By Sophia Bekele
What are the characteristics that make one women hate another? Beauty, success, intelligence, or confidence. Generally, the appearance of `having it all’ brings out negative reactions in women who feel that they lacke these qualities. Conversely, these characteristics are what appear to be attractive to men, yet, also make them uncomfortable. My observation and discussions with both men and women provide evidence and give credence to both kinds of behavior.
First, let us talke about women’s reactions. Well, there is the stereotype. Women who appear to have the above characteristics are perceived to be aloof and condescending. But, is this true or a stereotype? It is difficult to judge unless one gets the opportunity to know these women. Although some women enjoy having this unfriendly attitude, not all women behave in the same fashion. The advertising media also promotes these `have it all’ women as they capitalizing on them to fulfill their self interest, regardless of the contribution these women make to society. The reality is these women are either born with or having acquired what society today deems to be a form of success. Hopefully, they will use their attributes in a non-threatening manner.
Through working and associating with women that `have it all’, I have learned that the common dilemma these women face is the frustration of not being accepted as one of the girls/women in the circles they want to associate in. In fact, most of these women have to work harder than most women to earn trust and understanding, and to achieve intimate relationship because of the attitude society has toward them. Their frustration runs as high as the attention they get.
Now, let us look at another rationale for this `love to hate’ behavior: Not having what others have. Although it appears understandable, it could be self-destructive to the person who has the feeling of inferiority. Yet, unconsciously and consciously many women continue to allow themselves to be consumed with feelings that produce hate. My discussions revealed that lack of self-motivation and self-confidence, and an inability to accept reality tend to reinforce these kinds of emotions. However, with increased self awareness and a positive frame of mind, these perceived differences can be reduced.
What about men? While many of the men I spoke with expressed attraction to the women that “have it all,” they also expressed their love and fear of women who are unpredictable, intriguing and independent.
Some men said they like unpredictable women, because they found challenging. Others did not have the patience to keep up with such women. The intriguing women, as described by one man is captivating, charming, and mysterious. While he expressed his attraction for such women, he admits he feels insecure about her, as this type of women is also attractive to other men. He said, the feeling of insecurity is also enhanced because of the fear of losing such a women.
The subject of independence, however, seems to have brought out more of the fear factor. As I talked with these men, I learned that independence means different things to different men. It could mean either economic, social or emotional. The majority of the men agree that an independent women is someone who has achieved some form of success, is confident, self-reliant, sociable, and free-sprinted. They also agree that it is not easy to relate to such a women. “Not only are these
women outspoken and controversial, they are far removed from playing the traditional role of women, which makes men insecure,” said one. Yet another said, “It is also a control issue. Since men are raised to be always in control, they fear they can’t control the independent women.” He continued, “We still enjoy some form of dependence from women, be it social, emotional or economical.”
“How about the bitch factor?”, I ask, Knowing it would raise some eye brows and is increasingly being associated with the independent woman nowadays. The responses I got were, “I say that to a women who wants to be dominant, tells me what to do, is aggressive, is radical etc.” My next question was, are men not the same way? I usually get blank stares, so I responded, “yes, but it is only natural because society has allowed you to be so.” Then I shared with them the things I read in various articles: “A `bitch’ is an acronym used for a woman for being in total control of herself”, another article read, “women should not feel critical about being called a bitch, because it is a man’s way of saying she knows what she wants and knows how to get it.” The preceding comments were thought provoking to some, yet indigestible to others.
__________________
Sophia Bekele, a resident of San Francisco Bay Area, is a model and an EDP auditor for BankAmerica.
By Dr. Robert Ingram Powell
In the August 1991 issue, Tekle Menelik of San Francisco commented on my commentary, “Worthwhile Considerations For A New Government,” (July, 1991). It is not, as Mr. Menelik states, “the essential mandate of any legitimate government to defend the independence and dignity of the nation.” The essential mandate of any “legitimate government” is to use the police force of government to protect the inalienable right to life and liberty of its citizens. Defending the citizens of the nation from external force is only an extension of that use of force.
