In part three of this series, I indicated that there are major social and economic hurdles ordinary Ethiopians face each day that should compel Ethiopian opposition groups within and outside the country and the rest of us to make is their singular business to advance the cause of unity and stop bickering among themselves {www:ad infinitum}. More than any single factor, it is their quarrelsome behaviors and actions and their divisions that prolong the agony of the Ethiopian people. The lives and well-being of ordinary Ethiopians are not improving at all. In some critical areas such as incomes, inequality, graft and corruption, concentration of wealth, education, health, shelter, sanitation and employment things are getting worse. {www:Hyperinflation} continues unabated; and the governing party is in no position to contain this havoc. It is its own creation and some folks actually benefit from substantial rises in the cost of living and from shortages. There is a growing perception among ordinary Ethiopians that the Diaspora aggravates the problem.
My argument for unity is straight forward. It is the moral obligation of anyone and everyone who believes in Ethiopia and in the Ethiopian people to do the opposite of what the TPLF/EPRDF regime does so effectively to the Ethiopian people: divide and rule. All indicators show that there a huge disconnect between what top officials of the governing party say and what they do to alleviate the problems ordinary Ethiopians face. So, those who believe that Ethiopians are not being served by their government have no excuse not to close ranks and work for the same goals. For example, high ethnic officials show greater dedication for and commitment to their ethnic bases than they do to the entire country and its diverse population. When and if it suits them, they show affinity to Ethiopia and tend to appeal to the Ethiopian people as a whole, for example with regard to the financing of the Renaissance Dam. This duality is calculated to serve a strategic and not a national purpose. It is part of divide and rule and part of keeping the society in permanent suspense.
The strategy of divide and rule and keeping the society in permanent suspense operate together because political and social actors who oppose the system have yet to wake up from their slumber and work relentlessly and consistently in support of the vast majority of the Ethiopian people who seek justice, fair play, equality and opportunity now and not decades from now. Division within the opposition camp is a major source of strength for the governing party. Those who want political pluralism must recognize that Ethiopia is theirs to save and the Ethiopian people are their responsibilities to defend. They must accept the notion that Ethiopia belongs to all of them; and that its shame is equally their shame. I refer to continued poverty, hunger, illiteracy and disease that afflict millions. Ethiopia is still identified as “one of the hungriest and unhealthiest nations on this planet.” It is still poor and technologically backward despite US billions of dollars of aid that continues to pour into the pockets of a few. Aid is now contributing not only to the acquisition of higher incomes and wealth for the few; but is also to regional disparities and repression. More billions of foreign aid will not transform the Ethiopian economy. Only empowered Ethiopians can improve their lives and the status of the country.
Why is Ethiopia still poor?
Ethiopia has been and continues to be the world’s experimental laboratory in development in general and poverty alleviation in particular. For the aid business, this experimentation will continue because donors serve their own national interests first, and would not care if Ethiopia’s poverty persists for decades to come. A weak, dependent and hungry Ethiopia generates business for many in the aid community. There is no altruism. The Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) that assumed political power in 1991 has benefitted substantially from increased aid that now exceeds more than US$3 billion a year, US$ 1 billion coming from the United States, the largest bilateral donor. Today, Ethiopia is the largest aid recipient in Sub-Saharan Africa and the fourth largest in the world, after Afghanistan, Iraq and Indonesia.
If aid would move a country from abject poverty to sustainable and equitable development, Ethiopia would have achieved it by now. Donors pump in billions without measuring impact on the ground; and without a sense of who ultimately benefits from Western taxpayer dollars. There is no accountability to the Ethiopian people. The current Western preoccuption with Anti-Terrorism in the Horn of Africa compels them to place singular premium on peace and stability rather than human rights and sustainable and equitable development that emanates from popular participation and the rule of law. They tend to offer band-aid when people face famine and starvation instead of pushing for rapid reform and investments in smallholder agriculture.
The case of agricultural production tells the disastrous and ineffective nature of aid in the country. Donors ignore prerequisites such land tenure reform, a pro-poor and private sector regulatory framework, voice and participation, the rule of law and so on that will make aid at least more effective.
There is no reason for Ethiopians to go hungry. The country possesses ample natural and human resources including “arable land for crop and animal farming,” and water resources that are the envy of many countries such as Egypt and the Sudan. Ethiopia is the ‘water tower of Africa.’ Yet, irrigated agriculture is among the least developed and accounts for only 1 percent of farming. Massive aid, substantial remittances estimated by an internal World Bank study at US$3.5 billion {www:per annum}, millions of hectares of fertile and irrigable lands and huge human capital have not made a dent on the country’s intractable poverty. Opponents of the regime have immense data in their hands to shame the regime now and not a decade from now. But, they need to speak with one voice and pull in the same direction.
The UNDP estimates that {www:illicit} outflow of funds under the current regime is in excess of US$8.345 billion. Last year, Global Financial Integrity estimated that illicit outflow from Ethiopia amount to US$11 billion. The Prime Minister conceded that a few privileged Ethiopians have US$2 billion in foreign banks. Aid contributes these forms of plunder and scandalous activities. Most of Ethiopia’s pervasive aid comes from Western sources. Those in the Diaspora can and should challenge whether or not these donors live up to their own values of freedom, empowerment, free enterprise and the evolution of a robust domestic private sector in granting generous monies to a repressive, discriminatory and corrupt governing elite. Massive corruption and illicit outflow from one of the poorest and aid dependent countries in the world can be challenged using available and credible data.
Although estimates vary from country to country, experts say that more than 30 percent of foreign aid is ‘stolen’ through a variety of contractual and other schemes. Where does the money go is a legitimate question to pose. More than 87 percent of Ethiopians rely heavily on agriculture and related activities to sustain life. Yet, only an estimated 17 percent of agricultural produce is marketed properly. Only 17 percent of the country is urbanized. There are more than 7 million orphans. Unemployment among youth is among the highest in the world. Ethiopia’s largest export is labor, with hundreds of thousands immigrating to all corners of the world, especially to the Middle East.
