By Tecola Hagos
(Former legal adviser to Ethiopia’s tyrant Meles Zenawi)

The right to defend ones own rights individually or as part of an organized group is a legitimate cause irrespective of the identity of the adversary. However, such militancy may not be wise in every situation. One has to weigh-in other factors in order to decide the most efficient and productive means and the most opportune time for a fight before jumping into the fry of things.

Sometimes it might be far more useful not to allow self-interest over­ride other communal interests in or­der to preserve social cohesion, and advance the economic and political development of the group. Some­times self-defense and the defense of a group may overwhelm all other values. However, the respect of the legitimate rights of individuals who may not be a member of the group in power ought to be seen as a duty. Apartheid, Nazism, Christian and Is­lamic fundamentalism, and Zionism are examples of ideologies of nar­rowly constituted exclusive groups. Even though dissimilar in their ori­gins and goals, they all have as the basis of their philosophy elements of negative perception of other peoples or races. In a matter of speaking, almost all nationalist movements share an ideological perception of exclusivity based on birth and na­tional origin.

Tyrannicide: The Ethical and Po­litical Imperative

This is a very sensitive and ex­tremely important issue. Tyrannicide is not a simple question of murder but of civil disobedience in the face of oppressive and violent govern­ment leaders. It involves informed judgment and activities of deliberate violence against political leaders who are causing social and political de­struction of peoples’ lives through systematic abusive and violent meth­ods. In a situation where total state power is in the hands of a single leader or a group, where the political process is subverted and the rights of people undermined, it leads into violence and civil unrest. Tyrannicide is aimed at the power structure of a brutal and tyrannical government, and those who uphold it as leaders, such as the king and his functionar­ies—civilian, military and security operatives—at the command level, etc. The targets for tyrannicide should be individuals who are di­rectly involved in the command or the execution of brutal, tyrannical and indiscriminate violence against defenseless citizens who have no political or judicial outlets or rem­edies. At no cost it should involve children and any innocent person whether in government employment or not. Otherwise, it runs the risk of becoming a case of simple murder or terrorism. The formulation of the philosophical underpinnings or the rational for ‘tyrannicide’ is as diffi­cult as the practical operation of it. Thus one must be careful going that route.

Maybe a brief description of what is meant by the term ‘tyrant’ might help in differentiating what is an illegal and conspiratorial murders of leaders from the concept of ‘tyrannicide’ I am addressing herein. Some scholars (Ford, Laqueur) think that the term ‘tyrant’ or ‘tyranny’ has an Asiatic origin. The meaning I have attached to the term ‘tyrant or tyranny’ is more or less the descrip­tion provided by Plato in The Re­public, with a more pointed image of the tyrant to include even those leaders who were originally elected into power and later manipulated the political situation to monopolize ex­cessive power. It does not matter also whether the tyrant is locally breed or is coming from outside the community.

The Bible gives numerous ex­amples of the destruction of tyrants. It is full of stories of both Hebrew and non-Hebrew kings who were destroyed because they became ty­rannical and did not rule justly. In theory, the divine nature (or source of power) of kings carries with it the idea that the monarch rules as rep­resentative of God and not arbitrarily and on his own. The legitimate king or monarch per se is not considered to be a tyrant. Such monarch is ex­pected to dispense justice with mercy, and rule wisely. And it was believed in as far as the monarch tempered his obvious military power with justice and mercy, as well as concern for the welfare of his people, his reign was unchallenged and long lasting. However, if a leader stepped beyond such com­mon sense decent relationships with his subjects. God was expected to throw him down using other human agents including attack and destruc­tion by foreign powers. This, of course, is the religious source or au­thority to justify the destruction of tyrants.

For example, an incident that was told in graphic detail in the Bible is the political murder of King Eglon. who had subjugated the Hebrews for Eighteen years, by Ehud (a He­brew) to free his people from bond­age. (See judges 3:15-23) Another dramatic tyrannicide recorded in Judges is the story of Abimelech. a Hebrew tyrant, no less than the son of Gideon. [Gideon was one of the greatest Hebrew Generals not much different in stature than Joshua or even David], who murdered his own siblings and was unjust (violent) to his people. (See judges 9:1-57)

There is also a confusion be­tween terrorism and tyrannicide. Terrorism essentially is violence against innocent people—the more innocent the victims, the more ter-roristic the violence. In contrast, tyrannicide is the elimination of a violent and vicious oppressor of people. Tyrants will use terroristic violence against innocent individuals or against a people. The violence I am advocating here is to be used against such tyrants in the hope of neutralizing their abuse of power and the violence they commit against people. Of course, tyrants in their turn will unleash their state spon­sored terroristic violence to counter any effort to bring about democratic government structures. Contrary to the propaganda of governments and the media, state sponsored terrorism is the most devastating and wide spread tyranny in the world.

One must determine first the existence of a political situation which is so intolerable that the killing of the leaders is warranted. No po­litical institution, such as a govern­ment, would openly endorse such a measure even against an adversary government leader. The very idea of regicide is repugnant even to the most revolutionary bureaucrat. However, no one should outright re­ject the possibility and the righteous­ness of a deliberated execution of a tyrant or despot. Thus, tyrannicide is a very unique and unusual occur­rence. It need be carried out in ex­ceptional circumstances for the good of society.

