Over the past several months, there has been much discussion and debate over House Resolution (H.R.) 4423 and the two substitute amendments1 offered by New Jersey representatives Christopher Smith (R) Chairman, House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations and Donald Payne (D), ranking minority member of the same committee. While the active proponents and opponents of HR 4423 have been vigorously advocating their respective positions, it appears many Ethiopians who have been following developments on the sidelines may not have fully grasped the substance of the bill or the differences between the two substitute amendments.
Reading and understanding legislative language often requires specialized knowledge and training, and for most lay people such material tends to be legal “mumbo jumbo.†Lawyers and judges spend considerable time and energy disputing and deciphering the intended meaning, scope and application of a particular piece of legislation, often without reaching agreement. Given the complexity of statutory construction (formal rules of interpreting legislation), one may not reasonably expect the average Ethiopian reader of H.R. 4423 to engage in formal legislative analysis and arrive at a comprehensive understanding of its provisions or implications. The following comparative analysis is intended to aid in a better understanding of H.R. 4423. The analysis aims to illuminate some of the major policy and legislative issues that appear in the two amendments, enhance the quality of the general public dialogue over the bill, and render intelligible the legislative language so that anyone with a cursory interest in the bill could understand its provisions.
Objectivity and impartiality are critical to a fair rendition of the various elements of the two substitute amendments, and this author shall attempt to provide such an analysis. In the interest of full disclosure, however, the reader should know this author supports Chairman Smith’s substitute amendment, and briefly explains his reasons at the end in a postscript.
The comparative analysis focuses on legislative objectives, legislative findings, proposed action plan to assist Ethiopia and sanctions for noncompliance.
I. Legislative Objectives 2
Smith and Payne appear to subscribe to similar legislative objectives, although the practical implications and outcomes of their respective objectives are quite different. Smith broadly aims to support human rights, democracy, and economic freedom in Ethiopia. Payne seeks to promote human rights, good governance, free and fair elections and economic development, as well an independent judiciary and free press institutions. (See Smith, Sec. 2; Payne, Payne, sec. 2.) Analysis While there is apparent overlap in the declared objectives of the two amendments, the conceptual and practical differences become readily apparent upon closer examination. Both amendments aspire to achieve similar outcomes, but overused words and phrases such as democracy, good governance, human rights, economic development, etc., are often understood differently not only by lay persons but also legislators, political scientists, economists and others.
One illustrative example of different outcomes in legislative policy objectives concerns the issue of promoting “economic development†in Ethiopia. Smith approaches economic development along the lines of “economic freedom†(broadly defined in terms of private entrepreneurship, private ownership of land to allow the peasant farmer borrowing opportunities, and compensation for persons whose properties were confiscated by the Derg), and specific mechanisms aimed at advancing such freedom, e.g. providing technical assistance to develop the Awash and Nile hydro resources, promoting joint Ethiopian-American joint commercial ventures, improvements in the system of taxation, etc. (See Smith, sec. 5.) Payne’s notion of economic development is limited to support for rural education and effective water resources management. (See Payne, sec. 6.)
II. Legislative Findings
Both Smith’s and Payne’s substitute amendments are based on several sets of factual predicates (evidence) related to violations of human rights, deficiencies in the Ethiopian legal system and political process, obstacles to economic development and functioning of free press institutions, and post-election events.
Human Rights
Smith’s amendment begins its findings of human rights violations in Ethiopia by focusing on recent evidence of killings, torture and persecution of Anuaks in the Gambella region. Smith finds widespread human rights abuses in Ethiopia, including occurrences of unlawful killings of opponents, abuse and mistreatment of detainees, excessive use of force by security forces, detention of thousands of people without charge, government restrictions on the freedom of speech and assembly, and limitations on citizens’ rights to peacefully change their government.
Smith makes specific findings that after the May 15, 2005 elections, the human rights situation in Ethiopia deteriorated significantly marked by the killing of scores of demonstrators by government security personnel, and detention of tens of thousands of government opponents, including opposition political leaders, human rights activists, community leaders, and journalists.
Payne’s amendment begins its findings by framing the issue of human rights violations in Ethiopia as a Derg legacy, and implicitly commends the EPDRF for ushering a new era of human rights by ending “Mengistu’s brutal dictatorship.†The EPDRF-led government is credited for setting up a coalition government which has integrated various groups including liberation fronts (such as the OLF and ONLF), resulting in significantly improved human rights conditions and political stability in Ethiopia. Payne acknowledges that human rights conditions deteriorated significantly in Ethiopia after the May 15, 2005 elections, but points out that serious abuses occurred only after opposition parties refused to accept the announced election results and called for civil disobedience protests. Payne’s findings confirm that the government has detained notable political leaders, human rights activists, and journalists; and in Oromia and Amhara regions, Payne finds that federal police have threatened, beaten and detained opposition supporters often in nighttime raids.
Analysis
On April 6, 2006, Smith provided a mark-up statement3 to the Subcommittee explaining his reasons for introducing HR 4423. Smith became concerned after the May, 2005 elections when he learned of delayed release of election results and massive arrests of demonstrators. He was afraid the situation could “spiral out of control†and began working with international human rights organizations. He was able to craft legislation that would help improve “human rights abuses and encourage Ethiopia to pursue a more certain path to democratic elections, good governance and economic development.†Smith also sought to hold accountable those who were involved in the shootings of demonstrators.
Smith subsequently visited Ethiopia and observed first hand that opposition leaders were being followed and harassed. He met with Zenawi who bragged to him that he had “proof†opposition leaders had committed treason, and that he could arrest them at any time. Unbeknownst to Smith, Zenawi was telling him his actual plans, and within weeks, Zenawi had ordered the roundup and detention of hundreds of opposition leaders for treason and genocide. (See Smith Mark-Up Statement.) In the absence of an official mark-up statement or other public declarations by Payne, one has to rely on the plain language of his substitute amendment and record of hearings, which in this writer’s view are insufficient to provide a substantial basis to ascertain Payne’s real interest in presenting his amendment or in deciphering the reasons for his opposition to Smith’s bill.
The differences in legislative findings on human rights in the two versions are significant and wide-ranging. Smith’s findings place the entire burden of human rights violations squarely on the shoulders of the government. He holds the regime exclusively responsible for the denial of due process to opposition detainees and the deteriorating economic situation in the country. He is critical of the government’s human rights record, and makes no effort to explain away the human rights abuses that have occurred in the country. (See Smith, sec. 3-5.)
On a more subtle level, Smith frames the issue of human rights violations in Ethiopia as part of a comprehensive interplay of policy and institutional failures, including repressive government actions and policies, inept judicial officers and ineffective judicial institutions, general official indifference to the rule of law and unbridled use of security forces to violently suppress all opposition. The Ethiopian judiciary is criticized for its failure to protect the rights of the accused sua sponte (i.e. the court on its own power), and for its complicity with the government in denying due process to defendants by conducting closed proceedings, limiting or denying attorney-client consultations and disregarding the presumption of innocence accorded to those accused of political crimes.
Payne’s amendment takes a radically different view of the current and historical human rights situation in Ethiopia, and seeks to excuse the current regime’s record by condemning the Derg-era human rights violations. (See Payne, sec. 3 (1)) Payne portrays the defeat of the “brutal dictatorship of Mengistu’s regime†by the EPDRF as the dawning of a new age of human rights and participatory democracy in Ethiopia. (See Payne, sec. (2). Payne’s findings broadly acknowledge and commend the EPDRF and the current regime for creating a “spirit of a new start†in “the building of a democratic Ethiopia.â€Â
Payne’s findings imply that any human rights violations that have occurred since the takeover of the EPDRF government in 1991 were episodic and not systematic or significant. (See Payne, sec. 3 (9)). Although Payne acknowledges a “significant deterioration of human rights conditions†after the May 15, 2005 elections, and disapproves of the killing of nearly 80 demonstrators by government security forces and detention of opposition leaders and thousands of others, he curiously seems to hold demonstrators and opposition leaders responsible for their misfortunes. In other words, following Payne’s findings, had the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) abstained from civil disobedience protests and not challenged the election results, there would have been few human rights violations by the government in the post-election period! (See Payne, sec. 4 (1). This conclusion is somewhat analogous to a provocation defense sometimes raised in domestic abuse prosecutions where the husband pleads to the court that his wife is responsible for the injuries he inflicted upon her because she has a bad habit of talking back to him and challenging his commands.
Payne’s amendment makes no finding on the current status of detainees or the ongoing arrests and detentions of persons suspected of opposition to the government, the nature and gravity of the charges leveled against opposition leaders, the general atmosphere of fear, loathing and intimidation throughout the country, and the need to guarantee due process to the prisoners of conscience or international oversight of their trial.
Payne makes specific findings with respect to the “marginalization†of “the Oromos†and Ethiopian Somalis, implying that with the exception of these groups, others do not feel marginalized. (See Payne, sec. 3 (4) (5). Acknowledgement is made of the fact that members of the original EPDRF coalition “were forced to leave,†but the impression is left that only the OLF has been the object of military action by the government. The manifest implication of this finding is that other groups who were forced to leave, or who remained “outside the political process†have not suffered military action or persecution by the government. (See Payne, sec. 3 (4)).
