By Destaw Andargie (Dr.)
It will soon be twenty-two years since TPLF seized power in Ethiopia.
Over these long and torturous years, TPLF faced no serious external
challenge whatsoever. It has been in absolute command. Its rule has
never come under threat. Even during its worst internal crisis back in
2001, the issue was all about which faction would emerge the winner. It
was still all about TPLF- the sole star in the political theatre.
Indeed, despite dubious and useless rumors about infighting within TPLF,
all objective indications suggest that TPLF will continue to dictate
the country for the foreseeable future. The demise of its longtime
leader notwithstanding, TPLF is as assured of its hegemony as ever.
After 22 years of absolute domination, many are only hoping (against
hope) for TPLF to commit suicide. The extent to which people are moved
by the deceptive rumors that TPLF is fracturing proves nothing but the
prevailing level of defeatism.[1] After all these years and everything
that has happened; all the talk from the opposition camp (as with
citizens) is still about what the TPLF does and does not, as if action
was the natural monopoly of the TPLF. After twenty-two years, we still
continue to talk about how divisive and tyrannical TPLF is. Obviously,
such defeatist talks neither make news nor change anything. Yet, we
continue down that path either because blaming TPLF for everything
(including our own weaknesses) has transformed into a sort of addiction
or just because it makes us feel somewhat good about ourselves for it
relieves us from asking ourselves tougher questions. We seem to enjoy
blaming TPLF for everything, and never to ask ourselves.[2] And, of
course, TPLF loves that, for talk is cheap and will never alter the
status quo.
After twenty-two long years, we have no political group with any
realistic chance of knocking TPLF down now or at any point in the
foreseeable future. The grim reality is that it is not obvious if the
opposition is in a better shape now than it was ten or twenty years ago
or will be in a better shape after ten or twenty years. So much is the
magnitude of the opposition’s failure. This is a truly remarkable
achievement for TPLF-one that any dictatorship would dream of. What
remains to ask is this: why has TPLF been so successful? If TPLF is such
a tiny minority with deeply unpopular political agenda, how do we
fathom its extraordinary success? Where are the overwhelming majority of
Ethiopians-those who claim to hold a burning love and patriotism for
their mother land? What attributes does TPLF possess that the opposition
does not? These are simple but momentous questions anyone who really
cares about Ethiopian politics must ask. In what follows, I will engage
these questions and put forward my views. My views may sound harsh on
the opposition, but I have long been convinced that TPLF may not be more
responsible for our troubles than we are. TPLF is doing what it is
supposed to do, while the same cannot be said about the opposition.
Importantly, blaming TPLF has never solved, and will never solve
anything. If we really care and want to see change in Ethiopian
politics, it is an imperative for us to ask what we can do, for neither
TPLF nor anybody else in the world will do the job for us. Why? Because
change is fundamentally against their interest. Quite the contrary, TPLF
and global powers will do everything they can to preserve the status
quo. It is entirely up to those who crave change to bring about change;
as it has always been the case throughout history. Now, let me turn to
my first question: why has TPLF been so successful? And what lessons for
the opposition?
Success is NOT given, it’s earned!
Unarguably, it is not the law of nature, a stroke of luck or mythical
destiny that put TPLF at the helm. It is down to verifiable universal
attributes of success that TPLF possesses (and the opposition sorely
lacks). It is high time for the political opposition to come to terms
with reality. The harsh reality is that TPLF has superior standing and
vitality than probably any political group in Ethiopia. Whatever else
TPLF leaders are, they have proven to have a clear political project;
that they work around the clock and thus are masterly in executing their
project; that they are apt in making their case; that they are highly
organized, disciplined and tenacious (almost 40 years old, still as rock
solid as ever); pragmatically confident; cunning and skillful (which
unfortunately matter immensely in the game of real politics); and
crucially, that they are unwaveringly committed to the cause they fought
for! Whether their cause is good or bad is an entirely different
question, but they have a cause and they fought and continue to fight
for it. It would be an exercise in futility to try to find these
attributes in the opposition camp.
1. Clarity of purpose
As secretive and sophisticated TPLF leaders are, they are also
unabashed in declaring what they believe in (however obscene that may
be), what they stand for, what they plan to do, and they do it; action
being their other admirable quality. For anyone who cares, TPLF’s
political agenda, strategy, tactics, and almost everything else, were
known even before they came to the helm of power. That is why
accusations that TPLF is deconstructionist, or hates this of that
people, or is divisive, or is anti-free media, and the like become
annoyingly boring-something that neither makes news nor solves anything.