In countries that are nationalistic and all inclusive, education serves as a ticket out of poverty. In Ethiopia today, education does not necessarily lead to jobs. In development, the lead and primary responsibility of any government is to feed and shelter its population. In Ethiopia, this is not the case. The East Asian and Pacific region miracle countries such as Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, and increasingly emerging economies such as Bangladesh, China, India, and successful economies in Africa such as Botswana, Mauritius, Cape Verde, Ghana and others invested and still invest heavily in agriculture. Most recently, the government of Ghana secured US$100 million in soft loans from the World Bank to invest into agriculture in the North. This investment will offer job and income generating opportunities to thousands of Ghanaian youth.
A hungry and unhealthy population cannot produce. It is for the same reason that these and other successful economies invest heavily into quality primary, secondary and tertiary education and into comprehensive and quality health care. The Ethiopian government tells donors that it has trained thousands of health extension personnel. It says the same thing about agricultural services. Indicators show that health services are among the least developed in the world. The small island nation of Seychelles avails quality health services to the remotest village. India overcame recurring famine by investing heavily in agriculture (the Green Revolution) to which aid contributed. The government made substantial investments in the fertilizer industry so that farmers would have adequate access to nationally produced fertilizers.
China’s agriculture and rural sectors were transformed by the Chinese themselves without much aid from outside. This structural transformation eliminated recurring famine and hunger and improved wellbeing substantially. It is for this reason that I continue to suggest that a ‘Green’ type of smallholder based revolution is the single most important transformer of economic and social life in Ethiopia. It will have the greatest impact on the greatest number of people and would remove one of the sources of shame for all of us. Would the TPLF/EPRDF regime invest heavily into a smallholder revolution and release the productive potential of Ethiopian farmers and others in the rural sector? Would the aid community insist that the Ethiopian government changes policies to advance the cause of sustainable and equitable development? I doubt it. The poor are easier to control and to manipulate that the well to do. There is no evidence that it is either willing or capable of introducing radical reforms that will make poor people owners of assets such as lands.
Believe it or not, high officials of the government argue that Ethiopia will achieve food self-sufficiency and security by farming out millions of hectares of its most fertile lands and water basins to foreign governments, firms and individuals from 36 countries, and to a few domestic allies all affiliated to the TPLF. As the Prime Minister noted a few months ago, gradually foreign firms are “taking hold of the pillars of the national economy” and Ethiopians face the risk of losing these pillars and losing their country. The systemic causes and linkages emanate from single party and endowment dominance of the pillars of the economy.
The TPLF created and sponsored conglomerate EFFORT that controls at least 30 diverse enterprises, and the Saudi and Gulf States sponsored and financed conglomerate MEDROC group managed by Sheikh Al Amoudi controls 30 other large and diverse enterprises. Combine these monopolies and deduct the implications. They literally crowd-out the rest of Ethiopians. This is among the reasons why the national domestic private sector is among the weakest in Africa. There is nothing on the horizon to change the roles of these monopolies.
In a recent Al-Jazeera sponsored debate on land grab, a prominent Indian economist said that “foreigners have more power and influence than Ethiopians in their own home country.” Granting Ethiopian waters and fertile farmlands to foreign interests instead of raising the capabilities of Ethiopian smallholders and encouraging nationals to invest in commercial agriculture takes away the key sources of comparative advantage the country and its population possess. Foreign owned large scale commercial farms will not transform Ethiopian society for the better. As designed, they will make Ethiopian society more dependent and more vulnerable than ever before. For details, I urge the reader to read my latest book, The Great Land Giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirimit in Ethiopia.
Contradicting Ethiopian government officials, including the Ethiopian Deputy Prime Minister–who pronounced, on a visit to India, that smallholder farming is inefficient, and ineffective–most foreign experts and multilateral agencies such as the World Bank argue that:
i) Smallholder farms are more productive than large-scale commercial farms;
ii) 400 million farms around the globe, with less than one ha of land, are in a position to double or triple their harvest. In Punjab, India, smallholders raised their output from one ton per ha to 4-5 tons per ha after the introduction and wide-spread use of Green revolution that transformed Indian agriculture forever. Indian firms are among the “new farmland colonizers” in Ethiopia at the invitation of the government. They want to secure foods for Indian consumers and are planning ahead to secure food security. Who is thinking of future generations of Ethiopians and their food security?
iii) Next door in Kenya where smallholder based farming is developed, 27 tractors are deployed per 100 SQ km of arable land; in Ethiopia, only 2 tractors per 100 SQ km. The governing party is only interested in securing wealth for its core and allies and in maintaining power.
Just reflect on what top officials, including the Prime Minister tell the world. ‘Inflation is common in growth economies. There is no famine; only hunger’ and so on. They justify that which cannot be defended statistically. Inflation will be minimal if productivity increases. Hunger will be history if agricultural productivity was the norm and not the exception. The Ethiopian government’s priority is to meet the basic needs of the population and not to enrich itself and its supporters.
“Smallholder-based productivity growth is the most leveraged pathway by which we can address poverty reduction,” says Prabhu Pingali, a leading agricultural expert who also criticizes land grab. In its seminal report on food aid and dependency in Ethiopia, Oxfam noted that “Food aid is not the best way to alleviate poverty.” Rather, the best way is to boost the capabilities of Ethiopian smallholders. Heavy investment in a smallholder revolution in Ethiopia is therefore a smart policy for any government that is dedicated to the country and its diverse population. The benefits are two-fold: it reduces poverty and increases incomes; and eliminates under-nutrition or malnutrition from which millions suffer. Consumers will have access to cheaper food. Farmers with more incomes will afford to send their children to school. Mothers will afford to seek medical treatment. Instability and insecurity will ease.
The government will generate more revenues. Eliminating or at least mitigating the sources of drought–that India and others have done successfully—is smart public policy for another reason. According to Oxfam, drought costs Ethiopia US$1.1 billion per year, an amount that exceeds government investments in agriculture, and USAID to Ethiopia. Investments in smallholder farming by removing the policy, structural and input hurdles that keep the poor in their place and the country on a low level agricultural productivity track is responsible governance. The cause to the tragedy is not nature but poor and repressive governance that alienates the population from ‘their government’ and its institutions.
