What troubled Abrham Yohannes, also editor of Ethiopian Legal Brief, was Article 3 (2) (b), which states,“this Proclamation does not apply to contracts a public body enters into with another public body for the provision of goods, works, consultancy or other services at cost.” By the inclusion of this article, the law has set public agencies, the ministries, higher education institutions, commissions, etc, which are partly or wholly financed by the federal government to go their ways, since they would not be subject to procurement procedures, when acquiring goods and services.

Bear in mind that, as a ‘developmental state’ Ethiopia’s development activities are mainly spearheaded by the numerous state agencies acting as its vehicles. With pen strokes, as per Article 3 (2) (b), its officials are under no requirements of the law to be obliged by the need for transparency or competition, when they expend huge amounts of taxpayers’ funds every year for the purchase of goods and services. In this regard, the importance of Abrham Yohannes’s insight into the serious deficiency in our country’s public procurement law he has pointed out cannot be sufficiently emphasized.

The overriding tasks of these government agencies is service, which they have to develop and provide the public. To do so, they promote development ideas, plans and implement programs and projects, hire consultants, contractors and sub-contractors. They also consume lots of expensive goods procured from domestic and foreign markets. Perhaps the concern here may appear a bit magnified. Nevertheless, it is important to realize that, of itself this requires them to engage in numerous investment activities using public funds, operating as contracting parties in agreements and contracts they sign with other agencies — even if with other state agencies — behind which there could be an outside firm, domestic or foreign, since other government agencies cannot produce all the goods and services others need.

Readily comes to mind a kind of arrangement that can arise between EthioTelecom and EEPCo, ministry of water resources and EEPCo or two or three universities looking for some materials or that sort of thing. There are possibilities where the distinction in engagement between public and non-public contracts could get fuzzier.

Clearly, what Article 3 (2) (b) underlines is, so to say, the irrelevance of the law to procurement contractual relations between public bodies. There are enormous possibilities that this could allow subtle collusion of personal interests. If one examines this closely what they have done with that provision is to handicap possibilities of closing down loopholes against crafty individuals that could exploit today’s business exchange sophistication to personal gains.

In addressing his concern regarding this aspect of the public procurement law, Ato Abrham Yohannes’s premise is:

Generally speaking, the regulatory framework of public procurement as tool in the formulation and implementation of an effective and efficient system of public procurement should be guided by some internationally accepted basic principles. These principles are: transparency, accountability, objectivity, fairness and non-discrimination.
The principle of transparency helps to attract a greater number of participation, thereby encouraging competitiveness. It also makes the whole procurement process open and fair, thus avoiding the possibility of favoritism and discrimination. Transparency also makes it easy for procuring entities and officials to be accountable. Most importantly, it is an effective tool to curb corruption.

In fact, he argues that irrespective of the role played and the level of participation of the government or the private sector, the whole purpose of the exercise is to acquire the best quality of services with minimum cost, which makes an efficient and effective system of public procurement an indispensable necessity.

In other words, if officials running public agencies are left free to act as they like, unchecked by laws and regulations as has been so far, it means that no thought has been given to the fact that they are only lesser gods. In our country’s traditions and the prevailing political environment, they are likely to be constantly torn apart by the temptations of giving and receiving favors to political connections, the pressures of nepotism and expectations of other connections. How many of them mangage do not to blink in the face of it becomes very clear if the constant allegation by the prime minister’s about “our thieves” within his government should serve as a guide to the answer.

It should be borne in mind that it is the good laws in society, their applicability to all that shape and strengthen society’ values. It is a system and same process that everyone follows and governs everyone that can help society get and give its best. This is because in the process individuals could develop faith and confidence in the system and they are also helped to grow and institutions to function better. The author of the article stresses that transparency helps to attract wider participation, thereby encouraging competitiveness. He observes that by itself would make the whole procurement process open and fair, shutting any openings for favoritism and discrimination. Mosat of all, he argues, “Transparency also makes it easy for procuring entities and officials to be accountable.”

While Ato Abrham Yohannes acknowledges the improvement Proclamation No.649/2009 has introduced over a past that has been ‘lawlessness’, he still worries on wo accounts. Firstly, the exception granted to government agencies under Article 3 (2) (b) exonerates them from being subject to procurement regulations and procedures if they intend to participate in the provision of goods, works, consultancy or other services at cost. In effect what happens is that these bodies win contracts without any competition. Because of that they they would not have to labor to improve their performances and the quality of services they provide to the public. Most of all, they would not have to worry about costs since the state budget takes care of it.

His second concern is that this is a federal law and it applies only to federal entities. Unfortunately, the regional states are getting their lessons from a bad teacher. The writer cites the initiatives by the Amhara regional state, Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa administrations that, in devising their own procurement laws, have followed the model of the federal government in turn giving exemptions to their regional state agencies in respect of procurement.

In so doing, just like federal government agencies, the regional governments also have deprived themselves of the prospects of building a better system through greater transparency that competition forces and improves delivery of their services that such a system obliges their agencies to deliver in such areas as education, health, roads, water, extension services to farmers, veterinary, etc –.

As the country moves more and more into regional integration with other neighboring countries, one should not also exclude how its undeveloped procurement laws at the national and regional levels would make it difficult to benefit from good competitive procurement laws or loose out altogether.

I cannot thank enough Abrham Yohannes for putting his finger, as he did on something that has been badly wrong in our country! I share his conviction that, if Ethiopia is to fight corruption successfully, more particularly as a country that has been profusely bleeding, among others, from the rising level of corruption in the country and the massive capital flight it has experienced over the years, the first step to sealing the leaking hole is to design a good law. Only such laws and their proper implementation would stop the bleeding.

It means that, as a first step the country needs to be armed with the requisite laws! The second step is compliance with the law, which cannot be demanded when and where there is no law or regulation to comply with.

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

Why is Schadomsky bent out of shape over “ethiomedia and similar sites by extension”? Apparently, he had been chewed out, tongue-lashed, dressed down, squeezed, badgered, blackmailed and “monitored” by none other than dictator Meles Zenawi’s doppelganger in charge of information. Schadomsky explained to his staff:

You will be aware of the close monitoring of the Ethiopian government of any activities by our staff members perceived to be ‘opposition activities’. I have a number of names thrown at me by Bereket Simon every time I am in Addis… We will be embarking on another attempt to secure additional licenses in Ethiopia. You will appreciate that any activity outside the realm of objective news reporting will harm those efforts, and is generally not in line with our editorial policy.”

In an “Open letter to ethiomedia.com” in January 2012, intended to refute “a number of articles on Ethiomedia alleging self-censorship at DW Amharic,” Schadomsky triumphantly depicted himself as a fearless defender of press freedom and a paragon of journalistic integrity. He declared unabashedly:

I would like to go on record as saying that we at DW Amharic neither bow to pressure from the government of Ethiopia, nor give in to the increasingly outrageous demands made by radicalized opposition figures and organizations. Our editorial policy is guided by one principle only, namely: to provide millions of Ethiopians with access to free and fair information in a country where media freedom is heavily curtailed.

Schadomsky claimed to be “flabbergasted” by allegations made in an “open letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel that DW Amharic deliberately shuns voices critical of the [Ethiopian] government in its programmes.” He carped, “One expects a certain degree of harassment from an authoritarian government… (but) I did not expect the same, and worse, harassment from people who claim to champion democracy and freedom of speech.” He pontificated: “You don’t have to be a citizen of a country still struggling with its Nazi past to find the phrase ‘the fascist Woyane regime in Addis Ababa’ horribly inappropriate, no matter how much one may disagree with the present government.”

Who is a Disgrace to Press Freedom?

As Schadomsky furiously wags an accusatory finger at “ethiomedia and similar sites by extension” and vilifies them as a “disgrace”, he fails to notice that three fingers are silently and squarely pointing at him. But closer scrutiny of Shadomsky’s claims reveal some unsettling facts:

Editorial Policy: Shadomsky vaguely alludes to DW’s “editorial policy”, which he claims is “guided by one principle only, namely: to provide millions of Ethiopians with access to free and fair information in a country where media freedom is heavily curtailed.” How does he reasonably expect to provide “free and fair information” to the Ethiopian people when is on his hands and knees groveling for “additional broadcasting licenses”? When did freedom (in any from including expression and the press) become a licensable activity or commodity in Germany?

Editorial policy uninformed by ethical and professional standards and principles of press freedom is pointless and delusional. The Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists (which has been in operation since 1909 and universally adopted by professional journalists) urges journalists to “give voice to the voiceless” and to “tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so”. It instructs professional journalists to “avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived” and to “remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.” Schadomsky does not seem to be aware of these obligations.

Curiously, Schadomsky seems to have a very narrow understanding of journalism as he commands his staff to stay away from “any activity outside the realm of objective news reporting”. In pursuit of political correctness and “additional broadcasting licenses”, he has resolved to sacrifice news analysis, editorials and presentation of divergent viewpoints to his audience. Following Schadomsky’s “objective news theory”, DV Amharic could report that a major Ethiopian opposition political figure has been jailed, but related news or discussions of the legality of the imprisonment and the pattern and practice of official political persecution and human rights violations which nurture such arbitrary arrests and detentions in the country would be off limits. “Objective news” is meaningless without context, frame of reference. If “objective news” reporting is about fairness, accuracy and minimization of bias, the best way to achieve that is to allow expression of divergent views and opinions, and not underestimate the intelligence of Ethiopian listeners to separate fact from opinion.

The claim of pursuit of “objective news” is contradicted by other facts. For instance, coverage of certain opposition figures including Birtukan Midekssa while she was in prison was off limits. There is evidence showing that members of Zenawi’s embassy in Germany have met with DW’s Amharic staff at least twice and dictated terms and conditions to Schadomsky for their cooperation and granting of additional licenses. Among these conditions include DV’s avoidance of human rights related issues, banning of certain individuals from DV microphones (a fact Shadomsky admits when he stated in his memo, “I have a number of names thrown at me by Bereket Simon every time I am in Addis…”) and glorification of the economic and political progress made under Zenawi’s leadership.

Schadomsky also appears to believe that his editorial policy of tokenism by inviting a handful of Ethiopian opposition representatives from time to time proves journalistic neutrality and inclusiveness. He seems to believe that an occasional interview with Thilo Hoppe, German lawmaker and critic of Zenawi’s regime, opposition leader Berhanu Nega and “sole opposition MP, Ato Girma Seifu” in Ethiopia adequately represents the diversity of Ethiopian opposition views, or affords opponents of Zenawi’s regime a fair opportunity to be heard. But this policy of tokenism belies Schadomsky’s systematic and relentless browbeaitng and badgering of the Amharic staff to avoid certain subjects and ban certain critics of Zenawi’s regime from DW’s microphones, including Eskinder Nega, the present author and others.

But Schadomsky’s issues appear to go beyond lack of basic familiarity with professional journalistic ethics, conflict of interest principles, difficulties with truth-telling and imperious and cavalier treatment of his staff. Schadomsky can be challenged in three specific areas: 1) He simply cannot back up his accusatory claims which buttress his conclusion that “ethiomedia and similar sites by extension” are a disgrace to press freedom and the politically sober mind. 2) He manifests extreme sensitivity to criticism of his editorial policy or allegations of “self-censorship” and being a regime “mouthpice”. 3) There are significant questions which raise doubt about his professional competence to discharge his duties as editor-in chief of the Amharic program.

Hate Speech: In his January 2012 “Open Letter” Schadomisky alleges: “It is our view that some of the content splashed across certain news sites constitutes hate speech, and DW will not allow opinion pieces by its journalists to be posted alongside hate speech.” This conclusion is unsupported in Art. 5 (1) or other provisions of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (BL). Under the BL, there is a world of difference between offering an opinion and engaging in hate speech. Art. 5(1) guarantees that “Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing…”

On the other hand, hate speech refers to “utterances which tend to insult, intimidate or harass a person or groups or utterances capable of instigating violence, hatred or discrimination.” The German Federal Constitutional Court has held that “opinions are characterized by an element of taking a position and of appraising” and “demonstration of their truth or untruth is impossible.” Consequently, opinions “enjoy the basic right’s (BL) protection regardless of whether their expression is judged to be well-founded or unfounded, emotional or rational, valuable or worthless, dangerous or harmless… and do not lose this protection by being sharply or hurtfully worded.”

Schadomsky’s offers only one concrete example of alleged hate speech by “ethiomedia and similar sites by extension” in his hyperbolic allegations of “splashed hate”. He claims: “You don’t have to be a citizen of a country still struggling with its Nazi past to find the phrase the ‘fascist Woyane regime in Addis Ababa’ horribly inappropriate, no matter how much one may disagree with the present government.”

This alleged example of “hate speech” is nothing more than an opinion — a value judgment, a statement of belief or impression — and is fully protected by Art. 5(1) of BL. Fascism is a discredited, though historically a dominant, political ideology. It extolls a party and state led by one supreme leader who exercises dictatorial powers over the party, the government and other state institutions. Fascist regimes reject liberal (“neoliberal”) forms of democracy based on majority rule and egalitarianism in favor of centralized power in the hands of a few.

It is not “hate speech” for one to call a regime a “fascist Woyane regime” (“Woyane” referring to a rebellion in Northern Ethiopia in 1943) if one holds such an opinion. Neither is it hate speech to lambaste Diaspora Ethiopian critics as “fundamentalist neo-liberals”, “extremist hardliners” or to bandy other silly but colorful descriptions.

Extreme Sensitivity to Criticism. For reasons that are not apparent, Schadomsky goes ballistic when faced with criticism. He seems to be particularly stung by criticism that his program practices “self-censorship” and has become a “mouthpiece” of Zenawi’s regime, something he claims has “dumfounded him” in light of the fact that the “Government of Ethiopia routinely jams our broadcasts for months at a time… and [has] refused us additional reporter licenses”. To paraphrase Shakespeare, “Schadomsky doth protest too much, methinks.” By overreacting to such criticism, caustic and scathing as they may sound, Schadomsky risks validating them. The fact of the matter is that those in the media must tolerate criticism of their work and role because it comes with the territory. They just have to deal with it, not mope around moaning and groaning about it!

Competence to Serve as Editor-in-Chief: There is evidence to suggest that DW has a basic policy of appointing editors-in-chief in its radio programs who have facility in the particular programming language. For instance, the editors of the Africa programs — Hausa, Kiswahili, Portuguese — are said to be fluent in their respective languages. Schadomsky is said to have no fluency whatsoever in Amharic and largely depends on a single subordinate for advice and counsel in making editorial decisions. While this is an administrative matter, it does detract significantly from Schadomsky’s claim “to provide millions of Ethiopians with access to free and fair information in a country where media freedom is heavily curtailed.” His handicap in the Amharic language and reliance on the “heavily curtailed” information he receives from a single subordinate makes his claim of serving millions of Ethiopians rather hollow, if not laughable.

Schadomsky’s memo demonstrates that he is obsessed with political correctness, and fearful of unleashing the wrath of the powers that be in Ethiopia. This untenable situation has created a credibility gap for DV and a gullibility gap for Schadomsky. He can claim that there is no “self-censorship” at DV Amharic; but his memorandum is proof positive that there is not only self-censorship but also fear and loathing among his staff who wince at the very thought of expressing their views under his gag order. He can mount a campaign of fear and smear against “ethiomedia and similar websites by extension” and bombard them with verbal pyrotechnics in an attempt to deflect attention from his professional deficits and anemic ethical standards.

The fact of the matter is that the credibility of DV Amharic has been damaged beyond repair after the revelation of Schadomsky’s sanctimonious memorandum. As long as he remains at the helm, DV Amharic will be regarded by millions of Ethiopians as self-censoring, cowardly and trifling. Those who may listen to DV Amharic may do so not out of thirst for useful information but sheer habit. For most, DV Amharic will remain background static noise over the airwaves.

Apology is Due to Ethiomedia and Other Pro-Democracy Ethiopian Websites

Schadomsky owes “ethiomedia and similar sites by extension” an apology. He has unfairly characterized them as hateful and not having a “politically sober mind”. In other words, he has called them crazy hatemongers. They have their own viewpoints and perspectives as they are entitled to have; and they are passionate about their beliefs. Whatever faults they may have, one of them is not putting on a charade of being an independent news agency. I am confident that Ethiomedia and the other Ethiopian pro-democracy websites fully subscribe to the proposition that “A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press, must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the right of the people to know.”

There is no disgrace in standing up for one’s beliefs; but it is a disgrace to speak with forked tongue. My deepest gratitude and appreciation goes to all of the pro-democracy Ethiopian websites worldwide.

Sibhat was born in 1928 in the historical town of Adwa, North Ethiopia. He has published works of fiction and non fiction in French and Amharic. Some of his works are available “retold” in English. Sibhat has also worked as a journalist and columnist for the Ethiopian Herald and Addis Zemen newspapers as well as Menen magazine and others in his long writing career.

Sibhat was also famous for pioneering the naturalist writing style in Amharic. He has a unique writing style which is not constrained by the traditional Ethiopian writing style. Nor is his syntax orthodox. Even if he uses simple words and seemingly light prose, Sebhat’s concepts are highly sophisticated and philosophical. Some of his books are letum aynegalegn, Tekusat, Säbatägnaw Mälak, Egrä Mängäd, Mastawäsha and others Sibhat has got an award for his career from the UNESCO

Though it may not be noted in every history book, in 1896 the Battle of Adwa took place on the Horn of Africa. The battle pitted the armies of Emperor Menelik II of Ethiopia against invading Italian forces commanded by General Oreste Baraterie. The Ethiopian victory produced a resonance that vibrated the entire western world for a number of reasons.

For the first time African forces had defeated a European power bent on forging an empire in Africa. And once again in the history of Ethiopia, the victory was influenced by a powerful Ethiopian woman, Empress Taitu. Also, the question of racial superiority was beginning to affect western societies, especially post-slavery America. Many were surprised that an African nation could defeat a white colonial power such as Italy.

The heritage of the victory at Adwa is felt deeply by the people of Ethiopia, because it sealed the country’s fortune as the only African nation to have never succumbed to European colonization. The Ethiopian Heritage Society of North America feels especially charged to share and to keep alive the memory of the battle, not only because of the turning point it marked in Ethiopian history, but also because of the thrusting impact the victory had upon an already rapidly changing world.

Carving Up Africa

During the latter part of the 19th century, the mighty powers of Europe were intent on carving up Africa in their search for empires. The British, the French, the Portuguese and even the Italians were among them The Italians laid claim to Ethiopia. They were very interested because of the proximity of the new Suez Canal and the prospects of increasing trade. They were also interested in the wealth the land had to offer. Their first attempts at colonization involved establishing a colony in Eritrea.

From that foothold they had their eyes on the rich Ethiopian lands to the south. Emboldened by the success of other European powers in Africa, the Italians had reason to believe that snatching the land as part of their empire would require little effort. But their confrontation with Queen Taitu during discussions involving the Treaty of Wuchale should have given them warning.

From the House of Solomon to the Treaty of Wuchale

Taitu Betul was born around 1851 and traced her lineage back to the offspring of the biblical Queen of Sheba and King Solomon of Judea, as did her husband, King Menelik. The two would claim the positions of Emperor and Empress after the battle of Adwa. Tradition has it that the male offspring of that union was also named Menelik. Tradition also connects the Queen of Sheba with the “dark and lovely” companion of the Jewish king in the biblical psalm, “The Song of Solomon.”

As queen, Taitu wielded considerable political power and she was a key player in the heated negotiations over the Treaty of Wuchale. Crafted by the Italians, the treaty was two-faced. One copy of the treaty gave Ethiopia to the Italians; the other copy assured the Ethiopians that they could maintain their autonomy. Queen Taitu held a hard line for Ethiopia and the talks eventually broke down. At the negotiations she said, “I am a woman. I do not like war. However, I would rather die than accept your deal.” As a result, Italy turned to invade Ethiopia.

Ethiopia United by the King

King Menelik was ruler of the realm of Ethiopia. A wise man and a skilled general, he had noted that most of the defeats across the span of Africa were due to warring ethnic factions being unable to unite against the white colonials. He vowed that would not be the case for his country and warned every citizen from every corner of Ethiopia about that possibility. He became the leader of a unification of the peoples of Ethiopia and set out to train and equips a formidable army made up of all the Ethiopian peoples.

Menelik summoned princes, their vassals, and other people from every corner of the nation, and mustered a force of over 200,000 men. Queen Taitu herself rounded up 16,000. To provision his army, Menelik was able to gather 300,000 rifles, 5 million rounds of ammunition, 6 thousand revolvers and 25,000 blades for lances. Ample provisions for a formidable artillery force were secured as well. In fact, Queen Taitu commanded some of the artillery forces.

Battles Before Adwa

Two battles occurred before Adwa, one at Mekele and one at Ambalage. The battle at Mekele is certainly noteworthy as it involved the Queen and her troops and their superb tactics. The Italians had themselves well-fortified in formidable, hillside bunkers bristling with sharpened stakes and broken glass. The area was raked with solid Italian machine gun fire. The queen sent a spy to see if a weakness in the fortifications could be discovered. The spy returned to tell her of the vulnerability of the Italians’ source of water.

Taitu ordered her soldiers to capture the water supply. She told her army officials, “You were anxious to get involved in this war. As you know, there is not enough space for all of the army; I do not want lose any of you over friendly fire. Be on guard at the water supply down in the valley. I hope you are not afraid to die for your country and honor. I will give gifts for those who will come back alive. I will take care of the families of those who die. Let God be with you!”

The Italians tried several times to regain their water supply, but Taitu’s soldiers held through each assault. She kept the troops there well-supplied with food and ammunition. The troops were ready to die for her, their country and their honor. They defended the water well for 15 days against the Italians. As a result, the Italians finally had to sue for peace when King Menelik arrived on the scene.

The Battle of Adwa

When her husband marched forth to the north to meet the main body of the enemy, Queen Taitu marched with him. She was commander of an artillery battery during the Battle of Adwa. The Italian forces were made up of around 18,000 infantry and 56 artillery guns. Several thousand Italian troops were allocated to supply duties and the rest included many inexperienced troops and some Eritreans lead by Italian officers. Their equipment was poor and their morale was low.

The battle was a nasty and bloody affair. The Italians fought valiantly but they were out-numbered and out-smarted. One general’s brigade was decimated by Ethiopian lancers and the general’s body was never found. Over 7,000 soldiers from each force died. The battle was a crushing and humiliating defeat for Italy. The Ethiopians drove the retreating Italians to Eritrea and ultimately ran them out of the area altogether. As a term of The Treaty of Addis Abba, drawn on the 26th of October, 1896, Italy was forced to recognize Ethiopian independence.

Empress Consort of Ethiopia

Because of their success in uniting the nation, on the 10th of May in 1889, Taitu and her husband, Menelik, were crowned Emperor and Empress of Ethiopia. Just as when she was queen, the empress wielded great power at court. Their reign and their marriage could be seen as a “good cop – bad cop” affair. Her husband would always prevaricate or postpone decisions and deign to her rulings. As a result, her husband was much-liked, and she was not so well-liked. But, she made all the tough decisions. Because of the colonial wars, she had a great mistrust for anything European and defended Ethiopian traditions and culture vehemently.

The Three Victories of Adwa and Empress Taitu

The world learned at least three lessons from the Battle of Adwa. One, that it was possible for a united African nation such as Ethiopia to defeat a large, European colonial power. Two, women such as Taitu could lead in diplomacy and lead in battle just as could men. Long before women could even vote in Western nations, the soldiers and citizens of Ethiopia accepted Taitu’s leadership. Three, the notion of white racial superiority had been taken down a notch or two and this had great influence on societies around the globe, especially in America where the notion of racial equality was just starting to bubble up through the culture.

As said manifestations of a new born regime are yet to come. The fertile land for revolution is abundant , but the farmer is absent . The farmer is a political or civic society leader who can mobilize all the available resources to till the fertile land. The regime recognizes that it can’t change the fertile land into a non or less fertile one. The only thing it can make sure is that no farmer can plough this land. That is the strategy the regime is following: to make sure that no farmer dares to till the land. What is happening on Andualem Arage or Eskinder Nega or what has happened on Bertukan Midekessa or other political figures is the result of the strategy of prohibiting a farmer from tilling the fertile land for revolution.

This is I think the area where everyone concerned needs to think. There is nothing coming out as a result of telling the people time and again about their 1001 problems. The people know each and every detail of their life because they are living with it. It may help to remind the people about their plights, but it is not enough to stop there. There needs to be a strategy which enables us to produce the farmer. We haven’t been successful in this regard so far because much of our struggle focuses on stating the existence of the fertile ground than encouraging the farmer to till it. We expect the fruit by simply reporting about the fertile land without putting the farmer on the land. We expect the fertile land to produce the fruit for itself. A fertile land may produce something on it without being tilled, but we can’t be sure that that produce is whether a chaff or a wheat. The reason why the old is dying , but the new one cannot be born is I think the absence of the land tiller despite the existence of the fertile land.

elonsamson@gmail.com

While it is not surprising that our leaders should suffer from lack of institutional memory, they should, however, find it helpful to realize that resettlements were first proposed to the Ethiopian government as a package of projects decades ago by the World Bank to move people from lands that have failed them in several districts in the country to more fertile parts. That not being worked out successfully, today millions of our compatriots to be precise in 290 districts of the country have become dependent on international humanitarian aid under the Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP).

Therefore, the problems encountered experienced in implementing resettlement or villagization program have taken the form of manifest opposition or systematic reaction from within and open criticisms and vilification from abroad have more to deal with the manner of its implementation. That is to say disagreements underlie the program’s implementation doubts being expressed whether it has been voluntary, the concerned people and communities have voice, are active participants in its design and implementation and that there is unmistakable reliability of the projects underway that people would be better off in their new environs now and over the long-term.

The for and against of villagization as it is being played out

While the Ethiopian government claims that the program it has been implementing meets the above criteria, its words have lacked both potency and credibility to convince those that mostly are concerned with and for respect for fundamental human rights of the individuals and families to be resettled and whether the approach envisioned has been holistic in the development sense — schools, health services, infrastructures, markets, etc.

If anything, the actions and virulent denials of the government regarding the failure of its resettlement program have fallen on disbelieving ears. This primarily is because of information filtering out from the settlers themselves that they have been forcibly relocated. They have alleged that they are thrown where nothing has been prepared for them. Most importantly, they have confirmed time and again to researchers, aid workers and the media about them being beaten, their shacks gutted out and the people forced out of their localities. What has stuck in my memory is the picture of gutted out villages in Gambealla, investigated in March 2011 by the Guardian’s environment editor John Vidal and his interview with State Minister of Agriculture Wondirad Mandefro.

For instance, quoting diplomatic sources in Addis Abeba, on January 24, 2011 Capital wrote that “a third of the 240 households that have been relocated in a state-run “villagization” program in Gambella region left resettlement areas during the first year of the initiative.” The paper attributes this to poor facilities and living conditions, according to the diplomatic source it talked to. The diplomat who spoke to Capital on condition of anonymity added, “Conditions are such that people decided to walk one or two hours back to where they came from last year.”

Government Communication Affairs Office Minister Bereket Simon picks up this and says:

We have to clearly assess the situation on the ground. Even if there is credible information that shows that some people have left- out of some 20,000 people, it only shows that the government understands their right to leave the villages. They were voluntarily included into the program and they may exercise their right to leave the villages whenever they wish to do so which is fully respected by the state.

The minister even goes further and adds, according to Capital, lack of medicine and under equipped facilities can be seen from time to time and the federal and local governments have been meeting the demand as they arise. I thought I had heard the minister on 17 January 2011 giving the BBC a list of number of the amenities that have been built. He also said at the time that the government did not take the decision on villagization lightly since its objective is to help those people who are denied in the past such basic infrastructural amenities.

Perhaps in remembering that, when talking to Capital he returns to that same theme and amplifies it as follows:

The approach has been to prepare the facilities in advance and relocate the people later; this will continue also in the future programs. However, some shortage may occur and we will respond to that as they arise but the efforts exerted to put in place the start-up facilities have been successful.
I do not think anyone expects the government to establish a resort for the settlers. The issue here is whether the government is caught in its haste to clear the lands for investors. Because of that it may have considered those people as creates of goods to be shipped away somewhere or to be pushed off the land.

Nonetheless, indicating that haste and consistent with what Capital wrote quoting its diplomatic source, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had also been involved in protecting and supporting 1,400 individuals that had run away from Gambella’s resettlement villages. Why do these people have to run away, if there is no danger to their lives, or the regime’s police and security organs have labelled them as troublemakers for demanding their rights.

The Ethiopian government says, according to Capital, the number of people who have left the resettlement program is very small. Their departure shows they are willing participants in the program and they are exercising their right to leave the village when they wish to do so, according to the government. This does not mean that there are no settlers that have become content with their new villages. The problem is that people must have experienced traumatic problems, given the Ethiopian state’s heavy-handedness. That is what the reports that filter out indicate.

You are not echoing what I am saying, so you are my enemy, says the government

The problem for the Ethiopian government is that the operational parameter of engagement with it is circumscribed by its notion that it is either its words or else everyone that has a different view is against it. As the essence of its statements on resettlements indicates, those that spoke anything different from what it says are seen as liars! This is a very difficult predisposition for the government itself to make amends in situations where mistakes are made or wrong policies are implemented.

For instance, in its response to all the allegations, above, and that of Human Rights Watch in Waiting Here for Death,the Ethiopia’s Ministry of Federal Affairs not only has it denied the allegations as a whole with wholly ideological overtones but also simply dismissed them as an expression of the organization’s hostility “that emanates from the market fundamentalism ideology advocated by neoliberals which Ethiopia does not accept.”

The small exception in approach to all this, however, and that I welcomed as encouraging is the partial admission by Kedir Yasin, Gambella’s point man for coordination of development activities. In an interview produced by the government’s propaganda arm Walta Inc video (Villagization in Gambela), he confidently underlined that the implementation of the region’s resettlement program had experienced serious constraints. In producing the video, the intention of Walta has been to counter the allegations by parading hand-picked settler interviewees who are heard praising the resettlement projects as the best thing that has ever happened to them.

There is always a better more productive ways of doing things

For a moment let us keep that on one side. At the same time, in that same video let us take into account what Ato Kedir Yasin said in so many words. He explained that the whole program has suffered from lack of construction workers, capable builders and untold capacity problems on every front. His conclusion is that this forced substantial delays in planned implementation of certain activities. This, he added, was further compounded by administrative failures in making sensible follow-up of program implementation.

To be honest, I was puzzled when I saw the video at first glance, mostly because of the unmistakable correspondence between his admission as a professional in charge and the allegations by Human Rights Watch in the above-mentioned report and what the anonymous diplomat had told Capital. In a way, it should teach good lessons to good students of government. Instead of making its case in the manner of Ato Kedir Yasin had done and seeking help where need, as a developing country still grappling with so many capacity limitations — the Ethiopian government chose, as part of its consistent patterns, to stand by the side of defensiveness, denials and it knows it better.

The whole thing left me wondering with the whys of this problem. I also wondered when our country would learn to engage all those that have different views from it and explain its position in a more honorable manner. As one can see from their words here, instead they preferred to throw volleys of senseless counter allegations and denials, or fabrication of charges to go after their critics.

This points to two things: the first is sign of drowning in a very perplexing ideological world view that officially and strictly operates on the plane of ‘them and us’. It only acts not from the position of in control of its environment and strength, but on instructions from a tiny single cell at the center. This inevitably renders the actor to becoming suspicious of everything, the excesses of which could lead to psychological disorder known as siege mentality — a sense of victimization and defensiveness. Secondly, these manifestations speak of someone, as individual or a nation, always trying to jump where the fence is short, since its self-preservation strategy has ‘escape’ in its default mode.

The fact of the matter is that by now the leadership ought to recognize that there is no shortcut to where they want to take Ethiopia, without having the people on their side! Two decades should have been more than enough for them to learn that the people have passed the stage of gullibility and manipulation by political cadres and their gimmickry about popular participation! They need to get over it, that has not worked in Ethiopia under the Dergue! It does not work on now either! The recourse to force and threats of use of force also produce only silent resistance that would liken the regime to a burrowed tree from within.

If the TPLF-led EPRDF were to examine their actions in some respects and most of their reactions objectively to every situation in the past two decades, they would be surprised. They would certainly reach one unmistakable conclusion from the consistency of their patterns of responses. They would see that they have needlessly created more frustrated and disenfranchised people from within and surprised and dismayed partners and observers from without to the country’s policies and heavily ideology-laced politics than true friends.

This needs changing, before it is too late!

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

Ninety (90) percent of Ethiopians earn less than the worldwide threshold of US$1.25 per day. More than 60 percent earn less than US$1 a day. Imagine surviving on such income yourself. Last year, the cost of food rose by 50 percent. An Afar, Somali, Anuak, Oromo or other mother outside the privileged ethnic elites who benefit from the system has a higher chance of dying from lack of basic maternal care, along with her baby in one of the “unhealthiest countries in the world.” If the baby survives, her or his chance of growing stunted or of becoming an orphan is among the highest in the world. There are 7 million orphans in Ethiopia today. Children and girls are among the largest exports in the country. If a child reaches the age of maturity (18), her or his chances of attending school are lower than in next door Kenya. If, by some miracle, she/he attends high school or even college, the chance of finding a job that pays a livable wage are increasingly nil.

On the other hand, the chance of immigrating and facing the prospect of death on the way or humiliation abroad are among the highest in the world. The Gallop Poll found that 46 percent of Ethiopians, mostly the educated, want to leave the country. This is the lead reason why I have consistently suggested that growth that does not offer equitable access to opportunities does not reduce overall poverty. TPLF incorporated (TPLF Inc.) would care less whether the affected individual is Afar, Somali, Amhara, Oromo, Anuak or Tigrean. Why should it? The less people who demand public services and or freedom, the better it is for the regime. The less domestic competition there is the better for few who make money. TPLF INC is especially inimical to national oriented individuals and institutions. Reflect for a single minute why the country is void of nationalists, patriots and civic minded folks and institutions.
What is surprising to fair minded observers—whether Ethiopian or foreign—is that the condition of running a multiethnic nation as a business is not fully grasped or appreciated even by those who say they oppose it. This wishy-washy tendency is among the lead contributors to the disarray. Some have the audacity to accept ‘crumbs’ as democratic outcomes and neglect the vast majority who live in abject poverty and destitution. They ignore the notion that democratic outcomes mean shared power and shared resources. It certainly is not accepting second class status in one’s own region and country.

One can’t help but appreciate those who were part of the regime; reject it; and join the opposition camp. They know more about the intrigues of TPLF Inc. than we do. It is time that we let go of their past, invite and encourage them to join the democratization process. Evidence from and testimonies offered by these former supporters and participants in the establishment of ethnic federalism– the geopolitical manifestation of ethnic polity– show that the Ethiopian Prime Minister and his close allies are leading the entire society into the abyss. In this abyss, no current or future generation is likely to be spared. Sad but true, for Tigreans, the collateral damage that emanates from this system of exclusion is huge. Those who left it know this very well and can help in dismantling it. They know that, unless change takes place soon, Tigreans will incur long-term damages without necessarily receiving a substantial share of the proceeds from minority ethnic elite political and economic capture. Some in the Diaspora who visit the glitz in the country return with the false impression that things are better for the vast majority of the population. They equate glitz with wellbeing for 90 percent of the population. They fail to recognize that, at US$350, per capita income is among the lowest in Africa. Having left the country in search of opportunities abroad, they detach themselves from the bigger and troublesome realities in which most live.

TPLF Inc. offers critical officials, including generals, urban lands and accesses to loans to own and build mansions and buildings in prime locations that cost between 45 and 90 million birr. Diaspora visitors fail to ask how it is possible for a general on an Ethiopian salary to build multimillion birr physical assets in one of the poorest countries in the world.

An ordinary Tigrean does not live in a decent home let alone in a palatial or mansion like edifice in Mekele or Bole in Addis Ababa. So, we cannot afford to be categorical in chastising the Tigrean population for the misdeeds of TPLF Inc. We need to make clearer distinctions between those who rule and exploit or plunder the country and the rest. By the same token, we cannot afford to assume that every Oromo supports the OLF and that most Oromo support secession. The vast majority of the Oromo population suffers from the same systemic barriers as the rest. This condition creates resentment against the system. This does not, however, mean that most Oromo or Tigrean support secession. Oromo and Tigrean and others have sacrificed as much as anyone in defending and preserving Ethiopia. It is equally wrong to assume that every Somali supports the Somali National Liberation Front. These categorical notions and beliefs are what TPLF Inc. wishes us to buy in the market place of propaganda. If we wish freedom for all Ethiopians, we cannot afford to be trapped in this cycle of categorical condemnation of others and misdeeds of the past. What matters most is the future.
Who wants national unity and the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people?

This question leads me to one general observation that some present in a recurrent fashion as if the people on whose behalf they talk—without the benefit of being elected–do not know what they want. Active and sustained support of Ethiopia’s national independence, territorial integrity and unity and sovereignty that embraces the diversity of the population is national hopes and aspirations. These do not belong to the so-called ‘unity crowd.’ Such narrow and self-serving attribution serves TPLF Inc. and narrow ethnic elite outlooks. Indirect or direct reference to the so-called ‘unity crowd’ is another way of confining identification narrowly to a group rather than to the entire society. It is a reinforcement of the current ethnic federal system that discourages communication and interaction among the country’s diverse population. Who benefits from such an arrangement? It is elites and not the people they contend to represent. Trade, employment, investment and knowledge sharing are restrained heavily by this narrow definition of the ‘unity crowd’ theme. TPLF Inc. reinforces such an insular and isolated life at the cost of millions of Ethiopians. Those who echo the same are essentially saying the same thing: live in isolation from one another. Restricted economic and social activity on the basis of ethnic identity deters the natural flow of knowledge, best practices, experience and markets. It deters innovation and change and counters the global trend toward social, economic and market integration.

One unintended consequence that those who demean the ‘unity crowd’ advocate is that isolated ethnic communities are more vulnerable to manipulation by domestic elites and globalization than nationally oriented societies. As such, the argument is not so much one group advancing ‘unity’ for its own sake and another protecting ethnic turf. Instead, it is advancing the noble causes of shared power and shared resources that can only occur when Ethiopians have the freedom to choose their representatives in a free and fair electoral process; and when their government becomes accountable to them and not to narrow ethnic elites. Those who adhere to the notion of national unity as if this concept is embedded narrowly in one or two ethnic groups (the ‘unity crowd’) fail to realize that unity in a multiethnic and multi-religion country such Ethiopia is a national and not an ethnic concept at all. This is especially the case in this century. How else does one justify the European Union or the illusive African Union? National unity is a matter of economic and political survival.

TPLF Inc. has gotten away with murder so far by institutionalizing the irreconcilability of ethnic groups and by categorizing all Amharic speakers as ‘oppressors.’ It inherited these traditions of categorical accusation and demeaning from the EPLF and foreign powers inimical to Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people as a whole. The division within the Worldwide Ethiopian Student Movement in the 1960s and 1970s; and later on, the ensuing onslaught against nationally oriented and highly competent Ethiopians, was part of the strategy to undo Ethiopia forever. In large part, this strategy succeeded. It is not so much because of the brilliance of EPLF intellectuals that it did. It is because of the gullibility of many Ethiopian intellectuals who wanted change and listened to anyone without assessing motives and calculating possible outcomes.
The country lost its access to the sea and is now losing the pillars of its economy. In large measure; and whether recognized or not; this gullible generation helped to create a submissive and subservient political culture. The emergence the EPLF and the TPLF Inc. is part of this gullible generation. Foreigners inimical to Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people have a knack at recruiting, funding and arming Ethiopians against one another. Who pays the price ultimately? It is the country and its people. Why else would we leave our country and immigrate to all corners of the world; and then go back to our country as tourists?

