NEW YORK — Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn has pledged to maintain the controversial policies of his predecessor, Meles Zenawi, who died last month. The Ethiopian leader outlined his views on foreign and domestic issues in an interview with VOA’s Peter Heinlein in New York.
In a 30-minute conversation, Prime Minister Hailemariam discussed topics from Ethiopia’s strained ties with neighboring Eritrea, relations with China and the United States, and the government’s clampdown on media.
The interview was Hailemariam’s first since taking office last week. It took place in New York, on the eve of his first address as prime minister to the United Nations General Assembly.
On Eritrea, he said he sees no sign of a thaw in a relationship that has been frozen since an indecisive two-year war that ended in 2000. That conflict left at least 70,000 people dead.
Eritrea says progress depends on Ethiopia’s acceptance of an international border commission ruling that favors Eritrea’s position. However, Hailemariam says the only solution lies in bilateral dialogue.
“There is no change in policy. Our policy designed after the war since nine years, a standing policy that we need to have dialogue without conditions, so we offered this to the Eritrean government and leadership and are waiting for this to happen for the last nine years and will continue to do so,” said Hailemariam.
Ethiopia’s relations with Egypt also have been strained over sharing Nile River waters. The government of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak had resisted efforts by Ethiopia and other countries along the upper Nile to renegotiate a colonial-era water sharing agreement.
Hailemariam says he will wait to see what policies the new government in Cairo will adopt.
“The previous Egyptian regime was looking into the Nile issue as a security issue. There are a number rumors that this is [seen as] a security issue, but I cannot tell you the government’s position until now. So I don’t want to deal with those speculations because we haven’t come across officially a change of policy with the current Egyptian governmen,” he said.
Hailemariam also expressed satisfaction with the election of a new president in neighboring Somalia, and with the signing of a cooperation agreement between Sudan ad South Sudan. He said both developments will contribute to regional stability.
The Ethiopian leader said relations with both China and the United States are good. He rejected a suggestion that Ethiopia is tilting toward Beijing for economic and ideological reasons, and he defended the decision of Ethiopia’s ruling party to strengthen relations with China’s Communist Party.
“Our party has very close ties with the Communist Party of China because we have areas where we can learn from the work the Chinese Communist Party is doing, simply because we are people centered, where Chinese Community Party has experience with working with people at the grass root, so we learn with China, this kind of approach, it doesn’t mean our ideology is similar to China,” said Hailemariam.
On domestic issues, Hailemariam defended the imprisonment of several journalists and opposition politicians under a recently enacted anti-terrorism law. He said those sentenced to long jail terms, such as award-winning blogger and fierce government critic Eskinder Nega, had been living a double life, or as he called it, “wearing two hats.”
“Our national security interest cannot be compromised by somebody having two hats. We have to tell them they can have only one hat which is legal and the legal way of doing things, be it in journalism or opposition discourse, but if they opt to have two mixed functions, we are clear to differentiate the two,” he said.
The Ethiopian leader also suggested his government will continue to clamp down on opposition media, including jamming VOA Amharic service broadcasts and blocking foreign websites considered objectionable.
“My government has no policy of blocking these issues. It is depending on the websites or whatever, if there is any connection with these kind of organizations, it’s obvious. That’s done in every country. You cannot open a blog of Osama bin Laden in the United States,” he said.
Hailemariam is filling out the remainder of the late prime minister Meles’ term, which ends in 2015. He said if the ruling Ethiopia Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front, or EPRDF, gives him the chance, he would like to serve at least one more term. But he added, “that will be a decision of the party”.
The EPRDF has held power in Addis Ababa since 1991, when it ousted the pro-Soviet Marxist dictator Mengistu Hailemariam after a lengthy armed struggle.
The eulogy delivered in Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa by Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, on the occasion of the funeral and mysterious death of dictator Meles Zenawi will probably go down in the annals of US diplomacy as one of the most inauspicious moments in which an opportunity was missed to assert the values of this great country.
To the dismay of the people of Ethiopia, the Ambassador failed to seize the moment to send an unwavering message of America’s commitment to democracy and the rule of law to a captive audience that included TPLF cadres and some of the most notorious African dictators, and instead chose to join the likes of Omar al-Bashir of Sudan in profiling a larger-than-life portrait of the deceased despot, who had ruled that poor African nation with an iron fist for over two decades.
In complete ignorance of her own State Department report on the abysmal human rights records of Zenawi, Rice gave credence to the outlandish fanfare the TPLF cadres had orchestrated, in a brazen imitation of the Kim of North Korea, to idolize the “Great Leader”, and added her voice to the ululation the inhabitants of Addis were dictated to wail under deplorable duress.
For a seasoned diplomat, that moment was a golden opportunity to reiterate to the cadres of the TPLF and other African dictators in attendance the timeless message of Barack Obama in which he perceptively counseled:
“…. there are some who advocate for democracy only when they’re out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. So no matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy. “
In point of fact, diplomats do not often get a second chance to redeem themselves from catastrophic missteps. Fortunately for Rice there is a second chance to make nice with the Ethiopian people and to discharge her diplomatic responsibilities with prudence by engaging the Ethiopian delegation on what is expected of good governance, when they come to New York to attend the U.N. General Assembly on September 28, 2012.
Recognizing Ethiopia is at a crossroads, the Ambassador should exercise discreet diplomacy and send a strong message to the EPRDF kingmakers that the time to play ethnic politics is over; and that leaders who do not play by the rule of law, who consider themselves above the law and who deny their people basic human rights and the freedom to choose their own government, will be disallowed membership to the community of civilized nations and denied access to much-needed loans and financial assistance.
More importantly, the Ambassador should take to heart and reinforce Barack Obama’s direction:
“… Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments– provided they govern with respect for all their people.”
Following the unexpected demise of Meles Zenawi, leaders of his ethnic-based party, the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), and the umbrella front, the EPRDF, have on many occasions expressed their determination to continue his repressive policies by other means, without regard to the rights and aspirations of the people of Ethiopia for a free and all-inclusive representative government.
Many peace and freedom loving Ethiopians hope that the recent announcement by the regime’s propaganda chief, Bereket Simon, concerning the appointments of Hailemariam Dessalegn, a Southerner, as chairman and Demeke Mekonnen, an Amhara, as vice-chairman, of the EPRDF, is not a window-dressing move intended to enable the perpetuation of the ethnocentric dictatorship of the TPLF, that still is in full control of the vital economic, military and security institutions of the country.
Ethiopians at home and in the Diaspora anxiously pray that the EPRDF cadres are not succumbing to an age-old trick of dictators who appoint figureheads and hold sham elections in order to buy time to eliminate opponents and entrench themselves in power. They painfully remember all too well how Mengistu HaileMariam deceptively used this ruse when he placed Aman Andom, an Eritrean, and later Teferi Banti, an Oromo, as heads of state, before he conveniently eliminated them and imposed his brand of brutal dictatorship.
