THE QUAGMIRE OF ETHIOPIAN DIASPORA POLITICS—AND A WAY OUT

By: Haimanot Lakew

January 6, 2008

It’s been almost five months, since the leaders of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) were pardoned and subsequently released after having been convicted by the Ethiopian Court. To their thousands of supporters in Ethiopia, who stood in line for ten to twelve hours to propel them forward into the political scene while indirectly strengthening the as of yet nascent multi-party democratic culture and to their critics, like myself, who had doubt in the first place whether these leaders could be the fathers of such a multi-party establishment in Ethiopia, the spirit of the Ethiopian Millennium coincides with this historic moment to create a rare opportunity for CUD’s leaders, after having been released, to go back and reevaluate or reassess the strengths and weaknesses of their organization and the political debacles that led to their imprisonment in the first place. In other words, it was incumbent upon these leaders to immediately seize this opportunity to have an extensive and sincere dialogue with their constituency and supporters within Ethiopia. However, to the chagrin of their constituency in Ethiopia and the triumph of the cynics, like myself, who had never had any fantasies that these people could fulfill the Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian roles in my country, they instead fled abroad to Europe, Canada, and the United States. Initially, they created a huge commotion within diasporic politics in each state’s airport that they arrived at, hailed as the liberators of Ethiopia. I could even imagine ordinary Americans, seeing the pandemonium surrounding these so-called liberators, perhaps thinking that they would even be capable of finding a solution for the Bush debacle in this country, never mind the political situation in Ethiopia. All joking aside, it was very saddening, after the all-too brief commotion to see the absolute disintegration of the group as separately, the leaders became mired in the diasporic political scene. Suddenly, we saw individual splinter groups forming around Hailu, Berhanu, and Birtukan, political cliques that began to cultivate their own separate bases. All types of mud-slinging ensued, campaigns that involved name-calling and even outright accusations ranging from calling the other groups dictators or “hodam” and finally degenerating into the most appalling of allegations, such as rapists. This outrageous behavior became the norm of struggle among these extreme diasporic groups.

The focus of this paper is not to analyze the ethics behind diasporic politics but rather to ask the fundamental question, namely, why this kind of extreme politics is prevailing within the so-called opposition groups to the current Ethiopian government. Furthermore, I want to probe the causes for the daily weakening and splintering of the opposition into newly formed cliques, to the detriment of staying within mainstream politics in order to uphold political engagement by encouraging viable opposition parties within Ethiopia. Above all however, I want to highlight the serious danger that these extreme political groups will pose to the overall Ethiopian diapora community, by undermining its common values, culture, history, and identity. Therefore, I am arguing in this paper that a minimum and clear set of principles should be carved out as a common ground that we hold sacred to be a viable diaspora political community, a guarantee that as different groups within the diaspora, no one will be marginalized in the democratization process in Ethiopia.

Prior to expounding upon the set of principles which I have just mentioned, let me briefly share my personal observations regarding Ethiopia’s development within the political, social, and economic spheres. Since 2002, there has been a gradual but significant and consistent progress within Ethiopia, marked in particular by surges within infrastructural development and progressive social agendas. In addition, there has been a marked upswing in agricultural production, export, and investment opportunities. Within the past four years, Ethiopia has shown an impressive 10% annual average growth rate, which has not gone unnoticed within the international community as many multilateral institutions, including the World Bank and IMF, call attention to the country’s burgeoning economic growth. Encouraged, many of the country’s policy makers are optimistic that within the next two decades, there is no reason why Ethiopia can’t join the ranks of other middle-income countries. Furthermore, Ethiopia has been classed as one of the only non-oil producing African nations which will meet the Millennium Development Goals, specifically in the areas of universal primary education, poverty reduction, healthcare, food security, and provision of sufficient water and sanitation facilities. The twin demons of famine and drought, which have long branded Ethiopia’s reputation among other nations, are on the verge of being put to rest, as well as its shameful characterization as a nation perpetually at the behest of warfare, internecine strife, and political dictatorship. In fact, this negative image is well on the way to being replaced by a much more positive and progressive image as a nation that has been able to trounce its own enemies in the forms of famine, drought, and poverty, without the aid of foreign nations.

All of these developments have been made possible, at least partially, by the presence of a favorable and reasonable (with the word “reasonable” highlighted here) political environment, one which has allowed much of this progress to expand at the rate that it has. In an important step towards renouncing the aforementioned image of a dictator-ridden country with little to no political freedom, the fundamental foundations of a political democracy have already been laid in the form of the ratification of the 1995 constitution, which called for Ethiopia’s supreme law to uphold basic democratic rights, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, the right to an independent trial, the right to both vote or stand in elections, the right to freely travel, the right to hold property, and the protection of basic human rights. As a result of such far-thinking initiatives, other aspects of Ethiopian society have also experienced incremental growth, including private print media, additional political parties, and NGOs which provide valuable service within the public sphere.

