Abdullah A. Ado – abdullahadoa@gmail.com

Introduction:

Since 1993, there have appeared various analyses, by Eritrean and non-Eritrean writers alike, of the causes and effects of Issayas Afewarki and his regime’s crisis; and the likely impact it will have on the overwhelming majority of the population within Eritrea proper in the near future. These include descriptive summaries of events of failed ‘nation building experiments’. Vivid facts are cooking like latent volcano underneath the surface. Reasons are many. But let me ask only the following leading quarries: Do highlanders and lowlanders maintain any shared aspirations to speak of? Are the dreams of lowland Afar and kunama people and that of the highlanders mutual? Do highland–lowland divisions allow passage across obstacles? Do we know and love each other at all? Or do we remain at odds ever since? In the lowlanders view, Eritrea remains a divided nation yet in the making; struggling to come out of the clouds that overshadow its mere existence as a stable nation because of the border dispute along the Badme-Tsorena lines. Yes Eritrea is yet in our minds not solidified even as much as Djibouti is in the eyes of the outer world. Communities within Eritrea have a long way, longer and harder way to go, than the idealist Eritrean highlanders have always taken for granted; and wished that the nation building process is a done deal since Afewarki assumed power. But by so thinking they readily fell flat when it comes to explaining Eritrea’s own internal differences between highlanders and lowlanders; between the resentful Kunama and Afar societies on the one hand and the hard-handed Afewarki’s tyrant regime on the other. A case in point worth mentioning is the recent UNSC resolution. It is a good example of a well researched resolution that not only provides a detailed exposition of major mishaps that lead the contemporary crisis within the Afewarki regime, but also an objective analysis of the events which led naturally to a coherent and cogent set of UNSC’s objective resolution.

At the other end of the spectrum are always pseudo-intellectual rants mainly of Highland Eritrea origin who permanently publish on various Eritrean websites, warning the imminent danger that may result in the collapse of Issayas Afewarki and his regime’s polity. Obviously as its nationhood crafting is not based on solid grounds the aftermath will obviously lead into long-anticipated anarchy and chaos. There will emanate continuous sources of problems and irritation to not only the 9-major ethnic groups within Eritrea proper; but also to the neighbouring states in the region. One thing clear for those of us confined within Eritrea proper is the naked fact that the style of age old authoritarian governance within the Afewarki regime is not only young and fragile, but also outdated and demagogic. Thus it has to be replaced instantly. Unless we are ready to carefully nurture the situation with tools that help eradicate the maladies it will remain a source of fight for our respective community rights. It is this common premise that bears closer examination since it is patently very true. So before I commence my brief discourse, it is useful to define some basic terms in the interests of clarity and also in order to set the parameters of the discussion below within the context of socio-political theory.

Definitions:

The first term that needs to be defined here is “democracy”, since this concept lies at the very heart of the issue under discussion. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines democracy as a: “ (a) government by the people; especially : rule of the majority; (b) government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.” The important point to note here is the phrase “… usually involving periodically held free elections …” We know from experience that free elections are not, in and of themselves, a necessary pre-condition for a democratic system of government; although they usually comprise an important element of such a system.

The central feature of a democratic system is that, government power is vested in the people and they exercise this power either directly, or through freely chosen representatives, which act in their behalf. This central democratic governance concept was articulated and enunciated, perhaps most famously, by Abraham Lincoln of the USA in his Gettysburg Address as: “… government of the people, by the people, for the people…” In fact, this precise and pithy exposition of a democratic system of government has become the popular definition of democracy.

To this effect, this central point leads me to the critically important concept of “political consent”, (i.e. the consent of the people to submit to the authority of government). In a democratic system, the people consent to a governmental authority because that very authority derives from the people freely choosing their leaders through periodically held elections.

As an Afar fellow by origin, I consider my own pastoral and clan-based system as the basis of our societal make up in which direct participation by each adult male in major decisions of the clan, or sub-clan, (e.g. whether to go to war or to resolve disputes with other clans/sub-clans through dialogue and negotiation) take place. Indeed, in the socio-political structure of traditional Afar, Kunama and other pastoral society remains extremely egalitarian and democratic; each with its own inner structure of appointing wise leaders without any public election system in the Western sense of it; and without any sophisticated provision for any electoral process. Even then, we can still characterize the Afar, Kunama and other pastoral communities as democratic. We adhere to the point of customary law and order by our direct, participatory nature of the system of social and political governance in each of our pastoral society whereby important issues are openly debated in mass public meetings and the majority views prevail and become binding upon all clan/sub-clan members after all the viewpoints are thoroughly aired out and deliberately discussed. This indigenous, participatory democracy has neither formal institutions nor any formal office holders (for example the Tajura and Asaita Sultanates remain purely ceremonial with no formal powers); yet each not only works, but has thrived and commanded the allegiance of our people for centuries, if not for millennia. Indeed, in traditional, pastoral, Afar society, clan elders are not elected but chosen through an evolutionary, dynamic, almost osmotic, process whereby those clan members that are perceived by their kinsmen as wise, reflective, or visionary do decent and honourably emerge as spokesmen and socio-political leaders whose opinions and judgments are widely respected and followed. This may be viewed as a social equivalent of the Darwinian evolutionary principle of ‘survival of the fittest’; except that it may be characterized as ‘emergence of the wise and honourable’. Thus, the success of the Afar-Kunama and other pastoral people in establishing a functioning, democratic system within their respective communities by defying Afewarki’s regime in the wake of a prolonged, devastating civil war against a tribally based, highland military dictatorship that had ruled for nearly two decades is not surprising.

Afewarki and his regime’s crisis in the Context of pastoral democracy

Needless to say, liberty is meaningless when the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinion has ceased to exist. Of all rights, the right to utter is the fear of tyrants of the likes of Issayas Afewarki. It is the right to utter which they first of all strike down since they know well that it is power. The Eritrean nation building process has been built on the experience of personalities. It has no tangible political foundations that can bring fundamental changes in the structure of the ruling system. And these days, leave alone in the lowland areas, even in the highland tracts where Afewarki and his regime have the upper hand, the political impasse on how and when to hold elections has become not only a taboo, but also Afewarki’s regime has dug its dubious heels over irreconcilable political positions that grew ever more intractable. There is a saying that goes: “There is no cure for the patient who hides his ailments.” Eritrea under Afewarki is really sick. So the deteriorating political situation and the death incidences happening on those uttering their rights in the pastoral communities among the Kunama and the Afar population in particular, galvanized our people in most parts of lowland Eritrea into antagonistic action as the prospect of sustained, and possibly armed, conflict continues to loom over our horizons.

As usual, there remain protracted armed conflicts every now and then in smaller scales between Afewarki and his henchmen on the one side; and each of the lowland clans on the other side of the isle. These antagonistic symbioses continue to provide to lowlanders essential lessons the hard way. Each of the episodes and military incidents that occur painfully demonstrate to our ordinary lowlanders the social and human cost of facing Afewarki’s anarchic regime. The Afewarki regime’s crisis thus must be seen in the context of a highly partisan, chauvinistic, and lopsided political stance; where highlanders are better trusted and where our peoples’ basic human rights as lowlanders are mismanaged at all times. These events lead our people to far worse crisis situation each time when protracted actions continue to contribute to an all out socio-economic and political subjugation.

Critically observing the public affaires, what accounts and analysis written by highlanders ignore is the role played by our lowlanders in the resolution of Afewarki and his regime’s make up. Instead, these highland writers focus mainly upon the role played jointly by Afewarki and the highlander actors within the nation make-up process. They forget the fact that we too are supposed to remain equally stakeholders in the statehood arena; and have equal say on any action that affects our lives and livelihoods within Eritrea proper.

Afewarki and his regime in the eyes of Lowlanders

There remain palpable and widespread public unease and anger with Afewarki and his regime’s political stand, which allows the clan situation to deteriorate. But falling back on traditional avenues of political and social intermediation, ordinary lowlanders everywhere instigated clan elders, religious leaders and their petty-business community (i.e. civil society leaders) to prevail upon the Afewarki’s local political appointees to tone down their rhetoric and reach a compromise with our society.

Afewarki and his regime’s political actors have a vested interest in de-railing the lowland community’s traditional democratic system and plunging it into the same old anarchy and chaos that has bedevilled highland Eritrea. They are willing to foment internal conflict; armed if necessary; in order to realize their political goals; and remain holding their ascent to power for a long while indefinitely. The key actor here is, of course, Issayas Afewarki himself with his age old nihilistic mission of plunging the whole Horn Africa region back into the Middle Ages type of war mongering. The painstaking rejection of these so-called Afewarki regime’s cadres by our lowland people is literally evidenced by the success of our clan authorities in thwarting repeated attempts by Afewarki and his associates to mount attacks, which is due primarily to the vigilance of our communities’ security watchers in recognizing and reporting suspicious activities and persons to the clan authorities.

In addition to, and separate from Afewarki and his henchmen, there are political actors from highland Eritrea who assume that they have so much in common with lowland Eritrea when it comes to recognizing the not yet stabilized state of Eritrea. These highlanders are also equally ready to force lowlanders to abide by their dream of shaping statehood through clan warfare, in order to create sufficient havoc to overthrow the local authorities and chiefdom and instigate a seizure of power on behalf of the Afewarki regime under the pretext of re-establishing order. For instance, the conflagration of a routine dispute between by-passing highlanders and pastoral clan-men over water rights has at times caused murders of innocent civilians in furtherance of their ambitions for power.

Hence the carefully orchestrated subversion of popular complaints in local communities into armed confrontations with Afewarki’s henchmen simply keep on sowing seeds of armed conflict, distancing and secession from that of Afewarki crafted nationhood. The intervention of the Kunama and the Afar clan elders, not to mention the maturity of the overwhelming majority of the concerned clans within Eritrea proper, succeeded in preventing the hitherto propping up disputes turning into ugly, armed war between clans and Afewarki’s regime. Correspondingly, the widespread public outcry against the political manoeuvrings and sedition of both Afewarki’s regime and highland opposition groups against lowlanders’ right to secede always, continue to force both the lowlanders and highlanders to abandon their sterile impasse and raise their political temperature to the level of no return.

