No Qualms toward the Draft Proclamation:
Unadulterated Food Sharing Instinct is Apolitical
Adal Isaw
July 16, 2008
So much has been said about the food shortage problem of Ethiopia, and not surprisingly, conflicting assessments and accounts of the problem have been pervading numerous news outlets. Nothing seems morally repugnant more so than politicizing the problem of food shortage of any magnitude. Deflating, inflating, and negating such a problem is purely political and it is regrettable. For most of us Ethiopians and friendly citizens of other nations though, the greatest intention in our hearts is not mired with politicking but rather with intent to ameliorate the problem itself and itself only
There is nothing political about the unadulterated natural food sharing instinct that we all humans are endowed with. What is political is the choice that we make to go about solving such a food shortage problem by putting our natural food sharing instinct at the back burner. We have a choice, and the choice that we have to make at this juncture is within the humblest nature of our humanity, to detest and throw away the politicking of food shortage problem in exchange for caring and loving hearts.
Show Ethiopia your true hearts not your tears; tears it has that it wants to wipe with caring hands of her children. Let your heart come back to her, not your actless agonizing murmur of politics. At this very moment in time, Ethiopia needs no passion of the kind in the aftermath of winning a sport game or a political election. It needs a passion- the realistic duty bound and responsible participation of its children to keep her a sovereign mother that she is for millenniums to come. Everything else is political-a string or a condition set in lieu of an impending support of food and politics. And, it’s for this reason that I have goose bumps every time an ‘expert’ on foreign aid mumbles-sounding as though he is the only savoir of a people.
Unfortunately, ‘experts’ of many NGOs of the world mumble and have not born out of unadulterated food sharing instinct. As a result, their scope and understanding of the food shortage problem in the world is so blurred and self-aggrandizing that, some of them may even impede a country from achieving food security in a short period of time for the sole purpose of staying in business.
Ethiopia’s food shortage problem is not a detached and singular worldly phenomenon; rather, it’s an entangled part and parcel of an international issue of politics and economics on food production, pricing, and distribution. Food shortage problem cannot be solved by production alone, unless adequate infrastructure parallels the distribution of what is being produced amply. Moreover, food shortage problem cannot be solved in any meaningful way, for as long as people inhabiting the earth are incapable of paying the inflated price tag that the holder of the food is asking.
Inflation can be as culpable as protracted drought in bringing millions of people to their knees in hunger. In fact, it is now apparent that, one of the single most important factor to determine the existence of food shortage or lack there of is income or purchasing power of the consuming public. For example, despite the booming economic development that India is registering day in and day out, still, more than half of the hunger stricken populous of the world composes the nation of India for one obvious reason-half a billion Indians are still making so much less to buy the needed food to overtake hunger. Ethiopia is not that different in this respect, although EPRDF is working arduously to correct an economic and market system that allocates wealth in uneven manner. And, unfortunately, no matter how good an NGO’s venture is, NGOs are incapable of fundamentally changing the course of food shortage in each and every country, till a revamp of the world economic order takes place for good.
The deep seated cause of food shortage problem of the world at large is born out of an asymmetric political and economic relationship that still pervades the international arena of market interaction.
Countries in the South were relatively food self-sufficient before they were colonized by the west. Colonization or interactions with industrialized nations via trade, aid, and investment in least developed countries by Western banks and industries”immiserized” local economies. Those developing nations that overcame poverty and hunger, such as South Korea and Taiwan, were given huge amounts of aid because they were of strategic interest to the Western powers.
David N. Balaam & Michael Veseth
Introduction to International Political Economy
(New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. In., 1996). p. 386-387.
It is this part of the obvious which is always overlooked by many when either an NGO or a seemingly interested and very powerful state immerses itself into the politics of food.
States are literally powerless in exporting their food items, political ideologies, and also their own culture had it not for several institutions who stand to bear the brunt of exporting these finished and unfinished products and ideas for profit. With the exception of few NGOs, many other NGOs are formed for such purposes of exporting ideologies and market ideas without adhering to unadulterated food sharing instinct. Unadulterated food sharing instinct is apolitical and renders to no activism of the sort that is being acted on to change the constitution of what is otherwise a sovereign nation. Furthermore, unadulterated food sharing instinct has no string attached to it and takes no side either in favor or against any political system.
