Ethiopians for Obama kicked-off a “Project Yechalal” Virginia voter registration drive at St. Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church. Volunteers were deployed at the church and registered voters on a non-partisan basis. The excitement from the Ethiopian-American congregation was overwhelming.
“I was excited to see Ethiopians registering other Ethiopians.” stated Nadew Hailu. “I was looking for a way to become involved and to register to vote. When I saw the registration drive, I instantly felt a part of the process”
Nadew’s efforts were amazing. He took on the responsibility of letting others in the church know about the registration drive and guided Ethiopians to the table in droves. His enthusiasm was contagious, his excitement was unbelievable.
The excitement did not end with Nadew. Ethiopian-Americans from Virginia, Maryland, and Washington DC were elated to have the opportunity to register. This is something new in the Ethiopian-American community; few have witnessed this level of effort to make sure that Ethiopian-Americans take part in the political process. This is truly the beginning of a new era, Ethiopian-Americans are motivated and excited to vote unlike any election in recent memory.
Alemseged Gelmariam is a registered voter; he took note of the Ethiopians for Obama volunteers and their dedication. Alemseged understands the value of voting, he said that most Ethiopians don’t think their vote makes a difference. However, he knows full well that Ethiopian-Americans have a responsibility—if not a duty—to vote.
“It does not matter who you support because voting is a responsibility that we should all take seriously”, stated Alemseged. “I was so encouraged by seeing Ethiopians take it upon themselves to organize and register other Ethiopians.”
There seems to be a hesitancy to be a register to vote amongst many in the Ethiopian-American community. Some explain this phenomenon as one borne out of fear—political involvement has not always been an encouraged activity amongst the Ethiopian community. In fact, out of the many people who stopped by to find out about the Ethiopians for Obama effort, over 70% were not registered.
Genene Tufer became a citizen only a few months ago. He understands fully the value of voting, he knows that there are millions who wait every year to become a citizen—voting is a right that should not be taken for granted. He always followed politics on CNN and C-SPAN and has a passionate belief in the electoral process. He is a big supporter of Senator Obama, he believes that Obama is the best person for the job in an critical time. Genene believes that Obama is the one person who can fix the mess that eight years of Bush has created.
“I can’t wait to vote this year, I waited for years to become a citizen,” said Genene. “I finally have a chance to vote and I get to vote for a man of honor and principle.”
Regardless of whom one supports, it is vital that Ethiopian-Americans register to vote. The policies that are enacted in the United States has impacts throughout the world. As citizens of the United States, Ethiopian-Americans cannot take for granted the precious right to vote that countless others do not enjoy elsewhere. It is easy to criticize or to complain from the sideline, but the vote is the one powerful tool that all citizens can exercise to deliver change. America is our country, as citizens, we have a duty to vote—our actions today will have an influence of the lives our children live tomorrow.
Source: Ethiopians for Obama
By H. Menelik
As one of the least developed countries, Ethiopia has many political, economic, social and cultural ills.The economy is stagnant. Population explosion is high, the endemic AIDS is still rampant, famine and starvation are real, tension in the hinterland, war with neighboring countries are both real and imminent. In this article I argue that if the country can adopt Liberal Democracy sooner than later, a radical shift can be made in the political system of the country that paves the way for rapid all-round development.
The Current Situation
There is confusion and inertia in Ethiopia’s political system. The confusion stems from the fact that the country is still under a revolution, ‘Revolutionary Democracy,’ a remnant of Maoism. After having undergone through a revolution, a Socialist system under the military dictatorship, the country should have made a smooth transition to Liberal Democracy, the logical subsequent political system, as has been done by the former East European Socialist countries.
Because of the confusion in the political system, 18 years have already elapsed and the leaders of the country still lack a political road map that can transform the country to Liberal Democracy, the best political system in the present day.
