The selling of Ethiopia to the highest bidder. By Yilma Bekele
Actually that statement might not be true. We do know our country is being sold but we have no idea if the bidding has been open or closed. We have sold almost all of Gambella, we have leased half of Afar and Oromia has been parceled out bit by bit. Our Beer factories are under new owners, our gold mines belong to the fake Ethiopian sheik, Telephone is under the Chinese and our Airlines is looking for a suitor. Have we always looked for outsiders to own us?
Not really when you consider that we celebrated the victory at the battle of Adwa a few weeks back and that was the mother of all wars that made it clear this African country is not for sale. We might not have contributed much to the industrial revolution but we did manage to rely on our own ingenuity to follow along and do things our own way. You might not believe this but there was a time when Ethiopians actually used to be involved in making stuff from scratch. You think I am making things up don’t you? I don’t blame you because today you cannot even come up with one name that stands out as an Ethiopian entrepreneur, go getter or someone that shines like the north star based solely on his own sweat and blood.
The things that were accomplished by earlier Ethiopians are all around us but we don’t see them. All the things the current government brags about have their roots in the yester years they so much condemn and brush off. I don’t know where to start but here we go. Let us start with hospitals. Bella Haile Selassie (Bella), Leelt Tshay (armed Forces), Paulos, Haile Selassie Hospital (Yekati 12), Balcha, Ghandi, Tikur Anbessa, Ras Desta, Minilik etc. The vast majority of the doctors were Ethiopians, the hospitals were clean, well equipped and you don’t even have to take your own sheets and blankets.
How about Hotels? Ethiopia, Ghion, Wabi Shebele, Ras, Bekele Molla were the premier destinations. They were owned and operated by Ethiopians. When it comes to Ethiopian Airlines the Pilots were proud Ethiopians and the technicians were the envy of Africa. The Imperial government built the Airlines from scratch. Trans World Airlines (TWA) was a partner until we were able to train and staff our own and we did manage to do that.
If we talk about agriculture we did manage to establish the Sugar estates of Metehara and Wonji not to mention Setit Humera, the wheat and corn fields of Arsi, the fiber plants of Sidama and the cotton fields of Awash Valley are testimonial to our ingenuity. The sixties saw the emergence of the new educated Ethiopians that raised the bar of excellence.
The establishment of Africa Hall was how Africans showed respect to our Emperor and our old history when they choose Addis Abeba as the head quarter for the continent. The University at sadist Kilo was a gift to his people by the Emperor and it was a spectacular success. All the teachers were highly educated Ethiopians and the graduates were the pride of our country.
Why am I discussing such subject today? It is because two items reported by the media caught my eye a few days back. Both are an assault on our sovereignty and our ability to grow our own economy by Ethiopians for Ethiopians. Heineken a Dutch conglomerate is building the biggest brewery in Ethiopia and Guangdong Chuan Hui Group from China is given 41,000 Sq. meter of land to construct hotel and industrial complex. The way the story is being reported we should be jumping with joy. What could be better than those two benevolent multi nationals investing so much in our poor destitute country?
Is that how we should look at it? Is there another aspect to this story? In order to see the pros and con of the question posed In front of us it would have been nice if there has been a nationwide discussion to see if the plan makes sense when it comes to our homeland. That is how smart decisions are made. Open and vibrant nationwide discussion regarding such important issues that impact our national economy and our people’s well-being assures a better outcome.
That usually is not the case in our country. There are no checks and balances. There is no independent legislative body and the judiciary is a government tool. A single party the TPLF controls all and everything in the country. Our political leaders have no faith in the ability of the people to know what is good for them. That is why they approach their job as being a ‘baby sitter’ and are constantly fretting about what the people hear and read. Decisions are made by a few TPLF politburo members to be approved by the rubber stamp Parliament. Anyone that questions such a decision is branded as enemy of the people and dealt with.
Let us start with our beer story. You know beer is nothing but European Tella. It is bottled fancy and costs a little bit more. How long ago do you think we acquired the idea of brewing for a larger crowd? Eighty years ago my friend! St George brewery was started in 1922. Meta Abo Brewery was founded in 1963. Meta Abo was a partnership between government and private capital and started with a base capital of 2million Birr. The military junta nationalized both and the current TPLF Woyane regime inherited them with the rest of Ethiopia. What do you think these successive regimes did with our own old industry and land? Did they build on what was started? Did they reinvest the profit to make the enterprises bigger and better? Did they run our industries, enterprises and farms in a responsible and judicious manner?
Both St. George and Meta Abo are no more Ethiopian enterprises. BGI (an internationally acclaimed Brewing Company that operates in many countries.??) bought St George in 1998 for US 10 million ‘through foreign direct investment’(??) Meta Ambo was sold to Diego Industries-a British congalmorate for US 225 million. Heineken a Dutch multi-national acquired 18% of Bedele and Harar breweries for US 163 million in 2011. Raya Brewery an idea that has not materialized yet but promoted by Lt. General Tsadkan W.Tensai and investors such as Yemane (Jamaica) Kidane and other TPLF officials sold 25% interest to BGI for 650 million Br and invited Brewtech a German company as a partner.
As you can see the TPLF regime collected close to US 400 million from the sale of our home grown breweries. By all imagination that is chump change when you consider the ownership is lost and the profit for eternity belongs to the foreigners. Is this a good way to grow a national economy? Has it been done before or is this another of that failed ‘revolutionary democracy’ pipe dream?
BGI, Diego or Heineken are investing in our country to realize profit for their shareholders. What is our country getting out of this? The beer manufacturing business is a highly automated enterprise so it is not about job creation. Most if not all of the high paying managerial jobs will be occupied by the parent company. The malt, barley and other ingredients are imported and are considered a trade secret. We all know about creative accounting thus I am sure our country does not even benefit from the profit because the bookkeeping is rigged to minimize taxes.
Let us not even think of technology transfer since we cannot learn what we have already mastered. Remember we have been brewing beer since 1922. I will tell you what we got out of this unequal relationship. We as a people got royally screwed. The TPLF party officials got paid plenty for their pimping effort. The regime in its insatiable appetite for foreign currency bought a few months of respite to purchase oil, wheat, cooking oil etc. to postpone its inevitable collapse.
There are certain things we know how a growing economy with a nationalist government operates. We have seen how China, India, Malaysia, Brazil and other emerging economies handled their growth potential. They use what is known as subsidy to protect their infant industries from foreign predators. They allowed investment where technology transfer will bring benefit to their people but shielded their home grown industries from foreign competition.
Why do you think the TPLF bosses are interested in selling our sovereignty? I doubt it is because they are anti-Ethiopian even though the late evil PM used to suffer from inferiority complex when it comes to central highlanders. I believe it is because of their ‘get rich quick’ philosophy. They are in a hurry to accumulate before their Ponzi scheme comes crashing down. According to the UN billions of dollars are leaving our country. They are buying properties in the US and Europe, sending their children to expensive schools abroad and vacationing in exotic places with the money they steal from our country.