Take a look at global surveys and conclusions. In recent surveys by the Gallop Poll, the Legatum Prosperity Index, Freedom House and the Wall Street Journal as well as assessments by the World Bank and the IMF, it is clear that the governing party is totally detached from the population: it does not serve them at all.
The vast majority do not trust their government, its leaders and institutions. Only 30 percent of those surveyed approve what the government is doing. Only 21 percent are convinced or are satisfied that the government is doing anything and everything meaningful to address their problems. Only 19 percent believe that the governing party respects free and fair elections. This is why the country is ranked 101st in the administration of the rule of law without which sustainable and equitable development is unthinkable. Application of the rule is fundamental in advancing opportunity.
In the 21st century, no country can achieve sustainable and equitable development without quality education that leads to jobs and business creating opportunities. In the 2011 UN Human Development Index, Ethiopia ranks 107th, an absolute failure for a poor country that the regime claims is growing by leaps and bounds each year for several years. No single country can aspire to join middle income status without allowing the power of information technology such as mobile phones, the Internet, television and other media that unleash the productive potential of its population, especially girls and other youth. There are 5 mobile phones for 100 people. Only 29 percent of the population has access to sanitation and only 7.5 percent to safe drinking water. At only 0.4 percent, access to electricity is a luxury in Ethiopia as is access to good shelter. Access to financial and banking institutions is only a dream for most. Thirty-three percent have to walk 20 km to access the closet bank. Chronic unemployment is taken as a way of life. Twenty-one percent of the population is unemployed. Some people will never dream to hold a job in their lifetime. They may be born poor and may die poor.
More than 5 million people depend on remittances to survive and to perhaps to enjoy luxuries such as mobile phones that they would obtain otherwise. What about the rest who have no relatives abroad or are not connected to the ruling party for sheer survival?
The structure of the economy is stuck. Small enterprises are the largest employers in the so-called modern private sector, with an estimated 29,083 enterprises according to government statistics. Of these, 93 percent are grain-mills. Can you imagine transforming the structure of the economy with grain-mills? Indigenous production of traditional clothes, metal based supplies, medicines and others are shunned instead of coveted, protected, further developed and modernized as national resources, Most are forced to give way to imported substitutes. It is as if products and services of Ethiopian origin have little or no value at all. Nationally oriented governments give attention to and protect indigenous products and give them prominence.
The government of Namibia is a prime example in protecting indigenous culture, products, natural resources and peoples. It has gone further than any by incorporating environmental laws in its national constitution. Namibia consists of different nationality or ethnic groups who have decided to live with one another as Namibians. They interact with one another as Namibians and accept Namibia as their common country. They protect their environment for future generations. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Ethiopian government does this. Remember, Namibia is one the newest African countries; and Ethiopia the oldest. Can the governing party explain why it allows foreign governments and businesses to destroy the remaining forests and misuse scarce and precious water resources, for example, to produce flowers for export while Ethiopians go hungry each day? Deforestation continues at alarming rate of 88,000 ha per year. One of the “hungriest and unhealthiest countries in the world” is at the same time one of the few countries in the world whose government is not protecting the environment.
In the 2011 Legatum Prosperity Index, Ethiopia is in the bottom 3 of 110 countries surveyed in terms of per capita income and wellbeing along with the Central African Republic (CAR) and Zimbabwe. Citizens with low incomes cannot buy what they need to survive. They cannot afford to buy medicine or to build homes. Despite its huge population, Ethiopia ranks 76th in market size because there is no broad economic participation in the economy. Wealth and incomes are highly skewed and concentrated. In a country that heavily ethnicized through the kilil system, the domestic market and economy are fractured. Lack of market integration associated with lack of national cohesion is costly to the economy and to entrepreneurs. The cost of doing business is among the highest in the world because of ethnic division, market fragmentation, collusion, administrative and state capture corruption. This is why someone in Addis Ababa characterizes Ethiopia as a country that resembles a “person who travels in the darkness of night not knowing where he is going.”
All foreign visitors to Ethiopia are alarmed by the gaping differences in incomes, wealth and wellbeing between the small political, economic and social elite that wield political power and the vast majority of the population that is poor. Ethiopia ranks 20th out of 110 countries surveyed. Similar to this Legatum finding, Mo Ibrahim places the country 35th out of 53 African countries. The 2011 UN Human Development Index that ranks Ethiopia 174th out of 187 countries is consistent with other surveys. This survey is more significant in that it covers wealth and incomes, education, life expectancy, health and sanitation, shelter and other basic needs. A key element in this multidimensional survey is gross inequality between those who have and those who do not; between who can eat and those who cannot; between those who are employed and those who have no access to opportunities; between those who benefit from growth and those who are left out. “Ethiopia’s HDI is 0.363 which gives the country a rank of 174 out of 187 countries with comparable data.” Human development index for Sub-Saharan African countries increased from 0.365 in 1980 to 0.463 in 2011 while it declined in Ethiopia, placing it below the regional average. In other words, Ethiopians are worse off than the rest of Africans.
This begs the question: where is the evidence that growth has benefitted most Ethiopians? There is no evidence and the UN Human Development Index is the best evidence one can offer to prove the point.
Part four is divided into two sections for ease of reading a technical piece. Part four (b) of five will discuss the relationships and distinctions between growth and development, the perceptions of the Diaspora who travel back and forth to Ethiopia; and seven critical hurdles Ethiopian society faces today.
For those interested in providing feedback and in ordering my new book, “The Great Land Giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirimit in Ethiopia,” the author can be reached at: [email protected]
(AFP) – Ethiopian authorities The Woyanne junta charged 24 people with terrorism offenses Thursday including an opposition politician and a journalist, a government spokesman said.
“They are accused under the anti-terrorism law of being members of a terrorist network and abetting, aiding and supporting a terrorist group,” Shimeles Kemal told AFP.
Prominent opposition leader Andualem Arage and journalist Eskinder Nega were among those charged, the latest in a string of opposition supporters to be accused of plotting against the state.
They were arrested on September 14 on suspicion of being involved in “terrorist activities that would likely wreak havoc” added Shimeles.
