Whilst it is very clear to any sober person that Ethiopia suffered as an oppressed country, and whatever it managed to recover from the imperialist onslaught is gained through huge sacrifice and resistance, a particularly sinister reading and twist was given to its role during the Scramble for Africa, as if it was part and parcel of the Great Powers, and indeed a great power itself!! Nothing can be furthest from the truth than this preposterous claim that Ethiopia was part and parcel of the imperial and colonial system. Ethiopia was a victim of the colonial-imperial order and cannot be considered as part and parcel of the imperial system even if it were to have allied with one sort or group of imperial powers locked in rivalries with each other to retain a partially carved state from the Indian Ocean to the Red Sea.
In the Conference in Lund some delegates who should know better tried to spread some unusual tales claiming that the current Somali invasion by the Ethiopian Government was a continuation of the imperial colonial project of the Scramble for Africa where they alleged Ethiopia participated by sending a delegation to the Berlin 1885 infamous meeting. Even if Ethiopia sent an observer, it is a far cry from exaggerating such a presence into a role that Ethiopia was part of the forces that carved the African continent.
Conceptually such a claim is outrageous and bankrupt. The Ethiopian emperor was clear that the people from the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean are historically and culturally connected. But he lamented the fact that the imperial project disrupted their unity and appealed to God to restore their unity at some possible time in the future. That prescient insight by emperor Menelik has nothing to do with a colonial project. It has everything to do with redressing great power imperial and colonial injustice visited upon not only on the people from the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean, but also Africa from the Mediterranean to the Indian and Atlantic Oceans.
In Ethiopia those who have legitimate demands to decentralise the states of the region particularly in Ethiopia by localising authority at the grassroots by devolving power and empowering ordinary citizens went overboard and created false ideologies of Ethiopia as a’ colonial’ power. This thesis has been loosely spread by books such as Addis Hiwot’s From Autocracy to Revolution, London, published by the Review of African Political Economy group, 1975, Bereket Habte Selassie, Conflict and Intervention in the Horn of Africa, MRP, New York, 1980, A. Jalata, Oromia and Ethiopia: State Formation and Ethnonational Conflict 1868-1992, Lynne Reinner, 1992, Sisay Ibsa et al The Invention of Ethiopia, Trenton, Red Sea press 1991. There are many articles and pamphleteering from the various fronts from the TPLF to OLF, ONLF, Sidama Liberation Front and others that spread loosely the false conception of Ethiopia’s relations with the various communities both inside and outside the region as a colonial relation. This sinister anti- intellectual and devious misconstruction must be rejected and the precise concept that truly characterises relations of oppressions involving the peoples of the region re- formulated by mounting an unsparing criticism of so much of the propaganda masquerading as science. Ethiopia’s relations with Eritrea, Somalia, Djibouti or Sudan has never been colonial and is not colonial in the sense of a relationship that Britain, Italy or France had with these various states including Ethiopia.
5. Build the Unity of the People from the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean
The people of the region must enter into an overriding project to unite and reject colonial boundaries. It is a scandal that in 1998-2000 nearly 100, 000 people died to defend borders drawn by others for their own reasons against the interest of the grassroots population by the elites that chose to split Eritrea from Ethiopia and bring both regions to the brink. This is indeed a historic wrong that continues to amaze all justice and humane people throughout the world. Not only has a war being fought, but to this day a no war and no peace state prevails affecting negatively the people who live on both sides of the Mereb River.
The elites have created refugees from each side and it looks the refugees have turned into a breeding ground to destabilise each regime. In recent weeks a new rhetoric has been launched by both the rulers in Ethiopia and those in Eritrea. Isias has given an interview in a glossy magazine in three languages about his undying and unchanging commitment to a ‘one Ethiopia—andit or hanti Ethiopia’!!! He declared in the front cover: “It’s our persistent stance to strive for a united Ethiopia.” Issias utters such a statement, according to the Ethiopian ambassador in Stockholm, whilst hosting forces that have an explicit agenda to break away and create splinter states from Ethiopia in Asmara!
It is also the case that Isias has been instrumental in the support given to the TPLF during its early formation. It is no exaggeration that the formulation of Eritrea’s relation with Ethiopia as a relation between colonized Eritrea and colonizer Ethiopia has given impetus to the tactics and strategy of using and exacerbating ethnic division in order to facilitate Ethiopia’s separation from Ethiopia. This strategy has been used by the EPLF and now it looks rhetorically Isias wishes to join the forces of unity rather than the forces of fragmentation. Curiously in the back cover of this glossy magazine which was distributed at the Lund conference, it has a picture of engineer Hailu Shawl of CUD and Siye Abraha of the TPLF!! Siye has been credited for refusing to be bullied by Isias and urging to re-arrange fair settlement of the Eritrea and Ethiopian problem.
To his credit, Issias now seems to oppose ethnic inequalities under the guise of equalising ethnic communities in his concept of ‘hanti Ethiopia’: He said: “The people of Tigray have suffered and have become victims of the hostility created by the TPLF regime’s apparent favour towards the people of Tigray over other ethnic groups.” (p.56) What prompted this commentary in a glossy magazine projecting an austere and modest Isias? If indeed there is a profound change in the way Isias understands Ethiopia, his call for ‘hanti Ethiopia’ can be welcomed. The real problem is what does Issias understand by it and even more does his word and deed match or go in opposite directions as the Ethiopian ambassador to Stockholm pointed out at the conference? The true reasons for this latest posturing by both sides, i.e., Issias swearing for Ethiopian unity on the one hand, and Meles and Sebhat swearing to preserve Eritrean sovereignty on the other, may be revealed when something in terms of actions ensue.
The only way that the recent rhetoric from Isias can be taken seriously is if it stops him from reacting with knee jerk logic and continues to support forces that keep mis-formulating relations between Ethiopia and others in the region with concepts of colonialism and such like. Any colonial formulation is not aimed at a fight against the regime in Ethiopia now. It becomes a fight against Ethiopia’s existence: it is thus, above all, a fighting of the very survival and ontology of Ethiopia as an entity and country itself.