Boycott as a Tool of Democracy

Maimire Mennasemay wrote an article recently titled "Retooling the 2010 Election as a Weapon of Democracy" in which he suggested that the upcoming Ethiopian elections in May could be used as a means to advance the cause of democracy if handled right. Here is the crux of his argument:

...Elections are political tools, and like any tool, every election could become a tool for democracy if we “hold it right”, which means that if we hold the 2010 election right, it could become a powerful weapon for effectively de-legitimating the TPLF/EPDRF regime....

...Using the COC [Code of Conduct] as a political boomerang that comes back to its originating context and knocks it open to expose what it tries to hide—the anti-democratic and exploitative nature of the TPLF/EPDRF regime—is an action that those who signed and did not sign the COC, and those who participate and do not participate in the election, could take....

...But this is possible only if the members of the Ethiopian democratic family abide by a democratic code of conduct, implicit or explicit, based on mutual respect and tolerance.

Oh, how I wish this could be the case! Unfortunately and sadly, the Woyane regime has been preparing diligently for the last five years to make sure that there is very little chance of this scenario unfolding during the upcoming election. Besides, opposition groups of all hues had participated in elections in 1992, 1995, 2000 and 2005, and all of them have already proven that the ruling regime is not interested in being a partner for building a democracy in Ethiopia. Been there, done that. This is not to suggest that the weaknesses among the opposition has not contributed to democracy not taking root in Ethiopia under Woyane rule, but the blame rests squarely on Woyane's shoulders, no question.

So, what is the point of participating in another election, especially one that is highly scripted, which will not provide Ethiopians with any hope for representative government they desire and deserve? It is pointless.

It is not that I disagree with the notion that "every election could become a tool for democracy if we 'hold it right'”; it's just that I think Ethiopia, 18 years into Woyane rule, has reached the point where participation in yet another sham election will cause an irreparable harm to the larger task of laying the foundations for a democratic order in Ethiopia. Therefore, in my humble opinion, the best tool to use to advance the cause of democracy in Ethiopia at this point in time is through BOYCOTT, not participation in yet another sham elections.

I do not reach this conclusion lightly. As any long time reader of this blog can easily surmise, I have a lot of respect to those politicians who take tremendous risks to their own safety to fight the Woyane dictatorship on the ground in Ethiopia by using all peaceful means at their disposal. The supply of such politicians is limited and I see no need to waste precious resources and energy in the upcoming election. What is the logic behind sacrificing these kinds of politicians for a meaningless objective? I can't justify.

Isn't the sacrifice of Birtukan Mideksa and the thousands of others who are currently and have previously been incarcerated and the hundreds who have already given their precious lives for the cause of democracy not sufficient enough to prove the Woyane regime is an illegitimate one? I think it is! I would rather see the Mideksa type of Ethiopian politicians wise up and live to fight another day.

My view is that even if the parties that are currently registered to run in the elections, especially those with the Medrek coalition, end up taking part in the election, the political forces that are left out of the process are way too significant to consider the election a useful tool for democracy. I say: Why not boycott the 2010 election and let the chips fall where they may?

How to Fix American Health Care

A little more than half of the visitors of this blog are from the US. This post is for their benefit.

"A crisis is a terrible thing to exploit"

This was the subtitle for today's Wall Street Journal editorial on the Massachusetts Senate special election. While the phrase is an accurate description of President Obama's first year in office, the WSJ was also taking a shot at the now infamous "You never let a serious crisis go to waste" quote of Rahm Emanuel, the White House Chief of Staff, regarding the financial meltdown of 2008. The Journal editorial goes on to say that:

Whether or not Republican Scott Brown wins today in Massachusetts, the special Senate election has already shaken up American politics. The close race to replace Ted Kennedy, liberalism's patron saint, shows that voters are rebelling even in the bluest of states against the last year's unbridled pursuit of partisan liberal governance.... The lesson of Mr. Obama's lost first year is that an economic crisis is a terrible thing to exploit.