Conclusive Remarks

First of all, several key points outlined above need carefully weighing and taken to serious considerations. To us lowlanders, the political culture of participatory democracy is not new. It is indeed a central feature of our societal socio-political ethos, culture and tradition. This fact is perhaps not fully appreciated by highland Eritrean people; and especially by Afewarki and his regime. To them, democratic governance is a new construct among our lowland population and in our communities’ political history. This hypocritical contemptible look at lowlanders explains the over-arching focus upon embracing on the making of the “New Eritrea” while at the same time ignoring our key important features in our traditionally existing democratic systems. It is important to remember the following points. During the decade commencing from 1993 until the end of 2009, Afewarki’s regime has never been a representative one, where lowlanders in particular enjoyed the freely given consent of their society; not to mention their confidence. There has never been any representative democracy and elections in the whole of Eritrea proper as initially promised in 1993, let alone in lowland areas. There has never been any attempt to adapt the indigenous, Kunama-Afar clan-based, pastoral democracy to the modern institutions in Asmara. There has never been any independent judiciary and a legislature of House of Representatives in Asmara.

Secondly, the drafting of a constitution and its ratification was done by presently exiled highlander by the name Bereket Hapte Sellasie, who originally was born and brought up in Harar, Ethiopia; and had no clear knowledge or understanding of our lowlanders’ culture or civility. His draft constitution has no clan-based pastoral democracy adopted in it. Thus, the making of Eritrea proper remains half baked; qualitatively more undemocratic right now than it was during the 1952-1993 federation with Ethiopia. The fact is Afewarki’s regime always downgraded the clans’ traditional, pastoral political system to benefit from his own archaic, nihilistic, institutional and anarchic structures. Thus, the shift from the clan-based, pastoral democracy of the pre-1993 era to the present one whereby Afewarki and his hand picked henchmen continues to affect the lowlanders negatively. Overall, the dream for nation building is deteriorating the traditional democratic changes in terms of representation; the consent of the people to its clan authority; and finally the transparency and accessibility of lowlanders to the forthcoming ‘federal system’ embracing all 9-ethnic groups equally and impartially.

Thirdly, the determination of the ordinary lowlanders not to surrender the independence, stability and peace we have enjoyed for generations under our home-grown system of representative local government and a free clan-based society is going to remain the powerful foundation. It ensures our durability for ever as it has done for generations thus far. During this Afewarki’ regime’s crisis, our determination has been trumped. In fact, it is a fundamental cause for the machinations of both our political elders and the malevolent plots of would-be usurpers of clan-state institutions. Indeed, the timely support of our brethren inside Ethiopia and Djibouti remains the main viable and valuable stick with which to compel Afewarki and his regime either to look beyond their narrow chauvinistic self-interests and see the ‘big picture’; or step down and leave our lowland communities to freely choose our respective destiny how to live and let other live in peace. This very desire for our clan and national self-determination up to and including secession for our free society is deeply ingrained in our lowland pastoralist peoples’ mind. It also remains the basis of our revolt against Afewarki and his chauvinistic and partisan highlander dictatorship; and the subsequent, long war of our liberation since 1993. It is also a fundamental and enduring feature of the history and culture of pastoral societies within Eritrea proper, which has survived for centuries of, admittedly benign, Italian-British-French colonial rules. But now, the treachery of a union in the making of a nation has subverted by the calculations of chauvinist highlanders’ domination; an oppressive, tribal dictatorship that declared war on its own citizens; intensifying armed, clan conflicts; motivated by an overweening lust for power; sustained efforts by a regime force to subvert the very existence of our clan-based democracy as an independent local state; including acts of terror and violence, nationalization of assets, and trade embargos; and, most recently, the inability of Afewarki’s regime to look beyond its own naked war mongering banditry ambitions.

Fourthly, the recently concerted pressure exerted on Afewarki by the UNSC and the Ethiopian Government helps prepare the grounds for further struggle. Internal subversion attempts against lowlanders have thus far failed. This proves that Afewarki and his regime’s instigators as well as their highland supporters are forced to give-up on their aims by circumstantial evidence as indicated by UNSC resolution and by the worsening living conditions inside Eritrea proper.

Finally, far from being strong and cemented, Afewarki’s regime and its phoney-democracy are indeed fragile and destined to doom. His regime is founded on sandy grounds without embracing the cultural fabric of lowlander pastoral societies that are nourished by the determination of our ordinary pastoral clans to enjoy our freedom and pursue our lives and livelihoods in peace. In sum the hitherto existing Afewarki’s regime and his institutions, constitution and political systems require continual review and improvement; or else they are doomed to fail pretty soon. Afewarki’s regime must realize the need to remain inclusive of our clan-centric pastoral system to his platform-centric focus of chauvinistic and mainly highlander-based partial system. Then and only then can we claim the rights to utter words of thoughts and opinions freely and fraternally.

By Harakale Mohamed Hanfere – Email: harmohanfere@gmail.com

On Wednesday, December 23, 2009, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) slapped an arms embargo on Issayas Afewarki’s regime and imposed targeted sanctions for allegedly aiding Somali rebels and threatening neighbouring Djibouti. The 13-member body voted overwhelmingly and passed a Ugandan-drafted resolution that ban weapons sales to and from Eritrea and imposed travel restrictions on, and freeze assets of, Issayas Afewarki’s political and military leadership. Libya, the lone Arab member of the council and the current chair of the pan-continental African Union (AU) bloc, is the only country that voted against the resolution.

This powerful resolution passed by the UNSC imposing sanctions against Issayas Afewarki’s Regime in Eritrea is critically based on key justifiable measures including, but not limited to: an arms embargo; the inspection and seizure by Member States in their territory of such cargo to and from Eritrea; and, the imposition of a travel ban, and the freezing of assets of, Issayas Afewarki’s political and military leadership who is already blacklisted by the AU and UNMEE Committees other international bodies for its active participation in piracy, arms smuggling and intensification of tension along all the borders of neighbouring countries. As UNSC has strongly emphasized in the past weeks, this brazen act of Issayas Afewarki’s regime is based on pure contempt and disdain. But the Council’s findings on factual evidence and considering of provisions of international law on circumstances that instigate piracy, arms smuggling and intensification of terrorist training camps throughout Eritrea has brought to the fore the Afewarki regime’s continued travesty of justice and amplified dangers inherent in its systems. The fact of the matter is, this resolution was originally conceived by neighbouring countries facing the challenges of piracy, terror plots and destabilization of peace; and later it was executed by 13 UNSC member countries including, but not limited to the United States, Britain, and especially Uganda who sponsored the resolution for purposes of decisive and determined action packaging. Undoubtedly, the UNSC based its resolution on an earlier resolution passed by the AU that was warning Afewarki’s regime to adhere to international law and order. But Afewarki’s terrorist regime persistently continued to give in. In defiance of all hitherto passed resolutions against it, Afewarki’s regime still refuses to adhere to international law and order. Setting aside the retarded, outdated, and misguided policies and his guerrilla “Administration”, Afewarki has loathsome personal agenda and obsession to destabilize the region through wanton and contempt.

Hence, it is timely to exert an all rounded embargo and break Afewarki’s ever standing arrogance both internally on the Eritrean populations that are divided on religious, ethnic and political grounds; and externally for pushing arms smuggling, piracy and terrorist actions. Actually, what are the accusations levelled against Eritrea? How do these accusations match with the provisions of the UN Charter? Does the embargo process pursued against Issayas Afewarki’s regime conform to the modalities and precedents of the UNSC? I hope the following 5-reasons provide sufficient answers to these quarries.

First of all, the UNSC accusations against Issayas Afewarki and his regime for involvement in Somalia have evidentially been substantiated and verified by reports submitted to UNSC by UNEMEE, AU, IGAD and Ethiopia exposing Issayas Afewarki and his regime’s destructive roles in the region. The sanction imposed on Afewarki’s regime was the result of the Eritrean government’s simultaneous destabilization missions in Somalia, Djibouti and the Ogaden region inside Ethiopia. Hence, UNSC-Member States approved this substantiated resolution precisely for this very reason. Besides, the Somalia Monitoring Group had also previously accused Afewarki’s regime on several occasions for supplying arms to those opposing the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) in Somalia. Likewise the Council demanded Afewarki’s regime to “cease all efforts to destabilize or overthrow, directly or indirectly” the TFG in Somalia; and further indicts Afewarki for not only providing political, financial, and logistical support to armed groups engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia, but also advancing piracy on international water of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. Getting substantial financial backing from Libya and handful Arab countries that would like to challenge the West in clandestine, Afewarki’s regime has gained momentum for political will and source of finance for its arms distributive clouts to bankroll armed groups in Somalia, Ogaden, Djibouti and the rest of the region. As for the accusations of political support, it is an open secret that Afewarki’s regime has steadfastly refused to recognize the TFG in Somalia for its covert and unfounded reasons. In fact, these lop-sided and unbalanced positions emanate from Afewarki’s profound desire to destabilize the region’s peace by propagating further the crisis in Somalia. These political considerations aside, the fundamental legal issue at hand is whether Afewarki’s outlaw regime can come to terms of jurisdiction as crafted by the UNSC. Indeed and very truly indeed, it is within the UNSC’s mandate to punish with punitive measures against any bandit regime like that of Afewarki’s. Afewarki should not be allowed to continue acting as a springboard for piracy, arms smuggling and funnelling terrorism that cause regional destabilization; and on accounts of religious and political views it manifests against the majority of the world nations; it should be stopped from its illegal piracy propagation roles and its invasion on a defenceless country like Djibouti arbitrarily.

Secondly, the UNSC’s resolution refers to the “decision of the 13th Assembly of the AU, calling upon the UNSC to impose sanctions against Issayas Afewarki’s regime in Eritrea. It was tabled, and only opposed by Libya which has a special linkage with Afewarki and his regime for reasons explained herein above. More importantly, the UNSC’s function is to base its decisions on evidential resolutions adopted by AU and on the basis of indisputable facts focused on international law.

Thirdly, the UNSC-Resolution recommends other penal measures against Eritrea on the accounts of border disputes with Djibouti where the latter has been appealing both to the AU and to the UN for quite a number of years in the recent past. Regarding the border dispute with Djibouti, the UNSC’s demand reiterates its call in Resolution 1862 adopted in January 2009 that Afewarki’s regime must pull out its forces and all their equipment from disputed territories and ensure that no military presence or activity is pursued in the area. That resolution had given Afewarki’s regime in Eritrea five weeks to pull out. It is recalled that the dispute over the Ras Doumeira promontory on the shores of the Red Sea last flared up in June 2008 after previous clashes in 1996 and 1999.

Fourthly, Afewarki and his regime forget the fact that there has never been any legally accepted border demarcation between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Nor has the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia been given any viable solution. This has encouraged Afewarki’s regime to captivate the overwhelming Eritrean population under the guise of “national military service” with which to constantly keep them in check and at an alert position for likely war situation against Ethiopia along the long stretching and yet non-demarcated borderline.

