In the
aftermath of the 2005 elections, public trust and confidence in the electoral
process are shattered. The democratization process has to be rebuilt from
scratch. Evidence lies in the willingness and readiness of all parties,
especially, officials of the ruling-party, to vow publicly and unconditionally
that it will accept the rule of law and scrupulously recognize the rights of
Ethiopian voters to cast their ballots in secret and without undue pressure or
influence from any party. Both the ruling-party and the opposition camp must
begin the healing process and restore mutual confidence and trust among the
population now for this to happen. They must recognize that the election is not
about the personalities who lead parties. Elections are about offering the
Ethiopian people an institutional alternative to improve their lives. I predict
that without public voice and participation, the current deplorable conditions
in the economy will persist; and corruption will go on. This does not mean that
there will not be growth.
The
indicators to-date suggest that the governing party is nowhere closer to the
demands of the population and opposition groups today than it was 8 years ago. It
digs deeper and deeper into a garrison mentality and forces the entire society no
other choice but to rebel against oppression and restore justice. Accordingly,
opposition political parties and civic organizations need to get their act
together now in order to lead and to avert potential chaos. The alternative
they offer must be much more promising and compelling than the current
governing party. In my estimation, this will not happen by chance. Offering
alternatives to the public comes from an institutional process that guarantees
the Ethiopian people the right to engage in and experience the true meaning of
a free, fair open, transparent and competitive election. This will be the
essence of political pluralism and a departure from the tradition of leftist
politics and the current ethnic elite system. To start with, opponents have an
obligation to the Ethiopian people and reach-out to one another and build
confidence and trust among themselves.
Cynics
argue that proposing such a notion in peaceful change is naïve. The system will
not allow peaceful change. They feel that the prospects are dim, because
political pluralism, the evolution of democratic institutions and a level
playing field in the economy will undermine single-party political and economic
dominance. This, they say, the TPLF/EPRDF will never allow. This point of view
has credibility. Is it really appropriate to worry whether or not the ruling
party allows free and fair elections? We know that it has not and will not.
What should concern us is organizational and leadership weakness within the
opposition camp. For example, with a few exceptions, opposition parties are led
by traditional and unimaginative political actors. The country needs a new cadre
of leaders with creativity, imagination and capacity and ability to innovate
and tools. The society needs political organization and leadership that places
the interests of the country and its entire people ahead of party and
personality.
The
society needs new and insightful leaders capable and willing to bury the past (without
forgetting it) and move toward a future that accommodates everyone and leaves
no one. The burden of proof that officials of the ruling-party and opposition
groups are not afraid of change that will come from the Ethiopian people
remains to be seen. It is their ability to dare to change that will determine
the future and undo the current oppressive system.Calling the shots by using monies to buy
elections and the media to propagate ideology won’t change the way citizens
feel deeply about the ruling-party. Borrowing heavily from the banking system
and from outside to carry-out growth without participation that will change the
structure of the economy will not change the lives of the vast majority and
stop the hemorrhaging of Ethiopia’s social capital. Once people rise to claim
their future, there is no force that will stop them. We saw this in North
Africa and we are witnessing it in the Middle East. This is why the opposition
camp cannot afford to lag behind the needs and hopes of the population.
Political
parties and leaders must believe that changes in attitude and mindset are
possible. The recent change within one faction of the OLF is indicative a
positive trend in the right direction. It is not enough. We all need to build
on it. For example, what about Article 39 that keeps the country in permanent
suspense? Some argue that ethnic
politics play substantial roles in highly developed nations such as Canada and
Belgium. These countries cannot be considered as peers. One cannot deny the
fact that there is ethnicity and ethnic affinity of some sort. Both countries
are, however, constitutional monarchies with parliamentary forms of government.
First and foremost, a Canadian or Belgian accepts herself or himself as a
national of the country, namely as Canadian or Belgian while enjoying cultural
and linguistic freedom.
Continuing
the fracturing political and social culture of blaming one another, refusing to
dialogue with one another and demeaning one another will lead Ethiopian society
nowhere. Perpetuating the same ideological path of ethno-nationalism and
ethnic-federalism is a limiting model and strategy. Among other things, it will
not advance broad-based, equitable and rapid growth and development. It lacks
wisdom and farsightedness. It has proven to be disastrous for the vast majority
of the Ethiopian people. It will restrain productivity and increased incomes
for millions of people.
