EPRDF’s ethnic policy imperils the goal of AU

 

by Robele Ababya, 31 March 2013

Unity of Ethiopia is paramount

The EPRDF regime is killing, arbitrarily arresting and encouraging ethnic cleansing; therefore an all-inclusive struggle in self-defense is morally and legally justified. The Amharas and Oromos are the main victims of such heinous crimes and must rely on their combined overwhelming majority and join other progressive democratic forces in order to dislodge the TPLF minority warlords from power and save Ethiopia from disintegration. In this regard, the call for justice, freedom and democracy is irresistible!


I would like to elaborate my point starting with the following Abraham Lincoln’s quote in August 22, 1862. I do so in order to stress the supreme importance of Ethiopian unity and territorial integrity under the umbrella of the African as the theme of this piece.

Quote My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause Unquote.

It is my understanding that the Great Statesman Abraham Lincoln gave top priority to saving the Union from the southern slave owner separatist States because their success in the American Civil War would have been worse for the slaves. The defeat of the separatists heralded the illegality of slavery although it took a long time and hard struggle for African Americans to earn their right to vote. There is still racial discrimination in the USA but a lot of progress has been made in securing their rights.

In view of the above I strongly believe that the unity of Ethiopia is paramount and must be secured at all costs so that all grievances including violation of human rights can be resolved.


The 9^th EPRDF Congress


The gathering at Bar Dar was dull and pathetic in that no substantive change was made to the reckless policy of the late Tyrant Meles Zenawi. His design of replacing top cadres by lower cadres did not materialize. The Prime Minister made the ludicrous blame on the opposition forces for not making an iota of contribution to the developmental state. Is he right in making this shameful remark given that his party holds 99.6% of parliamentary seats by dint of stolen votes and heavily rigged election process by the ruling corrupt thugs?

One surprising drama was Azeb Mesfin’s non-procedural intervention to disclose how poor her late husband was supporting his family at a monthly salary of US$ 250 – according to her the only lowest paid leader on payroll in the world, which fact the US government knows it too. I mention this to highlight the kind of ignorant gang of thugs that have been ruling Ethiopia since 1991 with generous support of the Western donors.

 The mother of corruption Azeb has underestimated the intelligence of the international community and displayed her arrogant contempt to the Ethiopian people. She took the floor to speak on a matter outside the agenda in her desperate attempt to forestall accountability for her huge wealth, luxurious life-style and spending spree. She now stands as a credible witness of her own corrupt practices and abuse of power. Some say she must be mentally deranged to make such a self-damaging statement at the fake Congress of the illegitimate regime.

 The popular idiom “??????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????” (One that stole from offerings to Saint George lives talking about it unprovoked until death) that I heard on ESAT Radio is an apt description of Azeb’s worried state of mind scared of accountability for plundering state property. She stands tall among the illiterate thugs that have been ruling Ethiopia for more than 21 years.


Zenawi’s destructive policy


In general, the policy of the late tyrant Zenawi was disastrous and his betrayal of vital national interests qualifies him as a traitor unprecedented in the history of Ethiopia. His divisive ethnic policy inherited by the EPRDF will spread like bush fire across the African continent making it a fertile ground for neocolonialists, including communist China, to be locked in competition for its abundant resources to the detriment of its population. Ethnic cleansing has been going on for the last 21 years; the regime is hell-bent on pitting Muslims against Christians. The ethnic-based federal system of government, which is the brainchild of Zenawi, is proving to be a time bomb ready to explode unless checked in time.

Tribalism is a cancer that must not be allowed to spread to the rest of African states. This process of contagious malaise of tribal feud leading to disintegration into unsustainable mini-states cannot be checked without the African states being involved to face the menace in unison.
At the time of this writing the disgusting news from Ethiopia is that ethnic cleansing is in full swing, the Amharas being the chief victim; the Oromos are victims of arbitrary arrest in a country whose citizens in larger prison because freedom of expression is completely denied by the brutal regime in tight control of all pillars of democracy.

 These two major ethnic groups were chief targets of Fascist Italy to exclude them out of political participation in Ethiopia; the TPLFites are doing the same thing. The reason for this exclusion policy is that the duo comprises two-thirds of the Ethiopian population and own overwhelmingly vast natural resources including fertile farm lands in a country acknowledged as one of the first areas in the world to develop agriculture in this order: Ethiopia, China, and Asia in about 3000 BC. Egypt borrowed it from Ethiopia.

Before the famine caused by drought in 1973 Ethiopian farmers took agriculture to a new height and the country earned the accolade of “bread-basket” of the Middle East. But this has been no longer the case for over the last 21 years due to gross mismanagement of fertile lands such as leasing them to foreigners at cheap price by evicting locals, which could produce better and export the surplus. In a nutshell, the TPLF surrogates of Graziani threw away to the gutter the spirit of self-reliance thus impoverishing the people of Ethiopia morally and materially.

What the repressive EPRDF regime is now doing is contrary to what the truly Pan Africanist advocate, President Yoweri Kagutta Museveni of Uganda, said 20 years or so ago. I heard His Excellency say that the present artificial boundaries between states were marked by colonial masters and that the ordinary people are ignoring those boundaries and cross over to the territories of neighboring states to do business and return to their homes.

 He added that it is the political leaders that complicate issues and retard the process of realizing the Unity of Africa. Indeed Uganda is a haven for refugees because of the foresight of the President and political maturity of Ugandans.

Ethiopians today are not able to move freely in their own country to do business; they have to stay within their tribal land prescribed by the TPLF/EPRDF regime like in the days of Apartheid in South Africa under the White rulers. This horrific plight of citizens is no longer bearable; the struggle for justice, freedom and democracy must continue until the convincing victory of 2005 by the opposition is reclaimed.


Appeal to the AU


In my open letter to Her Excellency the Chairperson of the African Union (AU) dated 07 February 2013 posted on Zehabesha website I wrote: -
“The young generation has lost trust in the AU Leadership for all the reasons stated in the foregoing paragraphs. Arbitrary arrests and extrajudicial killings of peaceful protesters, state-monopoly of all pillars of democracy, rampant corruption, high unemployment and wastage of money on security forces as in the case of Ethiopia as one of the worst examples have dashed the hope of young generation to live in a prosperous and democratic continent endowed with enormous natural resources.

 The scramble by external powers for these resources is too obvious to state. The pervasive influence of neo-colonialism is being felt, but leaders have not prepared our citizens to counter it. With all due respect, the fault lies with the AU Leadership for failing to promote democratic culture and expedite the advent of a strong collaborative union in the best interest of all the citizens of the AU member States.“ I implored Her Excellency to provide daring leadership to rectify the grave shortcomings of the AU.”

The EPRDF’s ethnic policy imperils the strategic goal of AU! This policy will ignite catastrophe unless the AU acts quickly to engage the EPRDF regime and persuade it to: reverse its ruinous and contagious ethnic policy; respect its constitution of non-interference with religious affairs; curtail the controversial land leasing to external investors; stop dislocation of citizens against their will; stop unfair criticism of home-based opposition political parties; revisit the Renaissance Dam project for the sake of obviating regional instability and environmental degradation. Above all the regime must respect its own constitution and lift all restrictions on freedom of expression.

I request that the Chairperson will extol and promote the Kenyan election and constitution as a model for Africa to emulate in the interest of standardization as much as possible as we move towards unity. The constitution defuses tribal pollution by requiring that a presidential candidate must garner 25% of the votes in at least 50% of the constituencies in order to be declared the winner.

Conclusion

So far the adage that “every nation gets the government it deserves” has proved to be true in Ethiopia. This is due to lack of unity among the elites in the opposition camp exacerbated by mushrooming political parties with tribal names. What a shame!

Kenya has emerged as a role model for Africa in view of its enviable successful election, proving that democracy works in Africa. Ancient Ethiopia lost the golden chance in the 2005 election because the TPLF regime stole votes in broad daylight in full view of the Western powers that continue to support the brutal regime. It is another shame that Stalinist thugs are keeping prominent political prisoners behind bars despite repeated calls by the international community for their unconditional release.

Finally I wish to appeal to the political parties, movements and civic organizations in the Diaspora to set their differences aside and act in unison to expedite the burial of the dying EPRDF regime by bolstering through giving all round support to home-based opposition forces including Ethiopian Federal Democratic Unity Forum (MEDREK), All Ethiopia Unity Party (AEUP), Blue Party, et al.

 

Allen West Full CPAC Speech 2013

 

 

 

March 14, 2013 - Former Congressman Allen West on Thursday addressed the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in what TheBlaze's Mike Opelka described as a "fiery" speech that had "everyone on their feet." "I'll give it to you straight," West began. "Last November we did take one on the jaw, but this movement and this fight is not determined by the punches that we take. We're defined by how quickly we pull ourselves off the mat and our perseverance."

"There're no shortage of people telling us what conservatism cannot accomplish, what we can't do, how we cannot connect, how we must change our values to fit the times."

"Well, ladies and gentlemen, I want to tell you: That that truly is a bunch of malarkey," he added, seemingly channeling the spirit of VP debate Joe Biden.

Prisoners of conscience in Ethiopia: By Birtukan Mideksa

Al Jazeera

Birtukan Mideksa is a fellow at Harvard University’s WEB Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research and a former prisoner of conscience in Ethiopia.


 
　
Birtukan Mideksa

Although Ethiopia has its first new prime minister in 17 years – so far, the government has failed to right a long history of wrongs. With prisoners of conscience still languishing in its prisons, Ethiopia must receive the clear message – especially from allies like the United States – that continued human rights violations will not be tolerated.

My journey to become a political prisoner in Ethiopia began as a federal judge fighting to uphold the rule of law. Despite institutional challenges and even death threats, I hoped to use constitutional principles to ensure respect for basic rights.

But, having witnessed firsthand the government disregard for fundamental constitutional rules, I joined the opposition and became the first woman to hold a high-level position in an Ethiopian political party.

Our party – the Coalition for Unity and Democracy – contested the 2005 elections with a multiethnic platform based on economic liberalism and respect for individual rights. As momentum gathered, many hoped change had finally arrived in Ethiopia.