Fifthly, according to a recent article on www.Africa.com, most Eritrean people do support the United Nations sanctions imposed on Eritrea under the ’repressive’ Issayas Afewarki’s regime that has repeatedly been accused of destabilizing the Horn of Africa since it gained its de-facto “independence” from Ethiopia in 1993. According to ABC News Reporter Dana Hughes from Nairobi, Afewarki and his regime officials admitted on December 16, 2009 that the Eritrean soccer team as officially missing, after failing to return home from a tournament that took place in Kenya. The plane carrying the 12 players and the coach to Nairobi returned to Eritrea with only the coach.  It sounds like an intriguing mystery, but the truth is those young men, who disappeared while in Kenya are just some of the thousands of the Eritrean youths who try to defect from Afewarki’s SAWA-Military Garrison by all possible means every year. It is an open secret that Eritrea is considered as one of the most repressive regimes currently existing in the world. In fact, there is no freedom of press or religion. The regime’s tough nationalization of nearly all private enterprises has left the country in abject poverty. As it stands, it is illegal for any one Eritrean to leave Eritrea without Afewarki and his regime’s approval, which is hardly ever granted. Mandatory conscription can last indefinitely. The tyrant dictator Afewarki holding fast the driving seat, he justifies the indefinite conscription policy by maintaining his argument that his regime needs a strong and large army to counter Ethiopia, on the non-demarcated border issues that erupted in 1998 and still continue at full-swing. But according to the Human Rights Watch, this brutal policy of Afewarki, along with other repressive measures persistently taking place inside Eritrea has turned its population to live under a totalitarian military giant garrison. In fact, Human Rights Watch has documented several cases of people who tried to flee being imprisoned and tortured. Needless to say, Eritrea’s security forces reportedly have a “shoot to kill” order for any citizen caught trying to flee the border into Sudan, Ethiopia or Djibouti. The situation is so severe that the United Nations High Commission of Refugees recommends countries should not deport any Eritrean, because of the almost guaranteed mistreatment upon the refugees return. For those who do escape, their families become direct targets for revengeful attacks by Afewarki’s garrison keepers; indeed, several families reportedly have to either pay a fine of several thousand dollars or face prison sentence themselves. By 2007, when Afewarki’s regime issued a new policy that all travelling athletes must deposit about $6,000 before leaving the country, this has now become a kind of insurance policy that they would return home. But this time, the 12 young men who were sent to Kenya decided to stay away whatever the price of escape is to them or to their families. They found it worth paying and disappear once and for all than to toil under a tyrant regime engulfed in endless misery.

The UNSC-Resolution-1907(2009) is thus a timely action; critically founded on international law and irrefutable facts. Among UNSC member nations, the United States has also employed its support to the resolution on clearly justifiable sanctions against the troublesome Afewark’s regime. All alone Afewarki’s regime dreams to turn the tables and victimize innocent neighbouring nations through its wanton, disdain, piracy arms smuggling and terrorist training camps and other cynical crimes that it is responsible for in the first place. In fact, the truth is, Issayas Afewarki and his regime remain steadfastly responsible for the mayhem and suffering that is bedevilling not only Somalia, but also Djibouti, Ogaden and the Eritrean population at large. Indeed, it is an open secret and common knowledge that as intractable as the Somali crisis may be, there were real hopes of a turnaround for the better by 2006. But for reasons that defy rationale, Afewarki’s regime then acted to roll back those promising developments by instigating havoc and defying Ethiopia’s and Uganda’s involvement in peace keeping roles within Somalia. That single debacle alone aggravated the humanitarian crisis to this very day in Somalia to unprecedented levels. Therefore, what the UNSC has acted recently is purely based on rightful justice and legality. Indeed, it took action on solidly existing evidence gathered from stakeholders seeking justice. Also it seriously bode well for keeping international law, peace and order in tact. This is why we strongly feel that a bright day is on the way thanks for the UNSC-sanctions against Afewarki and his destructive and evil-filled regime.

By Obo Arada Shawl  December 23, 2009

The spirit of Wallelign

The process of Debteraw

The writings of Hama Tuma

have triggered respectively, to the downfall of the Monarchy, the military Dictatorship and to Ethnic Tyranny

Introduction

The politics of Eathiopia tend to pull in different directions. It is definitely three-dimensional class, the class of EPRDF led by TPLF, the class of EPLF led by EPDJ and all others with or without EPRP. The collective thoughts of Wallelign, DEBTERAW and Hama have predicted the end of nation states long before they began the struggle for change. Nowadays, the Nation State appears to be almost a nostalgic fiction. Take, for instance the State of Eritrea, or Tigrai state, for that matter, ten years ago, both TPLF and EPLF were fighting tooth and nail to become a nation state.

Recently, I have been reading a book entitled the “generals” by Eyob A. Endale (shambel) It is a book about how the Ethiopian generals attempted to overthrow one of their own military dictator, Colonel Menghistu Haile Mariam. Why on earth do the “generals” attempt a coup d’etat? This week, we are hearing about death sentences against coup plotters. I thought we have passed the stage of coup d’etats!

What was/is wrong with the elites of Eathiopians? Where do they learn their life lessons? Is it from their parents, peers or genes? Or is it something else? Perhaps, their education or training is alien to the Eathiopian masses. Where were these coup d’etat plotters during the Ethiopian Revolution and counter-revolution? I was not only surprised but also shocked to read about the way the generals died. No wonder, the so-called generals had to loose the war against EPLF and TPLF. They seem not to learn anything from the Eway Revolution.

The concept of self-determination by Wallellign Kassa Mokenen, the Eway Revolution as applied by DEBTERAW, Tsegeye G. M and the challenge of electoral politics by the writings of Hama Tuma are all – assets and heritage of EPRP. No one seems to deny that the experience and heritage of EPRP would come to be the prime mover of struggle in the context of Eathiopia.

In the entire struggle for power and politics in Eathiopia, notwithstanding with the above assertions, there are two missing points. First, it is the nature of the Eathiopian Revolution and second, it is about how the strategy and tactics for the Revolution were applied. In the first instance, the Eathiopian Revolution was about change of concepts and attitudes and not changing of personalities. In the second instance, the methodology applied was guerrilla warfare – የተራዘመ ትግል – not coup d’etat – መፈንቅለ መንግሥት – or Insurrection – አመጽ –. Unless and otherwise, Eathiopian politicians are clear about these concepts, theories and applications, there will be no common ground to reach at a solution via reconciliation or negotiation.

For a good period of years, the Eathiopian politics will seem to pull along three-dimensional directions, i.e. Nationalism, Reaction or Revolution. In other words, Separation, Unification or Division. In actual fact, Eway Ethiopia has stepped into five dimensional directions, according to my mentor DEBTERAW. Let me briefly go over the missing points of departure.

The DERG military Factor: a power player

Although the DERG (comprised of 120 members) assumed political power without the generals of Ethiopia, nominally, they had placed personalities like generals Aman Andom and Teferi Bante, at least to lead them in name – hypocrisy.

On the one hand, it was true that the DERG’s pronouncement was based on a revolution and not on reform. The DERG led by Colonel Menghistu had attempted to destroy, the ancien regime, to harass the Bureaucrats, and to become friendly with Moscow and Havana in order to oppose western countries political system of government. While on the other hand, the DERG’s Politburo was mainly comprised of military men. This means that the generals were part and parcels of the military rulers of Eathiopia another hypocrisy.

The “generals” have seen not only the movement of the guerrilla fighters but also, their organizational set up. It was a truism that the nationalists were embarked on a long struggle based on the peasant masses. From the DERG’s side of movement and organizational structure, it was similar with a flavor of fear of the Dictator Colonel. What I don’t understand is the “generals” attempt to overthrow the dictator without throwing him from the plane or putting him under house arrest. Besides, not only a coup d’etat was “massacre” considering the generals’ power position. Why did they not learn from Menghistu’s ‘slogan of massacre’ ለምሳ ያሰቡንን ለቁርስ አደረግናቸው

Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that some of the military Eathiopian elites have learnt to accept a struggle for a democratic Eathiopia – a step in pentagonal dimension.

The“BEKAGN” and the “NOW” Generation Factor

This generation includes the victims of the DERG who were cheated by the military regime, particularly those students who were involved in Edget Behbret, those soldiers, marines, air forces or national guards; actually those who were promised by the DERG that it will return to its barracks once it has eliminated the ancient regime and its allies. Or alternatively, to those gullible Eathiopians who believed that Menghistu would fight until the last bullet to be used by him. Besides, this group includes those who were in prison or who saw deaths and mayhem within the “Revolution”.

The second groups of “NOW” are those would not believe that “Ethiopia” had a glorious history of trade, religion, independence and civilization. Even if it had, this generation claims it is of no value. All they are interested is”quick cash”. The amazing thing is that they don’t know what cash is let alone money and finance. This generation is a product of EPRDF.

The Walleligne Factor: Concept of Self-determination

The Eritrean concept of struggle for Indepndence obviously was initiated in 1896 right after the Italian occupation. 65 years later, the Eritrean struggle formally started with an armed struggle.

Politically, the struggle took shape when the University students especially the radical students determined to solve the question of nations and nationalities. The university students’ challenge against the administration, the professors and the subject matter became obsolete. The student body became followers of the radical student leaders.

As to the national question, many papers and discussions were presented but the most important article was written by WMK and it was presented on the occasion of freshman party. Later on, Walleligne’s article was published in the popular student magazine of ‘struggle’. The Ethiopian government newspapers condemned WMK’s article on the national question. The Ethiopian University Students were also depicted as anti-Ethiopia. Wallellign was labeled as an agent of Imperialism as well as anti-Amhara.

However, both charges against Wallellign were absolutely false. Once the Ethiopian government propaganda machine lied about Wallellign and the student body, other news media continued to lie about WMK and the student body.

Despite TPLF and EPLF’s distortion and damage of the question of nationality, WMK has sacrificed his life for the unity of Ethiopia via theory and application for he was Tsinhate Muhur Akal. The democratic nature of Wallellign will be honored when truth prevails.

Wallelign and his seven comrades* had attempted to hijack a plane and all killed but one by anti-hijackers. WMK and his comrades were not to kill or blow up themselves as in the current terrorists practice. They just wanted to scare the crew, the anti-hijackers and the passengers in that order. WMK and his team did not have the heart to kill but to sacrifice as their comrades in Assimba – shading blood if necessary – not in the name of the Eathiopians but in real terms. That event was a testimony for action.