Almost all existing governments abide by the unwritten international norm of self preservation and frown against civil unrest. For example, the United States, by an Executive Or­der, forbids explicitly any assassina­tion attempt against a foreign leader, enemy or not. But that is a typical American government hypocrisy. The fact is that there are records of numerous instances where the United States has promoted such violence against leaders who are not “yes-boys.’ After all, during the Reagan era, the CIA had authored a handbook, titled Psychological Op­erations in Guerilla Warfare, for distribution, on how to conduct ter­roristic activities including political assassinations of popular leaders. On the other hand, several other countries have either constitutional provisions, or through their criminal codes punish by sever sentences and even death any form of violence against officials of foreign govern­ments.

Historical Perspective

As stated above, there are nu­merous instances of tyrannicide throughout human history. I might only be able to touch the tip of the iceberg in my discussion of examples of tyrannicide. The more practical and secular approach was that of the Greeks and the Romans. Over two thousand five hundred years ago, from Homeric times, the Greeks struggled with the idea of tyranny and tyrannicide. (See James F. McGlew, Tyranny and Political Culture in Ancient Greece. Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1996.) Plato devoted a section of his Dia­logue discussing the negative char­acteristics of a tyrant and the de-structiveness of tyrannical govern­ments. (Plato, The Republic, trans. and introduction Desmond Lee, New York: Penguin Books (Clas­sic), 1955,392-415.) So did Aristotle in his Politics. Not much has changed to this date in the description of a tyrant since then. Thucydides ar­gued about the issue of tyrannicide even more pointedly than previous historians. The great Greek play writers also dealt with the issues of the destructions of tyrants by coura­geous heroes in a number of plays.

The Romans started with the benefit of having learned from the Greeks ideas of democratic direct representations and political struc­tures. The Roman leadership before Augustus Caesar were republican and as such far more closer and representative of the nature of their political organization. Marcus Tullius Cicero, the symbol of republicanism, wrote in 55-51 B.C., two thousand and forty six years ago. about the right and duty of citizens or people to get ride of a tyrant. “If. as is usually the case. the tyrant is crushed by the leading citizens, the common­wealth enjoys the second of the three form of government I mentioned. For there is a certain regal or pater­nal element in the council of chief men who study to serve well the people’s needs. If. on the other hand, the people themselves have slain or driven out the tyrant, they govern with considerable restraint so long as they are prudent and wise.” (Marcus Tullius Cicero. On the Coiiimoinvcalili. emphasis added) Marcus Tullius Cicero was born in 106 BC near Rome. He distin­guished himself as a great orator and statesman with distinctly mod­ern republican ideas. He died by the hands of Mark Anthony’s soldiers on December 7, 43 BC. As a matter of fact, even a would be tyrant, Julius Caesar paid with his life because of his ambition to monopolize power and become a dictator. Romans had carried more tyrannicide than the Greeks. More Roman Emperors (than republican leaders) such as Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, Galba, Domitian, Commodus. Pertinax, etc. were either murdered or forced to commit suicide because of their tyrannical governments com­pared to Greek tyrants. (Franklin L.Ford, Political Murder: From Tyrannicide to Terrorism, Harvard University Press, 1985)

The Hebrew Sicarii and Zeal­ots were politically motivated killers despite their heavily religious rheto­ric. They were immortalized, even if misidentified and negatively por­trayed, by the narratives of FlavJus Josephus, a Romanized and a one time Hebrew rebellion leader. The targets of the Sicarii or Zealots were Roman leaders, whom they were trying to expel, and Hebrew collabo­rators, whom they wanted to punish. For the 5′icarii, Masada was their last stronghold where they perished to the last man by their own hands in 73 A.D. rather than be captured alive by the Romans. There are some who believe that the historical Jesus was one of the founders of the precursor structure that gave birth to those rebellion groups.

The Assassins who started out as a militant faction of the Ismaili movement about the end of the Elev­enth Century were an extreme as­pect of Islamic political processes who fulfilled the moral imperative of murdering leaders who seemed not to follow strict scriptural tenets or usurpers of the political leadership of Islam. [The Ismaili basically are Shi ‘a who oppose any Moslem secular leader (Caliph) who is not descended from the Prophet (Imam)] In some form the Assas­sins, the Sicarii and the Zealots share similar characteristics of self righ­teousness. Sadly, all the Sicarii, and
most of the Zealots and Assassins were exterminated before develop­ing into a political system (not nec­essarily a violent one), in the case of the Sicarii at Masada by the Ro­mans. and in the case of Assassins by Hulagu. the Mongol leader, who veered into their Elburz mountains holdout on his way to Baghdad which he destroyed in 1258 A.D. However, considering the current politically motivated murders going on in the Middle East, I am not sure that fanaticism has died out.

In the rest of Asia. until the be­ginning of the Twentieth Century. the destruction of despotic leaders seems to be a result of power struggles between ambitious indi­viduals with very little civic motiva­tion, and is not similar to the Roman or Greek tyrannicide which was car­ried out to promote rights of citizens in general or of a collective body. This may be one reason why schol­ars insist on making a distinction be­tween Asiatic form of despotism from that of European feudalism or despotism. In both China and India. the most dominant cultures and civi­lizations in Asia proper, religion might have shaped the political mili­tancy or the absence of it in the general population.
The experience in Western Eu­rope and the New World seems to have followed no particular pattern from the Middle Ages down to the last part of the Seventeenth Century when politically motivated assassi­nations seem to have taken over all other forms of struggle for power within the aristocratic families of Europe. There are few examples of tyrannicide such as the beheading of Charles I of England (1649 A.D) which were in the nature of political struggles between common citizens against their despotic monarchs. A couple of hundred years later, start­ing with the execution of Louis the XVI of France and his Queen (1793 A.D) we entered a new era. Both Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centu­ries were marked by individual vio­lence against political figures, not necessarily tyrants. In Europe, those two centuries were periods of tre­mendous economic and social trans­formations—the transition from agrarian economic structures into in­dustrial ones.

