Ginbot-7 held public meeting in Frankfurt, Germany

Andargachew Tsige Senior political affairs officer of Ginbot 7 Movement for Justice, Freedom and Democracy held discussion Saturday, 28 February 2009 with a large number of Ethiopians who converged on Frankfurt from places as far as Holland, Switzerland and Austria and as well as from German cities far away from Frankfurt.

At the meeting, which lasted nearly four hours, Andargachew took the first few minutes to explain briefly about the program, the way of struggle and the reason behind it, and the future courses of action that should be followed in realizing the objectives of the movement.

In a question and answer session he addressed several issues ranging from working with parties who claim to have a stake in Ethiopia’s political future to the need of working towards the form and structure of democratic institutions which will be put in place once the Meles-led regime is removed. The meeting came to an end after a successful fundraising event.

Ethiopia Appeals for $ Half Billion for Emergency Food Aid

The Daily Monitor, Addis Ababa- Ethiopia on Tuesday appealed for financial aid amounting to close to a half a billion USD to feed 4.9 million citizens the government says are in dire need of emergency relief in 2009.

The figure is not in par with humanitarian agencies who put the number as high as 12 million who actually are in need of emergency foods aid.

The government says donors far various reasons inflate the number of people.

The government, on a number of occasions, announced economic growth "for six consecutive years." State Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD), Mitiku Kassa told a press conference on Tuesday at his office that the deteriorating humanitarian situation, prompted by severe food shortage resulted from poor performance of the 2008 fiscal year, failure of belg rain, poor performance of 2008 Meher, soaring food prices, unfavorable terms of trade, and slow recovery from effects of previous drought.

Click on 'Read More.'

Citing joint Government and humanitarian partners' assessment, Mitiku said the total net emergency requirement, including food needs for the year and non food needs for the first six months of 2009, amounts to USD 454,369,769 within six to ten months.

Accordingly, the net food requirement stands at 450,611 MT, valued at USD 389.3 million.

The Targeted Supplementary Food (TSF) Programme requires 30,327 MT amounting to USD 26.2 million to respond to needs of estimated 1.2 million beneficiaries, Mitiku explained.

Moreover, the net requirement for the non-food sectors (health and nutrition, water and sanitation and agriculture and livestock) amounts to USD 38.8 million.

The Crop and Food Supply Assessment Missions' (CFSAM) report indicated that cereal and pulse production during the meher 2008/09 season was about 10 percent above last year's post-harvest estimate.

According to the report, this is the fifth consecutive season of good meher harvest with total cereal and pulse production estimated at 18 million MT, including 17.4 million MT from the meher season and a forecast of 0.6 million MT for the belg 2009 season.

All the same, the number of people who needs emergency relief is n increasing since the last five to six years despite increasing agricultural production, the government says.

This year's harvest is expected to e one million more than that of last year's.

Though the national reserve has the capacity of over 404,000 MT, currently the country has only 170,000MT.

Mitiku added some 60,000MT tone of food was on the way via the Djibouti port.

Meanwhile, concerns are high over continuing food insecurity in the coming months, in parts of the country.

In Somali Region, malnutrition and food insecurity will likely exacerbate during the coming jilaal, dry season from January to mid April, Mitiku indicated.

Oxfam GB last moth indicated from Nairobi, at least 4.6 million people in Ethiopia were dependent on emergency assistance to meet their immediate food needs in 2008, in addition to the 7.3 million chronically food insecure people being assisted through a national safety net programme.
International aid agencies including UN-OCHA last month reported that in 2009, an estimated 12 million people, 20 percent of the rural population will continue to require humanitarian assistance.

This, they say, is derived from the Humanitarian Requirements Document issued on 30 January 2008 which indicates that a total of 4.9 million people will require emergency food assistance in addition to the 7 million chronically food insecure people that continue to be assisted through Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP).

Yamamoto Meets Press, Speaks on CSO Bill, Birtukan

The Daily Monitor, Addis Abeba — US ambassador to Ethiopia Donald Yamamoto on Monday met and held discussion on a host of outstanding issues in the context of the bilateral relations between the two countries.

In his monthly round-table discussion with journalists, the ambassador also responded-tried to respond- to a number of questions from reporters.

The new NGO bill and the re-arrest of the leading opposition figure Birtukan Mideksa dominated the discussion and the question to the ambassador.

Speaking on CSO bill, Ambassador said the law remains confusing as, he said, it has a lot of contradictions.

Asked whether it was reluctance on the US government or firm Ethiopia's resistance that there was not as yet any change to the law, Yamamoto said: "We are trying to consolidate the issue with Ethiopian government." He added "We recognize the right of all countries to make a statement on their own laws on CSO or NGOs. So the law is not unique," he said while elaborating his effort.

