EPPF’s 10th Anniversary Conference Report and more News. Watch below:

ይድረስ ካንባቢዎቼ [pdf]
እኔ ደህና ነኝ!
እናንተስ እንዴት ሰነበታችሁ?

“የጋዜጠኛው ማስታወሻ” የመጀመሪያው እትም ተሸጦ አልቆአል። መፅሃፉን ለገዛችሁ ሁሉ ምስጋናዬ ይድረሳችሁ። ሁለተኛው እትምም ታትሞ ለስርጭት ዝግጁ ሆኖአል። ከመጪው ህዳር ወር ማብቂያ ጀምሮም በሁሉም ክፍለአለማትና ከተሞች ይሰራጫል። “የጋዜጠኛው ማስታወሻ” ሁለተኛ እትም የጀርባ ሽፋን ላይ የፕሮፌሰር ጌታቸው ሃይሌ፤ የተክለሚካኤል አበበ እና የነአምን ዘለቀ ቅንጫቢ አስተያየቶች ታትመውበታል። መፅሃፉን ለማከፋፈል የምትሹ ወደ [email protected] ደብዳቤ በመፃፍ ፍላጎታችሁን መግለፅ ትችላላችሁ።

“የደራሲው ማስታወሻ”ን ቃል በገባሁት መሰረት ፅፌ ጨርሻለሁ። 21 ምእራፋትና 406 ገፆች ላይ ተጠናቆአል። ይህ አዲሱ መፅሃፍ፤ “ቀዳሚው ውሃ ነበር!” የሚለውን ብሂል ያስታውሳል። ጥቂት የማረም ስራ እና ቀሪ ቴክኒካዊ ተግባራት ብቻ ነው የቀሩኝ። በመጪው የፈረንጆች አዲስ አመት ማግስት ለስርጭት ይበቃል ብዬ ተስፋ አድርጌያለሁ።

በመጨረሻ፤ ኢሜይል ለላካችሁልኝ ሁሉ ከልብ አመሰግናለሁ። ምላሽ ላልላኩላችሁ በጊዜ እጥረት ነውና ከይቅርታ ጋር የክብር ምስጋና ተቀበሉኝ። አብዛኞቻችሁ እንደተመኛችሁልኝ እንደ ከዋክብት ባልራቀ ጊዜ ውስጥ ተያይዘን ወደ ቢሾፍቱ እንገማሸራለን። የወንዛችንን ዘፈን እየዘፈንን ወደ ጣና፤ ወደ አባይ፤ ወደ አዳባይ፤ ወደ ጨንቻ፤ ወደ አኝዋክ፤ ወደ ሌቃ ዱለቻ፤ ወደ አይሳኢታ፤ ባገራችን ዋሽንት ታጅበን እንዋባለን። ይህ ህልምም ቅዠትም አይደለም። የአገዛዝ ስርአቱ የቆመበት መሰረት ውስጡ የተበላ ነው። ምሰሶው ቀፎውን ቀርቶአል። ጠጋ ብለው የልብ ትርታውን ሲያዳምጡት የጭንቀት ኡኡታው ጆሮ ይበጠርቃል። ዝርዝሩን “የደራሲው ማስታወሻ” ያወጋችሁዋል። በሰላም ያገናኘን።

ተስፋዬ ገብረአብ
[email protected]

ASMARA — Marking its 10th anniversary, the Ethiopian People’s Patriotic Front (EPPF) held a special conference from October 17 – 18, 2009. The event was attended by executive and central committee members of EPPF and chapter representatives from the United States and Europe. High-level officials of the Eritrean government were invited as guests of honor.

The 2-day conference passed several resolutions after lively discussions in preparation for EPPF’s general assembly that will be held shortly. (click here to read).

The special conference was held at a secret location in Eritrea.

Ethiopian Review publisher, who had attended the conference, will present a series of reports and analysis on the activities of EPPF, as well as general observations, in the coming weeks.