The Twentieth Century is ex­ceptional for its two opposing devel­opments: it brought about both an extremely high degree of violence as well as the era of the emancipa­tion of the common man from his­toric subjugation and oppression. After all. it is in the Twentieth Cen­tury where we had the first trench war costing over twenty million lives. and the first truly catastrophic mod­ern warfare of the Second World War where over fifty million people perished including the first system­atic genocide that wiped out six mil­lion European Jews. and the deliber­ate annihilation of civilians by nuclear bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki The communist transfor­mation of traditional societies in Rus­sia and China resulted in the de­struction of no less than fifty million lives. Man has been bloody through out history, but nothing comparable to the atrocities, in terms of sheer numbers of casualties and victims. of the Twentieth Century.

In Black Africa, disappointingly, there are much too few instances of real courageous^ actions against ty­rants by civilian individuals or groups, except for the nationalist and patri­otic struggles against imperialist and colonial aggressors. Even in Ethio­pia (the oldest Black nation) there is not a single instance of tyrannicide that stands out in all of the thou­sands of years of tlie history of the Ethiopian people. The exceptions seem to be: a) the single instance of something close to a political murder of an abusive regional governor by rebellious group of Wollo Azebos during Haile Selassie’s Government in the 1950s; and b) a series of politi­cally motivated killings in the 1970s, a period commonly known as the ‘red’, and ‘white’ terrors, which was designated as such by the brutal des­pot Mengistu who was responsible for the murder of hundreds of politi­cal leaders. The young men and women who came into their major­ity in the 1960s and 70s were unique in Ethiopian history. Their opposition to power and authority, with tre­mendous courage and great sacri­fice, was unprecedented in Ethio­pian history. Their effort to change the nature of Ethiopia’s feudal power structure was uniquely remarkable when seen against the background of the stagnant and oppressive Ethio­pian culture that discouraged any form of challenge to those in power. By contrast the generations, since then, of the 1980s and 90s are ashes when compared to the firebrand pre­vious generations mentioned above.

The series of military coup d’states against several African leaders in the last thirty years were not the type of tyrannicides 1 am discussing here. They were mostly ‘palace’ murders by military strong­men than tyrannicides. In Ethiopia. the age of the Mesafmts (1769-1855) is similar to that type of political control, minus the murders, bv war lords and military leaders witnessed in Africa of the last thirty years. It seems Black civilian Africans are much less violent and much less fa­natical than other races, and far more tolerant of the violation of their rights. In the alternative, the situa­tion might be a case of Black Afri­cans having a far more profound understanding of human nature and the process of history, which might be the reason for such laxity rather than ‘a nature’ of non-violence. At any rate, this act of tolerance for despots might explain why Africans are suffering violations of their hu­man and political rights at the present time under persistently abusive gov­ernments. I am risking here the fact of being labeled as a racist; how­ever, such is not the case.

Philosophical Justification

John Stuart Mill who wrote ex­tensively on liberty was very much concerned about tyrannicide. His analysis of the concept of liberty is never far from his consideration of the shadow of tyranny looming in his time. He complained in a footnote in one of his essays (later compiled along with other essays and pub­lished in a book) that he was unduly criticized for writing about the law­fulness of tyrannicide. Our modem philosophers and political scientists seem to shy away from the idea of violently eliminating tyrants. For ex­ample. Professor Ford who had done monumental studies of the phenom­enon of ‘political murder’ ultimately comes out against tyrannicide. Thus, I am very much aware of the fact that my advocacy of tyrannicide is neither a popular nor an enlightened one—but an effective and a moral one.

It seems to me the fact that every individual has a set of human rights, at times expanded or more often restricted, implies the duty and the right to defend those rights indi­vidually or collectively where/when ever challenged or threatened by a leader or a system. The more diffi­cult problem is how and when to use violent means to preserve and exer­cise those rights. The safeguard of those rights maybe in any form, i.e.. from ‘peaceful’ protest to tyrannicide. At times such decisions can only be personal. However such decisions are made. the ultimate responsibility lies with the individual who carries out the violent act.

I believe there is a moral and social duty to destroy tyrants. The non-violent method of fighting social injustices as preached and lived by Mahatma Gandhi and by later fol­lowers such as Martin Luther King depended for its success on a paral­lel third party confrontations. If there were no social consciousness in the general public against oppression. and an absence of pressure or threat of violence from militant individuals and groups, such non-violent method would have remained a curiosity or an academic issue. In reahtv. the non-violence of Gandhi is also a vio­lent method, although the violence may not have been directed against another person. It was directed against oneself, and depends far too much for its success on the human­ity of the oppressor. It is not much different than the behavior of some wild carnivores animals exposing their most vulnerable parts of their bodies, when defeated or overpow­ered by an opponent, in the hope of getting some relief from continued attack—which does seem to work a lot of times. It holds ‘the self hostage by exposing it to an immediate danger.

There is both a moral and a so­cial duty to preserve and safeguard fundamental individual rights. Whether we consider the individual as a cre­ation of God or a marvel of evolu­tion, the fact remains that there is no other known being in this part of the solar system [with exaggeration, Galaxy] who is as complex and as talented as the human individual. As indicated above, there are both reli­gious and historical precedents for tyrannicide. Tyrannicide is also ef­fective in giving notice to would-be tyrants that despotic rule has a very high price. Thus, any impediment that undermined or destroyed the integrity of the individual must be challenged. It must be seen almost as a sacred duty to do so. Nietzsche, even if erratic at times in his think­ing, summed his profound philoso­phy on the ‘will to power’ and about ‘slave morality and master morality’ (if I may summerize him) stating that individuals who are not willing to sacrifice their lives to preserve their autonomy and freedom have a slave morality of subservience and humiliation. Thus, fighting a tyrant or a tyrannical system is a liberating experience and an as­sertion of ones own freedom.

