The Great Ethiopian Run to Freedom

Alemayehu G. Mariam
professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino

In his epic autobiography, the great Nelson Mandela used the metaphor of the "long walk" to describe his decades-old struggle against apartheid and minority rule in South Africa. In Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela described, among other things, his labor of love trying to steer his nation away from racial and fratricidal war by using dialogue and negotiation to achieve national reconciliation and build a multiracial, multiparty system. His long, hard walk to freedom across the veldt, the cities and townships eventually led South Africans to trade in their fears and tears for hope and faith in a free South Africa. In the process, Mandela became a formidable moral force and an exemplary teacher in the fight for human rights and racial equality throughout the world.

In the annual "Great Ethiopian Run" that was held last week in Addis Abeba, one can see a fitting metaphor for a long and hard run for freedom in Ethiopia. The organizers and sponsors may have seen a clever money making gimmick in the event, but for the Ethiopian runners it was their one and only chance a year to collectively breathe the fresh air of freedom. It was their annual festival and gathering of peaceful mass protest for freedom and justice, and against tyranny and dictatorship in Ethiopia. On the day of the Great Run, Ethiopians who could afford to pay at least 50 birr got to say out loud what has been burdening their hearts, distressing their minds, agonizing their souls and searing every fiber in their bodies for the past year. The assembled crowd of 35,000 runners did not mind paying. Each one of them knew the fresh air of freedom, however fleeting and momentary, is priceless.

In the "Great Ethiopian Run", Ethiopians kept on running down the streets and up the boulevards of the capital. They ran for their own freedom, and the freedom of their countrymen and women. They ran for the true champion of Ethiopian freedom, Birtukan Midekssa. In a deafening crescendo of defiance and daring, they cried out: "Free Birtukan! Birtukan Mandela! Birtukan, the heroine!" Birtukan probably heard them chained in the bowels of Kality prison just on the outskirts of town. They called for the release of all political prisoners. The river of humanity that flash-flooded the city streets on the 10-kilometer stretch denounced the perpetrators of injustice. Thumping their way past the "Federal High Court", they proclaimed, "In this temple of justice, there is no justice." Rolling past the "Ministry of Justice", they charged, "There is no justice in the ministry of justice." Rumbling past the "Ministry of Defense", they scoffed: "There are no men of courage in this building to defend the people." The Great Ethiopian Run proved to be fundamentally an act of mass civil disobedience thinly disguised as a running event; and to the great credit and dignity of the runners, there was not a single incident of violence or breach of the peace.

The multitudes were not just running for freedom, they were also running away from tyranny and dictatorship, despair and hopelessness, and from their daily life of indignity and humiliation under a ruthless dictatorship. Sadly, they were all running in circles in the prison nation Ethiopia has become. But as we have learned from President Mandela, to achieve freedom one must take a long hard walk. For Ethiopians, it will require much more-- a long hard run; and there is much Ethiopians runners can learn from one South African walker. Mandela said, "You may succeed in delaying, but never in preventing the transition of South Africa to a democracy." The dictators in Ethiopia may temporarily thwart genuine multiparty democracy, but they can never, never prevent its ultimate triumph. Mandela defiantly told the masters of Apartheid: "Any man that tries to rob me of my dignity will lose." The dictators in Ethiopia may temporarily succeed in robbing us of our dignity and human rights, but as long as we remain truthful, principled, fair and irrevocably committed to the cause of freedom and democracy, we shall prevail; and they shall find their rightful place in the dustbin of history.

On his long walk to freedom, Mandela discovered the defining truth about tyrants and dictators: "A man who takes away another man's freedom is a prisoner of hatred." The wardens of Prison Nation Ethiopia are prisoners of hatred that has churned and boiled in their hearts, minds and souls for their entire lives. They are consumed by it and driven to genocidal brutality. They deserve our pity for they can not help themselves. But we can help them, by showing them the truth about their evil ways and the path out of the misery of hatred to the ecstasy of brotherly and sisterly love. Mandela taught us that "The victory of democracy in South Africa is the common achievement of all humanity." If we keep on running for freedom, we can make the triumph of democracy in Ethiopia the common achievement of all of Africa. As Ghana has transitioned from a military dictatorship to a genuine multiparty democracy and South Africa succeeded in establishing a tolerant multiracial society, so can Ethiopia forge a real multiparty system, free of the poison of ethnic politics, and one day to become the envy of Africa.