It has been obvious for some time now that, in struggling ‘under developed nation,’ where the power of the state is feeble compare to many multinationals, many NGOs are inclined to act in manners like states and at times more like multinational corporations. In fact, in countries like ours, even a transient diplomat, like Anna Gomez of the west, may become bold and denigrating to undermine the rule of the land and the simple protocol of diplomacy. To share food is one thing; to boss around what is otherwise a sovereign state is the other THING that we Ethiopians are well known to confront head on and WIN big. Ethiopia is not a political and ideological play ground for those NGOs who want to share their resources with a coiled string attached to it.
The only true stakeholders of Ethiopia are only Ethiopians. Defying this truth however, we now have many bold faced claims of interest in the affairs of Ethiopia from numerous NGOs, states of differing powers, multinationals, civil societies, and many more organizations. And, by deduction, it is within the national security interest of Ethiopia for our government to ask the obvious and verify the validity of all these bold claims of interest. Where do all these entities come from? Where do they get their money? And under what condition and for what explicit reason are they getting it? Who if ever is to control all these entities if their stated interest is in dire conflict with the interest of the Ethiopian peoples at large?
If the interest of any of these entities is to provide food and food only, then, verifying is not that hard a thing to do. However, if the bold interest of these entities is to engage in money laundering, corruption, and also in political activism as though they are the opposition party of Ethiopia, then, it is a must that our government should put an end to such illicit political activism, money laundering, and corruption by enacting the Draft Proclamation for local NGOs into law. If the bold interest of these entities is premised on purely unadulterated food sharing instinct, they have nothing to hide and would have no qualms with the draft proclamation what so ever.
News Outlets of the Ethiopian Diaspora:
Stop conflating a rumor into a juggernaut news of sensationalism!
Adal Isaw
adalisaw@yahoo.com
May 12, 2008
The idea of EPRDF rendering what is an Ethiopian territory to Sudan in order to dismantle Ethiopia, as NES and other pundits are suggesting, is unthinkable and beyond comprehension. Normally, you would expect for pundits and surrogates of the opposition to hold their misfire of the worst kind, fearing shame and showing a bountiful of gratitude to the Ethiopian people. However, these same pundits and propagandists have come again full circle, to claim hyperbolically that, " EPRDF is abrogating its duty by handing out Ethiopia's land to Sudan."
Mashing the trivial with the serious, these surrogates are using German Amharic Radio, VOA, Nazret.com, Ethiomedia, and the feeblest of all, NES, to stir up crises and induce a sense of urgency within the Ethiopian populace, so that, their self-inflicted wound brought by their own political idiocy in 2005 would heal in time for another round of election in 2010. Till then, they will be standing to create crises out of a rumor until any kind of government other than EPRDF is selected.
Many crises are resolved peacefully; few are not. Specific to our case, we Ethiopians may face border conflict with Sudan, Eritrea, and Somalia, but in no way should each and every conflict with our neighbors lead us to war. In principle, if any border conflict that we have with Sudan and any of our neighbors is resolved peacefully in a manner that both parties benefit from the outcome of the resolution, so be it. The Ethio-Sudan border is neither the result of EPRDF's successful struggle to oust Derg, nor it is the result of Derg's dictatorial years and the kingdom's failure to keep an eye on the border. Instead, like many other countries with border conflict, it is what colonialism brought forth.
To efficiently mange the newly subjugated people and their resources, colonialism sought a cohesive political unit, and it deliberately weakened and dismantled all local authorities and rearranged where people live and use their resources in ways suitable to its management. Many border conflicts may arise from this specific colonial rearrangement of resources.
Why some border conflicts develop into war and others do not is obviously an issue of great interest for us all. Because, understanding the nature of border conflict may give us the impetus to benefit from resolving border conflict peacefully. From what is being propagated by different news outlets favorable to the opposition, however, there seems to be an uproar by pundits and surrogates of the opposition against resolving border conflict peacefully.
At least in theory, peaceful border conflict resolution may include to mean the rendering of land that isn't yours as much as it is the gaining of land that is yours. The process can be very complex and abstruse if one is to interject the colonial boundaries of different eras. The question then becomes who if any is to benefit more from unresolved border conflict? The answer, those who want conflict after conflict rather than resolve, so that, havoc be the order of things in Ethiopia and in the Horn.
