The Washington Examiner reports that the DC police has found 300 lbs of khat after arresting an Ethiopian cafe owner. Khat is an illegal drug in the U.S., but it is widely consumed by members of the ruling party in Ethiopia, including the head of Woyanne junta Meles Zenawi. Read the report below by Scott McCabe:
Ethopian cafe owner arrested in major khat bust
WASHINGTON DC — District police charged the owner of an Ethiopian cafe with the illegal narcotic {www:khat} after investigators intercepted hundreds pounds of the leafy substance, which is used as a common stimulant in East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.
Police recovered more than 300 pounds of khat that had a street value of more than $95,000, said Lt. John Haines of the 4th Police District.
The bust “removes a major drug traffic dealer” from the neighborhood north of Sherman Circle, Haines said in a statement.
Etana Shuremu, owner of the Dira Dawa Deli & Cafe, 5333 Georgia Ave. NW, has been charged with unlawful possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance. No one answered the phone at the business Tuesday, and Shuremu’s attorney, Sara Kopecki, said she could not comment.
According to court documents, the investigation began in February when a D.C. police officer got a tip from a confidential informant that boxes of khat were being shipped from overseas to the Ethiopian cafe. Khat is a plant cultivated in Kenya and Ethiopia that is typically chewed like tobacco, though it can be smoked and sprinkled on food. In its fresh state, it’s classified as a Schedule I controlled substance under United States law, along with drugs like LSD, PCP and Ecstasy. The khat leaves typically start to break down within 48 hours and become a much lesser stimulant considered a Schedule IV drug.
The leafy substance was shipped in boxes labeled “green tea” from the United Kingdom, police said. The source told police that 15 to 20 boxes were delivered three or four times a week. The informant provided cardboard packaging that contained the “green tea” label with a clear plastic bag containing khat residue that had been found in the trash, documents said.
The officers learned that the business was about to receive a shipment of khat from two overseas locations in March. Investigators obtained a warrant to open five packages addressed to Shuremu at a U.S. postal facility before the boxes were delivered to the Diradawa cafe.
A Drug Enforcement Administration lab confirmed that the packages contained 230 pounds of khat, and that the dealers had devised a method to keep the khat fresh, documents said. Police executed another warrant at the store and recovered an additional 80 pounds.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime-punishment/2011/05/ethopian-cafe-owner-arrested-major-khat-bust#ixzz1LSdFteQU
By Getachew Begashaw
The government of Meles Zenawi has recently declared its plan to build a mega hydroelectric power dam along the Nile despite objections from concerned countries, especially Egypt. This dam will be built in the western part of Ethiopia, Benishangul Zone, about 25 miles (40 kilometers) from Sudan’s border. The government claims that the project will cost as much as 5 billion US dollars, which is about 85-90 billion Ethiopian birr. According to Zenawi, the construction of this dam can be completed without any foreign aid. In one of his televised interview with Yasin of Al-Hayat London Newspaper, he touted: “… it will not be impossible for 80 million people to contribute 80 billion Birr”. If the claims and estimates of Zenawi’s are to be taken seriously, the projected dam will produce about 5,250 MW of electric power and will be completed in 5 to 10 years. The project is announced amid the recent Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) controversy among the {www:riparian} states. According to the Alternative Energy Africa’s report, Egypt and Sudan are in partnership against all the signatories of the Entebbe agreement of the NBI that include Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya, and Burundi.
Many Ethiopians are wondering why Zenawi’s regime decided to embark on this huge project that could have serious impact on peace, stability, and development of the country and the region. The general sentiment is captured in a paragraph of an article by an anonymous writer that appeared on Ethiomedia, May April 26, 2001:
Undoubtedly, given the topography of the Blue Nile valley, constructing a hydroelectric dam on it requires a high-level engineering technology not to speak of the billions of Birr it requires. Has Meles acquired donor funding for it? We know he hasn’t and in the deputy prime minister’s own admission they have not secured any funding; and it is highly unlikely that donors will ever fund it because of political reasons that can trigger the wrath of Egypt thereby affecting the Middle East peace process. Why choosing this risky business at this time? No funding, political risks: why risk it now? Is it really possible to build a dam of such scale without donors’ grants or loans from them but with contributions from the most impoverished people in the world and by selling bonds to them? We can discern from this that the purpose of the millennium project rhetoric is not development as it is neither serious nor feasible. By now, we can see the dominant feature of the political aspect in this project. It is indeed a political project aimed at deceiving the public and diverting their attention from a possible uprising.
In this paper I argue that, in addition to the above astute observation, Zenawi is cunningly using the project to perpetually milk the hard earned money of the Ethiopian people, including those in the Diaspora, for the foreseeable life of the project. The project not only will ensure kickbacks to Zenawi and his cronies from the no-bid contract awarded to Salini Costruttori, it is also conceived to generate a stream of revenue for TPLF through coercion to buy bond and lucrative contracts to the vast TPLF-held business conglomerate.