The 10-kilometer run is just a down payment for a long and difficult Marathon for Freedom. That is why each one of us must develop the defining quality of the marathon runner: Endurance. As she pounds the pavement for miles, the distance runner knows the route to the finish line is long, grueling and hard. But she is prepared to give it her best and endure for the long haul. The marathon runner does not say, "It is too long, too difficult... I could never do it." He maintains a winner's state of mind and never gives into self-pity and defeatism. He does not use his energy in bursts of speed, but in sustained steps and calculated spurts. The marathon runner has a plan to win and paces his every step along the way to achieve his goal. The distance runner does not allow herself to be overwhelmed by the miles she has yet to cover. She is committed and focused on the next milestone, the next hill and the next bend in the road until she reaches the finish line. Some of us would much prefer the race to be a quick sprint to the 10-kilometer finish line. We are discouraged and dispirited by the very thought of a long distance run. We are tired and ready to give up before taking the first step. But the Marathon to Freedom does not have a finish line. As Mandela said, "After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb."

We can't sit idly by and expect freedom to run to us. As Dr. Martin Luther King said, "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent." It could also be said that a man can't ride your back if you keep on running and chase after your freedom.

Ethiopia's great distance runners -- Abebe Bikila, Mamo Wolde, Mirus Yifter, Haile Gebreselassie, Kenenisa Bekele, Elfnesh Alemu, Fatuma Roba, Derartu Tulu and Koreni Jelila and Tilahun Regassa and many others -- gave their very best for the glory of Ethiopia. We are so proud of them! It is now our turn to run and win the Great Ethiopian Run for Freedom, Democracy and Human Rights. Let us not be fooled by their 10-kilometer run. Our course will be much more challenging; we will have to climb the great hills and descend the treacherous canyons and gorges and crisscross the low deserts and the highlands. And those who can't or choose not to run with us should ready themselves to take a long walk...

The dominant Executive in Ethiopia

Wednesday 25 November 2009 03:16.


By Magn Nyang

November 24, 2009 — In the Western democracies, such as in the United States separation of powers involves the division of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions of the policy-making process among separate institutions. These three functions are assigned to the Congress, the president, and the Supreme Court. The Congress makes policy, the president implements policy, and the Court judges the fairness of the application of the general policy. The assumption is that governance functions better if individuals who administer or implement policy are separated from those who make policy.

In Ethiopia, the three functions are performed by one institution, the Ethiopian People’s Democratic Front (EPRDF) with Meles Zenawi as its executive. This phenomenon constitutes to what is called executive dominance.

Let me consider some concrete manifestations of the executive-dominant system in Ethiopia. I regard an independent legislature or parliament as the surest check on the power of the executive. In Ethiopia, the legislature provides virtually no real check on the executive (Meles Zenawi) since the members of the assembly do not represent any independent base of power. The Ethiopian less freely elected legislature is so dominated by a powerful EPRDF (Meles Zenawi) that it has few real powers and is reduced to ratifying decisions made by the executive (Meles Zenawi). The prime minister enjoys such power because his party, the EPRDF, hold 430 of the parliament’s 547 seats. From my latest finding, the combine opposition parties hold only 117 seats. Thus, in no instance can I say that Ethiopia’s legislative assembly is an effective counterweight to the executive branch.

Another indicator of executive dominance in Ethiopia is the degree to which Meles Zenawi manipulates constitution by engaging in electoral irregularities to remain in power beyond the end of his legally prescribed term of office. After first telling the whole country that he is stepping aside for the upcoming 2010 election, he pushed through constitutional amendments to only come back and announce that his party had nominated him again to stay in power until 2014. In Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi jails political opponents and holds them for years without trial, closes down newspapers, and suppresses public dissent. He censors the press and jails his opponents for simple acts of dissidence. In all, at least 100,000 dissidents are now sitting in jails and in prisons across Ethiopia.

