The international aid system has a dirty secret. Despite much rhetoric to the contrary, the nations and organizations that donate and distribute aid do not care much about democracy and they still actively support dictators. The conventional narrative is that donors supported dictators only during the cold war and ever since have promoted democracy. This is wrong. … As for US foreign aid, despite all the brave pronouncements… more than half the aid budget still went to dictators during the most recent five years for which figures are available (2004–2008). … And there are still modern-day counterparts to Mobutu and Bokassa. Paul Biya, the dictator of Cameroon, is marking his twenty-eighth year in power in 2010 by receiving the latest in a never-ending series of loans from the International Monetary Fund with imaginative labels like “Poverty Reduction Growth Facilities.” Biya, whose government also enjoys ample oil revenues, has received a total of $35 billion in foreign aid during his reign. There’s been neither poverty reduction nor growth in his country: the average Cameroonian is poorer today than when Biya took power in 1982. In February 2008, Biya’s security forces killed one hundred people during a demonstration against food price increases and also against a constitutional amendment that will extend his rule to 2018. Many of the victims were “apparently shot in the head at point-blank range.” The IMF justification for the newest loan in June 2009 noted laconically that these “social tensions” have not recurred and “the political situation is stable.” Helen Epstein recently described in these pages the support that aid donors give to Ethiopia’s tyrant Meles Zenawi, who has roughly matched Biya in aid receipts in a shorter period of time… [continue reading here]
As Ethiopians around the world gathered over the weekend to remember those who were gunned down by Meles Zenawi’s death squads following the May 2005 election, Judge Frehiwot Samuel, Dr Berhanu Nega and others have asked how long are we going to allow ourselves to be victims? When are we going to start holding the perpetrators of gross injustice in our country accountable?
Ethiopians are facing an enemy that is armed and financed to its teeth by the US, EU, and their financial arms, the World Bank, IMF, DFID, and USAID to the tune of $3 billion per year. Ironically, the same amount of money is flowing into Woyanne coffers from Ethiopians in the Diaspora [read here]. It is therefore pertinent to ask why are we complaining about the money flowing from the World Bank and others to Woyanne while we Ethiopians are doing the same thing? We all know that Meles and gang (Woyanne) cannot survive one month in power without the foreign aid and Diaspora remittance. The hard currency from these sources are Woyanne’s life blood.
This question was one of main themes of this month’s 5th anniversary of the Ethiopian election massacre remembrance events around the world.
Ethiopian Review, in collaboration with other Ethiopian media, will delve into this issue deeper and challenge Ethiopians in the Diaspora to come up with an answer. To start with, please read the following summary of a study paper presented by a civic action study group that was formed recently to come up with recommendations [an Amharic version will be made available shortly]:
Ethiopia’s Diaspora and the Moral Hazards of Remittances
Drying up fuel that is feeding the Meles dictatorship
Presented by Ethiopian Civic Action Study Group
For the past 20 years, the Ethiopian people have suffered from repressive political governance and an exploitative economic system that have offered immense wealth and assets to members of the ruling party, Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), its core membership, its puppets, allies and endowments. Remittances have become a major source of foreign exchange and firms and individuals involved in its transactions continue to benefit.
The first big wave of the Ethiopian Diaspora that established permanence abroad begun because of repression, factional onslaughts, civil wars and unbearable conditions in the country. This wave consisted mostly of professionals, civil servants, military leaders and personnel, students and political opponents to the Socialist Dictatorship. It was the beginning of what one would call the de-institutionalization of the country and the erosion of its social capital. This phenomenon of the emergence of Ethiopia’s Diaspora continued with a second wave in 1991 when TPLF took power.
The single most important variable that drove the next wave of Ethiopia’s social capital, especially those with tertiary and advanced education: professionals, technical personnel, military officers and leaders, business women and men was ethnic-federalism and ethnic division. The TPLF virtually made it impossible for national and democratic leaning persons to work and live in the country. In other words, both the first and second waves of immigrants were caused primarily by political conditions in the home country. Immigration in search of economic and social opportunities is a recent phenomenon for Ethiopians. The second wave was supported by relaxations in entry requirements among favored countries such as the United States and member countries of the European Union, Canada, New Zealand and Australia among others. The United States begun to issue Diversity visas that attracts a steady stream of Ethiopian individuals and families. Further, Ethiopians found other homes in developing countries in Africa and the Middle East. Today, Ethiopians live and work not only in Western countries but also in Kenya, Ghana, Uganda, South Africa, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, United Arab Emirates and others.
