Imitating EPRDF on the philosophy of war

Adal Isaw(03/28/07)
adalisaw@yahoo.com

Straying away from the adage of America that stipulates to get even instead of getting mad, when I get mad over issues of my survival, I don’t get even; since to get even is to halfheartedly let live that which in the first place created the madness in me. A tie score of 1-1 with my sworn dangerous enemy that is bent to disrupt my existence by any means necessary is nothing, but a way of procrastinating the likelihood of the danger that may one day mature into an impending imminent threat. Although ambivalently, however, contrary to what my peripheral brain would like to dictate on me, when I get mad over issues of my existence, I don’t get even; since getting even brings out my emotion rather than my wit, to squash the impending imminent danger that I am facing in a pinpointed and a reasonable manner of resolve. And thus, imitating EPRDF on the philosophy of war in many instances, I dwell onto no ‘eye for an eye’ jurisprudence-a civilized and lawful way of modern day conflict resolution that forsakes war for dialogue and diplomacy.

I forsake war for dialogue and diplomacy because of my reverence to life. My life as is, is not a freely floating independent entity, but rather an abstruse and convoluted time and space wired to each and every aspect of that which is living. That which is living is more or less part of me. By extension, that which is the most in me is part and parcel of that which is living. And hence, to kill that which is part of me in order to protect the most of who I am, while it has not yet become a clear and impending threat to my own survival is a violation so gross words fail to assemble it for comprehension. In most instances, then, instead of killing that which is part of me, I believe in the killings of bad ideas, social misdeeds, hindrances, and obstacles, wanting to preserve my wired life to each and every aspect of that which is living- the very definition of the beauty of life and living.

The beauty of life and living can only be enhanced by dialogue and diplomacy. However, even with exemplary dialogue and diplomacy, the issues of life and living may not be as smoothly navigable as the essence my philosophical imitation of EPRDF alludes to. And most important, since nature is prone to a disorderly conduct by inclination, chances are, that there may be a time in which I will be under the gun of a conceivable pressure to preserve the most of who I am. My abducted fellow Ethiopians, for example, are most of who I am, and those who abducted them are part and parcel of me. And, if I am under the gun and the pressure of which continues to build unabated threatening my whole existence to the point of no return toward dialogue and diplomacy, I may eventually have to crisscross my hand and hold myself close to think thoroughly. And consequently, in order to preserve the greater part of who I am, I may be forced to kill that which is part of me. Still hesitant to kill though, and also finding the last sound reason by imitating EPRDF on the philosophy of war, I may resort to pinching and peeling of that which I may or may not eventually have to kill.

Juxtaposing my imitation of the EPRDF on war with the indignation of many Ethiopians lately as a result of the hostage taking episode of Ethiopian citizens, I envision nothing but patience and the will to resolve all the hindrances perpetrated by Esayas Afewerki and company, by pinching and peeling from that which we may or may not eventually be forced to kill. Oh! How dare we entertain to kill that which is part of us? For we have become attuned to finding the last sound reason forsaking confrontation for the choice of a better life, and also, believing that a life worthwhile living in Eritrea is magnified in its worthiness in the lives of the Ethiopian cousins just an inch away from that shabby line of separation. The arbitrariness of our separation invites our contentious cousins to do us harm while the peace-loving ones exchange goods, and at times use it to sneak out, to let themselves free from a megalomaniac. In our part, conceited from our toes to our heads by the power of our Defense Forces, we may not declare a full scale war knowing that the avenue for dialogue and diplomacy specific to some non-impending crises is not yet adjourned. Even then, imitating the EPRDF on the philosophy of war, I would argue, the best way to deal with some crises is to pinch and peel the very aspect of that which we may or may not be forced to kill in the future.

But, if our cousins by themselves, or allow any part of us or others abduct part of who we’re as hostage, which in fact they did, all that we’re able to do for now imitating the EPRDF is to caution them to read us between the lines, for we have made it abundantly clear that we may be forced to kill that which is the smallest part of us in order to preserve the greater part of who we are. Hesitant to kill though, we still prefer to kill the ideas that they harbor. Hesitant to kill, we still hope for their sanity to show up in due time in order to see in us what we see in them. Hesitant to kill the part of us no matter how minuscule it’s, we will be pinching and peeling the sleeping spirit in them till they hand us our Ethiopian brothers unscathed. A choice to avoid the havoc of war by resolving a crisis through dialogue and diplomacy brings greater joy than any joy the day after a complete military victory over a megalomaniac can ever bring; reads the last chapter on the philosophy of war by EPRDF-a peculiar philosophy worthy of imitation.