On Ethiopian Millenium celebratiom

On Ethiopian Millennium Celebrations: Reflections of a Southerner By Channito Galitto September 12, 2007

Warning : this writing calls a spade a spade. By not mincing words and avoiding political correctness, it intends to evoke healthy reflections.
In a lackluster speech celebrating the dawning of the new millennium, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi categorized Ethiopia’s past into two --- the first one thousand years in which Ethiopia was a rising superpower and the second one in which it took a nose dive. In the same breath Meles Zenawi declared that, thanks to his “wise leadership”, the downward slide has been arrested and that in the new millennium Ethiopia’s lost glory will be restored.
Listening to the speech two implications come to mind. One is obvious and the other one is a bit subtle. Let me start with the obvious one first. Meles Zenawi wants to be remembered as the great leader who stood firmly at a crucial historical juncture to halt Ethiopia’s downward spiral and launch the country’s ascendance towards a glorious future. This desire to be seen as Mr. Nice Guy and a towering figure is also evident from his recent Time interview.
Ethiopian leaders are known for their lofty, albeit empty, statements of vision. Even more so as they approach their demise. Haile Selassie billed himself as the great modernizer. Mengistu craved to be the great revolutionary hero who single-handedly, not to mention out of scratch, built “the only proud socialist country in Africa”--- “be Afrika bichanyawaa genaanaa sooshalist hager”. Holding a big vision, even if only a slogan is one thing. All kinds of human and material resources are unwisely expended in the service of these grand goals.
To declare a vision is one thing, to see to it that it gets fulfilled is quite another. For example after a good start, Haile Selassie’s autocratic methods stood in the way of his stated goal of modernization. Even worse, by clinging to power while growing virtually senile, he paved the way for the emergence of a brutal dictatorship. At the outset Mengistu aroused the sympathy of the peasantry, especially in the South, mainly due to the land proclamation. His later actions however ended up enslaving the very peasants this proclamation helped liberate. It is his brutality coupled with the misguided policies of forced conscription, collectivization, villagization, and endless campaigns against many real and imagined enemies more than anything else that sealed his doom. Assuming that the rock bottom had been reached, many thought that whoever replaces the Dergue could not be any worse. It did not last long before this false hope begun to give way to utter pessimism. Today TPLF is even more discredited politically than the Dergue was in its decaying stage.
Let me now go to the second, and most important, not to say most worrying, implication. As today’s Egyptians appropriate the pyramids and the Pharoas who built them solely to themselves, for Meles the first millennium, based as it was in Axum, must have been a period of Tigrean dominance. In an often-quoted comment in a 1991 TV debate Meles asked: “What does the Axum monument mean for the Walaita?” He self assuredly answered “Nothing!” to his own rhetorical question. He would not say it openly today, at least not in this speech, but the inference is that the 2nd millennium in which Tigreans lost supremacy to the Amhara represents Ethiopia’s dark age. Since Tigreans are once again in full control, the 3 rd millennium is therefore a time of greatness.
In other words, as the center moved South, Ethiopia’s imminence faded and its civilization degenerated. Stopping the relapse required reversing this trend. This view has many proponents, including Hagai Erlich, the author of a book on Ras Alua, the guy from whom Meles sought advice upon assuming state power.
The Millennium Celebrations have helped to bring to the fore some deep social and political divisions in Ethiopia. The first divide is between the two groups claiming ownership of the official history of Axum --- the Amhara and Tigrean elites. Whereas the Amharas make up close to one-third of the population and Tigreans 7%, the latter wields a virtual and highly resented hegemony.
While the lavish celebration at home was attended predominantly by the new Tigrean elites, the ones in the Diaspora smelled, looked and felt more like an Amhara festival. Although both events were billed as “Ethiopian”, each side could vividly see the ethnic undertones in each other’s work. A comment by Tecola H. Hagos drives this point home when he wrote “What is now billed as the Ethiopian Millennium Celebration at Howard University and later at the DC Armory is not a celebration of Ethiopia at all, but an orgy of self congratulatory aggregation of individuals blinded by hate and moved by narrow ethnicism.” By the way the ethnicity Tecola is referring to be none other than Amhara. Despite the attempts by the likes of Nuguse Mengesha and Mesay Kebede to have the audience see both sides of the debate, diatribes by false prophets like Asefa Negash left many simply disillusioned.
The question as to whom--- the Amhara or Tigreans--- are the proper heir to the legacy of Axum legacy forms the first fissure. For purpose of brevity let us entertain elsewhere the debate as to whether the Kushites or the Semites are legitimate claimants to Axum. However, it is important to note here that the argument as to “who is the most authentic Ethiopian?” is still in contention.
The second divide is the divide between the Northerners (Abyssinians is a better term than Axumites) and the Southerners. The latter---which incidentally forms the majority of the population in Ethiopia--- includes the Oromo, Afar, Sidama, Ogadeni, Walayita, Gedeo, Kaficho, Yem, Janjaro, Anyuak, and the over 70 other ethnic groups that straddle the East, South, West and center of Ethiopia. Although politically a periphery, the South is for all practical purposes the real center and heart of Ethiopia.