　

Eskinder Nega and his wife – Serkalem Fasil and their son Nafkot.

But after early reports showed our party ahead in the polls, the government dashed our optimism by throwing me and my colleagues behind bars and declaring a victory for the ruling party.

When I emerged after 21 months in prison, our party was outlawed and the political landscape had grown increasingly repressive. But we forged ahead, forming the new Unity for Democracy and Justice Party and continuing to advocate for dialogue and non-violent political reform in Ethiopia.

Authorities arrested me again in 2008, claiming that I had mischaracterised the circumstances of my release. But peaceful political activities are not the only way to become a prisoner of conscience in Ethiopia.

Independent journalists face the very real threat of imprisonment in response to their work. Authorities have detained my friend Eskinder Nega eight times over his 20-year career as a journalist and publisher.

After the 2005 elections, Eskinder and his wife – Serkalem Fasil – spent 17 months in prison. Pregnant at the time, Serkalem gave birth to a son despite her confinement and almost no pre-natal care.

Banned from publishing after his release in 2007, Eskinder continued to write online. In early 2011, he began focusing particularly on the protest movements then sweeping North Africa and the Middle East.

Eskinder, who does not belong to any political party because of a commitment to maintain his independence, offered a unique and incisive take on what those movements meant for the future of Ethiopia.

Committed to the principle of non-violence, Eskinder repeatedly emphasised that any similar movements in Ethiopia would have to remain peaceful. Despite this, police briefly detained him and warned him that his writings had crossed the line and he could face prosecution.

Then in September 2011, the government made good on that threat. Authorities arrested Eskinder just days after he publicly criticised the use of anti-terror laws to stifle dissent. They held him without charge or access to an attorney for nearly two months.

The government eventually charged Eskinder with terrorism and treason, sentencing him to 18 years in prison after a political trial. Unfortunately, Eskinder is not alone; independent journalists Woubshet Taye and Reeyot Alemu also face long prison terms on terrorism charges.

The legal advocacy organisation Freedom Now, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention – a five-person panel of experts from around the world that consider individual cases – found Eskinder’s continued detention illegal under international law and called for his immediate release.

The UN specifically found that the government prosecuted Eskinder using overly broad terrorism charges because he exercised his internationally protected right to freedom of expression. It also held that procedural violations, such as denying Eskinder access to an attorney for nearly two months, violated his due process rights.

With this unequivocal finding by the UN, the international community can, and must, do more to help Eskinder and his imprisoned colleagues. In particular, the US, which has a close relationship with government in Addis Ababa, must speak out at every opportunity for those who cannot speak out for themselves from behind the prison walls.

Birtukan Mideksa is a fellow at Harvard University’s WEB Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research and a former prisoner of conscience in Ethiopia.

George Ayittey - Oslo Freedom Forum 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Galloway: I don't recognize Israel

Ethiopia’s Opposition at the Dawn of Democracy?

by Alemayehu G. Mariam 

Respeaking Truth to the Powerless

For several years now, I have been “speaking truth to power”. In fact, the tag line for my blog page is “Defend Human Rights. Speak Truth to Power.” It is a special phrase which asserts a defiant

moral and ethical position against those who abuse, misuse and overuse their powers. By speaking truth to power, the speaker bears witness against those whose power lies in lies. But speaking truth to the powerless is sometimes also necessary.

The powerless have no power to abuse, but their fault lies in not knowing their true power. While the abusers of power have might, the powerless who are abused have the power of right. It is the power of right that the powerless must use in their struggle against the abusers of power in achieving their ultimate victory because, as Dr. Martin Luther King said, “Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant.”

In June 2010, I wrote a weekly commentary entitled “Speaking Truth to the Powerless”.  I expressed deep concern over what I perceived to be manifest political paralysis and inaction in the Ethiopian opposition following the daylight theft of the May 2010 election in which the ruling party claimed to have won 99.6 percent of the seats in parliament. I urged the Ethiopian “opposition” to take a hard look at itself and take corrective action. I explained that  “my aim is not to lecture or to bash” but   merely to help “clean out the closet  so that we could begin afresh on the long walk to democracy. It is said that the ‘truth hurts’, but I disagree. I believe the truth heals, empowers and liberates its defenders.”

Ethiopia’s Opposition Through the Eyes of the Ruling Party

As opposition parties, journalists and dissidents faced unrelenting persecution by the ruling party and underwent apparent disarray following the 2010 election, I wondered what the party bosses of the ruling party really thought of the opposition (and the people) in making their outrageously absurd and audacious claim of total electoral victory. I thought then, as I do now, that looking at the “opposition” through the eyes of the ruling party bosses might give the opposition, particularly opposition parties, some insights into what courses of action they ought to take as the political situation evolves given recent changes:

… Zenawi knows the opposition like the opposition does not know itself. He has studied them and understands how they (do not) work. Careful analysis of his public statements on the opposition over the years suggests a rather unflattering view. He considers opposition leaders to be his intellectual inferiors; he can outwit, outthink, outsmart, outplay, outfox and outmaneuver them any day of the week. He believes they are dysfunctional, shiftless and inconsequential, and will never be able to pose a real challenge to his power. In his speeches and public comments, he shows nothing but contempt and hatred for them.

At best, he sees them as wayward children who need constant supervision, discipline and punishment to keep them in line. Like children, he will offer some of them candy — jobs, cars, houses and whatever else it takes to buy their silence. Those he cannot buy, he will intimidate, place under continuous surveillance and persecute. Mostly, he tries to fool and trick the opposition. He will send “elders” to talk to them and lullaby them to sleep while he drags out “negotiations” to buy just enough time to pull the rug from underneath them. He casts a magical spell on them so that they forget he is the master of the zero-sum game (which means he always wins and his opposition always loses)…

Who is the “Opposition”?

Who is the Ethiopian “opposition”? That is an intriguing question for which there is probably not a definitive answer. There is certainly not a monolithic opposition in the form of a well-organized party. There is no strong and functional coalition of political parties that could effectively challenge both the power and ideology of the ruling party. There is not an opposition in the form of an organized vanguard of intellectuals.  There is not an opposition composed of an aggregation of civil society institutions including unions and religious institutions, rights advocates and dissident groups. There is not an opposition in the form of popular mass based political or social movements.

The problems of “opposition politics” in Ethiopia is the age old  problem that has plagued African opposition politics following the “invention” of the one-man, one-party state in Africa by Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana in the early 1960s. Nkrumah crushed, suppressed and persecuted his opposition, including political parties, judges, union leaders, dissidents. Over the past one-half century, those who opposed the incumbent regimes in Ethiopia have been victims of not only legal and political restrictions but also all forms of persecution including imprisonments and extrajudicial killings.

 I find it difficult to fully characterize or quantify the Ethiopian opposition. As I asked in my commentary after the May 2010 election: “Is the opposition that amorphous aggregation of weak, divided, squabbling, factionalized and fragmented parties and groups that are constantly at each other’s throats? Or is it the grumbling aggregation of human rights advocates, civic society organizers, journalists and other media professionals and academics? Or are the groups committed to armed struggle and toppling the dictatorship by force the opposition?

Or is it all or none of the above?

What is the Proper Role for the “Opposition” in the Ethiopia?

Playing the role of opposition in a police state is not only difficult but also extremely risky. Following the May 2005 election, nearly all of the opposition party leaders, numerous civic society leaders, human rights advocates and journalists were rounded up and jailed for nearly two years. Over the past six years, opposition parties have been denied any meaningful political space and their leaders, along with an ever growing number of journalists and dissidents have been harassed, intimidated, imprisoned, exiled or worse.

 But the opposition, particularly the opposition parties, have also been severely weakened and suffered erosion of public credibility by failing to develop a coherent set of policies, programs and ideology that are different from the ruling party’s. Some parties and party leaders have lacked accountability and transparency in their actions and omissions. Others have resisted internal democracy within their organizations. Still others have promoted a cult of leadership around a single individual or small group of individuals who themselves have manifested dictatorial tendencies and engaged in factional struggles within their organizations to consolidate their power.

Regardless of how one might define the “opposition” in Ethiopia, there is no question that the ruling party’s  claim of electoral victory of 99.6 percent stands in stark contrast to the fact that in 2005 opposition parties routed the ruling party’s candidates in landslide victories throughout the country. The principal lesson the Ethiopian “opposition” needs to learn from the experiences of the past six years is that the opposition’s role is not simply to “oppose, oppose and oppose” for the sake of opposing.

 The opposition’s role and duty goes well beyond simply opposing the ruling party and its policies. Their role goes to the heart of democratic governance of the country. Their principal role is to relentlessly demand accountability and transparency in governance. They should always question the actions and omissions of the ruling party in a principled and honest manner, challenge, analyze, criticize, dice and slice the ruling party’s policies, ideas and programs and offer better, different and stronger alternatives. It is not sufficient for the opposition to champion the failures of the ruling party and make broad claims that they can do better.

Heaping insults, gnashing teeth and denigrating the ruling party and its leaders not only erodes the superior  moral position of the opposition, it is also counterproductive  and distractive to the opposition in its role of promoting accountability and transparency in governance. Many in the opposition speak out against those in power in the language of anger, frustration, fear and loathing. Few seem to be prepared to challenge the rulers on the basis of cold hard facts and logic. It is rare to see the opposition undertake a thorough analysis and critique of the ruling party’s policies, programs and projects. That task if often done by foreigners who undertake specialized studies and investigations. For instance, the regime’s policy which allows predatory land grabs by international agro-businesses was exposed not by Ethiopia’s opposition but foreign NGOs and researchers. The disastrous environmental impact of the various hydroelectric dam projects in the country were revealed by foreign researchers, not the opposition.

 The bulk of the work documenting human rights violations in Ethiopia is done by the various international human rights organizations, not the opposition. Much of the economic analysis on Ethiopia is done either by the various international lending institutions whose review is highly questionable on conflict of interest grounds or economic commentators in the popular media. By failing to challenge the ruling party on substantive policy and programmatic grounds, the effectiveness and credibility of the opposition has been significantly diminished. What is needed is not verbal condemnation, demonization and teeth gnashing against those in power, but critical and systematic analysis of the failures of the regime, its programs, policies and laws followed by well-thought out proposals that offer real alternatives and hope of a better future to the people if the opposition were to hold the reins of power.