What are we the victims doing about this rape and pillage of our resources and the degradation of our national pride? I am afraid other than insistently talking there is nothing more most of us are doing about it. Why do you think that is so? I could think of a few things but ignorance comes to mind first and foremost. Our ignorance prevents us from connecting the dots and looking at the bigger picture. Our misplaced pride does not allow us to listen to others and learn to be able to formulate better solutions to our problems.
Today we have a population that is not familiar with its history. Sixty four percent (64%) of our people are under twenty five years old while twenty nine percent (29%) are under the age of 54 years. We have a toxic population on our hands. Those under twenty five grew up under the Woyane regime where being an Ethiopian is taken as a liability. While those under fifty four are the result of the Derge era of undermining religion, family, and stability. Ninety three (93%) of our population is a fertile ground for evil Woyane to plant shame, doubt and insecurity about being Ethiopian.
It is this population that is sitting on the side and cheering the selling of their country. For most people what bothers them is not what is lost but they spend endless energy to get a piece of the action. In Ethiopia stealing, lying, being part of a criminal enterprise is encouraged by the regime. When the recently dead Meles Zenawi said ‘even being a thief requires being smart’ he was giving a green light to his cadres and the population at large. The so called Diaspora is the number one enabler of the criminal Woyane machine. They use their new found riches to bribe Woyane so they could acquire stolen land to build their flimsy unsustainable condominiums and spend endless nights worrying if the next highest bidder will in turn take it away in broad day light.
This is exactly the reason we are having a problem forming a united front to get rid of this cancerous body in our midst. This is the reason even in exile we are unable to form a democratic, inclusive and worthy association that will benefit the many. The ninety three percent are in need of education in civic affairs and a dose of what it means to love your neighbor as you would love yourself.
May be it is the lords way of teaching us little humility and humbleness as he did with the children of Israel when he left them to wonder for forty years in the wilderness so they know what is in their heart. It is a choice we have-to be humble or perish due to pride.
http://allafrica.com/stories/201107051138.html?page=2
http://www.diageo.com/en-ie/newsmedia/pages/resource.aspx?resourceid=1168
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2013/03/07/heineken-to-build-ethiopias-biggest-beer-factory/#axzz2MxqCwlH1
http://allafrica.com/stories/201107051138.html
Omot Ojulu Odol, a 33-year old Ethiopian-American visiting his hometown in Gambella and five other local Anuaks were murdered in cold blood by Ethiopian security forces on March 2, 2013, according to the Vancouver, Canada-based Anuak Justice Council.
March 13, 2013
On March 2, 2013, seventeen Anuak men were ambushed by Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF), as they were sitting under a tree near Gilo river in a rural area in the Gambella region of southwestern Ethiopia. Six men were killed. Among those killed was a 33-year old American citizen, Omot Ojulu Odol, [B.D. 2/2/1978] who came to the U.S. as a teenager more than fifteen years ago. Mr. Odol had been visiting his homeland.
The Ethiopian government claims Mr. Odol was killed for acts of terrorism in the region; however, eyewitnesses and others on-the-ground in Gambella share a different story, as learned by the Anuak Justice Council (AJC), a human rights organization that has been investigating the incident since it occurred. The AJC has many contacts on the ground, some of whom were eyewitnesses, family members of the deceased, friends and community members. As the Government of Ethiopia responds from afar to questions regarding what happened, those present during the incident provide a different scenario to the attack and its aftermath. The reality is, not only is the federal government in Addis Ababa disconnected from the region, they have repeatedly committed egregious human rights crimes in the region, fabricated propaganda and twisted information so as to advance their own deeply entrenched economic interests in the area.
Background: For those who do not know, the AJC was formed following the massacre of the Anuak by the same Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) in December 2003. At this time, 424 Anuak leaders were targeted and brutally slaughtered within three days. Most of their bodies were buried in mass graves and have never been recovered. This all has been documented by respected human rights organizations such as Genocide Watch in their two reports and by Human Rights Watch in their report entitled: “Targeting the Anuak: Human Rights Violations and Crimes against Humanity in Ethiopia’s Gambella Region [ http://www.hrw.org/news/2005/03/23/ethiopia-crimes-against-humanity-gambella-region]. Thousands more were killed over the next three years when the military presence was very heavy surrounding an attempt to drill for oil on indigenous Anuak land, which eventually failed. Since then, the region has never recovered. The Anuak, in particular, have never found safety and security and many have left for neighboring countries.
The tensions in the region have only been exacerbated by the large-scale land acquisitions by foreign and local investors that have displaced 70,000 local people from land the Anuak and others have depended upon for their livelihoods for centuries. [For more information on the displacements, please see the investigation by Human Rights Watch entitled: “Waiting Here for Death” Forced Displacement and “Villagization” in Ethiopia’s Gambella Region. http://www.hrw.org/reports/2012/01/16/waiting-here-death ] Between now and 2015, another 150,000 indigenous Gambellans are to be moved to resettlement villages in a villagization program that has left the displaced homeless, with inferior land, with poorer access to water, with fewer or non-existing services and in hunger. In this milieu, anyone who attempts to defend their constitutional rights to their indigenous land can be called a terrorist and subject to human rights crimes.
Incident: From eyewitnesses and testimony from other local people, the AJC has learned that the incident began when someone reported to the local security in Gambella that an Anuak farmer had purchased a gun from the highlands in Ethiopia and had brought it back to this lowland area. Prior to the Anuak massacre in 2003, the Anuak had been disarmed of their guns despite using them for hunting and protection from the wild animals in the region that would prey on their livestock. Notably, the disarmament was ethnic-based and did not include those from other local ethnic groups. In fact, as of today, the Anuak remain the only disarmed people in the Gambella region while others still maintain the right to possess guns.
After receiving the report of this gun purchase, authorities had gone to the farmer’s house on February 28, 2013. He was not at home; however, there were some other young men in the home, some of his relatives and others his neighbors. One of his relatives, Mark Omot, who is 26 years old and whose father was killed in the Gambella massacre of December 2003, was interrogated and tortured. He was beaten by the barrels of the guns and he sustained many serious injuries to his head, neck and chest before finally telling the authorities that during the dry season, the majority of men go to the riverbanks to fish and hunt. [If you want to eat during the dry season, it greatly helps to have a gun to hunt.]
A local Anuak security official, along with the ENDF, took this man and forced him to help them find the farmer. After a search lasting several days, on the morning of March 2, the farmer was located about 40 kilometers away on the bank of the Gilo River near the village of Abelean and Apoo. Mr. Odol and sixteen others, including a number of children as young as ten years of age, were found sitting under the shade of a tree. Without warning, the ENDF began shooting at them, killing six persons, including an eleven-year-old. The others escaped, including the farmer. No one shot back. After the six men died, the troops searched through the bodies and their belongings and found only one gun. During their search of the bodies, they found Omot Ojulu Odol’s American passport and Washington D.C. driver’s license on him. This is when the entire situation changed. Instead of focusing on the farmer, the others they had killed or those who had escaped, they focused only on Mr. Odol and justified killing an American citizen by calling him a terrorist. They separated his body from the others and videotaped his body, propping the gun up beside him along with his American passport and U.S. driver’s license.
