EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a good news for the tens of thousands of Ethiopians whose land has been {www:confiscate}d and given to Karturi, an Indian Company, to grow crops for export. The Karturi farm has no benefit for most Ethiopians. The profit from the farms goes in to the pockets of Meles Zenawi and members of his ruling junta.
By William Davison
ADDIS ABABAB 6 (Bloomberg) — Karuturi Global Ltd., the Indian food processor that earns most of its revenue abroad, said it will replant its corn {www:crop} in Ethiopia after a {www:flood} destroyed its first planned {www:harvest} in the country.
The damage was caused by flooding on the Baro and Alwero rivers in the western Gambella region, Sai Ramakrishna Karuturi, managing director of the Bangalore-based company, said in interview on Oct. 4 in Addis Ababa. A potential {www:harvest} of 60,000 metric tons of corn was lost after 12,000 hectares (29,653 acres) of land was flooded, he said.
“The waters started rising last Wednesday and have not stopped until Sunday,” he said. “Most of our {www:maize} is lost. We have taken a bit of a hit there.” The company said in a statement on Oct. 3 the loss was estimated at $15 million.
Karuturi, the world’s largest rose grower, in 2009 leased 100,000 hectares from Ethiopia’s government to grow sugar cane, palm oil, cereals and vegetables. The company may receive an additional 200,000 hectares if the government is satisfied with the first phase of the project, according to the Agriculture Ministry.
The project is “ahead of expectations” and will be completed by December 2013, and the government is “extremely satisfied” with progress, Karuturi said.
Ethiopia plans to transfer 3.3 million hectares of land to investors during a 5-year growth plan announced last year. About 350,000 hectares has been leased since Sept. 2009, according to the Agriculture Ministry’s website. The Oakland Institute, a U.S.-based research group, said in a report earlier this year that 3.6 million hectares has been rented by investors since early 2008.
‘Crazy Amount’
The flooding that breached specially built barriers near Karuturi’s plantations couldn’t have been predicted, Karuturi said. “This kind of flooding we haven’t seen before,” he said.
“This is a crazy amount of water.”
A second crop of as much as 15,000 hectares of corn will be planted when the waters {www:recede} and will be harvested around March, Karuturi said. A 200-hectare {www:sugar cane} nursery started by the company is expected to expand to 10,000 hectares before being sold in 2013, while 500,000 plants of palm oil will be ready after two years, he said.
To minimize transport costs, produce from Karuturi’s Gambella operations will be exported to South Sudan and other East African markets, rather than farther afield, Karuturi said. Crops will be paid for in dollars, bringing foreign exchange to the National Bank of Ethiopia, he said.
Two tug boats with the capacity to carry 600 tons each and which will transport crops along the Baro River that flows into South Sudan are expected to be operational within 18 months, Karuturi said. The company is forming partnerships with foreign companies to build rice and sugar processors on the farm, he said.
Federal Police Joint Anti-Terror Task Force in Ethiopia has caught the suspect that is responsible for causing the death of 9 ruling party musicians.
The suspect, a 2-year-old bird named Al’ula, has been positively identified by the driver of the bus that crashed on its way to South Sudan carrying over 25 members of the TPLF musical group.
The driver, fighting back tears, told investigators that the bird barged into the bus and savagely attacked him causing him to lose control. The bird was assisted by an ox, the driver said. The ox is yet to be apprehended.
The suspect, Al’ula, has been brought to Maikelawi Jail in Addis Ababa today for interrogation. Initial investigation indicates that Al’ula has received extensive terror training in Eritrea, according to TPLF regime spokesperson Bereket Simon.
They include two Swedish journalists – Martin Schibbye and photographer Johan Persson – who were charged a fortnight ago with terrorism. The two men were arrested in early July after crossing from Puntland into Ethiopia‘s troubled Ogaden region.
In the last two weeks Ethiopian security forces detained two Ethiopian journalists, Eskinder Nega and Sileshi Hagos. Ethiopian government spokesman Shimelis Kemal accused the journalists, of plotting “a series of terrorist acts that would likely wreak havoc.”
Two other Ethiopian journalists were detained over the summer and have been held on terror charges for writing articles criticising the government.
Wubishet Taye of the Arawamba Times and Reeyot Alaemu, a part-time columnist, are currently held in Maikelawi prison in Addis Ababa awaiting trial. They could face sentences of up to 20 years.
“In the past four months, authorities have used sweeping terrorism laws to detain six independent journalists in an attempt to wipe out the few critical voices left in the country,” said CPJ’s east Africa consultant, Tom Rhodes.
“If the authorities have credible evidence against any of these journalists, let them present it publicly. Otherwise, they must release them.”