The opposition, particularly opposition political parties, can play many vital roles beyond simply preparing to run for elections. They can help build consensus and aggregate the interests of their members and the broader society. They can articulate their policy preferences and choices and educate the wider community. They can promote debate, dialogue and national conversations on issues, problems and the direction of the country. They are best positioned to build and institutionalize  a democratic culture. If opposition parties are to succeed, they must take action to provide leadership training opportunities to the youth and women. Many opposition party leaders are way past the age of fifty and few women are seen at top leadership levels. While “age is nothing but a number”, there is a distinct difference between youth and geriatric politics. The younger generation has greater enthusiasm, dynamism and commitment to carry on with the cause. Opposition parties also need to work closely with media and civil society institutions to reach out to the people.

Sometimes the opposition can also agree with those in power to do the right thing and serve the greater public interest. In 2007, the late Meles Zenawi expressed his “hope that [his] legacy” would be not only “sustained and accelerated development that would pull Ethiopia out of the massive deep poverty” but also “radical improvements in terms of good governance and democracy.” Prime Minster Hailemariam has vowed and pledged publicly numerous times to carry out Meles’ legacy. There is no harm in joining Hailemariam implement Meles’ legacy of “improving good governance and democracy.” The opposition should hold Hailemariam accountable for improving good governance by insisting on the release of political prisoners, repeal of repressive laws, opening up of political space and broader democratization.

What Kind of Opposition is Needed Today?

I believe the ruling party’s dominance and persistence is made possible in significant part by the shambolic (chaotic) state of Ethiopian opposition politics. In other words, if the opposition were not so divided and uncentered, the ruling party would have been far less successful in imposing its arbitrary rule. So, what kind of opposition is needed today?

Loyal Opposition? In some parliamentary systems of government, the term “loyal opposition” is used to describe opposition non-governing parties in the legislature. In a functioning democratic parliamentary system, it is the duty of the loyal opposition to challenge the policies and programs of the governing party without fear of harassment, intimidation or persecution. Obviously, there can be no “loyal opposition” in Ethiopia when the ruling party controls 99.6 percent of the seats in parliament. It is not possible to have a one-person loyal opposition.

Silent or Silenced Opposition? There is much silent and silenced opposition to the ruling class. The majority of the people are afraid to show their opposition to the regime because they are afraid of retaliation or retribution. If they criticize the ruling party or its leaders, they could lose their jobs, be dismissed from school, suffer economic harm or even serious persecution. People are jailed for simply saying they oppose the regime. In an incredible development recently, four individuals were criminally charged for stating in public, “Meles is dead. Good riddance. We are not sorry he is dead. The government is dead. There is no government.” (To see the official charging document, press here.)  There are many who privately express opposition but would not dare to make their views known because of fears of prosecution and persecution.

Disorganized Opposition? An opposition that is floundering, angry and disorganized is unlikely to pose a challenge to the ruling party. A disorganized opposition is unable to formulate viable and appealing policies or convert popular discontent into decisive political action. Neither is it able to convince and mobilize its base or expand its reach and influence.

Divided Opposition? A divided opposition is best guarantee for the dominance of the ruling party. The myth of the supremacy and invincibility of the ruling party and its leaders is built on the foundation of a divided opposition. The ruling regime survives and thrives using a strategy of divide and rule; and when the opposition itself is divided, it is easy for those in power to abuse, mock and denigrate them.

A United Principled Democratic Opposition? That is what Ethiopia needs today. Such an opposition is built on a foundation of the values of tolerance, cooperation and compromise.  A united opposition is consensus based and results in a coalition of divergent interests and groups. The coalition provides a  forum  to work together not only to compete in elections but also in formulating broad based policies, providing broader representation of the electorate and broader representation of the views and demands of the majority. Since a  wide consensus of opinion is necessary in coalitions, policies and actions will be debated and examined thoroughly before being presented to the public. Coalitions provide a basis for good governance because their decisions are made in the interests of a majority of the people. Coalitions may sometimes be fractious but the tendency to  build consensus often overcomes that impulse.  The Ethiopian opposition ought to organize around coalition politics to effectively challenge the ruling party and its policies.

What Is to Be Done by the Ethiopian Opposition?

Following the 2010 election, I offered unsolicited advice to Ethiopia’s opposition. It does not seem there were any takers at the time. But I am a tenacious and steadfast advocate who is not easily deterred. So, I offer the same advice again now that the political game has changed and despite the repetitious litany among the leaders of the regime that nothing has changed and things will continue as before.

 Things have changed fundamentally and will continue to change even more dramatically in the near future. That irreversible change is from dictatorship to democracy. There is no force on earth that can stop that change. No amount of bluster, swagger, bombast, hubris or imperiousness by those clinging to power can stop the change from dictatorship to democracy. There is only one question left to be answered: What is to be done by opposition parties and the aggregation of civic society and media institutions, human rights advocates, dissidents and others in Ethiopia’s transition from dictatorship to democracy?

Atonement and Reconciliation With the People:  All of the opposition political party leaders who participated in the 2005 election need to go back to the people and ask forgiveness for squandering their hopes, dreams and aspirations. They need to tell the people straight up, “We did let you down. We are deeply sorry. We promise to do our very best to earn back your trust and confidence.” The people deserve an unqualified public apology from opposition leaders. They will be forgiven because the Ethiopian people are decent, understanding and compassionate.

Learn From Past Mistakes: It is said that those who do not learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat it. Many mistakes and blunders have been committed by opposition leaders in the past. These mistakes need to be  identified, studied and lessons drawn from them so that they will not be repeated again.

Understand the Opposition’s Opposition: The opposition’s opposition should not be underestimated. Their strength is in dividing and ruling and in playing the ethnic card. If the opposition unites and acts around a common agenda, they are powerless.

Stop Playing Victim: Some in the opposition manifest “victim mentality”. When one feels like a victim, one tends not to take action or responsibility. There is some recent criticism of Hailemariam over his public statements concerning the jailed journalists, political prisoners and other issues. Last week, he told the Voice of America that the political prisoners in the country are actually “terrorists” who “work with a violent organization” while “wearing two hats”, one “legal” and the other “illegal”. He gave no indication if he intends to open up the political space. The fact of the matter is that regardless of what Hailemariam and the ruling party say or do not say, the opposition must be relentless in demanding the release of all political prisoners and repeal of oppressive laws. That is what accountability is all about.  The opposition must always stand up for what is right. Releasing political prisoners is right; keeping them imprisoned is wrong.

Develop a Common Agenda in Support of Issues and Causes: The core issues democracy, freedom, human rights, the rule of law and the unity of the people and the physical integrity of the Ethiopian nation are shared by all opposition elements. Why not build collective agenda to advance and support these issues?

Agree to Disagree Without Being Disagreeable: Opposition leaders and supporters must abandon the destructive principle, “If you do not agree with me 100 percent, you are my enemy.” There is nothing wrong with reasonable minds disagreeing. Dissent and disagreement are essential conditions of democracy. If the opposition cannot tolerate dissent within itself, could it justifiably condemn those in power for intolerance?

Guard Against the Cult of Personality: One of the greatest weaknesses in the Ethiopian opposition has been the cult of personality. Time and again, the opposition has created idealized and heroic images of individuals as leaders, showered them with unquestioning flattery and praise and almost worshipped them. Let us remember that every time we do that we are grooming future dictators.

Always Act in Good Faith: Opposition leaders and others in the opposition must always strive to act in good faith and be forthright and direct in their personal and organizational relationships. We must mean what we say and say what we mean. Games of one-upmanship will keep us all stranded on an island of irrelevance.

Think Generationally, Act Presently: The struggle for genuine democracy is not merely about winning  elections or getting into public office. The struggle is for great causes — establishing a durable democracy, protecting human rights and institutionalizing accountability and the rule of law in Ethiopia. If we believe this to be true, then the struggle is not about us, it is about the generations to come. What we do should always be guided by our desire to make Ethiopia better for our children and grandchildren.

Give Young People a Chance to Lead: There is a hard reality that most of us in the older generation in the opposition have been unable to face. That reality is that we need to learn to get out of the way. Let’s give the younger generation a chance to lead. After all, it is their future. We can be most useful if we help them learn from our mistakes and guide them to greater heights. If there is one thing universally true about young people, it is that they love freedom more than anything else. Let the older generation be water carriers for the young people who will be building the “future country of Ethiopia,” as Birtukan Midekssa, the first female political party leader in Ethiopia, used to say.

Think Like Winners, Not Victims: Victory is not what it seems for the victors, and defeat is not what it feels for the vanquished. There is defeat in victory and victory in defeat. Both victory and defeat are first and foremost states of mind. Those who won the election by a margin of 99.6 percent project an image of being victorious. But we know they have an empty victory secured by force and fraud. The real question is whether the opposition sees itself as a bunch of winners or losers. Winners think and act like winners, likewise for losers.

The Opposition Needs to Reinvent Itself: The ruling party, though its public statements, is trying to  reinvent itself as the same old repressive police state. They say “nothing will change” from the time of their former leader. The opposition also needs to reinvent itself by rededicating itself to democratic principles, articulating the peoples’ aspirations with greater clarity and cogency, creating democratic alliances, strengthening its position as voices of the people and by always standing up for right and against might.

The Opposition Must Never Give Up: Sir  Winston Churchill was right when he said: “Never give in–never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” This is a winning strategy the Ethiopian opposition should adopt and practice passionately!

 

Uhuru Kenyatta on Zuku Road to Statehouse

Norway asylum seekers face discrimination despite residence permit

Mobile Edition. 13:20, 28 March, 2013

09:30, September 14, 2012

by Michael Sandelson.
(Filed under News)

 

 

As a new book criticising the Norwegian government’s harsh asylum policy is published, several municipalities are refusing to settle those allowed to stay.