It is reasonable to estimate that at the end of 2010, the number in the Diaspora to exceeds 1.5 million. This estimate includes individuals who are undocumented. For the purpose of gauging remittances, one can assume the single most important driver, namely the outflow and descendants of Ethiopian immigrants to be substantial and increasing at a steady pace.
One of the most interesting features of the Ethiopian Diaspora—a feature also shared by other African immigrants–is that 84 percent possess at least a high school education and 29.5 percent have college degrees. Before 1974, there was only one known Ethiopian physician living and working overseas. The World Bank’s Migration and Remittances Fact Book shows that at least 29.7 percent of Ethiopian trained physicians have left the country since 1991 and continue to leave each year. The proportion of nurses and other professionals who leave the country is at least the same or higher. Where ever they live and work, Ethiopians have proven to be a model immigrant community in almost all sectors of economic, spiritual and cultural life across the globe. These attributes mean that employability is better and incomes more secure than for others. There is resiliency in remittances. However, self-sufficiency and self reliance and creating communities and institutions abroad come at a huge cost for the country in the form of massive brain-drain. No matter how one may try to put a positive spin on the subject, no amount of remittances could possibly compensate for this massive brain-drain on the country’s capacity and development. All experts in development not with dismay that Ethiopia’s well trained, educated and experienced human capital resides overseas and this affects the country’s rapid, inclusive and sustainable growth and development.
How are remittances deployed by recipients?
One is obliged to accept the notion that individuals have moral obligation and the right to remit monies in support of families, relatives, friends and organizations committed to social and economic causes. Ideally, remittances could meet an investment gap in importing goods and services not available domestically and therefore enhance domestic productivity and services. There is another compelling point augmenting these pro-remittance views. It strengthens freedoms and enables access to opportunities for recipients. Given wide spread repression and human rights violations in Ethiopia, freedoms and access to economic and social opportunities are heavily curtailed. The survey based data findings in Ethiopia counter the widely held view that remittances would have impact on society by reducing poverty levels. It is this view that compels development groups to support immigration and remittances. They suggest that remittances fill an important investment gap by mobilizing foreign exchange from the Diaspora and channeling them into productive activities. In some countries such as China, Ghana and India, remittances play developmental roles. Evidence shows that these countries have lifted millions out of poverty. Remittances support good economic policies and management. Foreign exchange from remittances and or local currency equivalents are invested heavily and consistently into productive enterprises such as commercial farms, manufacturing and social infrastructure such as school, clinics, hospitals and roads and services. In the case of Ethiopia, there is no substantial evidence that shows relationships between remittances and investments in socially meaningful activities and productive enterprises that reduce poverty, increase incomes and substantially boost sustainable growth and development and generate significant employment opportunities.
What then are the issues?
Those who are skeptical about the prudent developmental and poverty reducing impacts of remittances in Ethiopia accept the principle that members of the Diaspora have moral obligation and responsibility to help family, relatives, friends and organizations by remitting monies. There is no indication or argument that anyone should be asked not to remit. The issue is how remittances can and should be transmitted. The how is buffeted by a number of substantive points. First, the foreign exchange remitted fortifies single party dictatorship. The leadership uses foreign exchange to purchase weapons and other tools of control. Second, given wide-spread corruption in the country, foreign exchange is routinely and illicitly taken out of the country for private use. This deprives communities and the country from using foreign exchange for development and reduction of poverty. Third, there is ample evidence to show that remittances, foreign aid and FDI induce unacceptable level of inequality. Fourth, the ruling party channels foreign exchange to party owned and endowed enterprises. The national prominence of enterprises such as EFFORT, which manages numerous firms under it, is a consequence of its favored status. Easier access of foreign exchange is a manifestation of such privileged status.
It is these arguments that suggest redirecting as much of the remittances as possible through informal channels with a view of depriving the ruling party free and unbridled access to the Diaspora’s hard earned foreign exchange. In this regard, it is reasonable to ask what difference rechanneling or redirecting would bring when the government has accesses to foreign aid, FDI and remittances from those who support the ruling party. Here, the amounts of remittances sent through formal and informal channels might tell the story of why redirecting, as part of an overall sustained approach, might have some effect in changing government policy. Let us first explore volume.
