March 16, 2015
Looking back and evaluating the road travelled is a necessary condition for what one intends to do and do it successfully subsequently. If we look at our most recent political history since 1974, many political organizations have come and gone. Have any of the leaders of these organizations summed up their experiences through a critical assessment of their ideologies, strategies, alliances, strengths and shortcomings, etc. in a manner that successive generations can draw lessons? It didn’t seem so since infighting and cannibalization among potential allies remained a norm rather than an exception. While there are few individual accounts given in some books, they all fall short of being self-critical. It is always the other party that is expected to shoulder all the blame for all the failures.Critical Reflection in our Political Culture:President Issayas is once again in the spotlight! I remember him winning the “Person of the Year” choice on the Ethiopian Review website in 2008. The publisher and editor-in-chief of this web-based magazine subsequently conducted a face-to-face interview with the President in Asmara in 2009. At the time, this journalist appeared to have had a fascination with Issayas’ persona and the potential support he would garner from him to the armed group he used to support, the EPPF. Little did he know that this juvenile fascination would turn deadly and frustrate all those who had made such an abhorrent decision to work with a tyrant of historic proportions! One should never obediently acquiesce to illegitimate authority- ever! Did we take lesson from that experience? It appears, NOT? Here is a point of view that tries to explain why.
Likewise, in the 1990s and thereafter, new political groupings and alliances have come and gone. Did the leaders try to look at what worked and what did not and why? It appears that they were again finger pointing at each other for all the fiascos! None seemed to want to take the slightest responsibility for the failures. Our political leaders do not seem to realize the importance of critical reflection and drawing lessons from past mistakes.
Unfortunately, this trend seems to have been mainstreamed into the nexus of our culture. It is probably related to the failure of our institutions of higher learning in delivering and nurturing an intellectual culture that values competing models and views while promoting critical thinking. How else can we explain how and why the leaders of an entire generation subscribed just to one point-of-view of society (Marxian) only to abandon it in toto in short two decades and now aspire to become Jeffersonian overnight? Such way of knowing has been hindering the mother of all diversities, intellectual diversity. Such a culture has permeated all our social and political life. Dissenting voices and dissident ways epistiomologies are immediately shattered before carefully assessed for their merit and demerit. Clinging to our established beliefs even in the face of contrary evidence, failing to identify real sources for our failings, failing to value the importance of doubt and skepticism in our thoughts and actions are only indicative of the failure of our educational institutions. We will never succeed in establishing participatory democracy until and unless we challenge this view head-on.
This culture has been exasperated even more with the ascendance of a deadly and suffocating ande-le-amstphilosophy of educational organization and leadership, a philosophy that requires people to use so-calledlematawi/abyotawi democracy whenever evaluating ideas. We have to break this and begin to come out of our inflated egos and look at our actions as critically as possible. With this as a backdrop, let me now draw your attention to issues related to what I call the Issayas phenomenon.
The re-emergence of Issayas in our Midst:
I listened to Issayas’ recent interview on a popular Ethiopian television and radio station. I also listened to several big-wigs, veteran and novice, journalist and politician, commenting on the interview. The ones I listened to seem to agree on the positive attributions of Issayas and his potential to contribute to Ethiopians’ search for democracy and a huge admiration for his realpolitik. I did not feel comfortable listening to a monolithic view nonetheless as it reminded me of the yester years which I referred to earlier.
And now, after a couple of years of hiatus, Issyas has re-emerged once again in the political map of Ethiopia. He is now being depicted as an inevitable ally without whom Ethiopians’ struggle for democracy is doomed to fail. He is now accorded a statesmanship demeanor and portrayed as a champion of Ethiopian unity.
He was even portrayed as a leader who has always kept a predilection to support Ethiopia’s unity. Most if not all political commentators I listened to on ESAT seem to push the point of view mentioned above as if it is ‘a party line’. Where are the competing views? Also, does the history of Issayas warrant such a description and prediction? The brief commentary that follows is based on what I heard on ESAT Radio and Television station and Addis DimtsRadio station. First, let me say a few words about the significance of an independent media and press. Since I hear an argument being made in some corners that an independent media is free to present anyone it chooses, a brief discussion of the issue may be relevant here.
Independent Media and Press are Virtuous:
The idea of establishing a competing media network in Ethiopia is long overdue. Although attempts have been made in Ethiopia in the not long distant past, the ethnocratic dictatorship inside the country had consistently rejected the idea and refused to heed to the public outcry for an independent media and press. The few brave souls who took the initiative to establish independent print media in the first few years of the life of the ethnocracy have been systematically weeded out, one after the other. The very few that lasted for a little longer worked under very restrictive and hostile conditions. We now know that there is virtually none today. No surprises here since the very idea of an independent media and press sends shivers through the TPLF spine as it does to any dictatorial regime.
