PLEA FOR COMMON SENSE & DECORUM
By Genet Mersha, 28 Dec. 2007
I commend Prof. Messay Kebede’s plea for honest dialogue amongst Ethiopians (Aiga Forum, 18 Dec; Ethiomedia 19 Dec). I fully share his exasperation with the deepening intolerance in émigré politics. Not that the other side is any better, but worrisome tendencies permeate émigré politics.
Civilized countries and their institutions honour and reward citizens with outstanding contributions. Through the symbolism of that act, they ensure both society’s enrichment and continuity. At the same time, the action manifests individual aspirations, much as it reflects the dynamism within society. The Catholic Church, as the largest Christian denomination, is renowned especially for its indefatigable dedication to update and comb its rosters in search of saints. If not, society might think God is dead, or in the age of ‘instant gratification’, there may be temptation to think that He is no longer capable of making miracles or deliverance.
Many folks are uncomfortable with the growing tide of intense emotionalism with which Ethiopian politics keeps on crowning, dethroning and dehumanizing individuals. They have become aware that it has been responsible for our nation’s paucity in political, institutional, ethical, judicial, etc., legacy, despite Ethiopia being one of the few oldest countries in the world.
By force of history, we Ethiopians have become a generation of contrarians, adept at tearing each other apart. We have lost capacity to understand or appreciate one another’s achievements and sacrifices. This is because rise and fall coexist in a unique symbiosis in our culture entertaining us by their light speed successions. Our entire society is locked within dreadful indifference, borne of insecurity and a sense of inadequacy. It threatens to deprive Ethiopians of immense sources of inspiration and strength. We have seen that even history is scarcely spared of defilement.
If we follow Prof. Kebede’s quest, perhaps the scope of discussion on
his interesting topic might prove less worthy of the efforts. He is interested
in finding out the causes of division within the CUD leadership. At this stage,
late as it is, the rest of us would have little to gain from that exercise, save
historians of political organizations. Therefore, it behooves us to look beyond
to address the root causes of our political problems.
It is unlikely that the CUD would continue in its present form. Different forces have conspired to unmake it. With his latest action, Mr. Hailu Shawl might have forced the hands of some or encouraged others in top leadership to split or re-align. Some in the Ethiopian parliament are also in tussle on the periphery over its name, although neither the organization’s legal personality nor the claims of any one side is recognized in the country. In that sense, CUD’s future path is full of hurdles and too may unknowns. However, the story of its death is premature, despite the festivities and tap-dancing in some quarters. Observers may be in for surprise, if this turns out to be a blessing in disguise. For the first time in Ethiopian history, the crisis may give rise to the birth of a genuine national political party founded on democratic principles and the broadest possible participation. This thought may have crossed some minds amongst Mr. H. Shawl’s ex-colleagues. The air on their side smacks of indifference to his latest actions, as if it were a sign of them being unimpressed by his instructions from his sickbed to go it alone, or by co-opting others.
The current cleavage within the CUD leadership appears to be the outcome of an inherent process of organizational metamorphosis. It could have been aided by personal frustrations, humiliations suffered in prison, intense outside political pressures, and expectations of supporters. Most importantly, free from the constant gush of adrenalin of engagement against the regime and staying in close proximity with each other in prison for almost two years, they had the time to focus on themselves and their activities as members of a young coalition. Already immediately after their release, stories of their rancour had preceded their travels to the United States. It is only shortly after their arrival there in two groups that they began jabbing in public. They are convinced that they have little in common amongst each other. Therefore, the division may force repositioning of forces. At this stage, provided conscious efforts are exerted to allow domestic public sentiments to filter through its successor organization(s), there is little to suggest much is lost. After all, much as we need democracy today and tomorrow, we may also have to give thoughts to the experience and tradition of having genuine and national political parties, which is lacking today.