Executive dominance is also reflected in the relatively high degree of administrative centralization that exists in Ethiopia. Even though, Ethiopia has adopted the federal form of government, which supposes certain political autonomy for provincial or state-level administrative units, in most instances, the autonomy of the lower administrative units is more apparent than real. Meles Zenawi dominates the legislative and judicial branches at the national level, and because of that domination he also dominates local, provincial, and municipal governments. For example, in the last three elections in my own state of Gambella, Meles Zenawi acted forcefully to curtail state power and to remove from office state officials who opposed his policies.

In Ethiopia, provincial administration receives their power and resources from the central government in Addis Ababa. The minister of interior in Addis Ababa, with blessing from Meles Zenawi, appoints, removes, transfers, or even jails the provincial governors (in the case of Okello Nygello of Gambella). These subordinate officials are, consequently, responsible to the interior minister in all they do. All major decisions are referred to the minister. The provincial governors are powerful only in a derivative sense; that is, they have no resources themselves but derive power from carrying out central government decrees.

Under the pretext of federalism, the constitution gives provincial governments authority; however, serious lacks of resources prevent them from taking advantage of this constitutional delegation of power. Intentionally, to keep the central government powerful, all the needed resources are made to reside solidly in Addis Ababa, the home-base of the central government. There is no real provincial self- governance in Ethiopia because it is hampered by a lack of locally obtained and locally expended founds. Therefore, the states in Ethiopia live and breathe at the mercy of the central government in Addis Ababa.

By the virtue of his party’s number of seats in Ethiopian’s parliament, Meles Zenawi became the absolute decider of policies. With 430 parliament’s seats in his disposal, he can push through any policy he sees fit for his party and his stooges without worrying about any challenge from the opposition. As it is, he dominates the three branches of Ethiopian’s government: the executive, legislative, and judicial. He is more than a dictator. He is an absolute monarch.

In a closed meeting which I was part of, I posed a question to Dr. Merera Gudina to tell me how many seats his Oromo National Congress (ONC) got in Ethiopian’s parliament. His answer was “44 seats.” Imagine 44 seats challenging 430 seats! Also, as it stands, Medrek, the combination of opposition parties led by the same Dr. above, have “96 seats.” Can anyone in his/her right mind imagines what kind of challenge Medrek will pose to Meles’ 430 seats no matter how many more seats it gains in May 2010 election? Unless, of course, it gains 300 seats. That way, it will have 396 seats to allow it to formidably challenge Meles Zenawi’s absolute power. If Medrek is not going to gain 300 seats in upcoming election, I suggest that they stay away from the election. Participating in upcoming election will not only be a waste of time and resources, it will also give legitimacy to so called democracy in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia is a one party country. Let the world and the donors know that by staying away from the upcoming 2010 election. We do not need to give Meles Zenawi one more reason to keep deceiving the donors by using his so called democratic election in Ethiopia. We all know that there will not be free election or democracy in Ethiopia as long as there is an Executive Dominance in Ethiopia; that is as long as the same institution (EPRDF) and its chairperson (Meles Zenawi) control the three branches of Ethiopian’s government.

Magn Nyang is a son of Gambella and can be reached at magnnyang@yahoo.com

Source

Ethiopia -Witness for the future

By Alemayehu G. Mariam | November 16, 2009

In his book Night, Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor and the man the Nobel Committee called the “messenger to mankind” when it awarded him the peace prize in 1986, wrote:

For the survivor who chooses to testify, it is clear: his duty is to bear witness for the dead and the living. He has no right to deprive future generations of a past that belongs to our collective memory. To forget would be not only dangerous but offensive; to forget the dead would be akin to killing them a second time. The witness has forced himself to testify. For the youth of today, for the children who will be born tomorrow. He does not want his past to become their future.”