---

“Children are the targets”

Rune Berglund Steen, who is also communications manager at Norway’s Centre Against Racisim, has authored ‘Svartebok over norsk asylpolitikk’ (’Black book about Norwegian asylum policy’).He is highly critical to the tri-partite coalition’s methods.
The some 350-page book covers subjects about people forcibly deported back home despite facing torture, and child asylum seekers being subjected to systematic discrimination by the Norwegian state.

Having worked with refugees’ fates in Norway, he also writes about that children can no longer expect treatment according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Maria Amelie (Madina Salamova), who was deported from Norway to Moscow last year but returned as a labour migrant some four months later, says the book “shows that the public is poorly informed about the intimidating Norwegian asylum policy... and how vulnerable people's needs are being ignored in the system.”

Mr Steen says to The Foreigner, “the main hallmark of the present government is that for the first time, it has made children the main target of a brand of hard, experimental, and restrictive asylum policy.”

“Examples include issuing unaccompanied children temporary residence permits only until they turn 18, when they are supposed to be deported to war-torn countries. Those from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ethiopia, for example, often suffered tremendous harm before they came to Norway,” he continues.
The Foreigner has also previously written articles about hundreds of children living in limbo in Norway's asylum reception centres whose parents’ final applications have been turned down, and who risk being deported back home. Some of them were born and raised in Norway.
Coalition politicians, including local Labour (Ap) ones, have protested government policies, arguing the interests of the child should come first after they have been in Norway for a certain length of time.Disgraceful
                                                              
Heikki Holmås, former immigration policy spokesperson and now Minister of International Development for the Socialist Left (SV), thinks this should be three years.
“We need to have a new policy in place for long-waiting refugee children...their rights should be increased. Although the government says immigration law weighs heavier, it should be the attachment of the child to Norway that does instead,” he told The Foreigner earlier this year.

 

Rune Berglund Steen

Finn Ståle Felberg/Forlaget ManifestLabour Deputy Minister of Justice Pål Lønseth has expressed the importance of parents not using their children as a tool to gain residency “when the family did not meet the requirements for this initially.”

“It’s scandalous”, says Rune Berglund Steen, “to allege that parents are pushing their children ahead of them. Would he do the same with his children?”

“Parents are most concerned about their own children and that they might suffer harm. Alternatively, parents are worried that they may not be able to look after them if they suffer harm themselves.”
Mr Steen declares that the Deputy Minister is “just attributing cynical motives instead of identifying with these parents and their children He shouldn’t generalise about people he does not even know.”

"Author Berglund Steen claims that refugees in Norway are subjected to injustices on a daily basis," Deputy Minister of Justice Lønseth writes in an email to The Foreigner. "This claim is unfounded. Asylum seekers in need of international protection, are granted asylum in Norway. Currently, the recognition rate is about fifty percent. Those who do not meet the criteria, however, are obligated to leave Norway. Effectuating returns is a priority for the current administration, and the number of returns carried out is increasing steadily."

 

The government has rejected calls for an amnesty, and has now presented its whitepaper on asylum children, which also addresses those who come to Norway alone. It contains no major legislation changes.

At the proposal stage, officials asked the Immigration Appeals Board (UNE) to take the best interests of the child more into account when looking at cases where applications have been rejected.
Minister of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion Inga Marte Thorkildsen, and Ann-Magrit Austenå at the Norwegian Organisation for Asylum Seekers (NOAS) greeted it positively.
UNE director Terje Sjeggestad declared he did not feel bound by the suggestion, however, and his organisation would not be looking upon asylum cases involving children any differently.

Powerless

Meanwhile, the Directorate of Immigration and Diversity (IMDi) tells The Foreigner 2,864 adult refugees who have had their applications approved were still staying in asylum reception centres as of 31 July.
819 know in which municipality they will be settled, but officials either cannot or will not accept all the over 2,800.
An IMDi official says all they can do is request the municipalities settle refugees as it is voluntary.
Reasons for not accepting refugees are many and varied. Bodø municipality has agreed to 70 in 2012, and the directorate has asked for a further 20 to be settled before the New Year.



Deputy Justice Minister Pål Lønseth

Ministry of Justice/Flickr“We have major challenges attending to the rest of the housing market,” Bodø Conservative (H) mayor Ole Hjartøy told NRK, Wednesday, “so we have to impose a limit to be able to cope with the refugees as well as the locals who are here already.
“It’s not a case of a lack of political will. We just don’t have any more properties to offer,” he said in response to Labour (Ap) municipal councillor Ida Pinnerød’s statement about where there is a will, there is a way.

Nordland regional IMDi director Dulo Dizdarevic declares, “These persons [the refugees] have to get out [of the asylum reception centres] as soon as possible. They’ve been given a residence permit following thorough consideration. Every single day they spend inside is one day less for qualification and integration.”

Oslo city council has now changed its mind and decided not to accept any further refugees this year. The move follows a pre 2012 budget deal with Progress’ (FrP) Carl I. Hagen, the capital’s health and social committee group leader.

“We tried to get the number down during negotiations, lower than 410. The Progress Party in Oslo has always fought for a lesser figure for the capital because we have major integration problems, and other parts of the country can chip in. It’s obvious that we react very negatively when they wish to increase something already in the budget deal without speaking to us.”
2,678 (17 percent) of the asylum seekers living in reception centers in Norway, are still waiting for a decision on their application from the Directorate of Immigration (UDI). Average case processing time is 162 days, a press spokesperson informs The Foreigner.

Fundamental freedoms

 
Human Rights – Secret Strategy to Identify Problems and Violations

Different countries have different questions of violations of human rights and needs of various legal documents and procedures to correct problems and violations thereof. Many people are confused to understand the fundamental violations of individual rights and how to declare the law. Being a student of a university degree in Human Rights, have attempted to summarize what are the rights of man?

What are human rights? Important interpretation of individual rights is as under:

1. It refer to the rights and fundamental freedoms which are entitled to all human beings, often held to include the rights to life, liberty, freedom of thought and expression and equality before the law.

2. It refers to the rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled. Examples of rights and freedoms that have come to be regarded as individual rights include civil and political rights to life and right to freedom, the rights to freedom of expression, rights to equality before the law and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to participate in culture, the rights to food, the right to work and the right to education.

3. It applies to all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. All individual beings are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

4. It refers to rights and fundamental freedoms which are entitled to all individual beings, often held to include the rights to life and personal liberty, freedom of thought and expression and equal rights before the law.

5. It refers to rights that belong to everyone as a consequence of the individual being.

6. It refers to legal rights and moral rights recognized by national laws and international human rights.

7. It is a specific type of moral and inalienable rights. It is attached to all persons under their individuality, without distinction of race, nationality or membership in a particular social group. It defines the minimum conditions of dignity and a tolerable life.

8. It refers to rights that have been cataloged by the United Nations in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948); a resolution is not legally binding. Other rights are found in the constitutions of many countries and regional organizations, such as European countries. This definition of individual rights is available on the point of view of Human Rights United Nations.

What are the violations of human rights? Rights abuses common in the world are as under: -

1. The right to adequate food and shelter for human beings are violated in the world; rich people are not willing to share technology and resources at reasonable prices with the poor.

2. All human beings have the right to democracy is violated by more than half the world as dictators and criminals are not ready to go or have the support of the interests of world powers.

3. The right to own property alone as well as in association with others is not respected in the country which is much more based on Communist philosophy.

4. The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion are being violated in the country that have much more of law based on religion specific philosophy.

5. The right to work, to free choice of employment and working conditions is not respected, even in more developed countries.

6. The right to education in the elementary and fundamental is violated in the world for humans.

7. The right to marry and raise a family of choice in many civilizations in the world is still missing.

8. The right to privacy and the culture is allowed to be violated by the developed countries, particularly through television and the Internet for many people in different parts of the country.

9. The right to life, liberty and security is violated by developed countries by polluting the global environment.

10. All human beings worldwide are born free and equal is violated equal rights for women are still deprived of much of the world.

11 violations of human rights based on race, color, language and religion, national or social origin still exist, even in developed countries.

12. Use of veto by the major powers on issues of human rights is itself the violation of human rights in the world.

“ሀገሬ ገመናሽ” በፕ/ር መስፍን ወ/ማርያም (ክፍል ሁለት

በየፍርድ ቤቶችሽ የፍትህ ውርጃ ሲፈፀም ዝም አልሽ።

 

በፕ/ር መስፍን ወ/ማርያም (ክፍል ሁለት)
በቀደም ሳት ብሎኝ፣
ለመጀመሪያ ልጄ ብቻ የፈረንጅ ሸራ ጫማ ገዝቼ ገባሁ። ያለወትሮዬ ማለቴ ለወትሮው ገበያ የምወጣው ሁለቱንም ልጆቼን ይዤ ስለነበረ ነው። ታዲያ ያን እለታ ማታ ትልቅዋ ልጄ

ጫማውን ስትለካ፣ የታናሽ እህትዋ አይን ከሚለካው ጫማ ጋር ሲንከራተት ተመለከትኩ፤ ወይም የተመለከትኩ መሰለኝ። ^‹‹ከወደድሽው ላንቺም ይገዛልሻል^›› አልኳት፤ የትንሽዋን ልጄን አይን እየሸሸሁ። በውስጤ አድሏዊነት ተላወሰ። በልጅትዋ ህሊና ውስጥ ይህ ስሜት እንደማያድር ባውቅም፣ የእኔን ሃሳብ ግን ቶሎ ላስወግደው አልቻልኩም። አየሽ ሀገሬ? እንኳን ህዝበ አዳምና ሔዋንን በእኩልነት ቤት ሆኜ አኖራለሁ የሚል ሀገር፣ አንድ ተራ ምስኪን ወላጅ እንኳን በጎጆው አድሏዊነት እንዳይሰፍን ይጥራል። አንቺ ግን ሀገሬ! … አንቺ ግን ዝሆንና ጥንቸል እያፋለምሽ ለአሸናፊው ታጨበጭቢያለሽ፤ ትሸልሚያለሽ።

መቼም ማንም ቢሆን፣ የአደባባይ ውበቱን እንጂ የጓዳ – ጎድጓዳ ገመናውን ሲነግሩት አይወድምና አንቺም ከአደባባይሽ ጀርባ መዝለቄ እንደማይጥምሽ አውቃለሁ። አደባባዮችሽማ ለዜጎችሽ የጋራ ፍትሀዊ መኖሪያነትሽን ይመሰክሩልሻል። መቼም የዜጋ ሁሉ እኩልነት የሚረጋገጠው በህግ ፊት ባለው እኩል መብት አይደል? ይህ ደግሞ ከገጠር ቀበሌሽ አንስቶ እስከ መዲናሽ ባሉ አደባባዮችሽ የሚታይ ነው። የወረዳ ፍርድ ቤት፣ የዞን ፍርድ ቤት፣ የክልል ፍርድ ቤት፣ የፌደራል ፍርድ ቤት፣ ከዚህ በተጨማሪ ደግሞ ጠቅላይ ፍርድ ቤት፣ ሰበር ሰሚ ችሎት… የፍትህ ቢሮ… ይህ ሁሉ አደባባይሽን ያደመቅሽበት የዜጎችን እኩልነት ማስጠበቂያ ተቋም ነው። ሀገሬ! ለመሆኑ በእነዚህ ተቋማት ምን እያደረግሽ እንዳለሽ ታውቂያለሽ?

