Quo Vadis Ethiopia: Where Are You (not) Going? [Prof Alemariam]

March 28, 2016

(Excerpted English version of speech given at the “Conference on the Future of Ethiopia: Transition, Democracy, and National Unity” organized by Vision Ethiopia on March 27, 2016 at the Marriott Georgetown.)

…I want to thank Vision Ethiopia and the organizers of the “Conference on the Future of Ethiopia: Transition, Democracy, and National Unity”.

When Prof. Getachew Begashaw called me months ago to invite me to attend and participate at this conference, I was impressed by the idea of a forum for broad engagement, dialogue and debate on issues facing Ethiopia. I hope others will follow the vision of Vision Ethiopia and organize more forums.

I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to Prof. Getachew and all of the organizers in Vision Ethiopia for their wonderful efforts in putting together this conference. Thank you all for caring so much about Ethiopia and the people of Ethiopia in organizing this conference. Change cannot come without caring.

I also want to thank Ethiopian Satellite Television for covering this conference. It   was in May 2010, six years ago that ESAT literally burst on the Ethiopian scene from space to provide alternative news, information, analysis and entertainment to Ethiopians wilting under T-TPLF propaganda.

I served as the first chairperson of the ESAT advisory committee. It was wonderful working with Ethiopians from diverse professional backgrounds.

I know the forces of the Dark Side who draw their power from fear, anger, hatred, revenge and aggression continue their efforts to block ESAT transmissions, but ESAT with its light saber relentlessly continues to slash through the curtain of darkness hanging over the people of Ethiopia.

The best weapon of dictators is secrecy.

The best weapon against dictators is free media.

The best battle plan against dictators is to be armed to the teeth with the truth and use the media to shine the blinding light of accountability on oppressors clinging nakedly to power.

Thank you ESAT for shining your blinding light on visionless oppressors. Thank you ESAT for all you have done to inform and enlighten the people of Ethiopia.

I want to thank all of the presenters at this conference for their thoughtful and provocative presentations. I have learned much from their insights and diversity of views and opinions.

I thank all of you who attended this conference this weekend. Thank you for your penetrating questions and insightful comments. Your participation has vastly improved the quality of this conference.

As many of you are aware, I got into the human rights struggle in Ethiopia after the late Meles Zenawi ordered the massacre of unarmed protesters following the 2005 election.  We all know that 193 men, women and children were shot down in the streets and over 30 thousand persons imprisoned throughout the country. There are 237 policemen who committed those atrocities who are walking the streets free today.

That massacre continues today. The mass arrests and persecutions continue today.

In the past few weeks, over 270 Ethiopians have been massacred in Oromia region by the Thugtatorship of the Tigrean Peoples Liberation Front (T-TPLF).

Thousands have been jailed in T-TPLF secret and official jails. No one but the T-TPLF knows the real figures about how many they have killed and jailed. They are not talking. They are just killin’ and jailin’.

The absence of massive outrage and visible support for the struggle in Oromia against the T-TPLF is itself an outrage and a moral abomination. When Ethiopians in Oromia bleed, when they are jailed and disappear, why do we remain silent? Why?

Before I offer my remarks, I ask you all to join me in remembering the 193 men, women and children killed in the Meles Massacres in 2005, the thousands of others the T-TPLF has massacred but whose deaths were not recorded by any inquiry commissions since or before that election, the 270 documented victims of T-TPLF wanton violence recently and the thousands of political prisoners languishing in T-TPLF prisons today.

I want to take a moment to remember our Ethiopian heroes unjustly imprisoned by the T-TPLF. There are so many of them. It is impossible to list them all.

We remember Eskinder Nega, Andualem Aragie, Bekele Gerba, Ahmed Jebel, Abebe Qesto, Emawayesh Alemu, Woubshet Taye, Temesgen Desalegn and so many others.

“Quo vadis, Ethiopia?”

I have come across three time zones to answer this question with questions, more accurately to interrogate the question itself.

What does the question “Where is Ethiopia going?” even mean?

I am sure for many people it is a straightforward question for which there is a straightforward answer. For me it is a mind-bogglingly complex question for which there could be an infinite set of answers.

The modern usage of the phrase “quo vadis” originates from a question allegedly asked of Saint Peter the Apostle as he fled likely crucifixion by Emperor Nero Augustus Caesar in Rome. It is said that Peter met the risen Jesus on the outskirts of Rome where Peter asked Jesus “Quo vadis?”. Jesus allegedly replied, “Romam eo iterum crucifigi” (“I am going to Rome to be crucified again”).

Inspired by the response, Peter is said to have returned to Rome to continue his work eventually crucified upside-down.

Happy Easter to all who celebrate that holiday today.

I first came across that Latin phrase when I was in high school in Addis Ababa in the late 1960s.

Well over four decades ago, I published an article, an op-ed of sorts, in a popular English monthly(?) magazine in Addis Ababa (circa 1968-69), the name of which I cannot remember, with same Latin phrase questioning, if my memory serves me right, what I believed the unconventional life styles of some of my youthful contemporaries. I was a geek of sorts then and was questioning where the youth were going.

Almost one-half half century later, I am asking the same question. “Quo vadis, Ethiopia?” Where are you going Ethiopia? I should like to add, “or not going?”.

Life can be strange and funny sometimes.

It is strangely funny to me to ask the same question I asked of my contemporaries so long ago of the young people today.

Over 70 percent of the population of Ethiopia is said to be under 35.

So the first question about the question is, “Should the question be reframed more precisely as “Quo vadis, Ethiopia’s youth?”

I am not trying to sideline my Hippo Generation, just stating the hard facts.

As I ask the youth where they are going, I am compelled to share with the Cheetah Generation a cautionary but wise African saying about going places: “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.”

So it is important for Ethiopia’s youth to have a road map to navigate to their chosen destination(s).

Others say, “All roads lead to (from) Rome.”

