Ethiopia Needs a New Political Arrangement, Not a Leader
Tuesday 28 March 2006 09:38.
By Apee Ojulu Mar 28, 2006 —
In “Mother Ethiopia is Crying for a Leader,” Sudantribune.com/March 26, 2006 Biadeglegne Tesfaye articulates the need for a leader to lead Ethiopia. Unfortunately, his hope for the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) to produce that leader, replace the ruling Tigray People Liberation Front (TPLF) and deliver the country to a promised land is anything but a fanatic dream. The political parties and leaders that created CUD intended only to restore past Amhare Empire in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Democratic League (EDL); All Ethiopian Unity Party (AEUP); United Ethiopian Democratic Party-Medhin Party (UEDPMP) and Rainbow Ethiopia: Movement for Democracy and Social Justice (REMDSJ) all intend to restore Amharo Empire (See Reference 1). These four parties shared two common goals that were to take power and restore Amhare Empire. They anchored these ideas in the CUD to reconstitute an Amhara centralized Ethiopia through three specific political programs.
First, CUD leaders plan to amend Article 39 of the Ethiopian to reassert Amhare grip on power in the country. Article 39 grants citizens in each regional state of Ethiopia the exclusive rights to elect their own representatives to local assemblies and national parliament, the rights to govern their region, control their resources and teach their own languages in their respective schools in their regional states (see reference 2). CUD leaders detest Article 39 very much for precisely because it weaken Amhara control over other Ethiopians, by placing Amhara language and culture as secondary respectively in each regional state. Their leader, Hailu Shawils, the chairman of CUD, asserts in an interview with Robert Wiren, “We believe in the unity of Ethiopia and not in article 39” (see reference 3). Shawils intends to take away Article 39 and replace it with direct rule. Direct rule CUD intends to recreate means an Amhara from far north of Ethiopia who never had any contact with, say, Binshangul Gumuz region would be appointed to govern Binshangul Gumuz and this Amhara would expect the local population to follow his policies without resistance like predecessor governors Menlike, Haile-Selassie, and Mengistu Haile Mariam sent that led only to domination of non-Amhara and non-Tigrean ethnic groups.
Second, CUD leaders plan to prevent Ethiopians from converting to Islam, and discriminate against those Ethiopians who are already Muslims. CUD key leaders have described growing conversion among some Ethiopian communities to Islam as a threat to the Ethiopia Orthodox Christian character, and repeatedly they say they would never tolerate a new religions taking over Ethiopia. Many Ethiopians, mainly Oromos and other oppressed ethnic groups, these CUD are talking about converted to Islam as a way out from the domination of Amhare and their cousins, Tigeres. By embracing on an attempt to prevent Ethiopians from converting to their own religions of their choice, the CUD stands ready to discriminate against Ethiopians who are now Muslims, either directly or indirectly through policy choices.
Last, CUD leaders plan to reopen the issue of the Eritrean port, Assab, meaning they still question the independence of Eritrea. CUD leaders remain adamantly opposed to the idea that Eritrea took its port of Assab and willing to recover the port by whatever mean necessary. Yet CUD leaders’ intention to do whatever necessary to recovery Assab is an imperialism venture, and brings only a destructive war which definitely marginalized ethnic groups in Ethiopia would shoulder as is often the case in hours of need, by being forcefully sent to front lines as were the case during the Ogeda war with Somalia, Eritrea war of independent and past wars.