With the vast majority of the army generals still hailing from the minority Tigrai ethnic group, TPLF affiliated conglomerates controlling the vital economic activities in the country, journalists and other dissenting members of the society languishing in prison in thousands, major opposition groups completely shut out from the political process, and all relevant mediums of communication controlled by the ruling party, many genuine Ethiopians wait to be convinced that it is not a charade for the EPRDF cadres to pretend they have a change of heart in naming members of other ethnic groups to leadership positions.
The Ambassador and the US government have a historic opportunity to impress on the EPRDF cadres to establish a strong Ethiopia and leave a lasting legacy by abandoning the destructive ethnic policy of the late dictator, and opening the door for genuine dialogue and discourse on the way forward to building a better Ethiopia – an Ethiopia in which individual rights will be respected; everyone will have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and no individual or group will be above the law.
All internal and external players should understand the bitter fact that a minority member of a society cannot continue to rule, repress, exploit and deny the basic rights of the vast majority through force, repression, subterfuge and espionage. History has shown time and again, be it in Apartheid South Africa or Ian Smiths’ Rhodesia, that repression and exploitation by a minority ethnic group would inevitably fade away. Failure to understand this historical verity has drastic consequences; and as John F. Kennedy famously said: “Those who make peaceful evolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable”.
In case the EPRDF leaders and their sponsors find it necessary to be reminded, the following are prudent measures, embraced by all freedom and peace loving Ethiopians, that should be implemented immediately as a demonstration of goodwill and readiness to change :
Release, unconditionally, all political prisoners, including such journalists as Eskinder Nega.
Annul all repressive laws promulgated in the name of “war on terror” but intended to harass, intimidate and incarcerate opposition groups and individuals.
Invite all opposition groups inside and outside of Ethiopia who fight for the establishment of rule of law and democracy in Ethiopia, and form a consensus on a framework for establishing democracy in the country.
Permit unfettered freedom of speech and expression.
Desist from implementing irresponsible economic and fiscal policies, abandon the current campaign of land grabs, and foster a market economy where all citizens participate in business opportunities without regard to political, religious or ethnic affiliations.
Diversify the monolithic army leadership through active recruitment of talents from all ethnic groups that constitute the Ethiopian mosaic.
(The writer can be reached at Selam Beyene, Ph.D. [email protected])
Ethiopians had their new year on September 11. It is now 2005. On September 21, they also got a new prime minster. How delightfully felicitous to have a new prime minister in the new year! Heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to the people of Ethiopia are in order.
Hailemariam Desalegn was sworn in as prime minister before a special session of parliament. It was a rather low key affair with little pomp and circumstance. There were no parades and no sounds of bugle or trumpet announcing the changing of the guard. No inaugural balls. It was a starkly scripted ceremonial affair with minimal fanfare and political theatricality. Some 375 of the 547 members of Parliament sat quietly and heard Hailemariam recite the oath of office and gave him a hearty round of applause.
Since late May, Hailemariam has been operating in political limbo. He was officially described as “deputy”, “acting” and “interim” prime minster, the latter two offices unauthorized by the Constitution of Ethiopia. There were also some nettlesome constitutional questions about the duties of the deputy prime minister in the absence of the prime minister and the proper method of succession. Those issues aside, Hailemariam’s swearing in ceremony was scheduled on several prior occasions only to be cancelled without adequate explanation. The abrupt cancellations fueled all types of speculations and conspiracy theories about turmoil and confusion among the ruling elites. To complicate things further, it was officially announced days before the actual swearing in ceremony that Hailemariam would be sworn in early October. For some publicly unexplained reason, a special session of parliament was suddenly called for the purpose of naming a prime minister creating additional public confusion about the manifest dithering among the power elites.
Hailemariam takes office under a cloud of apprehension. Speculations abound that he is really a “figure head”, a “front man” and a “seat warmer” for the entrenched interests in a transitional period. Critics suggest that he will have little independence of action and will be puppet-mastered by those who control the politics and economy behind the scenes. Others suggest that he is a “technocract” who is unlikely to survive in a political machine that is lubricated by intrigue, cabalist conspiracy and skullduggery. But some, including myself, have taken a wait-and-see attitude and would like to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Hailemariam’s “inauguration speech” hammered the theme of “Stay the Course.” He said under his leadership the programs and projects that have been initiated and underway will continue to completion. “Our task is to stay the course on the path to firm development guided by the policies and strategies [of our party]. We will continue to pursue development and democracy by strengthening our collective leadership and by mobilizing the people.” He said modernizing agriculture and the rural economy by accelerating agricultural development were top priorities. His government “will work hard” to improve agricultural infrastructure. He promised help to cattle raisers. He emphasized the need for better educational quality and entrepreneurial opportunities for the youth. He said the country needs a curriculum focused on science, technology and math. His administration will work hard to expand opportunities for women and pay greater attention to women’s health and improved health care services to mothers. He called upon the intellectuals and professional associations to engage in rigorous applied policy analysis and research to solve practical problems.
Hailemariam said his vision is to see Ethiopia join the middle income countries in ten years. To achieve that, he said significant improvements are needed in industry and manufacturing. His administration will pay special attention to remove development bottlenecks, improve the export sector and facilitate greater cooperation between the private sector and the government. He promised to work hard to alleviate housing and transportation problems in Addis Ababa. He touched upon the economy noting that though inflation is coming down, much more action is needed to bring it under control. He urged Ethiopians to bite the bullet (tirs neksen) and make sure the existing plans for ground and rail transportation, hydroelectric power generation and telecommunications are successfully executed. He pledged to complete the “Hedasse Gidib” (“Renassaince Dam”) over the Blue Nile. He referred to corruption and mismanagement in land administration, rent and tax collections and public contracts and pledged to get the public involved in eliminating them. He noted that there were significant deficits in good governance in the operation of the police, courts, security system that need to be improved.
Hailemariam emphasized that importance of human rights. He urged the parliamentary oversight committee to review the work of the Human Rights Commission for improvements. He underscored the vital role of the Elections Commission, the Human Rights Commission, press organizations and opposition parties in the country’s democratization. He said he was ready to work “closely” with press organizations, civic society institutions and other entities engaged in the democratic process. On foreign policy, he focused on regional issues, Ethiopia’s contribution to peace-building in Somalia, South Sudan and the Sudan.
