Diary of the Eritreans independence (where are those proud (or empty)Eritreans now? Can they talk about Ethiopia the same way? well I don't think so this what they use to say)

Dear
After reading your response to my article I can conclude only that you
are one of those who are moaning because of Eritrean Independence.
Regardless who you are, that is whether you are an Eritrean or an Ethiopian
masquerading as an Eritrean the epoch verdict of Eritrea's 30 years struggle
is bound to inflict a permanent sadness on many people. Read the Eritrean
National Anthem. I have no sympathy whatsoever toward these people. They got
what they deserved.

As to your assertion that midget Meles has deprived Eritrea from exporting
its goods to the Ethiopian market...is laughable. By the time Meles arrived
in the picture, there was no manufacturing Industry to speak of. All the
manufacturing industry was uprooted and transported to Ethiopia to the point
that Eritrea was reduced to exporting its talented people to Addis to fill
the labor demand of Ethiopia. Your incredible assertion the Eritrea can
benefit by being under Ethiopia, the second poorest country in the world,
( World Bank report...Dec,2001) contradicts not only logic but also common
sense.Whatever problems you see in Eritrea are inevitable problems that
naturally encounters an infant and developing country such as Eritrea,
however, I believe and am very confident that this difficulty are better
solved by Eritreans as they are directly affected by it. These problems by
themselves are not and will never be an indicators for nostalgic savoring of
Ethiopia's annexation.

Eritrea will endure and prosper despite people like you. Just follow the
drama as it unfolds.

Daniel Haile


> Dawit!
> I read your short note to respond to my fellow
> brother, I was just amazed when you telling us,
> Eritrea independence was a nightmare for Adam and
> Ethiopians, and what you should ask yourself, is that
> What Adam lost because Eritrea got independence? Or
> what Ethiopians lost because Eritrea got independence
> frankly speaking nothing! Or whether we admit it or
> not we are the one we lost, and will continue losing.
> Is that Ethiopians night mare, my advise to you is
> that don't listen to some hard liner Ethiopian about
> Assab port and etc. the fact is because they lost
> Assab they didn't lose anything they use port Sudan
> Djibouti and Somalia and Kenya.
>
> The fact is Melese became our nightmare when he grants
> us our independence struggle with out resistance. He
> continued to deny us access for Ethiopian market,
> closed the border no trade between those brotherly
> countries; there is no communication with Eritrea in
> Air or ground, when he deported us from Ethiopia.
> so don't fool around it is a reality, so be smart,
> Adam he questioning our independence because of the
> dictator controlling the country right now, and expect
> more blood shed in Eritrea there is Afar issue Kunams
> issues and Muslims issues and etc. what are you going
> to do? So Hamasin or what ever your background we need
> to resolve all this issues, if we don't our nightmare
> is continue to chase us.
>
Dear
Thank you for your long letter. Over 90% of Eritreans
prefer to remain Eritreans, a UN supervised referendum
proves that. Despite the dismal situation that the
failed state of Somalia finds itself in, Somalis feel
that anything is better than Ethiopia. Just as many of
your fellow Ethiopians would also chose independence
over unity with Ethiopia if they were given the same
chance as Eritrea.

Unity, democracy and development are great things, but
it only works if you have civilized neighbours. All of
Ethiopias maritime neighbours agree that Ethiopia is a
landlocked, barbaric nation on the verge of total
anarchy, frankly a pest to live next door to.

In fact the most important regional cooperation we
(the neighbours of Ethiopia) would participate in, is
the containment of Ethiopia's internal problems...
within Ethiopia. Your cultural, political and
economical problems as well as your landlockedness are
the greatest sources of instablity to the Horn of
Africa region. To the broader international community,
you symbolize chronic poverty, continuous economical
and political disaster. Let alone a confederacy based
in Addis Ababa, the best thing for the world would be
if Ethiopia ceased to exist, just like Yugoslavia and
the former USSR (your first and foremost ally and arms
supplier).