In addition to three programs CUD leaders plan to implement, Amhare region, CUD’s political base, sent Emperors Menelik, Emperor Selassise and Colonel Mengistu Halie Mariam in the past to rule the country and they, in turn, built an Amhare Empire over other nationalities. These leaders implemented policies that were “characterized by hierarchic social stratification and authoritarian tradition,” as Abiyu Geleta rightly observed (See Reference 4). These Amahro social stratified the entire society where the Amhare was the rulers and other ethnic groups that made up the majority the ruled population. Each Amhare leader brutally extended these systems of internal imperialism over nationalities within the country to centralize the state in the Amhar-centric state. Emperor Menelik and his predecessor, Emperor Selassie tried to “Amharaziation” the entire population to erase the national question in the minds of many nationals within the Empire. Each of these leaders, Mariam and Selassie, used different strategies to implement this domination over other nationalities but they tried, as Edmond Keller observes, to erase “national question.” Mariam, at least publicly, adopted a “scientific socialism” approach as way to solve this pressing national question (See Reference 5).
All in all, each of these regimes, though different in characters, tried to build an Amhara-centric Ethiopia state. Amhare revisionist intellectuals like Tesfay and their intellectual allies elsewhere paint a different picture about these leaders then their actual pictures. These revisionist intellectuals made two arguments. Some argue that Menelik, Salessie and Mengistus did their best most for the country during their times, and other argue that they were dictators that their rules did not benefit Amhare region or people. The tendency toward separation among nationalities within the country or instability is the fault of Meles Zenawi and his TPLF. These revisionist intellectuals are arguing tendency toward separation in the country lies on the leadership of Meles Zenawi and his advisors in the TPLF, because they have dissolved power to the regions that are not now able to exercise it effectively, but to destroy the unity of the country with.
It is true that Meles and his advisers in TPLF have committed a lot of crimes against all nations in Ethiopia. Thus no doubt that Zenawi has done his part to increase the tension in the country. He had authorized his military forces to commit genocide/ massacres in Gambella, Sidama, Ogeada, Beni Shaugi, and Oromia. In final analysis, however, he is not totally responsible for division to the level that Amhare revisionist intellectuals claim he is- that Meles is the only person responsible. Amharo past rulers were the ones implanted ills in the country by building a hegemonic political structure that privileged Amhare in culture, politics, economic and social the past Amhare rulers created that now CUD intend to replicate.
In sum, CUD is not more a democratic political party compared to the current Meles Zenwai’s regime. In fact, CUD is more extreme than the Zenwai’s regime is and, if is to take power, its policies would more extreme policies than Zenwai’s. Thus, for the sake of economic development and peace for all nations inside Ethiopia, each nation in the country should be allowed to choose either separation or create some union with other nations within the country and outside. The current Ethiopia state is a mess and we should not continue to pretend like CUD and other unionists continue to do that the mess in Ethiopia right now can be cleared up and reformed. Ethiopia has existed for over two thousand years of Ethiopia state and the current mess existed through out these years.
References
http://www.sidamaconcern.com/articles/abiyu.htm
1. Coalition for Unity and Democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_for_Unity_and_Democracy
2. Ethiopian Constitution http://www.sas.upenn.edu/African_Studies/Hornet/Ethiopian_Constitution.html
3. Geleta, Abiyu. 2000. Ethiopian System of Domination and Its Consequences. The Sidama Concern Vol.5. No.4, pp.5-10. [on-line]
4. Asafa Jalata. 1998. Oromo nationalism and the Ethiopian discourse: the search for freedom and democracy, p. 109-124 Dictatorship is not road to peace in Ethiopia
Saturday 8 April 2006 16:37.
This is a response to TDA’s response to my article, "Ethiopia Needs a New Political Arrangement, Not a Leader", which appeared on March 30, 2006 on the Sudan Tribune.
By Apee Ojulu*
April 7, 2006 — Dear TDA, Upon reading your response to my article, I could not help myself but to say I was flabbergasted by the manner in which you had attempted to make yourself neutral by describing yourself as an Oromo-Amhara stock but turned around to express the very Amhara elite chauvinism by degrading all non-Amhara nations in the country with usually traditional code words such “genuine Ethiopians.”
I expected a response from someone with your capacity to not only, civil, express dismay on the domination of Prime Minister Meles Zenwai’s regime and his advisers in Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), but in fact also express remorse about policies of the past regimes (of which some of its officials are now active members of and supporters of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD)).
