Standing Out of the Shadows of Tyranny: A Guest Post

(One good thing about having your own blog is you can do whatever strikes your fancy. Of course, readers are free to go elsewhere if your sense of propriety is out of wack or if you fancy foolish notions. All of this is my intro to something this site had not engaged in in the past. For the first time (but hopefully not for the last time) we are posting a piece authored by someone else.

We had priviously posted notes received from this guest in the comments section of this site. The author submitted the current post as a comment. However, we felt that the piece should be read by as many of our visitors as possible and so we are posting it on its own.)

A New Comment on "You Can Fool a Lot of People For a Long Time!" by H. Gabriel

Dear Eth4life;

Thank you for sharing your thoughts about the Ethiopia we should work on leaving behind for our children. I fully agree with you. As you said, "They deserve to stand in the sun light out of the shadows of tyranny". You also raised a critical question that was also raised in a previous posting by One Ethiopia. What can each one of us do today (not tomorrow) to enhance the democratic process in Ethiopia? Here are my thoughts:

1. Support CUDP and UEDF financially, politically and in every way we can. At this point in time, I don't see other organizations that are struggling for a democratic federal Ethiopia where the right of the individual as well as the group is respected. These two organizations (for the most part) are being led by people who have been committed to the democratic process in Ethiopia. They have been and continue to pay the "price for freedom". Eth4Life is right that freedom is not free. We can actively be part of these organizations or at least support them financially. If we have doubt about their Support Organizations in the Diaspora, we can indirectly send the money to members in Ethiopia and/or others who are at the mercy of the EPRDF for their daily bread.

2. Support all the free press. We need to understand that there needs to be a big enough tent to accommodate even those who we may not agree with. If Ethiopian Review seems "out there" sometimes, we should still appreciate the big picture. This guy is at least walking the walk even though sometimes it is hard to tell which way he is going. Sometimes it appears his fingers are typing the words before his brain processes the ramifications of what he is saying. After all the inappropriate comments he made about Berhanu Nega, I still have not seen a public apology. Anyway, we should support him, since he is providing an invaluable service in the fight against the tyranny of the EPRDF. Actually, Mengistu was a tyrant. Afeworqi is a tyrant. Meles is worse than a tyrant. He wants to kill the spirit of a nation he is supposed to lead. He loath and despise what Ethiopia means to most of the people that inhabit the land. Much better writers than me have vividly described what Meles means to Ethiopia, so I won't waste you time here. We should also encourage others to come into the field; Internet, print as well as radio and TV. They can be local in the diaspora or targeted to Ethiopia. We can support them financially and make them viable businesses.

3. Fully and actively engage by non violent means in the fight against the EPRDF. Implement the directives that were given by the CUDP as a starting point. Improvise and be imaginative. I just read today about the incident at the Stadium. Can you imagine of the impact if everybody in the stadium gets up and turn their back as a symbolic gesture in a big match attended by Meles and his cronies. Can you imagine if everybody at church one Sunday all over Addis hymns "Egzio meharene christos" as a protest at the same time. The same at the Mosques during Friday prayers. However, we need to organize such activities in a clandestine manner so we don't have the fiasco of hooting the horn during the OAU summit. I believe the beginning of the end has already begun for the EPRDF. In the next six month we will start seeing this minister and that minister jumping ship. Eventually, Meles might join the Derg members in the Italian embassy. His fathers dream will be fulfilled if the Italians give him citizenship. At this point, my concern is what happens next? What kind of transition are we going to have? Are we going to have a Rwanda like transition orchestrated by the EPRDF/OLF and all the other LF's or are we going to be ready to take this opportunity to be free? The only way we can have a smooth transition to democracy is by actively supporting the organizations we believe can bring democratic governance. As I said above, the only two I see are CUDP and UEDF. We need to race against time so we are not caught with our pants down again. Agitate and organize. The EPRDF is using its SS (Agazi) troops because it does not trust the non Tigrai troops. These other troops have mothers and fathers , brother and sisters that are suffering. They are not immune to the anguish in every corner of the nation. CUDP and UEDF should actively recruit these men so when the time comes, they know which side they will be standing on.

By the way, I am getting a complex not having a handle like you guys (Eth4Life and OneEthiopia). Maybe I will be EthioForever. I think Meles already has EthioHate, EthioDestroy (sounds like a Humvee with a bunch of Agazi troops) and EthioDivide. Berhanu Nega has EthioSave and EthioLove and Birtukan Mideksa has EthioBeautiful and EthioCourage.

In the Trenches of the Information War

I read on Ethiomedia.com, a site I trust immensely and visit religiously almost every day, a report which was first published on December 7, 2005 by the student newspaper of the University of Manitoba. That report (http://umanitoba.ca/manitoban/2005-2006/1207/1621.ethiopia.information.shortage.php) propagates numerous erroneous notions regarding the political chaos engulfing our country. I found its characterization of the historical background, its description of the protagonists and its reportage on the demographic characterstics of the country substantially in error.

Consequently, I prepared a document highlighting the most obvious and most critical of the errors and forwarded it to the editors of the Manitoban on December 8, 2005. I also shared this report with Ethiomedia when they posted the Manitoban report. Ethiomedia immediately removed the item from its site and published this post two days later. Some 8 weeks later, The Manitoban has neither published nor acknowledged receipt of my e-mail. The document is published below both to serve as counter point to the Vanderhart report for the benefit of visitors to this site but also to highlight the need for vigilance by Ethiopians everywhere to monitor and respond to erroneous reports which confuse the public and rrode support for the cause of the Ethiopian people.