The speech could best be described as “technocratic” in the sense that it focused on ways of solving the complex problems facing the country. The speech was short on rhetoric, oratory, appeals to the pathos of the masses and big new ideas and promises. He did not sugarcoat the deep economic problems of the country with hyperbolic claims of 14 percent annual growth nor did he make any grandiose claims about Ethiopia as the “one of the fastest-growing, non-oil-dependent economies in the developing world”. There were no impactful or memorable lines or sound bite phrases in the speech. He offered no inspirational exhortations in words which “soared to poetic heights, igniting the imagination with vivid imagery”. There were no anecdotes or storytelling about the plight of the poor and the toiling masses. It was a speech intended to serve as a call to action with the message that he will work hard and asks the people to join him. He spoke of responsibility, hard work, willingness to lead, standing up to challenges, engaging the opposition, civil society and press institutions, etc. for the purpose of improving the lives of the people.
Hailemariam’s speech was a refreshing change from similar speeches of yester years in a number of ways. It was delivered in a dignified and statesmanlike manner. It was not an ideologically laced speech despite repeated references to the guiding grand plan. It was accommodating and bereft of any attitude of the old militaristic and aggressive tone of “my way or the highway.” There was no finger pointing and demonization. He did not use the old tricks of “us v. them”. He did not come across as an arrogant know-it-all ideologue. He offered olive branches to the opposition, the press and other critics of the ruling party. What was even more interesting was that he did not pull out the old straw men and whipping boys of “neoliberalism”, “neocolonialism”, and “imperialism” to pin the blame on them for Ethiopia’s problems. He did not pull any punches against the local opposition or neighboring countries. He used no threats and words of intimidation. Even when he addressed the issues of corruption, mismanagement and abuse of power, he aimed for legal accountability rather than issuing empty condemnatory words or threats.
Another surprising aspect was the fact that the speech contained none of the old triumphalism, celebratory lap running and victorious chest-beating exercises. There was no display of strength of the ruling party, no self-congratulations and ego stroking. He softly challenged the opposition and the people to work together in dealing with the country’s problems. His speech seemed to be aimed more at making the people think and act on existing plans than making new promises. Over all, the speech was written with intelligence, thoughtfulness and purpose. Hailemariam spoke in a cool and collected manner and tried to get his points across directly. What he lacked in rhetorical flair, he made up with a projection of self-assurance, humility, respectability and profesionalism.
What Was Not Said
There were various things that were not said. Though Hailemariam acknowledged the structural economic problems and the soaring inflation, he offered no short-term remedial plans. He repeatedly came back to “stay the course” theme. Does “staying the course” mean “our way or the highway”? Is national reconciliation an idea the ruling party will consider? There was no indication in the speech about the transitional process itself, but he did offer what appeared to be olive branches to the opposition, the press and others.
Hailemariam also did not give any indication about the release of the large numbers of political prisoners that are held throughout the country. Nor did he mention anything about re-drafting the various repressive press, civil society and so-called anti-terrorism laws. For over a decade, all of the major international human rights and press organizations have condemned the government in Ethiopia for its flagrant violations of human rights, illegal detention of dissidents and suppression of press institutions and persecution of journalists.
Words and Actions: Shoes of the New Prime Minister
It is often hard to judge politicians by the speeches they make. It is not uncommon for politicians to deliver inspirational speeches and come up short on the action side of things. It is true that action speaks louder than words. In his speech, it seems Hailemariam sought to move himself, his party and the people to action. But he is in a difficult situation. He feels, or is forced to feel, that he has to “fill in big shoes”. He said he will walk in footsteps that have already been stamped out. But the shoe that fits one person pinches another. But for all the hero worship, Hailemariam must realize that there is a difference between shoes and boots. For two decades, boots, not shoes, were worn. Those boots have made a disfiguring impression on the Ethiopian landscape. It must be hard to pretend to walk in the shoes of someone who had sported heavy boots. The problem is what happens when one wears someone else’s shoes that do not fit. Do you then change the shoe or the foot? I hope Hailemariam will in time learn to walk in the shoes of the ordinary Ethiopian. He will find out that those shoes are tattered and their soles full of holes. Once he has walked a mile in those shoes, he will understand what it will take to get every Ethiopian new shoes. He must also realize that “it isn’t the mountain ahead that wears you out; it’s the grain of sand in your shoe.” There comes a time when we all need new shoes. That time is now. All Ethiopians need new shoes for the long walk to freedom, democracy and human rights. Prime Minster Hailemariam does not need hand-me down shoes; he needs shoes that are just his size and style and rugged enough for the long haul.
I believe Hailemariam gave a good “professional” speech. I do not think it will be remembered for any memorable lines, phrases or grand ideas. It was a speech that fit the man who stood before parliament and took the oath of office. As a self-described utopian Ethiopian, I thought the very fact of Hailemariam taking the oath of office symbolically represented the dawn of a long-delayed democracy in Ethiopia. Few would have expected a man from one of the country’s minority ethnic group to rise to such heights. Whether by design, accident or fortune, Hailemariam’s presence to take the oath of office, even without a speech or a statement, would have communicated a profound message about Ethiopia’s inevitable and unstoppable transition to democracy. Most importantly, now any Ethiopian boy or girl from any part of the country could genuinely aspire to become prime minister regardless of his/her ethnicity, region, language or religion.
I do not know if history will remember Hailemariam’s “inaugural” speech as a game changer. History will judge him not for the words he spoke or did not speak when he took the oath of office but for his actions after he became prime minister. It’s premature to judge. I like the fact that he appeared statesmanlike, chose his words carefully, focused on facts and presented himself in businesslike manner. It is encouraging that he expressed commitment to work hard to make Ethiopia a middle income country within a decade. He showed a practical sense of mission and vision while keeping expectations to reasonable levels.
To be Or Not To Be a Prime Minister
“Being Prime Minister is a lonely job,” wrote Maggie Thatcher, Britain’s first female prime minsiter. “In a sense it ought to be; you cannot lead from a crowd.” I would say being a prime minister for Hailemariam, as the first prime minster from a minority ethnic group, will be not only lonely but tough as well. But somebody has got to do it. Hailemariam has his work cut out for him and he will face great challenges from within and without, as will the people of Ethiopia. I wish him well paraphrasing Winston Churchill who told his people in their darkest hour:
I would say to the House as I said to those who have joined this government: I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Democracy. Democracy at all costs. Democracy in spite of all terror. Democracy, however long and hard the road may be, for without democracy there is no survival.”
I believe Ethiopia will survive and thrive and her transition to democracy is irreversible, inevitable, unstoppable and divinely ordained!
On a personal note, I would give Prime Minster Hailemariam a bit of unsolicited advice. Smile a little because when you smile the whole world, not just the whole of Ethiopia, smiles with you!