‘Belling’ the Cat

Had Hitler been eliminated be­fore he launched his genocidal war machinery on an unwary world, it would have saved the lives of tens of millions of peoples. Is there any­one who might think otherwise by hindsight? Probably no one. The same can be said of many tyrants around the world including Mengistu HaileMariam. Tyrannicide is ex­tremely cost effective. The effec­tiveness of tyrannicide in removing an individual who has become a ter­ror and a hinderance to social justice is a time tested solution. What is required for tyrannicide to be effective is courage, dedication and a sense of public duty. There is no security bubble that could surround and protect a tyrant from the rage of patriotic executioners. Rather than spending millions of dollars and years of hard work creating, training and leading freedom fighters, it will take only a fraction of that to train highly committed, fast moving and highly mo­tivated vanguard fighters to send on such type of mission of mercy.

All that is well, maybe better said than done. The real problem is a practical one: who is going to ‘bell’ the cat? The difficulty of translating theory into practice is best illustrated in the story I learned in grade school about a group of rats conspiring against a cat that was terrorizing their little world. The story tells us that after a lengthy discussion one smart rat proposed the installation of an early warning system that will give the rats ample time to escape when ever the cat approached to catch them. The plan was elegant and effective, if carried out. The idea was to tie a bell around the neck of the cat which will ring every time the cat is moving, thus warning every rat of the cat’s whereabouts and approach. The rats agreed on the plan after applauding the brilliant young strategist. At that moment a wafer rat asked about the future heroes who were going to tie the bell round the neck of the cat. Well, that was the end of that brilliant idea! I can imagine that wafer rat being thrown out from the group in anger for bursting their bubble.

Fear has a paralyzing effect on individuals who are lead to believe that there is not much they can do to avert a disastrous situation. Through out human history, it is a recorded fact that hundred of thousands of people were lead into their execu­tion or murder without protest or attempt to fight back their tormen­tors and murderers, in a surrealisti-cally peaceful procession, almost herded like domestic animals into a slaughter house. In our own time, we have seen records of brutality and murders of millions of people by imperialist and colonial forces, Nazi and Fascist forces. Communists and small time dictators. The fear of in­dividualized death has tremendous psychological pressure on the indi­vidual. Unless one is equipped with a self righteous moral strength and/ or fanatical religious belief, the act of individualized defiance and rebel­lion is far too unnerving and/or remote to carry out. I do not need to go far and wide searching for proof on this. The evidence is all around us.

In conclusion, I must emphasis the fact that tyrannicide is not ter­rorism. Tyrannicide is the destruc­tion of a leadership that is terroristic, abusive, brutal and anti-democratic. This active defense of rights against national tyrannical leaders is an hon­orable and a sacred duty incumbent on every citizen, and as such is not limited to local tyrants but also against their foreign imperialist mas­ters. The fact is no human life should be degraded, brutalized or exploited by someone or a group from within or from the outside. We have one short life—unique and sublimely complex. One should defend, honor and love that life no less than the next person. Those who carry out tyrannicide are great heroes. However, it is extremely difficult and unjustified to require any­one to be heroic. Heroes create mo­ments and not the other way—and heroes are elements of surprise like a flash of lightning.

(Tecola Hagos is a former legal adviser to Ethiopia’s tyrant Meles Zenawi. He currently resides in Boston, USA. The article was originally published by Ethiopian Review in January 7th, 2009.)

TPLF Inc. institutionalization of ethnicity, party and state and the undoing of shared power and resources – Commentary 7

By Aklog Birara, PhD

The pursuit of justice and political pluralism in Ethiopia has been severely compromised deliberately and systematically by the architects of an ethnic polity that is doing irreparable damages to all Ethiopians. Some see merit in the current system and suggest that ‘oppressed nationalities’ are better off today than they were under previous regimes. Let us ignore the bigger picture of no ‘shared power or shared resources’ in the management of this new polity. Instead, let us relate governance to ordinary Ethiopians regardless of their ethnic, religious or demographic affiliation. I will illustrate this by providing socioeconomic examples.

Ninety percent of Ethiopians earn less than the worldwide threshold of US$1.25 per day. More than 60 percent earn less than US$1 a day. Imagine surviving on such income yourself. Last year, the cost of food rose by 50 percent. An Afar, Somali, Anuak, Oromo or other mother outside the privileged ethnic elites who benefit from the system has a higher chance of dying from lack of basic maternal care, along with her baby in one of the “unhealthiest countries in the world.” If the baby survives, her or his chance of growing stunted or of becoming an orphan is among the highest in the world. There are 7 million orphans in Ethiopia today. Children and girls are among the largest exports in the country. If a child reaches the age of maturity (18), her or his chances of attending school are lower than in next door Kenya. If, by some miracle, she/he attends high school or even college, the chance of finding a job that pays a livable wage are increasingly nil.

On the other hand, the chance of immigrating and facing the prospect of death on the way or humiliation abroad are among the highest in the world. The Gallop Poll found that 46 percent of Ethiopians, mostly the educated, want to leave the country. This is the lead reason why I have consistently suggested that growth that does not offer equitable access to opportunities does not reduce overall poverty. TPLF incorporated (TPLF Inc.) would care less whether the affected individual is Afar, Somali, Amhara, Oromo, Anuak or Tigrean. Why should it? The less people who demand public services and or freedom, the better it is for the regime. The less domestic competition there is the better for few who make money. TPLF INC is especially inimical to national oriented individuals and institutions. Reflect for a single minute why the country is void of nationalists, patriots and civic minded folks and institutions.