One Battle in the War Against Disinformation

Dear Editor;

As I read the story by Tessa Vanderhart titled “Ethiopia: Information Shortage”, I was torn between expressing gratitude and lodging a complaint. The Manitoban is not just one of the few Canadian papers reporting on the unfolding political crisis in Ethiopia, it is in deed one of a handful North American media outlets having something to say on this matter. For that, I and 77 million other Ethiopians are grateful. Many western media institutions seem to find the very concept of an African people fighting for basic human and democratic rights to be such a fringe notion, that they skip over news of violence perpetrated by government forces on incipient democratic movements as something not worthy of reportage. Repression, they seem to say, represents the norm. Just as the warm tides of the Gulf of Mexico do not make news, African strongmen quashing an emerging democratic movement by turning their armies on their population are deemed to be the routine norms of nature not worthy of special note either in the morning paper or in the evening news. The Manitoban stepped out of that tired old mold and dedicated substantial space to examining the recent political developments in Ethiopia. For that, you are to be commended.

I would have liked this note to end at that. Unfortunately, I must point out a number factual errors and ambiguities in your report, including some errors on substantive matters. Given the depth of frustration Ms Vanderhart expressed regarding the lack of accurate information on Ethiopia, I surmised that you might be interested in getting feedback and corrections when there are obvious gaps in your understanding of some key fact so that you can fill the gaps for your readership. Hence, I took up the task of writing this note to you.

I will begin with the basic demographic facts of the people of Ethiopia. The website of the Ethiopian Embassy in Washington, DC reports that according to the last census conducted in 1994, the ethnic background, the mother tongue and religious mix of the Ethiopian population is as reported in the table that follows. (Source: http://www.ethiopianembassy.org/population.shtml). These proportions are essentially the same as the results from the 1984 census – which was the first ever census conducted in that country.

Ethnic Group by Self-identification (%):
Oromo 32.1, Amara 30.2, Tigrawi 6.2, Somalie 6.0, Guragie 4.3, Sidama 3.4 and all others 17.8.
Ethnic Group by Mother Tongue (%):
Amara 32.7, Oromo 31.6, Tigrawi 6.1, Somalie 6.0, Guragie 3.5, Sidama 3.5 and all others 16.6.
Population by Religion (%):
Christian 61.6 (o/w Orthodox 50.6 Protestant 10.1 Catholic 0.9), Muslim 32.8 and Traditional 5.6.

Two basic facts stand out from both the 1984 and 1994 census. The first is that the Amara and the Oromo people are nearly equal in number; the two languages are spoken by nearly the same number of people; these two groups of people constitute about two-thirds of the total Ethiopian population and that no other ethnic group numbers more than one fifth of either the Amara or the Oromo. The second fact supported by the census is that Ethiopia is a decidedly Christian majority country, with Muslims constituting approximately one-third of the population. Orthodox Christians constitute an absolute majority of the population.

It is in the face of these facts that one can understand the depth of the grievances of the Ethiopian people against the current government. The EPRDF government which has ruled the country over the last 15 years is dominated by the minority Tigrawi ethnic group which number just a shade above 6% of the population. While the EPRDF is technically a coalition of several regional ethnic parties, it was established, controlled and directed by the victorious Tigrawi People Liberation Front (TPLF) army which ousted the military dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam. Indeed, the other constituent parts of the EPRDF were themselves established by the TPLF on the eve of its ascension to power to provide it a mask of national character and legitimacy.

Hence, your statement that “three tribes of people substantiate much of Ethiopia’s population: the Amharic tribe, which is represented politically by the EPRDF, the Oromo, which are the largest group by population, and the Tigrayans” is erroneous in several regards. The architects and leaders of the EPRDF, including the Prime Minister and all other key officials of the government are entirely Tigrayan. Perhaps even more to the point, the Amharic tribe is not represented politically by the EPRDF. On the contrary, the EPRDF promotes itself as the power which liberated Ethiopia from the “Amharic tribe”, to borrow your phrase.

Before I go too far from the subject of the identity of the EPRDF I must also report that your statement that “in 1991, the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) seized power from the socialists” incorrectly implies that the EPRDF themselves are not socialists. The fact of the matter is that the TPLF was established as a socialist liberation organization, nurtured and supported by the world socialist movement during its days as a guerilla army. Today it continues to rule as a Marxist Leninist organization with members of the Marxist Leninist League of Tigrai (MaLeLeT) occupying every single national security position in the TPLF/EPRDF government. Its policies which include government ownership of every square inch of land, continued ownership of large public corporations, stringent control over private investment, setting aside of key areas of the economy such as transportation, telecommunication, power generation and distribution and electronic media exclusively for government monopolies belie its claim to conversion to the ideals of liberal democracy and free market economy and lay bare its socialist identity.

A paragraph which appears to report the comments of one Conrad Evans continues to further confuse the basic facts. Evans seems to suggest that the opposition is drawn from the Oromo only. The fact is the opposition is equal parts Amara and Oromo but counts as its supporters majorities in nearly every ethnic group including the majority of the Amara. The exception, if any, might be the Tigrayan people where the TPLF is based and exercises absolute control over the lives of the population there. Clearly the opposition which received the vote of the Amara and the Oromo blocks could and did win a parliamentary majority. The opposition and their supporters believe they did win. Nearly all Ethiopians who can read, read and speak the Amharic language which is the mother tongue of the Amara. Amharic also happens to be the official language of the country for nearly 200 years and is the preferred language of private press. The suggestion that Amharic is “not the native language of its readership, but rather the Amharic government” errors both with regard to the native language of the readers and as well as about the native language of the government. The government is Tigre not Amara and the opposition is Amara and Oromo not just Oromo.