Best Regards
Zeru Isaac

Dear
You try to lecture an Eritrean about the principles of
self-determination. Although I realize that "dignity"
is very hard for you Ethiopians to understand, try not
to sink so low that you pretend to be something you
are not...You're not fooling anybody. Even if a hyena
wears sheeps skin, it still smells like hyena.

The Eritrean people, be they Afar, Kunama or Tigrigna,
are the only people in the Horn of Africa who have
practiced the right of self-determination. If you
refuse to accept what they chose (to divorce from
Ethiopia), that is your problem. Sooner or later you
will learn to live with the bitter truth. The sooner
the better. In the mean time the UN and the rest of
the REAL world have testified and accepted the voice
of ALL Eritreans so your self dellusional rantings
really don't matter.

You said:

"...whether you admitted or not Ethiopia is a great
country with a great resource..."

What is Ethiopia's great resource? 60 million donkeys?
Prophet Mohamed lived over 1300 years ago. Whatever he
said about Ethiopia's future then, we are still
waiting to see it happen. Ethiopians have waited over
3000 uncolonised, proud years of "freedom" to see
Ethiopias "great protential" develope. 3000 years from
now, dumb fandiyas like yourself will still be talking
about Ethiopia's great protential. Meanwhile we will
only see one year after the other with famine and war
replacing eachother or coming together at once...to
the hopeless land of Ethiopia. Like I said it would be
better if Ethiopia did not exist.

Best Regards
Zeru Isaac


Dear
Every day, we hear and read about political and
economic misfortunes facing Ethiopia under the brutal
ethnic minority dictator and his comrades.
Increasingly, soldiers and students are voting with
their feet by running away to whichever country is
willing to take them; even an elderly woman is
reported to have walked all the way from Mekele, to
the Eritrean border. Crime is apparently on the rise,
poverty is spreading and deepening, and the government
is loudly and frequently appealing to the
international community for food donations to feed the
majority of the population. Some Ethiopians are even
asking whether the idea of war with Eritrea (for
"sovereignity" as they call it) was wise after all,
since they lost Badme and got no ports...Deported
Ethiopians are desperately trying to return back to
work as shoeshiners in Eritrea.

The British Broadcasting Corporation had reported
last week about coffee prices (Ethiopias #1 export)
being desperately low and famine threatening the
country again due to drought. Ethiopia is again asking
to be kept alive by international life support system
which it has been parasiting on for as long Ethiopians
can count their years of "independence".

Well for the emergency aid to reach starving
Ethiopians quickly they need accessible ports and the
one and only Djibouti will not do the trick alone. So
the government in Addis Ababa, despite its pretentious
bravado in the eyes of Ethiopians in the Diaspora and
the world community, has been desperately begging on
all fours behind the scenes to normalize its
relationships with Eritrea since it has no confidence
of surviving as a landlocked nation at the mercy of
surrounding Arab League member states:)

It has tried to use religious leaders, academicians in
American Universities, foreign embassies in Addis
Ababa, international non-governmental organization,
and anybody else to mediate with Eritrea.

The latest attempt at mediation would be attempted
during a conference on confederations of states in
the Horn of Africa. The University of South Florida
has organized a conference entitled "Prospects for a
Horn of Africa Confederation" to be held this coming
November 14 and 15. It is not clear yet as to who
might be behind the forthcoming conference...

There was another conference held at Stanford
University in April 1991 entitled "the Horn of Africa:
Prospects for Sustainable Peace, Regional
Cooperation, and Development", where the key panelists
were
Ethiopia's Ambassador to the United Nations, Eritrea's
Ambassador to the United States, and the man in charge
of African Affairs at the United States Department of
State in 1991 named Herman Cohen (a known enemy of
Eritrea and a temporary friend of the TPLF regime).

The conference was organised by powerfull friends of
Ethiopia who wanted to make sure that the security and
stability of their greatest ally in the region:
Ethiopia (or the remaining landlocked part of it),
would be preserved. Perhaps the same people organizing
the up and coming conference.