Unlike the Northerners who are predominantly Orthodox Christian, the South is truly diverse religiously, culturally and linguistically. As such their views on some political and social issues could be in sharp contrast to their countrymen from the North. For example, a Muslim Ethiopian Somali, Affar, Adare, or Silte might follow the Islamic Calendar and find the designation of yesterday as a universal Ethiopian Millennium at best difficult and at worst an imposition. The same is true for an Oromo who adheres to the cosmic-based Gada Calendar. For many in the South the issue of which Millennium is authentic is not just an academic one but fundamental to whom they are as individuals and people.
However hard they looked, these groups could not see themselves in the history narrated by both elites about the 1st and 2 nd millenniums. To them no grand vision or celebration means a thing unless it entails an end to their continuing marginalization. The millennium discussion did not produce a better recognition of their bitter experiences. It did not address their current grievances. Nor did it lay out a more inclusive alternative narration to make them believe that their marginalization would end anytime soon.
The Millennium was a non-starter for many. For example the large numbers of Oromos, Ogadenis and Anyuaks who live in the Midwest and throughout the US did not hold any celebrations at all. Perhaps with the repression and atrocious crackdown underway at home weighing heavily on them they just could not see a reason to celebrate. It is doubtful if the mood at home is any different.
The audacity by some Amhara elites to narrate a reading of the past as if it is an all-inclusive and balanced history of the whole country is mind bugling. Likewise the Tigrean minority’s wish to forever dominate the country by blaming all evils of the past on the Amahara elites while giving deaf years and blind eyes to their repressive rule of fifteen long years is also puzzling.
This takes me to the third divide, which is the one within the South itself--- my own backyard. After experiencing one brutal military crackdown after another and waging a protracted liberation struggle, the Ogadenis are sure that the old Ethiopia that is being glorified by Amhara and Tigrean elites did and does not embrace them. The Oromo, demographically and culturally the most important constituency for the very survival and future of Ethiopia, also see themselves slighted by some of these openly biased Axum-centric accounts of history.
Politically other Southerners seek self-government but are afraid of going it alone. They sympathize with their Oromo, Ogadeni and Sidama brothers and sisters as far as ending marginalization and the desire to enjoy the rights of self-government are concerned. While agreeing with the adoption of self-determination as a constitutional right, they are mad as hell that this did not translate into genuine self-government and remained an unfulfilled promise. While concurring with those emphasizing the importance of respect for individual rights under a just system, they worry that the relentless assault on “collective rights” may lead to the country’s breakup rather than its unity.
Now enough with the “divides” and back to the commentary on Meles’ speech. There was a muted expectation that he would use this occasion to offer an olive branch to his opponents. Those who knew him maintained he is just like all other Ethiopian leaders of the past who come to power by the gun, cling to it until it is too late and then either die fighting or get killed, a fact abundantly made clear by his behavior in the aftermath of the May 2005 elections.
Despite their deep disappointment a few held on to the tin hope that he would not squander this last chance that comes once in a thousand years. However, true to his form, Meles failed to use the occasion to start a credible process of reconciliation. By so doing Meles lost a golden opportunity to leave the legacy that he so desperately longs to leave behind in his speech. On the contrary by alienating major political forces--- such as OLF, CUD and ONLF--- from the political process, he ensured that the fragile political experiment that he put in place may not last his tenure, let alone the next century or millennium.
The question now is who else would come up with a more uplifting, all-inclusive and unifying message. Obviously and naturally this issue is bigger than any single organization, be it OLF or CUD. Frankly speaking we are fed up with the zero-sum game of either this or that. AFD’s proposal of a win-win formula goes a long way to fill the vacuum. However to become a vehicle for transformation AFD needs to put its acts together as a matter of priority.
Granted the road ahead is an uphill one. Luckily there are things we could do to make this journey less treacherous. The first step is for the elites of all stripes to stop relying on narrow readings of history as a foundation of political discourse. Ethiopian politics needs to be forever divorced from this poisoned chalice of biased history and geared towards creatively addressing current and future challenges. The more we look back, the more we are stuck in the past.
The second step is to end the hypocrisy and arrogance, both implied and explicit, about the role and contribution of the marginalized peoples, who need and deserve to be, accorded more stake in Ethiopia for the latter to progress. This is important for three reasons. One, since democracy is the wave of the future and it means majority rule--- with equality before the law for everyone and equality of all votes--- talking as if these people do not exist or count is simply unacceptable, not to mention untenable. Two, the values of tolerance and accommodation so vital for democracy to blossom are amply found among these peoples. Three, these communities field some formidable organizations and highly mobilized constituencies that can no longer be ignored. To disregard them and their legitimate grievances is to put Ethiopia’s future in great peril.
The writer can be reached at: ChannitoG@yahoo.com