The implication for the Diaspora is particularly dire, since the naïve investors will be held hostage and be forced to buy more of the bond, to ensure the completion of the project and to redeem the bonds they have already bought. Indeed, this has been the indirect means of control the TPLF has exercised over our compatriots who have gone back to Ethiopia and have made some investments in real-estate and service industries.
Socio-Economic Consequences of Large Dams
Based on experiences with the construction and operation of large dams around the world, the benefits from these projects have been seriously questioned and challenged by numerous interest and focus groups, including locally affected people and global coalitions of environmental and human rights activists. Dorcey, in his book titled, large dams: learning from the past looking at the future, documents that the expected economic benefits of large dams are not realized and that major environmental, economic, and social costs are imposed on societies.1 In a related study, Scudder, a professor in Development Anthropology at California Institute of Technology and a World Bank’s senior environmental advisor, asserts that adverse social impacts of large dam constructions have been underestimated and that they have “unnecessarily lowered the living standards of millions of local people”.2. Further, the 1994 Manibeli Declaration, the 1997 Curitiba Declaration, and the 2002 Posada Declaration, along with several other declarations, called for a moratorium on the World Bank funding and reparations for those affected by the constructions of large dams.
In a rigorous empirical study of a large dam construction that has many similarities with that of Ethiopia’s proposed Nile dam, Lin and Schuster3 studied the problem of hydroelectricity development for the Grand Inga Project in the Democratic Republic of the Congo with particular reference to ownership of land and water, policy assumptions behind development of the project, public works construction, socio-economic development, and environmental conservations. They concluded that investment in hydroelectricity fails to stimulate economic development within the Democratic Republic of Congo because of the following reasons:
… [t]he investment in the Inga-Shaba project … did not lead to socio-economic development in DRC due to political instability and mismanagement of public finance and resources, which result from the failure of the political regime to develop institutions and laws that (1) involve stakeholders in the formulation of national natural resources policies, (2) distribute benefits from exploitation of natural resources in ways that are perceived as equitable and legitimate by regional stakeholders, (3) ensures public accountability in public investment, … and (4) use of military in political disputes”.
In a separate study, the International Rivers group reports that Africa’s large dams have consistently been built at the expense of rural communities, who have been forced to sacrifice their lands and livelihoods to them and yet have reaped few benefits. Large dams in Sudan, Senegal, Kenya, Zambia/Zimbabwe and Ghana have brought considerable social, environmental and economic damage to Africa, and have left a trail of “development–induced poverty” in their wake. Project benefits have been consistently overstated and inequitably shared. Large hydropower dams also reinforce centralized power grids, which disproportionately benefit industry and higher income groups, and widen income disparities (and energy inequities) between Africa’s poor and Africa’s elite4.
Similarly, The Economist, in its issue of May 6, 2010, wrote: “…. political instability, graft and incompetence have meant that many African dams, once built, have failed to produce what was promised. The Inga I and II dams on the Congo River have generated a fraction of the power they were meant to. The technology is demanding. Seasonal rains produce muddy rivers, with higher sedimentation than northern countries’ dams filled with melted snow. That means a shorter lifespan and heavier maintenance”.
The Gibe III Project — A Harbinger for the Nile Dam
A look back at the disastrous experience with the Gibe III project may shed light on the impending catastrophe with the ill-conceived mega project on the Nile. The Gibe III dam, whose construction began in 2006, is perhaps Ethiopia’s largest investment project so far. A fact sheet about this dam in Ethiopia, published in May of 2009 by International Rivers, a lobby group that tries to save rivers from dams it considers are destructive, presents solid accounts of the technical, economic, social, and environmental disasters that followed the construction and mismanagement of the project5. According to the report, Zenawi’s government neglected to properly assess economic, technical, environmental and social risks, violating domestic laws and international standards. The government, in its rush to construct the dam, also neglected to study the effects of regional climate change, which could even dramatically affect the dam’s performance over its lifespan. The report further disclosed that the dam could be a development disaster for Ethiopia and the region.
Another human rights group, Survival International, documented that the livelihood and culture of over 200,000 agropastoralists from eight distinct indigenous people in the Omo river basin could be ruined by Gibe III and even asserted that the government of Zenawi has behaved criminally in pushing through the project6. The project will destroy the Omo River’s annual flood that supports riverbank cultivation and grazing lands for livestock.
According to a UNESCO World Heritage Site report, Lake Turkana in Kenya, that is considered an oasis of biodiversity in a harsh desert environment, will be destroyed by the Gibe III project. More than 300,000 people with rich animal life depend on the Lake and the agency warns that hundreds of thousands of fishing families and pastoralists will be adversely affected if the lake’s fragile ecosystem is stressed to the brink of collapse7.