The reader
would appreciate the potent socioeconomic and political arguments which would
follow in assessing the reasons and conclusions as to why ethno-nationalism and
ethnic federalism are lethal for Ethiopian society. Simply put, it is a
strategy of divide and rule and is intended to maintain minority ethnic elite
single party dominance. This is why Freedom House concluded that the
democratization process is “stalled.” In my view, it closed. It is worth going
back to and tracing its history and attributes and the reasons of why Michela
Wrong, who wrote a riveting fact based analysis of ethnicity and corruption in
Kenya, concluded that this ethnic elite governance is “toxic.” The question
that I should like to probe is the extent to which there is direct co-relation between
the current “monolithic party state,” the Economist’s contention of the
Ethiopian developmental state as an instrument of “plunder” and ethnic-based
rule.
During the
1970s–the rise of ethno-nationalism and wars of national liberation–buffeted
through diplomatic and material globalization–cost Ethiopia and the Ethiopian
people dearly. The country lost its traditional access to the Red Sea. While it
is not tenable to argue that it does not have some fundamental democratic
features–the right to use and enjoy one’s ethnic language and culture and to
demand recognition of one’s history and so on–there are numerous political, administrative
management, economic and social capital formation, domestic market and
investment issues that are apparent and must be addressed openly and boldly for
the benefit of all Ethiopians.Let me
explain them in greater detail drawing from the experiences of other countries
and insights from compatriots.
First,
there is no doubt that ethnic federalism works against; and actually undermines national level social capital formation.
The education system is deliberately narrow, parochial, shallow, and in terms
of the challenges of this century, of low quality. I am not aware of a country
that has achieved developed country status by adoptingsocialization process that is patently
anti-country and anti-broad society. How in the world would Ethiopians compete
in the 21st century with a human capital that is fear based,
divisive and second rate? It is interesting to note that ethnic elites equip
their children and others in the privileged camp through access to private
schools and financing them to study overseas thus giving them the best
education possible.
Second, by
design the regime’s ethnic based social
capital formation does not nurture or promote
communication across ethnic and religious lines. In fact, it reinforces
separate identity, world outlook, behaviors and tendencies. If this generation
of Ethiopians is barred to communicate with one another naturally and as human
beings–and more important as Ethiopian citizens–is it not possible that they
will be strangers to one another in their own country? How would they trust one
another when they grow up if they are taught that they come from
“irreconcilable ethnic and religious groups?” How would they build a modern, democratic and just multiethnic society
if they are encouraged to believe in separate ethnic identities? At a basic
level, how would they tolerate one another? How would they contain emotions if
the system breaks down? This is the reason for my thesis that ethnic federalism
keeps the society in permanent suspense and undermines solidarity across
manmade ethnic boundaries.
Third,
ethnic federalism constrains the free
flow of knowledge, experience and capital, including labor, across
geopolitical, religious and ethnic lines. This is exactly the opposite of
trends in other countries such as Ghana. Unrestrained communication and the
sharing of knowledge and best practices are vital in modernizing the country
and in giving each citizen an opportunity to succeed. Ethnic federalism based
location is now a major barrier to opportunity compounding the criteria of
loyalty to minority ethnic elite party.
Fourth, by
design, Article 39 of the Constitution reinforces secession, civil wars and
permanent suspense. When people see no other option in asserting their
socioeconomic and political rights, they tend to resort to extremes, including
the right to secede. Is it not strange then to find that the top leadership
professes nationalism and national unity whenever it wishes and whenever this
advances its narrow interests; but does the opposite in creating the conditions
that will make national independence, territorial integrity and the unity of
the population enduring. One of these conditions is free, fair and competitive
election.
Following
its defeat in the electoral process in 2005, the Prime Minister had the
audacity to claim that the opposition intended to trigger ethnic genocide or
Intrahamwe that claimed the lives of close to 20 percent of Rwanda’s population.
It seems that the Prime Minister stretches facts in order to achieve an
objective. The sad thing is that such a declaration is irresponsibility without
accountability. The Ethiopian people have lived with one another for thousands
of years. They have fought side by side and defended the country he now rules.
For the
above reasons, I suggest that continuation of ethno-nationalism and
ethnic-federalism as a geopolitical architecture to resolve internal ethnic
differences has in fact created unintended consequences of potentially fracturing
and dismantling the fabric of Ethiopian society. The country’s cohesiveness and
accommodating the democratic aspirations of all its mosaic are vital for its
survival, modernization and sustainability. Peace and national reconciliation
will be impossible without political pluralism, justice, equitable access to
opportunities, freedom and democracy for the country’s mosaic. Otherwise a
competitive national private sector will not emerge and endemic poverty will
not be removed. This is why a new win-win formula is imperative.