The security forces left the other bodies behind, without burying them, but took Mr. Odol’s body with them to the town of Pinyudo, the capital of the district of Gok. When in Pinyudo, they placed his lifeless body in the back of their army truck, flagrantly displaying him as they drove through the town, boasting that they had killed the man who did not want investment or development in the region. They claimed that there would now be peace and development in the region because this man, who was “anti-development”, “anti-foreign investment” and “anti-villagization”, was now finally killed. The location where Mr. Odol was killed was near to the place where land had been leased to a Turkish land investor. They were among those who had been forcibly displaced from the area, ending up at the location 40 kilometers away where the farmer and they most of them were now living.
Following this, the ENDF forces brought Mr. Odol’s body to the regional capital of Gambella Town, publically announcing their intent to display his body the following day, Sunday, March 3; however, the next day the people were told that his body would instead be displayed at the stadium and that the people should come and see the remains of a man who was “anti-development” and “anti-foreign investment.”
They claimed that he had been responsible for the attack on employees at the Saudi Star agricultural farm in May 2012 and for the deadly bus ambush in April 2012, which had occurred when he was not in Ethiopia according to reports from the ground.
However, the anticipated showing of his body in the stadium never took place. Allegedly, the central government in Addis Ababa stopped their plans, warning local officials that there could be a backlash because Omot Ojulu Omod had been an American citizen. This information was also confirmed by Gatluak Tut, Gambella Regional Vice President, when he was interviewed by the government-run newspaper, “Reporter,” on Wednesday, March 6.
On Monday, March 4, some ENDF went back to the village in Gok Depach where the farmer had lived and killed another farmer, Okwier Ojulu, who lived in the same vicinity. They saw him walking from his home and they ordered him to stop but he did not listen to them; knowing what had happened to the others and that if he stopped, he would be interrogated and possibly tortured. The soldiers then shot him in the back and killed him. His whole family witnessed his death. The soldiers left him dead on the road. Soldiers then arrested another farmer, Omot Abella, and his two teenage sons as well as one other Anuak farmer. People suspected that the defense forces feared retaliation from the villagers because of the people killed on the riverbank along with Omot Ojulu Odol. Those arrested, as well as Mark Omot, remain in custody in Pinyudo in the military’s detention center.
Additionally, two others were also arrested. One was Mr. Oman Agwa, the chief of police of the Gambella region who had condemned the killing of Omot and the others, saying that these were innocent people and that there was no proof of them committing any crimes. Out of guilt or shame, the Anuak governor of the Gambella region, Omot Obang Olom, who was complicit in the massacre in 2003 of his own people, along with ENDF commanders, arrested this man in order to silence him. However, when Governor Olom was asked during an interview on Voice of America on March 5th about the arrest of the chief of police, he claimed that the man had been arrested because authorities had found a T-shirt in the man’s house that called for the secession of Gambella from Ethiopia. No one else had ever seen such a T-shirt, but obviously free speech does not exist in one of the most repressive countries in the world– Ethiopia. He remains in detention in Gambella.
The second man arrested is Paul Agwa, a security guard at the Mekane Yesus Church in Gambella. He was accused of being related to the farmer who had bought the gun and authorities believed he had been aware of the purchase of the gun and had not reported it. There are reports that he was tortured during his arrest. He remains in custody in Gambella. These are the facts from the people on the ground.
The Anuak, including family members, reported the incident to the U.S. State Department. The U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa later confirmed the man’s death to the State Department.
In reports the AJC received from U.S. government sources, they indicate the following:
Ethiopian officials have informed the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa that a U.S. citizen was killed on March 2, 2013, as part of an Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) operation against a rebel group that operates in the Gambella region of Ethiopia.
The U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa has not been able to confirm the details of this reported incident, and is seeking additional information.
On March 7, Ethiopian television reported that security forces had killed Omot Ojulu Odol in Gambella because he was a terrorist. They never mentioned the other five persons who had been killed, including the eleven-year-old, perhaps because it would diminish their argument that they were fighting a “rebel group” operating in the region.
Conclusion: What began as a report of one gun being purchased by a farmer for hunting—a crime only for the Anuak—ended in the ambush and cold-blooded killing of six Anuak people who had committed no crime. Unknowingly, one of these victims they had killed had been an American citizen, which totally changed the rationale and focus of their actions, but yet it gives an accurate picture of the kind of insecurity the Anuak continue to face on a daily basis.
The AJC, as an organization that speaks for the well being of the Anuak, wherever they are found, finds it necessary to respond to the one-sided propaganda given in this case by the Ethiopian government. Most Anuak consider the TPLF/EPRDF regime, which has been in power for over 21 years, a terrorist regime that has a record of killing innocent people, not only in Gambella, but throughout the country. If they were genuine, they should have reported on the deaths and arrests of the others, but they did not. Sadly, this kind of biased and untruthful reporting by ETV and Tesfa- alem Tekle is not unusual, especially when the reporter, as in this case Tesfa- alem a hard-core TPLF supporter who based in Mekelle, northern Ethiopia.
From what we know, Omot Odol was not a terrorist. This was someone who was a responsible U.S. citizen who had had a job and reportedly, had never committed a crime in America, not even a driving violation; however, he had always spoken out against the human rights abuses committed by the current TPLF/EPRDF government. His own brother was killed by government-controlled military forces in 2008 and a few months later, his mother met the same fate. Maybe this was why he felt compelled to go back home to do what he could to speak out for justice. We are unaware of any crimes he has ever committed, and according to reliable sources, he was not even in Ethiopia at the time of either the Saudi Star attack or the ambush of the bus for which he is being accused.
On the other hand, since 2003, the Anuak, simply for being of that ethnicity, have been targeted for repeated egregious human rights violations in their own land. No one has yet to be held responsible for these crimes, including for the December 2003 massacre and aftermath. Over the last several years, as the land grabs are continuing to displace the Anuak, those who speak out against the injustice can be called terrorists and are at great risk. Those Anuak who return to their homeland for visits from other countries are regularly targeted as suspicious persons by the authorities. We have documented more than twenty-one cases over the last two years where Anuak coming from the US, Canada, Europe or Australia have been detained and interrogated. Some have even been victims of torture and abuse by the TPLF/EPRDF. In certain cases, Ethiopian military and other security forces have even crossed international boundaries to harass and intimidate Anuak in the Republic of South Sudan and in Kenya.
The killing of Omot Ojulu Odol is not unique to Gambella. What makes it different is the fact that Mr. Odol was an American citizen and that he was killed without any due process. The Government of Ethiopia now wants to avoid accountability to the U.S. Government by taking the easy way out, which is to label him as a terrorist and to accuse him of crimes that reportedly occurred when he was not even in the country. In a statement made by Gambella Regional governor, Omot Olom on ESAT [Ethiopian Satellite TV] on Friday, March 8, 2013, he said, “Anyone who broke the law in Ethiopia could be killed whether an Ethiopian or an American!”
Last month Governor Omot detained an Australian Anuak in Gambella, accusing him of aiding the rebels even though he lived in Australia. Allegedly security officials told him that they could kill him regardless of the fact he was an Australian citizen. In other words, educated Anuak from abroad are a real threat to them and they are obviously willing to break international laws in response to them.