አንዳንዴ ሳስበው ፍርድ ቤቶችሽና የፍትህ ተቋማቶችሽ ለዜጎች እኩል ያለመሆናቸውን የምታስታውቂበት ስፍራ ይመስለኛል። ይህን ስትሰሚ እንደምትቆጪ አውቃለሁ። ገመናው ሲሸፈንለት እንጂ ሲገለጥበት የሚወድ ማን አለ! አሁን እስቲ አንቺ ህግ አቁሜያለሁ፣ ዳኛ ሰይሜያለሁ ትያለሽ? ሀገሬ ሙች አፍሽን ሞልተሸ አትይም። ምነው ብትይ እማኝ ጠቅሼ እሞግትበት ሞልቶኛል።
አንድ አትዮጵያዊ ለትምህርት ውጭ ሄዶ ሳለ፣ በፈቀድሽው ከታክስ ነፃ መብቱ ተጠቀመና አውቶሞቢል ገዝቶ መጣ። አንቺንና ያቆምሽውን መንግስት እያሞገሰ አራት አመት በአውቶሞቢሉ ተጠቀመና ተመልሶ ለትምህርት ሄደ።

ባለቤቱ ደግሞ አሁንም አንቺንና መንግስቷን እያመሰገነች ስትነዳ፣ አንድ ቀን በጉምሩክ አሳሽ ጓዶች ተያዘች። መቼም ^‹‹ለምን?^›› ማለትሽ አይቀርም። የመኪናው ሊብሬ በባለቤትዋ ስም ስለነበር፣ አንቺ በአውቶሞቢሉ መገልገል አትችይም ተብላ፣ ተያዘች። መኪናው ታሰረ። አጣሪ ተቋቋመ። አጣሪው አጣርቶ ^‹‹ባለመብቱ ባለቤትዋ በመሆኑ፣ በአውቶሞቢሉ መጠቀም መብትዋ ነው^›› ብሎ ሪፖርት አቀረበ። ኮፒው ደግሞ ለሴትየዋ ደረሰ። ታዲያ ሀገሬ ጉዳዩ የቀረበለት የጉምሩክ ባለስልጣን፣ ቀረጡን ትከፍያለሽ አላት። ተያይዞ የቀረበውን ሪፖርት ተመልክቶት እንደሁ ጠየቀችው። አለመመልከቱን፣ ቢመለከተውም እንኳን ሪፖርቱ እግዚአብሔርም ቢመጣ ከመክፈል እንደማያስጥላት፤ ካልከፈለች መኪናዋ ጉምሩክ ውስጥ እንደሚታሸግበት ነገራት። ሀገሬ፣ ሴትየዋና ባለስልጣኑ ሁለቱም ያንቺ ዜጎች፣ ሁለቱም ኢትዮጵያዊ ናቸው። ቆይ ህግሽ ላይ ^‹‹አንድ ኢትዮጵያዊ^›› የሚለው ሀረግ ማንን አስበሽ ያሰፈርሽው ነው? እና ሴትዮዋ ሃምሳ አራት ሺህ ብር ከፈለች። ከመክፈልዋ በፊት ግን ሀገሬ ሙች አልቅሳ ለምናዋለች። ከእግዚአብሔር በላይ ያስቀመጥሽውን ዜጋ መለመን እንጂ ምን መፍትሔ አለ! ባለቤትዋ ይህን ሲሰማ መጀመሪያ ያዘነው ባንቺ አይደለም። ባስቀመጥሽው ባለስልጣን ትእቢትና ድንቁርና ተደነቀ። ህግ ፊት አቅርቦ፣ ባለቤቱ በህግ የተሰጣትን መብት የሚጥስበት ከህግ የከበረ መብት እንደሌለው ሊያሳየው፣ ባለስልጣኑን ህግ ፊት ሊገትረው ከአውሮፓ ሲበር መጣ፤ ጠበቃ ቀጠረ።

በቀጠሮው ቀን እሱና ጠበቃው ማልደው ፍርድ ቤት ደረሱ። ተከሳሽ አልቀረበም። የመስሪያ ቤቱ ጠበቃ እንኳን አልቀረበም። ዳኛዋ ሌላ ቀጠሮ ሰጡ። በቀጠሮውም ቀን የቀረበ የለም። ዳኛዋ ባለስልጣኑ ፍርድ ቤቱን ማዋረዱን፣ ከአንዴም ሁለቴ በቀጠሮ አለመቅረቡን ከምንም ሳይቆጥሩ ፍርዱን ገመደሉት። ባለስልጣኑ ትክክል መሆኑን፣ ሴትየዋ መያዛቸው፣ ገንዘቡንም መክፈላቸው አግባብ መሆኑን ፈረዱ።

ሀገሬ፣ ያ ከአውሮፓ የፍትህ ጥማት ሲያበር ያመጣው ሰው፣ በፍትህ መዶሻሽ የተጨፈለቀ ዜግነቱን ይዞ ወደአውሮፓ ተመለሰ። አየሽ ሀገሬ! ለዚህ ነው የምሞግትሽ፤ እኛን ዜጎችሽን ከወባ፣ ከተስቦ ብትፈልጊም ከኤች.አይ.ቪ በላይ የጎዳን በየፍርድ ቤትሽ በህግ የበላይነት ለማያምን ዳኛ ያስጨበጥሽው መዶሻ ነው።

እንዴ እውነቴን እኮ ነው! ሀገሬ ሙች እውነቴን ነው። ለወባው፣ ለተስቦውና ለኤች.አይ.ቪ.ው እድሜ ለቱጃሮቹ ጓደኞችሽ እንጂ፣ መች መድሀኒት ይገደናል- መርከብ ሞልተው ይልኩልናል። ደግሞ ብንሞትስ! እድር አለን እንቀበራለን። ቆይ እድር ባይኖረንስ! ደግሞ ለመቅበር! አበሻ እንኳን ሞተሽለት ገና በጣር ተይዘሽ፣ ላይ ላዩን መተንፈስ ስትጀምሪ ነው ጉድጓድ መቆፈር የሚጀምረው። ግን ሀገሬ እንዲህ በቁማችን በፍትህ መዶሻሽ ስንሰባበር፣ እነዚህ የወባና የተስቦ መድሀኒት በመርከብ ሞልተው የሚልኩልን ጓደኞችሽ አንቺንም ሆነ መንግስትሽን ሀይ አላሉልንም። እና ሀገሬ፣ ይህ የአንቺ ብቻ ሳይሆን የነሱም ገመና ነው።

ቆይ እኔ የምለው መንግስት ከህግ በላይ ነው እንዴ!? እስቲ ንገሪኝ ሀገሬ- መንግስት የሆኑት ከእኛው መሀከል፣ እንደኛው ዜጋ የነበሩት አይደሉም እንዴ! ዜጎችሽ አይደሉም እንዴ ^‹‹መርጣችሁናል^›› ብለው መንግስት የሆኑት! ታዲያ ለምንድነው የፍትህ መዶሻሽ እነሱ ላይ ቄጠማ የሚሆነው? ይኽው በአንቺ ውስጥ ከልጅነት እስከ እውቀት ስኖር መንግስት ከሳሽም ተከሳሽም ሆኖ ሲረታ እንጂ ሲፈረድበት አይቼም፣ ሰምቼም አላውቅም። ምን ያስቃል ሀገሬ! በእርግጥ ገንዘብን፣ ወይም ደግሞ ሌሎች ቀለል ያሉ ጉዳዮችን በተመለከተ አንድ ሁለት ፋይሎች በመንግስት ካሳ ከፋይነት እንዲዘጉ አድርገሽ ሊሆን ይችላል። ይህን ተይና እውነት ሀገር ከሆንሽ፣ እስቲ በሰብአዊና በዜግነት መብት ጉዳይ መንግስትን ከስሶ ያሸነፈ አንድ ዜጋ ጥሪ! እረ ጉደኛ ነሽ፣ ሀገሬ!

እኔ የምልሽ የህግ ትምህርት ቤት፣ ምናምን ምን ያደርግልሻል? ለምን አምስትና ስድስት ዓመት ህግ ታስተምሪያለሽ? ለእኛ ለዜጎችሽ ያቆምሽው፣ ህግ እንዳይዛነፍ፣ በየፍርድ ቤቱ ያስቀመጥሽው መዶሻ አናት አናታችንን እያለ ቅስማችንን እየሰበረ፣ ከዜግነት ተራ እንዳያስወጣን አይደለም እንዴ! በአንቺ በሀገሬ ህግ፣ እንኳን መርጠኽኛል፣ ያለ ባለስልጣንና መንግስት ቀርቶ፣ እየሱስ ክርስቶስም ቢሆን፣ ኢትዮጵያዊ ነኝ ብሎ አብሮኝ ቢኖር፣ በህግ ፊት እኩል ነን። አቦ ሀገሬ በፍትህ ስም የምትሰሪው ግፍ በዛ! የምር በዛ። ወይ በቃ የህግ ትምህርት ቤቶችሽን ዝጊና ዳኛ ለምታደርጊያቸው ዜጎች እንዴት የባለስልጣንንና የመንግስትን የስልክ ትእዛዝ ተቀብለው ተግባራዊ ማድረግ እንዳለባቸው አንድ ሁለት ሳምንት አሰልጥነሽ … በቃ!

