By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Rent-a-Thug Against Democracy

In a recent piece entitled “Mob Disrupts Political Meeting in Adama,” former Ethiopian President Dr. Negasso Gidada described how “an organized mob disturbed a public political meeting of the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ) in Adama, Oromia, and forced the discontinuation of the meeting.” Dr. Negasso explained:

Around 50 people started to disturb the meeting while Eng. Gizachew Shiferraw, Vice Chairperson of the UDJ was addressing the meeting. The disturbers were shouting, clutching and whistling from the rear of the hall. This mob came up running to the front and damaged a microphone while trying to grab it. They continued to shout: ‘This is Oromia’, ‘Oromo is our Language’, ‘You have to start the meeting by a blessing ceremony in accordance with Oromo culture’, ‘You can hold the meeting in Oromo language’, ‘If you do not speak in Oromo language, and you can not hold meetings in our country’. Several people tried to cool down the mob by promising that what is said would be translated in Oromo. But the mob would not heed the appeal. It even threatened to beat us up. Eng. Gizachew could not continue his speech. He was forced to announce that the meeting is adjourned because of the disturbance… The mob was not a spontaneous disturbing group. There were some OPDO/EPRDF cadres among the mob. I myself could recognize at least two OPDO cadres with whom I worked in the organization before I resigned from it in June 2001. It is obvious that the disturbance was an organized one.

In a separate Amharic piece on the subject, Seeye Abraha (the former defense minister and currently a member of Medrek (Forum for Democratic Dialogue in Ethiopia) who attended the Adama town hall meeting pointed to a discernable emerging pattern in the use of thugs and hooligans by the “EPDRF” to disrupt opposition meetings. He identified two other similar disruptions a few weeks earlier, one at a UDJ meeting in Debre Markos and another at an Arena Tigray meeting in Mekele. Seeye suggested that a dual strategy is being used to prevent opposition elements from having public meetings: 1) Deny meeting permits on the basis of absurd excuses; or 2) Issue permits but disrupt the meetings using hired thugs and hooligans. Seeye declared that opposition elements will not be intimidated by thugs and “vigilantes” and their outreach efforts to the people will continue. He also put the dictators and the Ethiopian people on notice that should they be victims of thug violence at such meetings, the “EPDRF” should be held responsible.

Thugs and the Triumph of Kilil-istan Chavinism (Tribal-based Ethnic Federalism)

This is Oromia… Oromo is our Language… You have to start the meeting by a blessing ceremony in accordance with Oromo culture… You can hold the meeting in Oromo language… If you do not speak in Oromo language, and you can not hold meetings in our country….

The sounds of such atavistic lyrics of ethnic chauvinism must make sweet music to the ears of Ethiopia’s dictators. It must bring them everlasting joy and ecstasy to have these divisive and truculent words become part of the lexicon of Kilil-istan chauvinism, which is the highest stage of ethnic federalism. No doubt, these words represent the purest expression of the capo dictator’s dream: An Ethiopia blinded, deafened and muted by ethnic, linguistic, tribal and cultural chauvinism. BRAVO!

For nearly two decades, the dictators in Ethiopia toiled ceaselessly to shred the very fabric of that ancient civilization and society, and sculpt a landscape balkanized into tribal, ethnic, linguistic and regional enclaves to establish their own version of a Thousand Year Reich (Reign). They crafted a constitution based entirely on ethnicity and tribal affiliation as the basis for political organization. Article 46 (2) of their constitution provides: “States shall be structured on the basis of settlement patterns, language, identity and consent of the people.” In other words, “states”, (and the people who live in them) shall be organized as homogenous tribal homelands in much the same way as the 10 Bantustans (black homelands) of apartheid South Africa were organized to create ethnically homogeneous and “autonomous” nation states for South Africa’s different black ethnic groups, effectively wiping out their South African national citizenship.

The tribal homelands in Ethiopia are officially called “kilils” (enclaves or distinct enclosed and effectively isolated geographic areas within a seemingly integrated national territory). Like the Bantustans, the Killilistans represent territory set aside for the purpose of concentrating members of designated ethnic/tribal/linguistic/cultural groups in nominally autonomous geographic areas. Ethiopia’s dictators have used a completely fictitious and ridiculous theory of “ethnic (tribal) federalism)”, unknown in the annals of political science or political theory, to justify and glorify these Kililistans, impose their atrocious policy of divide and rule against 80 million people and scrub out any meaningful notion of Ethiopian citizenship.

Big Thugs, Small Thugs and the Rule of Law

Article 9 of the dictators’ constitution provides that the “Constitution is the supreme law of the land…. All citizens, state organs, political organizations, other associations and their officials, have the duty to comply with this Constitution and abide by it.” Article 29 of this “supreme law” guarantees that “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression without interference. This right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,…” Article 30 further ensures, “Everyone shall have the freedom, in association with others, to peaceably assemble without arms, engage in public demonstration and the right to petition.”

In Thugland, no one seems to be particularly concerned about constitutional rights. Dr. Negasso, Ato Seeye, UDJ members and the other community attendees were peaceably assembled at an authorized meeting to engage in important political discussions. They have an absolute right to conduct their meeting peaceably without being molested by thugs, hooligans, criminals, gangsters, hoodlums, delinquents and hustlers. It is the supreme and solemn duty of those in authority to guarantee that the constitutional rights of those peaceably assembled is protected from “interference” by anyone. To be sure, the authorities had a legal duty to arrest the disruptive thugs and “vigilantes” and prosecute them for their egregious violation of the constitutional rights of all those in attendance at the town hall meeting. But as we have seen time and time again, the “supreme law” of the land does not apply to thugs because thugs are above the law of the land; indeed, thugs are the law of the land!

Thugs Here, Thugs There, Thugs Everywhere!