We in the AJC are working to pressure the American government authorities to do their maximum in investigating this incident. To start, we have called on them to conduct an on-the-ground investigation in Gambella, beginning with exhuming the body in order to conduct forensic DNA tests to determine whether the remains are Omot Ojulu Odol’s, beyond a doubt. If it matches, we call on U.S. officials to claim his remains so that they might be given to his family for a proper burial.
As of now, the ENDF are the only ones who know where the body is buried. We also call on U.S. authorities to investigate who ordered the killing and who actually killed him so that they will be held accountable. Even if he was guilty of some crime, they should have arrested him and brought him to justice because of his American citizenship. This issue has already been taken up by some in the U.S. Congress and U.S. Senate.
The AJC and the Anuak as a whole, see Mr. Odol’s death and those of the other five Anuak killed alongside of him, as more names on the list of the thousands of Anuak who have already been killed by the TPLF/EPRDF since they came to power. The Anuak will not rest until justice has been served for all of them. It may not be done now, but surely there will be a day of accountability. Until then, the AJC will continue to gather the information and the names of those implicated in the crimes. When this government changes, the guilty will be found wherever they are and charged. This demand for accountability is not only for the Anuak, but for the rest of Ethiopians who have lost their lives throughout the country.
May God comfort and strengthen the families of those who have lost these loved ones. Ethiopia has become like a weeping mother, crying for her precious children who have come to a premature end. May their deaths not be in vain but be building blocks towards a more peaceful, life-affirming Ethiopia. May God strengthen the living to reach out to each other to bring an end to this regime and their crimes against our Ethiopian people.
May Ethiopia stretch out her hands to God who will not abandon us if we call him in humility and faith.
Please do not hesitate to e-mail your questions or comments to Mr. Ochala Abulla, Chairman of the Anuak Justice Council (AJC): E-mail:[email protected]
The Ethiopian government has launched a comprehensive campaign to stamp out the year-long Muslim protests against government interference in religious affairs.
According to the website Tigraionline, the government has deployed an array of potent weapons against the Muslim community. These weapons include: tax collection as a pretext to harass Muslim businesses, denial of bank loans and access to land.
Tigraionline is a website closely affiliated with the ruling Tigre liberation front and Ethiopia’s intelligence services.
“Over 50% of Mercato traders are Muslims and they have made huge amounts of money over the years but paid very little tax, “ writes Tigraionline. Denying new bank loans and harshly enforcing existing ones are among the array of weapons the government is using. Denying Muslims access to land is also yet another tool the government has actively pursued.
According to Tigraionline, “the government has been taking strong measures …. [against Muslims] and the actions are bearing results.”
The crackdown against Muslim merchants may also be used as an excuse to transfer businesses to a minority ethnic group that controls Ethiopia’s government.
Although the Ethiopian Muslim protest is home-grown, the Tigraionline article entitled “Who is Goading Ethiopian Islamic Militants,” desperately tries to link the movement to violent overseas groups
Late last month, Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Defense Minister Prince Khalid Bin Sultan fired a shot across the bow from the Arab Water Council in Cairo to let the regime in Ethiopia know that his country takes a dim view of the “Grand Renaissance Dam” under “construction” on the Blue Nile (Abbay) a few miles from Sudan’s eastern border. According to Prince Khalid, “The [Grand] Renaissance dam has its capacity of flood waters reaching more than 70 billion cubic meters of water… [I]f it collapsed Khartoum will be drowned completely and the impact will even reach the Aswan Dam…” The Prince believes the Dam is being built close to the “Sudanese border for political plotting rather than for economic gain and constitutes a threat to Egyptian and Sudanese national security…” The Prince raised the stakes by accusing the regime in Ethiopia of being hell-bent on harming Arab peoples. “There are fingers messing with water resources of Sudan and Egypt which are rooted in the mind and body of Ethiopia. They do not forsake an opportunity to harm Arabs without taking advantage of it…”
A spokesman for the regime in power in Ethiopia sought to minimize the importance of the Prince’s statement by suggesting that the Saudi Ambassador in Addis Ababa had disavowed the Prince’s statement as official policy or a position endorsed by the Saudi government. The alleged disavowal of the statement of a member of the Saudi royal family and top defense official seems curiously disingenuous after the fact. But that is understandable since “an ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.” The regime spokesman also insinuated in fuzzy diplomatese that such inflammatory statements could result in war between Arab countries and African countries in the Nile basin.
The real possibility of a water war between countries of the upper Nile basin, and in particular Ethiopia, and Egypt and Sudan over the so-called Grand Renaissance Dam is the (white) elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about openly and earnestly at this stage. But in November 2010, the late dictatorMeles Zenawi in an interview with Reuters seemed to defiantly relish the possibility of war with Egypt. With taunting, dismissive and contemptuous arrogance, Meles not only insulted the Egyptian people as hopelessly backward but bragged that he will swiftly vanquish any invading Egyptian army. “I am not worried that the Egyptians will suddenly invade Ethiopia. Nobody who has tried that has lived to tell the story. I don’t think the Egyptians will be any different and I think they know that…The Egyptians have yet to make up their minds as to whether they want to live in the 21st or the 19th century.” Meles also accused Egypt of trying to destabilize Ethiopia by supporting unnamed rebel groups which he promised to crush. Meles served the Egyptians an ultimatum to engage in “civil dialogue”: “If we address the issues around which the rebel groups are mobilized then we can neutralize them and therefore make it impossible for the Egyptians to fish in troubled waters because there won’t be any… Hopefully that should convince the Egyptians that, as direct conflict will not work, and as the indirect approach is not as effective as it used to be, the only sane option will be civil dialogue.”
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit denied Meles’ allegations and expressed amusement and amazement over Meles’ braggadocio. “I’m amazed … by the language that was used. We are not seeking war and there will not be war… The charges that Egypt… is exploiting rebel groups against the ruling regime in Ethiopia are completely devoid of truth.” Gheit may have been diplomatically deescalating the war of words, but his statement belies statements by a long line of top Egyptian leaders over the decades. President Anwar Sadat in 1978 declared, “We depend upon the Nile100 per cent in our life, so if anyone, at any moment, thinks of depriving us of our life we shall never hesitate to go to war.” Boutros Boutros Gahali, when he was the Egyptian Foreign State Minister (later U.N. Secretary General), confirmed the same sentiment when he asserted “the next war in our region will be over the water of the Nile, not politics.”
“If it comes to a crisis, we will send a jet to bomb the dam and come back in one day, simple as that.”
What will Egypt will do if Meles’ “Grand Renaissance Dam” is in fact built? “Simple.” They will use dam busters to smash and trash it.
The same source further indicated that Egypt is “discussing military cooperation with Sudan” and has “a strategic pact with the Sudanese since in any crisis over the Nile, Sudan gets hit first then us.” That military cooperation includes stationing Egyptian “commandos in the Sudan for ‘worst case’ scenario on the Nile issue. Sudanese president Umar al-Bashir has agreed to allow the Egyptians to build a small airbase in Kusti to accommodate Egyptian commandos who might be sent to Ethiopia to destroy water facilities on the Blue Nile…The military option is not one that the Egyptians favor. It will be their option if everything else fails.” So far Egypt has successfully lobbied the multilateral development and other investment banks and donors to deny or cut funding for the dam and to apply political and diplomatic pressure on Ethiopia and the other upstream Nile countries. The World Bank has publicly stated it will not to fund any new projects on the Nile without Egypt’s approval.
