Never was so much owed by so many to so few…
How does one thank those who put everything on the line to stand up for justice, truth and the Ethiopian way?
How does one express appreciation to those who left their families, friends, neighbors and country to expose the truth about unspeakable crimes committed against children, and call international attention to the massive human rights abuses committed by Zenawi’s regime?
How does one express admiration to those who left high positions of authority and willingly gave up their professions and livelihoods because telling the truth was far more important to them than any amount of personal gain or advantage?
How does one say thank you to Woldemichael Meshesha, Frehiwot Samuel, Mitiku Teshome, and Alemayehu Zemedkun?
I am overcome by deep emotion as I struggle to answer these questions. And I find myself lacking the eloquence of diction or enough words in my vocabulary to express my respect, admiration, gratitude and appreciation for what these men have done in the cause of freedom, democracy and human rights in Ethiopia.
Our Four Points of Light…
These young men are four points of light in a country gripped by the darkness of fear and terror. Frehiwot, Woldemichael, and Mitiku illuminated the dark secrets and the ugly truth about the massacre of hundreds of our children by Zenawi’s specially recruited storm troopers.
They undertook a thorough and meticulous investigation of the massacres. They conscientiously documented the facts of the murder of each child and young person, interviewed hundreds of witnesses including those who were wounded and maimed in the brutal assault and talked to family members of victims. They examined the photographs of the grotesquely disfigured and bullet riddled corpses of the young men and women, and evaluated all manner of physical evidence related to the killings.
They energetically interrogated evasive, cagey, cocky and imperious officials who spared no effort to stonewall their investigations. And they fearlessly pursued their fact-finding mission without backing down. Not even once!
Then they reported to the world the shocking facts by way of a briefing to the United States House of Representatives. The body count: at least 193 young people murdered in cold blood. Over 760 suffered life-threatening bullet wounds. These were only the victims for whom documentation could be obtained or their deaths and injuries forensically verified. There were thousands, tens of thousands of other innocent citizens who were executed, made to disappear or grievously injured in the prisons, in the streets and in their homes and places of work. No documentation could be found for them, but the whereabouts of these patriots is known only to God.
But that was not all: These young men documented what the world had suspected all along. The young protesters were righteously indignant in challenging the election results, and they went about it in a peaceful and civil manner. They destroyed NO private or public property. Not a single one of them was armed! They were just a feisty throng of youthful demonstrators.
And finally, they forced us to confront the shocking truth that caused the deepest wounds in our hearts. Zenawi’s troops fired on these children not to disperse them, and not to scatter them away. No, No, No. Zenawi’s troops intended to butcher as many of them as they could that day. They intended to mow them down like grass stalks and leave their bodies littering the streets. Yes, all of those young men and women died from bullet wounds to their heads and/or upper torso. Such are the facts these young men discovered.
In the end, Mitiku, Woldemichael and Frehiwot revealed to the world the truth about the monstrous crimes committed against Ethiopia’s future, its youth. Their report became a devastating indictment of Zenawi and his regime for crimes against humanity, and a testament of truth for history and succeeding generations that there once was a regime in Ethiopia so cruel, so vicious, so depraved, so barbarous and demonic that it massacred its youth in the streets in cold blood.
Alemayehu Zemedkun was the deputy attorney general for the civil division in the state ministry. He was ordered to initiate civil action against the imprisoned leaders of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy, human rights defenders and civic leaders for damages allegedly caused by the young protesters. “Sue them in civil court. Let’s take everything they got. Let’s not just send the opposition leaders to the jailhouse, let’s also send their families to the poorhouse,†Alemayehu was commanded. But he declined to prosecute. He told his bosses that there was no evidence to prove the opposition leaders had anything to do with the protesters or any damage that may have been caused by them He told them the civil process can not be used to persecute citizens for their political views or beliefs. It is fundamentally unfair to have these individuals defend against both a criminal prosecution and a civil action at the same time, he told them. In any case, he was not in the business of using the law to steal from the people, or to oppress them. He knew he had no place among a horde of thieves, and so he packed up and went into exile. By taking such a heroic act, Alemayehu thwarted Zenawi’s carefully laid plans to send the families of the opposition leaders to the poorhouse.
Godsend to the Diaspora…
Frehiwot, Mitiku, Woldemichael and Alemayehu are a Godsend to Ethiopians in the Diaspora at this crucial stage of our struggle to improve the human rights situation in the homeland. As we pursue our human rights agenda in the United States Congress and H.R. 5680 returns to the legislative process under a different number, we will have our unimpeachable witnesses to tell the American people of the horrific crimes that are being committed on Ethiopian citizens by Zenawi’s regime. We will show them how their tax dollars are being used to support a vicious and ruthless dictator.
And in time, these young men will make their mark on the human rights struggle and make their contributions to us in many ways and forms. In their West Coast Tour, we will be learning a great deal from them. As Inquiry Commission members and judicial officials, they have seen the ugly underbelly of Zenawi’s regime and the massive human rights abuses he has unleashed on the people. We want to know firsthand what really goes on in the “belly of the Beast†where the innocent are arbitrarily arrested, tortured and killed, and often disappear altogether without a trace.
We aim to interact with them and sharpen our awareness of human rights abuses in Ethiopia, and tap their insights about what specific things we can do in the Diaspora to help out. So, as they begin their tour of the West Coast, we are confident that they will inspire us all to be better organized and become more effective advocates in the cause of human rights in Ethiopia. Ultimately, we are hopeful that their civic efforts, moral authority and legal skills will help us bring those who have committed crimes against humanity to the bar of justice.
Our Messengers of Truth…
As we think of the ways to thank these young men, we remain mindful of the fact that they are part of a generation that had faced the greatest challenges in Ethiopia’s modern history. For much of their lives, they have known and lived under tyranny and oppression — first it was the red terror, then white, then terror in Technicolor under Zenawi’s regime.
During their adult lives, they lived in a country of extreme contrasts: a country with a few millionaires, and tens of millions of poor people. They lived in a city bursting with “economic developmentâ€Â, and a country agonizing under grinding underdevelopment. They walked among elites who spend their work and play time in posh and plush hotels sipping the best French cognac and champagne, and a country where the bar tab for the evening can sustain several families for a year. They grew up in a country where the powers that be believe that everybody has a price — cash, a house, a fancy car, a good paying government job, influential position, title, whatever.