What is surprising to fair minded observers—whether Ethiopian or foreign—is that the condition of running a multiethnic nation as a business is not fully grasped or appreciated even by those who say they oppose it. This wishy-washy tendency is among the lead contributors to the disarray. Some have the audacity to accept ‘crumbs’ as democratic outcomes and neglect the vast majority who live in abject poverty and destitution. They ignore the notion that democratic outcomes mean shared power and shared resources. It certainly is not accepting second class status in one’s own region and country.

One can’t help but appreciate those who were part of the regime; reject it; and join the opposition camp. They know more about the intrigues of TPLF Inc. than we do. It is time that we let go of their past, invite and encourage them to join the democratization process. Evidence from and testimonies offered by these former supporters and participants in the establishment of ethnic federalism– the geopolitical manifestation of ethnic polity– show that the Ethiopian Prime Minister and his close allies are leading the entire society into the abyss. In this abyss, no current or future generation is likely to be spared. Sad but true, for Tigreans, the collateral damage that emanates from this system of exclusion is huge. Those who left it know this very well and can help in dismantling it. They know that, unless change takes place soon, Tigreans will incur long-term damages without necessarily receiving a substantial share of the proceeds from minority ethnic elite political and economic capture. Some in the Diaspora who visit the glitz in the country return with the false impression that things are better for the vast majority of the population. They equate glitz with wellbeing for 90 percent of the population. They fail to recognize that, at US$350, per capita income is among the lowest in Africa. Having left the country in search of opportunities abroad, they detach themselves from the bigger and troublesome realities in which most live.

TPLF Inc. offers critical officials, including generals, urban lands and accesses to loans to own and build mansions and buildings in prime locations that cost between 45 and 90 million birr. Diaspora visitors fail to ask how it is possible for a general on an Ethiopian salary to build multimillion birr physical assets in one of the poorest countries in the world.

An ordinary Tigrean does not live in a decent home let alone in a palatial or mansion like edifice in Mekele or Bole in Addis Ababa. So, we cannot afford to be categorical in chastising the Tigrean population for the misdeeds of TPLF Inc. We need to make clearer distinctions between those who rule and exploit or plunder the country and the rest. By the same token, we cannot afford to assume that every Oromo supports the OLF and that most Oromo support secession. The vast majority of the Oromo population suffers from the same systemic barriers as the rest. This condition creates resentment against the system. This does not, however, mean that most Oromo or Tigrean support secession. Oromo and Tigrean and others have sacrificed as much as anyone in defending and preserving Ethiopia. It is equally wrong to assume that every Somali supports the Somali National Liberation Front. These categorical notions and beliefs are what TPLF Inc. wishes us to buy in the market place of propaganda. If we wish freedom for all Ethiopians, we cannot afford to be trapped in this cycle of categorical condemnation of others and misdeeds of the past. What matters most is the future.

Who wants national unity and the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people?

This question leads me to one general observation that some present in a recurrent fashion as if the people on whose behalf they talk—without the benefit of being elected–do not know what they want. Active and sustained support of Ethiopia’s national independence, territorial integrity and unity and sovereignty that embraces the diversity of the population is national hopes and aspirations. These do not belong to the so-called ‘unity crowd.’ Such narrow and self-serving attribution serves TPLF Inc. and narrow ethnic elite outlooks. Indirect or direct reference to the so-called ‘unity crowd’ is another way of confining identification narrowly to a group rather than to the entire society. It is a reinforcement of the current ethnic federal system that discourages communication and interaction among the country’s diverse population. Who benefits from such an arrangement? It is elites and not the people they contend to represent. Trade, employment, investment and knowledge sharing are restrained heavily by this narrow definition of the ‘unity crowd’ theme. TPLF Inc. reinforces such an insular and isolated life at the cost of millions of Ethiopians. Those who echo the same are essentially saying the same thing: live in isolation from one another. Restricted economic and social activity on the basis of ethnic identity deters the natural flow of knowledge, best practices, experience and markets. It deters innovation and change and counters the global trend toward social, economic and market integration.

One unintended consequence that those who demean the ‘unity crowd’ advocate is that isolated ethnic communities are more vulnerable to manipulation by domestic elites and globalization than nationally oriented societies. As such, the argument is not so much one group advancing ‘unity’ for its own sake and another protecting ethnic turf. Instead, it is advancing the noble causes of shared power and shared resources that can only occur when Ethiopians have the freedom to choose their representatives in a free and fair electoral process; and when their government becomes accountable to them and not to narrow ethnic elites. Those who adhere to the notion of national unity as if this concept is embedded narrowly in one or two ethnic groups (the ‘unity crowd’) fail to realize that unity in a multiethnic and multi-religion country such Ethiopia is a national and not an ethnic concept at all. This is especially the case in this century. How else does one justify the European Union or the illusive African Union? National unity is a matter of economic and political survival.

TPLF Inc. has gotten away with murder so far by institutionalizing the irreconcilability of ethnic groups and by categorizing all Amharic speakers as ‘oppressors.’ It inherited these traditions of categorical accusation and demeaning from the EPLF and foreign powers inimical to Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people as a whole. The division within the Worldwide Ethiopian Student Movement in the 1960s and 1970s; and later on, the ensuing onslaught against nationally oriented and highly competent Ethiopians, was part of the strategy to undo Ethiopia forever. In large part, this strategy succeeded. It is not so much because of the brilliance of EPLF intellectuals that it did. It is because of the gullibility of many Ethiopian intellectuals who wanted change and listened to anyone without assessing motives and calculating possible outcomes.