The maximum sentence for supporting a terrorist group is 15 years, according to Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism legislation.
The suspects are accused of receiving support from neighboring Eritrea to carry out attacks in Ethiopia, according to the charge sheet.
“They have received from the Eritrean government weapons and explosives for the purpose of carrying out terrorist activities in Ethiopia,” Shimeles said, reading from the court-issued document.
Eritrea and Ethiopia are long time foes, with both accusing each other of supporting proxy rebel forces to destabilise each other.
Eskinder and Andualem were arrested on September 14 on suspicion of being involved in “terrorist activities.”
Opposition member Berhane Nega, a former mayor of Addis Ababa currently living in exile in the United States, was also charged with terrorism.
“He is being charged in absentia,” Shimeles said.
But opposition member Negassa Gidada, a former president of Ethiopia, called the charges “laughable.”
“What they’ve tried to do is make the people shut their mouths. Unacceptable. Unacceptable,” he told AFP.
Ethiopia’s media is among the most repressed in Africa, according to the US-based Committee to Protect Journalists, which calls the country’s anti-terrorism law “far-reaching.”
The watchdog reports six journalists have been arrested since June.
“In addition to its complete dominance of local and national government institutions, a number of large businesses are linked to the ruling party, either directly or through family members.”
Human Rights Watch and Center for Strategic and International Studies
In connection with the global concern about the rise of the world’s population to 7 billion on October 31, 2011 and the projection of 9 billion by 2050, James Eng, Chief Editor of MSNBC, one of America’s leading news organizations, asked me along with other global experts to share my views on whether this growth is “a cause for celebration or concern.” I should like the reader to understand that it can be one or the other depending on how a society with high population growth is governed. China is the most populous country in the world today. Its population is not a curse but a blessing for one simple economic and social reason. It has overcome the structural and policy sources of famine, hunger and destitution. It is the most dynamic economy in the world today, transforming the rural economy and integrating it with the rest. Close to 674 million Chinese or 50.3 percent of the population live and work in rural areas; but they do not starve. The world perceives China as the global “factory,” shipping goods to the globe as Japan did when my generation was in elementary school. What is worthy to note is this.
The Chinese economy derives 88 percent of its GDP from diversified local economic activities. The economy has been tranformed into ways: radical policy reform that empowered all sectors of the national economy and unleashed its productive capacity; and well-designed and planned structural changes that deepened diversification and intensification in the rural sector and integrated it to the rest of the national economy. The agricultual sector is now a key component of the real economy. Chinese farmers produce more food per hectare than Ethiopian or other African farmers. Institutionalized agricultural intensification and diversfication have taken roots in China. The TPLF/EPRDF argument that the Ethiopian developmental state mimics China and other progressive nations is not true.
Close to 83 percent of Ethiopians live in rural areas; most of them go hungry. Millions starve. Whether one supports or opposes the regime, one cannot deny the fact that, today; farmers are unable to feed their families three meals a day. In Eastern and Southern parts of the country, those able to feed their children at least two meals a day find it harder and harder to offer one meal per day.
Contrast rural and urban lives
In China, millions move out of rural areas to urban areas. They have job opportunities, and incomes are three times higher. In Ethiopia the poor who move to urban areas remain poor. There are no jobs that offer higher incomes. The poor remain poor regardless of location. In contrast, in China, fewer and fewer farmers produce more and earn more from less land because of improvements in technology and other inputs. As rural incomes rise, the income gap between the rural and urban population narrows. In Ethiopia, the average rural farm size is less than half ha, and technology and other inputs have remained “biblical.”
The policy and structure remain the same.
Whether rural or urban the poor are least likely to challenge a repressive regime than those with jobs, and higher and better incomes. Jobs and better incomes embolden and empower citizens. There are clear indications that, even in China, rising incomes and job security embolden Chinese citizens to demand more and more accountability from their government. This is a virtuous cycle that does not exist in Ethiopia. In almost all countries, virtuous economic and social cycles tend to contribute to greater freedom in the long run. Economic and social stagnation and repression go hand in hand.
Believe or not, it was not long ago that China suffered from recurring famine and hunger. One can say the same about India and others. China is by no means democratic. However, the political leadership is nationalist and has overcome one of the sources of national shame, namely famine and hunger. India is democratic. Although there is widespread poverty, there is no famine and debilitating hunger that characterized India before the “Green Revolution.” Population size is no longer a curse in any of the two or in Bangladesh and others that are developing faster and that have given special attention to the agricultural sector and smallholder revolutions in one form or another.
It is the health and wellbeing of individuals, families and the entire society that determines the extent to which population growth is a source of concern or a source of celebration. This is the reason for my thesis in the MSNBC piece that the single most important contribution that the global aid business that has poured in billions of dollars into the Ethiopian economy over the past two decades could have and could still make is to channel most of these resources into an Ethiopian smallholder farming or green revolution. This takes courage in the aid business community; to challenge dictatorial regimes to change thier ways and build the capabilities of their society without any form of discrimination.
I argued in my latest book, “The Great Land Giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirimit” in Ethiopia, that the TPLF/EPRDF regime failed miserably by not removing the policy and structural hurdles that keep the country among the “hungriest and unhealthiest in the world,” and the urban and rural population as among the poorest. Poor and repressive political and socioeconomic governance censures or restricts freedom and empowerment regardless of geographical location, ethnicity, religion or demography. For the regime, rise in population is just a number and not a potential source of growth and development. It does not see the potential that comes from empowering the poor to become both consumers and producers. Repression and control keep the poor and the rest in their place. As the Guardian Co. UK put it, “In Ethiopia, the threat of imprisonment for political journalists (and political dissenters whether rural or urban) is constant.” Here is the problem in simple terms.