The Grand Renaissance Dam or the grand dam (de)illusion?
All African dictators like to build big projects because it is part of the kleptocratic African “Big Man” syndrome. By undertaking “white elephant” projects (wasteful vanity projects), African dictators seek to attain greatness and amass great fortunes in life and immortality in death. Kwame Nkrumah built the Akosombo Dam on the Volta River, at the time dubbed the “largest single investment in the economic development plans of Ghana”. Mobutu sought to outdo Nkrumah by building the largest dam in Africa on the Inga Dams in western Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire) on the largest waterfalls in the world (Inga Falls). In the Ivory Coast, Félix Houphouët-Boigny built the largest church in the world, The Basilica of Our Lady of Peace of Yamoussoukro, at a cost of USD$300 million. It stands empty today. Self-appointed Emperor Jean-Bedel Bokassa of the Central African Republic built a 500-room Hotel Intercontinental at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars while millions of his people starved. Moamar Gadhafi launched the Great Man-Made River in Libya, dubbed the world’s largest irrigation project, and proclaimed it the “Eighth Wonder of the World.” Gamal Abdel Nasser built the Aswan High Dam which could be affected significantly if upstream Nile countries build new dams. Ugandan dictator Yuweri Museveni built the Bujagali dam which was completed in 2012. The backflow from that dam has submerged a huge area of cultivable and settled land forcing migration and resettlement of large numbers of people.
Meles Zenawi hoped to build the “Grand Renaissance Dam” as the mother of all dams on the African continent to outdo Nkrumah, Mobutu and Gadhafi. Like all of the African white elephants, this Dam is a vanity make-believe project partly intended to glorify Meles and magnify his international prestige while diverting attention from the endemic corruption that has consumed his regime as recently documented in a 448-page World Bank report. Meles sought to cover his bloody hands and clothe his naked dictatorships with megaprojects and veneers of progress and development. The “Grand Renaissance Dam” is the temporary name for the “Grand Meles Memorial Dam”. Meles wanted to be immortalized in that largest cement monument in the history of the African continent. To be sure, he had a “dry run” on immortality when he commissioned the construction of Gilgel Gibe III Dam on the Omo River in southern Ethiopia which has been dubbed the “largest hydroelectric plant in Africa with a power output of about 1870 Megawatt.”
The Dam and the damned
There is little doubt that IF the “Grand Renaissance Dam” is completed, it will have a significant long term impact on water supply and availability to the Sudan and Egypt. The general view among the experts is that if the dam is constructed as specified by the regime in Ethiopia, it could result in significant reduction in cultivable agricultural lands and water shortages throughout Egypt.According to Mohamed Nasr El Din Allam, the former Egyptian minster of water and irrigation,if the dam is built “Millions of people would go hungry. There would be water shortages everywhere. It’s huge.”
The regime in Ethiopia claims the depth of the Dam will be 150 meters and the water reservoir behind the Dam could be used to irrigate more than 500,000 hectares of new agricultural lands. Experts suggest that the water reservoir behind the dam could hold as much as 62bn cubic meters of water; and depending upon seasonal rainfall and the rate at which the reservoir is filled, there could be significant reductions in the flow of water to Egypt and Sudan. The environmental impact of the Dam in Ethiopia will be catastrophic. Experts believe such a dam if built will “flood 1,680 square kilometers of forest in northwest Ethiopia, near the Sudan border, and create a reservoir that is nearly twice as large as Lake Tana, Ethiopia’s largest natural lake….” The so-called tripartite committee of international experts is expected to issue its report on the potential environmental impacts of the Dam in May 2013.
The legal dimensions of the Nile water dispute
The are many knotty legal issues surrounding the treaties and agreements concluded between Britain as a colonial power and the countries in the Nile basin (Burundi, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Sudan, and Egypt) on the use of Nile water. Beginning in 1891, Britain concluded at least seven agreements on the use and control of the Nile. In the major treaties, the British included language which effectively prevented Ethiopia and other upstream countries from “construct[ing] any irrigation or other works which might sensibly modify its flow into the Nile” or its “tributaries.” For instance, the May 15, 1902 Treaty regarding the Frontiers between the Anglo- Egyptian Sudan, Ethiopia and British Eritrea, restrained “His Majesty the Emperor Menelik II, King of kings of Ethiopia” from “construct[ing] or allow[ing] to be constructed, any works across the Blue Nile, Lake Tsana or the Sobat,… except in agreement with his Britannic Majesty’s Government and the Government of the Sudan”.
The current legal and political controversy over the Nile water revolves around the 1929 Nile Waters Agreement (which guarantees disproportionately high volumes of Nile water (85 percent) to Egypt and gave Egypt the right to monitor the Nile flow in the upstream countries and veto powers on all Nile projects upstream) and the 1959 agreement between Britain and Egypt in regards to the use of waters of the River Nile for irrigation purposes which recognized “Egypt’s natural and historic rights in the waters of the Nile and its requirements of agricultural extension…”
A number of the upper-riparian states including Ethiopia, Tanzania and Burundi have rejected the validity of the 1929 Treaty and believe that they have the right to do whatever they choose with the water that flows through their boundaries (“Harmon Doctrine”). In 1964, the Government of Tanganyika openly disavowed the 1929 agreement (“Nyerere Doctrine” which asserts that a newly independent state has the right to “opt in” or selectively succeed to colonial treaties): “The Government of Tanganyika has come to the conclusion that the provisions of the 1929 Agreement purporting to apply to the countries ‘under British Administration’ are not binding on Tanganyika.” On similar grounds, Uganda and Kenya subsequently rejected that agreement. Even Sudan has challenged the allocation ratio of the water it got under that agreement.
Ethiopia’s legal position on the various colonial treaties is explored in full in Gebre Tasadik Degefu’s authoritative work, The Nile: Historical, Legal and Developmental Perspectives (2003). Gebre Tasadik challenges the validity of the treaties on the grounds that “while Ethiopia’s natural rights in a certain share of the waters in its own territory are undeniable…, no treaty has ever mentioned them. This fact would be sufficient for invalidating the binding force of those agreements, which have no counterpart in favor of Ethiopia.” He also points out significant technical issues in the treaties. He suggests that the “English version of the 1902 agreement obliged Ethiopia to seek prior accord with the united kingdom before initiating any works that might affect the discharge of the Blue Nile… The Amharic version does not oblige Ethiopia to request permission from the British Government…”
Others have argued that Ethiopia is not bound by the 1902 treaty with Britain because the “treaty never came into force as Britain did not ratify it and the Ethiopian government had rejected it in the 1950s”. Even if that treaty were valid, Britain is said to have violated its terms by “supporting and recognizing the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in violation of Article 60 of the 1902 agreement”. Technical interpretation of the relevant clauses of the 1902 treaty are also said to favor Ethiopia since that treaty “does not prohibit use of the Nile” but obliges Ethiopia “not to arrest of the Nile, which is interpreted to mean total blockage.”
