Deadly battle for quixotic prize: Vague promise of finding oil drives violence in Ethiopia, complicating a region already embroiled in civil war, as nation’s real natural gas reserves attract global attention
ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia – Petroleum nearly killed Eskedar (Eskinder?) Demissew. Or at least the illusion of it did. In the predawn gloom of a morning in April, insurgents rousted the stocky truck driver from his tent at a remote oil prospecting camp in Ethiopia’s Ogaden desert. They lined him up in the sand with other workers. And without further ceremony, they sprayed them with machine-gun fire.
Demissew survived, just barely, by playing dead. But 74 other people, including nine Chinese contractors, died in one of the worst attacks on an African oil facility in recent memory.
“I will never work in oil again,” Demissew said quietly at his tiny house in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, where he was popping painkillers and hoping to regain full use of his nerve-damaged arms. “It isn’t worth it.”
Unfortunately, when it comes to getting shot over disputed energy resources, that’s especially true for the Ogaden, where little oil actually has been found.
Indeed, while lucrative pools of crude have inflamed conflicts in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa, even the merest promise of oil wealth — most of it tragically overblown — is stoking violence in the arid wastes of eastern Ethiopia, one of the poorest corners of the world and home to a secessionist movement that has been bubbling for decades.
Rebels with the Ogaden National Liberation Front have added oil operations to their usual targets of army convoys and police stations in the Ogaden, warning all foreign companies not to steal “the mineral resources of our people” on pain of further guerrilla attacks. At the same time, Ethiopia’s government has assured exploration firms that recent security crackdowns in the region have again made prospecting safe. And local conspiracy theorists now hold that the ugly civil war in the Ogaden is heating up only because the U.S. and China are vying over its hydrocarbon riches.
All of which is belied by a startling fact: Today there isn’t a single functioning oil field in the Ogaden, a tract of scrubland the size of Nebraska near the Somalia border. Most of the wells drilled to date have been dry holes. Natural gas is another matter: Exploitable reserves abound. But even this relatively modest bonanza is many years away from profitable development, experts say, because of the area’s profound isolation and instability.
“You’ve heard about resource wars, right?” said a geologist in Ethiopia familiar with that nation’s energy potential. Asking not to be named because of the political sensitivity of the issue, he added, “Well, this one involves an unusual resource. It’s called imaginary oil.”
The main trouble in the Ogaden doesn’t involve squabbling over supplies of black gold.
Ogadeni insurgents have been battling for independence from Ethiopia since 1984, complaining of discrimination by the central government against the region’s Somali-speaking nomads.
In recent months the rebels have accused the federal army of mass rapes, torching villages and withholding food aid in the famine-prone region. Ethiopia angrily denies the charges.
But in response to the spectacular rebel attack on the Chinese-run Abole exploration project on April 24, some of the war’s bitterest rhetoric has involved the ownership of the Ogaden’s underground wealth. And grossly exaggerated notions regarding the size of that bounty — whether it be used to bankroll a future Ogaden state or alleviate poverty in a unified Ethiopia — have only complicated a seemingly intractable civil war, analysts say.
“It is my opinion that oil will eventually contribute significantly to the country’s economy,” Alemayehu Tegenu, Ethiopia’s minister of Mines and Energy, predicted in an interview. “We need three or four more years of exploration to fully understand our potential. After that, I see oil as a unifying force.”
But many residents of Ethiopia’s Ogaden beg to differ.
“The oil is under our land,” insisted Kadija, a wizened trader from the dusty Ogaden capital of Jijiga who was too worried about government reprisals to share her full name. “These foreign companies should be giving money to our Somali elders. They should be building schools here.”
In fact, there simply is no oil money to give out.
According to industry reports, some of the Ogaden’s rock formations match those found across the Red Sea in oil-sodden Saudi Arabia. But years of drilling, some by American companies, have proved disappointing. The U.S. Energy Information Administration says that Ethiopia can muster a paltry 428,000 barrels of estimated crude reserves — what neighboring Sudan exports every 24 hours.
The real prize in the poverty-stricken country seems to be natural gas, experts say. An estimated 4 trillion cubic feet worth of gas has drawn large companies such as Malaysia’s Petronas and Sweden’s Lundin to the volatile and nearly roadless Ogaden. Chinese subcontractors do much of the prospecting.
All the activity in the Ogaden is part of a new hunt for oil in Northeast Africa, industry analysts say.
Exploration projects are under way in such improbable oil sources as Uganda, Kenya, Djibouti, Eritrea and even war-racked Somalia. Contrary to local gossip, the volumes of potential reserves involved haven’t attracted American or Chinese oil majors, which are wrestling for access to bigger subsurface treasures elsewhere in Africa, mainly Nigeria and Angola.