አንዳንዴ ሳስበው ያ ታከለ የሚመኘውን ምኞት እኮ ሁላችንም ልንመኘው ነው! ሀገሬ መቼም ታከለን ታውቂዋለሽ። ለነገሩ አንዳንዶቹን አውቀሽ ችላ ትያቸዋለሽ እንጂ፣ አንቺ ዜጋሽ መቼ ይጠፋሻል። እሱም አንዱ ፍትህ መከበር አለበት፤ ያለ ህግ የበላይነት ሀገርና ህዝብ አይቆምም፣ ባይ ነው። ታዲያ የውልሽ፣ ከአመት ተመንፈቅ በፊት የቢ.ፒ.አር አሰራሩን ተቃውመሀል ተብሎ ከስራ ታገደ። ሁለት ወር ያለ ስራ ደመወዝ በላ። በሶስተኛው ወር ደመወዙ ቆመ። ሀላፊውን ሊያነጋግር ሄዶ የስራ መልቀቂያ ደብዳቤውን ተቀብሎ መጣ።

 ታዲያ ያን ሰሞን እቤቴ መጣና፣ ^‹‹ገንዘብ አበድረኝ^›› ሲለኝ፣ ያው እንደወትሮው ወር መዳረሻ ገዶት ይሆናል፣ ብዬ ^‹‹ስንት መቶ?^›› ስለው ^‹‹ሰባት ሺህ^›› አይለኝ መሰለሽ!? መስሪያ ቤቱን ሊከስ እንደሆነም ነገረኝ። ገንዘቡን ለጠበቃና ለአንዳንድ ተጨማሪ ወጪ ፈልጎ ነው። ባንክ በቆጠብኩት ሁለት ሺህ ብር ላይ ከባለቤቴ ቤተሰቦች አምስት ሺህ ብር ተበድሬ ጨምሬ ስሰጠው ^‹‹ተው! ይቅርብህ! የመስሪያ ቤቱን ባለስልጣን የሾመው መንግስት ነው። መንግስት ደግሞ ከሶም ተከሶም ይረታል። ሰማይ አይታረስ ንጉስ አይከሰስን አስብ። ቃሉ ቢለወጥም ያው መንግስት ማለት ንጉስ ነው። ቀበሌ፣ ወረዳ፣ ዞን፣ ክልል፣ መስሪያ ቤቶችና መንግስት ያላቸው ልዩነት የተዋረድ ብቻ ነው^›› አልኩት። ሀገሬ ሙች አልሰማኝም። እንዲያውም አልሰማ ቢለኝ በየመስሪያ ቤቶቻቸው የተሰየሙ ትንንሽ መንግስታትን ከሰው አቅላቸውን የሳቱ፣ ‹‹ቂጣቸውን በሳንጃ የተወጉ›› ዜጎችን በየዘመኑ ማየቴን፣ ገመናሽን ገልጬ ነገርኩት። አልሰማ ብሎ ፋይሉን በወረዳ ፍርድቤት ከፈተ።


በወረዳ ፍ/ቤትሽ የክስ ፋይል በከፈተ በአራት ወሩ የውሳኔውን ወረቀት አምጥቶ አሳየኝ ሀገሬ ሙች እልሻለሁ ገረመኝ! አንቺ እኮ ትገርሚያለሽ! የፍርድ ቤቱ የፍርድ ውሳኔ ከማህተሙና ከፊርማው ልዩነት በስተቀር፣ ያው የተባረረበት ደብዳቤ ግልባጭ ነው። አዘነ። ሀገሬ ሙች አዘነ። የፍትህ መዶሻሸ ያረፈበትን አናቱን ቀና አድርጎ መመልከት አቃተው።


ታከለ ግን የዋዛ ዜጋ አይደለም። ^‹‹እውነትና ንጋት እያደር ይጠራል^››ን እየተረተ ይግባኝ አለ። ይኽው ከዚያን ጊዜ ጀምሮ ሰው ሰርቶ በየወሩ ደመወዝ ሲቀበል፣ እሱ በየደረጃው በሚገኙ ፍርድ ቤቶች፣ የተባረረበትን ደብዳቤ እያፀደቀ ይመጣል።
እና ታከለ ምን ተመኘ መሰለሽ! ሀገሬ ሙች እንደገመናሽ ዝግናኔ የግል ፍርድ ቤት ቢመኝ አይፈረድበትም። አንድ እሁድ ቀን አንድ ካፌ በረንዳ ላይ ተቀምጠን ማኪያቶ ስንጠጣ፣ ከመንገዱ ባሻገር ያለውን የግል ሆስፒታል እየተመለከተ ^‹‹በህይወት ዘመኔ ማየት የምመኘው ምን እንደሆነ ታውቃለህ?^›› አለኝ። ^‹‹ምን^›› አልኩት፤ ቁብ አልሰጠሁትም። ^‹‹እዚያ ህንፃ አናት ላይ በግል ሆስፒታሉ ስያሜ ምትክ ^‹‹ብርሃን ከፍተኛ የግል ፍርድ ቤት፣ መለያችን ይግባኝ አልባ ፍርዳችን ነው!^›› የሚል ተጽፎ ማየት። ሀገሬ ሙች አያስቅም! ደግሞ ሰው እንጂ ሀገር ሲስቅም ሲያለቅስም አያምርበትም።


እውነቱን እኮ ነው! በመንግስት ፍርድ ቤት መንግስትን መርታት ካልተቻለ፣ ለምን በግል ፍርድ ቤት አይሞከርም። በቃ ሀገሬ አንቺም የፍትህ ገመናሽን መክላት ካማረሽ፣ በቃ የግል ፍርድ ቤት ክፈቺ። እና የመንግስት ፍ/ቤቶች በዜጎችሽ መካከል ያለን ክስ ይመልከቱ። በማንኛውም ሁኔታ በመንግስትና በዜጋ መካከል ያለን ክስ ደግሞ በግል ፍርድ ቤት እንዲታይ አድርጊ። ያኔ የዜጎችሽ አናት መንግስት ለዳኞችሽ ባስጨበጣቸው መዶሻ አይነደልም። ዜጎችሽ ቀና ብለው ይሄዳሉ፤ ስለፍትህ ስርአትሽም መልካሙን አብዝተው ይናገራሉ። ከሁሉም በላይ ደግሞ አንቺ ደስ ይልሻል። አንቺ ደስ ሲልሽ ደግሞ እኛም መልሶ ደስ ይለናል።
ስለፍትህ ገመናሽ ስናገር የሰሙ አንዳንድ ዜጎችሽ፣ ^‹‹እንዴት ሰው፣ ከሰው ገመና አልፎ የሀገርን ገመና አንድ — ሁለት — እያለ ያብጠለጥላል!^›› እያሉ ያብጠለጥሉኛል። እኔ ምን ተዳዬ! ሀገሬ አንቺ ራስሽ ገመናሽን መች ሸፈንሽውና እኔ እኮነናለሁ? እንዴ! የምር እኮ ነው የምልሽ! ገመናሽን እንደጋለሞታ ደጃፍ ገልጠሽዋል እኮ! አንቺ ራስሽ አይደለሽ እንዴ ተቃዋሚ፣ አሸባሪ፣ አክራሪ ብለሽ ዜጎችሽን ባሰርሽ ማግስት አኬልዳማ፣ ጀሀዳዊ ሐረካት– ምናምን የሚል ፊልም እየሰራሽ የፍትህ – ገመናሽን ቲቪ ያስገባሽው! እውነት ሀገሬ ያሳፍራል።


ለዚህ እኮ ነው መንግስት የገባበት ክስ የዝሆንና የጥንቸል ፍልሚያ ነው የምልሽ። ያውም ሮጣ የማታመልጥ እግርዋ የተሰበረ ጥንቸል! ሲጀመር ለመንግስት ዝሆንነትን ሰጥተሻል። ጠመንጃ አለው፤ እስር ቤት አለው፤ ቲቪ አለው፤ ራዲዮ አለው፤ ዳኛ አለው፤ አቃቤ ህግ አለው። ይህ ሁሉ ካለኝ ደግሞ እኔም ብሆን፣ ዝሆን መሆን አያቅተኝም። ተቃዋሚ፣ ሽብርተኛ፣ አክራሪ ተብሎ የተመረጠው ደግሞ ጥንቸል ነው። ጥንቸል ከዝሆን ቢፋለም እድሉ አንድ ነው- ሮጦ ማምለጥ። አንቺ ግን ሀገሬ! ጥንቸሎችሽ በፍትህ ስርአትሽ ሮጠው ነፃ የሚወጡበት የመርፌ ቀዳዳ የምታህል ቀዳዳ እንኳን እንዳትኖር፤ ክሳቸው እንኳን ወጉ ተነቦላቸው የእምነት – ክህደት ቃላቸው ሳይሰማ፣ እንዴት እንዳከረሩ፣ እንዴት እንዳሸበሩ ፊልም ሰርተሽ በቲቪ ትለቂዋለሽ። በፍትህ አደባባይ ሮጠው እንዳያመልጡ የጥንቸሎቹን እግር ስብርብር አደርገሽ ማለት ያኔ ነው! .. ኧረ በእውነት ይዘገንናል! አባቶቻቸው ተጠርጥረው ከተከሰሱበት ወንጀል ነፃ የሚወጡበትን ቀን የሚናፍቁ ልጆችን … እናቶቻቸውን.. ጎረቤቶቻቸውን… አስቢ እስቲ! አንቺ በእነሱ ቦታ ብትሆኚና ፍትህን ያስከብርልኛል ያልሽው መንግስት በተጠረጠሩብሽ ላይ፣ እንደዚያ ያለ ፊልም እያቀረበ የፍትህን ጽንስ ለውርጃ ሲዳርግ ብትመለከቺ ምን ትያለሽ! ምንስ ታደርጊያለሽ! ዳሩ አንቺ ሀገር እንጂ ዜጋ አይደለሽም። ዜጋስ ብትሆኚ እግሮችዋ የተሰበሩ ጥንቸል ሆነሽ መታገል ከማይሰለቸው ዝሆን ፊት ብትቆሚ እጣሽ ምንድነው? አቦ ሀገሬ ተይኝ! ገልጠው የማይጨርሱት ገመና አድሎሻል!
(ይቀጥላል)

The Dragon Eating The Eagle`s Lunch in Africa

Monday, March 25, 2013 @ 12:03 AM ed

Flight of the Eagle and pursuit of the Dragon

In June 2011, during her visit to Zambia U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton pulled the alarm bell on a creeping "new colonialism" in Africa. While dismissing "China’s Model" of authoritarian state capitalism as a governance model for Africa, she took a swipe at China for its unprincipled opportunism in Africa.