The 1959 Nile Waters Agreement between Egypt and Sudan sought to give the two countries full control and utilization of Nile water by modifying certain aspects of the 1929 agreement. But that agreement completely ignored the interests of any of the upstream countries, particularly Ethiopia.
Egypt has refused to renegotiate the 84-year-old treaty and insist on the perpetual binding authority of the colonial era treaties as legal formalizations of Egypt’s historical and natural rights over the Nile water. They also insist that the international law of state succession makes the treaties made by colonial Britain binding on successor post-independence African states.
The general consensus among informed commentators is that the Nile treaties are not binding in perpetuity. They point to the inequitable elements of the various agreements on upper riparian states and the radical change in the scope of obligations under the agreements over the past eight decades to challenge the validity of the colonial era treaties.
The paramount question is not whether the Nile water dispute can be resolved in an international court of law or other tribunal but what political accommodations can be made by the basin states to equitably benefit their nations and strengthen their bonds of friendship. Equitable sharing of Nile water is necessary not only for regional stability and amity but also to meet the growing energy and food production needs of the populations of all Nile basin countries in the coming decades. There is no shortage of predictions of doom and gloom over the looming water scarcity worldwide. Over a decade ago, United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan warned, “Fierce competition for fresh water may well become a source of conflict and wars in the future.” Insisting on the eternal validity and binding nature of the Nile water treaties is untenable and unreasonable.
The Nile Basin Initiative was established in 1999 to develop a scheme for the equitable distribution of water among the Nile basin countries. Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and Kenya have signed the Agreement on the Nile River Basin Cooperative Framework (Entebbe Agreement). This agreement allows construction of projects that do not “significantly” affect the Nile water flow. Egypt has rejected the Agreement because it necessitates renegotiation of its share of the Nile water and surrender of its veto power guaranteed under the old agreements.
Water, water everywhere… and Meles’ “damplomacy” of brinksmanship
Whether there will be an actual “Grand Renaissance Dam” is the $5bn dollar question of the century. Because Egypt has been successful in pressuring multilateral development and investment banks not to fund the project, the regime in Ethiopia has defiantly forged ahead to fund the project itself. But is self-funding of the mother of all African dams a realistic possibility?
The regime has kept much of the details of the Dam behind smoke and mirrors. The regime claims that the dam is 14 percent complete (whatever that means) and will reach 26 percent completion by the end of 2013. When it comes online in 2015 as scheduled, the regime claims the dam will have the power generating capacity of nearly 6,000MW, much of it to be exported to the Sudan, Egypt and the Arabian peninsula.
The regime has forged ahead to build the “Grand Renaissance Dam” by “selling bonds” domestically and in the Ethiopian Diaspora. The regime claims to have collected USD$500 million from bond sales and “contributions” of ordinary citizens. Business and institutions have been forced to buy bonds. The regime’s Diaspora bond sales effort has been a total failure. Most Ethiopians in the Diaspora have been unwilling to bet on imaginary and speculative future earnings from operations of the dam because of the regime’s morbid secrecy and lack of transparency. They have little confidence in the regime’s capacity to guarantee their bond investments. For instance, current underpricing in power tariffs which have ranged between “$0.04-0.08 per kilowatt-hour are low by regional standards and recover only 46 percent of the costs of the utility.” That does not bode well for long term bond holders.
To add insult to injury, the Meles regime has the gall to say that it intends to sell the power from the “Grand Renaissance Dam” to the Sudan, Egypt and the Arabian peninsula once construction is complete. That is not only nonsensical but downright insane! Why would Egypt or the Sudan buy power from a dam that damns them by effectively reducing their water supply for agriculture and their own production of power?
Meles and his disciples have always known that they do not have the financial capacity to complete the Dam. They also know that actually completing the constructing the dam will be dangerous for their own survival as a regime should regional war break out. But Meles has always been a peerless grandmaster of intrigue, machination, duplicity, one-upmanship and diplomatic gamesmanship. With this Dam, he was merely pushing the envelope to the outer limits. His real aim was not the construction of dam but to use the specter of the construction of a gargantuan dam on the Nile to fabricate fear of an imminent regional water war. His price for continued regional stability, avoidance of conflict and maintenance of the status quo would be billions in loans, aid and other concessions from the international community and downstream countries.
Meles’ diplomatic strategy shrouded a clever deterrent military strategy: If Egypt goes for broke and attacks the “Grand Renaissance Dam”, Ethiopia could retaliate by attacking the Aswan dam. Meles likely believed the threat of mutual assured destruction will prevent an actual war while maintaining extremely high levels of regional tensions. By playing a game of chicken with Egypt and the Sudan, Meles hoped to strong-arm donor and development banks and wealthy countries in the region into giving him financial, political and diplomatic support. There is no question Meles would have driven on a collision course with Egypt only to swerve at the last second to avoid a fatal crash had he been in power today. It is unlikely that Meles’ disciples have the intellectual candlepower (“megawattage”) or the sheer cunning and artfulness of their master to play a game of chicken with Egypt to skillfully extract concessions.
For love of white elephants and war of the damned
Water is a source of life. War is a source of death. The water of the Nile has given life to Ethiopians, Egyptians and the people of the Nile basin countries since time immemorial. If Meles prepared for war by building his dam, his disciples shall surely inherit war. But Meles should have reflected on the words of Ethiopia’s poet laureate Tsegaye Gebremedhin before embarking on his “Grand Renaissance Dam” project: “O Nile, you are the music that restores the rhythm of existence…/ You are the irrigator that cultivate peace…/ …From my Ethiopia sacred mountains of the sun…”
Meles’ legacy could indeed be a water war of death and destruction on the Nile, but he will never have a cement monument built on the Nile to celebrate his life. Meles’ disciples would be wise to remember an old prophesy as they march headlong to build their doomsday dam on the Nile: “God gave Noah the Rainbow Sign: No more water. The fire next time!”
Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino and is a practicing defense lawyer.
Previous commentaries by the author are available at:
http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/
www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/
Amharic translations of recent commentaries by the author may be found at:
(Yemen Post) – An investigation conducted by al-Wethaq a couple of months ago – a right group organization based in Yemen – revealed that two years in its post revolution era Yemen is still home to hundreds of slaves.
Despite its many promises to address all grave human rights violations such as slavery, the central government has proven unable, or politically unwilling to impose its human rights agenda to Yemen, barely controlling its institutions.
Because of Yemen tribal structure and an overlapping of influences in between the state institutions and tribal leaders, Yemen’s government can often only “advice” Sheikhs, encouraging them to follow their directives rather than impose the rule of law.
It is this conflict of power and political authority which is preventing issues such as slavery, child labor and under-age marriages to be properly addressed and rooted out from society.
Yemen will have at one point or another to reconcile its desire for democracy and its tribal tradition, as both as they currently stand now cannot cohabit.