Obama and the Democrats have overreached. They knew all along that the result of the 2008 elections was not a mandate to expand entitlements and increase the size and scope of government, but they went ahead with it anyhow.

Now that voters from New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts, states which Obama easily carried in 2008, have clearly rejected the expansion of government, Obama and the Democrats should stop pursuing their highly divisive domestic agenda. Instead, they should put their efforts into issues that have the support of most Americans, issues like: job creation, energy independence and incremental health care reform because the very essence of America is what is at stake. (See Not a Transformational Figure.)

Thank you voters of Massachusetts for putting the brakes on the march towards a nanny state!

PBS Series: This Emotional Life

If you have six hours to spare, the three-part PBS TV series which premiered last week titled "This Emotional Life" is well worth your time. The series "explores improving our social relationships, learning to cope with depression and anxiety, and becoming more positive, resilient individuals." The host is Harvard professor Daniel Gilbert and you can watch the whole thing online.

Mideksa: Not Forgotten

The Guardian's East Africa correspondent, Xan Rice, wrote a touching piece today on Birtukan Mideksa, perhaps Ethiopia's best hope to break out of its violent cycle, and the toll her incarceration has taken on her elderly mother and only child. There are many lines worthy of quoting in the article, but here is the one that stands out for me:

"The government says the more we make noise the more difficult it will be to get her [Mideksa] out," said one western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. "Are we going to risk our entire aid budget for one person? No."

Does any one get what this anonymous western diplomat is saying? Is he/she saying that the reason they do not make noise is because they (the donors) can't afford to offend the aid recipient? What kind of twisted logic is that? What a heartless diplomat!

It is in moments like these that I feel Ethiopia would be better off without Western aid. But that would be heartless, wouldn't it?

Eritrean Regime Sanctioned

Last week the UN Security Council passed a resolution which imposed targeted sanctions on Eritrea for its destabilizing role in Somalia and for refusing to withdraw its troops from Djibouti. The sanctions include an arms embargo and travel restrictions on and a freeze on the assets of the political and military leaders of the regime. These sanctions are tied to two other previous UN resolutions (resolutions 751 and 1267) and seem to have some teeth, which explains the regime's freakish reaction to the resolution. You can read the full text of the resolution here.

This is a welcome development for the Horn of Africa region; the sanctions are balanced and appropriate for the offence commited. However, punishing the Eritrean regime alone will not bring peace to Somalia or stability to the Horn region. That would require a comprehensive carrot and stick approach towards all the regimes in the region and a real support to human rights and democracy advocates in the region. On this score, the Obama Administration has so far proven itself to be as worthless as the administration it replaced.

Christmas Cheers!

Here is a cheerful Christian song by Asfaw Melese. The setting is Hossana, which happens to be Asfaw's hometown, and also mine. The audio is not great, but the energy is infectious. Watching the kids enjoy themselves made me wish that I was a teenager again. Enjoy!

Copenhagen Blues

The Telegraph wrote a headline today which read "world leaders miss best chance" in describing how the Copenhagen climate change summit ended in disappointment for the global apocalypse faithful. It went on to conclude:

They have agreed to meet again early next year to agree targets for 2020. But no one was denying that making further progress will be hard, as will regenerating the momentum that was lost so recklessly over the last days.

I am not sure what recklessness the Telegraph was talking about. But, thanks to Climategate, it is now clear to any rational mind that the parties that were reckless are the group of scientists who tried to sell to the world a half-baked science as settled science and their leftist allies from all around the world who can't seem to miss a chance to alarm the world about the catastrophe that global warming has purportedly caused and will cause in the future.

Now that the collusion between these two groups has been exposed for the sham that it is, those scientists with any sense of descency left in them should return to their labs and ponder on alternative and dissenting views on climate-change science, like the one suggested in this WSJ article and many others, and come up with research that is transparent and invites scientific scrutiny. And, what about their political allies? They should re-direct their energy towards environmental issues that have broad-based support and can be implemented in a financially sound way.