Opinions published on News and Views section of this site are those of the authors and not necessarily that of OLF.
Copyright ©2005 ABO/OLF All Rights Reserved Email Webmaster olfinfodesk@earthlink.net

Jendayi Frazer :Unofficial TPLF Spokeswoman or a Top US Official?

Sept 09m 2007At a time when multiple sources including human rights and Non-Governmental Organizations, NGOs, working in Ogaden have detailed not only the type of atrocities but also the extent of the war crimes committed against the Ogaden citizenry by the TPLF army and its’ associated militias; At a moment when no international journalist is allowed to set foot in Ogaden, it is quiet disappointing, to say the least, to hear the recent outburst from Jendayi Frazer who is a host to the same Ethiopian junta that has not only ordered but carried out the current war crimes reported in Ogaden.When Frazer terms the genocide that has and is taking place in Ogaden as merely allegations that are 'unsubstantiated', which happens to be the same terms used by Zenawi in the recent Time’s interview, we are left to wonder whether Frazer is a top US diplomat for African affairs or an unofficial spokeswoman for the Tigrian People’s Liberation Front, TPLF.What evidence, other than the propaganda fed to her by the TPLF misinformation minions, does Frazer have that can make all the horror stories provided the internationally renowned human rights organizations, Ogaden survivors of the current Ogaden war crimes, and the NGOs who have an innate knowledge of the Ogaden landscape and people, as mere ‘unsubstantiated’ allegations?We, the Ogaden Editorial Board, EOB, believe that Frazer has accepted in face value, the misinformation provided by the TPLF junta headed by Zenawi. EOB also believes that merely accepting TPLF propaganda in face value harms not only the image of the United States of America as a champion of democracy but also US security interests in the horn. Instead of acting as an unofficial TPLF spokeswoman, EOB hopes that Frazer will closely scrutinize the actions of the TPLF junta in Addis Ababa. The US State department should use its clout in order to put the brakes on the war crimes that are taking place in Ogaden.editorial@ogaden.comOgaden Online EditorialSept 09, 2007