As to the spirit of WMK, he was a highly motivated person and an honest thinker. He thought hard about the role of the ruling class. He knew that oppression (cultural and social) had created more damaging effect on the Eathiopian populace than exploitation (economic). WMK emphasized in his writings about the pretension of not only the Amharas but also even the Tigrians pretension of becoming Ethiopian with an “Amhara face”.

I do not think it is fair to blame WMK for the cession of Eritrea and others that would follow. And we should blame the TPLF for perpetuating the concept of self -determination out of context. Even now, the TPLF are caught between the followers of WMK’s article or becoming a wholesome Eathiopia. There is no creativity but copycat.

The DEBTERAW Factor: The Eway Revolution

DEBTERAW was prepared mentally, physically and emotionally to finish what was started – the Eway Revolution. He was not for coup d’etat; he was not for insurrection but for the long march of educating, organizing and arming the people of Eathiopia to empower them with information, knowledge and wisdom. DEMOCRACIA for DEBTERAW was a process not an end.

Articles on CALL ME BY NAME: a debate with DEBTERAW or Solutions with DEBTERAW should be revisited for grasping the essence of the Eway Revolution. They can be found on Debteraw.com Assimba.org Ethiox.com or by goggling on Goggle.

EPRP was the best political party fighting for the Eathiopian people. EPRP was a visionary political party for it saw the future and explained it in a new way

The Hama Tuma Factor: the struggle for Electoral politics

Hama Tuma is a prolific writer of Eathiopia as well as on African affairs. Since his early days of youth, he has been consistent with his ideology for combating against real or perceived enemies of Eathiopia and Africa.

EPRP was not well known for its political prowess or for its populist discontent, according to Hama’s writings

A politically correct struggle was a lost struggle. Take the Badme war, take the generals’ May coup d’etat, take the current article 39 in the constitution, and take Ginbot 7 Election or the coming election of 2010. They all depend on political correctness or in our parlance, feudal mentality.

However, it is time to reconsider EPRP’s role in the current Eathiopian situations/conditions, as its enemies were ferocious to disrupt its mission and physically destroy its entity. EPRP can only win when its leaders talk head to head, when its army meets face to face, when its members communicate heart to heart and when the party regardless communicates with all Eathiopians soul to soul.

The most “dissenting generation” against EPRP have been those groups who became vengeful of events and circumstances. Such groups are those who really believed that Eathiopia was first in everything but was destroyed by those who were involved in one way or another in a “revolution” or socialism. Or alternatively, these are the groups who prefer to blame others but not themselves or rather who are scared to express their opinions in public but mostly involved in back biting. Hama Tuma’s writing usually targets against such groups of hypocrites- አስመሳዮች – ፈሪዎችና ምንደጝች –

Conclusions

WMK has contributed a lot of ideas and thoughts for all Eathiopians to act whereas DEBTERAW’s contribution is immensurable in terms of implementing the ideas and concepts of the Eway Revolution.

Hama Tuma’s writing and exposition of opportunists and self-conceited Eathiopians along with their foreign masters have done incalculable damage to EPRP’s image but an immense benefit and pride to the majority of Eathiopians.

If Eathiopians were to sacrifice lives and resources in the Eway Revolution, we must finish the war and the struggle to its conclusion. We must be committed to win and reach the goal.

In addition, EPRP’s associates* its supporters should be educated and informed on EPRP’s current mission and vision. Its leaders should lead, its army should defend, and its members would support. All these three units were supposed to sacrifice lives and resources. EPRP was not for political correctness. It was founded on correct political and democratic system to be instituted in their country Eathiopia.

TRUTH WILL PREVAIL

For comments and questions

woldetewolde@yahoo.com

By Alem Mamo

There are dictators and there are purist dictators. The first group of dictators have the minimum intelligence required to notice and somehow accept when their time is up. They reluctantly give in realizing the fact that time and history are not on their side. The latter group, however, believes that the principles of dictatorship should not be adulterated or diluted. As a result they continue to rot in their bubble, failing to wake up when the smoke detector goes off. Since this group of dictators are chronically delusional they keep telling themselves, ‘I am in control’, ‘Things are fine’, ‘I will crush my opponents’, so on and so forth. They have extremely exaggerated versions of their own self worth. Adolf Hitler, Nicolai Ceausescu, Benito Mussolini, Samuel Doe, Jean-Bédel Bokassa, Mengistu Hailemariam, Slobodan Milosevic, and yes, the current menace, Meles Zenawi, fit into this band of dictators. They regularly have to invent a narrative to nourish their egomaniacal personalities. The narrative is primarily based on their insistence that their version of the truth is not only superior but also absolute.

On December 11, 2009, Meles Zenawi demonstrated his delusional personality in front of local journalists (a.k.a. handpicked TPLF cadres). Answering a broad range of pre-planted “questions” (http://www.ethiotube.net/video/6974/PM-Meles-Zenawi-Press-Conference-on-Current-Issues–Dec-11-2009–Part-1), he jumped from one topic to the other without a semblance of coherence or a discernable pattern. Among the questions asked was the issue of possibly forming a national unity government in the next election, modelling the power sharing arrangements of Kenya and Zimbabwe. The answer he offered clearly revealed the inside workings of Meles Zenawi’s brain. One can pick two clear signs of delusion from this particular answer. First, instead of answering the question within the context of the Ethiopian political process, he chastised the political compromise made by Kenyan and Zimbabwean politicians. In this regard, I believe he still thinks he is in the Dedebit Mountain, and he is the leader of a guerrilla movement, not a leader of an internationally recognized state. Second, I say this because in doing so he violates one of the basic tenants of international relations and international diplomacy. This is the non-interference by outside leaders, in particular dictators, in the internal affairs of any sovereign nation moving toward democracy. While Zenawi grips tightly to the principle of non-interference when others challenge his human rights record, he ignores it when pointing toward the Kenyan and Zimbabwean processes, which are actually moving in a constructive and inclusive direction. A very convenient contradiction in support of one thing: absolute dictatorship…without borders.

The questioner asked about the possibility of a national unity government (if the need arises in the next election) modelling the Kenyan and Zimbabwean experience? “As for the so-called Kenyan and Zimbabwean model,” Mr. Zenawi said, “one must understand the strategy of the color revolution organizers in its entirety.” According to Mr. Zenawi, the strategy of the color revolution organizers is divided in to three stages. “ Their first goal is to achieve power through post-election chaos.” If that fails, he said, “They are prepared to settle for national unity government. Once they succeed that, their final goal is to remove the ruling parties of their respective countries from power.” He went further and said, “ This approach of rewarding the leaders of the color revolution is not only wrong, it is also undemocratic.” In an accusatory tone, he further elaborated on the Kenyan experience. “ In the case of Kenya” he said, “politicians agreed to form a national unity government after instigating religious and ethnic violence between the Kenyan people. The path Kenyan and Zimbabwean leaders took in power sharing is a path of chaos, destruction and most of all is undemocratic. Therefore, my government and my party do not intend to follow this path. It has no chance in Ethiopia.”¹

The United Nations Charter clearly states: No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly for any reason whatever in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted intervention and all forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the state or against political, economic and cultural elements are concerned.

The African Union Charter also clearly states under no circumstances can one country interfere in the domestic (internal) affairs of another country.² Contrary to these international covenants, Meles Zenawi has waded into the domestic affairs of Kenya and Zimbabwe. He even went as far as saying that the formation of national unity governments amounts to “rewarding the leaders of the Velvet revolution” here; without mentioning them by name he is referring to Prime Minister Raila Odinga of Kenya and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai of Zimbabwe. International diplomacy 101, even for junior level diplomats let alone for someone who claims to be a leader of a country is clear: Don’t meddle in the internal affairs of a state.

The formation of national unity governments in Kenya and Zimbabwe has been aided by national and international heavy weight diplomats. In the case of Kenya, for instance, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan personally facilitated the process and helped Mr. Mwai Kibaki’s Party of National Unity Party and Mr. Raila Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement party reach an agreement. It is clear that these governments are steps on the way to real democracy, but at least they are steps. As a chief negotiator of Kenya’s power sharing arrangement, Kofi Annan said: “ I have the firm impression that sufficient political will now exists among the coalition partners and sufficient unity of purpose exists among the public at large to provide Kenya with a historic opportunity for peaceful transformation. Yet, this is a time of immense challenge for Kenya. It is also time of great hope. By becoming together as one people, in pursuit of shared objectives, I am confident that Kenyans will overcome the difficulties of the past, restore confidence in Kenya as a unified nation and serve as a source of inspiration for people far beyond the country’s borders.”³

Ironically, the same man who was charged with the task of representing Africa at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, Zenawi, shows no respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a member state, as he shows no respect for democracy itself. Kenya is one country that I am familiar with and for which I have a special affection and affinity. In the mid-1980s when I was forced to leave Ethiopia due to the atrocities of the military regime, Kenya was my destination. It is there that I was welcomed with open arms and provided refugee status until I moved to Canada. I know the decency and generosity of the Kenyan people. By all accounts, they deserve respect and at least non-interference in their internal matters. Whatever political path they choose should be left to the Kenyan people and their elected leaders. An un-elected tyrant like Meles Zenawi has no business telling them how to govern themselves. I hope the authorities in both Kenya and Zimbabwe take notice and demand an explanation from this unruly regime, which still behaves in accordance with the law of the jungle, and does not know or understand the basics tenants of international relations.

What is inferred in Meles Zenawi’s statement is the following: The acceptance of a national unity government by Mr. Mugabe and Mr. Kibaki sets a dangerous precedent for him and other delusional tyrants. If the trend continues in this direction, he is the next one to be forced to share his AK47 earned helm of power with others. Therefore, he has to clearly oppose this kind of government before anyone gets the idea of applying it to Ethiopia.

The problem with this thought is that the next time around it is him and himself alone who should be pleading for a national unity government. Whether or not he agrees, the wind of change will soon reach his office. The question is not if but when. Our concern is whether he would follow the path of Ceausescu, Samuel Doe, his predecessor Mengistu Hailemariam, or would he learn from Mugabe and Kibaki. In the meantime, Mr. Zenawi, if you are contemplating adding another ‘NGO’ into your business enterprise, the name Dictators Without Borders is not taken and it fits your Curriculum Vitae perfectly.