The snooping in Africa’s Horn is spurred mostly by energy nationalism locking up supplies on other continents, experts say. Yet that hasn’t stifled wild expectations that oil will yank some of the world’s poorest nations out of misery.
“It seems like a buzz, but we’re really just turning over stones at this stage,” said an executive in Addis Ababa who refused to be identified because Ogaden rebels were making death threats against some oil companies. “With Russia and the Middle East closed off to us, we’re working around the margins.”
Mitchell noted that the Falklands War between Britain and Argentina was stoked in part by murky reports of offshore oil — reserves that remain untapped to this day. And theoretical crude deposits in the high Arctic are now causing friction between Russia and its circumpolar neighbors, he said.
On Thursday, a Russian submarine dropped a flag onto the seabed at the North Pole in a gesture meant to strengthen its claim over potential oil supplies hidden away there. With global warming melting the northern ice cap, the Arctic is drawing the energy-hungry gaze of several nations.
In Ethiopia, Demissew, the wounded truck driver, said he could not care less whether his abandoned oil prospect produced anything. With three bullet holes in his body, he considered himself lucky to be alive. Most of his tent-mates, he said, were dead.
“Nobody told us the company had been warned by the rebels,” he said, cradling a useless arm in his lap.
Back in the Ogaden, meanwhile, industry sources said that Demissew’s former employers were already replacing the oil camp vehicles and generators destroyed during the rebel attack.
Hope and death spring eternal in the Ogaden, it seems, even when oil doesn’t.
There is a disturbing new development in the premises of the Ethiopian Teachers Association (ETA) in Addis Ababa, this week. The time is a summer break for teachers in Ethiopia. Using this opportunity, the Addis Ababa branch of the ETA decided to hold a meeting to discuss how to carry of their professional duties in the forthcoming academic year, in the absence of the ETA-Addis Ababa chairman, Ato Kassahun Kebede, the victim of the Woyanne’s miscarriage of justice.
As soon as the delegates started arriving, the Woyanne Federal Police Force and undercover agents started detaining and searching them. In the process, the security men found in the bag of Ato Tesfaye Yirga, the Secretary General of the Addis Ababa branch of ETA, the Educational Internationale’s campaign cards, addressed to the leaders of respective countries to release imprisoned teachers in Ethiopia, Guatemala and Botswana. The Woyanne agents started freaking out as if they found secret weapon. They took away Ato Tesfaye Yirga to an unknown destination.
After arresting Tesfaye, the Federal Police prevented the delegates from holding any meeting any where. The delegates stayed in the cafeteria and waited to face all the harassments. In the meantime, the Woyanne agents went into the office and started harassing Ato Abate Angore, Woizero Elfinesh Demissie, Woizero Berhanework Zewdie and Ato Wassihun Melesse (all ETA Executive Board members), saying why they wouldn’t leave the country like their colleagues instead of staying in the country and disturbing the peace.
The ETA leaders were puzzled by such irresponsible comment from the Woyanne agents and simply ignored them. The premises of the ETA is surrounded by Woyanne agents as this report is written.
Ato Kassahun Kebede, chairman of the ETA’s Addis Ababa branch, had been released in April 2007 after being jailed for almost two and half years. Recently, the prosecutors appealed against his release and obtained a warrant to rearrest him. The Woyanne agents then went to his home and the ETA head office but he has eluded them. Kassahun has now disappeared and no one knows his whereabouts.
HE MIGHT not have been able to stand when the national anthem was played in Darwin at the Arafura games in May this year, but you couldn’t find a prouder Australian than Abebe Fekadu.
“I cried with happiness when they raised the flag and played the national anthem for me,” Fekadu says.
“I was so proud to be there as an Australian.” After almost a decade of hardship, Fekadu finally has a reason to look forward to the future. Not only is he one of Australia’s newest citizens, but the 37-year-old paraplegic won gold in powerlifting for his adopted country and qualified to compete at the Paralympics in Beijing next year.
Ironically, it was while agitating for freedom and democracy in his home country of Ethiopia that Abebe Fekadu lost his own.
In 1996, the young activist had spent three months in an Addis Ababa prison for demonstrating against the imprisonment of political prisoners.
“It was hell. There were a hundred people in one cell. They beat us with electrical wire, handcuffed us with our hands behind our back. They did to us the worst things that you can ever do to another human being.”
Fekadu had reason to fear even after his release. In 1978, at the height of the socialist government’s “Red Terror” campaign, his father, a wealthy businessman, was executed, accused of being “anti-revolutionary”.
“I was eight. They took my father to prison and he never came home,” Fekadu says. Despite his previous incarceration, he continued to oppose the government. “All we wanted was freedom of speech and peace. To be able to vote without fear, to live in a better country,” he says.
It was at a secret pro-democracy meeting in the town of Gondar in 1997 that his life changed irrevocably.