Silencing those who demand economic justice will not remove famine, hunger and destitution whether the population is 90 million (today) and reaches 278 million by 2050. What will solve the problem is political and socioeconomic freedom that allows ordinary citizens to demand justice and to hold their government leaders accountable for their actions. Let me give you one example to illustrate why it is so critical for all opposition groups–whether political or civic–to work toward a common goal and action; and to speak with a single voice. Yemeret neteka ena kirimit abrogates many principles, among them citizenship and ownership of natural resource assets by Ethiopians. In a recent debate on Al-Jazeera, a leading Indian Economist noted that transfer of land resources to foreigners would have led to public outrage in India. Indian companies are among the lead land grabbers in Ethiopia, with Gambella, Beni-Shangul Gumuz and Oromia at the center. These companies are literally free to do as they wish: produce and export even to third parties while Ethiopians go hungry. They can destroy the environment as they wish. They can divert and use water as they wish.
Do not forget land giveaway is water giveaway
Huge land giveaways to business interests from 36 countries and to a selected few domestic allies are done at a huger cost to future generations of Ethiopians. Remember that these giveaways do not occur in an economic, social, political and financial vacuum. Someone benefits and someone else loses. Foreign investors make billions. They take hold of Ethiopia’s water sources for up to 100 years renewable.
I show the multidimensional and severe nature of the problem in my 478 page book with close to 150 references. It is the book that prompted MSNBC to ask me for views on population growth. Fortunately, there are many experts who see the danger of land grab in Ethiopia. The Indian economist mentioned earlier made several points that Ethiopians should note and do something about. Among these is the empty rhetoric on the part of the Ethiopian governing party that large-scale commercial farms owned by foreigners for periods ranging from “50 to 99 years” would “transfer technology, generate employment, lead to food self-sufficiency and security and raise incomes of the poor.” The expert suggested that none of these is true. What would lead to sustainable and equitable growth in agriculture is to empower smallholders and to remove the policy and structural hurdles that keep their productivity low and that perpetuate insecurity.
The fact that the new economic actors in land grab are non-traditional colonialists does not make them any different. They serve only their business, financial and national interests and not the interests of the Ethiopian poor or the country. The Arab world that includes Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Egypt has always been interested in controlling the sources of the Nile. The Saudis are doing it through Sheikh Al-Amoudi who controls 30 different conglomerates in the country.
This travesty that emanates from almost permanent transfer of Ethiopian water basins and fertile farmlands from Ethiopian to foreigners alone should embolden Ethiopians within and outside the country to reject the governing party’s economic and social model. It is essentially disempowering and dis-enabling. The Indian economist said something that each of us should keep in mind. If these kinds of transfers took place in India, people would revolt against their government leaders and throw them out of office.
A closer look at land grab will amplify the story. When one looks at it from the perspective of millions of Ethiopians who are land poor and landless, famine-prone and hungry, these massive transfers of water basins and farmlands and other pillars of the economy to foreign governments and businesses compel each of us to reflect more closely as to ‘Why unity of purpose and action is critical and urgent.’
The country should have achieved food security and food self-sufficiency close to 21 years of massive foreign aid. Instead of empowering smallholders and other Ethiopians, the governing party invited 36 foreign governments and more than 8,000 applicants from investors to take over millions of hectares of the most fertile farmlands and water basins. This is effective transfer of ownership from Ethiopians to the likes of Karuturi of India and Saudi Star of Saudi Arabia and undermines both sovereignty and citizenship.
Water and land transfers affect sovereignty and citizenship
The primary responsibility of any government in the world is to feed its population. For this to occur, a government must adopt sound, pro-poor and sustainable and equitable development policies and programs. Investments and foreign aid that do not correspond to these fundamental requirements will not work and have not worked in Ethiopia. Growth and the use of foreign aid are highly politicized and favor the merged party, ethnic elites and the state. This is why nepotism, discrimination, exclusion, corruption and illicit outflow of foreign exchange and money-making assets flow out of the country. In 2009, 22 percent of Ethiopians depended on international emergency food aid to survive. Today, the governing party admits that there is drought but not famine or hunger. The top leadership of the governing party differentiates who is to live and who is to die on the basis of political, ideological and ethnic criteria. This is what makes it heartless and soulless. Do not take my word for it. Just take a look at the Ogaden and other parts of the country where children and women are dying and judge. The contradictions that exist in terms of fairness, justice and equity are legendary. The simplest measurement is the condition of life for individuals and families on the ground.
In countries that used to be called “banana republics (Central America and the Caribbean) and natural resource curse nations (many Sub-Saharan African countries),” elites in power squandered natural resources at the expense of their populations. Yemeret neteka ena kirimit in Ethiopia does practically the same. Waters and farmlands are equivalent to or better than petroleum and gas, diamond and gold, bananas and fruits and so on. Ethiopia’s waters and farmlands are potential sources of riches and must be protected from the plunder that emanates from unguided and unregulated globalization and foreign direct investments; as well as political and economic elite capture. Just remember the millions of Ethiopian youth who need opportunities: jobs, new and income enhancing opportunities including commercial farms. Why should they allow transfer of these resources to the Saudis, Indians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Turks and others? Would these nations and nationals allow the reverse? Not in your dreams.
Massive transfers of water basins and fertile farmlands from Ethiopians to foreigners and domestic loyalists–all done in the name of development–do threaten sovereignty, citizenship, and the future of millions of Ethiopian youth as well as the environment. They make inhabitants aliens in their own country; they make them more vulnerable. They disempower the poor and drive them to urban areas where there are no alternatives for employment. In this sense too, the Ethiopian developmental state is not at all an empowering but controlling state. In contrast, the Chinese and Vietnamese or Brazilian developmental state creates the conditions to release the productive potential of all citizens. Here is my overall conclusion. Mismanagement and misallocation of natural resources subverts the future. It is distortions in national economic and social policy that makes the so-called developmental state in Ethiopia self-serving and opportunistic. Gaining immediate cash in the form of foreign exchange and riches for the few will, inevitably, lead to uneven development and will aggravate income disparities, corruption and diversion of resources.
The Ethiopian people and especially its youthful population that constitutes more than 50 percent–40 million of whom were born after the TPLF/EPRDF took political power in 1991–deserve better and empowering and freedom enhancing governance.