The writer could be reached at alem671@hotmail.com

1 http://www.ethiotube.net/video/6974/PM-Meles-Zenawi-Press-Conference-on-Current-Issues–Dec-11-2009–Part-1

2 http: www.Africa-union.org/au/Documents/Treaties/text/OAU_charter_1963.pdf

3 http://www.dialoguekenya.org/docs/End-of-yeararticlebyH.E.Kofiannan.pdf

By Alem Mamo

There was a time in African history when visionary leaders defeated the unjust hegemony of colonialism. They envisaged a peaceful, developed, united and self-reliant continent that lives in peace with itself and others. Their commitment and quality leadership uplifted the spirit of the continent from the shackles of European colonialism and ushered the dawn of a new era. The central message of these leaders was unity over division, forgiveness over revenge. They stood strong and committed in the face of aggression and domination.

Emperor Hailesellassie of Ethiopia, for example, stood before the League of Nations in Geneva in 1936 challenging the European moral authority to protect the weak and powerless against the barbarism of the so called civilized world. The Emperor, for his part, predicted that if the western leaders fail to act against the aggression of Mussolini, who blatantly invaded a sovereign nation and savagely killed thousands of innocent civilians, that they themselves would be the next victims, if they fail to stop the madness of the fascist regime. The prediction came true after Benito Mussolini joined Adolf Hitler in 1936, and when Hitler and Mussolini aided Francisco Franco in the Spanish Civil war, subsequently creating a formal alliance in 1939.

Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana steadfastly challenged the British colonial authorities, which occupied his country since 1844. Upon independence, he illuminated the spirit of Ghanaian’s and the people of Africa still languishing under colonial rule. Amilcar Cabral of Guinea Bissau, Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya, Patrice Lumumba of the Congo and many more gave their lives for the betterment of their fellow citizens and the continent in general. Africa under their leadership was brimming with hope and optimism. The people of Africa began to see far beyond the euphoria of independence and freedom.

But that all began to change when army officers and thuggish rebel leaders began to take control of the countries, one after the other. Idi Amin, Mengistu Hailemariam, Samuel Doe, Jean- Bedel Bokassa, and many others established military dictatorships that stole the hopes and aspirations of the African people. As if that wasn’t enough, the struggle that was launched to get rid of the military dictatorships gave birth to the coming of unruly, thuggish rebel leaders who do not understand the principles of rule of law. They had no vision apart from their permanent thirst for vengeance, self-aggrandizement and destruction. The sad reality of Africa’s economic and political leadership poverty is at the point now that the people of the continent are being taken hostages.

Chinua Achebe, one of the most respected and celebrated novelists of Africa, wrote in 1983 “The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian character. There is nothing wrong with the Nigerian land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility, to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership.”¹ Although Chinua Achebe lamented over the state of Nigeria twenty-six years ago the fact still remains unchanged. In fact, the reader of this article could simple take ‘Nigeria’ out of the above paragraph and replace it with any country in the continent, and there one can see a disturbing trend of leadership crisis across the continent.²

The current global economic recession followed what some analysts have labelled a “global democratic recession.” Africa’s performance has been worse than in recent history, with several coups in the continent since 2005, beginning with the Mauritanian military takeover, the post-election violence in several countries including Ethiopia’s 2005 elections, Kenya’s 2007 elections, and Zimbabwe’s political nightmare. The most recent example of the unconstitutional change of government in Madagascar again demonstrates that democracy in the continent is facing serious setbacks.³ Only one African country, Mauritius, is among the 30 full democracies in the world. About forty five percent of totalitarian regimes in the world are found in Africa. Africa is home to the world’s longest serving heads of states,⁴ and in 2008, of the 51 authoritarian regimes of the world, 22 are found in the African continent.

On December 7, 2009 legitimate and illegitimate leaders alike will make the thousands of miles journey on their private jets to attend the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. Some will present real and practical ideas for tackling the challenges of climate change. Others, like Meles Zenawi and the rest of Africa’s vampires, will extend their begging bowls instead of ideas and solutions. The likes of Meles Zenawi do not have the slightest respect for human dignity and human life, and they tell us that they are concerned about climate change and global warming. As laughable this may sound, this is the state of Africa to day. In a recent interview, Mr. Zenawi said “Africa will ask rich nations for billions of dollars to respond to the climate change caused by industrialized nations.”⁵ The problem with this approach is that, first of all, the climate challenge we face as a result of global warming could not be dealt by simply pumping money. Particularly, handing money to African despots like Meles Zenawi could in fact end up harming the people and the planet in general. Meles Zenawi, a man who personally ordered the murder of more than 150 peaceful protesters in broad daylight in Addis Ababa in 2005 wants the world to see him as a man who cares about the trees, water, land and sea, and yet he doesn’t even have the bare minimum respect for human life and human dignity.

.

The argument that these African tyrants have been making is that Africa as a continent did not contribute to the calamity of climate change and full responsibility lies on the side of the developed world. Well, the argument is not entirely true. As far as the average African is concerned yes, there is little to no blame. On the other hand, however, the vampire like leaders of Africa should be held accountable on two levels.

On a personal level, there are the fleets of limousines and luxury cars that they and their families use on daily bases; the private jets used by them and their families to fly to Europe, Asia and North America; and the energy consuming palaces, villas and luxury homes (all purchased with stolen public funds, while the people starve).

On a policy level, the list includes:

• Lack of knowledge of environmental issues and absence of comprehensive environmental policy;

• Lack of environmental impact assessment frameworks;

• Mass sale of land to corporations and foreign governments for food production with a goal of shipping the harvest overseas;

• Marginalization of experts and academics who could help develop sound environmental policy; and

• Implementing land policy that starves small farmers and involves mass deforestation.

For Meles Zenawi and other African tyrants to play a role of protector of the earth is not only an utter lie, it is an insult to the people of the African continent. As if the suffering these tyrants have inflicted on them is not enough; they show up on international stage claiming to represent those that they regularly imprison, torture, maim and kill.

The last time that Africa experienced genuine and inspiring leadership was between 1991-1994 when Nelson Mandela (Madiba) became the first democratically elected President of the Republic of South Africa. He generated hope and optimism, not only to South Africa, but also to the entire continent and the world as a whole. He advocated forgiveness and reconciliation to his nation scarred by the injustice of Apartheid. He brought his country from a brink of war to tolerance and coexistence. He walked out of prison with open arms and with a vision of an inclusive South Africa — a rainbow nation. Nelson Mandela didn’t govern from the point of anger or vengeance, he instead envisaged South Africa capable of moving beyond its past. That was one of the most hope full times in African history. For the first time in African history he also became the only leader to voluntarily walk away from the helm of power after just 4 years.

The leadership crisis facing most African countries in effect has caused a permanent image of the continent that is ravaged by war, famine, disease and poverty. Policy makers of the donor countries, citizens in those countries and international organizations need to understand Africa’s problem in its entire complexity, highlighting the lack of visionary leaders. In Copenhagen, what we will see is the likes of Meles Zenawi attempting to use the forum as a platform to garner legitimacy, which their own people know that they lack. Finally, those who orchestrate the murder, torture and disappearance of thousands of citizens should not be given a minute on the international stage and should be facing the wrath of international law. The challenges of climate change require leaders who respect human life, and all forms of life. Providing an international platform to Meles Zenawi and the likes is an insult to the intelligence, pride and dignity of the people of Africa and to the continent itself.

1 Chinua Achebe,

2 See Martin Meredith The State of Africa: A History of 50 Years of Independence, The Free Press, 2005.

3 http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/04/29/the-democracy-index-and-africas-performance/

4 http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/04/29/the-democracy-index-and-africas-performance/

5 http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GWForAfrica.htm

By Obo Arada Shawl – November 13, 2009

Name: Hailu Shawl

Address: unknown/undetermined

Title: Engineer

Desire: HIM = Hailu-Issaias-Meles = His Imperial Majesty

It is to be recalled that on October 13, 2007, I have written an article entitled “A choice of political leadership for Ethiopia: an Engineer, an Economist or a Political Party? It was posted on www.Debteraw.com and on other websites. It was an attempt to decipher the relationship between cost and benefit that related to the professions of Engineer Hailu vis-à-vis Economist Berhanu.

In this article I will point out how an engineer (petroleum engineer, the highest paid job in the field of engineering) by profession has finally succumbed to low level of political stooge by accepting the wrong side of the equation i.e. If C > B, then it is feasible or profitable.

At the time of my writing the previous article, I had hoped that the two professional individuals would come to an agreement on a basis of benefit cost analysis for the country as a whole. It was a missed chance to show to Ethiopians and the world that the educated elites of Eathiopia could save the country from the terrible human and material loss that went unabated since the coming of the DERG. In addition, the scenario would have been a wonderful opportunity to show to the uneducated class to witness cooperation and coordination (CC) among all ምሁር አካል. It did not happen. I have tried this challenging equation between cost and benefit with an Eritrean economist versus an Eritrean engineer. It did not work either.

The answer, therefore, lies on something or somewhere else, such as in our culture or in the arrogance of our intellectuals or in the ignorance of our people.

What is cost and what is benefit? What is the relevance of these equations? Cost benefit is an informal approach to making decisions of any kind. The formal process though is often referred to as either Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) or Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA). In other words, cost-benefit analysis is a method to determine if a project is economically worthwhile. The benefits, which are translated into dollars, should be greater than the costs.

Berhanu Nega (Ph.D) by training and education is an economist and as such he should have dwelt on the benefit side of the equation whereas the infamous engineer Hailu Shawl should have concentrated on cost side of the equation. On hindsight, the engineer was not interested on cost, as we all have probably witnessed while he was working for the DERG. It is no news now that he is ready to serve the TPLF as he did the military junta. I presume he is on the benefit side of the equation very uncharacteristic in the field of Engineering. In the same manner Berhanu is not seeking after benefit but after cost. Maybe his early involvement in EPRA had influenced him, I cannot say for sure. In other words both individuals do not synchronized their inner selfishness with their outward education, training and experience. I have the hunch that economist Berhanu is seeking for social/economic justice practiced in EU (European Union) while residing in US and engineer Hailu is hungry for the American economic system while serving the EU. What an aberration! In our world, it seems that we are unable to relate cost with benefit. Who can salvage Eathiopians without the knowledge of engineers and economists (EE)?

Both individuals did not live up to either profession or stand to the welfare of their community. Had it been to the welfare of Eathiopia, both would have taken Addis Ababa or Finfine by storm. But they were not courageous enough to sail between a hard rock of TPLF and the residents of Addis Ababa. And so they failed to struggle but chose to shop around for their niches.

