Friday, August 21, 2009

Africa’s problem is corruption and leaders’ insatiable greed (New Vision)

We all know that very few African countries are in the business of manufacturing arms of any kind save for South Africa. We are all net importers of military armaments we deploy in our conflicts. We don’t even manufacture gas masks, teargas, bullet-proof vests and helmets. All we export to industrialised Europe, America and China are raw materials like oil, diamonds, gold, uranium, tea and coffee, most of which they extract themselves and pay us peanuts for! In exchange, our countries have huge and secretive military budgets that we must spend year in year out whether we are at war or not. ...more..

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Movement of jah people (Economist)

Ethiopia’s prime minister, Meles Zenawi, says there are no political prisoners in his country. Human-rights activists and diplomats say there are thousands—and a lot of Ethiopians believe Mr Afro was one of them....more..

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Drought and Famine: Ethiopia's Vicious Cycle Continues (Times)

Earlier this year, Ethiopia's parliament passed a tough new law seeking to regulate charities and foreign humanitarian groups in the country. The law, which labels as foreign any local organization that gets more than 10% of its funding from abroad, restricts charity work on issues related to gender, ethnicity, children's rights and conflict resolution, and bars advocacy activities. The government says the law is meant to ensure that charities focus on development, but many fear it will deter those working in the field from taking bold actions like advocating for the hungry....more..

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Pop Star Teddy Afro Freed From Jail in Ethiopia (ABC)

ADDIS ABABA (Reuters) - Ethiopia's most popular singer, Teddy Afro, was freed early from prison on Thursday after serving 18 months of a two-year sentence for hit-and-run manslaughter....read more...

The two sides of Meles Zenawi (Economist)

But then there is the harsher side of Mr Meles, the Marxist fighter turned political strongman with a dismal human-rights record who is intolerant of dissent. In 2005, after a disputed general election, his police shot dead some 200 civilians. An independent inquiry ended up with several of its judges fleeing the country. Mr Meles sprinkles spies through the universities to intimidate and control the students; he was once a student agitator himself. He closes down independent newspapers and meddles in aid projects, banning agencies that annoy him. Last month he suspended the activities of about 40 of them from the Somali-populated parts of the country....more...

Saturday, August 8, 2009

U.S. Policy Shift Needed in the Horn of Africa (CFR)

Change is needed to ensure the sustainability of the U.S.-Ethiopia partnership and U.S. counterterrorism goals in the region at a time when Somalia continues to flounder as a failed state. The United States should consider adopting a more assertive approach that makes use of two primary points of leverage:

First, the U.S. Embassy and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) should refuse direct funding to the many known "GONGOS" (governmental nongovernmental organizations) that pose as legitimate civil society development organizations, but are in practice political and social agents of the ruling party. The recognition of GONGOs as legitimate civil society organizations abets the Ethiopian strategy of marginalizing nongovernmental actors, and allows the government to continue a "business as usual" approach to the delivery of international support.

Second, the United States should publicly express its concern over the shrinking democratic space, the crisis in the Ogaden, and Ethiopia's refusal to uphold the findings of the independent border commission. Ethiopian officials are extremely sensitive to public opinion and likely to respond to threats to their country's international standing and participation in international fora such as the African Union and the United Nations.

Relations with Ethiopia are likely to become strained, and the United States can expect, at least initially, to receive very limited support from its European partner nations. These countries, including France, Germany and the United Kingdom, lack the political leverage necessary to lead a collective shift in donor policy and have been hesitant to alienate the Ethiopian government. This reluctance may require a diplomatic version of the "good cop/bad cop" approach, in which the United States agrees to take an isolated, leadership role in demanding change, while European donor nations persist in a strategy of quiet diplomacy. This has the advantage of ensuring that some constructive dialogue will continue.

In a worst-case scenario, the United States may have to threaten to suspend foreign and military aid to Ethiopia. U.S. humanitarian and development assistance to Ethiopia was upwards of $650 million in 2008, and the U.S. has contributed significant, though less transparent, financial and tactical support to Ethiopia’s attempts to modernize its armed forces. Such an action has rightly been perceived as unthinkable in the past, as the cessation of aid would certainly risk destabilizing the Ethiopian government and may precipitate widespread public disorder. At the same time, Ethiopian certainty that U.S. aid is inviolate has allowed the Ethiopian government to effectively tune out demands for reform. Ethiopian dependence on U.S. assistance is a card that policymakers must learn to play to provoke meaningful change. This is another reason to consider developing a good cop/bad cop arrangement with the European donors--if the United States is forced to suspend aid, other donors may mitigate the shortfall while quietly reinforcing demands for democratic reform. ...more...