The Roman Empire was large and political power radiated out of Rome to the rest of its imperial possessions.

(Just in passing I will mention that “Il Duce” Benito Mussolini found a road to Ethiopia in 1935 to begin the “new Roman empire” and sent his troops over to  declare, “I came, I saw, I conquered.” His predecessors tried the same thing in 1896.

Twice Rome found out from the Ethiopians, “You came, you saw and here is a boot to your rear end to help you get back to Rome pronto.)

But the question to Ethiopia’s youth is, “Do all roads lead to (from) Ethiopia?

The question, “Quo vadis Ethiopia?” has its corollary, “Where are you going T-TPLF?”

The T-TPLF master builders of the empire of corruption have the same attitude about Ethiopia as did Mussolini. They came out of the bush and declared, “We came. We saw. We conquered.”

Ethiopians should deliver the same message to the T-TPLF. “You came. You massacred. You stole. Here is a boot to get you back to the bush in a hurry.”

Follow the youth

To find out where Ethiopia is going, I say follow the youth.

So the question, rephrased again is this, “Are Ethiopia’s youth looking to find Ethiopia?”

Albert Einstein once observed that “If I had an hour to solve a problem I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about solutions.”

Einstein also said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

Phrased more poetically, George Bernard Shaw said, “You see things; and you say, ‘Why?’ But I dream things that never were; and I say, ‘Why not?’” That is the kind of imagination I am talking about.

I have been given 20 minutes to solve all of Ethiopia’s problems, so I have decided to use 17 minutes to think about the problems out loud with you.

I will use the remaining 3 minutes to think about the solutions.

I shall try to weave together four themes — the African proverb, the twin Einsteinian notions of thinking critically and thinking imaginatively and  creatively and the notion that all roads lead to Rome.

The organizing question for the conference is, “Ethiopia, where are you going?”

It is an important question because it is on the minds of every Ethiopian.

I have wrestled with the question for quite a while.

In April 2011, I wrote a commentary entitled, “The Bridge on the Road(map) to Democracy”.

In June 2012, I wrote a commentary entitled, “Ethiopia: On the Road to Constitutional Democracy”.

In January 2011, I wrote a commentary weekly column entitled, “After the Fall of African Dictatorships”.

I have written many other commentaries on the question, the latest one this past December entitled, “The ‘End of the Story’ for the T-TPLF in Ethiopia?”.

Why it is on the minds of all Ethiopians is open to question. There are a thousand different reasons to ask that one question.

Is the question raised because we could see the twilight of the T-TPLF?

Could it be because things are changing so fast in Ethiopia that some see an enveloping darkness of deepening repression over the horizon and others blinding light of liberation from T-TPLF rule at the end of the tunnel?

To me the five words in the question resonate differently.

I hear those words asking me, not one but endless questions:

Ethiopia, where are you going with the T-TPLF? (Ethiopia is at a dead end with the T-TPLF.)

Ethiopia, where are you going after the T-TPLF is gone?

Ethiopia, who will take over after the T-TPLF is over?

Ethiopia, are you going to be an undiscovered country after the T-TPLF is gone?

Ethiopia, are you going backwards into tyranny and authoritarianism as you have over the past one hundred years?

Ethiopia, will you walk over the minefields the T-TPLF has set for you over the past 25 years and implode?

Ethiopia, are you heading towards civil war?

Ethiopia, are you finally getting back on the long walk to freedom in the same sense as Nelson Mandela?

Ethiopia, are you walking in the direction of truth and reconciliation?

Ethiopia, are you ready to walk out of the kilil walls built around you and into a land free of the shackles of ethnic politics, sectarianism and thug rule?

No one I know wants to answer or begin to answer these questions.

I certainly don’t want to answer them.

These are very difficult questions. They are scary questions. They are complex questions. They are mind-boggling questions. They are questions that seem intractable and insurmountable. They are questions that trigger depression in the most optimistic and good-willed Ethiopian.

Answering these questions demands extraordinary creativity; extraordinary imagination and extraordinary commitment and sacrifice.

I know how the T-TPLF’s answers these questions.

The T-TPLF will tell you that without their guidance and leadership Ethiopia will go the way of the way of Syria and Libya. (That’s their fervent wish. If they can’t have Ethiopia for their playground, let it be destroyed. Apre moi, le deluge. (After me (us), the flood.) Or as the Ethiopian saying goes, “The donkey said after she is dead she does not care if grass ever grows.)

The late T-TPLF mastermind Meles Zenawi was fond of saying that without his guiding hand Ethiopia will go the way of Yugoslavia. The former Yugoslavia is today seven nations. That was Meles’ dream for Ethiopia. That is the T-TLF’s dream today. After they go, Ethiopia will go 7 or 9 separate ways.

Meles is gone and Ethiopia is still here.

After the T-TPLF is gone, Ethiopia will continue to be here.

It is the privilege of self-proclaimed messiahs that the road will end with them and without them.

There is no question that the Ethiopia-stan made of killils and kililistans will end with the end of the T-TPLF.

Didn’t apartheid end (at least officially) with the end of white minority rule in South Africa?

Ethnic federalism (ethnic apartheid) is the womb and amniotic fluid in which the T-TPLF was gestated and born.

Kililistans were birthed to maintain the T-TPLF in power. Just as there could be no white minority rule and bantustans in South Africa without apartheid, there could also be no T-TPLF rule without ethnic federalism and killilistans.

But I have chosen to re-frame the question “quo vadis” in an imaginative way.

The question is, “Where is Ethiopia going after the T-TPLF is gone?”

To me that question is similar to asking a person afflicted by cancer what he would do if s/he is suddenly free of cancer.

Supposing a person who is unjustly imprisoned for decades is suddenly set free, how would that person feel?

Supposing a population held in bondage for decades were set free, how would they feel?

I think we can answer these questions with other questions.

How did the majority of South Africans feel when the minority white apartheid regime collapsed and was replaced by majority rule in 1994?