Due to this continuous liberalization in all aspects of Ethiopian life, members of the Ethiopian diaspora are beginning to repatriate into Ethiopia, some after many decades of having lived abroad. Today, those who have gone the route of repatriation have become examples by establishing themselves within the business community, throwing themselves into various endeavors to further social progress like NGOs, and so on.

Once again, the readers should be acutely aware that, having narrated this overall optimistic assessment of Ethiopia’s progress, which is essentially my own personal observation, other Ethiopians might disagree with my evaluation of the current situation in Ethiopia, which is in fact, quite understandable. Returning to my original thesis, the fact that someone or some group entertains a different opinion is not the reason that diasporic politics has become enmeshed in the quagmire that I have already referred to but is instead the absence of a minimum common ground of principles, which has in turn led to the degeneration of diasporic politics, creating various splinter groups within the community. So what matters in my opinion at this historical juncture, is not mere engagement of political dialogue of different political parties on their respective programs, but rather finding the common ground on which this dialogue can proceed in a more constructive and reasonable manner.

Upon further scrutiny of the diasporic political oppositions’ dilemma which has reached an alarming stage in terms of internal divisions and further disintegration into far-flung cliques, it soon becomes clear that it is the absence of the following concrete principles which has led them to this debacle. In fact, even so-called legitimate political party leaders from Ethiopia, who would have had the chance to secure their own political victory by taking their legitimate Parliamentary seats, are dragged into this diasporic trap and finally become marginalized from the Ethiopian political scene. So, out of this long experience, marked by a number of repeated strategic mistakes made by diasporic political leaders, it’s wise to reaffirm again and again the following principles as our guiding influence.

A.) Recognition and respect of the Ethiopian constitution: It’s true that diasporic political parties will obviously have reservations about specific articles within the constitution. Nonetheless, arguing for changes within the constitution and completely neglecting the duties of an Ethiopian citizen and/or native to recognize and respect the constitution are two different things. In fact, what we continuously see today within the diasporic community is an attempt to undermine the constitution, sometimes by any means necessary. As a matter of fact, political leaders of the diaspora who feel that they have a serious political agenda against the ruling party in Ethiopia in the areas of human rights violations, political accommodations, and so on, should have been the first of the political groups to claim ownership of the Ethiopian constitution, the supreme law of the land, in achieving their political goals. Instead, time and time again, we hear the same idiotic complaint that it is a single party’s constitution, in other words, the property of Woyane. This refusal to accept the constitution as theirs is what has led them to their current quagmire. In my perspective, the first step to creating a common ground within the diasporic community is by recognizing the constitution as the legitimate supreme law of the land.

B.) Defending and supporting all political parties that pursue their political agenda through and only through peaceful means and abide by the constitutionally established institutions and legal bodies of the country: This does not mean being partial or partisan to either the ruling or any of the legally formed opposition parties but being supportive of the constitutional order. As of now, diasporic political leaders deliberately pick and choose the times that they would like to propagate legality and when they would like to encourage certain illegal forms of struggle. However, in my opinion, to engage in peaceful and legal political activity is the utmost of strategic decisions one has to make. They should stick with this path no matter what. Unfortunately, in the absence of a clear commitment to this form of struggle, their influence extends to even the fragile legal opposition parties in Ethiopia, which are attempting to rely on legal forms of struggle. In fact, when these legally bound political leaders happen to visit the diaspora, records clearly show how they are attempting to derail these parties from this legal path, simultaneously preventing them from thriving and consolidating their victories into the establishment of a strong foundation for a multi-party political system in Ethiopia. In retrospect, the recent rush to visit the diasporic community by CUD’s political leaders after their release, confirms this argument. In my opinion, when we call for peaceful political engagement in Ethiopia, we should also be aware of the need for the expansion of political spaces on the federal, state, and local levels. Our call and our principles should also include the ruling party to nourish a conscious effort in the cultivation of these political spaces, to accommodate the existing legal parties within Ethiopia because as the popular saying goes, it takes two to tango.

