A LOOMING WAR AND THE ETHIOPIAN PREDICAMENT

An Opinion

Teshome Abebe

Introduction:

The time to deal with Eritrea is now!

When the EPRDF government in Ethiopia assumed power in 1991, it did so with the support, planning, military assistance and protection of the then Eritrean warlord Isayas Afeworki.  The Eritrean warlord was rewarded for his help with the declaration by the Ethiopian ruling party that Eritrea has earned the right to call itself a country, and that Eritreans would be regarded as equals in their dealings with the  Ethiopian state.  Many seasoned observers of Ethiopia believe that the Eritrean warlord would have continued to enjoy the spoils of this partnership with his Ethiopian counterparts had he not been so greedy as to violate Ethiopian sovereignty in 1998 in search of more riches and mischief.

As is well known by now, the relationship between the Eritrean warlord and the Ethiopian rulers began to sour as a result of the warlord’s zero sum game mentality in his relationship with the Ethiopian state, and eventual invasion of its territory in 1998. What remains curious to this day is the action or lack thereof of the Ethiopian government prior to the invasion. By many accounts, it is believed that the Ethiopian government was either not prepared to defend its territories or was simply negligent in abrogating  its responsibilities to defend the country against threats by a former  ‘friend-in-arms’.

Be that as it may, it is also well known that in 2000, the Ethiopian defense forces routed the Eritreans, temporarily dismantled their fighting capabilities and embarrassed the Eritrean self-aggrandizing warlord.  Many in and outside of Ethiopia had urged the government at that time to respond to the Eritrean aggression with unrestricted and  unabashed force so that this tiny hamlet would never ever cause further political and military problems for Ethiopia in the foreseeable future.  That advice was never totally heeded by the ruling party, and in the ensuing years since 2000, there has prevailed a no-peace, no-war state of belligerency between the two sisterly countries.

Relations between the two countries have deteriorated beyond repair, and in his unending and unabated zeal for the attention of the world; his continuing hatred of anything Ethiopian; his desire for the dismemberment of the Ethiopian state; and his dislike and spite for the ruling party in Ethiopia, the warlord in Eritrea has been funding, training, arming and directing anti-Ethiopian groups of all sorts. These include shortsighted opposition groups, military deserters and now, the Jihadists in Somalia.

One can argue about the right of states to support whomever they wish to support and maintain relationships with whatever group serves their interests. This is nothing new, and has been going on from the beginning of time, and will continue so as long as there are states with differing perspectives and different views in their state-to-state relationships.  For example, Ethiopians have known for centuries the actions of the state of Egypt to undermine, unsettle and destabilize the Ethiopian state. There have been instances of other countries, either directly or indirectly, undermining Ethiopian development initiatives, sewing the seeds of disharmony and discontent among its citizens, or attempting to foment chaos.  However, each action by one state against another has consequences. Those consequences may range from simple diplomatic actions on one end to the declaration of war on the other extreme.  In today’s world, no single state is immune from the destabilizing actions of another state. In reality, however, there are also consequences to engaging in such behavior.

One of the most outrageous acts of petulance and aggression against Ethiopia is Eritrea’s reported training, assistance, arming, directing the Jihadists in Somalia, and direct participation in concert with them to attack and destabilize Ethiopia. These acts have been reported by the UN, and the Ethiopian government is aware of and has referred to these acts in its dealings with the fanatics across the south-eastern border. Eritrea has no borders with Somalia, and its actions are a clear and present danger to the Ethiopian state. In fact, the warlord in Asmara is trying to achieve by other means what he was unable to do so when he recklessly invaded Ethiopia in 1998: dismember the Ethiopian state. This is his ultimate ambition, his ultimate goal, and it is likely that he will never relinquish this goal voluntarily. He desires to be someone of consequence; he desires to be important, and his ferocious desire to destroy Ethiopia will continue unabated.  The irony of the situation is that if he can not get along with the current regime in Ethiopia, it is unlikely that he will ever get along with any other future government in that country! The current regime crowned him with the gift of a state, the current regime enabled him and his cohorts to rob and loot Ethiopia for years before his erratic and reckless behavior brought an end to the sweetheart deal he had managed to concoct out of the regime.  In return, he wants to destroy and dismember what he perceives is a divided Ethiopia.

Over the past several years, the Ethiopian ruling party has shown considerable patience to the provocations of the temperamental authorities in Asmara and their belligerent behavior towards Ethiopia and its national interests. I believe that Ethiopians are fed up with this state of affairs. During the last war with Eritrea, many in and outside of the country hoped that the government will find the determination and the will to deal with the problem in a conclusive way. Moreover, Ethiopians were promised by the current ruling party that they would forever live happily in peace if they would only accept the independence of Eritrea from Ethiopia.  Ethiopians were promised that the brotherly and sisterly peoples of Eritrea will one day provide a market for Ethiopian goods, and that the burgeoning trade between the two countries would be an example to the other countries in the region. Ethiopians were told that the loss of their access to the sea is meaningless as a free and independent Eritrea would facilitate such an access and at mutually acceptable terms. Sober and well-meaning Ethiopians who argued differently were labeled as insane as well as warmongers. We now know that none of the promised objectives were fulfilled, Eritrea is at war with Ethiopia, and to make matters worse, Eritrea is reportedly actively arming, assisting, and fighting alongside the enemies of Ethiopia.

