Opinion depot

The stumbling opposition

Editor's Note: Since I wrote this piece, the opposition in exile, mainly G7, has emerged from its long awaited ceremonial reconciliation with the major archenemy of the current regime, the OLF, which also up until now, insisted in keeping the significantly dissociating gap with the rest of the opposition. It has officially denounced its separatist policy, which had been the stumbling block of any coalition with other pro unity parties, which encompasses almost all others.

Whenever I listen to alternative approaches by political intellectuals about the application of democratic ideals in differing demographics, it makes me think but not to the extent of persuading me into believing it works. When a prominent politician takes the podium and makes his/her rhetoric somehow convincing to the audience, I always think how far the message can resonate with the wide specter of the population to draw their ultimate attention for a popular support. Sometimes the rhetoric won't go beyond a personal view of an individual who has succeeded in influencing his/her likes. For keeping a social status alive, this may be necessary for one's accomplishment in life, but we have to ask if it is enough to propagate a sensational message to the people it targets for change. In my opinion, if the idea is not showing convincing tendencies of fruitfulness in several decades of its movement, it may be because it doesn't hold water. So, what is the alternative for such a far pronged approach to the otherwise urgent situation where the people are in a constant search for a system that encourages free thinking and life full of purposes.

When we look into Ethiopia's case as an example, there are so many unanswered questions that always come to mind. If we look back at the last two decades of the EPRDF rule, specially the causes of its establishment just after the end of the cold war, it was more like the sudden dire situation of the country was shaping the politics than a well organized and purposefully oriented national force replacing the then Dergue regime. It is like there was some sort of disorientation and confusion that could have brought turmoil, which may have resulted in a civil war that could match several that already occurred in Africa during those times. One may well have expected the weakened Ethiopian-ism could have resurfaced in no time to rescue the people that have been facing an 'ethnic division' and a country that is being indoctrinated by a sole path of choosing one dominant party. To the surprise of many, it didn't happen. While it is time to ask why, it is also a legitimate approach to look into the causes and change the course if need be, as it looks increasingly crucial for the continuation of the status quo where the country can have a freely thinking society.

How is it possible?

The question of building a free thinking population may pose a counter appeal as to what it means and how it is possible to tell when it is the right time to do so. A free thinking society strives when an idea is not necessarily predetermined by a leadership as bad and as a result, blocked, but when it is offered to the people to judge. This kind of gesture requires a regime that accepts a contending power to be, if chosen by the people. There is a thin line that intrigues me as it may have instigated many other curiosities to asking whether a government blocks ideas out of fear or because it may not be timely? Does timeliness mean anything to an established society? How can one determine what is timely or not?

When I see a country where there is a peaceful coexistence, no matter what one thinks, except of course, it is not detrimental to society, I see the full purpose of life and a legitimate system of organization whose downfall may not mean its elimination from the system, rather a power that continues as a back bone of the system. To establish a system that conforms with the upcoming challenges, one has to be a visionary, or else, go the routine paths of 'dismantle obstacles as you go' mentality. Can somebody tell me with confidence if that is what is going on in Ethiopia right now?

The opposition in Ethiopia has found itself between a rock and hard place. The ruling party has played democracy in its own peculiar way. The doors are closed for those who question the constitution and the legitimacy of the EPRDF. EPRDF has a stringent policy of recruiting members in the party. It also never believes in forming coalitions with other parties, specially the opposition. The reason officially given by the prime minister was that, "The difference between us is irreconcilable" (quote mine). In other words, the opposition can either win the election or stay subordinate to the regime. It goes without saying the Ethiopian system of democracy is designed to play a two faceted role. Doing what other democracies do and set up legitimate elections via electoral procedures of involving the opposition parties to debate in the public media. After letting the people know who is who in the political arena, secure the level of understanding of the people about how advanced and ahead of the game the process of democratizing the country is getting by putting them in the position of believing there is no alternative to the current way of doing things. The opposition, on the other hand, has been proving to the people its incompetence by choosing dramatic designs and tactics to discredit the regime in what so far has accomplished disappointing results.

The opposition in essence can be divided into several categories:

1. The old imperial regime deserters that make up the majority of the first generation of the diaspora are the well known members of an aging group who have accumulated ample experiences in playing a role of modernizing the initial infrastructures of the country. They are known for their ultra obedience for the then constitutional monarchy of the Emperor Haile Selassie rule. What brought down the west's most friendly regime in Africa was believed to be the unsustainable nature of the feudal system regarding modernity, thus, creating a continuous flow of newly emerging problems that were not met by innovative governance because of the lack of budget and know-how of spreading modern education and effective planing for the growing generations. During those days, it was evident things were getting worse for the middle and lower class citizens, the result of which was the eruption of the grand revolution. The problem with this generation is; they barely understand the newly developing social and political trends in the country, thereby contributing no new ideas other than cherish the old habits and wish to bring back the previous regime.

2. The middle generation are the group that are relatively young and are the product of the 1974 revolution, specifically, the active members of the then popular party, known as EPRP. They fled the country via the bordering nations, chased by the Dergue (military Junta) that took power in the wake of the overthrow of the monarchy. Members of the EPRP and the current ruling EPRDF party had a lot in common before they departed their own ways, mainly due to the conflicting Eritrean issues. To the dissatisfaction of many, this group has embraced the comfort of living in the diaspora, with little or no intention to aggressively participate in the country's political activity, other than issuing press releases and creating insignificant and indirect skirmishes here and there.

3. The final groups are the ones formed mainly before and during the current regime's establishment as a government, enthused by its ethnic based policy. As we recall, the foundation of the EPRDF is formed by its ethnic based 'kilils'. Ethnic liberation fronts were the major constituents of the regime right until its arrival to Addis. Some of them, namely OLF and ONLF, were strained for their stubborn policies of stressing on the "autonomy up to secession" article in the constitution. They are still the break-away organizations whose weakened but still in-obedient nature of their strife is taking longer to re-conciliate with the current upheaval of the country's democratization.