It is puzzling that Payne makes no findings that “marginalization†is a direct outcome of the government’s policy of “ethnic federalism†— a gentler and kinder version of bantustanization or tribal homelands – which has been used to force Ethiopians to declare their ethnic identities and establish narrow ethnic allegiances. One could conclude from Payne’s findings that Ethiopia’s “ethnic federalism†is the most significant recent innovation in the general political theory of federalism. It is remarkable that a distinguished member of the American federal government could find any merit in the fictitious notion of “ethnic federalism.â€Â
Payne’s overall findings suggest that he has a threshold of human rights abuses to trigger his outrage. Unfortunately, the killing of scores of demonstrators and incarceration of hundreds of opposition leaders and thousands of opponents is insufficient to provoke his moral outrage and demand immediate remedial action.
Deficiencies in Legal/Political Processes
Smith’s amendment finds significant flaws and deficiencies in the political and judicial processes in the country. As alluded above, some of Smith’s legislative findings accuse the Ethiopian courts for acting inconsistently with Ethiopian law and constitutional protections. The election board is criticized for what amounts to a dereliction of duty by failing or refusing to perform an impartial investigation of allegations of election irregularities, and for undermining opposition efforts to pursue their election complaints. The government is blamed for failing to release election results in a timely fashion, and expelling internationally respected nongovernmental organizations for political reasons.
Smith encourages Ethiopian opposition parties to follow through on court challenges of the May 15, 2005 elections, and urges reorganization of the National Election Board to be more representative of the spectrum of political parties and perspectives in the country, and to become more independent in its investigative functions and decision-making.
Payne’s findings on the performance of the EPDRF and the government it has led since 1991 are largely favorable. The EPDRF is credited with bringing “stability†and much improved human rights conditions in Ethiopia. (See Payne, sec. 3 (9)). It is given credit “for significantly changing the political structure†and “shifting political dominance among groups,†creating “ethnic federalism,†and a “multiparty system,†and is approvingly described as “the best organized political party in the country†with wide support in the countryside. It is also commended for conducting a “transparent, competitive and relatively fair and fair election†in May, 2005, and for establishing a commission to investigate the post-election killings of demonstrators. Casting a shadow on this illustrious achievement, according to Payne’s findings, was the threat of dissension within EPDRF and challenges to Zenawi’s power (which was resolved through “restructuring and ouster†of dissenting leaders). (See Payne, sec. 5 (a) (1), (4), (5), (6) (16))
Payne’s findings on opposition groups are far less favorable. They are characterized as “suffering from internal divisions†and “lacking clear policy objectives.†They are said to suffer from government and exile group interference. They are generally portrayed as a negative political force responsible for election boycotts, civil disobedience protests and causing election turmoil. (See Payne, sec. (a) (2) (5) (10) (12)). It is noteworthy that Payne is dismissive of Ethiopians in the Disapora, and by inference particularly those “exiles†in the United States. He finds little role for “exile†groups of Ethiopians in the political or economic life of their homeland.
Repression of Free Press Institutions
Smith’s findings are critical of the Ethiopian government’s treatment of press institutions and journalists. The findings lament the fact that the government’s “repressive media law,†which threatens capital punishment for its violation, has had a chilling effect on the free press and spawned rampant self-censorship. The government’s monopoly of the electronic media (radio and television and internet) and lack of progress towards licensing of private radio are singled out for special criticism. Smith’s amendment encourages the Ethiopian government to support freedom of the press by allowing print and broadcast media to operate without censorship, facilitate and expedite the licensing of independent radio and television, and provide unimpeded access to the Internet. Smith specifically urges the government to revise Press Proclamation No. 34 of 1992 with the aim of repealing criminal defamation provisions and other speech-related crimes. Payne’s findings on the operation of a free press merely pays lip service to the severity of government control and censorship. He finds that while “foreign journalists continue to operate freely,†independent Ethiopian journalists continue to face harassment, prosecution, detention and exile. This parallel universe of a free foreign press operating alongside a decimated independent Ethiopian press does not seem to present any contradictions for Payne requiring immediate remedial. (See Payne, sec. 4 (6) (7)).
Economic Issues
Smith’s amendment finds economic conditions in Ethiopia have worsened “measurably†over recent years due to the government’s inability to formulate and implement effective policies and regulations and control corruption. The Ethiopian economy is deemed to be mostly “unfreeâ€Â, largely due to a cumbersome bureaucracy that deters investment, a judicial system that does not offer sufficient protection for property rights, and a system of higher tariffs on imported products. The government’s refusal to change its policy of state ownership of all land and insistence on land leases is said to prevent financing opportunities for farmers, and contribute to the suboptimal performance of the agricultural sector. Lack of water is considered a major reason for the recurrent famine in the country, but Smith finds that food insecurity in Ethiopia is exacerbated by misguided government policies, including prohibitions on the private ownership of land, excessive taxation of farmers, and the high cost of fertilizer sold by companies affiliated with the government.
Payne’s findings on the economic situation in Ethiopia merely acknowledge that the country remains poor country despite strong performance of the agricultural sector. His findings simply lack the depth and breadth of understanding of the complex economic issues facing the country.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLAN TO ASSIST ETHIOPIA ACHIEVE DEMOCRACY AND GOOD GOVERNANCE, AND OVERCOME ITS HUMAN RIGHTS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS
To promote and preserve human rights in Ethiopia, Smith proposes various types of support and mechanisms: financial and technical assistance to independent human rights monitoring organizations working in Ethiopia, training to government officials and other leaders/activists on international human rights standards, readmission of the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDA) and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) to continue their work in developing democratic institutions and practices, and use of the office of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture to conduct an investigation of the conditions of prisoners of conscience in government custody.
Smith also provides for training assistance to strengthen local, regional, and national parliaments and governments, political parties and civil society groups in Ethiopia. Such assistance is expected to facilitate ongoing communication between political parties and the government and improve voter/party/candidate registration to ensure the credibility of the next election in Ethiopia. Assistance is also available to enhance the independence and competence of the Ethiopian judicial system, particularly to support institutionalization of procedural due process.
Smith’s amendment further provides additional technical assistance to the government in such areas as budgeting, taxation, debt management and banking. Assistance will be available to develop the Nile and Awash River resources and hydroelectric power and irrigations systems to prevent future famines. There is additional assistance in Smith’s bill to promote use of financing programs for joint United States and Ethiopian commercial ventures. The bill also aims to remove obstructions that have prevented Ethiopia from participating in such programs as the United States Millennium Challenge Account.
Payne seeks to promote human rights in Ethiopia by creating a Victims Support Network for Ethiopia, which will provide assistance to families of individuals killed in demonstrations and others injured by security personnel, as well as financial support for the legal defense of prisoners of conscience, human rights groups and others actively monitoring the status of detainees. Payne proposes a Judicial Watch Network to monitor court proceedings throughout Ethiopia, and insulate and strengthen the judiciary from undue government usurpations.
Payne aims to promote democracy and good governance by providing assistance to strengthen local, regional and national parliaments and government agencies in Ethiopia in the form of training provided by such organizations as the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the International Republican Institute (IRI) and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). These organizations are expected to undertake various tasks, including training of local groups in election monitoring and voter registration, and establish programs focused on reconciliation efforts between the government and groups outside the political process. Payne’s amendment provides economic development assistance by increasing funds to support the education sector, especially in rural areas of Ethiopia, and by providing technical and financial support for irrigation and improved management of the Nile River and other water resources.
Sanctions
Smith’s amendment requires suspension of all joint military activities between the Ethiopian and U.S. governments other than anti-terrorism and peace-keeping activities. Travel restrictions will be imposed on any Ethiopian official or member of the security forces involved in the shooting of demonstrators. Non-compliance with the legislation could also result in the denial of non-essential United States assistance (all aid except humanitarian assistance, emergency food programs, assistance to combat HIV/AIDS, fistula treatment, health service planning, child/motherhood programs, etc.).
Payne’s amendment provides for denial of visa to any government official or member of the security forces involved in the shooting of demonstrators, unless waived by the U.S. President.
Commentary
The Ethiopian Government is Unlikely to Agree to Smith’s Demand for the Immediate and Unconditional Release of Political Prisoners and Prisoners of Conscience and Free Operation of Human Rights Groups, or Accept Economic Development Measures Prescribed in the Bill.
In his Mark-up Statement, Smith asserted that “H.R. 4423 is not merely a punitive measure,†but seeks to use “technical assistance and other support†to change the human rights situation and contribute to Ethiopia’s economic and political development. The first order of business for Smith is the “immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and prisoner’s of conscience.†This is to be followed by reactivation of international and local human rights organizations to operate in the country, and deployment of the U.S. Special Rapporteur on Torture to undertake an investigation of the conditions of the prisoners of conscience. It is highly unlikely that the Ethiopian government will accept either of these proposals.
First, the government has painted itself into a corner by detaining opposition leaders on charges of genocide, treason, incitement and so on. These are patently bogus charges. Amnesty International has characterized the genocide charges “absurd.†If the government were to release the political prisoners now, it would be an admission that they were held arbitrarily and improperly in the first place. Unlawful detentions are a violation of international human rights standards, and the government is unlikely to admit such culpability.