Anti-Terrorism proclamation of 2009
In 2009, the Ethiopian government passed anti-terror legislation, with definitions of terrorist activity that are broad and ambiguous.
It permits a clampdown on political dissent, including political demonstrations and public criticisms of government policy that are deemed supportive of armed opposition activity.
It also deprives defendants of the right to be presumed innocent and of protection against the use of evidence obtained through torture.
Mohamed Keita, coordinator for the CPJ’s Africa programme, says: “Ethiopia is certainly one of the most restrictive nations in Africa in terms of press freedom. It has one of the most appalling press freedom records on the continent.”
International broadcasters harassed
The free press expanded under the Ethiopian government when the ruling party, the EPRDF, first came to power in 1991.
But in the aftermath of the 2005 elections, when the contested results caused civil unrest and the massacre of 193 civilians, there has been a relentless crackdown on the independent press.
Many publications were shut down and 13 editors imprisoned. Today, most of the media in Ethiopia is state-owned. Even the international media are not immune to political interference.
Both Voice of America (VOA) and Deutsche Welle (DW) have had their radio and internet services jammed within the country.
This occurred particularly during the May 2010 elections and in 2011 against the backdrop of the revolt in North Africa.
A VOA spokesperson said: “Three VOA stringers have had to flee Ethiopia because they were harassed for reporting VOA’s Horn of Africa service during the 2005 national election.
“Another stringer fled Ethiopia because she was being repeatedly harassed, even after she stopped working for the service.”
Ludger Schadomsky, head of DW’s Amharic service, said: “The government is putting a lot of pressure to bear on DW and VOA to have certain opposition people removed from the airwaves.”
DW have allegedly been told by Ethiopia’s minister of communications, Shimles Kemal, that the jamming of their services was “owing to interviews DW had conducted with ‘terrorist organisations.'”
It is alleged that this relates to an interview with the Ginbot 7 political opposition leader, Berhanu Nega.
Schadomsky said: “We have made it clear we will not be arm twisted into self-censorship. The present climate of fear leads many of our prospective partners in Ethiopia, and even in the Diaspora, to decline our interview requests. ‘We have family back at home’ is the standard line.”
A cable released by WikiLeaks [05ADDISABABA3915] reveals that in 2005 the Ethiopian government also exerted pressure on US diplomats over VOA broadcasts.
The document is an interesting commentary on the government’s position on the media. The US diplomat reports that, the Ethiopian government “remains focused on issues of control and restraint… rather than positive engagement and outreach.”
When the foreign minister, Tekeda Alemu, met diplomats at the US embassy in Addis he expressed his concern at VOA’s biased reporting.
He contended that VOA was “not working as a news outfit but was instead carrying out political activities intended to damage the EPRDF and the Ethiopian people with no sense of embarrassment or proportion.”
Journalists in Ethiopia
In Ethiopia, the threat of imprisonment for political journalists is constant.
Dawit Kebede is editor of the Awramba Times, one of the few independent publications in the country.
He was arrested and imprisoned for two years on charges of treason and genocide following the 2005 elections when he wrote a column suggesting that the EPRDF may have lost the elections.
He said: “The recent atmosphere in Ethiopia for journalists is the state of insecurity and fear of what tomorrow might bring. Journalists who write on political issues work under a shadow of fear.
“When it comes to giving aid, donors should ask about the democratic status of Ethiopia. If they could bring up issues of ‘What does freedom of the press look like’ as a precondition of their aid, I believe it would create better conditions in Ethiopia.”
The bureau has asked the Ethiopian government on numerous occasions for a comment about the media in Ethiopia. It has declined the chance to respond.
It will be an understatement to state that, regardless of ethnic, religious, gender, age or ideological {www:affinity}, Ethiopians and people of Ethiopian origin discuss their country of origin with passion and genuine interest. Broadly, they share a common set of principles. This is the good news. However, there is another side to the story that generates animated conversation within and outside the country. This short article reflects my own assessment and conclusions with regard to the two schools of thought that have more or less raged for more than forty years.
What is the area of consensus?
All of us wish to see good governance based on the rule of law, equality and justice, commitment to human rights and human dignity, freedom and political {www:pluralism} otherwise known as democracy. Clearly and by any socioeconomic and political measurement, the world in which ordinary Ethiopians live is as inhospitable as anyone could imagine. It is this in- hospitability that drives those of us who hope for a better tomorrow for all Ethiopians that dictate these generally shared values. They are fundamental and critical enough to force each activist to soul search so that we can contribute to the realization of the hopes, dreams and aspirations of the Ethiopian people as individuals and as communities.
What then is the hurdle or problem?
