Samuel Getachew, an Ethiopian-Canadian who is running for Toronto City Council seat, is proposing that Toronto’s Danforth neighborhood be named “Little Ethiopia” in the following article that was published on Toronto Sun today.
Does Little Ethiopia belong on Danforth?
By Samuel Getachew
I don’t usually like big mega cities, like New York. However Toronto is an exception.
Toronto, a city I admire, has always been full of characters, or much like the way former prime minister Joe Clark envisioned Canada in his successful 1979 election — a community of communities.
The Greektown on Danforth, Chinatown around Dundas West and Spadina Avenue, Korea town on Bloor in the Annex are some of the areas that attract thousands of tourists on a yearly basis.
On top of all of these, festivals such as Caribana, Taste of the Danforth, the Toronto Film Festival and Luminato helps us attract lots of people and resources to the city. Greektown alone claims to have more than 1 million visitors yearly.
These areas help us showcase the rich diversity of our city, not just in words but in deeds.
That is why a few friends and myself are asking the City of Toronto to name a section of Danforth Ave. around Greenwood Ave. as Little Ethiopia.
The history of Ethiopian Canadians, especially in the Toronto Danforth area, is new.
Ethiopians are one of the many groups of new immigrants to have fled successive broken governments and settled in Toronto. But what makes Canada different than most countries is we can be passionate citizens without losing sight of our heritage.
Earlier this year, a few of us met with the Toronto Danforth Mosaic BIA for about 30 minutes about our idea for Little Ethiopia. We spoke about our hope and dream for our city. They spoke of a multicultural mosaic they wanted to create in the area, one that is not a ghettoized neighbourhood, and rejected the idea.
Along the Danforth from around Greenwood to Monarch Park, there are about 16 Ethiopian Canadian businesses and their contribution is very visible. We are owners and tenants of the many buildings found in the area.
However, we lack visibility in our area BIAs, activities and at City Hall.
Governments can do much to help connect us to the area and have us take ownership of the areas we frequent. To clean it more, make it lovely like Greektown, and above all take ownership of it.
To have us believe in our BIA’s enough for us to join its boards and volunteer at the different activities in the community. The idea of Little Ethiopia is of celebration and not of ghettoization.
Greektown, Chinatown and the many areas named after a certain country or countries are not ghettos but a celebration of global citizenship.
As a Torontonian and as a black person, I get my hair cut in the heart of Greektown, buy the best and the cheapest Italian beef in Chinatown and go for the best coffee in Little Italy at College and Clinton.
Almost always the people I see are diverse in their representation from every country on the planet.
That is the wish for our aspiring Little Ethiopia on Danforth project — that of many cultures and a recognition of the Ethiopian Canadian experience.
We are not tourists to Canada but citizens of an awesome country.
I believe Little Ethiopia can be a start.
We are a very small group pushing forward this idea with the hope of thousands.
Our effort is no longer an Ethiopian story but that of a Canadian: Passion, youthful vigour and hard work — the hallmark of what makes me a proud Canadian.
(Samuel Getachew is a member of the Ethiopian community in Toronto and is running for council in Scarborough)
The world’s earliest illustrated Christian book has been saved by a British charity which located it at a remote Ethiopian monastery.
The incredible Garima Gospels are named after a monk who arrived in the African country in the fifth century and is said to have copied them out in just one day.
Beautifully illustrated, the colours are still vivid and thanks to the Ethiopian Heritage Fund have been conserved.
Abba Garima arrived from Constantinople in 494 AD and legend has it that he was able to copy the gospels in a day because God delayed the sun from setting.
[A page from the Garima Gospels – the world’s oldest Christian book found in a remote monastery in Ethiopia]
The incredible relic has been kept ever since in the Garima Monastery near Adwa in the north of the country, which is in the Tigray region at 7,000 feet.
Experts believe it is also the earliest example of book binding still attached to the original pages.
The survival of the Gospels is incredible considering the country has been under Muslim invasion, Italian invasion and a fire in the 1930s destroyed the monastery’s church.
They were written on goat skin in the early Ethiopian language of Ge’ez.
There are two volumes which date from the same time, but the second is written in a different hand from the first. Both contain illustrations and the four Gospels.
Though the texts had been mentioned by the occasional traveller since the 1950s, it had been thought they dated from the 11th century at the earliest.
Carbon dating, however, gives a date between 330 and 650 – which tantalisingly overlaps the date Abba Garima arrived in the country.
So the first volume could be in his hand – even if he didn’t complete the task in a day as the oral tradition states.
The charity Ethiopian Heritage Fund that was set up to help preserve the treasures in the country has made the stunning discovery.
It was also allowed incredibly rare access to the texts so experts could conserve them on site.
[The incredible relic has been kept ever since in the Garima Monastery near Adwa in the north of Ethiopia]
It is now hoped the Gospels will be put in a museum at the monastery where visitors will be able to view them.
Blair Priday from the Ethiopian Heritage Fund said: ‘Ethiopia has been overlooked as a source of these fantastic things.
‘Many of these old Christian relics can only be reached by hiking and climbing to remote monasteries as roads are limited in these mountainous regions.
‘All the work on the texts was done in situ and everything is reversible, so if in future they can be taken away for further conservation we won’t have hindered that.
‘The pages had been crudely stitched together in a restoration in the 1960s and some of the pages wouldn’t even turn. And they were falling to pieces.
‘The Garima Gospels have been kept high and dry which has helped preserve them all these years and they are kept in the dark so the colours look fresh.
‘This was the most astounding of all our projects and the Patriarch, the head of the Ethiopian Church, had to give his permission.
‘Most of the experts did the work for nothing.
‘We are currently undertaking other restoration programmes on wall paintings and religious texts.