Consider OLF, ONLF, Eritrea, and the once "powerful" ICU and ask yourself what exactly do they lose by saying yes to all of EPRDF wishes to talk and negotiate an outcome for peace. Nothing, other than their apparent want of defacing Ethiopia from the face of the Horn.
We Ethiopians have stood united and have denied the wishes of OLF, ONLF, Eritrea, and ICU from taking any grip to hamper our existence. The opposition is seeking to exploit this nationalist fervor of ours, to " swift boat" EPRDF as un-Ethiopian, by claiming that, a great chunk of the Ethiopian territory has been handed to Sudan. This misinformation is also part of an agenda intended to upgrade the negative political temperature of those true Ethiopian patriots and to urge them do something about it. The agenda has one clear objective, and it is the making of crises after crises, in order to create the impression that real crises is taking place in Ethiopia.
There is a pivotal characteristic of a crises that stand out, and it refers to important events for the Ethiopian peoples, our beloved country and EPRDF, and involves fundamental issues of security and possibly the continued existence of Ethiopia. The cases of Soamlia and Eritrea are the two important events that stand out as pivotal characteristic of a crises.
During crises, the government is obliged and authorized to take actions that it deems proper and necessary. As a government of the people of Ethiopia, EPRDF had reinvigorated the pride in us all by badly bloodying the megalomania in Asmara till he uttered "no mas," while NES, ONLF, OLF, and the forgotten umbrella group of AFD had coalesced in the open to do just the opposite by dissolving the name Ethiopia from their own vocabulary of "freedom."
NES, ONLF, OLF, AFD and Eritrea are the darlings of these same propagandists who stand to tell us that EPRDF has abrogated its duties of protecting the sovereignty of Ethiopia. Really? If we ask Awyes and the megalomania from Asmara to relay the answer to VOA, German Amharic Radio, Nazreth.com, Ethiomedia, and NES, we are sure that, they are more likely to hand us a "proof" of the vast Ethiopian land that they have annexed right after the two wars. Lies, lies, and lies. Why on earth then, these pundits and surrogates of the opposition would like to depict EPRDF as craven land tossing government while they're aware of the very fact that it isn't? Simple; rating.
The time is so bad for all these supposed news outlets, and they are in need of increasing their listenership, readership, or what ever the case may demand of their followers. All these outlets are in a period of decline or diminution, and that who generates more beguiled follower stands to gain the most. Airing, writing, and posting inflaming subject matters without evidence suffice this precise intent.
All these outlets have been blazing under the guise of reporting the "truth." Realistically speaking though, these pundits and surrogates of the opposition have come together to exhibit to us the folly of journalism of the highest order, by obliterating the first article of faith in journalism. The first article of faith in journalism is that, "you don’t take issue, you report the issue," provided you have one.
Supposedly, if there seems to be an inconsistency in the story being told, a reporter must maintain independence from its sources and should stand to ask its sources to put the evidence where their mouth is. In any case, at the center of this egregious violation of the rules of journalism resides the tendency to give a favorable coverage to an issue rather than the truth. Like in war, the first casualty in bad journalism is the truth, and no wonder all these "news" outlets are in a mode of war with EPRDF. Neither war nor bad journalism is peculiar to Ethiopia, and these "news" outlet of the Ethiopian Diaspora may learn more from the egregious example of those Americans who violated the fundamental rules of journalism.
Janet Cook and Kurt Lohbeck, the former, a reporter for Washington Post, and the latter, a "CBS News" stringer in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion, each egregiously violated the fundamental rules of journalism on accuracy, objectivity, fairness, sensationalism, and many more. Janet Cook concocted a dramatic news story about the life of an eight-year-old drug addicted boy, under the title, "Jimmy's world." The Washington Post won a Pulitzer Prize for it to only return back the Prize after it is learnt that Cook cooked the story and resigned in disgrace.
In a slightly different fashion of deceit, Kurt Lohbeck of the then "CBS News" stringer, falsified reports, created his own battle scenes, and worked his heart out as a publicist for the Mujahadin, until a reporter named Mary Ellen Walsh offered evidence otherwise. Keeping Lohbeck's tradition, these "news" outlets of the Ethiopian Diaspora are not that new to concocting a dramatic story to the point of becoming the publicist of all of the enemies of Ethiopia. And, all that we can ask for now from these "news" outlest is nothing more than to refrain from the dereliction of their duty in journalism. News outlets of the Ethiopian Diaspora: Stop conflating a rumor into a juggernaut news of sensationalism!