It may be recalled that the government of Zenawi directly awarded a no-bid engineering, procurement and construction contract for Gibe III to the same Italian construction company, Salini Costruttori, in June 2006. According to Transparency International, “large public works projects are one of the world’s most corrupt sectors, and no-bid contracts are an open invitation to corruption”8. The two contracts, worth $1.7 billion for Gibe III and $5 billion for the Nile dam, violate Ethiopia’s Federal Public Procurement Directive, which requires international competitive bidding. The World Bank declined to consider project funding for both projects because the contracts violated the Bank’s own procurement policy.
The Nile Dam – A Tragedy-in-Waiting
According to the report of the government, the proposed Nile dam project will be Africa’s largest and the world’s 10th largest hydroelectric dam, with twice the generating capacity of Hoover Dam in the United States and slightly lower than Robert-Bourassa of Canada. The government claims that it will be the single most important infrastructure project that will take Ethiopia out of poverty. Despite the government’s manufactured exuberance over the projected future benefit of the dam, by all accounts, it is a national tragedy-in-waiting.
The proposed mega dam project on the Nile is fraught with many questions that shed light about the sinister ploy behind its genesis. Is the project serious and genuine? Why is it announced at this particular moment? Why insist on this project while all regional and global indicators and the adverse outcome of our exercise with Gibe III advise against it? More importantly, if it is advertised as the project of the millennium, how come it is not even remotely indicated in the much talked about Ethiopia’s Five Year Development Plan, billed as the Millennium Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP). Nowhere in the document, even in the section of the plans of the Ethiopian Electric and Power Authority, could one see any mention of this mega project. Why is it then that it is proclaimed all of a sudden with so much fanfare? These and other secrets that shrouded the project lead one to surmise the following:
1. It is just a propaganda ploy manufactured after the release of the GTP document sometime in August to divert attention from the revolutionary surges in the Middle-East and North Africa
2. A calculated scheme to garner new sources of income for Zenaiw’s repressive regime.
Irrespective of the ulterior motives of Zenawi’s regime, building this mega dam on the Nile is an ill-advised undertaking in terms of feasibility, security, desirability, and sustainability. There will be no benefit to the local people or the country. As evidenced by the negative impacts of such huge dams around the world, there is no economies of scale argument to justify the size and the scope of this project in Ethiopia. It will fail with a hefty cost to the people, and a huge debt for generations to come.
In an article distributed to members of the Ethiopian Development Policy Focus Group (EDPFG), Hurisso Gemechu presents compelling arguments that there are other better alternatives to this highly expensive and unsustainable huge hydroelectric project. More specifically, mini or micro hydroelectric power systems can easily bring up to100 KW of power to villages and towns using local water resources, and that they can also easily be connected to other existing and future electric power networks at low cost. Moreover, these types of hydroelectric projects can be environmentally benign energy conversion options without significantly interfering with river flows, and that they can be more attractive in terms of economic values and environmental considerations. In the context of Ethiopia, these alternatives are well suited for power generation as well as irrigation, recreation, tourism, and fishing much better than what the highly eroded deep escarpments of the Nile can provide.
Bond Issuance through Coercion and Deceit
As acknowledged by Zenaiw’s government, the usual donors and lenders will not fund this project. There are several reasons for this apathy on the part of donor nations and institutions. First, the project is a bad investment decision because it will have a certain negative return. Secondly, any such venture will inevitably have an untoward impact on the entire geo-politics of the Middle East. The West cannot afford to let this happen, especially at this time of so much uncertainty about the region. Even China would be reluctant since the benefit from such an investment is no match for its oil interest.
As a consequence, having declared “it wouldn’t be hard for 80 million people to contribute 80 billion birr”, Zenawi has launched a massive campaign of coercing the Ethiopian people and businesses to buy the “Millennium Bond”.
The features of the bond specify that it is a Corporate Bond, issued by the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation (EEPCO), through Commercial Bank of Ethiopia (CBE), and is called EEPCO Millennium Bond. The guarantor of the bond is the government and it is issued in USD, Pound Sterling, Euro and other convertible currencies. The minimum bond issued is USD 500 and the interest rates are 4%, 4.5 % and 5% for 5, 7 and 10 years maturity periods respectively.