Oppression, that you had alluded against the people of Gambella, Sidama, Oromo, Ogadan, Southern Nationalities, Afar and other nations in Ethiopia did not just start under the current Tigry domination, but under Amhara domination/dynasty/Empire. I certainly have no problem with you advocating the removal of Zenawi and his advisers in TPLF from power and creating another political system for the country. Like other opponents of the regime in Addis Ababa, I believe getting rid of Zenawi and his advisers in TPLF is a noble thing to do.
Before I proceed to clarify your allegations, it’s necessary for the benefit of our readers first to clarify the central issue that confused you. The point I made in my original article that comparing CUD with the ruling TPLF doesn’t make much sense, was not based on imagination- and it was not to undermine CUD’s messages or prospect for power. I reached this conclusion based on a logical calculation derived from available evidence. Here is what I derived:
Unlike current Tigry elite domination, Amhara domination was based on at least four elements. One was the political unity system Amhara established. Second, Amharic language that Amhara elite imposed on other nations within the country. Third, Amhara elites forced the concept of Orthodox Church as a state religion at the expense of numerous other religions many in the country adhered to. Fourth- the feudal system Amhara elites established until 1974, some of its remnants were found until 1991.
If CUD intends to restore this Amhara elite dynasty, as I had argued in the article, it would be more severe as compared to the current Tigry domination. Tigry elite domination is a one area domination- political domination. If any another person compares Amhara and Tigry, it’s fair to say that the person could reach the same conclusion. In fact, Amhara elite domination is/was worse than the current Tigry elite domination.
By removing Zenawi’s regime I think we will start speaking freely about historical injustices that have occurred in the country throughout centuries. It will also circumspect our thinking to prevent recurring of past domination, and we will remain vigilant of any chances of reemergence of Amhara dynasty from the remnants of 1991. I’m clear that the prospect for peace and economic development in the country depends on reforming the present Ethiopian State, not crowning another one like Emperor Menelik, Emperor Haile-Sellassie and Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam. A new political arrangement is desperately needed because the current system today is deeply flawed. It does not measure up to true nature of federation where each state/region is allowed to practice and make its decisions. Therefore maintaining such political arrangement is road to more conflict, killings and inter-ethnic wars that end only in miseries. At the same time, I should also say that returning to pre 1991 political unitary system where provincial rulers were directly appointed by a self-made ‘His Excellency’ in Addis Ababa who was often a Amhara ruler, is not an option to maintain a united country either. Political system that incorporates dynasties only breeds tyrannical dictators that Ethiopia experienced until 1991. And modern world does not allow such system.
After rejecting both Amhara and Tigray elite system, there are two other options available that are based more on measured and prudent approaches. One, without Zenawi, to make the current constitutional arrangement measure up to its concept (constitution) which allows each state to exercise its rights of administration, regulation of economy, control over its languages and resources, etc. Enforcing this will allow people of each region to practice their rights. Such system is based on voluntary basics and is the only system that eliminates conflict. Other option is to allow people in every region to fully exercise their rights to choose whether they want to remain a part of the united country or they want to associate with other people. Such system also eliminates conflict among nations and continues to subside economic depression as well as political chaos now existent in the country.
Unitary political system that you and your friends in the leadership of CUD still dream of is a colonial system, whose time has passed with the arrival of modernity. Only a few dictatorial states like China, North Korea and Cuba still maintain such system, and you know what their societies are like. States like Britain that has been democratic for decades have recognized that unitary system brings domination. Upon realization of this, Britain granted regional parliaments to Scotland, Northern Ireland and other territories that became self-governing entities, and this was equal to federal political arrangement.