Official remittances inflows provided to the World Bank by Ethiopian officials show a steady rise in remittances from 2003 to present, with a sharp drop from a peak of US$386.7 in 2008 to US$301.1, a decline of US$85.6 million. For a country like Ethiopia, this is a substantial loss, largely driven by the financial and economic crises in developed countries. Given the contradictory figures from various sources and the low level figures from the National Bank, it is highly probable that official remittances are underestimated by hundreds of millions each year. In contrast to official remittances inflow reported by the World Bank, whose source is the National Bank of Ethiopia, other sources report higher figures. It may be reasonable to hypothesize that drop in remittances would require additional foreign aid, while rise in remittances would not necessarily result in reducing aid dependency. It is clear from this concern of possible decline and from the government’s continued courting of the Diaspora that remittances played a huge role in supporting the government’s needs for predictable foreign exchange resources. The figure of official remittance of US$1.2 billion in 2008 is the most credible that one can and should assume. In the event, the combined informal or unofficial of a low of two times the official amount would mean close to US$3.6 billion. In light of the financial and economic crisis, this figure may still be too high. However, it is reasonable to assume that informal or non-official remittances are at least twice official remittances. With the above conservative assumption, the total amount of remittances of US$3.6 billion per year since 2008 is reasonable. This is a huge amount and exceeds net foreign aid and export earnings. In light of these estimations and various reports from independent experts as well as conversations with numerous Ethiopians over the past few years, figures provided to the World Bank are said to be very low and not realistic. When one combines remittances sent via official and informal channels, the amounts are substantial enough that the country should be doing better if these resources were used for the sole purpose of boosting productivity, stimulating the private sector and generating income earning opportunities for recipients and others.
The Ethiopian Diaspora has effectively replaced foreign aid as the single most important sources of foreign exchange and investments funds for the Ethiopian government. The sharp decline in inflows that begun in the second quarter of 2008 and continued in the second quarter of 2009 , may be an ominous sign. However, it does not tell us the whole story. Informal remittance amounts may be more resilient than amounts sent through normal channels. In the event, asking the Diaspora to channel its monies through informal or non-official channels is a sellable proposition. Like other immigrants, Ethiopians have a tendency to save more and send more to families, friends and other recipients when times are tough back home. Nevertheless, one would be hard pressed to dismiss the impact of the financial and economic crisis on the amount of remittances to Ethiopia through both official and informal channels.
In summary, it is against the backdrop of endemic poverty, hunger, aid dependency, illicit outflow of funds, massive migration and repressive governance that one must gauge and assess the role and impacts of remittances on Ethiopian society and explore the options available to the Diaspora in leveraging this substantial capital resources in pursuit and support of equitable, inclusive, rapid and sustainable growth and development. The vast majority of one and half million Ethiopians scattered around the globe make every effort to assist close family, relatives, friends and those in need in one form or another. Some invest in corporations and non-governmental organizations committed to the reduction of poverty, especially in the social sectors. In general, members of the Diaspora try to make sure that they share whatever they can afford with the people they left behind. They send huge amounts of remittances through official and non-official channels. While their intent is genuine assistance to families, relatives, friends, those in dire need and various organizations, the Ethiopian government considers this large and relatively well to do Diaspora as an important source of scarce foreign exchange. The ruling-party, on its part, has not lived up to the expectations of the Ethiopian people. Corruption, rent-seeking activities, embezzlements, diversion of financial resources, illicit outflows of funds, endemic poverty, hunger, high inflation, unemployment and hopelessness continue to persist. Billions of dollars in foreign aid have yet to free Ethiopian society from depths of poverty and heavy dependency. The Prime Minister himself acknowledged that “rent-seeking behavior” is no longer acceptable. Yet, it is government policy that has allowed this condition to envelope the entire society with no end in sight. The country is more dependent than at any time in its long history. NGOS are wide-spread with little impact in alleviating poverty.
Approaching the issue with wisdom
Remittances perform humanitarian, social and economic functions. This notion should not be in dispute at all. Hating the ruling party is one thing; but punishing the Ethiopian people is another matter. One needs to make a clear and careful distinction between the two. In an ideal situation of which the Ethiopian case is not a part, Ethiopia’s Diaspora could have played a critical role in the development process, not so much because it has money, but that it has a stock of knowledge and skills that are transferable. However, at the moment, the political environment does not allow most members of the Diaspora to use their intellectual and other social capital in the advancement of their country. So, remittances to family, relatives and friends are morally and socially defensible. Remittances save lives. Remittances supplement incomes and meet day-to-day necessities. It will be political suicide for the Diaspora to ask anyone not to remit monies in support of families, relatives, friends and organizations that support noble causes in the country. Redirecting remittances through non-official and non-formal channels might be defensible as long as the remitters and the recipients are not affected adversely.