As to the actual agreement(s) that were made in Copenhagen, the Obama Accord or any of its variants, they are as worthless as the papers they are printed on. And, if any one out there believes that the African nations will ever get the 100s of billions of dollars they extorted from the rich nations, regardless of whom the extorter-in-chief was, then I have a magic pill that will cure your Copenhagen Blues and any other ailments you might think of here.

A Model Nation for Religious Persecution?

The BBC reported yesterday that 30 elderly women have been arrested in Eritrea while praying together. This report is just the latest in a long series of persecution for adherents of various Protestant Christian denominations, Jehovah Witnesses and other faiths that are not granted an official stamp of approval by the Eritrean regime since 2002.

One of the well known cases of this ongoing persecution is that of gospel singer Helen Berhane who was tortured and detained without charge for two years before she was released in 2007 and was granted asylum in Denmark. As you can see in the video below, Helen has a difficult time walking as a result of the torture she was subjected to during her incarceration. Obviously, the tortures did not brake her. As is often the case, persecution of religious people never accomplishes its intended objective.



I fail to understand what Isaias Afeworki and his henchmen want to achieve by such inhumane treatment of their own people! Trying to become a model nation for religious persecution? Here is a graphic description of what happens to the Christians and others from an Eritrean witness who was a prison guard:

I was doing my national service in Sawa Military training during the period 1999- 2001. During the two years period of my stay in Sawa, I witnessed an enormous amount of beating and torture to individuals who happened to be followers of Jehovah's Witness and Pentecostal (commonly known as "Pente") religions. I was, on many occasions, a prison guard to these people. The Jehovas are detained for refusing, according to their faith, to take the military training. But the "Pentes" are usually simply detained for reading bibles, praying in a group, singing gospels etc during the free time, even though they are good soldiers. Once they are detained their head is shaven, like the other criminals in the prison. 20-30 of them are detained in a 3x4 metal-house. They were allowed to go out only for 30 minutes in whole day. The perfect relaxation time for the detainees were when they were taken to load and unloads cement, food etc from trucks. They all prefer this work than to be locked in the container even though it is physically exhausting for them. But the worst time for all of them was during 'questioning' time. They were badly beaten to the
extent that noses are broken, feet bleed. After the beating comes the notorious 'helicopter' torture in which your two legs are tied with your hands on your back. You are thrown in the sun and milk is poured on your body to attract the flies. It was the most inhuman treatment I have ever witnessed

Amanuel, Cape Town, South Africa

Africa and Climategate

Much hoopla surrounds COP15, the Climate Change Conference that is set to open in Denmark in a couple of days. While the industrialized nations are still haggling about the extent to which carbon emissions should be cut by the great carbon pollutors of the world, the African countries, represented by an Ethiopian despot named Meles Zenawi, are sullivating to extort large sums of money from the industrialized nations for their "carbon sins" (see Africa will not reveal its climate compensation demands).

Meanwhile, a big scandal is brewing in climate change science itself, dubbed Climategate by some, that is threatening to derail the Copenhagen conference. In case you have not been paying attention in the last couple of weeks, the nerve center of climate change study, University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit in the United Kingdom, was hacked and that has brought to public view email communications among scientists which revealed the unscientific nature of climate change science.

What these email exchanges between climate scientists reveal is that much of the science that was used to declare "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations" was tainted by ideologically driven politics. I suppose these revelations may probably mean that not much concrete progress is likely come out of Copenhagen.

What about the Africans? Well, Climategate could also dash their hope of collecting a handout in the name of global warming. The same scientists who were caught cooking the books in climate change science are the ones who supplied the "scientific" basis for the Africans' claim. Here are a couple of articles that discuss the effects of global warming which the Africans are using in making their case:

Alarming health effects of global warming
Health toll of climate change seen as ethical crisis

Climategate has given scientists a bad name and it has underscored the need for scientists to decouple themselves from the political debates that touch upon their scientific research area. One of the climate scientists who was involved in the aforementioned email exchanges put this maxim best in a WSJ Op-Ed article titled "The Science and Politics of Climate Change":

Climate scientists, knowingly or not, become proxies for political battles. The consequence is that science, as a form of open and critical enquiry, deteriorates while the more appropriate forums for ideological battles are ignored...