A shared
understanding of the benefits which would come from commonalities becomes a
driving principle for debate and dialogue. If there is no consensus about
commonalities, vulnerabilities will emerge and the current system will endure.
Economic and social integration across geographic and ethnic lines will not
take roots. Vulnerabilities would deepen implying weaknesses in mobilizing the
capabilities of all Ethiopians in order to preserve the country and move it
forward. It cannot move forward without social justice and political freedom.
It cannot move forward without all members of Ethiopian society having fair and
equitable access to opportunities. Enclaves of ethnic and localized growth that
benefit ethnic elites and their supporters do not offer the panacea to
technological backwardness, hunger, hopelessness, unemployment, low incomes and
poverty.Inclusiveness and laying
favorable conditions for shared prosperity will do marvels for Ethiopian society
and will reduce the thwarting roles of globalization. Why? Ethiopians will be
masters of their natural resources and will be in a better position to chart
their future. Together, they will be strong.
In
November 2009, I attended part of a presentation on politics, repression,
instability and the political economy of reform in Sub-Saharan African
countries sponsored by the World Bank. A Ghanaian Political Scientist, Dr.
Emmanuel Akwetey, made a remark which I found pertinent to the Ethiopian
situation. His analysis was on the paradoxical links of democratic elections and instability. In highly ethnically
polarized societies such as Ethiopia, this danger exists for sure. But, its
intensity will depend on how issues will be framed and presented to the public
by contestants in the future. “By accepting the liberal democratic model that
we will have cyclical instability, we have accepted that elections should not emphasize our cohesion.”This is the key point of my argument.
If
contestants do not surface and debate fundamental issues that affect all of the
Ethiopian people and instead focus on narrow, ethnic-oriented and parochial and
competing interests, tensions will mushroom and instability will ensue. Akwetey
put it succinctly when he said “We need systems that consider cohesion after the election has been
won.” Losers and winners must accept outcomes as long as the election process
is free, fair, open, transparent and competitive. There must be the prospect of
a next time. Elections are not like coup d’états. The ruling-party and some
within the opposition, treat them as such. The hard work of building
institutions and the infrastructure to support democratization is lost in the
process. This is why ordinary Ethiopians mistrust their government and its institutions
and have low confidence in the opposition. The opposition must surmount the
confidence and trust deficit by reaching out to one another now not half a
century from now.
When I
underscored the need for Ethiopia’s social cohesiveness, I was referring to the
country’s sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national
interests as well as to the benefits which will accrue from the sovereignty and
authority of the Ethiopian people and commonalities in the economic and social
system. I suggest that the solution starts by identifying and agreeing on
common problems with a view of finding common solutions. These commonalities
refer to the interests and needs of all citizens. One common interest they
share is the need to assault endemic poverty in all of its manifestations. Another
is gross human rights violations. Another is the plunder of the resources by a
minority ethnic elite and global actor. Cohesiveness within the opposition camp
provides them with the numerical strength to challenge the system which keeps
them poor, powerless, ineffective and isolated from one another. The immense
untapped treasures embedded in each and every nationality, religious, gender and
demographic group suggests prevalence of potential social, cultural and economic
benefits that will make the society prosperous in the long-term. It is this
prospect that should lead opponents to coalesce.
I say this
because of the social capital inherent in each nationality group and in each
democratic leaning opposition party and civil society. It is the sum total of
these potential assets or parts that make the whole formidable. Exploitation of
this potential to benefit all will make the society far more prosperous than
separate enclaves. For this reason, I genuinely believe in social, cultural,
economic and political equity and inclusion. Innovative organizations and
leaders must recognize the value added of confidence and trust building that
will lead to cooperation rather than rivalry. A mentality of exclusion is
costly and limiting to the democratization process and to growth and
development. Inclusion and social justice do the opposite. These capabilities
can be harnessed to the fullest to the extent that all opponents are able to pull
in the same direction. They cannot do this unless they trust one another; and
work with one another.