Click on 'Read More.'
"You have to have some types of coordination and also how you do recognize. Because you have some issues who is CSO or who is NGO. How do we get the money? So it's true each country has the right to regulate international organizations. But the issue we said is in the implementation process. It is how it gone be implemented." Yamamoto said the new law will prove problematic when it comes to implementation.

"We really think there is lot of contradiction. We are not quite sure how that can be implemented. The issue comes in the next year during the implementation stage" he said adding: "We are working very hard to consolidate with the government." According to him, 67% of US assistance to Ethiopia is given through NGOs and CSOs and the lion's share goes to grass roots development, "as we cannot go to all part of the population of Ethiopia which is estimated around 74 million." Yamamoto stressed the need to have a clear understanding so as to draw a line between what we consider as CSOs and the so called NGOs as much as we have to know which group of the society this will affect.

"We have to know also the definition that is why it is so critical to understand. What parts of the assistant groups would be affected and why," Yamamoto said.

Speaking about government's recent action against Birtukan, he said it was a tragic-both for the detained and the government.

"To me the case is very tragic for the Ethiopian government and Birtukan, including for all opposition parties in the country." Yamamato said he hoped the issue will be resolved peacefully for the benefit of all the parties involved.

The ambassador hailed the recent move by the opposition in forming an alliance saying "the good step would facilitate and promote dialogue with the government.

"It makes them stronger and helps to make decisions," he said.

He, however, seemed sceptical on the possibility of a smooth and constructive dialogue between the ruling party and oppositions in the run up to the next national election.

He said he expected the dialogues to be full of emotionally charged debates and wrangling.

But the dialogue will be instrumental for both the government and the opposition" he said.The ambassador said Birtukan's arrest will not affect the long standing and strong relation that exists between Ethiopia and the US "I don't think Birtukan's case will be a barrier for our relation, if we continue towards an open and democratic election," he said adding however that Birtukan case was a very sensitive issue.

Ambassador Yamamoto did not want to further comment on that-until the next roundtable, may be.

Binyam Mohamed coming to terms with freedom, says sister

The Daily Telegraph- He was flown back to Britain on Monday after more than four years in the controversial US military detention centre and was reunited with his sister Zuhra Mohamed,

The 30-year-old claims he was "tortured in medieval ways" with the full knowledge of British intelligence while being held on suspicion of terrorism.

Ms Mohamed said last night that she burst into tears as she hugged her Ethiopian-born brother for the first time in 10 years.

Speaking from a secret location, Ms Mohamed told BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "It was crazy. You don't expect these things to happen.

"I saw my brother, I hugged him and I cried. I could not control myself. It's hard not seeing a person for 10 years and then seeing my brother. I still can't believe he's here.

"I was overjoyed and thankful to everybody."

She said Mr Mohamed was "really thin" but otherwise healthy and mentally sharp, and had not needed hospital treatment.

The 6ft 1in detainee's weight is said to have dropped below 9st after he went on hunger strike at the start of this year.

She added: "He's happy and he's glad to be out. It hasn't sunk in yet that he's really here.

"He's just looking around. So far he's doing good actually, but he can't yet believe that he's here."

Read the rest here. You will also find a related story here.

Thousands flee Ethiopia clashes

BBC-Tens of thousands of people have reportedly fled their homes as a result of fighting between rival groups in a remote part of southern Ethiopia.
The BBC's Elizabeth Blunt says 300 people may have been killed - mostly in a major battle on 5 February.
People are moving away to safer areas following the clash between the Borana people and the Gheri, a Somali clan.
While the fighting has now stopped, the area is still tense and some reports estimate more than 100,000 displaced.
Ethiopia's Minister of State Responsible for Emergency and Disaster Planning Mitiku Kassa acknowledged the existence of the problem but said the figure of 100,000 was an exaggeration.
The fighting, which took place near the town of Moyale, was so severe that for a time the main road to the Kenyan border was closed.
Immediately after the peak of the clashes on 5 February, the Gheri people began moving away from the area in large numbers.
The BBC's Elizabeth Blunt in Addis Ababa says armed conflicts, particularly over water, are not unusual in this part of southern Ethiopia.
They have been increasing in recent years because of boundary changes, and because of drought which has made control over wells and water points even more critical.
A long term observer of the area told the BBC it was tragic that something like this happens virtually every year, and is now considered almost normal.

The question of unity: do words matter?