So far, I may not have said any thing new other than recap the history of political reshaping of the country. As you have been making your own observation, the problem lies on how to unite these groups to create a viable opposition that can work in unison for the common goal. So far, this crucial element, necessary for the revival of a healthy system of government, hasn't materialized. Rather, the argument that it is hard to tell which kind of democracy is right for a certain situation is winning the outlook. This belief, however, shouldn't mean that we are happily married to the current tendency of a seemingly effective rule, where the other half of the nation's strength is away from home, not being able to support the backbone of a truly vibrant democracy where there can always be an alternative, challenging view for any issue. Unless there is a contending group of party conglomeration where there is an equal and opposing force of thought for any of the regime's policies in a legitimately accepted system of government, its destiny will always be like a glass half full. For this not to continue, the EPRDF ruling party has to overhaul itself and review its policies of using all the tools of indoctrinating the otherwise dynamic strength of the people's natural will to participate in a carefully designed, responsive and compromising system of government.

From the editor's desk.

Horn of Africa - beyond borders

I wrote this piece during the inception and rise of the EPRDF. To give myself credit, looking at it form today's perspective, it has been playing a predictive role as a good guideline to follow as well as a reference material for future progress in the Horn region.

By Tadesse Haile

Contents

Introduction

• -Touch on history
• -The reasons

• The internal factors

• Ethiopia:
• -Nationalities
• -party relations
• -that was then this is now
• -freedom of the press

• The case of Eritrea:
• -The opposition and Eritrea

• The Somali Dilemma:
• -What happened?
• -Wish vs. Vision

• External factors:
• -Global influences

Introduction

My initial drive to create this piece was influenced by the current situation in the Horn of Africa. The area encompasses countries that have future prospects to cooperate for the purposes of stabilizing the region. These countries: Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea and Djibouti have strategically mutual interests that persuade them to start political dialogues to create a commonwealth of the Horn nations. With so many hurdles on the way, although this is not something that looks feasible under current situations, there has become an argent sense of need to follow up developments in the positive directions. As the natural tendencies of the peoples of the Horn nations are inclined toward identifying their geopolitical significance to the rest of the world as a prerequisite for active participation in the global arena, this book is established as a means of encouraging the transition toward that goal.
When I thought about all the factors that would support the notion that the region could be better off coming up with an entity that makes economic, regional and geopolitical sense, it looked like there is no better title of representation for the region than a name that would begin with the “Horn of Africa ….” Before I started writing on this subject, I thought bothering about something that is far away from my current geographical location and societal influence would be far-fetched from the reality. I also imagined very few of my generation would touch this area as I have been observing they would rather do something that relates them to their immediate acquaintances or relatives than something as broad as this subject. It is of course the right thing to do if it were with the understanding that contemporary problems in an inclusive sense would bring about a relief for all. It is a fact that the global economic and political situation can hardly be stabilized while a comparatively high proportion of Africa’s population has become a financial black hole which as a result, is a dragging factor due to the ever expanding gap between the rich and the regions struck by infrastructural poverty. Imagine living with a poor blood circulation in certain parts of one’s body. It can be likened to an emergent situation that calls for an urgent response to avoid an eventual dysfunction of the whole system. This analogy applies to the fact that there will always be the cyclical global economic crisis because of poor performing economies which can consequently result in a potential threat to peace. In this 21st century of ours, the technologically advanced economies need to focus on fixing these problems in order to do away with any eventual global crisis by creating a healthy flow of economic network which, as a kickback, will guarantee peace and their own sustained growth. A strong financial backbone is a good way of building a recession proof economy. One of the first steps to take in this regard is to encourage individual countries to create an orderly management of their regional affairs. The capacity of the well-to-do countries to breed excellence equitably has been limited to confined areas. The forgotten, and as a result, conflict prone parts of our planet are merely dependent on the upcoming younger and ambitious generation instead of seizing the moment to build a positive future prospect. The new century should be mainly about creating efficient flow of information and education exchange among societies. Digital revolution can contribute immensely in this regard. It is a powerful tool in a sense that it brings the world together with an effort of only a click. The knowledge starving people can have a tremendous gain from the global networking of the Internet, if the individual countries provide a well filtered and productive version of communication among nations.

The delay in the implementation of the new communication technology lies in the excessive cautions the governments of various Horn of Africa countries are taking in introducing to their people globalized inter-networking due to the fear of possible transmissions of damaging elements, not only of destabilizing contents but also of a cultural dimension. It is ironic that so far there is no international standard (that I know of) set up to enforce a minimal level of service as a right to all citizens of the world. As a gesture for this noble idea, I choose to assess the sources of the problems in the region I was originally brought up(Ethiopia), in the belief that it may contribute to the betterment of the human development by narrowing the digital divide.
As the challenges of the global competition are getting tighter, the attempts by individual nations to manage their status in rapidly changing environment depended on which geopolitical and geographical region they are located. Europeans, even with their extraordinarily well performing member countries, haven’t ignored the need to form a union. The EU is now a contending world power in relation to the USA and other emerging economies. Africa, particularly the Horn of Africa is a different story. Trailing behind all continents in all ratings of progress, it fails to create an urgent strategy that will help maintain self sufficiency using its own abundant resources. The transformation of the OAU to AU has proven to be just an idea whose realities are decades away. In order to promote the objectives of building a functioning Union of African States, it would be imperative to have the continent divided into regional representations. The Horn of Africa countries can offer a vital contribution in that sense.
The Horn of Africa in a larger sense may sound like an idea ahead of its time and probably not achievable for a long time to come. Taking the current situation into consideration and understandably so; many in the region may have a hard time envisioning the United Horn of African States as a significant and resourceful power in Africa. Unless action is taken, time is running out and the sufferings of the people won't go away as long as the leaders of Africa’s vast region are not willing to come up with a revolutionary idea that will break the monotony of adopting a cyclic repetition of poor politics.