‘We believe that preserving Ethiopia’s cultural heritage will help to increase visitor revenue and understanding of the extraordinary history of this country
Note: This is my fifth commentary on the theme “Where do we go from here?” following the rigged May 2010 elections in Ethiopia in which the ruling dictatorship won by 99.6 percent [1]. In this piece, I express deep regrets over the never-ending subjugation of women in Ethiopian society and call for a movement for the advancement of Ethiopian women’s human rights. I urge Ethiopian women to join hands in building the “future country of Ethiopia” that Birtukan Midekssa, Ethiopia’s foremost political prisoner and first woman political party leader in Ethiopian history, dreamed about.
Women in the “Present Country of Ethiopia”
Birtukan Midekssa, Ethiopia’s foremost political prisoner and first woman political party leader in Ethiopian history enjoyed talking about an allegorical “future country of Ethiopia” that would become an African oasis of democracy and a bastion of human rights and the rule of law in the continent. In Birtukan’s “future Ethiopia” women and men would live not only as equals under the law, but also work together to create a progressive and compassionate society in which women are free from domestic violence and sexual exploitation, have access to adequate health and maternal care, and are provided education to free them from culturally-enforced ignorance, submissiveness and subjugation. But if the situation of women in the “present country of Ethiopia” is any indication, Birtukan’s “future country” is in deep, deep trouble.
Article 35 of the Ethiopian Constitution (1995) guarantees women not only full equality but also preferential treatment “in the political, economic and social fields both within public and private organizations.” Women are provided sweeping constitutional protections from “all laws, stereotyped ideas and customs which oppress women or otherwise adversely affect their physical and mental well-being.” They have guaranteed property rights and “the right of access to education and information on family planning” to “prevent health hazards resulting from child birth.” Article 34 secures matrimonial contractual rights for “women attaining the legal age of marriage.” It mandates that “Marriage shall be based on the free and full consent of the intending spouses.” Even before the rights of women were “constitutionalized” in 1995, the ruling dictatorship of Meles Zenawi took the lead by issuing a National Policy on Women in 1993 with the aim “to institutionalize the political, economical, and social rights of women by creating an appropriate structure in government offices and institutions so that the public policies and interventions are gender-sensitive and can ensure equitable development for all Ethiopian men and women.” After a lapse of seventeen years, the evidence on the status of women in Ethiopia society is horrifying and shocking to the conscience.
The 2000 U.S. State Department Human Rights Country Report on Ethiopia[2] described the status of women in appallingly disheartening terms:
The Constitution provides for the equality of women; however, these provisions often are not applied in practice. Furthermore, these provisions often are in conflict with the 1960 Civil Code and the 1957 Penal Code, both of which still are in force. The 1960 Civil Code is based on a monarchical constitution that treated women as if they were children or disabled. Discriminatory regulations in the civil code include recognizing the husband as the legal head of the family and designating him as the sole guardian of children over 5 years old. Domestic violence is not considered a serious justification under the law to obtain a divorce. Irrespective of the number of years the marriage has existed, the number of children raised and the joint property, the woman is entitled to only 3 months’ financial support should the relationship end. However, a husband has no obligation to provide financial assistance to his family and, as a result, women and children sometimes are abandoned when there is a problem in the marriage. All land belongs to the State; however, land reforms enacted in March 1997 stipulate that women may obtain government leases to land. Discrimination is most acute in rural areas, where 85 percent of the population lives. In urban areas, women have fewer employment opportunities than men do, and the jobs available do not provide equal pay for equal work. As a result of changes in the Labor Law in 1998, thousands of women traveled to the Middle East as industrial and domestic workers. There were credible reports that female workers were abused, and even killed, in these positions.
A decade later, the 2010 U.S. State Department Human Rights Country Report on Ethiopia[3] described the status of women in similar stark terms:
The constitution provides women the same rights and protections as men. Harmful Traditional Practices (HTPs) such as FGM (female genital mutilation), abduction, and rape are explicitly criminalized; however, enforcement of these laws lagged. Women and girls experienced gender-based violence daily, but it was underreported due to shame, fear, or a victim’s ignorance of legal protections. Domestic violence, including spousal abuse, was a pervasive social problem. The 2005 Demographic and Health Survey found that 81 percent of women believed a husband had a right to beat his wife. Prostitution was legal for persons over age 18 and was commonly practiced around the country. Sexual harassment was widespread [and] harassment-related laws were not enforced. The law sets the legal marriage age for girls and boys at 18; however, this law was not enforced. For example, a 2006 Pathfinder International study found that in the Amhara region, 48 percent of women were married before the age of 15, the highest early marriage rate in the country. Limited access to family planning services, high fertility, low reproductive health and emergency obstetric services, and poor nutritional status and infections all contributed to high maternal mortality ratio… Discrimination against women was most acute in rural areas, where 85 percent of the population was located. There was limited legal recognition of common law marriage. Irrespective of the number of years the marriage existed, the number of children raised, and joint property, the law entitled women to only three months’ financial support if a relationship ended. A common-law husband had no obligation to provide financial assistance to his family, and as a result, women and children sometimes faced abandonment. In urban areas women had fewer employment opportunities than men, and the jobs available did not provide equal pay for equal work.
It is manifest that in 2010, the vast majority of Ethiopian women, particularly in the rural areas, enjoy very little personal security against violence and degradation. In fact, these women believe that violence and degradation is an appropriate form of treatment for women. According to the 2005 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey (“a nationally representative survey of 14,070 women age 15-49 and 6,033 men age 15-59”) “81% of Ethiopian women believe their husbands have the right to beat them if they burn food, refuse sex, or go somewhere without their husband’s consent”[4]. Ethiopian women are not only lacking personal security but also social security. Seventy- five percent of all Ethiopian women are illiterate, and consequently bear the heaviest burden of poverty. Maternal deaths from childbirth for Ethiopian women is among the highest in the world[5]. High HIV infection rates, child marriages and the devastating health consequences associated with them and many other risk factors have left Ethiopian women in a state of misery and despair facing a daily ordeal for survival.[6] With one of the highest birth rates in the world, Ethiopia’s population is projected to increase by 20 million in the next 10 years and double to 160 million by 2050.
Thanks for Nothing!