For more than forty years, political parties, groups and their supporters focused less on the commonalities that bind them as people and drove their thinking and their actions through the prism of ‘irreconcilable differences.’ This is a trap implanted by the current governing party. The experiences of people across the globe in general and the recent people-anchored revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East inform that there is no contradiction between the {www:essence} and meaning of one or unified Ethiopia that embraces all of its citizens, and freedom and democracy. Divisions along ethnic, religious or rigid ideological lines and the contention that Ethiopia is an artificial creation of the ‘colonial type’ continue to act as barriers in pursuing and achieving the hopes and aspirations of all of the Ethiopian people. What best describes Ethiopia and Ethiopians is that they are the sole creators of a mosaic of nations and nationalities that defended the national independence and territorial integrity of the country for thousands of years. This Ethiopian made multi-nation building was not imposed by colonial powers. At various times in history, all Ethiopians contributed to the formation of this mosaic. I suggest that no single nationality group has preponderance over this, recognizably, tumultuous history through which other countries had to pass. Ethiopia deserves the same treatment as other countries that have gone through rough waters in which an untold millions were killed in what most experts believe is the natural evolution of both homogenous and {www:heterogeneous} or multi-ethnic nations. Belaboring the agony of the past that comes from each successive system of governance detracts from singular focus on the future.
I should like to illustrate the enormous economic, social, political and security costs for all members of Ethiopian society of past and current preoccupation with ‘irreconcilable types of differences’ by citing five examples:
• The so-called developmental state led by the TPLF/EPRDF has induced one of the worst income inequalities in the world. The gap between the small super rich whose incomes, wealth and assets originate directly or indirectly from a discriminatory and exclusive system has reached a dangerous level. This pronounced inequality in wealth and assets deprives better livelihood for the vast majority of the Ethiopian people. It undermines fairness and equity and retards the development process. Inequality takes a toll on the national economy in that those with low incomes and the poor cannot afford to purchase even domestically produced goods and services. In the end, inequality that comes from discriminatory and exclusionary policies and programs will threaten the very fabric of the society and will lead it to instability and fragility. The regime is able to get away with gross inequality because there is no political competition. It is not accountable to the public but to itself. Opponents can and should mobilize and work in unison to bring gross inequality to the attention of the world community.
• In a succession of reactions to poor and repressive governance, my generation opposed and revolted against the Imperial regime, the Socialist Military Dictatorship and now the TPLF/EPRDF dictatorship without a clear vision of the future and the alternative political and socioeconomic order that will govern the country.
• Ethiopia and its diverse population lost their legitimate access to the sea. Therefore, the Ethiopian and Eritrean people that share a great deal in common lost economic and comparative advantages that would benefit both. Political elites in both regions who exploit divisions and tensions have put them at risk.
• The TPLF/EPRDF exploited the void in unified political and civic opposition and granted millions of hectares of Ethiopian fertile farmlands and waters to more than 1,000 licensees from 36 countries, and to favored supporters of the regime. Yemeret neteka ena kirimit affects sovereignty, dignity, citizenship, security and wellbeing, long-term national interest, the environment and ordinary lives of people.
• The same void in political wisdom, organization and national leadership within the opposition exposes individuals and groups within the country for constant and relentless assault by the governing party and state. The Failed States Index for 2011 and Wiki leaks reveal shocking information concerning the brutality of the one party state on Ethiopian society: group grievances not addressed, human flight in thousands, uneven development and income emanating from discrimination, economic decline and relentless inflation, increasing de-legitimization of the state and gross human rights violations almost on a daily basis. The regime has compromised the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Wiki leaks reveal that the governing party cost Ethiopia “a large chunk of territory” that the regime transferred to the Sudan in a secret deal. The single party state is “the judge, jury and executioner” with no end in sight.
All of these and more present a dire picture that cannot be resolved unless all opposition parties, groups and civil society close ranks and place the interests of all of the Ethiopian people at the center of their struggle.
What then is the alternative?
In my assessment, a firm and determined commitment for the unity of the Ethiopian people and for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country is the surest path to freedom and political pluralism. I have no doubt in my mind that unfettered unity will lead the Ethiopian people to freedom and political pluralism. The country is large and potentially rich enough to accommodate the hopes and aspirations of all of its diverse population. The ills, misinterpretations of history, ‘brutalities’ and other transgressions of the past can and should be addressed by a democratically elected government rather than used as a precondition for transformation. In Australia, South Africa and other democratic countries, legitimate representatives of the people set-up institutional mechanisms to investigate and address past grievances. Ethiopia can achieve the same goal.
I believe that we can draw a critical lesson of what not to do from our own recent political history that division along ethnic lines rather than genuine commitment for the pursuit of freedom for all Ethiopians is a losing proposition. For example, I would hate to imagine that ethnic and other divisions would subject Ethiopians to perpetual civil war in order to satisfy the narrow interests of foreign powers or the needs of political elites. The regime’s relentless attack on individuals and groups in the country is a prime indicator that it will not tolerate any form of dissent. This is the reason why I argued in several articles that the regime is more like Libya, Syria and Yemen than Egypt or Tunisia. This attribute should compel all to work in tandem and energize all Ethiopians within the country to rise against repression and oppression.