The group’s lookout spotted the police and Fekadu ran for his car. A high speed chase ensued and the car spun out of control, Fekadu was thrown from the driver’s seat and lay crushed under the car.
“I was unconscious and they believed I was dead, so they left me.”
He was rescued by passersby.
“When I regained consciousness, they asked if I would like to go to a hospital in the capital, but I couldn’t, I knew it was dangerous. Instead they got me a traditional medicine man who told me I would be OK, and gave me medicine. It didn’t stop the pain though, and at times I wanted to die because it was so bad.”
Ten days later when he showed no sign of improvement, the people who were sheltering him took him to the capital. “The doctor saw me and he told my relatives I wouldn’t walk again, that my only hope of some sort of life was treatment overseas.”
Friends helped Fekadu fly to Italy where his brother lived.
“In Italy I had an operation, to put plates in my spine so that at least I could sit, and I spent six months in hospital recovering flat on my back.”
He was released into the care of his brother, who lived in a seventh floor apartment with no lift. When an attempt was made to take Fekadu down, the enraged landlady screamed at the pair that it was not a place for people with wheelchairs and that he should get out.
“My brother tried to find an accessible place for us to live but couldn’t, so he told her I was gone and from that time I could only stay in the flat. For 10 months I saw nobody.”
In desperation, Fekadu’s brother got new passports and visas and told him they were going to Amsterdam for treatment. Instead, in 1998, they flew to Australia where they claimed asylum and were detained.
For Fekadu, life in detention was an improvement. But
the sense of liberation didn’t last long – his brother was sent back and while Fekadu’s case was considered he was released with a bridging visa, meaning he was unable to work, study or receive any state-funded medical assistance.
“It was like home detention. Life as an asylum seeker is very bad – you have no idea of what is going to happen to your life. Any time, any day they could send you back home. I have no complaints though. If I complain about the Australian Government, then I complain about the Australian people – and it is thanks only to their kindness, those people of Brisbane who provided me with food, shelter and emotional and psychological help for all this time, that I am alive today.”
It was at the suggestion of a volunteer that Fekadu began going to the local sporting wheelies gym.
“I was very depressed at that time. My English was poor, I had no strength in my arms to operate my chair, and didn’t know how to catch public transport. After a few months I grew stronger and I started to see other disabled people and what they were capable of and had some hope.”
Fekadu began powerlifting and entered his first professional competition in 2002, going on to become Australian champion in 2004, 2005 2006 and 2007. “I had not been sporty at all before this – it never occurred to me that I could be an athlete.”
Earlier this year, he was given the news he had waited nine years for.
He was granted a “talent visa”, acknowledging his special sporting skill and just days before the Arafura games, took part in a citizenship ceremony.
“It was a big party, with all the people who had helped me there, so many wonderful people who had looked after me.”
At the Arafura games Fekadu competed for the first time as an Australian, lifting 157.5kg, almost three times his bodyweight to win gold. He now hopes that with the help of a sponsor, he’ll be able to reach his ultimate goal – to compete for Australia in Beijing in 2008.
“It is my greatest wish and dream to compete as an Australian and to inspire people, both people with disabilities and asylum seekers, to give them hope that if you just keep going, one day, eventually, a door will open for you,” he says.
* Fekadu is seeking sponsorship to help him get to Beijing. Contact the Refugee Claimants Centre in Windsor on 3357 9013.
Haile Gebrselassie of Ethiopia walked through Manhattan on a sweltering afternoon, a slight man in a simple khaki outfit, drawing attention only because two burly bodyguards cleared a path for him. Gebrselassie’s trademark smile, unwavering in yesterday’s heat and commotion, erupted in laughter when two passersby wondered aloud if perhaps he was the president of an African country.
If Gebrselassie had crossed town unescorted, the man universally regarded as the greatest distance runner would have turned few heads. His star will only shine come tomorrow when he re-enters the world he dominates, running in the NYC Half-Marathon. It will be the first time the 34-year-old Gebrselassie will run in New York.
The star-studded men’s field will also include the former New York Marathon champion Hendrik Ramaala and the three-time Boston Marathon champion Robert Cheruiyot.
“New York is New York,” Gebrselassie said later, laughing again, ensconced in an Ethiopian restaurant, Meskerem. “I come here and I wonder when it will become quiet here. It is never quiet.”
Luring Gebrselassie into the din from his home in Ethiopia was an eight-year quest by New York Road Runners. The group’s president, Mary Wittenberg, hopes he will someday join the field of its biggest event, the New York Marathon. This year, the Half-Marathon fit into Gebrselassie’s schedule as he prepares for the Berlin Marathon in September.
“There is Haile as an athlete and Haile as a man, and he is a superstar in both regards,” Wittenberg said. “He is the best ambassador for our sport. He can take over a race and he just fills up a room.”