From where I stand, the comment I found to be not only in error but perhaps maliciously so is your comments about press freedom in Ethiopia and the position of the CPJ in it. The sad fact is that in Ethiopia today there are only three kinds of journalists: those who work for the government those who work for media outlets owned by the ruling party and those in the private press who must sell their soul to the government to stay alive and support their families. The CPJ has been actively monitoring developments in Ethiopia since day one. Its reports reflect the consensus view of most Ethiopian reporters, publishers and editors working for the private press as well as those of the majority of the people. As I write this, I tried to unsuccessfully locate a news report by a South African journalist who visited Ethiopia some three months ago. He reported that practically no one buys the government rags, no one watches television news or listens to the radio news programs because no one trusts anything they report. This reporter wrote how people are so desperate for news they line up to buy papers published by the private press even when these papers are known to embellish the news to fit the readers’ desire. So, I think, it behooves you to check the fact out a bit more thoroughly before you dismissively write about the CPJ “…not only is the information from the CPJ without attribution and not subject to any scrutiny, it is also ignored by the mainstream, international media.” The CPJ maintains a data bank of the names, dates and places of the arrest, interrogation, beating and detention of Ethiopian journalists. It receives its information both from Ethiopian based human rights organizations, from the reports of its affiliated organization in Ethiopia, and from court records. Furthermore, the international media does not ignore the CPJ’s reports. It is true that the media does not ballyhoo these reports both because persecution of reporters in a common occurrence worldwide but more importantly, because media managers do not believe that Western readers have any interest in such issues.

I also found the following statement to be rather puzzling. In describing the unworthiness of the Ethiopian Amharic language private press, you wrote “For example, recent criticisms leveled against Prime Minister Zenawi focused not on his politics, his government’s tendency to violence, his treatment of Eritrea, or even the unconstitutionality of the election (all common complaints in the English-language media of the country) — but rather accusations of ballot rigging.” One wonders how a paper becomes scandalous just because it wrote about persistent accusations coming from every opposition party and from international election observers including from the European Union (EUEOM) and the Carter Center. These institutions report that the government prevented the election and vote counting process from operating in a fair and transparent manner. These institutions reported that taken together, the government’s actions constitute rigging of the election. Indeed, it is not just possible but likely that the opposition would have won the election except for the government’s intervention in the vote counting process. On May 24, one week after the vote counting was suspended in the face of early reports showing the government losing by a wide margin; the EUEOM rang the alarm bells loud and clear warning of massive fraud (http://www.et-eueom.org/statement0524.zip). Opposition parties and their supporters remain convinced that they won the vote except for government fraud. So, I see nothing wrong in the free press reporting on a sentiment that is so broadly held.

From that point on, your hold on the facts got ever so tenuous. You wrote that the Amharic language papers are “vocally critical of the government’s actions — in stark contrast to the rest of the country’s media sources”. Perhaps you do not realize that nearly all English language papers are government owned, with the sole duty of trumpeting the political line of the party. Of the two private English language papers, the Reporter is run by a former editor of the government owned Ethiopian Herald, with continuing strong ties with the ruling clique. The Addis Fortune once had an independent streak in its editorial content. However, when all hell broke loose in June, it quickly lined up behind the government. Given the reality of the Ethiopian government and economy, I fully understand why Fortune had to do what it did do. But, to conclude that those who did not tip toe along the same line are some how fringe or lunatic is way beyond reason.

Your frustration with your inability to substantiate information which originates from one or the other side is understandable and par for the course in Ethiopia. The country is gripped with fear. The government has deliberately created this environment of fear and uncertainty as a means of controlling the peoples’ actions if not their thoughts. From the start, the government has resisted the emergence of viable private news organization. It continues to refuse licensing private radio and television organizations even though it has laws on the books authorizing the establishment of such organizations. One of the reasons the government refused to turnover the administration of the city of Addis Ababa to the opposition which won 137 of the 138 seats in the city council was because the city council has a powerful radio station which can be used as an alternative news source. So, you should not be surprised that “we only know what the Ethiopian government wants us to”. I invite you to take a look at a news clip from Britain’s Channel4 TV news broadcast at the following link. http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1271. You will note that your frustration with the lack of information is shared by many including diplomats, citizens, media organization and business people. It is a sinister attempt of the government to keep everyone in the dark and to share only that which will make it look good.

Thank you for your consideration.
One Ethiopia

Thinking Aloud of Events in the News

1. Another Reporter Expelled, another Hole in the Iron Curtain Plugged

A week seldom passes when we do not hear of the desperate efforts of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s regime to put a complete black out of Ethiopian news from the ears of the Ethiopian people as well as from the international community. We hear of the abolition of the independent private press one week and of the jamming of VOA and Deutsche Welle radio programs the next. That Orwellian task of blanketing the nation with an iron shroud is nearing its completion.

Yesterday, word came that one of the remaining sources of real news on the cataclysmic events unfolding in Ethiopia is no more. The regime apparently expelled one Anthony Mitchell who was serving as a reporter for the Associated Press. In so doing, the regime removed one of the very few remaining reporters not on the government’s payroll. The explanation for the deportation of this reporter was almost comical. According to the government’s mouth piece, Mr. Mitchell was “engaged in disseminating news ‘tarnishing the image of the nation’”.

Mitchell was perfectly welcome to report, right smack in the middle of a political crises of galactic proportions, on the heroic acts of American GIs on a mission to rescue two miserable cheetah cubs (Parable of Two Cheetah Cubs and 77 Million Ethiopians). His report that Ethiopia had caught the international bug and is engrossed in watching the ridiculous for entertainment – with its very own version of American Idol – was proper and in keeping with “journalistic ethics”. Certainly, his reportage of the government’s plea for food to save the millions of our compatriots who are for ever on the verge of starvation was commendable and in line with government doctrine aptly called the Cargo Cult by ethiopundit. But he crossed the line when he reported that the regime is killing again. It is one thing for him to report on “the hooligans” who “throw hand grenades” and make “the police panic”. But reporting that the security forces shot live bullets at a peaceful religious procession with the intent to kill can only do one thing – tarnish the image of the nation. Now it is not as if they have a pristine record to protect. What angered the Great Leader is the exposure of what he and his propaganda network had worked so hard to keep from the public. Like the fictional vampire, the handiwork of the Great Leader and his gang cannot stand the light of day.