"In the long-run, medium-run, even short-run, no I don’t [think China is a good model of governance in Africa]…We saw that during colonial times, it is easy to come in, take out natural resources, pay off leaders and leave, …And when you leave, you don’t leave much behind for the people who are there. We don’t want to see a new colonialism in Africa…"

It seems the Eagle has finally taken a good look at the sidewinding Dragon eating its lunch in Africa. The U.S. is in stiff competition not only in Africa but also in the "world’s least explored" country. Clinton minced no words in telling the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "We are in a competition for influence with China; let’s put aside the moral, humanitarian, do-good side of what we believe in, and let’s just talk straight realpolitik… Take Papua New Guinea: huge energy find … ExxonMobil is producing it. China is in there every day in every way, trying to figure out how it’s going to come in behind us, come under us."

For the past decade, the U.S. has been nonchalant and complacent about China’s "invasion" and lightning-fast penetration of Africa. It was a complacency born of a combination of underestimation, miscalculation, hubris and dismissive thinking that often comes with being a superpower. But the U.S. is finally reading the memo.

Meanwhile, China is zooming along the African highway of "opportunism" with steely resolve and an iron fist sheathed in velvet gloves lined with loans, aid and expensive gifts. In July 2012, Chinese President Hu Jintao at the Opening Ceremony of the Fifth Ministerial Conference of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation proudly proclaimed his country’s economic prowess in Africa. "China’s trade with and investment in Africa have been expanding.

In 2011, our two-way trade reached 166.3 billion U.S. dollars, three times the figure in 2006. Cumulative Chinese direct investment in Africa has exceeded 15 billion U.S. dollars, with investment projects covering 50 countries." He added, "China and Africa have set up 29 Confucius Institutes or Classrooms in 22 African countries. Twenty pairs of leading Chinese and African universities have entered into cooperation under the 20+20 Cooperation Plan for Chinese and African Institutions of Higher Education."

In 1980, China’s total economic investment in Africa hovered around $USD1 billion; and 20 years later rose only to $USD10 billion. In 2010, China and Ghana signed infrastructure-related loans, credits and made other arrangements valued at about $15 billion. In 2009, China signed a $6 billion loan agreement with the Democratic Republic of the Congo for infrastructure projects.

In 2010, Chinese banks extended nearly $9 billion in loans and other types of financing to Angola for various projects. The Angolan government in turn used its oil credit line to commission the State-owned China International Trust and Investment Corporation to build a ghost town outside of the capital at a cost of $USD3.5 billion. (To see the video of the Angolan ghost town click here.) In 2011, Chinese firms accounted for 40% of the corporate contracts in Africa compared to only 2 percent for U.S. firms. According to a report issued by the South African Institute of International Affairs, between 2003-2009, there were between 583,050–820,050 Chinese living, working and doing business in 43 African countries. Today China is Africa’s largest trading partner as the U.S. recedes fast in the rear view mirror.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, is it a duck?


China’s official policy statement on its trade and aid relationship with Africa derives from the first of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. China "respects African countries’ choice in political system and development path suited to their own national conditions, does not interfere in internal affairs of African countries, and supports them in their just struggles for safeguarding their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity." China rejects accusations of neocolonial ambitions in Africa. President Hu Jintao explained that Africa and China are building a "new type of China-Africa strategic partnership… China and Africa have deepened practical economic cooperation featuring mutual benefit."

But many critics are quick to point out that China’s assertion of a "strategic partnership" cleverly camouflages its calculated strategic ambition to suck out African natural resources on a long-term basis, cultivate African markets as dumping grounds for its cheap manufactured goods and gradually impose its hegemony over the continent. The policy of "noninterference" is said to be an elaborate and shameless ploy used by China to pacify and anesthetize witless African dictators and secure lucrative long-term contracts for raw materials.

Kwame Nkrumah coined the term "neo-colonialism", the eponymous title to his book, to describe the socio-economic and political control exercised by the old colonial countries and others to perpetuate their economic dominance in the former colonies through their multinational corporations and other cultural institutions. He wrote, "Neo-colonialism is also the worst form of imperialism. For those who practise it, it means power without responsibility and for those who suffer from it, it means exploitation without redress. In the days of old-fashioned colonialism, the imperial power had at least to explain and justify at home the actions it was taking abroad. In the colony those who served the ruling imperial power could at least look to its protection against any violent move by their opponents. With neo-colonialism neither is the case..."

Is there Chinese "neocolonialism" in Africa? Is China exercising "power without responsibility" in Africa "causing exploitation without redress" for Africans?

China is in Africa in full force with traders, investors, lenders, builders, developers, laborers and others. But gnawing questions linger. For instance, is China’s "gift" of the $USD200 million African Union (AU) building in Addis Ababa in 2011 a public demonstration of its good faith, good will and good works in Africa or a subtle hint of its neocolonial ambitions and hegemonic designs?

Is China’s aid for the construction of roads, rail lines, bridges, dams and other public works projects evidence of an altruistic commitment to improve communication and commerce within Africa or a calculated strategy to further facilitate China’s deep penetration into the African hinterlands for raw materials (not unlike the European colonialists who built rail lines and ports to export Africa’s mineral wealth)?

Is China fully supporting corrupt-to-the-core African dictators because it does not want to "interfere" in local politics or is "noninterference" its way of maintaining a chokehold on African dictators to protect its long-term interests in Africa? Does China want to do business in Africa in the short term and control its destiny in the long term?

In my column, "The Dragon’s Dance with Hyenas", I suggested that Africa’s dictators could not be more happy with their "new strategic partnership" with China. They claim that China is not only a good friend but also the great rescuer of Africa from the ravenous and crushing jaws of neocolonialists, imperialists, neoliberals and other such nasty creatures.

AU president in 2011, Teodoro Obiang Nguema, the ruthless and corrupt dictator of Equatorial Guinea since 1979, even saw "a reflection of the new Africa, and the future we want for Africa" in the Chinese-built 20-story AU glass tower.

The late Meles Zenawi saw China leading Africa on a long march out of the winter of despair and desperation in to the spring of hope and renaissance. He proclaimed China brings to Africa a "message of optimism, a message that is out of the decades of hopelessness and imprisonment a new era of hope is dawning, and that Africa is being unshackled and freed…"

I disagreed with Meles Zenawi when he said he saw the "rise of Africa" and an "African Renaissance" reflected in the glass tower. I peeked behind the façade of that shiny edifice and saw standing "a giggling gang of beggars with cupped palms, outstretched hands, forlorn eyes and shuffling legs looking simultaneously cute and hungry and begging" and unable to pony up the chump change needed to put up a building that is to become their world stage.

The "China Model" and China as an ideal(less) partner for African dictators

African dictators talk about the "China Model" as a solution to Africa’s economic problems in much the same way as African sorcerers invoke voodoo incantations to heal those possessed by evil spirits. But the Chinese reject the notion of a "China Model". Liu Guijin, China’s special representative on African affairs offered an official disclaimer. "What we are doing is sharing our experiences. Believe me, China doesn’t want to export our ideology, our governance, our model. We don’t regard it as a mature model."

No African dictator has gone beyond phrase mongering to explain how the "China Model" applies to Africa. But the general idea in championing the "China Model" ("Beijing Consensus") is that Africa can be successful without following the "Washington Consensus" (a set of ten policies supported by the U.S. and the international lending institutions including "fiscal discipline (limiting budget deficits), increasing foreign direct investments, privatization, deregulation, diminished role for the state, etc.).

China presumably became a global economic power in just a few decades by pursuing state controlled capitalism instead of free market capitalism, avoiding political liberalization, giving a commanding role for the ruling political party in the economy and society, heavily investing in infrastructure projects, engaging in trial and error economic experimentation, etc.

African dictators believe they can achieve a comparable level of economic development by copycatting China. For Meles Zenawi and his disciples, the "China Model" is the magic carpet that will transport Ethiopia from abysmal underdevelopment and poverty to stratospheric economic growth and industrialization.

African dictators are particularly enamored with the "China Model" because China achieved its economic "miracles" in a one-party system that has a chokehold on all state institutions including the civil service and the armed and security forces and by instituting a vast system of controls and censorship that keeps the people from challenging the government or learning about alternatives.

In reality, the "China Model" for African dictators demonstrates not so much the success of authoritarian state capitalism but the triumph of praetorian klepto-capitalism – a form of militarized kleptocratic capitalism in which African dictators and their cronies control the state apparatus and the economy using the military and security forces. African dictators in Ethiopia, Uganda, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Equatorial Guinea, etc.

rule by coercion and their coercive power derives almost exclusively from their control and manipulation of the military, police, and security forces, party apparatuses and bloated bureaucracies which they use for political patronage. They have successfully eliminated rival political parties, civil society institutions and the independent press.

