electoral fraud was rampant in the states which sought to restrict African American electoral participation. Ballot box stuffing, throwing out votes for disfavored candidates, deliberately miscounting votes, changing votes from one candidate to another were common. Violence, threats and intimidation of African Americans were also commonly used to keep African Americans from voting despite federal laws against such criminal acts.
Women were not considered worthy of voting rights until 1920 when the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified guaranteeing women’s suffrage. “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” Native Americans did not acquire full citizenship rights including the right to vote in federal elections until Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act in 1924.
Though many of the laws and practices aimed at preventing African Americans from voting were invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1950s and 1960s, it was the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (and its expansion in 1970, 1975, and 1982) that enabled African Americans to finally and effectively exercise their right to vote. This law bans racial discrimination in voting and outlaws barriers to voting such as literacy tests. Most importantly, it requires certain state and local governments to “preclear” proposed changes in voting or election procedures with either the U.S. Department of Justice or the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It also requires that certain state and local jurisdictions provide assistance in languages other than English to voters who are not literate or fluent in English, in addition to granting authority to the U.S. Attorney General to send federal examiners and observers to monitor elections.
Deja Vu 2012: Voter Suppression or Protection of Electoral Integrity?
In the last few years, we have seen a spate of new state laws proposed and enacted to presumably strengthen the integrity of the electoral system. Some of these laws require “photo IDs” and proof of citizenship to register or vote. Other state laws aim to restrict voter registration drives, abolish election day registration, reduce the number of early voting periods and limit absentee voting opportunities. Still other states have sought to make it more difficult for people who move to stay registered and vote and prevent citizens with past criminal convictions from voting. Anonymous private groups have put up billboards and sent out flyers to intimidate, confuse and mislead potential voters, particularly those in the minority communities.
These laws appear to be benign and reasonable on their faces. There is little that is objectionable about requiring some form of official photo identification at the polls. It is customary in many countries to show identification for voters to cast a ballot. But despite lofty claims of protecting the integrity and prevention of fraud, the real reason behind these laws appears to be voter suppression. In a recent court case in Pennsylvania, the State of Pennsylvania admitted in a court stipulation that in passing its voter ID law, the state had no evidence of voter fraud. None! Indiana passed a voter ID law in 2005 even though there was no evidence of a documented or prosecuted case of voter impersonation fraud. Five voter impersonation complaints were filed in Texas in 2008 and 2010 out of some 13 million ballots cast. All of these laws are sponsored and were enacted by Republican state legislators and governors. In five states, Democratic governors vetoed ID laws passed by Republican legislatures. Such laws raise eyebrows in light of the ferocious declaration of the Republican minority leader of the U.S. Senate Mitch McConnell, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. That’s my single most important political goal, along with every active Republican in the country.”
Truth be told, these photo ID laws seem to be reminiscent of the old practices of voter suppression using literacy tests, poll taxes and the like. With new waves of immigration and diversity in the the electoral population, some may find the demographic trends alarming and threatening to their political power and dominance. Millions are expected to be disproportionately affected by these laws including African Americans, Hispanic and other ethnic voters, the young and elderly and mostly democratic voters. It is not clear how these laws will affect the 2012 presidential elections which are said to be too close to call. But it is clear that there is a looming, imminetn and ominous threat to the right to vote which was gained through two centuries of blood, sweat and tears of African Americans, women and others.
EVERY VOTE REALLY COUNTS!
In the 2000 Presidential Election, Al Gore won the popular vote by 50,999,897 to Bush’s 50,456,002 (or by 543,895 [0.5%]). Bush won Florida 2,912,790 to Gore’s 2,912,253 (by 537 votes!) and got that state’s 25 electoral votes winning the Electoral College by 271-266. It is not difficult to imagine that in a close election such as the current presidential election, every single, solitary vote really counts.
In Northern Virginia, Florida, Ohio and Colorado, there are tens of thousands of Ethiopian Americans eligible to vote. Though I would be very pleased and appreciative if they voted for President Obama, I would be equally happy if they exercised their right to vote for whomever they choose. If the idea of one party winning 99.6 percent of the votes in Ethiopia offends any Ethiopian American, s/he should make sure his/her one vote counts in America!
Amharic translations of recent commentaries by the author may be found at: http://www.ecadforum.com/Amharic/archives/category/al-mariam-amharic and http://ethioforum.org/?cat=24
Previous commentaries by the author are available at: http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/ and www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/
There are few things more difficult or dangerous than speaking truth to abusers of power. But for Reeyot Alemu, the 31 year-old young Ethiopian heroine of press freedom, no price is high enough to keep her from being “the voice of the voiceless”. She will speak truth to power even when she is muzzled and gagged and in prison: “I knew that I would pay the price for my courage and I was ready to accept that price,” said Reeyot in her moving handwritten letter covertly taken out of prison.