How did the majority of South Africans feel when Nelson Mandela and thousands of anti-apartheid leaders and political prisoners were released in 1991?

How did the majority of South Africans feel when they stood up for hours to cast their ballots for the first time in their lives and managed to elect the government of their own in an election that was not rigged, in a free and fair election, an election that was not won by 100 percent by the minority white apartheid regime?

The 600 pound gorilla or the 6,000 pound elephant in the room is where Ethiopia is going after the T-TPLF is gone, swept into the dustbin of history?

Where is Ethiopia going after the mud walls of T-TPLF dictatorship come tumbling down and the T-TPLF glass palaces of illusion behind the mud walls are shattered by a tsunami of popular uprising or creeping resistance?

Will Ethiopia go the way of Humpty Dumpty who “had a great fall” and could not be put back together by “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men”?

Or will Ethiopia rise from the ashes of the T-TPLF and be all it can be?

I have prophesied that the T-TPLF is on its last legs living on borrowed time. T-TPLF prime minster recently said the T-TPLF can no longer expect to cling to the backs of the people. Those days are over, according to Hailemariam.

The question, “Where is Ethiopia going?” cannot be answered without asking the corollary question, “Where is the T-TPLF going?”.

The T-TPLF is going to the dustbin of history!

The T-TPLF is a dead end street for Ethiopia.

So here are two questions that need to be addressed: 1) What happens in the run up to the time when the T-TPLF is swept into the dustbin of history? 2) What happens between the time the T-TPLF is swept in to the dustbin of history and history is made to replace the T-TPLF?

The Solution- A road map for the long road to freedom?

I will come back to the African proverb. “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.”

The road map is a new Ethiopian constitution.

I have studied the T-TPLF constitution. It is a patchwork of borrowed language from other constitutions just like the T-TPLF’s so-called anti-terrorism law is a cut-and-paste of terrorism laws from different countries.

From what I have been able to gather from the T-TPLF constitution, there is no such entity as “Ethiopia”, only “peoples, nations and nationalities” in the land mass known as Ethiopia.

Perhaps I should correct myself because the landmass known as “Ethiopia” is itself in question today after you subtract the land given in “arbitration” in the northern border to an invading army and a 700-plus kilometer slice of land secretly handed over to the Sudan.

In the Preamble   to the T-TPLF constitution, it is written, “We, the nations, nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia…”

There is no nation as “Ethiopia” per se constitutionally, only nations, nationalities and peoples.

Just to clarify what I mean, let me ask you to consider the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States which states: “We the People of the United States…”

There is one people of the United States (“We the People…”) even though the United States is a nation of immigrants who came from all nations, nationalities and peoples of the world.

“We the people…” is the principal reason why the U.S. has survived and prospered, despite major imperfections for well over two centuries. (I did not say abominations like Donald Trumpenstein.)

I believe the Preamble to the Constitution of the New Ethiopia should begin with the following phrase, “We the People of Ethiopia, in order to…”

Second, the constitution of the New Ethiopia should have language along the following lines: “The powers not delegated to the national Ethiopian government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” In other words, the new national government of the New Ethiopia will function only to the extent that the national constitution grants  power to it. You may have seen similar language in the tenth amendment to longest enduring constitution in the world.

Third and straight up, the new constitution of the New Ethiopia should adopt in its entirely Article 55(4) of Ghana’s Constitution: “Every political party shall have a national character, and membership shall not be based on ethnic, religious, regional or other sectional divisions.”

If these three constitutional objectives could be achieved, what remains is getting on Nelson Mandela’s long road to freedom.

Imagine a freedom ride on Nelson Mandela’s Way.

What is Mandela’s way? It is the way of freedom from the mental prison and slavery of racial and ethnic hatred and sectarianism.

Mandela said, “As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn’t leave my bitterness and hatred behind, I’d still be in prison.”

I believe a new constitutional roadmap to the New Ethiopia will lead all Ethiopians out of the mental prisons of long-simmering ethnic hatred and geographic cages called “kilils” into the promised land of truth and reconciliation.

Mandela’s way of truth and reconciliation.

Many countries have undergone a truth and reconciliation process including  Rwanda, Argentina, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Ghana and Chile.

There are different approaches to truth and reconciliation. The basic idea is to help a country heal its political and social by uncovering the truth about human rights violations that had occurred during a particular period.   The basic idea is you cannot build a new nation on a foundation of revenge and the Hamurabic Code of “an eye for an eye.” That could only lead to a nation of blind people.

Ethiopia is the global poster child for human rights violations so a truth and reconciliation process is vital for a post T-TPLF Ethiopia.

I believe a successful truth and reconciliation process will pave the road to genuine multiparty democracy.

I am talking about a multiparty democracy based on the rule of law, respect for human rights, governance accountability and transparency.

I do NOT mean a multiparty democracy based on ethnicity, religion, language, region and so on.

Good governance depends upon the ability of individuals and groups to express their opinions and compete in the political process. A strong multi-party political system enables citizens to organize around issues and advance ideas, policies and programs for governance. A strong multiparty system ensures people who share similar views and opinions to organize and pressure government. Competitive  multiparty systems provide political space for the expression of civic discontent and engagement into constructive policy debates for peaceful change. A multiparty political system facilitates inclusion of marginalized groups in society, particularly youth and women.

So, I will ask the question one more time. “Where is Ethiopia going?”

Ethiopia is going out of T-TPLF kililistan into a constitutional democracy where the rule of law prevails and human rights are respected.

Ethiopia is walking out of artificial and unnatural kililistan homelands into one Ethiopian nation.

Let me invoke the old African saying one more time. “If you don’t know here you are going any road will take you there.”

Now, we know where we are going and which road we need to take to get where we want to go.

The destiny of Ethiopia is in the hands and feet of all Ethiopians. They have the power to pick her up or to drop her and shatter her like glass. They can walk with her on the long road to freedom or they can leave her in the wheelchair built for her by the T-TPLF.