Corruption: The Byproduct of Greed and the "Profit Motive"
Adal Isaw
adalisaw@yahoo.com
April 10, 2008
No one begins life in Ethiopia with an empty slate, and what was an attribute to the medieval Europe social organization a millennium ago still pervades Ethiopia to an extent of requiring an arduous collective struggle. For many of our citizenry, their destiny is foretold in melancholies of seemingly unending songs. Devoid of choice, these sons and daughters of our mostly agrarian society are likely to be married to each other, and keep on working on the same land for generation to come. To block such a scenario from taking place perpetually, we Ethiopians should overcome the various impeding forces and continue our struggle to better the lives of our people by rebuilding our country anew.
Rebuilding a country anew is more than a revolution; it requires the complete overhauling of an old and backward social organization, using a modern and independent world-view of our own making. Chewing more than we can handle into the western ideological view impedes our ability to sort what is fitting and what isn’t, say, in matters of our personal obligation. Keep in mind that, the western ideological view is centered around the individual "I" while ours is inclined to " We" more often than we are able to realize. " I" or "mine" is not that savory a word in the world where a collective effort rather than a singular trial to better a country of many is in demand. Why do I say this?
Consider the issue of corruption: the degenerating force that is impeding Ethiopia from continuing its struggle to better the lives of its people. Fighting corruption requires the collective will of our people including our government, and the ceasing of pointing fingers as if it’s only the duty of the government. The culture of the desire to bribe, in order to gain better, biased, and faster treatment for personal gain is as impeding as the behavior of those carnal office holders within the government.
The culture of corruption may not be abolished in its totality. However, it’s highly likely for us to control corruption if the will comes in one bundle, and we as people are aware of as to what is causing it. Corruption is the byproduct of greed and the "profit motive." As it has been argued by western economic specialists, "profit motive" is the good old engine that runs the "free" market economic system- a system under which masses of people are expected to enhance their life standard and become member of a vibrant middle class. Health care, educational opportunity, and nourishment to the body and mind are assumed to be achieved in plenty, to the point of giving these vibrant consumers the right to choose from many good choices they can ever have in life. Succinctly put, the "profit motive" is the engine that promotes the good of the whole than any other motive of any market system. Is it?
Consequent to learning the difference in capacity of those who can and cannot purchase the necessities of life, one wonders if the "profit motive" is promoting the good of the whole in Ethiopia. Jacking up the prices of commodities that are essential to life may be the consequent of the "profit motive," while stealing gold from the national treasury is, an on your face and very bold unrestrained greed. On both cases though, the intent is the servicing of one’s own interest first and foremost, by neglecting the needs of the Ethiopian people at large. The question then becomes whether greed is that different an aspiration from what "profit motive" entails? Or, whether "profit motive"is that different an intent of action than the intention that a greedy person harbors deep in his conscience?
Few weeks ago, I was of the conviction that greed and the "profit motive" are two separate aspects of a liberal capitalist market system. But now, I believe that, greed and the "profit motive" are the two faces of a single aspect of a liberal capitalist market system. In fact, greed and the "profit motive" are synonyms so close in action they’re almost interchangeable words. The "profit motive" is nothing more than the euphemistic description of what greed is all about. If you’re a person who is bent into choosing words carefully, you don’t say Adal is dead; you say Adal passed away ( I have forgiven myself for calling upon the inevitable sooner than most of us wish). In the same manner, you call greed the "profit motive" to make it sound acceptable.
The "profit motive" has been made benign to the extent that very few of us have raised our hands to question the goodness it all, let alone daringly to call for the imprisonment of those who are profiting unscrupulously by keeping the essential goods of life out of the market. We are acting in such a manner, in part, because of our misconception that greed is something that does have little to do with the "profit motive," while it’s really what the "profit motive" entails. What the "profit motive" entails comes as the result of the intent to benefit from everything and anything that is being consumed in ways that maximizes the moneyed interest of the "entrepreneur." Consequently, " profit motive" becomes the prelude to greed rather than that which promotes the good of the whole as it has been portrayed.
Greed is profound where the free exercise of the "profit motive" is the singular article of faith, and also where government regulation is rejected as impediment to what would be other wise " life changing market system." Fighting greed is a " catch-22" venture for a "third world" government such as ours. A government such as ours is torn between having to regulate and deregulate the same market system by two opposing forces. Forces within Ethiopia may rightfully ask a segment of the market to be highly regulated, while outside forces with some support from within Ethiopia are quick to point out that it is counter productive to do so.