Of course, Anthony Mitchell must be thanking the gods. Mr. Meles just punched his meal ticket for him – placing his career on a new trajectory. Mitchell is now one among those reporters who have had the mettle to write stories good enough to irk an entire government to the point of deporting the messenger. He can be proud of the fact that his work was found to be worthy of receiving the same treatment as that of the reporters of VOA and Deutsche Welle – a group the people of Ethiopia call heroes.

The rest of us are now left with such Chinese stalwarts as Xinhua, China Post, and the People's Daily and the new news-for-hire outfits such as AllAfrica.Com's Sponsor Wire and its rival I-Newswire. The last two are newly minted creative outlets presenting adverts and press releases as though they were news items. The Great Leader and his minions have quickly picked up on these opportunities and have repeatedly used them to place “news” that is not news on the internet and elsewhere.

2. “They are Shooting Again!”

Here we go again. It seems as though the very thought of two or more Ethiopians getting together out in the open scares the devil out of our Great Leader. Why else would he try to stop us from hanging out with each other? Remember May 16. That was when he forbade us from coming out on the streets of Addis either to celebrate our victory or to demonstrate against the theft of our vote. We all know what happened when a few people defied a decision that was based only on his irrational fear of large numbers of Ethiopians coming together. On June 6th and 7th he let the blood of the young and the innocent flow over the streets of Addis. We then saw his reaction to people blowing their horns on the streets of Addis on the 1st of November. That too triggered his neurotic fear of Ethiopians coming together and once again he ordered his goons to kill and kill indiscriminately. On the occasion of the annual Demera holiday celebration, we witnessed another episode of a nervous Prime Minister ordering his troops to disrupt that religious event and to hunt down those who dare address their displeasure at those who were usurping the hallowed titles and uniforms of the revered leaders of our faiths.

So no one was surprised when word came that the regimes designated Patriarch of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church wanted to cancel Timket. Sure, everyone was enraged, but no one was surprised for we have seen it all. But, that must have driven the parish priests throughout Addis to near revolt, for we learned the next day that Timket was on again. I am certain nearly all who visit this page are Ethiopians and so you need no explanation from me about what goes on during the observance of the Timket-Ketera-CanaZegelila holidays. Timket is the only day when believers are allowed – indeed encouraged – to engage in an unabashed display of joy at a Christian religious occasion. It is by far, the biggest open air festival in every town and village across Ethiopia. Heck, many a young man meets his wife here.

The very prospect of this festival where for ages Ethiopians have enjoyed two-days and two-nights of unrestrained celebration must have scared the regime to its wits end. Millions were expected to be out in the open all across the country – hundreds of thousands in Addis alone. So, what is a desperate regime which fears nothing more than its own people coming together to do but order the troops to be vigilant and shoot to kill at the first sign of trouble.

By all account, there was no reaction from the people even when provoked by the heavy presence of security forces. The only act which might be deemed offensive apparently took place when the officially designated Patriarch of the EOC showed up in one of the processions. Apparently, the events of the Demera Holiday of September 26 repeated – worshipers serenading the Patriarch with chants of “leba”. For that, the security forces were ordered to shoot into peaceful religious processions at Sidist Kilo, at Menilik Adebabay, at Yeka, and several spots across the city.

You Can Fool a Lot of People For a Long Time!

I know what a democracy looks like, because I live in one. I also know what a communist dictatorship is, for I once lived under such a system. I have traveled and lived in many parts of the world including in Soviet Russia, in the United States, in Tito’s Yugoslavia as well as in numerous places across Europe, Africa and Latin America. I have personally experienced and witnessed the workings of a broad range of political systems: political systems ranging from democratic to autocratic and everything in between. I have observed feudalism at work just as I have fascism. I have studied theocratic governments centered on Islamic and Christian doctrines. There was a time I believed I had seen it all. But then I came face to face with what had befallen the people of Ethiopia – the government of Meles Zenawi. It is one of a kind and I know not what to call it.

In all of my years, in all of my travel and study, I had never seen a system quite like the system installed to enable Meles Zenawi to rule over the people of Ethiopia in perpetuity. His methods for keeping his hold on power are incomparable. His ability to corrupt any national institution from the church to the mesjid, from the courts to the armed services and from the press to the judiciary is unmatched by any I had come across in my many years. His willingness to resort to violence at the slightest hint of dissent, no matter how meekly it is expressed, is unprecedented in modern history. We who live in the information age can be forgiven if we believe that the violent spasm we now see repeated daily was unleashed only because the people rejected him at the polls. Those butchered in Gambella were not engaged in a heated argument over an election. The Sidama people who met a similar fate in Awassa had no election to decide the fate of their home town. Neither the parishioners of Lideta Mariam in Addis Ababa nor those of Qusquam Mariam in Gondar were threatening the regime when they perished in the hands of Mr. Meles right smack in the middle of church services.

He came to power as the leader of the Marxist Leninist League of Tigrai. He ascended the throne of Menilik by vanquishing the Workers Party of Ethiopia, an organization separated from his own only by a minor ideological schism. Someone once reported that when his TPLF forces “liberate” a town, they take down the pictures of Marx, Lenin and Engles from the town square and replace them with larger pictures of Marx, Lenin and Engles. He kept intact all of the systems his predecessors installed to control the population of Ethiopia. The kebele association, the peasant association, the cadre network and the people’s militia, all of them creations of the Dergue were kept essentially intact with the only changes being the identity of people who manage them. He continued the state’s absolute control over the economic life of the population. Every square inch of land stayed in the hands of his government so that every farmer, every homeowner and every business in the land is his tenant. Every line of business was either subject to tight government regulation or set aside exclusively for state enterprises.

