TPLF/EPRDF vs the People The political dilemma of Ethiopia By Negusse Gamma: January 30, 2005

The people of every country are the
only
safe guardians
of their own rights and are the
only
instruments which can
be used for their destruction.
– Thomas
Jefferson

Political analysts and historians define Nationalism as the spirit of
unity
existing within a country because of common backgrounds or aspirations
of
its people.
The undisputable long historical existence of Ethiopia as a nation is
nothing but the sacrificial result of its diversified people on the
basis of
common nationalistic and patriotic sentiment towards unity of their
motherland.

All past Ethiopian governments – including the dictatorship of Mengistu
Haile Mariam – have been characterized by their devotion to the
nationalistic ideals of the people.
Despite the fact that the internal political history of the country
remains
dependent on successive struggles made between the Amhara and Tigrean
hegemonies and warlords for central government power, at times of an
external threat, common nationalistic cooperation and mutual
undertakings to
safeguard the unity of the nation have always been present.

Ethiopia and Ethiopians had never come across a government that
undermined
their unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty as much as under the
current EPRDF/TPLF government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

The unity of a country and its territorial integrity is the prime
concern of
any government. Only in times of war with a foreign aggressor has a
government gripped power as an occupational army without regard to the
unity
of the country it rules.

After its devotion to the well-being of its people, the basic
responsibilities of a government lie in its commitments to safeguard
the
unity and territorial integrity of the country. Be it democratic,
dictatorial or monarchical, these realities are manifestations of
government
systems.

Border issues of a country have never been and shall never be a point
of
bargain; the Executive cannot GIVE & TAKE whenever they wish. It is not
a
business transaction where two or more parties bargain with territorial
issues as though they were commodities.

To date, a number of governments around the world, have been condemned
and
attacked for the excessive dictatorial powers they exhibit; absence of
rule
of law, violation and abuse of human and democratic rights, injustice,
corruption etc. Though the world has witnessed such tyrannical
governments,
none of them have submitted part or full sovereignty of their countries
willingly.

Yet the EPRDF/TPLF government of Prime Minister Meles is unique. To
any one
who closely and critically analyses the successive acts and decisions
made
by the government in order to legitimize the secession of Eritrea, it
is
undoubtedly a government that assumes an irrevocable arbitrary power
over
the life of its citizens and sovereignty of the country.

Regardless of its malpractices, the EPRDF/TPLF government – known for
its
internal repressive political, economic and social policies – has,
since the
July 1991 Conference and the Transition Period Charter, boldly sought
to
fulfill its mission – a mission to facilitate the successful secession
of
Eritrea and destroy the unity of an ancient historic country –
Ethiopia.

The EPRDF/TPLF government, and particularly Prime Minister Meles, has
obviously played the role of undercover agent for the Eritrean
government of
Isayas Afeworki during the last 14 years.

Regardless of the systematic looting and plundering of Ethiopian
resources
since the transition period until the time of the Ethio-Eritrean border
conflict, the most disgraceful act of Meles and his current government
is
not limited to the successful secession of Eritrea and, an effort to
support
the Eritrean economic prosperity at the cost of the Ethiopian economy
only,
but primarily the failure to protect the interest of its citizens after
the
1998-2000 war between the two countries. After nearly 100,000
Ethiopians
lost their lives to regain the occupied territory, Meles and his
government
unlawfully signed basically a defective technical arrangement and the
Algiers agreement in December 2000; agreements which rely on old
colonial
treaties.

At the Ethio-Eritrean Border Commission (EEBC) tribunal in the Hague,
the
EPRDF/TPLF government of Meles argued on behalf of the Eritrean
government,
going so far as to include an official written statement.

No
government in
the world has ever gone to court to willingly surrender territories it
has
gained by war on account of its human and material resources. The
commission’s boundary rulings don’t favor Ethiopia and Ethiopians, but
rather take away Badme and parts of Irob, thereby uprooting its
citizens
from their ancestral land and forcing them to accept another national
identity.

The Five-Point Peace Plan (5PPP) of Prime Minister Meles is an
arbitrary
proposal that further undermines the right of the people to decide on
the
fate of their country. In line with the 5PPP, the Ethiopian Government
has
agreed, in principle, to the Ethio-Eritrean Border Commission decision.

The
vagueness of the proposal, as well as EPRDF/TPLF’s lack of ethical
principles as a government, is highly suspect.
Surprisingly, the plan has been approved by the ‘Parliament’. In doing
so,
the House of Peoples’ Representatives has exceeded its delegated power,
ignoring the ideal that ‘sovereignty of the country lies originally
within
the people’. It remains unclear whether these actions are permissible
within the constitutional framework of the country.
Historically, if a government rejected its own constitution and assumed
undelegated powers, it was evident that anarchy and dictatorship would
result. On the basis of all the facts and actions of the EPRDF/TPLF
government, it is obvious where they stand and, in time, where they
intend
to go.

The general situation with regard to the Ethio-Eritrean political
relation
and the recent ‘peace plan’ of Meles is not a workable solution; and
peoples
of the two countries do not have a bloody interest to go to war.

A government like the EPRDF/TPLF that lacks legitimacy, openness and
rationalism from the start ultimately leads its country and people to
chaos
and crisis.

Such a government must be replaced by a government that will reflect
the
general will of the people: a new leadership with a shared purpose is
now
needed; with integrity and vision, and the interests of the population
at
its heart.

The coming election is crucial for Ethiopian people, both at home and
abroad. Thomas Hobbes stated that ‘a Subject has the right to abandon
a
ruler who can no longer protect him and to transfer his allegiance to
one
who can.’ Meles is certainly no Leviathan – able to protect his people
and
ensure the prosperity and harmony of Ethiopia. It now falls to
Ethiopians
everywhere to replace him and his government with a committed and
representative government which speaks with and for the country.