If remittances are not sent through non-formal and non-official channels, monies will be used to bolster the ruling party and its allies. If one agrees that the ruling party is repressive, oppressive, uncaring, cruel, discriminatory, corrupt, nepotistic, unchanging and un-representative, then, transfer of remittances through official channels does not make social, economic or political sense. Remittances provide the ruling party with one of the most vital tools in enhancing its arsenal of repression and in diverting foreign exchange illicitly. The same is true of foreign aid and FDI. It is for these reasons that other instruments of informal voluntary transfer must be explored carefully and imaginatively. The ruling party must not benefit from the Diaspora’s moral obligation to help family, relatives and friends or other worthwhile causes. It is possible to do both: deny the ruling party foreign exchange while meeting the social and moral obligation to help. The challenge for those who oppose the ruling party’s malpractices in governance is to deny it the requisite tools as much and as far as possible without harming those who deserve support. In any case, for redirecting of remittances to make any sense, it must be part of a sustained strategy and not a solitary one.
Commemoration events for the Ethiopian election massacre 5th anniversary were held Washington DC, and several cities around the world on November 7, 2010.
Silent prayer for the martyrs of Election 2005 – Sunday, November 7, 2010
The special remembrance event in Washington DC was broadcast live via video and audio. The event was held at the Washington Marriott Hotel starting at 2 PM.
The program was opened by Artist Tamagne Beyene who made an opening statement and showed a short video about the terror campaign that was unleashed against the World Bank-financed blood-thirsty dictatorship in Ethiopia following the May 2005 election.
Tamagne then introduced the guest speakers Judge Frehiwot Samuel, Dr Aklog Birara, Ato HaileGebriel Ayalew, Ato Henock Yeshitila, Dr Berhanu Nega, and Dr Gregory Stanton.
The first to speak was Judge Frehiwot Samuel, who asked why those who are accountable for the atrocities of June and November 2005 are still allowed to still roam freely.
Dr Aklog Birara discussed that Ethiopians must take matters into their own hands by waging a campaign boycotts such as rerouting remittances so that the hard currency is not used by the Meles dictatorship. He urged every Ethiopian to engage in civic actions that will help bring change in Ethiopia.
As a witness to the post-May 2005 elections massacre, Dr Berhanu Nega gave a firsthand account of Woyanne’s savagery.
Genocide Watch President Dr Gregory Stanton told the audience that Ethiopia, a country with rich history and long civilization, is currently ruled by a barbaric government. He urged Ethiopians in the Diaspora to get organized and work to remove the Meles dictatorship, pointing out that they could be a powerhouse for bringing change in Ethiopia. He also advised the tracking and registering of all Meles regime officials who are engaged in atrocities because there will come a time when they must face justice. He warned that the Meles apartheid dictatorship is hurting Tigreans more than any other ethnic group in the long term by fostering resentment toward them.
Similar events were held in several places around the world, including Seattle, Toronto, Las Vegas, North Carolina, Dallas, London, Stockholm, Cologne, Munich, and Melbourne.
In Ethiopia, due to the Meles regime’s repression, such events are not possible.
November is a cruel month. Bleak, woeful, and grim is the month of November in the melancholy verse of Thomas Hood:
No warmth, no cheerfulness, no healthful ease,
No comfortable feel in any member–
No shade, no shine, no butterflies, no bees,
No fruits, no flowers, no leaves, no birds,
November!
And no justice for the hundreds massacred in Ethiopia in November (2005).
No redress for the countless men, women and children shot and wounded and left for dead.
No apologies for the tens of thousands illegally imprisoned.
No restitution for survivors or the families of the dead.
No trace of those who disappeared.
No atonement for the crimes of November.
No absolution for the slaughter of November.
November is to remember.
How Does One Remember the Slaughter of November?
Elie Wiesel, a Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor, said we remember the innocent victims of evil by bearing witness for them.
For the survivor who chooses to testify, it is clear: his duty is to bear witness for the dead and the living. He has no right to deprive future generations of a past that belongs to our collective memory. To forget would be not only dangerous but offensive; to forget the dead would be akin to killing them a second time. The witness has forced himself to testify. For the youth of today, for the children who will be born tomorrow. He does not want his past to become their future.
For the past three years, I have chosen to bear witness for the hundreds of massacre victims of dictator Meles Zenawi in Ethiopia.[1] Wherever evil triumphs, all of humanity is victimized. I have never met any one of the massacre victims of June and November 2005, but that does not matter. I remember each and every one of them. So I bear witness once more on behalf of Tensae Zegeye, age 14; Habtamu Tola, age 16; Binyam Degefa, age 18; Behailu Tesfaye, age 20; Kasim Ali Rashid, age 21. Teodros Giday Hailu, age 23. Adissu Belachew, age 25; Milion Kebede Robi, age 32; Desta Umma Birru, age 37; Tiruwork G. Tsadik, age 41; Elfnesh Tekle, age 45. Abebeth Huletu, age 50; Regassa Feyessa, age 55; Teshome Addis Kidane, age 65; Victim No. 21762, age 75, female, and Victim No. 21760, male, age unknown and hundreds more shot and killed or wounded while protesting stolen elections.[2] Once again, I point an accusatory finger at the policemen who pulled the trigger, the invisible hands that pulled the fingers of the policemen who pulled the trigger and the mastermind who orchestrated the whole bloody carnage.
