ARTICLES PAGE

Ethiopian Citizens

By Nyikaw A Ochalla

The TPLF/EPRDF regime faces tremendous challenges from its political opponents struggling to bring change of government in Addis Ababa or else change the current political structure and power in the country; a trend, which many supporters and symphetizers of the united Ethiopia would greatly differ in views, opinion and comments.

The notion of Ethiopian unity has already been challenged. The first stage being set by the TPLF lead EPRDF government which broke the old power monopoly and structure to suit its political agenda and economic development specifically for Tigray people. Following this strategic challenge, others as OLF and its political allies have further questioned the fundamentals of the Ethiopian unity by calling for separate independent state of Oromia and perhaps various mini states of virtually autonomous nations and nationalities prior to the formation of the modern Ethiopian state. Whether such kind of arrangement would benefit advocates of separate independent entities out of the pride of African States is yet to be justified.

The TPLF to many is viewed as a “party” that took opportunity of political vacuum by redesigning its political and economic agendas to include the entire Ethiopian population when the country was under separatist threat. At this junction, I would like to remind the readers of the fact that change of government in Addis Ababa in 1991 was barely a peaceful one. The capital city as many parts of the country was under threat of severe ethnic conflict. And the presence of an organized group to fill the gap of political vacuum was a blessing to the Ethiopian society who strongly desires peace, security and stability. It minimized the cost of blood shade in the country that for centuries is seen as a symbol of pride by Ethiopian citizens as well as other people in the African continent. This is where credit is due for its intervention policies and strategies to save the situation. Indeed their policies of intervention cemented the Ethiopian fabric until today.

Of course, behind the policy of intervention lies enormous social, economic, and political factors, motives and interests for the liberation front originally obsessed with Tigray development agenda to find alternative feasible solutions to save what was perceived as a gone case. The TPLF fall short of its ambition of an “independent state of Tigray”. The future sustainability of the state and economic viability of the region chronically under famine threat has made the TPLF leaders to seek alternative solutions among which to change its policies to encompass the entire country. Without such change of policies and political agenda it could not dream of fulfilling their “independent state of Tigray” based on the objective reality on the ground. This change of vision has created sufficient resources to build up the war-torn region of Tigray and sustain its economy. This is obviously the case at present where Tigray region, a part of famine stricken country, is equated with regions of Europe through the process of resources exploitation from other parts of the country. It has drastically improved the potential state of Tigray and its economic viability.

On the political arena, the miraculous strategy of introducing the federal form of governance for the first time in the history of Ethiopia by recognizing various virtually autonomous nations prior to the formation of modern Ethiopian State has worked very well to their advantage. Again the TPLF leadership deserves due credit here for cementing the Ethiopian entity without which the existence of the Ethiopian State could have been at stake and lose its current shape. Indeed for the sake of Ethiopian unity, federal form of government or any other advanced form of government is the only viable form of government that could sustain the Ethiopian entity. Any attempt to reverse the progressive form of governance would not only disturbed the country but also would work in favor of sessionists and strengthen their ability to manipulate events to their advantage.

As the armed opposition groups intensify military combat, change of government could be expected any time. Inside, Meles regime is suffering from lack of genuine public support and in particular from his own people. The division within the political party, which he chairs, has faded his dream of stable and peaceful governance over the Ethiopian people. Whether his departure from power would mean that his fellow breakaway group would replace him or any other opposition group that currently engaged in the military activities cannot be easily predicted given the political uncertainties in the history of this treble part of the African continent.

Of course nobody would expect the OLF and its allies though currently engaged in armed struggle to assume power in the capital city, Addis Ababa for obvious reasons. Their dream is self-determination for the Oromo people and tiny separate states in the south, west, east and the north and they are carried away with the idea of redefining the present Ethiopian State. What a grave moment for the supporters and symphatisers of the Ethiopian unity!

It is unclear though whether the OLF leadership could embark on redefining its political agenda as the TPLF did in late 1980s to take opportunity of any political vacuum that seems unlikely. I suppose the reasoning for any change of policies and strategies if any would not be based on lack of sufficient economic resources as in the case of Tigray that could not survive on its own. The size of Oromia and the available natural resources could sustain the economy of the “independent Oromia State”. The Oromo territories include vast fertile land upon which the Ethiopian economy depends in addition to other territories in the south, east and the west.

However, the success of separate “independent Oromia State” would undoubtedly depend on enormous factors of which clearly defined geographical constitutes of the Oromia State and people are among others. As it stands, many people are very unclear as to what constitute the Oromia state and who are its neighbors once they achieve the aspiration of the Oromo people. Indeed, the potential “independent Oromia State” would be an homogenous state as the name indicates. Oromia derived from the ethnic Oromo and referring only to the territories occupied by the Oromo People. The war currently being fought in the Gambela peoples State in the western tip of the Ethiopian state, a non-Oromo people territories, gives unclear signals which may confirm the strained historical relationship and what many Gambela nationals fear that might happen.

As I write my perception of the geographical location of the Oromia State is a stream or Ameba like shape of the current state of Oromia under the regime in power excluding the Gambela peoples state, Benishungul, Somali, Afar Southern Ethiopian Nations and Nationalities states, Amhara state and Tigray. It is to be seen yet whether there is a new OLF map apart from the present. My confusion perhaps lies in the fact that little is seen on the OLF documents as to the map of the Oromia State other than their historical flag. This makes it hard to clearly understand what constitute the Oromia State. In my view the OLF leadership ought to clear this important policy matter and clearly defined what constitutes the prospective “independent Oromia State”.