The bond has several aspects that are not obvious to understand. It is defined as corporate bond and the government is assigned to be a guarantor. If we accept it as corporate bond, then, it will be a debt security issued by a corporation and sold to investors. According to the internationally accepted practice, the backing for the bond will be the payment ability of the corporation, the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation in this case. The payment ability of the corporation is typically determined by the money to be earned from future operations. That means, the payment ability of EEPCO is determined by the money to be collected in the future from the operations of the Nile hydroelectric power. In some cases, where the future earnings of the corporation are not fully reliable or secured, the corporation’s physical assets may be used as collateral for bonds. At this point, it is not clear what the investors may have as collateral. The physical assets of EEPCO or the Nile hydroelectric power are owned by the government and cannot be disaggregated and disposed. At any rate, corporate bonds are considered higher risk than government bonds. As a result, interest rates are almost always higher than for government bond, even for top-flight credit quality companies.
One argument that one could raise in regards to the bond collateral is that the government is a guarantor. Unfortunately, the government of Meles Zenawi itself has a bond rating of CCC-, which is less than what is called Junk Bond (BBB- rating by Standard & Poor’s). That means, the government’s bond rating is equal to that of corporations in default with little or no prospect for recovery. How such a government with poor rating can be a reliable guarantor of corporate bond is open to question.
Government guaranteed corporate bonds are not customary, and happen rarely. Once such rare instance was when the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) sponsored Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program to afford bank holding companies the opportunity to issue unsecured debt (bond in this case) guaranteed by the US government. The program is part of the government’s overall recovery plan and is intended to facilitate bank holding company recapitalization during the recent recessionary period. The program will now be ended by June 30, 2012. One other country that is much known for using the bond market to raise money for operations other than military functions is Israel. Even then, Israel doesn’t accept responsibility for bonds traded by Israeli corporations.
In all likelihood, this “Millennium Bond” is a government bond because EEPCO is a service agency of the government. Unlike the US government bond, usually called Treasury bond that is regarded as extremely safe in the investment world, the bonds of many developing countries do carry substantial risks. Like private corporations, countries can default on payments. This has happened in Eritrea recently. As reported by Haile Tesfay in awate (Nov 23, 2002), the Eritrean people, especially those in the Diaspora, got shortchanged following their generous response to the financial needs of the Eritrean government during its conflict with the government of Meles Zenawi. Tesfay wrote:
Eritreans dug deep into their pockets, bank accounts, credit cards and even took out second and third mortgages on their homes in order to respond to this call. When the government came out with the ‘dollar a day’ initiative, we dug into our savings. When the government came out with the “first, second and third offensive” initiatives, we emptied out our children’s education funds. When the government screamed we need more money, we went as far as borrowing from our credit cards. Finally, the government came up with bond certificates and we, in good faith, bought them, with the understanding that they would be honored upon their maturity. This year, the first batch of bond certificates matured and many Eritreans are finding out that the Eritrean Government is playing the ‘procrastination’ game; that it is not honoring its legal contract with the Eritrean people.
The “Millennium Bond” is issued in USD, and other convertible hard currencies. This makes it a Sovereign Bond. A Sovereign bond is a debt security issued by a national government denominated in a foreign currency of a country with a stable economy. The foreign currency denomination makes it significantly risky to the bondholder. According to many investment advisors, Sovereign Bonds, especially those issued by a government of a country with an unstable economy, will have significant default risks. This is because that government, beside all other economic problems, will most likely have shortage of foreign exchange reserve to honor the bond up on maturity.
Why do people invest in bonds? Generally, people invest in bonds to begin saving to provide for a secure tomorrow. In a well-functioning economy and stable political system, bondholders can reach their goals with safety, market-based yields, and tax benefits whether they are saving for a new home, car, vacation, education, retirement, or for a rainy day. In the US, for instance, U.S. savings bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. These bonds can earn market-based rates up to 30 years allowing the individual investment to grow.
There is no basis to suggest that government of Meles Zenawi, with a very poor credit rating (CCC-) in the bonds market, can be trusted for this kind of investment. The promised rates of returns on the “Millennium Bond” in Ethiopia are 4%, 4.5%, and 5% for 5, 7 and 10 years maturity periods, respectively. Ethiopia has been perpetually plagued with inflationary markets ever since the government of Zenawi came to power. It has been experiencing a chronic inflation rate that is more than 25% this current quarter alone, despite the stringent price control recently announced by Zenawi. The ever increasing inflation in the country has significant implication on the above rates of returns on the bond, especially for the domestic investors. Even in the unlikely scenario that the government will honor its obligation, the returns from this bond investment are extremely low. In the situation in which the government is the borrower and the bondholders are the lenders, the current inflation implies that the bondholders are paying the government about 20% of their savings in bonds so that the government could use their money! That is the real rates of returns (the nominal rates minus the inflation rate) will be negative 21%, 20.5%, and 20% respectively.2 In this irrational investment scheme, where lenders (bondholders) are paying the government (the borrower), the clear benefit of this transaction goes to Mr. Zenawi and his cronies at the expense of the Ethiopian people.
