The K-street ostriches and their London counterparts

By Yerasneh Kassa

February 16, 2006

“Since Prime Minister Meles came to power 14 years ago, his security forces have imprisoned, tortured and harassed thousands of people who have criticized the government. But in the countryside, such heavy-handed methods are often not necessary. Local officials are able to use their control over much-needed rural development schemes as leverage over the people they govern.” – Human Rights Watch; September 5, 2005

Being of a school of thought that believes in keeping your enemies closer, I check in on pro-TPLF websites to see how their strategy of lying and deception is taking shape to date. I could not help noticing an article of ‘analysis’ by Reuters’ Bryson Hull on February 15. And of course, it was proudly placed top and center like a plaque. As I started writing this, websites frequented by people who actually care about Ethiopia were starting to catch on, giving it little to almost no attention.

It was to say the least a disappointing analysis. Despite appearing on the worldwide web in the wake of assurances by US congressmen that they are now truly devoted to Ethiopian democracy, all Ethiopians in their heart of hearts know that the West is never a friend of the Horn. You may still be high from the invigorating speech by the congressmen, but I know that like me, most of you are being filled with a sense of alarm. How can a certain group of people from the corridors of influence appear to show a true concern for the sovereignty of democracy in Ethiopia, while another group give such analysis that is, if I could say so, criminal? Should you feel that I am being a bit over-dramatic, you should read the line below of what International Crisis Group (ICG) analyst Matt Bryden said.

“As long as he can keep the bloodshed at a minimum and avoid a return to war, he can muddle through.”

Yes, the agony of Ethiopians is of very little consequence; just keep the bloodshed to a minimum. Right? I mean, Meles, the very prime minister that shudders with disgust at the sight of his own flag, the very character who hates and can not wait to see Ethiopia melt into a cesspool of ethnic strife, sent people by the tens of thousands, people that actually loved their country, people who were not amused to see its boarders threatened, to fight a boarder war. By the thousands they went and by the thousands they died. The last count was over 70,000. And yet Meles ‘muddled through’ and here he is again to muddle through another series of bloodletting. The imprisonment all around the country may have reached 70 thousand but the death toll may not have, at least not the official count. So our analysts think why not. Why not they say, why not slide through this one as well without that many dents?

Double standard has become a feeble cliché, it is vulgar, it is criminal, and it is damn racist!!

Let us see how Bryden tries to legitimize the TPLF strategy of brutality.

“Even though the government is showing all these signs of autocratic behavior, they supervised a process that saw the opposition’s strength increase tenfold.”

This must be the most patronizing analysis ever made. TPLF is to be led to believe that they have outdone themselves by allowing election. The tenfold strong opposition that Bryden speaks of is bound and gagged, and without any regard to the people’s conviction the fact that TPLF allowed the May 15 elections is to override all its brutality.

Bryden continues to say, “If they try to dominate, then we’re probably going to see little brushfire rebellions breaking out in parts of Ethiopia, not at a national level, but as a voice of protest at the continuing hold on power of the EPRDF.”

My Bryden may be more knowledgeable on his government’s commitment on assisting TPLF in resisting rebellions. He may be in on how much support with resources and expertise is afforded for TPLF to fend of resistance. But it is wishful thinking to trivialize the resolute spirit of Ethiopians. Mr. Bryden may successfully invoice TPLF for his flat lies and empty promises, but it is foolish to think that Ethiopians will fail to see through it and buy the current struggle as brushfire rebellion as K Street peddles it.

And here is a remark by Tom Cargill of the London Think tank Catham House.

“What he’ll be hoping to do is emulate what leaders in other African countries where reputations have suddenly taken a knock, and that is ride it out.” He also said,

‘With a pervasive security and intelligence service to keep his ruling Ethiopian Peoples Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) abreast of internal or external threats, he should have the strength to do it.”

These K Street Ostriches and their London counterparts got their heads deep in the dune that is the Ethiopian crisis. Not only are they of the belief that if they close their eyes it will go away, but their analysis is very dull.

This dull analysis found its way from K Street and London to the pages of Reuters with money TPLF taxed from poor and starving Ethiopians. But I am not convinced that TPLF got their money’s worth. TPLF have been telling us that they are going nowhere and they have the power to do so. What is in Mr. Cargill’s statement that is any different?

But all things aside, why would guardians of democracy root for a despot to utilize the power at its disposal and WhackEmAll the current upheaval? Why are these people short sighted? How long is the stifled dissent underneath the appearance of stability going to last?

Why would the guardians of democracy opt for a cruel alternative to the question of the people? Instead of mulling over this confused analysis and subsequently feeling disappointed, one should decode the history between the west and people that stood up for themselves, be it globalization or colonialism. For people like those in Ethiopia that for generations refused to give in to colonization or people of Haiti who fought the French in the nineteenth century and dared to be the only independent black nation in the western hemisphere, will inevitably be punished for it. Case in point the shadenfreud analysis in question.

In his infinite wisdom, Stephen Morrison of The Center for Strategic and International studies says,

“If he has to resort to crackdowns, he’ll do that. And the West is going to continue to be there for him and ask him to do things for them.”

This is not news to Ethiopians, nor is it to Africans, nor is it to Haitians. It is never news in people of pillar nations; it is a subtle quotation from the manual of subjugation and globalization. This classic K street analysis is the best-case scenario for stability devoid of justice. It is a master plan for exploitation by proxy. It is the combination for the safe that is the sovereignty of a nation. One that possesses the combination gets to bypass mutual respect.

Even though one tends to feel disappointed by this analysis, one should not miss the fact that this very production strengthens the belief that Ethiopia’s hope comes not from strangers who claim to have a stake but from her true sons and daughters who love her.

Article in question:
ANALYSIS-Ethiopia’s Meles can weather political storms 15 Feb 2006 10:09:26 GMT
Source: Reuters
By C. Bryson Hull

Take a stand – Please join me in writing to these analysts and express your opinions:

Tom Cargill
Chatham House
10th street James Square
London SW1Y4LE
Tel: 44(0)2079575700
Fax: 44 (0)2079575710
[email protected]

Matt Bryden
International Crisis Group
1629 K Street NW Suite 450
Washington DC 20006
Tel: 2027851601
Fax: 2027851630
[email protected]

Stephen Morrison
Center for Strategic & International Studies
1800 K St. NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: 2028870200
Fax: 2027753199
Office of External Relations
Tel: 2027413878
Fax: 2027753199

The writer, Yerasneh Kassa, can be reached for comments at [email protected]