Gebrselassie’s storied career includes 22 world-record performances, two Olympic gold medals in the 10,000 meters and 107 major-race victories. Recently, Gebrselassie has turned his talents to longer distances, winning three of six marathons since 2005 and winning every one of his seven half-marathons. His world record in that event was surpassed earlier this year by Samuel Wanjiru, a 20-year-old from Kenya.
But Gebrselassie has little intention of resting on his résumé or giving in to a younger generation. He surprised the track world in May with a last-minute entry into a 10,000-meter race in Hengelo, the Netherlands, where he finished fifth and became the first man over 30 to break 27 minutes. He ran it in 26:52. The first time he broke 27 minutes, he was 22.
“Everybody was surprised,” Gebrselassie said. “People say, ‘You are too old.’ But I’m not old. I feel still young.”
Gebrselassie believes he could still dominate his old track distances, except the intensity of that training led to a series of injuries.
He was forced to withdraw from the London Marathon in April after 18 miles when he had an allergic reaction to the pollen in the air. He said had never had an allergy attack before.
“It’s not an easy thing,” Gebrselassie said. “In the marathon you are running against the distance. It’s 42K. You never know where the problem you will have. In the 10 and the 5,000, it’s just competing against either the time or the athletes. But the marathon, you compete against the distance itself.”
Gebrselassie has encountered no such problems in half-marathons, building an undefeated streak, and he is now the target of a strong international field in New York. The 13.1-mile race starts in Central Park, races through Times Square and ends in Battery Park.
“He is the greatest distance runner who ever lived,” said Peter Gilmore, the top American entrant. “I’ve never raced against him. It’s going to be cool.”
Gebrselassie, long accustomed to the awe he has inspired, refuses to stop finding challenges. He said he picked his races for the chance to do something special, to reward fans with a memorable performance.
Back home in Addis Ababa, Gebrselassie owns and runs a real estate developing business with his wife, Alem. Their four children, ages 9 to 2, know nothing of the hardscrabble beginning that launched their father’s career. He grew up on a farm, running the more than six miles to school each day.
“You need a hard time when you are training, especially long distance,” he said. “My kids, they live a luxury life. Between my house and school, it’s 3K and they use a car. My age, it was 10K and you walked to school.”
Across Ethiopia, a younger generation has taken up running because of Gebrselassie. Many runners he trains with, he said, are too shy to speak with him comfortably. But he loves to see them competing. It is a major reason he never moved from his country, despite his fame and the pressure that comes with it.
“When you ask them why they start running, and they say, ‘I start because of Haile Gebrselassie,’ for me it’s something special,” he said. “Now, you ask me what I feel. It’s the other way around. These athletes they start running because of me. Now I continue running because of them. When I see them run in the national championships and one of them breaks a record, I just feel so good. I am very proud.”
If he wishes anonymity, he needs only to come to Times Square on a summer afternoon.
Haile Gebrselassie of Ethiopia walked through Manhattan on a sweltering afternoon, a slight man in a simple khaki outfit, drawing attention only because two burly bodyguards cleared a path for him. Gebrselassie’s trademark smile, unwavering in yesterday’s heat and commotion, erupted in laughter when two passersby wondered aloud if perhaps he was the president of an African country.
If Gebrselassie had crossed town unescorted, the man universally regarded as the greatest distance runner would have turned few heads. His star will only shine come tomorrow when he re-enters the world he dominates, running in the NYC Half-Marathon. It will be the first time the 34-year-old Gebrselassie will run in New York.
The star-studded men’s field will also include the former New York Marathon champion Hendrik Ramaala and the three-time Boston Marathon champion Robert Cheruiyot.
“New York is New York,” Gebrselassie said later, laughing again, ensconced in an Ethiopian restaurant, Meskerem. “I come here and I wonder when it will become quiet here. It is never quiet.”
Luring Gebrselassie into the din from his home in Ethiopia was an eight-year quest by New York Road Runners. The group’s president, Mary Wittenberg, hopes he will someday join the field of its biggest event, the New York Marathon. This year, the Half-Marathon fit into Gebrselassie’s schedule as he prepares for the Berlin Marathon in September.
“There is Haile as an athlete and Haile as a man, and he is a superstar in both regards,” Wittenberg said. “He is the best ambassador for our sport. He can take over a race and he just fills up a room.”
Gebrselassie’s storied career includes 22 world-record performances, two Olympic gold medals in the 10,000 meters and 107 major-race victories. Recently, Gebrselassie has turned his talents to longer distances, winning three of six marathons since 2005 and winning every one of his seven half-marathons. His world record in that event was surpassed earlier this year by Samuel Wanjiru, a 20-year-old from Kenya.
