If the silenced majority inside of what has become Prison Nation
Ethiopia (PNE) could talk, what would they tell President Obama and
Secretary Clinton about US human rights policy? Would they pat them on
the back and say, 'Good job! Thank you for helping us live in dignity
with our rights protected'? Or would they angrily wag an accusatory
finger and charge, 'You speak with forked tongue. You wax eloquent on
your lofty principles to us in the morning while you consort with thugs
and murderers in the afternoon.'
What would the
thousands of political prisoners rotting within the closed walls of
dictator Meles Zenawi's prisons say of America's big human rights talk?
'Practice what you preach, Mr. President!' What would Birtukan
Midekssa, Ethiopia's No. 1 political prisoner, first woman political
party leader in Ethiopian history and the undisputed heroine of 80
million Ethiopians say to President Obama were she allowed to speak to
him? 'Mr. President, why do you turn a deaf ear when I have been
silenced in solitary confinement?' What would the innocent victims
gripped in the jaws of Zenawi's steel vices say to Secretary Clinton in
their faint whimpers from the torture chambers? I do not know. What I
know for sure is that the silenced majority of Ethiopians does speak
loud in bootless cries while gasping for air under the jackboots of a
barbaric dictatorship. President Obama, can you hear their deafening
silence?
THE BELLY V. THE BALLOT
The defenders of the dictatorship in Ethiopia argue that the masses of
ordinary Ethiopians are interested in the politics of the belly and not
the politics of the ballot. They do not care about human rights or
democracy because they are concerned about finding their daily bread.
The masses of poor, illiterate, hungry and sick Ethiopians in their view
are too dumb and too damn needy to appreciate 'political democracy.'
'Economic democracy before political democracy,' they proclaim with
certainty. They condemn free speech, free press, free elections, and
indeed freedom itself as alien Western ideologies that are meaningless
to the masses of poor and hungry Ethiopians. Ethiopia's dictators are
quick to stand on their hind legs and condemn the West for violating
their sovereignty because the West insists on human rights observances
in Ethiopia. Of course, these rights are not some bizarre imported ideas
but core element of the organic law of Ethiopia which incorporates by
reference all of the major international human rights conventions. All
African dictators have been justifying their dictatorships for well
over one-half century by claiming that there is democracy before
democracy in Africa.[2]
I raise the belly v. ballot argument
to contextualise American human rights policy in Ethiopia. The evidence
suggests that the attitudes and perceptions of American (and other
Western) policy makers may be latently contaminated by the view that
human rights are not of concern or are not important to the tired, poor
and huddled Ethiopian masses. I have heard it said artfully in moments
of candour by those who have access to US decision-makers, by some
decision-makers themselves and even by certain of my learned friends
that the majority of ordinary Ethiopians neither know of nor understand
their human rights. Even if they are aware of their rights, they do
not have a clue as to how to defend them. As a result, I am told, the
interests of the ordinary Ethiopian citizens do not figure in the least
in US human rights policy calculations. Some have even pointed out to
me (much to my disappointment, embarrassment and chagrin) that the lack
of informed and vigorous human rights debate and sustained and
organised human rights advocacy among Ethiopian elites within and
without Ethiopia is clear and convincing evidence that human rights are
not important to Ethiopians. I am advised to accept the fact that US
human rights rhetoric is primarily intended for international media
consumption and to give moral support to the few human rights-minded
Ethiopian elites while avoiding the scathing criticisms of the
international human rights community for US inaction and hypocrisy.
'That is realpolitik for you,' said one of my erudite colleagues
jokingly. 'The US would rather blather about human rights violations to
the African masses in the morning only to sit down for a seven-course
meal with Africa's murderers and butchers in the afternoon.'