By Sophia Tesfamariam

On my flight back from London, UK, I decided to catch up on my reading and began by going through some articles that were compiled for me by a friend. It was amongst the pile that I found the piece on Somalia by J. Peter Pham; it turned out to be yet another lazy analysis… I say lazy because his entire piece was a patching together of “cut and paste” paragraphs collected from various dubious self-serving sources. Pham´s incoherent piece was an elaborate apologia for Meles Zenawi, the only terrorist lurking in the Horn of Africa, who bears full responsibility for the carnage in Somalia. Pham has become one of the most vocal apologists for the minority regime in Ethiopia and his latest “cut and paste” piece is a regurgitation of the regime´s often heard narration (tantrums), as it scrambles to get itself out of yet another self-created quagmire.

Those of us who have been observing development in the Horn region know Meles Zenawi´s modus operandi. This latest piece by Pham is a desperate and transparent attempt to divert attention away from the ill-advised, illegal and immoral US-backed Ethiopian invasion and 2-year occupation of Somalia, and international crimes committed by Meles Zenawi´s regime in Somalia. Sanctioning Eritrea (for not toeing Washington´s line on Somalia) is supposed to give Meles Zenawi a respite from his self created quagmire. For Pham and his cohorts, blaming Eritrea is somehow supposed to absolve Meles and those responsible for the crimes committed in Somalia. It may take time, but sooner or later, Meles Zenawi and his handlers will pay for the destruction of Somalia and the deaths of thousands of innocent Somalis. It is Meles Zenawi´s hands that are drenched with the blood of Somalis, not Eritrea´s. Pham is barking up the wrong tree.

My first instinct was to ignore the dishonest individual and his “cut and paste” propaganda piece, which he attempts to pass of for an intellectual analysis on Somalia. But since there may be some lawmakers who might take his statements for fact and believe his misinformation, once in a while, as we have done in the past, it’s important that Eritreans, Ethiopians and Somalis, as citizens of the Horn, call him out and expose his hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty. This ordained Catholic priest (a credential rarely mentioned in his articles) has traded his priestly collar for a “falfalina” (bow tie), and replaced the morals and teachings of the Catholic Church, with lies and deceptions in his new found (much more lucrative) vocation as a hired gun (or is it hired pen). This embedded priest exposes the ugly side of academia and how much US Foreign Policy is damaged by self serving, morally bankrupt operatives such as Pham who have no qualms about deceiving the US public and lawmakers in order to advance their own illicit (often illegal) agendas.

Horn residents are not surprised by J. Peter Pham’s latest piece in defense of Meles Zenawi and the minority regime in Ethiopia. One of the “intellectuals for hire” that has provided the minority regime political shield in Washington with “testimonies in Congress”, Pham has deliberately lied to, and misled, lawmakers and the American public with is faulty analysis on Somalia, Somaliland, the UIC and more. Pham´s thinking is not just beyond the pale, it´s willfully dangerous and evil. This self appointed “expert” on Africa believes his brief stint as a “Vatican envoy to East Africa” gives him the credentials to write at will, without providing a single shred of evidence to support his far fetched assertions. “Cut and paste” paragraphs fit together to fit Meles Zenawi´s narratives will not cut it. Distorting the facts, omitting the truth and fabricating lies is not a Christian thing to do…as a former priest, he ought to know better.

It is no secret that Pham is closely associated with the conservative neocolonialist cartel; a dubious alliance of fundamentally different and even ideologically opposed religious and political factions such as the coalition of evangelical Christians (also known as the New Christian Right) and the aggressive political ideologues commonly known as the Neoconservatives who have launched an unprecedented evil campaign against Eritrea for the last 10 years in order to advance their hegemonic agendas in the region. Pham is also closely associated with Joseph Greibosky, the author of several erroneous reports on Eritrea and Iran and whose organization, the Institute for Religion and Public Policy, enjoyed a lucrative arrangement-to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars –with the Bush Administration´s State Department.

As a consultant for U.S. intelligence agencies who has helped place former students in intelligence positions, Pham knows a thing or two about that industry and its connections in Somalia. Pham, more than anybody else, knows that Eritrea has no interest in destabilizing Somalia. Despite what Jendayi E. Frazer and her cohorts purport, neither she, nor her hired guns have been able to provide any evidence to back up their evil allegations against Eritrea. It has been almost three years since Frazer and her accomplices fabricated the outlandish UN reports on Somalia, and to this day, neither Frazer nor her accomplices(Ethiopia, Kenya and the illegitimate TNGs), or any other independent party has been able to substantiate its contents-none. Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN Envoy for Somalia for Somalia, has admitted as much.