But there is no price to buy Alemayehu, Woldemichael, Frehiwot and Mitiku. Neither all of the gold mined and stolen out of Adola, nor the aid money siphoned off from international organizations and donor countries is enough to buy off these young men. Zenawi found out, much to his dismay and mortification, that these young men are not for sale, at any price.
But they will be available to us in America freely, to share the truth about the brutal dictatorship of Zenawi’s regime, the massive violations of human rights and ruthless suppression of dissent in Ethiopia. They will be our messengers of truth; and they will tell it like is! They will visit the cities of Sacramento, San Jose- Oakland-San Francisco, Los Angeles , Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego and Seattle to spread the truth. See the schedule: http://www.ethrev.com/2007/jan/01172007_inquiry_commission_west_coast_tour.html
Forever indebted…
As we stretch out our hands and welcome these young men in our midst in the West Coast, it is going to be an extraordinary experience for most of us. Few of us have ever met real Ethiopian heroes. We know more about brutal dictators and child killers than heroes who tell the truth and uplift the spirit of their people, give them hope, and inspire faith in the future of their homeland. You could say we are besides ourselves having them in our midst.
And as they visit with us, we shall thank them profusely, but not necessarily in the usual way of lavishing them with empty words and hollow phrases. No, we shall thank them by asking them deep and probing questions that will help us better understand the human rights crises in Ethiopia, and inspire us to take effective collective action.
We want to know about the human side of their investigative work. How did they feel when they found out that 193 young people were intentionally shot and their bodies thrown into the streets like rabid dogs? How did they feel when they spoke to those young victims who suffered life-threatening bullet wounds or were maimed for life and learned about their pain and suffering? How did they handle their grief and sorrow? How did they feel when the world remained silent or made empty gestures and sounded hollow words about human rights violations and extrajudicial killings, yet did nothing to help bring the criminals to justice?
We want to know about how it felt to show courage under fire: What was it like to look the Beast in the eye and say: “No! No! No! We will not change the truth. We will not fudge the facts. We will not falsify our conclusions. You can do whatever you like, and if it must be so, we will go to our graves clutching the truth close to our hearts.†Halleluja!
And we can’t wait to learn about duty, honor and country from these young men.
Duty. We want to know the enormous difficulties they faced performing their fact-finding duties, and how they managed to find the truth and document it massively despite relentless official stonewalling and bureaucratic obstructions. And once they discovered the truth, we want to know how they made it their sacred duty to stand for the innocent children who were murdered, to speak out against injustice and to hold a candle of hope for human rights for all their countrymen and women who suffer in quiet despair under Zenawi’s regime.
We will ask them about how ordinary people like themselves — fathers, husbands, brothers, uncles, neighbors and jolly ole’ good fellows in their communities — become extraordinary moral leaders by merely performing their duties with fairness, diligence, expertise, meticulous care and professionalism. We want to know about the moral supremacy of those who perform their duties with unflinching fidelity to the truth, while upholding the virtues of honesty and integrity, over the wicked villains who extol corruption as their highest moral virtue.
Honor. These young men would rather honor the memory and suffering of their young countrymen and women, than sell their souls to the Prince of Darkness for a few pieces of silver. They chose honor over everything — self, family, profession — and never gave in. As Winston Churchill said: “Never give in, never give in, never; never; never; never – in nothing, great or small, large or petty — never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense.†Woldemichael, Frehiwot, Alemayehu, and Mitiku never gave in, except to the truth and the facts they discovered in their investigations. We hope to learn about honor from them.
Country. We want to ask them about patriotism and their love for their homeland and people. Like all patriots the world over, they did their duty out of love of country and pride in their people. They believed in their Ethiopia, no human life, no person, however poor or wretched, deserves to be killed or maimed for exercising basic human rights. They loved their country and people so much, and had such great hope for the future, that they stood ready to offer their own lives and liberties in exchange for liberty and justice for all!
We want to talk to them about others things as well. Perhaps talk them a little bit about character. What is it in the character of a man or a woman that will embolden them to stand up and shout a mighty shout when confronted by acts of injustice? We live in America in relative comfort with robust constitutional rights, but most of stand mute in the face of manifest injustice and unfathomable acts of political cruelty. We have the means to help bring about change, but we lack the will to act.
We can organize and use our resources to promote human rights and freedom, but we spend more time pointing accusatory fingers at each other and showing each other’s fault. We criticize others for being intolerant, oppressive and tyrannical, but we hardly practice the virtues of tolerance, respect, compassion or collaboration. We want to know what it is that these young men “got that we don’t got�
Perhaps these young men can tell us a little bit about courage since they have practiced it so well. How does one acquire courage when one is overwrought by moral cowardice to the point that one is afraid to take a stand in public. Some of us write in pseudonyms and made-up names to criticize and castigate evil; yet we are afraid to show our faces or be known. Perhaps they can tell us where to shop for courage?
And while they are with us, we would like to tell them a little bit about ourselves in the Diaspora. They probably already know that far too many of us have gone into “survival†mode or AWOL from the CAUSE. We have become businessmen, learned men in the arts, sciences, the law and medicine. We are all very important people. We can’t be bothered by the situation of those poor little people who are dying over there. There is not really much we can do. We will probably explain to them in sophisticated scholarly language: “You must understand human rights abuses are systemic and structural problems. To improve things over there, you need process change and structural transformation.â€Â
Perhaps we’ll change the subject and ask them: “By the way, how are things over there? We hear business is booming. We want to go back and invest, you know, help the poor people there, give them jobs. May be snag a parcel of land and build a house while setting up the business. What do they think?†They may look at us in disbelief and amazement, and ask themselves: “Are we on the same planet with these guys?â€Â
But we are also apprehensive about some tough questions they might ask of us: “In our short stay in America, we have noticed the deafening silence of the Diaspora intellectuals on the human rights situation in Ethiopia, could you please explain why that is so?†Not an easy question. Got to do some hard thinking to answer this one.
Or they could ask: “It seems that Diaspora Ethiopians always react to what is done or not done by Zenawi or his regime. Many of you seem to be standing in a fog of uncertainty and vacillation about what you support and what you oppose. Could you please explain to us your agenda for Ethiopia?†Even tougher to explain this one.
Perhaps they may ask the most dreaded question of all: “What is the Diaspora’s vision for the future of Ethiopia?†We are mindful of the fact that these guys are lawyers and skilled fact-finders who will ask many follow up questions. Ummm! What to say?!