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Now is the time to end tyranny (Ethiomunich)

We must first recognize a fundamental truth that you have given life to in Ghana: development depends upon good governance. That is the ingredient which has been missing in far too many places, for far too long…

The dictators in Ethiopia have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are clueless about good governance; and their idea of development is ripping off the people to enrich their relatives and friends. “Concentrat[ion] of wealth in the hands of the few [that] leaves people too vulnerable to downturns” is not development.

Good governance is based on a set of objective measures. We subscribe to the 8 benchmark parameters of good governance set by the U.N.: Participation (men and women participate equally in political and civil society institutions); rule of law (an independent judiciary and impartial law enforcement agencies administer the justice system with strict adherence to the law of the land); transparency (public decisions are made and implemented according to established rules and regulations); responsiveness (public needs are met in a timely manner); consensus-building (the different interests of groups in society are harmonized in formulating policy); equity and inclusiveness (individuals and groups feel they have a stake in society and do not feel excluded); effectiveness and efficiency (scarce resources are used for maximum public benefit and service); accountability (leaders and institutions are accountable to the public and under law). In sum, good governance is to development as water is to a bountiful harvest. No water, no harvest!mpre..more...

Monday, July 13, 2009

No rest for the wicked! (Abbay Media)

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Bored?
There has been much talk recently about the possible “retirement” of the über-boss in Ethiopia. Reuters reported that “… Meles Zenawi wants to step down after 18 years running sub-Saharan Africa’s second most populous country.” Apparently, the dictator is “bored” with the racket he has been running for the past 18 years, or at least nagging questions about when he will be calling it quits. The dictator says he needs the permission of La Famiglia, “his ruling party before he can leave.” Reuters rhetorically asked: “So when might he go? And what will happen if he does?”

According to Reuters’ guessing game, the dictator could “get permission to leave” at the party congress in September, but that is unlikely “a year before Ethiopia has its next national election due in June 2010.” He could be ousted as a result of an opposition win, but that “would be a shock. The 2005 elections ended in violence when Meles claimed victory, the opposition shouted fraud and about 200 protestors were killed by police and soldiers.” He “wins in 2010 and the opposition cries foul… But despite Ethiopia’s close relations with the West, allegations of fraud or violence would be more difficult for the international community to take a second time and the country could see its aid slashed, plunging it deeper into poverty.” The dictator’s party “wins the election, there is no violence and Meles will probably resign within two years and be replaced by a party loyalist who will continue his domestic, economic and foreign policies.” Or the dictator “serves another 5-year term and runs again.”

The dictator is dismissive of these speculations. He says he wants to relinquish power, go into retirement and “have a long good rest.”

To Chuckle or to Guffaw?

We have listened to the amusing blather about staying or leaving office for the past several years. We are never sure whether to chuckle or guffaw every time we hear it recycled through the propaganda machine: “I will resign. I will leave office at the end of my term, but only if my party allows me to. I will stay in office as long as my party demands it of me. I will leave office, but I won’t tell you when. I will leave office when I leave office. Oh! Questions about when I will leave office bore me.” Indeed, the whole affair has become a recurrent farcical comic opera. International journalists ask the dictator when he plans to leave, and he feeds them the same crock of ambiguous, opaque and enigmatic answers in his usual doublespeak and pretentious phraseology. The journalists draw up their own fanciful speculations about what he will do, and the charade goes on and on. But the climax of this bizarre jabber is always the same: “May be I will go. May be I won’t. It’s for me to know, and for the rest of you to speculate about and play guessing games.”