The highly inflated price of grains, housing, and numerous commodities is the result of the "profit motive" going awry to greed in a market with few serious restraining regulations. If a certain grain is to be set aside till the price for it reaches the highest acceptable one for the holder, then, the trouble of paying the price being asked for that grain will be incomprehensible. Consequently, the Ethiopian consumer that stretches in its ability from minuscule to a nil purchasing power will suffer, and that should not happen under any circumstance. The "profit motive" seen from this vantage point is thus the giant burden of the Ethiopian economy that EPRDF should pay serious attention to.
There is also the sleeping giant "profit motive" that may vitiate EPRDF’s planned objectives- the men and women who join the front not so much for the love of their people and country but for their own calculated interest. These fellow Ethiopians may end up hurting our people and country more so than others for they are shielded by many layers of organizational and some other formal covers.
Ethiopia is at a crossroad, where curbing the degree of corruption drastically is a must do immediate course of action, before the sleeping giant "profit motive" is braided into a crushing chain of economic and political disaster. As a citizen of Ethiopia, I am earnestly asking EPRDF, to have a thorough rectification movement of some sort, to rid of itself, from those impersonators whose primary aim and interest is the betterment of their own life.
The nature of how democratic we’re as a society will be tested from now on by how far we go to facilitate the means of empowering, to the millions sons and daughters of the farmers of Ethiopia. EPRDF should not be the abode of those who are eager to first and foremost care for themselves, since EPRDF’s democratic endeavor is in essence mainly embedded in its commitment to furnish these sons and daughters of Ethiopia the choice to free themselves from a perpetual cycle of depriving stationary life. If we fail, as premier Meles asserted a while ago; it is worth doing a second round of a revolution. But then again, I would argue that, it is easier for EPRDF to rid itself of those who are backpedaling the movement by having a hidden "profit motive" than going back to do another round of a revolution.
NES (Network of Ethiopian Scholars)
and its delusional
"Ideas for ending endemic governance crisis in Ethiopia"
Adal Isaw
March 26, 2008
adalisaw@yahoo.com
In what is utter effrontery to academicians of the world, few realistically challenged asinine Ethiopians are calling themselves the Network of Ethiopian Scholars, to knowingly or unknowingly engage in the art of mass deception and disinformation. On November 2, 2005, NES naively called upon the people of Ethiopia and the world, to unite and topple one of the progressive government in Africa, claiming that, Ethiopia is under sadistic and fascist rule.
On May 22, 2006, the jubilantly excited NES broke the news that, "... a historic meeting convened, by the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP), the Ethiopian People's Patriotic Front (EPPF), the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF), the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF), the Sidama Liberation Front (SLF) and the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces (UEDF), at Utrecht in Netherlands," creating AFD-the step child of a megalomania from Eritrea.
Wounded but not dead, and while debunked for lack of academic sophistication; on March 20, 2008, NES still managed to lift up the heavy brush of deception to denigrate and paint Ethiopia as the land of "endemic governance crisis." The brush stroke from left to right, up and down zigzagging in intervals, painting the feeblest possible images, in an article titled "Ideas for ending endemic governance crisis in Ethiopia."
One needs not to read the article for only part of the title "endemic governance crisis" tells more than what the gist of the presupposition of the article in its totality can ever confess. Meanwhile, and mere academic exercise aside, there is always the need to define key terms of a presupposition if indeed the whole point of an academic argument is to produce a convert out of an Ethiopian reader who may have a stake in what is being argued.
NGOs, the so-called Western nations, opposition groups from the criminal element to the academically dishonest, and the very naive and vocal Ethiopian Diaspora have been using "bad governance," as point of argument against EPRDF almost to the point of making these two words of "bad governance" the cliche of the 21st century. And yet, none of these elements of the opposition, as a matter of fact has made the case that " bad governance" let alone "endemic" one is pervading Ethiopia as NES is claiming.
Endemic is a caustic word that speaks a volume whenever it is used in any order to describe that something extremely undesirable and potent is taking place. It is a word usually used to describe matters of health concern that may afflict a specific region and people, especially disease peculiar to the tropic. In this case, NES is using the word endemic to describe the lack of "good governance" in Ethiopia and have no clue as to how the word is unfitting to describe such a phenomenon.