Pham, who in a recent Washington Post article had the audacity to preach to President Barack Obama about the law, continues to justify Meles Zenawi’s lawlessness and belligerence in Somalia and numerous violations of international law and over two dozen UN Security Council resolutions. Exposing his bias and pro-Ethiopia stance, distorting the facts and deliberately omitting from his latest piece, the Final and Binding decision of the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) which was delivered on 13 April 2002, which unequivocally awarded Badme, the casus belli for the 1998-2000 border conflict to Eritrea, Pham attempts to divert the issue by mentioning the Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission (EECC), a body that chose to address an issue in 2005 that was outside of its Algiers Agreement mandate.

Had Pham done his homework, instead of parroting Meles Zenawi’s tantrums, he would have known that the Algiers Agreement, in addition to the EEBC and EECC, also called for the establishment of a Commission by the African Union and the Secretary General of the United Nations, whose mandate was to investigate the origins of the conflict. The African Union, now an appendage of Menelik Palace has yet to fulfill its obligations under the Algiers Agreements-ditto for the UN. Ethiopia continues to occupy sovereign Eritrean territories, including Badme, in violation of international law.

Eritrea´s principled position on Somalia has been consistent from day one. As far back as 1993, Eritrea has been consistently calling for non-interference in the internal affairs of Somalia and has repeatedly called on the international community to respect Somalia´s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Eritrea does not recognize the Transitional National Government of Somalia, not because of the individuals involved, but because it is an illegitimate regime that has been imposed on the Somali people against their wishes. The previous externally imposed TNGs that have been “propped up” in Mogadishu have been repeatedly rejected by the Somali people, who want to choose their own leaders. Eritrea’s non-recognition of the externally established TNG is not what is destabilizing Somalia; rather it is the Ethiopian invasion and occupation of Somalia and the installing of illegitimate TNGs in Somalia that will be amenable to the West and its allies that has threatened the peace, security and stability in the region.

Like Meles Zenawi, Pham is a flip flopping street smart “intellectual for hire” and knows how to sell his services. The man has no principles. He says one thing today and something different tomorrow, as long as it suits his handlers. There was a time when Pham opposed externally imposed TNGs in Somalia. Here is an excerpt from a piece he wrote before his conversion. On 25 May 2007, in a piece he wrote for the National Review, he said:

“…If anything, the very existence of the TFG – or any central government which in the Somali context is always viewed as an imposition from the outside – is a provocation that invites resistance and gives destabilizing forces an easy entry…”

In another article (“Do Not Resuscitate,” The National Interest Mar.-Apr. 2008) Pham went further to explain why an externally imposed TNG in Somalia would not work. He wrote:

“…It should be clear that the way forward in imported states is not to mindlessly repeat mantras about dialogue aimed at shoring up “transitional governments” that are congenitally incapable of governing. Rather, what is needed is the clarity of vision and the political courage to squarely face the facts on the ground. The interests of the international community, as well as those of great powers (like the United States) most likely to become involved in the conflicted regions like the Horn of Africa, require security and stability. That will not be achieved by propping up inherently illegitimate and destabilizing regimes constructed at some international conference center…”

In a June 2009 article he mocked the TNG led by Sheikh Sharif Ahmed:

“…Even as it was struggling to maintain control of what little bits of its capital it still holds, the TFG continues the charade of being a sovereign government…”

This embedded priest ought to know about charades.