The incontestably able and dedicated Ethiopian humanist and political activist Obang Metho, Executive Director of the Solidarity Movement for a New Ethiopia captures the essence of what I am saying in two themes: “Humanity before Ethnicity” and “No One Will be Free Until All are Free.” Division and fragmentation go exactly in the opposite direction from realizing freedom and political pluralism for each and all. If the ultimate objective is to dislodge the TPLF/EPRDF oppressive system of governance and replace it with a government of national reconciliation, peace, unity in diversity, freedom and equality, justice and equitable participation in social and economic life, human rights and the rule of law, then all aspirants must join forces and aim for the same goal. This is the reason why I suggest that the unity of all of the Ethiopian people is the surest path in achieving freedom and democracy in the country we love. Imagine if all Ethiopian rise against oppression. Who in the world can stop them? There is no force that can.
In my view, the hopes and aspirations of Ethiopia’s 90 million people are constrained by an enormous gap in national political organization and wise leadership. It is response to and filling this gap that will enable them to achieve genuine freedom, political pluralism and participatory and equitable economic and social opportunities. Ultimately, it is realization of this noble goal—that can only come from a unity of national purpose–that will create the foundation to conquer abject poverty, hunger and famine, dependency, unemployment, diseases, corruption and gross income inequality and illegal outflow of billions of dollars from one of the poorest and hungriest countries in the world.
Lack of unity of purpose and recognition that Ethiopians share common values and aspire for a common destiny will prolong the agony of the Ethiopian people. If we defer accepting the principles of Ethiopian sovereignty and territorial integrity and the unity of its diverse population, it will be difficult if not impossible to achieve the kinds of transformative, grassroots and youth-led popular revolutions we are witnessing in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria and Yemen. In none of these countries is the principle of national unity and the unity of people at risk. The tragedy of not forging ahead with a unity of purpose that comes from accepting these fundamental principles that will serve all Ethiopians in the long-run is that Ethiopia’s economy will be in shambles. Instability and gross violations of human rights will persist. We see evidence of this in hyperinflation, gross inequality and selected and indiscriminate killing, persecutions and jailing of innocent people by the governing party. The regime explains these and other anomalies as the price of growth and development; and ‘anti-terrorism.’ The terror comes from the one party state itself.
Where do we start and where do we end-up?
At the end of the day, political and social actors must believe in and trust the Ethiopian people to do the right thing. I do. The long-term interests of the country and its entire people must guide political and social action. I have no doubt in my mind that peaceful, country anchored and youth led transformation is possible; in fact, inevitable. The rest of us in the Diaspora have a moral obligation to contribute to the democratization process through collaboration rather than division or silence or skepticism or detachment.
If we remain preoccupied with our differences rather than the common bonds that we share as Ethiopians, and the aspirations and hopes we believe in for future this and future generations, we will contribute to the enormous risks that the country and its diverse population face. As some in Addis Ababa said recently, we will simply accept the tragic notion that “Ethiopia is a country that resembles a person who is traveling in a pitch-black dark night.” I know what it means to travel in a “pitch black night. “ In Waves, I depicted my own and my father’s journey in Northern Gondar at night not knowing exactly where we were headed to; but hoping that we will end-up at our destination by some miracle. A country led by an arrogant, cruel, repressive and exclusive ethnic clique is a country that moves in the dark. For those in power and with wealth, nothing can be as good and as bright as staying in power and enjoying the spoils of political capture. For the disenfranchised—the vast majority of the Ethiopian people—the Ethiopian regime is a nightmare. It turns daylight into darkness, hope into misery, aspiration into despair, and hope into hopelessness. The rest of us must reject this situation.
Our person-made and too often, self-serving divisions will postpone the democratization process indefinitely. This artificial division will allow the current repressive regime to single out and decimate persons of conscience, principle and stamina who expose inhumanity and cruelty. It will deny current youth the possibility of closing ranks and standing solidly for freedom and political pluralism in a sustainable way. It will undermine the noble tradition of the Ethiopian people to live side by side. It will give political elites a chance to divide and weaken all of us. It will prolong the life of a divisive, oppressive, inhumane and brutal regime. If the situation continues for too long, the country will continue on a path of eternal darkness, fragility and greater ethnic based fragmentation. This condition will not serve anyone. At minimum, the Diaspora can try to cleanse itself of the culture of egoism, individualism, village-like mentality, elitism, partisanship and division, attributes that sustain the TPLF/EPRDF regime. The current onslaught against civil liberties, individual rights and freedoms is as much a manifestation of a desperate regime that has gone berserk as much as it is a manifestation of weaknesses within the opposition camp whether within the country or in the Diaspora.