Paraphrasing Mark Twain, one could wonder out loud: “Suppose you were a thug. And suppose you were a member of a dictatorship. But I repeat myself.” The use of rented thugs to disrupt public meetings is the oldest trick in the Book of Dictators and Corrupt Politicians. Not long ago, Robert Mugabe’s (ZANU – Patriotic Front) thugs in Zimbabwe disrupted the Constitutional All-Stakeholders’ Conference (organized to write a new constitution) at the Harare International Conference Centre by lambasting and unleashing a torrent of profanity and vulgarity against the Speaker of Parliament. They also attacked delegates and officials with plastic water bottles. In the early 1990s, organized thugs, galvanized by the political ideology of “Majimboism”, (a Kiswahili concept for “ethnic regionalism”, or “ethno-federalism”) instigated ethnic hatred against the Kikuyu. Recently, Prof. Maurice Iwu, Nigeria’s Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, reported to the Nigeria House of Representatives that the “sporadic outbreak of violence in several parts of the country [in the last election] was a fall-out of political thuggery.” The ultimate African thugs are represented by a militia known as the “Janjawid” – bloodthirsty packs of roving criminals armed and supported by the Sudanese government that have caused widespread atrocities including village destruction, massacres and rapes in the Darfur region.

Thugging it Out!

Seeye Abraha has noticed the Ethiopian people that should they be victims of thug violence, the “EPDRF” is to be held responsible. It may be overly optimistic to expect reason and respect for the law from thugs. The fact of the matter is that thugs will always be thugs; but law abiding citizens can fight back — thug it out, so to speak — by doing the right thing: Always tell the people the truth, and speak truth to thugs. Unite the people where thugs try to put them asunder. Promote harmony wherever thugs sow hatred, division and enmity. Fight to win the hearts and minds of the people wherever thugs seek to crush their hopes, dreams and aspirations. Never lower yourself to the gutter world of thugs, but capture, preserve, protect and defend the moral high ground. Never, never, never abandon the cause of freedom, democracy and human rights in Ethiopia. Always do the right thing, the fair thing, the just thing. As Churchill said, “Never give in–never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” Never yield to thugs! Never forget the truth that if we don’t stand up for the Land of Thirteen Months of Sunshine, thugs will gladly transform it into the Land of Eternal Darkness.

Inherit the Wind

In Proverbs 11 is written, “He who brings trouble on his family will inherit only wind.” Those who have wrought trouble on the Ethiopian family for the last two decades will in the end inherit a tornadic wind. That is foreordained! Their wicked efforts to destroy, dismember, deface and disfigure Ethiopia through the politics of hate and ethnic division will fail just as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow. Their diabolical plan will amount to nothing! Like East Germany, ethnic federalism will be there one day and the next day it will be gone forever. Ethiopia’s best days are yet to come because her destiny rests securely in the palms of her bright, patriotic, industrious, conscientious, humble, forward-looking and God-fearing young people.

Is it not ironic that those of us who profess to champion the cause of justice, truth and morality far outnumber those engaged in the practice of evil, yet the few evil doers seem to outdo us nearly every time. As Dr. Negasso pleaded following his confrontation with the Adama thugs: “I call on all those who stand for the respect of democratic and human rights, for peace and stability of this country and for economic development of this country do something TODAY and not TOMORROW!!” That is why we should take to heart the aphorism, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil (thugs) is that good Ethiopian men and women do nothing” TODAY.

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

The Masks of Dictatorship

Last week, The Economist magazine painted a chilling journalistic portrait of Ethiopia’s capo dictator. The magazine described the ironfisted ringleader of the dictatorial regime that has “run Ethiopia since 1991” in starkly contrasting terms. “Meles Zenawi, still only 54, has two faces,” proclaimed the Economist. One is the face of a poverty buster, builder of “new roads, clinics, primary schools” and undertaker of “an array of agricultural initiatives.” The other is the face of a rehabilitated “Marxist with a dismal human-rights record who is intolerant of dissent,” whose “police shot dead some 200 civilians” and who jails his opponents on “trumped-up treason charges.”

But the wily dictator wears a thousand faces: He will put on the face of the smooth-talking, silver-tongued bit player with “polished English, full of arcane turns of phrase from his days at a private English school in Addis Ababa” who is always calculating to mystify, manipulate and flimflam Western donors and journalists. There is the face of a mendacious dictator who will embellish facts and claim Ethiopia’s “economy will grow this year by 10%, though the IMF’s figure is about half as big.” There is the cynical and egotistical face of a self-deluding, self-promoting Master of Hype who has managed to extract praises from “Western governments, with Britain to the fore, for improving the miserable conditions in the countryside”, and be knighted by Blair-Clinton as “one of the new breed of African leaders.” There is the poker-faced dictator who has presided over a nation which “on the business front remains very backward, has banking which is rudimentary at best, farms mostly for subsistence, and may have only a few weeks of foreign reserves left.”

There is also the face of a “crime fighting” dictator who, by all objective accounts, presides over a racketeering and corrupt political organization to cling to power. There is the face of a sanctimonious and philosophizing dictator who will wax eloquent on the democratic “process” but “closes down independent newspapers and meddles in aid projects, banning agencies that annoy him.” There is the face of the pretentious intellectual with a “sharp mind and elephantine memory,” but who simultaneously suffers massive selective memory loss and amnesia, and feigns outrage when confronted with unpleasant facts: “He avoids mentioning famine because the specter of it may be looming again… And famine looms once more. At that suggestion, Mr. Meles narrows his eyes and growls, ‘That is a lie, an absolute lie.’” There is the face of the indifferent dictator, who like Marie Antoinette of France who urged her famine-stricken subjects “to eat cake” pleads: “There is more than enough food in government warehouses to feed the people.” The Economist says, “The UN and foreign charities are predicting a large-scale famine in Tigray, Mr Meles’s home region, by November.” (Where the hell is Jonathan Dimbelby [who revealed the Wollo and Tigray famines of 1972-73 to the world] when we need him?)

There is the face of a dictator who is addicted to blaming others for his failures: “The prime minister is quick to talk up threats to his country, whether from malcontents in the army or disgruntled ethnic groups among Ethiopia’s mosaic of peoples… Ethiopia’s relations with Eritrea, his mother’s birthplace, remain lousy.” There is the face of a paranoid dictator who peers through the thick glass of an echo chamber surrounded by sycophants, “sensitive to criticism”, and has enacted “a new catch-all law that could make peaceful opposition liable to the charge of inciting terrorism.” Such is the portrait of a dictator with a thousand faces.