Knowledge is critical in the pursuit of change
Much, perhaps much too much, has been said about how bad things are for the vast majority under the TPLF/EPRDF. No day passes that someone, somewhere and somehow does not reveal the horrific untold stories of the authoritarian core that leads the country. I like to make a cautionary note though. One, let us pin down the reasons why change is necessary and for whom? Two, let us conduct serious soul searching on why opponents are incapable of setting aside minor differences to create strong and sustainable coalitions and partnerships. Here, I admit that all of us have failed to identify the reasons why the opposition camp outside the country is still in disarray. We are not guided by the needs of the country and the population’s all the time.
I intend this third in a series of five articles to serve as an analytical tool for those within the opposition camp within and outside the country who believe in one country and one diverse population whose hopes and aspirations are similar regardless of their ethnic or religious affiliation.
The moral imperative that should give us all sleepless nights is not simply to know and appreciate indescribable poverty, disempowerment and hopelessness, repression and persecution one by one but to respond to this crisis in meaningful and substantive ways. We cannot do that unless we equip ourselves with knowledge and information that is credible and incontestable. We cannot do that unless we set aside differences and make the needs of the Ethiopian people central and foremost in our thinking and actions. The top leadership of the governing party and its allies tell stories right and left and force the world to believe that the regime is on the verge of creating the next ‘Singapore’ or another Tiger in Africa. I wish this was the case. It is not and cannot be. A Tiger like economy cannot be created without wide-spread participation and without a dynamic domestic private sector owned and managed by Ethiopians from diverse backgrounds.
Before I close Party three of this series, I will pose a simple question for all of us to ponder. ‘Why does Ethiopia remain poor after an estimated US$40 to US$50 billion in all forms of foreign aid (official and unofficial) since 1991?’ I will give you my take. Ethiopia remains poor because of un-caring, cruel, repressive, discriminatory, non-participatory, unaccountable and exclusionary governance.
In part four, I shall provide a few measurements used by reputable research, multilateral and other firms to firm-up the above thesis. You can read and rationalize the reasons and express cynicism. You can make this a one evening conversation with family and friends. You can cry in your homes, as do numerous foreigners-who visit Ethiopia, and express outrage as they witness the grossest inequality and ‘indescribable’ poverty they have had ever seen-in the privacy of their hotels. You can also choose to let your voice and indignation known in partnership with others.
In part five, I intend to propose a set of recommendations or a framework to stimulate conversation that will, hopefully, lead to action in support of individuals and groups within Ethiopia who sacrifice their lives and their families in defense of justice, freedom, peace and national reconciliation.
In part one, I provided basic socioeconomic arguments of why unity of purpose and action among opponents of the TPLF/EPRDF is no longer an option for those who wish to see a unified, diverse and prosperous Ethiopia whose institutional foundation is grounded in fundamental principles of human dignity and freedom for the individual to choose, speak, associate and move; in the rule of law and a level playing field for each and all; in genuine equality, justice, fairness, inclusion and participation; and in political pluralism that allows and encourages peaceful competition.
For the above to take roots, the struggle for justice and freedom must be anchored in Ethiopian society, and especially youth, taxi-drivers, shop owners and the rest of the middle class of professionals, bureaucrats and the poor in rural and urban areas. It is these social forces that brought dictatorial regimes to their knees. Those on the outside can provide material, financial, technical and diplomatic support.
These and other {www:lofty} principles assume that ultimate power and the authority to determine legitimacy to govern reside with Ethiopian citizens and not with political elites. It is only when the institutional and leadership architecture that empowers ordinary citizens takes solid roots that there would be a respectful relationship between ordinary people, the state and government and the leadership that administer it on their behalf. In this sense, future change must be dramatically different from the past. Ordinary citizens will exercise this potential power through free, fair, transparent, open and competitive elections. This is why it is important to remember that opposition to the governing party is only one and necessary component of change; but not the only component.
Equally important is the ability to envision an appropriate transition toward meaningful and people centered change and to frame the alternative system that will replace the old order. Both the transition and the alternative must reflect the interests of the Ethiopian people as a whole and neither can be an afterthought.
Why people revolt
The ongoing Arab Spring in North Africa and the Middle East exploded because dictatorial and or authoritarian regimes refused to give-up their privileged political and economic positions peacefully. It is the pursuit of economic power and better social status that motivated them to assume political power by any means necessary in the first place. Once they assumed political power that offered them wealth beyond their imagination, they cling to it regardless of costs to any person or to any group. The tolerate greed, nepotism, corruption and exclusion because they created them. It is this that leads experts to conclude that dictatorial regimes encourage and rationalize income inequality and wealth concentration directly or indirectly. It is part of the architecture of running the state as a business enterprise. At most, those with political and economy power are likely to persecute and jail only small fish to appease the public and donors. The big fish at the top are always protected from the regulatory and legal system. It is they created the very system that benefits them and their core allies whether foreign or domestic. It is they that must protect ‘the goose that lays the golden egg,’ so to speak.
Reflect on what social and political forces drove Ethiopia’s Emperor and the dictator Mengistu HaileMariam out of power in disgrace? What forces compelled Ben Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his family to flee with an estimated 1.5 tons of gold that belongs to the people of Tunisia? What compelled Mubarak and his cohorts to cause massive carnage and to face the humiliation of court proceedings in the country he ruled for crimes against humanity and for stealing billions of money that belongs to the Egyptian people? Why did Gadhafi and his die-hards refuse to submit to the will of the Libyan people peacefully and get caught, hauled from a sewage pipe, humiliated and killed by liberation fighters as young as 19 years old that he had called “rats”? The manner and brutality and ‘savagery’ of his death will be a subject that will haunt millions of people for decades to come. For Libyans and other people who seek and deserve freedom and justice, saving Gadhafi’s life and subjecting him to the meaning of the rule of law would have sent a better omen. Instead, it sent chills accusations of the opposition itself is “lawless.” This may or may not be unfair. Only the future evolution of governance will tell.
Would other dictators in the rest of Africa including Ethiopia draw lessons from these shameful experiences and allow peaceful change through genuine free, fair, open and competitive elections? Listening to the Ethiopian Prime Minister in the aftermath of what happened in Libya; one concludes that dictators have no ear for human dignity, justice, freedom, equality, the rule of law and accountability. They feel invincible. In light of this, simple indignation will not be adequate.
