Once again, the Woyanne regime is trying to use the loyal opposition inside the country to deflect attention from its other problems. This week the Woyanne invading forces are withdrawing in defeat from Somalia. Woyanne death squads are engaged in wholesale massacre of Ogaden civilians to intimidate or prevent the ONLF fighters from attacking the retreating Woyanne troops. Arresting Birtukan and roughing up Prof. Mesfin Woldemariam, the weakest of all the so-called opposition figures inside Ethiopia, could be helping Woyanne’s goal of creating diversion, depending on how the media and the opposition parties react.
Today, as the withdrawal of troops is progressing in Somalia, every media is talking about Birtukan’s arrest. Woyanne cadres, who play the role of Birtukan’s ardent supporters, are working full time to fan the issue. But once again, Ethiopian Review is here to expose the game of shred Woyanne is playing with its willing accomplices like Birtukan.
Indeed, the whole apology controversy is a gimmick, and some are duped by it. What Birtukan has said in Sweden is so benign that it is laughable to arrest her over that. Other opposition leaders, particularly Hailu Shawel, has said much more stronger things about the apology on radio interviews. But Woyanne doesn’t want to make Hailu Shawel a hero by arresting him. Meles & gang prefer to deal with the weak and surrenderist Birtukan. So by attacking two of the weakest individuals in the UDJ party (Birtukan and Mesfin), Woyanne is also trying to build up their popularity.
Woyanne cannot continue to cheat and play with the opposition any more like a cat plays with a mouse that is under its control. That is what Birtukan is to Woyanne — a crippled mouse.
Only gullible individuals fall for Woyanne tactics any more. Ethiopians inside the country and around the world are looking up to leaders and political organizations that are determined to eliminate the Woyanne fascist tribal junta.
The Woyanne dictatorial regime today has arrested UDJ chairperson Birtukan Mideksa and attacked Prof. Mesfin Woldemariam, according to sources in Addis Ababa.
The attack on UDJ leaders came after the Federal Police gave Wzt. Birtukan 3 days to retract a statement she made in Sweden last month about not apologizing before being released from jail in July 2007.
It seems this is a gimmick since other former Kinijit leaders had said similar things. On top of that, the 4-page open later Birtukan released yesterday about the Federal Police’s ultimate is an indirect admission. She also wrote a letter yesterday to Aba Gebremedhin (formerly Aba Paulos) and Pastor Daniel.
By this action, Woyanne is succeeding in diverting the focus away from its retreat in defeat from Somalia, the recent genocidal attacks in Oganden where over 40 civilians were gunned down in one day, the unjust conviction of Teddy Afro, and other crimes it is committing.
Birtukan is the weakest of all the opposition figures in Ethiopia as far as criticizing the brutal dictatorship, but it is taking such measures against her knowing that it will create more news and deflect attention from the other issues mentioned above.
The attack on Prof. Mesfin Woldemariam is also a gimmick, since he has been preaching about taking soft stand toward Woyanne, such as not even calling the murderous gang an “enemy.” He has also been inactive as a UDJ executive committee member.
Once against, the opposition is walking to the tune played by Meles and gang.
The following article by Reta Asrat discusses problems surrounding fund raising efforts by Ethiopians in the Washington DC area for the needy back home.
MARYLAND (AP) – Two men have been arrested in connection with a thwarted bank robbery plot that included the kidnapping of a Prince George’s County family.
Maryland state police say Yohannes Surafel of Washington DC held the family at gunpoint Saturday morning, while ordering them to drive to the bank where the mother worked. A state trooper arrested him during a traffic stop.
Surafel faces numerous charges, including assault, kidnapping and conspiracy to commit armed robbery.
Another man, Yosef Tadele of Silver Spring, has been arrested and police expect to charge him.
Surafel and Yosef are accused of holding the bank manager and her family overnight at her Clinton home on Friday. Police are searching for the third suspect.
PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND, POLICE
COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND
(College Park, MD) – Working with the Prince George’s County Police Robbery Squad, Maryland State Police investigators have charged two men in connection with the kidnapping of a Prince George’s County family as part of a plot to rob a Silver Spring bank yesterday.
The first man is identified as Yohannes T. Surafel, 24, of the 400-block of Cedar Street, Washington, D.C. Surafel was the man holding the family at gunpoint in the car yesterday morning and arrested by the Maryland state trooper who stopped the car for swerving on I-495 near Rt. 1.