Touch on history

The Horn of Africa countries are Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Somalia. Greater Horn could include Kenya and Sudan. The Horn of Africa countries are rarely identified as a regional entity because of their historic, cultural and ethnic polarization due to the lack of the necessary means that would facilitate communication(transportation, telephone, electricity, media. etc.) among the communities. This resulted in the poor exercises of their freedom to form regional power house of economic and infrastructural cross border exchange in culture, trades, education and technology. Most Horn of Africa countries are in the self assessment of the post colonial syndrome that makes it hard for them to emerge from the mind set of regional conflicts. The Horn of Africa is composed of a good number of countries that are inherently preoccupied with the unending struggles to achieve the title of a regional power. The internal political inefficiencies within those countries are as complex as the intra-governmental issues concerning sovereignty. Although it is frustrating to see this outcome drag the population to the lowest of its potential, the visible negative phenomenon has its roots. This historic fact, unfortunately, effectively delays the effort to bring about a speedy progress in the region.

What are the reasons?

The reasons can be categorized into many branches. The main problem though, is the depressing post colonial dilemma that undermines the traditionally identifying ethnic and cultural factors which have the potential to strengthen inter communal relations in the region. Most African countries are having similar problems, but they are showing satisfactory progress, compared to the Horn countries; lack of the availability of vital resources factoring the most. The intriguing thing is, as time goes, newly emerging social upheavals that looked promising failed to have a grass roots base because of the lack of transparency or the incompetence of those who set the building blocks of a foreseen future prospect-the result of which is a constant redefining of not only the accomplishments but also the questions of statehood and the formations of boundaries.
The end of the cold war has also left its own legacy of new and unresolved issues. The beginning of the end of the cold war was encountered with new developments in the international relations concerning politics, economy, culture and religion. Several conflicts between nations and within nationalities have come and gone with no sign of our planet heading toward a relative peace. Cold war has left us in a state where the motto of the new world order is gradually defining itself. The abrupt shift in the world order has resulted in a sudden geopolitical changes that caught some in a surprise, leaving them under confusion prompting some catching up to do. As time went by, the confusions turned into new realities as a result of the reemergence of historic as well as natural factors that identified the movers and shakers of a particular region. The implementation of the principles of the new world order is persuading all countries and cultures to distinctively define their roles in the world community which interestingly enough, predefined the existence of a nation in the global community as contingent with the survival of the fittest; the effect of which can be shaped by internal as well as external factors.

The Internal Factors

Ethiopia

One might have realized that the importance of Ethiopia in the region has been facing a constant redefinition as new challenges emerge. Naturally, Ethiopia has always come to the attention of the world community as the center of gravity for the Horn region. The problem is; it has existing and newly developing internal and external challenges that need to be tackled before proving its power of eminence in the matters that concern the region. The problems have been around for time immemorial and they are still there; although some progresses have been made with regard to learning from past mistakes. To name one, the success in preventing human catastrophes from droughts by early intervention has proven to save lives, thanks to the increasing attention given by the concerned governmental organs, NGOs and the various global communities. It should be understood that the main goal of a nation or a regional entity should be to explore enough of its resources to fight its own natural crises such as drought. In spite of some tangible progresses, the future is still uncertain due to the way in which the regional powers are to finally settle their differences in defining and controlling the destinies of their member states within globally set standards. These new challenges, although different from the pre-second World War tensions, the road to progress certainly is not going to be a smooth journey. The ongoing dire situations in the Horn have major internal factors.
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 struggles mired with a 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 Emperor Minilik rule and then against fascism during the Second World War (with the help of the historic performances of the then Emperor Haile Selassie in the League of Nations), 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 stones 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 unbiased referendums 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 those 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 for the right causes, 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 class, 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 sequence. It comes as an irreplaceable alternative to cure all "ills" of human kind 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 significantly opposing 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 proven 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; I do not insinuate they are 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 indoctrinations.
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.
Sometimes, it is 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 sabotage to psychologically bankrupt the ruling establishment. This kind of opposition instigates a tighter reaction from the power hungry and usually nervous rulers, after which the discord astronomically exacerbates to the level of creating a point of no return, where any ongoing little progress starts to decline and then stalls. Consequently, the inevitable happens and 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 caused by Mengistu's unavoidable abandonment of his constituency. They formulated a new approach to the questions of the Eritrean independence struggle that lasted thirty years. 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 for 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 fall of the Military rule. 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 struggles 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 or a friendly partner of Ethiopia. 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 changes 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 meetings with the EPRDF, OLF and the representative of interim Ethiopian government that disbanded upon arrival in London. 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 meetings. 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 their 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 jobs en 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, 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 formal procedure 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 enhance democracy with a grass roots base. The best example of implementing revolutionary measures and the reaction of the diaspora opposition is explained in the following article prepared by me for publication in the Horn of Africa Daily web site:
“It all started with the sudden currency devaluation the Ethiopian ruling party single evenhandedly passed. It may have stunned many, but the consequence of not doing so would also be hard to imagine. So, many may not have been stunned at the idea of devaluation but rather at the magnitude of a whole 17% in one day. In many advanced countries this kind of grandiose move can only be a recipe for disaster. But in Ethiopia it has proven to be possible. For how long is it possible? It is yet to be seen. The turn of events since then, however have been gradually encroaching to connect all the developing economic problems to the devaluation of Birr. It looks like it has affected the poor tremendously. First the food prices started climbing, resulting in the concerns of the people pouring into the streets and the media. The government had to take a swift move in fixing this destabilizing trend in its early stages, as the North African revolts, mainly due to the sudden jump of food prices, are giving a good reason to believe it may soon come home. The prices of items were given a limit beyond which merchants can’t ask; salaries were raised and commercial wholesale stake holders were held accountable for their zealous attempts to unfairly collect too much profit at the expense of the consumers that have no other alternatives. According to the government spokesperson, the price limit was designed for the suppliers to make no more than 4-6% profit. This may be news you have already known. But have you realized its impact in the country’s politics? Economists have been predicting the well talked about measure will bring shortages of products and it very well did. In an apparent struggle to counter this trend, the regime has started to import and sell food and other items directly to the consumers, in what looks like we are back to the communist era. It reminds me of a saying about how history can repeat itself. Wait a minute; the regime is not by any means communist; they abandoned it just about 20 years ago. So where has this policy of government interfering with free trade and long lines of consumers forming in the government supply (rationing?)chains around the country has come from? Oh, how smart, they already said it is a short term measure. Ok; good luck with recruiting a new generation of selfless sellers that go beyond their interests - their country. Hopefully it is not going to take too long; only in Ethiopia. I wouldn’t be surprised, like everything else, if this wild guess also works. At least there is a form of (revolutionary) democracy in Ethiopia.