The Solipsistic Logic of Dictators

The question is never whether any dictator will stay or go. We know from Gandhi’s axiom that all dictators eventually go: “There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall — think of it, ALWAYS.” The question about when a tyrant will fall is solipsistic (has special meaning only to the tyrant) and reveals much about the tyrant’s egoistic self-absorption and self-indulgence with power. The tyrant’s choice of the word “boring” to dismissively respond to questions about the timing of his departure is quite curious. Boredom and anxiety are states of mind on a psychological continuum. Could it be that giving a date certain for leaving office creates in the mind of the tyrant deep angst about unclinging from power and the potential consequences that could follow?

For the critical observer, the question of when the tyrant will leave office is a rhetorical tautology (that is, the question is incapable of producing a truthful answer that can not be verified or falsified). In other words, any response by the dictator to the question is unlikely to produce or convey truthful or useful information regardless of how many times it is asked. The response will always be hedged and interwoven in a fabric of deceit and absurd contingencies such as obtaining permission from the party, new leaders taking over, democracy being institutionalized and so on. Consider the following muddled and transparently evasive response:

My personal position is that I have had enough. I am arguing my case and the others are also arguing their case. I hope we will come up with some common understanding on the way forward that would not require me to resign from my party that I have fought for all my life. We are not talking about Meles only. We are talking about the old generation. The party needs to have new leadership that does not have the experience of the armed struggle…. It would be very important for everybody, particularly for the fledgling democratic institutions of this country…. The party is in the process of dialogue, and sooner or later it will make its decision, and that will be it… We have a large leadership pool, any one of whom could take the mantle… [The ethnic background of his replacement] is not a prime consideration. The party has gone beyond that…”

It is not clear from the foregoing statement why the dictator can not leave office immediately or on a date certain, or what argument he is presenting for or against leaving office. But the dictator’s uncompromising conclusory statement “I have had enough.” objectively indicates that he has reached a final and irreversible psychological state on his tenure in office. Simply stated, the dictator is completely disgusted and bored with what he is doing. He does not want to do the job anymore. But he quickly qualifies his expression of disgust by pleading to stay in power so that he “would not [be] require[d] to resign from my party that I have fought for all my life”. He feigns humility by claiming that his staying or leaving office is not about him at all. It is really about the old guards passing the baton to the new generation of leaders and so on. He hedges by implying that he can not leave office until the generational transfer of power is complete. The whole self-contradictory response reflects the solipsistic narcissism of a megalomaniacal dictator who seeks to tether not only the fate of his party to himself, but also the country’s destiny.

But the dictator’s definitive statement invites further query: He has “had enough” of what exactly? Massive violations of human rights? Kangaroo court justice? Systemic corruption? Lies? Perhaps, he has had enough of THE TRUTH!?

All of this farcical talk about leaving office does have a not-so-hidden strategic purpose. It is intended as a trial balloon to divert attention from the already-won 2010 election. The dictator hopes to fool, confuse and confound the opposition and international donors by titillating them with the possibility of his leaving office. We will predict that the dictator and his gang will be shoveling loads of propaganda between now and the already-won election of 2010 in a futile effort to distract public attention and convince donors that they are the only viable democratic alternative.

We should refrain from playing a guessing game of who will replace the dictator. We know for a fact that replacing Tweedledee with Tweedledum from another ethnic group (or replacing the old guard from the days of the armed struggle with a newer generation of their clones) will not amount to a hill of beans. The problems that have been festering in Ethiopia for the past two decades can not be cured by the departure of a bored, jaded, dispirited and weary dictator, or by his replacement clone. The problems are structural and viral in the system of dictatorial mis-governance over the past 18 years. Let’s be crystal clear: The dictator’s “retirement”, “resignation” or whatever nonsense he is talking about will not mean the beginning of the rule of law and it will not mean the end of massive human rights violations. His retirement will not end arbitrary arrests and imprisonments; the independent media will not function freely because he goes; the bantustans of ethnic federalism he created to divide and rule will not vanish immediately, and corruption will not stop. There is only one way to bring about fundamental change: Replace the one-man, one-party dictatorship with a genuine multiparty system.

No Rest for the Wicked!

There is not a single instance in the history of modern dictatorships where dictators voluntarily packed up and left power one fine morning. Dictators are to power as bloodsucking ticks are to a cow. Neither can survive without its life-giving force. There are many reasons why dictators will not leave power voluntarily. In Ethiopia, the reason is that the dictators will never outplay themselves at their own zero sum game. For them leaving power means losing everything. EVERYTHING! It means being held accountable for their monstrous crimes; losing their privileged positions in society; giving up their ill- gotten gains and the absolute power they wielded for nearly two decades.