Confederation between Ethiopia and Djibouti makes a
lot of sense to landlocked Ethiopians, but not to
Djiboutians:) Of course Ethiopians have wet dreams
about their long lost province Eritrea as well as
Somalia and it's long seashore, even if they hate
admitting that they want something they lost
repeatedly at a great cost:) But unity with Djibouti
(and her port) seems more realistic to them (even
though it isn't):-) The relationship between Djibouti
and Ethiopia can be characterized into one
sentence: Djibouti sets the price: Ethiopia pays...
Tiny Djibouti has Ethiopia by the neck and they have
France to help them do it. While Ethiopia secretly
dreams of incorporating Djibouti and maybe the rest of
Somalia as well, Djibouti dreams of an independent
greater Somalia, secretly wishing Dire Dawa was part
of it:)

This in a nutshell why some Ethiopians are
apprehensive about a confederation with Somalia, their
fear of a unified Somalia, wanting to break loose
from Ethiopia:)


Although a re-unification with Eritrea is every
Ethiopians openly secret wet dream, many dellusional
ones will express false fears that Eritreans will:
"plunder Ethiopian resources" as if Ethiopia has
resources to plunder:) If they did, they would have
been colonised like the rest of Africa. Several more
Ethiopians say even dumber things like: "Eritrea
foolishly invaded Ethiopia". No nation in the world
would invest even a dime in invading Ethiopia. Because
they would end up with even less! Apart from having
the British fight off the Italians for them, and
Cubans fight back Somalias reconquest for them, the
only wars Ethiopia has engaged in, have ALL been wars
in which the dirt-poor country wanted to steal from
its neighbours or keep itself from falling apart:)

This is a real gem in the humor department:

"Ethiopia was their diamond mine"

Absolutely hilarious! This must come from the fountain
of all Eritrean jokes: a Tigrayan:) There is a saying
in Asmara: if you were to buy an Ethiopian for what he
is truly worth and sell him for what he THINKS he is
worth, you would make the biggest profit recorded in
human history:))

Creating a confederation with Ethiopia would be like
re-creating Yugoslavia. Ethiopia is a bad word to most
Ethiopians...who don't want to associate with that
name. They are fighting to go the same way as Eritrea,
towards freedom. Even Ethiopias government was once a
rebel movement called Tigray Peoples Lberation
Front:)) We are only proud to have served and continue
to serve as insipiration even though we regret that
some have come to prefer parasitism over independence
(TPLF).

Fabrication of Ethiopian history continues unabated

By Professor Seyoum Gelaye | July 23, 2010
Ethiopia.org’s July 18, 2010 interview with Mr. Hassan Abdullahi, the foreign relations officer of the Ogaden Liberation Front’s (ONLF), is a good start. We trust that this dialogue will be perused further because Mr. Hassan was allowed to echo unchallenged the fictitious histories of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF), Eritrean Liberation Front (ELF), and Tigray Liberation Front (TPLF) as a justification for Ogaden’s non-Ethiopianess. He did so by repeatedly citing article 39 (1) in TPLF’s constitution, which states, “Every Nation, Nationality and people in Ethiopia has an unconditional right to self-determination, including the right to secession.”

The fallacies of TPLF’s constitution and Mr. Hassan’s subsequent declaration have not been adequately challenged by the interviewer. Ogaden has never been an independent African Nation, such as: Uganda, Kenya, Sudan etc., for a nation signifies a self-governing and sovereign territory, inhabited by people sharing similar culture, values, and mores with a strong economic interrelationship, and recognized as such by other independent nations throughout the world. Ogaden or the other nine so called “nations” and “nationalities” in the present Ethiopia are TPLF’s creation emanating from Joseph Stalin’s Communist Constitution.
The “nation” and “nationality” designation, unfortunately, are direct copies from the constitution of the then Soviet Union. Joseph Stalin forcefully annexed officially independent nations in Europe, Asia and formed the United Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). The Radical Leftists of Ethiopia and other dubious individuals like: Melese Zenawi, Isayas Afewerk etc have copied verbatim the defunct Marxism and Leninism ideology of the then USSR and have attempted to impose these alien USSR experiences on the nation of present Ethiopia. Ethiopia is a home to many linguistic groups. During the Country’s 5000 years of recorded history, its citizens have interspersed sometimes voluntarily, and at other times due to internal conflicts or because of trade resulting in intermarriage, and settlement in various parts of Ethiopia. As a result, one time Oromo speakers are now speaking Tigrigna, Amargna, Guragigna, Sidamegna, Wolayetagna and vice versa.