Second, release of opposition leaders in the foreseeable future would be tantamount to handing the opposition a political and moral victory. The prisoners will emerge from detention triumphantly as heroes who valiantly faced persecution and sacrificed their liberties for the cause of democracy and human rights. They will gain considerable popularity and moral authority among the people, and inspire others to become even more defiant of the government. The government can not take such a risk.
Third, releasing the prisoners now would create the impression that the government is giving in or buckling to U.S. pressure. The government does not want to be seen as weak and irresolute. It wants to maintain the appearance of standing up to U.S. pressure, and even pretend that it does not want or need U.S. aid. The government can not appear to be an American lackey.
Fourth, the government will not agree to the free operation of domestic and international human rights groups with monitoring and civil society training missions. Such organizations will in effect function as watchdogs limiting the government’s scope of action in controlling opposition groups and parties, and in ensuring observance of Ethiopian law and constitutional mandates and compliance with international human rights conventions. The government can not withstand such scrutiny or accountability.
As to Smith’s proposals for economic freedom, particularly private ownership of land, they are unlikely to be accepted by the government. Presumably, the government’s objection to private ownership of land is based on fears of protracted litigation by pre-Derg land owners who may seek to reclaim their land or seek compensation, and/or because the government believes the peasants who currently have possessory use of the land will sell it and move to the city if they had full ownership rights, creating large numbers of displaced and landless peasants in the urban areas. Regardless of the economic merits of these contentions, the government is unlikely to allow private ownership of land because control of the land is its principal means of controlling the economic lifeline of the rural population, and its most effective strategy in disempowering this population and perpetuating its dependency on government handouts.
Changes required in the bill in other areas of government economic policy such as budgeting, taxation, debt management, bank supervision and corruption control are likely to be rejected as well because these issues require implementation of complex regulatory systems and structures. For instance, Smith’s amendment aims to provide policy assistance to address key economic obstacles arising from deficiencies in the system of taxation. This may involve overhaul of the Ethiopian tax system — which by some accounts is antiquated, irrational and afflicted by massive corruption — to achieve substantial efficiency and spur economic growth. It is unlikely that the government will be open to abolition of certain taxes and tariffs that are considered disincentives to foreign investments, or introduce substantial changes in the system of taxation, tariff and custom duties to bring about significant gains for the country’s economy.
Smith’s proposals for technical and economic assistance to enable Ethiopia to participate in the U. S. Millennium Challenge Account, develop the Nile and Awash River resources and undertake other hydroelectric power and irrigation projects to prevent future famines and joint commercial ventures all seem to make eminent good sense. It is unlikely that such massive national projects could be undertaken in the context of an “unfree†economy.
Why the Ethiopian Government Will Tacitly Endorse Payne’s Substitute Amendment
It appears Payne’s amendment has received the tacit approval, if not the active support, of the Ethiopian government. Some of the reasons for the government’s acceptance of Payne’s version seem obvious. Manifestly, Payne’s version “waters down†Smith’s robust provisions, which require significant policy changes and accountability on the part of the Ethiopian government. Under Payne’s version, the government is required to perform window dressing without undertaking any real changes in its policies or practices.
Payne’s amendment may be acceptable to the government because Payne does not really find any significant problems with Zenawi or the current regime, and in fact suggests that Zenawi and the EPDRF are the only viable option for the country today. Payne portrays the current regime as the only hope of political salvation and stability for the country. In the background of Payne’s findings on human rights violations and political repression in Ethiopia stands a shadowy specter of chaos and anarchy, which will consume Ethiopia should Zenawi and the current regime be removed from power. The government may find Payne’s apologia a valuable political and ideological tool.
Payne may not be alone in his messianic appraisal of Zenawi and his regime. British Prime Minister Blair handpicked Zenawi for his Commission for Africa because he believed Zenawi was one of the new breed of progressive leaders who will take Africa to new heights. It may be that Payne subscribes to the same view that in the meager field of real leaders and parties on the African continent, Zenawi’s government may be the only hope for Ethiopia. He is wrong.
Dislike and distrust of Ethiopian opposition groups may provide common ground for Payne and the Ethiopian government to oppose Smith’s bill. The fact that Payne’s amendment castigates and discredits opposition groups should be a welcome development for the government. Payne seems to have had unpleasant personal experiences with some Ethiopian groups in the United States over this bill. Judging from his comments at the last full subcommittee hearing, he seemed quite bitter and critical of the tactics used by these groups in advocating their support for Smith’s bill.
On the other hand, there is speculation that Payne’s own opposition to Smith’s bill may be based on ideological grounds. It is well known that the Congressional Black Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives has played and continues to play a critical role in the formulation of U.S. policy in Africa. Payne, as a former chair of the Caucus, may find it difficult to accept the idea of republicans championing the cause of freedom and human rights in a black African country. One hopes such speculation is groundless, for the cause of human rights and justice knows of no racial or ideological boundaries.
There is also other speculation that Payne has grown sympathetic and fond of the current regime because of his long term involvement with them, and wants to protect the regime from critical external scrutiny. Payne’s almost romantic fascination with the EPDRF and its efforts in dislodging the Derg regime, and his depiction of the regime as Ethiopia’s salvation should bring considerable delight to Zenawi and company.
Payne has not been vocal in explaining his version of H.R. 4423, nor has he articulated in detail his reasons for opposing Smith’s bill. For those who have had an opportunity to observe him at the hearings or other forums, he appears uncomfortable with the subject matter and overly defensive about his role.
In contrast, Smith has been forthright, passionate and candid in his views and comments on the situation in Ethiopia. His questions at the hearings were incisive, skillful and unrelenting, his observations keen and to the point, and his knowledge of the current situation in Ethiopia prodigious.
Postscript
There are many supporters of Smith’s version of H.R. 4423, particularly in the United States. I support Smith’s version because his bill upholds the principles of human rights and civil liberties, and private property ownership rights in Ethiopia. It is my professional creed that every person is entitled to due process of law regardless of the nature of the accusations or the gravity of the alleged crime. This means the accused is presumed to be absolutely innocent until proven guilty, that s/he has the right to counsel paid for by the government if s/he can not afford one, that s/he is entitled to a speedy and public trial and that no person shall be convicted unless there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. International human rights groups report that the prisoners of conscience in Zenawi’s jails are denied these and many other rights. I call upon Zenawi and his government to release all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience in Ethiopia immediately and unconditionally!!!
In the same vein, I believe that private property ownership is a natural right, and that no person shall be deprived of it without due process of law and just compensation. I reject wholly the socialistic principle that only the state can own land. The government must make changes to allow exclusive ownership of land in private hands.
I have defended these principles of civil liberties, human rights and property rights not only in American courtrooms but also in the court of public opinion. Smith’s bill deserves the support of all who believe in the preservation of civil liberties and human rights, and value the growth of democratic institutions, practices and culture in Ethiopia.
POST-POSTSCRIPT
This author remains perplexed by the singular fact that Representative Payne has not demanded and insisted upon the immediate and unconditional release of opposition leaders and other prisoners of conscience in Ethiopia. Payne knows that there is not a single government or international human rights organization that has recognized the legitimacy of the detention of opposition leaders in the aftermath of the May 15 elections.
Similarly, the stony silence of our brothers and sisters in the Congressional Black Caucus in the dialogue over H.R. 4423 and the detention of opposition leaders has, in the words of Martin Luther King, cast a “shadow of deep disappointment†upon a large segment of the Ethiopian community in the U.S. But we should be careful not to harbor resentment; rather we should reach out to the Caucus members and convert them to the cause of human rights and justice in Ethiopia with Dr. King’s message:
“Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history.â€Â
The yearning for freedom that African Americans experienced four decades ago is the same yearning that Ethiopians are experiencing today. Let’s share Dr. King’s message with our brothers and sisters on the Congressional Black Caucus in the spirit of solidarity for justice.
Whether H.R. 4423 will be enacted into law remains to be seen. It is abundantly clear, however, that regardless of the outcome of the bill, Ethiopians in the United States have gained a new consciousness and unflinching resolve to defend and sustain human rights and democracy in their homeland, and participate in its economic development. Those who continue to flagrantly abuse and trample upon the human rights of their citizens should heed the regretful observations of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto after the ill-fated attack on Pearl Harbor: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.â€Â
———————————————————-
Al Mariam, Ph.D., J.D. (Esq.) is professor of political science and a defense attorney in California. Readers are invited to visit and share their comments at: https://almariamforthedefense.wordpress.com/
———————————————————–
[1]. Refers to the two versions of H.R. 4423 presented before the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations [hereinafter “Subcommitteeâ€Â]: “Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to HR 4423 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey,†April 6, 2006; and “Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to HR 4423 Offered by Mr. Payne of New Jersey,†April 6, 2006. Specific references to the two versions in the discussion will be captioned “Smith, sec.__â€Â, and “Payne, sec__.â€Â
[2]. “Legislative findings†in a bill often provide insight on the facts and circumstances supporting the proposed legislation and component provisions. Such findings also provide insight into the thought processes of lawmakers (technically referred to as ‘legislative intent’) and are used in judicial interpretation (technically referred to as “statutory constructionâ€Â) of a bill once it is enacted into law.