The ethnic-based ruling elite continue to use its ethnic base as a shield. This shield is, however, subject to the same s scrutiny of loyalty as the rest. The Tigray regional state (Kilil) serves as the laboratory of repression and oppression of not only the region itself but the rest of the country. The ethnic elite reconfigure lands and politicize use and ownership thereby creating unnecessary animosity among Ethiopians. The good news is that, an increasing number of Tigreans, Oromo and others reject this system. Someone said, “You can fool the people some of the time; but you cannot fool the people all of the time.” The denial of freedom in the rest of the country is the same as denial of freedom in Tigray, Afar, Gambella, Amhara, Somali and Oromia and so on. Folks, I suggest that we are in this mess together. The only way out is to close ranks and cooperate and not cope out. It is time that Amhara, Oromo, Tigre, Anuak, Somali and the rest appreciate the notion that they are going to the abyss together. No one will be free from repression and oppression unless all Ethiopians are free. TPLF Inc. is fickle for a street smart reason: survival. Like a chameleon, it changes the composition of the leadership at the top and below on the basis of perceived threats and renewed or new loyalty required. This is the reason for the recent assessment (gimigema) and change of guards to protect the Prime Minister.

Increasingly, what seems to matter most for the top leadership is sheer survival against growing public resentment that the regime may not contain in the event of countrywide uprisings? This resentment is not bound by ethnic or religious affiliation. Those who wish to see an inclusive, just and pluralist Ethiopia must distinguish the trees from the forest and reach out to one another. I suggest that the personification of political leadership in a single figure or person is the weakest link of the present system that opponents can exploit now. If fear permeates this oppressive system, opponents have every reason to consider that their own fear is not warranted. They must appreciate the notion that, at minimum, fear is as pervasive within this system as it is outside. This is why generals and spies are rewarded like CEOs.

The good news is that fear outside the system is imposed; it is neither natural nor part of the Ethiopian tradition. There is power in numbers that civil resistance has yet to exploit. The outside world consists of the vast majority who reject the system. The sheer power of numbers makes fear conquerable and manageable. For this to happen, we all need to create and sustain a unity of purpose; and work on the ability to mediate and reconcile minor differences among political and civic dissidents. Opponents need to accept the possibility that narrow and personalized ethnic leadership is the Achilles Heel that is embedded in authoritarian and personalized leadership. It is this weak link that will unravel the regime. This weak link treats the entire country and its people as tradable commodities. For example, TPLF Inc. is Africa’s champion of land grab for which all ethnic groups are paying a huge price. Ethiopians are losing power, voice and a sense of citizenship in their own regions and country.

To those who find merit in Ethiopia’s ethnic polity, I have tried to show that the benefits are confined to elites. Where then is the benefit gained if the real economy is being assumed by foreign firms from India, Pakistan, the Gulf states, China and others and a selected few ethnic elites? This national onslaught must be countered fast through mobilization and consolidation of the opposition camp within the country and abroad now. The opposition camp must be courageous enough to turn the page around such that fear belongs to its rightful place: TPLF Inc.

Fear belongs to those who oppress and plunder

The fear culture that the ethnic governing elite spent hundreds of millions of dollars to implant and institutionalize is a consequence of fear itself: fear of history; of the Ethiopian public; and fear to innovate and change for the better. Let us take one example. The system of ethnicization of the security, police and defense establishment through economic and financial incentives—urban lands and borrowed financing of huge buildings in Bole, Addis Ababa, appointments to Boards and as heads of corporations– is part of the art staying in power. Fear has produced generals who live in multimillion birr homes and in the most exclusive neighborhoods in every large city in the country. A government that is not afraid of its own shadows does not bribe its generals. It has no one to fear.
The party owns the defense establishment
You buy the defense and security leadership to your side by bribing it; and by providing it economic and financial incentives because of fear. Here is a weakness that the opposition can and should exploit. Suppose TPLF Inc. declares war against Eritrea or is provoked to do so. The opposition cannot wait to educate ordinary soldiers who hail from every nationality groups. Ordinary soldiers and other low level personnel are not part of the financial and economic benefit deal and empire. Why not educate these thousands of police, soldiers and others who are not major beneficiaries that they are protecting a corrupt and deadly system that uses and abuses them? Why not inform them that the biggest beneficiaries of the current system are ethnic generals who are owners of huge assets, including buildings paid for at public expense.

This can only be done if the opposition is smart enough to set aside differences and focus on all of the Ethiopian people and on the country instead of itself. Cooperation is no longer a choice; it is a necessity.

The merged state needs material resources to sustain it
Political capture does not occur in a vacuum. State owned or run entities such as telecommunications serve the ruling-party and prevent the entire society from harnessing the information revolution. Genuine domestic private sector competition is not allowed. In the absence of structural changes, increased productivity and competition, it is inevitable that prices will continue to rise. When this happens, it all Ethiopians who suffer; hyperinflation does not discriminate. Ethiopia is being left behind other African countries in the use of mobile phones, the Internet and other modern communications tools. Last year, I visited Kenya to learn these contrasts in the use of telecommunications, mobile phones and Internet services that boost capabilities and express freedom of choice.

In Kenya, stiff competition is everywhere. There are more than 20 Internet firms that give citizens a level of access denied to Ethiopians. Young Kenyans told me that they use mobile phones and the Internet to critique and converse on such matters as the constitutional referendum. Contrast this with Ethiopia and see what TPLF Inc. is doing to the entire society. It suffocates freedom and undermines economic and social vitality and creativity. Any criticism of the Ethiopian constitution will land a person in jail. Kenya boasts the most advanced mobile money and other financial transfer system in the world. Wide spread use of the Internet and mobile phones have begun to change the social fabric of Kenyan society, blurring distinctions between urban and rural, youth and old, women and men, rich and poor. This technology is breaking ethnic barriers.

Many young Kenyans are highly critical of their government and its leaders. They want a future that will unleash the productive capabilities and potential of the entire society. Young people are not waiting for the government to solve socioeconomic and political problems. They are actively engaged in defining problems, searching for answers and setting-up enterprises. A free press allows them to express their views without fear. While one cannot conclude from a short visit that Kenya is on the way to Middle Income status by 2030–a national goal–optimism among youth and information technology suggest that this may be reachable. In terms of the information revolution and a vibrant press, Kenya is more like emerging countries in South Asia than its northern neighbors.

TPLF Inc. does exactly the opposite of Kenya, Ghana and others in Africa. Ethnic and region-based corporations and non-governmental agencies owe their legitimacy and assets to Federal Government budgetary transfers, contractual deals and easier accesses to the banking system, including the National Bank. This is why Ethiopian domestic banks are on the verge of collapse and are debt ridden to the tune of 60 billion birr and growing. So-called endowments firms play developmental roles. They exert monopolistic practices and crowd out opportunities for other Ethiopians. The banking system serves as piggy bank for the party. What makes Ethiopian ethnocratic governance unique and without parallel is the fact that an ethnic-based minority party (TPLF Inc.) has assumed legitimacy and total dominance in both the political state and the economy within a short period of 21 years.

The party, state and ethnic-based political, legal, judicial, economic and financial processes appear to be totally linked in a web that serves the ruling-party’s goals and interests. This is why I call it TPLF Inc. The definition of ethnocratic governance offered in previous commentaries has been augmented and validated by this merger that is total and absolute. The clash between national social and political groups on the one hand and the ethnic-based ruling-party on the other reflects tensions arising from this unacceptable concentration of political power and economic and financial wealth in a single ethnic-based elite. Given this, it is virtually impossible to expect shared power and shared resources any time soon.
Morally indefensible
This concentration is indefensible morally and in terms of socioeconomic development. It is detrimental to the notion of reducing and eventually eliminating broad-based poverty and in creating a vibrant and competitive national economy augmented by a strong domestic private sector. Growth that is not based on popular and equitable participation by the vast majority is likely to aggravate the already dangerous income and social inequality apparent everywhere in the country. By definition, ethnocratic governance cannot and will not be representative of the economic, financial, social, cultural and political interests of all constituents. It is narrowly, ideologically and ethnically based rather than societal-based. It cannot be democratic and equitable. The concept is exclusionary and founded on the premise of irreconcilability. Revolutionary Democracy (RD) is both class and ethnicity-based. Those who find some merit in this arrangement miss the bigger picture, namely, the meaning of shared power and equitable access to economic and social opportunities that lead to shared resources and shared prosperity long-term. Anything less understates the hopes and aspirations of Ethiopians as people regardless of ethnic, religious and demographic affiliation.
Commentary eight will examine how the TPLF Inc. formula undermines public trust and disempowers the vast majority of Ethiopians.
2/17/2012

The various speakers are calling for “Responsible Investment” that empowers their communities. Universities that do not positively affect the lives of their communities by investing in their own communities are challenged by students activism on various campuses more than 60 of them. The endowment of American universities which worth more than 400 billion dollar share holders are students, their families and the whole university community. They have a voice and have unified their activism since 2004 under Responsible Endowments Coalition (REC). Their work and the Oakland Institute work have got a common interest when it comes to universities and colleges “Irresponsible Investment” on African land. Harvard, Vanderbilt and Spelman colleges and some others have recently investing on hedge funds which are buying African lands for high rate of return and the research and the reports that came out through Oakland Institute helped Harvard recently to pull out its 500 million dollar investment from Emergent Asset Management a well known land buyer that promised high return for its investors.

The students activism in Harvard which started early before the “Irresponsible Investment” on land surely benefited from the Oakland Institute study on Land Grab in Africa. All eyes were on Africa since 2008 to “feed” the world. Food riots all over the world brought land buyers and sellers on one platform here in New York in 2008.

The students activism for responsible investment brought the land grab issue once again to the public thanks to the Fox news coverage on the Vanderbilt campus last week. Vanderbilt students challenged their chancellor the “secret” of their endowment when it comes to buying land in Africa. The students asked “Why did you hide it if you claim it is a win win situation ?” The truth of the matter, it is unethical for higher learning centers to maximize their return at the expense of poor farmers in Africa. It is Irresponsible/Predatory Investment, period !!!

As Joseph Stiglitz said the endowments on various universities might not be big to have huge impact but he said if all grass movements work in coalition as they are doing now to bring the responsible investment in higher education to the policy makers and their representatives it will bring a positive change as a whole. On her eloquent and passionate speech Anuradha Mittal told the participants most of them which are new to land grab issue on what has been going on poor Africa. I have no doubt she got new passionate energetic followers. She asked all of them to sign the petition by going to www.oaklandinstitute.org This petition which as of now has 800 signatures will be taken to the Obama Administration especially to USAID in the coming few weeks.

USAID is a facilitator of farmers dislocation in Gambella Western Ethiopia. The recent Human Rights Watch (HRW) research showed that more than 70,000 people were kicked from their land to be given away to foreign investors like Karuturi Global an Indian company and Saudi Star. USAID is giving food and temporary shelter to buy the silence of these poor people. USAID is also facilitating the entrance of more Indian Corporate farmers in Ethiopia.

Ethiopian farmers are forced to live on food aid like 15 million of them have been doing while Indian and Saudi companies both to be a strong ally of USA to export food to their people. Meles Zenawi the seller of our farm land is also a strong ally of USA. Where are our people allies ? The African farmers voice has now started to be heard in the university campuses of USA and African students should get involved in their campuses for responsible investing in higher education because it matter to them whether they live in America or in Africa.

Let us take the 10,000 signature to the Obama Administration and to the Indian Embassy in this spring according to the plan I was being informed. Both these countries are democracy where the people voice are heard and we will make sure the unholy alliance on “Land Grab Project” between India and America when it comes to Africa/Ethiopia should be defeated by mobilizing millions of African farmers, Yes We Can !!!.

For the totalitarian Saudi regime I have a message. You leave our farm land or we will kick you out !!!! I and the rest of my Ethiopian activists who were on last night program learned and made many new friends. The few minutes one to one chat we had with Joseph E. Stiglitz was very nice. He has limited information on the farm land issue and would like to know more. His voice has a heavy weight and that is why I “declare” from the podium calling his name Joseph, We Need You !!!!!

Thank You the organizers especially Dan Apfel the REC Executive Director for giving us time to give our own Ethiopian honor for Anuradha Mittal for being the Voice of the Voiceless African Farmers. She and the Board Member of Oakland Institute Jeff Furman were humbled to receive the badge of “Yenesew Gebre” who was martyred in Ethiopia on 11-11-11 but whose torch we carry on until Ethiopia becomes a Land of Free and Home of a Proud Farmers !!!!

However,since this analogy has been applied to African nations by the East African Newspaper/February 6-12,2012/ to assess how these mostly hapless nations are faring,I decided to indulge in some philosophical reflections.As has become the custom of the newspaper to evaluate the performance of African governments for the second time this year,it applied a variety of measures.Thus,it took into consideration the Mo Ibrahim Index of African governance,the Democracy Index,Freedom House’s Press Freedom Index,Transparency International’s Corruption Index and the United Nations Human Development Index.Then EA developed a Nation Media Group Index “to complement the others”the paper chose.Consequently,it based its final score for the political leaders through the average score of all these indices.What piqued my interest is the way these African “leaders”were assigned letter grades on the basis of their 0-100 score derived from the six indices.To the best, A+ and A is given which sadly are few.To the mediocres, C is given which is not only acceptable in the African context.It can be viewed as satisfactory in the developed world too. George W Bush at one time made a speech at a graduation ceremony by telling undergraduates that he was a C student which didn’t prevent him from assuming the highest of the highest office on this planet.So he told the American youth not to let their spirit dampen for being a C student.In my own student days,we used to assign D jokingly for dunce and F for flat or failure.Unfortunately,EA went beyond the normal grading we were accustomed to.After recording the dismal performance of these strongmen of Africa on different score cards,EA had shown us how some are hopeless beyond any redemption.Some are even unable to maintain earlier position despite clinging to power for eternity.Rulers like Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal,King Mohammed VI of Morocco,Alassane Ouattara of Cote d’Ivoire,Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi,his Majesty of Swaziland etc have not only declined but plummeted in their performance as “leaders.”Personally,I find this to be “ progress” commensurate with the law of nature.As a human being cannot remain a child once after s/he’s born but rather matures,then grow old and dies,no living thing can remain static.Moving forward or sliding backward is part of the inexorable law of nature.Before I proceed to what I find uncomfortable to accept,though,I’ve to congratulate the people of my host country,Uganda.EA broke the good news that the government of Uganda presided by Yoweri Kaguta Museveni recovered from ICU and notched up to F.Though,it may not be considered as a tremendous stride,it can be taken as a bouncing baby crawling on all four.

Having said that,I am baffled while some like the Djiboutian establishment led by Ismail Omar Guelleh deteriorated and succumbed to “morgue,”some like the regime of Ethiopia at the behest of Meles Zenawi maintained the same ICU status.To me it’s understandable if those who were in the morgue last year are still in the morgue this year.After all, dead bodies are mummfied and kept for various reasons.But the unchanging situation of a person in ICU at best cast a doubt in the diagnosis itself.However,if the diagnosis is said to be fool proof,then one has to also consider euthanasia/mercy killing/to put them out of their misery once and for all.How long one can remain in ICU?And how long one can callously see the suffering of another in ICU without any hope of redemption?

An Ethiopian Human Rights Defender exiled in Uganda
Email;kiflukam@yahoo.com

No one speaks openly in the so-called developmental state of Ethiopia. Every body is spying on everybody else. It doesn’t have to be true but they all believe it is so. That is what matters. This is a form of mental terror. Those outside are not immune to this. In most meetings Pictures are shot from the back of the room careful not to alarm people. Most prefer ‘pen’ names or aliases when they write to hide their identity. That is true even on social media. It is not to belittle or make fun of our behavior but it is true and it is so due to fear. Real or imagined is not important but it affects how we think and act. It affects our inner soul.

That is what a bully does to you. Bullies instill fear. Remember agriculture (peasant farming) is the vocation of 85% of the population and accounts for 45% of GDP. We are the product of a pre industrial society. It really don’t matter where one resides that trait is wired into our behavior. Sometimes in haste we seem to forget that. The truth is that we accept authority with out much fanfare due to old culture and ignorance. We accept the importance of hierarchy and the virtue of keeping quiet and suffering silently.
This drama of “pardon” is nothing more than another ponzi scheme to play with our fears. The current drama started with the ferenji reporters. The regime had a hot potato issue in its hands. The Swedish reporters were caught in the Ogaden during a firefight between the TPLF Army and ONLF freedom fighters. Once they were caught alive they were never in danger. They cannot be made to disappear. You just don’t go around killing white people like you do with Africans. The moment their capture became public their own government and every European Embassy made it clear that the Ethiopian Junta is responsible for every single hair on the body of their unwelcome guests.

The idea of using the reporters to bully the Ethiopian people seemed like a winning idea. It has its risk but one can only deal with the cards on the table. The regime decided to use the occasion to send its own message to the Ethiopian people. The ‘anti-terrorism law was a perfect vehicle to widen the net. Ethiopian Journalists and opposition leaders were hauled away and bundled with the ferenjis. The West was consumed by their own kind and did not pay that much attention to the natives. I am talking about the Western Governments here and their big Media. There were plenty of organizations and individuals protesting loudly regarding all prisoners in Ethiopia.

We are always thankful to Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters without Boarders (RSF), Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) Doctors without Boarders (MSF), and plenty others that are friends of all those that suffer under all kinds of Dictators. Using the anti-terrorism Law the TPLF regime has arrested god knows how many Ethiopians. We have the names of all the prominent ones but to their friends and family all arrested are prominent and dear. We publicize the names of the ones we know but they speak for all the other thousands. Eskinder was picked up on his way to pick up his son from school, Andualem was arrested at his office, Reeyot, Wubshet and Zerihune were hauled away from their place of work. None were caught with any kind weapon other than their free will and their pen.

I keep Eskinder in my heart all the time. I have conflicting feelings about him. His stubbornness irritates me. His strength threatens my docility. I harbor a certain amount of anger towards him. That is the Ethiopian in me, blaming the victim. There aren’t many Eskinders on this planet. That is why we treasure them when they show up like the morning Sun, bright and warm. His determination against all odds fills all of us his brothers and sisters with so much strength while his jailers recoil with shame. Using the might of the State to bully one citizen is such an abuse of power and authority it makes the jailers look so small and uncivilized. He has been in jail since September 14. It has been over one hundred twenty days or over six months my brother has been kidnapped for no other crime other than wanting to be free to think, write and raise a family. His wife Serkalem and his miracle son Nafkot live in agony. We cannot imagine their sorrow. How do you miss someone you haven’t met but I miss him and wish him all the strength to live another day.

The regime used the their ferenji prisoners to talk to us. Bullying is how the regime communicates with us. Jailing our best and brightest is meant to teach the rest of us the futility of defiance. Meles and company to show us they can do whatever they want. They can even jail a ferenji and impose their will is what they were telling us. Observe and behave is the message. It is a government gone rogue.

No words describe the satisfaction when we witness the plan boomerang. It backfired big time. It is not a game changer but it has managed to expose the workings of the Ethiopian Junta in power to a bigger audience. It counts a lot. We the vocal Diaspora, the talkers and non-doers are very happy of this outcome. We take complete credit for the debacle. The exposure of the regime’s method of waging war on the Ethiopian people has become a public relations nightmare to their public relations firm. They are attempting damage control. They are trying to put lipstick on a pig.

Ato Meles and his minority-based dictatorship are feeling the heat from their enablers. The spring of TPLF style ‘Pardon’ is upon us again. Kinijit Pardon Judge Bertukan’s pardons are in the history books. I have to refer to Pardonoligists to determine if Judge Bertukan’s pardon is given one or two credit. Our two foreign guests are leaving us soon. They will be pardoned and let go in the next few weeks. The regime using its monopoly media will tell its subjects that the Swedes accepted responsibility and asked for forgiveness while showing remorse and they were deported. But the damage was done. Even the New York Times noticed. What we have been saying is sort of noticed by foreigners that matter. As I said it is a step forward but not a game changer.

The issue becomes are we going to sit and watch Meles releasing the foreigners while our people languish in jail? Are we going to suck on our lips and wait for the next drama from Arat Kilo? Do you feel helpless? Is it your helplessness that empowers the dictator and his gang? Is this a case of being immobilized due to fear? It is all right to admit it. We are all afraid. It is human to fear organized crime. By now you have realized the Meles regime is nothing else but criminals in charge of state power. Why do you think we are backward and starving? It is not necessary to have a degree in nuclear physics to figure this out my dear Diaspora do you?

I will give you a simple example. You as a refugee make ten dollars an hour and your rent is five hundred dollars. Your family consists of husband and wife and two kids. You pay for utilities, food, car and insurance. If your salary is fifteen hundred and your expenses are sixteen hundred you figure you have to adjust your life style or get a 2nd job. Of course you can ask for help from family and friends but for how long? You can also get further training and increase your income if possible. It is that simple.

Think of Ethiopia the same way. How does Meles solve this little problem? No 2nd job or no new training, that is not the Woyane way. Here is what he will do. 1) Get rid of a son. 2) Lease the daughter to a neighbor 3) Apply for welfare 4) Lease a bedroom to an outsider 5) Get rid of the car and phone 6) restrict use of electricity and water 7) With the savings hire security and paint the outside of the house. 8) Cut off the wife’s tongue not to hear her complain. 9) Burn the house for the insurance unfortunately his own security refused to let him out. This is the solution you have been raving about. We enable this idiotic behavior by our silence and a few by cooperation.

Arab Spring’ has made a few things clear. The people themselves have to conquer their fear and demand their rights. There is no other formula or recipe. What we saw was when the people slowly realize their power there is nothing to stop them from snatching it away from the usurper. How it is snatched is a whole story by itself. Think of Mubarak, Gaddafi, Saleh and think of Ben Ali. Three selfish bastards with three different responses to the same demand. Go figure who today is able to pray facing Mecca.

What is clear is that we are contributing our share. Make no mistake about our role. No one will pay attention to Meles’s crimes if it was not for us in the outside. Our activates on the Internet and on Facebook is bearing fruits. ESAT is proving how balanced, informative and educational we could be given the chance. ESAT is 100% made in Ethiopia. The independent Web sites are flourishing. Arab Spring was all about using every available means to create one big family focused and willing to act as a bridge to tomorrow land. I am sure an opinion maker like Mr. Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times Googling us will see the kind of people we are. We are passionate but we are not haters. We are probing for a solution that is acceptable to the many. We celebrate diversity. Our Free Web sites reflect that. The Ethiopian regime cannot say that. They block ideas they do not agree with. They are afraid of airing an opinion different from theirs. They win by silencing not by the power of their argument. A dammed down population is easy too bully. They keep our people in the dark by design. That is why some of us shout and scream. Looks like we are getting heard.

What we do with this knowledge is something to think about. Surely we think about the prisoners of conscience that are paying for doing what was allowed in the regimes own constitution. Do we double our efforts so the Eskinders, the Andualems, the Reeyots the Zerhunes, the Wubshets will be free and enjoy life to its fullest? Do we dare to conquer fear and unite in a positive manner to do good? Do we allow the regime to bully us into submission or rise up in righteous indignation and say hell no! Our individual tiny contribution in consort with other minuscule offerings becomes a tsunami when put together. That is what we learnt from Egypt. Do not let the bully get away with his rude and crude method of dismissing us but make him pay attention and watch him flail to explain the unexplainable.
Listen to Communication Minster Bereket Semeon trip over his words trying to explain who and how in the world he thinks he is entitled to regulate what we write and say. Watch the Junta leader confess that he copied the Law from the West so it must be correct. It is pathetic and so void of commonsense it makes you wonder how they view us. When you see the Kangaroo Parliament laughing at his tasteless jokes and moronic explanations you can see it is the blind leading the blind and our current situation of jumping from one crisis to another makes perfect sense.

There are a few fighting evil. We are not all docile. We are not all self centered. On the other hand it is true most of us are afraid. We try to cover that by being belligerent towards each other. Afraid of Meles and his killing machine we turn our ire against each other. That has to stop. It is not cute and it makes us so cheap and laughable. Being afraid to confront Meles and his people does not justify dumping ones anger against those that are resisting his crimes. Do you see yourself my friend? You lie down dead and blame those that fight back? Does that make sense? What are you going to do when the Ethiopian people rise up like Egyptians or Libyans or Syrians? Blame the victims and blame us for inciting? Some say why don’t you go back and fight? Really is that the best you can come up with? From where I sit most of us have three choices to make. We can help our people resist, we can sit on the side and pretend dead or join the TPLF as junior partners. Choose and act.

Further Information:

http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/36678

http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/36505

http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/36364

http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/36209

Ethiopians are signing a petition demanding that a statue of the pan-Africanist leader which was recently unveiled outside the new African Union headquarters be joined by one of the late emperor Haile Selassie or removed.

As well as the signatures, a group of Ethiopian elders, opposition politicians and scholars have written to the AU Commission voicing their disappointment at its decision to “ignore” the deposed emperor.

The golden statue of Nkrumah was erected to commemorate his founding role in the Organisation of African Unity, the AU’s predecessor.

The late Ethiopian monarch’s supporters have argued that their man, who became internationally famous for his resistance against the Italians under Mussolini, was a longer-standing supporter of African liberation than Ghana’s founding president.

“It is Haile Selassie who is described by African leaders as the father of Africa not Nkrumah,” said Yacob Hailemariam, an opposition politician who has spoken out against the choice of the Ghanaian.

The campaign has, however, infuriated Ethiopia’s current leader Meles Zenawi who said it was “crass” to question Nkrumah’s choice as an African symbol and has repeatedly denounced Selassie, who died in 1975, as a “feudal dictator”.

“It is only Nkrumah who is remembered whenever we talk about pan Africanism,” Mr Meles told local media. “It is a shame not to accept his role.”

The AU confirmed that it had received a letter signed by prominent Ethiopians, many of them living abroad, but declined to comment. The protest letter says that Selassie who ruled Ethiopia for 40 years had “the legal, moral, historical and diplomatic legitimacy to have his statue erected next to Kwame Nkrumah.”

The inauguration of the new headquarters in Addis Ababa was meant to underline Ethiopia and Africa’s burgeoning friendship with China which funded the $200m construction. However, the summit served to remind the outside world of the AU’s reliance on foreign funding and on its propensity for squabbling as Cameroon’s Jean Ping and South Africa’s Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma fought each other to a draw over the leadership of the 54-nation club.

The revelation that the AU relies for two-thirds of its funding on Western donors and that many members had both failed to pay their dues or fulfil their aid promises made during last year’s Horn of Africa famine, dampened the occasion. The empty coffers reminded many observers that the main patron of pan-Africanism in recent years was the deposed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi who was killed last year.

The statue row has enabled Ethiopia’s downtrodden opposition to rally support and opposition blogs have started to refer to the AU’s new 100 metre tall marble home as the “sarcophagus of Africa”.

Under Prime Minister Meles, who backtracked on his promise to leave office and ran again at the last election, the country has become increasingly authoritarian, imprisoning opposition leaders, curtailing non-governmental organisations and harassing political opponents.

The two competing African champions might have found the whole row quite strange as they were close supporters of each other’s causes before the emperor was deposed by the Derg coup leaders in 1974.

… This magnificent…building which will now house the headquarters of our continental organization is built on the ruins of a prison that represented desperation and hopelessness… The face of this great hall is meant to convey this message of optimism, a message that is out of the decades of hopelessness and imprisonment a new era of hope is dawning, and that Africa is being unshackled and freed… It is therefore very appropriate for China to decide to build this hall — the hall of the rise of Africa — this hall of African renaissance… I am sure I speak for all of you when I say to the people and government of China thank you so very much. May our partnership continue and prosper.
There was no end to the bootlicking and praise of the “generosity of the Chinese government”, and how the “gift” represents “a qualitative leap in the relations between China and Africa”. AU president Teodoro Obiang Nguema, Equatorial Guinea’s dictator since 1979, even saw “a reflection of the new Africa, and the future we want for Africa” in the glassed 20-storey tower.

The Dragon was equally obliging:

…There exists profound traditional friendship between China and Africa… China has always been Africa’s good friend, good partner and good brother…. [S]trengthen[ing] unity and cooperation between China and Africa and promot[ing] common development is an important cornerstone of China’s foreign policy, and a long-term strategic choice…

… First, we must firmly uphold peace, stability and development of Africa…. Second, we must fully respect the efforts of African countries in resolving African issues independently…. Interference in Africa’s internal affairs by outside forces out of selfish motives can only complicate the efforts to resolve issues in Africa…. Third, we must vigorously support African countries in seeking strength through unity and the integration process…. Fourth, we must pay more attention to the issue of African development and make bigger input…

… Throughout the development of China-Africa relations, we have always respected the sovereignty and development path of African countries and refrained from interfering in their internal affairs… We…have never attached political strings to our assistance to Africa. … To further strengthen China-AU friendship and cooperation… China will provide a total of RMB 600 million free assistance to the AU in the next three years…

The “China Model” in Africa

It is fashionable among African dictators to pledge allegiance to the so-called China Model of economic development. Meles Zenawi, the dictator in Ethiopia, claimed that by following the “China Model”:

The African Renaissance that we all dreamed of is beginning to happen. There could be no better proof of this than the fact that the pundits and academics who were publicly advocating for the re-colonization of our continent have now refrained from doing so… The magnificent new head quarters (sic) of our continental organization—the AU which has been at the center of the struggle for the African renaissance (sic) is the symbol of the rise of Africa…

But what exactly is the China Model?

African dictators rarely explain the “China Model”, but the phrase rolls off their lips like the voodoo incantations of sorcerers. If the dictators are to be believed, the “China Model” is the magic carpet that will transport Africa from abysmal underdevelopment and poverty to stratospheric economic growth and industrialization. Supposedly, China became a global economic power in just a few decades by opening up its economy to foreign and domestic investment, cutting and reducing taxes, co-investing in infrastructure projects and vastly expanding the labor intensive services sector. It is said to be a “win-win” situation for China and Africa.

But there is one small catch: China did it all by maintaining a one-party system that has a chokehold on all state institutions including the civil service, the armed and security forces and by instituting a vast system of censorship that systenmatically filters or significantly obstructs the flow of information to the people.

What does China think of the “China Model” being exported to Africa? Not much! Liu Guijin, China’s special representative on African affairs assuredly says, “What we are doing is sharing our experiences. Believe me, China doesn’t want to export our ideology, our governance, our model. We don’t regard it as a mature model.”
So, why do African dictators insist on championing a half-baked “China Model” as the Holy Grail of African economic salvation when the Chinese themselves do not think it is a “mature model” worth exporting or imitating? Could it be that African dictators are using the “China Model” hype as smokescreen to justify their clinging to power and sucking their economies like ticks on an African milk cow?

Stripped off its hype, the “China Model” in Africa is the same old one-man, one-party pony that has been around since independence in the 1960s. Yoweri Museveni of Uganda and Paul Kagame of Rwanda, and even the wily and sly eighty-six year-old Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, pull the “China Model” stunt just to cling to power. In the good old days, Zenawi, Museveni and Kagame used their status as the “new breed of African leaders” (bestowed upon them by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair) to legitimize and perpetuate themselves in power. Now they heap contempt on the West for its “band-aid” approach to development, criticize the “gunboat diplomacy” of the U.S. (whose taxpayers have shelled out tens of billions in the last decade) and tongue-lash “extremist neo-liberals” (whoever they are) for slamming them on their atrocious human rights record and mindboggling corruption.

The one-man, one-party state recycled as the “China Model” is nothing new. Kwame Nkrumah was the first Sub-Saharan African leader to try it and fail. Just like the silver-tongued mouthpieces of the “China Model” today, Nkrumah back then condemned neocolonialism (a term he reputedly created) and imperialism for Africa’s exploitation and depridation. Nkrumah’s program of rapid industrialization – to reduce Ghana’s dependence on foreign capital and imports – had a devastating effect on its important cocoa export sector. Many of the socialist economic development projects that he launched also failed miserably. By the time he was overthrown in a military coup in 1966, Ghana had fallen from one of the richest African countries to one of the poorest. Similarly, Tanzania nose-dived from the largest exporter of agricultural products in Africa to the largest importer of agricultural products. The one-man, one-party state, touted as the solution to the problems of ethnic and tribal conflict, also failed as civil wars, genocides, and corruption spread throughout the continent like wildfire. For decades, African liberation leaders and founding fathers qua dictators and military junta leaders have tried all types of tricks to justify the one-man, one-party state and avoid a genuine multiparty democracy. Now Africa’s newest dictators want to rebottle the same old one-man, one-party wine in a new bottle labeled “Chateau China Model”.

The Record of the “China Model” in Africa

Are Zenawi and the other members of African Dictators, Inc., really following the “not mature” “China Model” in practice? Are foreign and domestic investors free to to do business in Africa without being bogged down in silly and mindless regulations and running the gauntlet of a buzzsaw of corruption? For instance, how much of Ethiopia’s business environment is really “negotiable” for investment? The 2011 World Bank Ease of Doing Business Index which ranks 183 countries (1=most business-friendly regulations) shows dismal figures for Ethiopia: Overall Ease of Doing Business Rank (111); starting a business (99); dealing with construction permits (56); getting electricity (93); registering property (113); getting credit (150); protecting investors (122); paying taxes (40); trading across borders (157); enforcing contracts (57) and resolving insolvency (89).

The “China Model” is obviously a smokescreen for Zenawi and African Dictators, Inc., to pull the wool over the eyes of the people of Africa. It provides a plausible justification for avoiding transparent and accountable governance, competitive, free and fair elections, enforceable property rights and suppressing free speech, the press and independent judiciaries. It is a hoax perpetrated on the people to ensure absolute political obedience and control, maximize the ruling class’ monopoly over the economy and justify the brutal suppression of all dissent.

The “China Model” naturally appeals to Africa’s kleptocratic dictators because it enables them to project the illusion of economic development as they suppress the democratic aspirations of their people and suck their national economies dry. Global Financial Integrity recently wrote: “The people of Ethiopia are being bled dry. No matter how hard they try to fight their way out of absolute destitution and poverty, they will be swimming upstream against the current of illicit capital leakage.” That is what the China Model means in Ethiopia, and for that matter much of Africa.
Why the China Model? Why Not the “Ghanaian Model”?

The “China Model” may be just fine for China, but why can’t Africa have an “African Model”? Is there not a single country in Africa worthy of some imitation. Must Africans always worship before the altar of Western or Eastern political Deities?

In July, 2009, in one of my weekly commentaries I asked a simple question:What is it the Ghanaians got, we ain’t got?” I argued that present day Ghana can offer a reasonably good, certainly not perfect, template of governance for the rest of Africa. Ironically, it is to Ghana, the cradle of the one-man, one-party rule in Sub-Saharan Africa, that we must now turn to find a model of constitutional multiparty democracy.

Ghana today has a functioning, competitive, multiparty political system guided by its 1992 Constitution. Article 55 guarantees that “every citizen of Ghana of voting age has the right to join a political party”. Political parties are free to organize and ‘disseminate information on political ideas, social and economic programs of a national character’. But tribal and ethnic parties are illegal in Ghana under Article 55 (4). That is the key to Ghana’s political success. The Ghanaians also have an independent electoral commission (Art. 46) which is “not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority” and has proven itself by ensuring the integrity of the electoral process. Ghanaians enjoy a panoply of political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights. In 2010, Ghana (with a population of 24 million) ranked 26 out of 178 countries worldwide on the World Press Freedom Index (WPFI).

In contrast, Ethiopia (with a population of nearly 90 million) ranked 139 out of 178 on the WPFI. There are more than 133 private newspapers, 110 FM radio stations and two state-owned dailies in Ghana. Ghanaians express their opinions without fear of government retaliation. The rule of law is upheld and the government follows and respects the constitution. Ghana has a fierecely independent judiciary, which is vital to the observance of the rule of law and protection of civil liberties. Political leaders and public officials abide by the rulings and decisions of the courts and other fact-finding inquiry commissions. Ghana is certainly not a utopia, but she is positive proof that multiparty constitutional democracy can help overcome political and economic dystopia in Ethiopia and the rest of Africa. Why not adopt the “Ghanaian Model”?

Why is the Dragon Dancing With Hyenas?

China’s economic investment in Africa is said to exceed USD$150 billion; and hundreds of Chinese companies are doing business in all parts of the continent. The Chinese government through its banks has given billions of dollars in low interest loans and credit lines to undertake a variety of infrastructure projects and other high profile projects, including the new African Union building. It has provided a range of technical assistance programs and provided scholarships and training opportunities to African students.

But why is China so generous with Africa? The conventional explanation is that China is hungry for natural resources to feed its economy. It uses its loans, grants and development assistance to project “soft power” and access Africa’s vast natural resources in oil, timber and minerals while cultivating a market for its surplus production in industrial and consumer products. Others say, loans and assistance programs to Africa are velvety gloves that hide an iron fist of neocolonial and neo-imperialist ambition. Last Summer, in an interview concerning the growing role of China in Africa, Secretary Hilary Clinton plaintly stated: “We don’t want to see a new colonialism in Africa.”

China’s role in Ethiopia in particular raises some troubling questions. According to one study, “whenever Ethiopia sought Chinese aid, loan, investment and arms, the latter has responded positively by providing debt reduction and technical assistance to Ethiopia with no political strings attached.” Another study concluded: “In the construction and the energy sector, Chinese involvement in telecommunication, road and power plant construction projects through very low initial bid-prices (as well as offering credit to finance such projects) has been displacing both local and other foreign construction firms (Notwithstanding, for example in the case of power plants, the fact that the very low initial entry bid-prices are off-setted by high operational costs when the projects start operation; and the fact that Chinese big credits are almost at commercial terms).” Others have complained of trade deficits, dumping of low price textiles and clothing, industrial products and consumer electronics. Perhaps this should not come as a surprise to anyone. At the 1963 inaugural O.A.U. Summit, H.I.M. Haile Selassie said, “Africa was a physical resource to be exploited and Africans were chattels to be purchased bodily or, at best, peoples to be reduced to vassalage and lackeyhood. Africa was the market for the produce of other nations and the source of the raw materials with which their factories were fed.”

Blowback for China?

Sooner or later China has to come to terms with three simple questions: Can it afford to fasten its destiny to Africa’s dictators, genociders and despots? How long can China pretend to turn a blind eye to the misery of the African people suffering under ruthless dictatorships? Will there be a price to pay once the African dictators that China supported are forced out of power in a popular uprising?

Perhaps there are lessons to be learned from Zambia where just a few months ago the role of China became a hot political issue in the elections. Michael Sata, who became president of Zambia last Fall after four attempts, “made a sport of baiting China, calling its businesspeople in the country ‘profiteers,’ not investors”, and denouncing the Chinese for “bringing in their own people to push wheelbarrows instead of hiring local people.”

The Dragon is known for breathing fire. If China does not re-think its African policy carefully and continues its blind association and unquestioning support of corrupt African dictators and tyrants, in time it will likely suffer multiple “blowbacks” across the continent from the flames of popular upheavals and backlashes from revolts against dictatorship.

China’s policy of “noninterference” (a/k/a “hear no evil, see no evil and say no evil” about Africa’s dictators) is actually the most conspicuous and underappreciated from of interference there is. What can be more “interference” than providing the economic means to sustain and nurture repressive and dictatorial regimes? In time, “noninterference” will logically and inevitably evolve into tighter defense and military relationships with the dictatorial regimes; and significant military presence may be unavoidable to defend Chinese economic interests and investments in Africa.

In Chinese folklore, the dragon is known for his intelligence, strength, goodness, longevity and wisdom. In African folklore, the hyena is known for treachery, gluttony and stupidity. Jia Qinglin, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), in his speech at the 18th summit of the African Union inaugurating “China’s gift to Africa” said, “As an African saying goes, to be without a friend is to be poor indeed.” But the Dragon should think twice before befriending hyenas because the African people, like African elephants, have long memories. They remember their friends and the friends of their enemies. But Chairman Quinglin should also heed a couple of wise Chinese sayings: “A man should choose a friend who is better than himself” (unless, of course, the man believes that “birds of a feather flock together”). But more importantly, “One should not lift a rock only to drop it on one’s own foot.”

As we all know, the Ethno-centric TPLF’s leaders are incompetent, repressive, corrupt, and theirs values driven by money, and their party controlled the country’s economy through endowments enterprises such as EFFORT and GUNA. With this scheme the regime looted and stashed billions dollars into foreign banks, and placed a policy that forces indigenous farmers to be driven out of their land by government leasing the land for 99 years. As a result, the farmers became homeless in their own birth place, and the precious natural resources like forests destroyed by new foreigner’s investors more rapidly than nature can replenish. This land grab drive in Ethiopia by foreigners is accelerating fueled by the TPLF’s corrupt leaders by making secret deals and putting billions into their own pockets as our people continue live in extreme poverty.