Mr. Menelik incorrectly assumes that the only interest from those external to Ethiopia would be drug traffickers or criminal money launderers. Certainly such interests are possible, however not likely if the country has a legal system to prohibit such activity and an enforcement system capable of detecting and dealing with such problems. Every country faces and deals with such problems daily.
In the U.S.A. and most other open systems of government, anyone who desires to purchase land, buildings or go into legitimate business may do so with only the restrictions imposed by the Federal, State, Country and City Governments respecting local land use and building construction and business laws and practices.
In the case of Axum, Lalibela or any other area of antiquity and a National Treasure, there is nothing inherently wrong with the ownership of foreigners outside the borders of the National Treasure, so long as the architecture of the building and other man-made constructs do not interfere with the sanctity of the national treasure.
Certainly hotels, restaurants and similar complexes need to be established to encourage tourism such as to bring much needed money into Ethiopia and donations for the preservation of the national treasures.
The question addressed to chemical or pesticide factories should not be isolated to Foreign Industrialists. It should include Ethiopian Industrialists. There is nothing inherently wrong with operating Chemical or Pesticide factories, given they are operated at the State of the Art with safety functions properly monitored by a government hired environmental testing facility to keep them honest.
As to loans, the Ethiopian government should seek loans at any level it can get them to rebuild the country’s infrastructure, and invite anyone who will come to invest and build in Ethiopia for negotiated conditions in a free enterprise zone that will attract capital.
What national safeguards Mr. Menelik has in mind are conspicuous by their absence to preclude the country from assuming huge debt burdens.
He errs again in addressing Brazil and Chile as “stridently free markets.” They are not free markets, but disintegrating collectivist, socialist remnants of an anti-philosophical system, “long dead.”
The only essential law in a rational society of free men and women is, “that no individual (whether in private or in government) may initiate the use of force to violate the inalienable right to life and property of another individual.” When some individual does so, that individual is a criminal to that extent and rational laws can deal with criminals. All crimes are against individuals, not against collectives, i.e., society. Individual criminals whether acting together or in groups commit crimes against other individuals or groups of individuals — what is significant is that at the root base it is individuals who are aggressed against. In a free system, any individual can do anything that does not use force to violate the right to life and property of another individual by force or fraud.
It is important for Ethiopia to establish free enterprise zones to attract capital investment. The only system in the history of the world that makes freedom possible is capitalism/individualism. Under that system of government the greatest freedom, charity, productivity and observance of individual rights has evolved for the more than 200 years in the United States of America.
Within internecine tribal warfare in Ethiopia from the dawn of history, with frequent incursions by outsiders trying to take over Ethiopia or part of it, the entire system has throughout its history been on the brink of disaster.
Establish free enterprise zones, find out what capitalism can do for Ethiopia while watching it and measuring its productivity and response to human needs. When you destroy the incentive for people to create and excel, they don’t. Keep the government limited to enforce the laws, operate the military and the courts under a system of by and for the people and privatize all other functions that can be privatized, with emphasis on limited government, then watch Ethiopia take its place in the world of nations.
By Lemma W. Senbet
After twenty years of departure, I visited my home country on a two-week trip in August. The trip was filled with excitement, sadness, and at times hopelessness. My remarks focus on my observations of the current developments in Ethiopia primarily along an economic front. I would then hope that my remarks would stimulate our attention to opportunities and obligations facing us as Ethiopians here toward Ethiopia.
My visit lead me to conclude that, despite the enormous problems facing the country, Ethiopia has immense untapped resources and vast investment potential virtually in every sector of the economy. I came back convinced that Ethiopian’s future is dependent upon how successfully its government can implement a radically redesigned economic system, one based on the principles of the market economy.
The Problems
Ethiopia is currently an economic basket case! It is uniformly viewed as a beggar country and widely considered as the poorest in the world. It faces billions of dollars of foreign debt and growing budget deficit. As soon as you get out on the streets of Addis Ababa, you are struck by the semi-starved and painful looks of pedestrians.