The country lost its access to the sea and is now losing the pillars of its economy. In large measure; and whether recognized or not; this gullible generation helped to create a submissive and subservient political culture. The emergence the EPLF and the TPLF Inc. is part of this gullible generation. Foreigners inimical to Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people have a knack at recruiting, funding and arming Ethiopians against one another. Who pays the price ultimately? It is the country and its people. Why else would we leave our country and immigrate to all corners of the world; and then go back to our country as tourists?

The ethnic-based ruling elite continue to use its ethnic base as a shield. This shield is, however, subject to the same s scrutiny of loyalty as the rest. The Tigray regional state (Kilil) serves as the laboratory of repression and oppression of not only the region itself but the rest of the country. The ethnic elite reconfigure lands and politicize use and ownership thereby creating unnecessary animosity among Ethiopians. The good news is that, an increasing number of Tigreans, Oromo and others reject this system. Someone said, “You can fool the people some of the time; but you cannot fool the people all of the time.” The denial of freedom in the rest of the country is the same as denial of freedom in Tigray, Afar, Gambella, Amhara, Somali and Oromia and so on. Folks, I suggest that we are in this mess together. The only way out is to close ranks and cooperate and not cope out. It is time that Amhara, Oromo, Tigre, Anuak, Somali and the rest appreciate the notion that they are going to the abyss together. No one will be free from repression and oppression unless all Ethiopians are free. TPLF Inc. is fickle for a street smart reason: survival. Like a chameleon, it changes the composition of the leadership at the top and below on the basis of perceived threats and renewed or new loyalty required. This is the reason for the recent assessment (gimigema) and change of guards to protect the Prime Minister.

Increasingly, what seems to matter most for the top leadership is sheer survival against growing public resentment that the regime may not contain in the event of countrywide uprisings? This resentment is not bound by ethnic or religious affiliation. Those who wish to see an inclusive, just and pluralist Ethiopia must distinguish the trees from the forest and reach out to one another. I suggest that the personification of political leadership in a single figure or person is the weakest link of the present system that opponents can exploit now. If fear permeates this oppressive system, opponents have every reason to consider that their own fear is not warranted. They must appreciate the notion that, at minimum, fear is as pervasive within this system as it is outside. This is why generals and spies are rewarded like CEOs. What for? To protect the merged ethnic, party and state for which they their loyalty has been thoroughly vetted and assured.

The good news is that fear outside the system is imposed; it is neither natural nor part of the Ethiopian tradition. There is power in numbers that civil resistance has yet to exploit. The outside world consists of the vast majority who reject the system. The sheer power of numbers makes fear conquerable and manageable. For this to happen, we all need to create and sustain a unity of purpose; and work on the ability to mediate and reconcile minor differences among political and civic dissidents. Opponents need to accept the possibility that narrow and personalized ethnic leadership is the Achilles Heel that is embedded in authoritarian and personalized leadership. It is this weak link that will unravel the regime. This weak link treats the entire country and its people as tradable commodities. For example, TPLF Inc. is Africa’s champion of land grab for which all ethnic groups are paying a huge price. Ethiopians are losing power, voice and a sense of citizenship in their own regions and country.

To those who find merit in Ethiopia’s ethnic polity, I have tried to show that the benefits are confined to elites. Where then is the benefit gained if the real economy is being assumed by foreign firms from India, Pakistan, the Gulf states, China and others and a selected few ethnic elites? This national onslaught must be countered fast through mobilization and consolidation of the opposition camp within the country and abroad now. The opposition camp must be courageous enough to turn the page around such that fear belongs to its rightful place: TPLF Inc.

Fear belongs to those who oppress and plunder

The fear culture that the ethnic governing elite spent hundreds of millions of dollars to implant and institutionalize is a consequence of fear itself: fear of history; of the Ethiopian public; and fear to innovate and change for the better. Let us take one example. The system of ethnicization of the security, police and defense establishment through economic and financial incentives—urban lands and borrowed financing of huge buildings in Bole, Addis Ababa, appointments to Boards and as heads of corporations– is part of the art staying in power. Fear has produced generals who live in multimillion birr homes and in the most exclusive neighborhoods in every large city in the country. A government that is not afraid of its own shadows does not bribe its generals. It has no one to fear.

The party owns the defense establishment

You buy the defense and security leadership to your side by bribing it; and by providing it economic and financial incentives because of fear. Here is a weakness that the opposition can and should exploit. Suppose TPLF Inc. declares war against Eritrea or is provoked to do so. The opposition cannot wait to educate ordinary soldiers who hail from every nationality groups. Ordinary soldiers and other low level personnel are not part of the financial and economic benefit deal and empire. Why not educate these thousands of police, soldiers and others who are not major beneficiaries that they are protecting a corrupt and deadly system that uses and abuses them? Why not inform them that the biggest beneficiaries of the current system are ethnic generals who are owners of huge assets, including buildings paid for at public expense.

This can only be done if the opposition is smart enough to set aside differences and focus on all of the Ethiopian people and on the country instead of itself. Cooperation is no longer a choice; it is a necessity.

The merged state needs material resources to sustain it

Political capture does not occur in a vacuum. State owned or run entities such as telecommunications serve the ruling-party and prevent the entire society from harnessing the information revolution. Genuine domestic private sector competition is not allowed. In the absence of structural changes, increased productivity and competition, it is inevitable that prices will continue to rise. When this happens, it all Ethiopians who suffer; hyperinflation does not discriminate. Ethiopia is being left behind other African countries in the use of mobile phones, the Internet and other modern communications tools. Last year, I visited Kenya to learn these contrasts in the use of telecommunications, mobile phones and Internet services that boost capabilities and express freedom of choice.