It is unimaginable how they are doing this free handout of national land to foreigners without any guilt. The landless feeling of rural household are now reflecting to urban dwellers through a new expanded lease policy that shows the regime continues it reckless policy to enrich itself. Their claim in growth economy talk often rings hollow. It is known fact the basic commodity prices increase has put the overwhelming majority of citizens to extreme poverty, while the regime and its cronies become extremely rich.

The TPLF Leaders have no ability or willingness to draft a road map or a vision for a better way of good economy can build for Ethiopia society. They are not seeking to the well-being of society. They are merely implementing mercenary work. They are committed in self-serving desire to win at all costs. They continue to rule through sheer terror. Their campaigns in name of terror/Akeldama to arrest, torture, killing of the democratic forces or the propaganda on ethnic federalism etc. on regime controlled media do not cut it anymore. The diaspora are continuing exposing the regime corrupt practice, human rights violation, etc. until Ethiopians achieves freedom.

Thanks to the internet, now we have more power than ever before to expose mis- guided policy and others bad deeds. The voice of the visionaries reject the regime’s mockery of democracy, abuse the rule of law, and Justice, suppresses the media, tortures, jails and kills the decedents. Furthermore, it rejects the notion of exploitation of the country’s wealth to continue in its present form. Our children’s children should not expect to inherit these conditions. Dr. Aklog Birara, a known scholar in economics field, refereeing to his seminal work on land grab, “The Great Land Giveaway (2011) book “, and other of his commentaries in several free media outlets argue with concrete facts and supported by other think tank studies that the regime claim the lease land is vacant, create better opportunities, or provided compensation for the farmers, etc. are not true. The Human Rights Watch, video clips by Guardian Co., UK newspaper, Aljazeera etc. all showed through facts on the ground the Ethiopia regime is forcing tens of thousands of people to leave their homes as part of this farmland lease policy. During this NY forum, we listened to what Dr.Aklog had to say regarding on this subject. One of the many heart-wrenching stories includes the following: The Indian commercial manager at a site in Gambella says the Ethiopia government “Gave it to us, and we took it. Seriously, we did not even see the land. They offered it. That all”. Dr. Aklog calls it “farmland colonization by invitation”. Baffling indeed.
As opposition group continue to have friction and too little collaborations among them, the major concerns of the people are getting lost. Make no mistake to varying degrees all opposition groups are imperfect and have some major concerns that makes to some extent destructive, as result TPLF regime keep benefiting.

Unfortunately, opposition appears to be unwilling to acknowledge this problem and always hasn’t lived up to their rhetoric in forming United Front on the commonality they have. We clearly understand that the opposition political point of view is not one size fits all but at least should be focused on common causes and shared values. Therefore, the voices of visionaries call relentlessly to build a highly interactive community opposition group.

The opposition group shall associate on Ethiopia Unity, exchange ideas, critique as idea presented out of place, adapt to willing to cozy up and to overlook past disagreement, and keep conversation going on common causes and shared values. The visionary agenda of the intellectuals shall be to continue to engage in a struggle for people economic and political empowerment, even though it will be long and protracted. We understand that it is neither smooth nor simple too. The United front is not always in harmonies, but badly needed to save the country from continuation of ethno-centric TPLF regime that runs a toxic single ethnic-based rule.

The recent successful political forum held in New York on 1/28/12 is one of the pathways to connect and collaborate with concerned diaspora citizen in the search for a viable solution to the problems facing Ethiopia. The forum also provided an outlet to voice our visions for the future and work with people around a mutual goal in freeing up the country from TPLF’s regime. One hopes that similar forum to be established in other states.

We need to recognize all of us may have our own opinions about politics. Some of us are more involved and interested in the political process than others are. While the more involved group actively participate in organizing mass rally or exposing crimes on internet news media against TPLF regime, the less involved group need to help and support in whatever way they can. At a minimum they need to stay informed. This New York forum demonstrated the usefulness of dialog, discussions of idea to minimize and finally eliminate existing opposition groups’ differences.

If you care about Ethiopia do not remain idle, get involved and make your voice be heard. It will take a massive effort, discourse, dialogue, and to get Ethiopia back on its feet and to make it home again for all Ethiopians.

Despite its status as a donor darling, Ethiopia’s government is, once again, doing little to encourage the attentions of its Western suitors.

Often using a 2009 antiterrorism law, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s administration has prosecuted scores of opposition figures and a handful of journalists over the past year. Most are accused of links with banned groups, such as the US-based Ginbot 7, whose leaders gave up hopes of unseating Mr. Meles at the ballot box after the disastrous fallout from a 2005 poll.

Rights groups are unanimous in their condemnation. “There is no evidence that they are guilty of any criminal wrongdoing,” Amnesty International said about a group including three Ethiopian journalists jailed for plotting terror acts last month. “We believe that they are prisoners of conscience, prosecuted because of their legitimate criticism of the government.”

While Amnesty and Human Rights Watch consistently slam the government, others have only recently joined the fray. Five United Nations Special Rapporteurs expressed “their dismay at the continuing abuse of antiterrorism legislation to curb freedom of expression.”

The world’s media have also tuned in. A HRW report detailing coercion and abuse in the resettlement of tens of thousands in the nation’s west was widely reported, and Nicholas D. Kristof dedicated a recent column in The New York Times to Ethiopia’s treatment of two Swedish journalists caught embedded with a rebel group. “Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, Ethiopia’s increasingly tyrannical ruler, seemed to be sending a signal to the world’s journalists: Don’t you dare mess with me!” he wrote.

A more-silent West

However, criticism has not been so forthcoming from Ethiopia’s Western partners.

On the first day of the Swedes’ trial, which resulted in 11-year sentences for entering the country illegally and supporting a terrorist organization, the US ambassador to Ethiopia, Donald Booth, attended, but such provocative gestures are rare from Ethiopia’s biggest benefactor.

The reason for the deference is largely geographic. At the end of January, US Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns dropped into Addis Ababa. Although concerns over the antiterror law were expressed, his mission was to “emphasize the strategic importance of that country to countering violent extremism in the greater Horn of Africa region.”

Not only is Ethiopia neighbor to the two Sudanese nations teetering on the brink of conflict and wartorn Somalia, but its role is vital: Its troops are patrolling the flashpoint border district of Abyei and also backing up forces allied against the terror group al-Shabaab; Meles was also the key mediator in a recent attempt to broker an agreement over the oil-transit fees Juba, in South Sudan, should pay Khartoum, Sudan’s capital city.

“From the point of view of Western and especially US geopolitical considerations, it would be a monumental disservice to national interests to do anything to undermine engagement with Ethiopia,” says J. Peter Pham, director of the Michael S. Ansari Africa Center at the Atlantic Council.

But it’s not just due to geopolitical scheming that donors remain loyal – it is also the government’s commitment to improving health, education, and infrastructure. Donors may give $150 million a year to build on improvements in education, reported Voice of America this week.

Even Mr. Kristof says – among a barrage of barbs – that “Meles has done genuine good in fighting poverty.” A British government aid official says the anti-terror law will be “high on the list” of points to raise in bilateral discussions. A radical response would be awkward given that Ethiopia was made the UK’s biggest beneficiary of aid last year on the basis of its record of social and economic progress.

Exiled journalist Abiye Teklemariam – himself recently convicted in absentia under the law – recently skewered Western cheerleaders for Meles. Noting the shifting characterizations of the former Marxist rebel over the last two decades, he said that with few heralding his democratic credentials these days – one opposition member won a seat in a parliament of 547 in 2010 elections – Meles is now portrayed “as a technocratic, if dictatorial, leader who had been able to crack the code of East Asia’s rise and download it into an Ethiopian hardware.”

The guiltiest culprits here, Ethiopian critics say, are those who believed Ethiopia would quickly transform into a Western idyll: The government has always directed the market, and even more carefully managed elections – 2005 aside. Now more than ever, the intention to improve the lives of the nation’s poor rural populace without distractions from critical journalists or divisive opposition politicians is clear.

Even if Western donors desired to change this, given Ethiopia’s strong bonds with emerging powers, they have few strings to pull.

Double standards?

This dynamic makes it unlikely that Western concerns will alter thinking on the terror law, which Meles said this week is copied “word-for-word” from the West’s own statute books. In parliament, he berated the West for double standards over Ethiopia’s criminalization of the media, using the treatment of WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange and Britain’s phone-hacking journalists to illustrate his point.

Mr. Pham has some sympathy for the charge of Western hypocrisy. Turkey, an EU candidate, has a prime minister who “regularly brings both civil and criminal cases against commentators who criticize him,” he says. “Canada is viewed as a bastion of civil liberties, yet it allows foreign journalists to be prosecuted for alleged ‘hate speech,’ ” Pham argues.

Other commentators differ. “The antiterrorism law is so all-inclusive and broadly written that it seems to cover almost any pronouncement or action,” says former US Ambassador to Ethiopia David Shinn. “Perhaps that was the goal, but this leaves it wide open to abuse.”

With its domestic control and international goodwill, the intolerance bemuses Mr. Shinn. “I have always been perplexed why the government responds so harshly” to its media opponents, he says. “It would be well advised to ignore criticism.”

Others, such as Ethiopia expert Kjetil Tronvoll, believe the ruling party’s Marxist-Leninist origins mean that crushing critics is inevitable. In a post-liberation state, where liberation parties equate themselves with the state, all dissent is seen “as threatening not only to the party but to Ethiopia’s overall development.” Recent arrests are an “attempt to crack down on possible opinion leaders which may mobilize the broad masses,” in light of the Arab Spring, he believes.

Whichever analysis is more accurate, the government’s unbending response marks the way forward. “This barrage of criticism emanates from ideological and political differences,” senior government official Bereket Simon says. “Organizations like HRW do not accept our independent path of development.”

It is for many familiar with Ethiopian politics an almost unimaginable prospect, while skeptics will point out that Meles has repeatedly promised to step down.

But early this month, senior officials of the ruling EPRDF party (Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front) hinted at a succession plan to replace its 56-year-old leader at the end of his current term in 2015.

While no one in the party that he has tightly-controlled since 1985 has so far ventured to make any public comments on the sensitive topic, a senior government official and member of the ruling party told this reporter on condition of anonymity that Meles will “surely” hand over power by 2015.

The ranking official said they were not sure as to who could replace the strongman, but there has been widespread party speculation about two hopefuls: Deputy Prime Minister, also Foreign Affairs minister, Hailemariam Desalegn, and Health minister Tewodros Adhanom.

Hailemariam, a humble family man and former university lecturer, looks to be more well-placed given his proximity to the Premier, and also because he has not had direct contact with military and intelligence circles as he was not part of the armed struggle against the Mengistu Haile Mariam regime.

Picking his deputy would mean Meles would have considerable influence if he were to relinquish power in 2015. A protestant, Hailemariam joined politics in the late 1990s and became the regional governor of southern Ethiopia in 2000 on an EPRDF ticket.

He has been a trusted Meles ally, and was in 2010 elevated to deputy Premier and Foreign Affairs minister. Hailemariam is also the deputy chairman of the EDRDF and has recently been chairing Cabinet meetings, in addition to supervising all ministries.

The hottest conversation in Ethiopia today is land: who owns it; and who does not? Who prospers from it and who becomes destitute? Who will have power and who will remain dependent? Who will have power and who will remain powerless and voiceless? In the realm of political economy, no public policy issue is more telling about governance than the land question for which hundreds and perhaps, millions of Ethiopians had sacrificed their lives. It was the most important driver of the 1974 popular revolution.

The right to own a piece of land in one’s own homeland –within the boundaries of the law–that can be developed, sold, exchanged, collateralized and passed on to children and so on is a fundamental human right. It gives meaning to citizenship and freedom. Its alienation undermines many rights, including the fundamental right to own private property that occupies physical space. Whatever its size or shape and whatever investment has been made on this physical space to improve it, alienating the roof and walls (the investment) from the physical space is an abrogation of public trust.
Contrast the land proclamation of the Socialist regime, 47/67 and the TPLF/EPRDF 721/2004 and examine the distinctions. The former erased tenancy. The later reinstates it big time. The former legalizes private ownership of a piece of urban land up 500 cm of physical space and ensures that the owner can develop, collateralize, sell, exchange and pass on the property to heirs. At minimum, Ethiopians felt that they had a stake in their natural resources: they had a home that they could call their own. In contrast, the TPLF/EPRDF transfers and legitimizes absolute ownership of urban lands by the ethnic-minority party. Under the former, a young Ethiopian would aspire to save, borrow and build a home of her or his own. Under the new law, this hope is dashed forever unless it is reversed or put for a referendum so that the Ethiopian people can make an informed decision.

The TPLF/EPRDF argues that it is translating the law so that there is standardization. Here is my question. Who is the standardization for and why? What is the social and economic motive behind a draconian law that does not make the Ethiopian people central to the development process? This leads me to the meaning of lease. By any definition, lease means rent. If there is rent; there must be a land lord that rents it. It means that the government is now de facto the new land lord that the Ethiopian people rejected in 1974. Below are the direct implications of the new proclamation however it is sugar coated:
a) The Ethiopian public is left out of the debate and the discussion.
b) The TPLF/EPRDF assumes all legal and economic responsibilities for the disposition of all lands in the country: values, market rates and decisions as to who can do what on land anywhere in the country.
c) The government decides how many houses, buildings; condos and so on can be built in the country. Only those in power, with connections can and will own real property. The regulatory environment will not be friendly or conducive for young people to own real property unless they belong to the selected club of new land lords. The cost of leased land will skyrocket to the point of making it virtually impossible to attain one’s dream. This will also be true for most of the hard working Diaspora that has no political connection to the TPLF. A home cannot be built in the air?
d) In light of the above, there is a direct connection between the alienation of ordinary Ethiopians from urban land ownership and violation of fundamental human and economic rights.
e) The new lease policy and massive land giveaways to foreign firms such as Karuturi and Saudi Star and Tigrean elites are directly interrelated. They emanate from the same ethnic political and social system.

The new urban land lease policy and rural land giveaways are intended to prolong the life of the regime and to make a selected few richer and power powerful. The consequences are potentially devastating. I will cite a few:
a) Ordinary Ethiopians are increasingly forced to be more dependent, more vulnerable and more subservient to the governing party than ever before.
b) Fundamental freedoms, a sense of justice and equity and a sense of belonging and citizenship are severely undermined.
c) The Ethiopian family, a key foundation of the society is degraded.
d) Private ownership of a home, an aspiration of all Ethiopians, especially those with education, will be less tenable.
e) Alienating Ethiopians from their homes erodes patriotism and a sense of belonging to the country; and is thus a security risk.
f) Ethiopian sense of citizenship is potentially eroded.
Unless the new proclamation is reversed and a serious study on urban and rural land initiated and offered to the Ethiopian people for discussion and consideration, large numbers of Ethiopians will be disenfranchised.

The further politicization of urban and rural lands for the benefit of the governing party and its domestic and foreign supporters is most likely to lead to public outrage that the governing party can only try to contain by force. It is hard for me to imagine that any party or any government anywhere in the world can claim that it can contain the anger and disenfranchisement of millions of citizens through the use of force. The TPLF generals and other high officials who build multimillion dollar homes in Bole or in Mekele or anywhere cannot hide from public scrutiny. The ordinary soldiers they command will never be in the same privileged position as the generals whose primary responsibility is to defend the country from external enemies and not to be part of a corrupt and repressive system that denies the Ethiopian people fundamental rights and freedoms. How long can such a system last?

Abrogation of fairness, justice and equitable access to the benefits of natural resources including urban and rural lands leads me to persistent and recurring violations of fundamental human rights by the TPLF/EPRDF. One needs to look at all violations in tandem. In its January 4, 2010 report on human rights, civil liberties and democratic freedoms in Ethiopia, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) identified a menu of policy issues and made 99 recommendations on human rights, civil liberties, the rights of children and women, gender equality, economic injustice, reduction in child and maternal mortality rates, hunger and malnutrition, the rights of marginalized communities, including minorities, the role of human rights organizations, poverty reduction, economic and social inclusion, political pluralism and competition, fair and equitable representation in decision- making, de-ethnicization of the political process and greater national integration to the Ethiopian government. A number of representatives emphasized the need for national integration, with a representative from an African country posing a query to the Ethiopian delegation to explain the “notion of nations, nationalities and peoples” contained in the Ethiopian constitution. Proclamation 721/2004 presents the law in the name of “nations, nationalities and peoples,” the façade of democracy. While the Ethiopian government acknowledged addressing many of the recommendations, there were 32 on which it disagreed. Top officials of the ruling-party are that much obstinate and rigid. The same attitude will prevail with regard to the new urban land lease.

One is struck and dismayed by the fact that officials rejected the most critical recommendations: elimination and de-politicization of ethnicity and a move toward socioeconomic and political inclusion, multiracialism, greater national integration and increased emphasis on national-oriented political parties and organizations that will give greater weight to the voices and rights of the Ethiopian people. The reluctance on the part of the Ethiopian government to de-politicize the political process and move from the fracturing, divisions, polarization and inequities associated with ethnic-governance and ethnic-federalism make the other agreements meaningless. The government cherry-picks only non-controversial and non-contested recommendations in order to appease the international community; and rejects substantial policy recommendations. It rarely chooses options that will make substantial difference to the Ethiopian people and the country in the short, medium and long-term. This cherry-picking in political culture has the ultimate effect of prolonging hard-core political, structural and policy issues that will keep the society in a constant state of friction and suspense. The new land lease does the same thing.

The setting-up of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) led by the ruling-party did not change the fundamentals facing the country. It is an appeasement strategy that downplays the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation which puts the burden of proof on the accused; and the civil society proclamation passed in January, 2009, characterized as one of the most “draconian” in the world. The implementation plan of the new urban land proclamation will end up the same. There will not be substantial changes that will, for example, grandfather those whose ownership rights were recognized under 47/67 (Dergue).

People talk about the constitutional provisions that protect land and other natural resource ownership by the government on behalf of the Ethiopian people. This is a paper exercise only. In reality, the single party state that has practically merged ethnicity, party and state functions as the sole owner of natural resources. It has assumed the meaning of “people.” Writing a law is not the same as implementing it. The governing party is the judge and jury: what is says goes. Look at provisions on human rights and the opposite actions in real life. Conceptually, one-third of the Ethiopian constitution is dedicated to civil liberties, human and democratic rights, social and economic justice and gender equality. These are all symbolic to appease public opinion. They have not been put into practice. The governing party introduced a constitution with promising features and has ignored to implement the core of its human and civil rights provisions. The EHRC has ended up serving the ruling-party than civil society. This is among the reasons why merger of party, state and ethnicity becomes most dangerous and the lead reason why political pluralism is critical. Dissent and political competition will challenge both a narrower power base and the possibilities of extracting or “raping the national economy and transferring the proceeds” to party-owned and endowed enterprises that the ruling-party believes belong to those that contribute to the so-called developmental state that the Prime Minister created. Political and economic competition and political pluralism pose a risk to this narrow power base to the economic monopoly which it supports and perpetuates. Depending on contestants, competitive elections are more likely to offer voters newer and better options. Economic competition would boost domestic competition and offer youth alternatives they desperately needs. It is in the absence of political competition and a strong civil society that the new urban land lease and rural land giveaways are taking place.

With better political and policy alternatives, citizens may have improved access to public goods and services such as education, health, shelter, sanitation, safe drinking water, tools, credits, markets, Internet, infrastructure and information. Without access to these and other public goods, the struggle to escape the poverty trap will be much harder to overcome and will take longer. For youth, access to education, training and employment and a home, is fundamental in order to improve their lives. For business women and men, access to urban lands, credits, information, licenses and permits to set up new enterprises, security to land to set-up a business or to expand an existing one, raw materials, and network of domestic and international markets are critical as is access to information. Effective merger of party, state and ethnicity (hereafter referred to as merger) has substantial adverse impacts in both the political and economic arenas. Merger allows a single minority ethnic party to issue a new urban land policy that, potentially, disenfranchises most Ethiopians from urban lands; as it has done all of the rural poor from security to farmlands.

Merger restrains free accesses to the social, economic and political processes in the country. Regardless of the endeavor, merger shuts or at least restricts citizens from opportunities and fulfilling their potential. Merger restricts mobility. Lack of opportunity for anyone or group would mean life trapped in endemic poverty, lower productivity, incomes and employment opportunities. For skilled and semi-skilled Ethiopians, it means leaving the country.

When merger deters political pluralism and a level playing field for all, it limits chances to improve political and social conditions that enhance freedom and capability. It arrests freedom and fair economic competition. Narrow interests tend to be single party-oriented and monopolistic. If and, when merger allows and reinforces single party rule and nepotism, favoritism, cronyism, and corruption at the cost of government impartiality, it becomes a burden for the entire society. It is an oppressor rather than a facilitator or enhancer of socioeconomic and political inclusion and fair play. Merger means minority ethnic single party rule and rewards for some and penalization for others. People lose confidence, give up hope and resign to a condition that things will not change no matter how hard they try. One must have grasped the inevitability that ethno-nationalism, minority ethnic-based political governance and ethnic-federalism perform best for the few as long as the society is devoid of institution-based separation of powers or checks and balances. At the political and economic levels the merger has had the adverse effect of government favoritism and lack of impartiality that erode the social fabric. The phenomenon puts in question the federal state’s credibility to play an impartial role in inducing social change equality. I suggest that it cannot.

The TPLF/EPRDF initiated political architecture of Revolutionary Democracy (RD) and ethnic-federalism has outlived their initial utility value. Initially designed to offer a political alternative to oppressed nations, nationalities and people (s) as defined by its architects, it has nether improved social or economic conditions. The ideology itself does not offer much insight into the creative genius of its founding fathers as the tenets were borrowed from Marxist ideology: the right of nations to self-determination, including secession incorporated into article 39 of the Federal Constitution. Equally, the values and principles that govern Revolutionary Democracy are residues of leftist ideology with limited relevance to the demands of the 21st century and building a modern multiethnic and unified national state. In order to accelerate growth and development, a multiethnic country requires greater social and economic integration, while allowing local autonomy. The current government has failed to act as legislator and regulator because it is a business owner (monopoly) which has lost moral claim to serve the common good.

The principal reason for the TPLF/EPRDF divide and rule strategy is its commitment to dominate national economic, financial and land resources by disadvantaging competitors. What appears to be theatrics fueling and feeding into the fears of Ethiopia’s diverse population, including members of the ethnic-minority led party and government, will be best understood if one delves deep into the financial, economic and social gains made by the ruling-party’s core: owners of its party affiliated enterprises and endowments and its ethnic-base. Grants of massive lands and accessed to loans and credits to generals so that they become owners and defenders of the party empire and longevity. Evidence shows that the single party state no longer serves the democratic rights and aspirations of the oppressed in the Afar, Gambella, Ogaden, Oromia and other regions. I am doubtful that it serves the poor of the Tigray region except psychologically. It does, however, offer more opportunities to Tigreans in all segments than to any other ethnic group in the country. It is certain that the ruling-party serves and protects narrow interests of an emerging, wealthy, exclusivist and largely ethnic-based capitalist class that is benefiting from the largesse of an authoritarian federal state. Marxist principles have now been substituted through pursuit of financial, economic and other material wealth. Asset accumulation is the new vogue. The top leadership that claimed moral justification to its power is now morally bankrupt: it is the most corrupt and exclusionary elite in the country’s history.

Dominating urban land is part of the strategy to dominate
In more than two decades, the pendulum has swung and singularly focused from consolidating political power to exercising hegemony over the banking, financial, infrastructural and natural resources of the entire country. Thus far, financial and economic gains by discouraging, pressuring, taxing delegitimizing potential competitors replicates the concept and practice of what is commonly called by experts as a zero-sum game. This is exercised by minority business, intelligence, military and bureaucratic ethnic- elite: the biggest beneficiaries. Some call this political elite capture. In Ethiopia, this political capture has now firmly established economic and financial capture at unprecedented levels.

The ‘you have no place here’ economy

Simply put, in order for a political elite to financial and economic gains from the public good, another or others must lose and must be excluded. Given finite financial, economic, land and other resources, command and control over such scarce goods are indispensable for sourcing wealth and creating assets–manufacturing, trade, land, infrastructural and social service sector enterprises as well as homes, buildings and lands. Merger of party, state and ethnicity strengthens the ability and capacity to possess the means to effect command and control over the commanding heights of the economy.

Changing the law and dictating proclamations that give legal legitimacy to single party command and control is part of the strategy. The fewer competitors there are the better for the party and its business allies and beneficiaries. The institutions of the state become instrumental in providing political legitimacy in merging entirely the party, state and ethnicity and blurring any distinctions between the merged state and endowments; and the commanding heights of the national economy. Any potential or money making asset including girls and babies are tradable commodity. This is the reason why urban land is so lucrative. Greater urbanization and specialization in the economy, makes land a source of both political power and greater wealth. In light of this, the governing elite push competitors out through a variety of instruments, including new laws and regulations.

Merger suffocates and stifles the emergence of a domestic (national) private sector

In order to understand the reason why there is a preponderance of party-owned and endowed enterprises that prove to be deterrents of equitable and rapid development, one needs to examine the nexus between the constitution, national resource acquisition and expropriation, allocation and asset accumulation for the privileged minority ethnic elite. The ruling-party manipulates the constitution, laws, regulations to influence policies and practices in accordance with its vision and goals. Suffocation of the Ethiopian private sector is a consequence of this well designed strategy bolstered by Prime Minister Meles’ thesis of the role of “the developmental state.” Political party-owned and endowed enterprises (PPOEs) receive their legitimacy from this nexus; as do endowments, generals and so on. The theory distinguishes these enterprises whose initial capital is hardly recorded and known from others. The ruling-party supports PPOEs as pro-development and others as corrupt and rent-seekers. PPOEs are never audited. The public k knows that initial capital was acquired by ‘looting the banking system’, through central government money transfers, diversion of foreign aid through contractual arrangements, savings or joint ventures. How is it for a general to own a multimillion birr building in Bole unless he is paid huge sums to defend the corrupt system to which he now belongs? Politics in Ethiopia today is big business. You acquire power by force and keep it by force. This is how you are able to change laws regularly and at will and impose on the Ethiopian people.

Given political power, the ruling-party feels justified in arguing that part owned and endowed entities should operate freely nationally while aborting or barring non-privileged firms from competition. Political authority allows the ruling-party to direct the economy as it wishes. This is where crowding-out the private sector and unfair competitive advantage for the privileged come-in. RD defines non-privileged entities as anti-revolutionary and untrustworthy. Given its exclusionary and monopolistic features, the developmental state is another term for party and endowment control. Why do I say this? It primary role now is to strengthen its narrow capacity; to act as agent of wealth for generals, party leaders and bureaucrats who implement policies as well as foreign and domestic allies.

Who does the developmental state develop?

The developmental state led by minority ethnic elite for an emerging and exclusionary largely minority ethnic business class has absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of civil society. The principle has nothing to do with development of communities, increasing productivity and making the country competitive and self-reliant. Why? The Ethiopian people do not feature prominent in the development agenda. It is as if they do not exist or matter. While the developmental state is statist in concept, it supports and defends the formation of a small modern domestic private sector effectively controlled and owned by party dominated and endowed conglomerates. It is the essence of what is commonly known as crony capitalism. This is a form of capitalism that advances growth without fair and transparent competition.

The dire situation of the banking system that is now burdened by at least 60 billion birr of debt without making a dent on the housing, unemployment, hunger, hyperinflation and other social crises while generating insane profits for a few attests to Ethiopia’s tragic economy. Amidst this incapacitating scene, a few reap the benefits of aid, deficit financing and land grab. For this reason, the system is neither sustainable nor equitable. It does not change the structure of the economy in meaningful ways. It disenfranchises the vast majority of the population and punishes future generations. I suggest that there is a great deal that those of us who believe in human dignity and hope can and should do. I have identified several in the series “why Ethiopians must unite and Ethiopians can indeed unite if they are willing.” There is no excuse anymore not do so to counter the assault on human dignity and freedom that we see with our naked eyes.

I leave you with a sobering thought from one of America’s leading thinkers and urge you to act now before it is too late.

What can and should we do?

Simply put, “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.” Thomas Paine.
Those within the opposition camp can no longer afford to dwell on the misdeeds of the governing party. It shows us what it does best and for whom. It is for those who wish the best for all of the Ethiopian people to set aside minor differences and operationalize the unity of purpose on which there is a general agreement: the pursuit of a just, inclusive, pluralist society in which the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people is central and the unity in diversity of the country is secure.

At minimum, the Diaspora can come out of its shell and provide sustainable financial, diplomatic, technical, policy support to those within Ethiopia who struggle daily and “undergo fatigue” with the expectation of “reaping the blessings of freedom.” This goal does not come cheap; and will not be granted by anyone. It is the Ethiopian people who must fight for it. The rest of us who live in freedom can at least say no to division and anger with one another and head in the same direction.
02/09/2012

This might have not been a fight the Meles regime would have wanted to pick now. It only burst on its face willy-nilly, as it tried to get the draft legislation stealthily approved through the backdoor on the second day when parliament members returned from holiday around mid-October, i.e., without reference to a relevant main committee. Of course, the MPs were back physically then, but not mentally.

Get me right. In stating this I do not mean to give the impression that discussions in parliament have been helpful to date in advancing the interests of the people against any unwanted legislations that habitually are shoved down their throats. No way, it cannot happen, since 99.6 percent of MPs are beholden to the ruling party for their survival.

Consequently, in stage-managed legislation in parliament what the ruling party tried to avoid was alerting citizens that, as co-owners of lands with the state, they were being deprived of their property rights, with no public consultations or discussions.

On this matter, in its editorial of 23 October, Addis Fortune eloquently captured the essence of what I am struggling to say. It observes:

Critics are proved right. Little debate prevails in the EPRDF dominated parliament than protocol. It all runs dry. Party loyalty overshadows reasoned representation and interest based deliberation remains a pipe dream. Legislations are serving to put governmental intent into laws.

How such behavior has been reflecting badly on government credibility and ‘its’ parliament requires no further discussion, since it adds little to what has already been known.

Why fear discussion within parliament?

Nevertheless, the approach of the regime on urban land lease legislation has shocked Ethiopians throughout the country, according to tidbits of news filtering out of the country. It would be an understatement to say that Ethiopians are enraged. That is why they now are bracing for a showdown, the defiance of which has already been registered since last November/December.

It is something that signals people have had enough of the overreach by an arrogant regime that neither has a sense of proportion nor limits. If what is gleaned from the various pretentious discussions over the fait accompli legislation between citizens and officials, conducted under the aegis of Mayor Kuma Demeksa of Addis Abeba and Urban Development and Construction Minister Mekuria Haile, is correct, the fearless resistance of people from all walks of life and age groups conveys the sense that Ethiopians are resolved to defend their rights.

Irrespective of its outcome, in looking back this incident time would come when it would be considered a watershed moment that a gentle and tolerant people have served unmistakable notice to an arrogant state power that lacks the wisdom to realize that there is limit to everything.

Even in this situation, the danger now is that this would only add up to the smoldering undercurrents of dissatisfactions and anger — indicators of the collision course the country has been on internally on account of the deepening poverty, insurmountable cost of living, rising inequality, and privileges proffered on the few on ethnic basis and undue exploitation of the country’s agricultural resources by a few investors on the basis of unequal benefits.

Certainly, in a country where consultations are scarce between policy-makers and citizens, this negative development has been the product of the gulf that exists between aspirations of the people and a regime obsessed with its uninterrupted stay in power. Therefore, whatever the regime does, there is little trust and confidence in a situation that each side is bidding for the best moment to show what it wants.

When the TPLF–led EPRDF officials could not stand the heat of public anger, Urban Development and Construction Minister Mekuria Haile chose the usual route of the regime: blaming others for the confusion. Thus, he accused the media of not “not providing clear and correct information”, “popularizing the proclamation [because of which] wrong interpretation and complaints about the proclamation have been raised”. Of course, the media isnot or cannot be in a position in that country to defend itself when used as scapegoat for the confusion the officials themselves created. They have to take it lying down!

As it happens, the regime has seized its moment through this land lease legislation to completely stifle any public reaction or uprising. This is because there is only one correct view in Ethiopia and only one truth — the regime’s!

Consequently, in a revolt of the first kind this has caused now on one hand this has evolved into a situation where the people have taken offense by the actions of a government are no longer willing to watch it passively. They strongly feel that they have been held down this long by a regime as determined to make sure that either everyone dances to its tune or face the consequences. In responding now negatively, though calmly and legally, people are showing that they can no longer put up with this behavior.

On the other, their indifference to the voices of the people the officials who run the country hardly see themselves and their role being serving the interests of the people. This has now emerged as yet another evidence of their mode of governance with contractual terms that reflects only their own interests, not the people’s.

What could be Meles’s motive in coming with the land lease legislation now?

More troubling, however, to the future of the country is the fact that at every stage the regime has hardly shown interest that it values national consensus as indispensable tool of good governance, national development and social cohesion. This has left many wondering why it should always prefer controversies and heavy-handedness as its chosen governance strategies.

For instance, this urban land lease legislation has been on the political plate for a while. In his March 2011 press conference to Ethiopian journalists, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi stated that the existing urban land legislation “does open the way for transfer of lease right which could lead then into the speculation in urban land. The intention of the law was not to encourage speculation in terms of urban land ownership.”

As far as he is concerned, therefore, “There are two actors; on the one hand the private sector developers who were effectively engaged in grabbing the land that does not belong to them in any legal sense and misusing the land lease rights that they were given for personal profits and speculation and there were government officials who facilitated such activities or at least turn a blind eye while such activities were taking place.”

If that is the situation, then is it not appropriate that one should ask him why punish the entire society by going against the grain, i.e., the legislations that have been in place since 1975 and have evolved practices and customs in the course of nearly two generation, which entitles them important place as the laws?

In that press conference, the prime minister indicated that as at the beginning of 2011 there have been a few critical issues that have deprived him of nights sleep. From his perspective, these situations have been described as having serious implications in “determine[ing] stability and progress in Ethiopia.” These situations are:

(a) meeting the financial requirements for the implementation of the growth and transformation plan (GTP),
(b) whether there is capacity in the country for the implementation projects,
(c) combatting inflation over the medium-and long-term, and,
(d) ending speculation on land and land grabbing.

These in turn give rise to the question whether the land legislation is driven by the state’s need to raise more revenues. It also gives credence to the insight of those analysts that long ago recognized that the actions of the Ethiopian state are consistently motivated by its desire to squeeze more money from citizens, including the abuses by the tax administration; I state this without denying that the tax base in Ethiopia is one of the narrowest in the world. However, for the first time early this month, at the height of the hues and cries of taxpayers the director of the office openly admitted before parliament about the existence of misuse of its powers, for which, as usual, the blame was thrown at rent-seekers in his office.

There are others that believe that this land lease legislation is driven by the regime’s success in rural areas, where it has ensured its control of the rural populace. Throughout these years, the rural population ‘has been kept loyal’ under the fear of losing their lands or not getting farm inputs, if they did not vote for or cooperate with the ruling party.

Those who see it from this angle are convinced that political extortion has been the regime’s modus operandi all along outside urban areas across the different aspects of Ethiopian lives. We heard on the eve of the 2010 election reporting by foreign journalists and researchers of the reach of this shameful practice even the ranks of aid receiving hungry people afflicted by man-made and natural disasters.

Now in the wake of the Arab Spring, those analysts say, the regime is in need of silencing suspected pockets of resistance to its power. They strongly believe that that it is the reason why it has turned its attention to urban dwellers. In order to achieve these objectives, under the guise of fighting corruption and speculation on land it has brought its “proven” control mechanism to the cities. Since then, this legislation Damocles Sword has been suspended on the heads of urban residents that from day one have shown distrust of the TPLF-led EPRDF. Their choice now is to lie down and take it as it comes or suffer the consequences of not cooperating with the regime.

There is no doubt that the manner it has gone about this is unbecoming of a state and statesmen. Mind boggling is the extent to which the regime becomes political insensitivity when it thought it was smart in what it has been doing. Unfortunately, it has only presented itself as legal illiterate and politically amateurish.

When would governance become transparent in Ethiopia?

If we assume for a momentthat laws govern Ethiopia, one thing they also constantly hammer, why should the reality be any different from that as regards the motive and the manner this legislation walked in? As far as I could tell, the reality is that neither are the 1975 proclamations of the military regime rejected after the TPLF seized power. Nor has the constitution in force in any manner changed the provisions of those laws that affirm land is public property in Ethiopia. Under the TPLF-led EPRDF regime, the meaning of ‘public property’ has been increasingly rendered to emphasize the place of the state, as if it is intended to mean exclusively state ownership. In fact, in Article 40 of the constitution launched and approved by this regime, citizens also have as much right as co-owners, as discussed above.

That article also clearly reiterates its recognition of “the right to the ownership of private property.” Moreover, it provides for:

The right to ownership of rural and urban land, as well as of all natural resources, is exclusively vested in the State and in the peoples of Ethiopia. Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and shall not be subject to sale or to other means of exchange.
This does not in any way suggest that the search for solutions to the problems of speculation on land should end up with expropriation of the co-owners’ share, as the secret approval process the new legislation went through seems to suggest. It is in black and white with video recordings that already in his March 2011 press conference the prime minister has indicated, “So, we will take steps to clarify those specific provisions in the law to make sure they don’t open a flag [flood?] gate for speculation in urban land.”

If the search for solution to the problems of corruption is real indeed, then could it not have been easier and successful outcome guaranteed if government chose to act in concert and with the people behind it? This is not the way the regime seems to want it, when considered from the point of view of its desire to go behind the back of the people, instead of accommodating their interests and rights to own private properties. Of course, by all indications that is not a strong forte of this unique, aggressive and muscular developmental state that is being envisioned for Ethiopia.

Perhaps what remains now is to see if the above speculations that the are claimed to be the driving force behind this legislation. Did they want to kill two birds with one stone? That is to say: (a) raise more funds for the programs and projects it plans to implement within the framework of the GTP; and, (b) use the land lease legislation as a leash to control the urban population, as has the regime done to the rural population.

Incidentally, at that same March 2011 press conference that took place when the Arab Spring has become one of the primary agendas of the international community — for both good and ill — a journalist asked Ato Meles Zenawi about his “overall assessment of the unfolding situations in North Africa and Middle East”. His response:

The political changes in North Africa are very interesting. As I said I don’t think anyone of these events has come to a final conclusion. Libya is obviously in turmoil and nobody knows how this going to end. Tunisia and Egypt have completed the first phase of the revolution peacefully. So far, one part of the political establishment has displaced the other part of the political establishment that has, as we know is not a definition of revolution. These things have not yet to come to a halt. These are the ongoing processes and nobody can pretend to know where this is going to end.

Has the prime minister then been fortifying his firewall in good time and realistic manner? If time could be called as reliable witness, after all, this legislation was already given flesh and blood in early 2011.

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

The Ethiopian Women Conference Coordinator Committee (EWCCC)*
Invites You to attend

Ethiopian American women from diverse background are planning to hold a conference focusing on current socio-economic, political challenges, and achievements of Ethiopian women in the homeland and in the Diaspora. The conference will take place during the international woman’s month March 9-11, 2012. The theme of the conference is “Empowering Ethiopian Women and Advancing Their Rights.”
A number of Ethiopians, and Ethiopian American women and other scholars are scheduled to present papers that will critically examine the status of Ethiopian women at home and abroad. Samples of topics are:
• Empowering Ethiopian Women: Challenges and Opportunities
• The impact of Land Grab on Ethiopian Women & the Environment
• The condition of Ethiopian Women in the Middle East
• Violence Against Women, Women & Poverty in Ethiopia
• Ethiopian Women in Leadership positions
• Emerging Voices – A platform for Young Ethiopian Women…, etc.

At the opening night March 9, 2012, the event will be open to the public and Judge Birtukan Mideksa will be honored. The March 10th & 11th program is exclusively for women of all ages. Detail information will be forthcoming.

For further information please visit our website www.ethiowomenconfrence.org and facebook – https://www.facebook.com/events/233042740111244/. Also you can contact Ms. Lemlem Tsegaw, Public Relation Officer for the conference via e-mail – ltsegaw@gmail.com .
We look forward to seeing you at the conference,
Ethiopian Women Conference Coordinator Committee

*EWCCC is not affiliated with any political groups, government or civic organizations.