The Psychopathology of Dictatorship

All dictators wear many faces. Psychological studies and analyses of dictators lend insight into the psychodynamics (interplay between unconscious and conscious motivation) of the behavioral syndromes that create the many masks worn by dictators. The data and anecdotal evidence suggest that many of the most ruthless dictators of the past century – Enver Hoxha of Albania, Joseph Stalin, Papa Doc Duvalier of Haiti, Saddam Hussein, Agosto Pinochet of Chile, Francisco Franco of Spain, Idi Amin, Nicolae Ceausescu of Romania, Mengistu Hailemariam, Pol Pot of Cambodia and the current dictator in Ethiopia suffer from deep psychological and emotional trauma.

In his study of dictators, political psychologist Jerrold M. Post employs the concept of “malignant narcissism” to describe the psychological chaos raging in dictators’ minds. Post argues that malignant narcissism in dictators is a manifestation of the “absence of conscience (moral vacuum), insatiable psychological need for power, unconstrained aggression, paranoid outlook and [inflated] sense of self-importance and grandiosity”. These amoral dictators see themselves as great messianic figures transforming society and saving the world. They are driven by fantasies of personal glory. They remain isolated in echo chambers where they nurture their megalomania. They see the world through a thick lens of paranoia while trapped in a permanent siege mentality. They believe they know everything, and know what is best for their country, their nation and their people. In their delusional self-exaltation, they believe they are demigods. They have a low opinion of their supporters and those serving them; they think of them as ignorant, untrustworthy and lazy lackeys and servile opportunists who will dump them at the drop of a hat. They project their failures on others. They trust no one and are ruthless political calculators who will go to any lengths to achieve their goals. They are duplicitous, cunning, calculating and cruel always masking their true nature behind a public mask of civility, sophistication and affability. Ultimately, the dictators’ sense of grandiosity, pomposity, self-absorption and conceit prevents them from being able empathize with the pain and suffering of others. It is this lack of basic human empathy that enables them to commit unspeakable atrocities, appalling brutalities and horrible crimes without so much as blinking an eye. These dictators are “unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts.”

Girma Tassew, M.D., in his psychological profile of the capo dictator in Ethiopia argues :

He [Zenawi] misrepresents facts, opportunistically shifts positions, ignores data that conflicts with his fantasy world, is overly confident and acts as statesman despite commensurate merits and narcissistic life achievements. [He] considers himself above the law, displays false modesty while sublimating aggression and grudges. As a narcissist, he has the emotional maturity of a child, or even an animal, but the intellect of a man. What makes this guy dangerous is his lack of consciousness combined with his high self-serving intelligence and his superb performance that has fooled and outsmarted many. As a malignant narcissist his survival is dependent upon having control or the perception of control. When the control is challenged, he feels threatened and responds as though his very survival is at stake.

From the Great Dictator to the People

In the Great Dictator, the peerless Charlie Chaplin, satirizing Nazism and Adolf Hitler in the role of the misbegotten barber turned absolute ruler of Tomania, delivers a passionate plea to the people to unite and fight dictatorship. The scene represents one of the greatest monologues in the history of motion pictures (See Youtube:

Hope… I’m sorry but I don’t want to be an Emperor – that’s not my business – I don’t want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible, Jew, gentile, black man, white. We all want to help one another, human beings are like that.

We all want to live by each other’s happiness, not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone and the earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful. But we have lost the way. Greed has poisoned men’s souls – has barricaded the world with hate; has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.

We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in: machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical, our cleverness hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little: More than machinery we need humanity; More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.

The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me I say “Do not despair”.

The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress: the hate of men will pass and dictators die and the power they took from the people, will return to the people and so long as men die [now] liberty will never perish.

Soldiers – don’t give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you – who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel, who drill you, diet you, treat you as cattle, as cannon fodder. Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines. You are not cattle. You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don’t hate – only the unloved hate. Only the unloved and the unnatural. Soldiers – don’t fight for slavery, fight for liberty.

In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written “the kingdom of God is within man ” – not one man, nor a group of men – but in all men – in you, the people.

You the people have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness. You the people have the power to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let’s use that power – let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security.

By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfill their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfill that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers – in the name of democracy, let us all unite!

Look up! Look up! The clouds are lifting – the sun is breaking through. We are coming out of the darkness into the light. We are coming into a new world. A kind new world where men will rise above their hate and brutality. The soul of man has been given wings – and at last he is beginning to fly. He is flying into the rainbow – into the light of hope – into the future, that glorious future that belongs to you, to me and to all of us. Look up. Look up.”

Look up, Ethiopians! Do not despair! We are coming out of the darkness into the light. Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. Let us fight for a world of reason. Let’s do away with greed, with hate and intolerance in our motherland!

(The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at [email protected])

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Ministry of Education or Ministry of Loan Sharking?

Ethiopia’s “Ministry of Education”, (or more appropriately, the Ministry of Loan Sharking) has adopted a “new scheme” (new scam) of official extortion to professionally incapacitate young Ethiopian college graduates. According to a report by Addis Fortune, “Students graduating in the year 2008-2009 from all governmental higher learning institutions have been prohibited from collecting their academic credentials including the student copy until they find jobs which enable them to refund the cost sharing expenses utilized at the universities.” The ministry’s public relations officer, Derese Kitila, explained: “Students pledged to pay back the expenses for any of the services they consumed either in the form of cash or recourses. However this has never been effective from the way it had been projected. But with this new scheme the government might be able to raise back those expenses and handle human resources going abroad.”

The “new scheme” does not apply equally to all graduates: “Since the country has human labour deficits in the sectors of education and health, the new directives will not affect students from education faculty, medical, pharmacy and other health related schools.” Under the “directive”, any university graduate in the non-preferred disciplines would be virtually unemployable because, according to Adey Abraham, human resource manager for the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) International Service, “employers will also face difficulty in the selection process of potential employees from among the new graduates since they have no access to any students’ grade reports to measure the talents of candidates. If the breakdown is not available it is hardly useful to find the right person for the right position.”