Science never writes closed textbooks. It does not offer us a holy scripture, infallible and complete. This is especially the case with the science of climate, a complex system of enormous scale, at every turn influenced by human contingencies. Yes, science has clearly revealed that humans are influencing global climate and will continue to do so, but we don't know the full scale of the risks involved, nor how rapidly they will evolve, nor indeed—with clear insight—the relative roles of all the forcing agents involved at different scales.

Your (US) Tax Dollars At Work

This is a quote from a letter from Amare Mammo, a former official with the Ethiopian Agricultural and Food Organization, to Dr. Seid Hassan of Murray State University. For most Ethiopians, myself included, the content of the letter may not come as a surprise, but only very few of us can actually substantiate allegations of government corruption and voter intimidation with such detail and first hand witness account. Thanks to Mr. Amare for the eye-opening letter and to Dr. Seid for sharing with the rest of us. Hello US State Department!

A Rejuvenated UDJ?

The news of Negasso Gidada and Seye Ahraha, former high officials of the Woyane regime, joining the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ) party a few days ago was pleasantly surprising. It was surprising because it came on the heels of a UDJ internal turmoil and the mysterious departure of Yacob Hailemariam from his UDJ leadership position. It is a pleasant news because these two gentlmen are seasoned politicians who have the potential to add a significant number of supporters to the fledgling UDJ from key constituencies.

However, with all the disappointments Ethiopians have had to go through with the recent Kinijit debacle, not to mention many of the other false starts, it would be prudent to take a wait-and-see attitude regarding this news. We will all find out before too long whether or not the Negasso-Seye move can rejuvenate the UDJ, perhaps in a matter of weeks. If the energy I witnessed among the participants of the vigil for Birtukan at the White House earlier tonight can be taken as an indication of the UDJ's future, then we may be in for more pleasant surprises in the near future. In any case, the UDJ is lucky to have these two gentlemen on its side, and good luck to all of them!

Milton Friedman

Interview with Richard Heffner on The Open Mind (December 1975)

Nominate Birtukan

Milton Friedman was probably the most influential economist of the 20th century. But he will most likely be remembered in history as one of the greatest champions of freedom and limited government. Birtukan deserves the 2010 Milton Friedman Prize. Please nominate her here. Please also send the post card prepared by Amnesty International to the European Commissioner for Humanitarian and Development Aid. Thanks.

Wycoff this!

I just read a news item that said the US is concerned about the restriction on Ethiopian opposition groups ahead of elections in May of 2010. The AFP quotes Karl Wycoff, the deputy assistant secretary of state for East African Affairs, as saying:

The US is concerned by what we see as reduction in political space and the ability of opposition parties to operate and do what opposition parties should do.

Hallelujah! I guess the US gets it, eh! The Obama Administration seems to be worried that the Ethiopian regime is closing down the political space. But, in all seriousness, isn't this the same administration that gave its stamp of approval for a Zenawi-$hawel deal just three weeks ago while knowing fully well that the Ethiopian regime is not remotely interested in openning up the political space? Who are they trying to fool?

If such a concern had been voiced publicly when foreign minster Seyoum Mesfin visited with Hillary Clinton at the State Department a couple of weeks ago, a case could have been made that the US is serious about its concern. But it was not, and that was done deliberately. Instead, that burden was was left to Karl Wycoff, a mid-level official whose main expertise is counter-terrorism.

It is quite evident that the reason Karl Wycoff was sent to Addis has nothing to do with pressuring the Ethiopian regime into openning up the political space but, rather, it had everything to do with the situation in Somalia and punishing the Eritrean regime for its cynical support of Somali Islamists.

Enough with such nonsense! It is now apparent that there isn't a dime's worth of difference in US foreign policy towards Ethiopia between this administration and its predecessor. Shame on me for believing that a change of political party in Washington could be a harbinger of better days for Ethiopia.