Stating the development of Liberal Democracy across the globe, after the Socialist system proved a failure in the Soviet Union, the rising star academician of our time, Professor Francis Fukuyama, in his famous book, The End of History and the Last Man, stressed the need to adopt this political system by all countries without exception. He even considered Liberal Democracy as the Last political system of human kind. That is why he termed the transformation as the end of history, but he later on corrected his hypothesis and concluded that the End of History will come about when the progress of science and technology make a halt. He loves the system that he propagates, underlining its inevitability once more in his latest book, ‘State-Building and Governance in the 21st Century’.
Indeed, Liberal Democracy, with all its deficiencies, is the best political system human kind has achieved so far. It affords mankind a unique opportunity by providing both individuals and groups freedom and democratic rights, unlike the Socialist System which deprives freedom and democratic rights. All of us Ethiopians know very well the effects of political and economic deprivations when we were under the yoke of the military regime which lasted 17 years. There was no freedom of conscience,freedom of religion,the right to assembly, peaceful demonstration etc.
Measured against this background, it is doubtless that now there is no a better political system than Liberal Democracy. That is why all the former Socialist countries including Russia, the champion of the old system are now buckling down to the task of rearranging the political system to suit to the parameters of Liberal Democracy. The former East European Socialist countries are also busy now clearing their houses and developing their all-round relations with the EU and NATO.
In a similar vein, China, since the time of the reformist Deng Xiaoping, is changing fast specially with regard to the the development of the economy. Unfortunately, China didn’t make a parallel change in its political system, its human rights record is one of the worst in the world. Suffice it to mention here the recent crackdown made by its authorities against Tibetans who are making a strenuous struggle to gain autonomy.
In Cuba, both the politics and the economy have stagnated. The average income in Cuba per month now is only 60 US dollars. It is funny also that Cubans were allowed to have mobile phones a few weeks ago. This simply shows the Socialist system for which Fidel Castro and his friends paid heavy sacrifice in the hay days of the student movement of the 1960s doesn’t work now. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the present Cuban leadership to make the necessary change at the right time.
The former Socialist countries in Africa, with the exception of Ethiopia, are streamlining both their political and economic systems. Why not Ethiopia, a country with three thousand years of history, a country which effectively resisted colonialism, a beacon of freedom and hope for the entire black race?
Ethiopia was a champion in the establishment of the Organization of African Unity which significantly contributed to the decolonization of Africa. South African’s first black president Nelson Madella took military training in Addis Ababa. The veteran African statesman in his autobiography paid tribute to the Ethiopian government for the training that he received. However, the veteran leader didn’t come to Ethiopia after he assumed political power. Can any one guess? My guess is that he was displeased by the current Ethiopian leadership in their role of dismembering the country which was a beacon of freedom.
Why the retrogression to tribal politics now? The reason is mainly lack of knowledge and experience. The present leaders of the country are all former leftist university students who have still the lingering effects of leftist political ideas of the Student Movement of the 1960s and 70s. All the leaders, specially Meles Zenawi, who claims to be the chief architect of the political system, most often, mentions the name of Wallelegn Mekonen, a revolutionary university student who advocated the equality of all nationalities in Ethiopia, as an acknowledged political scholar, his taught as a guide for present-day politics in Ethiopia. The problem, however, is that the world-wide student movement of 1968-1974 (in the case of Ethiopia) was a short lived one, the political experience of Wallelegn and Co was limited. Wallelegne and his friends who hijacked a passenger plane to Algiers had no exposure of Europe or North America where they could see what democracy is. Praising Cheguvera and Hochimin or Fidel Castro was the fad of the day. But no more after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
It is an indisputable fact that Wallelegn played a major role as a source of inspiration to the student movement but his ideas don’t serve for present-day Ethiopian politics. Now we are at globalization age, where the 192 member countries of the UN are busy connecting themselves to each other in trade, investment, economy, military alliances, cultural exchanges, scientific and technology cooperation — all of which demand dynamic leadership, not static political ideology that goes back to the student movement of the late 1960s.