In Kenya, stiff competition is everywhere. There are more than 20 Internet firms that give citizens a level of access denied to Ethiopians. Young Kenyans told me that they use mobile phones and the Internet to critique and converse on such matters as the constitutional referendum. Contrast this with Ethiopia and see what TPLF Inc. is doing to the entire society. It suffocates freedom and undermines economic and social vitality and creativity. Any criticism of the Ethiopian constitution will land a person in jail. Kenya boasts the most advanced mobile money and other financial transfer system in the world. Wide spread use of the Internet and mobile phones have begun to change the social fabric of Kenyan society, blurring distinctions between urban and rural, youth and old, women and men, rich and poor. This technology is breaking ethnic barriers.

Many young Kenyans are highly critical of their government and its leaders. They want a future that will unleash the productive capabilities and potential of the entire society. Young people are not waiting for the government to solve socioeconomic and political problems. They are actively engaged in defining problems, searching for answers and setting-up enterprises. A free press allows them to express their views without fear. While one cannot conclude from a short visit that Kenya is on the way to Middle Income status by 2030–a national goal–optimism among youth and information technology suggest that this may be reachable. In terms of the information revolution and a vibrant press, Kenya is more like emerging countries in South Asia than its northern neighbors.

TPLF Inc. does exactly the opposite of Kenya, Ghana and others in Africa. Ethnic and region-based corporations and non-governmental agencies owe their legitimacy and assets to Federal Government budgetary transfers, contractual deals and easier accesses to the banking system, including the National Bank. This is why Ethiopian domestic banks are on the verge of collapse and are debt ridden to the tune of 60 billion birr and growing. So-called endowments firms play developmental roles. They exert monopolistic practices and crowd out opportunities for other Ethiopians. The banking system serves as piggy bank for the party. What makes Ethiopian ethnocratic governance unique and without parallel is the fact that an ethnic-based minority party (TPLF Inc.) has assumed legitimacy and total dominance in both the political state and the economy within a short period of 21 years.

The party, state and ethnic-based political, legal, judicial, economic and financial processes appear to be totally linked in a web that serves the ruling-party’s goals and interests. This is why I call it TPLF Inc. The definition of ethnocratic governance offered in previous commentaries has been augmented and validated by this merger that is total and absolute. The clash between national social and political groups on the one hand and the ethnic-based ruling-party on the other reflects tensions arising from this unacceptable concentration of political power and economic and financial wealth in a single ethnic-based elite. Given this, it is virtually impossible to expect shared power and shared resources any time soon.

Morally indefensible

This concentration is indefensible morally and in terms of socioeconomic development. It is detrimental to the notion of reducing and eventually eliminating broad-based poverty and in creating a vibrant and competitive national economy augmented by a strong domestic private sector. Growth that is not based on popular and equitable participation by the vast majority is likely to aggravate the already dangerous income and social inequality apparent everywhere in the country. By definition, ethnocratic governance cannot and will not be representative of the economic, financial, social, cultural and political interests of all constituents. It is narrowly, ideologically and ethnically based rather than societal-based. It cannot be democratic and equitable. The concept is exclusionary and founded on the premise of irreconcilability. Revolutionary Democracy (RD) is both class and ethnicity-based. Those who find some merit in this arrangement miss the bigger picture, namely, the meaning of shared power and equitable access to economic and social opportunities that lead to shared resources and shared prosperity long-term. Anything less understates the hopes and aspirations of Ethiopians as people regardless of ethnic, religious and demographic affiliation.

Commentary eight will examine how the TPLF Inc. formula undermines public trust and disempowers the vast majority of Ethiopians.
2/17/2012

UDJ Party official Andualem Aragie has been beaten up in jail and his captors refused him medical tratement, according to Dr Negasso Giddada. The following is a letter that is sent out today by Dr Negasso:

Yesterday, around noon time, I received information that Andualem was beaten up by an {www:inmate} in his prison cell by an inmate day before yesterday and that someone should come to the prison and see him. I phoned his brother and his lawyers to ask them if they could
visit him in the afternoon. They could not go to the prison in the afternoon because the visit hours were only in the mornings.

They could see him today and came to UDJ office to report what they found out. First of all about Andualem’s condition. Andualem, who is usually emotionally and spiritually strong, was down. He was depressed and was weeping when he met his brother and his lawyers. He complained of headache. A small bruise can be seen on his face on the right side below his eye. He expressed that he has fear that “they” want to kill him. No medical care has been given to Andualem so far.

Background: Andulem is in a prison cell for 14 people in the so called maximum security zone (Zone 3) with people such as Ato Bekele Gerba of OFDM and Olbana Lelisa of OPC and Dr. Tilahun Fantahun. The cell does not have windows.

About a month ago a prisoner named Ibas Asfaw was added to Andualem’s cell. Ibas has been in prison for 16 years and was once sentenced to death because of murder. His sentence was latter changed to life imprisonment. It is said that he has transmittable illness. Ibas is
{www:provocative}, insulting and {www:quarrelsome}. He takes away food from his cell inmates by force and gives it away to others. He is frequent visitor to the office of prison administration and is said that he is in friendly relations with the authorities there.