Dictator Zenawi, in a “victory” speech celebrating his 99.6 percent win in the May 2010 “election”, thanked Ethiopian women “boundlessly”:
We, the members of EPRDF, with great humility offer our gratitude and appreciation to the voters who have given us their support freely and democratically. We also offer our thanks to the real backbone of our organization, the women of Ethiopia who are committed to our struggle due to their realization of our track record on gender equality and who want to forge ahead on this path of peace, development and democratization. Our admiration to the women of Ethiopia is indeed boundless!
It is disconcerting to think of the vast majority of Ethiopian women who suffer in absolute misery and wretchedness becoming a “backbone” to anyone. But if we must resort to anatomical analogies, women can best be described as the rump of Ethiopian society, little valued and appreciated. Their backbones, spirit and will have long been shattered by official neglect and indifference and the daily reality of domestic violence, illiteracy, sexual exploitation, underage marriages, lack of education and grinding poverty. It is adding insult to injury to patronize them as the “backbone” of a potbellied dictatorship when they can barely stand up on their own two feet. If we are to offer “admiration” to Ethiopian women (and they deserve it all), it is only because of their incredible capacity to withstand unimaginably “boundless” suffering, degradation, cruelty and indifference. Even illiterate women know when they are being patronized by crocodilian words of “humility”, “gratitude” and “appreciation”.
Misogynistic or Chauvinistic?
I am not sure of the qualitative difference between misogyny and male chauvinism. Misogynists hate and have total contempt for women. A male chauvinist just believes women are naturally inferior to men and do not deserve equal treatment. If it is not misogyny or male chauvinism, what on earth could possibly explain the fact that “81% of Ethiopian women believe their husbands have the right to beat them if they burn food, refuse sex, or go somewhere without their husband’s consent”? This deeply disturbing fact was historically observed only among slaves. The slave was absolutely terrified of his master and always lived in fear of his master’s whims and fancy. The slave believed his master could do whatever he wanted to him because he understood himself to be his master’s property. The slave, totally dependent on his master for his very existence, pinned the blame for his master’s cruelty and depravity on himself. The slave believed that mistreatment and abuse by his master is his divinely foreordained destiny. Could it be that long after the odious institution of slavery has been abolished in the world, the overwhelming majority of women shackled by domestic violence, inequality, sexual exploitation, destructive traditions and customs and poverty continue to believe themselves to be chattel property (personal property) to their husbands and men?
Ethiopian Women’s Human Rights
If 81 percent of Ethiopian women believe they are the property of their husbands, it seems obvious that they are not aware of their human rights secured under international law. Since 1948, there have been at least ten major international conventions and protocols protecting the human rights of women throughout the world. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ratified by Ethiopia in 1981, prohibits as discrimination a variety of actions that compound the subjugation of women, and requires state parties to take action to eliminate them. Governments are required to act and eliminate “social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.” A special legal duty is imposed upon governments to “take into account the particular problems faced by rural women and take all appropriate measures to ensure the application of the provisions of the present Convention.” Women have the “right freely to choose a spouse and to enter into marriage only with their free and full consent.” Children can not give free and full consent to marriage. As parents, women shall have equal rights “irrespective of their marital status, in matters relating to their children.” It is discriminatory to arbitrarily deny women spousal support and equal custody rights at divorce. Various other conventions ensure that women are protected from involuntary servitude, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Domestic violence can not be ignored as simple “family misunderstanding” but must be prosecuted as a serious crime. The Convention on the Rights of the Child protects young girls from being forced to undergo the painful and degrading practice of genital mutilation and rape in the form of child marriages.
Calling for a Movement for Ethiopian Women’s Human Rights
It is manifest that the vast majority of Ethiopian women are trapped in a patriarchal and paternalistic system that exploits them sexually, socially, politically and in every other way. For centuries, Ethiopian law has “treated women as if they were children or disabled.” Discrimination, abuse and mistreatment against Ethiopian women has continued for so long that it is time to end the silence and stand up and speak up against their dehumanization. All Ethiopians, and particularly the educated ones and those in power, should publicly condemn the brutal practice of female genital mutilation. It is an atrocious and dreadful custom. All educational and informational efforts must be employed to eliminate it. The rampant violence against women must not be tolerated. It must be combated through a combination of education, information and rigorous prosecutions of abusers. If actions or lack of action speaks louder than words, it is obvious that Ethiopian men do not think much of their women’s lives and dignity and could be straddling that thin line between misogyny and male chauvinism. A broad social movement needs to be established to challenge all practices that degrade women and challenge cultural and social patterns defining the lopsided power relationship between men and women in Ethiopian society.
A New Culture of Women’s Activism and Assertiveness is Needed
Throughout the Western world and elsewhere, women have organized effectively to form political, cultural, and economic movements aimed at establishing greater rights and securing effective legal protection for women. In some part of the world, the label “women’s liberation” has been given to describe the campaign for women’s rights. Those who advocate for women’s rights have been called “feminists” because of their efforts to change traditional perspectives on a wide range of issues covering domestic violence, sexual harassment and exploitation, economic equality and elimination of all forms of gender discrimination against women.
Labels and designations for Ethiopian women’s activism are unimportant in describing the need for activism. What is important is the realization that effective activism and advocacy on behalf of Ethiopian women is long overdue. Well-educated and well-placed Ethiopian women are in the best position to engage in activism to stop violence against women, help teach them to assert their legal and human rights and research and document the condition of women in society for informed policy-making. They are also in the best position to challenge Ethiopian men to reconsider their long held beliefs about women and encourage and show them how they can change their outdated beliefs and unhealthy behavior towards women. In other words, it is possible to help Ethiopian men gain new awareness and consciousness about the plight of their women and help protect their dignity and value in society. In this regard, I believe Diaspora Ethiopian women bear special responsibility to articulate Ethiopian women’s issues in international forums.