The dissatisfaction of the Ethiopian populace in the state of affairs and in the ruling party manifested itself, at least in part, through the returns of the 2005 elections. Regardless of the final outcome of those elections, Ethiopians, for the first time in their history, spoke and spoke loudly. The interpretation of what they said with that election should be left for history to sort out. Sufficient to state here that any political party that does not pay close attention to the Ethiopian public’s view of national sovereignty and its prominence in the Ethiopian psyche  can only maintain its grip on power by force and not by consent.

Like a few thoughtless states of the past, the Eritrean boss has misinterpreted the generosity of the Ethiopian people and their time-tested resolve to stand in unison to defend their country from any power on earth that wishes to harm them. As in the past, Ethiopians might be alone, but they will stand up in unison to defend the mother land when called upon. No power on earth can subjugate a proud and courageous people, and no one-bit-dictator of questionable motive can threaten or intimidate a people of proud heritage.  Ethiopia is not a creation of yesterday, and its institutions and people, no matter how different their political orientation or nationalities might be, will never allow an outside force to violate their sovereignty.

A Call for Action:

Contrary to the current decision to deploy Ethiopian troops against the fanatic Jihadists in the southeast, the decisions to engage Eritrea in 1998 and 2000 were, I believe, primarily based upon domestic political considerations as opposed to national security concerns. In fact, most of the early decisions by the ruling party regarding Eritrea appear to have never seriously contemplated   national security concerns as primary considerations. It is imperative, henceforth that all decisions regarding Eritrea strictly address the national security concerns of Ethiopia. In this regard, any act of the Eritrean dictator and his cronies must be dealt with without hesitation, without mercy, and with the utmost certainty that the country will never again become a serious national security threat to Ethiopia.  Its militarist orientation must be checked, its meddling in Ethiopian affairs must be matched by equal and proportionate response, and its aggressive anti-Ethiopian stance and foreign policy should be threatened by the withdrawal of its recognition as a sovereign state putting its future back to where it all began: a renegade killil within the Ethiopian state.

One thing is certain: Ethiopia can neither continue to wage war every few years nor can it exist in an atmosphere of no-peace, no-war situation forever. Therefore, every decision regarding national security issues has to be made with the highest degree of certainty and the highest and most exacting degree of precision. Errors are extremely costly and the consequences affect future generations for years to come.

A final word on the current crises with the Jihadists in which Eritrea’s meddling is quite apparent.  One of the most respected African specialists within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Tekeda Alemu, has aptly and correctly defined the situation as the ‘Somali Trojan Horse’ waiting to cause harm to the Ethiopian state. And contrary to the opinions of a few individuals as well as political parties, the decision of the Ethiopian government to deploy troops to stave off the crisis is the correct one. In fact, the Ethiopian parliament has just wisely endorsed this specific action. With all due respect to contrary opinion, the Jihadists’ intentions are the destruction of Ethiopia as we now know it. The endless declarations of Jihad, the alignment with Eritrea, the support, arming and coddling of separatist groups who are enemies of the Ethiopian constitution and who wish to use this as their magic-carpet ride to power and riches, is clear testimony to their many agendas and no sensible individual—Ethiopian or otherwise—would ignore such mortal threat from a group that is serious in its aims.  This unholy alliance of the demented fanatics on one hand and the deranged enemies of Ethiopia on the other must be brought to an end.

The preservation of the sovereign Ethiopian state trumps everything else including the argument that some have advanced that Ethiopians must first fight for democracy before  engaging themselves in ‘Meles’ war’. There are at least three problems with this line of reasoning. The first is that this is not ‘Meles’ war’. Meles did not invent the clan politics of what is today Somalia. With all serious fairness, Meles might infact have read the Somali conundrum earlier than anyone, and more accurately than any other politician. The second reason is that ‘democracy’ is an abstraction for many Ethiopians who are concerned about jobs, incomes, health care, and families. After all, Ethiopians have known for centuries that one can not experience democracy without sovereignty. Indeed, democracy is only possible within the concept of a secure and sovereign state! And finally, I believe it is not only shame full but also disrespectful, dishonest and unpatriotic to call any war as the deed of a single person. Those who die fighting in the name of the country are the sons, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives, fathers and mothers to someone; and they are all our brothers and sisters. They deserve our respect, they deserve our gratitude, and they deserve our prayers.

The Author of this opinion lives in the United States and can be reached at:

fekade12003@yahoo.com.