Ibas started insulting Andualem since the 13th of February. He took away papers Andualem was using to writ his defense case for the court in two weeks. No one knows where he took the papers. On the 14th, Ibas comes to the cell at around 13 hours with another prisoner
from outside the cell and closes the door and asks Bekele and Dr. Tilahun, who were resting, telling them to get out of the room because they have something secret to talk with Andualem. The two refused to get out. Ibas then went directly to Andualem and kicked him on the left side of his head. Andualem fall down. Ibas boxed Andualem three times while he lay unconscious on the cement floor. Bekele was trying to push away Ibas while Dr. Tilahun called the guards. The guards took Ibas away.

It is rumored that he was taken to the prison administration office and received more than Bir 2,300 and taken to another cell in zone 1. It is said that he receives money since 2005 because he was injured during the shooting in prison when many prisoners are said to have
been killed.

To the questions of the lawyers the prison authorities said that they can allocate prisoners in any cell they want, that this is administrative matter, they will deal with Ibas administratively, they can get Andualem’s papers from Ibas and Andualem can forward appeal and accusation to the prison administration if he wants to. The prison administration did not take the matter seriously.

Conclusion: We suspect that the placing of Ibas in Andualem’s cell is deliberate and that it was an indirect way of torturing Andualem, humiliate him and have him morally, psychologically and physically broken down, as has been done to Burtukan Mideksa.

The Executive Committee of UDJ will discuss on the matter tomorrow and will decide what action it would take. In the mean time I appeal to all friends to forward this information to all defenders of the Human Rights to condemn what happened to Andualem and demand that he gets medical attention as soon as possible.

Dr. Negaso Gidada, Chairman of Unity for Democracy and Justice Party

By Geletaw Zeleke

In Ethiopia, in order to build trust between government and the people two kinds of trust must be supported for building a successful reliable system, namely, conscious and systemic trust. The confidence flowing between the people and the government moves through the following channels to build a successful and reliable system: The following points are very important.

Building Accountability

In all institutions of the government should be structured by and around a system of accountability. For example, in a given sector when officials provide a service to people there should be an organizational body that is responsible for holding that official accountable for his conduct and service, among other things.

Accountability can be seen from two perspectives one is accountability for upholding rules and regulations and the other is accountability of conscience. People trust and rely on the system and the fair judgments of civil sector officials and employees. There are a multitude of day to day judgments and practices that are not written into the management of offices and official duties. It is the responsibility of the civil servant to protect the interests of the people.

Transparency

The system itself has to be clear for people and available for them to know, use, understand and rely on.

The smooth flow of operations as well has to be clear for people. It should be timely and reliable so that people can depend on getting tasks accomplished efficiently and effectively.

Vision

A clear vision has to be presented and known through out sectors. Those leaders who do not have a clear vision are blind leaders who people can not trust in. Sectors lacking vision lose the power to make change. Those leaders who lost vision are victims of emergencies.

Participation

The government sector has to allow the populace access to administrative positions and the power to influence and evaluate government performance. Plans and programs of sectors must serve the community base. Just as corruption will destroy confidence and trust in government serving the populace will build confidence and trust in local government.

Competence

Another critical element to build confidence and trust in government is competent leadership and civil servants including level of skill, knowledge and attitude.

Building Independent Institutions

The civil service sector has to be free from the direct or indirect interference of political parties. Especially the court and media must be free from any political interference. The Ethiopian Constitution of course declares that these sectors are free and independent from the influence of politics, but in reality they are highly dependent on government interference. The problem is that the constitution does not have the power to influence public sectors instead the power is transferred to officialized and highly centralized government representatives.

Leader personality

The personal character and personality of high ranking government officials can impact the fate of our nation either positively or negatively. People who are affected by corrupted personalities or those who have psychological problems can spoil the system as a whole. Look at the differences brought about by Adolf Hitler, Muammar Gaddafi, Mohamed Suharto, Ferdinand Marcos, Mobutu Sese Seko, Sane Abacha and Idi Amin,

On the other hand look at the differences brought about by Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln.

When parties recruit or select representatives they should be very careful to judge their physical and psychological health and character as it can have such a beneficial or detrimental affect.

Top-down trust

When we talk about vertical trust we are talking about the flow of trust from government to people and from people to government as we have said. The government needs to trust its own people by the following areas.

Working habits

The government in order to implement its own development plan it needs a good working habit.

Capacity building

The people capacity to accept innovative ideas and to implement its programs

Perception and attitude of the people

Horizontal Trust and Across the groups

Mostly horizontal trust is the reflection of vertical trust. If the vertical trust, which means the trust between the political representatives and the government and the people in good conditions then the reflection of this can be seen in the people’s day to day life.

Ethnic groups naturally do not fight by their external differences I have never heard that a group who fought my food is delicious your is not good my clothes are beautiful your clothes are ugly My wedding ceremony is meaningful yours is meaningless, my holidays are important yours are not or my dance is beautiful yours is talent less my language is expressive yours is simplistic or we are beautiful but you are not Etc.

Instead groups are interested in seeing new culture excited by usually, Groups fight whenever their differences are politicized. And because of this when they lack justice and democracy they develop politicize their identity and they become greedy about their immediate geography and natural resources. After this they become los to trust amongst the groups.

To build horizontal trust the play of politics has to be far away from religion and ethnicity. In Ethiopia the groups’ difference can be seen under culture and language we can not put the Ethiopian ethnic groups’ difference on the level of race since all Ethiopians are Black under the major race categories.

The government and the people have to work hard on the horizontal cultural unity that can be an anchor for the unity of the people and it is important to stable peace and development.

Development needs peace it is impossible to make a positive change if there is a conflict and fractured social structure.

Germany Radio (Deutsche Welle) Amharic Service reports that 35 Ethiopians continue to languish in Saudi Arabia jail for no reason other than praying in their homes. Listen below:

Listen Part 1

Listen part 2