This article is about engineer Hailu Shawl as for the economist Berhanu Nega it is for another day.

Engineer Hailu Shawl: does he deserve this title?

For many years, engineers have transformed life and technology. But what is an engineer and what do engineers do? This article will seek to illustrate by analogy exactly what an engineer is and how he makes an impact on the world.

The following is an excerpt from an article that was written by a young engineer, Jonathan Dunder. It is posted at Free Info Society.

Jonathan Dunder writes on

“Essentially everything that you use in a given day was designed by engineers. From your computer monitor to your automobile, from your satellite radio to traffic lights, from your cell phone to the plane you fly in and the web browser you are using right now to read this article. Engineers design all of these things! Engineers create almost everything that society uses!” Does Engineer Hailu belong here?

“Engineers invent solutions and products in every field, including disciplines like aerospace, software, biomedical, chemical, civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering. All engineers are given a similar basic education, but they also choose one of these specific disciplines to be trained in. Many engineers work in multiple disciplines, for example electrical engineers writing software and electrical engineers designing electromechanical motors.” I hope Engineer Hailu is about to bring solutions to our country and people without complacency.

“An engineer is trained such that they can be given a goal and accomplish that goal. An aerospace engineer that works for Boeing or Airbus might be told to “design a plane that can fly X miles at Y speed and use Z amount of fuel”, This example is a bit extreme since most work is divided among many engineers, but that engineer would be able to take the problem and design a solution that meets the requirements. A similar example might be a software engineer being told to design an embedded application for a cell phone that allows a person to see where they are on a map using GPS. Another example might be a mechanical engineer being told to design a car that weighs X amount, has a top speed of Y, and gets Z mileage.” Engineer Hailu Shawl should tell us his choice between Boeing and Airbus!!!

“When considering a problem and potential solutions, an engineer has to try to find the best solution that meets the requirements and is financially feasible. Some solutions would work or are too expensive; another solution might work, but would take too long to develop. Typically a project has very specific time and money limitations, requiring an engineer to make difficult decisions. And sometimes, a project is simply impossible given the requirements and existing technology.” Maybe this is the concern for engineer Hailu.

Engineers are scientists, mathematicians, inventors, and project planners combined. An engineer takes information from various fields and applies that information to solve problems. An engineer creates! An engineer is a force to be reckoned with! What about Engineer Hailu Shawl? Does he deserve the title? Call me by my name, address or title (NATionality). Ato Hailu is not in the business of finding solutions as he should have but instead he is being involved in the creation of problems.

This is where Engineer Hailu versus Economist Berhanu’s project collides. There was no human cost involved for Engineer Hailu, as there are no quantified benefits envisaged for all Eathiopian according to economist Berhanu

Now that we know what an engineer is, perhaps we might like to know how to become an engineer unlike engineer Hailu. Write to Jsdratm@gmail.com

Ato Hailu chose to be a business leader. The question is why does he cheat and pretend to be a public political figure. Why, why and why. I tell you why; he is coward internally for whatever reason. He is not liberated; he has a “slave” mentality. There is a saying that “if you can survive the challenges of engineering school, you can probably survive the challenges of any field.” This may be true for president Issais who has been in engineering school but I doubt that it will work for engineer Hailu. We have to wait and see as Ato Hailu claimed to BBC that he and Melese trust each.

Warning for Engineer Hailu!

I don’t think Ato Hailu knows with whom he is dealing. He is dealing with leaders who have read the following books: –

• The Prince, by Machiavelli

• The Social Contract, by Rousseau or

• The Republic by Plato

And whose followers have known the works of Enver Hoxha of Albania, Mao Zedong of China and Stalin of Soviet Union, but not the works of Eathiopians.

For the sake of Engineer Hailu and his followers, I will deal briefly with The Prince. Niccolo Machiavelli (born in 1469) lived during a turbulent period of history. He received the ordinary humanistic education of his times. The wide knowledge he had achieved was a result of private reading, meditation and above all practical experiences with life and people. In addition to many other books, Machiavelli’s book, The Prince has created many Machiavellians among us. This book represents the principles of new sciences of statesmanship based on the experience of human events and history. Engineer Hailu does not seem ready to follow neither the principles of statesmanship nor the rules and ethics for assuming the leadership of business world.

Again for the sake of the engineer and his followers, some of Machiavelli’s political doctrines are presented below:

• A prince should be cruel because it is more beneficial to be feared than loved, although he ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred.

• A prince should care little for keeping his promises and should break faith whenever necessary.

• A prince should be impetuous than cautious

• A prince should gain esteem by displaying his strength in the fields of foreign policy

• Machiavelli concludes that war and its rules and discipline should be the only thought of a wise prince

The above five-belief system is one way of perceiving modus of operandi (M.O.) of the TPLF leaders. Another side of their story was based on the peasant masses directly in contradiction with Machiavellian who did agree with the adage of” he who builds on the people builds on mud.” Where does Ato Hailu fit?

My first contact with Ato Hailu was in 1972 when he came to represent the shippers such as Shell, Mobile, Total and Agip corporations. The meeting was to find ways and means for the smooth operation among shippers, truckers, bus companies, and ministries of communication, defense and road builders. The meeting was scheduled to take place in the office of Road and Transport Administration that was run by the Honorable Shimellis Adugna. At the time, I was new and young employee and I did not see the need for the relationship and coordination among these diversified groups. All I remember was about the energy of Ato Hailu defending the Oil industries and Ato Mamo “katcha” defending the Eathiopian bus and truck owners. That was during the era of the Monarchy.

Ato Hailu has come to serve the DERG in various capacities. And he is going to serve the TPLF and the EU in various capacities. He is not going to serve the Eathiopian people for sure. It is high time for him not to talk about elections and votes. He should be bold enough to support the American capitalism and join to plunder the resources of Eathiopia with the Al Amoudi and the Azeb groupies. It is that simple. No more confusions and pretensions.

On a concluding note to Ato Hailu Shawl, he should realize that practically all opposition to the rule of EPRDF are based on either the Social Contract by Rousseau or on the Republic by Plato. Definitely, the opposition is not for “divide and rule” a la Machiavellian. This is my first and last warning to Ato Hailu unless he becomes P.M. himself.

Concluding Remarks

In short, Ato Hailu has finally found his niche with the TPLF after long and hard shopping. I cannot say more than what Ato Tecola Hagos has said in his article entitled “lacrimosa for Ethiopia” that was posted on November 11, 2009 at www.Abbaymedia.com. I fully concur with Hagos the way he depicted the nature of TPLF leadership albeit he rediscovered this after his second exile. It is never too late for any discovery. EPRP has aptly described the works of TPLF leaders in one of its publications of DEMOCRACIA – ዝንጀሮን ወደ ባሕር ዓሳን ወደ ተራራ – meaning taking baboons to the sea while transferring fishes to the mountain. Both species will die. That was/is the nature we are all in. Is this a requiem for Eathiopia or for the EPRDF? We need to discuss.

Berhanu (the Economist) is greater than Hailu (the Engineer) by staying away from the so-called elections. Benefit should be greater than Cost i.e. B > C for Berhanu to participate in the election process. As perceived by the economist, Berhanu, as it stands now, the cost is much bigger than the benefit i.e. C > B.

Ato Hailu Shawl should be mindful of the heavy cost (human and material) that all Eathiopians have paid in order to attain Justice and democracy. The Eway Revolution is not about “cash” flow – a cash flow possessed via government corruption and illegal business dealings.

For comments and questions

woldetewolde@yahoo.com

November 10, 2009  By Alex Birhanu – alexbirhanu@yahoo.com

In today’s Eritrea, a country of 5 million people, the acute needs are becoming boundless by the day as this tiny nation is continuously slipping down into its deepest political isolation and economic stagnation since its de-facto “16 years of fuzzy independence”. A decade after the 1998-2000 devastating border flare-ups with Ethiopia that remains unresolved to this very day, Afeworki has never been permitting popular political elections in country. To the contrary, according to the US-State Department human rights report that came out in 2008, he banned opposition groups and independent media, and reportedly banished thousands of people to remote desert prisons where they languish without trial in “harsh and life-threatening conditions”. The unresolved border dispute with Ethiopia is used by Afeworki and his regime to justify the severe restrictions held on civil liberties by effective control of the security force (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/af/119000.htm).

Men and women younger than 50 within Eritrea rarely get permission to leave the country as the entire able-bodied population is assigned on military reserve duty frightening and flexing such duty against the Ethiopian army posted along the border-lines along Badme–Tsorena zones. In fact, anyone who resist the service are routinely imprisoned and tortured, as documented in a 96-page 2009 report by Human Rights Watch, which found that Afeworki’s regime had issued a ‘shoot-to-kill’ orders for anyone caught trying to cross any of the borders without permission.

Amidst all these flexing and frightening regime-led chaos, the fabrication of non-existent national attributes in order to arouse the attention of different religious and ethnic groups of people in Eritrea from the mainstream political status quo to less critical issues of separating the Eritrean people from the rest of Ethiopia has remained an age old trick employed by Afeworki and his stooges working for the Eritrean regime that bids mainly to lengthen Afeworki’s stay on power.

Thanks to Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia who persistently kept Isaias Afeworki in chase and check positions since the mid-1990s, Afeworki’s regime is now almost on the verge of collapse and his tiny nation’s economy, education and all other social fabrics are constantly squeezed simply for maintaining its fuzzy and bloody borders watch efforts. Eritrea’s de-facto independence has become a high costing game to toil for. Evidently, the Eritrean peoples under 50 years of age are held to indefinitely serve in the national army hiding behind deeply-dug trenches stretching across thousands of kilometres from Badme to Tsorena fronts. And at all times, these SAWA-military graduates remain restlessly alert for any likely flare-up of skirmishes with the Ethiopian army standing equally alert on the other side of the ‘no-man-zone’.

Yes, Afeworki’s regime keeps on digging-up and employing a series of flexing and frightening old tricks in the same fashion as it used to do during its good-old EPLF-frontal stance of the 1960, through to 1990s by causing riffraff, rifts and ethnic-division among peoples inside Ethiopia; simply to enrich its creational tiny nation that hardly withstands the existence of a united and stronger Ethiopia. While keeping the entire Eritrean population as part of its military garrisons stretching along the thousands of miles of trenches in the wake of likely attacks by the Ethiopian army, Afeworki simply remains naive enough to assume that his age old flexing and frightening dirty tricks will continue to work for the despotic regime; but it is vivid to anyone today, including the overwhelming Eritrean population, that his outmoded regime’s flexing and frightening strategies have failed to work for the past seventeen years.

