Ethiopian Review

By Tadesse Haile
(Nazret) — The Ethiopian people have had a long history of preserving their sovereignty amid internal conflicts that have historical proportions in the region. Serfdom under the reigns of kingdoms and land lords was the modern version of blue collar workers with the exception that under serfdom the backward system of exploitation was unparalleled. Traditionally, the Ethiopian people always followed their leaders no matter what until their destinies are truly judged by the merits of their wisdom to lead. This was true throughout the country showing no significant variations in the daily lives of the people either in the north or the south. The land lords in the north and south used this opportunity to organize the masses behind them to win over their rival powers. The Horn of Africa region has been characterized by conquest mentality whose result, to name one, was the making of Ethiopia after which the momentum spread to the subsequent areas in the region. I don’t see anything uncharacteristically wrong with those historic events as this was the fashion during the 18th and the 19th century world affairs. Ethiopia’s was no exception despite the fact that some want to paint it a colonial extension of the west. As a nation that went through two fierce struggles against the expansionist Italian aggression during the Menelik rule and then against fascism during the Second World War with the then Emperor Haile Selassie, it’s unfair to characterize Ethiopia’s efforts to unite the region under one umbrella as a colonial attempt to forcefully rule the people. The modern day challenges in Ethiopia arise from some prominent politicians and groups who want to promote their agendas by formulating their version of the history of the people they hardly get to unite under their banner. Culturally, the people of Ethiopia want a peaceful coexistence in an effort to provide food, education and hope for their children in exchange for the growth and improvement of their living standard. These achievements can be enhanced by the openhandedness of the role models and their ability to lead by example. Good example is set by closely watching what people need most. Good role models envision long term goals rather than short term gains. They know they can’t grab power by choosing short cuts that lack power base and grass roots support which require people power behind them. Grass roots movement can’t be achieved unless freedom of participation and expression with open medium for information exchange, education and thus, economic growth are defended to guard people’s right not to be compromised.
Nationalities

As a home of over 80 ethnic groups and many languages, Ethiopia has existing and new challenges that need to be tackled not only wisely but also courageously. There are issues relating to the fates of the nationalities within Ethiopia that create enormous momentum for change day by day. Some of the issues involve the realities that one can’t ignore. Some are creating unnecessary confusions that can only contribute to the negative trends that drag the progress of the region. No matter what the problems are, the basic items of any agenda need to give at most priority to resolving them in a peaceful manner. Without peace nothing can be done. In a region like the Horn of Africa where the population survives on the verge of a looming disaster, regional conflicts should be a bygone era. Any attempt to resort to violent means to achieve the goals of liberation or autonomy is like throwing stone at a glass house as the whole region is in a brink of collapse as it is, leave alone elements of self destruction are added. What happened in Ethiopia during the elections of 2005 and most recently, the Kenyan and Zimbabwe contested elections, are good examples of the consequences of conquest mentality. It is a warning signal for more tragedies to come unless the responsibility of every prominent politician, political group or a party of interest is to give peaceful means of dialogue a chance.

The issues of nations and nationalities are apparent as time goes. We need to learn from the examples of the Eastern European countries including the tragic outcomes upon disintegration of the former Yugoslavia. From the case of Yugoslavia, we learn how not to go about doing certain things, although theirs is a sudden outpouring of events that proved to be fatally out of control. In the cases of countries like the Check and Slovak Republics and the Former Soviet Union; they listened to the voices of the overwhelming majority of the people in an unbiased referendum s and elections for either separation from the main land for independence or in the case of Germany, for a reunion. For similar things to happen in the Horn of Africa, one can’t expect them overnight. It is a tedious process of first making the ground work of knowing what the immediate needs of the people are. People know their priorities and they are not always exotic ones. Time will come for everything including major transformations and unavoidable changes. When they are done at the right time and peacefully, we won’t even notice the consequences because the favorable conditions will persuade responsible powers to bring about the necessary changes without a significant damage. By that I don’t mean one should sit and wait for that day to come as that would be a foolish thing to do. Without instigating trouble, one can contribute to a peaceful transition of events including exposing or challenging the ruling class to stand by its obligations to facilitate change.