Where Ethiopia is going is up to all of the people of Ethiopia.

Let me come back to Einstein and Shaw one more time.

Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

I believe Einstein meant that human destiny is not determined just by what we know, but also by what we can imagine. It was Einstein who asked the supremely beautiful imaginary question, “What if I can ride a beam of light across the universe?”

What if we can imagine establishing a genuine multiparty democracy based on a foundation of the rule of law in Ethiopia?

What if we can imagine establishing a federal system of government in Ethiopia based on the division of powers between the national and sub-national governments?

What if we can imagine establishing political parties organized NOT on the basis of ethnicity, religion, region, language, etc.?

What if we can imagine an Ethiopia free of the T-TPLF cancer on the Ethiopian body politics?

I let my imagination run free and wild. Like Shaw I ask, “You see things; and you say, ‘Why?’ But I dream things that never were; and I say, ‘Why not?’”

If some can imagine the freedom of riding on a beam of light, why can’t we imagine setting on a long walk to freedom?

Ultimately, the question of where Ethiopia is going will be answered by Ethiopia’s young women and men, Ethiopia’s Cheetah Generation with the support of Ethiopia’s Hippo Generation. It is going to be answered by the thousands of political prisoners in Ethiopia who are paying the ultimate price for our freedom.

ALL ROADS LEAD TO THE NEW ETHIOPIA!!!

ESAT appoints Abebe Gellaw as executive director

(ESAT News) — The Board of the Ethiopian Satellite Television and Radio (ESAT) announced that it has appointed journalist and activist Abebe Gellaw as the new executive director. Abebe will fill in the position vacated by Neamin Zeleke who resigned few months ago due to other responsibilities and commitments. 

Journalist Abebe Gellaw

Abebe in his capacity as the executive director will oversee the day to day activities of ESAT which has branches in DC, London and Amsterdam. Abebe has years of experience in journalism under his belt and is known and commended for his activism in the struggle to bring freedom and democracy to his country.

“I will do my level best to lead ESAT to more successes and overcome the many challenges it faces,” Abebe said in his Facebook post on Friday.

Abebe worked for ESAT from 2011 to 2013 and then moved to California where he has been working for an IT company in Silicon Valley for the last three years.

His appointment is effective April 01, 2016.

Where do we go from here?

By Teshome Abebe (PhD)

The following text of the speech was presented at Vision Ethiopia Conference on March 27, 2016. Because of time limitations, some paragraphs may not have been presented. I attended the conference as an academic only representing myself, and not as a member of a political party or any other group. As a result, the views expressed are mine alone. No financial support was requested or received from any individual or group, and my assignment was to respond to the following questions:

Quo Vadis? Where Do We Go From Here? Who Should Do What to Guarantee Democracy, Transition, and Unity in Post Conflict Ethiopia?

Background: Where We Have Been

There is no need to dwell too long on this part of my presentations, as all of you know so well where we have been over the past many decades. Suffice it to state that part of the failures in our past have to do with the excessive need to maintain and exercise power by the Atse Haile Selassie regime as well as by the Derg. In both cases, we have witnessed that they stayed in power too long; refused to listen to the citizenry; and never prepared the country for a peaceful transition of power in any meaningful manner. The result has been very familiar: assume power by force; get chased out of office by force.  The price the nation has had to pay for this state of affairs or dysfunction has been enormous. We have lost too many and too much both in lives and treasury; we have lost enormously in opportunity cost; and for all intents and purposes, the nation is still backward: we still can’t feed ourselves; and we have taught the young an incredibly bad lesson: that disordered force is the norm in Ethiopia. In my opinion, this is a truly sad state of affairs. On this, I am certain that there is general agreement on all sides.

Where We Are Now

As I leave where we have been and transition to where we are now, I am afraid that I don’t have too many things that are encouraging either.  Talking about where we are now requires one to take a sort of a survey – kind of a meta-study of the events and then conditions in which we find our country today. Let me first state that when we talk about the conditions in our homeland, we are not waging a vendetta or a personal campaign against anyone; rather it is simply an examination of the unflattering facts.

Though you are all students of Ethiopian affairs, let me try to summarize the situation in the following manner. This summary is based on the review of the literature of important studies; a thorough reading of the opinions and positions of people in academics, the professions, and most of all, of people in government; and a personal assessment of events and conditions on the ground in Ethiopia.

The African Development Bank, in a report on economic outlook in Ethiopia, recently stated that, “Ethnic Federalism has heightened and transformed historical territorial conflicts into contemporary inter-regional boundary conflicts. Inter-clan conflicts have begun to inform perceived or real disenfranchisement and inequitable distributions of economic and/or political benefits. Radicalism has also underlain sporadic religious clashes.”

Where we are today, can charitably be described as, what Thomas Hobbes referred to as “the chaos of competing enemies”. This chaos of the competing enemies afflicting the country is a classic strategy manufactured to sow conflict.  When resources are short (the resource here could also be power), people divide, scapegoating one another. What ensues is the turning of one region against another; one culture against another; older people against younger ones; one political party against the others; leaders against members; and one idea against another. Hobbes called this the pre-social pre-political world. For the ruling party, chaos has become power, and an opportunity to remake the world in their preferred configuration.

The ethnic stratification we witness in Ethiopia today, is the result of several factors: the introduction and implementation of the Killil system (a hammer blow to Ethiopian unity) the appearance or perceived appearance of ethnocentrism; the competition along ethnic lines for some common goal, such as power or influence, or a material interest, such as wealth or territory; and the emergence of deferential power. (See Donald Noel).  To make matters worse, there is evidence that the competition is driven by self-interest and hostility, and would result in inevitable further stratification and conflict. (See Lawrence Bobo & Vincent Hutchings).  These conditions, interwoven with what I will call the policy of ambitious domination, have the potential to produce ethno-national conflict.