The march of history tells us that the brave and principled souls within the country who are sacrificing their lives, their families and their wellbeing are precisely what Ethiopia and Ethiopians need today. At minimum, we can and should stand shoulder to shoulder with them and reject repression and oppression of the one party dictatorial state today and not tomorrow.
In November 2006, in her farewell cable to her replacement Donald Yamamoto and the Assistant Secretary of State Jendayi Fraser, former Acting U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia Vicky Huddleston warned: “It is time to stop hating Ethiopia.”
In November 2007, in a N.Y. Times op-ed piece, Huddleston sternly admonished the U.S. Congress: “Do not turn on Ethiopia.” She lectured Congress that “by singling out Ethiopia for public embarrassment, the bill puts Congress unwittingly on the side of Islamic jihadists and insurgents.” She sought to alarm Congress by raising the specter of “enemies that have besieged Ethiopia from within and without.” She advised Congress to discard H.R. 2003 (Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act) “and instead use creative diplomacy to deal with the combined threat of insurgency and war.” She said if the U.S. does not support the ruling regime in Ethiopia, the U.S. could “lose Ethiopia” and “cede our influence” to China and Russia.
In October 2007, Samuel Assefa, the former ambassador of the ruling regime in Ethiopia to the U.S. complained: “The U.S. House of Representatives today approved irresponsible legislation that, if it becomes law, would create fresh obstacles to Ethiopia’s bold efforts towards comprehensive democratic reforms. The legislation also would undermine regional stability in the Horn of Africa by jeopardizing vital security cooperation between the United States and Ethiopia.” Assefa later told the Washington Post, “We are very disappointed because the House did not pursue an agenda that is recognizably that of the U.S., Ethiopia or friends of democracy.”
If the names of the two ambassadors had been withheld, even the most sophisticated reader would have difficulty recognizing which one of the two ambassadors is the actual representative of the ruling regime in Ethiopia. But Huddleston’s rhetorical pyrotechnics on behalf of a host country is rare for the guileful world of diplomacy, and certainly disproves the old saying is that “An ambassador is an honest man (woman) sent to lie abroad for the good of his (her) country (not the other country).”
Gone Native?
But Huddleston’s defense of Zenawi’s regime would put many a silver-tonged American trial lawyer to shame. Reading Huddleston’s farewell cable, one is confused about which country she represents. Her zeal and passion in defending Zenawi’s regime is so bizzare, one has to wonder if she had indeed “gone native” (a phrase sometimes used to describe U.S. diplomats who work so fully inside a foreign culture that their policy recommendations become those of the host country). In her cable, she pleads with her bosses that Zenawi is “the ideal partner” and America’s buffer “from terrorism and radical Islam” in the Horn. She argues that Zenawi is the only one who can keep together the “old and fragile Ethiopian empire”. She paints Zenawi as a man of reason and as evidence of that she claims he has listened to her and dropped “charges against VOA reporters and 14 others.” She says by having “conversations with Meles and the EPRDF”, she has “effectively encouraged Meles and the GOE to deepen their commitment to Ethiopia’s democracy and development.” She believes H.R. 2003 is a “hubristic” manifestation of American arrogance, imperiousness, condescension and disrespect for Zenawi. For all the things temporal Zenawi can do, Huddleston forgot to mention that he can also walk on water.
But Huddleston has no respect or use for Zenawi’s opposition. She advises that the “goal” of the “nay-sayers” who oppose Zenawi “is neither democracy nor development, but regime change.” To help the naysayers is to “unwittingly contribute to the break-up of the nation.” She reserves her special antipathy for the jingoistic and chauvinistic “hard-line supporters [of the CUD] in the Diaspora [who] are unwilling to engage in the democratic process.” She warns that if the U.S. acts “aggressively to appease the Diaspora, some members of Congress and some civil society groups, we will lose Ethiopia.”
In Defense of Zenawi
In her defense of Zenawi, Huddleston pulls out all the stops and uses every trick in the diplomatic pouch to steer the new ambassador to fully support Zenawi. She pleads and coaxes, warns and charges, vilifies and condemns just to sustain unflagging American support for Zenawi.