Payday Loan Sharking

The “new scheme” from the “Ministry of Education” is what is commonly known in the criminal underworld as “payday loan sharking.” It is a simple trick: The loan shark (almost always a member of the criminal underworld) extends an unsecured high interest loan to low wage employees facing extreme economic hardship for repayment on payday. The basic idea is to create an ongoing relationship between the loan shark and the needy borrower so that the borrower is permanently trapped in a vicious loan cycle. The re-payments will drag on for years as the borrower makes payments on payday only to have very little money left to cover his ongoing expenses. The borrower is extended more loans as he digs deeper in debt without the realistic ability to ever pay back the loan. The loan shark eventually “owns” the needy borrower.

What the “Ministry of Education” is doing through its “directive” and its “new scheme” (scam) is a variation on the classic underworld payday loan sharking. Hapless, helpless, choiceless and disadvantaged students who seek higher education are snagged into the “new scheme” and forced to sign an adhesion contract (a contract in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage) and give up their rights to their personal academic records until they find a job. When the graduates find employment, the official loan sharks will be right there to obtain a monthly payday wage assignment or garnishment from the new employer. Like the criminal loan sharks who secure repayment by intimidation and violence, the ministry holds for ransom the graduates’ “academic credentials” to extort repayment. The preposterous notion that this scam will “enable the graduates to refund the cost sharing expenses utilized at the universities” is as convincing as the underworld crime boss’ defense of his loan sharking operation as a micro-financing program for poor borrowers.

Discrimination Among University Graduates is Illegal

The “directive” and the official “new scheme” are patently discriminatory and in violation of Article 25 of the dictators’ constitution which provides: “All persons shall be equal before the law and shall be entitled to equal protection of the law without any discrimination whatsoever. All persons shall be entitled to equal and adequate guarantees without distinction of any kind…” The meaning of this sweeping article is self-evident. The clause “All persons shall be equal before the law and shall be entitled to equal protection of the law without any discrimination whatsoever” means officials CAN NOT ENGAGE IN ANY DISCRIMINATION WHATSOEVER! There is no exception for discrimination against “persons” based on the “the country’s human labour deficits in the sectors of education and health,” affiliation with the ruling dictatorship, ethnicity, wealth, profession, religion or any other classification. Thus, if “all persons are equal before the law” and must be treated “without any discrimination whatsoever”, how is it that “educators, doctors, pharmacists and other health” care providers are given complete preferential treatment by an official “directive”, which by its very purpose professionally incapacitates, imposes extreme hardships and arbitrarily penalizes graduates in the non-preferred disciplines? Where in the equal protection clause of Article 25 are “educators, doctors, pharmacists and other health” care providers”, “EPDRF” party loyalists and political hacks made more equal than engineers, lawyers, accountants, architects, chemists or economists? But in the Orwellian Animal Farm that Ethiopia has become, “All animals are created equal, but some animals are created more equal than others.”

The fact of the matter is that the official discrimination will work extreme hardship and inconvenience on graduates in the non-preferred disciplines as they seek employment. Adey Abraham’s statement confirms this fact: “Employers will also face difficulty in the selection process of potential employees from among the new graduates since they have no access to any students’ grade reports to measure the talents of candidates…” Simply stated, before these graduates can be hired by an employer, they have to take their offers of employment to the ministry and get authorization for the release of their “academic credentials”. Given the well known and rampant bureaucratic caprice and corruption of the dictatorship’s so-called ministries, it is reasonable to infer that the education ministry could impose any condition whatsoever for the release of the academic records for payday wage assignments. The prospective graduate employee would have no choice but to agree to any terms and conditions imposed by the ministry to obtain the academic records so that s/he could get the job, not unlike what the street loan shark will do to squeeze the deeply indebted borrower for repayment terms.

There is another thing that is completely nuts — just downright crazy — about the “new scheme” which “will not affect students from education faculty, medical, pharmacy and other health related schools.” These graduates can simply pick up their official academic credentials and disappear without a trace, or even leave the country permanently. How does this “directive” save on “human labour deficits” in these critical service areas? On second thought, the “directive” makes perfect sense and is in line with official policy as it has been authoritatively stated: “Ethiopia does not need medical doctors.” Obviously, today in Ethiopia not only is there no need for doctors but also educators and other health professionals. Such is the opera buffa (comic opera) of dictatorship!

The official “directive” also violates the graduates’ constitutional right to “freedom of movement” under Article 32: “Every Ethiopian or any other person lawfully within Ethiopia shall have the freedom to freely move and establish his residence within Ethiopia as well as to travel abroad.” Graduates who wish to travel within the country or abroad in search of employment will effectively be prevented from doing so because their “academic credentials” certifying their educational performance and achievements to prospective employers are held hostage by the ministry. Since these graduates will not be able to prove their university education, they are inevitably limited geographically in their job search. Could a ministry abrogate by a half-baked and ill-conceived “directive” a citizen’s constitutional “freedom to freely move and establish his residence within Ethiopia as well as to travel abroad?”

The indisputable fact of the matter is that young educated Ethiopians do not want to leave their country. They would rather stay and serve their people. They want to go abroad because their human rights are not respected and their professionalism is subordinated to nepotism, cronyism and favoritism. If the rule of law reigned, not only will educated Ethiopians stay in their country, hundreds of thousands of others who live and work abroad will stampede back to their homeland just for the privilege of serving their people. Educated Ethiopians leave their country because they see no hope and no future living under a tyrannical dictatorship. If you want them to stay, support them, embrace them, respect them and assure them that Ethiopia’s future sits secure in the palms of their strong and able hands. Let their creative powers develop freely so that they can freely develop their country. As President Obama said, “We’ve learned that it will not be giants like Nkrumah and Kenyatta who will determine Africa’s future. It will be the young people brimming with talent and energy and hope who can claim the future that so many in previous generations never realized.”