It makes no news because that is what they told us they would do from
the very beginning. Look at the following statements:
The country will have to be a federation …We can no longer have Amhara domination…
EPRP…have become just another version of the Derg. They favour Amhara
domination. We don’t think we can cooperate with them…We are often very
unhappy with the Amhara chauvinist line we hear on…the Voice of
America…It sometimes sounds more like the “Voice of the Amhara” than the
Voice of America…
These are statements of the late Meles Zenawi, made in his
conversation with Paul Heinz, the American intelligence officer back in
1990. They reveal how they were prepared to deal with what they call
Amhara dominated Ethiopia. It reveals their apprehension of any media
that they have no control over (hence the VOA) and of any political
party whose birth they have not midwifed. TPLF has never concealed its
deconstructionist political agenda. Its hegemonic strategy has never
been disguised. When it masterminded the creation of the other
‘coalition’ members (so-called PDOs-), one after another, simply to give
the appearance (at least to the outside world) of an ethnically
balanced representation, it was obvious that they would not be equal
partners. While the created can never claim equality with its creator,
TPLF made it clear from the very beginning that there would be no room
for rival political groups, and that its doors are completely shut
against the idea of national reconciliation. Standing in 1990, you could
tell almost everything they would do for the next twenty-two years and
beyond. As the above statements indicate, TPLF had a clear political
project, and they have been executing just that. They never promised to
protect Ethiopia’s territorial integrity; they never professed love for
the mother land; they never promised to respect and protect individual
freedoms, and you cannot break what you haven’t promised. What is rather
remarkable is that they know their path; they know themselves; they
know their ‘enemies’; and they have time-tested skill in dealing with
every conceivable threat. Clarity of purpose is the first recipe for
success; whether the purpose is wicked or noble is, again, a different
question altogether-that falls in the realm of ethics, not of politics.
Clueless opposition
When it comes to the political oppositions, the trouble begins with
identifying who is who. That is compounded by the sheer number of groups
who calls themselves opposition parties. We know that there are close
to a hundred political groups. Sadly, however, that is almost all we
know. We do not know what precisely their political programs are; how
their programs are different from one another; what irreconcilable
differences prevent them from working together; or why they continue
down the beaten path. Importantly, that most of these groups do not do
anything worthy of note means you cannot help questioning their
relevance. In short, the gravest tragedy in Ethiopian current politics
is not TPLF being evil; it is rather the opposition being virtually
useless. You cannot blame TPLF for that. Blaming TPLF for the
inexcusable weakness of the opposition doesn’t explain, let alone solve
anything. Otherwise, what is TPLF supposed to do? Help dig its grave by
letting the opposition thrive?
At a risk of overgeneralization, we may divide the opposition into
three broad categories: diaspora-based opposition; armed opposition; and
so-called ‘legal-opposition’. Of the three, I believe we can safely
discount the first group. There is no single evidence in history of a
foreign-based political group redeeming a nation from tyranny (it is
useful to note history sometimes). In politics, as in any game, one
needs to be on the turf in order to be a playing. Once you leave the
field, the best you can be is a supporter. It is obvious therefore that
diaspora forces, including what we may call ‘diaspora rebels’ who wage
war on TPLF from their comforts will almost certainly not achieve
anything. What is interesting is rather the breathtaking audacity and
moral contempt involved in sitting in one’s comfort overseas and telling
poor people back home to rise up against oppressors. The second group
seems to exist only in name. With the exception of those that hold
secessionist agenda, there really has been no evidence of any viable
armed struggle over the last 22 years. The aim here is not to engage the
question of whether lasting peace and democracy can be attained through
armed struggle; it is rather to underscore the fact that none of the
several armed groups that claim to be operating in the country has done
anything worthy of note. You cannot blame TPLF for this either.