Concluding Remarks
Ethiopia does not need a huge hydroelectric dam that is proven to cause untold human, economic, social, environmental, and natural resource destructions. Many small dams with a mix of various uses, including agricultural irrigation, power generation, fisheries, tourism, and recreation could be built around the country at a much lower cost and guaranteed success. Ethiopians should not allow a government that has continued to embezzle and squander their hard earned money to put its hands on their meager resources again. They should not be fooled by fake nationalism and patriotism of a government that:
* made the country landlocked, without any access to the sea and maritime trade,
* parcels out the fertile agricultural lands to foreigners at almost no cost, and puts out anything Ethiopian for sale,
* cedes fertile farmlands of western Ethiopia, all the way from Gondar to Gambella, to Sudan,
* has no respect or regard for the country’s history or heritage, including its flag,
* is known for corruption, nepotism and lack of transparency,
* divides the people along ethnic lines and homelands, and
* denies its people basic human rights and freedoms.
The ethno-centric government of Meles Zenawi has repeatedly demonstrated that it has no interest in promoting the long-term interest of the country. The affront on Abbay (Nile), which is very close to the hearts of many Ethiopians as a symbol of national pride, is another attempt by Zenawi to reassert his authoritarian control over the people in the guise of patriotism. Ethiopians cannot and should not fall for this manufactured nationalism of a dictator, who has much to account for crimes he has committed during his 20 years of authoritarian rule.
Many scholars believe that if there is another world war, it will be a war over waters. Therefore, the Nile issue requires a sober and deliberated approach where all Ethiopians are consulted and heard through a democratically elected government.
By all accounts, the TPLF government has initiated this mega dam project, not out of its goodwill to catapult Ethiopia out of poverty, but out of its sinister schemes to divert the attention of the people from the revolutionary uprising on the horizon and to swindle money out of the pocket of the hardworking Ethiopians. Therefore, all Ethiopians at home and in the Diaspora, have a historic responsibility to stand in unison and thwart the destructive plan of the dictator.
(Getachew Begashaw, Ph.D., is a Professor of Economics and member of the Ethiopian Development Policy Focus Group (EPDFG). He can be reached at: [email protected])
By Yilma Bekele
When you take an object apart to see how it works, or take software and disassemble it to locate the source code it is referred to as reverse engineering. Basically what you are doing is inverting the system by going backwards the developmental cycle all the way to conception. Reverse engineering begins with a final product and works backwards.
This is done for various reasons. It could be done for learning purpose to see how it works, to enhance the product to make it function better, to copy it which is mostly illegal or for malicious purpose such as infecting it with virus.
I believe we have been reverse engineered by the TPLF government. You can be sure the purpose was not to learn, enhance or integrate but rather to destroy or disrupt. The pie in the sky idea of the Millennium Dam was the malicious code that was inserted into our operating system.
We woke up one morning and were appalled to discover TPLF was clad in our beautiful tri colored flag and we were left covered in Eritrean and Egyptian clothing. My hats off to our Woyane hackers. Today ladies and gentlemen we have TPLF on this corner proudly dressed in green yellow and red and on the other side is the opposition dressed in Eritrean t-shirt top and Egyptian briefs. Watch Ato Meles bouncing around in his new Chinese made uniform jabbing the air with his beautiful tri colored gloves and raising his fist up high and Ato Bulcha Demeksa getting booed by the spectators.
The Americans call it topsy-turvy situation. In Ethiopia it is called the coming of sementegna shi, the eight-millennium. It is uttered to signify a bizarre, unexplainable and totally weird situation. It is a sign of total resignation. What is there to do when you are witnessing the end of the world? I believe that is what we got here. The real sementegnaw shi is upon us.
The theft of our uniform also managed to put the question in a different perspective. All of a sudden the debate became for and against Abay. Did you notice that? To build a dam or not became the issue. That is the way the regime defined the debate.
Now tell me have you met any Ethiopian opposed to building a dam on Abay or any river? The question is absurd. Why would anybody not wish a dam, a factory, a research university and other beautiful things for his country? Then what is all this false debate about?
Like everything else in Ethiopia, due to its monopoly of the media the TPLF regime defines the issues and presents its side using every available means. The Ethiopian people, those that are able or have conquered fear get bits of information from ESAT (www.ethsat.com) VOA, DW and Internet.
The issue is not about building a freaking dam or not but rather it is all about democracy. Such colossal projects require sober discussion and a national consensus. When governments plan such huge and costly endeavors they usually carry out a consorted effort to include the population in a lively debate to build enthusiasm and good will. Again, like everything else TPLF, they have managed to stand the concept on its head. They have put the cart in front of the horse. I know it is nothing new.