Pact With the Devil

In the classic German legend, Dr. Faust agreed to surrender his body and soul to the Devil after twenty-four years in exchange for the Devil’s promise to give him all knowledge and wisdom. Dr. Faust signed the agreement in his own blood. Faust got all the knowledge and wisdom in the universe as he wanted. In the end, the Devil got Dr. Faust’s soul and body. The obvious but hard lesson for Ethiopia’s youth is: “When you make a pact with the Devil who plays a zero sum game, you always lose, and he will own your soul and body!” As to the “new scheme”, it is an old scam from the criminal underworld.

————
The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at [email protected]

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Escapees of Conscience or Deserters From a Sinking Ship?

Over the past month, there has been a spate of reported official “defections” from Ethiopia. The alleged “defectors” said to be seeking asylum in the U.S. include a high level official attached to the “State Minister of Government Communications Affairs”, an individual identified as the “Director of Ethiopian Telecommunication Agency” and another person said to be a member of Ethiopia’s rubber-stamp parliament. A well-known Ethiopian novelist is also reported to be seeking asylum in the U.S. Three officially sponsored Ethiopian “exchange students” sent to England for a three-month program “vanished during a trip to the Houses of Parliament” and are believed to be seeking asylum there. The grapevine in certain circles is abuzz with rumors that a number of the head honcho’s ambassadors in various countries have either refused to return to Ethiopia or are forestalling their return. Over the past few years, dozens of diplomatic officials are reported to have deserted the crippled ship of state of the dictators in Ethiopia.[1]

The question is whether the recent defections signify the proverbial desertion of a sinking ship, or are simply episodic instances of individual “escapees of conscience”.

Why Defect?

There is a long tradition of individuals fleeing tyranny and despotism in their homelands. Over the past three decades, thousands of Ethiopians have escaped oppression, persecution and dictatorial rule in their homeland and obtained political asylum in various countries. Receiving asylum in a host country does not necessarily make an individual a “defector”. There is no formally cognizable status of “defector” under international law. Such persons are generally treated as “refugees” under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. The U.S. Government in its administrative manuals defines a “defector” as a “person who repudiates his or her country when beyond its jurisdiction or control.” When the Soviet Union existed, a “defector” was an individual who “committed treason by cooperating with a hostile foreign intelligence service”.

There is no single prototype of a defector. Defectors from the former communist countries have included generals, diplomats, scientists, artists, musicians, atheletes, and even children of supreme dictators. For instance, among well-known Russian defectors to the U.S. include KGB general Oleg Kalugin; pianist Dmitry Shostakovich, Olga Korbut, the four gold and two silver medal winning gymnast and chess grandmasters Viktor Korchnoy and Boris Spassky. In 1967, Stalin’s daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva, defected to the U.S. In 1993, Fidel Castro’s daughter, Alina Fernandez Revuelta, did the same after entering the U.S. disguised as a Spanish tourist. Far fewer numbers of Americans have defected to the Soviet Union, mostly for ideological reasons.

Individuals defect for a variety of reasons. Some do so for purely personal reasons; and others for moral, philosophical, political, intellectual or ideological ones. Soviet defector interview data and autobiographies suggest that among the major factors motivating defections included strong beliefs and perceptions that: 1) the Soviet regime lacked popular legitimacy and mandate and rules by means of lies, intimidation and violence; 2) communism as an ideology is bankrupt and that the Soviet regime uses it to justify its monopoly on power; 3) basic human rights and the rule of law are disregarded and violated routinely by communist officials, and 4) since no legal opposition to the Soviet regime is allowed or tolerated, defection is one of the few ways for individuals to show their opposition and rejection of the communist system. Others have described Soviet defectors as “cynical people who understood the corruption of the Soviet system, used it to their advantage and turned against it only when it failed them in their self-centered pursuits or somehow victimized them.”

Life as an Official of the Ruling Dictatorship

Anecdotal evidence obtained from some Ethiopian defectors paints a portrait of the inhumanity, depravity, cruelty and decay of the dictatorial regime there, and the existential trap in which the defectors found themselves. These defectors reported facing a variation on the excruciating question: “How could I serve in good conscience a brutal, corrupt and ruthless dictatorship?” Witnessing injustice, abuse of power, unfairness, exploitation and outright criminality everyday, yet being part of a system that perpetrates and perpetuates it, created a hellish situation for many of these defectors. They reported being tormented by the proverbial little voice in their consciences telling them: “This is so wrong. Don’t do it. Don’t be a part of it!” They described facing an endless struggle between their consciences and the harsh reality they faced servicing the dictatorship. They lived each day overwhelmed by a sense of powerlessness and helplessness. They felt they had sold out their consciences to make a daily living and put food on the table for their families. Dependent on the dictatorship for their daily bread, a number of these defectors reported living a life of self-loathing, duplicity and quiet desperation: They were afraid to speak up against the injustices they witnessed for fear of retribution; they were tormented by guilt because they felt completely powerless to change their circumstances; they felt they had to live a life of pretension just to survive and not to arouse suspicion of disloyalty; they were overcome by unrelenting anxiety and insecurity about possible official retaliation for something they had done on not done; and they seethed with anger for being bossed around by a herd of ignoramuses.

These defectors also reported seeking escape from a daily existence of humiliation, shame and self-loathing before defecting. Many withdrew into the world of alcohol and self-indulgence to escape their misery and contain their moral outrage. Some waited and schemed in secrecy for that one opportunity to travel to the West for some training program or a diplomatic assignment. When they got that chance, they quietly slipped away from their delegations to seek political asylum. Others not fortunate enough to travel and not drowning themselves in alcohol are said to seek alternative relief by consorting with opposition elements, or seeking solace in prayer and other spiritual pursuits. Those who could not take it anymore treaded the risky waters of opposition politics, and soon find out there is a huge price to pay for standing up against the dictatorship. They found themselves out of a job or worse. Some are said to be so overcome by fear and anxiety about their personal well-being that they simply want to drop out the officialdom and be left alone. But dictatorships are like the devil; and as the old saying goes, once the devil catches you by a single strand of hair, you are his forever until you save yourself or are redeemed.