Amharic translations of recent commentaries by the author may be found at: http://www.ethiopianreview.com/amharic/?author=57
Previous commentaries by the author are available at: http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/ and www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/
After I wrote a commentary a few days ago saying that we Ethiopians need to give the new prime minister some time to prove himself worthy of our support, I have received a flood of responses from some who supported my call, others who strongly opposed me, and a few who are in the middle. Supporters of TPLF are also disguising themselves as opposition and trying to exploit the discussion to their advantage. They want Hailemariam to fail so that they will return to power.
To my surprise, the most aggressive criticism of what I’ve said came mostly (not all, but mostly) from individuals who are contributing little or nothing to the struggle for freedom in Ethiopia. By contrast, those who have been expressing goodwill toward Hailemariam are mostly those who have been active in the struggle. My focus in this commentary are the cynics.
One of those cynical individuals is a friend of mine who called me on Friday afternoon, right after the new prime minister was sworn in, to give me tongue lashing. She said, ‘How dare you ask us to support Hailemariam? How is he better than Meles? Nothing has changed… Didn’t’ you hear his speech today? He didn’t give any hint of change… I am angry at you… etc.’
I asked her: ‘Did you expect Hailemariam, who is currently surrounded by TPLF hynas, to say any thing that would antagonize them? Do you want him to get assassinated? Do you want him to become another Teferi Benti or Aman Andom?’
My friend: ‘At least he could have hinted that there will be changes and that he will release the political prisoners… He is too weak to say or do any thing that contradicts the wishes of his TPLF bosses…’
Me: ‘Do you mean Hailemariam should be brave like Andualem, Eskindir, Prof. Asrat…? I am sure you would not shed a drop of tear if TPLF put a bullet in his head? What have you done when TPLF jailed brave Ethiopians like Andualem? What have you done when Meles gunned down all those young pro-democracy protestors in the streets of Addis Ababa? I bet you didn’t lose even one hour of sleep over that…’
Not surprisingly, my friend did not have any answer.
It is the same story with many (not all) of those who are now condemning Hailemariam before the guy was not even sworn in. Such individuals are engaged in nothing more than political bullshitting. Empty talk, no action! They come up with all kinds of excuses not to support opposition groups and the independent media. And yet, they have no shame in expecting some one to sacrifice himself.
Let’s be serious: Was it really that difficult to overthrow Meles Zenawi, or at least force him to come to the negotiation table? Meles’s strength was our apathy, laziness, and disunity. Meles could not have thrown the political leaders and journalists in jail had enough people been serious about the struggle. Without firing a single shot, through economic boycott alone, we could have crippled Meles and his Woyanne junta. It is because most people have become so selfish and stopped caring for one another that very few people have to pay heavy sacrifices.
Hailemariam cannot do any thing by himself. His first priority is not our demand. It should be his own survival. He is surrounded by TPLF, a gang of cold-blooded murderers who are capable of killing him in a split second. To me, the fact that Ethiopia is no longer led by an evil dictator who hated her and her people is by itself a major change. By all accounts Hailemariam is not an evil person, and he doesn’t hate Ethiopia. I heard from various people who know him closely that he is a decent man. That is a good starting point. Now it is up to us to help him transition Ethiopia to genuine democracy by weakening and defeating the enemy, TPLF. We have the power to defeat TPLF without firing a shot. Let’s do it.
If you want Hailemariam to release the political prisoners, I have this message for you: get off your butt and let’s campaign against the TPLF, not Hailemariam. Let’s boycott all business enterprises that are controlled by TPLF, such as Ethiopian Airlines (that is headed by an incompetent TPLF cadre named Tewolde Gebremariam), Wugagan Bank (owned by Sebhat Nega), Guna Trading (controlled by Azeb Mesfin) and others. For the next 3 month or so let’s also reduce the money we send to our families in Ethiopia by 20 – 30 percent. TPLF will be forced to agree to release all the political prisoners, or else they will run out of money. That is how the U.S. forced TPLF to accept Hailemariam as prime minister. There was no money in the bank after Meles Zenawi’s family and friends looted the treasury. Banks had stopped giving hard currency to importers. The economy, that is dominated by TPLF, was about to collapse. The U.S. promised them hard currency infusion if they do not block Hailemariam from becoming prime minister. They relented. We can do the same think. We can force TPLF to accept our demands.
If you are not willing to take part in such campaign, shut the hell up please.
Obang Metho speaks about Land, Water and Resource-Grabbing and Its Impact on Food Security in Africa
At the 1st Africa Congress on Effective Cooperation for a Green Africa in Bremerhaven,Germany
Solidarity Movement for a New Ethiopia (SMNE)
Thank you for inviting me to address the 1st Africa Congress on Effective Cooperation for a Green Africa (ECOGA). It is a great honor for me to be here with you and I am humbled to be one of the keynote speakers on a topic of such great importance to Africa and the world beyond. Before I start, I would like to thank Mr. Arne Dunker, the Executive Director of Klimahaus, (Climate House), a brilliant way of letting others experience the different climates of the world within one building without going anywhere. It is a unique way to educate the people about preserving our environment. Even the rooms used at this conference are named as significant symbols of concerns regarding global warming raised at the Kyoto Accord and Montreal Accord. I would also like to thank the Society for Threatened Peoples, Jens Tanneberg, Dr. Eva Quante‐Brandt, Dr. Auma Obama, Ken Nyauncho Osinde, Dr. Nkechi Madubuko and other dignitaries here.
As I speak about the relationship between land, water and resource use related to food insecurity; particularly related to what I have called the “Second Scramble for African Land, Water and Resources,” I will not only be speaking of Africa as a whole, but I will be speaking as an insider—as someone who comes from this land and soil called Africa; in particular, from the Gambella region of Ethiopia in East Africa, which enables me to use my own experience as a microcosm of what is most at risk on the continent. Yet, the issues of Africa are also global issues that will positively or negatively impact our global society. As global citizens, we will best flourish when we respect the rights of others for “no one will be free until all are free.” This is a fundamental principle of the Solidarity Movement for a New Ethiopia (SMNE), the social justice movement of which I am the executive director.
We are all connected together not only by living our lives together on this planet, but by the God-given humanity within each of us, which should be a bridge to valuing “others” – including those unlike us—putting “humanity before ethnicity” or any other differences. This is another fundamental principle of the SMNE for our humanity has no ethnic, religious, political or national boundaries while the dehumanization of “others” has repeatedly led to genocide, injustice, exploitation, corruption, poverty and deadly violence. When I speak, I am talking not only about my life and the future of my children and grandchildren but also of yours. It is that same inter-connectedness that brought me here today to address this audience made up of some of the top thinkers and decision-makers related to a “Green Africa,” even though I grew up in one of the most remote and marginalized regions of Ethiopia, on the border of South Sudan.
