While the above might be true for the Middle East now, it is by far long overdue for Africa and for the many millions who live under totalitarian regimes in the guise of democracy. America still stands for stability rather than democracy when it comes to deal with situations in Africa.

Africa began liberating itself from its colonial masters in the beginning of the 1960’s and every government was welcome as long as it was national in character. It did not matter whether it was democratic or not. It was ok as long as an indigenous tyrant, who became more autocratic and more brutal than the “white” master, replaced the colonial master. The west accepted it because of the bipolar power structure that existed then. Stability was the main concern; because an unstable country was a menace to the balance of power between the word divide: unstable countries usually precipitated towards the then Soviet Union or the Eastern bloc. Hence, the west, especially the United States was content when totalitarian governments, like the Congo of Mobutu, the Egypt of Nasser, the Indonesia of Suharto and so forth, trampled democratic rights of these people The right to speak freely, the right to associate, the right to worship and the right to education were foreign to these countries and the West ignored the pleas of these peoples for the sake of stability. But stability without democracy was unsustainable and those countries with little or no democracy became the unstable and the least governable. Revolutions became customary and people were forced to choose between the West, which kept aloof to their predicament, and the East, which superficially encouraged democratic principles and justice for all. Thus, countries like Ethiopia and many others in Africa fell prey to the Soviet manipulation and machinations.

The democratic instinct of human beings far outweighed the superficial stability created with handouts and foreign aid which propped up dictators and totalitarian governments. The relief obtained through such acts was only temporary. Some handout may have trickled down to the masses but most of it was used to buttress regimes that were alien to the people. Stable governments, as we know them in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s were stable in name only because they lacked the basic ingredient to be stable: democratic institutions and good governance.

Securing democratic ideals is the best guarantee of securing stability because an undemocratic society is an unstable society. For the United States to shortchange democracy for stability since the end of the Second World War has cost her a lot of friends. It is high time that it took a different tack. We do not want America to force its will on others, but it should help us find our own way towards our own freedom. The tyranny that is imposed in millions of us should be voted out by democratic means, which ought to be the will of the people. Stability without democracy is not achievable and is false stability. The rhetoric of Western democracies should not be3 confined to the sand dunes of Iraq or the mountains of Afghanistan. The Western democracies, especially The USA and Britain need to stop Meles- not only for the sake of human rights or democracy but also to preserve their own strategic interest and to stop terrorism from spiraling out of control
As far as Ethiopia is concerned, the last fourteen years of political activity is a good example where the expediency of stability over democracy and good governance was meaningless as manifested by the outcome of the recent May election: elections whose outcome is yet to be announced. In Ethiopia the shortsighted Ethno-centric government denies the democratic rights that it is enshrined in the constitution, which it has lip serviced to uphold. The oppressive regime of Meles had to resort to guns and his elite Agazi force to subdue the people and to steal the election.

Beneath the so-called democratic institution, the Meles regime has installed a system of power structure and administration to perpetuate its undemocratic and ethnocentric rule. Meles and his cronies cannot deceive themselves by pretending to be democratic but at the same time suppressing all democratic alternatives to prolong their rule. The present government serves Meles and Meles alone, it is not democratic, it is not for the people and bodes little to safeguard human rights. Meles continues to over rate his importance to Ethiopia, going to the extent of equating his personal ambitions with Ethiopia’s destiny, thus using repression to achieve the unachievable. Repression has a limited life span and does not last long. It is bound to fail and even his elite Agazi force could not sustain it. Stability alone without democracy is meaningless and is sure to fail and the days of reckoning are at long last in sight. Justice will prevail and Meles will have his special place in the annals of Ethiopian history, a place reserved for dictators and tyrants like him.

Democracy entails that citizens are able to replace governments. It should ensure the security of civil and political rights. The rights of free organization and association must be respected and citizens must be aware of these rights in order to exercise them. Democracy should involve also social and economic rights. Poverty, ignorance and lack of education are impediments to social and economic progress and voting becomes meaningless when citizens are preoccupied with the effort for survival on a daily basis. The government of Meles has done little to alleviate those problems even though it has been in power for the last fourteen years. The party cadres and those closest to Meles and his entourage have benefited a lot at the expense of the people. It is time to let go of government by default and the international community should demand the prevalence of democracy to the people rather that stability in the region, since an undemocratic regime is in the final analysis the primary cause of instability of the region. The universality of freedom is unquestionable and to be free and democratic, people should be steadfast. Though this is difficult, it is achievable.