Where We Have Consensus

Asserting that we have a general agreement on some things is a dangerous proposition among any group much less among Ethiopians who are very passionate about politics, and even more passionate about their country. Over the past quarter of century, we have debated as well as grieved. People are sad about what has happened in Ethiopia, and they have talked and written about all kinds of topics. I have to admit that this ‘grieving’ process continues even today.

I can safely state, however, that there is an amicable consensus on a number of fronts among the commenting class, and those who are engaged with the issue. The debates we have had over the past 25 years—and they were intensive debates–have rendered some arguments moot, and yielded consensus on others. What are the areas in which we have general consensus?

There is general consensus that we wish to see a Democratic Ethiopia. We have experimented enough with other forms of government, and that the future for Ethiopia must clearly, unambiguously and unalterably be Democratic.  An Ethiopia in which democratic institutions thrive; an Ethiopia whose leaders have an unflinching commitment to democratic values; and a country whose leaders have purged themselves of all forms of non-democratic impulses. Of this much, we agree.

There is consensus that we wish to see a united Ethiopia. By this we also mean one country, one people, with differentiated cultures but a common root. Diversity with a common root!

There is consensus that we wish to have an Ethiopia whose sovereignty is not questioned (not left to interpretations): not questioned by outsiders; and certainly not questioned by its children.

There is consensus that we wish to have an Ethiopia whose integrity is not violated. By this, we mean that the assurance of sovereignty is necessary but not sufficient: it must also be respected.

There is consensus that we wish to see a developed Ethiopia. What we wish to have is an Ethiopia that is socially, economically, technologically and scientifically developed.

There is no consensus on the issue of how to deal with the ruling party—the TPLF/EPRDF. I hold the very controversial view that when it comes to engaging the government; we might do better to focus on replacing, reforming, influencing and/or humanizing the TPLF/EPRDF rather than its complete eradication as some would wish to have it. The realistic choice that I think we face isn’t really a choice between an Ethiopia without TPLF/EPRDF and an Ethiopia with only TPLF/EPRDF. The realistic choice we face is between an Ethiopia where Democratic values, buttressed with democratic institutions, are supreme; where human rights are respected and upheld; and where the development process is all-inclusive versus an Ethiopia where these are lacking. Given that choice, the former sounds more appealing to me regardless of who rules the country. This, I believe, is an expansionist (as opposed to a reductionist) view that is not only proper, but also consistent with the principles of inclusion as well as that of true democracy.

Furthermore, I hold the view that the more serious and long-term threats to Ethiopia are not the TPLF/EPRDF or nationalist forces by themselves. Rather it is the coalescing threat on the horizon, that which might emerge from the Arab World. The petro dollar enabled alliance between Egypt, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Eritrea, Somalia and Djibouti is likely to become an existential threat, with religion as the driving force, but the desire to weaken Ethiopia as the primary thrust.

What is Lacking Or What Must Be Done?

For a variety of reasons, Ethiopians have lacked unity in their responses to the ruling party’s policy of ambitious domination. This has been true of all segments of society. We espouse too many divisions; too many plans; too many groups; too much duplication of effort; and too many personal agendas. It seems to be natural to us, that in an instant, we fall back on an almost tribal urge to defend our side. And as you know, sometimes, one choice precludes another. As a consequence, we are ineffective in our efforts even if we were to come together temporarily.  It seems to me that what it is called for here is the Latin imploration ‘in things important, unity’. Remember our own adage ‘Dirr Biabir, Anbesa Yasir’. Yet, it seems that when it comes to meaningful action, the adage gets thrown out the window. There are economic and non-economic explanations for that state of affairs.  But regardless of the explanations, what is undeniably true is that we remain intangible to those in power if we are not united. We remain intangible to those that might wish to assist us if we are not united; and we remain intangible to those that wish to dominate us if we are not united. The first duty we should have to each other on the matter of the motherland is unity! Unity based on ‘citizenship’ or some other super-ordinate goal.

The second thing we must have is reconciliation. One might ask, who is to be reconciled and with whom? Well, there is plenty of reconciliation that must take place before we unite for a purpose. To be sure, reconciliation is not just about receiving or just about corrective action. It is about the future. It is a means of addressing how we are going to live together; it is a means of taking constructive action; it is a means of sorting through choices; and it is a means through which we take responsibility for past mistakes, and pledge to never ever repeat the offense again.

As such, we should have true and genuine reconciliation between political parties. This requires that the transgressions, real or imagined, of the past must be buried for good, and new efforts must be made to start anew. And I am happy to report that there are groups gearing up and ready to assist with this.We need reconciliation between the governed and the governing. This is so because the ruling party has so much to explain.

Reconciliation between the government and the opposition parties is also critical if the country is to deploy all available talent to overcome the multitude of challenges.

Reconciliation between Ethiopians and their history is another must. Though this requires time as well as patience, there is a general feeling that many in Ethiopia and some outside of it are revising the country’s history to fit current needs. It may be possible to embellish history, but unnatural to edit it without molesting the truth. As a consequence, our historians have their work cut out for them in this regard.

We also need reconciliation on the issue of ‘ethnic federalism’. There are essentially two recognized methods of dealing with this important issue.

The first method is for the government not to acknowledge ethnic, national or social identities but rather instead enforce political and legal equality of all individuals. (See Jurgen Habermas & Bruce Barry).

It appears to me that this might be unworkable at the moment.  For one thing, the current generation and the one just before it primarily see themselves as belonging to an ethnic group first, and the prominence of ‘citizenship’ is not as strong as we might wish to see it. I have to concede here that while I can only judge my contemporaries, I can only make educated guesses about those before or after me.

Second, ethnic groups in general and ethnic cultures in Ethiopia in particular, have moved up and down the ethnic ‘diacritic’ overtime. And which ‘diacritic’ of ethnicity is salient depends on whether people are scaling ethnic boundaries up or down, and whether they are scaling them up or down depends generally on the political situation. (See Ronald Cohen & Joan Vincent). Furthermore, ethnicity emerges when it is relevant as a means of furthering emergent collective interests and changes according to political changes in the society. (See Barth & Seidner for more on this). Unless the political system changes, people will cling to what appears to them to be safe, comfortable, or even expected.