Old dictators never fade away; they just cling to power like bloodsucking tics on a cow, until they inevitably fall. Sometimes they do run, but they can never hide. As for a “long good rest,” it is written in the Book of Isaiah (57:20, 21), that “the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked.”

—–
The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. He can be reached at almariam@gmail.com Source: Abbay Media

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Obama to Africa: End corruption (MSNBC)

President praises and scolds the continent of his ancestors, asserting forces of tyranny must yield if Africa is to achieve its promise. Video

Obama's speech in Accra, Ghana - July 11, 2009 (Full text-IBTimes)

Repression takes many forms, and too many nations are plagued by problems that condemn their people to poverty. No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves, or police can be bought off by drug traffickers. No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top, or the head of the Port Authority is corrupt. No person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery. That is not democracy, that is tyranny, and now is the time for it to end.

In the 21st century, capable, reliable and transparent institutions are the key to success – strong parliaments and honest police forces; independent judges and journalists; a vibrant private sector and civil society. Those are the things that give life to democracy, because that is what matters in peoples' lives. ...more..

Obama declares to Africa: End tyranny, corruption (AP)

About every time Obama cited his basic argument — that democracy is about more than holding elections, that Africa resist the drug trade and enforce a rule of law — members of Parliament raucously cheered him on. Then again, this audience was friendly. When Obama left, a choir sang a song to his campaign theme of "Yes we can," a line he used himself...more..

Friday, July 10, 2009

What Obama can do for us (Guardian)

Obama would also hear that there can be no compromise on free and fair elections. In too many countries recently – including America's close allies Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya, as well as Zimbabwe – elections have been seriously tainted, and have been followed by violence, the loss of liberties and the strengthening of state security organs. ...more...

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Ghana Fixation (Abbay Media)

By Yilma Bekele.

I was listening to National Public Radio and they were reporting about President Obama’s coming visit to Ghana. Of course I turned the volume up. I did not want to miss anything. My Ghanaian cousins were delirious. The reporter was interviewing a hotel owner that has named his establishment Hotel Obama. He was describing the big portraits of Mr. and Mrs. Obama in the corridor near the special suite named for them. They even spared a wall for VP Bidden. Let us just say the Ghanaians are gloating.

May be they do have every right to gloat. It is not every day that a US president drops by Africa. And when the US President is a fellow African it makes the visit extra special. Just because they were able to hold three consecutive elections without bloodshed and turmoil do they think they are god’s gift to Africa? The fact that the visit by President Obama will give them the opportunity to showcase democracy working on the African continent is no reason to be filled with pride.

They claim this is not just a visit by Mr. Obama but an investment that will pay dividends for a long time to come. It is true that investors are going to look at Ghana in a different light. We know that the self-esteem of the Ghanaian people is entering a new phase.

I don’t mean to rain on their parade but excuse me how about us Ethiopians? Hello we are still around. Thank you very much for asking but we are not just sitting idle either. We have a few accomplishments to crow about.

First thing first where is the President flying from to visit Ghana? That is right he was attending the G8 meeting in Italy (richest industrialized countries that include USA, UK, Japan, Germany, France, Italy and Canada) Officially invited were China, Brazil, India, Mexico and South Africa. It is a very important conference. Who do you think was claiming to represent Africa? That is right it was no other than the King sorry Prime Minter of Ethiopia. Don’t ask me what Ethiopia was doing there. We were invited by no other than our friend Senor Berlusconi ok? Let us just leave it at that.

This year G8 meeting was primarily concerning the global warming trend and reduction of green house gas emissions. I know for a fact the Ghanaians are not cooperating. From what I hear they are marching fast to industrialize their country. Their power consumption is one of the highest in Africa and they are in the process of developing their offshore oil deposits. Due to their ridiculous insistence on development and raising the standard of living of their people they were not invited to the meeting. That should serve them right.

On the other hand look at Ethiopia. A true citizen of this planet. A country that should be held in high regard by humanity. We are on the forefront of those that are concerned about the fate of planet earth. With no probing by anybody our country has decreased its carbon emission by more than eighty percent. We want the world to know that electricity is something you can do with out. We have voluntarily curtailed our generating capacity. Three days a week is more than adequate.