What Professor Fukuyama stated in his latest book mentioned above, about sub-Saharan African countries holds also true to the current situation in Ethiopia. He characterized the present sub-Saharan African countries as “neopatrimonial” — that is, with political power used to service a cliantelistic network of supporters of the country’s leaders. Leaders who embezzle the finance of the country are described as having a predatory behavior, while the others who stand for the benefit of their ethnic groups, like Meles Zenawi, exercise rent-seeking –that is, use of the public sector to reallocate property rights to the benefit of a particular interest, that is directed to a single family, tribe, region or ethnic groups.
It would telling the obvious to try to retell the story of power abuse, nepotism, corruption, naked partiality to the region of Tigrai under the current government. Using the state power as an exclusive domain, the regime of Meles Zenawi, established an extensive economic empire, no less than 50 in number for Tigrai, not for the other regions of Ethiopia. The article which was posted in a web site by the officials of the region, specially Dr. Solomon Enquaoi, clearly demonstrates the extent of the uneven development made by the regime in favor of their region. Meles repeated what Mobutu did in his birth place. Mobutu, it was reported, made infrastructural development in his birth place depriving other regions same opportunity.
Meles gets mad when somebody tries to speak against such injustice, unfair economic development in Tigrai region. A former MP who denounced the unbalanced development in the same region at the rubber-stamp parliament some years ago, was severely rebuked by the brutal dictator, and fled the country after receiving a death threat by the security agents. Meles labeled the out-spoken MP as a deadly enemy of the people of Tigrai. Even now, if someone speaks any thing against Tigrai and Meles, he is liable to be categorized as genocidal, Interhamwee, and even risks his life.
Ethiopia has also become a country of nepotism par excellence. The so-called freedom fighters, who are mostly from the same region have virtually dominated the military and the public service. They call this an affirmative action, to give it a democratic color. However, it is an outrageous tribalism modeled after Ziad Barre’s Merihan-style of domination. It behooves, therefore, that Ethiopian politicians make a radical but peaceful change by transforming the country to Liberal Democracy to undo the imbalances and to open a level field for all citizens of the country.
The Prospect of Liberal Democracy In Ethiopia
Before coming to raise the possibilities of Liberal Democracy in Ethiopia, I would like to make a highlight on the development of democracy throughout the world in the past two decades. Studies made in this regard indicate that since 1974-1986 democracy has expanded throughout the world embracing Greece, Spain, in nine Latin American countries, Philippines, Korea, Taiwan. By 1987, the third wave of democratization had spread to the point where about two of every five states in the world were democracies: all of Western Europe, much of Asia, and most of Latin America. But that still left gap in Eastern Europe, Africa, the Middle East. Democracy was still a regional phenomenons situation has changed dramatically with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and then the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. By 1990,most of the states of Eastern Europe and even poor and isolated Mongolia held competitive elections and began to institutionalize democracy.
In February 1990 two seminal events launched a new wave of democratic transitions in Africa. In Benin, a coalition of forces in civil society, organized in a “sovereign national conference,” claimed governing authority and launched a transition to democracy. In South Africa, the apartheid regime released Nelson Mandela from prison and launched a process of political duologue and normalization that gave birth to democracy in 1994. When these two events occurred, there were only three democratic countries in Africa — the Gambia, Botswana, and Mauritius. But starting in 1990, Africa experienced a rolling tide of democratic change. Under heavy pressure from international donors as well as their own peoples, most African states by 1997 had at least legalized opposition parties, opened space in civil society, and held multi- party elections. Many of these openings were largely a facade, marred by continued repression and blatant rigging of the vote. But well over a dozen met the minimum conditions of democracy, and in several cases, long-ruling incumbent parties were defeated.