The second method is for the government to recognize ethnic identities and develop a process through which the particular needs of ethnic groups can be accommodated within the boundaries and/or sovereignty of the country. ( See Charles Taylor & Will Kymlicka). The Ethiopian government attempted to do the later but with provisions that have had disastrous consequences. These two points of view must be reconciled, and, I believe it is possible to do so.

The third thing that must be done is to provide a unified response to the three questions of: Land Ownership; Religion; and Ethnic Federalism.

Before the TPLF ascended to power and thereafter, it identified these three factors as wounds of the Ethiopian polity, and decided to turn them into weapons. Initially, the three issues resonated with the general population that had already been emotionally decimated by the Derg. While there will be disagreements on the efficacy, policy wise, of the particular factor, it is safe to say that the ruling party has used these three factors as a wedge issue between and among the populous. It is also safe to state that the initial euphoria generated among the population may have started to ebb as the public began to weigh and assess the benefits and costs associated with the particular issue. I am going out on a limb and suggest that the Ethiopian people have not embraced the ‘ethnic’ issue in a way that could make the ruling party claim success. In fact the opposite might just be true as Ethiopians began to view the ‘ethnicity’ issues as very divisive and threatening national unity and security.  Indeed, an honest and correct assessment of the issue, notwithstanding what the high priests of ‘ethnic federation’ might think, would lead us to conclude that the ‘ethnic cleansing’ that took place in parts of the country had repulsed Ethiopians and offended their senses.

In all cases, however, there have not yet been clearly articulated positions or alternatives provided by either opposition political parties or academe to the vexing issues of land ownership (as you know, ownership is the prerogative to control); the role of religion, if any; and viable alternatives to ethnic federalism acceptable to all.

The fourth thing that must be done is an identification of a new form of ambition. Simply stated, we need to formulate a new agenda, if you will. The ruling party had promised Ethiopians the freedom from hunger. That concept has sold well overseas where outsiders, having tired of watching little hungry kids on their television sets, had given the government the benefit of doubt. Now that we know the result of that promise, I will refrain from restating it here again. But I think that Ethiopians—both inside and outside of the country—wish to articulate a new form of freedom: the freedom not to have to consider ethnicity in their daily lives. Simply stated, we need to have a new ambition. Because all ambitions require forward thrust, perhaps, this will provide the forward momentum that we desperately lacked.

Finally, we must establish a post-conflict organization to instigate economic, political, social, technological as well as scientific reform, and to make sure that the gains achieved are maintained and advanced; to advance a genuine inclusion agenda that incorporates actors from all stakeholders, and assure that there is no backsliding; and to sustain a conflict containment agenda that is proactive to make sure that the economic costs of violence are contained and managed.

How Would We Accomplish These?

In two recent articles, I have argued that we must have conversation. The conversation we are going to have should be about the solutions to the problems the country faces, and would include conversations about politics, power, authoritarianism and hegemony. If we agree that it is time for solutions, we must also agree that such solutions must be based on a transparent and realistic account of what caused the problems in the first place. Here, I don’t mean to overburden our conversations with a chronology of what took place and when because that won’t help explain it. What we need to do is examine the motivation for the actions taken, and on what basis those actions were taken. In trying to do so, all sides must understand that while the regime in Ethiopia faces considerable opposition, it also enjoys internal support. Most importantly, the government also has powerful allies, notably the U.S and the U.K. just to mention two.

Having framed the issue in this manner, a message has to be framed and delivered, and that message has to be effective.  For a message to be effective, first, it must come from a unified group—a united opposition (just remember that no one in their right mind would wish to bargain with an intangible entity that cannot deliver); and second, it must reach and influence those in control—whether they are elected officials, dictators, regulators, or private actors. That means, therefore, the communication would ultimately have to be with the ruling party. This is crucial. Take for instance women’s issues: to bring about change regarding women’s issues, it is not enough to talk to women alone. The conversation has to include men as well. Similarly, if we wish to bring about change in power and hegemony, the conversation would have to be with those that wield it. Peaceful change will only take place in Ethiopia with the positive involvement of the ruling party.

So what will we be the modality of the conversation with the ruling party? The Constitution, of course. I have written before that if there is ever anything we ought to talk about, it is the constitution. Why the constitution? Because, like it or not, accept it or not, the current government of Ethiopia is a ‘lawful’ regime and not an ‘unlawful’ one. It may be unlawful in many of its governing practices, but is recognized as a lawful regime by every country in the world. Hence, the focus on the constitution. It should be the center of our effort, the focus of our energies, and the roadmap to any peaceful change that is likely to bring about solutions to the problems Ethiopia faces to day. I have never advocated throwing away the current constitution in its entirety. I hold the opinion that the current constitution is one of the most liberally worded constitutions out there—it even allows for ethnic groups to cede from the motherland! How more liberal can you get? But like everything else, the devil is in the details. While there are elements of the document that might be useful to retain, there are also elements of the document that could produce disastrous consequences, and are damaging to the country.

Although not directly echoing my call for a constitutional reform, even the Chair of the Constitutional Assembly, Negaso Gidada, has given recent testimony that the drafting, approval and implementation of the constitution was fraught with many errors and problems, and expressed regret at the end product. Of the stunning admissions is his regret that the people of Ethiopia had no say in the final document. (See Teshome Abebe; & Negaso Gidada Interview).

Concluding Remarks

Let me summarize these comments as follows: Our country is distressed, and it needs our attention. Each person has an opportunity to contribute their talents and unleash some of their potential (ሀብት ያለው በሀብቱ፣ ጉልበት ያለው በጉልበቱ፣ እወቅት ያለው በእውቀቱ).