The one notable difference from his predecessor was his radical notion of allowing commercial enterprises to be owned and operated by political entities other than the government proper. He created a series of enterprises directly controlled by him and his inner circle and operated for the benefit of that inner circle. He transferred ownership of some of the most lucrative state enterprises to these party owned firms. He afforded these firms first dib at any business transaction in the land, subverting all principles of the market economy. Yet he sold his program of diversion of public property into sectional ownership and control as part of his agenda for the privatization of state enterprises in the context of the liberalization of the Ethiopian economy. Consequently, actions which under the laws of much of the free world would constitute theft by conversion, were successfully sold as just one of the bold steps of a determined adherent to free market capitalism in the long process of freeing the Ethiopian economy from the tight grip of government.

Amazingly, despite the overwhelming evidence attesting to the barbarity and indecency of the principal actors of his regime, people who should know better, prominent citizens and leaders of governments around the word, proclaim him a disciple of liberal democracy and a champion of free market economy. The World Bank, the IMF and the United Nations, institutions which for decades stood as the incorruptible symbols of hope for oppressed people everywhere, sing their praises to him as they honor and decorate him as a living legend. Diplomats whose profession elevates making statements with room for equivocation into an art form, dare make unequivocal statements profusely attesting to his virtues: a renaissance man, a new kind of African leader, the only leader in the region who is moving his country towards democracy and development. The leaders of two of the world’s most democratic countries single him out for praise as a peace seeking terrorist fighter committed to drag his country and all of Africa kicking and screaming into the era of liberty, prosperity and peace.

The people of Ethiopia of course have always known something entirely different. From the very first days of this regimes’ ascendance to power, Ethiopians everywhere have sought to unmask the nature of the regime for all to see. Many in the international community are only now beginning to see the barbarity of this regime. Over the last twelve months, nearly all of the large international human rights organizations ranging from Human Rights Watch to Amnesty International as well as free speech campaigners such as the Committee to Protect Journalists and PEN have launched major campaigns to bring to light the story of the Ethiopian people’s struggle for freedom and the nature and tactics of the oppressive regime that seeks to keep them in fear and bondage through sheer brutality.

From time to time I have wondered aloud just how this regime succeeded in keeping a barbaric repression carried out in full view of 77 million Ethiopians a secret from the world. Sure, the regime sought to keep prying foreign eyed away from what goes on in the country. But it never fully succeeded. There have been recurring alarms and warnings given by many a report about the unparalleled control the regime exercises over the lives of the Ethiopian people. Only the international community’s eagerness to go along with the charade kept the secret going.

The IMF and the World Bank are fully aware of the slight of hand of the regimes minions in their reportage on the purported reform agenda. They simply chose to look the other way. These institutions ignore the dirty little secrets of government control over every aspect of the life of the Ethiopian farmer, from deciding on the size and location of his plot, to determining access and pricing of fertilizers and credit, from the marketing of his produce to its pricing. They ignore the fact that the regime retains approval authority over every aspect of private investment, from the selection of the line of business, to facility location, to capitalization to the marketing plan. In the face of the regimes absolute control over the economy, a control scheme which would have earned the envy of many a Marxist dictator, these institutions praise the country’s progress on such obscure standards as the Millennium Development Goals or its performance on such macroeconomic parameters as growth, rate of inflation and external reserves.

All of the major countries of the world have adequate representation in Ethiopia. After all Addis is still the diplomatic capital of Africa. Every single one of them can be assumed to be fully apprised of humanitarian record of the regime. As can the United Nations and that disgraced organization which calls itself the African Union, each with thousands of officers stationed in their headquarters there. So if they sing the praises of the democratic transition unfolding in the country, it is not necessarily because they lack information. Other considerations influence their judgment.

Among the Diaspora, there has been much said about what the international community does and does not know; much talk about what the international community should have and could have done. Yet, deep down, Ethiopians have known all along that in the end it is up to them, the victims of this regime, to decide how and when it is to be removed. It would have been naïve to expect a not-so-enlightened world to rush to the rescue of the Ethiopian people. It did not happen in 1936, it did not happen in 1976 and it would not happen in 2006. We have to dig our way out of this and we will.

Yes It Is Time!

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.” -- words of renowned classical economist John Stewart Mill, 1859.

Social anthropologists theorize that prolong exposure to war such as that which has persisted in Ethiopia can cause a shift in the attitudes of a people towards conflict and its resolution. Although it experienced full-scale war only sporadically, Ethiopia has never known a full decade of real peace since Mussolini's attempted conquest in the 1930s -- war has been a constant. So much so that landmark events of family life such as births, deaths, and weddings are often catalogued and recalled with reference to the names and places of the battles and of the heroes who fought in them. It is no wonder then that the disposition of the people of Ethiopia towards matters of war and peace has indeed been radically altered by the pervasive stress associated with living under wartime conditions for so long.

Throughout the 1980s, the civil war was the all consuming issue not only for the government and the army but also to the average citizen. Ordinary citizens were suffering from economic deprivations arising from the war. The scars of war, the very physical reminders of the barbaric fraternal carnage were everywhere. The patriots’ village and the orphans’ village (yejegnoch amba, yehitsanat amba as they were known in Amharic) as well as all the other facilities built to look after the casualties of war were no sooner opened for business when each quickly filled to overflowing. Hospitals and clinics, city streets and country roads were overcrowded with the living casualties of the war. As the war dragged on and the cost escalated, the morale of the population and of the fighting men and women deteriorated. As a consequence, beginning during the last years of the Mengistu regime and continuing through the first decade of the EPRDF, a striking new development in the Ethiopian psyche set in. An atmosphere of pervasive pacifism descended on the land with the attendant readiness to negotiate any issue and to hold nothing sacrosanct.