I find your charges against me troubling. Your obsession to mudslinging instead of bringing out the discussion on how to re-arrange the state for a peaceful settlement is, definitely troubling. I tell you, these hardliners!! TDA, I’m not blood thirsty. If I were, I’d advocate for the very regimes you are advocating for. If you got the impression after reading my article that I am a supporter of the current despotic regime in Addis Ababa, I am here to reassure you again that I am their foe, not even distance ally. I don’t work for the regime, I never did, and I never will. The current regime in Addis Ababa has demonstrated by it actions that it is not only drenched in corruption, but is also trying to create a hegemonic empire within surrounding territories and dominating other nationalities.
TDA, in fact, as someone with well intentions and a deep passion for the well being of my people, it would be a shame to associate myself with such regime. Those who know me personally can testify on my behalf and can certainly provide you with evidence that I am far from supporting that regime. But I’m not going to testify- its not necessary. I don’t have an obligation towards you, and my logical discourse should make it clear that I’m an independent thinker and a well-wisher of my people, not a supporter of any regime.
Also, I presume that you have a name like me and other readers on this website. If you do not have strength to stand behind what you said in public with full confidence, I doubt your credentials. You either are one of CUD’s henchmen, or you were unable to defend your arguments because mine were logical and backed by evidence. It could also be that you realize that evidences I had gathered about CUD’s plans for future are very true, and you couldn’t refute them. Or are you a former member of Emperor Sellassie’s regime or Colonel Mariam’s regime?
Also, in your response to my article, you claimed that CUD’s plan to retake Eritrean Assab port is legitimate, hence worth supporting and dying for by all Ethiopians. You also mentioned that you were a lawyer by vocation. So I presume that you studied international laws governing relations between states. You must have come across charters of the United Nations and its resolutions. For example, UN Resolution 3314 prohibits one state from taking actions against another state. It defines aggression as “(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof”[1]. Have you forgotten that international laws prohibit Ethiopia from annexing Eritrean port or any part of its territory? Assab port is an Eritrean port and no other country has a right to take it from Eritrea. If you missed this aspect of international law, I ask that you enroll in a course now to learn the basics. Or I should also make it clear that you may have taken studied before the creation of international institutions and laws pre 1945; If you did, fellow TDA, I apology to you in advance. The idea of taking another state property was at the heart of the current dispute between Zenawi and his cousins in Asmara over Badme. You had accused Zenawi and his henchmen of starting endless wars. In supporting CUD objective to take Asmara port, are you not in the same league with Zenawi in wanting to take another country’s port and therefore bring wars to the country?
TDA, in your second point you attempted to counter argue what I said about CUD’s intentions to restore Ethiopian Orthodox Christian domination in the country, as a “completely baseless fabrication and superficial accusation.” But underneath this statement lies the fact you confirmed yourself; that Tefera Walwa, Ethiopian Minister for Capacity Building, raised the same issue on a visit to Awassa. Why did the minister raise the involvement of the Orthodox Church in political arena? You failed to clarify, so I will do you a favor by explaining why.
The minister raised the issue when he was in Awassa because the Orthodox Church, through some pretended traditional church activities, turned a religious festival to a CUD political rally targeted against the government (source: BBC and other independent publications). When the minister got a signal that the Orthodox Church was pushing to take hold of hot political disputes, he raised the issue of an unholy alliance between the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and the CUD. Why didn’t you raise this issue in your article TDA? You knew about the Orthodox Church’s interferences in politics TDA, but you didn’t want to reveal facts and educate our readers. Why? You wanted to deliberately hide these facts about the Orthodox Church because you didn’t want readers to get an impression that the Church was interfering in politics on behalf of CUD. Do not get me wrong and think that I am against the church, taking side of people against the regime. As an institution devoted to welfare of citizens, I expect it to defend the interest of its people. When the church does take such actions, though, it exposes itself to condemnation like every other institution that takes stand on charged political issues. So TDA, do not manufacture facts for the purpose of derogating your foes and enhancing your own position. End should not justify the means. As Plato and Aristotle discovered centuries early, good conduct is the only means to reach good ends. Your use of Machiavellian world of deception to obtain ends that you see as good, only ends in perpetuating evil that you want to end in the first place. We all agree that Zenawi is a sick man who wants to maintain power by all means possible, but opponents of the regime should also avoid use of similar methods the regime uses to maintain high ground against it. This is the only way to defeat the regime.