I brought this up because there seems to be all sorts of attempts to knock down or demean our past. It is very shameful and destructive. The whole idea is so strange that it is difficult to find a rational explanation why our ‘leaders’ will resort to such ugly method to stay in power. It is understandable if our so-called enemies use such tactic. But our own government doing that is a little bizarre.

There is no denying our Country has existed for a very long time compared to other Nations. That is verifiable fact. It is also true that Ethiopia is prominently mentioned in the Holy Bible and spoken of favorably by the prophet Mohamed (may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him) in the Holy Koran. I am not even going to mention Dinknesh. I just want to point out that we are the source of Abay that nourished and sustained the Great Pharos. The Pyramids of Giza were built from the waters and dirt from our Highlands. Ethiopia was there before written history.

Now the Victory at Adwa was our crowning moment. Emperor Minilk accompanied by Queen Taitu Betul and the combined might of our ancestors dealt a heavy blow to European Colonialism. That victory of an African nation against the big and ugly European that has been tormenting Black people for over three hundred years was heard across the Galaxy. Hey, you never know where you will find black folks. You think I am exaggerating? Ask Marcus Garvey, W.E.B. Dubois, Kwamen Nkrumah and Nelson Mandela. I will leave the Rastafarian’s out of this brouhaha. Our esteemed Black leaders all wrote the significance of Ethiopia in helping them keep hope alive in their struggle for freedom and dignity. The Establishment of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) is the continuation of that central role our country has played as a bright light that defines the hope and aspirations of all Black people. Just because we are at the bottom now it don’t mean we were always there.

This attempt to belittle, gloss over or cover up the pivotal role Ethiopia played in the formation of the OAU is futile and should definitely be considered to be a criminal act. We should never allow the spirit of our ancestors to be trampled upon. That is my opinion and I am unanimous in that. His Imperial majesty Haile Selassie I, his Cabinet led by Prime Minister Aklilu Habteweld and his brilliant protégé His Excellency Ato Ketema Yifru, Foreign Minster deserve the lion’s share of the credit for this Herculean effort. This is not to belittle the efforts of hundreds and thousands of others that worked hard. Not at all, but somebody always gives life to ideas and our leaders were smart enough to know the moment and act on it. That is how history is made.

OAU came at a time of “African Spring” of the 1960’s. The Europeans and Asians have managed to kill each other in a spectacular manner and were tired of war. Africans were waking up from their slumber. To say Black people were created to suffer does not describe the reality. Slavery and colonialism ‘s after effects will take centuries to erase. We are resilient people, thus we took the lull at the end of the war to assert our coming out. Young dynamic leaders graduates of the struggle for independence were emerging. They maneuvered and gained independence from the colonial powers. Their name still evokes pride and hope.

The 60’s Africa was a child of two worlds. On one side were the ‘Casa Blanca Group’ molded by the young Turks that have emerged from the yoke of colonialism as the new leaders. They included Gamal Abdel Nasser, Kwame Nkrumah, Sekou Toure, Ben Bella, Jomo Kenyata to mention a few. They were fired up and thinking big. Pan-Afrcanism that meant one big Continent Country like the USA was their goal. One Continent one Nation was their motto. They all were big people with big dreams.

On the other side were the ‘Monrovia Group’ led by the old and cautious. They wanted to go one step at a time. They were not willing to experiment. Sengor, Tubman, Boigney, Tafewa Balewa were formidable leaders in their own right. The two camps were vying for leadership. It is at this particular juncture in time that Ethiopia showed up to assert its leadership. Our credibility was unshakeable. Both sides respected and trusted our country and leader. We were not a product of this or that colonial master. We were an island of freedom and dignity in a sea of black suffering and abuse. The African leaders were conscious of this fact.

The much-heralded black people unity was realized in Addis Abeba Ethiopia in 1963. It came about by the hard work, far sighted and decisive leadership of our Emperor and his savvy Foreign Minister. The impossible was achieved in Addis Abeba and Black people all over the world celebrated. This is our contribution to African unity and no one can take that away from us.

Why we are discussing this past history is due to the current inauguration of a new building to house the Organization. It is a modern building. As buildings go it could be considered beautiful, more European than African if I might add. It was financed and built by the Peoples Republic of China as a gift to Africans. Why they would want to do that is a whole other discussion. I am not going there today. My interest centers around the issue of statue and the credit for the existence of the Organization in general.

The statue of His Excellency Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah former President of Ghana was prominently unveiled during the inauguration. No question he deserves the heart felt thanks of Africans and all Black people. It is a proud moment for all of us. His Excellency played a major and pivotal role in advancing the concept of Pan-Afrcanism and cemented the relationship of Africans and the African Diaspora in the West. It was an important linkage in showing the commonality of our struggle for freedom and dignity.

Some of us Ethiopians feel there is something missing here. Without taking away from others we believe may be it would have looked a little better if Dr. Nkrumah’s statue was accompanied with others that have labored as much to form this august body. Of course we have His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie in mind. Is that far fetched with a hint of selfishness on our part? I plead guilty. Since I am an Ethiopian I will let my African brethren answer that question. I am sure they will agree with us.

Why do you think HIM’s statue is not part of the new building? Here we are going to open Pandora’s box. All the evil is going to be spilled and you have no one to blame except yourself. Let us start with Osagyefo Nkrumah first. As you know he was the first President of Ghana. He led his nation on its transition from British playground to a free African nation. That was 1957. He has a tumultuous relationship with his people until he was overthrown in 1966. Truth be told that the builder of hydroelectric dams, champion of Pan Afrcanism and founder of the OAU was given to be an opponent of civil liberties and wrecker of political parties. So much so that he made his party (CPP) the only legal one and was declared President for life. All great leaders come with a baggage. What do you think the present leaders and people of Ghana think of their leader?

Here is where we part company with our Ghanaian friends. In Ghana the Osagyefo is seen as the most respected leader of Africa. Father of their country. Universities are named after him. Large boulevards carry his name and commemorative stamps bearing his face are the rage. In fact it is the current President of Ghana that have the statue made and delivered in Addis. They admire and love him very much warts and all.

See what I mean my friend? What is the hobby of our leaders? Kicking Ethiopia around comes to mind. Haven’t you noticed the inordinate amount of time spent by the TPLF mafia in discrediting all our early achievements and history? It should not be news to no one. The chances of our Emperor’s statue in Addis is no more than the chances of Meles Zenawi winning a free and fair election in Ethiopia. In other words hell will freeze over before that happens. These assorted simpletons even felt threatened by a dignified funeral service for the Emperor let alone allow erection of a statue. A Statue will definitely be the cause of mind melt. After all isn’t Ato Meles that called the emperor a ‘reactionary’ in front of all Africans? What makes you think they will honor the leader we ourselves condemn?

Please watch the speech given by dictator Meles supposedly defending Ethiopia in an AU meeting. TPLF cadres are so proud of his defense of our nation that it is heralded out on every occasion when they think it necessary to build his credentials as a lover of our country. It is a shame that the leader needs such crutch to make us a believer. I saw the video and I wanted to hide. It is a shameful performance worthy of a cadre. Where in the world did he get that larger than life Holly Wood reading glass? Was there something placed in the chair to make him jump around like a grasshopper? From what I can see he was as usual demeaning other representatives trying to make enemies rather than friends. By the way ‘reactionary’ Haile Selassie did not train revolutionary Nelson Mandela. No sir we trained fighters of African National Congress. It is not about individuals here but a cause. Our country was a welcome haven to all Black militants and freedom fighters.

We are not happy with the sidelining of our Emperor and thru him the contribution of our government and people. Recognition of the hard work and wise leadership of our Emperor is a reflection of the single minded and fiercely independent trait of our ancestors. The issue is not Haile Selassie but all of Ethiopia. Credit given to his Majesty for a job well done is something to be proud of by all of us. We love and respect him very much wart and all.

Today this fact of HIM’s statue missing is a no-brainer. Our country is misruled and on the verge of collapse is what should worry us. The sale of our land to foreigners is what should keep us awake at night. The fourteen million or more in need of food should be our focus. The lack of unity and determination to do good for our people and ourselves is my agony.

When the time comes we will build the biggest and baddest monument to our Emperor and other heroes. I have no doubt that will happen. If not us our children will rise up to this challenge and do what is right.

Materials used in this article:

http://www.oau-creation.com/Part%20One.htm

http://www.blackpast.org/?q=1963-haile-selassie-towards-african-unity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9hiWS3YVfU

http://www.rbgtube.com/play_audio.php?audio=17

Rights groups have reported that more than 150 people, including 10 journalists, have been imprisoned under the “Anti-Terrorism Proclamation” since 2009. Human Rights Watch called the law “restrictive” in January 2012 report, and said it “has been used to justify arrests of both journalists and members of the political opposition.”

Zenawi denied the allegations, according to Reuters, which quoted him as telling Parliament: “All trials are transparent. All suspects are allowed access to lawyers and some have even been freed when no evidence was found to justify their arrests.”

Like us on Facebook

“But we would also consider granting clemency if culprits admit guilt and to making mistakes,” he added.

Mohamed Keita, Africa Advocacy Coordinator at the Committee to Protest Journalists, views this statement with skepticism.

“This is exactly what the government wants,” Keita said. “It is a conditional pardon, and they can revoke it at any time.”

For Ethiopian nationals, this conditional clemency would constitute suspension of free speech and political activities. Since 2001, at least 79 Ethiopian journalists have fled the country, more than any other country in the world, according to CPJ.

Designated Terrorists

Under the Anti-Terror Proclamation, two armed groups — the Ogaden National Liberation Front and the Oromo Liberation Front — and one opposition party, Ginbot 7, have been labeled terrorist organizations.

HRW reported that in March 2011, authorities arrested more than 200 members and supporters of two registered opposition parties –the Oromo Federal Democratic Movement and the Oromo People’s Congress — publicly accusing them of involvement with the OLF.

“Those arbitrarily arrested and detained included former members of Parliament, long-serving party officials, and candidates in the 2010 regional and parliamentary elections,” reported HRW.

Among the 10 journalists in custody are two Swedish nationals, reporter Martin Schibbye and photographer Johan Persson, who were given 11-year sentences, charged with aiding the ONLF and entering the country illegally. Schibbye and Persson admitted to illegally entering into Ethiopia’s Ogaden province through Somalia, but said it was to investigate the activities of an oil company that purchased licenses there in 2009 from Sweden’s Lundin Petroleum.

“The harsh sentences against Johan Persson and Martin Schibbye are an affront to justice and press freedom,” said Keita in a CPJ statement. “With this politicized case, authorities showed they are intent on quashing coverage of important events in the Ogaden region. The Ethiopian government should unconditionally release Persson and Schibbye, and allow independent access to the Ogaden region.”

Despite the mounting international criticism over Zenawi’s application of the anti-terror law, many foreign governments have yet to speak out, including the U.S., which declares Ethiopia “an important regional security partner of the United States” on the State Department’s Web site.

“From the U.S. point of view,” said Keita. “The security issue trumps the human rights issue.”

I am just wondering! When will these disgraceful rulers stop begging? They beg for food, water, medicine, clothes, plates, forks, spoons, dishes, and now for offices in the name of the people they firmly force to live in starvation and unhealthy conditions. Furthermore, they supplicate money to construct roads, bridges, dams, which in fact, break apart before they start providing services. It appears these tyrants carry begging- DNA chains that encode their daily soliciting activities. They spend ample time not in producing ideas or goods but following the tails of wealthy-nations’ leaders as scavengers follow the stench of carcasses. The donor nations’ leaders have given diplomatic fancy names for the baloney they throw to the relentless beggars who drool looking at their dinner tables. Yep! They call it assistance, AID, Gift, donation, economical cooperation and blah…blah. How on earth could a continent or a country develop an inch using begging business as a prime tool? One should not have to take psychology courses or conduct scientific researches to demonstrate the harmful effect of begging on self-confidence, innovation and productivity. The mother of human race- Africa does not still possess strong neck that holds her head upright. When she tries to sit up, she still falls backwards because her beggar-despotic children have dreadfully weakened her stamina and self-confidence.

As a child, I used to know a life- time beggar woman. Although her standard of living was better than most of the community members, she never felt she was self- sufficient. In addition, she used to believe that she would lose her fingers and toes if she stopped begging. Could that be the case with African dictators? Why they continued begging although they amass African wealth and western donations not just in millions but in billions? May they lose their hands, feet, noses, penises, testicles or any other body parts if they discontinue begging? Could not each of these despots be able to build a two- hundred thousand dollars building? Do not donor nations hurt Africans when they continue entertaining such sorts of life-time beggar despots (or hypos as George Ayittey calls them)? Should starved Africans remain as spectators when the hippos use the robbed money to buy fashionable -American ties, stylish- British outfits, and modish- Italian shoes for themselves; and lipsticks, bras and nail polishes for their extravagant wives and mistresses? Should citizens keep silent when the self-acclaimed rulers write internationally humiliating history for the current and future African generations just like the traitors did during the colonial era?

An Ethiopian adage goes “The bride’s weeping during her wedding is an expected tradition”. The beggars tried to blend their begged product with a historical- legacy by erecting the emblem of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. Was this visionary African really waiting for this day? Was he praying day and night for the Chinese government to establish the African Union Headquarter in the 21st century? Did he tenaciously campaign to unite Africans or brutal dictators? Whether the Chinese Engineers encrypt their finger prints on the building or not, this 100- meter tall construction signifies the magnanimity of the Chinese empire not the strength of the African Unity. Its erection on African soil does not make it African Product or insignia of African Unity. Each story-tower and flight of stairs heralds the tallness and ascension of China while it reveals the unfortunate dwarfism and the sinking of Africa. Furthermore, it clearly demonstrates that Africa is ruled by shameful oppressors who do not hesitate to trade the dignity of their people. It looks the African dictators were waiting for the second coming of Economic Messiah (the first coming was the colonization era). As one can read from the picture, it seems the giant donor stands tall with broadened – shoulder and inflated -heart. On the other hand, it appears his beggars stand on either side and behind him with thankful mood as well-fed puppies stand with their owners to express their gratitude. In my view, no matter from which angle we look at it, this unfortunate donor-beggar relationship has left a degrading historical scar for Africans.

In summary, building corporate offices with supplicated money will never transform these disgraceful rulers to African leaders or improve the lives of Africans. The only way Africa could develop, unite and establish its own headquarters is when its peoples’ minds, sense organs and hands are free from interwoven dictatorial chains. These God given human traits could be free only when these ruthless despots are replaced with conscientious citizens who fully understand the significance of free thought and speech that fosters innovation, flow of ideas, interaction and unification. Otherwise, the current African Union is nothing but the dreadful African dictators’ mutual long finger- nail which they use to scratch each- others’ back whenever they are caught stealing elections and massacring their own tax payers. Despite the voracious ambition to unite, Africans are still falling apart as result of ethnic conflicts ignited by the very malicious individuals who are standing with the “charitable” Chinese man. In reality what we see is not united Africans but African rivers draining human blood and African vultures devouring human fleshes whose souls have been taken away by the dictators’ bullets, starvation or preventable communicable diseases. Therefore, neither African Union nor its headquarters are established. What the Chinese government built in the African Capital City is the Chino-African Dictators Corporation Headquarter.

Thank you!

End notes
1. All Africa. Com : New African Union Head quarter inaugurated http://allafrica.com/stories/201201290047.htmlhttp://vibeghana.com/2012/01/29/au
2. AU new Headquarters opened. http://vibeghana.com/2012/01/29/au-new-headquarters-opened-in-ethiopia/

Related Articles
1. African Spiders Portia spiders: http://abbaymedia.com/News/?p=2770
2. African Union: A Shameful Misnomer http://www.addisvoice.com/article/african_leaders.htm
3. Standing Ovation for Dambisa Moyo; http://www.addisvoice.com/article/standing_ovation_for_dambisa_moy.htm
4. Addressing African Dictators; http://addisvoice.com/article/african_rulers.htm

The writer can be reached at abatebelai@yahoo.com

… This magnificent edifice is built on the ruins of the oldest maximum security prison in our country. People in Ethiopia used to call it Alem Bekagne, loosely translated it means I have given up on this world- this life. This building which will now house the headquarters of our continental organization is built on the ruins of a prison that represented desperation and hopelessness…

This magnificent new head quarters (sic) of our continental organization- the AU which has been at the center of the struggle for the African renaissance (sic) is a symbol of the rise of Africa. The face of this great hall is meant to convey this message of optimism, a message that is out of the decades of hopelessness and imprisonment a new era of hope is dawning, and that Africa is being unshackled and freed not only from the remnants of colonialism but also from want and violence. It is very interesting to note, that just as Africa is rising from the ruins of the desperation and Afro-pessimism this magnificent new head quarter (sic) of the AU is rising from the ruins of a prison of desperation and hopelessness.

… It is therefore very appropriate for China to decide to build this hall — the hall of the rise of Africa — this hall of African renaissance — (sic) and the adjoining office building for us. I am sure I speak for all of you when I say to the people and government of China thank you so very much. May our partnership continue and prosper.

The current AU chairperson, Equatorial Guinea’s three-decade plus dictator Teodoro Obiang Nguema, praised the “generosity of the Chinese government”, and described the building as marking “a qualitative leap in the relations between China and Africa”. He raved about the building as “a reflection of the new Africa, and the future we want for Africa”.

Why didn’t the African countries chip in to build this “magnificent” symbol of an “Africa Rising” and an “African Renaissance”? Well, they do not have the money; they are poor. (Incidentally, a few months ago, the U.S. Government filed legal action against Teodorin Obiang, AU Chair Nguema’s son for racketeering (illegal business). While the Chinese were sweating it on the new AU hall, Teodorin had commissioned construction of a yacht [the second most expensive in the world] at the cost of 380 million dollars, [nearly twice as much as it cost to build the AU building] for his rest and relaxation.)

Africa Rising or Africa Panhandling?

Far from being a symbol of African hope, renaissance, optimism and glory, the new AU building reinforces the world’s indelible perception of Africa as the continent of poverty, famine, corruption and dictatorial extravagance. Reporter Richard Poplak insightfully observed the new AU building is the ultimate architectural symbol of Africa as a beggar continent and the moral decay of its dictators:

… The new African Union headquarters in dusty Addis Ababa is a structure in which form perfectly marries function – the building means nothing, and nothing will ever get done inside it…. The building doesn’t need to symbolize anything further than its existence, wherein it becomes a staggeringly articulate representation of Africa’s greatest skill: begging…. The first thing we notice is the tiled silver dome that acts as the building’s centerpiece. This reminds us of nothing so much as an overturned beggar’s bowl, left in the street after a solid day of mewling at the feet of passersby… Then there’s the tower. Stretching up 20 storeys… it resembles… a beggar’s outstretched hand… None of this could we have achieved by ourselves. Instead, in order to raise this fine structure – this symbol of continental unity – from the bare African earth, we used the one skill that unites us all. We stretched out our collective hands, batted our eyelashes, looked simultaneously cute and hungry. And we begged.

A Monument to a Do-Nothing African Union

The AU has 54 members. It was formed in 2002 as a successor to the Organization of African Unity (OAU). The AU’s declared aim is to “accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent, promote and defend African common positions to achieve peace and security in Africa, and promote democratic institutions, good governance and human rights.”

In its decade of existence, the AU has little to show for itself. It sent peacekeeping troops to various hotspots in Africa including Burundi, Uganda, Somalia and Darfur, Sudan. The AU dumped its Darfur mission on the United Nations in 2008 unable to deal with that tragic situation. In 2007, the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) was established to promote “stabilization of the country in furtherance of dialogue and reconciliation, facilitate delivery of humanitarian assistance, and create conditions for long-term stabilization, reconstruction and development in Somalia.” Suffice it to say, “Mission stuck in the quagmire of Somali clan politics.” The AU also adopted various documents intended to remediate the problems of corruption, poor governance and economic development in the continent including the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (2003), the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (2007), the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and its associated Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance. Yet the theft of elections and billions of dollars in Africa has continuedover the past decade.

George Ayittey, the internationally acclaimed Ghanaian economist does not mince words in sizing up the AU:

Please, please, don’t ask about the African Union. It is the most useless organization we have on the continent. It can’t even define “democracy” and it is completely bereft of originality. It is imbued with “copy-cat” mentality. Europe has the European Union (EU), so we must have the African Union (AU). The AU forgot that to become a member of the European Union, a country must meet very strict requirements. But in the case of the African Union, there are no requirements. Any rogue and collapsed state can be a member. And when the African Union unveiled NEPAD (the New Economic Partnership for African Development), it boasted that NEPAD was an “African crafted program.” But as it turned out, NEPAD was modeled after the Marshall Aid Plan. When the Darfur crisis flared up, the AU was nowhere to be found. It was doing the watutsi [dance] in Addis Ababa. After much international condemnation, the AU finally managed to cobble together some troops to send to Darfur.

The “uselessness” of the AU is evident not only in its political impotence and economic ineptitude but also in its steadfast refusal to maintain observance of minimum standards of human rights in member countries. The AU has openly instructed member countries to “disregard” the International Criminal Court’s warrant of arrest issued against Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir who is sought for crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. It did the same thing when an ICC arrest warrant was issued against Gadhafi. The AU yelped from the sidelines as Cote d’Ivoire descended into civil war following the 2010 presidential election. France, a former colonial power, had to come to the rescue. The AU was among the last to recognize the Libya’s National Transitional Council. No doubt, the AU was deeply distressed by the sudden demise of Gadhaffi, its longtime patron and sugar daddy. When Zenawi declared a 99.6 percent election victory in the May 2010 Ethiopian elections, the AU monitoring team led by former Botswana president Ketumile Masire praised him and declared: “It is recognised that 2010 Ethiopia’s legislative elections reflected the will of the people. Conditions existed for voters to freely express their will.”

The AU is managed by an inept and bungling commission which acts as the executive/administrative branch with empty suit commissioners lording over different areas of policy. According to news reports, “of the $256 million the commission was allocated in 2011, the AU used less than 40 percent. The commission has about 1,000 staff members, 328 posts have been vacant for the past eight years.” (One can surmise that the unused $154 million could have been a nice down payment for an all-African financed AU building. Talking about African countries not having “enough resources” for public projects, the International Monetary Fund recently reported that there was an unexplained USD$32 billion discrepancy in the Angolan government’s accounts from 2007 through 2010. Does “discrepancy” mean stolen? According to Global Financial Integrity, 11.7 billion was stolen from Ethiopia in the last decade. The same story is repeated in the Sudan, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Niger, Nigeria and many other African countries.)

Is Begging Africa’s Eternal Destiny?

For a long time, the Western world regarded Africa as the “Dark Continent”, not because of the complexion of the people but because little was known about Africa. Sadly, much of the world today regards Africa as the “Beggar Continent”. African dictators can wax eloquent about the “new Africa”, “Africa Rising” and the “African Renaissance”, but nobody is buying it. Everyone can see today that Africa is gasping to breath under the trampling boots of brutal dictators. Africa is not a continent in “renaissance”; it is a continent on a tightrope. Let the facts speak for themselves:

Over one-half the population of Africa lives on less than USD$1 a day. Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region in the world where poverty has increased in the past 25 years. In 1960, Africa was a net exporter of food; today the continent imports one-third of its grain. Today, more than 40 percent of Africans do not even have the ability to obtain sufficient food on a day-today basis. Declining soil fertility, land degradation, and the AIDS pandemic in Africa have led to a 23 percent decrease in food production per capita in the last 25 years while population has increased dramatically. Among the 38 of the world’s heavily indebted poor countries, 32 are in Africa. The average life expectancy at birth for Sub-Saharan Africa is 52.5 years. Slums are home to 72% of urban Africans. Primary school enrollment in African countries is among the lowest in the world. In Sub-Saharan Africa, only two-thirds of children who start primary school reach the final grade.

Africa loses an estimated 20,000 skilled personnel a year to developed countries. A woman living in Sub-Saharan Africa has a 1 in 16 chance of dying in pregnancy, compared to 1 in 3,700 for a woman in North America. On average, women in Sub-Saharan Africa have two more children than the rest of world. More than 40 percent of women in Africa do not have access to basic education. There are an estimated 5,500 AIDS deaths a day in Africa. Every year six million children die from malnutrition before their fifth birthday. More than 50 percent of Africans suffer from water-related diseases such as cholera and infant diarrhea. The prevalence of HIV for people ages 15-49 in Sub-Saharan Africa is nearly 7 times the world’s prevalence.

Ethiopia remains at the very bottom of the world’s poorest nations. Under the “leadership” of the dictator Zenawi, for the past two decades Ethiopia has achieved the dubious honor of being the second poorest country in the world (after Mali) and the largest recipient of net official development assistance in Africa at USD$3.82 billion in 2009. The World Bank reported: “At US$380, Ethiopia’s per capita income is much lower than the Sub-Saharan African average of US$1,165 in FY 2010.”

According to a recent U.S. Census Bureau report, in just four decades, Ethiopia’s population will more than triple to 278 million, placing that country in the top 10 most populous countries in the world. A recent report by the Legatum Institute presents some sobering and heartbreaking findings on the situation in Ethiopia today: Ethiopia has an “unemployment rate [that] is almost 21%, which is the sixth highest rate, globally.” The “capital per worker in Ethiopia is the fourth lowest worldwide.” The country has “virtually no investment in R&D.” The ability of Ethiopians “to start and run a business is highly limited… [with a] communication infrastructure [that] is weak with only five mobile phones for every 100 citizens”; and the availability of internet bandwidth and secure servers is negligible. Inequality is systemic and widespread and the country is among the bottom ten countries on the Index. The Ethiopian “education system is poor at all levels and its population is deeply dissatisfied.” There is “only one teacher for every 58 pupils at primary level, there is a massive shortage of educators, and Ethiopian workers are typically poorly educated.” Less than a “quarter of the population believe Ethiopian children have the opportunity to learn and grow every day, which is the lowest such rate in the Index.”

On “health outcomes, Ethiopia performs abysmally poor. Its infant mortality rate, 67 deaths per 1,000 live births, and its health-adjusted life expectancy of 50 years, places Ethiopia among the bottom 20 nations.” The population suffers from high mortality rates from “Tuberculosis infections and respiratory diseases. Access to hospital beds and sanitation facilities is very limited, placing the country 109th and 110th (very last) on these measures of health infrastructure.” The core problem of poor governance is reflected in the fact that “there appears to be little respect for the rule of law, and the country is notable for its poor regulatory environment for business, placing 101st in the Index on this variable.”

Africa Rising, African Uprising

African dictators want the world to believe there is an “Africa Renaissance” and “Africa is Rising.” They want to hoodwink the world into believing that Africa is “unshackled and freed”. They proclaim the “façade of the great Africa Union hall conveys a message of optimism out of the decades of hopelessness”. They insult our intelligence. We know Africa shall remain in the dark ages so long as dictators cling to power like ticks on an African milk cow. We know Africa is not rising while under the deadweight of dictatorship; but nothing can stop an African uprising. Despite the deceptive and beguiling words of pompous and imperious dictators, we know Africa is shackled and not free. How can Africa “rise” or undergo a “renaissance” when she is bound, gagged, chained, straightjacketed and hog-tied by gangs of ruthless dictators?

Behind the façade of the great AU hall stand a giggling gang of beggars with cupped palms, outstretched hands, forlorn eyes and shuffling legs looking simultaneously cute and hungry, and begging. The stark truth of the matter is that dictatorship has birthed a shiny tower of desperation and hopelessness on the very “ruins of a prison of desperation and hopelessness”. Teodoro Obiang said the AU building represents the “future we want for Africa”. Excuse me, but begging ain’t much of a future!

China’s economic investment in Africa is said to exceed USD$150 billion. Thousands of Chinese companies do business in all parts of the continent. We know that business is business, and money talks. But as to “China’s gift to Africa”, it is best to heed the old adage: Beware of those bearing gifts. On the other hand, it is bad from for a recipient of charity not to be grateful and amiable. So in the customary words of all palm-rubbing, belly scratching and kowtowing panhandlers, it is appropriate to say to the gift-givers:

The book begins by giving a philosophical defence on the importance of writing the history of the great Ethiopian revolution. The defence enumerates some of the social and cultural achievements of the revolution, namely, the all-out war to eradicate illiteracy and backwardness; the coming into existence of the first publishing agency, Kuraz; the spouting of Ethiopian literature during the time; and the translation into Amharic of some of the outstanding work of socialist (communist) thinkers.

Following the defence, the book spends an introductory chapter on the history of Ethiopia, covering a vast period of time (from Aksum to the Italian occupation in 1936) in 60 pages.

Then the book devotes another chapter to summarise the time between the Italian Occupation and 1968. The highlight of this time is the first attempt by the Neway brothers to overthrow the monarchy. In this chapter, the author examines the extent of public discontent, the factors that contributed to the defeat of the rebellion, and the microscopic fracture the rebellion inflicted on the monarchical existential foundation.
Perhaps the most interesting part of the book begins on page 99 and goes all the way to page 274. In these pages and in 10 solid chapters the author relates with some detail some of the outstanding aspects of the revolution, including the establishment of the Derg; the overthrow of the monarchy and the death of the Monarch; the “revolutionary” assassination of the first 60 minsters; and the rise and fall of some crucial figures (General Aman Andom and Colonel Atnafu Abate).

The remaining parts of the book, no less important (for example, the war against the Eritrean Liberation Front and the Somali Army; the building of the army and its capacity; etc.) have already been recorded by a large number of scholars and may not come as a complete surprise to someone who is already acquainted with contemporary Ethiopian history. Having said this, one need to carefully read the latter part of the book in order to be able to look into things from the same vantage point the writer of the book is looking at the history for which he is predominantly responsible.

The book is a work of careful contemplation, rich of names, places, and occasions. The language of the narration, though by no means noble, is flawless and adequate. Except occasionally, when it is absolutely necessary to provide details and facts, the book flows fast and reads well. Perhaps this is because the Mengistu we meet in those pages is no longer the 37 years old Mengistu of the infamous revolution, but the 75 years old statesman who looks into the past with patience and amazing clarity. Therefore, throughout the book, Mengistu is presented to us as reconciliatory, wise, peace loving, intelligentsia friendly, and premeditative; who always prefers to deal with conflicts through dialogue and impromptu discussions over the phone or over dinner. We never see him wilfully confronting, demeaning, or embarrassing his opponents, in public or private; he will be the last to pronounce judgement on the unfortunates when this must no longer be avoided.

This does not mean, by any means, that the book is self-justifying. The author candidly and soberly presents before us the vast and damning problems that tangled the country, from within and without, at the time he took the fateful role and how he dealt with them: The revolution was unavoidable. The confrontation with the ELF was unavoidable. The problem with Somalia had already existed even before he became a cadet. The level of illiteracy and poverty of the Ethiopian people was beyond words could express. The irredeemable short-sightedness and greed of the educated few (civilian and army generals alike) eventually exposed the nakedness of the country for all to see. These are evidences pertaining to the inevitability of the revolution no self-respecting person would refuse to take into account.

The book narrates with remarkable clarity the subject the author knows very well, namely, the army and the various fronts. The reader is presented with comprehensive knowledge of the Ethiopian army and its hierarchy; its politics and intrigues; and the complexity of the challenges that surrounded it. No other book presents with such a comfortable ease the names, personalities, and deeds of so many Ethiopian Generals. The same can be said of the author’s knowledge of the various fronts, in almost all parts of the Ethiopia that once was – names of places infused with war history, defeats and victories, flow from page to page without boring the reader for a second.
But for the reader looking for an answer or explanation to some of the disturbing sides of the Ethiopian revolution, the book has little to offer.

The Emperor

The author goes a great length to persuade us with what difference and respect the Derg initially handled the Emperor until one day a secrete document was found inside the Emperor’s personal safe box. This document was believed to be a Swiss bank account statement. Following this discovery, the Emperor was ordered to give up the money he saved with this account. The Emperor, expectedly, denied the presence of money under a secrete account. This disagreement potentially led to his “unforeseen” death and the eventual destruction of everything he had built for more than 40 years.

Considering the age of the author and his inexperience in the rule of law (and, we may add, the insurmountable problems oppressing the country), it is understandable the Emperor was asked to return the money he allegedly kept in a secret account. But the impatience and ignorance to the rule of law with which the delicate problem was approached are not admitted even forty years later.

The Execution of the Sixty Minsters and others

The author explains away the execution of the 60 minsters (we should be grateful; the original plan was actually to murder 150) in a mere three-line paragraph at the end of chapter 8. This same banal justification will become a patter in the subsequent pages to justify the execution of General Aman Andom and Colonel Atnafu Abate. As to the death of General Teferi Benti, the author does not have anything to tell us. This matter is simply ignored.

If we accept the author’s justification of the shedding of innocent blood, we must indeed accept Hitler’s justification to the extermination of millions of European Jews. But we don’t need to enter into contestable dialogue. We will soon find the author contradicting himself. On the one hand, he tells us that the execution of the sixty was not premeditated. It was not even in anyone’s agenda until a nameless, malicious lieutenant by the name Kedu Dule brought it to everyone’s attention. Moreover, had it not been for the conspiracy of General Aman Andom, the lieutenant himself wouldn’t have the opportunity to do so… But on the same page, the author beseeches us to understand the context. The decision to execute them was a revolutionary decision; it was a decision made by the peoples’ representatives. It is acceptable. We should accept the Terror and the Guillotine of a poplar revolution, in which wilful, unruly, and unexpected murderous thoughts are entertained and justified.

Treason

Treason is another baffling subject in the book, for it is intractably associated with the betrayal of an atheistic socialist ideology. Those who questioned its scope and usefulness to the country’s future were cold-bloodedly murdered. Who defined treason this way and under what justification or mandate are nowhere explained. The author simply tells us that those who utter the vow of trust for the revolution and the socialist ideology shall abide by their vow or otherwise they will die. He never pauses for a while to question the legitimacy of the vow.

The rule of Law

Throughout the book, the absence of the rule of law is conspicuous. Everything is settled according to the pressing need of the time as perceived by the author and his colleagues. Given the God fearing nature of most Ethiopians, some argue, it is a mystery how an entire nation could surrender to such a hideous evil (by the way, it has never freed itself to this very day). If we take the author as the sum total of his past, his generation, and his background, the book forces us all to be confronted with our depressing past. It does not help to push the blame to the breast of one man or a few bad men.

The Derg

The author gives a detail and honest account of the creation of the Derg, a group of military personnel from the Ethiopian army which overthrew the Monarchy and ruled the country with absolute dictatorship for the next 17 years. The reviewer cannot say much about this entity without a pang of pain. In short, here we are presented with a group of men, all of them below the rank of a Major, none of them save one had a formal higher education, who decided the fate of the country without having a clue in which direction and how it should be led.

The Memorable Page

There is an image on page 254. It is the image of (from left to right) Colonel Mengistu, Colonel Atnafu, and General Teferi Benti. The three are standing and there is a conspicuous gap between Colonel Mengistu and the rest. Colonel Mengistu stands erect with a gaunt, miserable look on his face (many mistake it for firmness) while the other two, in a marvellous contrast, stand relaxed and very near to each other. Colonel Atnafu is speaking to the General, who is attentively but cordially listening. This image speaks volumes about these three people, more than all the words used in three solid chapters to tell us about them.

Conclusion

It is impossible not to take this book as an autobiography, since the author is present and actively playing a detrimental role throughout the book. If so, one is forced to ask why the author left out essential autobiographical elements from the book. We do not know where and from whom he was born; to which school he was sent; how did his childhood look like; who made the strongest influence in his life; where did he meet his future wife, etc.? When were his children born? Innumerable questions of this nature are left out from the book.

The absence of this vital information from the book is the first indication of the presence of unresolved psychological issues in the life of the author. Secondly, whereas it is expected that mistakes can be made in a revolution, particularly, given the background of our country and people, the author neither acknowledges nor apologises a single mistake in his book. No words of regret. No reflections. No admission of a lesson learned. The new generation which will come to this book in search of advice will have to be disappointed.

But the book has academic contribution, if nothing else. Students who write their thesis on communist Ethiopia will certainly find the book helpful.

There is nothing wrong with such ambition and getting rich with good integrity. Nevertheless, the problem with Karuturi — a person with big ego and a mouth that because of his arrogance betrays his entire bag of tricks to go about it — is dangerous. He is prepared to deploy anytime his unsavory schemes so long as they serve his goal of getting rich quick.

Unfortunately for him, he sets out to this goal by underestimating the capacities and intelligence of people he is dealing with in Ethiopia. So far, there is no doubt that because of their folly those in high government positions have facilitated everything he needed. To this day, I say it with all sincerity, I cannot see the gains for Ethiopia those people in power see.

One thing he has not realized about Ethiopians is that we all share the common trait of valuing integrity. It means that we are likely to remain wary of controversial individuals, such as him, that go for success by any means. In some sense, he compels my mind to line him up with the class of Gordon Geikko, who deified greed in the Wall Street movie with Michael Douglas played an impeccable performance in depicting the real character.

What I hear is the voice of Karuturi with similar tone as Geikko’s, lecturing in the video one of his admiring lieutenants on his Gambela farm about his principle that “some times scandal is good.”

Not surprisingly, therefore, in late August and September Mr. Karuturi floated the idea that he was about to rent out 20,000 hectares of the land to Indian farmers. The 12 October 2011 issue of the Bangalore also confirmed the story.

Addis Fortune also reported on October 30 that Karuturi Global was in talks with the Indian Water & Power Consultancy Services (WAPCOS) that is empowered by government to enter joint ventures and subsidiaries to provide consultancy services in flood control and the design of irrigation and drainage systems to build dike around the farm. It is not clear if Ethiopia’s institutions were consulted whether this would have any other implications.

His plan could not materialized, least of all not because the Meles regime opposed it. When protests all over the world reached crisis points about this scandalous move, Karuturi denied he had any such designs. The external pressure forced him to retract the plan, at least for only a while.

Not long after, however, the Indian Ocean Newsletter on 13 January 2012 reported that the first clash between Mr. Karuturi and the Meles regime occurred in late 2011, when the Indian investor approached the ministry of labor and social affairs (MoLSA) to issue work permits for a few hundred Indians he allegedly brought into the country as workers on his farms.

The truth came out when MoLSA consulted the ministry of agriculture (MORAD), whether this is in accord with the country’s laws and needs. For the first time, MORAD washed its hands off Karuturi’s shady affairs, in small ways though, according to the newsletter, stating that permits would be issued to foreigners only when local manpower is lacking or insufficiently qualified for the relevant jobs, but not for farming. With that Karuturi was told to return those people back home.

Perhaps this is not the end of this story. Although the terms of the contract would prohibit him from doing so until 75 percent of the farmlands he has rented are developed, Karuturi may still be knocking at the doors of top TPLF officials to get this by past this hurdle. He may also involve the Indian government to stand by its native son, who is trying to expand employment opportunities for Indian laborers in Ethiopia. After all, for India and Karuturi, Ethiopia may only appear as mere aid and loan seeker. Please bear in mind that Ethiopia deserves something better than mortgaging the future of our children — as happened to generations of millions of East Africans that lost their right to properties and power to Asians.

Wonders never end with Mr. Karuturi. Addis Fortune of 29 January freshly reported that the Indian investor/farmer “is planning to go public, floating 200,000 shares worth ETB 1,000 each to local investors, once it gets the nod from its board of directors. The shares will be short-term, with a guaranteed annual return of 10pc in dividends.” It is attractive.

The question is how can the agreement allow him to do such things, when he has not developed any part of the land? The TPLF regime would need to see this for what it is. They dispossess citizens of their leased lands for not developing them. What makes it right for this foreign investor who took this huge chunk of land for chicken feed to get away with it?

Why is Karuturi going the crooked ways to raise money? When everything else he has tried failed to raise an additional $180 million Karuturi Agro Products Board has agreed to develop the land, he now seems to prefer to hitchhike to his goals with the sell of shares ETB 1,000 each.

I will bet anyone, we have not heard the last tricks of Managing Director Sai Ramakrishna Karuturi of Karuturi Global!