The "China Model" is the ultimate smokescreen for African Dictators, Inc. It provides a plausible justification for avoiding transparent and accountable governance, competitive, free and fair elections and suppression of free speech and the press. Simply stated, the "China Model" in Africa is a huge hoax perpetrated on the people with the aim of imposing absolute control and exacting total political obedience while justifying brutal suppression of all dissent and maximizing the ruling class’ kleptocratic monopoly over the economy.

Could the "China Model" work in Africa?

Stripped off its hype, the "China Model" in Africa is the same old one-man, one-party pony that has been around since the early days of African independence in the 1960s. Time was when Zenawi, Museveni and Kagame were crowned the "new breed of African leaders" (by neoliberal imperators Bill Clinton and Tony Blair) and given a free pass to suck at the teats of neoliberal cash cows such as the World Bank and the IMF.

Today these dictators heap contempt on "neoliberalism" as a "band-aid" approach to development, criticize the "gunboat diplomacy" of the U.S. (whose hard working taxpayers have shelled out tens of billions of dollars to shore up these dictatorships in the last decade) and tongue-lash "extremist neo-liberal" human rights defenders and advocates for slamming them on their atrocious human rights record and mindboggling corruption. If neoliberalism did not work in Africa, why should the "China Model" work?

Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery but flattery does not get you anywhere in economic development. The great absurdity of all African dictators is that they believe they can copycat "word-for-word" ideas and practices from different countries, systems and cultures and make it work in Africa. For instance, in February 2012, Meles Zenawi literally believed he had the most perfect antiterrorism law in the entire world. He told his rubberstamp parliament with great pride and gusto, "In drafting our anti-terrorism law, we copied word-for-word the very best anti-terrorism laws in the world. We took from America, England and the European model anti-terrorism laws. It is from these three sources that we have drafted our anti-terrorism law. From these, we have chosen the better ones."

One cannot pirate, copycat or cut-and-paste an economic model in the same way as one would make knockoffs of famous fashion accessories, popular brands of electronics or machine parts. But African dictators believe they can cut-and-paste the "China Model" in Africa and create economic miracles. But what they have succeeded in creating is the optical illusion of economic development by constructing shiny glass buildings and fancy roadways that go nowhere while sucking their national economies bone dry.

As Global Financial Integrity concluded, "The people of Ethiopia are being bled dry. No matter how hard they try to fight their way out of absolute destitution and poverty, they will be swimming upstream against the current of illicit capital leakage." That is what the "China Model" means in Ethiopia, and for that matter in much of Africa where it is followed.

Fightin’ Eagle in Africa?

So far we have heard a screaming Eagle grousing about the unfair advantage, immorality, amorality, opportunism and new colonialism of the Dragon. But will we ever see a fightin’ Eagle standing up to a fire-breathin’ Dragon in Africa and "win"?

The U.S. "battle plan", other than the "moral, humanitarian, do good" human rights rhetoric, is to do too little too late. In 2000, the U.S. enacted The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) followed by the Africa Investment Incentive Act of 2006 to substantially expand preferential access for imports into the U.S. from designated Sub-Saharan African countries. These laws were intended to be substitutes for a Free Trade Agreement and enable reforming African countries the most liberal access to the U.S. market.

By creating effective partnerships with U.S. firms and encouraging African governments to reform their economic and commercial regimes, the U.S. hoped to change and improve its long-term trade relations with Africa and open vast opportunities for Africans. As of 2011, U.S. trade with sub-Saharan Africa accounts for about 3 percent of total U.S. imports and 1 percent of U.S. exports. Oil makes up more than 90 percent of the $44 billion generated by U.S. imports from the AGOA countries. These laws have produced little success in achieving their aims.

Earlier this month, U.S. Senator Chris Coons, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African Affairs released a report ("Embracing Africa’s Economic Potential") which underscored the "clear and pressing need for increased U.S. economic engagement in sub-Saharan Africa." The Report argued that "increased trade facilitates growth for U.S. businesses as well as our African partners, simultaneously strengthening our own economy and Africa’s emerging markets."

It made several recommendations urging the development of a comprehensive strategy for increased U.S. investment in Sub-Saharan Africa, reauthorization and strengthening of the AGOA, removal of economic barriers and engagement of the African diaspora community in the United States. It will be hard to fight a Dragon with Eagle feathers!

How about an "Africa Model"?

I like to ask naïve questions. For instance, I ask not why China built the African Union Hall but why 53 plus African countries could not chip in or borrow the chump change needed to build the most symbolic building on the continent representing the independence, unity and hope of all African peoples? By the same token, I do not ask why an increasing number of African countries choose to follow the "China Model" but rather why they avoid following an African model such as the "Ghana’s Model"?

I am a big fan of Ghana. In July, 2009, in one of my weekly commentaries I asked one of my naïve questions: "What is it the Ghanaians got, we ain’t got?". I argued that present day Ghana offers a reasonably good, certainly not perfect, template of governance for the rest of Africa. Ironically, it is to Ghana, the cradle of the one-man, one-party rule in Sub-Saharan Africa, that the rest of Africa must now turn to find a model of constitutional multiparty democracy.

Ghana today has a functioning, competitive, multiparty political system guided by its 1992 Constitution. Political parties have the constitutional right to freely organize and "disseminate information on political ideas, social and economic programs of a national character". Tribal and ethnic parties are illegal in Ghana under Article 55 (4). That is the secret of Ghana’s political success. The Ghanaians also have an independent electoral commission (Art. 46) which is "not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority" and has proven its mettle time and again by ensuring the integrity of the electoral process.

Ghanaians enjoy a panoply of political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights. There are more than 133 private newspapers, 110 FM radio stations and two state-owned dailies in Ghana. Ghanaians express their opinions without fear of government retaliation. The rule of law is upheld and the government follows and respects the Constitution. Ghana has a fiercely independent judiciary, which is vital to the observance of the rule of law and protection of civil liberties. Political leaders and public officials abide by the rulings and decisions of the courts and other fact-finding inquiry commissions.

It is possible to do business with China without following the "China Model." Ghana has done billions of dollars worth of business with China without using the "China Model". In 2012, Ghana snagged a loan from China for a cool USD$3 billion. In 2010, Ghana signed deals with China for various infrastructure projects valued at about $15 billion. Ghana is proof positive that Africa can do business with China without becoming "Western" China. Ghana is certainly not a utopia, but she is living proof that multiparty constitutional democracy can help salvage African countries like Ethiopia from political and economic dystopia. Why not adopt the "Ghanaian Model" continent wide?

"Let’s put aside the moral… and just talk straight realpolitik"

As Secretary Clinton rhetorically urged, "Let’s just talk straight realpolitik." In international politics, there are no moral standards. The rule is might and self-interest makes right. That principle of international amorality has been taught since the ancient Greek historian Thucydides described relations between nations as anarchic and immoral. The world is driven by competitive self-interest.

Machiavelli and Hobbes warned against mixing morality in the relations between nations as did Hans Morgenthau in the mid-20th Century. He wrote, "Universal moral principles cannot be applied to the actions of states in their abstract universal formulation, but that they must be filtered through the concrete circumstances of time and place."

International amorality has its own virtues. Zeng Huacheng, a counselor at the Chinese Embassy in Ethiopia says, "It’s not China versus America. It’s whatever helps the Ethiopians. If we don’t help, Africans will suffer." So also said the fox guarding the hens in the henhouse, "I am here only to protect and serve you."

There is an old African saying that when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. What could happen when the Dragon and the Eagle fight in Africa? Who is likely to win? Not to worry. There will be no fight as there was no fight at the Berlin Conference in 1884; only a gentlemen’s agreement.

I believe there will be a great struggle for the destiny of Africa – a destiny that beckons Africa to take the low road of developmental thralldom and another that summons Africa to rise up and follow the high road to freedom. That struggle will be decided in a contest between the powers of "greedom" and the powers of freedom.

Will Africa’s destiny be determined by the Dragon, the laughing-to-the-bank hyenas, the Eagle or the people of Africa? The dragon is symbol of power and strength. The Emperor of China used the image of the dragon to project his imperial ambitions and domination. The Eagle represents freedom. The Eagle can freely sweep into the valleys below or fly upward into in to the boundless sky. The hyena thrives on carrion. But the African people have the power of freedom in their hands and in their souls.

Speaking truth to power means speaking truthfully to power and letting the chips fall where they may. I see great similarity in what the Chinese and the U.S. are doing in Africa. China gives money, loans, aid and gifts to corrupt-to-the core African governments. Doesn’t the U.S.? The only difference is that China is honest about it. China does not speak with forked tongue.

It does not talk our ears off about human rights violations and crimes against humanity and turn around and reward the criminals with billions of dollars in aid and loans. For China, there is no human rights, it’s all strictly business. Aah! But isn’t U.S. talk of human rights in Africa as beautiful as the sight of the Bald Eagle in flight against the background of snow-capped mountains and the deep blue sky? But the U.S. first minds its business before minding African human rights. I am afraid human rights in Africa for both countries is a simple issue of mind over matter. They mind their businesses, don’t mind African dictators and the human rights of Africans don’t matter!

Perhaps the answer to the question of Africa’s destiny was given long ago by the man elected as the "Father of African Unity" at the 1972 Ninth Heads of States and Governments meeting of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). H.I.M. Haile Selassie at the 1963 inaugural O.A.U. Summit told his fellow African heads of state:
… Africa was a physical resource to be exploited and Africans were chattels to be purchased bodily or, at best, peoples to be reduced to vassalage and lackeyhood. Africa was the market for the produce of other nations and the source of the raw materials with which their factories were fed…
…The answers [to the continent’s problems] are within our power to dictate. The challenges and opportunities which open before us today are greater than those presented at any time in Africa’s millennia of history. The risks and the dangers which confront us are no less great. The immense responsibilities which history and circumstance have thrust upon us demand balanced and sober reflection. If we succeed in the tasks which lie before us, our names will be remembered and our deeds recalled by those who follow us. If we fail, history will puzzle at our failure and mourn what was lost… May [we]… be granted the wisdom, the judgment, and the inspiration which will enable us to maintain our faith with the peoples and the nations which have entrusted their fate to our hands.

Thus spoke the African Lion!

Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino and is a practicing defense lawyer.