I come from a tiny, previously unknown, and now what some consider to be an endangered people group called Anuak, which means, “people who eat together, who laugh together and who share.” Anuak indigenous land stretches between eastern South Sudan and western Ethiopia, dividing the Anuak between two separate countries. When the civil war was going on in Southern Sudan, tens of thousands of refugees from every ethnicity, passed through our land, seeking refuge and peace. The Anuak of Gambella, Ethiopia would often supplies food and water to the weary refugees as they fled war-torn Sudan.
Sadly, right now, the Anuak, nearly all small subsistence farmers, are becoming refugees in their own land as they are internally displaced from indigenous land their ancestors have possessed for centuries. They have become “discardable” people by a regime that wants their land, but not them, in order to lease it to foreigners and regime-cronies for commercial farms. They are not alone; millions of other Ethiopians and Africans from countries all over the continent are facing the same plight.
One of the greatest threats Africa has ever faced is the impact from this new phenomenon of land-grabbing. In many places, these land grabs are going on without any input from stakeholders and without any compensation for lost lands, homes, crops and livelihoods. Small farmers are ill-prepared for the sudden dispossession of their land and with it, the means to their livelihood. Lacking education or training for other jobs, some have become a source of cheap labor as they are left without alternative means for survival. These foreign investors, countries and regime cronies are often making secretive leasing agreements with authoritarian regimes that give them millions of hectares of land for next to nothing for periods of time as long as 99 years in some cases.
With the current concerns for food security, especially in a changing climate where our soaring world population is expected to reach nine billion inhabitants by 2050—only 38 years from now, unused andunderutilized land, with access to water for irrigation, has become the new “precious commodity”sometimes called “green gold.” Add to that the ever-increasing global need for resources like minerals, oil, natural gas and commodities in general and where do eyes turn but towards Africa, a continent with great reserves of rich, untapped resources. This is what is driving the second scramble for Africa.
During the first scramble for Africa, foreign slave-traders trafficked African human beings with assistance from partners on the inside, Africans themselves, who were wanting to profit from the betrayal of their fellow African brothers and sisters, especially those from competing tribes. Divide and conquer policies made it easier for outsiders to align with some African opportunists, the powerful among them, who then became complicit with these outsiders in the exploitation of other Africans. Colonialism, while making some genuine contributions to Africa, is still broadly considered one of the darkest of times in the history of humanity, marked by the ruthless, exploitive and dehumanizing pursuit of slave labor, economic profit and power from Africans and Africa.
This pursuit of Africa’s people as marketable commodities and of Africa’s many resources led to foreign-led minority rule, which was maintained through divide and conquer strategies, later adopted by African strongmen. The continent has not recovered. These African strongmen, with their “tribal-based groups” continue today. Even in Ethiopia, where colonial efforts failed, feudalism succeeded—with similar results. Whether colonialism or feudalism, both systems fed off of the manipulation of tribalism or its weaknesses. Now, “one-tribe-take-all” politics, with its “colonial” or “feudal” strongmen, has infected much of Africa and can be seen in theethnic-based, one-party regimes typical of most dictatorships on the continent. Conflict never resolves as one group thrives—usually a minority of the population—while everyone else struggles. If another group comes into power; the pattern is oftentimes repeated. Strong institutions for checks and balances do not exist or when they do, they are pseudo-institutions, controlled by those in power. These non-representative governments continue to epitomize what happened at the Berlin conference of 1885, held only a short distance from where we are today, when Europeans met to divvy up the continent of Africa based on their self-interests. No Africans were present. Now, modern-day African dictators are doing the same.
Thirsty for power, material wealth and privilege, and empowered by foreign and crony partners and heavy-handed militaries, they are divvying up the indigenous land and resources of the African people, without consulting the people or providing compensation for losses, as required under international law and many national constitutions. The people are disempowered, intimidated or “bought off.” The environment has never been at greater risk as short-term interests and quick gain trumps the political will to give oversight to ecological concerns surrounding development projects.
From 2008 until now, some 204 million acres of land (approximately 80 million hectares) have been leased worldwide. The majority of it is in Africa. Within the African continent, Ethiopia is at the forefront of these land-grab deals. Within Ethiopia, no place has been more affected than my own home region of Gambella, which has now become the epicenter of land-grabs in the world. Let me share with you how it happened and how these land-grabs are contributing to food insecurity in a place where people have not had to rely on outsiders to feed them until now.
In 2008, the authoritarian regime, led by the recently deceased Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, made a secretive deal with Karuturi Global LTD, an Indian-run commercial agricultural operation. In that deal, they leased 100,000 hectares for fifty years, with the promise of 200,000 more hectares when they developed the first section; making it the largest commercial farm in the world.
Most of the produce is destined for export to India or other commodity markets. Some of the local Anuak have been employed by Karuturi, but wages are mostly below the World Bank’s established poverty level. In one year, from 2009 to 2010, the number of private investors in the Gambella region—mostly companies from India, Saudi Arabia, China and regime cronies— mushroomed from close to zero to nearly 900. They include Saudi Star, owned by Sheik Mohammed al Amoudi, a half Ethiopian-half Saudi billionaire, who allegedly will be exporting the food to Saudi Arabia. This past year, armed insurgents, opposed to the land grabs, broke into their headquarters and killed a number of Saudi Star employees, an indication of potential for violence in some of these communities opposed to the expropriation of land from the local people.
A land study completed for the Ethiopian government in 1995 highlighted the value of the Gambella region as being a potential breadbasket of Ethiopia because of its fertile land and plentiful water in the lowlands of the Upper Nile headwaters. It was an undeveloped region of great bio-diversity, abundant wildlife and virgin forests. Around the same time, oil was found. Finding resources on your land is like finding cancer in your body—it threatens your life and future—especially in a country where the people are seen as impediments rather than valued; even more so if these people demand their rights under their own constitution and international law.
In 2003, the regime went after the oil. The first step was to silence those Anuak leaders who were most outspoken regarding having a say—a right within the Ethiopian Constitution—in the development of the oil reserves on Anuak indigenous land. Starting on December 13, 2003, armed Ethiopian Defense Forces, accompanied by civilian militias equipped by the regime with machetes, attacked and brutally murdered 424 Anuak leaders within a span of three days. The bodies were buried in mass graves. Women were raped and homes, clinics and schools destroyed; followed by over two more years of widespread perpetration of human rights crimes and destruction. I personally knew over 300 of those killed during this 3-day massacre; among them were relatives, classmates and colleagues in the development work I was doing in the area. The regime covered it all up and attributed it to ethnic conflict between the Anuak and another indigenous ethnic group. A Chinese company, under the auspices of Petronas of Malaysia, began drilling for oil at the very same time. As long as they were there, the human rights crimes continued.