Al-Wethaq established in its six-months field study that slavery mostly persists in three north western provinces — Hodeidah , Hajjah and al-Mahwit –
UNHCR wrote in its 2012 report “while no official statistics exist detailing this practice, sources report that there could be 300 to 500 men, women, and children sold or inherited as slaves in Yemen, including in the al-Zohrah district of al-Hodeidah Governorate and the Kuaidinah and Khairan al-Muharraq districts of the Hajjah Governorate, north of the capital.”
In all three provinces slave markets are being operated by human traffickers and smugglers.
Most incredibly, deeds of ownership are exchanged between slave traders and the slave owners upon completion of the trade with a price tag running at around $2500 per person at any given moment.
The idea that “legal papers” are being exchanged warned activists is proof slavery in those areas has been standardized.
An activist in Hodeidah said under cover of anonymity he had himself witness slave trading. “Traffickers are operating quite freely in the region, slave trading has been normalized here. Given the economic difficulties Yemen is going through right now the government needs to put an immediate stop to such practices or more people will fall victims to slavery.
Farmers are always looking for cheap labor and nothing is as cheap as slaves. This is a dangerous situation as minority groups and African refugees are at great risk here.
Al-Wethaq recorded 190 cases of slavery so far which as far the foundation is concerned is 190 too many.
Human rights activists working for al-Wethaq have complained that despite their many pleas and reports to the government, officials had so far “politely” ignored their calls, only half-heatedly committing to support their anti-slavery campaign efforts.
While Human Rights Minister Hooria Mashour has been active in promoting anti-slavery and other human rights violations, her ministry alone cannot possibly hope to eradicate slavery on its own.
Activists made clear that unless the government as a whole is willing to actively pursue traffickers and hand out hefty prison sentences while rehabilitating slaves back into society, they had little hope things will ever get better.
“Yemen slavery problem is an economic one. People needs to make money, hence traffickers and others, buyers, are looking for cheap labor. The equation is really simple and there is plenty of money to be made on the misery of others,” said Ahmed an activist in Hodeida.
He added that while buyers were often local land owners, many were also acting on behalf of Gulf nationals — Saudi Arabia, Oman, UAE and Qatar. And if some rich families are only buying the slaves to free them later on as an act of charity others will arrange for their smuggling over the border and use them as domestic help or some instances sex workers. A link has been made in between slave trading and prostitution, where women and sadly even children were sold into prostitution abroad.
Ethiopian and Somali women and children travel voluntarily to Yemen with the hope of working in other Gulf countries, but some are subjected to sex trafficking or domestic servitude in Yemen. Others migrate based on fraudulent offers of employment as domestic servants in Yemen, but upon arrival are subjected to sex trafficking or forced labor. Some female Somali refugees are forced into prostitution in Aden and Lahj governorates, and Yemeni and Saudi gangs traffic African children to Saudi Arabia. Smugglers capitalize on the instability in the Horn of Africa to subject Africans to forced labor and prostitution in Yemen,” read UHCR 2012 trafficking in person report.
Mohammed Naji Allaw a former member of parliament explained while most slaves in Yemen were freed after September 26 Revolution – 1962 – the practice had somehow survived through the decades, the remnants of Yemen old feudal system.
Najeeb al-Saadi, an activist working for al-Wethaq noted the government had tried on many instances to quiet his organization, denying slavery was an issue in Yemen as to avoid answering embarrassing questions.
Back in 2010 HOOD, – most prominent rights organization in Yemen – launched an anti-slavery campaign calling on the country’s general prosecutor to pursue all slave masters and for the government to build housing complexes on fertile plots of land to help those emancipated from slavery get a new start.
“We asked the government to look into the problem and the general prosecutor to investigate,” said Khaled al-Anesi, a lawyer with the National Organization for Defending Rights and Freedoms in 2010.
Despite the campaign and calls from local and international rights organizations nothing of consequence was ever achieved. Slavery continues to be an issue in modern Yemen.
Activists now hope that the momentum created by 2011 revolution and a sense of civic duties will mean the government will eventually come through and devise a plan action which will translate into real change. Because beyond being set free Yemen’ slaves need to be given a chance to re-integrate society as well as receive compensations for their suffering.
Ancestral land that for generations has served as home and livelihood for hundreds of thousands of indigenous people in Ethiopia is being leased out, on 99-year renewable contracts at nominal sums to foreign corporations. The land giveaway or agrarian reforms as the government would prefer to present them began in 2008 when the Ethiopian government, under the brutal suppressive Premiership of Meles Zenawi invited foreign countries/corporation to take up highly attractive deals and turn large areas of land over to industrial farming for the export of crops. India, China and Saudi Arabia were all courted and along with wealthy Ethiopians have eagerly grabbed large pieces of land at basement prices; rates vary from $1.10 to $6.05 per hectare (HA), comparable land in India would set you back $600 per ha.
A total of 3,619,509 ha, the Oakland Institute (OI), a US based think tank, estimate has been leased out. Land made available by the forced re-location of hundreds of thousands of indigenous people under the government’s universally condemned Villagization progamme, which aims to forcibly re-locate over 1.5 million people from their homes.
India corporations have taken the lion’s share, acquiring around 600,000 ha concentrated in Gambella and Afar, split between 10 investing companies. The term ‘investing’ implies benefits for Ethiopia, which is misleading; ‘profiteering’, or ‘exploiting’ sits closer to the truth of these land deals, as the OI make clear, “taking over land and natural resources from rural Ethiopians, is resulting in a massive destruction of livelihoods and making millions of locals [farmers and pastoralist communities] dependent on food handouts”. With small scale farmers being evicted from their land, prices of staples such as Teff, used by millions throughout Ethiopia to make Injera (bread), has rocketed in price, according to Ethiotribune 22/5/2012, increasing fourfold since 2008.
Corporate expansionism: small change big profits
In line with its ambitions of diversity and world food dominance – Karuturi Global, the world’s largest grower of roses, leads the Indian charge, leasing 311,700 ha in Gambella. Not satisfied with this, GRAIN (an international NGO, working to support small farmers) report Mr.Karuturi “wants to set up farming operations [throughout Eastern and Southern Africa] on more than 1 million [ha]” – too much never enough in corporate expansionism.
Almost a quarter of Gambella’s 25 million ha has been earmarked by the federal government for agricultural ‘development’. Karuturi, whose profits “rose 55.13% to Rs 1.21 crore [10 million] in the quarter ended June 2012”, took their chunk without even seeing it, paying only $1.10 per ha. For the Indian giant it is, John Vidal in ‘Land Grab Ethiopia (LGE)’ says, “the sale of the century”. ‘Green Gold’ is how Mr. Karuturi in GRAIN (‘Who’s Behind the Land Deals’), describes his 300,000 ha of Ethiopian soil, “for which he pays $46 per ha per year including water and labour and expects at least $660 [per ha] in profit per year”. (Ibid)
In addition to paddy, Indian farmers are being sub-contracted to grow maize, cereals, palm oil and sugarcane amongst others. All of which are destined for export, either to India or Europe, where companies farming in Ethiopia (and other Sub-Saharan African nations), benefit from lower import duties applied to developing countries, notwithstanding the fact that the land is leased to, and the crops produced and sold by, multi million-rupee rich companies.