We wanted to discuss intelligently and answer the two vital questions of why and how? They don’t have adequate answers so they resorted into stealing the flag and hiding behind it like a coward. We are saying hold on, before we decide shouldn’t we discuss it? Unfortunately, today we are actually forced to discuss an event that is not going to happen. Why it is not going to happen has been analyzed and dissected by Ethiopian experts in the fields of economics, engineering and politics. No one from the regime has presented a compelling reason to use our limited resources on one gigantic project or answered the simple issue of affording it. It cannot be done because there is no study to justify Ato Meles’s delusion.
The purpose of the Abay dam issue is to deflect attention from the current economic failure and the specter of uprising in the vicinity. They have managed to confuse some people. They have used a very important question to win political point. In their tiny little heads they have won the day. How pathetic. Here is a good timely quotation from FIFA’s (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) Fair play code.
Play fair
Winning is without value if victory has been achieved unfairly or dishonestly. Cheating is easy, but brings no pleasure. Playing fair requires courage and character. It is also more satisfying. Fair play always has its reward, even when the game is lost. Playing fair earns respect, while cheating only brings shame. Remember: it is only a game. And games are pointless unless played fairly.
TPLF plays dishonestly. Winning by cheating is second nature to our Woyane warriors. TPLF refuses to grow up. The Ethiopian regime is infected with toxic philosophy of us against them. They spend a lot of time concocting negative ideas and scenarios to confuse, set one up against the other and survive another day. Since Woyane assumed power our people have not seen a single day of peace.
Today democratic Ethiopia is demanding businesses use a cash register furnished and maintained by the government. The cash register costs over seven thousand Bir and maintenance and upgrades cost over two thousand. It is not open for discussion. Today democratic Ethiopia demands the citizen report to Kebele if he has an overnight visitor in his own house. Today democratic Ethiopia determines how much a private merchant should charge for his goods.
The Abay dam theatre is one more abuse to prop up a dying system. The regime has already started to expropriate money from civil servants and the banks to finance its military and security due to the threat of people’s uprising. The willing Diaspora that was lulled over by promise of appreciating real estate values is now coming face to face with TPLF’s ugly side. Forty percent is the current rate of the rip off billed as tax, but it is just the beginning. The song ‘Don’t cry for me Argentina’ comes to mind. I have a feeling some of my Hodam relatives will soon be singing the Ethiopian blues.
The reality on the ground is that the regime has spent the entire budget appropriated to the dam building project. Transporting Ato Meles and his friends to Benishangul Zone, setting up the necessary prop for television cameras bringing a marching band and two worn out caterpillar tractors is all the investment required to stir up this hollow discussion. The rest is all about fleecing the citizen and the Diaspora. Don’t hold your breath about seeing an actual dam on the mighty Abay.
The mighty Abay is not just another river. Abay is special. Abay is born in Ethiopia. Abay nurtured the Pharos and help build the great pyramids. Abay was close when Jesus walked on Earth. The prophet Mohammed sent his relatives and followers on the first Hijra (migration) for safety to Ethiopia by the shores of the mighty Abay. Without Abay there will be no such thing as Egyptian civilization the fore bearer of World civilization. It is not a good idea to toy with Abay. Abay is not a forgiving River.
Everything else Ethiopian has been debased and degraded so it is nothing new Abay is the current victim. When you think the flag is a playground for some infantile scribble Abay stands no chance.
Alemayehu G. Mariam
Lies, Junk and Cut-and-Paste
Meles Zenawi, the dictator-in-chief in Ethiopia, says he does not want to talk about the 2010 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights [Report] in Ethiopia. But speaking through his parrot Hailemariam Desalegn, Zenawi said the Report is a meaningless “cut and paste” exercise and will be treated with “the contempt it deserves”:
The last two years we have engaged ourselves with the authorities of the United States and discussed several meetings on the human rights situation in Ethiopia. We thought we had convinced each other on many of the issues… If this is not considered at all, then there is no need to accept this report as something that can help us. So that’s why we dismissed the report totally because it is based on unfounded allegations which are baseless… We said this is a methodology failure. So if the United States is worried about the human rights challenge, then it should be critically evaluated. So if it is ‘cut and paste,’ then it doesn’t give any meaning to anyone. So we said, if it continues like this, it has nothing to do with changing and improving the human rights situation in Ethiopia.
Desalegn said the Report would not affect the “cordial relationship” between Addis Ababa and Washington. With snooty sarcasm he emphasized, “we dismiss the report, we have not dismissed the United States.” Translation: We will gladly pickpocket American Joe and Jane Taxpayer to the tune of USD$1 billion a year, but they can take their human rights report and shove it.