Specifically, at this moment it appears that the Oromo Liberation Front are expanding fighting to Gambela and Benishungul regions where there is hardly an Oromo village. The question is why are they in Gambela and Benishungul? Information suggests that Oromo as well as Nuer ethnic groups have been receiving training from the Eritrean government to fight the Ethiopian government in the western part of the country. There trainings and military support to a single ethnic group, the Nuer is devastating the Anuak villages where over 50 people this week are reported to have died and over 70 and 150 innocent civilians children, women and elderly people are wounded and missing respectively. Friendly relationship with the Nuer is another and cannot justify their presence in the non-Oromo states as Gambela and Benishungul. The death of innocent Anuak civilians at Itang and many more that are dying is the responsibility of the groups that claims to fight to overthrow the government in the region as well as in the center.

With regard to the death of Anuak and instability in the region the Ethiopian government share the same blame for the death of civilian Anuak that is still going on as I write. They are made responsible for their partial disarmament policy, which targeted the Anuak leaving the Nuer unarmed. Moreover, they are failing to intervene and report the ethnic conflict in the region that is growing out of control.

In fact the genuine Oromo people struggle should not be undermined. As it is stipulated in the current Ethiopian constitution, self-determination is an alienable right of any nation and nationalities who wish to take control of their destinies. The Oromo people and many other nations and nationalities in the Ethiopian empire who have been under subjugation by successive oppressive governments in the country should enjoy the right to self-determination what ever the outcome may be. In this sense self-determination should not be seen as an end to the Ethiopian entity. Instead it would promote strong identity and equal development of the people under the Ethiopian umbrella. Covering up the shames and mistakes on which the Ethiopian foundation lies is waiting for silence explosive that could explode any time and the consequences would exceed its benefit.

Indeed, in the heart of every effort to call for separate independent entities out of the current Ethiopian empire is the idea to achieve equal development and just society for the subject discriminated by past and present systems since the Abyssinian state expansion into the south, west, and east. The current Ethiopian entity has failed to deliver important public services to its subjects equally and create classes among the citizens, some of which find themselves in the current shape without consent. Injustice and imbalance social services provision prevails and it is a make-up of the government systems designed by leaders who hardly care for other Ethiopian subjects including their own people but to fulfill their narrow personal interest once comfortable in power.

If the current Ethiopian entity is to survive would not be credited to the success of single political party being the regime in power trading in the name of democratic governance and respect of fundamental human rights or any other that currently engaged in the armed struggle in the field. Rather, it would involve conscious and compromise between the political parties small or big and come up with agreeable model of government which equality and justice is the foundation. These simple words so far though are enshrined in the successive Ethiopian constitutions are by far at the heart of all political upheavals in the country, which many leaders have failed to address. The 30 years prolong war that resulted in the separation of the today state of Eritrea is the war of equality and justice. Even that of TPLF, which currently had forgotten the basic principles for which, it had fought is also to eliminate injustice and inequality among the Ethiopian subjects.

It is hard to argue against separate independent states out of the current Ethiopian State given the fact that experience and lessons has proved in favor. The tragedy of war that clouded over the Ethiopian people in the past could provide great lessons in finding sustainable solutions for the diversified people of the country to accommodate and live together with cultural and linguistic respects. I find it very hard to explain other justifiable reasons of the Eritrean war of independent apart from imbalance resources distribution, lack of equal development, social and political injustice perpetuated against the Eritrean people by the successive regimes in the country.

Indeed, the lesson of the Eritrean peoples’ struggle that lead to the independent state of Eritrea in the Horn, could teach any regime in Addis Ababa and easily predict the outcome of lack of respect for fundamental freedom, human rights, and policies that promote social and economic injustice among its subjects and regions. Yet the current regime in the country though from minority group finds it very hard to build up from the past and design social, economic and political policies that promote justice and equality of all citizens. It lacks commitment to open up political process and invite all stakeholders to participate equally with out discrimination based on geographical location, ethnicity, political opinion and religious background. The regime has done little effort to distribute country resources equally to contribute to equal regional and overall country development. Among others successive regimes like the one in power promote policies of social prejudice against certain group of people in the country whose participation is ignored.

I presume the Ethiopian society including those calling for separate independent states do not aspire for “independent states” for sake of independence. Instead the calls manifest the dissatisfaction of the people in social, political and economic policies of successive regimes in the country, which trebly failed to listen to the heartbeat of the society.

The future of the Ethiopian state-united or separate entities lies in addressing the root cause of injustice and inequality other than centuries slogan of “territorial integrity” that could not do justice but drained the country’s economy. Colorful constitutions and words to convince the international community and organisations could not save the Ethiopian unity. Something must be done to keep the diversity of Ethiopian society. Regimes should broaden their vision to accommodate the Ethiopian diversity and develop policies and programmes that promote equality and justice society without discrimination. Ignoring the principle of equality and just society in practical terms would then invite pain to advocates of “territorial integrity” slogan.

click here to return to the first page click here to go to the next page