Police Riots: Understanding the True Scope of the Massacres in 2005
There are two astonishing facts about the massacres of June and November, 2005. The first is that the policemen sent out to contain the “disturbances” literally had a riot shooting up anything that moved in the streets. The second is the manifest undercount of the actual fatalities and casualties of the massacres. When an Inquiry Commission was established by Zenawi under Proclamation 478/2005 to investigate post-election “disturbances”, its investigation of incidents was limited to specific dates and places, namely: violence that occurred on June 8, 2005 in Addis Ababa and 2) violence that occurred from November 1 to 10, 2005 and from November 14 to 16, 2005 in identified locations in Addis Ababa and other specifically designated towns and cities outside the capital.
In public presentations, Inquiry Commission Chairman Judge Frehiwot Samuel has indicated that the Commission’s charge prevented it from including evidence of casualties and fatalities that occurred in close proximity to the dates and places set forth in the Proclamation. There is little doubt that a full and comprehensive investigation of the post-election “disturbances” in 2005 would reveal casualty and fatality figures that are many times the number reported in the Commission’s report.
In its investigation, the Inquiry Commission examined 16,990 documents, and received testimony form 1,300 witnesses. Commission members visited prisons and hospitals, and interviewed members of the regime’s officialdom over several months. In the end, the Commission determined[3] that the police shot and killed 193 persons and wounded 763 others on the specific dates and in the specific places identified in the Proclamation. Further, the Commission documented that on November 3, 2005, during an alleged disturbance in Kality prison that lasted 15 minutes, prison guards fired more than 1500 bullets into inmate housing units leaving 17 dead, and 53 severely wounded. Commission Chairman Judge Frehiwot commented: “Many people were killed arbitrarily. Old men were killed while in their homes, and children were also victims of the attack while playing in the garden.” Over 30,000 civilians were arrested without warrant and held in detention.
By an 8-2 vote, the Commission made specific factual conclusions about the “disturbances”: 1) The persons killed or wounded during the violence were unarmed protesters. “There was not a single protester who was armed with a gun or a hand grenade (as reported by the government-controlled media that some of the protesters were armed with guns and bombs)”. 2) The shots fired by government forces into crowds of protesters were not intended to disperse but to kill by targeting the head and chest of the protesters. 3) There was no evidence that any security officers involved in the shootings were attacked or killed by the demonstrators: “Security forces which are alleged to be killed by demonstrators were not taken to autopsy, even there is no evidence of either photograph or death certificate showing the reason of death and couldn’t be produced for police as opposed to that of civilians.”
There is a Certified List of 237 Killers in the Massacres of 2005
In 2008, a “think tank that met regularly at the Ethiopian Embassy in London” commissioned an “internal security study” to counter criticism by various international human rights organizations following the 2005 elections. In a report entitled “Modernizing Internal Security in Ethiopia”[4] (see fn. 4 for copy of original study), counterterrorism expert Col. Michael Dewar, British Army (Rtd.) revealed some shocking facts about the federal police, detention facilities and riot control capabilities and procedures in Ethiopia. One of the most surprising facts revealed by Col. Dewars was the existence of a certified list of policemen involved in the massacres. Col. Dewars stated in his report that “after three hours of one to one conversation”, Werkneh Gebeyehu, the Director General of the Ethiopian Federal Police, told him that “As a direct result of the 2005 riots, he [had] sacked 237 policemen.” The Director General’s admission to Col. Dewars conclusively establishes the existence of a list of names of at least 275 policemen who are prime suspects in the massacres of unarmed protesters in June and November of 2005. These criminals must be brought to justice immediately for prosecution on charges of murder and crimes against humanity.
Understanding the Historic Significance of the Massacres of June and November, 2005
On March 21, 1960, South African police without provocation slaughtered 69 unarmed black protesters in the township of Sharpeville and wounded 180, exposing the savagery of the apartheid system for the world to see. In 2005, security forces loyal to Meles Zenawi slaughtered 193 unarmed protesters and wounded 763 others. As the Ethiopian protesters were “targeted in the head and chest” and shot, as documented by the Inquiry Commission, nearly all of the black South Africans in Sharpeville were shot in the back as they tried to flee the scene. The Sharpeville incident played a decisive role in the ultimate dismantling of apartheid rule in South Africa over three decades later.
