The Rhetoric of the Ethio-Eritrea Conflict

__________________________________

By Tadesse T. Tsion
06/12/06)

Is there any way out for Eritrea and Ethiopia? Can their leaders save their people from this looming, destructive war? Are they stuck in their hellish and obscure contention, happy to take their nations into the abyss? Has the culture of war become intractable, changing a peaceful people into combative, aggressive and pugnacious citizens?

Let it be clear to the leaders of Ethiopia and Eritrea, however, that there is a way out and the hope of it should never be abandoned because, perhaps, patience has run out, stubborn public pressure has weighed in, or, peer mentality supports the war. There is always that cocky peer attitude: “We are strong and superior; we can win this war and we can teach our enemy a lesson or two.”

The irony of this statement is: It’s uttered by the other camp, just as loudly.
An article from one of the mushrooming sites advocating the war put it this way: Public opinion is in favor of the war. Meles has left us landlocked. This is the only way we can regain our sea route that was offered to the Eritreans by our generous Prime Minister.

The writer has concluded that Ethiopia will be the winner. He didn’t take into account that Eritrea, one of the poorest nation in the world, has gone on a weapons shopping spree, arming herself to the teeth. Equipped with a modern arsenal at her disposal, still, he overlooked the fact that Eritrea is quite capable of a fight. He also didn’t take into account that Islamabad, Beijing and even Pyongyang have immensely profited from weapons sale to Ethiopia and Eritrea, implicitly encouraging these nations to wage wars. He has concluded that Ethiopia, because of the size of her population, could overwhelm Eritrea. Sadly, however, in this age of technology and sophistication, the size of the army is no match for the size of the weapon. Three million-strong Israel annihilated a hundred million-strong Arabs, in the 1967 War, only in six days!
By the way here is an article posted on AIGA, by AHH (“Ethiopia – Eritrea Crisis: The Fresh US Diplomacy, Scenarios and Policy Considerations”) analyzing the Eritrean position.

“… is Eritrea really smaller? Internal analysis of Eritrea’s military capabilities reveals that it is a highly militarized state. With its military expenditure exceeding 13 per cent of GDP, Eritrea has an army of as much as ten percent of its population.[47] In 2004, the number of its soldiers was one hundred thousand higher than that of its larger adversary, whose defense expenditure was estimated to be 4.6 per cent of GDP.[48] According to Reuters news agency, Eritrea has an “estimated 300,000 professional and conscripted soldiers” from an “estimated 3.6 million population.”[49] In that light, one cannot at all say Eritrea is in fact smaller and hence the underdog.”
Enough with “we are strong and superior” mantra.

Let’s talk about public opinion.
Before the Iraq war, 80 percent of the American public supported the campaign against Saddam. An overwhelming 75 percent of the Senate and the Congress fully backed Bush, including Senator John Kerry. Former Secretary of State Collin Powell, who had second thoughts regarding his support for the war after his resignation, went before the United Nations forum and pleaded his case for war.

Now, after 200 billion dollars were spent and countless lives lost, American public opinion has dramatically shifted, with the support dwindling down to between 30 to 40 percent. If you recall, only three years ago, amid predictions that American Marines who were to land in Baghdad would be welcomed with sweets and flowers, euphoric pundits then declared a new Pax Americana, a commonwealth of freedom, even a form of cooperative imperialism. The noblest currencies, freedom and democracy, were believed to rule Iraq and even promote peace and democracy throughout the rest of the Middle East. The situation however didn’t materialize in the manner it was hoped for and the harrowing experience of Iraq has become old news today, leaving the American public indignant, confused and uncertain. The hero on the streets of America today isn’t George Bush, but people like Joan Baez and Cindy Sheehan, who, asking for the immediate withdrawal of the troops from Iraq, make Mr. Bush slightly jittery.
His poll numbers are not good of late.

To cite another example of public opinion, 90 percent of the Germans supported Hitler before the Second World War. An alarming 90 percent of Italians were jubilant about Mussolini’s plan to invade Ethiopia. Before Ho Chi Min crushed the American spirit, again Americans, with nearly 500, 000 troops stationed in Vietnam, supported President Lyndon B. Johnson.

It is unnecessary to revisit the denouement of these wars and what has happened to those leaders who advocated them. We all know what happened. Certainly, before their eventual ignominy, history tells us that they had all captured the minds and souls of their citizens before staging wars. Hitler, for example, knew about the delicate sensibility of mass mores. He picked the incisive Goebbels to manipulate and exploit; and Goebbels, being a consummate liar and falsifier, went crazy with it.

That’s public opinion, readers. It can be maliciously spun into any direction, and be manipulated and exploited by a single man whose long arms can control the radio, the television and the print media. The chimerical vision of a megalomania dictator can viciously twist and break the strong opinion and long held belief of a public. Public opinion is virtually dependent, in many cases, on the whims of the government. In Eritrea today, for example, 80 percent of the people might back their leaders, but this same public would change their mind overnight if their nation suffered a blow. The notion of winning and the spoils of victory are the main compelling factors that shape public opinion. Take those two elements out of the questionnaire and ask the public if they support war, any war for that matter; you will be amazed.

Both the Eritrean and the Ethiopian public are weary of war drums at this time. But, there is, currently, the propagation of myth that could create a ripe condition for war between Eritrea and Ethiopia. The myth, mostly a result of self-aggrandizement, is sweeping both nations as if they are indestructible. Both sides, with their mantra of “Our troops are battle tested,” “Our people are superior,” and “Our le-oolinet will be violated,” are taking their nations into a dark alley; alley of no return.

What is Le-oolinet by the way? How is it that the Eritrean or the Ethiopian any different from one another? What makes anyone confident that one has a force more superior than the other?

Instead of engaging in war rhetoric and superfluous brouhaha, however, they should focus on the state of their poverty-stricken nations and work toward progress. They need to do that and become great paradigms for the rest of Africa. Sadly, what we see is their return to autocratic rule to which many African leaders looked up once, reverting to the same method of rule of their predecessors, unable to extricate themselves from those strongholds and become real leaders. Driven by a dictatorial mentality, that megalomaniac urge, the urge that has captivated the likes of Hitler, Idi Amin and currently Mr. Mugabe, the new African leaders are still operating with passion as they move toward the destruction of their people.

Additionally, it is clear that both sides are engaged, short of an outright war, in a long term covert hostility hemorrhaging one another. The Ethiopian side is charging that the Eritreans are arming opposition groups and terrorists, while the Eritreans are issuing similar condemnation. At a time when emotions are row, these scenarios impede the journey to peace. Covert programs are actually undeclared wars, albeit less publicized and promoted. Both countries must stop these activities if they care enough for the wellbeing of their people.
Ephrem Issac’s statement (Ethiopiafirst) summed it up this way: “The hostilities between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the present internal conflicts within the two countries respectively are already draining both economically. Some fear that if the interstate and intrastate conflicts continue or persist, Ethiopia and Eritrea will weaken respectively to the point where they could possibly vanish from importance, except as dangerous and disaster zones like Somalia. The potential for leadership possessed by these gifted peoples in the Horn of Africa-leadership not only within Africa, but also in the world - will be destroyed for decades. Damage will be done to the strategically important region that straddles the Red Sea oil trade route".

The final destination of war is hell. Is this really the direction that the leaders of these two sister countries want to take their people? THINK!

home