No democratic governance can sustainably be put into place without the institutionalization of a web of media network that is robust, vibrant, and vigorous. Long after several false starts, ESAT was created which now seems to fill this long-sought void, at least partially. Kudos to all, who put their minds together and institute such a magnificent and crucial media network. This is not an easy achievement and I applaud it! At the same time, let us not forget that this media, unlike the ones that were inside the country, has no overseer except itself and therefore needs to use this unrestricted right very cautiously and responsibly.
Again, as no democratic system of governance can be fathomed without a vigorous independent media, the institutionalization of ESAT is and will continue to be a welcome addition to the struggle for democracy. I hope its motto would remain to be ‘reporting the news and not making the news’! I think this is a quality that should guide the work of professional journalists lest they become mere tools of just one brand of politicos!
The public’s positive predisposition toward this fledgling institution should not however be taken for granted. Any sign of group think that lacks transparency needs to be vigilantly combated. The organization itself should be open for public scrutiny and take critical feedback from the active citizenry. Given its nascent nature, it could improve its challenging task and meet the ever increasing high public expectations by listening to active citizens. It should always realize that contemporary popularity due to novelty may eventually wane unless it periodically self-examines by taking a critical distance and, also, revamps its programs by listening to critical voices.
The only way to guard against the fallouts of “group-think” is the use of critical self-analysis and a willingness to listen to dissenting voices from the viewing and listening community. Kerso lerso program is a vital resource if used rationally, for example. We should not lose sight of how important it is to monitor one’s progress through periodic self-examination. That was probably why Plato considered the development of the critical mind as a virtue when he wrote, “the unexamined life is not worth living”. Whether an individual or institution, it benefits out of subjecting itself to critical self-analysis.
Make no mistake that ESAT is currently making a vigorous contribution toward the public good. Nevertheless, in this humongous task, it always has to guard itself from the influence of powerful bigwigs lest it fall into the service of specific political interests. If it chooses to go that route, it will end up becoming just like Demtsi Weyane or Fana! Whatever it does should be evaluated against the long-term interest of participatory democracy, the Ethiopian State and its people. No less no more.
A Roadblock to Real Independent Media:
I was flabbergasted when I heard someone on Addis Dimts, a private radio station around Washington, D.C. area, threaten people who may dare to critique individuals working for ESAT. The discussants on this radio station were sharing views critical of Issyas and the views articulated on ESAT as a result of which a compatriot was deeply angered. He expressed dissatisfaction for an expression of a competing viewpoint and this, in the name of “protecting” ESAT. My friend ESAT Yene New is a great rallying motto, but ESATen Atetechu is an unpalatable one. Alas, this is dangerous!
The view this caller emoted is misguided, to put it mildly, and becomes even more worrisome when we know that it was articulated by a person whose professed goal sounds to be the creation of a democratized Ethiopia. It even becomes more troublesome when such a point of view is embellished with a reference to “Hitler” and collaborating with him in fighting off the brutal TPLF dictatorship. Such a position is unprincipled, indefensible, and unacceptable.
This example is indicative of a larger problem entrenched in our community which I briefly alluded to in the “critical reflection” section of this commentary. That is, we seem to gravitate toward exaggerating the strength of oneself or institutions we consider sacred and refuse to look at shortcomings, a tendency to create a god out of the institutions we created and defend them wholesale at any cost. This line of thinking encourages what I call “timid quietism” which is antithetical to the democratic frame of mind. This is unacceptable, for it creates a roadblock to our collective search for democracy! Intimidating one for offering a critique of an idea, action, or institution is an egregious violation of free speech, a quality vital in participatory democracy!
No institution could maintain its robustness and vibrancy unless it is open for public scrutiny. The institution can only be sustainable if and only if it listens to critical voices and recalibrates its public mission accordingly. What would be wrong to, for example, critique ESAT journalists for their lack of follow-up questions while interviewing personalities?
The Need for Follow-up Questions:
Let me cite an example. Recently Ato Assefa Chabo was interviewed by one of my favorite journalists on ESAT, AtoSisay Agena, in which the former attributes his decision to join the Derg camp to the resolution of the “Land to the Tiller” question! Ato Assefa would have found it challenging if he had been further questioned about the validity of his claim. We very well know that Derg only nationalized the land and did not return it to the tiller and hence AtoAssefa’s claim is unpalatable. The “land to the tiller” question has not been answered even today and the Woyaneis using it as a political tool to domesticate the Ethiopian peasantry and make millions selling it out! Guests on a public square like ESAT should be challenged and not simply get free air time to pontificate non-credible information.