The few industries that were generating some pollution have been idle. The net reward is less commute for our people so they spend more time with their families huddled around kerosene lamps. We have also realized savings by abolishing the Ministry of Industry. As it was it was just a drain on our budget but the new policy of no electricity has made it obsolete.

Ethiopia has also been the pioneer in population control. We have elevated the science of food shortage crisis into a higher level. The current government is building on the important far-reaching work laid by the military regime. We are happy to say that food begging has been made into an art form. In accordance with our commitment to reduce world population Ethiopia has been sacrificing between ten to fifteen million citizens yearly. We are in the process of clearing more virgin forest to use it for subsistence level farming. We assure the world that the yield is so low that it will have no impact on our goal of creating further famine.

Our education policy is the envy of the continent. The whole planet is a net beneficiary. In the 1970 we dabbled in what is referred to as the ‘red’ and ‘white’ terror. The policy was able to eliminate most of the educated community. In the last twenty years we have perfected the system. Simply put we practice what is known as the ‘educate, train and exile’ principle. To attain that goal we have exported most of our university teachers and Doctors. The government is in the process of abandoning the field of education to be filled by unscrupulous individuals and organizations with profit as the main motive. We believe an ignorant population will help us meet our self-imposed goal of one hundred percent green house gas reduction. We will also realize gains by less expenditure on munitions since an ignorant population is a docile population.

We have a lot to crow about. You don’t see us gloating about all this, may be except the folks at Aiga. You know how they are. It don’t take much to excite them. I mean they put up a computer generated freeway system on top of a picture of Addis and get super delirious. Reality challenged is their other name. It would have been a lot better if Mr. Obama would have come to Addis and experienced total darkness. No light. No TV. No Internet. No cold soda. No hot water. If he is so lucky he can also enjoy the double whammy of no electricity and no water. Give us two more months and we can foresee the possibility of triple a hit. With the country’s foreign reserve dwindling there will be no petrol for civilian use. Need I add no Automobile. In your face Ghana!

Source: Abbay Media

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Human Rights Watch Objects To Ethiopia's Anti-terrorism Law (NASDAQ)

"The draft law's overly broad definition of terrorist acts could be used to prosecute peaceful political protesters and would in some circumstances impose lengthy prison terms and even the death penalty as a punishment for damaging property or disrupting public services," the statement warned....more..

New Ethiopia law may criminalise opposition - group (Reuters)

"As drafted, the law could provide a new and potent tool for suppressing political opposition and independent criticism of government policy," Human Rights Watch said in a statement. "It could turn political speech and peaceful protest into terrorist acts."...more..

Monday, June 29, 2009

Hero vs. Zero (Addisportal)

Jason McClure of Bloomberg News reported last week the capo dictator in Ethiopia had declared that “there is ‘zero’ chance that opposition leader Birtukan Mideksa will be released from prison in time to compete in the elections scheduled for next May. He also said Birtukan’s jailing is not a pretext to eliminate political opposition… The prime minister also defended local elections last year, in which opposition candidates won just three of 3.6 million seats, saying that ‘democracy is about process, it’s not about outcome…If the process is clean and you get zero, tough luck.’” (Italics added.)...more..

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Analysis of Ethiopia’s Draft Anti-Terrorism Proclamation (HRW)

The draft Anti-Terrorism Proclamation expands police powers in significant ways. Despite Ethiopian constitutional protections, the police and armed forces have long been implicated in arbitrary arrest, incommunicado detention, and torture and other mistreatment of persons in custody.19 Thus, the expansion of police powers without a serious effort to improve ..more..

Monday, June 15, 2009

Ethiopia plot suspects tortured, say relatives (Reuters)

"Some of them have been tortured and are injured," one relative, who asked not to be named, said outside court. "They have been interrogated for up to nineteen hours. One man with injuries to his penis had to be treated in hospital."...more...

Echo Chamber for Dictatorship? (Ethiomedia)

By Alemayehu G. Mariam | June 15, 2009


Fierce Urgency of Speaking Truth to Power

Are we becoming an echo chamber for the dictatorship in Ethiopia by repeating its never-ending political babble and lies?