Surafel is charged with four counts of first degree assault, four counts of second degree assault, two counts of kidnapping, two counts of kidnapping a child under 16, four counts of false imprisonment, four counts of reckless endangerment, conspiracy to commit armed robbery, and use of a handgun in the commission of a felony. After his release from the hospital last night, Surafel was taken to the Prince George’s County central booking facility where he was charged and is being held.
The second man charged is identified as Yosef Tadele, 23, of the 4100-block of Colie Drive, Silver Spring, Md. Tadele was arrested at the State Police College Park Barracks shortly before 5:00 a.m. today, after meeting with police investigators. Tadele was taken to the Prince George’s County central booking facility where he is expected to be charged with four counts of conspiracy to commit first degree assault, four counts of conspiracy to commit second degree assault, two counts of kidnapping, two counts of kidnapping a child under the age of 16, and conspiracy to commit armed robbery.
Both men are charged in connection with the overnight kidnapping of a bank manager and her family in Clinton, Md that began Friday evening. After Surafel’s arrest yesterday morning, investigators from the Maryland State Police and the Prince George’s County Police Robbery Squad have worked continuously to piece together the facts of the case while identifying and apprehending other suspects.
During the night, investigators determined Tadele drove Surafel and another suspect to the Clinton home of the bank manager and dropped them off prior to the kidnapping Friday night. Investigators also believe Tadele picked up the other suspect who was with Surafel in the victims’ house Saturday morning, after Surafel and the family left for the bank. Tadele came to meet with police at the College Park Barracks last night and, after further investigation, was arrested and charged as a co-conspirator.
Police investigators continue to work to identify and prepare charges for the third suspect. At least one additional arrest is expected in this ongoing investigation.
CONTACT: Mr. Gregory Shipley
Office of Media Communications & Marketing
Prince George’s County Police
410-653-4236 (Office) 410-653-4200 (through Headquarters Duty Officer)
One of the truisms of American life is that anyone from any country can come to America and assimilate into the society. The idea is that America is a land of immigrants naturally hospitable to new immigrants. In many ways, this is true. In the U.S. immigrants from all parts of the world live side by side more or less harmoniously.
The American Dream is said to bind most people, immigrant and native born, to a common purpose and destiny. But beyond this myth (or reality) defining the “real” American or the American experience is not that easy.
America still has serious racial problems. Black Americans or more appropriately African Americans (because they are descendants of Africans brought as slaves over 350 years ago) have made some progress over the past three decades but for hundreds of years they have been enslaved and segregated. They have yet to integrate fully in American society.
Lately, I have been wondering about Ethiopians in the American melting pot. We are among the most recent group of Africans to come to America. Those of us who came before the Derg came mainly to get American education and technical training. Almost all of us believed that sooner or later we will return to Ethiopia. In reality, very few of us managed to return largely due to fear of political persecution by the dictatorial regimes back home. Much larger numbers of Ethiopians came to the U.S. seeking to escape political persecution.
But how are we all doing in the American melting pot?
There seems to be a curious situation among Ethiopians in America. The first generation of Ethiopians (those born in Ethiopia) does not seem to be “melting” well despite many years of residence in America. They show marked indifference or even calculated detachment from the cultural processes of American society. They seem to do well in the economic sphere but beyond that they seem to be immersed in their old world culture and traditional practices.
Most Ethiopians have other Ethiopians as friends. They spend much of their leisure time with other Ethiopians and their networks consist of individuals in the Ethiopian community. The first generation Ethiopians takes great pride in its “Ethiopianness.” They get married to other Ethiopians. When they have weddings, almost all of the guests are Ethiopians. They prefer to eat Ethiopian food and observe traditional modes of personal behavior.
I know of very few Ethiopians who have Americans as their best friends. Few Ethiopians I know belong to American social groups or civic organizations. Few are active in charitable or other local organizations.
I also know few Ethiopians who avail themselves to the cultural experiences that are abundant in American society. Few venture to experience raw Americana. One is not likely to see many Ethiopians traveling the American backcountry, attend some good old foot stomping country music or soul-elevating gospel music. Not too many Ethiopians go to the rodeos to see modern cowboys ride a bull. Maybe this kind of stuff is too country!