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

The plaque boosts my Pan-African feeling. Besides as an Ethiopian it reminds me my country’s survival posturing as the sole independent African State during the colonial era, enshrining liberty and fostering a significant example of independence and self-rule in Africa. It also keeps deep into my heart the contribution my country made to the liberation of the rest of African nations, nearly 25 in number at that time. In particular the support to, Somalia and Kenya that were not lucky enough to attend the summit during that time because they were still under colonial rules was significant. Also the contributions my country made to the independence of African nations, now in the summit was also immense among which the highest regard was to the Libyan independence.

The plaque also refreshes my sympathy to South Africa that was under a cruel apartheid white supremacy rule. Moreover because I am an Ethiopian well aware of what liberty means for humanity and proud of the contribution my leader, Emperor Haile Selassie committed to make the May 1963 summit possible and to solidify its outcome thereafter, the contents of the plaque have special message to me.
“In the august assembly under the chairmanship of Emperor Haile Selassie I, 30 African Head of States and Governments performed the impossible” run the words in the second paragraph of the plaque. And further in the 7th paragraph the plaque states, “To Ethiopia the nation honored by such a historical gathering, the glory of playing host to many of her illustrious sister African nations remains vivid. She will cherish it forever and will guard it selfishly as a priceless treasure destined to occupy pages in her national and international annals.”

In the biography of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, I remember to have read how he felt when he learnt Mussolini had invaded Ethiopia, the only independent state and thereafter how the two leaders, emperor Haile Selassie I, and Nkrumah worked on the promotion of Pan-African sentiments among Africans in the Diaspora while the Emperor was in asylum in Great Britain. The idea of Pan-African was conceived by Nkrumah and he, without doubt was the prime mover of the movement. Nevertheless the contributions of his collaborators to make the dream come true are undeniable. Theories were formed; meetings were conducted in foreign lands and in situations that were very difficult to manage. But equally difficult was to bring together Africa that was linguistically divided by colonial masters after attaining independence and before the May, 1963 Summit.

It was at this time that the Emperor took the lead of bringing Africa together taking advantage of Ethiopia’s neutrality from the lingua -phone divided Africa. Nkrumah being Anglophone he was categorized with English speaking African Countries by the Francophone African nations who wanted their own organizations. Haile Selassie being an Amharophone speaking leader, with a unique language spoken in Africa before the English and the French languages were known to the world and from a nation that has never been colonized was regarded as “neutral” & was respected by both parties. Thus could manage to convince them at least to come to the table to form the Organization of African Unity the purpose of which would be at first to liberate those that were suffering from the yoke of colonialism. This was done successfully but not easily. The Emperor had to scamper forth and back the contradicting parties and the sabotage by their former colonial masters was not easy. Even in the May 1963 summit, the confrontation between the conflicting parties was enormous and the Emperor had to say in his opening speech and I quote from the plaque on my wall, “This conference cannot close without adopting a single African Chapter.”

Yes it could not, thanks to the insistence and wise leadership of the august emperor. As proudly witnessed in the concluding statement of the plaque, the world had to watch each leader signing the charter. Here is how the plaque expresses the historic performance and how may have the Emperor felt it. “How discerning he must have been! For only three days later, one by one, in a dignified ceremony, amidst tumultuous applause, each African leader proceeded to the rostrum and affixed his signature to the charter of the African Unity in Africa Hall, in Addis Ababa, on that memorable midnight of May 25, 1963.”

And now 49 years later the organization being transformed to follow its original path of creating the “United States of Africa” as per the aspiration of Kwame Nkrumah two episodes have taken place in the history of the organization; the construction of a splendid twenty story building to house the AU which is a gift from the Government of China and the great monument dedicated to Dr. Nkrumah greeting at the gate, the present generation and the generation to come. On the body of the monument it is said the famous biblical statement of the Psalm “Ethiopia Stretches its Hands to God” is written. While these are wonderful dedication to Dr. Nkrumah who undoubtedly deserves it, and the people of Ghana whom I respectfully salute, it is also sad that they fall short of paying gratitude to the Emperor Haile Selassie I and the people of Ethiopia without whose dedication the AU would not have happened.

It is true that the OAU has not been without controversy. Those who restrain abhorrence to Ethiopia and the emperor have demonstrated overt and covert adversity in spite of the fact that Ethiopia struggled for their independence and the Emperor utilized his majestic influence to speed up their liberty. Libya and Somalia are some of the cases in point here. The Libyan leader, Colonel Gadafi for example had not concealed his emotion that openly discredited the Emperor and Ethiopia but never were such obstinate forces entertained by the OAU before as they were today by AU, denying the right place that the Emperor Haile Selassie and the people of Ethiopia should hold in the history of Africa. It seems to me that this happened today because both Ethiopia and Africa are defenseless as incompetent and self serving leaders are in power.

In spite of the deficits however, the plaque on my wall will remain at its honored spot. It will profoundly pass to my children and grand children as well as to my great grand children. For, as quoted above and as I repeat the quotation here. “To Ethiopia the nation honored by such a historical gathering, the glory of playing host to many of her illustrious sister African nations remains vivid. She will cherish it forever and will guard it selfishly as a priceless treasure destined to occupy pages in her national and international annals.” So, shall I!

The Writer Zenebe G. Tamirat is available at ztamira@yahoo.com

Ethiopia holds journalists accountable when they commit crimes, Communications Minister Bereket Simon said.

“Ethiopia clearly differentiates between freedom of expression and terrorism,” he said in a phone interview from the capital, Addis Ababa, today. “This is simply a very wrong defense of foreign journalists who have been caught red-handed when assisting terrorists.”

Ethiopia was the third-largest recipient of humanitarian aid in the world in 2009, receiving $3.8 billion, according to Global Humanitarian Assistance, the Wells, England-based research group. There are 26 UN agencies operating in Ethiopia, according to the Addis Ababa-based Development Assistance Group, which represents Ethiopia’s donors.

Terror Acts

Next month, 24 people including government opponents, exiled journalists and dissident writer Eskinder Nega, begin their defense of charges of committing terror acts under the Horn of Africa nation’s 2009 law.

“Journalists, bloggers and others advocating for increased respect for human rights should not be subject to pressure for the mere fact that their views are not in alignment with those of the government,” Margaret Sekaggya, who speaks for the UN on behalf of human rights defenders, said in the statement.

Critics are applying “double standards” as they do not claim freedom of expression is endangered when journalists are prosecuted in the West, according to Bereket.

Five human-rights groups, including London-based Amnesty International and New York-based Human Rights Watch, said a court case today in Addis Ababa threatens the “last remaining human rights monitoring NGO in Ethiopia.” The Addis Ababa-based Human Rights Council is trying to get a decision to freeze its funding reversed, the group said yesterday.

In 2009, Ethiopia banned charities working on human rights from receiving more than 10 percent of their funding from abroad.

–Editors: Paul Richardson, Karl Maier.

To contact the reporter on this story: William Davison in Addis Ababa via Nairobi at pmrichardson@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Antony Sguazzin at asguazzin@bloomberg.net.

A few days ago, by accident the mouse pointer of my computer hovered over the question: Who is the founder of the OAU? The place was on Answers.com . For some reason, it caught my attention.

I felt as if it were sort of extrasensory message for me. After all, don’t they say that coincidence, which some people also refer to as telepathy, is a state of mind that represents high-level percolation of events and thoughts of personalities?

In the case of the question above, admittedly it was something already on my mind especially after the events surrounding the convening of the 18th Summit of the heads of state and government of Africa Unity (AU) in Addis Abeba from 29-31 January 2012.

The new AU headquarters, built by China, as gift to Africa, next to it is Kwame Nkrumah’s statue

I knew that for days I had felt serious reservations by the unveiling on 28 January of the statue of Ghana’s first President Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, a proud son of Africa’s who had introduced the continent to Pan Africanism, standing alone. It was and is no consolation for me that underneath the statue are inscribed the words, “Ethiopia shall stretch forth her hands unto God, Africa must unite.”

Nevertheless, the effort to stand him alone left a bad taste inside me; I see it as an attempt to systematically amend or revise history, especially the decisive activities of the other former leaders preceding the founding of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 1963.

Not that I think www.answer.com is the final authority on this matter, but my reservation was all the more strengthened when I saw its answer, which confidently states:

The founder of the OAU is Emperor Haile Selasie I of Ethiopia. as [sic] we all know that the two blocs namely, Monrovia and Casablanca did not see eye to eye. So it was left to this magnificent leader to bring together these two blocs.
Hence, the next thing I did was to check out the African Union’s (AU) webpage if they have pulled together a page on the history of Africa’s efforts in the struggle for continental unity and its origins. Foolishly, I thought I was lucky when I saw under ‘About Us’, ‘History’. I followed it and it took me to ‘OAU Founders’ (in plural).

I clicked it. To my disappointment, I only found the same title dead and faded. The rest of the page was silent, more as the silence of an abandoned territory after war or, at its worst, an abandoned cemetery. I said to myself, I must be fortunate, since this situation has compelled me to write this piece.

Before proceeding further, I should, however, assure my Ghanaian friends and readers that there is no snippet of doubt in my mind that President Kwame Nkrumah was the initiator of the Pan Africanist movement in Africa. He even endeavored to realize his dream of African Unity, making Ghana’s external policy an instrument toward that and by experimenting sort of loose union he had tried with Guinea in 1959 and Mali in 1960. Nonetheless, as successive events had shown, it was hardly something for which the time had come.

Therefore, note that my reservation here is in no way to question Mr. Nkrumah’s thinking on Pan Africanism or his contributions to continental unity that helped Africa to play an outstanding and decisive role he played in the anti-colonial struggle.

The problem is, of course, for obvious reasons in Africa — almost all of it personal and a mental state of African leaders — Africa has difficulties to come to terms with the past and history. This has not been possible for the simple reason because of the manner in which African leaders seize power and exercise their powers — by force and tyrannical rule. This has put them in a constant search for subterfuges to explain away their excesses. One of such efforts is their conscious effort to subject generations of Africans to systematic and brutal historical revisionism.

For instance, why should Meles Zenawi openly and systematically discourage erecting Emperor Haile Selassie’s statue within the premises of the AU, as one of the foremost fathers of the OAU? Why should that make the long gone emperor a threat to TPLF and EPRDF Chairman’s heavily fortified power? Is that not a clear-cut denial of history?

Believe me, I was never pro-monarchy yesterday; I am not pro-monarchy today. But I can see no reason why a country, its political leaders engage in a war with the past. They least favor they could their nations is to correct past mistakes; create better conditions for today and tomorrow, instead of historical revisionism!

This incident and the subsequent thoughts brought to mind the 1999 article by a certain Seleshi Yaleh, entitled Architecturally Speaking…On Heroes and Monuments: A Reflection on Discontinuity. Its truism and eloquence, behind which lies a fellow countryman’s frustration about our leaders needless war with history has spoken to me. In Ethiopia, it has been manifesting itself in the renaming of libraries, buildings and streets. He observes:

If rulers were reluctant about demolishing all traces of their predecessors; if rulers were confident about sharing the limelight with the heroes of the day; if rulers were wise enough to reward and honor indigenous accomplishment and achievement…their monuments, I am sure, would shine and sparkle for millennia.

Ghana honors Nkrumah

I respect Ghana for honoring its visionary son by stepping forward and managing to give Nkrumah’s contributions a pride of place in history. To start with in 2009, they won the approval of the AU summit to recognize and observe September 21, the birthday of Nkrumah, as Founders Day.

Interestingly, this was followed by a vision by a Ghanaian architect and sculptor by the name Dr. Don Arthur, an official in President John Evans Atta Mills’ office. He toyed with idea of the statue and the president welcomed and gave it his approval, according to Ghanaian news source . The Ghana government then insisted to the AU that the 3.5-meter statue, cast in bronze, would only be made in Ghana and was airlifted to Addis Abeba.

The statue was unveiled on 28 January, moments after the AU headquarters building was inaugurated by President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo of Equatorial Guinea, the outgoing Chairman of the AU and Dr.Jean Ping the AU Commission Chairman, who just lost his post. A few heads of state attended the unveiling of the statue, according to news sources, possibly because many knew that something was missing that day.

Most importantly, they all must have known for a fact that, along with President Kwame Nkrumah, it was Emperor Haile Selassie, President Sékou Toure of Guinea and President Modibo Keita of Mali who in the final hours spared Africa of utter failure in forging continental unity of purpose through a regional organization.

The secret of Ethiopia, Guinea and Mali’s success was in bringing together the so-called Casablanca and Monrovia blocs, an action which eventually led to the establishment of the OAU in May 1963 as symbol of Africa’ Unity.

Incidentally, I am elated in seeing this afternoon on ESAT’s webpage that two distinguished Ethiopian Professors Mesfin Woldmariam and Bahru Zewdie have also expressed their bewilderment by what now is seen as an attempt to eviscerate the frontal role other founding fathers of the OAU had played.

It is unfortunate that some leaders and officials of the AU turned a false default state to enable them get away with unacceptable actions. In other words, the omission of some aspects of history has been utilized with convenience of the jostle and bustle of a summit and willful historical neglect and irresponsible abandonment of the home countries of the other founding fathers, i.e., Ethiopia, Guinea and Mali in particular, so much politically self-absorbed and possibly with a sense of vindictiveness against the statures of long gone leaders that have done some good for their countries and Africa.

The difficult path of Pan Africanism

When one speaks of African unity, obviously he or she cannot separate it from its origin in the Pan Africanist Movement of the early 20th century, mostly associated with Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois. In Africa, Pan Africanism was given root by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, the first President of Ghana, who in his student days in the United States and the United Kingdom was an active participant in the struggles and activist movements of those days.

Upon his return to Ghana (Gold Coast then) in 1947, Nkrumah first became secretary general of the United Gold Coast Convention party, established by Dr. J. B. Danquah, whom he saw as enemy when he was in power and threw him to prison. Before that, however, he fully engaged himself in the anti-colonial struggle to help attain Ghana’s independence from Britain—more appropriately, home rule at the time.

Nkrumah thought he would do better in realizing the goal of independence and his life long ambition of African unity, more appropriately, Pan Africanism, which he not only practiced as politics but also lived with as profound personal conviction. Therefore, in 1949 he established his own party, the Convention People’s Party. With that as a mass galvanizing force, he led a series of strikes and boycotts and eventually forced independence from the British in 1957.

To his surprise and dismay, not long after Nkrumah realized that since late 1959 Africa was getting increasingly divided into north, east, South and west and other ideological groups. In fact, the more he tried on unity the more it became nearly impossible for him to see light of his nirvana in African Unity on account of the fact that Africa the division was getting deeper. At the same time, with economic factors and the clash of ambitions and intrigues within Ghana itself worked against him; his popularity sank at home.

The Casablanca and Monrovia blocs

Finally, they divisions within the different groups coalesced into two blocs — the so-called Casablanca and Monrovia groups. Nkrumah himself headed the Casablanca group.

The Casablanca bloc, according to Paul G. Adogamhe (PAN-AFRICANISM Revisited: Vision and Reality of African Unity and Development (2008), consisted, among others, of Ghana, Guinea, Morocco, Algeria, Congo, Mali, Tanzania, and Egypt. They favored political integration as a step toward economic integration and a socialist path to development.

This group had within it, among others, Ben Bella of Algeria, Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Ahmed Sékou Toure of Guinea, Modibo Keita of Mali, and Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt. The records show that this group was the hands on type and was impatient for the task in front of them, which means they were determined and but not strategic enough.

The Monrovia group was led by Nigeria’s Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and consisted of 24 countries, with Liberia and most of the French-speaking African countries. This group favored “functional approach to African Cooperation.”

The obstacle on the way toward African Unity was the lack of mechanism or a neutral country that could bring these two groups into talking. Since Ethiopia was not a member of any of them, it was being courted by both sides, which enabled it to understand better both sides. In terms of conviction, however, its sympathy was with the Monrovia group.

Ethiopia’s successful diplomacy heals the divisions

This is where Ethiopia’s diplomacy could pay a crucial role, especially with the advantage of not committed to any one of the two groups. However, it was convinced that something had to be done to overcome the hurdles to unity.

Thanks to the indefatigable efforts of Foreign Minister Ketema Yifru, according to a brilliant rendition of his performances by his son Mekonnen Ketema, who confirmed that his father endeavored to convince the emperor that Ethiopia must belong to “mainstream Africa” — meaning the Monrovia group. After hearing out Ketema Yifru’s views, the emperor summoned his officials to a meeting he chaired. Following that, the emperor gave his approval to Foreign Minister Ketema Yifru to take a position that protects Ethiopia’s interests and the future of Africa.

In the meantime, the foreign minister who had assumed his post only in June 1961 had already been working on plan how to bring the two blocs together, with approval of the emperor. He explored possibilities to bring members of the two blocs to a meeting in Addis Abeba. To that end, he first primarily focussed on President Sékou Toure of Guinea, a member of the Casablanca group, and the Guinean delegation to get his support to work together with Ethiopia.

As Egypt organized a conference of the Casablanca group in June 1962, to which Ethiopia was also invited, Foreign Minister Ketema had held discussions with the Guinean delegation to this end. Once he was satisfied by the positive response of the Guinean delegation, he asked the emperor to invite President Toure to Ethiopia for talks with him. He agreed and President Sékou Toure had his face to face with the emperor in Addis Abeba on 28 June 1962, which put on firm footing that there was chance for the Addis Abeba conference, more importantly the two blocs to work on their differences.

The emperor had already accepted Ketama’s plan on how to bring the two sides together, convincing President Sékou Toure that the division into blocs was detrimental to Africa’s interests. Using Ketema’s plan, he persuaded the Guinean leader to form partnership with Ethiopia. Once Guinea agreed to this position, Ethiopia secured a pledge that President Toure would speak in favour of unity. Following such arrangements, the emperor sent out invitations to the 32 African countries to attend a conference of both blocs in Addis Abeba.

Everyone responded affirmatively. This required, according to Makonnen Ketema, the Ethiopian foreign minister’s tour of all the capital cities to deliver the invitation personally and discuss with the governments leaders of all the countries about the conference.

Meanwhile, Ethiopia had prepared draft agenda, which according to Makonnen Ketema’s The Creation of the OAU consisted of:

• The establishment of an Organization of African States, with a charter and a permanent secretariat.
• Cooperation in areas of economy and social welfare, education and culture, and collective defense
• The final eradication of colonialism
• Means of combating racial discrimination and apartheid
• Possible establishment of regional economic groupings
• Disarmament
In opening the conference, Emperor Haile Selassie told his colleagues the head of state and government:

“We know that there are differences among us. Africans enjoy different cultures, distinctive values, special attributes. But we also know that unity can be and has been attained among men of the most disparate origins, that difference of race, of religion, of culture, of tradition, are no insuperable obstacles to the coming together of peoples. History teaches us that unity is strength and cautions us to submerge and overcome our difference in the quest for common goals, to strive, with all our combined strength, for the path to true African brotherhood and unity…Unless the political liberty for which Africans have for long struggled is complemented and bolstered by a corresponding economic and social growth, the breath of life which sustains our freedom may flicker out.”

Both the Casablanca and Monrovia blocs had also come to Addis Abeba with drafts of what their positions were. Following consultations at the level of foreign ministers, after some haggling, it was reported, they all agreed to work on the Ethiopian draft, aware that it could serve as a working basis since it had combined the essential positions of both sides.

In Addis Abeba, foreign ministers of the 32 countries, represented at the conference of ministers, finally drafted the OAU charter for approval by the heads of state and government. It was signed on 25 May 1963.Perhaps, it must have surprised every one of the leaders by the speed with which the two blocs came together and overcame their differences.

That is an important contribution Ethiopia has made to the establishment of the OAU.

Fortunately, with the establishment of the OAU, President Nkrumah must have drawn some degree of satisfaction to see in his own lifetime the emergence of a continental organization that became the leader in the liberation struggles to free those peoples and countries that still were under colonialism. Ghana provided weapons, as did Ethiopia to freedom fighters, especially in southern Africa.

Three years after the establishment of the OAU, President Kwame Nkrumah was overthrown in a military coup in 1966, while he was on a state visit to North Vietnam and China. He lived in exile in Conakry, Guinea.

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com

Internecine war of 1998 -2000

The root cause of the ugly internecine war of 1998 – 2000 between Ethiopia and Eritrea that claimed 100, 000 lives, numerous injuries, dislocation of innocent citizens and colossal damage to the economy should be revisited in order to predict whether more of the same would repeat. The fact that Zenawi publicly complained that he was “stabbed in the back” by his mentor Isaias Afeworqui may provide a clue but may not reveal the truth regarding their differences causing havoc to national and regional peace and stability. Any incident may ignite war between Ethiopia and Eritrea – not necessarily the ‘volcano attack. This writer would like to draw lessons from world history of warfare to make his best guess of the reason for the split of the duo that led to the war and then predict whether a second one may breakout.

Wars fought since the dawn of written history

Hundreds of wars big and small have been fought on our planet since the dawn of written history. For the purpose of this article, a snapshot of the two major wars of the 20th century is mentioned. World War I (1914 – 1918) involving the Triple Entente against the Central powers resulted in the loss of nine million lives and 21 million injuries. It ended in redrawing of boundaries and Germany was made to pay reparations as an aggressor. World War II (1939 -1945) broke out two decades later with the rise of Adolf Hitler; it ended with an estimated loss of lives ranging from 50 – 70 million; other statistical sources estimate 62 – 78 million lives lost. Ethiopia was an innocent victim of this devastating war although Italian Fascist invaders occupied the country in 1936. The expansionist Fascist Italian Dictator, Mussolini, had one and only one reason to invade Ethiopia and commit atrocious criminal acts on her citizens; it was rivalry with European colonial masters to spread his hold over as many countries as possible in Africa using the human and economic resources of Ethiopia as well as the fighting acumen of Ethiopian patriots of which he knew very well by the humiliating defeat of Italian aggressors in the famous Battle of Adwa.

Incidentally, the mostly peasant multi-ethnic Ethiopian patriotic forces, under the Northern Command of Ras Kassa Hailu, dealt a shaming defeat to Marshal Badoglio’s modern army supported by air power. He reconfirmed the bravery of Ethiopian patriots in Tigray in 1936 almost in tears over his loss. Leaflets dropped over villages in Tigray singled out the Amharas and Oromos1 in particular for hindering the ‘civilizing’ mission of Italy; the leaflets carried strict warning intimidating villagers not to cooperate with the Ethiopian army in any way. But fighter-bomber airplanes and containers filled with poison gas dropped from the air made the difference culminating in the occupation of Ethiopia for 5 years. All along Ethiopians treated Italian captives humanely and thought the savage a lesson in compassion.

1 Source: Habešská Odyssea (YeHabesha Jebdu) የሃበሻ ጀብዱ by Adolf Parlesak Translated by Techane Jobre Mekonnen – page 214 • It is an excellent book by the Advisor to Ras Kassa during the Italian Fascist invasion.

The quest for sphere of influence continues to this date supported by sophisticated gunboat diplomacy and/or military intervention by proxy or directly in the era of neocolonialism.

Loss due to internal conflicts in Ethiopia since 1974
The carnage to human lives and hemorrhage to the economies on both the national and regional scale since the breakout of the Ethiopian revolution in 1974 is despicably staggering. The parties in the upheavals include: protagonists of White Terror and Red Terror; separatists like ELF, Shabia, TPLF et al staunchly supported by the Arab world; the Greater Somalia ambition of Ziade Barre ignoring the OAU Charter to which Somalia was a signatory party – a typical example of hegemony still displayed by the five stars on national flag of Somalia. Add to this the invasion of Ethiopia by the Barre’s army equipped to the brim by the defunct USSR while Ethiopia was denied arms by the Carter Administration even though those arms were paid for from the miniscule treasury of in 1977.

Pretexts for starting wars could on the surface be ideological, sectarian, or racial hatred; but in the end hegemony and economic domination are the real underlying goal of political leaders.

Rivals in the pursuit of hegemony

The former inherited similar characteristics from his foster father Isaias Afeworqui. Child and father are both up to their necks in committing heinous crimes including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, engaging in proxy war, gross economic mismanagement, and destabilizing the region of the Horn of Africa, ad infinitum.

It is obvious that Meles Zenwi and Isaias Afeworqui are the main rivals for regional supremacy in the Horn of Africa. Ironically both worked hand in glove to obliterate Ethiopia and share the spoils. TPLF took Addis Ababa in 1991 and Isaias’ Shabia took Asmara and declared independence in a referendum, a whopping 99.83% supporting secession from Ethiopia responding to a sole questionnaire asking to choose between slavery and freedom. The much vaunted wild ‘vision’ of making Eritrea the Singapore of Africa was shattered for the assumption of making Ethiopia as Eritrea’s market for its industrial products became untenable.

The duo split for economic reasons without which political power cannot be sustained. The two dictators are now miserably desperate misruling impoverished countries and for that reason it is highly improbable that they have the stamina to wage war. If they do against so many odds one should expect refugees and army deserters flowing in both directions. The final solution may then be reversion to the Federation ante, which was dismantled by the Imperial regime.

Factors to consider

Following factors should be considered in the prediction of war between Ethiopia and Eritrea:

1.Degree to which the two arrogant and belligerent tyrants asses their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis, comprehensively and objectively, will be a determinant factor one way or another. If done properly, the outcome of the SWOT analysis should tell the duo that it is suicidal for both to engage in a major military clash. But experience shows that both are driven by petty pride;

2.Independence, strength, agility and dedication of civil societies: Independent civil societies do not exist in both countries to organize and hold public demonstrations to oppose hostilities. But Ethiopians and Eritreans in the Diaspora can collaboratively mount opposition to war between the peoples ruled under duress and suffering abject poverty;

3.Influence by foreign interests: The two dictators are surrogates of foreign powers that drive them on a collision course. Delinking Isaias from Al Shabab through concerted persuasion of the international community will make Zenawi irrelevant to the West, especially to the USA and U.K, and thus weakening his rationale and appetite for waging war.

4. Intervention by the AU and UN: These two international bodies can play diplomatic role to avert war; Ethiopians and Eritreans should collaborate to engage both of them to act positively;

5.Unemployed youth: The rampant unemployment of the youth in the region provide a convenient pool of available manpower suitable for conscripting the young into the military for short training and then deploy them as fighters. Parents and civil societies on both sides should influence their children not to fall prey to the propaganda of their dictatorial rulers and engage in an unjust senseless war once again between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Readers may consider the above and add more of their own to predict whether or not war may breakout between Ethiopia and Eritrea. As for me the danger for war does exist given the saber rattling stance between Meles Zenawi and Isaias Afeworqi and their rivalry for regional hegemony.

Lastly, I am reminded of a distinguished Professor who told me about Murphy’s Law and the next day, almost in tears, complained that he lost his document while giving it the last touch on his laptop for presentation to his employers.” What can happen, will happen” according to Murphy’s Law; let us all work hard and pray in earnest so that war between Ethiopia and Eritrea won’t happen ever again.

Release Andualem Aragie, Eskinder Nega and all political prisoners in Ethiopia immediately and unconditionally!

LONG LIVE ETHIOPIA!!!
robele_ababya@yahoo.com

Habešská Odyssea (YeHabesha Jebdu) የሃበሻ ጀብዱ by Adolf Parlesak Translated by Techane Jobre Mekonnen •

Mr. Fisher’s description fits most successful dictators. Admit it you thought he was talking about ours, didn’t’ you? It is all right, no need to worry; he was actually talking about the late Colonel Gaddafi. The Leader got away with just doing that for over forty years. Libya lost a generation. That is what failed leaders do to a country. After they are gone they leave a mess behind.

The drawing above is by cartoonist Ali Ferzat of Syria. Mr. Assad and his associates did not look kindly at his work. According to Mr. Fisher “On August 25, the 60-year-old Syrian political cartoonist Ali Ferzat was driving home from his office in Damascus when a car with tinted windows blocked the road. Men dragged Ferzat from his car, stuffed him in a van, beat him severely and broke both his hands in what they called “a warning” and dumped him on the side of the road.” Mr. Assad and his goons would like to kill Mr. Ferzat, thereby digging their grave. That is the logic of dictators.

Mr. Ferzat drew the above cartoon after his hands healed. What is going on in Syria is insanity, and that is putting it mildly. President Assad has witnessed the demise of Ben Ali, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Saleh but he is following the path that leads to the same dead end street. Why do you think? He is not stupid, and I doubt he is insane. May be a little insane ok? He probably thinks things are different in Syria. May be he believes he is more cunning and smarter than those buffoons. No matter what, he cannot stop this runaway train. He has no choice. It is a do or die situation. He is a prisoner of his own doing and the Syrian people are prisoners of their tolerance of evil for so long.

We Ethiopians are familiar with that state of affairs. We have been prisoners for a long time. It is true we have not been lucky with the leaders we seem to attract. Misfits and delusional describes them better. It is a good enough explanation for the debacle in our homeland. My question is how come the same dysfunctional behavior is replicated away from home?

It is fair to ask if we are running our affairs any better where ever we have settled. If our claim is that we have been cursed with bad leaders can we show any evidence that we are capable of building a harmonious society with out the interference of those we hold responsible for our failure? I believe it is a legitimate question that begs for answers from each one of us. I am interested in an answer not an excuse. Excuse is for losers. My interest is in looking for an explanation so we can search for a solution to fix the problem not to go on a fishing expedition to avoid responsibility or share the blame.

Look around you. We are in the hundreds of thousands that have left their home to construct a new reality. There is no denying that we are good at survival no matter how dire the circumstances. From the Jungles of Uganda all the way to Southern Africa, from Beirut to the Gulf, From Tuscany Coast to the frigid waters of Scandinavia and the mighty Continent of North America we Ethiopians are thriving in our new environment. Any mother would be proud of us! Please don’t get a big head now there is more.

That speaks about our individual achievements. My profound question to you my Diaspora cousin is how come we shine as individuals but fail as a community? Can you answer that for me? If you don’t mind I said answer not make up an excuse that will remove ‘you’ from the equation and dump the sins onto others. That is not good enough. That is what is called avoidance. It is a little difficult to imagine how each one of you is a perfect saint while all those ‘others’ are the ones causing the problem. It does not work like that. Believe me it is not that way.

If we are going to share the glory I believe we should be willing to share the blame too. The problem with our country is that there are so many that take credit for the past while screwing the present. I don’t mean to belittle the many achievements of the few. I am looking at the bigger picture. Voltaire wrote ‘No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.’ You see what I mean. There wouldn’t be an avalanche without the individual snowflake.

Our anti social behavior is manifested in most aspects of our interactions. Be it Political, religious or simple Eder the slash and burn formula is our choice of resolving simple misunderstandings. Just check out your community if you are lucky or unlucky enough to live in a large size abesha population. There is a high possibility that the effort of individuals is spent in conflict and drama instead of cooperation and harmony. We are becoming very good in this use and discard philosophy. It used to be like that in the West before they became aware of the limitations of resources. Everything was manufactured to be used and thrown away.

You know how good we are at copying. Unfortunately we are not discriminating. Thus we picked up that concept and applied it to our country. Circumstances forced us to leave. Returning was not a safe option. That fact made the act of leaving something you love behind a normal situation. Now we have enhanced that to include organizations and associations. If we disagree we just create a small faction and leave. After spending so much time and resources in building a beautiful organization, Church etc. we have no qualms in leaving it behind hoping it would disintegrate and disappear. I have seen situations where the wreckers have no plans with what to replace it with. All available force goes into making sure nothing survives.

Why do you think that is so? I am not imaging this. I am sure we all love our country. We love each other. I know that because we seem to spend inordinate amount of time worrying about each other and our homeland. We have our own Churches and Mosques; we have our own restaurants, quick stores, coffee shops, our own on line community etc. For people that can’t live without each other we definitely exhibit a strange way to show our love and concern.

This formidable force commonly called the Diaspora is a paper tiger. The Diaspora is all bark no bite. In fact the Diaspora is such a negative and destructive force it needs to be overhauled. Such talk might offend you. You might be forced to get your guards up. That is the snowflake talking. It is like saying I see all this dysfunction around me but I am not responsible. Who me? I am the picture of love and tolerance. It is all those others that are the cause of all evil. Stop that now.

That is what Gaddafi said. Look what it got him. Denial is not a winning strategy. Self-reflection is what the situation demands. Admitting there is a problem is show of maturity. Holding oneself responsible and willing to change is one giant step forward. This total dysfunction is the sum total of the little things we do in our everyday interaction.

I believe we can start with respect for each other. Respect based not because of education, wealth or gosa but respect because we are each other’s keepers. There is no need to demonize others, no value in demeaning fellow country people, not a good idea searching for motive in every utterance and no winner in war. If we take care of the little things, the big things will fall into place.

This habit of screaming bloody murderer about the hapless Woyane is not taking us anywhere. The crimes of our tyrannical leaders will be the cause of their downfall. The Ethiopian people will take care of that. They are working on it everyday. It is us I worry about. If we are not capable of forming a harmonious society out here where we really do not have conflicting interest what makes you think we could succeed over there? Shouldn’t out here be the place where we learn this new concept of respect, tolerance, kindness and all other winning behavior?

That is the advantage of living in a free society. It gives individuals a choice. No one compels us to do this or that. We are free to choose. Thus when we split our Church, when we disrespect our leaders be it Community or Party we are making a choice. When we speak ill of each other and when we hurt each other with venomous language it is a choice we each make. When we invest in Woyane land, buy stolen property, turn our faces away when we see our people being abused we are making a choice. No need to look at your neighbor. You ladies and gentlemen have to answer for your own actions. What would it be soaring high like the eagle or scavenging like the vulture. The choice is yours but you must take full responsibility for it!

The prime minister deserves high marks for improving the nation’s health indicators, economy and agriculture. Targeted U.S. aid helped achieve these outcomes, reducing Ethiopia’s long-term dependence on outside help.

But human rights organizations say Meles’ government is also turning parts of the country into prison camps, jailing, torturing or hounding into exile journalists and dissidents.

A shocking BBC news report last year found evidence that the government withheld food, fertilizers and seeds from villages that did not support Meles’ political party — a death sentence in this rural country.

The United States provides a significant share of the $3 billion Ethiopia receives annually in long-term development aid, mostly through a multilateral donor partnership. It and other donors need to convince Meles that it pays to have a civil society and to ensure that allegations of government misconduct can be independently investigated.

About our editorials

Plain Dealer editorials express the view of The Plain Dealer’s editorial board — the publisher, editor and editorial-writing staff. As is traditional, editorials are unsigned and intended to be seen as the voice of the newspaper.

Check their website

Mister President

Ethiopia is deemed to be an ‘important regional security partner’ by the US government and is one of the largest recipients of US aid – over $1 billion a year since 2007. According to Human Right Watch and the Oakland Institute the regime is forcibly evicting and relocating 70,000 people from Gambella and another 1.5 million people from other parts of the country to make land available for investment in agriculture. In implementing this policy they are illegally expropriating people’s property, making the people landless vagrants condemned to permanent poverty and misfortune, if not death. Dislocating people instead of improving their means of lively hood, implies psychological, social, economic and moral disarray that no foreign aid can substitute. According to the Oakland Institute people have been relocated in inhospitable places where they can’t feed themselves and likely to cause many deaths and extreme hardship. It will also aggravate the current hunger while laying the groundwork for future famine in Ethiopia .

The most alarming part of the article states that President Obama has authorized assistance of US Aid for this inhumane project with consultation with Raji Shah, the administrator of US Aid. We find it extremely difficult and distressing to believe that US funds should be used to support such illegal acts committed by a corrupt and nefarious regimes; which has never respected the rule of law and has been governing by dictate for the last 21 years, thanks to the support it gets from Western Powers among which the US and UK are the most prominent. Recollecting the forced removal of the indigenous people and settling white people in the Kenya Highlands, which directly led to the war of liberation spearheaded by the Mau Mau; and closer at home here in the US to what happened to Native Americans and their land. In Ethiopia violent crashes have already occurred in certain areas, and a very strong public opposition to this measure is evident. It is difficult to believe that the US, who should know about these precedents would support this type of inhumane and unjustifiable population displacement. As reported by reputable organizations like the Human Rights Watch and the Oakland Institute, the relocation project in Ethiopia amounts to actually settling Indian and other foreign farmers, while evicting and dislocating the local population. We believe that the President has been ill advised in this matter, which is contrary to the principle that he announced with regards to the rich exploiting the poor, particularly in view of the extreme poverty that prevails in Ethiopia. It is our hope that the President will rescind this measure and direct the US Aid administration to focus on projects that help those that are less fortunate, instead of being instrumental to detrimental to their well being.

Respectfully yours,

Imru Zelleke

Chairman ENPCP

Police arrested the group – including 29 women – after raiding a prayer meeting in the second city of Jeddah.

The women were subjected to strip searches and the men beaten and called “unbelievers”, according to HRW.

In 2006, the Saudi government promised to stop interfering with private worship by non-Muslims.

The group was arrested in a private home as they gathered to pray during the run-up to Christmas, celebrated by Ethiopian Orthodox Christians on 7 January.

HRW spoke to a man and two women by telephone from the prisons where they are being held.

They say they have been charged with mixing with unmarried persons of the opposite sex – even though HRW says Saudi Arabia has no law defining “illicit mingling”.

Mixing of the sexes is not allowed in public – but normally permitted in private unless for “the purpose of corruption”, according to the religious police.

The ultra-conservative Muslim kingdom bans the practice of any religion except Islam – but in recent years pledged to leave people of other faiths alone if they worshipped in private homes.

Ethiopia was one of the first Christian countries in the world, having officially adopted Christianity as the state religion in the 4th Century.

On the occasion, Secretary-General Ban said that sustainable development is a top priority for his second term of office. In that connection, he observed, “We need to chart a new, more sustainable course for the future, one that strengthens equality and economic growth while protecting our planet.” he added. “Sustainable development offers our best chance to change course.”

In submitting their 99-page report to the secretary-general in their letter of 30 January 2012, the two Co-chairs of the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability President Tarja Halonen of Finland and President Jacob Zuma of South Africa emphasized:
The signposts are clear: We need to change dramatically, beginning with how we think about our relationship to each other, to future generations, and to the eco-systems that support us. Our mission as a Panel was to reflect on and formulate a new vision for sustainable growth and prosperity, along with mechanisms for achieving it. With seven billion of us now inhabiting our planet, it is time to reflect on our current path. Today we stand at a crossroads. Continuing on the same path will put people and our planet at greatly heightened risk. The other path, we believe, provides extraordinary opportunity, but we must be committed and courageous in following it. Changing course will not be easy. But over time, we believe that following a more sustainable path will enhance human well-being, further global justice, strengthen gender equity, and preserve the Earth’s life-support systems for future generations.
The high-level panel sees its report as a continuation of the process started by the Brundtland report, which a quarter of a century ago introduced the concept of sustainable development to the international community. Although since then the world has gained a deeper understanding of the interconnected challenges we are facing today, the report states that sustainable development provides the best opportunity for people to choose their future.

The panel has made three concrete proposals on the way forward. These are empowering people to make sustainable choices, working towards a sustainable economy and strengthening institutional governance that support sustainable development. In its detailed recommendations, the report attaches enormous importance to the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development — economic, social and environmental.

The work of the High-level Panel, which the secretary-general commissioned in August 2010 was carried out by 22 members drawn from senior positions in government, parliaments and institutions from: Australia, Barbados, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, India, Japan, Mexico, Mozambique, Nigeria, Norway, Russia, Spain, South Korea, Switzerland, Sweden, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and the United States.

This report, according to the United Nations, is expected to serve as an important contribution to the Organization’s work on sustainable development, particularly in preparation for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in Brazil this June.

Synopsis of the recommendations

The report contains 56 recommendations geared toward facilitating realization of the objectives of sustainable development. These are divided into three major headings. They are:

A. Empowering people to make sustainable choices is the first one and it comes with 26 recommendations. Again, this part divides into six major parts, into which the recommendations are distributed. The focuses of these recommendations is summed up as follows:

(i) Delivering on the fundamentals of development: international commitments to eradicate poverty, promote human rights and human security and advance gender equality.
Three recommendations focusing on the imperative of eradicating poverty, government responsibility to respect, protect and provide for human rights and gender equality are clearly spelt out.

(ii) Advancing education for sustainable development, including secondary and vocational education, and building of skills to help ensure that all of society can contribute to solutions that address today’s challenges and capitalize on opportunities.