This fundamental attitudinal shift was a major departure from the traditional Ethiopian posture. Historically, Ethiopians of all ethnicities and religious faiths have had clear notions that such things as national sovereignty, territorial integrity, freedom to worship, and other ideals which they hold near and dear to their hearts were inviolable. All comers knew that Ethiopians stood prepared to fight, to bleed and to die for these ideals. It is this mark of our national character, our shared mold and bond which seems to have been broken by our exposure to years of war and repression. The progressively expanding guerilla war of the 1970s, the full-scale civil war that followed it and the pervasive repression and harassment in the hands of successive communist gangs masquerading as governments, eventually rendered Ethiopia into a nation of near zealot Gandhists, committed to avoid violence, no matter what the circumstances were.

Everywhere one looks, the virtues of non-violence are proclaimed ad infinitum. In the first years of the 1990s I could hardly hear myself think for the all the din created by the international community's songs of praise showered on the TPLF and EPLF for quickly and peacefully reaching an accord on the terms of Eritrean secession. Those who comment on such matters could not find enough superlatives to praise the defeated Ethiopian army for peacefully breaking up in disarray instead of staying together and seeking to negotiate terms of surrender that might include some protection for its members. Newspapers and journals were filled with endless praise for the peace loving and disciplined Ethiopian people who did not allow the situation to deteriorate as it did in Somalia.

The TPLF and its partners carefully encouraged this incipient pacifism. Meles and his gang bragged about a future Ethiopia that would not need an army. Nonviolence and pacifism was their mantra. Nonviolence was enshrined in the EPRDF constitution. It proclaimed that henceforth only those that swore against ever raising arms for any reason might participate in the political life of the country.

Save for OLF and ONLF, all noteworthy opposition groups quickly jumped on this bandwagon and pledged to wage their struggles peacefully. Even those groups which had sought to retain armed struggle as an option for advancing their political causes, found the goings too tough in this age when all of the affairs of the civilized world are orchestrated from a single power center.

In part to comply with the requirements of the EPRDF constitution, but primarily because of the torrent of pacifist sentiments cascading over the Ethiopian political landscape, all of the opposition parties which took part in the 2005 election were adherents of the principles of non-violence. Not one of the major opposition parties had entertained the need to create even small self-defense units within their organizational structures. Many opposition leaders, but particularly Dr. Berhanu Nega of CUDP eloquently articulated his vehement desire to bring about an end to the long cycle of violence. Speaking on behalf of CUDP, he hammered home the argument that if we relapsed to raising arms once again to remove our current oppressors, then we will have to raise arms later to remove our liberators. He sold to the Ethiopian people the notion that it is only when we are able to free ourselves without relying on an armed liberator that we can blaze into a future where the very need to raise arms would never come.

Much has happened since those heady days of April and May. Today we witness the Ethiopian opposition being methodically dismantled by the Meles Zenawi regime for the crime of having peacefully won the hearts, minds and votes of the Ethiopian people. Dr Berhanu and practically all of his colleagues find themselves in the grip of one who has no use for peaceful resistance. And yet, the opposition continues to seek solutions for its troubles exclusively in the sphere of peaceful negotiations or legal absolution in Meles Zenawi’s courts. It prefers to wage a non-violent peoples’ struggle against a well entrenched soulless tyranny.

Given the nature of our opressors, this is of course the height of folly. The other side refuses to abide by the law. Meles and his core constituency routinely ignore the norms of civilized political discourse, resorting to crude tactics of intimidation even when engaged in what were billed to be peaceful pre-electoral debates. The leadership of the TPLF often questions the manhood of the leaders of the opposition and challenges these individuals to go do what the TPLF had to do to take power from its doctrinal twin, the Workers Party of Ethiopia. I will never forget the exchange between defense minister Aba Dula and ONC chair Dr. Merera. Aba Dula was literally challenging the good professor to a fist fight, much like a tipsy young man in a Nefas Silk watering hole might do on a Saturday evening.

The TPLF engages in retributive violence against the person and property of members and supporters of the opposition as though it were not a government but a branch of an urban gang. Meles’ government has no qualms about launching the security forces of the country into combat against citizens who try to peaceably express their grievances. From Addis to Gondar to Awassa to Gambella to Ambo to Dire Dawa and Bahir Dar, it never passes on any opportunity to show its willingness to use all of the resources at its disposal to quash anyone who disagrees with it no matter how meekly. It welcomes confrontations, for these occasions provide it with the opportunities to remind the restive public what the price of dissent is.

Certainly, there had been several instances when oppressed people had been able to successfully resist their oppressors using non-violent mass movements. In India and in the American South during the 1940s, 50s and 60s as well as in Georgia and Ukraine in 2003 and 2004-05, freedom fighters employed civil disobedience to bring their respective struggles to successful conclusions. These countries and communities share certain critical attributes which contributed to the success of their civil disobedience. In each case, by and large, the peoples’ oppressor relied on legal means -- granted, these tend to be farcical laws legislated and administered by non-democratic/non-representative institutions in order to maintain the oppressive regime in place. In Ethiopia, the TPLF’s preferred method of governance is deceit and underhanded shenanigans on the one hand and violence on the other. Even in the Jim Crowe South, there were well established laws delineating what the government or the majority population can and cannot do to the minority. In Ethiopia, the law is always in flux, sometimes changing daily to accommodate the ever changing needs and whims of the regime.