INTRODUCING THE UNSUNG HEROES OF ETHIOPIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TO US POLICY MAKERS
I strongly disagree with those who sideline ordinary Ethiopians as too
poor and hungry to be concerned about their human rights or good
governance. I could not disagree more with the cynics who claim that
ordinary Ethiopians do not know or care about their human rights as long
as their bellies are full. In fact the contrary can be proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. When the 2005 elections were stolen by Zenawi in
broad daylight and opposition leaders were hunted down, arrested and
jailed, it was not the elites, the privileged and the degreed that came
out to defend democracy and human rights. The people who stood up for
democracy, freedom and human rights when it really counted were the
poor, the urban labourers, the students, the unemployed, the slum
dwellers, the retired and plain ordinary folks. The true unsung heroes
of Ethiopian human rights are Tensae Zegeye, age 14; Debela Guta, age
15; Habtamu Tola, age 16; Binyam Degefa, age 18; Behailu Tesfaye, age
20; Kasim Ali Rashid, age 21; Teodros Giday Hailu, age 23; Adissu
Belachew, age 25; Milion Kebede Robi, age 32; Desta Umma Birru, age 37;
Tiruwork G. Tsadik, age 41; Admasu Abebe, age 45. Elfnesh Tekle, age
45; Abebeth Huletu, age 50; Etenesh Yimam, age 50; Regassa Feyessa, age
55. Teshome Addis Kidane, age 65; Victim No. 21762, age 75 and Victim
No.21760, male, age unknown and hundreds more. These were the real
defenders of human rights in Ethiopia. Their story is memorialised for
history in the testimony of Yared Hailemariam,[3] an extraordinary human
rights defender and investigator for the Ethiopian Human Rights
Council (EHRCO). Hailemariam spoke before the European Parliament
Committees on Development and Foreign Affairs, and Subcommittee on
Human Rights in May 2006. The report of the official Inquiry Commission
investigated the violence in the post-2005 election period.
If American policy makers are giving lip service to human rights in
Ethiopia to please the few elites or immunise themselves against
criticism from the international human rights community, their concern
is truly misplaced. Human rights in Ethiopia is not about the elites
yapping about human rights, nor is it about fine intellectual
discussions, philosophical debates, speeches, annual reports or legal
analyses of the nature and importance of human rights. It is much, much
simpler than that: It is about helping to bring to justice the killers
and those who authorised the killings of Tensae Zegeye, age 14; Debela
Guta, age 15; Habtamu Tola, age 16 and all the rest. It is not about a
metaphorical 'closing walls'; it is about getting the thousands of
innocent political prisoners languishing behind the prison walls
released. It is not about an imaginary clenched fist but the real iron
fist of a dictatorship that crushes citizens mercilessly every day. It
is not about metaphorical steel vices, but about those who cling to
power like blood-sucking leeches on a milk cow.
American policy
makers should not be dismissive of ordinary Ethiopians. They should
not misinterpret their silence for consent to be brutalised by
dictatorship. Ordinary Ethiopians may not know much about the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights and the numerous protocols, resolutions and declarations
on human rights. They may not even know of Article 13 of their
Constitution, which incorporates all of the major international human
rights conventions as part of their rights. But there should be no doubt
that all of them know that as human beings, no person has the moral or
legal right to take their lives just because he wants to, jail them
and throw away the key because he feels like it or rule them for
decades against their will by training a gun to their heads. That is
all the human rights knowledge they need to know to deserve the respect
and support of the American government.
STABILITY V. HUMAN RIGHTS
It has been argued and anonymously reported in the media that 'Western
diplomats' in Addis Ababa believe that forceful US action on human
rights could create 'instability' in the country. To talk about
stability in a dictatorship is like talking about the stability of the
nuclear reactor at Chernobyl just before it suddenly exploded. But the
whole US 'stability' subterfuge to do nothing, absolutely nothing, about
gross human rights violations in Ethiopia is eerily reminiscent of a
shameful period in American history. The principal argument against the
abolition of slavery in the US, the ultimate denial of human rights,
was 'stability.' Defenders of slavery strenuously argued that if
slavery ended, the American South would simply disintegrate and
collapse because the slave labour-based economy would be unable to
sustain itself. They predicted that there would be widespread
unemployment and chaos leading to uprisings, bloodshed, and anarchy. To
ensure the 'stability' of the South, even the United States Supreme
Court joined in with its most infamous decision and held that the US
Constitution protected slave-holders' rights to their property. But
history proved that keeping the institution of slavery became the very
undoing of the American union when the civil war was fought. America
came apart at the seams because slavery that denied fundamental human
rights to African slaves was retained, not because it was abolished.
