THE GOOD, THE BAD, THE UGLY:

The politics of change vs. Permanent politics

Conventional wisdom tells us that politics is a dirty business. It also tells us that in politics there is no permanent friendship but permanent interest. Looked at from this perspective, politics is indeed pessimistic in essence and opportunistic in principle. Although there is some truth in all this, it should however not be taken at face value to be the whole truth. Doing so guarantees the verdict of conventional wisdom as being fact of nature. Thus, in order to get over the cynicism, the first thing to do would be to scrutinize the very logic which puts ‘permanent friendship’ and ‘permanent interest’ at odd. It is important to know that ‘friendship’ and ‘interest’ are not in conflict in and of themselves. What makes them antagonistic with each other is their common attribute “permanent”. It is the quest for a permanent state of affairs that fuels the contradiction giving credibility to conventional wisdom. As much as permanent arrangement appears to be commonsensical, it is nonetheless an empty rhetoric at best or a dangerous recipe for disaster at worst. It is therefore ridiculous to speak of permanent friendship or permanent interests. Nothing is permanent, everything is subject to change.

Adherence to a permanent scheme is a perfect way to ignore pressing issues on the ground. Since its creed is ‘the end justifies the means’, it absolves political actors from responsibility. So long as the end is defined as classless society, liberal democratic nirvana, or humanistic governance, everything is allowed so that political actors can effectively put the dirt under the rug. The time has come to discard, once and for all, the convenient yet useless doctrine of permanency and to acknowledge the virtue of change.

It is in the context of change that the political dynamics in the Horn of Africa ought to be analyzed. Accordingly, like any other region in the world, the Horn finds itself at a crossroad. It is undergoing fundamental structural changes that are directly attributed to the so-called Globalization and the attendant time/space compression articulated by information technology. Faced with such tremendous forces of global proportion the political agencies of the region, whether they like it or nor, are hard-pressed to respond. And this is where dogmatic adherents to permanent state of affairs, on the one hand, and pragmatic proponents of changing conditions, on the other, are locked in a crucial struggle. A struggle so crucial and so delicate, its outcome would be responsible in charting the future of the entire region. Four political actors in the region represent three possible scenarios. Namely, EPDRF in Ethiopia, Shabia and Neo-Derguists in Eritrea and the Diaspora respectively, and the Union of Islamic Court (UIC) in Somalia each incarnate different blueprints that have the potential of deciding the future of the region.

Shabia and UIC adhere to prefigured notions of permanency. Shabia dreams of bringing back the glory of the bygone Colonial Empire, the UIC aspires to institute an Islamic Caliphate. As much as, the aspiration of the UIC appears to be archaic, it is in fact very current. What makes it particularly dangerous is its affiliation with global terrorist networks. Shabia on the other hand is a relic of yesterday; completely subservient to its colonial legacy, Shabia exhibits classic symptoms of abandoned neurotic of Black Skin/White Mask. Unlike the UIC which is directly connected to twenty-first century terrorism, Shabia is fixated on nineteenth century colonial hegemony. Thus while the UIC is bad capable of turning the region into a terrorist safe haven, Shabia is ugly predisposed to bring back colonial relations thereby making the region fertile ground for all types of social miseries.

THE BAD

The UCI was indeed dangerous precisely because of its affinity to global terrorism. Despite its claim to grass root origin and Somali nationalism, the organization has nothing in common with the great anti-colonial Somali patriot Sheik Muhammed Abdille Hassen. As much as the Sheik was Muslim and Somali fighting for the dignity and freedom of all Somalis, the UIC is trying to forcefully proselytize the Somali people to alien Wahabist. To that end, during its short reign it had decreed the second class status of women. Neither was the UIC inclusive of all Somalis, to the contrary it was determined to establish the supremacy of one sub-clan over the entire Somali peoples. Fully funded by foreign petrodollar and highly trained by sophisticated operative of Al Qaeda, the UIC opted to systematically terrorize the people through grotesque public spectacles of stoning and amputation. As a cover of its sectarian agenda, parochial policy, and draconian rule, it attempted to fool the people by declaring “Gihad” against Ethiopia. Since its actions speak louder than its rhetoric, Ethiopia alongside the Somali government was obligated to nip the virus in the bud before it mutates into a deadly plague.

THE UGLY

Shabia is the quintessential embodiment of a vile political specimen. The abandoned neurotic syndrome of a colonial subject has permeated the organization to the core. The intuition which comes with the syndrome, although grossly irrational, has an intoxicating effect making one perpetually high. However, the effect of any intoxicant is short lived and the urge to maintain a permanent state of inebriation requires the constant supply of drug. Unless it gets the inexhaustible supply of potion which guarantees a permanent state of hallucination, the addict will leave no stone unturned until it gets its fix. Unfortunately, Shabia’s addiction is unbounded and the price to satisfy it is costly. It is not simply a pharmacological matter, in Shabia’s case the intoxicating ingredients are the wellbeing of peoples of Eritrea and that of the entire Horn. Unless it gets its fix, Shabia relapses into a deranged state of mind ready to wreck havoc. Since independence Shabia did not give a break to the people in Eritrea. Always searching for a fleeting illusion to be pursued but never to be attained, Shabia is obsessed in recapturing something that is unrealizable. If only Shabia takes a break and engages in a serious soul searching, it would be surprised to find out that its entire problem is more psychoanalytical than geopolitical. One wonders, if everything goes Shabia’s way, whether Shabia itself really knows concretely what it wants. Hence, no power on Earth can rectify the delusion or satisfy the fantasy that Shabia finds itself in.