By Maimire Mennasemay (Ph.D.), mmennasemay@gmail.com

Our Inheritance: Ethiopia without Ethiopians

Our ancestors made Ethiopia but not Ethiopians. It is this historical condition that has made the issue of ethnic diversity and Ethiopian unity a central concern of Ethiopian political discourse and practice since the 1960s, and has found expression in the ethnicization of Ethiopia in the 1994 Constitution. Our ancestors achieved the territorial unity of Ethiopia but left us with an ethnically and culturally fragmented population.
As a result, our collective consciousness of Ethiopian identity is shot with contradictions; and the self-conception of Ethiopians as Ethiopians is incomplete for many, and for some, unacceptable. What is a historical achievement for some—the territorial unification of Ethiopia—is a historical calamity for others. The historical task of this generation is then to transform the inherited territorial unity into a democratic unity that embraces all who live in Ethiopia. But how? The popular answer is through “unity in diversity”. But if we step back from this answer and reflect on what it means, we may discover that it has consequences that we may not be willing to live with. Click on 'Read More.'

In politics, false answers, as we have seen under the Derg and the EPRDF, trap us in circumstances that derail our aspirations for freedom and prosperity. To avoid falling into the pitfalls of the past, we need to clarify what we mean by unity and diversity in considering the issue of how we could move from the already achieved territorial unity of Ethiopia to the democratic unity of Ethiopians. It is folly not to recognize that there is ethnic diversity and exclusion in Ethiopia. But it is folly compounded to deny that the history of the territorial unification of Ethiopia holds within it powerful historical aspirations—and a historical task—to make this land the home of all Ethiopians.

With the creation of an ethnic federation in 1991, the EPRDF disowned these aspirations and historical task. In reaction, the idea of “unity in diversity” gained currency among many who fear that the ethnic federation is the first step towards the disintegration of Ethiopia. This fear is fuelled by the 1994 Constitution that fragments Ethiopians into “Nations, Nationalities and Peoples”, disavows Ethiopia as the locus of sovereignty, and reduces her to an aggregate of ethnic states by declaring that “All sovereign power resides in the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia” (8/1). This demotion of Ethiopian unity is reinforced by the recognition of “the right to secession” (39/1) and the downgrading of the unity of Ethiopia to the “mutual consent” of “Nations, Nationalities and Peoples” (62/4), as if Ethiopian unity were merely a marriage of convenience. Instead of becoming a framework that transforms the territorial unity of Ethiopia into a democratic unity of all Ethiopians, the 1994 Constitution plays the role of an armed zebegna loyally safeguarding ethnic divisions and keeping them alive for posterity. And yet the EPRDF regime speaks of Ethiopian unity.


The paradox of “Unity in Diversity”
The EPRDF often encapsulates its idea of Ethiopian unity in the expression “unity in diversity”. At first blush, one is hard-pressed to deny the felicity of this choice of words for it appears to catch well the factual situation of ethnic diversity and the ideal of Ethiopian unity in a tidy three-word formulation. So, where do the EPRDF and its critiques differ? After all, both use often the same expression, “unity in diversity”.

The difference between the EPRDF and its critiques is, among other things, in their readings of Ethiopian history. Whereas the EPRDF reduces Ethiopian history to its failures, its critiques point out that no history is a straight path to unity and freedom. To be sure Ethiopian history is full of failures. But we should also recognize that the quests for unity and freedom also gestate as triumphs in these failures. The failure to defeat the Fascist invasion led to the implicit triumph of Ethiopian unity and freedom expressed in the emergence of self-organized multi-ethnic anti-Fascist grass-roots patriotic struggles (1936-40). The failures of the Ethiopian state in the 16th and 17th century (the Gragn wars and the Zemene Mesafint) gave birth to a population with multiple and overlapping identities out of the interacting Oromo, Amhara, Tigrean, Christian and Muslim inhabitants of the region extending from Begemder to Tigrai, Wollo, Damot, Yifat, Hadiya and beyond. Unity and freedom, as the history of humanity shows, realize themselves through failures also. Ethiopia is no exception. What we need to do is to give life to what in Ethiopia’s past failures is more than the failures themselves. This “more” is our quest for freedom and prosperity. Thus, our historical responsibility is not to build an Ethiopia that embodies its failures, as the EPRDF does. Rather, our task is to redeem the aspirations of unity and freedom that inhabit the failed struggles of our ancestors.

True, both the Imperial regime and the Derg failed to complete this task. But the EPRDF has done worse in that it has turned the historical clock back by fragmenting Ethiopian territory in terms of an ethnic taxonomy. It has thus rendered even more difficult the transformation of Ethiopian territory into a commonly shared democratic space in which we could recognize in Ethiopia the fulfillment of our aspirations for freedom, justice and prosperity. The EPRDF’s carving of the Ethiopian territory into exclusive ethnicstans has made Ethiopians from one Killil resident aliens in other Killils. No wonder, Meles’s publicly remarked in 1992 that Axum, Lalibela, Gondar have no significance to Oromos, Gurages, and Wolaitas.

In this context the EPRDF’s claim that it promotes “unity in diversity” is paradoxical. But then again, perhaps it is not. Could it be that the EPRDF chose the expression “unity in diversity” precisely because it captures its intent to keep the country ethnically fragmented? What if “unity in diversity” encapsulates perfectly the EPRDF’s intention to prevent the growth and solidification of the trans-ethnic Ethiopian identity that was being born, like all births, painfully, through the ups and downs of Ethiopian history?