Defection as a Moral Act of Outrage and Redemption

Defection made for the right reasons could be a supreme act of moral redemption for the defector. Those who have been involuntary agents of oppression and criminality have the ability to morally purify themselves by openly and publicly repudiating their previous official life. But the moral duty of defectors transcends self-atonement; it includes a collateral duty to help those who suffer under the yoke of dictatorship. As Victor Kravchenko, one of the early Soviet defectors observed, it is the duty of a defector to speak his mind once in freedom because “an understanding of the Russian reality by the democratic world is the precondition for my country’s liberation from within.” It is because of the work of Soviet defectors who exposed the brutality and depravity of the Soviet system that an underground dissident and human rights movement in the Soviet Union was able to take root in the 1980s.

Defectors, Duties and the Diaspora: Doing the Right Thing

Foreign officials who defect in most Western countries have legal rights to seek political asylum. It is the duty of all Ethiopians in the Diaspora who believe in freedom, democracy and human rights to help those escaping oppression and persecution as victims of human rights abuses. It is commendable that many Ethiopian legal professionals in the U.S. particularly, and other charitable institutions, have offered or extended assistance to those who have sought asylum in the U.S. as defectors or otherwise. Many individuals and American civic organizations deserve gratitude for their efforts in facilitating the social integration of those fleeing persecution in Ethiopia.

Until we walk a mile in the defectors’ shoes, we have little moral basis to prejudge them for taking the courageous act of defecting from a ruthless dictatorship. Fundamental fairness requires that we give them the benefit of the doubt: They shall all deemed escapees of conscience doing the right thing until proven otherwise!

We do not know if we are witnessing the tip of a defection iceberg from the reports of this past month. Perhaps these defections will open the floodgates for an exodus of officials escaping oppression and persecution, or such defections will continue to trickle. Regardless, we must be careful not to malign these official defectors, or arbitrarily impugn their motives as some may be inclined to do. It may be that these individuals are abandoning a slowly sinking ship, or just doing the right thing and cleansing themselves. It does not matter. In the struggle for the hearts and minds of Ethiopians, it is the duty of those in the Diaspora to lend aid to such individuals as victims of human rights abuses. It is the moral duty of all well-intentioned defectors to name and shame their former masters and tormentors. Above all, it is their supreme moral duty to speak their minds once they find themselves in freedom; and, to paraphrase Victor Kravchenko, bear witness against injustice and human rights violations because “an understanding of the Ethiopian reality by the democratic world is the precondition for our country’s liberation from within.”

[1] http://www.addisvoice.com/PR/defections.htm

(The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at [email protected])

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

The Triumph of Multiparty Democracy in Ghana

Ghana has become the poster country for the triumph of multiparty democracy, stability and economic growth in Africa; and sadly, Ethiopia has been rendered the iconic failed African state ruled by a one-man, one-party dictatorship with widespread human rights violation. President Obama traveled to Accra recently to pay homage to Ghanaian democracy; but he did not miss the opportunity to be brutally frank with Africa’s brutal dictators: “History is on the side of these brave Africans and not with those who use coups or change Constitutions to stay in power. Africa doesn’t need strongmen, it needs strong institutions.”

It is an obvious question, but one that must be asked and answered: Why is democracy in motion in Ghana, and on life-support in Ethiopia? More bluntly, what do Ghanaians got, we ain’t got?

Two African Countries in Parallel Universes

Ethiopia and Ghana are a study in contrast. Both are unique among African countries. With the exception of a short-lived Italian occupation between 1936-41, Ethiopia has always maintained its freedom from colonial rule. Ghana was the first sub-Sahara African country to gain its independence from colonial rule in 1957. Both countries had leaders who were dedicated to African unity. Kwame Nkrumah was arguably the greatest advocate of pan-Africanism and African unity. Emperor Haile Selassie was arguably the most central figure in the formation of the Organization of African Unity, which he managed to headquarter in Ethiopia. Both Ethiopia and Ghana have suffered greatly at the hands of military strongmen. Mengistu Haile Mariam’s disastrous experiment in socialism between 1975-91 plunged Ethiopia into the abyss of economic and political chaos; and massive human rights violations were the hallmarks of that dictatorship. Mengistu fled to Zimbabwe in 1991 paving the way for the current dictators to cakewalk straight into political power. Since 1991, the current dictators have ruled Ethiopia by ethnically dividing the people and imposing their will with appalling brutality.

Between 1966-81, Ghana had successive military coups. Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings came to power in 1981 (and remained in power for two decades), suspended the constitution and banned political parties. In 1992, he engineered the promulgation of a new Ghanaian Constitution which restored basic freedoms and multiparty politics to Ghana. He served two terms as president and voluntarily stepped down as required by the Constitution.

In December 2008, 8.2 million Ghanaians went to the polls to elect a president and members of parliament. The four major political parties contested the elections vigorously through massive grassroots efforts and voter registration campaigns. The candidate of the National Democratic Congress, Professor John Atta-Mills, defeated the outgoing President John Kufuor by a razor thin margin in a run-off election. President Kufuor not only conceded defeat gracefully, he also cordially congratulated the president-elect. Ghanaian voters also threw out of office well-known incumbent parliamentarians from the four major parties who had taken them for granted. In the end, all of the opposition parties accepted the results of the election as determined by Ghana’s Electoral Commission, legitimizing once again the principle that the only pathway to legitimate power in Ghana is free and fair elections.

In May 2005, for the very first time in millennia, the seeds of democracy germinated in Ethiopia’s arid political landscape pockmarked by royal absolutism, military socialism and pluto-kleptocratic dictatorship (rule by rich thieves). But those elections gave birth to a stillborn democracy. The ruling dictatorship declared victory before the votes were fully counted and declared a state of emergency. In the wake of the elections, the dictatorship made a killing field of the country. By official account, 193 men, women and children were massacred, and 763 severely wounded in two separate incidents of police violence. (The actual post-election casualties far exceed the numbers officially reported.) Nearly all of the leading opposition leaders and other civil society representatives and journalists were jailed, along with more than 30,000 ordinary citizens. In the 2008 local elections, opposition candidates won just 3 (three) of 3.6 million seats! Make-believe parliamentary elections are scheduled to be held in May 2010.