U.S. gives stark warning to Eritrea

By Elizabeth Blunt September 10, 2007

The US has issued Eritrea with its strongest warning yet over its alleged support for terrorism.
A senior US official said the presence of an exiled Somali Islamist leader in Asmara this week was further evidence Eritrea gave sanctuary to terrorists.
The gathering of further intelligence could lead to Eritrea being named as a state sponsor of terrorism - followed by sanctions, the official said.
The Eritrean government has accused the US of deliberate distortion.
A full scale war of words is now going on between Eritrea and the United States.
The US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, said the presence of Hassan Dahir Uways at a meeting in Asmara was further evidence that Eritrea provided sanctuary for terrorists.
Rogue state
The Eritrean ministry of information website has just published a 35-point condemnation of US foreign policy accusing Jendayi Frazer herself of deliberate distortion.
Speaking at the end of a visit to neighbouring Ethiopia, Miss Frazer said that Eritrea's nasty words about the US were not a significant concern.
What had got her government's attention was Eritrea's actions to destabilise other countries in the Horn of Africa and, in particular, evidence that they were harbouring terrorists.
Miss Frazer said that this was about more than just simply considering Eritrea as a rogue state in the region.
It was quite specifically Eritrea's relationship with recognised terrorists which could lead to its designation as a state sponsor of terrorism.
This, in turn, she said would bring a change in the nature of its relationship with the US and in the ability of the US and other countries to provide assistance to Eritrea's government.

Somali opposition groups condemn AMISOM troops

Somali opposition groups condemn AMISOM troops

Somali Governor escapes a grenade bomb attack
The government opposing groups in Asmara condemned the African union for not being neutral. 10,Sept.07

Ethiopia Detains Oromo Opposition Members
Sep 7, '07 2:01 PMfor everyone
By Peter Heinlein
Heinlein report (mp3) - Download 675k Listen to Heinlein report (mp3)
The Ethiopian government has confirmed the detention of scores of citizens suspected of involvement in a regional insurgent movement. From the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, VOA's Peter Heinlein reports opposition lawmakers and human rights activists are calling the detentions illegal.
A senior Ethiopian government official confirmed to VOA that an unspecified number of persons described as 'operatives of the Oromo Liberation Front' have been detained by authorities in recent weeks.
Bereket Simon, a top adviser to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, said "the government has an obligation to put these people under control."
The official's comments were in response to charges by a prominent Member of Parliament from the Oromia region that at least 107 people, and probably many more, are being held illegally by authorities without charge.
Bulcha Demeksa, a lawmaker from the opposition Oromo Federalist Democratic Movement party, said some of the detainees have been held for weeks.
The Oromo people are Ethiopia's largest ethnic group, about a third of the population, and the Oromia region has been a hotbed of opposition to the government in Addis Ababa. But in a VOA interview, lawmaker Bulcha Demeksa rejected suggestions that those detained were terrorists or were involved in a plot to overthrow the government.
"These are people who live in the countryside, miserably poor people, they eat once a day, they have nothing, they have no guns, they are just some in little urban areas. They are traders," said Bulcha. "Some of them are street people. What can they do? The government knows that Ethiopians are not armed. Ethiopians are not armed, so these cannot be feared. Fear I do not believe at all. There is nothing to fear."
Bulcha says the detentions are an attempt by the government to intimidate potential political opponents in advance of next January's local elections.
"The purpose in my opinion of these mass arrests is to scare people because local election is coming up in January," said Bulcha. "The government is scaring people, saying, 'If you do not support the government, you will go to jail. If you do not vote for the regional government, nobody else can help you, we will put you in jail.' Particulary, people who are potential representatives are being arrested."
The government spokesman, Bereket Simon, rejected Bulcha's charges. He told VOA, "the rights of the citizens are being respected." He described the accusations as "far-fetched stories" designed to grab headlines at a time when domestic and international attention is focusing on Ethiopia's grand celebration of the millennium.
Ethiopia follows the Julian calendar, which is seven years and eight months behind the more commonly observed Gregorian calendar. The Horn of Africa nation will celebrate the arrival of the third millennium on September 12.
VOA News