Let’s turn to the last group. This group deserves emphasis not
because it is better organized, more effective, or less disoriented, but
because it is still on the turf. But, again, this is not a monolithic
group. There are numerous opposition groups who claim to be in peaceful
straggle, and you cannot do justice lamping those brave but numerically
minority individuals, such as Prof. Mesfin Woldemariam, Andualem Aragie,
and many other nameless Ethiopians on the one hand and those who
confuse pacifism with docility on the other. With the exception of those
brave citizens, who peacefully fight tyranny mainly at individual
levels (unfortunately), what TLPF calls the ‘legal oppositions’ does not
pose any threat to TPLF. It is allowed to operate because and only in
so far as it is not a threat. Many of them just roll over as TPLF
dictates them to. If a political party cannot call rallies or hold
meetings (things which are absolutely legal) because authorities are
unhappy, then it is not clear what the struggle is. If you abide by your
opponent’s will rather than by the law, then you cannot claim to be in a
struggle. Embracing nonviolent struggle requires as much, if not
greater, courage as armed struggle. Both require engaging your opponent,
and hence involve sacrifice; the mode of engagement being the
difference. Taking part in meaningless elections every five years in one
thing; engaging TPLF is quite another. The first serves the will and
interest of the TPLF, the second does the contrary. TPLF has clear
purpose and interest in holding shame elections periodically. What is
not so obvious is the goal of the opposition in taking part in the
theater, knowing full well that votes do not count. If fact, the surest
thing after election 2005 is that votes do not count as long as TPLF is
power. One can debate on whether elections 2005 was TPLF’s near fatal
miscalculation or a disingenuous scheme by TPLF, designed to lull the
opposition (and donors) into believing that there was freedom of choice,
and cunningly decimate independent voices through an array of legal and
extralegal means. But there is no debate that TPLF will never allow
that to happen again. TPLF knows it, the opposition knows it, and
everyone else knows it. If so, why would the opposition take part in a
nonsense election drama?
2. Determination
It takes extraordinary courage and determination to take on one of
the most militarized regimes in the history of Africa that enjoyed the
backing of a superpower. In a hierarchical society, such as ours, the
determination of any group is largely a function of the determination of
its leadership. Whatever else you think about TPLF leadership, you
cannot question their determination. There is no greater test of
character than to engage a multiple times mightier enemy. They led from
the front their ill-equipped and ill fed army and steered it to one of
the most dramatic military victories in history. You have to respect
TPLF leadership on that! That is what leadership means. That is
radically different from waging ‘all-inclusive war’ from the comforts of
home overseas, as some part-time ‘diaspora rebels’ appear to do. It is
completely dissimilar from ‘bravely confronting TPLF delegates’ in the
streets of Washington, D.C., or elsewhere.
Dubious and utterly irrelevant stories, such as those relating to
Meles’s supposed cowardice and how he retreated from his bank robbery
mission during his rebel days or how he never participated in a battle
may sound appealing. These senseless stories are appealing probably
because they make us feel somewhat good about ourselves-one of those
strange human behaviors of seeking psychological comfort by trying to
belittle one’s opponent. Hate him or love him, few people have left such
an extraordinary mark on Ethiopian politics as Meles Zenawi. You cannot
dispute that he lived for a cause and executed his plan until his last
breath. A bright student as he was, he could have achieved personal
successes without risking anything. However, he decided otherwise. Meles
was probably the only leader in history who ruled a country he
profoundly hated. You cannot have a worse ruler. One can legitimately
despise him on that. Yet, you have to respect his determination for what
he believed in. Such characterization more or less applies to the rest
of TPLF leadership.
The floating opposition
People have a natural tendency to crave change. It is no surprise,
therefore, if everyone (but the TPLF and beneficiaries of the status
quo) would wish to see political change in Ethiopia. Yet, that is
entirely different from being willing to help bring the desired change.
Freedom is never cheap; it comes at a price. It has always been that
way. All relative freedoms people enjoy today, without exception, came
about through the struggle of the oppressed, not of the magnanimity of
oppressors. TPLF people paid heavy price to win their freedom. Of
course, it does not always have to be TPLF’s way. Eskindir Nega, easily
one of the brightest Ethiopian journalists since Be’alu Girma, and many
others are paying the price for freedom in a nobler way. Yet, one has to
pay a price. The vexing question now is this: does the political
opposition have the will to do what it takes for freedom in our country?
Are you and I, as citizens, who probably brag about our steadfast
patriotism, prepared to do what it takes for freedom?