Coming to the last elections of May 15th, it can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the elections were manipulated and the outcome decided long before Election Day. Let us take some examples how the election defrauding process took place. Just before the election, there were two huge demonstrations for support: one for the ruling party and the other for the opposition. During the EPRDF rally, over half a million people were out, buses were provided for the people to come to the square. Money was paid to encourage participation. During the opposition rally, these same participants plus much more people came out-well over a million and half by some estimates. People were seen and heard chatting, “Yesterday we were out to fill our stomachs, today we are out in support of our aims” clearly demonstrating the pay off by the government. During Election Day, the EPRDF lost Addis Ababa by a huge margin. One then could ask, “Where were those people who adorned the Meskel Square?” Half a million people went out in support, less than a few thousand did go out to vote fore EPRDF. That is why the close colleagues of Meles were kicked out of the next People’s assembly. The mayor, the education minister and several other high ranking EPRDF members were all booted out.

A few days earlier to the rallies, the Addis Ababa merchants were called to a meeting in order to endorse Meles and his party. The organizers who are beneficiaries of Meles, ordered all merchants to pay dues to finance the campaign of EPRDF. At the door of the assembly hall, there were given the campaign emblem of EPRDF, which they were forced to pin to the lapel of their jackets. As soon as they got seated, all the merchants look of their jackets pretending to ward off the heart in the hall: the actual reason was that the merchants did not want to be seen on television wearing the pin and thus avoid being branded as EPRDF supporters. There are other instances where the people did show their abhorrence to EPRDF. A case in point is the encounter of a peasant farmer in Gojjan who was confronted by an EPRDF candidate. After a rally of indoctrination the candidate asked the peasant as to which candidate he was going to vote for. The peasant farmer thought for a while and replied that he was not sure of whom he was to vote for, but asserted that he definitely knew whom not to vote for. This says a lot about EPRDF and its so-called “win” in the elections.

There was a case where Meles called leaders of various religious denominations and asked them to pray for peace. This was several days ahead of the elections. I would not assume what each religious leader said, but it becomes very suspicious for a head of government to ask for prayers for peace ahead of elections, unless he anticipates trouble. Trouble will only come if the elections were manipulated or if the results were defrauded. True enough, the elections were manipulated in all but a few areas where observers were allowed to see the process. In the majority of constituents out of the reach of the few observers that were assigned, opposition candidates were beaten up, imprisoned or otherwise harassed. Ballot boxes were tampered with, quite a few were lost and most of them were stuffed up. The pattern of the results became quite clear. In the cities, the opposition won by a landslide. In the countryside, EPRDF declared victory even before counting and tallying began. When the opposition cried foul, the leadership was put under surveillance. When the students and transport workers demonstrated, there were murdered in cold blood, the leadership of the opposition were imprisoned and a few were not allowed food for as much as two days. Thousands were sent to labor camps and the “Goebel of Meles” had the audacity to call the students mere hooligans and justified the murderous as appropriate. That was stability at any cost, and that is what the Ethiopian leadership is worried about. Human rights-right of association, freedoms of speech, etc were mere slogans just to be heard but not practiced.

I hope that is all changed now. A month or two ago, Secretary Condoleezza Rice reasserted the principle of prioritizing democratic principles over stability. This has obviously come very late for some countries like Ethiopia, but as the saying goes “better late than never.” We now have an ally in our search for democracy. As president Bush said when he began his second term: “America will not impose our style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, to attain their own freedom, and to make their own way.” The Ethiopian people would form their own government, but we need help from the USA to find our own voice. Let us not sustain Meles at the expense of the good people of Ethiopia. Let democracy flourish in the streets of Addis Ababa and every city in Ethiopia, let democracy flourish in every peasant’s household and in all Ethiopian communities so that wee finally can create a democratic and stable Ethiopia. The Ethiopian people have said enough is enough and are willing to go all the way to attain democracy. All that we need from the major powers, especially the USA, is a little help. Freedom is our destiny and is inevitable. So let us not prop up Meles and his cronies. He is a communist dictator in Sheep’s skin. He is not Ethiopia and others should not be misled by him.

The Ethiopian people can not continue to be slaughtered and the world has a responsibility to stop the state terrorism unleashed by Meles. Ethiopians are looking towards the United States for action. A press release “urging the government and the opposition to refrain from violence and to maintain a peaceful atmosphere” is not enough.

I would like to conclude by quoting the former Secretary of State Colin Powell who said “There is no country that is not touched by America, for we have become the motive force foe freedom and democracy in the world….we are attached by a thousand cords to the world at large, to its teaming cities, to its remotest regions, to its oldest civilizations, to its newest cries of freedom. This means that we need to lead, to guide, to helping every country that has a desire to be free, open, and prosperous.” These should not be words uttered merely for the sake of propaganda or for the sake of political expediency. I believe that it was and is a public policy statement and as such should be acted upon. Anything less is un-American.