As democracy spread to Eastern Europe, a few states in the former Soviet Union, and a number in Africa, while extending deeper into Asia and Latin America, it came during the 1990s to be a global phenomenon, the predominant form of government, and the only broadly legitimate form of government in the world. Today, about three-fifths of all the world’s states (by the count of Freedom House, 121 of 193) are democracies. There are no global rivals to democracy as a broad model of government. Communism is dead. Military rule everywhere lacks appeal and normative justification. One-party states have largely disappeared, for what single party — in this day and age — can credibly claim the wisdom and moral righteousness to rule indefinitely and without criticism or challenge? Only the vague model of an Islamic state has any moral and ideological appeal as an alternative form of government.
If democracy can emerge and persist in an extremely poor, landlocked, overwhelmingly Muslim country like Mali — in which the majority of adults are illiterate and live in absolute poverty and the life expectancy is 44 years — then there is no reason in principle why democracy cannot develop in most other very poor countries. In fact, if we examine the 36 countries that the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) classifies as having “Low Human Development,” 11 are democracies today. If we widen our scope to look at the bottom third of states classified by the UNDP, the percentage of democracies rises from nearly a third to 41 percent. About a dozen of these have been democracies for a decade or longer. That there should be so many democracies among the world’s least developed countries is a phenomenon at least as noteworthy as the overall predominance of democracy in the world, and one profoundly in defiance of established social science theories.
Empirically, the implication that authoritarian and conflict-ridden states should emphasize the rule of law rather than democracy is viable only as a transitional strategy. In reality, democracy and freedom are closely related in the world. Even if we forget about the wealthy countries of the West — all liberal democracies — and examine only the developing and post -communist countries, we find that the countries where civil liberties and the rule of law are best respected are democracies, and the human rights (and humanitarian) emergencies are invariably to be found in non-democracies.
Each year Freedom House rates each country from 1 to 7 along two scales, political rights (basically to participate and compete democratically) and civil liberties, with 1 being most free and 7 most repressive. There are only two countries in the world that are not democracies and yet have a civil-liberties score below the midpoint on the seven-point scale: Tonga, and Antigua and Barbuda. One can hardly advance a general theory of political development based on these two micro states. To be sure, there are some pretty illiberal democracies in the world, with serious problems of human rights and the rule of law, but the only countries that give their citizens extensive civic freedom and a thorough rule of law are democracies.
In one respect, democracy is still not quite a global phenomenon. In every region of the world — except for one — at least a third of the states are democracies. Thirty of the 33 states in Latin America and the Caribbean are democracies, and about half of them are now fairly liberal in terms of their levels of freedom. Two-thirds of the former communist countries, half of the Asian states, and even about two-fifths of the African states are now democracies. Only in the Middle East is democracy virtually absent. In fact, among the 16 Arab countries, there is not a single democracy and, with the exception of Lebanon.
Most dictatorships in the world survive for a simple reason. Their leaders enjoy having unchallenged power as well as having the ability that power confers to accumulate great personal wealth. It is just not possible to look at the evidence from the ground (and from the public opinion surveys) in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East and argue that their peoples don’t mind living under dictatorship. Of course, no one could maintain that the majority of people in every country want a fully democratic system or that all peoples understand all the institutions of liberal democracy. But most people do want freedom. Given the choice, they would like to be able to constrain the arbitrary power of government, to replace bad and corrupt leaders, to have a predictable and secure life under some kind of just rule of law. When one assembles these basic political preferences, it begins to look an awful lot like democracy, even if the word may have different (or unsure) meanings in many places.
There is a lot of work to be done around the world to build the culture of democracy — the understanding of its rules, possibilities, obligations, and limits, the norms of tolerance, civility, participation, and mutual respect. Some of this cultural change happens with economic development, increasing education, and exposure to the global environment. Much of it can and should happen through deliberate programs of civic education and civil society construction. External democracy promotion programs and domestic civil society efforts have made some progress toward these goals. Much more remains to be done.
But the principal obstacle to the expansion of democracy in the world is not the people of the remaining authoritarian states. The problem is the ruling elites who have hijacked the structures of state power and barricaded themselves inside. As long as these rulers can corner a sufficient flow of resources to feed their apparatus of political predation and domination, they can survive.