Sharpeville and the massacres in Ethiopia were not random events. Both the apartheid and Zenawi’s regimes used cold blooded massacres as a deliberate tactic to ruthlessly crush and wipe out all political opposition. It was their way of saying that they will do anything to stay in power. The Sharpeville massacre was intended to “teach the kaffirs a lesson” they will not forget. Zenawi intended to teach his opposition a lesson they will not forget by indiscriminately massacring men, women and children in the streets or in their homes, as the Inquiry Commission has documented. It was a deliberate and calculated act designed to break the backbone of the opposition and make sure that no opposition will ever rise again.
It is characteristic of dictatorships to massacre their opposition as a demonstration of strength. History, however, shows that massacres are often manifestations of weakness, vulnerability and fear of popular uprising by oppressive regimes. South Africans were not intimidated by the Sharpeville massacre; they came out in full force to challenge the pass laws in every major city in South Africa as the masters of apartheid unleashed unspeakable violence against them. Sharpeville caused the apartheid regime to intensify its repression by tightening the pass laws (pass books required for black South Africans to travel within their country) and rigidly enforcing regulations to keep black South Africans in the Bantustans (black African “homelands” or “reservations”). Sharpeville also stoked the imagination of black South African youth and energized and inspired all freedom-loving South Africans to fight against apartheid with determination.
Following the 2005 elections, Zenawi went on a rampage. He jailed nearly all of the leading opposition leaders, civic society organizers, human rights advocates and journalists in the country on trumped up treason charges. He passed “laws” clamping down on independent journalists and newspapers and criminalized civil society institutions. Zenawi even jailed and put in prolonged solitary confinement Birtukan Midekssa, a young woman — indeed a highly respected former judge, learned lawyer and a much admired and loved opposition leader — openly and unequivocally committed to peaceful change and constitutional governance. A few months ago, Zenawi declared he had won the election by 99.6 percent.
Sharpeville marked a defining moment in the South African struggle for liberation from apartheid. The June and November massacres (and many others that have yet to be investigated) will in the same way mark a watershed in the march towards democracy and resistance to dictatorship in Ethiopia.
One of the most important lessons of Sharpeville is the role that massacre played in mobilizing international support for ending the apartheid regime. It was after Sharpeville that international efforts to isolate and sanction the apartheid regime began to roll unstoppably. Sharpeville gave the first signal to the foreign investors that apartheid is no longer tenable and a transition to majority rule absolutely necessary. Shortly after Sharpeville, foreign investors pulled out tens of millions of dollars out of South Africa draining that country’s reserves and bringing the economy to the verge of collapse. In the years that followed, as more countries adopted trade and financial sanctions and significant amounts of foreign investments began to be withdrawn from South Africa, it became clear to the apartheid regime that political change was inevitable and it had to accept majority rule.
End the Culture of Impunity: Demand an ICC Investigation into the Massacres of November, 2005
There is an entrenched and pervasive culture of impunity in Ethiopia as I have written previously[5]. Gross and widespread abuses of human rights are perpetrated without so much as a preliminary investigation being done to identify and hold the criminals accountable. Those in power feel that they can commit any act or crime and get away with it. The leaders of the ruling regime believe they are above the law, indeed they are the law. This culture of impunity must end, and a new civic culture based on strict observance of the rule of law must be instituted.
There is much to be learned about accountability from the recent history of a neighboring country. In the 2007 presidential election in Kenya, over 1,500 people were killed. Over 300,000 people were displaced as a result of the violence. The Waki Commission which investigated the violence fingered some high level government officials as prime suspects in the perpetration of the violence. The Waki Report which was passed on to Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), identified 19 politicians on a list of 219 alleged perpetrators including six cabinet ministers of the Kibaki government for possible prosecution for crimes against humanity.
ICC investigations cannot be initiated at the request of private parties. The ICC Prosecutor could initiate investigations only if he receives a referral from States or the U.N. Security Council. He could also initiate an investigation on his own. Despite the procedural hurdles, an organized and sustained demand for an investigation by the Prosecutor’s office could play a decisive role in persuading Moreno-Ocampo to consider launching a comprehensive inquiry into the massacres of 2005 in Ethiopia.
Immortalizing the Victims of Police Riots in Ethiopia
In November 2005, hundreds of Ethiopian men, women and children paid with their lives for the causes of freedom, democracy and human rights. Truth be told, the world does not remember the massacres of June and November, 2005. That is in good part because many of us in the Diaspora have done a poor job of remembering them ourselves and publicizing their cause and creating awareness worldwide. Thanks to so many dedicated individuals and groups that is changing. In this month of November, Ethiopians the world over are commemorating the 5th anniversary of Ethiopian election massacres.