Speaking of the ruling party, one can find it very tricky to delve in the depth of the matter. Although it is like comparing apples to oranges, I will begin with a closer look at democracy and dictatorship. There have been varying types of dictatorships with similar orientations whose goals are staying in power as long as it takes. As a matter of fact, communism is a type of dictatorship; the major difference being its design to work as an end in itself. According to the communist philosophy, it is an idea whose time comes inevitably when all other systems of society expire in a natural progression. It comes as an irreplaceable alternative to cure all “ills” of human kind that were caused by the sufferings under serfdom during feudalism; exploitations of the working poor during capitalism and its extension during imperialism. I believe the ultimate manifesto of promoting proletarian dictatorship by all means proved to be the major obstacle that failed communism due to its shortcomings in understanding the true nature of societal development. Societal development is not an easy task to formulate as it can be fiercely dynamic and its direction volatile, indecisive and unpredictable. For a stable system of society to function, it needs a support system that conforms to the changing conditions of the global geopolitical environment. While today’s democracy tends to accommodate those requirements, it falls short of effectively fighting the forms of dictatorships that prevail in the contemporary societies.

Dictatorship occurs when a favorable condition enables individuals or a group of cadres or self appointees to successfully capture the ruling establishment either after a long protracted struggle or a sudden creation of vacuum due to inefficiencies of the governing body. If everything goes well, then they can have a free pass to ruling as long as there is no significant opposition force to overthrow them in turn. Just to be fair, the modern day dictators are ever becoming skillful in making their days in power longer. Not recommending dictatorship, historically some have uncharacteristically proved their sincerity by paving the way to a peaceful transition to fair democratic elections. In contrast, some have ruined their countries before they fled to hiding. So, even in dictatorships, we need to walk the talk. There are dictators that could somehow assimilate with the people and develop a legacy of rule that continues even after their death. Some leave behind a dynasty that survives for decades. Don’t get me wrong; those rulers are not necessarily clean from abuses of human rights and malpractice of their power by instigating corruption, misuse of power etc. Their survival depended on how good they might be at cleverly quelling revolts and covering up corruptions of a systematic magnitude by changing tactics and running effective indoctrination.

The cases of Africa in general and the Horn of Africa in particular are no different. A few countries are making some impressive progress by putting together elements of basic democracy in their constitutionally approved elections for parliament and presidency. Although we need to keep our eyes open, I think it is time to look at two or more faces of issues that involve our attention so that the goals of bringing about changes to the people who need them most are not disrupted. If we are to build some form of democracy, unless we can prove otherwise, honest but cautious approach in participation will no doubt promote a peaceful and responsible display of stability in the nation building. It is sometimes hard to know for sure what the leading elites are doing behind closed doors but starting to work around what they say can build a hierarchy of a healthy opposition. Needles to say, it needs a cooperating entity to build a constructive democracy.

It is sometimes hard to openly prove who is not cooperating. The ruling party with its fist coated with sweet words or the opposition which has nothing in its hands other than the power of negation?

It is somewhat boring to expect smooth governance without any dissent and opposition. As there is no excuse for any ineptness of a leadership, a ruling party that chooses to lead a nation has to accept the reality of being under peoples’ watchful surveillance all the time. The problem is an inept opposition can also create havoc when its main goal is to disrupt rather than support the process by using various tactics of intimidation and negation to psychologically bankrupt the ruling mentality. This kind of opposition creates a tighter reaction from the power hungry and usually nervous rulers and then the discord astronomically exacerbates to the level of creating a volatile situation where any ongoing little progress starts to decline and then stall. Consequently, the inevitable happens after which the losers are always the people. Unfortunately, in spite of the success stories in the contemporary world of ours, some choose to learn the hard way. Africa and specially the horn of Africa, has a long way to go in this aspect. The only way to accelerate progress in this region is by creating an all inclusive effort to educate the people.