Last year Zenawi blasted the 2009 human rights Report as “lies, lies and implausible lies.” He even ridiculed the U.S. State Department for not preparing a report based on true lies:
The least one could expect from this report, even if there are lies is that they would be plausible ones. But that is not the case. It is very easy to ridicule it [report], because it is so full of loopholes (sic). They could very easily have closed the loopholes and still continued to lie.”
Zenawi’s consigliere, Bereket Simon, called the 2009 Report “the same old junk” released “to punish the image (sic) of Ethiopia and try if possible to derail the peaceful and democratic election process.”
Defending against unfavorable or critical reports of international human rights and other organizations by delivering a barrage of scorn, sarcasm and derision is standard operating procedure for Zenawi’s regime. In November 2010, Zenawi blitzkrieged the European Union Election Observer Report on the May 2010 election in Ethiopia as “trash that deserves to be thrown in the garbage“.
The State Department human rights report does not “deserve” condemnation in barnyard language, but diplomatic praise for its rigorous analysis and reporting of human rights abuses. The Report is an important policy instrument submitted by the U.S. Secretary of State to the Speaker of the House of the U.S. Congress annually pursuant to amended sections 116(d) and 502 B (b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and 504 of the Trade Act of 1974. Using the Report, Congress aims to hold U.S. aid recipient “governments accountable to their obligations under international human rights instruments” and promote the rule of law, expressive freedoms, women’s, children’s and minority rights in recipient countries. The U.S. State Department says it uses the findings and conclusions of the Report in “shaping policy, conducting diplomacy, and making assistance, training, and other resource allocations” and in determining “U.S. Government’s cooperation with private groups to promote the observance of internationally recognized human rights.” But the annual Report has broader significance in the global struggle for human rights. As Secretary of State Hilary Clinton explained, the human rights
reports are an essential tool – for activists who courageously struggle to protect rights in communities around the world; for journalists and scholars who document rights violations and who report on the work of those who champion the vulnerable; and for governments, including our own, as they work to craft strategies to encourage protection of human rights of more individuals in more places.
Taking cheap shots at the Report by calling it “lies”, “junk” and “cut and paste” is to put on public display one’s abysmal ignorance of the American policy and legal process. To be sure, submitting any document to Congress containing “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry” (i.e. “lies, lies and implausible lies”) is a serious crime subject to a five-year prison sentence under Title 18, section 1001 (a) (3) (c) (1) (2). If there are any statements in the Report that fall under the foregoing section of Title 18, it is incumbent upon anyone with evidence of such statements to lodge a complaint and request a formal investigation with the Office of the Speaker of the U.S. House, among other federal law enforcement authorities. Launching a tirade against the U.S. is no defense against the naked truth that Zenawi’s regime is a notorious violator of human rights, nor is it a substitute for substantial and credible evidence to support a claim of false statement.
Failure of Methodology?
Desalegn parrots his boss when he says there is “a methodology failure” that consigns the Report to the ash-heap of “contempt”. Over the years, Zenawi has used similar vague and unsubstantiated accusations of “methodological” flaws in a futile attempt to discredit unfavorable human rights reports on his regime. In 2008, Zenawi alleged that methodological flaws in a Human Rights Watch report on the Ogaden region of eastern Ethiopia amounted to manufactured lies. It is a fact that Zenawi’s regime has thwarted and frustrated every effort by human rights organizations to conduct open and independent investigations of human rights abuses in Ethiopia. By labeling the truth a lie, Zenawi seems to believe that he can indeed change the truth into a lie.
There is nothing secret or sinister about the “methodology” and data collection procedures of the U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. The Report is based on a compilation of information from a variety of sources. U.S. embassies collect “information throughout the year from a variety of sources across the political spectrum, including government officials, jurists, armed forces sources, journalists, human rights monitors, academics, and labor activists.” U.S. Foreign Service Officers undertake investigations of human rights abuses under difficult and not infrequently under “dangerous conditions”. They “monitor elections, and come to the aid of individuals at risk, such as political dissidents and human rights defenders whose rights are threatened by their governments.” The initial drafts of the Reports are completed at the embassies and submitted for review to the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor in the State Department. Information collected by other sources including “US and other human rights groups, foreign government officials, representatives from the United Nations and other international and regional organizations and institutions and academic, media experts” and other sources are also evaluated and included to ensure accuracy, balance and corroboration.
The Reports reflect the work of hundreds of highly experienced and knowledgeable employees in the State Department and other branches of the U.S. Government. For the Report to be “lies, lies and implausible lies”, there must be a grand criminal conspiracy of hundreds of officials in the U.S. Government, including Secretary of State Clinton.
What’s in the “Contemptible” 2010 Human Rights Report on Ethiopia?
Here are some of the “lies, lies and implausible lies” in the 56-page Report:
There was no proof that the government and its agents committed any politically motivated killings during the year… [but] there were credible reports of involvement of security forces in the killings…in the Somali region…” (p.2.)