The ruling party borrowed strength from the position it held; and from the emotions created by using ethnicity, the issue of land ownership and religion as weapons. We now know the consequences of this ploy. But like all borrowed assets, borrowed strength eventually diminishes as one loses influence with those that they wish to impress, and the strength turns into weakness. It is at this juncture that we must ask, “What does the situation demand? What strength, what skill, what knowledge, and what attitude?”

To me, the situation demands that there must be unity: unity in goals, unity in purpose, unity in effort, and unity in principles.

The situation demands the strength of empathy: empathy to seek to understand, and then to be understood.

The situation demands the skills to build relationships and build them with consistency and sincerity, based on national imperatives and not personal agendas.

The situation further demands the knowledge to be able to teach, to explain, to organize and to execute.

And finally, the situation demands an attitude of reconciliation, inclusiveness, democratic values, and of a new ambition to a new kind of freedom for Ethiopians: the freedom not to have to consider ethnicity in their daily lives!

Thank you

Ethiopian regime has a 25-years-long bloody legacy

By Degeufe Hailu April 7, 2016

“Nations cannot realize the full promise of independence until they fully protect the rights of their people,” Barrack Obama, president of the United States, said on tour to Kenya and Ethiopia last year. This is ironic, because on that trip he failed to criticize human rights abuses by the Ethiopian government, which he hailed as “democratically elected”.

Ethiopians are very familiar with the government's attempts to oppress any opposition. The Tigrayan People's Liberation Front (TPLF) government took power in 1991. All opponents are persecuted as terrorist collaborators.

Today, Ethiopia stands as a nation in contempt of human rights. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Ethiopia has the second highest number of journalists forced into exile between 2010 and 2015 after Syria.

Evidence of the denial of freedom of expression includes the arrest and incarceration of Zone 9 bloggers in 2014. Their name is a reference to the eight divisions of the infamous Kaliti Prison — suggesting that Ethiopia as whole is effectively the jail's ninth division. The arrest of the bloggers for publication of news and opinion pieces that were critical of the government and its repressive entourage exposed the country's non-existent due process.

Last June, Andargachew Tsige, the secretary-general of Ginbot 7, a group banned for allegedly advocating the armed overthrow of the Ethiopian government, was deported to Ethiopia from Yemen while in transit to Eritrea. This transfer violated international law prohibiting sending someone to a country where they are likely to face torture.

Tsige has been detained without access to family members, legal counsel or consular representation, which he is entitled to as a British citizen. His detention location, to date, is unknown.

Terrorizing those who publically criticize the government's endeavors, however, is not limited to media outlets. In April 2015, peaceful protests in Oromia over the government's planned expansion of the Addis Ababa municipal boundary were met with excessive force, including shootings. Many protesters perished, while others continue to be detained without charge.

Protest against displacement from land and family is not new to Ethiopia.

Under the “villagisation program” 1.5 million rural people have been relocated under the guise of improving their access to basic services. One example of this forced displacement is in the Gambella region, for which relocation was accompanied by insufficient compensation and consultations, and violence including beatings and arbitrary arrests. This was just in the first-year of the “villagisation program”.

In subsequent years, 200,000 indigenous persons from 240,000 hectares of land in the lower Omo Valley were displaced without compensation or consultation, due to the government's development of sugar plantations. The clearance of land, sold to foreign interests, year-in year-out has lined the pockets of the government, without regard for the region, or the Ethiopian people in general.

Inherent in this inculcating of terror, is the need to maintain the status quo. This is evident in the landslide victory in June 2015 of the ruling party and its insipid allies. The Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front, a rebrand of the TPLF, overwhelmingly ejected the only opposition parliamentarian from office.

“This result was completely expected, there is no multi-party system in Ethiopia. It's just fake,” said Taye Negussie, a sociology professor at Addis Ababa University.

President Obama's visit to Kenya and Ethiopia was to whitewash a continent.

US collaboration with the TPLF, a party that has expelled all opposition and is dedicated to a reign of pure terror, has a long history — Obama and three of his predecessors have visited.

The people in the Horn of Africa can live in harmony and in peace, and flourish through the development of a stable region, without the need for foreign interference.

The mission to oust the oppressive regime in Ethiopia, is aimed to stop a culture of fear and suspicion, especially if we want to enter into a serious problem-solving dialogue.

We need to be united participants of the political process and not the subjects of a repressive and terrorizing government, to address our problems genuinely and solve them definitively.

The Ethio-Norway Forced repatriation agreement four years later

By Samson Seifu,

It is to be recalled that Norway (the previous Red-Green coalition government) and the repressive regime in Ethiopia (which is in power for over 25 years) signed a five years bounded memorandum of understanding in January, 2012 with the aim of forcefully repatriating the Ethiopian asylum seekers in Norway.  This agreement has been met and contested with fierce protests from a number of angles such as among others:

1.      The asylum seekers themselves through their association called ‘’Ethiopian Asylum Seekers Association in Norway’’;

2.      The Ethiopian Community in Norway;

3.      The Task Force against Forced Repatriation of Ethiopian Asylum Seekers in Norway;

4.      A court case initiative by Professor Girum Zeleke against the Norwegian government both in Oslo, Norway and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, France;

5.      The Norwegian Organization for Asylum Seekers (NOAS);

6.      The Norwegian Centre against Racism (Antirasistisk Senter)

7.      Association of  January 12;

8.      Amnesty International, Norway;

9.      Norway based Ethiopian oppositions’ support organizations and

10.  Ethiopians all over the world.

These protest voices played a very instrumental role in preventing the implementation of the infamous forced repatriation of the Ethiopian Asylum Seekers to one of the world’s worst repressive regime.  As a result of all these efforts, up to the present time no meaningful implementation of the agreement has been effected.