On November 9-10, 1938, the Nazis destroyed thousands of Jewish homes, synagogues and businesses throughout Germany, killing nearly 100 and arresting and deporting some 30,000 to concentration camps. That was Krystallnacht (Night of Broken Glass), the forerunner to the Holocaust. On March 21, 1960, apartheid security forces in the township of Sharpeville, South Africa, fired 705 bullets in two minutes to disperse a crowd of protesting Africans. When the shooting spree stopped, 69 black Africans lay dead, shot in the back; and 186 suffered severe gunshot wounds.

Following the May, 2005 Ethiopian parliamentary elections, paramilitary forces under the direct command and control of regime leader Meles Zenawi massacred 193 innocent men, women and children and wounded 763 persons engaged in ordinary civil protest. Nearly all of the victims shot and killed died from injuries to their heads or upper torso, and there was evidence that sharpshooters were used in the indiscriminate and wanton attack on the protesters. On November 3, 2005, during an alleged disturbance at the infamous Kality prison near Addis Abeba, guards sprayed more than 1500 bullets into inmate cells in 15 minutes killing 17 and severely wounding 53. These facts were meticulously documented by a 10-member Inquiry Commission established by Zenawi himself after examining 16,990 documents, receiving testimony from 1,300 witnesses and undertaking months of investigation in the field.

Under constant threat by the regime and afraid to make these facts public in Ethiopia, the Commission’s chairman Judge Frehiwot Samuel, vice chair Woldemichael Meshesha, and member attorney Teshome Mitiku fled the country with the evidence. They made their findings public on November 16, 2006, before a committee of the U.S. Congress. Their report completely exonerated the protesters and pinned the blame for the massacres entirely on the regime and its security forces. No protesters possessed, used or attempted to use firearms, explosives or any other objects that could be used as a weapon. No protester set or attempted to set fire to public or private property, robbed or attempted to rob a bank.1

The victims of the post-election massacres were not faceless and nameless images in the crowd. They were individuals with identities. Among the victims were Tensae Zegeye, age 14; Habtamu Tola, age 16; Binyam Degefa, age 18; Behailu Tesfaye, age 20; Kasim Ali Rashid, age 21. Teodros Giday Hailu, age 23. Adissu Belachew, age 25; Milion Kebede Robi, age 32; Desta Umma Birru, age 37; Tiruwork G. Tsadik, age 41; Elfnesh Tekle, age 45. Abebeth Huletu, age 50; Regassa Feyessa, age 55; Teshome Addis Kidane, age 65; Victim No. 21762, age 75, female, and Victim No. 21760, male, age unknown and many dozens more.2

Ethiopians have a special duty to bear witness for these innocent victims who died as eye witnesses to the theft of an election and the mugging of democracy in Ethiopia in 2005. They went into the streets to peacefully defend their right to vote and have their votes count, and defend the first democratic election in Ethiopia’s 3,000-year history. We must force ourselves to testify for them not just as victims of monstrous crimes but also as true patriots. For they acted out of a sense of duty, honor, love of country and deep concern for the future of Ethiopia. They died so that 80 million Ethiopians could live free.

Ethiopia’s dictators would have the world believe that the victims of their carnage were nobodies who did not matter. It is true they were all ordinary people of the humblest origins. But we value them not for their wealth and social status but for their patriotism and sacrifices in the cause of freedom, democracy and human rights.

Elie Weisel is absolutely right. We have a duty to bear witness against those who commit crimes against humanity and for the innocent victims of tyranny and dictatorship. We have to “force” ourselves to testify not only for the dead but also “for the youth of today, for the children who will be born tomorrow.” We do not want the massacres of 2005 to become the future of Ethiopia.

When we bear witness for Ethiopia’s innocent victims, we bear witness for all victims of tyranny and dictatorships. For the cause of the innocent transcends race, ethnicity, religion, language, country or continent. It even transcends time and space because the innocent represent humanity’s infinite capacity for virtue as dictators and tyrants represent humanity’s dregs. When we bear witness for them, we also testify in our own behalf against that evil lurking secretly and deep in our souls and hearts. But by not forcing ourselves to testify against evil, we become an inseparable part of it. As Dr. Martin Luther King said, “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.” That is also the essential message of Elie Weisel.