Likewise, the young journalists who dared to travel to Eritrea and interview the country’s president would have done the same and improved on the quality of the interview. Incidentally, Mr. Issyas seemed to have succeeded in evading [or distorting, to borrow his favorite term] most of the questions and instead answered his own imaginary questions. These journalists could have taken him up repeatedly pretty much like what the journalist from Al Jazeera did to him couple of years ago and brought out the worst (and real) out of him! Regrettably, that did not happen. Hope lesson is drawn from that encounter.
Let me be clear here that I am not blaming the courageous young journalists. They are products of a traditional society which is high in power distance, i.e., a culture that accepts inequality between leaders and the led, the elite and the common, the managers and the subordinates, the professors and the students, etc., etc. Behaviors of all kinds that express such inequalities may be confused with humility, prudence, and respect and permeate our professional and social lives. While the later qualities are important they should be used in a manner that does not blur the search for truth. Regrettably, this problem is visible on many interview settings on ESAT. It needs to be changed and guests should be asked the tough questions for the sake of establishing authentic information. Otherwise, it would reproduce journalism ala EBC!!
Let me add one more example and then move on to another related issue. A veteran journalist and a former EPRDF official were being interviewed about Ato Issayas’ interview in which the later makes a reference to AtoYared Tibebu’s short commentary on his Facebook page. In this commentary, Ato Yared was paraphrased as having stated that Issayas had forgotten to speak Amharic when he met him couple of decades ago. Incidentally, this same reference was made in ESAT’s Eneweyaye program as well. Based on what is known about the science of forgetting, language acquisition, and brain plasticity and researching this body of knowledge, Ato Sisay would have posed a scientifically based and challenging follow-up question instead of recycling the “horse’s mouth” bias! How does Ato Yared verify that Issayas had indeed forgotten to speak Amharic or was he merely reporting whatIssayas told him? If Issayas did speak Amharic in his past, when did he learn it and how long did he use it? The answers to these questions are very pertinent for establishing the credibility of the claim. Remember, a professional journalist is always after truth! If you learned to walk, to talk, to swim, etc., can you unlearn it or deliberately forget it? If you learned to speak Amharic early and spoke it for quite some time, would you unlearn/ forget it? The issue is not as simple as either Ato Yared or his admirers’ put it! The issue of Ato Issayas’ language ability is really a non-issue and was raised here to underline the importance of raising follow up question with the intent of uncovering credible information.
Issayas and his ESAT Interview:
Let me say from the outset that there was nothing new in what the President said in this interview that we did not know before. Unlike a veteran politician’s view expressed on ESAT, I did not find any new information aboutWoyane from Isayas’ interview. Absolutely nothing! Yet, may be out of desperation, we are hearing some politicians claiming mirage facts about the role of Issayas in our struggle for democracy.
I was also unsure of why and how the renowned human rights activist and statesman was brought into this discussion. We all know that Professor Mesfin Woldemariam is a vigorous advocate of non-violence and a severe critic of armed struggle. I personally find it difficult to relate what he was quoted as having said to Issayas’ interview. Hence, the context in which the noted non-violent struggle proponent was brought into was also wanting. Sisaywould have been fair to his listeners had he asked his guest to clarify the response. After all, challenge brings out the best in a person!
Whereas a quick glance at the morphogenesis of Mr. Issayas’ political life leads me to surmise that this person cannot be trusted to hold a positive disposition towards the Ethiopian State, It was astonishing to see a commentator on the Eneweyay program on ESAT tactfully trying to repackage and rebrand Issyays as having been consistently pro-Ethiopian unity by way of referring to some written artifacts. Contrary to the claim made, there are many other documents which show all the virulent actions of Issayas against the Ethiopian polity. Incredibly, this guest had a free airtime to ululate and emulate the 30-year struggle of Issayas with very little challenge from the journalist.
This guy was talking about the justness of the long and gruesome “struggle” that shaped Issyas’ personhood. While it is within the purview of his right to remain steadfast with President Issayas and use the language of their choice, Arabic, for their private conversations, it remains a mystery to some of us why it is that we get subjected to a barrage of sanitizing renditions at this time. Issayas’ hegemonic desire and his proverbial struggle against the sovereignty of Ethiopia are well documented in multiple documents and can be availed [By the way, the individual seems to possess qualities that may qualify him for a communication minister portfolio in an Issayas-led Republic of the Horn of Africa!]