Also, according to Mr. Hassan, Ogaden has been an independent country prior to Menelik II’s (Reign 1889-1913) “invasion and annexation”. He further stated that ONLF is not only fighting to fully enshrine TPLF’s constitution but also to enforce United Nation’s post colonial charter designed to give rights to only the nations who were occupied by European colonial powers. This UN Charter does not have relevance to Ethiopia.

Eritrea was granted its independence by Melese Zenawi using the same assertions and presently OLF, ONLF, TPLF are pursing the same bankrupt agenda.

Mr. Hassan has gotten away with the distortion that Ogaden was a colony of Ethiopia. However, the fact is that Ogaden and- for that matter- the whole of Somalia was one time part and parcel of Ethiopia’s territory.

There are no nations and nationalities in Ethiopia. Instead, in Ethiopia’s context there are Negedes or Gossas and not Nations and nationalities.

Immam Ahmed Ebrahim, who was multi-ethnic Ethiopian (Somali/Adal/Belew), invaded Ethiopia using the present Somali (Including Ogaden) as his spring board and ruled for fifteen years all the territories extending up to Lake Tana. After Immam Ahmed’s defeat, a large number of his surviving fighters settled in all parts of the Country, adopting the local languages, cultures, and since then most have become Amargna, Tigregna, Guragigna, Wolaitigna, etc. speakers.

Immam Ahmed Ebrahim’s war of destruction took place during and after the era of Atse Libna Dengel of Ethiopia (1508-1540); this was 373 to 381 years prior to the coronation of Menelik II as an Emperor of Ethiopia.

Mr. Hassan also emphatically declared that the Amhara King, Menelik II of Shoa, invaded all independent “nations” in the south, including Ogaden, some hundred years ago and forcefully annexed these “independent nations” with the highland territories of the then “Amhara Kinggom.”

Menelik II- akin to most Ethiopians then and now- is multiethnic. His mother (Woizero Ejigayehu Lemma Adyamo) was a concierge in King Sahle Sillasse Palace in Ankober. Menelik II was, therefore, the son of Prince Haile-Melekot (son of King Sahle Sillasse) and Woizero Ejigayehu Lemma Adyamo. After the birth of Menelik, Woizero Ejigayehu Lemma Adyamo had to move to Angolel near Debreberhane, where the baby Menelik spent his 11 Gobena Dacho, the son of Tulema Oromo leader Dacho.

Contrary to Ato Hassan’s assertion, Ethipia’s history did not start and end with Menelik II. Menelik II succeeded Yohannis IV (1831-1889). Yohannis’ Ethiopia was threatened and invaded by various colonizing powers from Europe, Middle East, and Africa. Emperor Yohannes was always, therefore, seeking diplomatic and/or military support from Christian Nations all over Europe. The following is an excerpt of a letter Yohannis wrote in 1881 to Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany:

“I will be satisfied if Your Majesty will mediate, so long as it is done on the basis of what my ancestors, the Emperors of Ethiopia, held prior to the fall of the regime due to the advent of Gragn. After Gragn, the Empire was regained during Sertse Dengel, Iyaasu I, and Fasil, and later was lost by a certain Gugsa… To the east and south [...east] the boundary is the sea. To the west north, where there Haran Dawa, Gash, Massawa, Bedew Shoho, and Tiltal. Further, the regions inhabited by Galla, Shankilla, and Adal is all mine and yet recently in the middle of Shoa [!], a place known by the name of Harar was taken [from us]. All the same I listed these places so that my country’s boundaries be known, Page 321.”

It is time for all Ethiopians to unite and struggle so we may fight back folks like Mr. Hassan Abdullahi, Melese Zenawi, Isayas Afewerk and other indigenous ethnic warlords, threatening the survival of this glorious nation, Ethiopia.