In the high-decibel Diaspora critique of oppression, widespread human rights violations and political dysfunction in Ethiopia, I have observed in dismay some pro-democracy activists, civic leaders, bloggers and media elements parroting and, sometimes unwittingly, toeing the line ordained by the ruling dictatorship. Recently, I did a radio interview in which I was asked for my views on the “coming 2010 elections in Ethiopia,” the “new anti-terrorism law that is before the parliament,” and the “criminal charges and court case against those accused of plotting a coup”, among other things. On previous occasions, I have been asked to comment on “Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia”, the “civic society law,” the “new press law”, and the “revocation of pardon granted to Birtukan” and other topics.

I have often found questions on such topics mildly amusing, but also deeply troubling. By discussing and commenting on such topics without contextualizing and clarifying the assumptions that underlie them, one creates the risk of confusion and confirmation of facts which do not objectively exist. Here I am concerned about the loose and uncritical use of language in political dialogue and discourse. George Orwell, the famous English author whose penetrating understanding of totalitarianism, oppression and the need for clarity in language, argued that modern political prose and speech is intended to hide the truth rather than express it; and by using buzzwords and political platitudes one’s political consciousness and understanding of reality could be badly distorted. Orwell explained, “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible. Political language...is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind…”

Guarding Against “Doublethink”, “Doublespeak” and the Case for Unmasking Dictatorship

In our time, the means of communication available far exceed any limits that can be imposed upon them by the likes of Orwell’s all powerful Big Brother. The internet makes information available instantaneously to untold millions, which makes the task and duty of telling the truth urgent and all important because of the potential impact of propagating lies on the collective psyche of the citizens who inhabit the borderless cyberspace. Those of us who communicate by using internet technology or manage it must develop an acute sensibility about our indispensable role in public truth-speaking and unmasking official falsehoods. We must guard against both “doublethink” and “doublespeak.”

In his book Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell wrote:

"[Doublethink is] The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

The result of doublethink and doublespeak is that “war is peace, freedom is slavery ignorance is strength”; or alternatively, dictatorship is democracy; a kangaroo court is a real court of law, rigged and stolen elections are peoples’ choices; terrorizing the population is enrapturing them; and a cascade of lies is a torrent of truth.

What do I think of the “2010 elections”?

To answer this question one must deconstruct the “doublethink” that surrounds the word “elections” Are we talking about the “2010 elections” in the same sense as the “elections” of the apartheid regime in South Africa from 1948-1994? That illegal white minority regime defended its “democratic elections”. Or are we talking about elections a la Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe where opposition leaders were beaten and their followers harassed and jailed? Or elections held under the spiritual guidance of Ghaddafi’s Greenbook in which the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Command Council are ordained to rule forever while local congresses are elected periodically? Perhaps we could be talking about the “2010 elections” in the same sense as the 2002 Iraqi elections where Izzat Ibrahim, Vice-Chairman of Iraq's Revolutionary Command Council under the regime of Saddam Hussien, declared, “There were 11,445,638 eligible voters [in Iraq]- and every one of them voted for the president.” To talk meaningfully about elections, one must frame the question in terms of the preconditions that make possible the likelihood of free and fair elections such as the existence of competitive political parties, a functioning independent media and civil society institutions, free exercise of civil and political liberties by the people, the application of the rule of law and other similar things. An election that is not free and fair is not an election; it is a cruel fraud perpetrated on citizens. Thus, it is meaningless -- nonsense-- to talk about any kind of elections in Ethiopia. The most important opposition leader in Ethiopia, Birtukan Midesa, is jailed for life on trumped up charges, and opposition political parties suffocate under the oppressive thumbs of a brutal and maniacal dictatorship. Since the 2005 elections, we have witnessed widespread violations of human rights and unspeakable political violence. There are no independent newspapers and civic society institutions are outlawed. There are no independent institutions through which citizens can meaningfully participate in the political process or assert their rights against the state. Under these circumstances, to talk about a having elections in Ethiopia in 2010 is as meaningful as taking about a fish riding a bicycle!

What do I think of the “new anti-terrorism law”?