Three recommendations focus on the need for expanding educational opportunities and the necessity of private/public cooperation to that end.

(iii) Creating employment opportunities, especially for women and youth, to drive green and sustainable growth.

Four recommendations on green jobs and decent work polices, opportunities for young entrepreneurs, equality in work places and access for women farmers to land and resources are presented.

(iv) Enabling consumers to make sustainable choices and advance responsible behavior individually and collectively.

This has four recommendations that focus on sustainable production and consumption; the need for labeling of produces that aim to facilitate informed choices are presented.

(v) Managing resources and enabling a twenty-first-century Green Revolution: agriculture, oceans and coastal systems, energy and technology; and,

This has eight recommendations dealing with importance of working on agreement on global principles for sustainable and responsible land and water investment deals, universal access to affordable sustainable energy 2030; provision to citizens, especially those in remote areas with access to technologies, and international financial institutions supporting enlargement of innovation.

(vi) Building resilience through sound safety nets, disaster risk reduction and adaptation planning.

There are four recommendations to governments to ensure that all citizens are provided with access to basic safety nets through appropriate national efforts and the provision of appropriate capacity, finance and technology.

B. Working towards sustainable economy is a major heading that is divided into four subheadings and consists of 13 recommendations. These focus on ensuring sustainability of the economy through the following measures.

(i) Incorporating social and environmental costs: regulation and pricing to reflect externalities.
This comes with three recommendations requiring governments to create price signals that value sustainability to guide consumption and undertaking reforms, establishing the necessary institutions and standards.

(ii) Creating an incentive road map that increasingly values long-term objectives.

The four recommendations under this deal with businesses aligning their practices with universally accepted principles, sovereign wealth supporting the transition to sustainable development.

(iii) Partnering to leverage new investments.

Five recommendations are listed here, dealing with forging strategic partnership between governments and businesses; public investments to create enabling frameworks for additional financing. It also calls for measures for corporate accountability.

(iv) Establishing a common framework for measuring progress.

The one recommendation under this calls for establishment of a Sustainable Development Index by 2014.

C. Strengthening institutional governance. This is a major part of the report and breaks into five parts zeroing on the institutional aspects of sustainable development. These are:

(i) Coherence and accountability at the national and local levels
The five recommendations point to the need to ensuring the rule of law, good governance and citizens’ rights of access to official information, public participation in decision-making and the interface between science and policymaking.

(ii) Coherence and accountability at the regional and global levels.

Three recommendations under these treat the role and importance of equity in relation to sustainable development in a comprehensive way, nationally and locally, specifically calling on bilateral donors to step up their efforts to promote on impact of sustainable development in a comprehensive way.

(iii) Sustainable development goals.

The two recommendation under this call for a set of key universal sustainable development goals, covering all three dimensions of sustainable development [economic, social and environmental] as well as their interconnections to galvanize individual and collective actions

(iv) A global sustainable development outlook.

Under this come two recommendations highlighting the role of the UN secretary-general and the scientific community.

(v) Strengthening international governance for sustainable development.

Five recommendations are sketched pointing to the need for a global council to improve the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development making full use of the United Nations as the world’s global forum.

In conclusion, the report is pressing the point harder that the time is over for economists, social activists and environmental scientists simply to talk past each other — almost speaking different languages, or at least different dialects. “The time has come to unify the disciplines, to develop a common language for sustainable development that transcends the warring camps; in other words, to bring the sustainable development paradigm into mainstream economics. That way, politicians and policymakers will find it much harder to ignore.”

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com

Last week, a High Court judge in Kenya ordered Kenyan officials to arrest and deliver Sudan’s president Omar Al-Bashir to the ICC to face charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide if he ever set foot again in Kenya. The U.N. estimates well over 300,000 people have perished under Bashir’s regime. Bashir unsuccessfully claimed immunity from prosecution as a sitting head of state. Nearly all of the other unindicted African dictators have chimed in to severely criticize the ICC and demand suspension of Bashir’s arrest warrant. Five other suspects are also sought on ICC warrants in the Sudan including Ahmed Haroun, a lawyer and minister of humanitarian affairs, Ali Kushayb, a former senior Janjaweed (local militiamen allied with the Sudanese regime against Darfur rebels), Bahr Idriss Abu Garda, a rebel leader and two others.
In another development in Kenya last week, Uhuru Kenyatta, finance minister and son of Kenya’s famed independence leader Jomo Kenyatta, resigned following an ICC ruling that he will face trial for crimes against humanity in connection with the communal post-election violence between supporters of presidential candidates Raila Odinga and Mwai Kibaki in 2008. The U.N. estimates some 1,200 people died in weeks of unrest between December 2007 and February 2008 and 600,000 people were forcibly displaced. Cabinet secretary Francis Muthaura, a close ally of president Mwai Kibaki, former Education Minister William Ruto and radio announcer Joshua arap Sang face similar charges.

The ICC had also issued arrest warrants for Moammar Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam and Libyan intelligence chief Abdullah al-Senussi on charges of crimes against humanity. Last week, Libya’s Justice Minster announced that Libya, and not the ICC, will be trying Saif al-Islam. Al-Senoussi remains a fugitive from justice.

Last but not forgotten is former Liberian president Charles Taylor who went on trial on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes in The Hague before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. He is awaiting a verdict after a nearly three and half year trial.

The ICC presently has open investigations against individuals in various countries including Uganda, DR Congo, Central African Republic, Darfur and Cote d’Ivoire. The rogue’s gallery of suspects sought in ICC issued arrest warrants for crimes against humanity and war crimes include five senior leaders of the “Lord’s Resistance Army” in Uganda including the notorious Joseph Kony and his deputy Vincent Otti and three other top commanders. In the DR Congo various rebel and militia leaders and Congolese military officers and politicians including Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, Bosco Ntaganda, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui and two others are targets of ICC investigation.

No ICC, No Justice?

The ICC, established in 2002, is an institution with a lot of legal and political limitations in its investigative and prosecutorial duties. For instance, it has authority over “crimes against humanity” only if the acts were “committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.” The crimes must have been “extensively or rationally orchestrated” by the perpetrators. The ICC can investigate cases only where the accused is a national of a state party that has accepted ICC jurisdiction and the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or if a “situation” is referred by the Security council. Most importantly, it can exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute such crimes.

The ICC has a very difficult job to do in investigating and chasing the world’s worst human rights violations across the planet. Despite its recent establishment, obstacles and limitations, it has a respectable record. As of September 2010, the Office of the ICC Prosecutor had received 8,874 “communications” about alleged human rights violations. After an initial review, it declined to proceed with 4,002 of them concluding that they are “manifestly outside the jurisdiction of the Court”. To date, the Court has opened investigations in seven African countries. Three investigations began following referral by state parties, the UN Security Council referred two more (Darfur and Libya) and two were begun proprio motu (“ICC prosecutor began on his own initiative”). To date, the ICC has charged 27 people and issued arrest warrants for 18 more. Five individuals are in various stages of trial and eight remain at large as fugitives. Two individuals died before their trials concluded and charges were dismissed against four.

The one unsettled question is what happens to those individuals who commit crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide in official or unofficial capacity but cannot be prosecuted because they are not part of the regime of the Rome Statute which established the ICC. For instance, Ethiopia has not ratified or accepted the Rome Statute and technically does not come under ICC jurisdiction. Does that mean the individuals who perpetrated crimes against humanity and war crimes in that country will never be held accountable under any international system of criminal justice?

The evidence of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Ethiopia is fully documented, substantial and overwhelming. An official Inquiry Commission report in 2006 documented the extrajudicial killing of at least 193 persons, wounding of 763 others and arbitrary imprisonment of nearly 30,000 persons in the post-2005 election period in that country. There are at least 237 individuals identified and implicated in these crimes. In December 2003, in Gambella, Ethiopia, 424 individuals died in extrajudicial killings by security forces. In the Ogaden, reprisal “executions of 150 individuals” and 37 others were documented by Human Rights Watch in 2008 which charged:

Ethiopian military personnel who ordered or participated in attacks on civilians should be held responsible for war crimes. Senior military and civilian officials who knew or should have known of such crimes but took no action may be criminally liable as a matter of command responsibility. The widespread and apparently systematic nature of the attacks on villages throughout Somali Region is strong evidence that the killings,torture, rape, and forced displacement are also crimes against humanity for which the Ethiopian government bears ultimate responsibility.
In 2010, Human Rights Watch made a submission to the U.N. Committee Against Torture “regarding serious patterns of torture and other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment in Ethiopia.”

Torture and ill-treatment have been used by Ethiopia’s police, military, and other members of the security forces to punish a spectrum of perceived dissenters, including university students, members of the political opposition, and alleged supporters of insurgent groups, as well as alleged terrorist suspects. Human Rights Watch has documented incidents of torture and ill-treatment by Ethiopian security forces in a range of settings. The frequency, ubiquity, and patterns of abuse by agents of the central and state governments demonstrate systematic mistreatment involving commanding officers, not random activity by rogue soldiers and police officers. In several cases documented by Human Rights Watch, military commanders participated personally in torture.

Universal Jurisdiction

The are obvious limits to the globalization of criminal justice under the ICC regime. But does that mean human rights violators who are not subject to ICC jurisdiction get away with murder, torture, war crimes and genocide? Maybe not.

There is an encouraging trend globally that more and more national courts are willing to operate under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction to prosecute gross human rights violators for atrocities committed outside their countries. Simply stated, if someone who committed crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide is found in another country where the crimes were not committed, that country makes it its obligation to bring the perpetrator to justice using its own courts. For instance, Article 5 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment provides that each State shall “take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over such offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite him.”

Universal jurisdiction has been exercised in a number of high profile cases. A Spanish judge charged former Chilean president Augusto Pinochet in 1998 for crimes against humanity committed in Chile. After years of appeal and delays, Pinochet died in 2006 without facing justice. A Belgian court in 2001 convicted the killers of two Rwandan nuns for war crimes during the 1994 Rwandan genocide. A Belgian court in 2005 indicted the former president of Chad, Hissène Habré, for crimes against humanity, torture, war crimes and other human rights violations committed during his presidency in Chad. Two weeks ago, a Senegalese court blocked the extradition of the Chadian dictator because Belgium failed to file the “original arrest warrant and other papers”. A German court has convicted a former leader of a paramilitary Serb group for acts of genocide committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1997. Over the past several decades, more than 15 countries have exercised universal jurisdiction in investigations or prosecutions of persons suspected of crimes under international law including Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, the UK and the United States of America.

There are other non-criminal legal remedies as well. For instance, the Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit (HRVWCU) in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) National Security Investigations Division conducts investigations to prevent foreign war crimes suspects, persecutors and human rights abusers from entering the United States. It also identifies, prosecutes and deports such offenders who have entered the U.S. Over the past 8 years, ICE has arrested more than 200 individuals for human rights-related violations under various criminal and/or immigration statutes and deported more than 400 known or suspected human rights violators from the United States. Currently, ICE is pursuing more than 1,900 leads and removal cases involving suspected human rights violators from nearly 95 different countries. HRVWCU receives anonymous tips and information from those who report suspected war criminals and human rights violators residing in the U.S. Individuals seeking to report suspected human rights violators may contact the HRV unit at HRV.ICE@DHS.GOV

Justice Delayed is Not Justice Denied, Just Delayed

Justice delayed is just delayed. The victims of former Chilean dictator Gen. Augusto Pinochet might have thought justice delayed is justice denied. So may have thought the victims of Argentina’s Dirty War. The facts are very encouraging. Since December 2006, Chilean prosecutors and judges have convicted hundreds of former military personnel in the Pinochet regime accused of committing grave human rights violations. As of July 2008, 482 former military personnel and civilian collaborators were facing charges for a variety of offenses classified under crimes against humanity. Among these, 256 had been convicted, of whom 83 had had their convictions confirmed on appeal. In the Argentine Dirty War (the generals’ war against thousands of activists, militants, trade unionists, students, journalists and others), the mighty generals have been held to account. Many of the top military officers involved including Leopoldo Galtieri, general and President of Argentina, Jorge Rafael Videla, former senior Army commander and de facto President and other lesser known top officers were tried and sentenced to life imprisonment or long prison terms. Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s dictator for over three decades, his sons, interior minsiter and others are today facing justice in an Egyptian court. Syria’s Bashar al-Assad of Syria and Ali Saleh of Yemen will no doubt face justice in Syria, Yemen or elsewhere. Justice will also arrive like a slow, chugging and delayed train for those who have committed crimes against humanity and war crimes in Ethiopia.

“Repression is not the way to virtue. When people restrain themselves
out of fear, their lives are by necessity diminished.” Mihaly Csiszentmihalyi

The brutal Zenawi regime, through the courts it controls, has sentenced Fetehe newspaper columnist Reyot Alemu and reporter Hirut Kifle to 14 years and 19 years of prison time respectively. Wubshet Taye, the deputy editor of the now closed Awramba Times newspaper, received 14 years behind bars. Using their pen to hold political leaders accountable, as is their right under the constitution, is their crime.

Eskinder Nega, the popular reporter, known for his strong advocacy of a peaceful and nonviolent Egypt-like change in Ethiopia, also found himself in Kaliti, accused of inciting violence.

The UDJ’s young, popular, and charismatic vice president, Andwalem Aragie, a UDJ council member and leader Nathnael Mekonnen were also accused of supporting G7, a charge that has been proven baseless even by the very audio evidence presented by the prosecutor.

Bekele Gerba and Olbana Lelissa, leaders of the main alliance of opposition parties, Medrek, were falsely accused of being OLF supporter and for providing Amnesty International with information about the regime’s unconscionable discriminatory distribution of donor-donated food aid and the denial of that aid to opposition supporters.

All in all, no explosive devices, intelligence radio communications, or any equipment that could remotely be used for terrorist acts were found in the home and offices of the jailed reporters and political leaders. However, their pens and speeches have taken them to the notorious, rat infested Kaliti prison. They are journalists, non-violent individuals, and peaceful political opponents; but they have been labeled as “terrorists”.

Why are these reporters and UDJ/MEDREK leaders in Kaliti? Why is the hope of seeing a better Ethiopia getting dimmer and dimmer?

Professor Asrat Woldeyes stood for Ethiopia and its people. He came out of prison in a body bag. What guarantees do we have that Eskinder Nega and others will not be the new Professor Asrats?

Birtukan Mideksa stood for justice, honesty, and the rule of law. The Zenawi regime barbarically placed her in solitary confinement for more than 6 months, something that has not happened even to rapists and serial killers. She was denied visitations by family, lawyers, and spiritual fathers and physically and psychologically tortured. Under duress, she walked out from prison emotionally, spiritually and psychologically damaged. What guarantee do we have that Eskinder Nega and others will not be like Birtukan Mideksa?

Eskinder Nega, Andwalem Aragie, Reyot Alemu and others, because they love their country and are selfless, stood for Democracy and Ethiopiawinet. They stood against dictatorship, ethnic politics, and mock democracy. They did their duty.

Had they decided to be silent, they could have easily spared themselves prison life. They could have even joined Addis Zemen newspaper or the EPRDF by making deals with the government. They could have a choice of ministerial positions. They could have chosen a live in exile and live comfortably in Europe and America. They could have been easily like us. Ethiopia is no more a mother to them than us that they find themselves in where they are now.

However, Eskinder Nega and the others went to prison because they are visionaries and have faith in the people. They believed the people, with the help of the Almighty God, will soon deliver them from Kaliti Prison. Though emotionally and physically painful is their incarceration (to them and their families), they are filled with hope and see a prosperous, unique and democratic Ethiopia beyond the walls of Kaliti prison. The hope of a better Ethiopia has given them the strength to endure their pain.

We may not see them and listen to what they say in person. However, we can hear them in spirit. From Kaliti, they are calling to us to stand up and continue the struggle. They are asking for our help and support. We must not let them down.

It seems the Diaspora is disillusioned, confused, and retracting itself from the struggle because it feels it could not make a difference. Many of us are possessed with the spirit of self-defeatism and despair. We are losing the battle before it starts.

We may not have supported the EPRDF. We may not have directly contributed to the incarceration of our brothers and sisters. However, our silence is the reason UDJ/Medrek leaders and journalists are still in jail. Our silence is providing bullets for the EPRDF forces.

I am afraid Eskinder Nega, Reyot Alemu, Adwalem Aragie, Wubshet Taye, Bekele Gerba, Olbana Lelessa, Nathaniel Mekononen, and Hirut Kifle will be the new Professor Asrats and the new Birtukan Midekssas. For sure, they will not be released unless an earthquake happens in the minds and perspectives of Ethiopians. How could Kaliti prisoners be released by the tyrannical EPRDF government unless Ethiopians make it happen?

At this time, the brave democracy activists are in jail not because the EPRDF is strong. They are in jail because Ethiopians are weak, selfish, and silent.

In struggles, there are ups and downs. Some may say, “It is impossible to force change in the Zenawi administration”. Our efforts may seem meaningless. On the surface, the democratic struggle may seem to have “vanished”. The situation in Ethiopia may be “calm” with Prime Minister Meles Zenawi at the helm of power. HOWEVER, WE SHOULD NEVER GIVE UP. It may take years. We might not see a free Ethiopia in our own time. But our children will one day rejoice in a free, prosperous and democratic Ethiopia.

The Great American President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said “First of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”. The only power the EPRDF forces have is their excellent use of the public media. They are good at dividing the opposition and spreading fear among the general public. They want us to fear them. More than its guns, the EPRDF is using FEAR effectively to crush the will of the people. Fear cripples the energy of the human mind.

A handful of EPRDF rulers are able to control the Tigray region and the rest of Ethiopia with an iron fist and unleash fear and terror. They have built up an image of themselves in the mind of many Ethiopians that they are like “gods”. They have successfully established the idea that they are untouchables and that whoever stands in their way will be crushed.

It is time to think of the EPRDF as what it is, a rotten and dying organization. It has no popular support from any region including Tigray. It does not have military strength as many of us might think. The armed forces are disintegrating. They are losing confidence and getting more and more desperate. Their refusal to sit around the negotiating table and start a dialogue with the oppositions shows by itself their lack of confidence. Since they are filled with insecurity and inferiority, they consider everyone their enemy.

It is in this context that I call for a renewal of vision. Instead of being filled with fear and an image of a big “Meles Zenawi”, we should learn to believe in ourselves. “What is man without freedom” said Judge Birtukan Mideksa. A life lived in fear and despair is no better than death. A life lived without a purpose is a tragedy.

It is time to be free from the bondage of fear and ignorance. Freedom starts from within. A man who only thinks of himself and forgets where he came from, is a man who is spiritually poor and sick.

I have hope. I see the potentials of Ethiopians. Ethiopia has so many talented children and tremendous strategic resources. If we have peace and love, if we believe in ourselves, if we look to our brothers and sisters, if we stop being silent on matters that matter , if we allow our God-given talent and energy to come from within us, we would solve our problems on our own and free our brave democracy fighters from prison.

Eskinder and the others did their duty. Let us do ours. It all starts from each one of us. Ethiopia is equal for all Ethiopians. There is no reason one should pay a bigger sacrifice than another. It is time to speak out and assert our freedom in our country. We are all created in the image and likeness of God. God has given us a country called Ethiopia. He has given us the right to live in peace and dignity in Ethiopia. The EPRDF must not be allowed to continue denying us, our God given rights and our dignity.

Let us say No to brutality and torture! Let us say No to dictatorship and ethnic politics! Let us say No to war and poverty! Let us say No to the status quo!

May Our Lord God stretch out his scepter of Peace towards our country!
May He touch us with his Spirit of Freedom and Courage so that we can be free from fear and reclaim our God given rights to live in a peaceful, democratic and prosperous Ethiopia where the rights of its entire people are respected regardless of age, ethnic affiliation, religion, and gender!

In its latest World Economic Outlook, the IMF is of the view that global recovery would stall, risks intensify and as epicenter of the new crisis, the Euro zone economies are foreseen falling into mild recession. Accordingly, the Fund has sharply cut its global growth forecasts to 3.3 percent in 2012 and 3.9 in 2013. In contrast, the World Bank’s forecasts are sterner at 2.5 in 2012 and 3.1 in 2013.

The perspective from the Federal Reserve in the United States is not any different. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke cautioned on Wednesday that the central bank would keep rates at the present floor rate through 2014, a firm indication that the much-touted economic recovery in the United States is not firming up. It seems owing to that, he has qualified his statement by indicating, “Unless there is a substantial strengthening of the economy in the near term, it’s a pretty good guess we will be keeping rates low for some time.”

In mid-January, Justin Yifu Lin the World Bank’s Chief Economist and Vice President for Development Economics sounded the alarm to developing countries from Beijing, urging them “to evaluate their vulnerabilities and prepare for further shocks, while there is still time.”

Another official in charge of the Development Prospects office at the Bank recommends to developing countries to “pre-finance budget deficits, prioritize spending on social safety nets and infrastructure, and stress-test domestic banks.” Of course, many of them would express their frustrations by muttering ‘easier said than done.’

Consequently, it is now clear that the first unfavorable signs of the 2012 shocks would come in the form of falling growth rates in both developed- and developing countries by as much or more than that of 2008/09, according to a World Bank official in charge of global macroeconomics. His view is that this time, “An escalation of the crisis would spare no-one.”

The adverse impacts of these evolving situations in European economies and finances on Sub-Saharan Africa, according to the World Bank, would primarily affect merchandize exports, tourism receipts, commodity prices, foreign direct investment and remittances — the very sources of their means of importing the essentials for their development.

If this assumption is to hold, the first line victims of this onslaught could be countries such as Ethiopia, whose foreign trade by nearly fifty percent is destined to European markets. Europe has always been Ethiopia’s largest export destination, although steady rises have also been observed in the level of Chinese imports during the last few years.

Picking up the other end of the equation, the January 2012 issue of the Economic Intelligence Unit’s Country Report on Ethiopia points out, “Any significant slowdown in the pace of expansion in China—, a crucial economic partner for Africa in terms of trade and investment flows —would be of particular concern.”

This means that many developing countries must brace up with the reality of scaled down growth performances and expectations. This is because, as discussed above, many economies in the developed countries are heading into recession and are in no position to import as many commodities, entailing also falling prices for those they import.

Macroeconomic policies as source of continuing Ethiopia’s problems

On the inflation front, the World Bank observes, “Declining commodity prices have contributed to an easing of headline inflation in most developing countries. Although international food prices eased in recent months, down 14 percent from their peak in February 2011, food security for the poorest, including in the Horn of Africa, remains a central concern.”

Nevertheless, the threat to Ethiopia is not limited to what is happening in European economies. Decisions and policies contributing to macroeconomic instabilities would still be setbacks for economic growth and the country’s development. Recall that Ethiopian authorities in spring announced that they would bring down inflation to less than 10 percent by last September.

In October, the IMF had to warn Ethiopia and, I must add, proved right in stating, “High and rising inflation and entrenched negative real interest rates also threaten Ethiopia’s macroeconomic stability.” A sign of the continuing instability in Ethiopia’s economy is that, despite some signs of decline in inflation lately, by end December 2011 it was as high as high as 35.9 percent with food inflation at 46.5 percent.

It is very likely that we would see further declines in the inflation numbers. The question, however, is what importance it would be if after another quarter the country is to be back to further macroeconomic disturbances?

In any case, this puts to test Access Capital’s forecast in its Macroeconomic Handbook 2011/12, where it exuberantly foresees, “The possibility of an agricultural transformation involving rising acreage, rising yields, and rising exports [as] a very realistic possibility within the next few years.”

China would make its own adjustments

The current problems facing the global economy would also be source of worries for China. Therefore, Beijing would make its own internal adjustments in response to contraction in its foreign markets and increased consumption at home. This would involve prioritizing its imports, elbowing for new markets and searching for greater scope in existing ones to increase its exports.

This would not preclude the possibility of arm-twisting of its African clientele states, including Ethiopia — dependent on its financing of major projects — to import more goods and services. In 2011, Ethiopia’s imports from China are assumed to have outstripped its 17.5 percent level of 2009/10 (source NBE). This is mainly due to China being the source of loans and the centre of many purchases. Of course, one major difficulty is that, as Europe is the largest destination for Ethiopian exports, Asia remains the country’s largest import market, with China leading the way.

The debt burden is likely to become burdensome for Ethiopia going froward, as experts from the ministry of finance indicated to The Reporter. The worst part of the problem is that the loan negotiations are carried out by people who have no ideas of what risks they are putting the country into. The ministry of finance and the economy has no say, at least, in coordinating the debts. Certainly, it means that they also have no say in knowing what has happened to the monies.

In the face of this behavior of the ዘመነ መሣፍንት (the Era of Princes within government), I share the frustration of those great citizens and experts at the ministry of finance. I am struck by their courage to speak openly to the publicly, which I quote here, as an open call for help:

‹‹በተናጠል የብድር ስምምነቶች የሚያደርጉ ድርጅቶችን የሚመሩ ከፍተኛ የመንግሥትና የፓርቲ ባለሥልጣናት ስለሆኑ መሥርያ ቤቱ ብድሮቹን ለማስቆም ይቸገራል፤›› (Those who lead the offices that individually make loan agreements with foreign countries are high-level government and party officials, because of which it is difficult for the ministry of finance to stop the loans to those offices.”)
Therefore, the responsibility of Ethiopian experts in the eyes of those people is simply to record what they borrow, which the country either ends up paying or seeks relief (of course not Chinese loans), irrespective of whether these loans have been essential and effective in the first place in ensuring national development. The Chinese and the others know this and go to those officials, who in turn tough negotiators become difficult to operate as sort of lobbyists/government officials to benefit for foreign companies.

As it happens, at the moment the Chinese appetite for making up for the losses is strong and may take many forms. Unless Ethiopia carefully reviews whatever leverages it may have, the future engagement with China would turn out to be tougher, since its calculation may be dictated by their need to cut losses elsewhere.

Short of that, it should not come as surprise to anyone if Ethiopia continues to dissipate the few leverages it has had, because of officials whose sole loyalty is to politics that sees not the future, not even the country’s longstanding interests. As a consequence of that, today as yesterday, Ethiopia remains incapable of properly playing its cards with the Chinese, especially after the 2005 election aftermath, as well as with others.

These days, I see heavy traffic of Chinese papers writing on Ethio-Chinese friendship. The one that caught my attention, among others, is the following from the ministry of foreign affairs of the People’s Republic of China:

Bilateral economic cooperation and trade grew rapidly. Ethiopia has become one of the important partners of China in Africa in project contracting and economic cooperation and trade. In January, Minister of Commerce Chen Deming visited Ethiopia. China-Ethiopia package loan cooperation made steady progress. The outcomes of the Beijing Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) were implemented smoothly. The two sides are stepping up communication and coordination on the implementation of the eight new policy measures on assistance to Africa announced at the Fourth Ministerial Conference of FOCAC.
In a study that came out in November and in a manner that underlines how much the Chinese have banked because of their relations with Ethiopia, Christine Hackenesch rightly observes:

For the EU as a whole (EC and EU member states), Ethiopia is the largest aid recipient in Africa (EU donor atlas 2010). Aid is the major instrument in European cooperation with Ethiopia and Ethiopia constitutes one of the key countries in reforming the European aid system. For China, in contrast, Ethiopia is not primarily an aid recipient but an important economic and political ally in its new Africa policy. Contrary to widespread assumptions that China primarily engages in resource rich countries, Ethiopia has become one of the largest recipients of Chinese official flows.
The advantage Ethiopia has facilitated for China is not inconsequential or something that should be considered an everyday opportunity. China has gained more than Ethiopia has, the value of which cannot be easily quantified in financial terms.

Most often, when the question of relations with China is discussed, politicians are quick to point out the importance of China in the development of African countries, especially infrastructural development –roads, power installations and etc. Surely, there is no obliviousness in that regard.

As the Chinese foreign ministry has openly stated, the arrangement must have suited China, when it says, “Ethiopia has become one of the important partners of China in Africa in project contracting and economic cooperation and trade.” The point of this article is that the benefits and interests must be balanced as two-way traffic as bilateral relations to make it even better and more a win-situation in practical terms.

As evidence of the present realities that is being disputed here regarding the realities of our relations with China, we have already got a taste of it from the level of Ethiopia’s interest payments on its fast accumulating debts China is owed, as The Reporter recently indicated. Data from the Ethiopian ministry of finance and economic development has shown that even in normal years, China has literally been charging Ethiopia humongous (relative to Ethiopia’s capacity) interest rates on commercial terms on 20-year loans linked to the LIBOR, compared to moderate interest rates from India, Kuwait Fund and others.

I do not mean to offer any consolation in writing the following. I must, however, state that this is not the first time Ethiopia has fallen victim to its foolish designs, by failing to capitalize on its advantages — or forgive the language — for choosing to prostrate before the interests of others.

For instance, when the Soviet Union was Ethiopia’s friend in the 1970s and 1980s, they knew that Ethiopia needed them more than they needed Ethiopia.
Therefore, they imposed extortive interest rates with manipulated exchange rates of the ruble on any loans or in the barter trade the country was involved with them. They even attempted on several occasions to discourage import of goods with better quality and relatively cheaper prices from other Eastern Europe, their sisterly socialist states.

Sadly, today’s Ethiopia has taken few lessons from that. Even where common sense could have been a better guide, the politics of the moment has prevailed, compelling the country to repeat the same mistakes all over again to its detriment — more debts and strengthening Chinese leverage on Ethiopia.

Coming May, the World Economic Forum Conference would take place in the Ethiopian capital. Since the conference’s focus would be Africa, what would Ethiopia’s contribution be, as a host and in the light of its own experiences with china, to help other countries benefit more, especially by avoiding its mistakes and the pitfalls of its experiences?

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

Regardless of how the genocidal regime of Meles Zenawi tries to characterize the incident or who it claims has perpetrated the killings, there remains one fact it cannot deny. The incident took place inside the borders of Ethiopia. And it happened while under the protection of Ethiopian authorities.

On the 19th of January, The Voice of America (VOA) aired an interview with Information Minister of Ethiopia Bereket Simon, and in it, the Minister openly admitted that Ethiopia does not and cannot control its borders. Ethiopia is a country under fire in every direction due to the reckless adventures of the minority regime inside Ethiopia and the region. In Ethiopia, rebellion is flourishing throughout the entire country. There exists the Oromo Liberation Front, The Oganden liberation Front in Eastern Ethiopia, AEDUF in the Afar region, there is the EPPF in the central region, the Benishangul in the West and the Tigray movement TPDM etc…operate inside Ethiopia for different reasons. Some are fighting for self-determination and the others for greater freedoms from the oppressive minority regime.

This is how The Christian Science Monitor characterized Ethiopia’s claims. “This week, even before Ethiopian officials knew how many people had died, or even when the fatal shooting of five European tourists in its remote northeastern region of Afar had taken place, they were sure of one crucial detail: It was Eritrea’s fault.”
It is convenient for Ethiopian authorities to claim Eritrea did it for many reasons. It is easier. It deflects attention away from Ethiopia’s ever-exploding internal civil struggles. It is within the strategic objective of trying to label Eritrea, as a country that sponsors all the anti-regime activities as terrorist activity and within that context, all the rebellion in Ethiopia is considered terrorism and, the rebels’ terrorists.

But here is the problem with that assumption and claim. If Eritrea is capable to develop all that activity inside Ethiopia, what that means is Meles’s regime has effectively lost control of Ethiopia. The authorities in Ethiopia have lost control of the entire country.
The various movements in Ethiopia have been there for decades fighting for their rights. The OLF was there before the regime came to power; the Ogaden has been mired in conflicts for decades, and so have the Afars. These groups are fighting for denied rights by Ethiopia. They are not terrorist organizations. In fact, in contradiction to Meles’ claim that these groups are terrorist the US never labeled the OLF or others as terrorists. In fact, they have offices in the US. Meles and his cronies know this fact.

In this case, the blanket claim by the regime that Eritrea is at fault in order to cover up its internal problems backfired in many major ways. First off, the regime looked defeated by playing a victim. Secondly, it lost any credibility that it may have had internally and globally because, the truth came-out swiftly and contradicted their fabrications making them look pettier. Thirdly, it gave AEDUF, the rebel group, international exposure they never had and, advertised Ethiopia’s internal conflicts to the world.

Fourthly, and most importantly, the minority clique gave the world unadulterated evidence that the regime has lost its legitimacy. The genocidal regime, in order to score a political point against Eritrea threw all discovery mechanisms-out and actually got in the way of the evidence-discovery process thus denied the world access to truth. As The Christian Science Monitor reported, “They were sure of one crucial detail: It was Eritrea’s fault” before any meaningful information was extracted.

This is clear evidence that the regime is not about finding-out truth to protect the Ethiopian people and the tourists. The regime was not concerned about the tourism industry of Ethiopia. This is a major PR disaster for the tourism industry of Ethiopia. By infusing Eritrea in the killing, the illegitimate regime magnified the level of negative attention into all tourism related activities of Ethiopia. This was in effect advertising that announced; come and tour Ethiopia and you might earn the chance to be killed, wounded and captured. Just imagine, can anyone dare take the volcanic tour in the Afar region after this? The answer is NO. That means the people in the Afar region will suffer because an industry or a means of income was taken away from them. This is not a sign of a caring government.

The rebels quickly gave their condolences to the families, facilitated the release of those captured and, claimed those that died were killed by Ethiopian authorities. This put the minority regime in a spot and forced it into a defensive position.

Here is the reality, prior to his fall, the Mengistu regime was losing large swath of territories, to then rebels, the current regime, in the same manner the minority regime is losing now. This incident provided a great opportunity for the world to see that Ethiopia is burning from within with fire that is ready to consume the entire nation fast. Through the hasty announcements, the regime inadvertently advertised to the world that it doesn’t control the Afar region. This is also true throughout the entire country.

Every action the government takes now is strictly designed to elongate its life. In the West, the regime uprooted over 70,000 Gambellans from their villages destroying their way of life. The illegitimate genocidal regime has done this in every territory in Ethiopia. The genocides in Gambella and Ogaden are recorded in detail with evidences by major humanitarian organizations.

Ethiopia has seen consistent growth in its tourism industry for decades. This will definitely damage it. The minority regime has managed to stay in power by oppressing the various nationalities that it wants to label terrorist now. All these people are doing is demand their rights. However, instead of resolving the internal issues peacefully the regime resorted to force. In time, the rebellion has gathered enough momentum and it is ready to engulf the nation. The minority regime, fully aware it can no longer contain it, is trying desperate approaches such as labeling the entire nation terrorist. Individuals that oppose the regime are labeled terrorist and tried. The Diaspora is not spared because the regime makes it a point to sentence them in absentia.

This is a regime on the brink. Certainly, tourism needs peace to flourish and in Ethiopia, peace is dissipating like water in the desert sand. The regime’s acceptance by Ethiopians and people in the region is almost nonexistent. People are anticipating when and how the big shoe will drop. In this climate it is very difficult to commit to any investment in Ethiopia and certainly those that have money are sending their hard currency abroad because they are not certain of the future. This is the reason why it is easy to predict the fall of the minority regime eminent. That is why the former Ambassador Herman Cohen said that the hegemonic minority rule of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) is difficult to sustain, as Ethiopians are demanding freedom and democracy.

Conclusion

It is ironic a terrorist regime is trying to label Eritreans, the Somalis and the entire Ethiopian population terrorists with fabricated trumped charges. By doing so the regime is asking the international community for a mandate to rule with iron fist as a king maker of the region. This is also clear evidence that this futile ambition has put the regime at odds with all the people in the region. One thing the regime has done clearly is that it is challenging the publics of the region with blood in every turn.

Hence, it is crucial for the people of Ethiopia, Somalia and Eritrea to come together and rid of the vermin finally. And I am certain this will happen soon because the people of the region are saying enough to the genocidal, illegitimate regime of Meles Zenawi. In order to hasten his demise and to help end the little Batustans he created, it is everyone’s responsibility to stop cooperating with this criminal and end his reign before more harm could be done.

Awetnayu@hotmail.com

Exiled internet blogger Elias Kifle was sentenced in absentia to life in prison. Kifle is editor of the U.S.-based Ethiopian Review website, which regularly features scathing criticisms of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s government.

A three-judge federal panel last week convicted Kifle, two local newspaper journalists and two political activists of violating Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism law. The charges included conspiring with the Ginbot Seven opposition political party, which Ethiopia considers a terrorist organization.

The two local journalists – Reeyot Alemu and Woubshet Taye – received 14-year sentences. Reeyot was a columnist for Fiteh, Ethiopia’s only remaining independent newspaper devoted to politics. Woubshet was deputy editor of the Awramba Times paper. The paper stopped publishing and editor Dawit Kebede fled into exile after Woubshet’s arrest.

Reeyot’s attorney, Molla Zegeye, says he is disappointed by the harshness of the sentence against his client, given that no terrorist acts were committed.

“I didn’t expect this sentence. I didn’t,” he said. “It was an attempt. She didn’t commit the terrorist crime. She didn’t as far as I’m concerned. She’s a journalist, a professional journalist. Well, it shouldn’t be like this.”

At the trial, prosecutors presented emails and other documents as evidence that Woubshet and Reeyot were conspiring to organize acts of terrorism.

The Committee to Protect Journalists issued a statement Thursday saying that the convictions were based on their writings about political dissent. The organization says that at least 10 journalists are in Ethiopian jails, including two Swedes who recently were sentenced to 11 years in prison on terrorism-related charges. The Swedes were arrested last June in the restive Ogaden region in the company of armed members of an outlawed rebel group.

After the conviction, the Swedish government issued a statement saying that it considers the pair legitimate journalists, and called for their prompt release. An Ethiopian spokesman said the government has no remorse about the convictions.

Another Ethiopian blogger, Eskinder Nega, is facing similar terrorism charges and could face the death penalty, if convicted. He is among 24 defendants, including several exiled journalists and two prominent opposition politicians who are also accused of involvement with the outlawed Ginbot Seven group.

Government spokesmen repeatedly have rejected charges that Ethiopia restricts press freedom. Government officials say the convicted journalists used their profession as a cover for terrorist activities.

Elias Kifle, exiled Ethiopian editor of the Washington-based opposition website Ethiopian Review, was handed a life sentence in absentia today, which followed a 2007 life sentence given to him also in absentia on charges of treason for his coverage of the government’s brutal repression of 2005 post-election protests, CPJ research shows. A court in the capital, Addis Ababa, sentenced Reeyot Alemu, a columnist with the independent weekly Feteh, and Woubshet Taye, deputy editor of the now-defunct weekly Awramba Times, to 14 years in prison and 33,000 birrs (US$1,500), news reports said.

“The life sentence for Elias Kifle and the prison sentences for Reeyot Alemu and Woubshet Taye are based on their writings about political dissent. This verdict has little to do with justice,” said CPJ Africa Advocacy Coordinator Mohamed Keita. “We condemn this politicized prosecution designed to cow critical voices into silence and call on the Supreme Court to reverse all the convictions.”

The three journalists were charged in September with lending support to an underground network of banned opposition groups, which has been criminalized under the country’s 2009 antiterrorism law. Alemu and Taye were arrested in June and held for weeks on government accusations of plotting to sabotage telephone and electricity lines before they were charged. In the trial, government prosecutors presented as evidence intercepted emails and phone calls between the journalists, as well as more than 25 Ethiopian Review articles on the activities of opposition groups, CPJ research shows.

Eskinder Nega, another Ethiopian blogger, has been imprisoned since September and could be sentenced to death if convicted of similar politicized terrorism charges in connection with his coverage of banned opposition groups.

My cousin is in deep shock. His once big and vibrant household has dwindled to a few young ones with no place to go. The once bigger than life, articulate, graceful head of the family now walks with his head down avoiding eye contact. His wife the most beautiful, generous, vibrant lady God has created has become a sickly woman that spends her days crying and praying. Their children left a long time ago.

Where the children went is another story to be told all by it self. I am not going to burden you with more sad tales. Let us just say no one left that Home in what is considered the proper way…..something like getting married, buying his or her own house or higher education. No, they all left in a hurry. No one was given a proper sendoff. They were dispersed into the four corners of the world. They have become what is known as the ‘Diaspora’ to use a modern phrase to describe those that left out of despair, been pushed out, nudged, escaped or encouraged to ‘leave’ while still alive.