[3]. See Mark-Up Statement for H.R. 4423, Rep. Christopher H. Smith, Chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, April 6, 2006. “Mark-Up†refers to the preparation of a bill in final form in a congressional committee before it is reported out for a vote by the legislative body. Smith’s “Mark-Up Statement†was provided before H.R. 4423 was reported out of his Subcommittee to the House Committee on International Relations.
I would like to add my voice to the ongoing debate and exchange over the creation by some opposition parties of a coalition titled “Alliance for Freedom and Democracy.†The initiative has generated a chain of diverse, contradictory, and sometimes heated reactions, ranging from surprise to outright support and rejection. Unsurprisingly, TPLF supporters reject or downplay the alliance, arguing that it is unnatural. For them, the alliance cannot last because it can never overcome the incompatibility between the CUDP’s and OLF’s political agendas. Among the supporters, there are those who show some anxiety: they demand for more clarification as to the political program of the alliance; in particular, they would like to know whether the OLF has abandoned its secessionist goal. Those who fully support the agreement do so because they consider it as a significant advancement on the democratic road. It shows the choice of resolving conflicts, however serious they may be, through the democratic process rather than through imposition. Moreover, they see such an alliance as the best way to shorten Meles’s regime by effectively countering his divide and rule policy.
These are all valid reasons for supporting AFD, but they fall short of indicating the social dynamics that pressured the CUDP and the OLF into reaching such an agreement. When agreements occur between political parties that exhibit great disparity both in terms of ideology and political programs, we must suspect that they are involved in a strategic planning projecting some substantial gains, if not final victory. I maintain that the May election, its results, and the shortsighted crackdown of the Meles regime combined to bring about the new strategic thinking.
In the eyes of the CUDP, if there is one thing that the election results confirmed beyond any doubt is that the party is not only the most powerful force of opposition, but also a national force. The ethnic ideology and political structure of the Meles regime was shaken, not by other ethnic parties, but by a party transcending ethnic organizations and ethnic political agenda. This was nothing short of a renewal of Ethiopian nationalism, the very one that organizations, such as the EPRP, the MEISON, and even the Derg, had represented, it is true inconsistently, after the collapse of the imperial regime. The essential result of the May election is, therefore, the official consecration of a strong national party.
The emergence of a strong national party explains the alliance. So long as the CUDP enjoys the support of a large number of Ethiopians, ethnic parties, including the OLF, which claims to represent the largest ethnic group, need not be excluded. Instead, they should be co-opted into the democratic process, which is unlikely to result in any secessionist outcome, given the unbroken and unbreakable presence of Ethiopian nationalism, henceforth incarnated by a tangible organization. What the alliance expresses is the self-confidence of the CUDP, self-confidence that emerged from the May election.
The overwhelming victory of the CUDP in the Addis Ababa election denotes its national stature, obvious as it is that the composition of the capital city is a sample of Ethiopia’s class and ethnic diversities. Had the CUDP operated in conditions free of the restrictions of the TPLF in the rest of the country, an appreciable number of people would have given their support. The strength of the CUDP came from its economic agenda, which set off nothing less than an alliance between various classes, all equally frustrated by the ethnic oligarchy controlling power and wealth in Ethiopia.
For its part, the OLF agreed to form the alliance because of the understanding that a national force has indeed emerged. To ignore the CUDP would be tantamount to saying that nothing new has happened in Ethiopia. Something great did happen: for the first time, a government was defeated through an electoral process, an event that invited political parties to serious revisions under pain of becoming irrelevant. Not to take account of the outcomes offered no other alternative than the endorsement of the disruption of the democratic process. One such outcome is the CUDP. And the more the TPLF attacked and imprisoned CUDP leaders, the more the party appeared as the true opposition to an increasing number of Ethiopians, including the Oromo. The crackdown only succeeds in expanding the identification of Ethiopians with the CUDP.
Let us go further. The OLF knows that by itself it will never threaten the TPLF regime. The need for alliance is flagrant; so is the fact that the CUDP is the only force that can seriously challenge the TPLF. Herein lies the puzzle. Given the CUDP’s political agenda, people rightly wonder whether the alliance means that the OLF has given up its main goal. If yes, the sacrifice does not seem worthwhile, since the OLF could have obtained a similar arrangement with the TPLP. That is why many Ethiopians suspect that the OLF is not sincere, that the agreement is simply a tactic to get rid of the TPLF so as to realize its secessionist goal.
Again, these interrogations fail to take into account the watershed created by the May election. Because the CUDP represents a large and inclusive movement, it alone is able to play the democratic game, thanks to which the OLF thinks of emerging as a major force. To the extent that the TPLF represents the sectarian interests of a few ethnicized cliques, it cannot play by democratic rules, all the more so now that the May election definitively took away from its leaders the illusion that most peasants and suppressed ethnic groups support their system. In other words, for the first time, the OLF saw the possibility of a genuine democratic process in Ethiopia. With the claim to represent the largest ethnic group in Ethiopia, the OLF could no longer push aside this unique opportunity. The opportunity does not necessarily mean secession; what it does mean is a concrete possibility for the Oromo to finally gain the real place they deserve in Ethiopia.
For both of them, then, alliance appeared as a win-win solution. If my analysis is correct, that is, if both the CUDP and the OLF agreed because of their respective confidence in the democratic process, then misgivings about the alliance should wither away in favor of support. As I have already indicated in various articles, behind the ethnicization of politics in Ethiopia there is nothing but elite conflicts. A perfect illustration of this is the paradox of the ethnicization of Tigrean educated elite. I say “paradox†because Tigray, the birth place of the Kibre Negast, is the source of Ethiopian nationalism.
For the purpose of dismantling the Showan hegemony and mobilizing popular support, a sector of the Tigrean educated elite baptized Tigray a nation even though no records exist that even remotely allude to a time when Tigray existed outside Ethiopia. Once the defeat of the Derg achieved, we saw the TPLF leadership easing itself into the position of new ruling elite. To give a lasting guarantee to their rule, the new rulers designed and applied the system of ethnic federalism. The system had one defect, but a colossal one: it could assure the persistence of the TPLF rule only by going against democracy, especially by holding down the two largest ethnic groups, namely, the Oromo and the Amhara.
This exclusion was reason enough for both ethnic groups to come together earlier, but mutual suspicion and, especially, the lack of democratic institutions did not create a situation where they could say that an alliance is worth trying. It is imperative to understand that this alliance cannot hurt in any way the Tigrean people without losing its democratic essence. On the other hand, as a minority group, the best way for the Tigrean people to protect their legitimate rights is to fully participate in the democratic process, and they cannot do so unless they champion, once more, Ethiopian nationalism. Otherwise, the attempt to have a special status leads nowhere but to supporting directly Meles’s rhetoric of accusing the CUDP of anti-Tigrean feelings, nay, of genocide.
Once this demonizing stand is adopted, I see no other way out than ethnic confrontations, which will benefit no one, certainly not the Tigrean elite. The fact that Meles’s repressive method seems to prevail should not blind us to the fact that the regime can survive only by developing a system of government akin to the defunct apartheid regime in South Africa. Participation in this malefic design will kill Tigray as we know and admire it. By the way, I don’t exclude the possibility of nationalist and farsighted Tigreans finally coming together and doing what is necessary to resume the interrupted democratic process.
The way out is clear enough: understand ethnicity for what it is, namely, not so much incompatibility between peoples as expression of elite conflicts, and you will see that democracy is its most elegant and final solution. The struggle for and the establishment of a genuine system of power-sharing should announce the decline of ethnicization. Such a decline means the emergence of a win-win situation for everybody, for the Oromo, the Amhara, the Tigreans, the Somali, etc. Only under the protection of unity or Ethiopian nationalism does diversity lend itself to democratic treatment.
AFD (Alliance for Freedom and Democracy) arrived with a bang and took almost everyone by surprise. Its birth had already generated strong reaction among all the stakeholders. Several articles and commentaries were written in this short period of time; mostly pro, a few against. Its arrival is welcomed by the majority as a beacon of hope, but a few others dismissed it as an unworkable venture; for some this was capitulation for the OLF, for others it was surrender for the CUDP. Some thought it will bring overnight the demise of EPRDF, and others feared it as an alliance against the Tigrai. This was an interesting week not short of opinions.
This Alliance is misunderstood by some quarters from its very outset. In a country accustomed to politics of zero-sum game this is not surprising. The essence of AFD and the revolutionary concept underlying it need to be captured and expounded, and the zero-sum fallacy underlying some of the criticisms should be exposed. It’s only if we understand the rationale for its creation that we can appreciate its implication and criticize its shortcomings. From what I have seen AFD is both praised and denigrated for the wrong reasons.