C.) Defending the nation against external aggression and terrorist attacks: Although this is self-explanatory on its own, the culture of diasporic politics has come to a point where even this basic core value, which we should hold dear as Ethiopians, is violated constantly. Not to be naïve, but the violation of this seemingly self-explanatory tenet has played a constant role within Ethiopian history, but this treason has ceased being covert and is out in the open for all to see. Today, some Ethiopian websites, radio stations, and even political leaders, are openly taking sides with Islamic political forces in Somalia and the Eritrean government, and are not willing to denounce all terrorist attacks in Ethiopia, all this in the name of struggling against Woyane. Instead of perpetuating and continuously violating this basic principle, we should be standing together as Ethiopians when it comes to outside aggression and terrorist attacks on innocent people, both of which we have faced from the Eritrean government and as part of our intervention in Somalia to keep our strategic national interest. Ethiopian citizens and natives within the diasporic community, quite understandably, might have certain reservations or alternative policies in regard to these situations; they should be encouraged to openly reevaluate these policies and these differences should be accepted. However, this can only be accomplished positively in a context where we have underlined or accepted our core values and principles as Ethiopians on which we stand together when it comes to aggression or terrorist attacks and when we decide to intervene on behalf of our nation’s interest.

D.) Deducing from the above principles, the conscious recognition and acceptance of the Ethiopian National Defense Force as the defenders of our nation: Here again, diasporic political leaders contend that the Ethiopian National Defense Force is an extension of the current ruling party. This dangerous notion has a seriously divisive effect on the Ethiopian diasporic community. We have come to a point where certain so-called Ethiopian websites within the diasporic community express their solidarity by showing the corpses of Ethiopian soldiers underneath headlines that blast these men as mercenary troops. This must stop and the only way for this to happen is by reaffirming these basic principles and advocating them within the diasporic community as glue to hold us together as a patriotic community.

E.) Endorsing and having a positive disposition towards such endeavors begun by the Ethiopian government in the areas of combating poverty, ensuring food security, expanding and achieving a rural electrification program, working towards universal access to primary education and clean water, establishing an equal and inclusive healthcare system all over Ethiopia, construction of roads and other infrastructural developments, etc: These noble and progressive social agendas should be collectively encouraged by the diasporic community as steppingstones towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Even these initiatives, of which all Ethiopians, regardless of political affiliation, should be supportive, are instead protested against at the World Bank and IMF headquarters by a tiny contingent of extremists within the Ethiopian diasporic opposition parties. It’s a shame. For those who claim to advocate the advancement of political democratization in Ethiopia, I wonder if they have truly examined the link between a country where only 17% of the population, (perhaps by now 24%), have access to electricity and the negative impact this has on a free and fair election in that same country. When we cry and shout over a stolen ballot box, why should we be so surprised, when probably 70% of the population doesn’t even have electricity after 4 PM? What I am trying to get at is that even for those who have exclusive interest in the democratization process in Ethiopia, it should be clear that these social agendas have a direct link to the development of the political democratization process. In other words, one cannot de-link the two by stating that first we have to resolve the problem of democratization by neglecting the need for the above social progressive agendas; they go hand in hand. In short, the support of these social progressive agendas should be part of the common ground upon which we as Ethiopians then pursue our individual political issues or goals.

The above set of principles, in my opinion, should be the basis for establishing the broadest consensus within the diasporic political community. If we establish and accept these principles, it is only the extremists who will ultimately be marginalized. Once we have accepted these principles, our supporting or opposing certain political parties will only be natural and will not undermine the core values that we as Ethiopians should together hold. It is the lack of such principles, in the first place, which has led to the current state of disintegration within the Ethiopian diasporic opposition parties, by marginalizing their struggle to the point of losing the actual reality of the country. Therefore, in my opinion, the first step of these extremist political leaders is to reevaluate their status and move towards a position where they can re-engage in the mainstream political force. To do this first requires acceptance of the above core principles or if these principles are not satisfactory to them, the burden is upon them to come up with another set of principles which all of us can agree on as a political community.

Even for those who support and probably are members of the current ruling party in Ethiopia, arguing for EPRDF’s political platform is meaningless without a comprehensive understanding of the unique situation that the opposition political parties in the diaspora are facing. As a matter of fact, lately, I have seen the proliferation of EPRDF support committees within the diasporic community. I was surprised, first of all because there haven’t been any such officially declared groups until now, and as a ruling party, a support committee for it should have existed a long time ago, in conjunction with other opposition parties’ support committees. Regardless of this, I hope that these EPRDF support committees clearly understand the opportunities as well as the challenges which we face in the diasporic community. Instead of rushing to assemble the diaspora’s political community members based on specific EPRDF political programs, I urge these EPRDF support committees to seize the moment and first pull everyone together on the basis of the above common ground principles. Thus, the immediate task for the Ethiopian diasporic community is to start a dialogue with an eye towards the end of establishing such a common ground. In this new year of 2008, I hope that sorting out the basic principles for this common ground becomes part of our agenda in future discussions and communication among all members of the diasporic political community.

Thank you.