Young Ethiopian Women Need Female Role Models
I often wonder if many Ethiopian fathers seriously ponder whether our daughters have good role models in strong, ethical and assertive Ethiopian women. It pains me to think that the vast majority of girls growing up in Ethiopia today will absorb the beliefs from their mothers and society that domestic violence and sexual exploitation are acceptable; that male supremacy is the natural order of things and that they will likely be married off in childhood and have children while they are themselves children and very likely die an early death from complications of childbirth.
I truly hope that all of the young Ethiopian girls will look up to Birtukan Midekssa and understand that she stood up not only for her rights and theirs, but also that she represents the new Ethiopian woman who stood up to the arrogance of power and male chauvinism. I have no doubts that if Birtukan dropped on her knees, bowed down and begged for mercy from her captors, as do women who face the daily reality of violence and physically abuse, she would be out of prison in heartbeat. We need more Ethiopian women like Birtukan who set new moral and ethical standards for the newer generation of women who in turn can change the attitudes and beliefs of the newer generation of men so they can together build “the future country of Ethiopia.”
The Question: To be or Not to be…. Birtukan
When I write about my heroine Birtukan Midekssa, I often refer to her as “Invictus” (unconquered).[7] Some wonder why I defend Birtukan passionately and ferociously against those who have unjustly imprisoned her and take every opportunity to humiliate and degrade her despite the universally recognized fact that she is innocent of any wrongdoing. I do so because Birtukan to me is the model of the new self-confident and dignified Ethiopian woman I hope to see in the “future country of Ethiopia.” Birtukan chained in prison stands taller for the cause of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Ethiopia than any man I know. She sacrificed motherhood to her 4-year old child so that the millions of little girls in Ethiopia could grow up in dignity, without physical abuse by men, educated and equal in every way to Ethiopian boys. Birtukan has shown more backbone and spine in standing up to dictatorship than anyone I know.
We can thank Ethiopian women until the cows come home, but so long as they have little personal and social security and are valued less and subjected to violence, there will be neither development, progress nor justice in Ethiopian society. The real question is not whether Ethiopian women can be the “backbone” of a political party or even society. It is whether Ethiopian men can be the backbone, indeed have the backbone, to lift their women out of the misery, suffering, degradation, insecurity and value them for their inestimable worth.
In my flights of fancy, I let myself imagine millions of young Birtukan clones growing up in Ethiopia. I imagine these young women standing up to male chauvinism and defending their rights to be free from physical abuse, sexual exploitation and discrimination. I imagine them demanding accountability from their leaders and government. I imagine them taking leadership in vast numbers in society. Then I realize that I am not really lost in imagination. I had just taken a brief detour to Birtukan’s “future country of Ethiopia”.
I will now say of Ethiopian women collectively what I have said of Birtukan individually:
Ethiopian women condemned to abuse, exploitation and indifference, but unconquered.
Ethiopian women subjected to the wrath of men and tearful, but defiant.
Ethiopian women beaten, bludgeoned and bloodied, but unbowed.
Ethiopian women mocked, ridiculed and disrespected, but gracious.
Ethiopian women vilified, strong-armed and manhandled, but unafraid.
Ethiopia under the crushing boots of soldiers of fortune.
Ethiopian women, Invictus!
Birtukan, Invictus!
FREE BIRTUKAN MIDEKSSA AND ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS.
WOMEN OF ETHIOPIA, UNITE!
Alemayehu G. Mariam is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. He writes a regular blog on The Huffington Post, and his commentaries appear regularly on pambazuka.org, allafrica.com, afronline.org and other sites.
The ruling Woyanne junta’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ethiopia has posted on its web site an article that attacks Jason McClure, a correspondent for Bloomberg and Newsweek. Jason has been targeted by the genocidal regime because he dared to expose the truth about conditions in Ethiopia. It is to be remembered that a few months ago, Woyanne propaganda chief Bereket Simon warned him with expulsion if he writes any more critical news about the regime. What triggered the latest attack against Jason McClure is his recent report about Africa drifting toward a new age of authoritarianism. Below is the Ministry of Information’s article:
Jason McClure’ Cold-War mentality
By Ministry of Information
The successful completion of the May 2010 elections in Ethiopia has certainly been received with a high level of enthusiasm by the great majority of the Ethiopian population. The widespread rallies that millions of people in different parts of the country made in the aftermath of the peaceful conduct of the election were clear indications of the amount of enthusiasm the results had generated. But then again, this was not entirely surprising after all; it was in large measure a reflection of the extent to which the peoples of Ethiopia take the process seriously and the manifestation of the unflinching resolve of Ethiopians to own the process. There also appears to be a near unanimous agreement among various stakeholders in the political process to view the results of the election in a favorable light irrespective of the relative performance of the contending parties.
Even the staunchest of the government’s detractors within the opposition seem to have come to terms with the assessment that the results are as much reflections of the incumbent’s track record in development as they are the result of peoples’ disenchantment with the zero-sum politics of the opposition. To the extent that the rather wide margin by which the incumbent won the election is relevant, it is in the unequivocal message it sends to both the winners and losers alike that the mandate of the peoples of Ethiopia can be won only by a proven commitment to improving their lots through hard work than by mere sloganeering and propagation of hate.
The reason why most gloomy predictions by too many western pundits of a post-election Armageddon rang abysmally hollow has everything to do with the commitment and vigilance of the peoples of Ethiopia to see their will respected. Those who might doubt the sincerity of the peoples’ resolve for democracy and good governance are certainly in for disappointment. Jason McClure of Bloomberg news—along with the coterie of interest groups he represents, of course—is one such people. He has long since crossed swords with sworn detractors of the whole economic and political developments in the country and has seldom missed an opportunity to paint the government of Ethiopia in the ugliest of light possible. His almost daily doodles on the web have always been selectively negative.