At the beginning I will in particular address Oromo groups, both those who support and oppose the formation of AFD. The Oromo people’s struggle has come a long way. Today, even if controlled by the TPLF, we have Oromia as a politico-administrative reality. Today, the brutal repression aside, Oromia’s children learn in their own language and more or less exercise their culture. Today, we have OLF, an organization that has, not only acquired a great deal of experience, but also earned a great respect among our people as well as beyond. Compared to the past, our people’s struggle has reached such a stage that even the ruling group could rule us only by using our own people. Given where we were about 30 years ago, this is one stage forward, but now we have to move beyond this. The TPLF, with all its state machinery, the army, the security and the bureaucracy, cannot rule Oromia without OPDO, and cannot undo Oromia without inviting a great danger to itself. Our new rulers have become in some curious ways the prisoners of our potential might; they are not free to act the way they want to. In short, it could be safely said that, if not impossible, it is very difficult for any force to dismantle Oromia. Oromia is today a reality that exists, and it is here to stay.
Two interdependent deductions could be made from this; the first from the Oromo side and the second from the angle of non Oromo political forces. Even, as some predict, if AFD resulted in exclusively bringing CUDP to power (mind you this is a big if and the chance of that happening is very minimal), would this be an end of Oromia? To this lingering question in the mind of many Oromos in Diaspora, my answer is, “absolutely not!†Even assuming for a moment that CUDP will try to do this, there is no way that this will be an easy ride for CUDP. To conclude that CUDP could easily dismantle Oromia, we have to assume that our people will not fiercely resist this. For me this assumption is preposterous. In fact, rather than fighting to achieve something new, people fight more fiercely when you try to take away from them what they already have. The Oromo are “given†some rights on paper and they want nothing short of making the promise for self-government real. Thus, the fear that the AFD will empower the CUDP, which will in turn lead to dismantlement of Oromia, is unfounded or highly exaggerated.
The existence of Oromia as a politico-administrative unit the last 14 years, and the support it has generated among the Oromo population has also implication on the other non Oromo political protagonists in Ethiopia. If democratic rule follows the fall of TPLF, it means that such major undertaking as dismantling the existing structure should be done democratically. Given the commitment that the Oromo people have for Oromia, I fail to see how this could be achieved democratically without the blessing of Oromos. If the Oromos agree to this in a democratic way, so be it. But the basic point is this: Any force or organization that has any ambition of becoming a national organization will not attempt to do this for the simple reason that it would not want to alienate Oromos. Democratic power basically means vote, and the Oromos have a lot of it that any organization would like to court; and that is the beauty of democracy. Of course, the question that follows is, “what if these forces want to achieve this undemocratically, i.e., by way of force or trickery?†This would be inviting a civil war in Ethiopia. After the fall of TPLF not many would want to go there. I believe that the commitment of our people and the strength of our political organization would be a great disincentive from indulging in this. And even if there are some foolhardy who would attempt to achieve this, given where we are today, they will not be successful. Thus, notwithstanding the declaration of this intention by some at this stage, no one who would come to power would attempt to implement this unless they are insane.
The above is based on the worst case scenario, and does not at all imply that CUDP will try to dismantle Oromia unilaterally. I can understand that not to alienate some of their supporters the leadership might not want to come out and clearly state that they are not against the existing structure. But the reasonable amongst them do recognize, even if they may not like it, that this is something here to stay. They have come into terms with it as an existing reality. This is one reason why the CUD platform left this to the decision of the people instead of taking a stand on it. To summarize, the two deductions are: The Oromo people would strongly resist any effort to dismantle Oromia as a politico-administrative entity, and the knowledge that the Oromo people would strongly resist dismemberment will restrain other forces from attempting this (cost factor).
Because of the above, there is no need to dwell on the fear of Oromia’s demise with the very remote possibility of CUDP’s coming to power alone. The danger to the existence of Oromia is not as serious as some want us to believe. The TPLF tries to paralyze the initiative by exaggerating the danger coming from Amharas, and we should not fall prey to it. This brings me to the second point of criticism of the AFD from Oromo angle. I have heard comments along the following line: “TPLF’s program is closer to OLF, therefore, OLF should have formed alliance with TPLF rather than with CUDP,†or something to that effect. I totally reject this line of thinking because unwittingly it is predicated on the assumption that we are destined to choose between TPLF and CUDP. The Oromo is no longer a force forced to choose between the two but a real force on its own merit. Besides, it is only when you vote that the question of whose program is close to you is of paramount importance, you look at the program of a party and choose the one that is close to your belief. When you are the contender for power it is not in all situations the cardinal point. The question for us today should not be whether it is TPLF or CUDP that is better to rule us. The question should rather be, “what situation will bring us closer to be masters of our own affairs?â€Â, or “what situation will bring us closer to establishing a just, representative and democratic society?†I say, as long as the TPLF is in power, the possibility of resolving our issue, as well as the question of forming a democratic polity is out of question. TPLF is maintained in power by dividing the people in Ethiopia. The essence of its existence is rooted in divide and rule. This is so, not merely because Meles Zenawi is a bad person, but simply because the constituency of Tigrai cannot be the basis for democracy–majority rule. If the Oromos and Amahras are not in each other’s throat, then Meles will not be in power, as simple as that. Besides, there is nothing more that the Oromo people need from TPLF, short of the TPLF stepping down, which the TPLF would never accept; therefore, there is no rationale for contemplating an alliance with Meles. TPLF’s control of power is the major stumbling block to the resolution of our question through dialogue and negotiation with others. In the journey to seek a solution, TPLF is not a member of the search team, but a spoiler that is there only to sabotage the search. Thus, the first objective, at this juncture, should be to force the TPLF out of office. And the formation of AFD is essential to achieve this. However, the creation of alliance with CUDP should not be supported simply because it is essential to force the TPLF from power, but also because it presents us with an opportunity to seek solutions to our problems together for the first time in our tortuous history. Given its constituency, its leadership and the common repression we suffered in the hands of TPLF, CUDP is a better partner to negotiate with.
This brings me to my third and last point. Only the belief and practice in democratic principles could bring together organizations as divergent as the OLF and CUDP together. It is essential for these organizations to be democratic for them to stand together. To be democratic essentially means accepting the supremacy of the people. It means not imposing your will on others by force. It means agreeing to disagree. It means resolving contradictions through dialogue and peaceful ways. It means respecting each other and each others views, it means disagreeing without being disagreeable. This means, as long as they are ready to bring their program to the vote of the people for decision, OLF and CUDP do not have to have the same program in order to form an alliance. Semantics aside, this is only an alliance; there is no objective to have the same political program. The only substantive agreement going beyond the ousting of TPLF is about the formation of a transition government that will lead to a democratic society. OLF does not have to change, and did not change its program and vision and CUDP does not have to do the same in order to achieve that. Agreeing to create AFD means, “let us create a democratic society where we can compete freely,†and does not mean let us merge our organizations. At the core of the formation of AFD is the dawn of democratic society—as their statement says “a just, representative and democratic orderâ€Â. One has to be totally democratic to accept this and even to understand it, and hence the confusion and hullabaloo in some sectors.
There are those who claim that OLF is using others as a vehicle to come to power. This is a concern raised by those who claim that they are for “unity†and sadly from quarters that traditionally supported “people’s rightsâ€Â. One thing that needs to be clear is that it is inevitable for the Oromo to assume a central role in a free and democratic Ethiopia. On the other hand, an Ethiopia that has fully embraced the aspirations of the Oromo and addressed their grievances would be a powerful Ethiopia, a peaceful Ethiopia. The fact that OLF played a central role in the formation of AFD should be commended and encouraged and not feared and discouraged. This for the first time brings the Oromo people to the central stage in Ethiopian politics and that is what makes AFD historical. In the long-term, we will not be talking about which group is the majority and which one is not. The majority will be based on ideas. That is the beauty of a free and democratic society.
The idea that empowering the OLF and the Oromo is tantamount to risking the dismemberment of Ethiopia is totally preposterous. This comes from those who still think in the old paradigm of win-lose and domination. The future the AFD promises is not one of domination. On the other hand, as Fekade Shewakena aptly suggested, “What is wrong with representatives of the Oromo people manipulating the rest of us at least once in history,†given “how many times in our history the Oromo people have been manipulated.†The fear of the Oromo is a presupposition that is based on the belief that the contradiction between Oromos interest and the Amharas is irreconcilable. If Ethiopia is free and democratic, the Oromo and others have no incentive to even consider breaking away as an option. The gain for the Oromos does not necessarily mean loss for the Amahras and vice versa, there is no reason why we cannot create a win-win situation for all. If this venture becomes successful it will change politics as we know it in this part of the world. Ethiopia cannot be saved by excluding Oromos and their organizations, but by making the Oromo movement to play a central role. The more democratic Ethiopia become by including the aspiration of the Oromo, the more difficult it will become to separate Oromia from Ethiopia. With negotiation, dialogue and compromise there is no contradictions that we cannot resolve or mitigate. There are even worse contradictions in history that were peacefully resolved to the satisfaction of all stakeholders. This is what underlies the formation of AFD, and what make it revolutionary in our context. This is a new paradigm, a paradigm based on the simple thesis that conflict is not a natural and inevitable law of nature, that conflicts could be overcome, people could rise above their differences, however protracted and deep-rooted. It is based on the belief that the problems in Ethiopia are complicated and even if we agree amongst ourselves on many of the fundamental issues, the problems we will be facing are still enormous. It is based on the premise that there is hope in freedom and democracy. The promise of freedom and democracy is what AFD offersâ€â€the hope that we can someday leave our terrible past behind us and concentrate on leading our lives freed from the violence, fear and repression that we are accustomed to. It is a result of the conclusion that domination, subjugation and exploitation of each other have condemned us all into misery, poverty, tyranny and underdevelopment. For those who think that this is a pact against the Tigrai people, AFD has extended its offer to the TPLF to change its ways and join the common effort. Even if the TPLF declines this offer and remains outside, it should be clear that this Alliance is not targeted against the Tigrai people. AFD is an all inclusive undertaking. Lasting solution in Ethiopia cannot be found by excluding the Tigrai people who have always played important role in the past.