That is where the international environment enters in. Predatory authoritarian regimes do not generate resources organically from within their own societies very well. Rather, they inhibit domestic investment, innovation, entrepreneurship, and hence economic growth by violating property rights and other individual freedoms. Such arbitrary rule also discourages foreign investment — except in the enclave economy of oil or other natural resource extraction.
This characterizes well the present situation in Ethiopia where a predatory authoritarian regime held in check the ownership of private properties, political freedoms of individuals. It has reversed the democratic aspirations of the 74 million people of Ethiopia. Though the scenario for the introduction of Liberal Democracy seems to be bleak, all Ethiopians living in the country or abroad have the duty to liberate themselves from the shackles of the tribal regime.
BEIRUT: Thousands of people ran through Beirut on Sunday morning as part of the HSBC Vivicitta Run for Peace, amid a positive atmosphere still clinging to the city after the presidential election and the Qatari-mediated end to the nation’s 18-month political crisis.
Smiling faces peppered a sea of white t-shirts and red baseball caps as the crowd waited to run for peace. Family members waved from behind a uniformed marching band as their children mingled among international athletes and enthusiastic volunteers. Clowns towered over the crowd on stilts, clapping along with the music that blared from loudspeakers. A small child waved a large Lebanese flag.
A line of athletes stood hand-in-hand at the front of the crowd, already sweating under the morning sun. At the sound of the horn they were off, with hundreds of children swarming behind them.
When they returned to the finish line, young women with colorful plastic pom-poms cheered as they passed. First came the athletes, shooting by as if in the Olympics, one of them jumping to touch the finish line banner. The rest of the crowd arrived a few minutes later, led by children who clearly hoped to one day wear the jerseys of the athletes they so closely followed. The spectators included a man with his daughter sitting on his shoulders and a smiling soldier leaning against the barricades.
Roughly 7,500 people took part in two events, a 5-kilometer run and a 21-kilometer race.
The winner of the 21-kilometer race, which involved an international selection of star athletes, was Ethiopian runner Alemayehu Shumye Tafere.
“We have here all religions and races,” said Jinan Mantash, an 18-year-old participant in the 5-kilometer race who won her age bracket. “Because children and youth are the new generations, now that they have united in this event they will learn when they grow up that a united Lebanon is a must. It feels great to work for Lebanon.”
“The students are from many schools in Lebanon. They are running from all Lebanon, and we can run hand in hand,” said volunteer Patrick Rizkallah, who helped coordinate schools and universities to participate in the event.
According to Rizkallah, about 7,000 students were recruited.
Edgar Abou Rizk from the Teachers’ Syndicate of Lebanon said he expected the event to reflect that stability had returned to Lebanon following recent events. “Outside Lebanon when they are going to see through the news that all the Lebanese are gathered together, this will bring peace and tourists again to the country and we hope that this race will be the pioneer program for this summer to bring a peaceful situation to our country,” he said.
For this year’s race the Beirut Marathon Association focused on bringing children from across the country to the event. Beirut Marathon Association director May al-Khalil said children participating were also asked to draw pictures and write about their visions of peace.
Khalil said that the Beirut Marathon Association (BMA) has signed an agreement with the Unione Italiana Sport Per tutti to continue doing the 21-kilometer as well as the 5-kilometer race. With this in mind, she said she hoped that the event would become more popular in the coming years.
“I believe this year was the first attempt for the Beirut Marathon Association and our partners to work together, but I have the feeling that next year the number you see today is going to be – if not twice – [then] triple next year,” she said.
“Everybody is supporting us – the government and the opposition,” said Ziad Shaaban, a volunteer at the event. Shaaban has volunteered for the BMA for five years, since the first race.
Shaaban said that this year’s run for peace event benefited from better organization than the year before.
“We learned from our mistakes,” he added. There were some “incidents” the previous year, when the location of key points in the run led to some confusion among those taking part.