And now, it is out of context for Afeworki and his totalitarian regime to speak about their flattery favour of the Ethiopian unity and oneness at this 11^th hour of the Eritrean regime moving towards its doom. At the cost of repeating history, it is to be recalled from the early 1970s that, Afeworki personally created and reared TPLF as its political baby inside Eritrea; and instructed TPLF to author the 1968 Manifesto while operating underground in its infancy days of their joint political meandering. From the start, this manifesto outlined by TPLF specifies targets to forward its inner wishes and desires on how to manoeuvre the circumstances along with EPLF and come to power, than work towards creating a democratic and federated regime that maintains the unity of Ethiopia in tact.

Although initially the EPLF of those days seemed to oppose the contents of TPLF’s initial manifesto and demanded a milder version of it by instructing the fundamental inclusion of the question of colonization of the Tigray-Tigrign peoples into the manifesto; it eventually agreed upon the inclusion of self-determination up to secession of all nationalities. Thanks to the boundless inputs, zealous efforts and strong bondage and comradeships of TPLF, Afeworki and EPLF ultimately succeeded to come to power in Eritrea through involvement in their outlandish public acrimony and playing down the need for the existence of a united and strong Ethiopia in the Horn of Africa. And ever since the TPLF-captured power in 1990, it ratified article-39 in its regime’s constitution; and even approved this infamous article that made secession legitimate within Ethiopia. But Ironic enough, in Eritrea, there has never been such talks of self-determination up to secession of all nationalities.

Today, after having successfully done the infrastructural damage and the human harm that divided the Eritrean and the Ethiopian peoples, Isaias Afeworki’s regime in Eritrea is trying to shade its crocodile tears by openly voicing its concerns about a strong and a united Ethiopia. Although secession was a cardinal decision that belonged jointly to both the Eritrean and the Ethiopian peoples to fraternally hold a democratic referendum such and many more incidents illustrate the fact on the ground, that it has never been the desire of either the Eritrean or the Ethiopian peoples; except for the joint Afeworki and Zenawi decision of the time who wished initially to see a divided and weaker Ethiopia.

Particularly, the Eritrean stance on the issue of Ethiopia has always been unwaveringly agitated on the wrong path since the times of the EPLF-TPLF marriage, forward moving relationships and struggles for power seizure. Ever since its creation, Afeworki and his regime have always entertained a ruse to divide Ethiopia by working hand in hand with different ethnic-led Ethiopian political entities to eventually split Ethiopia into smaller nations; and sought to open a new Eritrean regime’s chapter of mutual cooperation and peaceful coexistence with these smaller nations. It has consistently been the desire of Afeworki and his regime to work against a united and strong Ethiopia, because, strength and unity in Ethiopia, means weakness and subordination of Eritrea.

Flexing and Frightening Domestic and Foreign Policy

At the domestic front, lack of basic human rights, food shortages and frustration due to lack of popular government election in Eritrea are few of the trifling faces of deeper problems: a government that commits flagrant human rights abuses suppression and dissent. In future these could be merely the tip of the iceberg if the underlying detailed issues are not addressed. For instance the repression of the Kunama minorities, and religious sects, the widening cultural separation between Moslem lowlanders and the Christian highlanders could lead to the kind of anarchy that has plagued Somalia for a generation.

Regarding law and order in Eritrea, the U.S. State Department’s 2008 Human Rights report contains a chilling inventory of Afeworki’s regime practices. Lists of abuses are too long to repeat here. Main highlights include: limitations on citizens’ right to elect a government; unlawful killings, torture, beating, abuse, and mistreatment of detainees and opposition supporters by security forces, usually with impunity; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention, particularly of suspected sympathizers of forces opposed to Afeworki’s regime. In fact, the terror Afeworki has inflicted on his own people threatens to turn Eritrea into a failed state and a haven for terrorists by breeding constant fear, violence and systematic repression. In the absence of outside pressure, Isaias Afeworki and his cronies will never willingly change their dogmatic stand.

From its foreign policy point of view, the United States and other international bodies have consistently accused Isaias Afworki of funnelling arms, money and clandestine piracy supports to Islamist insurgents in Somalia and opposition groups in Djibouti (see the June 2009 report issued by the UN Munitions Monitoring Group) and have even threatened to slap him with sanctions. Regardless of such warnings, Isaias is bent on wresting influence from neighbouring nations including Ethiopia and has opened-up training centres for several rebel groups coming from various parts of the Horn of Africa. To our dismay, since some years now, Afeworki and his regime keep on accusing the UN Security Council of ignoring what it called “breaches of international law by Ethiopia”, with which it fought a 1998-2000 border war that ultimately killed about 70,000 people. On the contrary, critics including the U.N. Security Council, the African Union and the United States Government have repeatedly and openly stated that Afeworki’s regime has isolated itself; and consequently, it has become a danger to the national and regional security of the Horn of Africa; attempting to destabilise neighbouring nations including Djibouti, Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan. But Afeworki has always denied claiming that his regime has long been the victim of pro-Ethiopian prejudice and unfair meddling by the international community, particularly pertaining to its border dispute with Ethiopia (See: C Thomson, Reuters 2009).

Conclusive Remarks:

It is high time and quite essential that the international community tied in globalization frameworks, especially the United States of America, press the Eritrean regime to allow the Eritrean people to exercise the most basic human and democratic rights including justifiable referendum to outweigh the likely federation with Ethiopia. On a serious note, the U.S. government should align its rhetoric with its policies by putting critical embargos on Eritrea’s outlandish foreign affairs and domestic policies. It should also demand Afeworki’s regime to remove restrictions on foreign assistance to non-governmental organizations and give opposition parties access to function within Eritrea and to the media. Or else, the USA should help Eritrean opposition groups in Diaspora to remove Afeworki and bring democratic governance to Eritrea.

By Alem Mamo

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Much has been said about the curse of natural resources in the African continent. From the suffering of the Ogony people and subsequent murder of environmentalist and human rights activist Ken Saro-Wiwa in the Niger Delta, along with eight fellow activists, to the displacement of millions of citizens across the continent so that tyrannical regimes and multinational corporations can exploit and benefit from the riches that cover the beautiful landscape of Africa. Certainly the most publicised of all such enterprises is the diamond trade and how it has oiled and fuelled conflict in parts of Africa. As repressive regimes, lawless rebel groups and multinational corporations have juggled for portions of the pie, the inhabitants of the land have been uprooted and persecuted for voicing their opposition.

The abundance of natural resources in the context of fair, just and equitable social, economic, and political systems is a blessing, as it can be used sustainably and wisely to reinvest in local communities, for instance through building infrastructure and schools, and providing health care. In dictatorial regimes, however, it is capital for oppression and is used to silence dissent. Furthermore, it is often utilized to build the military and security apparatus that is established to maintain a grip on power. One such regime identified by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Democracy Watch and other international human rights organizations is the regime currently in power in Ethiopia – the original homeland of coffee. After overthrowing the military dictatorship of Colonel Mengistu Hailemariam in 1991, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), with Mr. Meles Zenawi as it’s head, has established one of the most repressive regimes in Ethiopian history – and is using Ethiopia’s great resource, coffee, to finance its oppressive efforts.

Coffee, the aroma of Ethiopian culture that brings family, neighbours, friends and even strangers together everyday, now has become a curse to the people of Ethiopia. In line with the typical practise of tyrannical regimes in Africa, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) currently in power in Ethiopia¹, has maintained a stronghold not only on political power, but also it has continued to stifle any economic progress by imposing one of the most illiterate economic policies in the African continent.² This policy has only benefited the business enterprise of the regime’s senior echelon, their families and close associates. On the other hand, millions of Ethiopians struggle to feed their families and children, and men and women continue to depend on food aid.

The recent announcement by Guna (TPLF owned business enterprise that operates several parastatal) declaring their intention to monopolize the coffee export business is a brazen declaration of total economic and political monopoly that has the hallmarks of absolute dictatorship. The impact of such a policy on the average farmers and their families predictably is making a tragic situation even worse. Coffee, the main cash crop of the Ethiopian economy accounts for 65% of foreign currency earning in Ethiopia, and the economic survival of many depends on it. Now, with this recent declaration what the regime effectively has done is take control of perhaps the most vital source of income for the country. Given the government’s record of spending in the past several years, it is a justifiable fear that this new income would be used to purchase military hardware for the purpose of strengthening its security, intelligence and police force with the prime assignment of quashing descent, silencing potential opposition and intimidating citizens. Since coming to power in 1991 the regime spent 5, 402 billion dollars on the military and security that terrorized the Ethiopian people for the last 18 years. The primary source of foreign currency used to purchase these deadly weapons is the export and sale of coffee.³Coffee, the centrepiece of Ethiopian culture, a gift of Ethiopia to the rest of the world, now has become the fuel of a dictatorial regime that has no regard for human life and human dignity. By officially declaring its intent to control the coffee export business, the regime’s calculated move places under its power the major source of foreign currency earning that it needs for the purchase of military hardware.

For the last 18 years the people of Ethiopia have endured unimaginable suffering in the hands of a regime bent on staying in power at any cost. As a result, tens of thousands of people have left the country and countless languish in the dungeons of prison, simply for voicing their opposition or for being suspected opposition to the regime has terrorized innocent civilians by its security, army and police force.

Despite the imprisonment, torture, disappearances and deaths, however, the people of Ethiopia continue to show their disapproval of the regime and resist it in any way they can. As history tells us, the struggle for freedom, democracy and justice should not be confined to the political boundary of a state or certain territory. As martin Luther King Jr. said, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere.⁴

The same way that coffee, a gift of Ethiopia to the world, became universal, the struggle of the Ethiopian people for democracy, justice, human rights and freedom must become a common struggle of humanity. In the past, the appalling oppressive system of apartheid, the unjust system of slavery didn’t end only through the resistance of those who were oppressed. Anti-apartheid movements on the streets of Europe, North America, Africa and elsewhere were a strong part of the freedom movement.

The recent declaration is simply a matter of formality and a demonstration of the regime’s determination to consolidate all economic and political power. Since coming to power 18 years ago the TPLF regime has directly and indirectly asserted its control over vital economic sources and financial institutions. What makes the recent declaration about monopolizing the coffee export market different is that the regime is not even pretending to be an advocate of free market economy, as it tried in the past to deceive donor countries and international financial institutions.