Party relations

The Ethiopian political environment has come a long way. The ruling powers have always encountered a level of opposition that frequently transformed into a rebellion by renegade forces whose ultimate goals are to violently overthrow the power at the top. For the first time in the Ethiopian history, mainly thanks to the abrupt change of balance of power due to the reshuffle after the end of cold war era, the rebel forces came to an astounding success by clinging to power with a new philosophy that in most cases challenged people’s belief about Ethiopian-ism. TPLF, later EPRDF was ahead of the confusion that was created by the vacuum left behind by Mengistu’s abandonment of his constituency. They formulated a new approach to the questions of Eritrean independence. Either out of weakness or tactical vision, EPRDF chose to leave Eritrea alone at the expense of creating a landlocked Ethiopia. It is ironic that, a country of 80 million with a daunting need to have a sea outlet is intentionally left without its own port. Most prominent politicians have different points of view regarding this issue. One of them is the hasty change of events right after the Derg. Because of its defensive position, it was not in Ethiopia’s advantage to sit at the negotiating table to discuss the terms of Eritrea’s transition to independence. Most believe, because of external factors, Ethiopia temporarily lost its upper hand to be able to control the terms of the secession of Eritrea. Some have hinted the long time relationship between EPLF and TPLF persuaded the latter to honor whatever commitment they had during their protracted struggle against the Ethiopian “hegemony”. Whatever the reason was, many Ethiopians still don’t accept the independence of Eritrea thus, they don’t believe in discussing the case of acquiring the port as in their belief, the whole of Eritrea will one day be part of Ethiopia sometime in the future. In spite of all the differing views, the reality is what the country is facing right now.

After the fall of the military regime, the Ethiopian people were yearning for any change to come. There was no looking back in their mind sets to stubbornly adhere to the past. They were persuaded to the level of accepting even the rebels of comparatively lesser cause. This showed well as the TPLF elements that based the motto of their main struggle on anger against the so called chauvinists surfaced. The mentality stayed with them until they realized they created over exaggerated conflicts with the essences of Ethiopia. Gradually, the TPLF, by initially converting itself to EPRDF showed progress in setting up a system that had to conform as it gradually interacted with the main stream Ethiopians and understood it is better off adapting to the national issues which are always bigger. As confrontations never helped, giving power away to a popularized idea and group would indeed promote a majority rule inclusive of the current ruling party.

At the start of the new rule, EPRDF was surrounded by its rebel supporters when the overwhelming majority of Ethiopians were helpless to repel the new breeds of force whose tendency was characterized by what some would like to associate with anti Ethiopian trends. The root of this problem was the London agreement in 1991, where the voice of some groups was overlooked because of the partial agreements made between Mr. Cohen, the then US envoy assigned to organize the meeting with the EPRDF, OLF and the representative of interim Ethiopian government that disbanded upon arrival. Some would argue the major groups like EPRP who initially struggled against the Derg were either out of touch and not prepared or intentionally avoided taking part in the London meeting. Since EPRDF was the only armed force ready to take over the role of leadership, the competing rebel groups gradually weakened with little or no significant voice in the new transitional government. The representatives of the OLF, sharing the same fate in the London meeting, lost the will to participate in the new government in spite of being invited to various ministerial and other leadership posts while other ethnic groups were losing their posts in a mass. Most OLF members rather opted to join the armed struggle after which yet another bundle left the country. EPRDF Had to go it alone in fixing the country’s new dilemma mostly with new and inexperienced third generations. It had the notion that those who don’t want to participate in contributing to a constructive role in the government can choose to go to the “jungle” to stage armed struggle. The OLF did try an armed struggle unsuccessfully mainly due to their secessionist agenda that failed to attract sympathy from the main stream opposition, thus, weakening the strength of the general opposition to challenge the EPRDF. It was probably a major opportunity missed to bring about competing parties to participate in a transitional government that would truly give way to a democratically elected majority government. Some compromising opposition leaders demanded that national reconciliation would pave the way for a healthy democratic transition for the country’s political system. To the envy of even the lay man, EPRDF continued with a firm belief that there is no reason for reconciliation whatsoever. I still think if the ruling party thought over its rather rigid attitude, it could have called a symbolic meeting for some form of negotiation to change the course of the country’s future prospect by winning additional support. Its choice to go alone again, no doubt, alienated many who could have participated in a compromised democracy.

EPRDF chose revolutionary democracy. Revolutionary democracy is a good thing for Ethiopia’s situation as it is a country running on subsistence farm economy with 80% of the population in the rural areas. It requires some form of revolutionary measures to be taken to enhance democracy with a grass roots base. I still think in addition to the belief in revolutionary democracy, the ruling party should have diversified its efforts to contain those who have differing views as a legitimate opposition without denigrating their ideas. An opportunity missed?