Genocide Watch completed two reports, classifying it as genocide targeting a specific people group, the Anuak, and determining that those in the highest offices of the country were involved in its planning and execution. Human Rights Watch did two reports and found widespread crimes against humanity related to the oil drilling.
In 2007, when the drilling only produced dry wells, the troops were moved to southeastern Ethiopia and Somalia where many similar crimes were committed against civilians of the Ogaden region.[i] Now, the Ethiopian government has announced that they will be partnering in the extraction of oil from the Ogaden region.
If you fast-forward to the present time in Gambella, it is now the grabbing of land, the forced eviction of the local people and the renewed human rights crimes perpetrated by the military against any resistance to the above that threatens the Anuak and other indigenous people. In 2011, we in the SMNE partnered with the Oakland Institute (OI)[ii] to complete a comprehensive study on the nature of these land grabs, “Understanding Land Investment Deals in Ethiopia.” It was part of a larger study done by OI and other partners of a number of other African countries.
Earlier this year, Human Rights Watch completed an investigation of the impact of these land grabs on the local people. They reported on the forced eviction of 70,000 indigenous people from their homes and farms in Gambella, with plans to eventually move a total of 245,000 people—three-quarters of the total population in the region. (See Human Rights Watch Report)[iii] The regime has alleged that the resettlement moves were voluntary and motivated by the regime’s intention to better provide services such as clean water, medical care and schools; but in actuality, the people were forced to move to “villagization centers” where many people ended up living under trees and to areas where services, fertile land and access to water were far inferior, less accessible or non-existent.
Some of those who have been displaced are people I personally know, so when I am talking about the impact, I know many of their stories. I know that those forced off their land are now struggling to eat. I know about the huge areas of virgin forests that have been cut down to clear vast fields for planting. I know how vulnerable the rivers are to pollution from chemicals and fertilizers. These are rivers from which I used to drink or fish. I know how the wildlife will be jeopardized. I know how those who resist are beaten, killed, disappeared or arrested. This is not only happening in Gambella and in Ethiopia but wherever people have no rights and where others covet their resources or land.This is confirmed by the PBS documentary http://cironline.org/reports/ethiopia-battle-land-and-water entitled: The latest battleground in the global race to secure prized farmland and water and another video done by the Guardian http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt22chvx_yQ&feature=related
Land-grabs Undermine Food Security in Places Previously Independent of Food Aid
When we talk about food shortages in 2008 and food insecurity in general, we are not talking about the people in the rural areas of Africa where these land grabs are going on because these people, under normal conditions, have nearly always been able to feed themselves. These people will now be the ones to go hungry because their land is being used to feed the world, but not themselves.
Here are some facts on food security in Africa:
According to the UN’s Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO):
One out of three persons in Sub-Saharan Africa is undernourished.
According to the African Human Development Report of 2012[iv] that focuses on improving food security:
Over 41% of children, under the age of five in Sub-Saharan Africa, had stunted growth. Their projection for 2020 only went down by 1%.
Hunger in Africa is the highest in the world.
In the June, 2011 quarterly issue of the African Food Security Brief[v], they report:
Sub-Saharan African countries reported an increase in cereal production in 2010 from 2009, but it failed to result in increased food security in many of the countries studied.
Modern-day dictatorships set the foundation for the second scramble for African resources.
Where there is no freedom, no voice or no justice, the rights and interests of the people are ignored, forgotten or abused. Let’s look at some recent statistics that link poor African governance and the lack of freedom to food insecurity and the threat of land and resource grabbing.
Africans are among the least free people on earth.[vi]
According to a 2012report from Freedom House,[vii]fiveof the ten countries in the world suffering the greatest aggregate declines in freedom from 2007 to 2011, were in Africa.
Topping the list of those countries experiencing the greatest declines in freedom over the past two years were: The Gambia, Ethiopia, Burundi, Rwanda and Djibouti.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, 82% of the countries studied were only partly free or not free; contrasted with Europe, where 96% of the countries are free, with only 4% being partly free and none being not free.
In terms of the population, 88% of Sub-Saharan Africans are only partly free or not free whereas 13% of Europeans are partly free and no country within Europe is considered “not free.”
Interestingly, two African countries made the list of countries that have seen the greatest net gains in freedom. They are Tunisia and Egypt, both of whom overthrew their authoritarian leaders in the Arab Spring, following decades of repressive rule; hopefully, they will continue in this direction.
Freedom House saw the greatest declines in freedom in these countries in respect to the rule of law and freedom of association with other noted declines related to flawed elections, suppression of the political opposition, the media, journalists and civil society; and in my own country, Ethiopia, the use of anti-terrorism laws to target political opponents and journalists.
I was recently charged by the current government of Ethiopia, and convicted in absentia, of terrorism, without ever receiving a single document regarding it. I received hundreds of calls and emails of congratulations from Ethiopians complimenting me for making the list as it meant the government saw our work as a threat to their authoritarian rule. Sadly, some of Ethiopia’s most democratic and valiant voices for freedom have been locked up and tortured within Ethiopia.[viii]
Dictatorships, crony-capitalism and corruption will block food security despite efforts.
Meles Zenawi, the architect of the Ethiopian system of increasing authoritarianism, has died. Under his leadership, Ethiopia had plans to lease 4 million hectares of land to foreign and crony investor. Accompanying these secretive land deals are record amounts of illicit capital leakage from the country. Preceding the release of a more comprehensive study by Global Financial Integrity on Illicit Financial Outflows from Developing Countries Over the Decade Ending in 2009,[ix] they chose to highlight Ethiopia.
They reported $11.7 billion (USD) leaving the country in the period of 2000- 2009 and a shocking $3.26 billion USD in 2009 alone—the first year of record land acquisitions. They stated: “The people of Ethiopia are being bled dry. No matter how hard they try to fight their way out of absolute destitution and poverty, they will be swimming upstream against the current of illicit capital leakage.”
Not only is money from investment, foreign aid and funds for development blocked from reaching the people, but an atmosphere of corruption prevents better models of investment from materializing. Corruption deters ethical investors from doing business in Africa—decreasing good economic opportunities for Africans and instead increasing their food insecurity. In the second scramble for Africa, it is no longer the people who are sought after, but instead it is their land, water and resources. In Ethiopia, anyone who stands against these land-grabs is called “anti-development,”“anti-investment” or “anti-economic growth” and becomes a target of the regime while investors and companies willing to give bribes and kickbacks, while ignoring the violation of rights on the ground, are becoming complicit with Africa’s corrupt governments in its abuse of the people.