In a recent report he wrote to the Newsweek (June 18, 2010), presumptuously entitled “why Democracy Isn’t Working”, he has once again engaged in yet another mud-slinging campaign against the Ethiopian government. In a style typical of his previous reports, he draws pervasive conclusions on the basis of one or two observations colored by his own bias. While his latest article is supposedly meant to show the trend throughout Africa towards what he calls ‘a new age of authoritarianism’, its main thrust, however, is an unmitigated campaign to discredit the recent political developments in Ethiopia particularly the results of the election. Mr. McClure’s penchant for hyperbole and downright fabrication is quite phenomenal. His visceral hostility to the government of Ethiopia coupled with his proclivity to offer his services to anyone out to get the government has rendered his judgment all too skewed apparently beyond repair.
His explanation as to why hundreds of thousands of people in the capital went out on a rally in support of the EPRDF, for example, was an outright lie that would put even the most ardent of the government’s detractors to shame. People, he tells us, “were paid the equivalent of a day’s wage for a few hours of shouting against Human Rights Watch”. What this shows of course is the extent to which he is willing to go to tarnish the government’s image even if he has to fabricate the most outrageous of lies. But more importantly, such remarks also betray his deep-seated contempt for the people who took it upon themselves to go out in droves to express their desires to have their will respected by the likes of Mr. McClure. It is not for the first time that Mr. McClure got involved in an out and out smear campaign
against Ethiopia. He has in several occasions colluded with the most rejectionist elements of the opposition in trying to create—even succeeding to do so—a media circus contrived to muddy the waters of the electoral process long before campaign had been properly begun. In his latest report too, he cites dubious sources to make his mendacious claims plausible. It is difficult—even unnecessary—to respond to every mendacious allegation that Mr. McClure makes in his recent article.
That would be a tall order. But one inescapable conclusion is that his is a mentality that belongs in the cold-war era, putting as it does higher premium on using any leverage that comes with aid to effect changes in the political structures of recipients for the sake of serving narrow ideological interests. His view of democracy for instance leaves no room whatsoever for the natives to manage their own affairs. It has to be consonant with some pre-packaged matrix to be dictated by the ideological high priests of the orthodoxy Mr. McClure’s handlers preach. Clearly, Mr. McClure has been frustrated by the generous outpouring of public support to the incumbent as displayed in the rallies by millions of people throughout Ethiopia and more particularly in the capital. These developments certainly run counter with the kind of Armageddon scenario the likes of HRW would have us believe the country would be unless the opposition won. His involvement in reporting about the state of democracy in Ethiopia is apparently informed by his fancying himself as having the central role to play. If that sounds too much of an overreach a foreign correspondent can ill afford, Mr. McClure would accept none of it.
His zeal to denigrate every development—however positive, borders on the messianic. But his frustration is likely to continue to mount—and along with it his hysterical postings—with each passing day as Ethiopia marches triumphantly along in its fight against poverty. One final statement is in order. McClure is a disgrace for journalism. Though he insinuates in his article that there is no free press in Ethiopia, he probably has never enjoyed as much freedom to write as he wished as those reporters in Ethiopia writing for Fortune, the Reporter and the Capital.
This week a conference is taking place in Mekele by Eritrean opposition groups under the auspices of Meles Zenawi’s regime in Ethiopia. One of the meeting’s main agenda is how to overthrow the current Eritrean government. The other main agenda is instituting ethnic politics in Eritrea. Read the following news from Mekelle by Sudan Tribune:
Exiled Eritreans vow to launch Ethnic-based movement
MEKELLE, Ethiopia (Sudan Tribune) – Eritrean Nationalities that represent the majority of Eritrean ethnicity vow to join hands together in the efforts to step up struggle to oust Asmara regime.
The Democratic Front of Eritrean Nationalities (DFEN) has hold Eritrean nationalities conference in the Ethiopia’s northern town of Mekelle, where representatives of some five ethnic groups, civic societies, religious leaders, refugees and front allies took part.
During their 3-day conference this week, Eritrean nations and nationalities reach an agreement to intensify their struggle to ensure their democratic rights.
“Eritrean nations and nationalities have decided to collectively take an arms struggle in a united form to secure the abandoned rights of self determination up to secession” Mohamed Mear, Red Sea Afar Democratic Organization(RSADO) foreign affairs head told Sudan Tribune.
“The latest move is the only way to topple an oppressive and tyrannical regime so justice and peace among the Eritrean nations and nationalities is ensured” Mohamed underscored.
Participants condemned President Issayas Afeworki-led Eritrea’s only party PFDJ of undermining the demands of its own people and ruining the nation.
“The atrocities on daily bases happening against Eritrean nationalities t is intolerable,” they said in a statement adding “now is the time we all act in united form to rebuild a democratic new Eritrea.”
The Red Sea Afar Democratic Organization (RSADO) and the Democratic Movement for the Liberation of Eritrean Kunama (DMLEK) last year created the Democratic Front of Eritrean Nationalities (DFEN).
The front, currently embraces political organizations from Afar, Kunama and Saho ethnic groups. Two other, the Nara and Blen ethnic organizations are expected to join the front in a near future.
“The main aspiration of these peacemakers is restoring genuine justice and peace where all Eritrean nations and nationalities might exercise their democratic and basic human rights.” Nara National organization said in support to the Mission.
The Democratic Front of Eritrean Nationalities (DFEN) would hold Eritrean nationalities conference on 7, July 2010 to deliberate on an action plan.
According to Nessredin Ahmed, another RSADO official, the planned ethnic based movement will participate Eritrean refuges currently residing in Ethiopia and Sudan.
Currently there are some 50,000 Eritreans that took refugee in Ethiopian Camps; A lot more, an estimated 350,000 Eritreans are also being sheltered in neighboring Sudan.
Nassredin called on all peace-loving Eritreans at home and outside, all concerned groups, other Eritrean ethnic groups and the international community as a whole to shoulder the movement.
Last month, some Eight Eritrean opposition forces created a joint military front to launch a massive and well coordinated military attack against Eritrean government.