That was then and this is now. It looks like the gamble worked. The ruling party understood what I have always believed is the necessary direction to take as a crucial step for the stable progress in Ethiopia is to first take care of the 80% of the rural population who even in their silence, define the core essence of Ethiopia. Involving their hidden but dynamic potential in all matters pertaining to the national issues requires a leadership that strives to work with them. Ignoring them is like looking for the national solutions in the wrong places. That is why I believe the EPRDF embraced the philosophy of giving a major priority to the rural agriculture oriented majority in an attempt to bring about a revolutionary change to the region. As a rebel force borne through struggle by the help of the rural people in the north, they didn’t have a hard time getting along with the power sources of the country. This strategy, spearheaded by the struggle to improve the living standard of the main stream Ethiopians will work for the ruling party; a gamble or not. So, due to those qualities, the ruling party managed to do away with the rather costly decisions of ignoring or in some instances blatantly confronting the so called elite groups in the urban sections of the country. The problem with some Ethiopian opposition politicians is looking to the wrong places to run politics. We all know democracy is at the inception in the whole region. It needs to be carefully cultivated from the root. The root is the people we want to represent. There is no short cut to representing the people unless one knows what they need and how they want to go about getting it. This kind of responsible approach requires involving the people whom one wants to lead to help them achieve their goals. Any sane strategist can’t do it by creating patches of confusions that don’t constitute popular support of the majority of the population. Support is earned by taking a closer look at peoples minds and speaking their mindset. The change starved people will identify those who can feel their heart beats. They will cross boundaries to find those who speak for them. So there is no worry about being invisible as long as one has transparency. Opposition forces looked solely for the help of the Diaspora for their struggle and EPRDF took advantage of their shortcomings. It is not realistic to struggle for the people without making the necessary connections with the people.

The last two of the three elections went by unnoticed because of the time it took the opposition to catch up with formulating their power struggle. In the elections of 2005, the new tactic of strengthening the opposition by creating coalitions helped to popularize the way no one expected. Opposition party came close to winning the election by a small margin in an attempt to establish an inclusive government. However, the effort ended up being futile because of the claim from both parties to have won the election. Unfortunately, casualties due to the riot incited in support of the opposition didn’t help the transition to a fairly conducted election. The opposition leaders were driven to jail for a couple of years for alleged participation to destabilize” the country. It is hard to guess which side is right; it is my belief though that both sides have a great lesson to learn. Hopefully, unless a great damage was made to the credibility of the opposition, the next one will be more thoughtful. It could have been understandable, in spite of election frauds that are hardly unavoidable even in the most advanced democratic systems; the most important thing would have been continuing the inception of what looked like a promising democratic rally in the history of the country. Another missed opportunity?
Freedom of the press

One of the major tasks of revolutionary democracy is to make sure freedom of expression is carried out in a way that doesn’t instigate confusion and anarchy. The media as the major recipient of the press freedom has to equip itself with responsible professionals. Freedom of expression, no doubt is always a victim of those who have the power and the means to suppress it. At the same time it is naive to assume unchecked and unregulated journalism can enhance a healthy media. It requires law abiding and responsible citizens to carefully lead the country into a bastion of a cooperative and consultative culture of reporting. Categorically speaking, there are typical examples of misuse of the freedom by those who misinterpret the limit. In countries that have centuries of experience in media reporting, news items and editorial opinions are covered by well established names. Their priorities are to have their story base on confirmed facts with accountable and professional reporters on the field. The ruling party in Ethiopia deservedly has for the first time established press laws and reviewed them multiple times in response to challenging media issues.
Laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression; in order that every man presents his views without penalty there must be a spirit of tolerance in the entire population.
Albert Einstein

When samples of free speech were initially introduced, newspapers and magazines mushroomed all over the country mostly in Addis Abeba. As there is money to be made with more readerships, some reporters may have crossed the line writing unfounded and/or offensive stories for the purpose of attracting more readers. It is one thing to write a tabloid about the famous (celebrities, as we call them here) and their lavish lifestyles but it is entirely a different story to make biased and irresponsible political remarks in a way that perpetrates instability. It is understandable a developing media can have some elements with little or no basic journalistic knowledge. Not being judgmental, the choice for those kinds of reporters is to learn the hard way by having to face the consequences. I am confident the occasionally reviewed press law may, as a condition require a journalistic background in the reporters’ resumes. My comment obviously doesn’t target those who are intellectually critical in their approaches as their challenging contributions are essential for the growth of journalism and improvement of press freedom in the country. Speaking of professional journalism, it is high time the private TV and radio networks have their licenses issued to educate and entertain people whose thirst for knowledge through media is increasing.