Agriculture, long the backbone of the economy, is in dire straits. The government owns and runs losing agricultural farms. These farms take much needed government funds but nothing in return.
The infrastructure, such as rural roads, irrigation facilities, health care facilities, water supplies, soil treatment facilities, are either in extreme shortage or devastated by wars. There is persistent drought, massive deforestation, overgrazing, and over- cultivation.
The industrial sector is also in a disastrous situation. The government owns everything and mismanages it utterly. The state-owned enterprises carry surplus employment reportedly ranging from 50 to 70%.
A third of the nearly 150 factories (by official estimates) are no longer in operation. The remaining are run grossly undercapacitated. This is partly due to shortage of raw material inputs and shortage of foreign exchange reserves. The industry is heavily reliant on foreign exchange reserves, because it needs imported inputs. The export sectors are all losing, because goods are shipped overseas below cost to generate foreign exchange.
Company managers grapple with both commercial and non-commercial objectives. These objectives are governed by periodic guides formulated by officials of the Ministry of Industry (or the relevant Ministry, such as defense) and passed down to managers. These objectives are often in conflict with each other, but more importantly, managers do not know the right tradeoffs between commercial and social goals. In the event that things go bad, which is more often that not, the poor performance is blamed on social goals. The perverse managerial incentives are actually magnified by the lack of performance-based compensation such that managers obtain their fixed salaries no matter what.
Pursuit of social goals is the ultimate goal of an economic system. However, it cannot be achieved through distorted production, pricing, employment, and wage policies. An economic entity should be run with maximum efficiency to make the available “pie” as large as possible.
To address the issue of equity (or fairness), then direct means and distributional rules, such as taxation or other transfer mechanisms, may be used to split the pie in any socially desirable way.
Another enormous economic problem arises from severe shortage of foreign exchange reserves. By some estimates (unofficial), only about US $3 million was available after the alleged depletion of foreign exchange by Mengistu. This pitiful situation has sawned its own humor: Mengistu, confronted with the allegation that he embezzled Ethiopian money, responded: “I did not take any Ethiopian money; I only took U.S. dollars.”
Unemployment is yet another major economic obstacle. It is getting out of control. The universities have minuscule space relative to demand, and they can accommodate only a very small fraction of high school graduating students. Thus, some of the country’s brightest students are left to join the rapidly growing ranks
of unemployed young people. Further, massive demobilization of the defense forces under way has added hundreds of thousands of former soldiers to unemployment roll.
Token Economic Improvements
There are some pockets of improvements over the last seventeen years. I made a trip to Hosanna area through the Gurage and Kambata regions, and I saw a modest improvement in the road system, urban planning, and health facilities. I was told that such uneven and token improvements existed in some other areas as well, such as in Sidamo (e.g., Awassa area), Wollega, etc. Nevertheless, ecologically those areas seemed in danger with dense population, overgrazing, over-cultivation, and deforestation. A forest in my birth place, for instance, is completely gone.
I was told those meager signs of development were the results of private initiative of the people themselves, and not the past regime. The regime’s inaction must have unintentionally helped these areas. It is then a reflection of what Ethiopians would be able to accomplish on their own initiative, despite severe shortage of resources, if they are free from government intrusion and mismanagement. Here, it is worth mentioning another prominent example — the famous Ethiopian Airlines. For some strange reason, Mengistu left the carrier alone, and, by all standards, it has become one of the most competitive airlines in the world.
The Task Ahead
We have an abundance of horror stories about Ethiopia. But what can we do for Ethiopia? We may continue to send charitable contributions as we react to some vivid TV images of Ethiopian famine. This is certainly helpful in alleviating the short-term difficulties, but it accomplishes little for the long-term.
I know that there is a surplus of movements on a political front here and in Ethiopia. There is no doubt that we need political pluralism in Ethiopia, but the people must also be economically liberated.
The other side of the economic debacle and depravation in Ethiopia is the existence of immense economic opportunities now on the brink of opening up for private initiative. Ethiopia must begin cleaning up after the legacy of Mengistu and move into a free market economy with adequate social cushioning.