Like the UIC and Shabia, Ethiopia has not been immune from its own version of delusional political operatives. It has its share of those who are unwilling to appreciate changes and still doggedly aspire to bring back the imperial order. Although the Derg, which was the ultimate archetype of Ethiopia’s lopsided “greatness”, is soundly defeated, its sympathizers scattered throughout the four corners of the globe are still crying wolf. All of a sudden yesterday’s acolytes of the Derg have transformed into today’s liberators. The mutation is so radical and complete members of the Workers Party (EWP) became liberal democrats, apostles of command economy turned into free market high priests, even anti-judicial investigative appointees are converted into human rights advocates. Regarding the UIC and Shabia, our newfangled humanistic libertarians are pointing accusatory fingers against EPDRF. They take the moral high ground by referring to the procedures of international law and by concocting all sorts of scenarios of conspiracy. After they are done condemning and holding responsible the Ethiopian government for everything that has happed under the sky, they ally themselves with Shabia and the UIC.

THE GOOD

Ethiopia is on the right track because it has acknowledged the inevitability of changes and tried to act accordingly. Unlike the UIC, Shabia, and Post Derguists all of which aspire to attain their respective delusional greatness at the expense of others, Ethiopia has addressed the most fundamental issue that had put it in tremendous hardship for the last half century. Namely, the new Ethiopia has accorded the rights and dignity of its composite ethnic parts. After all one of the most important worldwide phenomena that have prominently appeared on the social landscape because of the systemic restructuring of globalization is the social category of Ethnicity. It does not take much for one to realize that ethnicization is an ascending and potent social-political force to be reckoned with. Under the rubric of many names with positive connotation such as multiculturalism and diversity, as well as negative ones such as ethnic conflict and ethnic cleansing, ethnicity is here to stay for some time. In the Horn the issue is addressed differently by the relevant as well as irrelevant social agencies.

While Shabia, UIC, and Neo-derguists refuse to acknowledge the sectarian political reality of our time, The EPDRF chose to take the bull by the horn. It has recognized the country’s ethnic composition and implemented a federal system that is commensurate with it. Instead of dogmatically subscribing to a singular version of an identity form, Ethiopia accepted its multicultural composition. Unfortunately, this did not fair well in the mind of the intelligentsia. Somehow, the cultural diversity is thought of undermining the national cohesion of the country. It is preposterous, on the part of the learned ignoramus, to project ethnic federalism and unitary nationalism as mutually exclusive. Who says that two are inherently at odds with each other? If that is the case, then how can one account for Switzerland, Canada, and Nigeria? Even the US for that matter, are we not witnessing the efforts of the Ethiopian community to be recognized as one of the many hyphenated Americans? In our case the objective is to be known as Ethiopian-Americans. Why not simply American? The other point that is advance by the hardcore nationalists pertains to minority rule. Here again, the argument is without merit, every nation irrespective of its alleged inclusiveness is first and foremost an entity of minority rule. Whether defined by Race, Gender, Ethnicity, Class, a small minority is always at the pinnacle of power. The issue is and should be which system of governance is better given the limited choice. As far as Ethiopia goes the present order is much more inclusive than all of the previous ones.

IN CONCLUSION

The mania of permanency and its hallucinatory effects renders social time either to be unidirectional traveling to a prefigured end or non existent all stopping it altogether. Permanent solution actually undermines the very problem it claims to resolve. Because it is an unrealistic proposition and an unattainable objective, it makes politics either opportunistic, erratically shortsighted subject to the slightest shift of the political wind or dogmatic, sluggishly fanatical unresponsive to structural change of the social landscape. As a matter of fact, permanent solution is not foreign to history; it is enough to remember Nazi Germany and Interhamwe Rwanda, both of which have systematically engaged in the extermination of an entire people, all in the name of permanent solution. Unless the people of the Horn realize that their future is intimately tied, the bad and ugly political forces are determined to initiate a fratricidal orgy the world has never seen before.

The forces of evil are telling us to wait with patience and serenity for the almost eventually good tomorrow. For instance the Eritrean people are still undergoing unnecessary hardship to get to Shabia’s self-assured destination, which in reality is an illusion. At the end of the day, neither the opportunist politician’s short view nor the dogmatic official’s unrealizable dream is able to bring anything of value. Despite their apparent opposition, the two extremities actually share common ground. The Eritrean leadership is one of those political forces that symptomatically suffer from the discrepancy of political opportunism and ideological dogmatism. To make matter worse, the two opposite priorities in tandem made Shabia inflexible in some aspects and yet extremely malleable in others. The points of inflexibility and those of plasticity are so confused the regime itself finds it difficult to sort things rationally. And the Eritrean people are paying the price for all of Shabia’s irrational misdeeds.

Despite the cheap political shots against it, the Ethiopian government should be alert and steadfast against the triadic axis of Shabia, UIC, and Neo-Derguists. In direct contrast to the political stands and aspirations of the three, EPDRF is by far more responsible and adept in navigating the changing currents in world affairs and in deterring the likelihood of a general conflagration in the Horn of Africa. This is a matter of regional as well as national survival and it should not be up for negotiation.

Mehretab Assefa

May 19, 2007