“Courage is the most important of all the virtues, because without courage you can’t practice any other virtue consistently,” said Maya Angelou, the great African American civil rights advocate and literary figure. Last week, the International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF) awarded Reeyot Alemu its prestigious “2012 Courage in Journalism Award”. Last May, I wrote a column on Reeyot (Young Heroine of Ethiopian Press Freedom), expressing my outrage over the “legal” process used to railroad her to prison:
The so-called evidence of “conspiracy” against Reeyot in kangaroo court consisted of intercepted emails and wiretapped telephone conversations she had about peaceful protests and change with other journalists. Reeyot’s articles in Feteh and other publications on the Ethiopian Review website on the activities of opposition groups were also introduced as evidence. Reeyot and Woubshet Taye [editor of Awramba Times] had no access to legal counsel during their three months in pretrial detention. Both were denied counsel during interrogations. The kangaroo court refused to investigate their allegations of torture, mistreatment and denial of medical care in detention…
Today, I am ecstatically proud to see Reeyot as a recipient of the IWMF award for 2012. When Serkalem Fasil won the same award in 2007, I was overjoyed. What can be more awesome than having young imprisoned Ethiopian journalists standing up for the truth and against tyranny and lies being recognized, honored and celebrated for their heroic efforts by the world?
But what is the “courage” for which Reeyot and Serkalem were honored? Courage comes in many forms. The soldier who fights on the battlefield despite immediate danger to his life is driven by courage. A young woman who stands up to tyranny and defiantly declares, “I will be a voice for the voiceless and am prepared to pay the price”, is equally driven by courage. But what is courage itself? The great philosophers tell us that courage is a virtue that is manifested in the endurance of our body, mind and spirit. It enables us to “stand immovable in the midst of dangers”. Others say courage is found between cowardice and rashness. Perhaps courage is a vessel that contains other virtues including perseverance, tenacity, determination, patience, compassion and moral conviction in one’s beliefs. Those who practice courage in their lives, like Reeyot and others, do so despite personal sorrow and hardship, popular opposition, condemnation or commendation or official persecution and prosecution. We should be proud to have young women like Reeyot and Serkalem and young men like Eskinder Nega and Woubshet Taye and so many other jailed and exiled Ethiopian journalists who exemplify the highest standards of courage as human beings, citizens and journalists.
Reeyot’s handwritten statement read at the IWMF award ceremony in N.Y. on October 24, 2012 is a testament to courage for the ages. When the history of freedom — press freedom– in Ethiopia is written, future generations of Ethiopians will read the words of Reeyot and others like her and take pride in the fact that when the chips were down and the heavy boots of dictatorship crushed the people and trampled over their rights, there were few who stood for truth and against falsehood; for truth and against tyranny; and for truth, honor and country. It is truly inspiring to see a young woman who is confined in one of the worst prisons in the world (a prison described as barbaric and primitive by none other than a world renowned expert hired by the ruling regime in Ethiopia) standing up defiantly and fighting a ruthless dictatorship from prison with a ballpoint pen and scraps of paper:
I believe that I must contribute something to bring a better future [in Ethiopia]. Since there are a lot of injustices and oppressions in Ethiopia, I must reveal and oppose them in my articles.
Shooting the people who march through the streets demanding freedom and democracy, jailing the opposition party leaders and journalists because of only they have different looking from the ruling party, preventing freedom of speech, association and the press, corruption and domination of one tribe are some of the bad doings of our government. As a journalist who feels responsibility to change these bad facts, I was preparing articles that oppose the injustices I explained before. When I did it, I know that I would pay the price for my courage and I was ready to accept that price. Because journalism is a profession that I am willing to devote myself. I know for EPRDF, journalists must be only propaganda machines for the ruling party. But for me, journalists are the voices of the voiceless. That’s why I wrote many articles which reveal the truth of the oppressed ones. Even if I am facing a lot of problems because of it, I always stand firmly for my principle and profession. Lastly, I want to ask the international community to understand about the real Ethiopia. The real Ethiopia isn’t like that you watch in Ethiopia television or as you listen to the government officials talk about it. In real Ethiopia, a lot of repressions are being done. My story can show you the story of many Ethiopians who are in prison because of their independent thinking. Please, try your best to change this bad reality.
If anyone should seek the real definition of courage, let them not look for it in philosophical discourses or the annals of military history. Let them read these words from Reeyot and apply them to their cause.
But I often wonder: What makes individuals like Reeyot do what they do while the rest of us do very little or nothing? Were they born with courage or did they acquire it; and if so how and where? Was courage thrust upon them by circumstances? Why is it a moral imperative for Reeyot and others like her to “dream of things that never were, and ask why not” when many of us “look at things the way they are, and ask why?”. Why did Reeyot defiantly declare from prison, “I believe that I must contribute something to bring a better future [in Ethiopia]” while many of us sit comfortably in freedom and are only concerned about contributions to bettering ourselves? Why did she resolutely proclaim, “I always stand firmly for my principle and profession.”? Why would she plead with the world, “Please, try your best to change this bad reality [in Ethiopia].” Why is it a moral imperative for Reeyot to pay a price for her courage while most of us expect to be paid handsomely for our cowardice?