But Gebrselassie has little intention of resting on his résumé or giving in to a younger generation. He surprised the track world in May with a last-minute entry into a 10,000-meter race in Hengelo, the Netherlands, where he finished fifth and became the first man over 30 to break 27 minutes. He ran it in 26:52. The first time he broke 27 minutes, he was 22.
“Everybody was surprised,” Gebrselassie said. “People say, ‘You are too old.’ But I’m not old. I feel still young.”
Gebrselassie believes he could still dominate his old track distances, except the intensity of that training led to a series of injuries.
He was forced to withdraw from the London Marathon in April after 18 miles when he had an allergic reaction to the pollen in the air. He said had never had an allergy attack before.
“It’s not an easy thing,” Gebrselassie said. “In the marathon you are running against the distance. It’s 42K. You never know where the problem you will have. In the 10 and the 5,000, it’s just competing against either the time or the athletes. But the marathon, you compete against the distance itself.”
Gebrselassie has encountered no such problems in half-marathons, building an undefeated streak, and he is now the target of a strong international field in New York. The 13.1-mile race starts in Central Park, races through Times Square and ends in Battery Park.
“He is the greatest distance runner who ever lived,” said Peter Gilmore, the top American entrant. “I’ve never raced against him. It’s going to be cool.”
Gebrselassie, long accustomed to the awe he has inspired, refuses to stop finding challenges. He said he picked his races for the chance to do something special, to reward fans with a memorable performance.
Back home in Addis Ababa, Gebrselassie owns and runs a real estate developing business with his wife, Alem. Their four children, ages 9 to 2, know nothing of the hardscrabble beginning that launched their father’s career. He grew up on a farm, running the more than six miles to school each day.
“You need a hard time when you are training, especially long distance,” he said. “My kids, they live a luxury life. Between my house and school, it’s 3K and they use a car. My age, it was 10K and you walked to school.”
Across Ethiopia, a younger generation has taken up running because of Gebrselassie. Many runners he trains with, he said, are too shy to speak with him comfortably. But he loves to see them competing. It is a major reason he never moved from his country, despite his fame and the pressure that comes with it.
“When you ask them why they start running, and they say, ‘I start because of Haile Gebrselassie,’ for me it’s something special,” he said. “Now, you ask me what I feel. It’s the other way around. These athletes they start running because of me. Now I continue running because of them. When I see them run in the national championships and one of them breaks a record, I just feel so good. I am very proud.”
If he wishes anonymity, he needs only to come to Times Square on a summer afternoon.
(This paper was written in early 2000, and was published in Ethiopian Review Magazine and other Ethiopian newsletters at that time. Although the text is almost a decade old, the issues analyzed are still current and fresh.)
It is difficult if not impossible for most of us to assess the effects, including the loss of human lives, the displacement of a large number of people, and the impact on economies, of the still unsettled Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict – a most unfortunate war that is said to be a result of border dispute. To make such an assessment and be able to present relatively balanced figures on the repercussions of the war, one would certainly require a proper and probably lengthy study, including access to government documents in both countries and the cooperation of officials. In general terms, however, it is clear (as many observers have indicated) that if it is allowed to continue the war will have a devastating effect on the people of the two countries. Additionally, based on the experience of the past two years, one might also argue strongly that this unexpected war has deeply affected both day-to-day interactions and general social relationships between the people of two countries – so badly that deep seated hostility has reached a point that may be difficult, if not impossible, to reverse.
One cannot deny the existence of the tensions and resentments towards each other that have been present since the inception of the very idea of a separate state of Eritrea. During the 1980s – which marked the intensification of the armed struggle between EPLF/TPLF and the former dictatorial regime of Mengistu Haile Mariam – various hostile elements (including the distortion and misrepresentation of events and the history of Ethiopia, and quite disparaging statements directed at both Ethiopian and non-Ethiopian historians), were used as tools to gain sympathy and assistance from the international community with the overall goal of achieving an independent state of Eritrea and helping the TPLF to take power in Addis Ababa. In the same period, both EPLF and TPLF worked successfully to gain not only sympathy but also the financial, material and moral support they needed from the West. Later, the early 1990s, with “new leaders” in Ethiopia and Eritrea – at the time, regarded as role models for African leadership – marked a dramatic revival of diplomatic and economic relations with the west.