While listening to this interview, I was at the same time thinking of the tens of thousands of Ethiopian soldiers that perished fighting against Issyas and the organization he spearheaded. I was also thinking of the gallant son of Ethiopia, Col. Bezabih Petros, and the unsuccessful appeal the renowned artist-activist, Tamagn Beyene made toIssyays on behalf of Ethiopians to tell us about his whereabouts few years back!
For reasons unbeknownst to me some have even gone to the extent of defending him as having been a ‘defender’ of Ethiopia’s territorial integrity by opposing TPLF’s move to institutionalize the ethnolinguistic administrative division of the country.
Incidentally, Issayas might as well have disagreed with the TPLF leadership’s decision to ethnically kilelize Ethiopia, but that does not make him qualify as a harbinger of Ethiopian unity. Far from it. Given his own history and the history of the movement he led, the source of that savvy political position may have been rooted in the strategic defense of his power and desire to control the sub-region. This is what you call strategic thinking: Anticipating and creating an economically viable environment for the sustenance of Eritrea’s anticipated massive growth and development. In other words, a move to create a larger market once Eritrea is on the pedestal to unbridled economic advance!
Let’s not forget what he did and how he did it in his rise to power. His rise to the center-stage in the Eritrean military struggle started with a merciless elimination of a pro-Ethiopian left-leaning Eritrean HSIU students later referred to as the “menka movement”. It is now a public knowledge that individuals in this movement including Goitom,Mussie, Yohannes, Tareke, Teklu, etc. have been summarily executed at the behest of Issaya’s leadership!Issayas’ brutality has continued unchecked ever since. The number of Eritreans and Ethiopians who perished as a result of the actions of this autocrat has been well documented.
We can also look at what he did to his own former comrades-in-arms and where they are today: A death camp somewhere in Eritrea. History will not forget the tens of thousands of Ethiopian prisoners of war who had to forcefully build the country’s infrastructure. Neither would we forget the tens of thousands that were forcefully and readily evicted from Asmara and left on the streets of Addis with very little assistance from anyone save the charity of Ethiopians.
Issayas knows no bounds in what he does to stay in power! To lionize and whitewash such a person who has been creating havoc in our region and continues to do so is a razzle-dazzle, at best. Let’s hope that it is not the work of a cabal lurking among the unsuspecting and gullible Ethiopian community that is hard at work in resuscitating the political life of Issyas among us. If harboring Ethiopian armed groups is used as a measure to portray him as friend of Ethiopia, we got it wrong once again and I beg to differ. Issayas will never have Ethiopia’s interest and, for that matter, the interest of the Eritrean people in his realpolitik.
Armed Struggle or Peaceful Struggle?
How it is that we would institute a democratic form of government in Ethiopia has preoccupied the Ethiopian political elite for a long time. Some propose the ‘peaceful form of struggle’ while others promote ‘armed struggle’ or a combination of the two dubbed, hulegeb tegel. Proponents of the later camp argue that the non-violent method has not worked in Ethiopia for so long that we now need to change gear.
Supporters of the former school, on the other hand argue that the non-violent form of struggle has not been used extensively as outlined by the noted scholar, Gene Sharp, whose work incidentally has been translated into Amharic few years back. In fact, this group does not reduce peaceful struggle to just participating in elections every five years. They rather contend that, if used as Dr. Sharp suggests, it can become a force more powerful, but less costly than armed struggle. They also warn that a power that comes through the barrel of a gun is no guarantee to the institutionalization of a pluralist political system.
They concede though that it may be possible to overthrow the TPLF through waging armed struggle if that is the goal. Overthrowing a dictatorship may even be achieved through a coup de tat as well as a protracted popular war if that is the ONLY goal! That does not however ensure a democratic system. It may be just replacing one dictator with another! But then how should you go about that even if that is the intended goal? The following are a few pointers.
If we can learn from a deadly enemy itself, T/EPLF, and we must, here are a few pointers which may be relevant to note: First, the armed struggle will be a protracted one, given the challenging global situation. Second, it should be a popular war that relies on the people. Third, the popular war requires that a base area inside Ethiopia be in place pretty much like Asimba, Kuwara, Metekel, Dedebit, and Sahil and not vegetate in Eritrea for years like TPDM (14 years) and EPPF (16 years).
If in addition, there is a friendly country nearby, it will be a welcome addition and if Issayas is found to be such, so be it. BUT, knowing Issayas and looking back and evaluating the road traveled , his gesture is nothing but an insidious public relations antic that projects a grotesque caricature of the 2008 Person of the Year melodrama! Let’s all be mindful. So help us God!