On 02 Jul 09 Pham wrote the following in World Defense Review:

“…What this approach ignores, however, is that if the failure so far of no fewer than fourteen internationally-sponsored attempts at establishing a national government indicates anything, it is the futility—indeed, hubris—of the notion that outsiders can impose a regime on Somalia, even if it is staffed with presumably moderate Somalis duly vetted and anointed by the international community. Instead, in the context of the decentralized reality among the Somali, the concerned international community in general and the United States in particular need to invest the time and resources to seek out local partners who are actually capable of partnering to create a modicum of stability—societal, economic, and, ultimately, governmental—rather than throwing money and arms at a “Transitional Federal Government” which, as a former U.S. ambassador who dealt with Somali issues told me last week, “is neither transitional, nor federal, nor a government.”…”

Is Pham going to accuse this anonymous “former US ambassador”, as he did Eritrea, of being a spoiler, of destabilizing the Horn region? I doubt that.

Pham’s latest hypocritical piece is a perfect example of the dangers inherent in using “intellectuals for hire”. In pursuit of myopic political agendas such greedy, fame seeking individuals like Pham who have no qualms manipulating and distorting the fact lack scholarly integrity and credibility. Seldom held to account for the ramifications of their writings which are always shaped to advance a particular agenda-in this case, absolution of Meles Zenawi’s regime for its numerous international crimes, these “intellectuals for hire” have damaged US credibility and integrity in the world. US Policy for Africa is incoherent and racist because of self serving “advisors” and “analysts” like Pham.

This Islam phobic, incoherent US policy for Somalia is precisely what is threatening to destabilize the entire region. Pham and the other “intellectuals for hire” should be held accountable for the fire they helped fuel in Somalia with their faulty “analysis” and incessant lobbying on behalf of the regime in Ethiopia. With Meles Zenawi, Jendayi E. Frazer instigated and planned the invasion and occupation of Somalia. The pulverization of Somali villages and farms, the deaths of over 12000 innocent civilians, the displacement of over 2 million Somalis, the extra judicial massacres of individuals labeled by Pham and others as being “fundamentalists” and “extremists”, the indiscriminate bombings of Somali markets etc. etc. that followed is the cause behind the greatest humanitarian disaster in the history of Somalia.

The Obama Administration can do itself a favor by investigating Pham´s role in this sordid and destructive affair and ask him why he is hell bent on fueling the carnage in Somalia and campaigning for the dismemberment of Somalia. Whose interests/agenda is he promoting? Certainly, his agenda is not in the best interest of the United States or Somalia…

The rule of law must prevail over the law of the jungle.

By Messay Kebede

The problem with Jawar’s latest response, “Misunderstanding Nationalism: Rejoinder to Professor Messay Kebede’s Responses,” is that it moves further away from the main reason for our online debate, namely, the piece he wrote about the OLF in which he declares the organization “damaged beyond repair” and repeatedly speaks of its “demise.” His thesis is that inefficient leadership is responsible for this demise. My point was to ask him to look further or deeper, as ideological inappropriateness could also cause inefficiency. It is not clear to me why Jawar absolutely refuses to acknowledge that the ideology of an organization can impact on its efficiency.

My suspicious is that Jawar is now under enormous pressure from other Oromo nationalists. As a result, he effects a reversal: I become an enemy of the OLF while he himself rediscovers terms highly appreciative of the achievements of the organization. This does not come as a surprise since the absolute primacy of group solidarity characteristic of ethnic politics always ends up by silencing critical stands, even if they are legitimate.

That said, I agree with the last paragraph of Jawar’s reply in which he asks us to deal properly with Oromo identity and interest, provided that he tells us how the one-sided affirmation of a particular identity can agree with the need to promote pan-Ethiopian characteristics, without which there is no national unity. My quarrel is never against the affirmation of a particular identity; it is against those who at the same time do not see the need to develop pan-Ethiopian characteristics, not to mention those that are openly secessionists. I invite Jawar to read some of the many articles I wrote in which I promote the notion of a rainbow-nation, that is, a political and cultural solution crowing ethnic claims with a transcendent identity.

As to a detailed assessment of his reply, I make the following remarks:

I. Jawar writes: Messay “refuses to accept that organizational efficiency is primarily a result of strategy and committed leadership.” My reply: how is one to assess the efficiency, strategy, and the level of commitment of an organization without involving its ideology? No need here to come up with a sophisticated definition of ideology: one online dictionary defines ideology as “a set of aims and ideas that directs one’s goals, expectations, and actions.” Is it logical to argue that what defines goals, expectations, and actions has nothing to do with efficiency, all the more so as Jawar tells us that “an organization should be evaluated based on stated objectives?” Clearly, wrong objectives can make an organization inefficient.