But I don’t see many Ethiopians in cultural activities that are plentiful in the urban areas either. I know of few Ethiopians who make an effort to see American live theater or go to a classical music concert. I wager to say that few Ethiopians who live in the large metropolitan areas have ever gone to the museums or historical landmarks within a few miles of where they live. I dare say that few Ethiopians have ever bothered to read about American history.
While most Ethiopians do not seem to be attracted by the wholesome elements of American culture, they do not seem to be attracted by the negative elements either. Few Ethiopians are involved in criminal activities or drug abuse. There are few Ethiopians forced into seeking welfare. Few seem to be involved in morally corrupt practices.
In fact, most Ethiopians in America are relentless pursuers of the American dream. Most are hard workers. They strive to improve themselves educationally and economically. Most share the capitalistic frame of mind and are largely self sufficient.
Still from my vantage point, Ethiopians do not seem to be Americanizing very well. I have two theories about that. I think it has partly to do with psychological inability to fully accept the values and culture of American society. Many first generation Ethiopians tend to have traditional outlooks. They tend to believe that American society lacks self-restraint and self-discipline. American culture is too relativistic for them. They appreciate the physical and intellectual freedom in America but they reject its results. Many Ethiopian men have traditional (perhaps even antiquated) views and values on childbearing, role of women and family. They have a hard time accepting American values which accord women equal rights or make it difficult to discipline children by means of corporal punishment.
My other theory is best expressed in the saying “Once an Ethiopian, always and Ethiopian” or alternatively “You can take the boy/girl out of Ethiopia, but you can’t take Ethiopia out of the boy/girl.” Perhaps because Ethiopia did not experience the cultural devastation of colonialism, Ethiopians generally find it harder to accept other cultures or values. They have too much pride in their own history and culture. They view non-Ethiopians with benign indifference or paternalistic pity.
Often, they close their eyes and ears to things happening around them. But if they should open their eyes, ears and hearts, they will see the beauty that is in America, that is warts and all.
(This article was originally published in December 1992, but still applies today.)
DAKAR, (IRIN) – Is a proposed law to regulate charities in Ethiopia an attempt to regulate a sprawling sector and block foreign political interference or a clampdown on civil society?
A draft proclamation published and revised several times this year has been criticised by African and international rights groups. Ethiopian civil society groups allege some provisions are unconstitutional.
Critics argue the proposed rules, especially on foreign funding of Ethiopian NGOs, will deliberately stifle local human rights groups critical of the government and could disrupt aid operations implemented by local groups.
The government [Woyanne] disagrees. Meles Tilahun, a whip in parliament, told IRIN: “The law is needed to create a conducive environment for NGOs and CSOs [civil society organisations] and provide a separate legal framework for them. It does not mean to shut them down.”
The government [Woyanne] has, however, commented that the charity sector has been used by “political activists” who are working on “other issues”, not “catastrophes that required aid and assistance”, according to a communiqué released in September 2008.
The law, the Proclamation for the Registration and Regulation of Charities and Societies, has been passed by Ethiopia’s Council of Ministers Woyanne politburo but has not yet been presented to parliament, where pro-government MPs command an overwhelming majority. A hearing is expected on 24 and 25 December.
A donor official told IRIN: “There is currently no standard operating procedure for CSOs to work in Ethiopia and having a common set of rules and regulations is a good thing.”
But attempts to revise the law seem to be running out of time. “We’ve been lobbying to get the bill changed before it is enacted but we’ve almost come to the end of the road,” said the head of an international NGO in Addis Ababa, who asked not to be named.
The (draft) law
The law establishes an oversight agency, rules and supervision for the establishment of trusts and endowments, societies and charities. Rules governing fund-raising, membership and governance are detailed. Strong powers to investigate and oversee CSOs and tough penalties are set out.
Most controversially, the law restricts activity in human and democratic rights, gender or ethnic equality, conflict resolution, the strengthening of judicial practices or law enforcement. Only Ethiopian charities or societies having no more than 10 percent of their spending from “foreign sources” would be able to work in those areas.
However, several categories of organisation are exempted, according to a copy of the draft law on the NGO consortium Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA) website:
“Religious organisations, international or foreign organisations operating in Ethiopia by virtue of an agreement with the government of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia; ‘Edir’, ‘Ekub’ [traditional cooperative schemes] and other similar cultural or religious associations; and societies governed by other laws.”
The impact on international NGOs with government agreements may therefore be limited.