What else can I say? The whole reason behind this development is the fact that the merchants refused to sell their items with the limited profit the government passed as a “temporary” law. Let’s look at it very closely. First there was a humongous devaluation of the Birr, then, there was the inevitable inflation that was only meant to be a short term phenomenon but brought about its own garbage of the merchants trying to take advantage of it. Then the regime intervened. For how long no one knows? Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if this one too subsides, like everything else.

Now I tried to stop and think. Think about what has been happening in the last week or so. After the prime minister’s Historic speech and introduction of the Nile Dam initiative that will cost about $5B, there has been a feverish epidemic among the population to finance it solely by buying the newly released bonds as investment, savings and contribution to this nationally important project. The government sent its delegations to various European and North American cities to solicit support. I have been observing the unusually dumb character of the so called Diaspora opposition group but never as dumb as this time. Have they lost their mind and civility? Is it self-serving of self defeating? They wanted to storm meetings. They said shame on you, this time without mentioning names. They did everything they could to disrupt the meetings. What they forgot was the importance the Ethiopian people gave for this historic project. It is one thing to protest against the regime. It is quite the opposite to assume the country should stop planning and even functioning unless the current regime yields power, all from the comfort of the western life style. I have never seen such a counter-productive movement.

Then I thought how valuable this people would be for a healthy opposition if they could focus on a disciplined and challenging opposition that rings the bell for the people to think there is an alternative to all this. And I thought if Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, as usual, unilaterally passes an invitation for all to come and participate in the building of the new and inclusive democracy that involves all and for all to contribute by lifting the ban on free speech and the media as a whole and tell them to do everything they have been doing overseas in the home land. Will this courageous move pour cold water on their anger filled vengeance? I asked myself what if? And I answered to myself nothing as bad as the current bitterness would be observed if every ban is lifted overnight. Nothing at all because change belongs to people and they know very well how to make ends meet, however confusing it may seem. If this sounds like a letter to the Prime Minister, so be it.”

The question of developmental state and its relation to the processes of revolutionary democracy may indicate they are similar in character. Revolutionary democracy may be characterized as the initial stage of developmental state. Is Ethiopia at a revolutionary or developmental state? Can one know when and how to tell? Lately, the state apparatus is barely mentioning the term revolutionary. It is being replaced by developmental state where the government intervention in political and economic matters can accelerate growth in developing countries. China and the initial stages of South Korea can be mentioned as role models for the developmental path toward industrialization and prosperity.
“A more subtle argument has therefore been how can the developmental state clean-up the mess of patronage and rent-seeking in the initial states of its establishment by anything other than undemocratic means? A related issue has been the need for continuity of policy. Developmental policy is unlikely to transform a poor country into a developed one within the time frame of the typical election cycle. There has to be continuity of policy if there is to be sustained and accelerated economic growth. In a democratic polity uncertainly about the continuity of policy is unavoidable. More damaging for development, politicians will be unable to think beyond the next election etc. It is argued therefore that the developmental state will have to be undemocratic in order to stay in power long enough to carry out successful development.”
DEMOCRACY AND THE DEVELOPMENTAL STATE (MELES ZENAWI)

I don’t however see the need to use the term “undemocratic” in the measures taken to step up speedy growth in a developmental state. It is imperative that there are prerequisites to enhance the transformation for a developmental state to acquire a fully fledged democracy. These can be identified by the occasional but essential interventions by the government to adjust the path of the developmental journey. This unavoidable measure, as long as it is not misused, can be a useful instrument for a healthy progress. If done appropriately, the outcome can be a good historically working proof for the African countries to follow.
There is always the other half in a form of opposition that recounts the choices of the developmental state. The question is; is it worth ignoring the chaotic but vital force that may be required for a healthy growth toward democracy? Is it possible to contain those opposition groups at this stage and still make the transition work? I still think in addition to the belief in revolutionary or developmental state democracy, the ruling party should have diversified its efforts to contain those who have differing views as legitimate opposition groups without denigrating their ideas. An opportunity missed?

That was then and this is now.

Things have dramatically changed during the introduction of developmental state in Ethiopia. Although 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, there are still a lot of challenges emerging. The global economic woes are affecting the developmental states the most. As a result, things may not be progressing as expected. Continuation of the developmental state requires involving its hidden but dynamic potential in all matters pertaining to the national issues; a fact that requires a leadership that strives to work with the changing external and internal challenges. 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 with 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, EPRDF 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 domestic politics. We all know democracy in a developmental state 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 people’s 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 parties 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?
There is no doubt this problem will repeat itself as the make-up of the system of government is something Ethiopia has never been used to. Ethiopia had been ruled by either a constitutional monarchy or an outright dictatorship. It has never been ruled by a single party. The problem with this kind of government is its capacity to alienate many elites from participating as long as they don’t belong to a party of their own. So far it hasn’t been possible to create a party that can successfully balance EPRDF in election contests unless fragmented and unreliable coalition of little groups can temporarily bring about alliances only for the sake of participating in elections; it was utterly disproved in the 2005 election. A fresh party’s continuation in smooth governance can also be questionable. So what is next? I think for the good of the country, EPRDF itself needs to transform. Either it needs to open up its party to a diverse group or needs to abandon one party rule altogether. This can create a good start for being inclusive in all matters pertaining to governance. It will be a great way of putting capable personalities in the leadership and professional positions. It is imperative that in turn, they perform their duties under a well preserved constitution and its laws. A well preserved constitution can be implemented to combat anarchy.

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 lawlessness. 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 naïve 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 media 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.