AFD is an idea whose time has come. It is still a beginning but a beginning towards a journey into a new future, a future that is radically different from our past, a future where we can all win together, a future where the specter of the zero-sum game is once and for all retired from Ethiopian politics, a future where politics would not be our single most pressing preoccupation, a future where we can also dedicate part of our lives to more important things like love, literature, art, travel, culture and what not. AFD is a dream, a positive dream, a glimpse of the great things we could do together if we have the courage to redefine what is meant by “us†and “themâ€Â. Past systems might have unjustly benefited elites from only certain sectors of the society while the majority suffered. In a large sense, we have all been suffering, mostly together, for generations; for heavens sake, can we not think of a future where we can all thrive and prosper together, a future where the menace of unending animosity and conflict would give way to just peace and harmony? I am fully cognizant of the challenge, but fully believe we can! Ni danda’ama. Yichaalaal!
There is a new reason to celebrate. Something that was never expected to happen has happened. It has caused a cool, refreshing wind of change to start blowing over Ethiopia, from the west to the east, from the north to the south. As we enjoy the invigorating and gentle wind, we recognize that it comes from a new sense of unity and purpose that has been birthed with the formation of the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy, an organization made up of groups that have never before come together in such a way.
It is an unprecedented accomplishment; yet, many are asking whether such a promise for the future is to be trusted? Many wonder whether they will be included and whether it will last? Some point out its flaws and refuse to believe there are any real answers to the dilemma facing us Ethiopians, believing we are a people destined to suffering and victimhood at the hands of our leaders.
In response to the new Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (AFD), I, Obang Metho, have received lots of phone calls and emails asking what I think of the AFD. Some ask if I think this is a way to justice for the Anuak and how it affects our advocacy work? I decided I should respond more publicly instead of individually.
First of all, I want to thank all the Ethiopians who have called or emailed. You have shown your concern for your country. Secondly, I want to congratulate the leaders who formed the Alliance. You have done something truly significant.
For all of you, I hope that after you read this statement, you will find something in it, a word or an idea, that can be shared or used to empower other Ethiopians to contribute to a better Ethiopia. I am only talking as a simple guy, an individual with my own opinion. Some of you may disagree with me, but in the free society we all want, the right of open disagreement is an important one that can lead to better ideas as we are able to dialogue with each other, perfecting each other’s positions in a peaceable way.
On the day of the announcement of the formation of the Alliance, I was overjoyed as I considered it a new day for me, for the Anuak, for every individual Ethiopian and for Ethiopian communities and organizationsâ€â€a new day of hope for prosperity, peace, justice and stability.
That formation is like the much-anticipated birth of a new child in a family where everyone is excited and sees the new life and the child’s potential for the future. We want the best for this child so that some day, the child will grow up and contribute to the family and to the world. Like the child who is born, who starts off as a stranger, but after we name, nurture, guide and protect this child, the child becomes known to us and develops into the kind of person that we would want as part of our family. So it is with the birth of this Alliance, whose foundation are the principles of freedom, liberty and democracy that most of us value and seek. We hope its birth and development leads us to know it better and to support it in becoming more capable of promoting sustainable peace, stability, justice and the upholding of fundamental freedoms and civil liberties for all of us as laid out in its Memorandum of Understanding. We cannot argue with these principles. Instead, the question I am hearing is can this organization be trusted to deliver?
First of all, do not be surprised if you are hopeful on one hand and suspicious on the other. We Ethiopians have been so betrayed by our leaders that our ability to trust, even the trustworthy, has been severely damaged. We have been repeatedly promised much and have been repeatedly lied to so that our trust has been exploited. Therefore, do not be surprised if your fragile hope is accompanied by fear and worry that history will repeat itself.
We have been profoundly traumatized as a people and a culture and need recovery from a deeply entrenched woundedness. This woundedness and its partner, fear, darkens our outlook on most everything. We have become people who are hypervigilant of danger, expecting that it will come from anywhere, from anyone, from any ethnic group and at any moment, even if it is an imaginary threat. This suspicious outlook on life has become a way to survive under repeated trauma. Yet, it also becomes a controlling factor that dysfunctionally enslaves us in our fear. Yet, who can blame us? It has been our experience, but if we generalize our fear to every attempt for positive change, we disable our ability as Ethiopians to find our way out of the mess we are in.
I am not saying that we should turn off our minds, because our minds are critical to us in evaluating truth from lie, but we must realize how much a legacy of betrayal and oppression has caused us to reject and undermine the best attempts to bring about freedom and democracy. We cannot afford to lose an important opportunity that could provide the road to unity and freedom on which everyone is invited to travel. Because of its multiple members and openness to all, the Alliance has an internal mechanism of checks and balances to which it will be held accountable. I am thrilled with its formation and believe the Alliance is an organization that deserves our support and encouragement.
However, we must recognize that like in raising a child, there will be obstacles to overcome along the way. Some of them will be minor, but others more life-threatening. Yet, to accomplish our goals for our child, we must be willing to work hard to correct any problems that our child might demonstrate until our child “grows up†to be the kind of person for which we had hoped. Just like the Alliance may not perfectly reflect your desires at this time, neither are our children born without some imperfections and a need for correction along the way. Our children and this Alliance must be helped through these times and obstacles. As with our child, we must be patient until that child becomes an adult who can responsibly raise the children of the next generation.
The reason I am saying this is because I have heard that some are saying that parts of the Alliance are good and some parts are not. I want to remind you that like an infant, if something is imperfect with your child, we do not reject and discard our child, but instead we devote ourselves to help him or her become the best person possible.
This point is meant to help Ethiopians who are thinking that this organization should be born perfect and complete, to understand that this is an impossible dream. This is because we human beings are imperfectâ€â€only God is perfect. Therefore, any human organization is made up of us imperfect people who can only attempt to do it “right.†Because of this, the Alliance needs time to develop, just like the infant who cannot feed itself, this organization is in the fragile state of formation and must be protected and nurtured like the newly planted crop that must be watered and cared for if it is going to yield an abundant harvest. Its harvest may be one of the best ever in the history of Ethiopia as it offers something that comes from the hearts and souls of people who are being transformed internally into people more willing to reach out to others.
The leaders of this Alliance appear to be committed and sincere to upholding the highest of principles. Their willingness to come together is exemplary, but of course, as the Alliance implements these values, their credibility will increase. Yet, we must support and help them as they will face many challenges, as it becomes the first organization of its kind at a very critical time in our history.
The Alliance is not a political organization in the usual sense of the word, but an organization that promotes the very right and freedom to have political organizations with differing agendas and representation. It is based on values that are life-giving rather than life-taking. It proposes a completely different mindset than the one of hatred based ethnic division that has been defeating us all.
Yet, we should not only unify against something, like the EPRDF, as it is only the basis for short-lived unity. Instead, long-lasting unity is found in joining together around principles that build up people, families and societiesâ€â€principles built on God established truths of the way we individuals should behave in this world in relation to God and to others. As we live out these transformational truths in our own lives, others may join until our country may be one that goes through a national transformation starting in the individual hearts of its citizens.
I am saying to you that the formation of this Alliance is a sign that this transformation has started. It is a sign that Ethiopians are willing to work together to be in the same country and to be part of the same family. It is a sign that Ethiopians are willing to not separate from the country, but to come together. I am taking this day when the Alliance was signed, when these six groups joined together as one, as a momentous indication of the new fresh wind over Ethiopia. It is immensely significant that individual groups became willing to give up some of the things that were meaningful to each of them. They did this for the sake of Ethiopia and for the future generations of our country. The spirit of compromise was present, as the foundational principles of freedom and democracy were held supreme.
For example, no one ever thought that the OLF would join together with the CUD. Some never thought that those in the ONLF would join in with the rest, yet they and the others are showing that Ethiopians are Ethiopians whether from the north or south, the east or west. These groups are showing that Ethiopians are ready for tolerance, acceptance and the inclusion of all ethnic groups.
They have shown their willingness to compromise as an important means to do it. I am taking this as a victory and the first big step towards justice, freedom and a peaceful Ethiopia where everyone will be able to live their lives without the fear of oppression and terrorization by one’s own government.
Most of us know that the formation of the Alliance is a cause to celebrate; a shared celebration that we have heard was going on in the cities, towns and villages throughout Ethiopia when people danced in the streets after it was announced. It was recognized as the only way to bring this government to its knees and to offer hope for possible release for those leaders and others imprisoned for speaking up against injustice and oppression. This is a sign that the window of dialogue will be opened. It is a sign to the Western countries that did not help, claiming that Ethiopians were too hopelessly divided against each other to offer a better alternative to the current government.