And we will ask them to join us in celebrating other great heroes and heroines of human rights in Ethiopia — 193 young men and women slaughtered defending democracy along with 763 wounded, the leaders of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy and other civic leaders and human rights defenders, and the thousands of unnamed political prisoners and torture victims, and their families who have sacrificed so much and suffered so greatly to advance the cause of freedom, democracy and human rights. Lest we forget, we shall also celebrate our sister in the cause of human rights, Ana Gomes.
So, how do we thank these young men? Let me count the ways…
It is hard to resist the temptation to use mere words to thank these young men. But thank them we shall: for speaking the truth, for helping wage a human rights struggle against a monstrous tyranny that has set a new benchmark for cruelty and viciousness in the modern annals of crimes against humanity.
We shall thank them for putting justice above ethnicity, human rights above personal gain and democracy above partisan interest.
We shall thank them for lifting our hopes, for giving us pride in the determination and steadfastness of purpose of the younger generation.
We shall thank them for reinforcing our faith that not all of Ethiopia’s heroes are dead and gone; and for proving to us that we need not look to history to learn about duty, honor and country.
We shall thank them for keeping the memories of the young people massacred by Zenawi’s troops alive, and for reminding us that though these young people have died, the principles of liberty, freedom and democracy for which they gave their lives will endure and outlive any two-bit tyrant.
We shall thank them for teaching us the true meaning of being an Ethiopian — it is not ethnicity, religion, language, profession or bank account or residence — which is love of justice and belief in the dignity and worth of every human being.
We shall thank them for making us aware that millions of our countrymen and women who suffer under tyranny, and whose true leaders languish in prison, look to us for moral leadership and encouragement, even though we are separated by space and time.
And we shall thank them for teaching us the greatest lesson of all: “Never to give in, never to give in, never; never; never; never – in nothing, great or small, large or petty – never to give in†to the underhanded trickery, bullying, threats and intimidation of the bloodthirsty Beast who devoured so many of our children!
West Coast Challenge to the Rest of the Diaspora…
And so we freedom-loving human rights defenders on the West Coast call on all freedom-loving Ethiopians in the in the United States of America — our home away from home — to join us and say to Frehiwot, Woldemichael, Mitiku and Alemayehu: “THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR OUR HOMELAND AND OUR PEOPLE. THANK YOU FOR AWAKENING OUR CONSCIENCE AND FOR BEING OUR CONSCIENCE. THANK YOU FOR GIVING US HOPE. AND THANK YOU FOR REINVIGORATING OUR FAITH IN A BRIGHT FUTURE FOR ETHIOPIA.â€Â
We on the West Coast also put out a challenge to all Ethiopians living in America — from sea to shining sea, to those who live on the East Coast, in the Midwest, the Northeast and Northwest, the South, Southeast and Southwest — upon whom God has shed his grace, to open your arms in a warm embrace and welcome these heroes into your communities and personally say to them: “THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.â€Â
Postscript
On a personal note…
I am overcome with a sense of deep humility and great pride that these four members of the legal profession spearheaded the effort to expose the truth about the massacre of the young people after the 2005 elections, and for unearthing evidence of massive abuses of human rights in their investigations. In many ways, these young men remind me of the great African American lawyers who fought against racial segregation and discrimination in American society. Such dedicated lawyers as Thurgood Marshall, Charles Hamilton Houston, Oliver Hill and Elaine R. Jones, all great African American lawyers who stood up for truth and justice at great risk to their lives, and who ultimately cast their lot with the oppressed and the weak, and the wretched of the earth.
Though separated by distance, time and culture, our young lawyers also stood up before the court of world opinion and shouted a might shout: “193 children cry out for justice from their graves. Their families float in a sea of tears. Thousands of others are imprisoned daily, tortured and killed.†These young lawyers are now the voices of all of these victims from the grave, and from the prisons and jails, in exile and from wherever else Zenawi’s victims cry for justice. I have never been more proud of the members of my profession than I am now. I am overwhelmed. My cup runneth over!
In August, 1991, Prime Minister Tamrat Layne presented his economic proposals for public debate. The 35-page (Amharic) booklet entitled Draft Transitional Economic Policy for Ethiopia sought to comprehensively address the country’s diverse economic problems. Generally, the proposals are uninspired, timid and cumulatively favor maintenance of the status quo.
Magnitude of Economic Problems
Ato Tamrat’s proposals are derived from his analysis of the country’s dir economic situation. He claims that the country’s agricultural infrastructure has declined over the past 17 years as a result of mismanagement and poor economic planning. He laments the country’s inability to feed itself and the need to import foodstuffs. He asserts that the country’s industrial productive capacity continues to deteriorate because of the lack of raw materials and spare parts. He sounds the alarm on the depletion of the country’s foreign exchange reserves and accumulating debt. The country’s trading and commercial capacity, inflation and transportation infrastructure are all said to be approaching critical status. In sum: “Because our country is in such a desperate economic situation, a substantial segment of our population is facing starvation.”
Reasons for Economic Problems
Ato Tamrat points to the Derg’s relentless suppression of private entrepreneurship as the principal reasons for the country’s economic decline. The Derg’s war efforts are particularly blamed for the diversion of valuable resources from economic development programs. The Derg is also accused of overcentralizing and overbureaucratizing economic planning and policy making.
Tamrat’s Proposals for Transitional Economy
Ato Tamrat underscores the fact that his proposals are presented as stopgap measures for the transitional period preceding general elections. The Charter requires elections within two years. He asserts that efforts must be undertaken immediately to reverse the country’s economic decline. He claims the “democratic process” established under the Charter can facilitate economic revitalization.
Government Role in the Economy
According to Ato Tamrat, the transitional government should be concerned with “setting progressive economic policies and undertaking a limited role in those economic activities in which it is particularly efficient.” The transitional government should also be “involved in assisting the process of capital formation and mobilization of private enterprise. There shall be no limits on private investments and national capital should be given preference over external capital.” Government should also actively involve and encourage the public to participate in the debate over the economic policy. Ato Tamrat sees a special role for his government in promoting group investment ventures and in initiating diverse small-scale economic enterprises. “Government should actively seek foreign aid and use the assistance for economic development
programs.”
Agricultural Policies
Land ownership will remain with the government. Ato Tamrat argues that privatization of land will create severe economic and social problems. He feels his transitional government is ill-equipped to address the issue of land tenure and reform. In the short term, Ato Tamrat proposes removal of price controls on agricultural commodities and reductions in producer taxes. He proposes to give agricultural producers special assistance including farm tools, technical advice and improved transportation to facilitate access to markets. Drought-ravaged areas in the north are to be given special rehabilitative assistance.
