Ethiopian Review Readers Forum

Author

Comment

Jul 13, 2005 - 11:49AM

The Thorny Issue of the Ethiopian Politics

Rights of Nationalities: The Thorny Issue of the Ethiopian Politics
By Asegedech Mekonnen
June 13, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A lot has been said about the Ethiopian election. It would be appropriate to let the process consume itself before delving into any kind of pre and post election analysis. The contention is that there are more serious issues than arguing who is best suited to lead the country. The current issues that engage a vast majority of Ethiopians are secondary by-products of more pertinent problems. Besides, many people have eloquently written substantive issues on the election that a repeat of it would seem to saturate the topic.

Many tend to believe that this election year has brought the question of nations and nationalities to the forefront once again. We sense a simmering of emotions and bad taste on the part of many from the right and the left. Once more, it is again time for cool heads to prevail and help people to ground themselves on basic issues and facts, and distance themselves from self-destructive hate which could lead to misunderstanding, chaos and eventually, mayhem.

The election, as Leencho Lata and others have argued, has brought up some latent issues. In our view these issues, if not handled and addressed appropriately, will drive the country into more chaos, inter-ethnic conflicts and possibly a prolonged state of anarchy.

The commonalities among the people of Ethiopia are deep-rooted and historical. The different nationalities of Ethiopia have, some by force others through their own free will, or through the mix of both, inhabited this Ethiopia for centuries. This has helped them to acquire a common bond, a common history and a common sense of nationhood or statehood. The Oromo culture through the extensive movement of the people has penetrated Ethiopia from deep-south to up north stretching thousand of kilometers. The Amhara culture and language, by virtue of this group exercising power for hundreds of years, has now become the dominant culture and lingua franca of the country. One is tempted to say it has deep-rooted presence in the whole of Ethiopia. Other cultures of other nationalities, however limited, have an influence on the dominant ones. The inter-marriage that took place over the centuries has created a strong bond among the different nationalities of the country. These are realities that one needs to recognize without much argument.

There are other realities too. Mostly due to real oppression, and some due to perception of oppression a major part of Ethiopian nationalities have strongly come out to demand for the respect of their rights: their cultural and linguistic rights, the right to be served in their own languages, and to be empowered and administer themselves. Some have dearly paid for it. The nationalist movements of the Oromos, Tigrians, Somalis, to just name the prominent ones, started because of realities and perceptions of oppression. These are also objective realities that one needs to recognize without much fanfare.

The struggle for democratic rights in Ethiopia is multi faceted. To be more precise, the nation is seeking a solution to individual and group rights that have been missing for so long. Lack of these rights or freedoms has been a source of our poverty and underdevelopment. They continue to be a source of our agony to this day. This is so because Ethiopians have been unable to work with one heart and mind to alleviate poverty.

Today, we are in a state of affairs where the ‘seemingly’ contradictory nature of these two issues are fighting for supremacy. As Leencho puts it one group strongly stands on the side of group freedom and the other is strongly married to the idea of individual freedom only. But, an inquisitive mind asks: are these rights as exclusive to each other as the opposite sides try to tell us? Do the rights that are enshrined in the present constitution deny an individual the freedom to be what he is, to think and speak as his imagination permits him/her to do? A positive answer to these questions will go a long way in helping us understand the problem of the Ethiopian politics and political groups. But the common understanding is that these rights are not exclusive to each other and they should not be a point of contention among political groups.

If the logical conclusion that group and individual rights are not exclusive holds, then why do we hear so much animosity and hear so much divergent approaches between these two groups? The obvious answer seems to be that on the one hand there are those who want Ethiopia to be treated as one monolithic nation and on the other hand there are groups who believe that Ethiopia is endowed with many nationalities and their uniqueness needs to be nurtured and helped to grow. There are those who believe having different ethnic identity is a liability, and therefore needs to be discouraged and others feel that the suggestion that undermines the rights of nationalities is undemocratic and works against a voluntary union of all Ethiopians.

There are some things that Ethiopians need to know. The request by the many nationalities of Ethiopia to exercise their ‘group’ rights – the right to use their own language, develop their culture, and demand that their rights be respected in the Ethiopian state is not something that we should even question. An individual, a group, a nationality, a country – for that matter any entity - has the right to decide what is good for itself. In this respect, I find some people’s argument to the contrary a bit strange. The best thing to do is, therefore, political parties or groups that have a problem with group rights seriously and thoroughly re-think their positions.

We see, on the other hand, some group who would like us to believe that individual rights are secondary things that could be respected within the group right. I believe that rights are ‘equal’ by themselves, in themselves. There seems to be confusion between a ‘common good’ that has sometimes to take a precedence over an ‘individual’ good, and the right of an individual. In times of peace and normal day to day life, one right can’t be deemed secondary to the other. It is, therefore, appropriate to come out of this estranged thinking and see these broad issues with broader lenses.

Quite a number of people have many times written on the importance of a paradigm shift in our approach and thinking. The question of the abundance of a destructive ego in the mind of the Ethiopian elite has been raised by many people in the past. One can’t be sure if we have been able to listen and learn and from the messages conveyed by our compatriots.