The case of Eritrea

Fact or fiction, so many things have been said about Eritrea. The global reality in the late 20th century hasn't been kind to Ethiopia. As a result, there goes Eritrea in a historic turn of events that may not have been anticipated by many. I don't want to speculate on what would or wouldn't have been possible. It would also be a waste of time to wish things to be otherwise. After all, autonomy toward self governance is meant to be the destiny of all entities that make a regional sense. The question has always been how, when and why. Honesty has never showed immediate results in politics but it could very well prove itself in a long run.
The case of Eritrea needs to be closely viewed from a historic perspective. There are two opposing versions of Eritrean history of which many woke up late to learn about the new one. I wouldn't be surprised if another one is on the making. The major one that is most familiar to all is that Eritrea has been the natural partner under the banner of Ethiopia for as long as the known history of the region. No doubt, Eritrea was exposed to more foreign influences through its long borders with the red sea and the neighboring Arab countries. It has made it easy for the Italians to take control of Eritrea, added to the troubling decision made by the then Emperor Minilik of Ethiopia to suspend the struggle to liberate the entire region.

“It is hard to understand how this center broke from the whole. Perhaps it was because the Eritreans have been exposed to many kinds of propaganda and external interests. Unlike the rest of Ethiopia which was ruled by successive kings and kingdoms, in the Eritrean coast land and at a later phase in its history, in the highlands, the Turks, the Egyptians, the Italians and the British have played some roles in shaping the minds of people. These experiences have left some imprints which influenced the growth of different kinds of political thoughts and alliances.”
Dawit Wolde Giorgis in his article posted to the media.

Those are some of the excuses that triggered the creation of the second version of history by the secessionist forces from the safe havens of the external influences. The thirty year conflict and the post independence boundary disputes were the result of the developments of increased animosities that exacerbated due to the bitter antagonisms created by the discord between the two versions of the history of Eritrea. The Ethiopians simply can't accept the other side, mainly, because its inception was mired by elements that instigate regional instability.
Whatever the current realities are, I believe looking for regional interests beyond the borders will enhance the emancipation of the Horn of Africa initiative. Unfortunately, the gridlocks won't be removed for a long time to come; the result of which is the absence of human and natural resources of the region for the rescue of the emergent needs that visibly prevail in the day-to-day lives of the people. It is important that we examine the reasons why and how we got here to learn lessons from the past and use them to build a positive future.
The problem is expanding beyond the past sentiment as it is becoming a futile struggle to demonstrate who can be triumphant in damaging one an other's reputation than looking for a common ground to resolve daunting regional challenges that are diminishing the people's essence of life. Not realizing the emergent nature of the situation could be assessed, the relatively relaxed attitude of the Eritrean regime is willing to wait more than a generation to bring about a practical democracy. There is no apparent effort observed so far to consider the quest of the people for a speedy progress in a regional sense. Relating ones dictatorial rule to the cause for the mere existence of a country is not a good sign of a stable democracy or a flourishing development. There is a troubling sense of insecurity in the mindsets of the leadership, as a result of which the whole region is worse off, as the lack of fulfillment of expectations to bring about change in the living standards of the people in the region is exacerbating. There is no courageous and historic move by any of the leaders to take bold steps to improve regional relationships, as peace is the first thing required for stability in any of the countries in the Horn of Africa region.
This unfortunately, is not happening. It is like one can't coexist with the other unless a fight out decides the victor. No wonder we witness a decade old amassing of military might on all sides. In this regard the militarization of Eritrea demonstrates the level of insecurity as a mandatory conscription of the youth makes Eritrea one of the most combat oriented economy in the region, if not in the world. The arms budget may also be one of the highest in proportion to the nation's GDP.
What is the point after all, of keeping fake internal peace by isolating the people from the neighboring states; what kind of economic miracle is going to come out of this kind of vendetta that promotes closing boundaries and separating people from their resources? All resources of a region make sense when they are put to the benefit of the people in the region. The Horn of Africa is deprived of its endless potential to bring about a bustling economic growth because of the narrow and insecure regimes of the region. It is ironic to witness what looks like a deliberate choice to rather limit the dynamic tendency of the region to apply a system with an open environment for progress. Priority should be given to taking care of the internal problems before they spill into seeking external emergency aid from the international community who would rather commit themselves to economic and market oriented relations in an equal partnership basis. This is a perfect example of a repeated failure to make a courageous move to give at most priority to the people's welfare instead of gearing for war, as if the only solution for the problems in the region is displacement rather than cooperation by opting for legal means to resolve conflicting regional issues. Instead of putting aside the varying issues that need decades’ worth of research and studies and work together on the common problems in the region, some chose using the scant resources of the region to unproductive means of conflict generation, making the region a laughing stock of idiots.
"Eritrea had to understand that violence was unacceptable and that peaceful means must be used to resolve disputes."
Ethiopian envoy at the UN General assembly

The opposition and Eritrea

As the power struggle in the Horn of Africa rages, there is an unprecedented development in the migration of opposition forces from one country to the other. It is interesting to notice that most of them are persuaded to move to the other side in the belief that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" should work as a universal appeal. The problem is, in some cases, they chose this saying without assessing the possibility of legally playing the role of opposition inside their own territories. In the case of Ethiopia, it has been proven in a historic proportion that an election inclusive of the opposition is possible. The opposition in Ethiopia is facing an unwelcome approach by the people when they choose to use external staging fronts to oppose the government. Organizing from Eritrea or anywhere else for that matter, has proven to be more self defeating and backfiring so far. The reason is clear. In the case of Ethiopia, there is an opportunity for political participation however tricky one may find it to be. Eritrea has never exercised the kind of democracy that Ethiopia is currently displaying. Eritrea has found itself in a troubling position for not winning the support of the west by acting as a rogue state defying the need for democratic transformation of the country. Eritrea has openly denounced the USA for supporting the Ethiopian effort to develop a constitution and practice democratic election. Eritrea is openly implying that it would easily destabilize Ethiopia if there were no external cooperation to strengthen its regional efficiency. That shows the restless effort by the Eritrean regime to hasten the disintegration and weakening of Ethiopia and its conviction to contribute to a loosely confederated horn region. It is a perfect example of the origin of the Eritrean movement whose agenda is expanding its model throughout the Horn region. Can it succeed? So far it doesn’t seem so.
Those who chose to stage struggle from Eritrea are not set to enjoy a smooth journey. The problem by default is more of a personality conflict than the choice of a useful strategy to struggle for liberating the country from some sort of suppression. That may be the main reason why changing regimes hasn’t so far related to a dramatic change in progress - the reason why we observe the same story for decades. Hunger, malnutrition, over population and drought are becoming the norm. Trying to wage a political struggle from Eritrea for these kinds of motives won’t fool the people who have survived so many regimes without any meaningful change in their impoverished lifestyles. It is high time the opposition entirely changes its strategy to adapt a revised formula to dealing with the incumbent ruling party. That way, we may avoid a costly regret by adopting a complex route of struggle as life is a zigzag, not a straight line.