The Dominance of Shoa

Excerpt from "Rebels and Separatists Ethiopia: Regional Resistance to a Marxist Regime" by Paul Henze (December 1985).

Ethnicity had almost nothing to do with the emergence of Shoa as the core of the revitalized Ethiopian state at the end of the nineteenth century. Shoa played as important a role in modern Ethiopian evolution as Prussia did in the development of modern Germany. There are interesting parallels. Shoa was for much of its early history a frontier region, as Prussia was. Its people were a mixture of several ethnic strains, as Prussians were.

The challenge of dealing with frontier problems stimulated in Shoa the emergence of strong leadership and the development of efficient administration and military forces. Among a mixed population, concern with ethnic exclusiveness brought no advantage to those competing for leadership. Attitudes prevailing in Shoa created a favorable climate for the intensified and successful effort Haile Selassie made to overcome regionalism and build the governmental framework of a modern state.

To characterize Haile Selassie's Ethiopia as Amhara dominance, as many Western journalists and exile separatists have done, is to apply facile preconceptions rather than to analyze how the system worked. In the pre-Shoan era, the core of senior officials in the Ethiopian government came from Tigre or from the central Amhara provinces: Begemder, Gojjam, and Wollo. During the reign of Menelik II, the representation of these areas in the central government fell sharply.

The northern Amhara regions were severely disadvantaged during Haile Selassie's reign not only by lack of representation at upper levels of government, but as development accelerated after World War II, by lack of a proportionate share of investment and developmental priority. Table [below] gives the number of high-ranking officials (ministers, ministers of state, and vice ministers) in the central government from various regions over a 24-year period.


Shoan dominance of the central government intensified during Haile Selassie's long reign, with Eritreans coming to play a strong secondary role. If data were available on Eritrean participation in other ranks of the civil service and in key technical and professional positions (telecommunications, air transport, teaching, law, and commerce), they would show a higher proportion than Shoans in some fields; the northern Amhara provinces would account for only a minor fraction of such personnel.

Shoa's position can be exaggerated. I stress it here only to dispose of the facile characterization that, in its extreme form, depicts Ethiopia as a conspiracy of the Amhara against all its other inhabitants. The predominance of Shoa has an exact parallel in the preeminence of Paris and the surrounding region in France, of London and the home counties in England, and of Athens in modern Greece. Patterns vary. Rome and Latium dominated Italy for hundreds of years during the Roman republic and empire but have not gained the same position in modern Italy. Prussia, of course, no longer exists.

Ethiopia has survived long periods when power was diffused among regions. Until early modern times, the imperial court moved seasonally from one part of the country to another. But when Menelik II chose Addis Ababa as his capital in 1886, it quickly became the hub around which Ethiopian politics rotated, and the surrounding region, the old kingdom of Shoa, took on a central role in Ethiopian life which it has never lost. Addis Ababa and Shoa do dominate Ethiopia. They are the melting pot of the country's ethnic strains. The revolution has changed nothing in this respect.

No Famine Here

If you scan all the news outlets from Ethiopia in the last month, both govenment-owned and private, you would not know that the country is on the brink of famine. The reason is because the government is too busy doing all it can to discourge any talk of the impending famine.

In an article published two days ago, Toronto's Globe and Mail reports on the attempt to hide the famine in this way:

On the 25th anniversary of the famine that killed nearly a million Ethiopians in 1984, any talk of drought and hunger is still a highly sensitive issue in this impoverished country, subject to draconian controls by the government. Two regimes were toppled in the 1970s and 1990s because of discontent over famines, and the current regime is determined to avoid their fate.

Aid agencies that dare to speak out publicly, or even to allow a photo of a malnourished child at a feeding centre, can be punished or expelled from the country. Visas or work permits are often denied, projects can be delayed, and import approvals for vital equipment can be buried. Most relief agencies are prohibited from allowing visits by journalists or foreigners, except under strict government control.