Let us bear witness now for Zenawi’s victims. Let us tell the world that they cry out for justice from the grave. Let us testify that they died on the bloody battlefield of dictatorship with nothing in their hands, but peace and love in their hearts, justice in their minds and passion for the cause of freedom and democracy in their spirits and bodies. Let us remember and honor them, not in sorrow, but in gratitude and eternal indebtedness. Let us make sure that their sacrifices will tell generations of Ethiopians to come stories of personal bravery and courage and an abiding and unflinching faith in democracy and the rule of law. And when we despair over what appears to be the victory of evil over good, let us be inspired by Gandhi’s words: “There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall -- think of it, ALWAYS.” Let us remind ourselves every day that “All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men and women do nothing.”

Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. He writes a regular blog on The Huffington Post, and his commentaries appear regularly on Pambazuka News and New American Media.

J'Accuse

By Alemayehu G. Mariam
November 9, 2009

“No alternative in the opposition,” they whispered anonymously. What a disgusting phrase to use in justifying support for a ruthless dictatorship? That is apparently the scuttlebutt on Embassy Row in Addis Abeba. Reuters’ Barry Malone reported last week, “Most Western governments want Meles to continue because there is no alternative in the opposition. As long as the elections are semi-democratic, they'll probably stay quiet, keep giving aid, hope for liberalisation of the economy and leave full democracy for later.” Is this the ultimate proof of the triumph of Western moral relativism, hypocrisy and skullduggery in Ethiopia and Africa? Is this the new 21st Century Western paradigm of moral capitulation and appeasement of evil? Is the West going to a moral hellhole in a hand basket?

We now have a clear answer to a question that had puzzled us for the past two decades: Why do Western governments and their multilateral lending institutions support Zenawi’s dictatorship with billions of dollars in loans and foreign aid? Answer: Because “there is no alternative in the opposition!” Why do they turn a blind eye to the gross violations of human rights in Ethiopia? Turn a deaf ear to the bootless cries of the thousands of Ethiopian political prisoners rotting in Zenawi’s jail? Pretend to be mute on Birtukan Midekssa’s unjust imprisonment? Prop up a regime that ruthlessly decimates its opposition, crushes the free press, chokes civil society organizations, squanders and defalcates foreign aid and loans and lords imperiously over a famine-ravaged country? Why do “most Western governments want Meles to continue?” Answer: “Because there is no alternative in the opposition!”

It is agonizing to finally come face to face with the banality of depraved Western diplomatic indifference in Addis Abeba. It is heartbreaking to learn that Western governments have earnestly resolved to humanize and normalize a brutal regime while preaching to Africans in forked tongue that their dictators are on the wrong side of morality and history. They shed crocodile tears for the victims of African dictators. They comfort the helpless and frightened African masses with sweet words of hope and grand promises of democratic renaissance. Now we have come to find out that the hypocrites are secretly in bed with the very dictators they condemn in public! It must be true that “politics makes for strange bedfellows.”

The “no alternative in the opposition” Western diplomatic mantra and mindset could have devastating consequences on Ethiopia and other African countries suffering under the stranglehold of dictatorial rule. It means the seeds of the rule of law will die on the barren soil of African dictatorships; that totalitarianism and police states are morally justified and compelled in Africa whenever Western governments conclude there are “no alternatives in the opposition”; that state-sponsored violence and repression are necessary moral imperatives for the nurturance of an “emerging democracy”; and that dictatorship is necessary to save Ethiopians, and Africans in general, from themselves. Simply stated, the triumph of dictatorship in Africa is a necessary precondition for the rapture of democracy in Africa. Such has become the pitiful logic of moral decay and duplicity of Western governments in Africa today!