“We must strengthen our partnership”
“As I prepare to turn over my responsibilities to my good friend and respected colleague, Ambassador Don Yamamoto, I urge the USG to maintain and strengthen our partnership with Ethiopia. Ethiopia is moving in the right direction — despite the nay-sayers — on democracy, development, and protecting the region from terrorism and radical Islam. If we fail to consolidate and support Ethiopia, we could unwittingly contribute to the break-up of the nation, and fuel a Christian – Muslim conflict in the Horn…
CUD leaders could cause Ethiopia’s national disintegration
Ethiopia is an old empire but a fragile one. Political and religious divisions could potentially tear away parts of Oromiya, Gambella, and the Somali region from the uneasy federation. Even Tigray, where the Abyssinian empire began, is at risk because the jailed CUD leaders want a unitary state that includes Eritrea, and Tigrean and Eritreans alike will resist Amahara domination.
The CUD defendants and Diaspora supporters are extremist hardliners
The prosecution has recently argued somewhat more persuasively through ongoing witness testimony that some of the defendants called for armed uprising and protest to overthrow the government. Some of the CUD detained leaders as well as their vocal, hard-line supporters in the Diaspora are unwilling to engage in the democratic process, whether by joining Parliament or by agreeing to disavow street action.
Ethiopia as the “only democratic nation” and “bulwark against radical Islam”
Ethiopia, with its 77 million Christian and Muslims — the second most populus country in Africa — would seem to be the ideal partner… It is the only democratic nation that can project power throughout the Horn. It is also the remaining bulwark against the expansion of radical Islam throughout Somalia and beyond.
We are part of Zenawi’s “inner circle”
Because we built a relationship of trust with the Prime Minister and his inner circle as well as with the opposition… Our conversations with Meles and the EPRDF hierarchy have effectively encouraged Meles and the GOE to deepen their commitment to Ethiopia’s democracy and development. Dialogue between the ruling EPRDF party and all the opposition parties resulted in the overwhelming adoption of modified Parliamentary rules that reflect international standards and permit the opposition to question Minister and propose laws. The on-going dialogue among the ruling party and opposition has already addressed rule of law issues in the Oromia and Amhara regions and will now publicly review a new media law and capacity building at the National Electoral Board.
Ethiopian Democracy and Accountability Act HR 2003) is Bad
The democratic trend is positive. But the partnership will not be strengthened if we bend to demands to pass legislation that puts Ethiopia in the same category as countries on our terrorist list, or make public our private concerns about human rights and governance. Ethiopia — as I have learned — will not act from weakness or because of public threats or even loss of aid. If we stay the course — continue the partnership, and build the trust — not only do we stand a good chance of getting the prisoners pardons, but we will reinforce good governance, economic reform and defense against terrorism in the Horn.
“The right and wrong way to persuade” Zenawi
If we aggressively and publicly press Meles in order to appease the Diaspora, some members of Congress and some civil society groups, we will lose Ethiopia. We will cede our influence, leaving the field to China, Russia and others who have little interest in helping to create a multi-party democracy.
Putting pressure on Zenawi is helping the enemies of “democracy and development”
Ethiopia is neither — as its critics like to claim — a Marxist-Leninist dictatorship, nor is it a multi-party democracy that strictly adheres to open market principles. But if hubris demands that partnership be based on our standards, then we will find ourselves helping those whose principal goal is neither democracy nor development, but regime change.
“Meles will turn to China as a more reliable partner”
Meles has already turned to China as a more reliable partner than Europe, even though EU assistance levels have been restored. Today we have a strong relationship with Meles and the inner circle, but it is a wary one. It is not yet a full partnership because Washington remains hesitant over Ethiopia’s human rights record, despite significant improvements over last year. As Ethiopia faces – almost alone — a radical Islamist challenge to its existence and the region’s stability, it is time to put aside our hesitations and make Ethiopia a full partner of the US.
The Enemies of Ethiopia
At the same time, insurgents from Oromiya (the OLF) and the Ogaden (the ONLF), backed by Eritrea, will move east into Ethiopia. The ONLF intends to break off Ethiopia’s Somali region, uniting it with a Greater Somali state. The OLF will either ensure that there is regime change in Addis Ababa or separate Oromiya from Ethiopia. In the end, Ethiopia’s enemies — most notably Eritrea — would be successful in breaking up Ethiopia and ousting Meles.
“A Plan of action for Ethiopia”
I have met with Meles biweekly on average and I have never had a meeting with him in which I did not raise the issues of governance and human rights. As a result, I have been able to visit the prisoners three times and am working with concerned Ethiopians and Ethiopian-Americans on a process that may lead to pardons. The point here is that Meles — and the inner circle — listen to our advice if it is given in private and as a partner. Therefore I would suggest that we lay out a series of bench marks which can be used by Washington to gauge Ethiopia’s progress…
Huddleston’s “series of bench marks to gauge Ethiopia’s progress”
Parliament passes a media law and anti-terrorism laws that meet international standards;
The opposition is consulted on the appointment of a new, neutral National Electoral Board;
Parliament approves public financing for political parties;
GOE engages successfully with donors on the governance matrix;
The Government pursues the investigations recommended by the Independent Inquiry Commission;
Offices of legal opposition parties that have not been reopened are opened;
All legal parties are permitted to participate in the Spring elections;
The judicial process is completed and a verdict determined for all CUD detainees [and pardon given to those] who agree not to engage in illegal activities or civil disobedience are pardoned;
Preparations for local elections are done in consultation with the opposition; and local elections are successfully held.