The Ethiopian massacre victims now belong to the whole of humanity. They must be remembered by all freedom-loving peoples throughout the world, not just Ethiopians. In the U.S., we often hear members of Congress delivering stirring floor speeches in remembrance of massacres that took place half way across the globe. We have seen official proclamations and statements in memoriam for massacre victims in remote corners of the world. We have even read statements issued by U.S. Presidents reflecting on the historic significance of such events. American newspapers report on massacres that took place decades ago; houses of worship offer special prayers and even school children do special memorial projects in remembrance of massacre victims in different parts of the world. Perhaps next year, we may be able to do more things that will help create greater international awareness of the crimes against humanity that were committed in Ethiopia in June and November, 2005. By remembering the atrocities and spreading word about gross human rights abuses in Ethiopia, we not only keep alive the memory of the innocent victims of 2005 but also hasten the day when the criminals will be brought to justice.
Defining Moments: A Personal Reflection on the Slaughter of 2005
It seems to me that in the course of human events, most people face their own “defining moments”. Often that “moment” is a point in time when we gain a certain clarity about things that may have eluded us in the past or cloud our judgment. These moments are often random events beyond our control but define us as the persons we truly are. They come to us in the form of a choice: to be or not to be; to do or not to do; to speak up or not to speak up. By making the right choice we define the moment; and by making the wrong choice or not choosing at all, we allow the moment to define us. Frehiwot Samuel, Woldemichael Meshesha and Mitiku Teshome had their defining moments when they completed their report in 2006. They could have turned in a whitewash and received riches from Zenawi beyond their imagination. They chose to carry the truth into exile at extraordinary risk to their lives and began uncertain futures in foreign lands. When the modern history of Ethiopia is written, their names will be listed at the very top for displaying courage under fire, audacity in the face of despair, bravery in the face of personal danger, and unflinching fortitude in the face of extreme adversity. We can only thank them. “Never have so many owed so much to so few!”
Tyrants also have their defining moments and their lasting legacy for which they will be remembered in history. Adolf Hitler will be remembered for the Holocaust. Pol Pot will be the eternal symbol of the killing fields of Cambodia; and Saddam Hussien’s name will live infamy for his poison gas massacre in Halabja. Omar Bashir of Sudan, an indicted war criminal, will be remembered (and one day face face prosecution in the International Criminal Court) for this his genocidal campaigns against the Fur, Marsalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups in Darfur. Mengistu Hailemariam, the former military dictator in Ethiopia, will be remembered for his ruthless Red Terror campaign; and Meles Zenawi will forever be defined by the massacres of June and November, 2005 and many others that history will reveal.
The massacres of June and November 2005 were defining moments for me as an individual. I had to make a choice. The easy thing for me to do at the time was to shake my head in disbelief, cover my eyes in horror, roll my eyes in disgust and purse my lips in sorrow and move on to something else. That would have been tantamount to capitulating to evil and turning a blind eye to monstrous crimes committed against innocent human beings in my native homeland. My other choice was to muster the energy and courage to stand up and speak up against the personification of pure evil. I now live by the timeless maxim: “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men and women to do nothing.” Affirmatively stated, I believe all that is necessary to triumph over evil is for all good men, women and young people to do something.
The slaughter of 2005 must be made a warning to each new generation of Ethiopians of what happens when human rights are abused, the rule of law trashed, democracy trampled and freedom crushed. To paraphrase Elie Weisel, we must seek justice for the victims of yesterday not only because it is the right thing to do, but also to protect the youth of today, and the children who will be born tomorrow from similar injustice and wrong. We do not want the past to become the future of our children and grandchildren. That is why all of the criminals responsible for the 2005 massacre must be held accountable. Delaying justice to the Ethiopian massacre victims is to invite the harsh verdict of history upon ourselves and future generations: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
REMEMBER, REMEMBER THE SLAUGHTER OF NOVEMBER (2005)!
FREE ALL POLITICAL PRSIONERS IN ETHIOPIA.
[1] http://www.abugidainfo.com/?p=6709 ; http://ethioforum.org/wp/archives/1515
[2] http://ethiomedia.com/carepress/yared_testimony.pdf
[3] http://www.ethiomedia.com/addfile/ethiopian_inquiry_commission_briefs_congress.html
[4] http://www.ethiomedia.com/accent/modernizing_internal_security_in_ethiopia.pdf
[5] http://abbaymedia.com/News/?p=2512
Senior OLF diplomat and the current head of OLF (Oromo Liberation Front) Diplomacy for The European Chamber, Dr. Shigux Geleta, has reaffirmed his organization’s commitment for partnership and called for united front against the TPLF dictatorship in Ethiopia.