Of course, the whole notion of “no alternative in the opposition” is absurd and patently false in its premise and conclusion. There is definitely a viable alternative it the opposition in Ethiopia, but Zenawi ruthlessly eliminates and roots out any opposition before it poses a real challenge to him. Birtukan Midekksa and her Unity, Democracy and Justice party represent a viable opposition; but a year ago Zenawi jailed Birtukan for life on the ridiculous charge of denying a pardon. Medrek, an alliance of eight parties, is a viable opposition, but Zenawi refuses to jointly develop a consensus-based election code of conduct with it. He wants to shove down the opposition’s throat his own self-serving election code of conduct while grandstanding for Western governments that he is willing, ready and able to have free and fair elections.

Zenawi has completely paralyzed the real opposition by intimidation and brutal repression. Just last week, “documents were given to Reuters by four opposition parties listing [450] prisoners’ names, the dates on which they were arrested and the jails in which they were being held.” Gizachew Shiferaw, deputy leader of the Unity for Democracy and Justice party told Reuters, “These jailings stop our members running in elections. It has become a strategy for the ruling party. Ethiopia is a one-party state.” The All Ethiopia Unity Organization has recorded seven politically-motivated murders of its members over the last 12 months. Last month, Ethiopia’s former president, Dr. Negasso Gidada, presented a mound of anecdotal evidence documenting the complete absence of a “level playing field” for the 2010 “election”. If there is “no alternative in the opposition,” as the Western governments claim, it is because a real opposition can not survive in a totalitarian police state! In the Catch-22 diplomatic netherworld of Addis Abeba, the strategy is obvious: “It is better to deal with a devil you know than an angel you do not know.” In Ethiopia’s case, one must grudgingly give the “devil his due.” For the past two decades, Western governments have been confounded, hoodwinked, bambozzled, bluffed, duped, manipulated, seduced, beguiled, flim-flammed and sandbagged by a master of deception into believing that there is “no alternative in the opposition”.

But the canard of “no alternative in the opposition” could mask something more sinisterly selfish. Western governments apparently have their eyes transfixed on getting a lion’s share of the “lucrative telecommunications and banking industries in a nation of more than 80 million people” and “exporting commodities and exploring Ethiopia for probable oil and gas deposits.” They are scared that “if the opposition takes power, the future would be uncertain and investments delayed as foreign governments and lenders jostle for influence.” Hidden under the thick layers of hypocrisy is a deliberate decoupling of dictatorship from democracy and good governance and a coupling of calculated long-term economic interests with the strengthening of a stable dictatorship to advance a scheme of globalized economic exploitation in Ethiopia. In the old days, they called such things neo-colonialism. It is not clear what they call them these days, but there is no doubt that Ethiopian democracy and the Ethiopian people are held hostage in the grand cut-throat global competition for oil, gas and exports.

Western governments and multilateral lending institutions know better. As President Obama said, “Africa needs strong institutions, not strong men.” Or in the common idiom, “It is not about the man. It is about the plan.” They should be engaged in institution-building, not armor-plating the clenched fists of African dictators. They should use their financial leverage to help build strong multiparty institutions, facilitate clean fraud-free elections, establish structures of accountability, institutionalize the rule of law, fortify the protection of human rights and strengthening civil society institutions in Africa. That’s how viable alternatives in the opposition are created, nurtured and sustained in Ethiopia and the rest of Africa.

It is a truism to say that full democratization will take time in Africa. There will be many uncertainties and obstacles to Africa’s democratic development. Having an “alternative in the opposition” is not a panacea to Ethiopia’s decades-old problems. Any “alternative” to dictatorship in Ethiopia would have to deal with the legacy of human rights violations, economic mismanagement, corruption and the social chaos spawned by the dictatorship’s catastrophic “ethnic federalism” program. There will be many false starts and trials and errors on the road to democracy under an “alternative opposition.”