References:

Atse Mnelik. By: Pawlos GnoGno, Yekatit 1984.

Immam Ahmed Ebrahim (Ahmed Giragne). By: Teshome Berhanu Kemal, Miazia 2000;

Kasa and Kasa: Papers on the Lives, times and Images of Tewodros II Yohannes IV (1855-188). Edited by: Taddese Beyene, Richard Pankhrust, and Shiferaw Bekele, Institute of Ethiopian Studies, Addis Ababa University, June 1990;

Radicalism and Cultural Dislocation in Ethiopia 1960-1974. By: Messay Kebede, Rochester Studies in African History and the Diaspora, December 2008;

YeEtiopia Regim Yehizbena YeMengist TaRik, Andegna Metsehaf. By: Lapiso Ge. Dilebo, Nigde Matemia Bete, Addis Ababa, 1982; and

YeEtiopia Tarik, Be Asra Sdestegnaw Kifle Zemen. By: Yeilm Dressa, Hidar 20, 1959.

Seyoum Gelaye, Professor
E-mail: Sboggale@yahoo.com
July 22, 2010

The threat of a water war

NATIONS FIGHT over water, especially when access is curtailed or threatened, and there are the ingredients for a battle over the 4,100-mile long Nile River. Egypt and Sudan have counted on the abundance of the Nile’s life-giving flow. Now upstream nations want to keep more of the abundance for themselves. Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Congo, Burundi, and Rwanda are asserting their rights to more of the river’s relentless flow. Washington needs to intervene to forestall hostilities between the countries.


Britain conquered Uganda and Kenya in the 19th century in part to protect the precious Nile waters from being diverted away from their critical possession of Egypt, the Suez Canal, and the Red Sea route to India. Without the yearly sustaining floods of the Nile, agriculture and settlement in the valley of the river from Luxor to Cairo and Alexandria would have been impossible.

When Britain in the 1920s controlled all of the waters of the Nile, bar those sluicing down the Blue Nile from Ethiopia, it signed a pact that gave Egypt and Sudan rights to nearly 75 percent of its annual flow. This 1929 agreement was confirmed in 1959, after Egypt and the Sudan had broken from Britain but while the East African countries were still colonies.

A new 2010 Cooperative Framework Agreement, now signed by most of the key upstream abutters, would give all riparian states (including the Congo, where a stream that flows into Lake Tanganyika is the acknowledged Nile source) equal access to the resources of the river. That would give preference to large scale upstream energy and industrial, as well as long-time agricultural and irrigation uses.

Egypt and Sudan have refused to sign the new agreement, despite years of discussions and many heated meetings. Given climate change, the drying up of water sources everywhere in Africa and the world, Egypt, which is guaranteed 56 billion of the annual flow of 84 billion cubic meters of Nile water each year, hardly wants to lose even a drop of its allocation. Nor does Sudan, guaranteed 15 billion cubic meters.

About 300 million people depend on the waters of the Nile. The upstream countries, with still growing populations, believe that their socio-economic development has long been unfairly constrained by Egypt’s colonial-era lock on the river. Ethiopia and Uganda have not been able to support agricultural schemes. Nor have they been able fully to harness the river or its tributaries for industry and power. Both have suffered from major hydroelectric shortages in recent years.

Egypt has declared the continued surge of the Nile waters a “red line’’ that affects its “national security.’’ There is discussion in Egypt about the use of air power to threaten upstream offenders, especially if Ethiopia becomes too demanding. In theory, Ethiopia could divert much of the Blue Nile to its own uses. Or Ethiopia and others could charge Egypt for water that has largely escaped modern pricing.

Egypt is sufficiently disturbed by Ethiopia’s potentially aggressive water designs that it has recently made friends with Eritrea, Ethiopia’s arch enemy. In 1998, Ethiopia and Eritrea went to war over slices of insignificant mountainous territory. Although the shooting ended in 2000, a peace settlement handed down by the World Court in 2006 has still not been observed by both sides. If Egypt attacks Ethiopia, Eritrea might join in. Egyptian generals claim that Israel is on the other side, helping the upstream nations by encouraging their thirst for water and by financing the construction of four hydroelectric projects in Ethiopia.