The state of "good governance" or lack there of cannot be endemic by its very nature. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Good governance may afflict as many regions as bad governance or vice versa, and by deduction, it is indeed pandemic and cannot be attributed as a peculiar enigmatic sign to explain the state of poverty and hunger in the land of Ethiopia. If you doubt my assertion, just read the following evidence about the richest country of the world for a change, and debunk my surmise if you can.
On October 12, 2005, Oprah Winfery had a show unlike any other show she had had in the past. The show featured Anderson Cooper, the host of 360 on CNN and others to talk about destitution, and see with a naked eye the sad-ridden faces of the 43 million Americans that live below the poverty line. Video footage of poverty-stricken Americans disenchanted the audience and also the millions of viewers who were glued to the tube as usual.
It was breathtakingly unbelievable to see the graphic face of destitution and poverty in America-the worlds’ richest country. From that day on, it became apparent to many Americans that, poverty is neither an endemic state of affairs necessarily induced by speculated lack of "good governance" nor it is the sole attribute of all poor and underdeveloped nations of the world, as NES is idiotically suggesting. So, what is the fuss about this recent article by NES? If any, NES is merely engaging itself as usual in what Mathza (one of my favorite writers who also has shared the same story about Oprah show to her readers) calls, "...an endless variety of devious means of discrediting and demonizing the EPRDF."
The word " governance" has popped out of developmental literature to find itself being used by sectarian groups to bring about their interest to the forefront. Succinctly put, "governance" is defined as the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented. The whole process is influenced by formal and informal actors. The government is the formal actor and the list of informal actors can be very long to include political and economic Mafias. As you have noticed in our country recently, the economic Mafias may include those "entrepreneurs" who jacked up the price of salt 900% overnight.
The economic Mafias may also venture to ransack the national treasury of Ethiopia, and in no way are attributable only to poor countries who are inured of being condemned for having " bad governance" as NES is suggesting. In fact, responding to the recent gold scandal of Ethiopia, NES idiotically asked the following questions, stretching the incident to mean something that have been caused by the New Federal Democratic Republic System of Ethiopia.
Reaching to the epic of stupidity, NES asked, "What does this fraud show? What is the relationship between the prevailing ethnic governance and such grand theft committed against the nation? Is this colossal theft related to ethnic de-valorization of Ethiopianess and Ethiopian patriotic belonging where those who steal prefer to privilege their private pockets to the decent matter of allegiance to the national well being? How can they imagine they can rob the national treasury for so long undetected, unless they have powerful official and intelligence people backing them? Where did the real gold go? These are indeed trying questions at trying times where this unfortunate nation seems to continue to lurch from one disastrous episode to another? How much has ethnic politics to do with this colossal treachery against the nation?"
How is what it means to be an Ethiopian has got to do with those who stole gold from the national treasury? Is NES about to tell us that some within us-Ethiopians ,including King Haile Selassie and Mengistu Hailemariam, have never been implicated stealing from the national treasury? Is Federalism the culprit in this scandal as NES is suggesting? Oh my! I guess, only the feeblest minds among us Ethiopians render to vitriolic criticism such as this one to consequent havoc and division among people who are otherwise united under one guiding principle-the equality of all peoples of Ethiopia unlike any other time in their history under the supreme law of the land that we often call the constitution. NES, get used to it! Your dog didn’t eat your home work.
It’s baffling that NES is equating the idea of Ethiopiawinet with the recent gold scandal. No Ethiopian needs a lecture on the idea of Ethiopiawinet from anybody including NES in such platitudes and nonsensical manner. If there is a perceived degree of difference about how one feels Ethiopiyawe, it arises from a reason more complex than the gold scandal that NES is eager to equate with. No matter how, NES will never ever rightfully claim to be more of an Ethiopian than any Ethiopiawee since the mechanism to weigh the strength of a conviction of such an idea or lack there of is non existent.
The whole point is that, governance is influenced by economic Mafias of the kinds that have been involved in the recent gold scandal, and to a greater extent, it’s attributed to the culture of greed that a capitalist system brings forth. If EPRDF is influenced to "govern" and acts as the Communist Party of China and executes all those who stole gold from the treasury, I suppose NES would be complaining about cruel, unnecessary, and inhuman punishment. In any case, NGOs of different breed, the international media, both print and TV, inter non-governmental and governmental organizations, treaties, trade laws and agreements, and multi national organizations are some of the actors from the many to impact the nature of "governance" in any type of government.