In a speech in Poland at Community of Democracies meeting, U.S. chief diplomat Hillary Clinton pointed to the regime in Ethiopia as one of the enemies of civil societies. Read the full text of her speech below:
By Hillary Rodham Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State
Krakow, Poland
Well, I am delighted to be here with all of you. And I thank my friend, Foreign Minister Sikorski, for hosting us here in this absolutely magnificent setting, and for an excellent speech that so well summarized what the agenda for all of us who are members of the Community of Democracies should be.
The idea of bringing together free nations to strengthen democratic norms and institutions began as a joint venture between one of Radek’s predecessors and one of mine: Minister Geremek and Madeleine Albright. And they were visionaries 10 years ago. And it was initially a joint American-Polish enterprise. And I cannot think of a better place for us to mark this occasion than right here in Krakow. Thank you, Madeleine, and thanks to the memory of Minister Geremek.
I think you heard from Foreign Minister Sikorski some of the reasons why Poland is an example of what democracies can accomplish. After four decades of privation, stagnation, and fear under Communism, freedom dawned. And it was not only the personal freedoms that people were once again able to claim for their own, but Poland’s per capital GDP today is nine times what it was in 1990. And in the middle of a deep, global recession, the Polish economy has continued to expand.
By any measure, Poland is stronger politically, as well. We all mourned with Poland in April when a plane crash claimed the lives of Poland’s president, the first lady, and many other national officials. It was one of the greatest single losses of leadership suffered by any country in modern history. But it is a tribute to Poland’s political evolution that, in the aftermath of that accident, the country’s institutions never faltered. And tomorrow polls will move forward with selecting a president through free and fair elections.
Now, I would argue that this progress was neither accidental nor inevitable. It came about through a generation of work to improve governance, grow the private sector, and strengthen civil society. These three essential elements of a free nation — representative government, a well-functioning market, and civil society — work like three legs of a stool. They lift and support nations as they reach for higher standards of progress and prosperity.
Now, I would be the first to admit that no democracy is perfect. In fact, our founders were smart enough to enshrine in our founding documents the idea that we had to keep moving toward a more perfect union. Because, after all, democracies rely on the wisdom and judgment of flawed human beings. But real democracies recognize the necessity of each side of that three-legged stool. And democracies that strengthen these three segments of society can deliver extraordinary results for their people.
Today I would like to focus on one leg of that stool: civil society. Now, markets and politics usually receive more attention. But civil society is every bit as important. And it undergirds both democratic governance and broad-based prosperity. Poland actually is a case study in how a vibrant civil society can produce progress. The heroes of the solidarity movement, people like Geremek and Lech Walesa and Adam Michnik, and millions of others laid the foundation for the Poland we see today. They knew that the Polish people desired and deserved more from their country. And they transformed that knowledge into one of history’s greatest movements for positive change.
Now, not every nation has a civil society movement on the scale of Solidarity. But most countries do have a collection of activists, organizations, congregations, writers, and reporters that work through peaceful means to encourage governments to do better, to do better by their own people. Not all of these organizations or individuals are equally effective, of course. And they do represent a broad range of opinions. And, having been both in an NGO and led NGOs and been in government, I know that it’s sometimes tough to deal with NGOs when you are in the government.
But it doesn’t matter whether the goal is better laws or lower crime or cleaner air or social justice or consumer protection or entrepreneurship and innovation, societies move forward when the citizens that make up these groups are empowered to transform common interests into common actions that serve the common good.
As we meet here on the eve of our American Fourth of July celebration, the day when we commemorate our independence, I want to say a word about why the issue of civil society is so important to Americans. Our independence was a product of our civil society. Our civil society was pre-political. And it was only through debate, discussion, and civic activism that the United States of America came into being. We were a people before we were a nation. And civil society not only helped create our nation, it helped sustain and power our nation into the future. It was representatives of civil society who were the first to recognize that the American colonies could not continue without democratic governance. And after we won our independence, it was activists who helped establish our democracy. And they quickly recognized that they were a part of a broader struggle for human rights, human dignity, human progress.
Civil society has played an essential role in identifying and eradicating the injustices that have, throughout our history, separated our nation from the principles on which it was founded. It was civil society, after all, that gave us the abolitionists who fought the evils of slavery, the suffragettes who campaigned for women’s rights, the freedom marchers who demanded racial equality, the unions that championed the rights of labor, the conservationists who worked to protect our planet and climate.
I did begin my professional life in civil society. The NGO I worked for, the Children’s Defense Fund, helped expand educational opportunities for poor children and children with disabilities, and tried to address the challenges faced by young people in prison.
Now, I would be the first to say that our work did not transform our nation or remake our government overnight. But when that kind of activism is multiplied across an entire country through the work of hundreds, even thousands of NGOs, it does produce real and lasting positive change. So a commitment to strengthening civil society has been one of my constants throughout my public career as First Lady, Senator, and now Secretary of State. I was able to work with Slovakian NGOs that stood up to and ultimately helped bring down an authoritarian government. I have seen civil society groups in India bring the benefits of economic empowerment to the most marginalized women in that society. I have watched in wonder as a small group of women activists in South Africa begin with nothing and went on to build a community of 50,000 homes.
President Obama shares this commitment. In his case, it led him to become a community organizer in Chicago. Both of us joined in the work of civil society because we believe that when citizens nudge leaders in the right direction, our country grows stronger. The greatness of the United States depends on our willingness to seek out and set right the areas where we fall short. For us and for every country, civil society is essential to political and economic progress. Even in the most challenging environments, civil society can help improve lives and empower citizens.
In fact, I want to recognize two women activists who are with us today from Afghanistan and Iran. If Faiza Babakan and Afifa Azim would stand up, I would just like to thank you for your courage and your willingness to be here.
(Applause.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Now, it may seem to some of us like a very nice, but perhaps not essential presence to have just one woman from each country be here. But I can speak from personal experience that, just as civil society is essential to democracy, women are essential to civil society. And these women speak for so many who have never had a chance to have their voices heard.
So, along with well-functioning markets and responsible, accountable government, progress in the 21st century depends on the ability of individuals to coalesce around shared goals, and harness the power of their convictions. But when governments crack down on the right of citizens to work together, as they have throughout history, societies fall into stagnation and decay.