Words Matter
History and life teach us that words matter. Consider the disagreement on a couple of words in the Wuchale treaty that led to the Ethio-Italian war in 1896, or saying to a person the words “I promise….” In many cases, words are, especially in politics, like actions; that is, they have, as some put it, a performative function. One finds an acknowledgment of this performative function of words in Ethiopian wisdom, encapsulated in proverbs such as: “The wound inflicted by a word cannot be cured by a doctor”, or, “Let your mouth fast”, indicating that words have real consequences and must be used carefully. Words mould reality, consciously and unconsciously. With words, we narrate our lives, our relations with others and our surroundings. Words have the power to reveal and hide the world.

Our question then is: What does the expression “unity in diversity” reveal and hide? What are its implications? What if we substitute for it another expression, “diversity in unity”? Would there be a politically crucial distinction between the two formulations that could be of capital importance for the future of Ethiopia?


Unity in diversity
One way of grasping the meaning and implications of “unity in diversity” is to refer to institutions such as the United Nations. In the United Nations, like in all international organizations, each diverse element, that is, each member state, is treated as a sovereign entity. The constitutive principle of such organizations is “unity in diversity”, for each member is perceived to be a bearer of a distinct, single identity. The idea that members could have multiple and overlapping identities is unthinkable. That is why “unity in diversity” makes possible the co-existence of democratic and dictatorial states in the same organization. An international organization is then an aggregate of distinct entities, each defending its own interests. Consequently, “unity in diversity” is diversity-centric and operates in terms of a static conception of diversity that makes it the immovable horizon of politics. Inevitably, “unity in diversity” has perverse implications in that, by making diversity the unsurpassable horizon of politics, it institutionalizes division, leaves no place for trust and democracy as ways of resolving conflicts of interests, and makes asymmetrical power relations the foundation of all transactions. Those states who have the power—economic, diplomatic, or military—to bend the will of member states will use this power in the pursuit of their goals. When this is not possible, the powerful pursue their interests despite the opposition of the majority (the US invasion of Iraq), or, as in the defunct League of Nations, the institution disintegrates, unable to go beyond the horizon of conflicting interests. Thus, “unity in diversity” leads to either imposing one’s will through power, or to unilateral action by the powerful, or to disintegration.

Consider now the 1994 Ethiopian Constitution. It attributes sovereign power to “the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia” and makes each ethnie a bearer of a distinct, single identity. It thus treats Ethiopia as if she were the “United Nations” of ethnies. To render palatable this divisive and toxic conception of Ethiopia, the EPRDF uses the expression “unity in diversity”. But given the diversity-centric logic of “unity in diversity” and its dependence on asymmetrical power—and the holder of power in Ethiopia is the TPLF, the creator and manager of the EPDRF—“unity in diversity” is inherently inimical to democracy and, therefore, to the democratic mediation of ethnic diversity towards unity. It is an almost insurmountable obstacle to the development of multiple, overlapping and trans-ethnic identities without which a national identity cannot emerge. In such a context, the practice of elections cannot have any democratic or unifying potential, because elections themselves reinforce diversity, that is, ethnic divisions, instead of opening up a universally shared democratic space of political discourse and practice. Not surprisingly, trans-ethnic national parties are repressed in Ethiopia, because such parties undermine the EPRDF’s “unity in diversity” strategy which makes ethnic diversity the horizon of politics at all levels of government. The EPRDF itself is an aggregate of ethnic parties organized and run by the TPLF. In other words, in Ethiopia, voting under the EPRDF’s policy of “unity in diversity” means: “one ethnic person, one ethnic vote, no Ethiopian voice”. Consequently, then, “unity in diversity” cannot but lead to authoritarian rule such as the one we have now, to an increase in ethnic conflicts, and possibly to an ethnic disintegration à la Yugoslavia. So, when Meles says, without the EPRDF, Ethiopia will disintegrate, he is candidly telling us what “unity in diversity” means: the perpetuation of ethnic divisions. At least, on this point, Meles is telling the truth. We should listen to him and draw the appropriate conclusion.


Diversity in unity
The alternative, “diversity in unity”, has a different focus. It is unity-centric in that, in its very formulation, it makes unity the framework of diversity and the horizon of politics. That is, it affirms the existence of shared principles and norms that mediate diversity and transform it into a rich and complex unity. It suggests thus a dynamic conception of diversity that posits the potential of each ethnicity to generate from within itself universal principles and norms that go beyond the limitations of its own particularity, enabling it to evolve deliberative practices that engage it with other elements to create overlapping, multiple and trans-ethnic identities that find their fulfillment in unity. Trust and democracy thrive in “diversity in unity”, because, in making unity the horizon of political practices, it gives one the opportunity to break through the barriers of one-dimensional ethnic identity and to recognize the universal dimensions that go beyond one’s particular demands. Thus, the internal dynamic that results from making unity the political horizon of ethnic diversity discloses politics as a practice that could transform people’s identities, expectations and visions through a democratic collective will that goes beyond particular, corporatist, and ethnic interests.