I must point out that sooner than later, state-owned enterprises would go up for sale or for transfer of ownership to the private sector. Who are the potential private owners of these enterprises?
During my trip I was invited by the Ministry of Industry to give a talk to industry officials. Note that industry officials, including managers of major corporations, such as beverage and cement, are employees of Ministry of Industry, and hence government officials. Thus, the audience included top officials, including the minister, vice- ministers, and also some members of the Council of Representatives.
After a two-hour speech and break, there was an hour long discussion of the issues by the audience. I must say that it was heated. My talk included heavy dosage of the functioning of the market system and succeeded in “shocking” the audience consisting, in part, managers of predominantly Marxist orientation. I was keenly aware that no one would become a “capitalist” by baptism. A successful transition to a market economy requires a thorough understanding of how markets work. In my speech on August 28, 1991, at the Ministry of Industry, I called for wholesale privatization of state-owned enterprises and public services, including financial institutions, such as banks and insurance companies.
Proposals for Privatization
The fundamental job of the government is not to run industry, commerce, or hotels, but to formulate policies. A growing economy is the key (perhaps the only) answer to unemployment; a government cannot create jobs simply by adding layers of people to its payroll.
I strongly disagree with the view that ownership transfer to the private sector makes no difference. Of course, the net worth of the public sector is unchanged by a mere transfer of ownership through the privatization process. Perhaps that is what the proponents of continued government ownership have in mind. The real economic gains from privatization come from productive efficiency improvements to the way in which the assets are deployed. The efficiency gains are generated from the exposure of the corporation to the disciplines of the market place through the stock market, the private banks, security analysts, and various monitoring mechanisms built into the private system itself.
When corporations are owned by the government, ownership rights are not transferable within the market place. The non- transferability of ownership rights has far- reaching economic consequences. It prevents the existence of markets for corporate control in the sense that entrenched managers who run corporations inefficiently cannot be disciplined or replaced through the takeover market. The threat of takeover alone is a powerful discipline on managerial behavior and increases efficiency for the overall economy. Takeover opportunities are absent in the absence of transferability of ownership rights through an open financial market system.
Another efficiency gain of privatization comes from the recognition that a government-owned enterprise is in principle owned by all citizens, and hence the corporation is diffusely owned. That is, owners are much more widely dispersed than when the corporation is owned through the private market. No individual alone has a sufficient incentive to monitor the management of the enterprise on his/her own when it is costly to do so.
Of course, the more obvious advantage of privatization is an enhancement of the development of the capital market itself through a spread of shareownership. It is a widely held view that capital markets enhance allocational and productive efficiency. By extension, there is then a positive relationship between capital market development and economic development.
As a general principle, I believe in the privatization of every enterprise or service. This view does not allow the supremacy of the so- called mixed economy. In my view the market economy predominates. That is not to say that the society should leave the entire range of economic activities to be determined by market forces.
My idea of privatization includes financial institutions. These include banks, insurance companies, investment banking firms, etc. These institutions intermediate between lenders and borrowers, between supplies and users of funds. Privatization of financial institutions creates competition among financial institutions for funds to lend and earn a fair (competitive) rate of return on their savings.
Second, it promotes efficiency. Competing financial institutions will seek out the most profitable investments. Thus, the financial system can be thought of as the brain of the economy. It determines how scarce resources are allocated to the most productive uses.
The seemingly adverse consequence of privatization is that some people would be simply unable to be employed productively upon private and efficient ownership. I argue that the problem be solved directly through a transfer system, such as unemployment insurance and social security system. There are already resources expended on surplus work force, and these funds should be used as an initial pool for unemployment benefits. In the long-run, the social security system should be funded by contributions from both the employees and employers. I also think that the country can solicit financial/technical support from international/foreign agencies in setting up the system, since it is entirely motivated by considerations of productive efficiency.