North Korea, a country that cannot even feed its own people, has banned all civil society. In Cuba and Belarus, as Radek said, civil society operates under extreme pressure. The Government of Iran has turned its back on a rich tradition of civil society, perpetrating human rights abuses against many activists and ordinary citizens who just wanted the right to be heard.
There is also a broader group of countries where the walls are closing in on civic organizations. Over the last 6 years, 50 governments have issued new restrictions against NGOs, and the list of countries where civil society faces resistance is growing longer. In Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo, physical violence directed against individual activists has been used to intimidate and silence entire sectors of civil society. Last year, Ethiopia imposed a series of strict new rules on NGOs. Very few groups have been able to re-register under this new framework, particularly organizations working on sensitive issues like human rights. The Middle East and North Africa are home to a diverse collection of civil society groups. But too many governments in the region still resort to intimidation, questionable legal practices, restrictions on NGO registration, efforts to silence bloggers.
I hope we will see progress on this issue, and especially in Egypt, where that country’s vibrant civil society has often been subjected to government pressure in the form of canceled conferences, harassing phone calls, frequent reminders that the government can close organizations down, even detention and long-term imprisonment and exile.
In Central Asian countries, constitutions actually guarantee the right of association. But governments still place onerous restrictions on NGO activity, often through legislation or stringent registration requirements. Venezuela’s leaders have tried to silence independent voices that seek to hold that government accountable. In Russia, while we welcome President Medvedev’s statements in support of the rule of law, human rights activities and journalists have been targeted for assassination, and virtually none of these crimes have been solved.
And we continue to engage on civil society issues with China, where writer Liu Xiaobo is serving an 11-year prison sentence because he co-authored a document calling for respect for human rights and democratic reform. Too many governments are seeing civic activists as opponents, rather than partners. And as democracies, we must recognize that this trend is taking place against a broader backdrop.
In the 20th century, crackdowns against civil society frequently occurred under the guise of ideology. Since the demise of Communism, most crackdowns seem to be motivated instead by sheer power politics. But behind these actions, there is an idea, an alternative conception of how societies should be organized. And it is an idea that democracies must challenge. It is a belief that people are subservient to their government, rather than government being subservient to their people.
Now, this idea does not necessarily preclude citizens from forming groups that help their communities or promote their culture, or even support political causes. But it requires these private organizations to seek the state’s approval, and to serve the states and the states’ leaderships’ larger agenda.
Think for a moment about the civil society activists around the world who have recently been harassed, censored, cut off from funding, arrested, prosecuted, even killed. Why did they provoke such persecution?
Some weren’t engaged in political work at all. Some were not trying to change how their countries were governed. Most were simply getting help to people in need, like the Burmese activists imprisoned for organizing relief for victims of Cyclone Nargis. Some of them were exposing problems like corruption that their own governments claim they want to root out. Their offense was not just what they did, but the fact that they did it independently of their government. They were out doing what we would call good deeds, but doing them without permission. That refusal to allow people the chance to organize in support of a cause larger than themselves, but separate from the state, represents an assault on one of our fundamental democratic values.
The idea of pluralism is integral to our understanding of what it means to be a democracy. Democracies recognize that no one entity — no state, no political party, no leader — will ever have all the answers to the challenges we face. And, depending on their circumstances and traditions, people need the latitude to work toward and select their own solutions. Our democracies do not and should not look the same. Governments by the people, for the people, and of the people will look like the people they represent. But we all recognize the reality and importance of these differences. Pluralism flows from these differences. And because crackdowns on NGOs are a direct threat to pluralism, they also endanger democracy.
More than 60 years ago, Winston Churchill came to the United States to warn the world’s democracies of an iron curtain descending across Europe. Today, thankfully, thanks to some of you in this room, that iron curtain has fallen. But we must be wary of the steel vise in which many governments around the world are slowly crushing civil society and the human spirit.
Today, meeting together as a community of democracies, it is our responsibility to address this crisis. Some of the countries engaging in these behaviors still claim to be democracies because they have elections. But, as I have said before, democracy requires far more than an election. It has to be a 365-day-a-year commitment, by government and citizens alike, to live up to the fundamental values of democracy, and accept the responsibilities of self government.
Democracies don’t fear their own people. They recognize that citizens must be free to come together to advocate and agitate, to remind those entrusted with governance that they derive their authority from the governed. Restrictions on these rights only demonstrate the fear of illegitimate rulers, the cowardice of those who deny their citizens the protections they deserve. An attack on civic activism and civil society is an attack on democracy.
Now, sometimes I think that the leaders who are engaging in these actions truly believe they are acting in the best interests of their country. But they begin to inflate their own political interests, the interests of that country, and they begin to believe that they must stay in office by any means necessary, because only they can protect their country from all manner of danger.
Part of what it requires to be a true democracy is to understand that political power must be passed on, and that despite the intensity of elections, once the elections are over, whoever is elected fairly and freely must then try to unify the country, despite the political division.
I ran a very hard race against President Obama. I tried with all my might to beat him. I was not successful. And when he won, much to my surprise, he asked me to join his Administration to serve as Secretary of State. Well, in many countries, I learned as I began traveling, that was a matter of great curiosity. How could I work with someone whom I had tried to deprive of the office that he currently holds? But the answer for both President Obama and I was very simple. We both love our country. Politics is an important part of the lifeblood of a democracy. But governing, changing people’s lives for the better, is the purpose one runs for office.
In the Community of Democracies, we have to begin asking the hard questions, whether countries that follow the example of authoritarian states and participate in this assault on civil society can truly call themselves democracies. And to address this challenge, civil society groups and democratic governments must come together around some common goals. The Community of Democracies is already bringing together governments and civil society organizations, some of whom are represented here. And it is well suited to lead these efforts. I know that the Community of Democracies working group on enabling and protecting civil society is already working to turn this vision into a reality. The United States pledges to work with this community to develop initiatives that support civil society and strengthen governments committed to democracy.