One could cite the examples of India and South Africa—two multi-ethnic nations—as practitioners of “diversity in unity” and, consequently, of politics as a deliberative practice that creates a democratic collective will that goes beyond ethnic interests. Unlike the 1994 Ethiopian Constitution which fragments Ethiopia into “Nations, Nationalities and Peoples” and makes them the locus of sovereignty at the expense of the Ethiopian nation, the Constitutions of India and South Africa identify their populations as “a people” and attribute sovereignty to the national state only. These two countries do not suppress ethnic diversity. By adopting a policy of “diversity in unity” and making thus unity the horizon of politics, they give, on the contrary, full latitude to all ethnic groups to develop their cultures in ways that liberate the universal dimensions that resonate in them. In these countries, politics opens a universal democratic space that allows the inhabitants to reach beyond their particularities. In the process, they develop multiple and overlapping trans-ethnic national identities. Unlike these countries, in EPRDF’s Ethiopia, politics, garbed as “unity in diversity”, is subordinated to ethnicity, and the individual to a one-dimensional ethnic identity, implying that one’s loyalty is primarily to one’s ethnie in the same way that one’s loyalty of a member of the United Nations is primarily to the state it represents.


Ethiopian Democracy through “Diversity in Unity”
If we agree that words matter, then in light of the anti-democratic, anti-unity and anti-Ethiopian implications of “unity in diversity”, the democratic opposition must jettison this expression and opt for “diversity in unity”. “Unity in diversity” sucks Ethiopia into a deadly vortex of ethnicity that condemns her to authoritarian rule, breeds ethnic conflicts, and encourages ethnic secessions. Only “diversity in unity” embodies the idea of politics as a practice that goes beyond ethnic loyalties and opens the door for a politics that will make the land of Ethiopia a democratic home for all Ethiopians. For those who might be tempted to wilfully misunderstand the meaning of “diversity in unity”, it is interesting to point out the striking parallelism between the previous regimes and the EPRDF on the issue of ethnic diversity and unity.

Despite differences in political packaging, the Imperial Regime and the Derg were, as the EPRDF is now, against “diversity in unity”. All three consider ethnic diversity as a natural datum. In all these regimes, ethnicity is reified and not recognized as a historical process that is breaking out of and going beyond its particularisms. The Imperial regime put ethnicity out of sight: one has to be Amharized to be visible; the Derg criminalized it; and the EPRDF transformed it into a fetish. All three developed mechanisms to keep Ethiopian ethnies apart in order to implement their divide-and-exploit policies. Despite institutional differences, the political goal in all these regimes is the same: to stifle the universal democratic potential that gestates in the historical transformation of Ethiopian ethnies. No wonder then that all three regimes are stuck with the vicious alternative of either authoritarianism or disintegration. The idea that diversity could be mediated democratically to deliver national unity (“diversity in unity”) is totally alien to these three regimes. But no Ethiopian regime has gone as far as the EPRDF in using ethnic divisions, tagged as “unity in diversity”, to territorialize ethnic identities (ethnicstans or Killils) and to implement so brazenly the practice of “divide-conquer-exploit”.

It is then imperative to recognize that words matter. We need to use words that give voice to our ideal of a democratic, prosperous and united Ethiopia. “Unity in diversity” is logically and historically inimical to this ideal. The idea of “diversity in unity”, on the other hand, recognizes the universalizing potential of politics, liberates particular identities from their self-enclosures, and generates the principles, norms, and practices necessary to transform the territorial unity of Ethiopia into a democratic unity of Ethiopians.

Two Ethiopian Immigrants Murdered

Francis Hweshe, Cape Argus-Two foreign shopkeepers have been killed in their store - for an apple and a banana.

The robbers took the fruit and fled when they could not open the cash register. The killings bring the number of immigrants murdered in the Western Cape over the past two weeks to 10.

Milnerton police confirmed yesterday that the two Ethiopians had been shot dead on Tuesday night while working in their shop on Mnandi Street in Du Noon. Station spokeswoman Daphne Dell said a banana and an apple had been stolen. Dell ruled out the possibility that the murders had been xenophobic. She said one of the suspects had been armed and had fired several shots at Yonatan Gebreneskel, 22, hitting him in the head and chest.

Awake Ababa, believed to be in his early 20s, had been shot in the back. Both had died at the scene.

Both suspects are still at large. Click on 'Read More' for the rest. A reliable source told the Cape Argus the murders were about "business".