Speaking at the Workshop Organized by Solidarity Movement for a New Ethiopia (SMNE) from 28-29th October 2010 RISC, Reading in United Kingdom, Dr. Shigux has praised the SMNE for helping organizations with different political outlook to engage in dialogue and discussed the effort of OLF in creating different form of political partnership which dates back to the formation of Transitional Government in Ethiopia, the 2000 Paris Conference and the recent 2006 achievement in the formation of AFD (Alliance for Democracy).
He also discussed the nature of Ethiopian state, how TPLF managed to establish its political hegemony, the economy, human right situation and the way forward. He talked about the biased understanding of OLF by some Pan Ethiopianists who still remain in their traditional juxtaposition of individual versus collective rights in which case they uphold the first while rejecting the latter.
He explained, be the liberal theory as it may be, in reality there is no individual without certain basic social traits such as language, social habit, custom and ways of life, to say the least. This means by virtue of the fact that a human individual is brought up by a certain family under a given social structure in a certain way, he is already a social animal. His individuality is inseparable from that social environment in which he/she is brought up. Therefore, an individual can never be considered to be an atom whose identity is immaterial irrespective of time and space. Had it not been the case, there would not also be Ethipianness “Ethiopiawinet” for this Ethiopiawinet is anchored in a certain collective identity. So for liberal Ethiopians it would be self-contradictory in terms to uphold Ethiopiawinet and deny the social character of an individual at the same time. As much as Ethiopiawinet is the social source of nourishment for the individual, the individuals are the perpetrators or the agents of Ethiopiawinet. So there is no way to mutually separate the individual from the social and vice-versa. [Read full text of the speech here.]
What is more, his paper on “Current political affairs from OLF’s perspective” on the forum organized by Horn Of African Solidarity Group on 22 of May 2010 in Frankfurt, Germany [read here] has attracted tremendous audience across Europe. Dr. Shigux have explained the absurd reality on the ground in the Horn of Africa due to the TPLF dictatorship and called for the much needed partnership to tackle the ever growing trait posed by the one man rule in Ethiopia. He also briefly discussed the damages caused by the regime on power on democracy, land, people and its environment.
As a conclusion he said, the Meles regime will certainly fall sooner or later as a result of its own policies. Its fall, however, could be hastened, said Dr. Shigux, if all forces opposing the regime cooperate with one another on the bases of mutual interest and equality.
It was 5 years ago on November 1, 2005, that the ruling Tigrean People Liberation Front (Woyanne) under the leadership of Meles Zenawi unleashed a new form of terror on the people of Ethiopia. The repercussion of the terror campaign is still felt throughout Ethiopia and around the world where ever Ethiopians reside.
Following the May 5, 2005, elections, before the votes were counted, Meles declared victory and suspended his own constitution, stripping the people of Ethiopia the right to free speech, and other basic civil rights.
When Ethiopians peacefully protested the regime’s actions, Meles responded by giving a shot-to-kill order to his death squads. Meles Zenawi’s forces gunned down hundreds of unarmed citizens, rounded up over 40,000 young Ethiopians and sent them to detention camps in remote parts of the country. Meles also ordered the shutting down of independent newspapers and the arrest of their staff. November 2005 was one of the darkest moments in Ethiopia’s history.
Ethiopians around the world remember the November 2005 massacre, and the victims of the TPLF regime for the past 20 years by honoring the martyrs who paid the ultimate sacrifice and by also resolving to intensify the struggle for freedom and democracy against the anti-Ethiopia minority ethnic dictatorship of Meles Zenawi.
In Washington DC, there will be a public meeting on November 7.
Place: Washington Marriott Hotel located on 22nd and M Street NW, Washington DC.
Date/Time: Sunday, November 7, 2010, at 2 PM
In this month of November events will also be held in Denmark (Nov. 6), Stockholm (Nov. 6), Oslo (Nov. 6), Charlotte, NC (Nov. 6), Washington DC (Nov. 7), Denver, CO. (Nov. 7), Dallas, TX (Nov. 7), Seattle, WA, (Nov. 7), London, UK (Nov. 7), Las Vegas , NV (Nov. 10), Seoul, South Korea (Nov. 11), Vancouver, Canada, (Nov. 14), Melbourne, Australia (Nov. 14), Chicago, IL (Nov. 20), Cologne, Germany (Nov. 20).
The Washington DC event will be broadcast live via video and teleconference starting at 2 PM Washington DC time.
As a witness to the post-May 2005 elections massacre, Dr Berhanu Nega gave a firsthand account of Woyanne’s savagery.