The Somali Dilemma

It has been quite a long time since Somalia has been without a credible government. In my childhood, I remember one of the cabinet members of the Haile Selassie regime, who wrote a book by the name, "Somalia: The problem Child of Africa." Now I think of it, I can't agree more with this prophetic author while at the same time feeling sorry for the decent Somalis that want to run their lives peacefully without the nightmares of continuously fleeing conflict areas that are known to be indiscriminately violent.
Independent of its predominantly Muslim population, Somalia had seen its memorable moments of leading a secular lifestyle. Since the departure of the Siad Barre regime, Somalia proved it was not ready to promote a peaceful transition to the next system of government as all the attempts in the last two decades have failed miserably. During those times, Somalia went through the bitter moments of clan armed fights and the disintegration of its northern frontier resulting in the destruction of the country’s economy and infrastructure dragging them decades backward.

What Happened?

Is Somalia the last remaining victim of colonialism? Its colonial history was known for the scramble of the country by three colonial powers creating the French, British and Italian Somaliland. Somalia was known for being a stepping stone for the colonial powers amid visible confrontations to control more areas in the subsequent regions. Somali speaking population live on the other side of the border in Ethiopia and Kenya sparking controversy about the national belonging of the area. It needs to be noted that, at the end of the colonial retreat, as if the masters were in a rush to leave the area or in a futile attempt to quell potential border disputes, they made treaties with the forces that seemed to dominate the area. The Horn of Africa is not the exception in this manner; the Kurds in Asia, among others, are the perfect example of colonial boundary makings. The current UN policy respects the colonial boundaries to be effectively adhered in order to avoid any new conflicts due to the nationality controversies. Somalia was being driven by its leaders to believe the reunion of its people is possible. They attempted to accomplish their dream by establishing an imaginary national flag with five stars, two of which represent the regions currently under the controls of Ethiopia and Kenya. In 1977, they tried with vengeance to forcefully occupy the Ethiopian Somali region. As if it cannot coexist with its neighbors unless the colonial boundaries are broken, or unless its dream of five star banners is fulfilled, Somalia prepared with all its resources to take over the Ogaden region by force. Somalia’s downfall continued since the day the Ethiopian successful counter attack was launched, where Somali government supported insurgents were driven out of the area.
Why is Somalia gripping with such a policy that is the major source of its instability for decades? Is it worth it? The problem began with the utter disregard for the international law that respects international boundaries established during the colonial era. There are similar situations around the world where the leaders of those countries understood it is calling for trouble to create confrontational methods of resolving such matters. A good example is Albania whose Albanian speaking people live in the other side of the border with the Former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, now Serbia. They never dared to claim Kosovo as it can cause a debilitating instability to the whole region. That is what is happening to Somalia and as a result, the never ending threat to peace to the Horn of Africa region looms for decades. It is about time the Somali people realize their distraught situation due to the unpopular policies designed by their leadership and take control of their destiny by revising their attitudes toward their neighbors that is mainly Ethiopia. It is not possible to create a double standard toward a uniform global treaty that everyone else abides by. Somalia shouldn’t be an exception. If all those times of conflict were spent building relations rather than promoting hatred and hostility mostly due to ignorance about how things should work, the region would have been better off by now. The whole problem in the Horn of Africa region stemmed from ignoring the priorities in a baseless belief that somehow things will straighten out after an elusive accomplishment that doesn’t have a clear goal of its own.
Due to the fact that there is no functioning government to enforce rules and regulations and thus, plan the future prospects for the country, Somalia has been the breeding ground for terrorism. Speaking of terrorism, there is a widening gap of understanding about the definition of terrorism. Those who chose to commit what characterizes it as a terror act don’t believe they are terrorists. In fact they believe they are doing what is known as martyrdom to wage their struggle to liberate their ideology; in this case mostly the fundamentalist ideals of Islam as a religion. It would be of a lesser threat if they confined it to their areas of origin but the indiscriminately expanding nature of the dogma with the uniform indoctrination of its followers to promote Islam as the only superior religion to follow, is becoming toxic to the free world where religion is a personal choice rather than a norm that everyone is required to follow. As such, the old saying, “a terrorist for one is a rebel for its followers” is losing sense because of the terrorizing acts made even to its own people; the reason why the name terrorism fits their actions. The Somali situation more or less has some resemblance to terrorism, mainly because of the absence of a central government. This can be supported by the fact that so many terrorist acts that were targeted toward the Americans and other citizens including Ethiopians, originated from the safe havens of stateless Somalia. Another symptom of the absence of rules and regulations is the increasing threat of a global dimension that is carried out by pirates kidnapping ships on the Red Sea. Even with the international community, the UN and the AU taking measures to increase the peace keeping mission in Somalia to utterly resolve this problem, the piracy hasn’t eased to an acceptable level.

Wish vs. vision

As the political drama widens and confusion reigns, the more I look for a visionary approach for lasting solution in the Horn region, the more I feel it ought to be a wishful thinking. Initially, I thought the Somali turmoil will work itself out finally establishing a stable and possibly a model state for the whole region. But as we have witnessed for the last twenty years, that is not to be. The crisis seems endless causing permanent damage on Somalia’s reputation to coexist as a viable and promising nation. This has been dragging the major players into a conflict zone. That is why my thought about creating a working vision to formulate a solution may end up being a wishful thinking.
As a matter of fact only Somalis can play the leading role in dealing with their internal conflicts. If they work most of the job of bringing stability in their country, then the international community spearheaded by the neighboring countries and AU can assist them carry out the process of transition into a peacefully coexisting nation. The major problem at this juncture is the inability of the Somali peace loving people to create a government of their own in a democratic manner. Unfortunately a government of sorts is created outside the country by the initiation of foreign powers organized under the UN. This may be why it is not receiving the necessary acceptance by the contending clans and Islamic Fundamentalists who chose to adhere to an ideology that is in a confrontational mood with the rest of the world. No wonder if it takes many more decades for them to understand the world that can’t afford the counter effect of accepting their beliefs and motives. If they don’t have a government that can represent them in the UN then what ever they want to accomplish will not have a level of acceptance a stable country can have.