"They were hitmen sent to take them out. It's business," he said, alleging that Somalis in the area had been ordered by taxi operators to pay a R14 000 "protection fee".

Last year, after the xenophobic attacks in the Western Cape, Du Noon taxi operators admitted to de-manding a protection fee from foreign nationals who ran shops.

The killings follows at least three others involving foreign nationals:


On Saturday, seven Zimbabweans were burnt alive when a De Doorns shack was set alight. A 26-year-old man has appeared in the De Doorns Magistrate's Court on murder charges. The names of the dead, aged between 23 and 40, have not yet been released.


Last Monday Mohamed Mango, 24, of Somalia was shot dead after he tried to stop a group of robbers frisking his friends on a footbridge leading to the Home Affairs Centre in Airport Industria.

He was shot in the chest and died on the scene. Police are investigating a case of murder and robbery.


Last Friday, Congolese refugee Carol Muganguzi, 19, had his lips cut and tongue stabbed by criminals, 10 metres from the Nyanga Refugee Reception Centre.

When the Cape Argus visited Du Noon yesterday, an eye-witness said: "I heard two shots. When I came over to the shop, I saw a pool of blood.

"One of the bodies was lying close to the fridge with a shot in the head. The other was close to the door with a shot in his back.

"It's all about jealousy. The shop was always neat and people loved to come and buy from them," she said.

She said the victims had re-opened for business only three days earlier, after having closed because of the recent taxi violence, which had resulted in some Somali shops in the area being looted.

"It was not xenophobic nor a robbery. They were not hungry," said Bazil Congo, the victims' landlord.

He said a third man had survived the attack by running away.

"It is just senseless and merciless killing," Congo said.

Another shop owner said: "They were deeply religious, very kind and gentle. They loved to be part of this community, helping where they could."

A tearful Ethiopian shop owner in the area said: "I don't know why they killed my brothers and no one is taking responsibility."

2008 Human Rights Reports: Ethiopia

The US Department of State has issued a human rights report on Ethiopia for the year 2008. Here it is.

Ethiopia streetkids turn to PCs in language challenge

ADDIS ABABA, Feb 24 (Reuters) - In the shadow of Addis Ababa's biggest Orthodox church, more than 100 street children cluster around gazing as Amharic script flashes on computer screens before them.Ethiopia, one of Africa's biggest and poorest countries, has more than 80 languages. Experts say a quarter of those are on the verge of extinction, and the government faces a tricky balance between protecting its linguistic heritage and training workers to compete in a globalised world.As a result, the five-year-olds at Medhamiyalus Church's tiny primary school have to tackle three different tongues: their local language, Amharic -- the official language of Ethiopian business and politics -- and English."English is most important for our students, otherwise they cannot cope, they cannot get the proper education intended for them," school principal Fikre Teferra told Reuters TV."If these children succeed in getting to high school, and colleges, what else can they do? It is English that everything is given in."The pupils are playing various interactive computer games that teach them the notoriously difficult 256 characters and variations of the Amharic alphabet.Like the majority of the estimated 150,000 street children in the Ethiopian capital -- most of whom are from families that migrated to the city from rural areas -- it is not their first language.After the brutal Derg government was overthrown in 1991, the constitution was changed to safeguard the country's scores of local languages by giving ethnic groups the right to set up "mother tongue" primary education systems.Many regions chose the Latin script, rather than the Amharic script associated with the dominant Amhara ethnic group.Academics like Baye Yimam, linguistics professor at Addis Ababa University, say 18 years later that has actually made it more difficult for people from far-flung regions to succeed.ECONOMIC COST"Every child has to be literate three times," he said. "To turn people to this level of literacy, in three different tiers, different levels, is very costly economically."Ethiopia expects tough times as the global financial crisis curbs exports. Despite programmes to boost farming and diversify its economic base, Africa's biggest coffee producer still ranks just 170 out of 177 on the U.N. Human Development Index.The nation's 81 million people are still vulnerable to frequent bouts of searing drought and periodic floods that make them dependent on food aid.The government expects overseas aid to be cut because of the credit crisis.Seeking solutions to training its workforce for the new challenges ahead, the government has turned to Bill O'Connor of U.S. firm Fun With Phonics.He originally developed the Amharic computer games and lessons plans for Ethiopian expatriates in the United States worried their children losing their mother tongue. Last week, he signed a contract with Ethiopian state television to develop a cartoon that will teach children both English and Amharic.O'Connor said it was crucial the rest of the world engaged the Horn of Africa. Washington says the region is at risk of becoming a haven for militants like al Qaeda because of its porous borders, deep poverty and rampant corruption."The Horn of Africa is extremely important, it's extremely fragile right now," he said. "With the right programmes out there, we can enable people to come along and retain their own sense of ethnic identity ... we're able to move them into English whilst also teaching their own language. It's powerful."