2. Jawar complains about my “lack of objectivity”; that is why I (and people like me) “underestimate, misunderstand and mishandle nationalist movements.” This appeal to objectivity is baffling when we all know that politics is the clash of different interests. The ideal way of dealing with political conflicts is not by asking the one party to be objective. Not only does this approach forget that politics is the art of concession, but it also creates an imbalance. While the one opponent has the right to be subjective by speaking of the nation he wants to bring to existence, I am asked to silence my feelings about the nation that I want to defend. Rather than objectivity, the right attitude here is the effort to reach mutual accommodation.

3. According to Jawar, “had the OLF ideology failed, there would not exist a land known as Oromia in [the] country.” Maybe I am referring to an imaginary history, but recent events ascertain that Oromia was a gift of the TPLF, which represents another nation. Credit should be given where credit is due, even if it is for a sinister project. At any rate, Oromia was not established by indigenous victorious forces. And if Oromo are invited to be grateful to Tigrean conquerors for the creation of Oromia, I wonder why recognition is not extended to the primary benefactor, who is none other than Emperor Menilik. The latter should be praised for uniting the Oromo under the Ethiopian state, thereby saving them from utter dispersion under different colonial rulers, all the more so as this time Oromo were full participants in the conquest, as witnessed by Ras Gobena’s epic.

4. When Jawar accuses me of underestimating the force of Oromo nationalism, I respond that he has misread my previous article in which I state the following: “if the Oromo had really wanted to separate from the rest of the country, no force on earth could have stopped them.” Obviously, the problem is elsewhere. Jawar reminds me of the sacrifices that Oromo are paying for Oromia. He forgets one important thing, to wit, that more Oromo have died for the integrity of Ethiopia than for Oromia. A superficial look at the ethnic composition of the Derg’s army is enough to evince the enormity of Oromo sacrifices. Instead of one-sided affirmation, let us talk of dual commitment, that is, of ethnic self-assertion but also of common aspiration with other ethnic groups toward a nation based on citizenship or territory.

5. Speaking of Medrek, Jawar says: those who created the organization “have made a U-turn by embracing the reality as it is shown with their swift acceptance of Afaan Oromo as a national language.” Jawar fails to mention that this acceptance was made possible by the unconditional commitment to Ethiopia’s integrity, forcefully expressed through the rejection of secession. In my previous article, I have argued that the ground for mutual concessions is commitment to unity, which I portrayed as the building of a common house. What secessionists refuse to understand is that the so-called right to self-determination up to secession creates a dissimilarity that hinders democratic decisions, as it allows one group to practice political blackmail through the threat of secession unless it obtains all what it wants.

6. For Jawar, the nationalist awakening of the Oromo is a major transformational force, for “without the awakening of the giant, oppressed minorities of the South would still be called “bariya,” “Shanqilla,” “Walamo.” I do not deny that the pressure of Oromo identity constitutes a major force in the Ethiopian politics. However, I ask one more time that credit be given where credit is due. The terms “galla”, “wollamo,” etc., were banned, not by an ethnic political party, but by the Ethiopian student movement and the Derg, which both had multiethnic views. You do not have to be a member of an ethnic party to fight for the equal treatment of peoples’ culture and beliefs. There are no ethnic parties in the US, and yet people are protected in their diversity. As to the main inspiration behind ethnic politics, it is not justice and the equal treatment of peoples; rather, it is the control of state power by elites vying to monopolize scarce resources.

7. I agree with Jawar when he says that “Ethiopia is an unfinished project.” I will even go further by stating that it is a failed project. The reasons for the failure need not preoccupy us here. Even so, I find it hard to believe that ethnonationalist discourse of the kind I am hearing is liable to resume the project. When the whole issue is to marry a native attachment with a transcendent identity, the affirmation of an exclusive form of nationalism is not to finish the project; it is to sabotage it.