For coffee drinkers around the world, particularly to those who are fond of the Ethiopian brand, I urge you to consider and reflect on a few points before you order your morning medium or dark roast Ethiopian. Ask the following questions:

• What if the transaction you make to purchase a cup of coffee is helping to strengthen the oppressive institutions of one of the most ruthless regimes in Africa, if not in the world?
• What if the money you paid for a cup of coffee pays for the purchase of bullets and weapons used against pro-democracy activists?
• What if your coffee money pays the salary of those who torture and kill innocent civilians, human rights activists and advocates of social justice?
• What if your warm cup of coffee funds the luxury life of those who work full time against democracy, justice, human rights and democracy?

If you have answered these questions sufficiently and formed an opinion on the ongoing struggle for the establishment of a true democracy in Ethiopia then you should consider a form of action to carry out your global citizenship duty and responsibility. Here are some suggestions:

• Stop helping the machinery of oppression, injustice and terror.

• Gather information about the violations of human, democratic and political rights in Ethiopia. You can access factual and reliable information from the websites of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Genocide Watch, and Committee to Protect Journalists and other international advocacy organizations.

• Educate your classmates, colleagues, friends and family members about the appalling human rights situation in Ethiopia.
• Question trade labels. Although some of them may be genuinely helping those in need, there are some “fair trade” labels that still fatten the pockets of tyrants and their cronies.
• Join existing online campaigns for human rights, democracy and justice in Ethiopia or start-up a new campaign on Facebook, MySpace or other online social networking sites.
• Remember, we cannot make poverty history unless we make injustice, tyranny and dictatorship history. Therefore, do not fall into the trap of treating the symptom – help get rid of the cause of poverty.
• Your government may be showing unwarranted indifference when it comes to the pro-democracy movement in Ethiopia, perhaps even tacitly approving of the actions of the regime in Addis Ababa. Educate yourself about your government’s role and write to your representative voicing your concerns.

A responsible global citizen is not bound by geographic or political boundaries. The actions of someone somewhere could make the difference between life and death to those who are shackled and unable to speak for themselves. For some, the consequences of speaking up could prove to be deadly, particularly under a regime such as that in power in Ethiopia. These are a few suggestions, and they are not the only ideas to support the struggle for democracy in Ethiopia. Choose your own form of involvement that you think could be more effective. Finally, in the words of Archbishop Desmond Tutu attributed to the African philosophy of Ubuntu “I need you to be all you can be, so that I can be all that I can be. It is that my humanity is caught up in your humanity. The solitary human being is a contradiction in terms. We say: a person is a person through other persons.”⁵ Finally, don’t be a bystander in this worthy struggle. After all, Ethiopia is your original homeland, too. The land of Lucy and Ardi where the initial journey of humanity began. Join the struggle for freedom! You will be rewarded with nothing more than the freedom of your fellow human beings.

“Use your freedom to promote ours.”

Aung San Suu Kyi

1 A reader unfamiliar with Ethiopian politics might be surprised to hear a Liberation Front runs Ethiopia, and that by itself is a topic of discussion to which I intend to address in the near future.

2 http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/10/09/f-vp-stewart.html

3 http://milexdata.sipri.org/result.php4

4 http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

5 http://www.weltethos.org/00–home/tutu-e.htm

Dereje Tekaligne

I recently read in the EEDN Ato Mesfin Makonen (otherwise an honourable man who keeps us informed on how the US Congress deals with our fate) informing all of us that the recent document signed by Engineer Hailu and others with the TPLF/EPRDF regime is the result of US administration pressure on Meles Zenawi. We are expected to say thank you to Washington as he does. Some other Ethiopian had also written before that the USA can be Ethiopia‘s salvation.

With all due respect to the opinion of such people it seems to me unpatriotic and myopic to hand over one’s national fate to a foreign power that has, for the last century, shown its inability to heed the demands and aspiration of the poor Ethiopian people except when famine strikes and kills a million or so. I am not starting out from a leftist and anti imperialist premise (Chavez and our own Leftists included) but from direct experience and from the fact that US and Western involvement in the last decade (Anna Gomez excluded) has been detrimental to our country and people. The 2005 election was stolen by the pro America regime of Meles with the full connivance of Washington (remember Vicki Huddleston the US embassy official and how she colluded with two or so spineless so called opposition leaders to sabotage the Dead Cities protest). Meles killed close to 200 people and imposed himself by force and Washington continued to support him business as usual.

The recent document signed between the Meles regime and three opposition organizations is to say the least very controversial. To begin with it deals with election procedures and code of conduct and not with the basic issues of changing the electoral law and the regime controlled electoral board or commission. A lot of smokescreen is being directed at us ( Mesfin says wait and see till God knows when while others sound pleading notes of let us not be divided) to deflect us from discussing the documents and the signing that some are justifiably calling a betrayal. Since Ayele Chamiso and Lidetu Ayalew are detested already by too many people who consider them traitors the surprise and indignation and feeling of betrayal concern the elderly engineer on whom many had confidence imagining his stance against the regime/Weyane as admirable.

In other words, the signing of the documents that actually carry articles that serve well the regime in place is not a very positive thing. If the Americans did pressurize Meles to talk and compromise with the opposition the document that would have been signed would have dealt with the need to change the electoral law, the independence of the electoral board, the fair use of the media, the end to repression of the legal opposition itself, etc. Can one teach a hyena to be gentle and fair to a donkey? The Meles Zenawi regime has proved time and again that it is thuggish, murderous, cheating and discriminatory. What code of conduct! Meles will trample on any document or agreement to rig and steal the election, the result of which is known today already. This aside, the issue brings to the fore the ongoing malady of bowing to the White Man as it were, this un-Ethiopian bowing to foreign governments. Our salvation comes from our own struggle primarily and not from the US congress or the British and EU parliament. Recall when Mussolini invaded our country and Britain, France, etc backed him to the hilt till they found fighting against him to their own national advantage. This is the hard fact. Engineer Hailu thanked the foreign ambassadors who gave him and the others a Kurkum (a bang or knock on the head) every time “we strayed” and he expressed his thanks. And as Napoleon lost his salt with the salt tax in the old times, the Engineer also lost any self respect with his thank you for beating me on the head statement. It is a situation that neither Mesfin nor others can redeem or correct except by admitting the grave mistake and apologizing to the AEUP members and the people of Ethiopia.

Ato Mesfin laid down as goals issues that are not actually primary on the debate on the fairness of the election and the signing of the document by his AEUP leader and others. Neither is the assertion that the AEUP is an organization struggling peacefully going to serve as a refuge. That is not the issue as struggling peacefully does not mean bending to kiss the blood-dirtied shoes of the vain tyrant. Moreover, Ato Mesfin seems to have his countries confused as he writes as one of the goals a national health system. This is known as clouding the issue, a tactic in which the TPLF of Meles Zenawi is very adept. In Ethiopia we say ask the mule who its father is and it will reply my mother is the horse. This is first class diversion, to do a cover up. We are now dealing with the election and documents signed by the Engineer (AEUP) and others. At issue is not what are the basic themes and goals to be emphasized in demanding change in Ethiopia. Even then, we are dealing with a legal opposition that has kept silent on the ceding of Ethiopian land to the Sudan, the devastating famine and the high cost of living and wants to cry against Sheikh Alamoudi in concert with the corrupt female viper called Azeb Golla, wife of the tyrant. The flimsy talk about political prisoners is not even included in the documents and the AEUP leaders have made it clear that they are concerned with “our own” prisoners and may the devil deal with rest!

There is nothing as simple and as rewarding as saying I am sorry I have made a mistake but, alas, it seems an impossible feat in Ethiopia and as one tries to cover up and deny the problem becomes worse. The wait and see option saw us wait till Lidetu confused all and entered the Weyane parliament. Legal opposition groups that have the interest of the people and the Nation at heart have many options that preclude bowing to the Weyane and foreign ” kurkum” givers. They can boycott the election for one by demanding a change to the electoral laws and the independence of the electoral board. Wait and see is a call that actually says “shut up” and let the signatories work hand in glove with Meles Zenawi. It is not an Ethiopian friendly option. The whole position of being chastised by foreign kurkums, thanking foreigners for nothing, and worse of all declaring foreigners the saviours of Ethiopia is so un patriotic and un Ethiopian that it warrants our strongest objection and condemnation. Let us be proud of our Ethiopian heritage and let rely on our own people’s resolve and strength to defeat tyrants and invaders of all sorts.

The whole world is now aware of the political situation in Ethiopia because once again the Ethiopian people are staring at a situation of mass starvation.  Famines are not unique to Ethiopia.  All recent ones in the world, like the one in 1984 in Ethiopia, were politically inspired.

Recently the Ethiopian government has come to the table with its political opposition due to International pressure; especially that of the United States.  For this we owe a debt of gratitude to the Ethiopian-American community who have consistently supported the legislation to urge change in Ethiopia.

The legislation that the Congress of the United States has consistently supported over the last few years has helped.  Now we need to redouble our efforts to get across the goal line. Please contact, again!, your Federal elected officials to get this done.

The big news is that the regime has now met with its opposition in the past week in a formal setting in Addis Ababa.  Last week the press was filled with pictures and articles detailing a meeting of Meles Zenawi of EPRDF with Hailu Shawel AEUP, Ayalew Chamesaw and Ledatu Ayalew of EDP.

As we all know the All Ethiopia Unity Party (AEUP) is the only party in Ethiopia with representation in all of the country.  The AEUP in its negotiation remains focused on its eight points demand.  The AEUP after many serious internal discussions has decided to move forward in the election process, however flawed and compromised by the regime,  This is still an ongoing process and the AEUP is committed to achieving its program as highlighted in the eight points.

Please go to the Web site of www.kaeup.com to Read the text of this signed agreement.  Help us keep Meles to his word.

The AEUP is a peaceful organization.  We do not believe that violent confrontation with the regime is in the best interests of the Ethiopian people.  We do believe that negotiations are the best way to help Ethiopia to move forward.  This is a complex process but we do remember that you are the strongest voice in the Diaspora for effective change back in Ethiopia.

Our goals should include:

• To seek real Land Reform.

• To establish a national Health Service for all Ethiopians to especially  focus on HIV/AIDS and malaria.

• To organize a better educational system for all Ethiopian people particularly the youth.

• To get the government out of private business.

• To end, as a matter of policy, the use of ethnic differences to further Secessionist programs.

• And to secure our borders an establish a safe access’s to the Sea.

Let’s take a ‘wait and see posture’ now.  Remember the eyes of the world are on us and show our determination to better the lives of all Ethiopians.

Mesfin Mekonen