Ato Tamrat also proposes a major reduction in state involvement in agriculture. He proposes to “sell off or dismantle unprofitable state enterprises. Only the profitable ones should be held by the government and operate competitively and without subsidies.” He favors the expansion of “modern agriculture” and aims to encourage commercial agriculture by providing concessions, tax incentives, loans and guarantees.
Industrial and Related Policies
Both heavy and light industry will be owned by the government. Banking and risk management institutions will also be government-owned. Rail, sea and air transportation will remain under government control. Private entrepreneurs will be permitted to engage in joint ventures with the government. They will be allowed to engage in wholesale trade and small businesses. Indemnification of private capital is also proposed as a means of encouraging risk-taking.
Housing Policy
Individuals will be allowed to build private homes but the land will remain under government ownership. Homeowners, however, will be allowed to rent, sell or otherwise transfer their interests in their homes freely. Persons who lost their home to the Derg’s nationalization program will be able to reacquire them by presenting proper authentication. Large buildings will not be returned to their former owners nor will they be offered compensation.
Problems in Tamrat’s Proposals
Prime Minister Tamrat’s proposals on short-term economic issues appear to be on target. The transitional government could effectively act to aid farmers by providing tools and technical advice. It could remove stifling bureaucratic regulations on the economy and reduce taxes on producers. It can play an important role in seeking humanitarian aid to meet food shortages and avert another large-scale starvation. On the other hand, the his proposals on restructuring the economy are of dubious economic efficacy and constitutional validity.
Initially, one is struck by the curious similarities between Ato Tamrat’s proposals and the privatization and economic reform programs announced by former dictator Mengistu in the twilight of his regime. It may be recalled that Colonel Mengistu proposed a “mixed economy” which sought to allow a greater role for private enterprise in the economy. In much the same way, Ato Tamrat now proposes to reanimate the Ethiopian economy by a combination of superficial incentives and regulatory reform while essentially preserving a dominant role for government as an economic actor in the market place. The differences between the current proposals and Col. Mengistu’s “mixed economy” approach is imperceptible.
Ato Tamrat’s proposals on the transitional government’s role in the economy are puzzling. He proposes a diminished role for government limited to broad policymaking and selective participation in the market as an economic actor. Yet he insists on government ownership of heavy and light industry, monopoly in mining, energy, banking, transportation and a whole range of other vital economic activities.
The Prime Minister’s proposals on foreign investment and local capital formation are quixotic. Ato Tamrat claims that there should be no limits on private investments. Yet private investment may not even compete with government in critical sectors, e.g. mining, energy, banking, transportation. At best, private capital can form joint partnerships with majority government ownership. Ato Tamrat claims that domestic entrepreneurs will be given preference over external capital. He fails to realize that few foreign investors would tolerate second-class treatment. Any foreign investor today is guaranteed special and preferential treatment in Eastern Europe, the Soviet republics and Asia.
There is another major risk that is likely to chill both external and domestic capital investment. An elected government in two years could change the policies adopted by the transitional government. This risk is compounded if the country is governed under the current proposals for regional decentralization.
Ato Tamrat claims that his proposals are short-term and aimed at the transitional period. This is not borne out in the content of his proposals. He could not reasonably expect to achieve the major structural reforms he proposes in the next 18 months. The manner in which the proposals are cast suggests that Ato Tamrat is certain about the outcome of the anticipated elections including the likely composition of the leadership, the nature of the federal structure (presumably there will be a national or central government with supreme powers in economic policy), and the exact methods on how legitimately elected government could decide on how to open the country’s economy to internal and external market forces. If fair elections are anticipated prudence would urge greater circumspection on the part of the prime minister in the proposals he makes. Needless to say, only a legitimately elected government can authoritatively decide on whether to open the country’s economy to foreign investment and on what terms, sell off state enterprises or undertake long-term economic programs for infrastructure development.
There is another disturbing aspect of Ato Tamrat’s proposals. His proposals may lack constitutional (Charter) authority. It is dubious that the prime minister or the transitional government has the constitutional authority to auction off publicly-owned enterprises, commit the country to long-term international economic obligations or begin to unilaterally effect wholesale economic changes without the imprimaturs of an elected legislature. To be sure, the transitional Charter is notorious for its complete silence on the nature of the transitional economic.
Certainly, there are some urgent and very pressing problems that are within the proper sphere of a transitional government. Orderly demobilization and economic and social rehabilitation of both former soldiers and EPRDF fighters should be a prime consideration. The transitional government could act to quickly revitalize certain sectors such as tourism to generate foreign exchanges. As proposed, price controls should be removed while closely monitoring inflation. Moreover, the transitional government could act to remove other restrictive banking and currency regulations. It could employ its budgetary allocations not only to reenergize agriculture but also alleviate urban unemployment. Such kinds of issues should be the foci of a transitional economic program.
In the final analysis, there is little that Ato Tamrat offers to bring Ethiopia out of 17 years of economic hopelessness and malaise or insure a smooth transition to a market economy. The poisonous tree of Marxist economic planning is still in Ethiopia complete with roots and branches — its symmetry a bit warped and tarnished, but no less towering andpernicious. Well, back to the future!
__________________________________
Alemayehu Gebremariam, Ph.D., J.D., is Senior Editor of ER
In less than a month Mengistu HaileMariam and his Derg have been swept from the Ethiopian political landscape. Victory for the Ethiopian People’s Democratic Revolutionary Front (EPDRF) came quickly and Addis Ababa was captured with minimum resistance.
The political implications of this victory however remain unclear. Historic ethnic antagonisms and rivalries continue to inspire an atmosphere of fear and loathing.
The EPDRF is viewed with considerable suspicion because it is regarded as a `Tigrean organization’ with a hidden political agenda. Non- Tigreans generally dismiss EPDRF’s claims of multiethnic representation as crass political machination. Amharas resent a `Tigrean victory’ because they feel displaced from what they perceive to be their traditional role in government. The Oromos view the situation as a change without a difference.
Other ethnic groups feel they are pawns in a long-standing Amhara-Tigrean power struggle. Many remain suspicious and apprehensive about EPDRF’s intentions or its willingness to share political power. In its military victory, the EPDRF remains under intense internal and international scrutiny.