American policy makers should see the historical parallels. The undoing
and unravelling of Ethiopia will be the result of sustained and gross
violations of human rights by the dictatorship of Meles Zenawi, not
because of respect for and observance of human rights. Perhaps we can
crystallise the issue for American policymakers in the language of the
American Declaration of Independence: It is necessary for Ethiopia to
go through a civil war to ensure that every Ethiopian has the 'right to
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these
rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to
alter or to abolish it...'?
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S CHALLENGE TO ETHIOPIA AND AFRICA
President Obama now faces a great challenge in Africa, and particularly
in Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa. His African human rights rhetoric
is being tested by the cunning dictators on the continent who are
scheming to counter his every move. They are prepared to test his
mettle to find out how far they can push him before he pushes back. So
far, Zenawi has succeeded in cowering the US into inaction and
paralysis.
President Obama will soon have to make some tough
decisions in his choices in the Horn of Africa. He can choose to let
progress on human rights and democracy die on the vine by handing over
American tax dollars to sustain bloodthirsty regimes to oppress their
citizens, or use the same tax dollars to pressure for change. President
Obama is said to be 'a pragmatist' concerned about 'problem-solving.'
He has got a hell of a problem in Ethiopia and must make some tough
choices. His major choice will not be between 'stability' and human
rights, nor will it be a choice between the forces of radicalism and
terrorism and democracy in the Horn as the dictators want him to
believe. The one and only choice he has is how to help Ethiopia become
permanently stable by ensuring the protection of the human rights of
its citizens. There will be neither peace nor stability in Ethiopia
until the human rights of every citizen are protected.
Zenawi
complains that the US and the West in general interfere in Ethiopian
affairs too much by insisting on human rights observances and demanding
democratisation. But by Zenawi's measure, the US has been
'interfering' in Ethiopia for nearly two decades, handing out to him
tens of billions of dollars in aid. But for US aid and loans by
multilateral institutions under US control, his dictatorship could not
last even a single day. If the US is serious about progress on human
rights, it will have to kink the aid hose line just a bit. It is
guaranteed that someone will be shrieking at the receiving end, 'Uncle!
Please Uncle Sam!'
Giving lip service to human rights in
Ethiopia without action is tantamount to demoralisation of the brave
and dedicated Ethiopians who struggle everyday against dictatorship and
tyranny, trivialisation and crippling of efforts to build a strong
human rights movement and disempowerment and discouragement of ordinary
Ethiopians aspiring to a democratic future. It has been said that,
'Man can live about forty days without food, about three days without
water, about eight minutes without air, but only for one second without
hope.' The most critical need in Ethiopia today is neither food nor
water (though they are very much needed), but HOPE. The US has a moral
obligation to keep hope alive in Ethiopia by conditioning its aid on
significant human rights improvements. Stated simply, the US must
practice what it preaches!
Authors note: This is the second
instalment in a series of commentaries I intend to offer on US foreign
policy (or lack thereof as some would argue) in Ethiopia. In this
piece, I argue that the price of US lip service to human rights in
Ethiopia without action is demoralisation of the brave and dedicated
Ethiopians who struggle everyday against dictatorship and tyranny,
trivialisation and crippling of efforts to build a strong human rights
movement and disempowerment and discouragement of ordinary Ethiopians
aspiring to a democratic future.
See also the list of names of
massacred victims released by the official Inquiry Commission
investigating the post-2005 election.
This story originally
appeared in The Huffington Post. Alemayehu G. Mariam is professor of
political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and
an attorney based in Los Angeles.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment