By Zenebe Hailemariam
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Stupid is War
The long history of Ethiopia once was the history of Eritrea too. Eritrea was one of the then 14 provinces of Ethiopia. Yet after the military regime was toppled, it granted the right to succeed through which it acquired independence. Since Ethiopia adopted a Constitution containing Article 39 reads; Every Nation Nationality in Ethiopia has an unconditional right to self-determination, including the right to secession.
After independence, Eritrea started existence in statehood. The appearance of a sate entity with an aspired perception of common political view, historical, social, cultural and religion was considered as an opportunity for Ethiopia. Eritrea had been one of the good neighbors of Ethiopia. Unfortunately, that could not last long. It became an allied only for a while till stamped a new paper money to trade on Ethiopia’s products. The wish was to establish the statehood on the Ethiopian economy: politically being independent. That country would like to continue benefiting from the Ethiopian government budgetary support, which had been getting while it was once a province of Ethiopia.
A choice had been given, but some people requested total independence from Ethiopia. They got it! Why many Eritreans, especially, politicians insist on Eritrean independence from Ethiopia? This, actually, needs an in depth study. Nevertheless, here it is possible to treat the question with reasons. Before independence, even after that, there were more Eritreans in Ethiopia than in Eritrea, and many rich Ethiopians in Eritrea. Bearing this in mind, the ruling regime in Eritrea started playing a gamble in politics to create a rich Eritrea, which resembles to some states small in land area coverage, yet showing significant economic booms very recently.
The rule in Eritrea usually quotes the Asian Tigers, sometimes also referred to as Asian's Four Little Dragons, and it wished to be counted among them. Nevertheless, these countries have a typical economic, political, social, cultural, geographical backgrounds and characters. They have gone through unique cycles with various shortcomings. For a poor country like Eritrea, getting some lessons would be appreciable, but copying the whole system to create identical element would not be advisable. Here, what has to be understood is that for a country’s evolutional process, there are unique factors. These could be cultural, religious or some other invisible entities. Their roles on a state’s development or demolition depend on the context of that country. In this case, it is better to see the socio- economic and political context of Eritrea and the Asian Tigers.
The largest numbers of people in Eritrea are Muslims, and are extremely poor. Literacy rate is low. The government could not provide basic health services to the people. In this country, there are no well-furnished infrastructures. Even, the established infrastructures during colonial occupation are deteriorating due to age and over-utilization. The government does not have interest on new constructions and maintenances. Its top priority is building military forces. There are no encouraging development activities. Government policies do not practically base peace, democratization, technological advancement etc.
The leadership has poor attitude towards investment attraction, trade promotion, and tourism development. Highly centralized system of administration avoids privatizations. Everything is in the hands of the government. Individuals have no right-the right to have property, expressions, even to think and act accordingly. They are forced to lead their life only within the given political and economic cage, and respond positively in that manner. If someone tries to act out of the given norm, the punishment goes to the extent of claiming precious life. This punishment does not work only for some portion of the society. All people who speak against or act against the leadership are to punish. Even higher officials faced with the same fate.
In a book written by Don Connell entitled Conversations with Eritrean Political Prisoners (2005), voices of personalities whom once were members of Eritrean ruling system are heard from prisons. They reveal the root of despotism in Eritrea. As per their word Eritrean political organization is based on deeply divided, corrupted and old-fashioned Marxist-Leninist Communism Principles. Today, Eritrea is trying to realize the slogans of the Ethiopian Derge Communist Manifesto - Revolution eats its own baby.
The Asian Tigers had never been in such a context. These countries, of course, had been non-democratic and relatively authoritarian political systems during the early years. They were levying high tariffs on imports, and domestic consumptions were discouraged. Undervalued currencies had been once prevailed, as well. Nevertheless, beyond the undeniable fact that these countries would be models for developing states. They had focused on exports to rich industrialized nations and sustained rate of growth for decades. In addition, Asian Tigers have high level of US bond holdings. The people developed a culture, which help for high saving rate.
Contrary to this, where are the similarities of Eritrea with the Tigers? Except for some common features, which are also co-insides with the rest of the world developing countries, there is nothing unique. Unlike the Tigers Eritrea seeks friendship with some Arab countries and with few African countries, which are known for their mal-behavior. In this case, the Tigers did not try to use forces to base their economy on neighbors. They did not play unfairly on the foreign people and on their properties. Yet, the Eritreans played a game in mal-treating wealthy Ethiopians, merchants, and investors etc. through creating difficult situations to amputate them, so that they could hardly compete with their Eritrean counterparts.
Previously, Eritreans in Ethiopia have been expanding capitals and earnings, through taking loans from government and private banks. In order to realize that egoistic vision, Eritrean politicians started taking measures, and their country, which will never grow coffee naturally, was enabled to possess a rank in the world exporters market. That was a complete surprise for every Ethiopians, even for Eritreans, too. Eritreans took advantage over Ethiopian hard-working farmers. For the ruling system in Eritrea, that was too sweet a resource to tap keenly plenty within the forthcoming centuries. However, which is unfair for Ethiopia.
Following Eritreans introduction of a new paper money- Nakfa, Ethiopia also meant to do the same for convincing reasons. Firstly, it is unlikely for Ethiopia to welcome and use a paper, which assumed equal monetary value i.e. 1,5,10,25,and 50 cents and the paper money, as well. Secondly, Ethiopia require in changing the paper money, because the scar of Derg Communism were on them. Nevertheless, the measure taken had been unacceptable for Eritrean politicians, because it was an irresistible challenge for their strategy- creating rich Eritrea basing on the Ethiopian economy. When that faced with a problem, they started in looking for a solution, which they consider was correct: confiscating Ethiopian government's properties on the Assab and Massawa ports and Ethiopian civilians' properties who had been residing in Eritrea, putting innocent Ethiopian civilians into prisons, and killing them etc., and finally waging an all out war.
The leadership in Eritrea had/has tried to camouflage the truth of waging war on Ethiopia. The denials started in saying Ethiopia invaded us to exercise the historic expansion policy. Logically, in this 21st century such thinking is unexpected from a leader of a certain state. It is true that Ethiopia is poor: The world knows this fact. Yet, the people live in peace apart from poverty. There is maximum tolerance among the people within the existing diversity. That is a beauty. Likewise, which creates a strong bondage. Hence, the Eritrean ruling leaders' argument to cover up their illegality and true interest in twisting the fact is unfair. It is immoral to try to contaminate and destroy an honest nations' history. People who know Ethiopia feel apathy of the Eritrean rulers’ mere propaganda.
Unfortunately, that does not work for those who are seeing the harmony between Christians and Muslims. That is a real example in the world. Ethiopia is the first to welcome Islam. To attest this, there is no need of consulting individuals, because it is clearly displays in sacred books. There is extremely deep attachment, which even people of shallow knowledge could understand, between Christians and Muslims in Ethiopia. Since the majorities of the people of Eritrea are Muslims, and use the same Holly books, have identical culture, doctrine, etc. with Ethiopian Muslims; their taste resembles. There is no conflict of interest between the two people who are residing at the grassroots level. Yet, the ruler in that country digging every ground, and turning up every stones in seeking a difference so that that would be too easy to mobilize the majority of the people of Eritrea against their counterpart- Ethiopians.
The Eritrean leaders try hard to give sense for their co-existence as a peaceful beast in saying; Eritrea has strategic importance in Africa that is why it confronts threats from its neighbors. In realty, however, the so-called strategic importance is becoming the ideology of the past. Let alone a very small state like Eritrea, the world as a whole is becoming narrowing down to a village. Technological advancement is giving lesser importance to a certain extent for governments’ and states’ limitation. The claim of Eritrean leadership- strategic importance is nonsense for that matter. All the reasons Eritrean leaders provide are for the ordinary political gains.
The harmonious relations of the general people are contaminating through the regime's act. During the Cold War, of course, some states benefited from their geographical location. That was history. The rule in Eritrea should now the difference between past and present. At present, economically or politically people could bring effect. The how is very clear for a dynamic democrat leader. Simply, the human brain controls nature. People capable of treading with each other from any corner of the world. They are able to exchange their views with list cost and short period, only by pressing a button. Then, how can we be so stubborn and start war for old-fashion reason of geographic strategy?
In the human history, individuals liberated a society if they are with a beautiful mind and heart. They can also destroy it if their motif is cruelty. Between these two states what is happening, categorically, is in the same scenario. They have a lot of works waiting a head of them. The level of poverty is a problem by itself. Each moment, people deprive of their lives due to famine. The countries' economy is totally, bases on the donors and loaners goodwill. Civilians living within these poor countries badly need the assistances and the money collected in loan and grant to fulfill basic humanly natural demand. However, in the recent past, Eritrean leader Isayas decresed the number of NGOs from 37 to 13 and harassed the country's largest door i.e. the United States Aid for International Development (USAID).