Objections
In November, a CRDA task force welcomed the concept of a legal framework for CSOs, but set out a number of objections to the draft: the definitions of charities and permitted activities; the lack of a right to judicial review or appeal and the requirement that CSOs must have branches in five regions; “discriminatory selection and privileging of mass-based organisations”; lack of recognition for self-regulation by the sector; a 30 percent restriction on administrative costs; too many board members nominated by the government; charities not exempt from taxes and duty; and requirement to register with the authorities within one year of the bill taking effect.
The CRDA-sponsored report also argues that the foreign funding provisions restrict the participation of the Ethiopian diaspora and the constitutional freedom of assembly.
The CRDA commentary is only one of several critiques published by Ethiopian civil society, including prominent groups such as the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, which is frequently critical of the government and heavily dependent on foreign funding.
Reactions
The US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) alleged the law represented “a complex web of arbitrary restrictions on the work civil society groups can engage in, onerous bureaucratic hurdles, draconian criminal penalties, and intrusive powers of surveillance” and urged parliament to reject the bill.
Amnesty International, the development committee of the European Parliament, and the civil society lobby group CIVICUS, also criticised the law, as did the US government.
“I am not aware of an NGO law elsewhere that is more restrictive,” said Chris Albim-Lackay, senior researcher in HRW’s Africa division. “It will render the activities of most international and local human rights organisations Illegal.”
However, despite reservations, many NGOs and donors agreed that regulation was needed.
But ultimately the law could end up weakening Ethiopian civil society, some argue.
“Everyone respects sovereignty. But it depends what you define as national interest. We think it’s healthy that people complain about the government and provoke citizens to complain because it leads to better outcomes for societies as a whole,” the NGO representative said.
Other NGO laws
Ethiopia is not alone in coming under fire for its NGO law. In 2004, Zimbabwe passed a law banning domestic groups working on human rights and governance from receiving foreign funding, including Zimbabweans abroad. The law set up a government oversight mechanism that the US Bureau of Public Affairs called “highly intrusive and subject to political manipulation”.
Russia’s 2006 NGO law means the government can decline to register branches of foreign organisations where their “goals and objectives create a threat to the sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity, national unity, unique character, cultural heritage and national interests of the Russian Federation”.
And in the countries hosting western critics, there are restrictions too. In the UK, foreign NGOs must register under one of six categories: prevention or relief of poverty; advancement of education, religion; health or saving lives; citizenship and community development; human rights; conflict resolution or reconciliation, and can lobby for political or legal change only if it would further one of these goals.
The Ethiopian government has mentioned US law in its defence. In the USA, tax-exempt NGOs can lobby but “may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of their activities and may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates”. However, “social welfare” tax-exempt organisations are not limited in this way.
Impact
Ethiopia receives more than US$1 billion of humanitarian and development aid every year, and reports indicate some 3,300 NGOs operate around the country.
“A significant number of programmes under the new law could be prohibited,” a donor official told IRIN, referring to those focussing on strengthening the judicial system, conflict resolution, and democracy and governance. “If the law is implemented in black and white, some non-profits might have no future,” an NGO head told IRIN.
International NGOs are concerned about the status of local non-profits that play a major role in implementing projects (and might fall foul of the 10 percent rule) and the “rights-based” discourse and advocacy element in NGO work. Some argue that over the past two decades NGO work has inevitably become more “political”. Others have been reassured they will not have to leave or curtail their “classic humanitarian” operations and advocacy relating to food, health, education and water and sanitation.
“While regulation is needed, the law could have a ‘chilling’ effect on aid operations in Ethiopia, by creating an atmosphere of fear, distrust and potentially weakening innovation. That is where the law is quite threatening,” a donor representative told IRIN.
Lobbying
Advocacy may have paid off in small ways.
There have been some improvements to the latest draft bill, issued in December, according to Catherine Shea, programme director with the US Center for Not-for-Profit Law, with the punishment of a prison sentence dropped for unregistered NGOs.
However, employees of charities that fail to keep proper accounts, or whose administration costs exceed 30 percent of overall programming costs, can still be imprisoned.
One aid official said the restrictions followed apparent meddling by NGOs after the 2005 elections – the move is designed to ensure outsiders do not interfere in 2010 elections.
The government’s September commentary pointedly objected to aid operations being used by “political actors… which can sway votes in national elections”.