To answer this question, at least three logical proposition must be true: 1) There is such a thing as the rule of law in Ethiopia. 2) There is a legitimate law making body to enact laws. 3) The “anti-terrorism law” itself conforms to the “supreme law of the land” (“constitution”). Proposition one is false because there is no rule of law in Ethiopia or anything that approximates it. Because Ethiopia is ruled by a dictatorship, the arbitrary command of the dictator is “The Law”, which trumps any other law in the country. The dictator and his coterie can order the arrest, imprisonment, torture and killing of any person in the country with impunity. Following the elections of 2005, security force under the direct command and control of the leader of the dictatorship fired on unarmed protesters and killed 193 persons while wounding 763, with impunity. Proposition two is false because a rubber-stamp parliament is incapable of performing the legitimate function of legislation which requires genuine broad-based deliberation, consultation, negotiation and accommodation. Proposition three is false because the draft “anti-terrorism law” before the rubber-stamp parliament is a violation of the “constitution”. Ethiopia’s former president and parliamentarian Dr. Negasso Gidada described it as “unconstitutional” and a tool to terrorize opposition groups in the country:

The proposed bill contradicts the constitution by violating citizens’ rights to privacy… and it generally violates the rights of all peoples of Ethiopia… Such laws are manipulated to weaken political roles of opposition groups there by arresting and prosecuting them using the bill as a cover.

OFDM chairman and parliamentarian Bulcha Demeksa described the bill as a weapon designed by the ruling party not only to weaken and totally eliminate all political opponents. Ethiopian election is next year and if this law is endorsed it will definitely be very hard for opposition groups to run for election… Our campaign for election, political or other meetings will be restricted under this law as a single call from any one to the police, no matter if there is any evidence or not could be considered as terror-related activity and put us all in jail.

To talk about a “law” that is designed as a weapon of mass incarceration, persecution, oppression and suppression of the civilian population and political opposition as a legitimate law is as meaningful as talking about a fish riding a bicycle!

What do I think about “Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia”?

The war waged in Somalia by the dictatorship is a war of aggression and illegal under international law . But it is totally wrong to characterize it as “an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia.” It is an illegal war waged in the name of Ethiopia and its people. War is a matter of the ultimate seriousness undertaken only when a nation faces grave danger and only after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been exhausted or proven to be impractical, and the prospect of success assured. In war, military action is directed against combatants, not civilians. It is illegal to launch an attack on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.

In a televised speech, the leader of the dictatorship said, “Ethiopian defence forces were forced to enter into war to protect the sovereignty of the nation and to blunt repeated attacks by Islamic courts terrorists and anti-Ethiopian elements they are supporting. Our defence forces will leave as soon as they end their mission. We are not trying to set up a government for Somalia, nor do we have an intention to meddle in Somalia's internal affairs. We have only been forced by the circumstances.”

Of course, the only reason for the dictatorship’s intervention in Somalia was to “meddle in Somali’s internal affairs” as the dictator himself explained long after the invasion: “But on a more fundamental level it appears that this jihadist movement is hell-bent on controlling all of Somalia. That for them, the negotiations are a ploy used to facilitate their goal. They see Ethiopia as a stumbling block.” By invading, Ethiopia becomes a “stumbling block” to a negotiated settlement in Somalia – a classic Orwellian doublethink and doubletalk. The fact of the matter is that no substantial evidence exists to show “attacks by Islamic courts terrorists” against Ethiopia. The “mission” that began in December 2006 is still ongoing, supposedly after an official “withdrawal”. The number of Somali civilian deaths to date exceeds 20,000, and displaced persons exceeds one million. War crimes charges in Somalia have been documented by international human rights organizations.

Equally important, a legitimate war waged by a nation brings with it accountability because of the enormous sacrifices in lives and resources. The people in whose name the war is waged are entitled to know what happened and hold those who prosecuted the war accountable: Did the leaders lie to them in marching to war? Did the leaders engage in illegal activities? How many soldiers died in the war? How many were wounded? How many civilians? How many of the “enemy” killed and wounded? How many displaced? How much money was spent on the war? If such accounting can not be made, ipso facto, it was and is a private war waged in the name of Ethiopia and its people.

What do I think of Birtukan’s re-arrest and imprisonment by the “government for violation of the terms of her pardon”?