It is thus very deceptive of NES to imply that, the nature of "governance" is single- handedly influenced by a government. In fact, to a lesser or greater extent, even the behavior of NES as instigator of instability and disorder by having an affiliation with known terrorist organization have an impact on the nature of "governance" in Ethiopia. If NES is to behave in a civil manner and refrains from disseminating lies after lies, it’s very likely that our government would have markedly different mode of "governance" from spending more time on issues of political and economic detractors to spending time developing Ethiopia in full gear.
For some, including NES, EPRDF is the quintessential example of a government that went awry because of how it makes decisions and the way how it carries the decisions for implementation. But, for many Ethiopians who are cognizant of the context under which EPRDF is governing Ethiopia, EPRDF is one of the government that should have received the greatest commendation possible for good governance. It is very apparent that, NES stands to contend this bold assertion by giving us all of the reasons that it has forwarded on March 20, 2008, till I debunk all of the criticisms one criticism at a time.
"Unscrupulous syndicate of foreign and local business" are using Ethiopia’s land to grow "water thirsty rose for cheap export" thereby exposing our people to a protracted "food shortage," reads the introductory criticism of NES. Two untenable evidences are forwarded in support of NES assertions that, how rose production is bad for Ethiopia. The first one is, the fact that nine million people are waiting for food aid, and the second one, the fact that Portugal and Spain have ceased to produce rose, believing that it’s a detrimental venture. The allusion for the latter evidence is that, the Western developed world has abandoned rose production for reasons that NES is claiming about land usage in Ethiopia.
Contrary to NES claim, the Western developed states, particularly the European ones, did not abandon rose production by choice, and particularly not because of the reasons that NES is asserting. Rather, they were simply forced out by competition. In the 1960s and 70s, the Netherlands rose to a domineering stance in the world of cut flowers, but more specifically, roses, and its European developed states were eventually eliminated as competitors in rose production and were transformed into importers of roses. Today, Holland grows one out of every five commercially grown roses. And, for having done that, Holland has yet to create poverty-stricken citizens as NES is eager to point. The facts are not simply there to support that the nine million people in Ethiopia are waiting for " food hand outs" as a result of rose production.
The market for flower cuts, especially of roses has been expanding vastly to Asia, Africa, and south America. The list of countries includes but is not limited to Thailand, Malaysia, Zambia, Tanzania, Mauritius, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. For the Third World, roses have been treated by international market analysts and development experts as the "miracle crop" earning up to five times per acre what fruit crops bring in. So, what is the fuss about rose production, if the government of Ethiopia is avoiding banned and unregistered pesticides to avoid risks in health hazard and contamination of the soil? What is the fuss of rose production if the government is making sure that the working force is fit with protective gears even when registered and relatively safer pesticides are applied? What is the fuss about rose production if recycled water is used to harvest them? NES is simply out of gas and can only split hair in matters that have little bearing if any to the over all question of economic development.
By the way, weren’t you scholars supposed to premise your conclusion in solid evidence and trends of data that support your claim? Have you asked yourself how much of Ethiopia’s land is being used for herituculture vis a vi’s food production? How much of water? Are the nine million people waiting for "food hand out" the consequent of rose production? Is hunger the consequent of " bad governance" handing land to "unscrupulous syndicate of foreign and local business," to grow "water thirsty rose for cheap export," thereby exposing our people to a protracted "food shortage" as you are dishonestly suggesting? The answer is no, and here is the reason why.
As I have indicated earlier, good or bad governance is the product of two actors, and government of any kind is not going to be able to make decisions and carry out the decisions for implementation single handedly. Thus, the fact that we have "scrupulous" or "unscrupulous" foreign investors in Ethiopia indicates that, the blame, if there is any, should be attributed to the informal actors. EPRDF is not a mind reader and thus cannot sift the crook and the dishonest, from the honest ones, just by how they sign their lease agreements.