Another key factor that all of these people had going for them but which is absent in Ethiopia is an international community keenly interested in their affairs. The same cannot be said of Ethiopia. When each these people were engaged in their peaceful resistance movements, the world was closely monitoring their progress. In the American South as well as in Eastern Europe, the international community stood with the freedom fighters, denouncing every move made by the oppressive regimes and encouraging the freedom fighters to go on. At least for now, the Ethiopian people are on their own. The rest of the world seems to be too preoccupied either with events it finds more worthy or, even worse, too busy piling praises on the purveyors of oppression. Indeed, had it not been for the presence of large numbers of our compatriots around the world, I am afraid that even the sporadic coverage the crisis receives would not have materialized.

For 15 years, the TPLF preached peace even as it practiced terror. If you are reading this, you know of the litany of abuses—physical, mental, economical and spiritual abuses—the Ethiopian people have been subjected to over these years. By all account, the last six years—the years since Meles and Isaias had a falling out—have actually been the best of the Meles years. Apparently, Mr. Meles felt a bit naked when he parted ways with his allies and protectors. Yet, we see what he is prepared to do when his grab on power is threatened by the people’s peaceful movement. He has no mental hiccups about killing innocent men, women and children, indefinitely incarcerating tens of thousands, stealing an election, destroying the political opposition, perverting the judicial system or corrupting the national security institutions.

Let us face it; this man will not go away peacefully. He is determined to hold on. We cannot wait him-out for he is only 50 years old. We cannot appeal to his conscience. He has none. We cannot seek pity from the international community, for it is falsely enamored with him. So, what are the choices left to us? What is our strategy for removing the tyrant who, as you read this, is terrorizing the entire country?

There is only one other option left. We all know it. We are just afraid to face up to it; afraid to raise it in public forums. The people know it and only seek leadership to prepare them. Our leaders know it, but are afraid of the responsibility of sending someone’s child in harms way. Our backs are to the wall. So it is time to think and discuss the only real alternative we have left.

When he found himself in circumstances similar to that of the opposition today, Meles had no qualms in doing an about face on his “Ethiopia has no need for a large standing army” pledge. When in 1998 Mr. Isaias made a badly calculated move against Ethiopia, Meles ordered the propaganda machine to re-energize the Ethiopian people. The machine whose duty had been to castigate and label as chauvinist warmonger any one who questioned the wisdom of the Eritrean arrangements and the ill advised decision to demobilize the nation’s defense forces, stopped that campaign just long enough to help drum up support for the impending war.

During its first seven years of its rule, the TPLF made it plain that it views Ethiopian nationalism as an expression of latent militarism by the revanchist elements of Ethiopian society. Consequently, public expressions of nationalism had been rendered a cultural taboo and of dubious standing under the law. So, when the Eritrean army rolled across the border, the TPLF found itself unprepared for it. For two years, it tried to avoid the inevitable. For two years, it dickered at the OAU and at the UN. For two long years, it toiled in Washington, in Kigali, and in Ouagadougou.

In the end, none of the diplomatic maneuvers and the talk of peace achieved anything. It was only the decision to send our young men to war that dislodged the enemy from the trenches. In the end, it took a willingness on the part of some Ethiopians to die for the right cause to achieve the spectacular victory. In the end, Ethiopia had to set aside pacifism and nonviolence to regain that which was rightfully hers.

The Ethiopian democratic movement today can learn a great deal from that recent episode of our history. Appeasement has never guaranteed peace. In fact, history has shown time and again that appeasement frequently leads to war -- a willingness to fight is the precondition for peace. If we refuse to diligently consider all our option now, we will not only prolong our suffering, we will likely saw the seeds of an uglier war. If we have the wisdom to know that placing some lives at risk now can save many more lives in the future, the next war could be avoided.

John Stewart Mill also said that “the person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." Mill who is primarily known for his classical free market economic theory, eloquently argues that a man must be ready to die so that he might live and he must stand ready to lose his liberty in order to gain his freedom. This soft-spoken but powerful advocate of freedom tells us that a people intent on pacifism at any cost will invite aggression; a people who are not willing to fight to defend what is theirs or to protect what is in their national interest are sure to invite aggression except if others were to pity them or fight for them.

It is time for Ethiopia to openly debate and decide whether freedom is worth fighting for.

America’s Most Treacherous Scout in the Global War on Terrorism

As America was preparing to launch the global war on terrorism on the aftermath of September, 11, all sorts of unsavory characters volunteered their services in exchange for rewards ranging from monetary compensation to political support. Somali warlords and Pakistani village chiefs, American mercenaries and Uzbek tribal heads, private citizens, military commanders and heads of states came forward offering information, safe passage and/or fighting men to the U.S war machine. Given their unfamiliarity with the terrain where the battle was to be fought, U.S. forces were particularly eager to find resourceful partners who are familiar with the global terrorist network. Those who have had some success in battlefield encounters against Osama Bin Laden’s terror network were viewed with particular esteem and quickly invited to come on board.

It is in this hour of America’s great need that one Meles Zenawi stepped forward with overtures of collaboration. Mr. Meles then as now was the strongman of Ethiopia, a country surrounded by some of al Qaeda’s preferred stomping grounds. In the years before September 11, Sudan in the west and Somalia to the south of that country had served as either headquarters or as training ground for Osama and his al Qaeda boys. Additionally, al Qaeda’s home turf in Saudi Arabia and Yemen was just a few miles across the narrows of the Strait of Bab el Mendeb on the Red Sea.