EPDRF Statements
EPDRF leaders have so far shown extraordinary political skill and astuteness in the maelstrom of fear and loathing. EPDRF Chairman Meles Zenawi, aged 37 (whose real name is Legesse Zenawi), has appeared on television and responded to questions in Amharic. He gave assurances that Ethiopia’s flag will not be replaced by the Front’s flag. He expressed his “hope” that the EPDRF will be “an important element in a transitional government.” He has declared the aim of his interim government as one of “establishing a broad-based government to facilitate democratic elections.” He identified “stabilization of the security situation in the country” and famine relief as the top priorities.
Meles has stated that detained former government officials will be brought to trial once a provisional government has been established. He promised there will be no vendetta killings or retribution.
The most auspicious of the EPDRF statements announced the scheduling of a `political conference’ on July 1 to establish a `broad-based’ provisional government. EPDRF’s support for a referendum in Eritrea remains to be the most volatile and emotional issue to many Ethiopians.
EPDRF Actions
EPDRF forces have not openly gloated over their victory. They have been restrained in their use of violence and have refrained from large-scale vendetta killings. They have banned public demonstrations including those supporting them. Scores of youthful anti-American demonstrators were killed or injured by EPDRF forces while gathered before the U.S. Embassy. Several hundred former officials who have been placed in detention, including Legesse Asfaw and Tesfaye Wolde Selassie, are awaiting trial. Independent sources and western jounalists confirm that the detainees are being treated well.
EPDRF leaders have called on the country’s bureaucrats to seek their cooperation in reactivating civil administration. Kebele committees were established to conduct house-to-house searches for weapons. The highway to northern Ethiopia which had been closed for years is now open and famine relief activity appears to be underway.
EPDRF’s Critics
EPDRF’s critics remain unconvinced. Skeptics see sinister motives behind EPDRF’s actions. Some believe that EPDRF leaders are merely buying time until they are better able to consolidate their authority. Others claim that EPDRF leaders are cleverly manipulating democratic symbols to ultimately impose one-party Tigrean rule. It is also said that the EPDRF is merely responding to external and internal pressures and will show its implacability once it is firmly entrenched. Some even cynically suggest that the EPDRF aims to eventually breakup Ethiopia so that it can merge Tigre with Eritrea and establish a new state.
What is to be done?
The EPDRF has taken over state functions but does not regard itself a formal governmental body. EPDRF officials have said that they will defer decisions unrelated to public security until the establishment of a provisional government. This includes the trial of former officials who are in detention.
Winston Churchill once remarked: “The problems of victory are more agreeable than those of defeat, but they are no less difficult.” The EPDRF and the provisional government that it will help set up are likely to face their greatest challenges in victory than in their struggle to oust Mengistu. They have inherited complex problems.
The new government must walk a tightrope over a country teetering on the precipice of ethnic fragmentation, economic disaster and cataclysmic famine. Good intentions and good faith will not suffice.
The EPDRF leadership is `between a rock and a hard place’ particularly on the question of socialism. For many EPDRF leaders the decline and irrelevance of socialism must be utterly disconcerting. Arguably, many of these leaders including Meles, reportedly a one-time admirer of Stalinist Albania and a Marxist student activist while a medical student at Addis Ababa University in the early 1970s, attained their political education and maturity in the uncompromising tradition of Marxism-Leninism.
They looked towards Albania for a model. Ironically, three weeks after EPDRF’s victory Albanian communists voluntarily handed over power to non-communist elements effectively ending communist rule. Now the EPDRF finds itself facing a critical choice: muddle through with an unworkable and irrelevant ideology or openly renounce socialism and embrace democratic rule.
Statements by Meles suggest that the EPDRF is indeed shopping for some form of liberal democracy; and not only because socialism has been discredited but also because the democratic way is the `only game in town.’ The US and other Western countries have preconditioned any cooperation and assistance on the establishment of democratic institutions. US official Herman Cohen has obliged Meles by sending him the political writings of the framers of the American constitution.
Liberal democracy, at least in the American tradition, presupposes constitutional government with specific guarantees of individual freedoms. The powers of government are subject to constitutional constraints. The American experience also argues strongly for the division of powers between the national government and local governments under a system of federalism. In practice, periodic elections, party competition, free speech and freedom of political association are essential. Conflict is managed through compromise, negotiation and tolerance of different views. Economically, liberal democracy presupposes a free enterprise system with the role of government limited to regulatory functions.
In a society with little democratic tradition and a long history of dictatorial rule, the birth of constitutional government will be painful and even chaotic. In such circumstance, the sword often appears instinctively more appealing and efficient than laborious negotiation and compromise. But violence is its own antithesis. It begets hatred, fear and more violence. The EPDRF and the provisional government must recognize that Ethiopia can no longer be yoked by violence to preserve its integrity or attain harmony.
Ethiopia’s new leaders must be genuinely committed to democratic values and institutions. Thomas Jefferson aptly observed: “I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.” The new leaders must not only educate but also define a new vision for the society. They must undertake a means to change the way Ethiopians think not only about government, society, and politics but also themselves.
Burden of Education
The educational task is a unique one. Ethiopians must first unlearn and discard long-held prejudices, unfounded fears and blind ethnic aversions. We must learn tolerate each other in our diversity of views and beliefs. We must learn to respect and celebrate each other’s ethnic heritage. Only then can we begin to appreciate the innate equality of all human beings and the egalitarian value of democracy.
To Heal a Nation
There is great expectation about the July political conference. EPDRF leaders have pledged to facilitate broad-based participation in the political dialogue. However, they have not been clear on the mechanics of participation. Understandably, it is a delicate task. Many troubling questions remain unaswered.
Will participants to the conference be invited? How will groups or representatives of groups be selected? Will EPDRF leaders chair the conference? Will members of the formber regime be allowed to participate? Will organizations that have opposed EPDRF in the past be permitted to participate? Will EPDRF insist on certain portfolios such as defense in any provisional government? Where will the conference be held? If in Addis Ababa, what guarantees will be given to participants? Will the conference be televised or broadcast on radio?
If the conference is held as scheduled, EPDRF’s leaders will likely experience their first baptism in the fire of democratic politics. They should be prepared to face challenges to their legitimacy, competence, sincerity and intentions. As conference organizers with colorable title to leadership, they must show considerable political will and skill. Theyvmust strive to harmonize the diversity of views and opinions. They can not afford to be temperamental and must show an infinite capacity to negotiate and compromise. No better time to lay the groundwork for genuine democratic government than now. In the end what is at stake is not merely the construction of civil government but the healing of a nation wounded deeply by famine, poverty, and ethnic warfare. The choice is clear: A farewell to arms or a farewell to Ethiopia.