I cannot even begin to fathom the extraordinary courage of young people like Reeyot. Perhaps courage is a virtue reserved for some very special young people. Perhaps many of us in the older generation have lost our nerve, our mettle, our consciences. Perhaps some of us believe courage is cowardice, shame is honor, fear is valor and falsehood is truth. I don’t know. But I do know many who live in the “capital of the free world” write lofty opinions using pen names, pseudonyms and noms de guerre. They will boldly profess the “truth” while hiding their identity in anonymity. I know many who shade, decorate and nuance the ugly truth about dictatorship with eloquent words of ambiguity, evasiveness and equivocation just to serve their personal interests. I know many who are willing to testify the whole truth about tyranny in private but not a word in public. I have heard many speak the language of silence against tyranny. I have seen many pretend to be deaf, mute and blind to crimes against humanity. I have also wondered why Reeyot and others like her are willing to pay the price for their courage and many of us lack courage. Could it be that we are unwilling to pay the price for the courage of our convictions because we have neither courage nor convictions?
I do not know Reeyot, but I know and deeply honor the courage of her moral convictions. People like Reeyot live according to ideas and beliefs that originate in higher moral, spiritual and patriotic purposes. They take a moral stand and give everything they have got for what they believe ought or should be done. They have moral concerns which reside deep in their consciences. They are driven by irrepressible impulses to help create a better world, a more just, equal and compassionate society. They are deeply concerned about their fellow human beings and the human condition. They are outraged and disgusted by injustice, abuse of power and arbitrariness because it offends their basic sense of morality. Citizens like Reeyot are neither bound nor motivated by personal gain. They do not seek the approval of others. They reject herd mentality and groupthink. They know there is a personal price to be paid for their courage and are willing to pay pay it come what may. They know the price for their courage is the price of their soul. Such is the life story of heroes and heroines!
Reeyot can walk out of that “barbaric” prison at any time. All she has to do is get down on her knees, bow down her head and beg to be “pardoned”. But Reeyot does not want a pardon because she has done nothing wrong for which she needs to be pardoned. Following her sentence in kangaroo court, Reeyot’s father, responding to a reporter’s question on whether he would advise his daughter to apologize and beg for a pardon, replied:
This is perhaps one of the most difficult questions a parent can face. As any one of us who are parents would readily admit, there is an innate biological chord that attaches us to our kids. We wish nothing but the best for them. We try as much as humanly possible to keep them from harm…. Whether or not to beg for clemency is her right and her decision. I would honor and respect whatever decision she makes… To answer your specific question regarding my position on the issue by the fact of being her father, I would rather have her not plead for clemency, for she has not committed any crime.
Robert F. Kennedy once said, “moral courage is … the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change. Each time a person stands up for an idea, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, (s)he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” Because our sister Reeyot stood up and exposed the injustices of Ethiopia’s tyrants, she has sent a tiny ripple of hope to 90 million of her compatriots.
I want to thank and honor Reeyot for teaching us the real meaning of courage. I thank her for sending a tiny ripple of hope to her generation (though I strongly doubt my generation could feel the tiny ripples); for standing up against tyrants and clawing at the mightiest walls of oppression with a ballpoint pen and scraps of paper. Reeyot and so many others languish in prison while the rest of close our eyes, seal our lips and plug our ears so we hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil about evil. I believe we all have three choices in the face of the evil of tyranny. We can evade and avoid it behind a badge of shame. We can pretend there is no evil behind a badge of indifference. Or we can, like Reeyot, face evil wearing the red badge of courage and become the voice for the voiceless. If we can’t be a voice for the voiceless, could we at least be a voice for those imprisoned voices of the voiceless?
Postscript: It is painful and embarassing for me to see many Ethiopian heroes and heroines like Reeyot, Serkalem, Eskinder Nega, Woubshet Taye, Dawit Kebede and others recognized, honored and celebrated by international human and press rights organizations year after year while we seem oblivious to their extraordinary plight and personal sacrifices. Why can’t we honor them? Celebrate them? Pay tribute to them? If we don’t show love, honor and respect to our Reeyots, Serkalems, Eskinders and …, why should others?
“I believe that I must contribute something to bring a better future in Ethiopia.” Reeyot Alemu
It is proper to congratulate President Obama on his re-election to a second term. He put up a masterful campaign to earn the votes of the majority of American voters. Mitt Romney also deserves commendation for a hard fought campaign. In his concession speech Romney was supremely gracious: “At a time like this we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work, and we citizens also have to rise to occasion.”
There are few things more difficult or dangerous than speaking truth to abusers of power. But for Reeyot Alemu, the 31 year-old young Ethiopian heroine of press freedom, no price is high enough to keep her from being “the voice of the voiceless”. She will speak truth to power even when she is muzzled and gagged and in prison: “I knew that I would pay the price for my courage and I was ready to accept that price,” said Reeyot 
Today, I am ecstatically proud to see Reeyot as a recipient of the IWMF award for 2012.