Ethnicity and tribal allegiances are potent forces in Ghana and Ethiopia. Both countries are multi-ethnic societies with ethnic inequalities and historical rivalries. Ethnic tensions in Ghana are occasionally heightened by social and economic inequality. Although some Ghanaian politicians have resorted to ethnic appeals to garner votes, there have been very few instances of ethnic violence triggered by political party rivalries. Amazingly, the Ghanaian Constitution prohibits tribal or ethnic-based political parties: “Every political party shall have a national character, and membership shall not be based on ethnic, religious, regional or other sectional divisions.” (Article 55 (4).)

In Ethiopia, ethnicity and tribal affiliation are the foundation and the lifeline of the of the current dictatorial regime. Article 46 (2) of the ruling dictatorship’s constitution provides: “States shall be structured on the basis of settlement patterns, language, identity and consent of the people.” In other words, “states” shall be structured as homogenous tribal homelands based on four criteria, in much the same way as the Bantustans of apartheid South Africa. The tribal homelands in Ethiopia are officially called “kilils”. We believe they could be more accurately described as “Killilistans” since the “kilils”, like the Bantustans, represent territory set aside for the purpose of concentrating the members of designated ethnic/tribal groups in a nominally autonomous geographic area. Ethiopia’s dictators have used a completely fictitious theory of “ethnic (tribal) federalism)”, unknown in the annals of political science or political theory, to glorify these “Kililistans”, and to impose their atrocious policy of divide and rule against 80 million people for nearly two decades.

Ghana has maintained friendly relations with its neighbors, and has followed a foreign policy that has contributed to regional cooperation, peacekeeping and tension reduction. As an active member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Ghana has been able to substantially increase its exports and serve regional markets. Ghana has also contributed troops for peacekeeping missions in Liberia and other African countries. President Rawlings played a critical peace-making role when he arranged the signing of the Akosombo Accord of September 12, 1994, which accelerated the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement of July 1, 1993, effectively ending the civil war in Liberia.

Ethiopia’s dictators have poured fuel on the volatile politics of the Horn by invading Somalia in January 2007, a country which has suffered greatly under the scourge of “warlordism” since the early 1990s. They justified their invasion as an “invitation” by the Somali transitional government, and as a defense of Ethiopian sovereignty. They boasted that they will be out in a couple of months after they drive out the “terrorists”. Two years later, they were the ones who were chased out of Somalia with their tails between their legs leaving behind a colossal mess of death and destruction. In its 2008 report entitled “So Much to Fear: War Crimes and the Devastation of Somalia”, Human Rights Watch documented war crimes, civilian deaths and the destruction wreaked on Somalia as a result of invasion: “Since January 2007 at least 870,000 civilians have fled the chaos in Mogadishu alone— two-thirds of the city’s population. Across south-central Somalia, 1.1 million Somalis are displaced from their homes.” Recently, there has been growing tension with Kenya over the issue of adverse environmental impact on the ecosystem of Kenya’s Lake Turkana from a hydro-electric power plant under construction on the Omo River in Ethiopia. The dictatorship’s military adventurism has been principally responsible for escalating tensions in the region.

The “Magic” of Ghana’s Nascent Democracy?

Is there “magic” to Ghanaian multiparty democracy? No! Whatever success Ghana has achieved in institutionalizing democracy, the Ghanaian people and their leaders have earned by offering their blood, toil sweat and tears. President Obama offered the best explanation when he attributed Ghana’s democratic success to respect for and institutionalization of the rule of law:

Now, time and again, Ghanaians have chosen constitutional rule over autocracy and shown a democratic spirit that allows the energy of your people to break through. We see that in leaders who accept defeat graciously — the fact that President Mills’ opponents were standing beside him last night to greet me when I came off the plane spoke volumes about Ghana; victors who resist calls to wield power against the opposition in unfair ways. We see that spirit in courageous journalists like Anas Aremeyaw Anas, who risked his life to report the truth. We see it in police like Patience Quaye, who helped prosecute the first human trafficker in Ghana. We see it in the young people who are speaking up against patronage and participating in the political process.

Although Ghana’s democracy is still in its infancy, the evidence on critical measures of democracy demonstrates that Ghana has a great and promising future.

Respect for Rule of Law and Civil Liberties

There is little doubt that Ghanaians enjoy a relatively high degree of political freedom; and the rule of law is largely respected by Ghanaian leaders. The 1992 Ghanaian Constitution guarantees a panoply of political civil, economic, social and cultural rights to citizens. Press freedom in Ghana best illustrates the liberties enjoyed by Ghanaians. In 2008, Ghana (population 23 million) ranked 31 out of 173 countries worldwide on World Press Freedom Index (Ethiopia ranks 142/173). There are more than 133 private newspapers and 2 state-owned dailies. There are some 110 FM radio stations broadcasting in all parts of the country. Foreign media operate freely and internet access is uncensored by the government. Citizens express their opinions without fear of government retaliation, and the media vociferously criticizes government policies and officials without censorship.

The rule of law is largely observed in Ghana. The government follows and respects the Constitution. It abides by the rulings and decisions of the courts and other fact-finding inquiry commissions. The government has undertaken actions to conform its laws to the standards of international human rights conventions. The Ghanaian Supreme Court serves as the ultimate guardian of the rule of law. It maintains its institutional independence, and is not timid about overruling unconstitutional government policies and decisions. Amazingly, under Article 2 (4) of the Ghanaian Constitution, failure to obey or carry out the terms of a Supreme Court order is a “a high crime”, which in “the case of the President or the Vice-President, constitutes a ground for removal from office under this Constitution.” Under Article 2 (1), “a person” can seek declaratory relief against an alleged unconstitutional law or act of any person by petitioning the Supreme Court. Amazingly, under Article 64, any Ghanaian citizen has the right to “challenge the validity of the election of the President in the Supreme Court within twenty-one days after the declaration of the result of the election.”