___________________ Dr Alemayehu Gebremariam is a contributing editor of ER. Los Angeles
As opposition forces ringed Addis Ababa, Col. Mengistu Haile Mariam boarded an Ethiopian Airlines plane on May 22 and fled Ethiopia for a ranch in Zimbabwe. State-run radio announced Mengistu’s unceremonious departure without comment. After 14 years of iron-fisted rule, Mengistu left behind a demoralized army, a shattered economy, and an ethnically fragmented society.
In his last days Mengistu desperately sought to shore up his regime. He offered to negotiate with opposition forces in peace talks spon sored by the U.S. He attempted cosmetic changes for his regime by reshuffling his cabinet.He even promised to stray away from his Marx ist policies by relaxing control over the economy and allow more personal freedoms.In the end, as one observer noted:”Mengistu left power as stealthily as he seized it.”
Mengistu remained messianically defiant to the end. He deluded him self into believing that he was the linchipin of Ethiopian unity. He refused to believe that he could be an obstacle to peace and national reconciliation. Recently, he responded to a proposal for his resignation by scornfully instructing the petitioning university professors that he could only be removed by the masses who elected him. He sought to rally public support by raising the specter of secession and national fragmentation. He blamed western powers, particularly the U.S., for plotting his overthrow and undermining his regime both at home and abroad.
Many Ethiopians had long been resigned to the fact that Mengistu will remain in power indefinitely through brutal repression. Few Ethiopians had expected Mengistu’s stealthy departure. Even fewer expected that he would escape for a luxurious lifestyle on a large colonial ranch in Zimbabwe. It is rumored that he bought a ranch previously owned by Ian smith, the former outlaw Rhodesian prime minister. Mengistu’s departure was received with muted jubilation. The imminent siege of the city dampened any large-scale public expression of merriment.
There is divergent speculation on the factors leading to Mengistu’s sudden departure. Some observers suggest that the U.S. helped to secretly facilitate Mengistu’s unobstructed departure in anticipation of a peaceful transfer of power. Others suggest that the inexorable military pressure by the opposition forces convinced Mengistu that there was no hope of saving his regime. Still others speculate that Mengistu realized that he could no longer command the forces or adequately resupply them to continue the fight. Commanding officers reportedly deserted their troops and joined opposition forces. Others demoralized over recent defeats simply did not have the will to fight. The decline of socialism globally and changes in the Soviet foreign policy are also said to be responsible for the overall decay and disintegration of Mengistu’s government.
Mengistu’s Legacy
As the head of a semi-literate military governing structure, Mengistu ruled by Praetorian and military rhetoric. He believed that Ethiopia’s social and political problems could be solved by the forced application of Marxist policies. Both Mengistu and the Derg, the governing body, were often oblivious to the intricate and complex problems in the country’s economy and ethnic structure.
During Mengistu’s regime Ethiopia became synonymous with famine and a global symbol of poverty. Mengistu embraced socialism and experimented with voguish socialist policies nationalizing private property and collectivizing agriculture. He proclaimed a people’s republic and ordered the establishment of a working class party over which he reigned as chairman. He also established urban and peasant associations to maximize his political control at the local level.
Mengistu also left a bitter legacy of ethnic strife and political repression. He refused to negotiate meaningfully with opposition groups. He imposed military solutions to political problems. He ruthlessly eliminated political opposition and periodically purged the military and the derg. Occasionally he personally executed opponents. During the “Red Terror Campaign” in the late 1970,s, he ordered his loyalist cadres and militiamen to conduct political witch hunts resulting in thousands of deaths. In 1978 Amnesty International reported 8,000 political prisoners in Ethiopia.
Mengistu established the third largest military force in Africa with Soviet support. He spent over $10 billion to purchase arms. The military budget exceeded seventy percent of the country’s operating budget by the late 1980s.
Mengistu’s repression caused the largest exodus of Ethiopians in history resulting in the most acute refugee problem in Africa. International sources reported nearly a million Ethiopian refugees in the Sudan in 1985. Hundreds of thousands of other Ethiopians also fled the country to all parts of the world to escape Mengistu’s repression.
Mengistu will most likely be remembered for his depraved indifference to the millions of famine victims. According to Dawit Wolde Giorgis, formerly Mengistu’s commissioner for relief and rehabilitation, Mengistu and his Marxist coterie “either refused to believe (famine) existed, implying it was an insult to suggest such thing could happen in a Marxist-Leninist society, or they asserted if it did exist, it was best to let nature take its course.” Mengistu angered international donors by using food aid as weapon against opposition forces.
Current Situation
Mengistu appointed former defense minister General Tesfaye Gebre Kidan as acting head of state just before making his furtive exit. General Tesfaye had served as the military governor in Eritrea and reportedly opposed Mengistu’s decision to execute 12 generals two years ago. Mengistu later removed him from office.
Initially, there was some speculation that Tesfaye may be able to revitalize the army and successfully repel opposition forces. In a 15-minute televised speech shortly after Mengistu’s departure, Tesfaye expressed his desire to negotiate at an upcoming U.S.-sponsored peace talks.He pledged to carry on with the fight if political settlements could not be achieved.
Buoyed by recent military successes opposition forces seemed determined to vanquish the Derg. They quickly rejected Tesfaye’s interim appointment and declared that Mengistu’s departure in itself will not lead to national reconciliation or peace. They insist on the removal of all officials associated with Mengistu, and the establishment of a transitional government.
Tesfaye was unable to reverse the gains made by the opposition, and government forces lost ground. It had been expected that the elite forces deployed in the capital could indefinitely forestall capture of the capital. Within days the military situation for the government proved hopeless. Less than a week after Mengistu’s departure, the Eritrean People Liberation Front (EPLF) seized Asmara and the port city of Assab. Opposition forces had completely encircled the capital. The city’s defenders were in disarray leaving Addis Ababans wondering what might happen next. On the eve of the scheduled peace talks, the government did not appear to have much negotiating strength and was reluctantly willing to turn over power to the opposition forces. At the conclusion of the first day of talks, mediator and U.S. Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, Herman Cohen somberly announced: “After consulting with all parties, the U.S. government is recommending that the forces of the EPDRF enter the city as soon as possible to help stabilize the situation.” On May 28 EPDRF forces secured the capital after a brief battle. The government called on its soldiers to surrender. And thus ended a seventeen year nightmare.
Following the conclusion of the London peace talks, EPDRF Chairman Meles Zenawi responding to a reporter’s question on the organization’s presumed Stalinist tendencies stated:
“The EPDRF is for the formation of a broad based coalition government as soon as possible. After the formation of such a broad based government, there will be an internationally supervised elections in the country to form an elected government. If that is Stalinism, I am afraid that is what we are working for.”