Volunteer Tony Hajj said he joined the event to serve a good cause and gain organizational experience to add to his resume. He said the size of the run was smaller than the year before, in part due to the fact that income and tourism had suffered from the conflict earlier this month.
Howard Miller, a tourist from London, said he had decided to participate in the marathon after arriving in Beirut 10 days ago. Miller, who is traveling across the Middle East, learned of the event from posters in the city.
“I think it’s a fascinating time to be here,” he said. “It’s amazing to see people kind of relaxing, because I get the sense there was a lot of energy built up in two weeks when they just weren’t doing anything.”
“It’s a breath of fresh air,” said Amine Daouk, president of the humanitarian non-profit organization Makassed. “It’s what Lebanese, especially young people want: They want peace; they are all here as one.”
By Eugene Yukin and Jay Heisler, The Daily Star
Maureen Lynch and Katherine Southwick, Refugees International
Despite strong historic and ethnic ties, relations between Eritrea and Ethiopia have rarely been smooth. As a result, and particularly over the past decade, nationality rights of residents of both countries have been at risk.
After Eritrea’s 30-year struggle for independence, the country peacefully became a state in 1993 through a referendum in which Eritreans in Ethiopia also voted. Since the 1998-2000 border conflict during which both countries deported thousands of people – Ethiopians from Eritrea and Eritreans from Ethiopia – relations have remained bitter, with both sides stationing troops along the border. Weak enforcement of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s decision awarding Eritrea the disputed town of Badme has left the conflict unresolved. International reluctance to persuade Ethiopia to uphold the decision has also signaled that human rights abuses in that county will not face meaningful scrutiny. Political and religious persecution has compelled citizens of both countries to become refugees around the world. Ethiopia welcomes Eritrean refugees, but Eritreans living in Ethiopian society still face marginalization.
Challenges to Uphold Nationality Rights in Ethiopia Remain
During the 1998-2000 conflict, Ethiopia denationalized individuals of Eritrean origin, claiming that they were a security risk or that they had renounced their citizenship by voting in the 1993 referendum on Eritrean independence. An estimated 75,000 individuals were deported to Eritrea, ripping families apart and forcing those left behind to hide their identities. Without citizenship, Eritreans in Ethiopia faced restrictions on work, travel, education, and access to social services. Compensation has not been offered for confiscated property.
Sources suggest that many, perhaps most, Eritreans living in Ethiopia reacquired citizenship under a nationality proclamation enacted in 2003. But as one person related, “People are still afraid to talk though their position has improved.” Some interviewees reported problems obtaining national identification cards, including 3-year delays and interrogation by immigration officials. RI observed national IDs showing “previous nationality” as Eritrean. Eritreans with Ethiopian citizenship said they still feel compelled to conceal their background, even among close friends. They rarely congregate as a community, nor are they politically engaged. Some spoke of employment discrimination. An Ethiopian in a third country said, “They made us feel nothing for that country. My kids in Eritrea are not in a good life. Those in Ethiopia are treated as foreigners. They get work permits but must not bring attention to themselves.” A woman in Addis Ababa said she is afraid to open a bank account because her family lost a lot of property during the conflict.
Although the nationality proclamation states that “no Ethiopian may be deprived of his nationality” unless he renounces his citizenship or acquires another nationality, interviewees were uncertain about their status in the event of renewed conflict. Similar ambiguity appears in the Directive to Determine the Residence Status of Eritrean Nationals Residing in Ethiopia, which states that a residence permit may be canceled “where the bearer . . . is found to be an undesirable foreigner.” In the event of renewed conflict, individuals of Eritrean origin are unsure of their fate. As one man from Asmara observed, “the gap between law and implementation is like the space between the sun and the moon, and no one knows how to close it.”