Independent Judiciary

An independent judiciary is vital to the observance of the rule of law and protection of civil liberties. Article 125 provides that the Ghanaian “Judiciary shall be independent and subject only to the Constitution.” Article 127(2) further provides that “neither the President nor the Parliament nor any person whatsoever shall interfere with judges and judicial officers or other persons exercising judicial power, in the exercise of their judicial functions”. All state organs are constitutionally required to comply with judicial orders. Most importantly, the Supreme Court has judicial review powers (that is, the power to determine the constitutionality of the actions of the presidency and parliament). Various surveys have shown that the majority of Ghanaians have confidence in their judicial system even though they also believe that some underpaid and under-trained judges are likely to fall prey to bribery and other corrupt practices.

Competitive Political Parties

Ghana has a competitive multi-party political system. Article 55 of the Constitution guarantees “Every citizen of Ghana of voting age has the right to join a political party.” Political parties are free to organize and “disseminate information on political ideas, social and economic programmes of a national character.” Tribal and ethnic parties are illegal in Ghana under Article 55 (4) cited above. There are some eight registered political parties. The two dominant parties, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) are said to represent an estimated 80 per cent of the Ghanaian voters. There are few ideological differences among the parties. In the highly contested December 2008 elections, a run off was ordered by the Ghana Electoral Commission since neither of the two majority party candidates won more than 50 per cent of the vote.

Independent Electoral Commission

The Ghanaian Electoral Commission is the institution created in the Constitution to ensure Ghanaians’ right to self-government and clean elections. The Commission is responsible for voter registration, demarcation of electoral boundaries, conduct and oversight of all public elections and referenda and electoral education. Under Article 46, the Commission is guaranteed independence: With certain exceptions, “the Electoral Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any person or authority…” The presidential run-off election in 2008 was managed by the Electoral Commission with extraordinary impartiality and professionalism, despite political pressure, threats and intimidations. The Commission is widely credited in Ghana and internationally for sustaining democracy, political pluralism and constitutional rule.

Civil Society Institutions

Civil society institutions in Ghana are gradually emerging as vital social forces. They are mostly concentrated in the urban areas. The major ones include unions, international NGOs, professional media, legal, educational and research organizations and faith-based service groups and associations. Civil society institutions are becoming increasingly important in legal and legislative reforms and in playing vigorous advocacy roles for under-represented groups. Many of these institutions have made significant contributions by working with the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice in securing civil rights for disabled persons, prevention of domestic violence, and strengthening the rights of women and children. Private research organizations (think tanks) in Ghana have done some extraordinary work, and their contributions to public policy analysis, empirical data collection and innovative policy proposals should be the envy of other African countries.

Transparency and Accountability

Corruption is a problem in Ghana, but less so than in many other African countries. Ghana was ranked 67 out of 180 countries surveyed in Transparency International’s 2008 Corruption Perceptions Index. Ethiopia ranked 126/180. Corruption in Ghana is considered “opportunistic” instead of systemic (that is, where major institutions and processes of the state are routinely and extensively used by corrupt officials and others connected to them for their own advantage). Various surveys have shown that underpaid and under-trained judges were likely to succumb to bribery and other forms of corruption. Small time corruption is said to be rampant among the police and customs officials. The independent constitutional Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, mentioned above, was established to “to investigate complaints of violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms, injustice and corruption; abuse of power and unfair treatment of persons by public officers in the exercise of their duties, with power to seek remedy in respect of such acts or omissions and to provide for other related purposes” and “bring an action before any court in Ghana and may seek any remedy which may be available from that court”. Even though there is a difference of opinion on the efficacy of the Commission, there is evidence to show that it has made gains in anti-corruption efforts over the past decade. In 2005-06, the Commission undertook corruption and conflict of interest investigation against incumbent President John Kufuor and other top public officials, resulting in the resignation of certain ministers. But there are also encouraging examples of public integrity and personal sacrifices for the common good. For instance, the current President, John Mills, has refused compensation for his official services, directing that his salary and allowances be used for charity.

Threats to Ghanaian Democracy

Ghana’s multiparty democracy is still in its infancy and faces many threats. Some argue that the recently discovered “resource curse” of oil could derail democracy in Ghana as it has in other oil-rich West African countries. Inability of the government to improve the economic status of the rural and urban poor and provide better health care services to citizens could pose serious challenges. Lack of effective local governments in the rural areas could result in widespread dissatisfaction and instability. Failure to remedy the gross under-representation of women in leadership positions could retard Ghana’s democratic progress. Lack of investments in the educational sector could undermine Ghana’s long-term economic growth. The resurgence of ethnic politics aggravated by socio-economic problems could pose a grave threat to Ghana’s infant democracy. Numerous other challenges loom in the horizon, but Ghanaians appear prepared to meet them, and never to return to the days of tyrannical military strongmen.

The “X-Factor” in Ghanaian Democracy

Ghanaians have shown Africa’s tin pot dictators that multiparty democracy is not some fanciful Western ritual that is unworkable in the continent. They have shown that a non-ethnic, non-tribal multiparty democracy is the only viable option that could guarantee stability, equity and economic development in Africa. That is the secret, the “X” factor, in Ghana’s success. By constitutionally requiring that political parties NOT be ethnic- or tribal-based, Ghanaians laid a solid foundation for a single Ghanaian nation under the rule of law. They succeeded in creating a multiparty democracy that has the capacity to overcome the petty politics of ethnicity and tribalism. Amazingly, along the way they managed to create a political culture that integrates their humanity into a framework of national unity to forge a single Ghanaian identity.

Ghanaians have come to understand that they can do no nation-building by erecting impregnable walls of tribalism and ethnicity among themselves. They have also learned that democracy can not grow on the barren fields of tyranny where human rights are trampled upon and flagrantly disregarded. Even Ghana’s military leaders appreciated this fact when they bowed to the rule of law and returned to the barracks. Ghana today has become a beacon of hope to Africa. Ethiopia, as a collection of “Killilistans”, is a sad reminder of the darkest chapters of African history. We can all be very proud (and perhaps a bit jealous) of our Ghanaian brothers and sisters as they march united and confidently into the 21st Century secure in the knowledge that their rights are protected by the rule of law and their collective destiny rests sheltered in the palms of their hands.

Now, that’s what the amazing Ghanaians got, we ain’t got!

(The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at [email protected])