An article by René Lefort in March of this year titled "Ethiopia's famine: deny and delay" correctly pointed out the government's approach to handling news of the drought that has gripped the nation since 2007. But the regime was quick to lambast Mr. Lefort's article as "full of exaggerations and in some cases downright inventions." I am pretty sure they will come after Geoffrey York, the reporter for the Globe and Mail article, with the same gusto!

Aradaw $hawel

"We are slaves. I can't see how we can reconcile if the guy in power can't reconcile." Hailu $hawel, July 2007

"This time we really negotiated hard, we really came to an understanding, we've even come to a trust, that is a big jump, I believe that is a change from 2005." Hailu $hawel, October 2009

Ethiopia will be a Battleground for Sectarian Violence by 2025

Continuing on the theme of religion and politics from the last post, please consider the quote below from "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World", a November 2008 report by the US National Intelligence Council (NIC). Regarding religion-based identity politics and the intolerance that might result from it, the authors of the report note the following:

Although inherited and chosen layers of identity will be as "authentic" as conventional categories of citizenship and nationality, one category possibly will continue to stand out. Islam will remain a robust identity. Sectarian and other differences within Islam will be a source of tension or worse. The challenge of Islamic activism could produce a more intense backlash of Christian activism. Nigeria, Ethiopia, and other places in Africa will remain battlegrounds in this sectarian struggle.

Well, we are 15 years away from 2025, but Nigeria is already in the midst of a sectarian struggle since 1999 when Sharia was imposed in 12 northern states. There have been some instances of sectarian violence in Ethiopia since 2006 but, thankfully, none on a scale witnessed in Nigeria. Is it possible that Ethiopia can experience a large scale sectarian violence like Nigeria? Sure, it is possible.

What was intriguing to me about the NIC quote was that one of its authors, Johnnie Carson, would later become the United States Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, a position that is largely responsible for most of the US policy towards sub-Saharan Africa. Ambassador Carson was the main Africa expert at NIC at the time the report was published.

I am inclined to think that this quote gives a clue as to how the US policy towards Ethiopia might evolve in the Obama Administration under Carson's guidance. The clue, I think, is this: the Obama Administration could conclude that the causes of the main political problems in Ethiopia are ethnic and sectarian related and, therefore, may determine that the US foregn policy making apparatus should not be used in sorting out "internal" issues.

If this comes to fruition, then I think that the Obama Administration will have made a serious error in judgment and would leave Ethiopian human rights and democracy advocates out in the cold just like its predecessors did.

Here below is Ambassador Carson being interviewed by VOA's Tizita Belachew in the Spring shortly after talking office. His lackluster answer to Tizita's pointed question about a revision of American policy towards Ethiopia is telling.

Mahmoud Muhammad Taha

Mahmoud Muhammad Taha (1909-1985) was a Sudanese engineer turned spiritual leader who was executed by the regime of Jaafar al-Nimeiri. I came to learn about him through his association with another Sudanese intellectual named Abdullahi Ahmed an-Naim, a professor of law at Emory University, whom, in turn, I came across with while cruising through Sudanese blogs a few days ago.

I read a fascinating three-year-old lengthy article about Taha titled "The Moderate Martyr: A radically peaceful vision of Islam" on The New Yorker magazine, which is well worth your time to read if you care about human rights and the role of religion, Islam in particular, in politics. Here is a quote from the article:

Naim’s quandary over Islam was an intensely personal conflict--he called it a "deadlock." What he heard at Taha’s lecture resolved it. Taha said that the Sudanese constitution needed to be reformed, in order to reconcile "the individual’s need for absolute freedom with the community’s need for total social justice." This political ideal, he argued, could be best achieved not through Marxism or liberalism but through Islam--that is, Islam in its original, uncorrupted form, in which women and people of other faiths were accorded equal status.

The Islamists of the Sudan led by Hasan al-Turabi may have killed Taha, but they have failed terribly at killing his idea. Naim is the most visible proponent of Taha's idea. You can get a sample of his views from this recent interview at Georgetown University where he asserted that "As a Muslim, I need the state to be secular." Below is Taha's unwavering statement at his kangaroo court trial. Long live Taha!