The events surrounding the controversy suggest more than Dr. Berhanu deliberately acting beyond the scope of his authority. Dr. Berhanu, as a learned and intelligent man, deserves the benefit of the doubt.

However, there are some troubling facts:

Firstly, if Dr. Berhau, as he claimed was “delegated” the authority to negotiate on behalf of the CUD, and to prepare and furnish a formal CUD position to the Prime Minister on behalf of the Coalition, why is he not able to specify the Resolutions which so authorized him - in the manner that he did. In the absence of a Resolution, why was the decision not confirmed by minutes? Most importantly why was the proposal not submitted to the CUD Council for consideration and approval prior to presenting the proposed terms to the Prime Minister?

In light of the vociferous outcry by CUD supporters and the demand for his ousting, why is Dr. Berhanu not able to provide the particulars to defend himself?

Secondly, lets not forget, Ato Lidetu is a member of the CUD Council, even though no longer the coalition spokesman. He confirmed his position in his interview on Finot Radio and the interview with the Reporter. Why would Ato Lidetu lie and state that authority was not properly delegated to Dr. Berhanu, if it was?

Third, if in fact the authority was delegated, why is Dr. Berhanu’s friend, member of the Executive of Kestedamena and CUD lawyer, Dr. Yacob, silent? Why are the President of CUD Ato Shaul and the CUD Spokesman Dr. Araya silent and not providing needed clarification of the CUD position, in the interest of mitigating further damage to the reputation and credibility of the party and one of its esteemed members?.

Fourth, why is there no confirmation of a CUD Council discussion to consider the outcome of the meeting with the PM, their deliberations, and planned response?.

Fifth, why is Dr. Beyene silent and more particularly, why is Dr. Merrara the President of the UEDF not confirming that Dr. Beyene was authorized by the UEDF Council to engage in the negotiations on UEDF's behalf with corresponding authorizing resolutions?.

Sixth, why is the UEDF formal proposal to the PM different from the proposal previously provided to the PM by Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene as a joint CUD-UEDF proposal?

Seventh, why was the proposal made to the PM first and then followed by public deliberation as opposed to formulating and furnishing a formal position incorporating and reflecting the public deliberation to the CUD Council for deliberation and approval prior to submission to the PM and release to the public?

Eigth, in view of the serious potential to severely injure or handicap the working relationship and trust between the CUD coalition partners why is this matter being allowed to be aired in the open rather than disciplinary measures taken internally if appropriate.

Ninth, why is Ato Lidetu unleashed by the CUD and his own party Medhin to go on a publicity campaign to fuel the controversy and discredit Dr. Berhanu, Dr. Beyene and the proposal?

Tenth, why was a letter head and official stationary, rather than plain paper used to convey the proposal to the PM? Who authorized the use of the official party seals on the proposal? Why was the proposal not signed by the Presidents of the Coalitions or countersigned or accompanied by an authorizing resolution?

Eleventh, in my comment contemporaneous with the news of the meeting by Dr. Berhanu, Dr. Beyene and the PM, I raised the question - why were Ato Shauel as President of the CUD and Dr. Merrara as presidents of CUD and UEDF respectively, not invited to engage in the discussions with their counterpart, the PM?

Questions:

Is this a case of retaliation by the party hard-liners to discredit Dr. Berhanu and Dr.. Beyene and to punish them and drive them out of the coalitions for their past “transgression”??.

Is this only a pretext for discrediting and eliminating those elements that compromise on the “hard-line” position of the leadership.

Is this a case of others, behind the scenes attempting to discredit and drive Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene out to ease their transition into the party leadership positions?

Is this a case, where the unexpected Diaspora reaction justified finding scapegoats for the atonement?

Is this a case of revenge by Ato Lidetu and his “hardline” supporters who blame Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene for Ato Lidetus fall from grace?

Did EPRDF out smart the opposition by planning the events knowing full well the implications of ‘arranging a hasty meeting, using the eager Tim Clark to their advantage.

Possible Conclusions and Consequences:

The explanation offered by by Ambassador Tim Clark was to the effect that the meeting with the PM was a last minute arrangement, sudden, and unexpected. According to Dr. Beyene and Dr. Berhanu, they were unexpectedly and suddenly called individually by Tim Clark on their cell phones and instructed to meet with him and the PM. According to their own admission, they did not even know what the meeting specifically involved and the issues to be discussed and indeed that they were not even prepared for the meeting as it was “sudden”.

Apparently, a western intermediary, not accustomed to the nuances and complexities involved, but determined to bring the controversy to a hasty resolution, took it upon himself to select the people he thought would be more compromising and induced them to violate their own party protocols. In so doing he caused the two eager and liberal members of the opposition to sidestep established party protocols.

It is simply not believable that such an important event would be subject to such a hasty arrangement without time for the opposition leaders to consider their options, the proper process and the framework and agenda for the discussions. No fool would buy the explanation. An important meeting could have been set at a time convenient to have the appropriate parties present. It would appear that Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene in their eagerness violated a cardinal principle. They failed to recognize that they are not the designated leaders of their respective coalitions. They placed to much trust as Ethiopian’s tend to do and have historically done to their detriment – blind reliance on a western expert.

I think, this is a case where, as I predicted, the party leaders in AEPP and Medhin were agitated with what they perceived to be a slap in the face, usurpation of authority, getting to be too big for their “britches”, over zeal, and aversion to the party “hard line, by Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene. They allowed the PM and Ambassador Clark to “insult” the party leaders by explicitly demonstrating that party leaders are irrelevant and that the PM nor the Ambassador wish nor perceive the party hard-liners to be necessary parties to meet with. In short they do not matter.

This affront was confirmed by the actions of Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene by sidestepping their respective coalition leaderships and meeting with the PM without prior consultation. This in lights of the increasing EPRDF indoctrination and therefore public perception that Dr. Berhanu and Dr. Beyene are the “intellectuals” the “liberal” and the “reasonable” elements as distinguished from the former dergue and chauvinist hard-liners of the coalition. This miscalculation may well have provided justification and cover to disable one increasingly becoming belligerent and popular in the eyes of his jelous party adversaries.

Whatever the reasons, or underlying motives, given these circumstances, can the inflicted wounds be healed? Can trust be established between Dr. Berhanu and his coalition partners. How is Dr. Berhanu going to be perceived by the CUD and the Diaspora supporters with his trustworthiness eroded? Can Tim Clark gain the confidence and trust of the opposition in the future? Is this the predicted beginning of the end for CUD.

What cannot be denied is that CUD has suffered a fatal blow to its credibility and stature and may have to as a result of its further weakened position, oblige, in the end, the design of the ruling party.

He is a traitor.