As my readers know, I enjoy watchin’ American diplomats chillin’ out and kickin’ it with African dictators. I like watchin’ ‘em kumbaya-ing, back-pattin’ and fist bumpin’. I have trained myself to decipher their cryptic diplomatese spoken with forked tongue. I have also learned chew on their indigestible words with a whopping spoonful of salt and pepper.
Despite years of relentless effort, I have been unable to fathom their mendacity. I am mystified and spellbound by the depth of their duplicity and height of hypocrisy. Bewildered and frustrated, I was compelled to engage in a neologistic exercise and create a word that captured their culture of mendacity. I coined the term “diplocrisy” to refer to the deliberate and calculated use of double-talk, double-speak and double-dealing to misrepresent facts and mislead the inattentive public about what the U.S. is doing to actively promote human rights in Africa.
For the last two decades, the ruling party, EPRDF, set the agendas for political discourse, putting the opposition to a clear defensive position. The former drafted, ratified, and implemented rulings and laws solo several of which are calculated to contain and neutralize any form of public dissent. The opposition has had nothing to do about it but to mildly shout that the political playing field was and is too narrow to play. Discourses related to national economics and development were/are also the exclusive business of the ruling party. Moreover, it was/is the EPRDF only who re-defined/s our border lines and our relations to neighboring countries. The opposition reacted in some forms to such maneuverings. Generally, one could safely argue that the EPRDF and the opposition have respectively assumed their offensive and defensive roles for years.