According to the so-called Justice Ministry, Birtukan was imprisoned to serve out a life term because she denied receiving a “government granted pardon… and she failed to annul her denial, though she was repeatedly requested to do so.” This claim is patently false as Birtukan has attested in her widely disseminated public statement Q’ale (“My Testimony”): “As one of the prisoners, I had indeed signed the document, a fact which I have never denied.” The truth of the matter is, to paraphrase the dictator himself, that the ruling dictators are “hell-bent on controlling all of Ethiopia” come hell or high water. Birtukan was re-imprisoned not because she “denied” a “pardon” but because she posed a singular threat to the dictatorship. Here is a young woman who comes from a modest background irrevocably committed to peaceful change and dialogue. She has never advocated violence or armed struggle. There is no reason whatsoever to jail her. But the law of unintended consequences has intervened on her behalf. Birtukan today is the brightest point of light under the blue Ethiopian skies capable of leading the people out of the darkness of repression into the sunlight of freedom. She is a symbol of heroic and peaceful resistance in the face of oppression, and an outstanding example of the “power of the powerless". Like Aung San Suu Kyi, Birtukan believes: “‘Human rights’ means every human being should be able to live as free and respected members of society. But we are not free in our own country. We are very much prisoners in our own country. Prisoners of [a regime] which decides whether we have the right to freedom or the right even to live. Many of our people have been arrested without trial or without a fair trial, and many of them have been condemned to long years in prison.” Like Aung San Suu Kyi, like Birtukan!

What do I think about “the charges brought against the persons accused of plotting a coup”?

By official accounts the accused army officers are “desperadoes” whose plan was to “assassinate high ranking government officials and destroying telecommunication services and electricity utilities and create conducive conditions for large scale chaos and havoc.” But even assuming the “charges” were valid, is there a reasonable way to defend against them? To answer this question in the affirmative is to accept the truth of the following assumptions: 1)Political crimes are charged by prosecutorial professionals who make decisions only on the evidence of wrongdoing before them, and without political pressure, manipulation or interference. 2) There is a judicial system that functions independently of the dictatorship. 3) There are independent professional judges who perform their duties not only without political interference but also in active resistance to it and with unshakeable fidelity to the principle of the rule of law.

None of the three propositions is true with the judicial and prosecutorial systems in Ethiopia. As Human Rights Watch concluded in its 2007 report, “In high-profile cases, courts show little independence or concern for defendants' procedural rights… The judiciary often acts only after unreasonably long delays, sometimes because of the courts' workloads, more often because of excessive judicial deference to bad faith prosecution requests for time to search for evidence of a crime.” Dictatorships and judicial independence are like oil and vinegar. They do not mix. As vinegar is mostly water, dictatorship is mostly about the rule of one man. As oils are "hydrophobic" (chemically repel water), truly independent courts are "tyranno-phobic". They repel arbitrary and dictatorial rule. Thus, to talk about justice, due process and the rights of the accused in a dictatorship is as meaningful as talking about a fish riding a bicycle.

Calling a Spade a Spade

Ethiopians can never be reconciled to a dictatorship that maintains itself by brute force alone. In a country where there are no expressive freedoms but a flourishing culture of corruption and impunity, where the integrity of intellectuals is squeezed out by intimidation, threats and coercion and where universities are turned into temples of darkness, it is important for those in the Diaspora to take every opportunity to unmask the crimes, wrongdoings and brutality of the dictatorship. There is nothing more they wish than to have us become their unwitting cheerleaders talking about their bogus elections, laws and trials. But we should always guard against their ceaseless and slick efforts to make us echo chambers for their rackets. Our job is to call a spade a spade and tell it like it is. Analyze, scrutinize, criticize and publicize the crimes of dictatorship!

-----
The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at almariam@gmail.com

Source: ETHIOMEDIA

Monday, June 8, 2009

Ethiopia charges 32 with plot to topple government (Reuters)

Security forces killed about 200 protesters after elections in 2005 when the opposition disputed the government's victory.

Berhanu was elected mayor of the capital Addis Ababa in that ballot, but was arrested and accused of orchestrating the street protests. He was pardoned and released in 2007...more...

WORLD CLOCK - Move the cursor over the map to know the local time

Total Pageviews

CHUO Radio Archive