More significantly, this formation is shaking the ground underneath the EPRDF and for the first time, we are hearing the words, “dialogue†and “negotiation†coming from them. Some are reporting that the government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has approached what they consider to be their more “sympathetic friends†in an attempt to demonstrate a new willingness to talk with the opposition groups. However, for those of us well-acquainted with the tactics of this government, it appears to be a strategy to find a last resort means to hang on to a disintegrating hold on power that has been largely perpetuated by sabotaging our unity. To such a government, the formation of the Alliance is a most ominous development; yet to most Ethiopians, it is a reason to dance in the streets.
Yet, like a shooting star that we love to watch in its quick display of power before its light goes out forever, let us support the Alliance in such a way that its light is sustained and burns brightly. We should pray for the leaders and others who will join that they be equipped with the vision, wisdom, talent, energy and spirit that leads to the accomplishment of the worthy goals and objectives as set out in its Memorandum of Understanding for Freedom and Democracy in Ethiopia.
Think of what Ethiopians have already done to bring this formation about. They have not done it alone. Since last year’s election, you might not realize how Ethiopians everywhere have contributed to this day. No other African country or group in the Diaspora have continued to demonstrate for these values and have raised up these issues in every Western capital more than Ethiopians have done.
To those back home, they have done what they could, even if it has meant losing their lives or freedom. I would like to extend my thanks to every Ethiopian who has contributed to this cause, some without knowing it. To name a few I include the people in civil, churches or community organizations who have written letters, phoned friends to join a rally or who have given others rides to the rally. Others of you have contributed money to the cause or have made others around you more aware. Some have raised support for the families of those in prison or have prayed for those who have lost loved ones or for God’s help to bring about justice.
Many of you do not realize what you have done and how you have contributed to this day. If you are one of these individuals, be grateful and proud that you have been able to help. Call or email someone else who has helped in some ways, regardless of how small the contribution, because together, it all adds up to this accomplishment.
More than anything, thank God that He hears the prayers of the humble and the suffering of this world. This world will not change unless we do our part and it must begin by a transformation that starts in our hearts. God makes us into His new creation when we turn to Him. He then asks us to trust Him as He empowers us to become different people. Ethiopia needs the transformation that only comes from many of us surrendering to God and His plan for our lives. This country will not change unless we do. That is why I am calling on you to do more.
Peace and justice cannot come by itself. Right now, the Alliance is the result of the winds of change that many of you contributed towards. Do what you can to pray for the Alliance, to encourage and support them as they stand for all Ethiopians working together to bring peace and stability to our land. No one ethnic group can bring the needed changeâ€â€we need each other.
The Anuak in prison are convinced that justice will not come for them under this regime. The same is being said in other parts of Ethiopia. Four thousand Anuak refugees will not return to Ethiopia until safety is assured. Again, they are convinced it will not happen under this regime.
Two days ago, two Anuak men were shot dead by Ethiopian Defense troops in Gambella town and no one was arrested, even though there were witnesses present during the shooting. Such flagrant disregard for the law even in front of witnesses shows the atmosphere of impunity that the EPRDF is grounded on. We know that the justice the Anuak and others in Ethiopia are looking for will not come through the same people committing these injustices.
Ironically, the silver bullet against this regime is unity and empowering each other. It is giving acceptance and inclusion to minority groups with no voice. It is caring about others instead of robbing others of their legitimate rights. The regime’s ammunition of division has been like a life-threatening disease, infecting the bloodstream of the body of Ethiopians. But, God has given us a medication that not only cures the disease, but restores robust health. That medication is genuine unity, based on principles that values all human life, my own and that of others like or unlike me. As the medication reaches all our extremities, be thankful and encouraged that the dying have been brought back to life.
Do not be negative and critical, but be part of the solution. Expect that the 70 million people of Ethiopia may have different political agendas and needs, but yet human beings by nature, crave freedom. There will be a time to form political agendas only if real freedom and democracy exists. In the meantime, we need a watchdog, made up of all groups, to uphold these values. The Alliance may be that watchdog.
For example, there are people who say that the Alliance should not be chaired by an Oromo, but someone must lead it and most likely, it may be someone outside our own group. Also, some want their own language to be included, but in a country of over 80 dialects, we cannot include every language.
I am hearing rumors that some believe Eritrea has provided support for the formation of the Alliance and may have a hidden agenda. Regardless, this organization is not run by Eritreans, but by fellow Ethiopians. Even the CUD, who most of us believe received the majority of actual votes from Ethiopians during the last election, have joined the Alliance, believing that it is a valuable means to freedom and democracy for all. I do not think the CUD would join if such a hidden agenda that they previously opposed, was included in its formation.
Instead of letting rumors fuel our fears, let us actively hold the Alliance accountable to their goals and principles upon which they were formed while at the same time, we put aside our prejudices and any destructive suspiciousness that can destroy this first significant step to a freer Ethiopia. Unity is our most effective medication against our disease that ails us. This does not just mean including the top 3, 4 or 10 ethnic groups, but every ethnic group in Ethiopia must join together, as we all are part of the path to our liberation.
As long as some are not free and are victims of human rights abuses, we are not free. Do your part to change your world for the better. Remember, a slave is someone who is waiting for somebody else to free him, even while complaining about being a slave. We should understand that we have to do our best to free ourselves and that we cannot do it alone. We must join together.
The duty of the leaders of the Alliance right now is a great one and I call on you leaders to seek God’s help in guiding you to do your job well. Right now, you must reach out in every direction and engage the people of every different background. You must communicate in every way possible about who you are and what you are about. Demonstrate your principles by reaching out to those who may be suspiciousâ€â€to those who may be in disagreement.
Come forward and show us Ethiopians what you have and listen closely to our responses. Be willing to listen to suggestions, criticism and even insults as you will be perfected and held accountable in a way that will lead to the betterment of the Alliance and ultimately to all of us Ethiopians if you do. Engage with the people, unlike someone like Meles who said he was for the people, yet never stepped foot in Gambella or other places throughout Ethiopia. Stand up for the great principles of truth, like Ana Gomez who spoke the truth, despite becoming attacked by the EPRDF for saying it.
I challenge the leaders of the Alliance to well represent and carefully protect the interests of the 77 million Ethiopian people for whom you say you have been formed. You may be the founding fathers and mothers that help bring about true democracy in Ethiopia that is reflected in real liberty, justice, equality, and freedom of expression. What you do must reflect the interests of the Ethiopian people.
Handle this responsibility with great humility, diligence and care. These 77 million people are watching you to make sure you become who you say you areâ€â€that you stand up for the well-being of all, including the most disenfranchised. Once a climate of freedom exists, it will open up the way for political parties to elect the people they want as their leaders. These leaders then can work towards the universal availability of education, health care, women’s rights, environmental protection and a free-market economy.
The leaders of the Alliance may be called upon to negotiate with the government. I am not opposed to this, but those of you leaders must consult with Ethiopians and be extremely careful because the government knows its position is precarious with the birth of the Alliance, making them more open to dialogue, but not necessarily more open to actually giving up power and becoming accountable for its crimes, corruption and atrocities.
Consider the advice found in Psalms 94: 20-22:
Can a corrupt throne be allied with youâ€â€one that brings on misery by its decrees?
They band together against the righteous and condemn the innocent to death.
But the LORD has become my fortress, and my God the rock in whom I take refuge.
Leaders of the Alliance, as you soberly view the task ahead, seek God’s help. As the Psalmist writes in an earlier verse (Psalms 94: 18-19):
When I said, “My foot is slipping, your love, O LORD, supported me.
When anxiety was great within me, your consolation brought joy to my soul.â€Â
Know that there will be mountains and valleys to this journey. As you reach out to people on the way, learn from them and do not depart from your passion for upholding what is right and good. Know that your journey is not alone, but that the memory of the lives of many who have been sacrificed, including the Anuak and student protesters, are constantly at your side. Appreciate how many Ethiopians have contributed to this opportunity and know that it not only to your credit, but is the answer to the prayers and efforts of many that have prepared the road ahead. Do not misuse your positions or be diverted from your mission and task. Be reminded that the work ahead is not for your own benefit, but for the benefit of those you serveâ€â€the people of Ethiopia. You must be servant leaders.
As authentic examples of such servant leadership, you could lead not only Ethiopia, but all of Africa to by a truly “new breed of leadership!†Meles was called this kind of leader, but never lived it out in his actions, deceiving many outside the country. Instead, if you truly live out the actions of being a servant of the people, you may be remembered as a true African who de-colonized Africa from the vampire African leaders who live on the blood of fellow Africans. These are the old breed of leaders. Be a new kind of leader.
When the Day finally arrives when freedom and democracy come to Ethiopia, many will thank God while being able to share in joyful singing and dancing as true contributors to this accomplishment. You and each and every Ethiopian will be like the rays from the rising sun over our beloved land of Ethiopia that illuminate the land with a new brightness that allows every Ethiopian from every ethnic group and background to see their surroundings as never before and to find their way out of their darkness and silence.