No one will argue with the fact that Africa desperately needs development, investment and economic growth, but what is needed is the right kind of investor and development. In western countries, laws protect the people, but in most of Africa, those laws are absent or not enforced. The people of Africa seek investors who will partner with the people in mutually beneficial and sustainable economic opportunities; however, most of these kinds of investors, developers and partners shy away from much of Africa because of the very real risks of doing business there.
Those ethical foreign and local investors and developers, who do take the risk, usually do so with caution and on a limited basis; however, many simply refuse to even attempt to do business in Africa—or within most countries of Africa—because of its corruption, its lack of infrastructure, its insecurity and the unreliability of the forever changing whims and politics of its authoritarian political leaders.
A representative from a major agricultural company shared recently that they were only willing to do business in five African countries at this time because of the expectation of bribes by public officials and because their company had strict policies against bribery.
This decision is confirmed in a soon-to-be-released survey of eight East African countries by Transparency International and itsEast African Chapters.In their preview of it, they report that “more than half of all those who deal with public service providers are forced to pay bribes.”[x]Despite the 37 signatories to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),[xi] against bribery and corruption and its mission to improve the economic and social well being of the people of the world, bribery is still rampant, with many countries still not signatories or where signatories, many still have shown a lack of political will to enforce compliance. Germany is the second greatest enforcer of this act, only exceeded by the United States, with a higher population.
Unfortunately, where impunity exists, corrupt practices give unfair advantage to corrupt partners and undermine opportunity for principled economic partners who comply voluntarily or because of anti-bribery laws in their own countries. Such ethical partners should be rewarded once these countries are freed from the hands of their strongmen, but until then, Africans depend on these foreign partners to uphold honest and fair business practice. If Africa is not going to fall victim to the next scramble, it cannot be done alone without such international cooperation. Additionally, the people of Africa must press their countries for needed reforms, transparency, accountability, and improved regional and continental cooperation. Africa has 54 countries and 1.2 billion people who must take charge of their future.
As long as Africans are denied land tenure; food insecurity will continue.
Mohammed Ibrahim, Africa’s billionaire who is offering rich payoff’s to African leaders who do not take kickbacks says there is no justification for Africa being poor due to its immense wealth. He blames Africans for the way they govern themselves. He believes if African leaders were not so corrupt, that many more investors would be interested in investing. Every year he publishes a report, the Ibrahim Index of African Governance, looking at 86 indicators in Africa’s 54 states; ranking them accordingly. Accountability is one factor he believes is missing from most. In 2011 he gives Sierra Leone and Liberia some of the best marks for improvement even though they are not at the top. In regards to Sudan and South Sudan, he states in a recent interview by the Wall Street Journal,[xii] “In the absence of security, who can talk about development?” Sudan is his homeland.
However, he voices concern for most of Africa regarding a total disregard for property rights. He says, “The glaring issue here is the land title. Almost without exception, states hold title to everything… this means the 70% of Africans who farm for a living can’t monetize their profits, they have no collateral—if you don’t have title, how can you raise money, how can you borrow money? It’s a major issue in agricultural development, and it needs to be faced head-on.”
Like he says, land tenure is a major problem in ensuring food security and gives the legal justification for land-grabs. These unfair laws should be challenged and changed. Until Africans can own land, these problems will continue. Africans must demand the right to own land.
The SMNE will be publishing a study on the relationship of food insecurity to the lack of land tenure in Ethiopia. It was done in partnership with the Humphrey Institute at the University of Minnesota. It affirms all that Mr. Ibriham has said. This one factor, land tenure, would help the small farmers to multiply their productivity; yet, it goes back to the overwhelming need on the continent for freedom.
The rule of law is a weapon against hunger; where it exists, the people are more food secure.
No foreign country would ever come to Germany and kick the people out from their homes and land with no benefit to the people. No outside country could go to Canada to exploit the forests for its lumber; chopping down the trees and not caring about the effect on the ecology and the people; it would never be accepted. It is like someone going to Saudi Arabia and taking all the oil and not caring that the Saudi people did not have any oil to heat their homes or to run their cars. It is like depleting the fish on the coast off of Japan, and leaving none for the locals. Every well-functioning country has laws to protect the rights of the local people. This kind of exploitation only happens in those places where there are no strong regulatory mechanisms or where there is a government who does not care about the people. Unless there are ethics or laws, the privileged and the powerful will take all the advantages; leaving the most vulnerable out.
We live in a world where the balance between the advantaged and disadvantaged is large; like in the case of the exploitation of minerals in the Congo. If those minerals were found in West London or in New York State, the people of that place would benefit, but in the Congo, it is the African strongmen and their partners in many forms—other strongmen, opportunistic nations, corporations or even donor nations. If you are not strong, you are on your own. In some cases, those who are benefiting do not want the people empowered or awakened because if the people knew their rights; the daylight robbery of the people would stop and fairer competition and the rule of law would inhibit exploitation.
In Africa, the people often do not know their rights because they are intentionally denied knowledge and information. Ethiopia is the fourth least prepared country in the world for technological expansion.[xiii] The reason is because the dictatorial government has been so effective in using imported technology from China to limit the free-flow of information to their own people. Ethiopia should be embarrassed to have one of the lowest percentages of people with cell phones, Internet service or telephone landlines on the entire African continent.[xiv]All of these blocks to information hold the people back and keep the country hostage to poverty, hunger and starvation.
For many Africans, their land is the only thing they have. They are uneducated and ill-prepared for jobs beyond farming if suddenly forced from making their livelihoods in this way. For example, in the Omo Valley of Ethiopia live some of the most isolated and neglected of people on earth. Left alone, they have survived because of their land and water. Now, the Ethiopian government plans on taking their land and water away from them without giving them any benefits in order to make way for government-controlled sugar plantations. Who will speak for the people of the Omo Valley? Their government, who should be setting the regulations to protect them, is instead complicit. As a result, they become the victims. They will struggle and some, if not many, will die of hunger or related health issues. Who will benefit? Regime cronies will if the status quo continues under the newly appointed prime minister and his government.
God has given us a beautiful earth with abundant resources and we have toiled to feed ourselves. Whether we are human beings or another living creature, we share the land and the water. We still have enough land to share, but in this global society, that sharing requires that we think not only about ourselves and our groups, but also about others who may be weaker and more vulnerable. We must also consider preserving the conditions for life for other living creatures; creating a balance within our ecosystem to sustain ourselves and our resources. It cannot be done by rhetoric from the powerful, which only serves to cover up the exploitation of those on the ground for there are those who know the law and how to use laws to their own advantage. They pass laws to criminalize dissent and to guarantee their own access to the land of others. They use their power to justify what is wrong, rather than to act fairly. They use their power to exclude. It is immoral and unconscionable. It should not be accepted.