What is obvious to many of us today is that the desired objectives of both movements (being in power) have been achieved, but without any thought for the future direction of the countries and people they wanted to lead. That is, without developing the sort of vision that is an indispensable part of leadership. Instead, those in power appear to have had a hidden, deep-seated animosity towards each other, which they did not want to disclose to their people. Instead, the two leaders made countless statements in their endless speeches and in addressing many regional and international gatherings, saying they were peacemakers. There would never, never be war between the countries under their leadership; they were not only peacemakers in their own countries but also forces for regional stability, in countries including the war-torn Somalia, the Sudan and even further, to Central and probably even Southern Africa. They said they had taken power because they wanted to free their people from endless conflicts and from the yoke of military dictatorship; to bring an accelerated economic prosperity; and to make people in the region happy and proud of their countries and themselves. Nevertheless, Ethiopians remain unconvinced. Instead, they resisted from the beginning, in an attempt to make their views clear to the international community. There was opposition to the arrangements and agreements between the two regimes in Asmara and Addis Ababa, as well as to the ethnic policies of the Ethiopian government. Since the change of power in Ethiopia that coincided with the independence of Eritrea, Ethiopians, especially the Amhara, have become outcastes, rarely given higher level governmental responsibilities and kept in the dark regarding arrangements between the two countries. In fact, little or no information was given to “outsiders”. Ethiopians who were worried about the new directions being taken in Ethiopia were constantly accused by the regimes in Addis Ababa and Asmara, and also by donor countries and major NGO communities, of either being associated with Mengistu’s regime or of regretting the loss of power by the Amhara, who had been in power throughout most of Ethiopia’s history.
After fighting as hand and glove with TPLF against Mengistu’s regime, Eritreans (living both in Ethiopia/Eritrea and abroad) had at least a brief period in which they could enjoy freedom of movement. Also they, rather than Ethiopians, held the highest governmental and non-governmental positions in Ethiopia. They also had the privilege of advising and helping the TPLF (then called the Ethiopian Transitional Government) to craft strategies and policies in an effort to keep Ethiopians out of Ethiopia’s national and international activities and affairs. As can be seen from speeches and papers presented by Eritreans at many conferences devoted exclusively to Ethiopia, as well to the media in Africa, Europe and the United States, Eritrean intellectuals and professionals indeed behaved as the uncontested official representatives of Ethiopia. Eritreans today probably regret the many roles they played on behalf of the government of Ethiopia during the early 1990s. It is becoming clear that their behavior was not based on a rational assessment and a responsible attitude towards the future wellbeing of the people of these two countries.
Apart from protesting about human rights issues, Ethiopian intellectuals and professionals, on the other hand, produced little or no effective efforts to organize an effective, operational and respected voice capable of embracing Ethiopians and their issues. It is unfortunate that no effort was made to create and use such a vital and indispensable force, capable of linking the energy, knowledge, skills and expertise of Ethiopians living at home and throughout the international community. It is probably not wrong to see the past 15 or 20 years as a missed opportunity. The past two decades have been experienced by Ethiopians as a period of humiliation, characterized by a drastic reduction in the status of Ethiopia and Ethiopians in the international community – with increasing dependence on the outside world and external charities. Unfortunately many Ethiopians have spent this painful period mainly haggling with each other over largely irrelevant matters such as the future leadership of social and political groupings or organizations.
One of the frustrating factors that contributed greatly to the inability of opposing Ethiopian groups to form and shape a united force capable of challenging the regimes in Addis Ababa and Asmara has been the open handed support provided by western countries to both Ethiopia and Eritrea, while little or no attention was given to Ethiopians with opposing views. Western governments were eager to assist the two leaderships, because they were convinced they could do business with them. Long-term political stability in Ethiopia and Eritrea was expected. The presence and the active involvement of the United States was more obvious than that of other countries and its financial assistance, especially to Ethiopia, was said to be quite substantial. US–Ethiopia relations, however, were not limited to diplomatic relations and economic assistance. The United States was actively and publicly engaged in strengthening and shaping a combined regional force involving Uganda and the two countries that were now in conflict with each other. This was aimed at weakening and replacing the Islamic government of Sudan with “moderate” individuals or groups willing to work cooperatively with the west and embrace its economic models. It is also believed that, despite internal tensions and human rights violations, the IMF and the World Bank were and probably still are more open to lending large amounts to the Ethiopian government than to other governments in the region. Yet despite the involvement of donor countries and the provision of substantial financial and military support, and the wide-spread presence of western institutions and NGOs (the latter were largely in Ethiopia), it would be wrong to assume that donor countries were interested in the general well-being of the people, the issues facing rural people and the urban poor of the two countries. In fact it was evident that foreign powers had little or no interest in helping to craft a reliable framework or final agreements regarding Eritrean independence that would have been conducive to a lasting peace. There was also little interest in the many other issues related to future relations and cooperation between the two countries. Since the change of power in May 1991, as far as one can recall, no single western country or department official has shown any concern for human rights violations in either country. No concern was shown when thousands of Ethiopians were forced into exile; when those few Ethiopian public figures who managed to escape Mengistu’s seventeen years of terror were forced to languish (some have already lost their lives) in prison because their views differ from those in power. To convince the world, government officials call their victims criminals. They say these people have been jailed because of criminal activities. Government officials display weapons (secretly placed by government representatives in the backyard or house of a political opponent of the regime) to journalists and the media. Meanwhile Ethiopians have continuously attempted to make the international community aware of Ethiopians who have been killed or jailed and kidnapped or are victims of political repression by the governments in Addis Ababa and Asmara. Multiple sorts of evidence, including lists of names of victims of human rights violations, have periodically been presented to various western ministerial departments and concerned major western institutions and NGOs by national and international human rights organizations. The leaders of donor countries, however, remain reluctant to become involved; they have kept a deaf ear to the daily cries of Ethiopians.