I highlighted the major similarities and differences that characterize these diverse regimes in previous articles on the Arab Spring. In each case, and in today’s Ethiopia, those who govern failed and still fail to open up opportunities for the vast majority of the population, especially youth. For example, the TPLF/EPRDF regime runs an economic empire that has made a few individuals super rich, and is leading the vast majority to greater depths of poverty. The governing party failed to level the playing field in the economy. Party owned and endowed enterprises such as EFFORT, GUNA and others dominate the national economy. Believe it or not EFFORT owns at least 30 diverse and dominant companies. It started with little or no capital and now serves the economic and social interests of the top leadership of the TPLF and their extended families.
The top leadership of the TPLF/EPRDF is one of the most rigid and dismissal of any in the world. It really believes that its assault on human rights is to protect the public from all forms of “terrorism.” It continues to get away with violations in part because it has powerful Western backers; and in part the opposition is divided and weak. In light of this, the regime failed to hold anyone accountable for atrocities following the 2005 elections; for massacres in Gambella, and in the Ogaden; and jailing and killing an untold number of Ethiopians under the pretext of defending the state and the Constitution. The regime is the judge, jury and executioner. Do not expect it to change any time soon.
Economic and social injustice is widespread and there is nothing the public or dissenters can do about it. Donors and others are stunned of corruption and illicit outflow in excess of US$11 billion from one of the poorest and emergency food aid dependent countries in the world. They will not do anything unless opponents in the Diaspora close ranks and work collaboratively against corruption and {www:illicit} outflow in donor capitals everywhere. Corruption is an economic crime against the poor and the future of Ethiopian youth. In North Africa and the Middle East, we note corruption, cronyism, illicit outflow, and other economic and social ills constituted the material reasons of why people continue to die for justice, human dignity and freedom.
Here is the bottom line. People do not revolt out of hate for their fellow man or woman. They revolt out of desperation that the system in which they live is totally broken and that those who govern are not or will not be accountable to them. Escalating food prices, income inequality, corruption, nepotism and massive unemployment were among the material reasons why hundreds of thousands of youth and others revolted against repression, economic and social injustice and inequality. When a system is impervious to change, they have no option. Tunisian youth, professionals and the middle class arrived at the conclusion that the system under which they lived was intolerant of reform. This is similar to Ethiopia but took a more peaceful route. Citizens, especially youth, took matters into their own hands and gave real meaning to citizen voice, participation and popular revolt. The rest is history. Today, 110 political parties are in the process of competing in what is projected to be the freest and fairest election in Tunisia.
For Tunisian, Egyptian, Libyan, Syrian and Yemeni youth, the battle cry could be termed as ‘inequality and corruption stupid.’ Gross inequality in incomes and wealth arise when a system allows economic and social preponderance for one group over the rest, and discriminates deliberately and systematically. Tunisia was and still is more market friendly than Ethiopia. Yet, inequality was pronounced as was corruption. Egypt was worse. Gaddafi and his large family run the country as a family business. He lost his life and perhaps all his wealth and the wealth of his family. Freedom leads to the inevitable demand for accountability. But who in the top echelons of the Ethiopian government party is listening?
In Ethiopia, the economic and social system tends to emulate the worst features of crony capitalism and dictatorial ‘socialism.’ I say the worst features of capitalism because cronyism is rampant. Greed and corruption are widespread and punishing for the society. Humanitarian and other forms of aid are politicized and skew the allocation of resources along ethnic and party lines. If aid that saves lives is distorted, one will have little confidence that the rest of the economy and financial system is not distorted either. Ethiopia is neither farmland nor water resource poor. Yet, it is one of the ‘hungriest and unhealthiest” countries in the world. Take food self-sufficiency and security and investments in agriculture under the so-called Agriculture Development-led Industrialization (ADLI) approach–a strategy intended to boost the capabilities of smallholders and other rural folk–and assess outcomes.
Why did the regime fail to boost the capabilities of smallholders by providing them tenure security? As I document in my latest book, “The Great Land Giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirmit in Ethiopia,” the country is not able to achieve a level of agricultural productivity per hectare that it had attained in 1973 or 38 years ago? Believe it or not, the governing party no longer believes that Ethiopian smallholders and other domestic entrepreneurs can modernize and commercialize agriculture or anything else for that matter. In 2009, 22 percent of Ethiopia’s rural poor depended on some form of international emergency foreign aid to survive. I conclude from these facts and from skyrocketing food prices that the governing party’s strategy was not to release the productive potential of Ethiopian smallholders and to make the country food self-sufficient. Rather, it was to control the ‘peasantry’ and to make the rural population dependent and an appendage. A pro poor economic and social policy would have resulted in a smallholder Green Revolution in Ethiopia. Generous donors such as USAID, the World Bank and others share the blame in that they did not invest in smallholder commercial farming. Some donors perpetuate dependency by focusing on relief rather than on sustainable and participatory development.
It is a fact that twenty years ago, people could afford to buy food. Today, millions survive on one meal a day. Forty years ago, the educated and others aspired to join the middle class and expected to build and own their own home. Today US$50,000 cannot buy you a decent home in Addis Ababa or other major urban areas. The façade of villas, apartment and office buildings and other construction in Ethiopia’s capital and other urban centers is glitz at its worst. Rent seeking and corrupt culture produced the glitz. Who owns major buildings anyway? Who rents them to foreigners? It certainly is not the Ethiopian middle class. They worry about their next meal. These investments are owned by few powerful individuals, families and monopolies. The direct link between business monopolies and political power is a firm indicator of the merger of party, state and ethnicity. It is this merger that enables the governing party to misallocate national resources; and to transfer waters and farmlands and other pillars of the economy from the Ethiopian people to a selected few domestic allies and to foreign governments and businesses.
These economic and social distortions and adverse impacts on ordinary Ethiopians are essential to grasp in promoting a culture of collaboration and unity among opposition groups whether civic or political; and whether within the country or abroad.
(Part three of this series will highlight the dangers that emanate from massive transfers of water basins and farmlands and other pillars of the economy to foreign governments and businesses. The piece will continue to reinforce why unity of purpose and action is critical, urgent and everyone’s business.)