Food is the first priority. It is not fighting with bullet that assures the means of survival. Survival of the fittest is not the question of the day in this context. Twenty first century does not require War, but Peace. It does not appreciate partition, but cooperation. Dreaming to be victorious through fighting to kill considered purely savagery and primitive. Discussion to solve difference is the priority of the day. These have to be the guiding principles for almost all of the leadership in least-developed countries. Moreover, it should be a strategy that contributes for peaceful co-existence.
It is inhuman and animosity to believe and practice survival on power in paving the way for war. To believe in conflict is immaturity, and inappropriate application of balance of power. Mostly this is a typical nature for ineffective leadership with luck of confidence. Such a leader has a different character. The leader lives in extreme apprehension of the people. Under this system of leadership majority is a threat and unity of people is dangerous. Deceit, murders, warnings, etc. are exclusive psychologies. A ruler in such a system tries the utmost echelon to create boundaries. Trying to cross these boundaries is an inviolable. For some who raise against the system the fates are already predetermine: throw into jail or murder. Counter-change, anti-democracy, one who deter development effort, peace etc. would be their nickname. In such reasons, they would outcast from the government political, economic, socio-cultural activities. Simply efforts would be exerted to amputate the mind of an individual from being active. Yet it is not appreciable to be smart in creating a different paradigm out of the circle of the general system.
The rule is one figure. Everything is concentrated at the top. What says at atop must spreads to the roots. This is inviolable. Yet, human being has every freedom. There are many ways to exercise it. Speaking and listening are natural rights for all. Reading and writing are developing skills. Correspondingly, ideas, knowledge etc. gathered in these processes, as well. People modify, crucify, etc. feelings or ideas. Those unify many in bridging the inevitable gaps exist among them, which capacitate them self-governing potential. Mere difference does not impede them from working together.
In the globalize world information is power. Access to it is not through identical methods used by the Eritrean higher officials during straggle in jungles. Nowadays, information does not significantly travel through geographic borders, but through modern technologies. Currently the world in general, Ethiopia in particular knows what is happening in Eritrea. People are in compulsory services, leaders are throwing into jail for their different ideas and comments, and people are starving to death, journalists are under custody when they are on duty. What is more? Simply, the Eritrean people, today, are flashbacking the worse days of the Ethiopian people recent past history during the Military Regime. Rouge regime in Eritrea is enforcing the nation to involve in illegal acts. Its sadist nature well explains in the fight it is making with all of its neighbors: Ethiopia, the Sudan, Yemen, and Djibouti.
The Ethiopian people and government inquired why our brothers attacked us. It was/ is really still a puzzle for every Ethiopians, most Eritreans and for many people in the world. The ruling regime in Eritrea is insisting on its need is land. If the problem were that there, are/ would have been many ways to address it. However, War should never been considered at all. Even a stone, which had been attending horrible Wars like the First World War and the Second World War, would condemn the human aggression in War. For any peace loving people, war is an invisible monster, which sucks the living blood. It becomes proactive whenever a human being is in dispute. There is no mentally healthy creature in the human world that would like to see and aspire to live with it.
What did the Eritrean people and ruling system have had from war? On the side of the people, they cost the lives of their sons, daughters, brothers, fathers, mothers etc. Loss of property, their Ethiopian families and friends; on the side of the ruling system, due to its rough character it lost neighbors especially Ethiopia and the Sudan. Additionally, the ruling system got opportunity to reveal the unpredictable behavior and actions to international bodies, and dictatorship that enabled it to buy time for long existence.
On the other side, what did the Ethiopian People and government have had from that war? The people felt sad fighting with Eritreans and kill them, felt sympathy to Eritreans enforced to render compulsory military service that Ethiopians had been through, sadden for loss of time, capital and energy coasted, which were meant for development endeavors, and highly concerned with the regions instability. Generally, Ethiopia would not like to cost the political, economic, and social gains for war. Unfortunately, the Eritrean ruling system forced Ethiopians to engage into the inevitable war.
However Ethiopia did not plan the war, it took the dominating role during the process. There was nobody in Ethiopia who would like to kill an Eritrean even in such a war front. This is well known by the people of Eritrea. For every Ethiopians, Eritrea meant brothers and sisters in the next door. Even today, they are living with us. All of the leaders of Eritrea grew and learned the basic principle of life in Ethiopia. This is plain fact. Whatever is the case there is no cultural difference with this people. Their dispute could easily be solvable. They understand each other except for negligence and antagonism.
Unless for covering up the existing realty, and individual political interest the people of Ethiopia and the people of Eritrea are the last people in the world, which go for dispute. The problem here is that between the two peoples individual interests are swaying to obstruct the harmony. For them what is stupid is nothing, but war.