Despite the persistent outcry of Ethiopians regarding massive human rights violations, the present leaders seem to have had the power to convince both diplomats and the rest of the international community, saying it was their predecessors who committed inhuman acts; but they themselves claim to be the backbone of human rights organizations. And despite what must have been longstanding and growing animosity, both leaders were also capable of creating the impression for the outside world that their mutual friendship and cooperation would last for generations. Just three weeks before the official outbreak of war, when foreign journalists asked if he were aware of tensions and anxieties between Ethiopia and Eritrea, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi, indicated that he saw such rumors and gossip as the talk and dreams of enemies, of those who have nothing better to do than spread rumors. He said they were jealous of Ethiopia–Eritrea, and their strong and immovable friendship built on the basis of brotherhood and respect for each other. But this wasn’t true. The two leaders were engaged in making fools of us. The deep-seated animosity that had existed for many years became too much to cover up. It exploded in May 1998, spreading throughout the two countries in a highly accelerated fashion. Many friendly donor counties reacted to this news with surprise and disbelief. For the United States, the outbreak of the war was more than disappointing – it was a slap in the face. But for the INF government in Khartoum, the news was received with relief; it expressed its joy by simply saying “you see, Allah is always with us.”
Inside sources stated that, because the hate and hostile attitudes towards each other were so strong and had built up over many years, the war between the two leaders will not come to a peaceful end. They added that a peaceful resolution of the conflict would definitely affect the existing power structure and in fact the very chance of survival of each leadership. Thus, the two leaders must insist on maintaining the current course, at least their war of words.
Looking at the overall outcome and the painful conditions and experiences that the people of the now two countries have lived through in the last three decades, one tends to conclude that we are all the losers, with little or no prospect of future recovery. The goals that were said to be expected to come from war did not materialize. The obvious results of these years are instead the continuation of the war itself, the loss of more and more human lives, and the production and dissemination of elements that help the leaders to increase the animosity among the people, to help perpetuate their own power. And people listen to the leaders; they are used as instruments.
What has been more surprising, depressing and even shocking in recent times, however, is the instrumentality of intellectuals in the production and distribution of material that has helped to worsen the already existing animosities among the people of Ethiopia and Eritrea. The irrational approach of Ethiopian and Eritrean intellectuals and professionals to the complex and longstanding issues that face us, as well as the people at large, strongly indicates our willingness and readiness to be used as followers and tools of those in power who are interested in keeping people in conflict. We also seem to be incapable and/or unwilling to engage with each other and to look for ways to discuss our problems rationally and constructively. The continuation of the war at home and the increasing animosity towards each other have greatly contributed to the breakup of many marriages (even among those living abroad); many people who used to be good friends do not see each other anymore. But is this the best way to influence people? Is this what we want? In the search for possible strategies to peace and future relations between the people of the two countries, the education we received both at home and abroad (some of us with advanced degrees) seems in some cases more a detriment both to us and the people at large than a force that delivers the anticipated positive contribution.
It appears that our emotion has become exceedingly dominant over our rationality. The techniques we use in attempting to explain our views are often harsh, destructive to both current and future relations between people. Our views and attitudes towards each other are so full of hate and cruelty that we may not be able to reverse or repair the damage in the near future. Ninety percent of writings presented in various newspapers, magazines and web sites for reading or, rather intended for a deeper understanding of their grievance with a particular intention of getting sympathy from the international community contain only emotions and animosities. Texts seem to be written only with the objective of winning the battle and controlling the disputed area; defeat and kill the targeted enemy and then organize a huge party to congratulate those who achieved that. Such emotional articles, full of distortions about day to day events in our home countries and attempting to humiliate leaders and other government officials, are being produced and distributed (in my view) without the slightest thought of any responsibility for short and long-term consequences.
Of course people are being killed and others are suffering as a result of the endless conflict, but again, the loss of so many lives, the painful experiences and events are a clear result of our own creations, deeds and hostile attitudes towards each other. In other words, everything we have to deal with at present is the result of our own desire to achieve certain goals, spurred on by the force of emotion, whatever the cost. The question is again: Have our actions put us where we want to be?