European Union Special Envoy met with Andinet/UDJ leaders: affirmed commitment for the release of Birtukan Mideksa

Olaria Mosseti, the special envoy of the European Union leadership met with Andinet/UDJ leaders Dr. Yacob Hailemariam and Temesgen Zewde to look in to ways of securing Birtukan Mideksa. The two sides deliberated on the illegal imprisonment and inhuman treatment of Birtukan. The chairwoman of the main opposition political party (Andinet/UDJ) in Ethiopia was arbitrarily arrested on December 29, 2008 and has been in solitary confinement at the notorious Kaliti Prison since then. The UDJ leaders expressed their grave concern on the limited pressure from the European Union and called up on the organization for meaningful and effective measures.
Special Envoy Olaria Mosseti promised to conduct a multi-faceted approach to secure the release of Ms. Birtukan. The Special Envoy raised the importance of coordinating efforts with the American government. Olaria indicated that the Ethiopian government is set to report human rights condition at the Geneva based Human Rights Commission this coming April. The EU representative underlined that the Ethiopian government is expected to send a representative and give answers to the human rights violations reported in Ethiopia. It is worthwhile to remember that the Meles Zenawi regime refused to send a delegate to a similar invitation in a previous year when they knew the EU election observer mission chief in the 2005 controversial Ethiopian Election, Ana Gomes, was scheduled to be one of the speakers. To the embarrassment of the regime, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister blatantly accused the Honorable Ana Gomes of working to topple down his government. It is to be seen if the regime is going to apply the same lame excuse.
Local Non-Governmental human rights organizations and international human rights savvy organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International repeatedly accused the Ethiopian government for gross human rights violations, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

February 19, 2009

Seeking paths to Ethiopian Diaspora Dialogue and Consultations(wu-yi-yit and me me-ka-ker)

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Seeking Paths to Ethiopian Diaspora Dialogue and Consultations (wu-yi-yit and me me-ka-ker)

At the beginning of the year, we pledged to help initiate and sustain an Ethiopian Diaspora dialogue and consultation process with the aim of building broad consensus for collective action. We expressed our hope that with the proper groundwork it is possible to clearly identifying a set of issues over which pro-democracy Diaspora Ethiopians could take a unified position and speak in one thundering voice. We boldly proclaimed the inspirational theme, “Ethiopian united can never be defeated!”


For the past several weeks, we have been hard at work seeking ways of wiring Ethiopian Diaspora worldwide through dialogue and consultations. Our preliminary efforts to this end have involved exploratory dialogues and consultations with numerous progressive and forward thinking Ethiopians who are not only committed to creating a just and humane society in Ethiopia, but are also keenly aware that the most effective method to bring that outcome is to broadly engage in dialogue and consultations groups and individuals from diverse backgrounds who are equally committed to the survival and progress of the Ethiopian nation and people.


What We Mean by Civic Dialogue and Consultation (wu-yi-yit and me me-ka-ker)

We define Diaspora civic dialogue and consultation as a creative process of communication and exchange of ideas for the purpose of enhanced understanding of issues of common with the view to taking coordinated collective action. We regard dialogue and consultations as the methodology of the oppressed who seek to develop a common language of struggle for their ultimate liberation. In dialogue and consultations, we aim to learn to reason and think together and harness our collective intelligence for the good of the motherland.

Click on 'Read More.'

Our conception of civic dialogue and consultation (wu-yi-yit and me me-ka-ker) among pro-democracy Diaspora Ethiopians is based on four simple ideas: 1) Ordinary Diaspora Ethiopians can be effective agents of change in their motherland if they share a common understanding of the problems and challenges, and collaboratively and decisively act to address them. 2) To be effective agents of social change, Diaspora Ethiopians need to unlearn ingrained habits of debate and argumentation and re-learn skills of civic dialogue and consultation. 3) The dialogic and consultative processes require openness to perspectives and views that are very different from our own; and stakeholders must make a commitment to respectfully and genuinely engage others with different ideas, backgrounds and communication styles. 4) The outcome of Ethiopian Diaspora dialogue and consultations depends on building trust, dispelling stereotypes, and the creation of an environment of teamwork and partnership founded on fairness, candor and honesty.


The Year of Dialogue, Consultations and Action

We believe most ordinary pro-democracy Diaspora Ethiopians have come to realize that they can play a direct role in helping to bring about major changes in Ethiopia. Many Diaspora Ethiopians seem to agree with the inspirational words of Marian Wright Edelman, president and founder of the Children's Defense Fund: “You just need to be a flea against injustice. Enough committed fleas biting strategically can make even the biggest dog uncomfortable and transform even the biggest nation.” We believe that in 2009 there are enough committed ordinary Diaspora Ethiopians who are willing to “bite” strategically to bring about substantial improvements in Ethiopia by working to prevent human rights violations and bringing to justice those responsible for past violations; by mobilizing resources to secure the release of hundreds of thousands of political prisoners currently held throughout the country; by working together with pro-democracy elements in Ethiopia to re-establish democratic rights and facilitate the free operation of the independent media and civic society institutions; by promoting free political competition and helping to ensure free and fair elections are held; and by exposing corruption and exploring legal mechanisms to bring to justice those who have violated international law. In the past, we believe, Diaspora Ethiopians have lacked the dialogic and consultative mechanisms to achieve these values through collective action.