In your third point you claimed that article 39 of the1994 Ethiopian constitution was drafted and adopted by hand-picked committee members under the order of TPLF. To reinstate my stand, I’m saying it again- I did not raise the issue of article 39 in terms of whether its good or was adopted by all Ethiopian people. Rather I only made the point of article 39 in terms of what CUD intends to do with it. TDA, you should have answered this point only to refute and tell us whether CUD plans to take off the article 39 from the Ethiopian constitution, if and when, it gets the opportunity to take power.
For the sake of argument, article 39 is not as bad compared to the unitary system your friends who ruled Ethiopia throughout the years created and implemented in the country. Actually Article 39 allows each region to teach their own language, rule by own citizens, etc. Although these rights have not totally being ceded to the regional governments like the constitution intended them to, it’s a good start. In a sense that people today in regions such as Gambella, Oromo and others teach their regional languages that your friends prohibited them teaching for centuries during their rule and domination.
Oh, and TDA has attempted to advise me to adopt what he calls “a more constructive attitude that would you to appreciate the reality.” Let me tell you- me pointing out CUD’s prospective plans and conspiracies to others, for the heck of a better Ethiopia wasn’t less productive than you singing CUD tunes and dancing to make them happy. I do not buy your idea that people should not cross-examine what they are told because doing so would aid their foes; where are you? 15th century?? Your perception very well chimes with that of a traditional tyrannical dictator- indeed, that’d be one tactics the current regime could use to prevent people from questioning their actions and policies. Is that what you’re telling us to do, my friend? If I adopt such attitudes of blind following, I’ll lose my rights, future and habit for creating conducive political system to make my life and my people’s lives better. What, if you want people to follow you so blindly, distinguishes you from the current tyrannical dictatorship regime of Addis Ababa?
You know the fact the Oromo Liberation Front, Gambella People’s Liberation Movement, Afar Liberation Front and host of other movements accepted what the TPLF told them without questioning their authenticities in 1991 and allied with the tribal movement. You also know then TPLF took power. OLF and GPLM left the alliance with TPLF barely two years late and they have returned to armed struggle. Thus all movements struggling against the regime today do not want to follow another political group without clear commitment to certain principles, and that an ethnic domination is not what they are fighting for. Those who you have alluded to fighting the regime in Gambella, Afar, Sidama, Oromia, Ogenda, Southern Nationalities and other areas did not start their struggles only to flow with the current or just to see whether other ethnic domination could be established in the country.
FONT face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">In conclusion, TDA, your attempts to tie me to the current regime in Addis Ababa is baseless and does not carry any weight. I consider Addis Ababa a corrupt, chauvinistic and genocidal, just like the past Amhara Empire was. Regarding the future of Ethiopia, I advice you to closely follow non-Amhara talks and critical discussions on the Ethiopian state. Blindly following someone is no longer the tradition. In this new spirit people have access to education and other channels, and people are more open to criticisms and learn from their mistakes. And please don’t try too hard to make people believe “the top leadership of the CUD is persons with impeccable intellect and discipline.” Time has come for a fair political system.
Mr. Obbo Tokkumma and Mr. Tewtedagn Belew thank you for your measured responses to my article. Some of the things we did not agree on are minor I avoided discussing them here in the reply. I only want to response to Mr. TDA here
* Apee Ojulu is a citizen of the greater East Africa area and is the Editor of www.gambelatoday.com, a website which is devoted to publishing news and commentaries on issues concerning Gambella state, Sudan and Ethiopia. He can be reached at api@gambelatoday.com
|
Gambellan Voice,