All these issues provide conditions for a war over water. Washington, Egypt’s largest donor, has significant leverage to de-escalate tensions and mediate between the haves and have-nots. After all, Washington supports both Egypt and Ethiopia lavishly and militarily. It needs to demand that all sides stand down.

Robert I. Rotberg directs Harvard Kennedy School’s Program on Intrastate Conflict and is president of the World Peace Foundation.

© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.

The threat of a water war

NATIONS FIGHT over water, especially when access is curtailed or threatened, and there are the ingredients for a battle over the 4,100-mile long Nile River. Egypt and Sudan have counted on the abundance of the Nile’s life-giving flow. Now upstream nations want to keep more of the abundance for themselves. Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Congo, Burundi, and Rwanda are asserting their rights to more of the river’s relentless flow. Washington needs to intervene to forestall hostilities between the countries.


Britain conquered Uganda and Kenya in the 19th century in part to protect the precious Nile waters from being diverted away from their critical possession of Egypt, the Suez Canal, and the Red Sea route to India. Without the yearly sustaining floods of the Nile, agriculture and settlement in the valley of the river from Luxor to Cairo and Alexandria would have been impossible.

When Britain in the 1920s controlled all of the waters of the Nile, bar those sluicing down the Blue Nile from Ethiopia, it signed a pact that gave Egypt and Sudan rights to nearly 75 percent of its annual flow. This 1929 agreement was confirmed in 1959, after Egypt and the Sudan had broken from Britain but while the East African countries were still colonies.

A new 2010 Cooperative Framework Agreement, now signed by most of the key upstream abutters, would give all riparian states (including the Congo, where a stream that flows into Lake Tanganyika is the acknowledged Nile source) equal access to the resources of the river. That would give preference to large scale upstream energy and industrial, as well as long-time agricultural and irrigation uses.

Egypt and Sudan have refused to sign the new agreement, despite years of discussions and many heated meetings. Given climate change, the drying up of water sources everywhere in Africa and the world, Egypt, which is guaranteed 56 billion of the annual flow of 84 billion cubic meters of Nile water each year, hardly wants to lose even a drop of its allocation. Nor does Sudan, guaranteed 15 billion cubic meters.

About 300 million people depend on the waters of the Nile. The upstream countries, with still growing populations, believe that their socio-economic development has long been unfairly constrained by Egypt’s colonial-era lock on the river. Ethiopia and Uganda have not been able to support agricultural schemes. Nor have they been able fully to harness the river or its tributaries for industry and power. Both have suffered from major hydroelectric shortages in recent years.

Egypt has declared the continued surge of the Nile waters a “red line’’ that affects its “national security.’’ There is discussion in Egypt about the use of air power to threaten upstream offenders, especially if Ethiopia becomes too demanding. In theory, Ethiopia could divert much of the Blue Nile to its own uses. Or Ethiopia and others could charge Egypt for water that has largely escaped modern pricing.

Egypt is sufficiently disturbed by Ethiopia’s potentially aggressive water designs that it has recently made friends with Eritrea, Ethiopia’s arch enemy. In 1998, Ethiopia and Eritrea went to war over slices of insignificant mountainous territory. Although the shooting ended in 2000, a peace settlement handed down by the World Court in 2006 has still not been observed by both sides. If Egypt attacks Ethiopia, Eritrea might join in. Egyptian generals claim that Israel is on the other side, helping the upstream nations by encouraging their thirst for water and by financing the construction of four hydroelectric projects in Ethiopia.

All these issues provide conditions for a war over water. Washington, Egypt’s largest donor, has significant leverage to de-escalate tensions and mediate between the haves and have-nots. After all, Washington supports both Egypt and Ethiopia lavishly and militarily. It needs to demand that all sides stand down.

Robert I. Rotberg directs Harvard Kennedy School’s Program on Intrastate Conflict and is president of the World Peace Foundation.

© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.