If we are genuinely honest, we know that this land was given to us by God; in no place is that more affirmed than in Africa by the African people. We should not settle for anything less than what is right and it should apply to everyone. Knowing what is right is part of what makes us human. Whether educated or not, what is right is embedded in all of us. Everyone knows it—whether rich or poor, educated or illiterate, powerful or weak. For example, everyone knows that it is wrong to kill another person. The same applies to recognizing the need of other human beings for shelter, food, family and the necessities to sustain life and that what belongs to them should not be robbed from another person because they are weaker.
As global resources are becoming increasingly precious, we must follow righteousness in these decisions. If we do not, we will lose our humanity, our soul, our peace and our security. We will shirk our responsibility to care and protect others as we would want done to us.
This land-grabbing is life-grabbing. It should not be allowed and should not be accepted by decent human beings. We live on this globe called earth. It may look huge to us here, but from space, it is like a tiny ball that can fit into a hand. We are all in this together and we have to maintain it. We have a stake in it. When dealing with a human life, we should value it, putting “humanity before ethnicity” or any other distinctions that divide us from each other.
For a better world, it requires all of us to remember that “none of us will be free until our brother and sister—our fellow human beings in this world—are free.”Our humanity does not have boundaries. We have to preserve it, protect it and be part of it. Do not be bystanders. We have to reach out, take action, love our global neighbors and be the ones to do your share from wherever you are.
Thank you!
Please do not hesitate to e-mail your comments to Mr. Obang Metho, Executive Director of the SMNE, at: [email protected]. You can find more about us through our website at: www.solidaritymovement.org
A friend recently sent me a video presenting Sebhat Nega’s defense of the TPLF constitution. My friend was rightly amazed at the dismissive and arrogant nature of the defense. My reaction wandered a bit in the direction of assessing the origin of the defense: I could not help but ask what torturous path led a Tigrean to a defense erasing the shared legacy of a very long history. Let me first briefly summarize the content of Sebhat’s discourse.
Sebhat refers to a hypothetical situation where opponents intent on dismissing the TPLF constitution succeed in seizing power. Sebhat emphatically predicts the inevitable disintegration of Ethiopia and the outbreak of war. According to him, the TPLF constitution is the foundation of Ethiopian unity. It originated from a consensus of all the peoples of Ethiopia and remains the sole guarantee of equality. Since equality is the basis of unity, any change altering its main principles inexorably entails the collapse of unity. In his assumption, this almost happened in 2005 when forces inimical to the constitution scored important electoral gains. If the movement had not been violently crushed, it would have certainly resulted in war and disintegration.
By way of illustration, Sebhat takes the case of the United States. The foundation of the American federation is the Constitution, which, if changed, will entail the disintegration of the country. For Sebhat, what Ethiopians have in common with Americans is precisely that for both of them constitutional consensus is the source of nationalism. Just as American nationalism is tied to a constitutional document, so too Ethiopian nationalism derives from the TPLF constitution.
I leave out Sebhat’s illusion that the TPLF constitution originated from a consensus of all the peoples of Ethiopia when we know too well that said consensus was imposed on powerless peoples by the victorious Tigrean and Eritrean guerrilla armies. However, the illusion metamorphoses into arrogance when Sebhat compares the TPLF constitution with the American Constitution. The latter promotes individual rights while the TPLF constitution gives primacy to group rights, that is, to ethnic belonging, the consequence of which is that it works against national integration by isolating and nurturing ethnic states. States in Ethiopia are not administrative units that decentralize power and empower local communities but ethnic enclaves that create national borders within the nation and grant them with the right to secede.
What is most appalling and utterly false is Sebhat’s declaration that the fundamental act of being Ethiopian is an outcome of the TPLF constitution. How could it be so when what we all know so far is that the Ethiopian state and society have their origin in the distant history of the Aksumite kingdom and that their cultural features and history testify to a long and uninterrupted legacy that equally involved Tigreans and Amharas? Even our recent history defines Yohannes, not as the emperor of Tigray, but as the emperor of Ethiopia. The unequivocal reality is thus that Ethiopian nationhood is defined by history, and not by the acceptance of the 1994 constitution. Here we can extend to Ethiopia Margaret Thatcher’s famous statement, to wit, “Europe was created by History; America by Philosophy.” Rather than the constitution begetting Ethiopian nationhood, it presupposes it as the object of its rectification. This reversal of the correct order is typical of the thinking of the TPLF and is reflected in the first statement of the preamble in the form of “We, the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia.”
Let me ask a question: when the guerrilla army of the TPLF marched into Amhara territory and finally into Addis Ababa and seized state power, were we supposed to assume that Ethiopia did not exist yet? But then, there is nothing that prevents us from qualifying the march as an invasion of foreign troops, nay, as a colonial conquest. Since I am sure that Sebhat will contest such a characterization, then why does he keep defining Ethiopianness by a constitution when the country existed for a long time prior to the writing of the constitution?
What Sebhat is in reality revealing is the conditional nature of his Ethiopianism. He is Ethiopian so long as the constitution, imposed by the TPLF and conducive to its hegemony over Ethiopia, is the supreme law of the land. What this means if not that Tigray will not agree to remain within Ethiopia if the TPLF loses its hegemonic position. I cannot speak for all Tigreans, among whom many are dedicated Ethiopians, but Sebhat’s position shows that the leadership of the TPLF has been and still is appropriated by individuals who have always posed the issue of Ethiopian unity in conditional terms.
This conditionality explains why many pro-Ethiopian activists and intellectuals consider Sebhat and his likes as nothing more than stooges of the EPLF. Yet, their support for Eritrean independence is just a logical conclusion of their conditional Ethiopianness. One cannot be conditionally Ethiopian while being a resolute defender of the territorial integrity of Ethiopia. Moreover, the hegemonic goal of the TPLF could hardly accommodate a rival organization like the EPLF. Both ideological consistency and interest dictated the TPLF’s determined effort to oust Eritrea from Ethiopia.
Obviously, the perceived fragility of the system subsequent to the demise of Meles Zenawi now drives TPLF people to blackmail Ethiopians. If the TPLF does not rule, Sebhat promises the deluge. Is this not to admit that two decades of forceful enforcement of the constitution were not enough to generate even a semblance of consensus? What a brilliant achievement! Sebhat sounds like those children who agree to play with other children provided they always win.
In a 30-minute conversation, Prime Minister Hailemariam discussed topics from Ethiopia’s strained ties with neighboring Eritrea, relations with China and the United States, and the government’s clampdown on media.
Ethiopians had their new year on September 11. It is now 2005. On September 21, they also got a new prime minster. How delightfully 