The Evidence of Huddleston’s “Benchmarks”
The so-called anti-terrorism proclamation, with its vague and broad definition of terrorist acts, is now the principal tool of crushing all dissent in the country. It has been condemned by international rights groups as one of the most repressive laws of its kind in the world. There is no neutral “National Electoral Board”. In 2010, the largest coalition of opposition parties received the equivalent of USD$176 (3,000 birr) according to one major opposition leader. Human Rights Watch reported in 2010 that “donor-supported programs” have been used to “control the population, punish dissent, and undermine political opponents.” Zenawi’s handpicked Inquiry Commission determined after a meticulous investigation that 193 unarmed demonstrators were massacred in 2005 and 763 wounded. 237 of the killers still roam the streets free. In the past few weeks, leaders and members of opposition political parties, journalists and others have been jailed and many others continue to face intimidation, harassment and persecution. The first female leader of a political party in the history of Ethiopia, Birtukan Midekssa, was jailed for nearly two years on bogus charges of denying a pardon. The 2010 U.S. Human Rights report stated, “criminal courts remained weak, overburdened, and subject to significant political intervention and influence.” In the 2008 local elections, Zenawi’s party “won all but a handful of 3.6 million seats.” In May 2010, Zenawi’s party won the election by 99.6 percent.
It is regrettable that Huddleston did not read or ignored the findings and evidence in the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices – Ethiopia for the years 2005 and 2006.
It is time to love Ethiopia!
FREE ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS IN ETHIOPIA!
***Vicki Huddleston is currently the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Africa in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Previous commentaries by the author are available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ and http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/
The old saying is that there is no honor among thieves. Is it also true that there is no honor among dictators? Perhaps that is a distinction without a difference. But Meles Zenawi, the dictator in Ethiopia and Omar Bashir, the dictator of Sudan seemed to be good longtime friends. At least Bashir thought so. When Zenawi went to see him on August 21, 2011, “to resolve South Kordofan’s problem and defuse tension in the Blue Nile,” Bashir told reporters: “Meles is a friend and [he is] keen on peace and stability in Sudan and a strong advocate of Sudan in regional and international occasions.”
Some friend! Back in February 2009, Zenawi was not “advocating peace and stability” in the Sudan. Rather, he was sweet-talking the Americans to “remove the Bashir regime”. According to a Wikileaks cablegram:
Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles told Acting AF Assistant Secretary Phil Carter and AF/SPG Director Tim Shortley that with the expected ICC indictment of Sudanese President Bashir either 1) someone within Khartoum would take advantage of the move to attempt to remove Bashir, or 2) such an attempt will either fail or be aborted. While Meles gave the chances of success for option 1 as nearly zero due to the close knit ties among senior National Congress Party (NCP) officials, he argued that the result would leave the Bashir government a ‘wounded animal’ that is more desperate….
Meles suggested that if he were the U.S., he would either 1) remove the NCP regime or, if that weren’t an option, 2) make clear to the GoS that the U.S. is not out to get it and explicitly lay out what is expected of the GoS on Darfur and the South to avoid continued challenges…[Meles] clearly conveyed the preferred choice would be to ‘remove the Bashir regime.’ … Meles concluded the discussion by highlighting that ‘they don’t trust the Obama Administration’…
In a moment of extraordinary candor, Zenawi also characterized Bashir and the National Congress Party as money-grubbing, power-hungry thugs: “While the ‘Islamic agenda’ may have motivated the regime ten years ago, today they are interested only in money and power.”
Defending the “Wounded Animal”
In July 2008, Zenawi went gung-ho shielding the “wounded animal” from the spear of the International Criminal Court. Zenawi waxed poetic as he warned the West against the folly of the “single-minded pursuit of justice” by indicting Bashir for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur. Zenawi pleaded that “concern for justice should not trump concern for peace.” He joined the African Union in urging the UN Security Council to suspend Bashir’s indictment. Zenawi’s right hand man Seyoum Mesfin declared: “The government of Ethiopia believes that ICC’s prosecution process is unbalanced, lacks justice and violates the sovereignty of Sudan.” He lectured, “It is not the duty of ICC to present the image of a legal nation as if illegal.”