Discord and split are nothing new in political organizations. Like any other system, democracy has its flaws. What is interesting is how organizations respond to such challenges. In spite of the maturity of American democracy, the democratic and republican parties go through endless cycles of bipartisanship and extreme polarizations, though the latter has become far too common in recent decades. Only the public with its voting power exerts pressure compelling them to work together. On occasions, the respective parties have experienced divisions and factionalism from within. Often, successful strategists have won and transformed the platforms rewarding one side with victory to lead the charge. It may sound smooth; in reality, however, it has had severe implications to national politics and the values Americans hold dear. Prof. Paul Krugman[1] has recently published an insightful book on the subject.
After a long history, today Belgian political parties and groupings seem to opt to break away. The Dutch and the Germans see little in common between them and, hence, in living together within a unitary state, as one of the political leaders has put it recently. While they are in a state of reflection at present, the Belgian state is safe and intact, for now at least. This is because both sides shudder at the thought of being judged by the public as having failed in their responsibilities, before the people of Belgium have pronounced themselves. When we turn to our region, we see that we live in a culture where there is no respect to public sentiments and opinions. What matters to those wielding power is how they climb the ladders and how they extend their stay in power.
In recent years, deep-seated distrust and animosities among Pakistani opposition political parties have fostered too many tragedies in that country. Today, no one individual or party has gained from that, not even Pervez Musharaf who has pulled off the presidency recently, which he so much wanted, with a mere change of his uniform for civilian suits. In spite of that, governance will hardly be easier for him. At the same time, too many lives have been lost needlessly. In defence of democracy, only judges and lawyers have paid heavy price with beatings, lots of broken bones and imprisonments. Yet, democracy has slipped further away. On our side, the TPLF and EPLF have had stories of their own, in a country without democracy or political party traditions. Therefore, in keeping with our country’s authoritarian traditions, they have found it easier to stamp out differences by eliminating individuals. They justified their actions by labelling the victims either as corrupt or disloyal to the interests of the nation.
In the Ethiopian mind, educated or not, it appears that there is no distinction between religion and politics. They are practiced with the same fervour, as if distinctions between the intellectual and spiritual, or body and soul, faith and reason, hardly exist. As a result, the imperative necessities for the separation of state and government have remained obscured. Even in the official language, the word ‘state’ is seldom in use, if at all it exists. Primary in our education is the unity of state and government, their permanence and immutability. That way, it has served better those in power and other entrenched interests. One by-product of such an infusion though is its imbuing of the Ethiopian persona with confidence about the probity of one’s beliefs/causes. Like many, Ethiopians entertain largely the ‘holier than thou’ attitude.
If anything, this has diminished scope for reason or rationale, possibilities for political compromise and accommodation. Hence, the reason why our present and our past are replete with tensions, conflicts and wars. During the last three decades, this has not only proved extremely costly in terms of national image and human lives (…Red Terror 1977, mass massacres of June 2005, November 2005…), but has also become an added cause for our backwardness. At its worst, it has bred a disillusioned generation with dead insight and a diminished sense of individual responsibility towards oneself and society.
Most émigré politics has its heart at the right place. It is the inherent right of individual citizens to defend themselves against the excesses of tyrannical regimes. Nonetheless, over the years émigré politics has grown more and more sullen and unimaginative. Its unparalleled defiance of reason and rationale is costing it dearly in the form of impotence. As the past several years have shown, this has adversely affected the justifiable cause of fighting to improve governance and human conditions in Ethiopia. These weaknesses and intolerance are hardly the exclusive attributes of any one side. They are shared in common across the Ethiopians political spectrum—government, opposition political groups and individuals—irrespective of education, position, or on which side of Ethiopian politics one is perched.
Since last summer, some individuals and groups within the émigré community were very busy playing one side of CUD against the other. The popular webpages have also lent themselves to that. Perhaps they were dying for scoop. When it did not materialize, they editorialized to force the hands of ‘fate.’ As if stories of their engagement in undemocratic behaviour, especially censorship, are not enough, they have now allowed their forums to be used for attacks against individuals. A few months ago, the elderly Prof. Mesfin was vilified for speaking his mind in his maverick forthrightness. He was dethroned instantly from the pedestal that his consistent, selfless sacrifices and decades of struggles against past and present injustices have earned him.