The system should be designed with care, though. The objective should be to prevent the standard of living of those affected (the unemployed and dependents) from falling below some minimum standard. The level of support (employment benefit) should be such that it gives minimal incentives for some to quit existing jobs and maximum incentives for the unemployed to seek and accept new employment (part-time or full- time) and to acquire new skills.
It seems relatively easy in Ethiopia to create a disincentive for existing workers against quitting jobs to join the unemployment benefit pool. Those on unemployment benefit can be used to build infrastructure (roads, irrigation, railroad system, health care facilities, etc.) and other public goods not easily accessed by the private initiative. Thus, the system can lead to greater efficiency both in the agricultural and industrial sectors.
The government should move with speed and establish a Privatization Commission to dispose of a range of state-owned enterprises, including financial institutions. Banking laws and practices should also be brought in conformity with international standards.
The World Bank and The International Finance Corporation have facilities to help with privatization and restructuring of the commercial banking services. For instance, the Commercial Bank of Ethiopia would be denationalized so that its branch network can be restructured into multiple newly formed competing commercial banks. Consequently, I recommend a two-tiered banking system consisting of a single independent central bank with regulatory control over a network of competing commercial banks.
The international financial community should and will respond positively to such an economic reform program. In countries with such reform programs (e.g., Pakistan), local investors have become partners with the world Bank and other international agencies in carrying out large-scale projects. Also, the Export-Import Bank of the US has jointventures with local investors in implementing projects, such as power plants, highways, and river projects. These joint partners often seek indigenous expertise, and we Ethiopians here should play a role in providing such expertise.
Opportunities and Risks
The movements toward the market economy are irreversible. Ethiopia is a country with a vast, largely unexploited investment potential, accompanied by tremendous opportunities for growth and profit. The country is predominantly agricultural with about 90% of the population living on farms. In terms of national output, agriculture is said to account for about 50% of the gross domestic product annually. However, only 12% of the total arable land is known to be currently under cultivation, principally due to lack of proper infrastructure. Farming is highly traditional and weather dependent;
poor rains meant crop failure and famine.
There are large, unexploited investment potentials virtually in all sectors of the economy. The industrial sector is wide open and it is in its infant stage of development. Opportunities are abundant in various handicraft, small (cottage) and large-scale industries, including textiles, chemicals, fertilizers, beverages, processed food, leather products, etc. Opportunities in the construction industry include residential housing and urban development, commercial and residential buildings, and infrastructure projects.
Agricultural opportunities include dairy and meat products, cattle ranching, poultry, and animal feed processing. Mining opportunities include oil and gas exploration. Mining may emerge as a major component of the economy. The rivers in Ethiopia have great potential for hydroelectric powers; only a minute fraction of the potential has been exploited.
These investment opportunities are not left unnoticed. I was invited to a gathering of the founders of Corporation of Ethiopian Entrepreneurs (CEE) in Addis Ababa. It is headed by a founding member, Ato Debebe Habte Yohannes, former owner and chairman of Addis Ababa Bank. The corporation is committed to a free market system, and its primary objective is to rehabilitate and promote the private economic infrastructures for the self-reliance of Ethiopia. Its goal is to identify projects and proposals and promote business investments in all major areas that I mentioned above.
I believe that this is a very promising avenue to rehabilitate and privatize Ethiopia by Ethiopians themselves. This promises to be mutually beneficial for the country and the CEE members. CEE is recruiting associate founders (100 members) internationally on the basis of a member’s potential to contribute 1) talent, 2) initiate projects, or 3) capital.
Ethiopia is at a cross-roads. We have an opportunity and obligation to move it forward, and we can. We also represent a vital force capable of contributing to an efficient and productive market economy in Ethiopia. The alternative of inaction is a choice facing us, but it would be a missed opportunity and quite regretful. I already visualize a day (not far away!) when the party headquarters of Mengistu would be the headquarters of the Addis Ababa Stock Exchange in a pluralistic, peaceful, and prosperous Ethiopia.
Dr. Lemma W. Senbet is the William E. Mayer Professor of Finance at the University of Maryland, College Park. The above article is based on his recent keynote speech at the Second Annual Gatherings of Ethiopian Business and Professional Association, Washington, DC.