In December 2007, Zenawi was defiantly defending Ethiopian sovereignty against a bill in the U.S. Congress that he considered “insulting”. Zenawi told a member of the U.S. Senate that “H.R. 2003 – The Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act – was an insult and risks jeopardizing the excellent U.S.-Ethiopia relationship if enacted into law.” He protested that the bill “is unfair and unduly singles out Ethiopia.” He “argued that H.R. 2003 effectively represented the United States “kicking its friend” when others have far more egregious records. He demanded respect from the U.S. and warned the U.S. to not “legislate about the minutia of internal politics in Ethiopia.” It is OK for the Americans to “remove the Bashir regime” for human rights violations in Darfur, but not OK to pass a simple bill requiring human rights accountability in Ethiopia!?!
Regime Change in the Sudan and ?
Zenawi’s “preferred choice” was removal of the Bashir regime. In other words, he wanted regime change in the Sudan. But the mechanics of ridding Bashir’s regime remained unclear. Would the U.S. instigate a military coup? Undertake a covert CIA operation to eliminate Bashir and his top lieutenants? Coordinate NATO air strikes on critical military infrastructures? Launch a full-scale military invasion? Sponsor, arm and support rebels and dissidents in the Sudan? Support a neighboring nation (with experience in invading neighboring countries) launch a preemptive attack? Perhaps the U.S. Congress can pass a bill asking Bashir to remove himself?
On the other hand, what happens after the Bashir regime has been removed? Allow for free democratic elections? Leave the Sudanese to their own devices? Install puppets?
In a press release last week, Zenawi’s regime denied counseling Washington to remove the Bashir regime. It is not an uncommon practice to seek plausible deniability when one is caught red-handed. But one must consider Zenawi’s denial in the removal of Bashir in a broader context of his interventionary regional foreign policy pattern and practice. In December 2006, Zenawi invaded Somalia to effect regime change and save Somalia from“Talibanization.” In March 2011, Zenawi “announced a change in its foreign policy to actively advocate the overthrow of the government in neighboring Eritrea.” Is it reasonable to believe that someone who has a proven record of attempting regime change in two neighboring countries in the last few years would seek regime change in a third neighboring country?
But there is an irony in all of the regime change business that Zenawi does not seem to appreciate very well. One cannot condemn others for doing the same thing one is doing. Zenawi should not be surprised when others in neighboring countries allegedly plot to seek his removal. Nor should he be shocked at the alleged efforts of “part time amateur terrorists” who seek to remove him from the throne. The old saying goes that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Or is it?
People Who Live in Glass House Should Not Throw Stones
In soliciting the Americans to “remove the Bashir regime”, Zenawi makes the compelling moral argument that Bashir & Crew have no legitimacy whatsoever because they are “interested only in money and power.” How ironic! That is exactly what they say about him and his crew too. “According to the World Bank, roughly half of the rest of the national economy is accounted for by companies held by an EPRDF-affiliated business group called the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray (EFFORT). EFFORT’s freight transport, construction, pharmaceutical, and cement firms receive lucrative foreign aid contracts and highly favorable terms on loans from government banks.”
By a strange stroke of coincidence, Zenawi and I finally agree at the most fundamental level: All African dictators are in the business of politics “only for the money and power”. In one of my most widely-read commentaries over the past four years, Thugtatorship: The Highest Stage of African Dictatorship, I merely fleshed out Zenawi’s fundamental argument that the politics of dictatorship in Africa is only about money, power and privilege:
If democracy is government of the people, by the people and for the people, a thugocracy is a government of thieves, for thieves, by thieves. Simply stated, a thugtatorship is rule by a gang of thieves and robbers (thugs) in designer suits. It is becoming crystal clear that much of Africa today is a thugocracy privately managed and operated for the exclusive benefit of bloodthirsty thugtators.
There is a great lesson to be learned here. This is not about one African dictator plotting behind the scences with the “imperialist West” to remove another African dictator. It is certainly not about getting justice for the oppressed people of Darfur. It is not even about sovereignty, independence, respect and the rest of it. It is “only about money and power.”
Africans who have suffered the trials and tribulations of colonialism, faced the persecution and repression of military dictatorships and withstand gross abuses of their human rights daily deserve leaders who are in politics to help the poor, defend the rights of the weak and powerless, uphold the rule of law, practice accountability and transparency and respect the voices of the people. Africa needs leaders who honor and serve the people.
FREE DEBEBE ESHETU, OLBANA LELISA, BEKELE GERBA, ESKINDER NEGA, ANDUALEM ARAGIE, WOUBSHET TAYE, REEYOT ALEMU, ZEMENU MOLLA, NATHNAEL MEKONNEN, ASAMINAW BERHANU AND ALL OTHER POLITICAL PRISONERS IN ETHIOPIA.
Previous commentaries by the author are available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ and http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/