Family Separation Continues
Nearly everyone RI interviewed told a story of ongoing separation from loved ones, exacting a considerable personal and psychological toll. Travel between Eritrea and Ethiopia is prohibited, there is no interstate phone system, and Ethiopians have reportedly been jailed for communicating with persons in Eritrea via the internet. “Family separation is the problem,” one man said. “I am a nation-less person. Eritrea does not consider me as Eritrean. Ethiopia does not consider me as Ethiopian. My brother tried to go to Sudan but was caught and jailed. My sister is in Kenya. I’ve had no news from her in 5 years.”
A woman in Addis Ababa met her father in a third country for the first time ten years after he had been deported to Eritrea. She said, “I was very close to my father, and every time I saw his name, I would cry.” An Eritrean in Kenya said, “My two brothers went to Eritrea with my mom. We’ve had no communication for 10 years. My father and sister are in the U.S.” An elderly widow lamented that at the time of her husband’s death last year they had been apart for nine years. She is unable to visit his grave in Asmara.
Current Conditions in Eritrea Force Exodus
Refugees International was unable to secure visas to enter Eritrea, but former residents who now reside in third countries explained that the government has become more repressive over the past decade. RI was told, “People leave by the hundreds to Sudan, South Africa, and Dubai. Everyone would like to come out if they could.” One person reported, “There is no economic growth. After 9/11 clergy were arrested and newspapers were closed down. People are traumatized, but they don’t know their rights or what to do. Some people gravitate to the churches, but Eritrea is facing a massive flight of people out of the country.” Young people also flee the country to avoid hard labor in military service, risking death and knowing their families will face a 50,000 Nakfa (US $3,330) fine.
Seeking Refuge in Ethiopia and Beyond
Some observers used the expression “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” to rationalize Ethiopia’s motivation to host Eritrean refugees. Whether hosting refugees for political or humanitarian reasons, Shimelba Camp, close to the Eritrean border, has nearly reached its 18,000 person capacity, and another camp is being developed to house the new arrivals numbering up to 600 a month. “Camp is not a solution to have a normal life,” one refugee stated. “Residents are not able to work and support themselves.” The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its implementing partner, the Ethiopian Administration for Refugee/Returnee Affairs (ARRA), grapple with issues residents face, such as insufficient food rations, restricted mobility, presence of Eritrean opposition groups, and limited access to education and mental health services.
About 75 percent of camp residents are young males, many university-educated, who fled conscription or political persecution, and sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) is a widespread problem. Often arriving without Eritrean identity documents, women and children may be even more vulnerable when seeking reunification with a husband or father, only to find that individual has moved on. Others expressed concern about the small size and gender composition of police patrols. Refugees with relatives or resources have recently been permitted to live outside the camp. Others find their way as self-supporting city dwellers. Some refugees attempt crossing to Sudan or Kenya. Eritreans who head to urban areas in Kenya, a country with a camp-only policy, are not recognized as refugees. Passage to Europe, depending on the route, costs $4,000-$5,000.
Resolving the costly stalemate between the governments of Eritrea and Ethiopia will be difficult. But doing so is critical to upholding human rights and to improving security throughout the Horn of Africa.
Policy Recommendations
* Ethiopia should promote full integration and equity in employment for persons of Eritrean origin and ensure effective access to documents supporting an individual’s chosen nationality.
* Ethiopia and Eritrea should reunite families by re-establishing interstate travel and communications.
* Consistent with the determinations of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, both countries should devise plans to compensate victims of the 1998-2000 conflict.
* Ethiopia, Sudan, and Kenya should retain open borders and take steps to increase protection as well as to ensure full freedom of movement and access to durable solutions for Eritrean refugees.
* Ethiopia and Eritrea should become party to UN Statelessness Conventions and work with UNHCR and the domestic legal community to monitor and remedy statelessness.
Senior Advocate for Stateless Initiatives Maureen Lynch and Bernstein Fellow Katherine Southwick assessed the situation of Eritreans in Ethiopia in April 2008, visiting Addis Ababa and the Tigray region in the north of the country.
Download a .pdf of this policy recommendation.