Well because I write from America you are probably thinking that my cousin’s tragedy is a local event. You might think he probably got into drugs, became an alcoholic, was addicted to gambling or he was the victim of the economy or pure random bad luck. I don’t blame you. That does happen. I have seen many lives being ruined like that. I am afraid that is not the situation here.

My cousin became homeless in his own country. He was not a drug user, an alcoholic or a gambler nor did he lose his job. Did I tell you my cousin is a medical doctor? Yes, he is a highly educated, caring and productive member of society if that means anything these days.

He came from a good family. His grand father accompanied Emperor Minilk to the battle of Maichew in Northern Ethiopia. His father, my uncle never got tired of telling us the bravery of our ancestors. When ever we complained his response was to bring out the story of his father marching north walking bare feet, shield and spear as weapon and no food ration but resolved to defend what is his. We used to look at each other and snicker. Upon his return, King Minilk awarded him land to build on. Great uncle settled down and my cousin, the new homeless is his first child. He was the pride of the family. He never disappointed the clan. He lived up to expectations.

He acquired scholarship to a foreign land and returned back educated, handsome and a credit to his country. You should have seen the pride in my uncle’s and his mothers face when they saw their son wearing his clean snow-white jacket with a stethoscope hanging around his neck. They died happy. Their job was done.

My cousin inherited the house he was born in and started a family of his own. I am blessed with two nephews that I keep in touch with sporadically. They are the ones that left their home in the middle of the night. One traveled north to Sudan and now lives in Europe. The girl was accompanied south to Kenya and now lives in New Zealand. That sounds far. That was the day their mother died. Not physical death, but such agony that could only be understood by those that have children of their own.

My cousin and his wife settled to a life of getting old in an empty house. Migrating was not their style. They just wanted to die quietly in their own home. Well, they were resigned to it until now.

They are going to be homeless. The Ethiopian government is going to displace them from their home. The UNHCR will refer to them as “Internally Displaced Persons.” According to the UN the definition consists of two elements. 1) Coercive or otherwise involuntary character of movement 2) Such movement takes place within national borders. They fit both descriptions.

Even during the wholesale Nationalization without compensation crimes of the Mengistu era their house was spared. It was their castle. Their own liberated free zone. The Meles regime first demanded over $20,000 Bir to upgrade the Title and blueprint. They were forced to borrow to pay this arbitrary figure. There was no place to appeal. That was a few years back.

Today, as you read this my poor cousin was presented a bill for $350,000.00 Bir the price of the new lease. Ato Meles and his politburo have decided that amount to be the price of the land his house is sitting on. They have given him the choice to pay it or vacate. How these two retired elders will be able to come up with such outrageous amount of money apparently is not their concern.

The Mayor of Addis Corporal Kuma Demeksa and State Minster Mokria Haile were sent out to explain this new concept of leasing your own freaking property. The two TPLF errand boys have been trying to convince the people of Addis how this new Government sanctioned robbery is good for them. They have been wrecking their brains to convince the public to show enthusiasm while being raped by the TPLF mafia.

What gives the Government the authority to confiscate private property at will is a good question. The simple answer is it is legal. The laws of the land states so. Mengistu started the ball rolling when he was converted to Socialism and made taking what is not yours seem so natural. Ato Meles built on that foundation and added his TPLF’s Home grown enhancements. Callous regard for fellow human is the corner stone. He foresaw the possibility and made sure that the Judiciary he created would not one day mess with his plans. That is why the law prohibited the judiciary from looking into land issues. One can go to court to complain regarding the compensation amount but the Court does not have the authority to rule regarding ownership of land. The Law is clear on that. All land belongs to the Ethiopian Government. The TPLF Party runs the Government. Ato Meles is the de facto owner of the TPLF Party. You can fight all you want on what is on top but the bottom belongs to Ato Meles and his people. You Sir/Madam is subject to evection without notice. There is no appeal process, what Meles and his Party say is the law. No need to split hair, this is a fact.

Hold a minute, how about the Parliament you might ask? That has been taken care of. Kinijit almost rocked this important leg of ‘Revolutionary Democracy’ in 2005. Today it is working like a well-oiled machine. In fact it is ready to handle most situations without overt supervision. Ato Meles is in control of the Judiciary, the parliament and the Executive. He is three rolled in one!

The new Proclamation Land Lease Law 721/2004 is what gives Meles and TPLF Politburo the deeds to all land in Addis Ababa. How it came to be Law is a beautiful story all by itself showing us the workings of a Revolutionary Democracy up close. The Ethiopian Parliament returned from summer break and the President of the country gave a lavish dinner to members to welcome them from their vacation. While the exotic food was being served and liquor flowing like the Nile TPLF cadres were seen distributing the new proposal regarding land. The members were urged to study the brief.

They studied it overnight and the following day’s session of Parliament passed the Law with minimum fanfare. The people of Addis Abeba including my cousin were made home less by Parliamentarians that have not recovered from their hangover. Fifteen hours is the time it took our esteemed Parliamentarians to decide on such an important matter. That is Ethiopia in a nutshell.

I have been trying to come up with rational reasons why Ato Meles will risk getting the population angry at his Party. He has no choice. Running a criminal organization like the Ethiopian Government is a very expensive venture. Everybody has a handout. Most survive by corruption. The party needs money like a drug addict needs his fix.

We just have a very short memory. If you look back you will find so many instances where the search for more money has shown us the dark side of TPLF. To site a few: 1) switching lead and gold in the national Bank. 2) The disappearance of Coffee 3) the sale of part of Gondar to Sudan 3) the ‘Orphan’ adoption scam that generates millions 4) the maid trade to the Middle East 5) Lease of fertile and virgin land to foreigners. So on.

Regarding the new proclamation about Addis and other cities, according to Ato Israel Tesfaye a bureau chief in the Ministry of land Development and Administration the TPLF regime is free to give the land as gift, hold a lottery, ask for bids and lease the land they way it sees fit. You see my poor cousin’s land is in a desirable neighborhood. It became a curse.

The people of Addis were not consulted. The so-called ‘independent’ Kilils or Bantustans were not part of this discussion. The errand boys no matter how hard they tried they could not make the medicine go down easy. No one can explain how your own government can make you homeless in your own land. It is sort of surreal when you are told the house you father inherited from his father and you inherited from him is still not paid for. In fact today in fast growing Ethiopia you cannot afford your own house.

The regime got a few buyers in mind. The first in line is the dear Diaspora. They are the gullible that will pay real cash for stolen property. The local cannot afford any of that. Out of eighty million Ethiopians Seventy million cannot afford this insanity. Be it greed, ignorance or low self esteem those that left the country to make their life better are now destroying the life of those that stayed behind.

The abuse has become so much and frequent that we are completely desensitized to all kinds of atrocities. We feed the monster but we complain about it. We buy stolen property but when he sells it to the highest bidder we complain. Instead of building and strengthening our Associations and Civic Organizations, Churches, Mosques we break them apart and complain about the lack of unity. We make decisions based on Zer and Gosa, marriage, kinship, friendship and other trivia exposing our lack of convictions and stiff spine and we still complain and deny our role in this tragedy.

Hey the view that the sun revolves around the earth is just an alternative theory, right? You can add that selling land, selling people and selling country will bring peace and prosperity to that.

“Ethiopia’s long-awaited democratization has stalled over the last half decade. Today, there are fewer constraints on the EPRDF’s power than at any other time in its 20-year rule.”
Freedom House: countries at the crossroads, 2011

Development models are never ideology and politics neutral. This is why free and fair elections matter. They give people options and choices. Because citizens have no choices, the well-entrenched minority ethnic elite have the audacity to claim that it won by 99.6 percent. This claim is possible because opposition parties are barred from competing and civil society is disabled. Ethiopian public enthusiasm during the 2005 elections was an indicator of alternatives in policies and programs offered by competing parties. It was an indicator of change. Going forward, the next election in 2015 can’t just be about political parties or groups or individuals or about going through the mechanical motions of periodic and staged elections. For that, one can be sure that Ethiopian citizens will be expected to go to the polls and vote whether the process is free, fair, open, transparent and competitive or not. Just imagine one living and working in Ethiopia and not turning out to vote. One knows the consequences. The choices are limited. It is a top down and prescriptive system characterized by fear. The public will assess the coming national election against what happened in 2005 and what new policies are offered this time.

In the aftermath of the 2005 elections, public trust and confidence in the electoral process are shattered. The democratization process has to be rebuilt from scratch. Evidence lies in the willingness and readiness of all parties, especially, officials of the ruling-party, to vow publicly and unconditionally that it will accept the rule of law and scrupulously recognize the rights of Ethiopian voters to cast their ballots in secret and without undue pressure or influence from any party. Both the ruling-party and the opposition camp must begin the healing process and restore mutual confidence and trust among the population now for this to happen. They must recognize that the election is not about the personalities who lead parties. Elections are about offering the Ethiopian people an institutional alternative to improve their lives. I predict that without public voice and participation, the current deplorable conditions in the economy will persist; and corruption will go on. This does not mean that there will not be growth.

The indicators to-date suggest that the governing party is nowhere closer to the demands of the population and opposition groups today than it was 8 years ago. It digs deeper and deeper into a garrison mentality and forces the entire society no other choice but to rebel against oppression and restore justice. Accordingly, opposition political parties and civic organizations need to get their act together now in order to lead and to avert potential chaos. The alternative they offer must be much more promising and compelling than the current governing party. In my estimation, this will not happen by chance. Offering alternatives to the public comes from an institutional process that guarantees the Ethiopian people the right to engage in and experience the true meaning of a free, fair open, transparent and competitive election. This will be the essence of political pluralism and a departure from the tradition of leftist politics and the current ethnic elite system. To start with, opponents have an obligation to the Ethiopian people and reach-out to one another and build confidence and trust among themselves.

Cynics argue that proposing such a notion in peaceful change is naïve. The system will not allow peaceful change. They feel that the prospects are dim, because political pluralism, the evolution of democratic institutions and a level playing field in the economy will undermine single-party political and economic dominance. This, they say, the TPLF/EPRDF will never allow. This point of view has credibility. Is it really appropriate to worry whether or not the ruling party allows free and fair elections? We know that it has not and will not. What should concern us is organizational and leadership weakness within the opposition camp. For example, with a few exceptions, opposition parties are led by traditional and unimaginative political actors. The country needs a new cadre of leaders with creativity, imagination and capacity and ability to innovate and tools. The society needs political organization and leadership that places the interests of the country and its entire people ahead of party and personality.

The society needs new and insightful leaders capable and willing to bury the past (without forgetting it) and move toward a future that accommodates everyone and leaves no one. The burden of proof that officials of the ruling-party and opposition groups are not afraid of change that will come from the Ethiopian people remains to be seen. It is their ability to dare to change that will determine the future and undo the current oppressive system. Calling the shots by using monies to buy elections and the media to propagate ideology won’t change the way citizens feel deeply about the ruling-party. Borrowing heavily from the banking system and from outside to carry-out growth without participation that will change the structure of the economy will not change the lives of the vast majority and stop the hemorrhaging of Ethiopia’s social capital. Once people rise to claim their future, there is no force that will stop them. We saw this in North Africa and we are witnessing it in the Middle East. This is why the opposition camp cannot afford to lag behind the needs and hopes of the population.

Political parties and leaders must believe that changes in attitude and mindset are possible. The recent change within one faction of the OLF is indicative a positive trend in the right direction. It is not enough. We all need to build on it. For example, what about Article 39 that keeps the country in permanent suspense? Some argue that ethnic politics play substantial roles in highly developed nations such as Canada and Belgium. These countries cannot be considered as peers. One cannot deny the fact that there is ethnicity and ethnic affinity of some sort. Both countries are, however, constitutional monarchies with parliamentary forms of government. First and foremost, a Canadian or Belgian accepts herself or himself as a national of the country, namely as Canadian or Belgian while enjoying cultural and linguistic freedom.

Continuing the fracturing political and social culture of blaming one another, refusing to dialogue with one another and demeaning one another will lead Ethiopian society nowhere. Perpetuating the same ideological path of ethno-nationalism and ethnic-federalism is a limiting model and strategy. Among other things, it will not advance broad-based, equitable and rapid growth and development. It lacks wisdom and farsightedness. It has proven to be disastrous for the vast majority of the Ethiopian people. It will restrain productivity and increased incomes for millions of people.
The reader would appreciate the potent socioeconomic and political arguments which would follow in assessing the reasons and conclusions as to why ethno-nationalism and ethnic federalism are lethal for Ethiopian society. Simply put, it is a strategy of divide and rule and is intended to maintain minority ethnic elite single party dominance. This is why Freedom House concluded that the democratization process is “stalled.” In my view, it closed. It is worth going back to and tracing its history and attributes and the reasons of why Michela Wrong, who wrote a riveting fact based analysis of ethnicity and corruption in Kenya, concluded that this ethnic elite governance is “toxic.” The question that I should like to probe is the extent to which there is direct co-relation between the current “monolithic party state,” the Economist’s contention of the Ethiopian developmental state as an instrument of “plunder” and ethnic-based rule.
During the 1970s–the rise of ethno-nationalism and wars of national liberation–buffeted through diplomatic and material globalization–cost Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people dearly. The country lost its traditional access to the Red Sea. While it is not tenable to argue that it does not have some fundamental democratic features–the right to use and enjoy one’s ethnic language and culture and to demand recognition of one’s history and so on–there are numerous political, administrative management, economic and social capital formation, domestic market and investment issues that are apparent and must be addressed openly and boldly for the benefit of all Ethiopians. Let me explain them in greater detail drawing from the experiences of other countries and insights from compatriots.

First, there is no doubt that ethnic federalism works against; and actually undermines national level social capital formation. The education system is deliberately narrow, parochial, shallow, and in terms of the challenges of this century, of low quality. I am not aware of a country that has achieved developed country status by adopting socialization process that is patently anti-country and anti-broad society. How in the world would Ethiopians compete in the 21st century with a human capital that is fear based, divisive and second rate? It is interesting to note that ethnic elites equip their children and others in the privileged camp through access to private schools and financing them to study overseas thus giving them the best education possible.

Second, by design the regime’s ethnic based social capital formation does not nurture or promote communication across ethnic and religious lines. In fact, it reinforces separate identity, world outlook, behaviors and tendencies. If this generation of Ethiopians is barred to communicate with one another naturally and as human beings–and more important as Ethiopian citizens–is it not possible that they will be strangers to one another in their own country? How would they trust one another when they grow up if they are taught that they come from “irreconcilable ethnic and religious groups?” How would they build a modern, democratic and just multiethnic society if they are encouraged to believe in separate ethnic identities? At a basic level, how would they tolerate one another? How would they contain emotions if the system breaks down? This is the reason for my thesis that ethnic federalism keeps the society in permanent suspense and undermines solidarity across manmade ethnic boundaries.

Third, ethnic federalism constrains the free flow of knowledge, experience and capital, including labor, across geopolitical, religious and ethnic lines. This is exactly the opposite of trends in other countries such as Ghana. Unrestrained communication and the sharing of knowledge and best practices are vital in modernizing the country and in giving each citizen an opportunity to succeed. Ethnic federalism based location is now a major barrier to opportunity compounding the criteria of loyalty to minority ethnic elite party.

Fourth, by design, Article 39 of the Constitution reinforces secession, civil wars and permanent suspense. When people see no other option in asserting their socioeconomic and political rights, they tend to resort to extremes, including the right to secede. Is it not strange then to find that the top leadership professes nationalism and national unity whenever it wishes and whenever this advances its narrow interests; but does the opposite in creating the conditions that will make national independence, territorial integrity and the unity of the population enduring. One of these conditions is free, fair and competitive election.

Following its defeat in the electoral process in 2005, the Prime Minister had the audacity to claim that the opposition intended to trigger ethnic genocide or Intrahamwe that claimed the lives of close to 20 percent of Rwanda’s population. It seems that the Prime Minister stretches facts in order to achieve an objective. The sad thing is that such a declaration is irresponsibility without accountability. The Ethiopian people have lived with one another for thousands of years. They have fought side by side and defended the country he now rules.

For the above reasons, I suggest that continuation of ethno-nationalism and ethnic-federalism as a geopolitical architecture to resolve internal ethnic differences has in fact created unintended consequences of potentially fracturing and dismantling the fabric of Ethiopian society. The country’s cohesiveness and accommodating the democratic aspirations of all its mosaic are vital for its survival, modernization and sustainability. Peace and national reconciliation will be impossible without political pluralism, justice, equitable access to opportunities, freedom and democracy for the country’s mosaic. Otherwise a competitive national private sector will not emerge and endemic poverty will not be removed. This is why a new win-win formula is imperative.
A shared understanding of the benefits which would come from commonalities becomes a driving principle for debate and dialogue. If there is no consensus about commonalities, vulnerabilities will emerge and the current system will endure. Economic and social integration across geographic and ethnic lines will not take roots. Vulnerabilities would deepen implying weaknesses in mobilizing the capabilities of all Ethiopians in order to preserve the country and move it forward. It cannot move forward without social justice and political freedom. It cannot move forward without all members of Ethiopian society having fair and equitable access to opportunities. Enclaves of ethnic and localized growth that benefit ethnic elites and their supporters do not offer the panacea to technological backwardness, hunger, hopelessness, unemployment, low incomes and poverty. Inclusiveness and laying favorable conditions for shared prosperity will do marvels for Ethiopian society and will reduce the thwarting roles of globalization. Why? Ethiopians will be masters of their natural resources and will be in a better position to chart their future. Together, they will be strong.

In November 2009, I attended part of a presentation on politics, repression, instability and the political economy of reform in Sub-Saharan African countries sponsored by the World Bank. A Ghanaian Political Scientist, Dr. Emmanuel Akwetey, made a remark which I found pertinent to the Ethiopian situation. His analysis was on the paradoxical links of democratic elections and instability. In highly ethnically polarized societies such as Ethiopia, this danger exists for sure. But, its intensity will depend on how issues will be framed and presented to the public by contestants in the future. “By accepting the liberal democratic model that we will have cyclical instability, we have accepted that elections should not emphasize our cohesion.” This is the key point of my argument.
If contestants do not surface and debate fundamental issues that affect all of the Ethiopian people and instead focus on narrow, ethnic-oriented and parochial and competing interests, tensions will mushroom and instability will ensue. Akwetey put it succinctly when he said “We need systems that consider cohesion after the election has been won.” Losers and winners must accept outcomes as long as the election process is free, fair, open, transparent and competitive. There must be the prospect of a next time. Elections are not like coup d’états. The ruling-party and some within the opposition, treat them as such. The hard work of building institutions and the infrastructure to support democratization is lost in the process. This is why ordinary Ethiopians mistrust their government and its institutions and have low confidence in the opposition. The opposition must surmount the confidence and trust deficit by reaching out to one another now not half a century from now.

When I underscored the need for Ethiopia’s social cohesiveness, I was referring to the country’s sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national interests as well as to the benefits which will accrue from the sovereignty and authority of the Ethiopian people and commonalities in the economic and social system. I suggest that the solution starts by identifying and agreeing on common problems with a view of finding common solutions. These commonalities refer to the interests and needs of all citizens. One common interest they share is the need to assault endemic poverty in all of its manifestations. Another is gross human rights violations. Another is the plunder of the resources by a minority ethnic elite and global actor. Cohesiveness within the opposition camp provides them with the numerical strength to challenge the system which keeps them poor, powerless, ineffective and isolated from one another. The immense untapped treasures embedded in each and every nationality, religious, gender and demographic group suggests prevalence of potential social, cultural and economic benefits that will make the society prosperous in the long-term. It is this prospect that should lead opponents to coalesce.

I say this because of the social capital inherent in each nationality group and in each democratic leaning opposition party and civil society. It is the sum total of these potential assets or parts that make the whole formidable. Exploitation of this potential to benefit all will make the society far more prosperous than separate enclaves. For this reason, I genuinely believe in social, cultural, economic and political equity and inclusion. Innovative organizations and leaders must recognize the value added of confidence and trust building that will lead to cooperation rather than rivalry. A mentality of exclusion is costly and limiting to the democratization process and to growth and development. Inclusion and social justice do the opposite. These capabilities can be harnessed to the fullest to the extent that all opponents are able to pull in the same direction. They cannot do this unless they trust one another; and work with one another.

Opponents need to grasp the notion that sustainable economic and equitable development comes from inclusiveness, a vibrant national private sector and access to equitable opportunities and investments. The same way that most experts urge and defend the potential benefits of opening up the political space; I would forward the notion that socioeconomic sustainability requires opening up or leveling the investment and economic space for all and each Ethiopian. Opening up the political and economic spaces are manifestations of pluralism and democracy. One reinforces the other. One can’t have political democracy unless it facilitates economic and social justice for all citizens. Opponents can and should reject ethnic politics, including ethnic federalism because they are major barriers to genuine democracy that should manifest itself in one person one vote. For Ethiopian society to succeed in achieving political pluralism, free and fair elections must be national not local or ethnic-based. I will draw an economic argument to strengthen this point.

The hunger problem is not a Tigre or Amhara or Afar or Somali or Oromo problem. The unemployment problem is not a Somali or Oromo or Afar or Amhara problem. The land grab problem is not an Oromia or Gambella problem. The social and institutional de-capitalization problem is not an Afar, Somali or Amhara problem. Ethiopian national unity is not a Tigray or Oromia or Amhara problem. It is an Ethiopian problem. This is why I suggest that unbridled access to economic and social opportunities is the right of all Ethiopians. Without this right, sustainable and equitable development will remain out of reach for the vast majority regardless of another five year plan with billions of dollars in investments. Why? Monopolistic and ethnic practices are, by definition, inequitable, unjust, unfair and limiting. Fair investment policies and practices trigger opportunities across geopolitical, ethnic and demographic lines. Ethnic-based policies and practices crowd out these possibilities. While there is overwhelming evidence that Tigrean elites build mansions in Mekele; it is not true that a Tigrean farmer or any other poor can expect to live in this new mansion. While he may not starve because of favorable treatment from an ethnic regime, this poor farmer cannot be identified as better off than an Amhara or Oromo or Gambella farmer and so on. We cannot afford to generalize and penalize whole ethnic groups because elites at the top dominate national politics and economics or institutions of control. I do not underestimate the symbolic importance associated with ethnic based dominance of national politics, though.
This is why I argued in the previous two articles on ethnic federalism that state capitalism—a form of crony capitalism in Ethiopia–is marvelous for a privileged few because it crowds out deserving individuals from competition. It is a source of destitution for the majority and those excluded. In 2010, Amare Mammo who worked for the Ministry of Agriculture under the TPLF and left dismayed offered a testimony concerning the gap in wellbeing between those in power and those who are disempowered. He contrasted two emerging classes in Ethiopian society today, a few largely minority ethnic rich amidst a majority poor. The prudent question to ask is how the few accessed enormous wealth over the past 21 years, while leaving the vast majority destitute and poor.

At both the political and economic levels, opening up the windows of opportunity would occur only when there is unrestricted and free public participation and engagements; and a level playing field for economic and social participation and investments. Involvement by all citizens in the political process assumes consensus concerning a unified and shared geopolitical and political space that comes from an identity with Ethiopia and Ethiopian citizenship. Ethnic identity does not nurture shared political power and shared prosperity. If there is no willingness to share political power, it is predictable that there will not be shared prosperity. Why? The political party that is in power determines policies, decisions, programs and allocation of resources. This control provides it with the means that defines who would have access and who does not; who is wealthy and eats more than three meals a day; and who is poor and has difficulty securing one meal a day. Ethnic politics is this much powerful and decisive.

It is this practical and life and death situation that compels all political and civil opponents and the rest of us to find practical ways to set aside differences and focus on commonalities and on common actions. We have overwhelming evidence that the minority ethnic elite party of the TPLF and its ethnic camouflage, the EPRDF has practically closed political, social and economic space for the vast majority. This does not mean that it has not succeeded in recruiting millions of members through economic and financial incentives. However, a mercantile approach to governing a country is not the same as gaining political legitimacy through free, fair and competitive elections. Opposition parties, civic groups, intellectuals and the rest of society can and must seize the opportunity offered by this shallow and corrupt architecture and challenge it intelligently, strategically, systematically and in a sustainable way by doing exactly the opposite of ethnic divide and rule.

What do I mean by this? Set aside minor behavioral differences; do not dwell on the past; reach out to one another; build mutual confidence and trust; develop a common platform; and anchor the struggle within the country now. It is when this happens that miracles would occur; and this miracle will come from the Ethiopian people themselves. The overwhelming majority of Ethiopians are tired of being poor, repressed, disenfranchised, powerless, propertyless and voiceless. What they need is a political organization and leadership that is committed to them: rule of law bound, genuinely democratic, bold, imaginative, inclusive, trustworthy and transformative.
To be continued
1/25/2012

During the visit, from 9 to 12 January, the two Swedish journalists decided to request a presidential pardon instead of appealing against their conviction. “In Ethiopia, there is a long tradition of pardons and we have chosen to leave it to this tradition,” they said, announcing their decision on 10 January in Addis Ababa’s Kality prison.

“Persson and Schibbye were arrested with members of the Ogaden National Liberation Front but they never supported terrorism,” Reporters Without Borders said. “They went to the Ogaden as journalists. We are now in a new phase, one of political negotiation, and we hope that the Ethiopian authorities, the National Pardon Board and everyone else involved can reach an agreement under which they are released quickly.”

During the visit, Reporters Without Borders also assessed the current state of media freedom in Ethiopia and the constraints on its journalists, two of whom were convicted on terrorism charges on 19 January in Addis Ababa.

A repressive legislative arsenal and dwindling room for expression

Even if recent years have been marked by tension between the government and privately-owned media and surveillance of the most outspoken journalists, Reporters Without Borders recognizes that there is space for freedom of expression in Ethiopia.

As well as two state-owned dailies, the Amharic-language Addis Zemen and the English-language Ethiopian Herald, there are also privately-owned newspapers such as the Amharic-language Reporter, Addis Admas, Sendek, Mesenazeria and Fitih, along with the English-language The Reporter and The Daily Monitor. The privately-owned newspapers are routinely critical of government policies and at times provocative.

But, in the course of its observations and the interviews it conducted during this visit, Reporters Without Borders confirmed that freedom of expression has been on the wane for some time.

This has been seen, for example, in the fact that two Amharic-language weeklies, Addis Neger and Awramba Times, ceased to publish when their journalists fled the country, in December 2009 in the case of the first, and November 2011 in the case of the second.

In the course of the past three years, Ethiopia has adopted laws targeting civil society and combating terrorism that have arguably rode roughshod over rights guaranteed by Ethiopia’s constitution. It is partly this legislative arsenal that has had the direct effect of reducing the democratic space and freedom of expression.

Taboo subjects and working as a journalist

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an Ethiopian journalist who works for one of the weeklies told Reporters Without Borders: “There are red lines we cannot trespass while covering news stories. For example, the Oromo Liberation Front, which has long been a separatist movement, announced a few days ago on a website based abroad that it was abandoning its demand for autonomy. This is big news for Ethiopia but we cannot cover it in the local press because the authorities regard the OLF as a terrorist organization and referring to it might get you arrested.”

The journalist added: “We cannot publish the views of certain people, either. The journalist Mesfin Negash of Addis Neger, for example, is wanted on a terrorism charge. As he is living in exile, he can still write articles and offer them to newspapers in Ethiopia. But who is going to take the risk of publishing them? You could possibly be picked up at once and face charges. The law forbids it, so it is indirect censorship.”

Reporters Without Borders is concerned that when journalists with the privately-owned media dare to persist with their fierce criticisms of the state, it happens that they become the targets of criticism or smear campaigns in the state-owned or pro-government media.

Widespread self-censorship and fear of arrest have also at times led journalists to flee the country. After those who fled in December 2009, at least another three left in November 2011. They were Abebe Tola, also known as “Abe Tokichaw,” a well-known columnist for the Fitih and Awramba Times weeklies, his colleague Tesfaye Degu of Netsanet and Awramba Times editor Dawit Kebede.

Journalists facing a possible death sentence on terrorism charges

Reporters Without Borders wrote to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi in August 2011 requesting an investigation into the condition in which two journalists were being held – Awramba Times deputy editor Woubeshet Taye, who was arrested on 19 June, and Fitih columnist Reyot Alemu, who was arrested on 21 June. The letter did not get a reply.

In Addis Ababa, Reporters Without Borders asked the NGO “Justice for all, Prison Fellowship Ethiopia” to make enquiries about their situation and work with the government to assure that they are held in acceptable conditions while in detention.

On 19 January, an Addis Ababa court found these two journalists, along with a number of opposition figures, guilty of participating in a terrorist organization and preparing a terrorist attack. The charges carry a possible death penalty or life imprisonment. The court is due to issue sentences on a later date.

“Was there any irrefutable evidence of their involvement in terrorist activity produced in court?” Reporters Without Borders asked. “As showed by the prosecutor, both may have been in contact with opposition figures, which was risky, but the court should have considered the possibility that it could have been done in the exercise of freedom of expression. We are very disturbed by the idea that these two journalists may well receive harsh sentences just for expressing opinions.

“The Ethiopian government says the court just followed the law, but this law could violate journalists’ freedom to practice their profession, a freedom guaranteed by the constitution. A journalist carries a tough duty to proving information to the public. He needs special protection in order to fulfill this duty. This law in Ethiopia no longer allows journalists to do their job in that sense.”

Reporters Without Borders is pleased that the head of its Africa Desk, Ambroise Pierre, and the president of its Swedish Section, Jesper Bengtsson, were able to carry out this fact-finding visit to Ethiopia. They requested an opportunity to discuss the different issues with communication minister and government spokesman Bereket Simon, but he could not be available to receive the Reporters Without Borders delegation.

Andualem Arage of the Unity for Democracy and Justice party, journalist Eskinder Nega, and six others will begin their defense on March 5, Federal High Court judge, Endeshaw Adane, said today in the capital, Addis Ababa. They are accused of having links with the banned U.S.-based Ginbot 7 group and the Horn of Africa nation’s neighbor, Eritrea.

“I am innocent,” Eskinder said to reporters as he left court. “I am not of the opposition. I am not G7.”

Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s government is using a 2009 anti-terrorism law to silence critical journalists and politicians, according to London-based Amnesty International.
Since March, at least 108 opposition party members and six journalists have been arrested for alleged involvement with terrorist groups, it said in a report last month.

A further 16 people, including Ginbot 7 leader Berhanu Nega and exiled journalists Abiye Teklemariam, Mesfin Negash and Abebe Gallaw are being tried in absentia.

The court dismissed an argument from Andualem that a state media campaign against them made a fair hearing impossible, Endeshaw said.

Seats were allocated to the winning parties in a complicated manner, mainly pairing ballots to a split of worker/farmer seats. What matters is the that Egyptians have spoken and, therefore, the judgment is that they and the international observers are content with the outcome of the election and it has been found clean, fair and transparent.

On Saturday, the Egyptian Supreme Electoral Commission made public that Islamist parties have taken the most seats, with the Moslem Brotherhood (Freedom Justice Party — FJP) and Salafists Nour Party in a controlling position. The Moslem Brotherhood won 38 percent, i.e., 127 seats and the Nour 29 percent or 96 seats.

This means that the total number of seats under the control of Islamist parties is 223 + plus designation, which means about 70 percent of the total seats.

Over 80 years behind it in politics and mostly kept under the leash by Egypt’s rulers, this is the first time in modern Egypt that the Moslem Brotherhood emerges as the dominant power in that country. This victory gives the Brotherhood the post of parliamentary speaker. And it is reported that the party has nominated its secretary-general Mohamed al-Katatni for the post, whose reputation so far is that of a moderate.

Liberal parties not performing well

Trailing far behind are the moderates or non-Islamist parties, with the Wafd party taking 36 seats (11.0 percent), the Egyptian Bloc 33 seats (about 10.0 percent) and the Revolution Continues party 2.0 percent.

Some of the already known parties such as the Free Egyptians, Al-Gad and the Democratic Front did not meet the threshold required for parliamentary representation and did not qualify, when the offshoots of Mubarak’s National Democratic Party (NPD) garnered 4 percent of the seats, i.e., 13 seats.

The New York Times sees the two Islamist parties as “rivals rather than collaborators.” More importantly, the Moslem Brotherhood party has indicated that it would “respect personal liberties.” As far as the party’s agenda are concerned, Mohamed Katatni is quoted saying, “The top priorities of the next parliament are social justice, retribution for martyrs, fulfilling goals and demands of the revolution and the advancement of Egypt.”

Which way Egypt?

Egyptian policy is likely to be driven by the country’s fundamental interests, such as its desire to exercise control over the waters of the Nile, economic growth and regaining its lost leadership in the Arab World. By the faint sign of things so far, Egypt seems interested in revitalizing its activities with Nile upstream states and forging closer relations with Libya and the Sudan. It would not also come as surprise, if Egypt makes gestures toward Iran, while keeping its relations with Israel in the deep freezer.

As far as the Nile issue is concerned, following that country’s brief hiatus Egypt’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Kamel during the first week of January undertook a tour of six Nile Basin countries: Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Congo, South Sudan and Sudan. Not much has come and achieved by way of outcomes.

Foreign ministry Spokesperson Amr Rushdi simply said on 18 January that the minister was interested in strengthening relations with the Basin countries. A step in that direction is The minister’s invitation to his counterparts in the DR Congo, Tanzania, Rwanda and Kenya to visit Cairo. The intention of the visit is made clearer by the remarks of the foreign minister in Juba, South Sudan, where he said, “We realise that our brothers in South Sudan are aware of Egypt’s interests and the importance of the Nile water for Egypt.”

Perhaps in the minister’s calculation is the need to galvanize support and sympathy to Egypt’s position on the framework agreement signed by the six upstream states of Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda that is ready to come into effect once the Egyptian government and the parliament manage to pronounce themselves on it.

Its delay and postponement by a year by next May — more likely to be longer than that — is the outcome of the signatories desire to enable the Egyptian government to seize the opportunities and join them. If not, at the latest the agreement may come into effect by 2013. although it is not still clear how much successful it would be without Egypt.

The question now is whether the policies of the new Egypt on the Nile would be any different from the Mubarak era. Certainly, there may be differences of style, more frequent visits and interactions with upstream countries and offer of token Egyptian assistance, since one major accusation against the Mubarak regime was that of ignoring Africa.

Nevertheless, given what some of the candidates in the different parties in Egypt uttered during the campaigns and the so-called think tanks and research centers have been suggesting to formalize that, it is unlikely that there would be any meaningful changes in Egypt’s policies regarding the Nile question.

It is possible that Egypt may only bombard upper riparian states of the Nile Basin with a series of new proposals, whose motives may only be to delay the coming to force of the new framework agreement, or if possible, derail its implementation altogether.

Along that line and completely moving away from the principle of equal access to the Nile waters by all states of the Basin, as being advocated now by the upstream states in their framework agreement, Egypt has started testing the waters with a new notion of packaging projects involving southern African states into a new cooperative framework.

Theoretically, integrated approach to development may have greater benefits where the infrastructures and possibilities exist through efficiencies and economies of scale; but not in conditions where the incremental gains may prove more productive.

In the circumstances, if the idea of project packaging on a wider geographic scale that now is being floated is serious, the burden of another decade-long negotiations would certainly render it a non-starter, much less it being practicable.

Fortunately, eleven years of negotiations with Egypt on the forums of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) have equipped upper riparian states with the much-needed ESP (extra-sensory perception) to differentiate between Egypt’s serious and clever moves. The first is a reflection of its intentions to attain given objectives, while the latter action taken for mere affects sakes the purpose of which is to bid time.

If Egypt goes via this latter approach its intention is the latter, since what Egypt may want is to prevent implementation of the framework agreement signed by the six upstream states.

Already Egyptian experts have started warning, “Unless there are serious studies on joint or integrated projects in fields like electricity and agriculture followed by implementation of these projects, the water file will be a cause of conflict among Nile Basin states,” according to Al Ahram in an article entitled Basin bonding.

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

If a person were to maliciously burn or vandalize another’s house, it would be regarded as a serious property crime under the laws of any nation. If one were to walk into a bookstore and steal thousands of books and give them away to any passerby, that would also be a major property crime. How about taking a copyrighted book, scanning it and making it available to anyone in digital form online? Is that a serious criminal act? Is it also an immoral and depraved act?

Is it fair?

When a publisher, author or artist produces a book, a piece of music, a painting or other similar work, s/he is creating intellectual property which is as valuable as any other kind of property recognized by law. Just as doctors, lawyers, engineers and others make a living by practicing their professions, those in the literary, artistic and publishing communities make their living from marketing their intellectual creations. But the total disrespect and contempt shown by some individuals to the intellectual property rights of Ethiopian musicians, artists and authors is downright sickening and maddening.

Today, the music of the legendary Ethiopian artists, including Tilahun Gessesse, Mahmoud Ahmed, Bizunesh Bekele, Alemayehu Eshete, Kiros Alemayehu, Kassa Tessema, Ketema Makonnen, Asnaketch Worku, Mary Armede, Hirut Bekele, Ali Birra, Aster Aweke, Kuku Sebsebie, Muluken Melesse, Teodros “Teddy Afro” Kassahun, Shambel Belayneh and so many others, are illegally and casually stored online and made freely available. The artists receive no payments and their work is distributed without their permission and often to the financial benefit (selling ads on websites, subscriptions, etc.) of the music pirates. The individuals who store the music illegally and those who download them illegally work together to not only impoverish these great artists but also destroy their creative potential and ability to enrich the culture.

Crimes Against the Press

This contemptible culture of online piracy passed another shameful milestone recently when an entire book was scanned and posted on the internet in clear violation of international and national copyright laws. The book in question was the recently published memoir of former Ethiopian junta leader Mengistu Hailemariam. The website that scanned and posted the book online justified its action as follows:

Mass murderer and brutal dictator Mengsitu Haile Mariam (exiled in Harare, Zimbabwe) has written a 500+ pages book that has been published by Tsehai Publisher of Los Angeles. This mass murderer has not yet atoned or paid for his horrendous crimes and the mass killings of the Red Terror. He now hopes to benefit from the sale of his book of lies. We strongly feel that this criminal should be tried before a court of law and should be hindered from benefitting from his crime. Thus, we have published the book in PDF and we are posting it for free usage of all interested readers.

The website operators defended their illegal copying and posting by claiming that they had a right to do so under American law:

Our action is protected by Son of Sam Law in the USA which prohibits criminals from profiting from their crimes by selling their stories to publishers. Accessories to such actions are also included in the prohibition and in certain cases the law can be extended beyond the criminal to include friends, neighbors and family members of the lawbreaker. Denying the holocaust is a crime in many countries and Mengistu denies firmly the Red Terror and the mass murders. Concerned Ethiopians are studying the possibility of a law suit against Mengistu and his LA based publisher who may also be a target of boycott by all Ethiopians. Assisting and helping mass murderers to profit from their crimes by publishing their book of lies is a crime by itself.

The illegal posting is allegedly motivated by the desire to prevent Mengistu from getting a “benefit from the sale of his book”, despite the fact that posting the digital copy of the book will give wider dissemination of what they described as a “book of lies”. Ironically, by posting the book online for all to read, the copyright infringers more likely gave great credibility to Mengistu’s claims about them than actually discrediting him. But the real target of the vengeance is the publisher, Tsehai Publishers, and not Mengistu. The copyright violators’ twisted message is simple: If they do not like the message of an author, they will retaliate by scanning and posting the author’s book online and bankrupt the publisher.

One can disagree deeply with Mengistu and the facts or lies contained in his memoir. Having read the book, I am critical of the accuracy and selective recollection of many of his “facts”; and disagree with his attempt to avoid personal and regime accountability for his gross violations of human rights. But that is the way of all dictators. They always try to tell their stories in heroic terms and attempt to justify their crimes as patriotic acts. Although I disagree with Mengistu on numerous “facts” and unreservedly condemn his human rights record, I will be the first one to stand up and defend his right to write a book and publish it, even if it is all lies. To be sure, I defend Mengistu’s right to express himself just as vigorously as I defended the free speech rights of his successor Meles Zenawi when he spoke at Columbia University in September 2010. Why shouldn’t these two dictators be allowed to express themselves? Who is afraid of their “facts”, “lies”, ideas or opinions? Don’t the people have the right to hear these dictators and make their own judgment?