Western governments should be careful not to cerate and perpetuate an insidious myth that Africa has no alternative to dictatorship. It is psychologically devastating to tell 80 million Ethiopians that Western governments will support Zenawi’s dictatorship because they believe there are “no alternatives in the opposition.” Such a callous and cold-blooded attitude conveys a defeatist message to Ethiopians. It sends a signal that Ethiopians should abandon all hope of freedom and democracy because they are doomed and destined to eternal dictatorship. This attitude inherently de-legitimizes, disregards and ridicules the efforts of emerging opposition groups, and effectively tranquilizes them into stunned silence, depriving them of the confidence needed to stand up for democracy, freedom and human rights. Ironfisted dictators will no doubt be emboldened by this windfall of appeasement. Ultimately, this attitude of do-nothing-now and turn-a-blind eye to dictatorship will undermine the long-term policy interests of Western governments in Ethiopia and the rest of Africa by incapacitating them from using the vast financial leverage they have to aid Africa transition from dictatorship to democracy and pursue their geopolitical interests.

None of the foregoing is intended to suggest the Ethiopian opposition is blameless. Those genuinely in the opposition must accept responsibility for their inability to come together and articulate a vision for the country. They deserve blame for squandering valuable opportunities to build organizational alliances, develop alternative policies and train young leaders. Of course, there have been Judases in the opposition who have been willing to sacrifice the cause of democracy on the altar of dictatorship and kneel down and kiss the blood-drenched hands of Herod for thirty pieces of silver. But that is no excuse for not closing ranks against dictatorship now, and presenting a united front in support of democracy, freedom and human rights.

The catchphrases bandied around in the Western diplomatic cocktail circuits in Addis Abeba today probably go something like this: “Democracy is a dead end road in Ethiopia. Dictatorship is the beacon of light for Ethiopia’s future. Forget about the famine, human rights violations, corruption and the rest of it. Ethiopia is doomed because she has ‘no alternatives in the opposition!’”

Excellencies, it is said you will support Zenawi’s dictatorship “as long as the [2010] elections are semi-democratic”. To believe a dictatorship can be semi-democratic is to believe a woman can be a little bit pregnant. Do not deceive yourselves, and do not write us off just yet. In the long run, Ethiopians, and Africans in general, will receive the blessings of democracy by evolution or revolution! For now, we want you to know that Ethiopians are double victims of crime. They are victimized by dictators who have perpetrated upon them crimes against humanity with impunity. They are also victims of the crime of depraved indifference to their suffering by those who continue to coddle, aid and abet the criminals who have committed upon them crimes against humanity. Let it be known that we make no distinctions between the two types of criminals. Excellencies, that is why every patriotic and human rights-loving Ethiopian shall face you in righteous indignation, and charge: “J’Accuse!”

Famine and the Noisome Beast in Ethiopia

By Alemayehu G. Mariam
Huffigton Post
It is hard to talk about Ethiopia these days in non-apocalyptic terms. Millions of Ethiopians are facing their old enemy again for the third time in nearly forty years. The Black Horseman of famine is stalking that ancient land. A year ago, Meles Zenawi's regime denied there was any famine. Only "minor problems" of spot shortages of food which will "be soon brought under control," it said dismissively. The regime boldly predicted a 7-10 percent increase in the annual harvest over 2007. Simon Mechale, head of the country's Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Agency, proudly declared: "Ethiopia will soon fully ensure its food security." For several years, the regime has been touting its Productive Safety Net Programme would result in ending the "cycle of dependence on food aid" by bridging production deficits and protecting household and community assets. Famine and chronic food shortages were officially ostracized from Ethiopia.

But the famine juggernaut could not be stopped. Recently, Mitiku Kassa, Ethiopia's state minister for agriculture and rural development, was panhandling international donors to give $121 million in food aid to feed some 5 million people. The United Nations World Food Programme says a much larger emergency fund of $285 million in international food aid is needed to avert mass starvation just in the next six months.

Zenawi's regime has been downplaying and double-talking the famine situation. It is too embarrassed to admit the astronomical number of people facing starvation in a country which, by the regime's own accounts, is bursting at the seams from runaway economic development. USAID's Famine Early Warning Systems Network in its September, 2009 Situation Report indicated that there are "an additional 7.5 million" individuals to those reported by the Ethiopian government who are "chronically food insecure." Regardless of the euphemisms, code words and rhetorical flourish used to describe the situation by politically correct international agencies, between 15-18 per cent of the Ethiopian population is at risk of full blown famine, according to estimates of various international famine relief organizations.