Truth be told, it is not a question of the opposition falling short
of being as clever as TPLF. It is a question whether the opposition
really has the will in the first place. It is a question of will. It is a
question of sincerity. It is an ethical question. It is one thing to
sit in comfort overseas and agitate the helpless youth in Addis Ababa to
rise up (like those in Egypt or elsewhere); quite another to be part of
the change. A realistic (call it pessimistic) assessment of facts
suggests that change is a far cry in Ethiopian politics. The reason is
that those of us who want change do not have the guts to be part of the
change we crave. We don’t have faith in our own agency. We just seem
happy fantasizing someone from somewhere somehow someday to do the job
for us. Typical candidates may be the desperately poor youth in the
impoverished districts of Addis Ababa, whom we wait to rise up and
topple TPLF. But we also, ridiculously, hope for foreign powers,
especially US, to somehow help TPLF’s downfall.
3. Action and self-reliance
Ultimately, any political group has to prove its worth through what
it does. Action starts from a determination to carry your own cross. You
have to prove your clarity of purpose, determination, and resilience in
the face of adversity to win others’ support. TPLF proved that by
weathering grave natural and human adversities. Not only the group, but
the entire population was near decimation from an unforgiving famine.
They faced relentless military assault by the biggest military
government in the country’s history. Yet, they persevered, and
ultimately won. When you do that, friends and foes alike will have no
option but to have respect for you. TPLF did not hold countless rallies
in front of the state department. It was their discipline and tenacity
that won them over the attention of the world powers. Foreign
intelligence agents crossed treacherous mountains to meet TPLF
leadership in their hideouts. Action speaks louder!
The defeatist opposition and the illusion of external salvation
It seems that the political opposition does not only lack faith in
itself. Many of them seem to have no faith in the Ethiopian public. When
CUD leaders were released from prison, they didn’t have time for the
people that voted for them. They scrambled their ways to get out of the
country. We are at a time when people come to the US to form political
party that would liberate Ethiopian from tyranny. Many in the opposition
look for external salvation. Many seem to dream of a day when the
international community, especially the United States, get tired of TPLF
and tell the latter to change course. Rest assured, that will never
happen. One can decry US support for TPLF or how the Obama
administration failed Africa as if putting Africa in order is the US’s
business. One can dance forever in front to the State Department. But
the game will remain the same simply because TPLF is more vital to
Washington than any other force! It is as simple as that. It just can’t
be otherwise. TPLF is not only willing but also more capable of serving
Washington’s interest than any other group. There is a symbiotic
relationship between Washington and TPLF, and that is not going to
change just because TPLF is unkind to you. There has never been any
single instance in history that Washington or any other power supported
political change in a foreign country just out of altruistic concern for
human rights and democracy. There is no reason why there could be
exception in Ethiopia. In practice, democracy has never really been a
factor for any nation’s foreign policy. The United States is no
exception. The US has never had problems working with some of the most
ruthless and despotic dictatorships as long as its interests are served.
In fact, TPLF is not near as illiberal as some the Washington’s closest
allies, such as the Saudi Arabia. Crucially, if not TPLF, whom is the
US supposed to support?
Conclusion
TPLF rules probably because it deserves to. It has proved its worth
through the facts stated above: clarity of purpose, determination, and
action. If the opposition wants to be taken seriously, it has to do the
same. That requires asking tough questions. If we want change, we have
to ask ourselves, not TPLF. For one, TPLF is doing just fine; it is the
opposition that is ridden with problems. More importantly, whatever
happens in the TPLF camp does not and cannot translate into a change for
the better. If we wish to see positive change, then there is no way
that the job could be done by TPLF or any other agent. It is an
imperative for those who want change to do the job themselves. This may
require, of course, going beyond politics and unravel our cultural
ethos, our devotion and love of country, our cooperative spirit, and
even our morality (sincerity), among others.
The author can be reached at: destawats@yahoo.com
The author can be reached at: destawats@yahoo.com
[1]Such rumors are deceptive because even if there was infighting, it
does not in any way signal the end of TPLF’s rule; and it is useless
because what happens within TPLF would not change the country’s
political situation for the better.
[2] Even members of the previous regime’s army blame TPLF, rather
than themselves, for dissolving the army and throwing them like trash,
after their military defeat, although it is not obvious how an army that
proved to be incapable of even defending itself would expect to be
taken seriously.
No comments:
Post a Comment