Meles further indicated that the maintenance of law and order facilitation of the peace process will be high EPDRF priorities. Other EPDRF spokesmen have further indicated that elements of the Mengistu government will be “determined and tried as war criminals and international humanitarian organization will be able to visit them.”
Calm before the storm?
Addis Ababa remained outwardly calm in the week following Mengistu’s departure. There was not much joyous celebration either about Mengistu’s departure or the imminent takeover by the opposition forces. Remarkably schools and shops remained open although there was a 9 pm to 5 am curfew. Thousands gleefully witnessed the dismantling of Lenin’s statute two days after Mengistu left. Close associations of Mengistu and other party members were reportedly arrested or killed while attempting to escape. Most foreigners left the country; the U.S. and Israel coordinated the airlift of nearly 15 thousands Fallashas in 33 hours.
Addis Ababa was described to be in a state of nervous anticipation following Mengistu’s departure. While there was no perceptible panic among city residents, there was grave concern that anarchy could result when opposition forces began their advance on the city. It was also feared that Addis Ababans may turn against remnants of Mengistu’s regime to settle old scores. However, after the EPDRF moved into the city and suppressed pockets of resistance the city regained its calm. EPDRF elements appeared to be highly disciplined; and some were seen casually chatting with city residents on the streets.
Short-term Scenarios
Various scenarios appear to be possible in the short-term. The Derg and the political machinery established by Mengistu are certainly doomed. Tesfaye’s government neither had the opportunity to propose new initiative or the time to pursue negotiations to achieve a political settlement with opposition forces. In fact at the end of the first day of the peace talks Tesfaye had been served with the ultimatum: surrender immediately or face immediate attack. With the U.S. blessing EPDRF launched at attack on government position at dawn and quickly captured the city.
Many Ethiopian appear to be perplexed about the meaning of an out right victory by opposition forces. The Ethiopian Peoples Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPDRF) purports to be an umbrella organization with multiethnic and multiregional composition. It is believed that the core leadership of the EPDRF. But little is publicly known about the leaders or their political and economic programs. Often spokesmen are assigned the task of articulating the coalition’s military objectives. There is also little that is known about the internal structure of the EPDRF or the multi-ethnic coalition it purportedly represents. This has fueled considerable speculation. The leaders have also been described as “Albania-type communists,” “Maoists,” and “EPLF front.”
Recent statements by EPDRF spokesmen add to the mystery and uncertainty about the composition of the organization’s leadership or its political orientation. The EPDRF has not made clear its political objectives beyond general platitudes about multiparty elections and the establishment of a provisional government to replace the Derg. It appears impractical to believe that the mere promise of democracy could hold together a nation so deeply racked by ethnic division and longstanding political antagonisms. Observers suggest that the EPDRF by being reticent about its political programs may be missing a critical opportunity to establish itself as a viable alternative to the Derg. Some Ethiopians seem to be fatalistically resigned to the metaphor or the “old wine in a new bottle.”
It is likely that EPDRF will seize the moment and announce its short- and -long-term plans for the country and present its leaders to the public. U.S. officials at the peace talks have indicated that the EPDRF will form a transitional government for about 10 months until national elections could be held. If this coalition seeks legitimacy and credibility and ultimately succeed where Mengistu has failed, it must speak for itself and be prepared to discuss its political orientation, plans for the establishment of a democratically elected government and openly share its proposals for a provisional government.
Failure to do so is likely to foster distrust and fear and ultimately promote further ethnic strife.
There are late reports indicating that the smaller ethnic groups in the country feel left out of the negotiation process and fear that they will be left out of the political process altogether. Some observers suggest that unless the provisional government makes a determined effort to be inclusive and conciliatory, it will find peace to be elusive. There are late unconfirmed reports of clashes between EPDRF forces and local elements in Gojjam and Gondar, and an effort by forces still under Tesfaye Gebre Kidan and Tesfaye Dinka to regroup and retake Addis Ababa. Reportedly there are about 100,000 troops still under General Tesfaye Gebre Kidan in Harar, Sidamo, and other provinces that is not captured by the EPDRF.
The provisional government will be facing extraordinary problems. It must first seek to structure a genuinely representative government and quickly stabilize the anarchic conditions throughout the country. During the period of transition, a breakdown of law and order should be expected. Unless the provisional government quickly establishes order and moves on a political agenda that is sensitive to the multiethnic demands of the nation, it is likely to find bogged in the same abysmal morass that trapped Mengistu’s government.
The provisional government will have to quickly reactivate the civil service and the bureaucracy. It may find itself administrative paralyzed if it should attempt to remove existing civil servants and replace them with combat veterans. It must avoid intimidation of the bureaucracy and seek to overhaul it over a longer time period. It is instructive note that Mengistu succeeded in consolidating his power by reorienting the existing bureaucracy to his advantage. Of course, those guilty of crimes during Mengistu’s rule should be removed or disciplined
To allay public uncertainty the provisional government will have to make its political programs and orientation early on. The politics of silence and ambiguity will prove to be counterproductive. The new leaders must come out openly and share their vision of Ethiopia and concrete proposals for change. It indeed the new government is genuinely democratic, it should clearly spell out its proposals for a representative government and a timetable for multiparty elections. It should state unambiguously that it sees itself as a provisional and transitional government until elections are held. EPDRF’s current pattern of behavior is inauspiciously reminiscent of the early days of the Derg – anonymous leaders, platitudinous declarations about democracy, “provisional government,” inability to articulate a clear political direction, preoccupation with seizing power without contemplation of a vision to channel this power, messianic pretensions to save the country and so on. Ethiopians must not be quick to judge; and the provisional government must be given a chance to succeed.
The provisional government must make extraordinary efforts to limit political and vendetta killings. It should quickly establish investigative commissions to look into government misconduct and abuse during Mengistu’s regime. It should resist the impulse to execute or imprison suspects without the due process of law. Even those officials accused of the most heinous crimes should be given a fair trial before punishment is imposed. For in upholding the rule of law and resisting the temptation to act arbitrarily, the new government will have established its legitimacy not only in the of its own people but also before the court of world public opinion. If the rule of law is ignored, the provisional government will have begun its journey on the same irreversible course Mengistu followed to oblivion.