So, it was not a surprise to anyone when those responsible for planning America’s war on terror eagerly listened to Mr. Meles’ overtures. In addition to the strategic location of his country, the Ethiopia strongman bragged of the success of his security forces in crushing into near extinction the forces of al-Ithad al-Islamia. Al-Ithad al-Islamia is of course the Somali based operating wing of al Qaeda that was partly responsible for driving the United States out of Somalia in 1993-94. Mr. Meles offered the services of his experienced security forces to man the southwestern front of the global war on terrorism. So when, President Bush, having failed to secure the endorsement of the U.N. Security Council for his plans to invade Iraq, was reduced to constituting the coalition of the willing, the Ethiopia strongman stepped forward and grabbed a lead role for himself within that coalition.

Given the chance to be of service to the only remaining superpower, Mr. Meles and his security forces performed rather well. His security forces quickly assumed complete control of the troublesome territory that is the Horn of Africa, including every square inch of Somalia. In the glow of that success, Mr. Meles presented himself not just as an effective warrior and a loyal supporter of President Bush, he also cast himself as a visionary leader who understood the need to contain radical Islam from spreading into the African heartland. He often spoke of his fear of the devastation that would ensue should the 25 million strong Ethiopia Muslim population be radicalized and of the need to avert that real possibility by taking the fight to the home bases of the agitators – meaning al Qaeda. In Washington and in London, such words were music to the ears of those who must plan and execute the war on terror.

Unknown to all but to Mr. Meles, those fateful events were meant to set up the U.S. and Britain into backing one of the most ruthless dictators ever let loose on any country. The smooth talking Mr. Meles who is equally adept citing Karl Marx’ Das Kapital as he is Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, called in the favors President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair owed him early and often. He was able to extract well in excess of $1.5 billion per year in aid, above and beyond the emergency food aid which Ethiopia seems to be forever condemned to need. Equally importantly, he was also able to legitimize his ruling clique which came to power by overthrowing a rival communist gang in 1991. He got himself invited to serve on Tony Blair’s Africa Commission, where he demonstrated his facility with Jeffersonian notions of democracy as well as with the virtues of unfettered capitalism. In his capacity as member of the Africa Commission, Mr. Meles advocated for improved governance and economic liberalization as a necessary condition for development. He also spoke eloquently of the need to re-center Africa’s economic development efforts on the needs of the poor and women.

It is these carefully choreographed performances which had make it difficult for the U.S. and British governments to give credence to the recurring charges of government by terror over the years and to respond appropriately to the disturbing events which have been unfolding over the last seven months. Nearly seven months ago, just after Blair’s Africa commission put together its blueprint for African salvation, and as the exclamatory point in the canonization of Meles the Magnificent, Ethiopia was set to have its first truly multi-party election, where all candidates were allowed to campaign.

Unfortunately for Mr. Meles, a strange thing happened on the way to his planned sainthood. The election that was set up to be a landslide victory for him turned out so badly that Mr. Meles stopped the counting of the votes after just one third of them were reported. Instead, he declared a state of emergency and pronounced his party the winner. When citizens objected to his mischief, he shot dead more than one hundred unarmed protestors in two of his most violent outings. The entire leadership of the opposition, including about a third of the elected parliamentarians he finally recognized were arrested and charged with treason and genocide, offenses punishable by death. Nearly every member of the private press and the leaders of civic society were also arrested and charged similarly. Members of foreign media and foreign academics who regularly write on Ethiopian political and economic developments were not spared of this fate either. About a dozen American and European reporters, including six reporters working for the U.S. government owned Voce of America, publishers of online magazines and weblogs and several American and European academics were charged with the same offenses.

The U.S. seems to be greatly disturbed by these developments. However, the national security team is finding it difficult to formulate an appropriate response to the gruesome acts of one who has so ably supported America’s war on terror, especially when the war is not fully won. Mr. Meles, of course, keeps reminding the U.S. that without him, not only is the troublesome failed state of Somalia likely to be the next Afghan-like training ground for al Qaeda, he emphatically states that there is also a real possibility for Ethiopia proper being quickly overrun by the Jihadist movement with the support of Ethiopia’s Muslims.

The reality, of course, is much different. Ethiopia has a population that is two third Christian and one third Muslim. Consequently, it is not just whiz kid Meles that recognizes the necessity of interfaith peace between Muslim and Christian Ethiopians. Given Ethiopia’s demographic mix, a radicalization of any segment of the population can easily destabilize Ethiopia and the Horn sub-region. This nugget of truth is widely accepted and deeply ingrained in the mind of every Ethiopian—a fact that allowed Ethiopia’s people to consistently reject fundamentalist movements of either faith whether they are advanced by foreign or domestic agitators. The result has lead to peaceful interfaith relations that has lasted since the end of the Ethiopian Crusades in the 1400s. Six hundred years without inter-religious conflict did not materialize just by happenstance. It is the result of a coherent plan for interfaith peace developed through extensive village level consultation over the centuries and promoted by successive Ethiopian governments. Vigilance and containment of radical elements has been at the heart of every Ethiopian government’s policy for six hundred years, a fact that is likely to continue well beyond the Meles regime.

Meles’ self-congratulatory chest thumping and claim of credit for the absence of radical Islamic movements in Ethiopia is but another instance of grabbing credit not earned. Unlike Mr. Meles, the opposition in Ethiopia is supported by all segments of society – Christians and Muslims as well as the myriad of Ethiopia’s ethnic groups. Mr. Meles’ claim that but for him, the Horn of Africa will quickly fall under the spell of al Qaeda could not be farther from the truth. The U.S. must quickly re-examine its relationship with a man who does not share its ideals or control any ground except by sheer brutality. Should this pseudo democratic sycophant be allowed to persist in brutalizing Ethiopia much longer, it is not too difficult to see Ethiopia and the Horn destabilized. Insisting that Mr. Meles count the peoples’ vote and respect their human rights would advance the interest of the U.S. as much as it would advance that of the people of Ethiopia.