2373 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Smith,
On March 28, 2006, I attended the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Relations hearing on “Ethiopia’s Troubled Internal Situation.” I have been following Ethiopian politics for twenty-five years, having first traveled there in 1982 and periodically returning in various professional capacities.
I think that it is important to state up front that I have a very different interpretation of recent Ethiopian history than you have expressed in various forums, particularly in terms of its transition to democracy and the events that occurred last year. I believe that the May 2005 elections were genuinely competitive, credible and of profound historical significance to the people of Ethiopia. Your statement comparing Ethiopia to Romania, the former Soviet Union and Vietnam was not only inaccurate but also offensive given the recent history. This election was a milestone event representing decades of struggle against tyranny on the part of the Ethiopian people to choose their leaders. The fact that an opposition party freely competed and won nearly 200 seats in the parliament speaks louder than the voices of those who wish to undermine the democratic process in a naked grab for power. I believe that the opposition candidates who took their seats in the new parliament demonstrated great courage and integrity in keeping their promise to the voters to represent their interests in the government. I also believe that it is up to the Ethiopian courts to judge the merits of the case against the CUD leadership currently in detention.
Congressman Smith, with all due respect, the reason I am writing this letter is not to convince you to change your views on the current situation in Ethiopia. Rather, I would like to express my shock and dismay over the conduct of the March 28th hearing. It is my understanding that the purpose of a congressional hearing is to weigh the evidence of all sides of an issue in order to arrive at an informed judgement. It was obvious that, given the list of witnesses providing testimony, the members of the committee had already made up their minds. Three of the four other witnesses were either directly or indirectly associated with the opposition party, the CUDP. The fourth witness was a representative of Amnesty International. Moreover, the committee had agreed only at the last minute to allow the testimony of Ethiopian Ambassador Fesseha Asghedom Tessema
Indeed, it is ironic, to say the least, that the very judicial system that Mr. Andargechew Tsege made mockery of in his testimony released him on bail following his detention on charges of instigating violence that led to the deaths of 36 Ethiopian civilians and 7 Ethiopian policemen. By posting bail, Mr. Andargechew Tsige promised the court that he would appear for his trial. Mr. Andargechew Tsige left the country on an Ethiopian passport out of Bole airport without interference from Ethiopian security personnel because there was no court order to deny him exit from the country. It was hypocritical for the committee to call as a witness a person who knowingly lied to the court. A congressional witness who has escaped from the due process of law is hardly credible. If Zacarias Moussaoui had fled to Ethiopia before his trial, would his testimony to the Ethiopian parliament on the human rights situation in the United States be considered credible to the committee?
Congressman Smith, let me remind you that instigating violence that led to the deaths of 43 people is a very serious charge. To characterize a demonstration where 7 policemen were killed (one policeman was nearly decapitated) as peaceful is simply not logical. Your expressed contempt for the rule of law and judicial process in Ethiopia contradicts the very mandate you are responsible for upholding as a Congressman of the United States. You’re a priori endorsement of the testimony given by Mr. Andargechew Tsege in the absence of due process of law in an Ethiopian court puzzles me.
Congressman Smith, you said in your opening statement, “friends don’t let friends commit human rights abuses.” As you recall, Amnesty International’s 2005 report on the United States claimed that the U.S. “held hundreds of detainees without charge or trial at the U.S. naval base In Guantanamo Bay,” “…thousands of people were detained during U.S. military and security operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and routinely denied access to their families and lawyers.” The report cites “allegations of torture”, “deaths in custody and ill-treatment by U.S. forces” as well as alleging that “the U.S. administration had sanctioned interrogation techniques that violated the U.N. Convention Against Torture.” The report goes on to say “in the USA, more than 40 people died after being struck by police tasers.”
Congressman Smith, do you agree with Amnesty International’s allegations against the United States? Will you agree on behalf of the Government of the United States to allow the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture unfettered access to the prison camps on Guantanamo Bay. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield has denied this request for four years. You asked the very same question of Ambassador Fisseha—twice—knowing full well that he does not have the authority to agree to a visit by the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and can only pass on the request to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
This is not to say that I believe it is a policy of the Ethiopian government to permit torture in its prisons. And I am certain that you are as much distressed as I am that our own government has admitted to torture and has tried to justify this policy in light of the war on terrorism. The point I am trying to make here is that the March 29th hearing was neither fair nor transparent in its objectives. It was clear from the outset that the committee had come to a decision to condemn the Government of Ethiopia before the hearing had even begun and without due diligence in weighing the evidence of both sides of a very complex problem.
Congressman Smith, again with all due respect to the office you hold in the United States Congress and your twenty-five years of service to this country, it was distressing to hear some of your remarks and observe your conduct towards the Ambassador of Ethiopia. As you are well aware, the hearing room was packed with members of the opposition party. Congressman Smith, you played to the audience and were rewarded by the applause and even laughter at the expense of the dignity of a great nation and, as you stated in your opening remarks, an important ally of the United States. Your comments about Prime Minister Meles were inappropriate and disrespectful. You made no effort at all to question the other witnesses on the evidence they have to support these serious allegations against the Government of Ethiopia—some patently ridiculous. I am certain that this was not your intention but your combativeness towards the Ambassador, raising questions about the veracity of his responses, and the ridicule directed towards him was a poor reflection on the United States Congress.
I am also certain that you will consider my criticism in the spirit in which it is intended. I have argued many times that Ethiopia’s political culture is based on the lowest common denominator of reasonable discourse. I have observed that unlike Americans, Ethiopians have a difficult time “agreeing to disagree.” Let us agree to disagree but only after having heard both sides.
I hope that you and the other members of the committee will consider delaying the markup of the proposed legislation in order to consider more fully the evidence of both sides on these most important issues facing a most important ally of the United States.
Respectfully,
Elias David
Arlington, Virginia