The provisional government should move quickly to demilitarize the capital and mop up pockets of resistance. It should reconstitute the existing military structure and integrate a segment of the large number of guerrilla fighters into a disciplined military organization. It may be impractical to maintain a large armed force given the apparent democratic orientation of the new government. It may be necessary to decommission a sizable part of the guerrilla army and plan for the return of these individuals to their homes and farms. The new government, unlike Mengistu’s, must be frugal in its allocation of scarce resources to maintain a large military establishment. The new military must be small, professional and multiethnic. It must have a clearly defined mission and should be depoliticized. The new government must strive to establish a tradition of civilian supremacy over the military. A large politically active military will pose a permanent threat to the growth of democratic institutions in Ethiopia.
The provisional government must act quickly to respond to the dire famine situation in the country. The harvest this year has been disappointing with shortfalls reported throughout the country. The current political situation is already having severe impact on famine relief efforts. The war has disrupted food deliveries and an estimated 7 million Ethiopians are facing the threat of starvation. Failure to quickly organize international famine relief efforts will almost certainly result in heavy loss of life.
The provisional government must learn from the basic mistakes of the Mengistu regime. It must unambiguously renounce socialism and declare its support for private entrepreneurship as strategy for economic revitalization. The record of socialism in Ethiopia is uncontroverted–apocalyptic famine, dismally inefficient state and collective farms, chronic shortages of basic staples, unemployment, inability to attract external investment, inflation, asphyxiation of natural human impulses and aspirations and so on. Ironically, even Mengistu made a deathbed conversion when he ordered the reinstitution of capitalist forms complete with private ownership of small plots of land, unrestricted capital investment and even closure of inefficient state farms.
Revitalization of private enterprise in agriculture should be a first priority for the new government. Policies and strategies that spur individual entrepreneurship in agriculture should be implemented in the short-term and extended to all sectors of the economy. All artificial controls on agricultural commodities should be removed. In the long-term the government must aid private producers in the form of agricultural subsidies, low interest loans, price support and other financial incentives to insure high productivity. It is instructive to note that the former proselytizers of socialism have a record written in blood. There is no need to repeat it.
The provisional government will face its first test when it unveils its policy on the question of Eritrean secession. It is widely believed that the EPDRF does not oppose Eritrean secession but does favor any formal separation to be preceded by a referendum. However, given the EPLF’s recent military successes the new government may be powerless to influence events it the EPLF oppose any such precondition.
The viability and survivability of the new government is likely to hang on its approach to the Eritrean secession question. For in shaping its policy towards Eritrea it must carefully weigh the ramifications for Ethiopian unity and possible dismemberment. The provisional government must deal withy the thorny nationality question and come up with a plan in which the country’s multifarious ethnic groups could freely unite or go their own way. It will be untenable for the provisional government to look approvingly on Eritrean secession yet deny the same consideration to the other nationalities should they seek it. This in turn will determine whether Ethiopia will continue as a geopolitical entity.
There have been recent reports of fighting in Gojjam between EPDRF forces and elements of the local population. Similar reports have also come from Gondar and Wellega. Such flareups may be portentous particularly if such incidents are ignored. The government must act decisively to peacefully resolve local level conflict. The provisional government must tread carefully and avoid provoking or arousing ethnic antagonisms. It must be measured in its use of force. It must be willing to negotiate with those who disagree with it. It must be prepared to give a large measure of local self-government.
Most importantly, the provisional government must instill a sense of confidence in the Ethiopian people based on a commitment to the rule of law, individual dignity and liberty, respect for ethnic and political differences and a solemn covenant that Ethiopians shall not draw the sword to settle their differences. It must now seize the moment and build a new Ethiopia on the ashes of socialism. Ethiopia must now look forward into the 1990s as it must shoulder this awesome responsibility.
The U.S. role in the negotiations has also become much clearer. Mediator Herman Cohen announced:
“The U.S. here is serving not only as the U.S. representative but as the conscience of the international community which is saying to them you must go democratic if your want the full cooperation to help Ethiopia realize its full potential. The EPDRF, ELF, and OLF will welcome the presence of the U.S. and other international observers.” Cohen, however, warned: “No democracy, no cooperation.”
A massive anti-American demonstration has been reported in Addis Ababa. Apparently, demonstrators were angered by the U.S.’s recommendation that the EPDRF forces enter Addis Ababa before some kind of peaceful transition of power is arranged. In the U.S. in Los Angeles, and Washington, DC, Ethiopians held demonstrations opposing the Eritrea’s separation from Ethiopia. Eight people have been reported killed.
Some frictions among the coalition has also already started when the EPLF declared its intentions to establish its own provisional government.
The expectation that peace may not have been achieved yet at the end of the London peace conference strengthen when General Tesfaye Gebre Kidan, and Tesfaye Dinka rejected the recommendation by the U.S. the the EPDRF forces enter Addis Ababa and maintain order. General Tesfaye declared himself a rebel and vowed to fight the EPDRF. Also the expectation that the EPDRF can maintain order in Addis Ababa did not materialize so far. People have been killed while domonstrating against the EPDRF and the U.S., and violence is erupting throughout Addis Ababa when the Tigreans play their traditional victory song and dance. Apparently the Oromo and Amara polulation in Addis Ababa is provked by such celebration in the street by the Tigreans in Addis Ababa. Ethiopian Democratic Union (EDU) and the Ethiopian Peoples Revolutionalry Party (EPRF) began to fight in Gondar and Gojjam. These two organizations were shunned the EPDRF and their request to participate in the London peace conference is rejected by both the U.S. and the EPDRF.
Quo Vadis Ethiopia?
Mengistu’s legacy will have incalculable impact on generations to come. But where is Ethiopia going? It has been said that those who do not learn form the past are doomed to repeat it.
It is folly to believe that force of arms alone can bring about a permanent and durable solutions to Ethiopia’s multifaceted problems. Neither the present nor any future government could expect to use violence as means of governing this multiethnic, multilingual society. Leaders on all sides must share a common desire for peace based on genuine compromise and accommodations. They must also show a genuine commitment to the rule of law and respect for the individual’s freedom and dignity. Ethiopia’s leaders must strive to promote ethnic diversity and cast away outdated notions that one or another ethnic group is entitled to rule.
Ethiopia is poised in the twilight of a new era. Whether she will begin a new era of reconciliation and reconstruction or open another dark chapter is in the hands of its leaders and people. Wrong choices and miscalculations by its leaders can yet plunge this desperate nation into irretrievable misery. The leadership on all sides should not miss the opportunity to open a new chapter of peace and prosperity.