8. To underscore the force of nationalism, Jawar asks: “Why did “ethnic” movements outlive class struggle?” In other words, why in Ethiopia did the ethnic movements of the TPLF and EPLF defeat the defenders of socialist revolution? The notion that blood is thicker than interest is precisely the manipulative argumentation that elites use to mobilize the people. I say “manipulative” because it taps natural sentiments associated with relatedness but for the purpose of empowering elites. Both the failures of Leninist socialism and fascist regimes teach us that giving more power to states and elites, whatever their declared aims are—class interest or kinship––is not the road to liberation; the latter occurs through the containment of power. Political liberation is not a family affair. People become free when they limit and divide state power, not when they let it become boundless under the pretext of achieving a cherished goal. What is true of ethics is also true of politics: the end never justifies the means.

9. That is why we should establish political systems in which the primacy of individual and universal rights overtops the criteria of blood, class interest, religion, etc. Unlike the other criteria, individual and universal rights work toward the containment of state power by protecting the individual against unfriendly and seemingly friendly forces. Despite talks of liberation, neither the TPLF nor the EPLF has provided their respective ethnic groups with anything resembling democratic governance. Most disconcerting here is Jawar’s inconsistencies: he speaks of the TPLF and EPLF as models of liberation movements while perfectly knowing their failure, which has only exacerbated Oromo frustration. I conjure Jawar to read Dr. Negasso Gidada’s article portraying the functioning of a Stalinist political system in Wallaga. The spectacle of Oromo elites suppressing the Oromo people in the name of liberation forcefully shows the danger of ethnic politics and the need to place individual rights at the center of the struggle. What the people of Wallega needs is a federal protection of their individual rights. The height of the paradox is that, no less than the Oromo and other ethnic groups, the Tigrean people too need to be rescued by a trans-ethnic state. This is to say that Ethiopian nationalism is none other than the preeminence of individual rights over ethnic states effected through the erection of a trans-ethnic or national federal power.

10. To the question why ethnic movements outlived class struggle, the ultimate answer is that Ethiopian nationalism has been seriously undermined by the failures of socialist ideology. What explains the defeat is not the strength of the ethnic movements, but, as the great Ethiopian historian, Gebru Tareke, puts it in his recently published momentous book, “the revolutionary government ultimately lost because it failed to deliver on its big promises: freedom, equality, and prosperity” (The Ethiopian Revolution: War in the Horn of Africa, p. 2). Indeed the dictatorial method, the divisive goals, and the economic failures of the Derg combined to shatter the efficiency of the armed forces. Contrary to Jawar’s claims, here is a pertinent case of nationalist defeat that was caused by a dissolving ideology. Jawar should have seen the pertinence of the case since he maintains that the Eritrean issue could have been solved if the Derg had “negotiated for ‘Federation.’” Precisely, the inability to negotiate was how Ethiopian nationalism was made inefficient by a totalitarian ideology.

11. Jawar makes me say that “leftist ideology is responsible for growth of ‘ethnic’ nationalism, secessionist demand, and armed struggle” and then contests my alleged statement by citing liberation movements that are not leftist. Yet, my reference to leftist ideology was only echoing his own analysis of the legacy hampering the OLF. To quote him, “OLF is a foster child of the student movement that brought the revolution; as such it shares some common organizational behaviors and characteristics with all other organizations that came out that era, such as the EPRP, TPLF and EPLF”; “the political forces that emerged from the student movement were led by individuals who worshiped Mao Zedong and Stalin, so they embraced such undemocratic, rigid and control freak organizational model.” True, there are non-leftist nationalist movements, but in the particular case of Ethiopia, ethnonationalist movements have originated from a split of the student movement with which they share extremism and a vision of political struggle modeled on a zero-sum game. All the events and tragedies that occurred since 1974 are various manifestations of the rise of elites with ideologies advocating the exclusive control of state power as a means of appropriation of scarce resources. Secessionism or ethnonationalism is one of such manifestations, since it is how elites take up the cause of cultural particularism (language, religion, common descent, etc.) and argue for the natural correspondence between state and culture. In this way, they exclude their rivals as aliens and establish an exclusive entitlement to power.

(The writer can be reached at [email protected])