The book ‘Ideology and Elite Conflicts: Autopsy of the Ethiopian Revolution, by Prof. Messay Kebede, is the best and most thorough analysis of the causes and implications of the Ethiopian Revolution to date. Prof. Messay has written a {www:tour de force} of the political theory of the Ethiopians who overthrew the imperial regime of Emperor HaileSelassie and instigated a program of socialism that endured for 18 years (from 1974 through 1991) before utterly collapsing. In a carefully researched and logically crafted book, the author touches on a {www:plethora} of significant topics related to a {www:seminal} period in Ethiopian history and presents them in new and important ways. The arguments and insights presented are cogent.
From the start, Messay defines {www:trenchant}ly his terms and lays out the objectives of the book. Noteworthy is the examination of current theories of revolution, making a distinction between social and political revolutions, and positing discrepancies in the Ethiopian experience. Messay does a masterly job of reviewing the ideological and sociopolitical origins of HaileSelassie’s regime with its history of political {www:cooptation}, social blockage, and creation of discontent leading to crises that brought about its demise. In evaluating the Emperor’s quest for personal glory and his success in foreign policy, he correctly notes that Haile Selassie’s international reputation enhanced his internal authority and absolutism sufficient to postpone the modern development of his country. It was in consolidating his centralized power and in rejecting limits to such power that the Emperor set up the very instruments (a national army, a system of education, and a modern bureaucracy) that would bring the imperial absolutism to an end. As the monarchy lost legitimacy with the people, it lost authority over its own guardians—especially the military.
Messay skillfully traces the precipitating factors that led to the collapse of the imperial regime and the political ascent of the military. Chief among these factors was the miscalculation of the educated and reform-minded members of the ruling elite who thought they would assume leadership of the social protests with an ensuing radical revolution without drawing in the Armed Forces into the center of the political battle. With Western educations proving of little value in getting around the blockage of social mobility, the educated elite found itself marginalized. In desperation, it turned to the then dominant ideology of Marxism-Leninism. This very disfranchisement of the educated elite became quite inspirational to the rebellious junior officers and NCOs of the military, who adopted the perspective of the outcast elite to justify their power. In 1974, it became apparent that the government could not effectively deal with the crises that engulfed the nation. As the author notes, without clear civilian leadership in the opposition, the military officers filled the vacuum and soon were making political instead of corporate demands. To oversee the implementation of these demands, the military formed a representative committee, the Coordinating Committee of the Armed Forces, Police, and Territorial Army—the Derg, that took over the reins of government. There followed a bitter power struggle among individuals and opposing groups that resulted in the radicalization of the Derg which imposed a socialist revolution upon the country. Thus, the Derg hijacked the political revolution using a commitment to utopian ideas that originated from the students and intellectuals. The Derg adopted Marxist-Leninist ideology because if justified the absolute power that it needed to eliminate all other contending groups.
While this was occurring, Cold War politics intruded into the Horn of Africa: Soviet-armed Somali troops invaded Ethiopia, and the United States proved reluctant to provide military support to the nascent Derg. The Soviets, encouraged by the Derg, quickly abandoned the Somali government, their former allies, and gave massive support to Ethiopia, which appeared to be a more reliable client implementing a genuine socialist revolution. Somali forces were driven out of the country, and the radicals of the Derg led by Mengistu Haile Mariam emerged under the protective wing of the Soviets with absolute power. During Mengistu’s reign civil war was continuous. Large numbers of people either lost their lives or were forced to flee the country.
At the heart of Messay’s analysis is the use of {www:psychobiography} in finding Mengistu’s narcissism essential in understanding the revolution. In a significant contribution to the study of the revolution, the author delves into the double-edged nature of the dictator’s narcissism: on the one hand, his decisiveness, authoritarianism, cunning, and manipulative ability so suited for seizing power; but on the other hand, his negative paranoia, quick temper, cruelty, and sense of invincibility that impeded his winning the civil war. Like Haile Selassie before him, the very measures that Mengistu took to safeguard his absolute rule turned out to be those that most weakened him.
Messay is also incisive in analyzing the rise of ethnonationalism leading to the concept of a nation within Ethiopia possessing the right to self-determination either in the form of self-rule or, if need be, independence. Ethnonationalism became the rallying point for the Tigrean elite in resisting government intrusions into its territory. Together with the Eritreans who sought independence, the two northern ethnic movements scored decisive military victories that brought about the collapse of the Derg. Troops of the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) marched into Addis Ababa while the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front captured Asmara. The TPLF then dominated the transitional government that adopted a system of ethnic federalism and supervised a referendum on Eritrean independence that created a new nation and left Ethiopia without an outlet to the sea. The TPLF’s rule ever since continues under the shadow of the Derg’s socialist revolution.
In his concluding analysis of the Ethiopian revolution using both a narrative method and ideological factors, Messay synthesizes a philosophic perspective that is excellent political theory and a major contribution to the literature of Ethiopian Studies. The narrative history of Haile Selassie’s era and of the Derg’s reign are splendidly presented. I strongly recommend this book to all who seek to understand Ethiopia’s turbulent transformation from a monarchy into a socialist nation during the 1970s.
(Prof. Theodore M. Vestal, author of The Lion of Judah in the New World: Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia and the Shaping of Americans’ Attitudes toward Africa.)
Yet another shameful drama is currently taking place involving Al Amoudi’s {www:concubine}s (የጭን ገረዶች) who misrepresent themselves has officials of the Ethiopian Sports Federation in North America (ESFNA). During the past couple of days, the concubines have been holding a meeting in Virginia. They called it a board meeting, but as soon as it started, the participants begun showering each other with insults and kicking each other from the meeting. Founding members who came to the meeting to help rescue ESFNA, which has been completely taken over by a gang of Al Amoudi-hired thugs during the past five years, were {www:unceremoniously} expelled. The cause of the fighting that has been taking place in ESFNA is to show who is a more loyal servant to the drunkard Saudi billionaire Al Amoudi and get some crumbs from him. It’s disappointing that VOA sends a reporter to cover this embarrassing spectacle that only brings shame to the Ethiopian community in North America, while ignoring other Ethiopian events that positively portray our community in the U.S.