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” “Everyone” includes dictators and human rights violators. It is the moral duty of those of us who are committed to freedom, democracy and human rights to expose the lies, fabrications and brutality of dictators at every opportunity. By suppressing the views of the dictators, we not only undermine our own moral legitimacy against their lies but also prove to the world that we are indeed their clones. “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”

Those who posted Mengistu’s book online are absolutely wrong on the law. The so-called “Son of Sam Law” they tout as authority for posting the book online was adopted in the State of New York in 1983 to prevent convicted criminals from selling their stories to publishers and profiting from the notoriety of their crimes. That law was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991. New York adopted a narrowly tailored law in 2001 requiring, among other things, victim notification whenever a person convicted of a crime receives a certain amount of money. A similar law in California was struck down by that state’s highest court in 2002. Under federal law (18 U.S.C. § 3681 (2000) [Special Forfeiture of Collateral Profits of Crime]), the U.S. attorney may seek a federal court order authorizing “forfeiture of all or any part of proceeds from a contract relating to a depiction of such crime in a movie, book, newspaper, magazine, radio or television production…” There is no law in the United States that gives private parties the right to become “Special Prosecutors” to catch “mass murderers” who “profit from their crimes by publishing their book of lies” online, or violate the copyright of publishers in the name of preventing “mass murderers” from profiting. As a matter of law, no state or federal court has personal jurisdiction over Mengistu to deprive him of any “profits” he may get from the sale of the book. Even if such jurisdiction could be had, Mengistu would still be entitled to full due process of law before any court orders denial of proceeds from the sale of his book. Yes, dictators are also entitled to full due process before there are deprived of life, liberty and property.

Crimes Against Copyright Laws

The illegal posting of Mengistu’s memoir is not about lies, truths or criminals profiting from their crimes. It is about criminal infringement of copyrights. Since 1886, the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works “Berne Convention”, see Art. 2) has been in place to protect literary and artistic works. Under 17 U.S.C. §506 (a )(1 )(B), “Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed… (B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180–day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000.”

The whole idea in copyright law is to give the creator of an original work exclusive intellectual property rights for a specified amount of time, which in the U.S. is the lifetime of the author plus 70 years. During this period, the owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, perform, display, license, and prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work. Under the “fair use” rule, others may make limited use of the material for critical reviews of a work or for news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.

Crimes Against Culture

I suspect there may be some who are not familiar with Tsehai Publishers and the young man who has toiled so hard for so many years to create a publishing outlet to Ethiopian, African and other academics dedicated to scholarship on Ethiopia and the continent in general. Elias Wondimu started Tsehai Publishers in 1998. His aim was to create an institution that will “provide a venue for writers whose works may otherwise go unpublished.” Through these efforts, Elias hopes to achieve our goals of fostering intercultural dialogue and social justice.

Elias has an extraordinary and unrivalled record in seeking to enhance Ethiopian culture. He came to the U.S. in September 1994 to participate in the 12th International Ethiopian Studies Conference held at Michigan State University. Shortly thereafter, he began service as an editor for Ethiopian Review magazine, which appeared in print form until 2000. After closing out the print version of the magazine,

href=”http://tsehaipublishers.com/index.php/about-us/who-we-are/history”>he dedicated his time towards the establishing Tsehai Publishers, which is named in memory of his mother who died in Ethiopia in 1997. Over the past decade, Tsehai publishers, now based at Loyola Marymount University, has made available nearly 60 scholarly and literary works on a variety of topics, the vast majority of them concerned with Ethiopian and African affairs. The publications cover the entire political cross-section without partisanship and censorship.

Among the dozens of original scholarship and reprints of some classic works on Ethiopian and African history, politics, anthropology, sociology, economics, religion and culture include: Tradition & Change in Ethiopia (2010), Feudalism and Modernization in Ethiopia (2006), Wit and Wisdom of Ethiopia (1999), Enough with Famines in Ethiopia (2006), The Survival of Ethiopian Independence (2004), A Political History of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (2010), A History of the Beta Israel (Falasha) (2010), Protestant & Catholic Missions in Orthodox Ethiopia (2007), Life and Culture in the Townships of Cape Town (2007), AIDS Orphans and their Grandparents (2006), Wax and Gold (2005), Civil Wars and Revolution in the Sudan (2005), Ethiopia in Wartime (2004). A complete list is available here.

In 2004, Tsehai Publishers established The International Journal of Ethiopian Studies (IJES), currently available on JSTOR, the international online system for archiving academic journals. A number of Ethiopian academics and scholars including myself and professors Maimire Mennasemay, Worku Negash and Alula Pankhurst have served as senior editors. IJES is an interdisciplinary, refereed journal which is published twice a year and dedicated to scholarly research relevant to or informed by the Ethiopian experience. IJES publishes articles in English and Amharic. The Journal’s mission statement explains that

IJES will, for the first time, provide Ethiopian scholars with an Ethiopian venue for reflecting seriously on Ethiopian issues from a scholarly perspective… One of the deepest obstacles to African (including Ethiopian) progress towards democracy and economic prosperity is the peculiar situation of Africans being reduced to an object of knowledge by contemporary social science. The absence of Africans, including Ethiopians, as self-examining, self-evaluating, self-defining, and self-propelling subjects of history [has resulted in our] total dependence on external (European and American) definitions, interpretations, explanations, evaluations of who we are and what our problems and their solutions are.”

Tsehai Publishers has also organized a number of number of national conferences covering a wide range of issues and topics and sponsored a film festival for young filmmakers. The list of Elias’ contributions to the intellectual life of the Ethiopian, African and international communities is significant and much appreciated.

Those of us who take great pride in what Elias has accomplished could be faulted for speaking very highly of him. Perhaps others who have looked at his efforts could offer a more objective assessment. Prof. Wendy Belcher of Princeton University writes:

Elias is doing something unusual and important. There are very few publishers from the African continent, and, in the U.S., there are [only] a handful which are run by Africans and are publishing African texts. For an Ethiopian to have a press is more appropriate than almost any other nationality. They’ve had a written language going back 3,000 years and have long been in the business of printing and preserving the written word. He’s in a long, honorable line.”

Such is the contribution of Elias and Tsehai Publishers to the preservation, conservation and glorification of Ethiopian and African history and culture. Those who illegally copied and posted the book are not attacking the author of the book, but Elias and Tsehai Publishers. Their crimes are against the very essence of Ethiopian and African culture and those scholars and authors who spend years researching their works. All Ethiopians and Africans are victims of this cowardly crime.

It is important to know that Elias has brought great honor and pride to all Ethiopians. In 2007, he was named Ambassador for Peace by the Universal Peace Federation and the Interreligious and International Federation for World Peace to help establish lines of dialogue between African scholars, poets, historians, academics, aesthetes, journalists and scholars. In 2008, he was profiled in the inaugural edition of Who’s Who in Black Los Angeles along with such distinguished individuals as Steve Wonder, Tavis Smiley, Kobe Bryant, Isaiah Washington and Dr. Maulana Karenga. He was also profiled in a special edition of the LA Weekly as one the leading independent presses in Los Angeles. He has been interviewed on the Voice of America, National Public Radio, Deutsche Welle Radio, SBS Australia and other media on various cultural topics.

Let’s Right a CopyWrong: A Special Plea to All Ethiopians and Others Who Value a Free Press

This past week, the U.S. Congress considered two laws aimed at the type of copyright crime committed against Tsehai Publishers. The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (“PIPA”) would have allowed the U.S. Attorney General to require domain name registries to “suspend operation of, and lock, the domain name” of a website “dedicated to infringing activity.” The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) would have expanded the ability of U.S. law enforcement to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property. While lawmakers wrestle with the issues, we can all do our part to support, protect and preserve a unique and irreplaceable institution in the Ethiopian/African Diaspora. Above all, we should defend the right to press freedom and free speech against not only dictators who shutter newspapers and close down publishing houses but also those who use copyright blackmail and the threat of financial bankruptcy against publishers.

Let us do the right thing!

Those who have downloaded the book in digital or print form aware or unaware of the criminality of the act should delete it permanently from your computers and discard the printed version.

Those who have read the book online should have the courage of their convictions to contact Tsehai Publishers pay what is justly due at the link here.

Most importantly, we all need to show moral outrage by speaking out against such copyright criminality and moral courage by doing our part to support Tsehai Publishers for it is a treasure we cannot afford to lose.

Let us make our donations in any amount we can by pressing on this link.

On a personal note, I ask those who have followed my weekly commentaries and essays over the past six years to help me help Tsehai Publishers. I believe in Tsehai Publishers and fully support the efforts of Elias Wondimu and his associates who have toiled for years to make a gift of light (Tsehai) to all of us. It is a simple choice we face: We can do nothing and let darkness overwhelm our history, culture and future. Or we can do something and keep the sun shining brightly on Ethiopia, Africa and beyond!

Would you please help me help Tsehai Publishers? Please donate by pressing here. Any amount will do. THANKS….

SOCEPP Canada maintains that the continued incarceration and conviction of leaders of the opposition, journalists and citizens is a travesty of justice that must be condemned in the strongest possible way.

As we have repeatedly reported in the past, the TPLF/EPRDF regime has used the justice system to silence independent voices, political opponents and free media. To name a few of the many subjected to the ruling junta’s abuse of human rights include: the renowned surgeon and founder of the AAPO – Prof. Asrat Woldeyes, the former leader of the opposition UDJ – Betrukan Mideksa, the former leader of the Ethiopian Teachers’ Association – Dr Taye Woldesemayat, and Mr . Abera Yemane Ab – leadership member of COEDF.

This latest travesty only shows that even after 20 years of mockery of justice, the ruling TPLF/ EPRDF has no intention of reforming the justice system, introduce professionalism within the legal system and within its law enforcement agencies. Such behavior is unacceptable both to the Ethiopian public and the international community.
The ruling group continues to use all means at its disposal to stifle the justice system hoping this would go unnoticed. However, more and more Ethiopians are showing the willingness to pay the highest sacrifice to secure their dignity and basic human rights. As witnessed on November 11, 2011, a teacher by the name Yenesew Gebre, of Waka, Southern Ethiopia, burnt himself to death in protest. As one of the greatest leaders in Africa – Nelson Mandela once said, “There is no easy walk to freedom anywhere, and many of us will have to pass through the valley of the shadow of death again and again before we reach the mountaintop of our desires”. That is exactly what Ethiopians have and continue to be doing the last so many years.

We would like to remind the rulers in Ethiopia that repression only begets resistance. The way forward is to respect human rights engage in a genuine reconciliation to bring a lasting peace in the country and submit to the people’s verdict. Therefore, we call upon the ruling EPRDF/TPLF regime to immediately drop the case, release the defendants and refrain from further violation.

We call upon the government of Canada and the opposition parties and other donor governments to closely review the escalating repression in Ethiopia and use their influence to bring a lasting peace in that country.
SOCEPP Canada: www.humanrightsethiopia.com

The journalists are Woubshet Taye Abebe of the now-closed weekly newspaper Awramba Times, Reeyot Alemu Gobebo of the weekly newspaper Feteh, and Elias Kifle, editor of the online Ethiopian Review, who was tried in absentia. An opposition leader, Zerihun Gebre-Egziabher Tadesse of the Ethiopian National Democratic Party, and a woman named Hirut Kifle Woldeyesus were also convicted. All five were convicted of conspiracy to commit terrorist acts, which carries a sentence of 15 years to life imprisonment or death, as well as of participating in a terrorist organization. They were also convicted of money laundering under the Ethiopian criminal code. Their sentencing is expected on January 26.

“The verdict against these five people confirms that Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism law is being used to crush independent reporting and peaceful political dissent,” said Leslie Lefkow, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch, “The Ethiopian courts are complicit in this political witch-hunt.”

The case was marred by serious due process concerns. The defendants had no access to legal counsel during their three months in pretrial detention, and the court did not investigate their allegations of torture and mistreatment in detention.

Public comments by government officials have undermined the defendants’ presumption of innocence. A government spokesman, Shimeles Kemal, told Human Rights Watch in a telephone interview in September that Reeyot and Woubshet had been involved in planning terrorist acts. In October Prime Minister Meles Zenawi told the Ethiopian parliament that the authorities had conclusive evidence that the journalists and political opposition members arrested under the law were guilty of terrorism.

Both Woubshet and Zerihun alleged in court that they had been tortured, including being beaten, and mistreated during their pretrial detention at Addis Ababa’s notorious Maekelawi prison. None of the defendants were granted access to legal counsel during their pretrial detention. Local sources told Human Rights Watch that these complaints of mistreatment have not been investigated by the court.

Families and friends of the defendants have been granted visiting rights at Kaliti, where the defendants were transferred once the trial started in September 2011.

The evidence submitted by the prosecution only emphasizes the government’s political motivations behind the prosecutions, Human Rights Watch said.

According to the charge sheet, which Human Rights Watch examined, the evidence consisted primarily of online articles critical of the government and telephone discussions notably regarding peaceful protest actions that do not amount to acts of terrorism. Furthermore, the descriptions of the charges in the initial charge sheet did not contain even the basic elements of the crimes of which the defendants are accused. Two individuals attending the trial told Human Rights Watch that the prosecution put forward no evidence of involvement in terrorist acts.

“Getting a fair trial in a political case in Ethiopia today may be impossible,” Lefkow said. “The prosecution should drop the charges against these defendants and instead investigate their allegations of torture.”

Human Rights Watch has repeatedly raised serious concerns about Ethiopia’s Anti-Terrorism Proclamation of 2009, including its overly broad definition of “terrorist acts,” which can include acts of peaceful protest that result in the “disruption of any public services”. The law also includes vague provisions that proscribe support for, or encouragement of, terrorism, which can include public reporting on banned terrorist groups.

The provision on pretrial detention allows suspects to be held in custody for up to four months without charge, one of the longest periods in anti-terrorism legislation worldwide. The provision violates due process rights guaranteed under Ethiopian law and international law, Human Rights Watch said.

The ruling comes one month after two Swedish journalists were sentenced to 11 years in prison on charges of “rendering support to terrorism,” based on their having illegally entered Ethiopia to investigate and report on abuses in the Ogaden area. Since June 2011, at least two other people have been convicted under the law and 24 others have been charged, including six other journalists and three opposition party members.

“Within the space of a month five journalists and one political opposition leader have been sentenced under ludicrous provisions in Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism law,” Lefkow said. “The worst provisions in the law should be immediately amended to prevent further abuse and ensure that the law conforms to international standards.”

For more information on the trial and Ethiopia’s Anti-Terrorism Law, please visit:

http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/21/ethiopia-journalists-convicted-under-unfair-law

http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/07/25/ethiopia-terrorism-law-undercuts-free-speech

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/06/30/ethiopia-amend-draft-terror-law

“This is an affront to freedom of expression. The convictions are yet another sign that individuals who hold different opinions, represent different political parties or attempt to provide independent commentary on political developments, are no longer tolerated in Ethiopia,” said Claire Beston, Amnesty International’s Ethiopia researcher.
“There is no evidence that these three men and two women are guilty of any criminal wrongdoing. We believe that the five are prisoners of conscience, prosecuted because of their legitimate work and peaceful activities and they should be released immediately,” she added.
The five were found guilty on three charges: ‘Planning, Preparation Conspiracy, Incitement and Attempt of Terrorist Act’, Participation in a Terrorist Organisation’ and ‘Money Laundering’.
Journalists Woubshet Taye, Reyot Alemu and Elias Kifle have all written articles critical of government policy and practice, while Zerihun Gebre-Egziabher, the president of the Ethiopian National Democratic Party, has written statements on behalf of his party which were critical of the government.
Shortly before his arrest in June last year, the opposition leader had also requested permission to stage a political rally on 28 May in central Addis Ababa.
Hirut Kifle was jailed in 2007 for alleged involvement with an armed group, while she was a supporter of the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy, before being released by Presidential pardon.
Much of the evidence presented by the prosecution during the trial related to the defendants exercising their right to freedom of expression and association. This included numerous articles written by defendants,and even articles sent to them by other people.
A substantial proportion of the evidence against the defendants related to their reporting of, and alleged involvement in, the appearance of the slogan Beka! (“Enough!”) in locations around Addis Ababa in early 2011, as a call for peaceful protests against the government to take place on 28 May.
“This focus of the prosecution’s evidence illustrates that free expression has been criminalised in this trial, and that criticising the government is considered a crime,” said Claire Beston.
The court and pre-trial proceedings were also marred by numerous fair trial concerns. Both Woubshet Taye and Zerihun Gebre-Egziabher complained in court that they were severely beaten while held at Maikelawi detention centre in Addis Ababa, which is infamous for the frequent use of torture against pre-trial detainees. No investigations into these allegations have been carried out.
Woubshet Taye and Reyot Alemu were both forced to reveal their e-mail passwords during interrogation in Maikelawi. Contents of the e-mail accounts were presented as evidence against them in court. Woubshet Taye also complained that e-mails from his account had been changed, and some were falsely interpreted.
Reyot, Woubshet and Zerihun were denied access to family members for the first month of their detention in Maikelawi and were held in isolation cells during the initial stages of their detention. Hirut Kifle was reportedly denied access to family members for three months when she was first detained.
In October, Woubshet Taye and Zerihun Gebre-Egziabher were informed that their visiting arrangements had changed. Since then, visitors have only been permitted to visit the two men for ten minutes per day.
Since March 2011 at least 107 opposition party members and journalists have been arrested and charged with various offences under the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation and Criminal Code. Last month two Swedish journalists were convicted of terrorism offences and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment.

If effected, the ban could see the two, who won the 5,000m and 10,000m titles respectively at the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, being locked out from defending their titles at the 2012 London Olympics set to run from July 27 to August 12.

Melkamu also banned

Also banned are the 2009 Berlin World Championships 10,000m silver medallist Meselech Melkamu and the 2009 World Half Marathon bronze medallist Aberu Kebede. Meselech, who is also the 2009 Africa 5000m champion, was the chief guest during the 2011 Sports Personality of the Year Awards (Soya).

A populous athletics website – LetsRun.com – broke the news on Thursday following communication from an Ethiopian journalist after the federation banned the athletes following row over training.

LetsRun.com website said in part: “This morning, LetsRun.com has received a text from Ethiopian journalist Teferi Debebe, whom LetsRun.com met at the 2009 world cross country championships in Amman, stating that he had heard on an Ethiopian radio station that 35 top athletes, including 5,000 and 10,000m double Olympic champions Kenenisa Bekele and Tirunesh Dibaba, 2009 World half marathon bronze Aberu Kebede.”

Ethiopian Athletics Federation technical director, Dube Jilo, also reportedly confirmed to international media about the development.

“We have banned 35 athletes, including Bekela and Dibaba from competing in any event,” Jilo said.

Speaking at the launching of the Humanitarian Requirements Document (HRD) for the first half of 2012 here on Thursday Agriculture State Minister Mitiku Kassa said Ethiopia needs 168.7 million US dollars worth food and non-food items.

According to HRD, Ethiopia needs 365.6 MT of emergency food aid amounting to 122.3 US dollars of which a total of 46 million is estimated to be required for the non food sectors that include water, sanitation, agriculture and education sectors.

The minister recalled that some 4.5 million people were in need of humanitarian aid but the number declined to 3.2 million owing to the coordinated effort by the stakeholders.
He said the achievement made in terms of resources mobilization and addressing humanitarian needs in the second half of 2001 is a clear manifestation for the effective early warning response system and resource mobilization strategy and coordination mechanisms.

The documents reviews response status in the second half of 2011 and also presents prioritize food and non food interventions in the first half of 2012 along with estimated resource requirement for their implementation.

Acting Humanitarian Coordinator UNCEIF Country representative, Ted Chaiban on his part said the document is an essential reference point for our continued collective work.
He said emergency response capacity is an important insurance for development activities that enables the most vulnerable population to participate actively in their own development and maintain their livelihood assets.

“ We need to develop a joint strategy to asses the differential needs of all those requiring relief food and assistance provided under the productive safety net program PSNP including through its risk financial mechanism ” , he noted. — NNN-ENA

Its “amended” political program, issued at the same time and posted on its website, declares that one of the “goals of the political struggle of the Oromo people” is to form a “New Democratic Federal Republic of Ethiopia that will be established by the consent of its peoples based on principles of democracy, equality, freedom, liberty, justice and rule of law.” The new program also stipulates that OLF’s new vision, its principal “responsibility” and political agenda, is “to lead all forms of struggle to dismantle the fascist rule of the TPLF regime to enable the peoples in Ethiopia to form a new union based on democracy and rule of law for all of its citizens.”
(Emphasis added.) Through these declarations, the OLF has essentially disavowed any secessionist agenda that it has long been alleged to be espousing and has declared its readiness to join hands with all pro-democratic forces for a free, united and democratic Ethiopia.

The Ethiopian National Congress (ENC), a world-wide civil society organization which, since its inception 15 years ago, has been steadfastly advocating for and attempting to facilitate unity formation activities among all of Ethiopia’s pro-democracy forces, welcomes and applauds this action by the OLF. The ENC has always believed that it would be impossible to forge a stable, united, and prosperous Ethiopia without a democratic governance arrangement that genuinely embraces and serves the interests of all its peoples.

This has been and remains one of ENC’s core beliefs and guiding principles. Indeed, it was with this conviction that, during a two-year period in 2002 and 2003, the ENC was engaged in a protracted effort to bring together the leadership of the OLF with those of other political parties and organizations. There were times that our efforts appeared to be succeeding but such unity had proven to be elusive until now.

The ENC believes that this January 1, 2012 action by the OLF is a wise, bold and courageous action that should be embraced by all democratic and unity-minded Ethiopians. For it is an action which has the potential of dramatically changing the balance of forces in favor of our people’s struggle for a free, democratic, and united Ethiopia. When everything is said and done, it is the broad masses of the Oromo people – and the rest of the Ethiopian people – who will ultimately benefit from the successful pursuit of this new vision and course of action.

Meles Zenawi and his minority clique, which has successfully mastered and used the strategy of divide-and-conquer as the sin qua non for its 20-year long grip of dictatorial power, will no doubt ridicule this move by the OLF as one more futile and manipulative attempt by a divided and weakened “terrorist” group. Even some democratic circles will remain skeptical and suspicious about the “true intentions” behind this “change of mind.” Even more importantly, there will surely be factions within the OLF itself and other forces within Oromo society, both at home and abroad, who will oppose and work steadfastly to reverse this action. This is understandable and to be expected. Our hope — and pleading — is that these forces will be genuinely guided by the true and long-term interests of the Oromo people. We are confident that, if they do, they will ultimately see the wisdom – and transformative value – of OLF’s embrace of democracy and the need for a united struggle to free all Ethiopia’s people from the yoke of dictatorial rule by a minority clique.

This move by the OLF should also be embraced by the international community and especially by those legitimately concerned by the spread of terrorist activities in the Horn of Arica. The only sure way of ultimately containing terrorism in the region is to embrace the democratic aspirations of the people by supporting democratic governance and the rule of law. OLF’s embrace of democracy and determination to work with Ethiopia’s democratic forces to get rid of the minority dictatorship now in power, if allowed to succeed, will guarantee the evolution of genuine and sustainable democracies in the region.

ETHIOPIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS
JANUARY 18, 2012

The report accuses the government of forcibly relocating approximately 70,000 indigenous people from the western Gambella region. It is reported that these villages lack adequate food, farmland, healthcare, and educational facilities.

In the past, the government has persistently disputed charges of human rights violations of any sorts, including forced relocations. Not surprisingly, it has now strongly rejected the present report and its overall conclusions.

Nevertheless, it would be recalled that, among others, the feisty State Minister of Agriculture Wondirad Mandefro, confirmed to John Vidal, environment editor for the Guardian, in March 2011 that no one was forcibly relocated, notwithstanding a number of evidences the journalist has collected and informed him of them, which also was corroborated with video clips that speak to the contrary.

During the discussion with John Vidal, the state minister moved from outright denial to scoffing over such allegations and the concerns thereon, as he propounded his government’s position using pretentious arguments that are sound on hearing them but do sinisterly imply any action could be justified in removing dire poverty from the country. In that regard, he said:

“It is their choice…Either to choose to have these basic services come to the villages…It is based on their willingness. But of course, they have to abandon their previous ways of life. [Otherwise] you cannot provide any basic services to the community.”

The Human Rights Watch’s report alleges that state security forces have repeatedly threatened, assaulted, and arbitrarily arrested villagers who resist the transfers. Of this disturbing situation, Jan Egeland, Europe director at Human Rights Watch and formerly United Nations Undersecretary General for the Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs stated:

“The Ethiopian government’s villagization program is not improving access to services for Gambella’s indigenous people, but is instead undermining their livelihoods and food security. The government should suspend the program until it can ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place and that people have been properly consulted and compensated for the loss of their land.”
After initial refusal/hesitation to comment on the report, finally Government Communications Affairs Minister Bereket Simon reacted to the BBC on Tuesday, not only denying to Robin Lustig the charges, but also questioning the motives of Human Rights Watch against Ethiopia, as follows:

“First of all, regarding the current report I can tell you that it is baseless – on both grounds – on both the land grab issue and resettlement of the Gambella people. But at a larger picture of the whole, it has been quite few years since Human Rights Watch repeatedly started to report negatively [against Ethiopia] and based on wrong information and deliberate distortion of the facts on the ground.”
BBC World Service’s Robin Lustig interjected:

“Wait a minute, you say wrong information. They [Human Rights Watch] have interviewed many, many people who have told them stories which can lead them to the conclusion that there can be no doubt that there is a policy of forcible removal of tens of thousands of people from the homes.”
Bereket Simon:

“NO, in the first place Human Rights Watch has never been on the ground. They say in their report, for instance, there is no services on the ground. Let me give you the facts on the ground. We have built 22 health facilities for 20,000 people; 19 schools, 72 irrigation water schemes, 128 kms of rural road, 18 animal health clinics, 30 grain mills and 407 water pumps have been put in place.”
Robin Lustig:

Ok, but do you deny that people are being forced to leave their homes against their will?”
Bereket Simon:

“No one is forced. This is an absolute lie. In the first place let me tell you the facts on the ground. People around Gambella are sparsely inhabiting their place in a very scattered manner. They cannot be beneficiaries of the development like electricity, water and telecom. So for all practical purposes of helping those people who are denied in the past such basic infrastructural amenities, the government has decided to settle them. But it is not [just] a decision; we have discussed the issue in a very thorough manner with the beneficiaries; they have accepted it.”
Robin Lustig:

“Do you accept what is being said by Human Rights Watch and others that part of the impetus behind this villagization program is the government’s awareness that this land has commercial value and certainly has value to foreign investors.”
Bereket Simon:

“No. It is true that we are providing access to land on a lease basis for 25 years for local and foreign developers. We have about three million hectares of land which is not inhabited by anybody.”

Robin Lustig:

“You say not inhabited by anybody. So you are saying there are no cases of people leaving their land by their own will or by force in order to enable foreign investors or others commercial use of their land.”
Bereket Simon:

“Absolutely! This is their land. You know this is the land of Ethiopians. They have every right to stay where they are. Government cannot forcibly relocate them. It is only consensual. On the other hand, we have abundant land where we have not used before.”
Why has the government not investigated the allegations internally and release its findings to date?

The problem, as usual, is that the Ethiopian government is claim of only it what it says is true and right — no matter what the victims allege, people in the region say, what experts and journalists write or the concerns of the international community — I mean, anyone, outside their powerful allies.

There is no more dangerous mix than a state firmly convinced about its inexorable capacities to do everything and individuals that are without moral controls. That is the ugly situation Ethiopia finds itself today in terms of governance, where the line between truth and falsehoods and reality and fiction have increasingly become hazy.

In a way, by smoothing the rough edges of past denials with numbers and figures on services points, that exactly is what the minister’s defense is all about. Unfortunately, the line of his argument has been defeated from the start by the credibility gap Ethiopia’s development state has continued to suffer. Thus, the minister’s long list of defenses via ‘infrastructural amenities’ could not convincingly prevail over the eloquence and persistence of the long running allegations coming from frightened people who lack any recourses.

Another intriguing aspect of this question is that at no time has the Meles regime established a mechanism to investigate to see through the charges either to dismiss them or establish their veracity and correct the mistakes thereon. In Ethiopia, growth and politics are increasingly becoming a game for the chosen few, as the investor world is being fooled by projects dangling as national development undertakings. They are only the voodoos intended to fool under the impression that regime is pro-poor, which it is more in its rhetorics.

If denials were an all cure, the government’s could have ended the many censures around the world against itself. Clearly, their denials hardly get dented in the face of wide condemnations; surprisingly, nor do they get discouraged by the banality of their false defenses that have barely had any impact on the global opinion coalescing against Ethiopia’s harsh, repressive and violent developmental state.

People are right in distrusting the regime

In the circumstances, any citizen is within his or her rights to ask why they should trust whatever the Ethiopian government says. After all, numerous are the unfulfilled pledges and promises on delivering their “liberation of Ethiopia”, with a democratic future for its people, where its governance would be characterized by freedom and equality of individual citizens.

On the contrary, under the TPLF/EPRDF the situation has only proved that power itself is such a powerful broker. Instead it has ended up successfully consummating the marriage between Ethiopia’s political aristocracy and big capital. The regime has failed to balance the interests of the people in better life and openness of the country for foreign investment–never at the expense of one or the other.

A tale of two soul mates affirming their protocol of profound gratitude to each other
Is it not now a public knowledge that Minister Bereket Simon, the man who just made vigorous defense of his government’s actions against Human Rights Watch’s allegations on BBC, and Sheik Mohammed Al Amoudi, the 63rd billionaire in the world and 2nd wealthiest person in Saudi Arabia, are “soul mates”, as the minister described their relations at a lavish party given by the sheik on 22 December 2011 to promote the former’s controversial book on Ethiopia’s 2005 and 2010 elections.
Of course, the tycoon owns agricultural lands in different parts of the country. In Gambella, his was founded on lands cleared of people and natural forests, when he started Saudi Star Agricultural Development, initially on 10,000 hectares of land. There are news reports that he has been planning to expand it to 500,000 hectares, according to Addis Fortune.

Parsing the words of the sheik at that book event at his Sheraton Hotel, actually what he promoted was not only a book but also, as he put it, the wise and friendly leadership of the TPLF/EPRDF from which he has learned great lessons.

The matrix of that teacher-student relations, Al Amoudi has revealed at the party was something very interesting. He said, “ከዋናው ሰውዬ ጀምሮ ወዳጆች ነን፤ ተግባብተን እና ተቻችለን ነው የምንኖረው፤ እኔ ግን አንድ ቀን እንዲህ ሆንኩ ብዬ ቅሬታ አቅርቤላቸው አላውቅም እንደውም እነሱ እንደኔ ሁሉንም የሚጭኑበት ሰው የለም” (Starting from the Number One Person, we are friends. We have good understanding and mutually accommodate each other. However, I never went to them to complain about anything. Nor do I believe there is any other person they encumber for everything more than I.”) This is to show that the prime minister himself is in the palms of his hands.

As to the minister’s wishes becoming the sheik’s command, Ato Bereket openly announced that his book and that of his brother-in-law’s were published in Nairobi, with full publication costs covered from the sheik’s deep pocket on the basis of “the instruction” he gave the sheik.

Not only that. The sheik is also caretaker of the minister’s health, for whose maintenance not long ago he paid a hefty sum in Rands in South Africa, including arranging for the patient to fly by private jet.

Surely, in the eyes of the leadership this would be considered a crime only when someone outside their circle does it or a member outlives his usefulness. Certainly, they would inflict on him or her the full force of the law as a punishment, which Ethiopian law provides up to ten years of imprisonment for influence peddling and kickbacks received by officials.

By all available indications, what we have known all along is that Ethiopia’s political class is determined to defend and promote the interests of the sheik and his category of people. that is exactly what Minister Bereket Simon did on the BBC on 17 January, characterizing Human Rights Watch’s allegations as false and baseless.

It would not require a genius of the obvious to figure out that this is part of the job description of Ethiopian officials! Otherwise alleging that mistakes were made and crimes were committed would only turn the accusations on their head, exposing the collusion between international capital and the Ethiopian leadership in displacing Ethiopian citizens from their lands.

Conclusion

As bad as this is for Ethiopians, unlike Ethiopia’s long history of tolerance, people are now being forced to see that their country is being transformed into practitioner of ethnic discrimination as an official practice — i.e., in breach of the laws of the land. In other words, the state has been fulfilling its duties totally enmeshed in corruption. This has placed ordinary citizens at the receiving end of its ugliness,instead of the new direction and hopeful future the TPLF has promised Ethiopians, even when they have been wary of it from the get go.

This situation now points to the root causes of all its violences against farmers, the free media and independent journalists, teachers, etc., it has been unleashing for a long, long time. Its pervasive sense of knowing it all and being always right that it has been demonstrating speak to the continuing human sufferings in the country, which sooner or later would become the very vortex of its very self-destruction.

http://transformingethiopia.wordpress.com/

Anyone who has read the latest Human Rights Watch investigative report on land grab (yemeret neteka ena kirimit) in Gambella under the title “Waiting for Death” should have no doubt that the governing party is callous and does not place value on human life. The people of Gambella who are being moved or relocated “forcibly” are citizens and humans who deserve fair treatment like any human being on this planet. It is their citizenship that is being robbed from them and from their children by repressive ethnic elite that has aligned itself with loyal domestic and foreign investors such as Saudi Star and Karuturi. Shouldn’t this latest report on social, economic, cultural, political and psychological violations of citizens in Gambella and other regions where similar occurrences are taking place enrage and mobilize us? If such violations do not lead to convergence, what would? My plea to the reader is this. Land and water resource transfers to domestic allies and foreign investors in the name of development that do not show immediate and long-term benefits to the people of Ethiopia, and especially to so called indigenous or local inhabitants and at an immense cost to citizens is a travesty. This, in itself, should compel us to close ranks and cooperate and collaborate for justice and freedom.

I want to start this commentary with a rationale of why I am doing a series on ethnic based political organization and governance—the current well-crafted geopolitical architecture of the TPLF/EPRDF. It seems to me that each and every one of us who believes in the enormous potential of our country of origin and its diverse population has a moral obligation to identify and articulate the reasons why Ethiopia is still one the five poorest countries in the world with a per capita income in 2011 of US$350 compared to the Sub-Saharan African average of US$1,070. As important, we are obligated to reflect on why and what type of change we would like to see in Ethiopia that will serve and benefit all Ethiopians left out by the so-called economic boom since the thwarted elections of 2005. I have suggested that if we want to see change, we must overcome minor differences, agree on a minimum agenda and deliver for the Ethiopian people. The time for action is now and not tomorrow. Eshie nege (yes tomorrow) will not advance the cause of peace, national reconciliation, justice and the rule of law and the sovereignty of the Ethiopian people. It will prolong the agony that ordinary Ethiopians face: hyperinflation, unemployment, human flight, human rights violations. In short, it will perpetuate disenfranchisement.

Those of us outside the country possess the knowledge, diversity of experience, financial and material resources and technical tools to advance change if we are committed, willing and ready. I am not at all convinced that we are there. If we were, we would have contributed immensely in advancing the process of change by supporting grassroots and home-based individual activists, civic organizations and political parties that advance a common national agenda and or force others to do the same. These series of articles are intended to provide conceptual underpinnings or reasons behind the current disenfranchisement and powerlessness felt by the majority of the Ethiopian people regardless of ethnic or religious affiliation, gender or age.

Powerlessness and resource mismanagement

Have you ever asked yourself or your friend or anyone why the TPLF/EPRDF led government gives away millions of hectares of the most fertile farmlands and waters basins for literally nothing and for up to 100 years to domestic allies and foreign investors? Have you ever posed for one second to reflect on the long-term implications of these national resource transfers for this and coming generations? If land is “green gold,” why would any government grant it for almost nothing as if it has no social, economic, psychological, security and political value? What system allows for this to occur and why? Let me summarize a few fact contained in my latest book, “The Great land giveaway: yemeret neteka ena kirimit” and link it to the ethnic elite architecture that allows this to happen without challenge. Why is there no challenge? It is because ordinary people are denied their fundamental right to vote for and elect their representatives and leaders.

In April 2011, the Reporter newspaper presented an investigative piece on land grab and validated that the Federal Government has slated, promised or granted “3,638, 415 ha” of the most fertile farmlands and water basins, primarily to foreign investors from 36 countries. The same article noted that regions had turned over another 2,000,000 ha of lands to the Federal Government to allocate as it sees fit. A break down by Ato Wudineh of the Reporter showed that 1,149,000 ha of these giveaways are in Beni-Shangul Gumuz and 1,800,000 ha in Gambella, among the poorest regions in the country. Experts estimate that by 2015, the amount of lands given away will reach at least 7,000,000 ha. Smallholders farm less than half an acre and support a family of at least 6 persons. Ethiopian smallholders are the backbone of the national economy. Studies show that 4/5 (75 percent) of smallholders manage to produce and feed the bulk of Ethiopia’s population from 12,000,000 ha. In other words, smallholders are the ones that feed millions; and not large foreign owned commercial farms. Imagine what smallholders could do if there was a deliberate policy to help them modernize their farms; if they had security to the lands they farm and so on. Karuturi of India and Saudi Star of Saudi Arabia and other Middle East sponsored countries are the lead beneficiaries of the largesse. This is why Karuturi calls Ethiopia’s fertile farmlands “Green gold.” Access to land defines power. In current Ethiopia, it firms such as Karuturi and Saudi Star and loyalists to the TPLF and its allies that have power.

Here, I will not dwell on the pros and cons of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in commercial farms in Ethiopia except to provide two examples showing that the policy is utterly flawed. First, the government argument that these transfers will generate substantial employment for Ethiopians does not hold. Research by the Oakland Institute, Grain and others shows that each ha of land grant or sale or lease generates 0.005 employments. It means that the government would have to grant millions of ha to generate employment opportunities for thousands. Making matters even worse, Karuturi wishes to bring in and employ Indians to farm Ethiopian lands. Second, the government’s rationale that giveaway—that lacks preconditions or favorable conditions for Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people will bring in new technologies is not based on facts. Here is the problem. The country’s domestic investors with monies are doing everything within their power to take their capital out of the country as do officials with money. The indicator is massive illicit outflow that I have discussed in detail in earlier commentaries.
Why is there massive capital outflow from one of the poorest and capital starved or deficient countries in the world? I suggest that national investors do not trust their own government. They do not have confidence in the future. They are essentially voting with their monies against the regime. In other words, they do not trust or have confidence in the future of the economy. If they did, they will invest domestically and boost employment and productivity. On the other hand, large-scale commercial farming for Karuturi, Saudi Star and others is lucrative. Profits can me made relatively quickly and proceeds taken out of the country. Foreign investors have little incentive to spread technology, modern management practices and know-how to Ethiopian smallholders or the domestic private sector. Why would they create national competitors when they can dominate the large commercial farming sector for up to 99 years? Capitalism does not work that way whether it comes from China, India or Saudi Arabia. Third, the government argument that Ethiopia will achieve food self-sufficiency and food security through FDI is not borne by facts. Karuturi said over and over again that his firm is under no obligation to set aside sizeable quantities of the produce for the domestic market. This will not change unless the government changes the conditions in favor of the country and its starving millions.

These three examples lead me to pose a question to the reader. How is it possible for these flaws in government policy that undermine potential ownership of the means of production by Ethiopians and national productivity for Ethiopians to occur? Let us ignore my own research and findings that are documented in my latest book and look at what foreign observers say how this happens. In her “The Great land grab,” Rene Lefort highlights the following themes on the subject.

• Land defines citizenship
• Land is a source of power, wealth and corruption
• Land is used as a diplomatic leverage

These are among the reasons why the TPLF/EPRDF led government is the “world’s champion of land grab.” Have you ever wondered how a regime that claims to adhere to Revolutionary Democracy becomes a prime champion of unfettered capitalism? Have you ever wondered why a government leadership that accuses the private sector of rent seeking behaviors becomes the largest rent seeker in the country’s history or of any forward looking government in the 21st century? “They gave the land and we took it. This is green gold” did not happen by chance. It happened by invitation.