External Factors:

The Global Influences

The first European to show interest in Africa was Dr. Livingston. During those days, the routes to Africa were two. One is to travel south on land from the Mediterranean through the Sahara. The other well known was a round-about-way by the west side of Africa via the Atlantic Ocean. The closer route to use would be the Red sea, but the Suez Canal was not open then. The Horn of Africa is just to the right of the Red sea, below Egypt and to the east of Sudan. This fact proves very well that the reasons behind the isolation of the Horn of Africa were evident. The northern part of Ethiopia which is harshly mountainous also contributed to the barrier that isolated the region from the rest of the world. Time went by while curious European and later American visitors either ended up in the southern part of Africa or the central Lake Victoria and the Blue Nile source, not bothering to explore the inaccessible Horn of Africa. The only time the Europeans entered the then Abyssinia en masse was during the times of Emperor Tewodros when his cry for modernization ended up in disastrous conflict with the British Empire. This typical nature of isolation can be summed up by the following account from the British collections:

“In February 1862, the new British Consul Captain Charles Cameron arrived in Abyssinia with gifts from Queen Victoria, particularly a pair of fine engraved pistols. The Emperor lost no time in sending a letter of thanks to the Queen and announced in it his intention of sending an Abyssinian delegation to visit London. Regrettably an oversight on the part of the foreign office caused this missive to be overlooked and not even a formal acknowledgement was returned. As month after month passed Theodore’s resentments and suspicions rapidly mounted. In the new year of 1864 he ordered the detention of Cameron and his staff. But this gave little satisfaction and in the weeks that followed a considerable number of missionaries and their families were rounded up and imprisoned. Some of the missionaries were cruelly tortured and Cameron himself kept in chains. It took some time for the news to reach London through Aden. The foreign office refused to regard the matter as serious and decided to send a formal reply to Theodore’s long neglected letter with gifts. The delivery was entrusted to an Iraqi diplomat named Hormuzd Rassam. He was in no hurry to deliver and it was not until January 1866, almost two years later that the letter was in Theodore’s hands. The Emperor expressed himself satisfied and agreed to free the captives. However, shortly after, Theodore’s torturous mind suddenly veered again and on his orders the freed missionaries and consular officials were intercepted on their way to the coast and seized once more.
It was obvious that the expedition to free the captives would best be mounted from Bombay, the largest naval station in East India with plentiful resources of supplies and shipping, and its army was in cantonments conveniently close by. The commander of forces there was considered loyal and capable in the person of Commander-in-Chief Sir Robert Napier. He decided that any expedition would have to be landed near Massawa, on Egyptian territory and a large base established. The distance from Massawa to Magdala was estimated at 400 miles. When Sir Robert's extensive list of supplies required was received in Whitehall it caused a few raised eyebrows. The expense would be immense. The final decision was eventually taken that intervention was essential and placed Napier in command of the expeditionary force.”
Diary of the Journey to Abyssinia

In a sense, the barrier spared this part of Africa from facing the early formations of massive slave trades and the deep penetration of missionaries that spread Colonies. But on the other hand, the isolation created a limited communication with the rest of the world only to the areas that border the Red sea and that, only after the opening of the Suez Canal. This limitation slowed the speed of transformation into a more transparent society. It is not until the middle of the twentieth century that the scramble for Africa came down heavily in a not-so-loved occupation by the heavily armed European colonizers.

Who owns change?

Image via WikipediaBy Tadesse Tegegn

Summing up the recent developments in the Ethiopian politics, one can say it is a hell of events that carried a bundle of messages about which way the country is heading. It seems like a turn of a greatly deserving chapter whose subsequent pages tend to be heavily laden with yet another revolutionary tide that may change the course that we have been accustomed in the last 20 years.

If we look at the root causes of the current economic shortfalls, you may well agree it may have started with the sudden currency devaluation the Ethiopian ruling party passed. The measure may have stunned many, but the consequence of not doing so, may also be hard to imagine. Many may have been expecting some form of devaluation, but not at the magnitude of a whole 17% in one day. In many advanced countries this kind of grandiose move can only be a recipe for disaster. But in Ethiopia it has proven to be possible. For how long? It is yet to be seen. The turn of events since then, however have been gradually encroaching to connect all the emerging economic problems to the devaluation of Birr. It looks like, as a vulnerable group, the poor have been affected the most. First the food prices started climbing, resulting in the concerns of the people pouring into the streets and the media. The government had to take a swift move in fixing this destabilizing trend in its infancy, as the North African revolts, mainly due to the sudden jump of food prices, are giving a good reason to believe they may soon come home. The prices of items were given a ceiling beyond which merchants can’t ask; salaries were raised and commercial wholesalers were held accountable for their greedy attempts to unfairly collect too much profit at the expense of the consumers that have no other alternatives. According to the government spokesperson, the price limit was designed for the suppliers to make no more than 4-6% profit. This may be news you have already known. But have you realized its impact in the country’s politics? Economists have been predicting the well talked about measure will bring shortages of products and it very well did. In an apparent struggle to counter this trend, the regime has started to import and sell food and other items directly to the consumers, in what looks like we are back to the communist era. It reminds me of a saying about how history can repeat itself. Wait a minute; the regime is not by any means communist; they abandoned it just about 20 years ago. So where has this policy of government interfering with free trade and long lines of consumers forming in the government supply (rationing?)chains around the country has come from? Oh, how smart, they already said it is a short term measure. Ok; good luck with recruiting a new generation of selfless sellers that go beyond their interests - their country. Hopefully it is not going to take too long; only in Ethiopia. I wouldn’t be surprised, like everything else, if this wild guess also works. At least there is a form of (revolutionary) democracy in Ethiopia.