At that time, the child will have been raised, not only by one or two parents, but also by 77 million Ethiopians who have had a share in nurturing, protecting, disciplining and then feeling the pride that comes from seeing that the adult child they invested in has become even more than the child of our hopes and dreams.
My honorable leaders of the Alliance and fellow Ethiopians, let us take this job ahead of us very seriously. The cool and refreshing wind of change is blowing. The momentum has begun. Do not lose the opportunity before us. If we fail to do all we can or if we tear down the efforts of others, we are giving more years to the EPRDF and we all know that it would mean more killing, more injustice and more suffering. We must do our best to join the effortâ€â€we may not have a second chance!
“Famine is a visible horror…. Witness the agony, degradation, hopelessness and silent anger on the dismal and skeletal faces… faith for survival while in the agony of slow and grinding teeth of famine… the slender and uncontrollable hope for miraculous succour in the face of pious indifference…. Nothing else manifests man’s inhumanity to man more than famine.” Mesfin Wolde Mariam
Traveling north to Aksum and Adwa and south to Awassa I was struck by two things, the wan landscape and the swarms of people. The Awassa road, not so long ago lined with trees, appears bare savannah now. Formerly tiny towns had turned into sprawling urban centers. It made me think.
On return I studied up on food insecurity in a course on World Hunger co-taught with biologist Jocelyn Malamy. This made me more aware than ever of the close ties among population growth, deforestation, and food insecurity–and gave me a sense of responsibility to share that awareness with any reader who would engage the issue. Conveniently, one of my readers did so. Consider the response to Getz #4 sent by Ato Zinah Minyehal:
Professor Levine,
Why is population increase for Ethiopia such a concern? There are many countries with higher density of population than Ethiopia. Ethiopia’s problem is the dysfunctional political system, not the population. When democracy takes hold, the country will certainly prosper. I strongly disagree with the premise that population growth is a problem by itself…
Ato Zinah’s point of view represents the views of many Ethiopians I know. But I disagree, and in response, let me share some uncomfortable facts.
Some 85% of Ethiopia’s people still live in the rural sector. By itself, population growth automatically increases food insecurity among them. Can there be any doubt that malnutrition, hunger, and famine comprise a major challenge to Ethiopia in its foreseeable future? To take the most extreme of these afflictions: although famines have been reported in Ethiopia for nearly as long as we have records, averaging one famine every fifteen to twenty years between 1500 and 1940, in the last fifty years famines have occurred with increasing severity and frequency, averaging one every seven years. Recall: 1959; 1973-4; 1985; 1995; 2003; 2006.
A major cause of these famines is poverty. At times when production is ruined from natural hazards–drought, locusts, excessive rainfall–impoverished farmers and pastoralists have no reserves and no cash with which to secure food. As Mesfin Wolde Mariam demonstrated in Rural Vulnerability to Famine in Ethiopia, subsistence rather than commercial farming is the condition of famine in rural Ethiopia. Given that rural Ethiopians live in a subsistence economy, it follows that rapid population growth renders them more vulnerable to hunger, disease, and famine. Two million more infants per year means two million more mouths to feed, two million more children to school in a severely impoverished system. Increased family size means decreased size of food portions and declining nutrition. Malnutrition has already reached the point, UNICEF reports, where 47% of children under five are underweight, and more than half are stunted. Chronic hunger and intermittent famines require substantial relief aid. That heavily burdens the state, donors, and NGOs, diverting resources that might otherwise go to education, health, reforestation, crop improvement, soil restoration, water-harvesting technology, agricultural research, and improved farming technology.
Larger families diminish agricultural output, since all land that is physically cultivable is now cultivated. Larger families result in smaller farming plots, which means less food production per family for each new generation. Land units formerly measured by the gasha are now measured in hectares. Land use demands created by larger families cause subsistence farmers to overuse their land, thereby ceasing crop rotation and degrading the soil. Over four per cent of the country’s arable land has already lost its ability to support crops, according to Ethiopian environmental scientists.
More people results in increased demand for firewood, and constant deforestation to expand farmland. Deforestation exposes grazing lands and farmlands to soil erosion followed by massive land degradation with attendant drops in food production. Without government regulation, high population densities also cause degradation of water resources.
Such dynamics affect countries all over the world. Demographers project an increase of 2.6 billion people by 2050 living on roughly the same amount of arable land. But the cycle of poverty, hunger, and disease in which millions of Ethiopians are trapped makes these factors affect Ethiopia to an extreme degree.
And they threaten to grow worse, much worse, if present population trends persist. Consider projections provided by Daniel Assefa of the Ethiopian Economics Association in his penetrating analysis of the dimensions and impacts of Ethiopia’s demographic explosion. He calculates that Ethiopia’s current Total Fertility Rate (TFR = births per woman per lifetime) of 5.9 would produce a total population of about 325 million by the year 2050. This means that an area of farmland that hosted about 44 persons in 1995 and about 65 today would have to supply food for 300. Keeping to its current exceptionally high birth rate means nothing but catastrophe in Ethiopia’s future. At that rate, in ten years the population of childbearing age will have increased to the point that huge continuing population increases will be inevitable.
And yet, solutions to this crisis are not overwhelmingly difficult. Education is a major key, especially for women. Keeping girls in school longer will postpone the age at which they begin to bear children. Education empowers them to consider the advantages of smaller families and to learn about family planning. In addition, raising the age at which girls become sexually active lowers their vulnerability to HIV/AIDS infection and helps them withstand the pressure to enter the growing prostitution industry. To be sure, additional schooling is expensive and not quickly instituted. Family planning services delivered efficiently to all women of reproductive health and in particular to those who are married would likely have a powerful effect in a fairly short time.
In his report on population and environment in Ethiopia published by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Sahlu Haile rightly affirms that no population program has succeeded without strong and proactive support from national governments. Whatever the political system, this critical area can be dealt with. For example, Iran is viewed as a success story for reducing population growth dramatically by means that are universally applicable. In the decade after 1976, Iran’s population increased by 50 percent; at that rate of growth Iran’s population would have reached 108 million by 2006. But through a variety of methods–dropping maternity benefits for couples with more than three children, requiring men and women to attend classes about contraception before obtaining a marriage license, and making both condoms and contraceptive pills widely available, even giving away condoms at health clinics–the government of Iran managed to check population growth to reach only 71 million this year. Iran’s TFR started at Ethiopia’s current level of around 6, and then dropped to below 2!
Ethiopia’s government has done relatively little to deliver the message about family planning. Although some of her ministers realize the importance of this problem, the government has addressed it so ineffectually that dramatic changes are needed to deliver incentives to engage in family planning. Ato Daniel would expand the circle of agents to include private groups, NGOs, and the public at large as well as government agencies. To that, Dr. Ghelawdewos Araia has written in “Combating Future Famines in Ethiopia,” the conquest of famine in Ethiopia is a “mammoth historical task,” requiring action on many fronts, and should not be left to the homeland authorities alone: “The Ethiopian intellectual and professional in the Diaspora must be willing to contribute.”
Population growth and environmental degradation present the two most critical challenges that face this generation of Ethiopians. They constitute a common ground on which all Ethiopians can congregate. This common purpose can best be served by a robustly democratizing process, which supports a framework within which differences can be resolved nonviolently; which supports media that can freely report successes and shortcomings of initiatives; and which enhances communication that can facilitate all development undertakings.
Of course, many factors beside population growth contribute to chronic hunger and vulnerability to famine. But that is a big one. Can it be controlled? Only if more Ethiopians become concerned, and if all concerned demonstrate a commitment to “deny famine a future in Ethiopia” in Dr. Gheladawdewos’s stirring phrase. And, may I add, if we move to take action before it is too late.
There is an unwritten rule in an autocratic society that the news and other information disseminated must be sanitized to paint the government in a positive light. Furthermore other sources of information have to either be reduced to being a non-factor or being banned all together.
Since the 17th of May websites that have been critical of the Ethiopian Government have not been accessible to their readers in Ethiopia. This includes the sites that are hosted on blogspot.com. Despite the fact that there has been no official word from the authorities in Addis Ababa it is widely accepted that this is an effort at censorship and not a technical glitch.
There have been some major internal problems in Ethiopia in Recent months. A highly controversial election has had two major results. First there were violent street protests that left dozens of people killed and the other and potentially the most damning is the treason trial of members of the Opposition that sit in Parliament that refused to take their duly elected seats after the results of the election.
The Group Reporters Without Borders recently sent a letter to the Ethiopian Minister of Information seeking clarification into this Matter. It stated in the letter that “Preventing debate and controlling news and information circulating online will only aggravate an already very tense political climate.â€Â
The letter also made the statement that blocking access to the server has the effect of censoring all of the publications hosted on the site. Most of these sites do not deal with either Politics or Ethiopia in that matter. But the Government feels that it needs to take this action to control the flow of information.
This is not the only country in Africa where there are concerted efforts to limit the flow of information. There are serious efforts to limit the flow of information on the web notably this occurs in Zimbabwe and the DRC. But the efforts in Zimbabwe may be the proper comparison into the effort to limit the free flow of Information. Once again Freedom has taken a shot. But will its defenders rise to the task of defending it?
_______________________________ The Author comments on US Policy and Human Rights in Africa. He can be contacted at [email protected]