It’s so perplexing why NES is so craven to mention WTO, World Bank, and another international financial institutions, and the existence of an asymmetric political and economic relationship with the so-called Western world. NES is aware of the fact that, Ethiopia is compelled to open up its market and business ventures to foreign investors if it wants to do business with the Big Boys. Market liberalization is what has been required of Ethiopia for some time now, and the Ethiopian government is being pressured day in and day out to open up even those aspects of the economy that would put our country in harms way. In any case, the whole point here is that, poverty or hunger which NES loves to politicize for political expediency, is the function of asymmetric international economic and political relationship that has pervaded the world especially after WWII.
It won’t be surprising if NES is to equate the creation of Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) with hunger in Ethiopia and the so-called Third World. But, the fact is, FAO of the UN was created,
after hunger became the major concern of the United States and its European allies that had incurred a good deal of damage to their economies during the war. Countries in the South were relatively food self-sufficient before they were colonized by the west. Colonization or interactions with industrialized nations via trade, aid, and investment in least developed countries by Western banks and industries"immiserized" local economies. Those developing nations that overcame poverty and hunger, such as South Korea and Taiwan, were given huge amounts of aid because they were of strategic interest to the Western powers.
David N. Balaam & Michael Veseth
Introduction to International Political Economy
(New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. In., 1996). p. 386-387.
Poverty or Hunger, then, is not endemic to Ethiopia as NES is suggesting, but is a consequent of the asymmetric relationship that Ethiopia is compelled to have with the Big Boy of the so-called Western nations.
The implications of having liberal capitalist market system are many, and for one, it always creates great disparities of wealth and poverty. EPRDF is very cognizant of this fact and acts to restrain the disparities from going over board. The fact that land is apportioned for use via lease system is one good example that shows how EPRDF is putting the cork, to restrain the political and economic control that few may end up having if Ethiopia were to sell its land to Archer Daniel Midland company-a capitalist venture that is claiming of feeding the world. NES has to come out and propose an economic system other than the restrained capitalist system that we have in Ethiopia, and show us exactly how the disparities in wealth and power are going to be avoided. Our stance is that, even in restrained capitalist system, disparities are inevitable but restraining them is possible. NES, are you pondering on shooting your arm with the dose of "good, old, true socialist system?"
Food problems; gold scandal; dispirited sense of self; political and economic power disparities, and all of the complaints, as far as NES is concerned are the creations of "ethnic framed" governance. "Ethnic framed" is a reference given to Kilils that EPRDF has arranged as political units, to fairly and squarely distribute political rights, economic interests, and social benefits among the many people of Ethiopia.
Kilil is one of the issue that can easily be demagoged to mean the dismembering of Ethiopia into ethnic miniature states and anything and everything bad as NES is claiming. Those who oppose Kilil would not badge to claim a patriotic upper hand over those who advocate for it, exactly as NES is hail bent doing. Nonetheless, the principle that should guide our discourse on Kilil has to be the following: There should always be a contest in choosing the way how we live, but never should there be a contest with each other claiming to be more of an Ethiopian than those who stand to challenge the political living arrangement that we’re espousing for.
Neither the living arrangement nor the contest to choose one arrangement from another is immutable. Keep in mind that the fourteen provinces that made up the political unit arrangement of Ethiopia were never meant to stand still for ever. The same is true about Kili; it’s just another changeable political living arrangement being used for now to fairly and squarely distribute political rights, economic interests, and social benefits among the many people of Ethiopia.
Those who are standing to lose from such a political living arrangement in which power, privilege, duties, and rights are distributed are arguing in essence for immutable order of things. The traditional and historical edifice of Ethiopia stood on the premise of royal and aristocratic privileges, and this coercive edifice was imposed on fourteen political provinces. The edifice also was justified through ecclesiastical authority in order to shore and give it the appearance of immutability. Those who dare to challenge the royal and aristocratic living arrangements within the fourteen provinces of Ethiopia were dealt mercilessly. The continuing coercive living arrangement under royal and aristocratic administration brew local resistance and nationalist movements in many parts of the fourteen provinces of Ethiopia paving the path for EPRDF.
Well beyond the histrionics, rhetoric, and the dog eat my home work complaint of NES, Kilil is a political choice that resulted from decades of an Ethiopian struggle for justice, equality, and the right to self-govern oneself locally. It’s a political living arrangement representing the pacts and agreements that the EPRDF made with the peoples of Ethiopia as stipulated in the Constitution, emancipating and empowering the many people of Ethiopia from imposing and oppressing monolithic central government.1 NES, get used to the New Ethiopia, and stop the dereliction of your academic duty.