What else can I say? The whole reason behind this development is the fact that the merchants refused to sell their items with the limited profit the government passed as a “temporary” law. Let’s look at it very closely. First there was a humongous devaluation of the Birr, then, there was the inevitable inflation that was only meant to be a short term phenomenon but brought about its own garbage of the merchants trying to take advantage of it. Then the regime intervened. For how long no one knows?

Now I tried to stop and think. Think about what has been happening in the last week or so. After the prime minister’s Historic speech and introduction of the Nile Dam initiative that will cost about $5B, there has been a feverish epidemic among the population to finance it solely by buying the newly released bonds as investment, savings and contribution to this nationally important project. The government sent its delegations to various European and North American cities to solicit support. I have been observing the unusually dumb character of the so called Diaspora opposition group but never as dumb as this time. Have they lost their mind and civility? Is it self-serving or self defeating? They wanted to storm meetings. They said shame on you, this time without mentioning names. They did everything they could to disrupt the meetings. What they forgot was the importance the Ethiopian people gave for this historic project. It is one thing to protest against the regime. It is quite the opposite to assume the country should stop planning and even functioning unless the current regime yields power, all from the comfort of the western life style. I have never seen such a counter-productive movement.

Then I thought how valuable these people would have been for a healthy opposition, if they could focus on a disciplined and challenging opposition, that would ring the bell for the people to think there is an alternative to all this. And I thought, if Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, as usual, singlehandedly passes an invitation for all to come and participate in the building of the new and inclusive democracy that involves all and for all to contribute by lifting the ban on free speech and the media as a whole and tell them to do everything they have been doing overseas in the home land, will this courageous move pour cold water on their anger filled vengeance? I asked myself what if? And I answered to myself nothing as bad as the current bitterness would be observed, if every ban is lifted overnight. Nothing at all, because change belongs to people and they know very well how to make ends meet, however confusing it may seem. If this sounds like an open letter to the Prime Minister, so be it.

Dictators know no bounds

Image by wallyg via Flickr

By Tadesse Haile

Eye opening developments around the globe are reminding us the world is never asleep. People speak for their rights whenever and wherever there is descent, perjury and imbalance in taking control of their destiny. It is about time the leaderships around the world are ahead of the game by understanding the welfare of the populace is not for compromise. However, there is a wide specter of regimes around the world that choose to do things with the traditional ways of wait and see attitude, which inherently affects their decision making abilities to quickly developing trends. Situations may differ from country to country but the expected results of successful policies are always obvious. The extent of damages incurred by some erroneously calculating authorities whose negative accomplishments are usually widely disclosed, depends on how far they stretch the limit when testing the resiliences of the main stream economic and political driving factors of a particular country. We all know the honest and responsible way of dealing with the ever challenging and changing social structure is well proved to be the term limit of a government that is chosen to lead. It is a historically understood phenomenon that a leadership that stays for too long gradually loses its grip on the realities of the situation, repeatedly failing to respond to the changing people's needs and aspirations. It is by then that the futile struggle to prolong the inevitable, results in the accumulation of mistakes after mistakes.

Left: CARL VENNE, Crow Indian Tribal Chairman ...

Image via Wikipedia

There are countries that understood this universal truth and made their ways to the top of the class of effective systems of government by building a relatively responsive system. No doubt, education is key to producing literate citizens, whereby the level of communication and efficiencies of management of any system is more dynamic. The question is; which comes first? Is it putting together a system that looks progressive or a system that accommodates in a delayed response by conforming itself accordingly? We all know a perfectionist policy never worked because it puts forward a formula that is not tested to falter. A delayed but timely response can be more effective in terms of satisfying the needs of the people. There are good examples that implement farsighted and relatively well equipped and working systems to learn from by not necessarily being their stooges. Why not follow them then? This is where the problem arises; depending on how well the tested systems are implemented, the opportunities given to a ruling party to lead responsibly can be transformed into a positive development in the over-all growth of the system or it can result in a backward move as in most cases witnessed so far. The details can be hard to explain but connecting the dots will lead us to the fact that the success of a regime depends on how it came to power to begin with. If it is a group put together to lead in a haste to avoid more complications forthcoming in a country that may be engulfed in a sudden change of global or regional balance, not to mention its internal strife, then things depend on the understanding level of the regime to get back to the norm that the social status requires. Otherwise, it is easy to predict the outcome. The most recent change of leadership in Tunisia and the recent uprisings by the Egyptians and the current Libyan turmoil are very good samples for the people's reactions to prolonged dictatorial rules.

Now, the story of change of regimes hasn't been as smooth as one may think. There are ample examples where a sudden change of regimes due to outpouring of uprisings resulted in more damaging confusions because there was no coherent movement that is ready to continue in a peaceful transition. This kind of regime change has brought countries to their knees making it very hard to recuperate by making the dreams of those who fought for change more difficult to materialize. The reason is simple. Out of frustration, the revolt usually has no clear vision about what needs to be done after the overthrow of the impending regime. Their focus is mainly in overthrowing the current government, with the belief that there will be no problem what so ever in the aftermath. But the realities usually end up giving away the throne to a dictatorship that sometimes organizes within a short time to save the country from the anarchic and lawless situations. This is where planing effective transition is crucial for a revolt to be successful.

This has happened again and again in Africa. There is a generation of leaders that have led their countries for over two decades. Yet, it doesn't look they are ready to promote successive regimes that can take over without inciting power struggle that usually leads a country to a civil unrest, thus resulting in discontinuities of the direly needed economic, infrastructural and societal developments. It has already started in the north with Tunisia, Egypt and Libya in the lead. The tendency of it moving in any direction is dependent upon the merits of the regimes on whether they want their country to start from scratch after their demise or prepare to promote a smooth transition to a higher level? From all the clues that are openly and clearly revealing in front of their eyes, it is high time African leaders realize there is limit for everything.

Opinion depot

Opinion depot

The stumbling opposition

Horn of Africa - beyond borders

Who owns change?

Dictators know no bounds

Blog Archive

Featured Post

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Opinion depot

The stumbling opposition

Horn of Africa - beyond borders

Who owns change?

Dictators know no bounds

Blog Archive

Subscribe To