On the question of solving the nationality problems, the understanding is that all nationalities that profess to be negatively affected by the old system of governance appreciate the rights that are now documented in the current constitution of Ethiopia. It is our understanding that even OLF, a front that is very much opposed to the current EPRDF government has no quarrel with the part of the constitution that deals with the rights of nationalities. It is also logical to assume, in many cases, that these nationalities assume some kind of geographic boundary within which these rights are exercised. It is, therefore, our belief that all Ethiopians agree on these prominent issue of rights. Accepting this right in no way implies, even to the remotest imagination, a downgrading of the right of the individual which should reign supreme in any democratic system of governance.

The system of governments in Ethiopia in the past did not have any credibility in terms of the rights of nationalities. The nationalities that have been dominated in the past have many times voiced their displeasure with chauvinistic governments that trampled on their rights. We need to accept this and move foreword to seek a common solution to other common problems. One tragedy of the Ethiopian politics so far has been the unwillingness to compromise, the failure to understand other people’s concerns and issues, and the attitude to impose solutions on others with out consulting with them.

Many Ethiopians feel that the stratification of the country into various linguistic groups will undermine the strength and unity of an Ethiopia that we all want to have. Therefore, they argue, we have to discourage the division of the country into various linguistic enclaves. Yes, there is some merit in the above argument. It is very possible that some overzealous group, if given the power to administer a region, could undermine the rights of minorities within that region and cause further division among people of different nationalities. A monolithic society is devoid of these problems.

However, we are now in the late stage of the game. Unfortunately we can’t ‘monolithize’ our people and make them speak one language, portray same cultural traits and follow one religion. Historical process, through integration and assimilation may in the distant future make the wish of a monolithic society come true. But now we have to work with what we have. What we have is different ethnic groups occupying our Ethiopia and wanting their culture, language and other local interest be respected, counted as equal and given an opportunity to prosper. Acceptance of these demands is the right thing to do.

What we can do is, through our national documents (constitution and charters) establish the rule of the game and make sure that everyone is governed by it. There will be growing pains. Some rights will be trampled upon. Overzealous elements are abundant everywhere and will try to rock the boat, change direction and sway the country from following the right course. But with a leadership that has the support of the Ethiopian people as a whole, Ethiopia will overcome negative forces and become a country that can accommodate all its inhabitants in an equal and just manner.

One needs to acknowledge that the history of Ethiopia so far has been the history of the cultural dominance of the Abyssinians. Power has been shifting, in main between the dominant Amharas and Tigrians for centuries. Accepting this fact does not imply that these groups should be blamed for the past historical realities by any means. But knowing the past helps us not to repeat mistakes. It helps us to devise new grounds for mutual development and help Ethiopia develop.

Abyssinia is History. It obviously contributed towards the creation of Ethiopia and it is part of this promising Ethiopia. But Ethiopia is not Abyssinia. Ethiopia is a new, vibrant and emerging concept that embraces many people and nationalities who were not part of the old Abyssinia. Its history is diverse. Its people are diverse, and it geographic feature is diverse and beautiful. It is these diversities that we should embrace, celebrate and consider as a source of our strength.

Today, there was news on the creation of a united Oromo Forces that recognizes a federated, united Ethiopia and underscores the need for unity in order to address the common problems of Ethiopia. If this process of merger by any miracle – in fact it is attainable if there is a good will, a common purpose- includes OLF, a force that commands the Oromo Diaspora, this day will be a day when a united Ethiopia is practically realized and forces of reason triumph in our country. It will be the start of the day when poverty, underdevelopment, tyranny and apathy give way to prosperity, self-empowerment and a resolved determination by citizens at home and abroad.

OLF is mentioned for obvious reasons. Reasonable Ethiopians full heartedly support the rights of the Oromo population in the same manner that OLF does. The point of contention between OLF and other Ethiopians is OLF’s unwillingness to understand the apprehension of others when unity of all people is undermined. Other Ethiopians also consider Oromia as their birthplace, their home and part of their country. We are sure that OLF would get an overwhelming support of others if it were to declare that it too wants to work towards a united, federated and democratic Ethiopia – an Ethiopia that does not discriminate against its citizens because of ethnic identity.

We should not shy away from recognizing the need to address the issues of nationalities because they portray themselves as difficult to resolve. Reasonable people tend to believe that these are problems with simple solutions. What is required from each one of us, especially from our politicians of the left and right, is a simple and genuine recognition of the problem.

The question of nationalities should not be looked as outmoded and untimely. The struggle for democratic rights are ever present and continual. Nationality rights (or group rights) are not things that we can wish away easily. In fact we have always to be ever-vigilant because a slight semblance of undermining these rights could be a recipe for disaster for our Ethiopia that we all profess to care for.

Let us make an effort to understand each other’s worries and concerns. That alone will go a long way in unleashing Ethiopia’s potential to be democratic, prosperous and a jewel of Africa.

Ehiopian

Jul 13, 2005 - 12:31PM