He has never been anybody’s favourite; that has never been his concern, nor has it ever bothered him. Several decades ago, he stood against feudalism in his own way, with language and perspective unspiced with Marxist-Leninist lingo. He was defiant against junta socialism and its senseless policies against poverty in the 1970s and 1980s. The émigré community came to its senses and embraced him in the 1990s when he opposed gallantly elitist ethnicism and championed the cause of human rights against the present regime.
There is nothing wrong with honest disagreement or in refuting misinformation. However, brazen attack against personalities is not only repugnant, but also hardly sensible politics. It would only leave the national pedestal barren of stars and crowns. If this is allowed to continue, it would be studded with recriminations and mutual defamation.
The other side is hardly virtuous either. Lately many pro-regime webpages are full of their “I told you so!” bids and pieces. Their open and coded messages claim infallibility; they speak unabashedly of how right they have been all along in their scorn and onslaught against all opposition forces. They are unassailable in their belief that the regime in Addis Ababa is democratic. Nevertheless, at no time have they expressed concern, or provided Ethiopians with justification for their silence in the face of rampant disrespect to human lives, continued suspension of civil liberties, the lack of freedom of the press and due process of law. To put it mildly, their habits and operations are not only less than honest, they are also inconsistent, for instance, with what Prime Minister Meles told a group of academics in 1995 in Washington D.C. He assured the gathered professors—most of them long time friends of Ethiopia, including those who sympathized with or supported the TPLF in its struggle against the Dergue—that his government “needs a vigorous opposition to keep it honest and efficient, just as the Dergue kept the TPLF healthy and alert.”[2] There is hardly such reality in Ethiopia today. As a result, many of those professors are critical of the regime, as most Ethiopians are. What can I say? Either both the prime minister and the pro-regime webpages are wrong and need to admit and correct, or the TPLF/EPRDF has changed course since 1995.
Whatever Hailu Shawl’s political sins or personal weaknesses, I have hardly come across an article that has made its case against him. Most accuse him of dictatorial tendencies, even collusion of business interests with the TPLF/EPRDF. That was not what the other CUD leaders claimed during their tour of the US, even as they were sparring against each other. At least publicly, they appealed to him repeatedly to join them as their leader. It is possible that his recent facsimile by which he suspended his ex-colleagues and appropriated the organization for himself and for his newest friends could be used against him. I leave that to specialists in law and politics. However, long before that, and without establishing the facts, émigré politics has already rendered its judgement; it has torn him apart more ferociously than the TPLF/EPRDF has ever managed. The popular webpages have sanctioned and ratcheted their attacks against him, without the courtesy of presenting us with evidence.
The whole thing is truly bizarre and reflects negatively on émigré politics. It is more so especially when one recalls that only less than six months ago, these very same individuals were treated as holy relics. Recall the commotions at American airports their supporters tearing with joy, singing and some kissing their feet, a scene that took the home folks with incredulity. We have moved far since then to today’s orgy on the webpages to crucify the first fallen amongst them. There is growing weariness of the haste to destroy that has possessed émigré politics. Like many others, I have tried hard and for so long, but I lack the conviction to testify in defence of our capacity to reason out.
No one side will benefit from extremisms of this sort, not even the regime in Addis Ababa that is more than surprised by the disarray in émigré politics and the continued fragmentation of opposition forces.
With all humility, I want to impress on all sides across the political gulf, webpages of all political persuasions included, to accept this challenge and play their indispensable role to our betterment as individuals and that of our country. If we only strive to shed off our likeness to our authoritarian state, our nation could stand tall because of the united efforts and devotion of its children who could ably defend its higher causes and promote its interests. I am confident that, because we all love our country, we could rise to the occasion and to the challenges before us.