With the leadership and support of countries like Lithuania, Poland, Canada, and Mongolia, I believe that the Community’s 20th anniversary could be a celebration of the expanding strength of civil society, and the true institutionalization of the habits of the heart that undergird democracy. To make that happen, our joint efforts, I believe, should include at least four elements. First, the Community of Democracies should work to establish, as Radek recommended, an objective, independent mechanism for monitoring repressive measures against NGOs.
Second, the United Nations Human Rights Council needs to do more to protect civil society. Freedom of association is the only freedom defined in the United Nations declaration of human rights that does not enjoy specific attention from the UN human rights machinery. That must change.
Third, we will be working with regional and other organizations, such as the OAS, the EU, the OIC, the African Union, the Arab League, others, to do more to defend the freedom of association. Many of these groups are already committed to upholding democratic principles on paper. But we need to make sure words are matched by actions.
And, fourth, we should coordinate our diplomatic pressure. I know that the Community of Democracies working group is focused on developing a rapid response mechanism to address situations where freedom of association comes under attack. Well, that can’t happen soon enough. When NGOs come under threat, we should provide protection where we can, and amplify the voices of activists by meeting with them publicly at home and abroad, and citing their work in what we say and do. We can also provide technical training that will help activists make use of new technologies such as social networks. When possible, we should also work together to provide deserving organizations with financial support for their efforts.
Now, there are some misconceptions around this issue, and I would like to address it. In the United States, as in many other democracies, it is legal and acceptable for private organizations to raise money abroad and receive grants from foreign governments, so long as the activities do not involve specifically banned sources, such as terrorist groups. Civic organizations in our country do not need the approval of the United States Government to receive funds from overseas. And foreign NGOs are active inside the United States. We welcome these groups in the belief that they make our nation stronger and deepen relationships between America and the rest of the world. And it is in that same spirit that the United States provides funding to foreign civil society organizations that are engaged in important work in their own countries. And we will continue this practice, and we would like to do more of it in partnership with other democracies.
As part of that commitment, today I am announcing the creation of a new fund to support the work of embattled NGOs. We hope this fund will be used to provide legal representation, communication technology such as cell phone and Internet access, and other forms of quick support to NGOs that are under siege. The United States will be contributing $2 million to this effort, and we welcome participation and contribution from like-minded countries, as well as private, not-for-profit organizations.
The persecution of civil society activists and organizations, whether they are fighting for justice and law, or clean and open government, or public health, or a safe environment, or honest elections, it’s not just an attack against people we admire, it’s an attack against our own fundamental beliefs. So when we defend these great people, we are defending an idea that has been and will remain essential to the success of every democracy. So the stakes are high for us, not just them.
For the United States, supporting civil society groups is a critical part of our work to advance democracy. But it’s not the only part. Our national security strategy reaffirms that democratic values are a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Over time, as President Obama has said, America’s values have been our best national security asset. I emphasized this point in December and January, when I delivered speeches on human rights and Internet freedom. And it is a guiding principle in every meeting I hold and every country I visit.
My current trip is a good example. I have just come from Ukraine, where I had the opportunity not only to meet with the foreign minister and the president, but with a wonderful group of young, bright Ukrainian students, where I discussed the importance of media freedom, the importance of freedom of assembly, and of human rights. Tonight I will leave for Azerbaijan, where I will meet with youth activists to discuss Internet freedom, and to raise the issue of the two imprisoned bloggers, and to discuss civil liberties. From there I will go to Armenia and Georgia, where I will be similarly raising these issues, and sitting down with leaders from women’s groups and other NGOs. This is what we all have to do, day in and day out around the world.
So, let me return to that three-legged stool. Civil society is important for its own sake. But it also helps prop up and stabilize the other legs of the stool, governments and markets. Without the work of civic activists and pluralistic political discourse, governments grow brittle and may even topple. And without consumer advocates, unions, and social organizations that look out for the needs of societies’ weakest members, markets can run wild and fail to generate broad-based prosperity.
We see all three legs of the stool as vital to progress in the 21st century. So we will continue raising democracy and human rights issues at the highest levels in our contacts with foreign governments, and we will continue promoting economic openness and competition as a means of spreading broad-based prosperity and shoring up representative governments who know they have to deliver results for democracy.
But we also believe that the principles that bring us here together represent humanity’s brightest hope for a better future. As Foreign Minister Geremek wrote in his invitation to the inaugural meeting of the Community of Democracies 10 years ago, “Regardless of the problems inseparably associated with democracy, it is a system which best fulfills the aspirations of individuals, societies, and entire peoples, and most fully satisfies their needs of development, empowerment, and creativity.”
So, ultimately, our work on these issues is about the type of future we want to leave to our children and grandchildren. And anyone who doubts this should look at Poland. The world we live in is more open, more secure, and more prosperous because of individuals like Lech Walesa, Adam Michnik, others who worked through the solidarity movement to improve conditions in their own country, and who stand for freedom and democracy.
I think often about the role of journalists. Journalists are under tremendous pressure. But a journalist like Jerse Tarovich, a son of Krakow, asked tough questions that challenged Poland to do better. And Pope John Paul II, who, as Stalin would have noted, had no battalions, marshaled moral authority that was as strong as any army. We all have inherited that legacy of courage. It is now up to us.
Every Fourth of July Americans affirm their belief that all human beings are created equal, that we are endowed by our creator with unalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Today, as a community of democracies, let us make it our mission to secure those rights. We owe it to our forebears, and we owe it to future generations to continue the fight for these ideals.
Samuel Getachew, an Ethiopian-Canadian who is running for Toronto City Council seat, is proposing that Toronto’s Danforth neighborhood be named “Little Ethiopia” in the following article that was published on Toronto Sun today.
[A page from the Garima Gospels – the world’s oldest Christian book found in a remote monastery in Ethiopia]
[The incredible relic has been kept ever since in the Garima Monastery near Adwa in the north of Ethiopia]