Another major Indian company leasing land in Gambella is the decidedly green sounding BHO Bioproducts. Following the corporate rhetoric, BHO Chief Operating Officer Sunny Maker told Bloomberg in 2010 that, they have “plans to invest more than $120 million in rice and cotton production”, which, by 2017, should “generate about $135 million a year from sales divided equally between domestic [Indian] and international markets.” He added that the “incredibly rich fertile land”, will all be “cleared within the next three years”. Cleared yes, violently, indiscriminately and totally; villages, people, forests, woodland, all destroyed, burnt, relocated, displaced, desecrated. The governments promise to such prized investors is that the land is handed over stripped of everything and everyone. Dissent is not allowed and dealt with brutally should it occur, as Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of OI makes clear. “The repression of social resistance to land investments is even stipulated in land lease contracts, [it is the] state’s obligation to ‘deliver and hand over the vacant possession of leased land free of impediments’ and to provide free security ‘against any riot, disturbance or any turbulent time.”
The ‘rich fertile land’, lovingly cultivated at the hands of the men and women who have farmed it for generations, is unlikely to be nurtured so carefully by Indian (or indeed Chinese or Saudi Arabian) corporations with their thirsty ‘GM seeds’ (Ibid). For as Oxfam in their detailed report ‘Land and Power’ diplomatically point out, “investors short time scales may tempt them into unsustainable cultivation, undermining agricultural production.”
The devolution of development
Land is a prime cut asset in the commercialisation of everything, everywhere, and the “rich fertile land” in Ethiopia is cheap, even by Sub-Saharan African standards. Along with long-term leases, the government offers a neat bundle of carrots, including tax incentives and unrestricted export clauses, incentives that the OI state “deny African countries economic benefits” from land deals that the Ethiopian regime wraps up neatly in its complete disregard for the human rights of the indigenous people. Government indifference encouraging corporate irresponsibility – and they need little encouragement. Businesses hardly seem to be grabbing the land, so much as accepting it as a gift, parceled up and ready to be torn open.
In exchange for such attractive deals, the Ethiopian government has been extended, the OI reports “a $640 million line of credit… over five years to boost sugar production in the country’s Lower Omo region”. Not a philanthropic gesture, more a sales trap by India’s EXIM (export and import) Bank, who stipulate, “Ethiopia must import 75% of the value of the credit line in the form of Indian goods and services.”
The government-owned sugar plantations in the Lower Omo are themselves attracting a great deal of concern and criticism from human rights groups, who highlight the environmental and human damage being perpetrated. Government acts of violence and abuse, in the various land deal regions, are justified under the overused and misleading title of ‘development’; a term appropriated by the international monetary machine – the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) primarily – misunderstood and distorted by government development agencies, acting in line with foreign affairs policies by promoting national self interest and perverted by the corrupt ideologically-blinkered governments of developing nations.
An undeveloped ideological trinity whose actions have drained the 21st century sacred cow and its stable mate ‘growth’ – dry of any true and relevant meaning. Far from supporting human and or social development the “unfair terms and near give-away prices [of land deals]… are hindering development…. Foreign corporations and the World Bank are pressuring African leaders to give them exemptions from taxes, import and export duties, and local labor laws – not to mention water and mineral rights that could be worth billions”, the OI confirm.
More concerned with sitting at the top table and cultivating the right international allies than with doing their constitutional duty and serving the needs of the people, the Ethiopian government is in danger of giving away, and for peanuts, it’s ‘rich and fertile’ land to overseas companies who have no interest in Ethiopia, it’s environment, its culture and even less in its people.
Increasing hunger
Hunger and poverty stalk the land of both Ethiopia and India. 12 – 15 million people survive on food aid in Ethiopia, which ranks bottom of the World Hunger Index at 76. India, with the highest rate of malnourished children in the world, where 25% (around 270 million) of the world’s hungry live, despite the fact that, according to the World Food Programme (WFP), “the country grows enough food for its people”, it comes in 65th of the hungriest nations, below Niger and the Sudan – neither of which, to my knowledge, boast 61 billionaires and 200,000 dollar millionaires unlike India. And whereas “most countries have made consistent progress in reducing hunger, India has seen hunger rise over the last decade compared with the late 1990s.”(Ibid) This so-called economic miracle nation refuses to feed it’s own people.
Food insecurity, the WFP makes clear is caused not by lack of produce, but by an unwillingness to share the Earths bounty equitably. The states in India with the greatest numbers suffering from hunger and malnutrition, WFP records “include Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh”; these are the states where the poorest (Adivasi – indigenous and Dalit) people in the country and quite possibly in the World happen to live. The poor are dying of hunger not because India cannot feeed everyone, as the United Nations report on regional cooperation makes crystal clear, “the root cause of hunger across the sub-region and the world today is not a lack of food. It is the economic and social distribution of that food which leaves populations undernourished and hungry.”
Men women and children living in dire poverty starve to death, in India, Ethiopia and throughout the world. They starve and die for want of the food that is rotting in warehouses, food served up to rats or destroyed by the Indian government, because it is cheaper to burn it than to distribute it to those in need. As Graziano da Silva, Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (26/01/13) said, “globally, a third of all food produced is wasted, and… if one could avoid this waste it would be possible to feed all the hungry people [in the world] and have food to spare.” Food to spare!Such is the inhumane ethos that underpins market fundamentalism, that allows men women and children, young and old to starve – simply because the do not have the financial means to feed themselves. Shame on governments Indian and the rest, that allow such inhumane injustice to prevail, as a wise teacher said, “throughout the world there are men, women and little children who have not even the essentials to stay alive; they crowd the cities of many of the poorest countries in the world… My brothers, how can you watch these people die before your eyes and call yourselves men”.
The commercialization of the countryside in India and Ethiopia, which is displacing large numbers of small-scale farmers and concentrating crop production in the hands of multi-nationals, is intensifying existing levels of hunger. Substantive agricultural reform and real development would see the army of skilled small scale producers, with generations of local knowledge and love of the land, supported with the needed capital and technology, given access to markets that corporations bring. Such an agrarian revolution, ethically founded, environmentally healthy and socially sustained, would build long-term food security and feed the hungry.
Soft targets easy profits
India as the WFP makes clear, has no domestic need for food produced by the overseas industrial farms that are causing such far-reaching damage, to the hundreds of thousands of displaced people of Ethiopia as well as the natural environment. The movement in Ethiopia mirrors what is taking place to a much greater degree in India. The government has shifted all support away from Indian farmers and is supporting the transfer of land from the rural poor to large companies – wealthy government benefactors, causing the displacement of millions (60 million to date, according to Arundhati Roy) of indigenous people.
Corporations are targeting countries Oxfam 7/02/2013 makes clear, with “poor governance”, that “allow investors to secure land quickly and cheaply…. [They] “Seem to be cherry picking countries with weak rules and regulations”. Needy nations like hungry people make easy targets for multi-national man, whose pockets governments are desperate to nestle inside. The driving force behind such destructive land developments, undertaken by corporations obsessed by an insatiable desire for growth and world leading economic development, is, as Oxfam suggests, profit and profit alone.
Graham Peebles is director of the Create Trust. He can be reached at: [email protected]