As an illustration, Professor Jordan Gebre-Medhin’s characterizes (Ethiopian Review, Feb. 1993: 27) those who disagree with measures undertaken against the Ethiopian people and with the political and territorial arrangements reached between the two regimes as “Ankober chauvinist,” constituting a repressive campaign to make their dream of greater Ethiopia a reality. Professor Jordan’s article contains many disparaging statements, which does not encourage non-Eritrean readers. Professor Jordan concludes his article by instructing us to read his book for more information.
In the more recent Eritrean Studies Review (volume 3, number 2, 1999, published by Red Sea Press, Inc., and devoted to the Ethiopia–Eritrea war, with articles exclusively written by Eritreans), Professor Jordan again appears to make all possible efforts to add fuel to the existing tensions between the government in Addis Ababa and the Oromo people. In his attempt to convince us, Professor Jordan sees the source of the current Ethiopia–Eritrea conflict as the TPLF’s ambition for the “revival of Tigrayan hegemony” as seen under Emperor Yohannes IV. Jordan states that “Emperor Yohannes and the TPLF made extensive use of the Oromo peasants as the bulk of their army in their invasion of Merb Melash (Eritrea). The centralized states of Emperor Yohannes were built by slave trade from the populous Oromo region. The slaves were shipped to Europe and North America through the Red Sea.” To be able to control Eritrea. He sees exactly the same activity and the same objective as the overall aim of TPLF today: to gain and control access to the Red Sea. Jordan concludes by saying that “already under this Eritrean leadership two regimes in Ethiopia have fallen. If history teaches a lesson it is that the TPLF is marching headlong toward the same abyss into which its predecessors have fallen”. Regrettably, in his review of Jordan’s article in the same volume, Professor Tekie Fessehatzion, Editor of ESR, cites this article as “ insightful.”
It is not at all clear to me which period of Eritrean leadership and previous leadership in Addis Ababa Jordan refers to. Jordan of course mentions names of authors, including well-known names who write on Ethiopian history. But specific books, years and pages are not provided. Such vague, unverifiable analysis can hardly be expected from individuals such as Jordan. In fact it comes across as a bit of creative writing, with bizarre references intended to blackmail both the past and present leadership of Ethiopia. Such distortion and hostility suggests a total immaturity. One thing is clear: this sort of thing will never bring people closer. We will all remain the losers, without being able to help either ourselves or the people.
Another illustration of the growing animosity between the people of the two countries is the following. Since the war erupted, the official representatives of the two countries have been engaged in highlighting and explaining the causes that led to war to the Ethiopian and Eritrean communities residing in the West, to the best of their ability. Such gatherings are typically organized with the intention of arousing emotions, as well as getting moral support and financial contributions from the communities. The officials of each country do their best to convince community members to be on their side, and to share their attitude that their government has been forced to armed confrontation by an aggressor and invader, to defend the country and the well-being of the people.
I myself have attended some of these meetings, both in Europe and in the United States. Two or three weeks before one of the events in which I was a participant, a videocassette showing the bombardment of Mekele was distributed to the Ethiopian community. It graphically pictures the ravaging effects of the war, such as bodies of children who have been killed and wounded. During the meeting the Ambassador and other officials, who had come a long distance to inform us, asked the conference audience if we had already seen the film of the bombardment. A good number of people said “yes”, with a tone of sadness. But one young lady, who said she was from Mekele, said loudly, “yes, I saw it ten or more times.” She went on to tell her story very emotionally to the attentively listening government officials and conference audience: “I was married to an Eritrean man and have three children. Immediately after I saw the videocassette, however, it became clear to me how cruel those people can be. I realized my three children will never, never be a part of me. Because they have an Eritrean father. Two weeks ago, I left my children with their father. I am now living alone. And I will never, see them again”. Because her emotion was so high there was silence for some time among conference participants, and probably many sad emotions as well.
There are many more such instances; we have been witnessing them since the outbreak of the Ethiopia–Eritrea war. Meanwhile it seems to me we have been imposing a restriction on ourselves, so that we do not ask questions, such as whether our current enterprise of spreading hate and animosity against each other is the best way to fulfill our goals and dreams. In my view, they are not. As the past four decades have shown, not even a small section of the population of the two countries has experienced a positive effect as a result of the struggle or the animosity. Instead, almost all of us have clearly been the losers. Not only have we lost family members, also we have witnessed the repeated humiliation of our country and people as a result of frequently returning famine and hunger; and growing poverty, partly as consequence of the diversion of money and human resources into the military. Finally, we have seen the weakening and loss of our many common social and cultural elements. In summary, recovery would be easier if we could work together, but it will be extremely difficult if not impossible to restore the many sided cultural forces that have tied us together over centuries, unless we are willing to begin approaching our issues and problems rationally and to take measures to correct the mistakes we have made.
________________
The author can reached at [email protected]
Ironically, it was while agitating for freedom and democracy in his home country of Ethiopia that Abebe Fekadu lost his own.