Many Ethiopians view the recurrent famines as an expression of divine wrath. Successive governments have evaded responsibility for their failure to prevent or mitigate famine conditions. In 1973/4, Ethiopia's "hidden famine," exposed to the world by the BBC's Jonathan Dimbleby, resulted in the deaths of an estimated 200,000 Ethiopians. Emperor Haile Selassie said he was unaware of the magnitude of the famine. He lost his throne and life in the ensuing military coup. In 1984/5, the Soviet-supported socialist military junta known as the "Derg" denied the existence of a famine which consumed over 1 million Ethiopians. Today, the regime of Meles Zenawi shamelessly presides over a third apocalyptic famine in 40 years while boasting to the world an "11 per cent economic growth over the past six years."

Every Ethiopian government over the past four decades has blamed famine on "acts of God." The current regime, like its predecessors, blames "poor and erratic rains," "drought conditions," "deforestation and soil erosion," "overgrazing," and other "natural factors" for famine and chronic food shortages in Ethiopia. Zenawi's regime even has the brazen audacity to blame "Western indifference" and "apathy" in not providing timely food aid for the suffering of starving Ethiopians.

Penny Lawrence, Oxfam's international director, after her recent visit to Ethiopia observed: "Drought does not need to mean hunger and destitution. If communities have irrigation for crops, grain stores, and wells to harvest rains then they can survive despite what the elements throw at them." Martin Plaut, BBC World Service News Africa editor explains that the "current [famine] crisis is in part the result of policies designed to keep farmers on the land, which belongs to the state and cannot be sold." So the obvious questions for Zenawi's regime are: Why is all land owned by a government that has rejected socialism and is fully committed to a free market economy? Why has the regime not been able to build an adequate system of irrigation for crops, grain storages and wells to harvest rains?

Indian economics Nobel laureate Amartya Sen argued that the best way to avert famines is by institutionalizing democracy and strengthening human rights: "No famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy" because democratic governments "have to win elections and face public criticism, and have strong incentive to undertake measures to avert famines and other catastrophes." Ethiopia's famine today is a famine of food scarcity as much as it is a famine of democracy and good governance. Ethiopians are starved for human rights, thirst for the rule of law, ache for accountability of those in power and yearn to breathe free from the chokehold of dictatorship. They are dying at the hands of corrupt, foreign-aid-profiteering and ethnically-polarizing dictators who cling to the Ethiopian body politics like blood-sucking ticks on a milk cow.

Sen's democratic network of "famine early warning systems" do not exist in Ethiopia. Opposition parties are crushed ruthlessly, and their leaders harassed, persecuted and jailed. Birtukan Midekssa, the first woman political party leader in Ethiopia's recorded history, today languishes in prison doing a life term on the ridiculous charge that she had denied receiving a government pardon in July 2007 following her kangaroo court conviction and two year incarceration. The free press is silenced and journalists imprisoned for exposing official corruption and offering alternative viewpoints. They do not dare report on the famine. NGOs, including famine relief organizations, are severely hobbled in their work by a law that "criminalises the human rights activities of both foreign and domestic non-governmental organizations," according to Amnesty International. All along, Zenawi has been hoodwinking international donors and lenders into supporting his "emerging democracy." After two decades, we do not even see the ghost of democracy on Ethiopia's parched landscape. All we see is the specter of an entrenched dictatorship that has clung to power like barnacles to a sunken ship, or more appropriately, the sunken Ethiopia ship of state.

Images of the human wreckage of Ethiopia's rampaging famine will soon begin to make dramatic appearances on television in Western living rooms. The Ethiopian government will be out in full force panhandling the international community for food aid. Compassion fatigued donors may or may not come to the rescue. Ethiopians, squeezed between the Black Horseman and the Noisome Beast, will once again cry out to the heavens in pain and humiliation as they await for handouts from a charitable world. Isn't that a low, down-dirty shame for a proud people to bear?