However; what has become an eye brows raising matter once again is the recent appearance of the Undersecretary of the Ministry of Justice, Mr. Joran Kallmyr, in one of the country’s TV, Radio and internet broadcasting agency called NRK where the minster pinpointed his successful working visit (9 February 2016) in Ethiopia in connection with the reinstating of the already signed agreement which has been ineffective so far. As a result of the mutual communique between the two, it has been mentioned that the two sides agreed to begin the forced repatriation.   

Honoring Dictatorship and Repression

The new incumbent conservative government which is a coalition of the two far right parties of the blue party (Høyre) & the progressive party (FrP) as its foreign policy considers Ethiopia its focus country for aid-recipient, contrary to its previous promises to focus on the regime’s basic human-rights violations.  The prime minister’s party, i.e. the blue party’s representative in 2013 had promised his party's commitment to challenge the human rights abuses of the regime in Ethiopia in a public debate with the then incumbent government’s representative where he criticized the unjust practices of the then government when it comes to Ethiopia. But what is being observed and practiced is the opposite of what has been promised that is rewarding the human-rights abuses of the TPLF regime in Ethiopia once again by the new government.

The political Situation in Ethiopia

The TPLF regime after having claimed a 100% victory in the 2015 country-wide parliamentary election, which is an embarrassing improvement from the previous parliamentary election in 2010 where the TPLF regime claimed a 99.6% victory, has completely controlled the country. The regime among a number of other evil doings has:

1.      Opened fire and killed peacefully demonstrating people,

2.      Incarcerated journalists, bloggers, political activists and religious activists on bogus accusations,

3.      Closed down all  critical free-presses,

4.      Prevented the different opposition political organizations from holding public meetings and peaceful demonstrations,

5.      Stifled political opportunities to the people,

The opposition seems to have lost all hopes for a fair political playground and completely abandoned the so called peaceful and legal opposition and opted for other means of struggles like armed resistance. 

The Role of the Ethiopian Diaspora in Norway

The TPLF regime is getting it extremely difficult to pursue its diaspora politics to what it calls ‘’the silent majority diaspora Ethiopian community’’ due to a strong political opposition from the Ethiopian diaspora. Especially in Norway, it has almost been impossible to conduct any fundraising event by the regime’s operatives thanks to the fierce resistance waged by the Ethiopians residing in Norway in which the Ethiopian asylum seekers are a part and parcel.

The regime’s operatives living in Norway tried two failed fundraising activities in 2013 both in Oslo and Stavanger for the so called ‘’Nile renaissance dam project’’.  

The task force set up by the ‘’Democratic Change in Ethiopia Support Organization, Norway (DCESON) mobilized Ethiopians and successfully thwarted the planned fundraising events in Oslo and Stavanger (20 and 28 April 2013 respectively).

TPLF agents were furious to retaliate the failed fundraising events for ‘’the Grand Millennium Dam Project on the Blue Nile River’’ they planned to organize in Stavanger and Oslo in April 20 and 28, 2013 respectively. This time they planned to sabotage the fundraising event organized by the opposition support organizations in Norway to support the armed resistance against the regime in Ethiopia.

The TPLF agents bluffed the Nordberg Church administration by threatening to stage a huge protest demonstration at the church compound if the fundraising event is allowed to be conducted as planned. They also fabricated a false story to a daily newspaper called Vårt Land in order to get it published just a day before the event day with the news of the cancellation of the fundraising event as confirmed by the administrator of the Nordberg church, Olav Lende. The TPLF agents’ website known as ‘’www.abesha.no’’ published the cancellation of the fundraising event stating and siting the story covered on Vårt Land internet newspaper (http://www.vl.no/troogkirke/leide-menighetshus-for-a-samle-inn-penger-til-krig/). It was the TPLF agents who tipped off the misleading information to the news outlet Vårt Land Avis in the first place.

The Task Force in anticipation of the possible attempt to sabotage and thwart the fundraising event by the TPLF agents and operatives in Norway had a second plan (Plan-B) which had been kept secret until the event day i.e. 28 September 2013. The fundraising event was successfully conducted without any disruption at a venue envisaged as per Plan-B at Galgeberg Meeting Hall.

The successful accomplishment of the fundraising event was broadcasted to the Ethiopian People both at home and in Diaspora by ESAT Radio and Television both in headlines and full reportage. The famous anti-Government Paltalk media ECADEF and Zehabesha.com have also posted about the fundraising event on their websites.

1)      http://ethsat.com/video/esat-fundraising-event-for-g7-popular-force-in-oslo-oct-6-2013-ethiopia/

2)      http://ecadforum.com/blog/ginbot-7-popular-force-fundraising-task-force-in-norway/

3)      http://www.zehabesha.com/amharic/archives/7924

4)      https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.zehabesha.com/ginbot-7pf-fundraising-advertisement-oslo-norway-2013/&sa=U&ei=RLRuUonsPMTv4gT-zIG4Cg&ved=0CAgQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNFJbgUiTtgeIWezVs8dfUn4ohRQQw

The TPLF agents and their handful of supporters in Norway did not have the political will and the moral courage to come to the arrangement venue and protest out in public and hinder the fundraising event that was successfully conducted as per ‘’plan B’’ the way DCESON successfully disrupted at theirs planned fundraising events for the Grand Millennium Dam Project.

Norway needs to reconsider its policy of cooperation with the repressive regime

The regime in Ethiopia employs all forms of brutal means in order to cling on to power. The ‘’forced repatriation of Ethiopian asylum seekers’’ is one of the means to silence the Ethiopians’ opposition to the miseries being committed by the repressive regime.  These asylum seekers are very active in exposing the regime’s atrocities to the Norwegian public in particular and the world community in general thereby playing a pivotal role by becoming a voice for the voiceless Ethiopians at home who are suffering in the hands of their brutal rulers.

The Norwegian government has a moral responsibility and an obligation of respecting the international human rights law of not putting the lives of Ethiopian asylum seekers into danger by forcefully surrendering them to a regime which is very well known for its brutal deeds against its opponents in the last 25 years.