There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances; however, there were innumerable reports of local police, militia members, and the National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) seizing… opposition political activists. (p.4.)
On September 10, the federal government and Amhara and Oromia regional governments granted pardons to more than 9,000 prisoners, in keeping with a longstanding tradition for celebration of the new year on September 11. (p. 10.)
The UN Committee Against Torture noted in a November 19 report that it was ‘deeply concerned’ about ‘numerous, ongoing, and consistent allegations’ concerning “the routine use of torture” by the police, prison officers and others. (p.4.)
The country has three federal and 120 regional prisons. There also are many unofficial detention centers throughout the country… Most are located at military camps… Prison and pretrial detention center conditions remained harsh and in some cases life threatening. Severe overcrowding was common… Many prisoners had serious health problems in detention but received little treatment. (p. 6.)
Authorities regularly detained persons without warrants and denied access to counsel and family members, particularly in outlying regions. (p. 8.)
The Ethiopian government and regional governments began to put in place “villagization” plans in the Gambella and Benishangul-Gumuz regions… The plan involves the resettlement of 45,000 households… [T]here were reports of local skepticism and resentment… because much of the land was or was to be leased to foreign companies (pp. 14-15.)
The government used a widespread system of paid informants to report on the activities of particular individuals… Security forces continued to detain family members of persons sought for questioning by the government. (p. 15.)
While the constitution and law provide for freedom of speech and of the press, the government did not respect these rights in practice. The government continued to arrest, harass, and prosecute journalists, publishers, and editors. (p. 19.)
The government restricted academic freedom during the year. Authorities did not permit teachers at any level to deviate from official lesson plans and actively prohibited partisan political activity and association of any kind on university campuses. (p. 25.)
Although the law provides for freedom of association and the right to engage in unrestricted peaceful political activity, the government limited this right in practice. (p. 27.)
The constitution and law provide citizens the right to change their government peacefully. In practice the country has never had a peaceful change of government, and the ruling EPRDF and its allies dominated the government. In May [2010] elections, the EPRDF … won more than 99 percent of all legislative seats…. [T]here was ample evidence that unfair government tactics–including intimidation of opposition candidates and supporters–influenced the extent of that victory. (p.32.)
The constitution provides citizens the right to freely join political organizations of their choice; however, in practice these rights were restricted through bureaucratic obstacles and government and ruling party intimidation, harassment, and arrests, with physical threats and violence used by local officials and EPRDF operatives, local police, and shadowy local militias under the control of local EPRDF operatives. (p. 33.)
The World Bank’s 2009 Worldwide Governance Indicators made it clear that corruption remained a serious problem… [S]ome government officials appeared to manipulate the privatization process, and state- and party-owned businesses received preferential access to land leases and credit. (p. 37.)
The law provides for public access to government information, but access was largely restricted in practice. (p. 38.)
The government harassed individuals who worked for domestic human rights organizations. (p. 40)
The government denied NGOs access to federal prisons, police stations, and political prisoners. There were credible reports that security officials continued to intimidate or detain local individuals to prevent them from meeting with NGOs and foreign government officials investigating allegations of abuse. (p. 41.)
There were no further developments in the July 2009 case of the 444 staff members, including high-ranking officials, fired by the Addis Ababa Police Commission for involvement in serious crimes, including armed robbery, rape, and theft. (p.8.)
Women and girls experienced gender-based violence daily, but it was underreported due to cultural acceptance, shame, fear, or a victim’s ignorance of legal protections… Domestic violence, including spousal abuse, was a pervasive social problem. The 2005 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) found that 81 percent of women believed a husband had a right to beat his wife. (p. 42.)
Sexual harassment was widespread. The penal code prescribes 18 to 24 months’ imprisonment; however, harassment-related laws were not enforced. (p. 43.)
Child abuse was widespread. Unlike in previous years there was no training of police officers on procedures for handling cases of child abuse. (p. 45.)
There were an estimated 5.4 million orphans in the country, according to the report of Central Statistics Authority. Government-run orphanages were overcrowded, and conditions were often unsanitary. Due to severe resource constraints, hospitals and orphanages often overlooked or neglected abandoned infants. (p. 47.)
There were approximately seven million persons with disabilities, according to the Ethiopian Federation of Persons with Disabilities. There was one mental hospital and an estimated 10 psychiatrists in the country [of 80 million people.] (p. 48.)
If the foregoing facts are “lies, lies and implausible lies”, the U.S. State Department must be held accountable for issuing false, misleading and deceptive reports and those involved in its preparation should be prosecuted. But if it is the truth that keeps the human rights abusers in Ethiopia closemouthed, then as Scriptures counsel, “Let the lying lips be put to silence.”
It’s