By Herman J. Cohen
The thirty years of civil war, including seventeen years of brutal Communist dictatorship have ended in Ethiopia. At last, Ethiopia has the opportunity to concentrate on forming a government that will enable its people to earn a livelihood and have a say in the political and economic decisions which affect their lives. While Ethiopia needs and will probably receive substantial assistance from the international community, the issue of whether or not permanent peace and stability are achieved will be up to the Ethiopian people themselves.
The task ahead is formidable. Ethiopia has never had a democratic form of government. Ethiopian politics are still very volatile, and a legacy of ethnic and political rivalry remains. However, Ethiopia has many assets, including a long and noble history, a talented people, and abundant physical resources. The commitment to democracy that has been expressed by all political factions in Ethiopian politics gives cause for hope that Ethiopia has made the first steps in the direction of a society in which its people are free to make their own political and economic choices.
The broad-based transitional government in Ethiopia has made great progress in the few months it has been in existence. The Representative Council has adopted a charter of basic principles to guide the government, to promote fundamental human rights, and to hold free elections within two and a half years. Real political debate is heard in Addis Ababa for the first time in years, and political life — which atrophied under Mengistu — is beginning again. In September, an independent weekly newspaper began publication. Local and regional elections will probably be held before the end of the year.
While there is much to be done to develop institutions and practices which will ensure democracy and respect for human rights, the government appears to be moving in the right direction. However, we are concerned about the large number of officials from the Mengistu regime who are being detained. We continue to urge the transitional government either to charge these persons with an offenses and give them a fair trial or release them.
The Ethiopian government has wisely decided upon a two-year transition phase in which it will seek to revive the economy, rebuild infrastructure, and establish a democratic government and society. During this time, the international community should more quickly assist Ethiopian refugees outside Ethiopia to return to their homes.
After the transition phase, Ethiopia should be able to undertake projects to achieve sustainable economic growth and provide effective social services for all its citizens.
To help Ethiopia revive its economy and rebuild its infrastructure, the international community can assist Ethiopia in acquiring essential commodities and spare parts to get trucks rolling and factories working. Thirty to forty percent of the nation’s industries are now closed for lack of raw materials and spare parts and the vital transport sector is operating at less than half of capacity. Many of the country’s roads, bridges, telecommunications, schools, and clinics were destroyed or damaged by the war. Returnees, displaced persons, and ex- soldiers will need a range of assistance, such as seeds and tools, oxen, and job training, in order to reintegrate productively into Ethiopian society.
While Ethiopia will continue to require emergency assistance, consisting ostly of food, the United State’s goal is to move gradually out of emergency assistance programs and into development assistance programs. The United States government will support, and will encourage other donors to support, UNHCR’s efforts to promote voluntary repatriation for long-time Ethiopian refugees in Sudan, Kenya and Djibouti and Somali refugees in eastern Ethiopia and Djibouti. This would effect a durable solution for over one million refugees in these countries, both lessening the refuge burden on asylum countries and promoting stability in the Horn of Africa.
Also during the transition period, Ethiopia may need assistance as its officials develop new strategies, policies, and options for fostering political, economic, and social development. Areas in which such assistance could be provided are privatizing the economy, decentralizing the government, creating an environment in which freedom of expression and association can flourish, and establishing the rule of law.
At the present time, U.S. legislation enacted during the Mengistu regime is still in effect, restricting the type of assistance we can provide to Ethiopia. We are seeking the repeal of, or enactment of exception to, legislative restrictions on aid to Ethiopia. The U.S. no longer opposes loans and grants to Ethiopia by international financial institutions on human rights policy grounds.
As soon as we are legally able to do so, the United States will coordinate with the international donor community to provide development assistance to help Ethiopia during the transitional phase and over the long term, as long as it continues to progress in democracy and human rights.
_____________________________
Ambassador Herman J. Cohen is Assistant Secretary for African Affairs at the United
States State Department. He was the mediator at the London Peace Conference
that was held in May.