Opponents
need to grasp the notion that sustainable economic and equitable development
comes from inclusiveness, a vibrant national private sector and access to
equitable opportunities and investments. The same way that most experts urge
and defend the potential benefits of opening up the political space; I would
forward the notion that socioeconomic sustainability requires opening up or
leveling the investment and economic space for all and each Ethiopian. Opening
up the political and economic spaces are manifestations of pluralism and
democracy. One reinforces the other. One can’t have political democracy unless
it facilitates economic and social justice for all citizens. Opponents can and should
reject ethnic politics, including ethnic federalism because they are major
barriers to genuine democracy that should manifest itself in one person one
vote. For Ethiopian society to succeed in achieving political pluralism, free
and fair elections must be national not local or ethnic-based. I will draw an
economic argument to strengthen this point.
The hunger
problem is not a Tigre or Amhara or Afar or Somali or Oromo problem. The
unemployment problem is not a Somali or Oromo or Afar or Amhara problem. The
land grab problem is not an Oromia or Gambella problem. The social and
institutional de-capitalization problem is not an Afar, Somali or Amhara
problem. Ethiopian national unity is not a Tigray or Oromia or Amhara problem. It is an Ethiopian problem. This is why
I suggest that unbridled access to economic and social opportunities is the
right of all Ethiopians.Without this
right, sustainable and equitable development will remain out of reach for the
vast majority regardless of another five year plan with billions of dollars in
investments. Why?Monopolistic and
ethnic practices are, by definition, inequitable, unjust, unfair and limiting.
Fair investment policies and practices trigger opportunities across
geopolitical, ethnic and demographic lines. Ethnic-based policies and practices
crowd out these possibilities. While there is overwhelming evidence that
Tigrean elites build mansions in Mekele; it is not true that a Tigrean farmer or
any other poor can expect to live in this new mansion. While he may not starve
because of favorable treatment from an ethnic regime, this poor farmer cannot
be identified as better off than an Amhara or Oromo or Gambella farmer and so
on. We cannot afford to generalize and penalize whole ethnic groups because
elites at the top dominate national politics and economics or institutions of
control. I do not underestimate the symbolic importance associated with ethnic
based dominance of national politics, though.
This is
why I argued in the previous two articles on ethnic federalism that state
capitalism—a form of crony capitalism in Ethiopia–is marvelous for a
privileged few because it crowds out deserving individuals from competition. It
is a source of destitution for the majority and those excluded. In 2010, Amare
Mammo who worked for the Ministry of Agriculture under the TPLF and left
dismayed offered a testimony concerning the gap in wellbeing between those in
power and those who are disempowered. He contrasted two emerging classes in
Ethiopian society today, a few largely minority ethnic rich amidst a majority
poor. The prudent question to ask is how the few accessed enormous wealth over
the past 21 years, while leaving the vast majority destitute and poor.
At both
the political and economic levels, opening up the windows of opportunity would
occur only when there is unrestricted and free public participation and
engagements; and a level playing field for economic and social participation
and investments. Involvement by all citizens in the political process assumes
consensus concerning a unified and shared geopolitical and political space that
comes from an identity with Ethiopia and Ethiopian citizenship. Ethnic identity
does not nurture shared political power and shared prosperity. If there is no
willingness to share political power, it is predictable that there will not be
shared prosperity. Why? The political party that is in power determines
policies, decisions, programs and allocation of resources. This control
provides it with the means that defines who would have access and who does not;
who is wealthy and eats more than three meals a day; and who is poor and has
difficulty securing one meal a day. Ethnic politics is this much powerful and
decisive.
It is this
practical and life and death situation that compels all political and civil
opponents and the rest of us to find practical ways to set aside differences
and focus on commonalities and on common actions. We have overwhelming evidence
that the minority ethnic elite party of the TPLF and its ethnic camouflage, the
EPRDF has practically closed political, social and economic space for the vast
majority. This does not mean that it has not succeeded in recruiting millions
of members through economic and financial incentives. However, a mercantile
approach to governing a country is not the same as gaining political legitimacy
through free, fair and competitive elections. Opposition parties, civic groups,
intellectuals and the rest of society can and must seize the opportunity
offered by this shallow and corrupt architecture and challenge it
intelligently, strategically, systematically and in a sustainable way by doing exactly the opposite of ethnic divide
and rule.
What do I
mean by this? Set aside minor behavioral differences; do not dwell on the past;
reach out to one another; build mutual confidence and trust; develop a common
platform; and anchor the struggle within the country now. It is when this
happens that miracles would occur; and this miracle will come from the
Ethiopian people themselves. The overwhelming majority of Ethiopians are tired
of being poor, repressed, disenfranchised, powerless, propertyless and
voiceless. What they need is a political organization and leadership that is
committed to them: rule of law bound, genuinely
democratic, bold, imaginative, inclusive,trustworthy and transformative.