Today, many in the pro-democracy sectors of the Ethiopian Diaspora have come to appreciate the futility of rancorous debate with each other, and have chosen the path of dialogue and consultation. They are willing to transcend the “culture of argumentation” of the past in which we have engaged in political and social discourse principally to prove the legitimacy or correctness of one viewpoint over others, or to use strategic verbal encounters to outwit and belittle our “opponents”. Polarized debates and personal attacks have rendered pro-democracy Diaspora Ethiopians weak, divided and ineffective; and we must grudgingly admit that we have made ourselves the laughing stock of dictators. In our dialogue and consultations, we aim to change the terms of Diaspora engagement from debate to dialogue, from competition to cooperation, from criticism to appreciation, from secrecy to openness and from distrust to collaboration. We have chosen the path of dialogue and consultations because the motherland is crying for her children to work together to deliver her from evil.


Our Fierce Urgency of Now: Preliminary Step 1 – Dialogue and Consultation to Consensus Building

We regard ourselves as one of many facilitators in the ongoing Diaspora consensus-building process. “We” are the face of Diaspora Ethiopians from all backgrounds: academics, professionals in a variety of fields, business entrepreneurs, members of political parties, community and civic society leaders, political and social activists, journalists, students, women’s group members, service workers, retired public servants, senior citizens and ordinary concerned Ethiopians who wish only the best for their country and people. For the past several weeks, we have actively engaged a broad cross-section of the Ethiopian Diaspora activist community and others to identify potential stakeholders to engage in dialogue and consultations for the purpose of consensus-building and collective action. We have had numerous brainstorming sessions. We have held small group discussions using available internet technology, and we have done myriad one-on-one interactions.

From our preliminary efforts to date, we have ascertained two basic facts which we would like to share with all Ethiopian pro-democracy elements. First, we have detected an overwhelming sense of “fierce urgency” to undertake broad dialogue and consultations now, and devise and implement a step-wise plan of Diaspora action to produce positive change in Ethiopia. This sense of urgency, we believe, is supported by substantial anecdotal evidence:

1. There is widely shared belief that divergent elements in the Ethiopian Diaspora can begin to work together immediately on a common purpose despite their differences. For instance, improving human rights in Ethiopia is one of several issues for which there is broad Diaspora consensus as an action item.

2. There is evidence which suggests that Diaspora Ethiopians are thinking less in terms of narrow constituencies or group interests, and are embracing the totality of Ethiopians society as their constituency. For instance, there is a clear tendency among members of diverse groups to look beyond special group grievances and injustices to strong support of human rights protections for all and opposition against government wrongs towards any.

3. There is broad agreement that it is not necessary to wait for the development of a perfect Diaspora political program before taking action. There is a sense of urgency to put values into action (praxis), and a belief that both dialogue and action can be works in progress. For instance, many believe global advocacy efforts can be undertaken in host countries in the short-term while cooperation and collaboration on other issues can be built over time.

4. There are few issues of importance to the Diaspora that need “redefinition or reframing”, paving the way for broad-based collaboration and development of a tentative action plan. There is manifest complementarity of interests, positions, values on the important issues of democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

5. There is substantial evidence of a general Diaspora readiness to work together on a common purpose and in the process build trust across political, ideological and ethnic lines. We believe pro-democracy Diaspora Ethiopians want “win-win” solutions not for themselves or their special groups or parties, but for the glory of Ethiopia and progress of all Ethiopians. For instance, we are inspired to hear representatives of groups who have long perceived themselves as competitors and rivals resonating agreement on core issues that are vital to the motherland.

Second, we have also come to appreciate in our preliminary efforts that there may be many challenges to overcome: Could we build the necessary collaborative trust, understanding and momentum to begin acting on core issues of common concern in the short-term? Is a centralized coordinating body for Diaspora efforts the most efficient and effective method to proceed? How can we best engage the “silently concerned” Diaspora Ethiopians in the dialogic and consultative process? How do we accommodate stakeholders that are not ready to participate in the dialogic and consultative process? How can we maximize engagement of the of the Ethiopian Diaspora community given traditional barriers of ethnicity, religion, gender, age, class, education, language and other factors? How can we neutralize and marginalize those elements who will spare no efforts to drive multiple wedges among pro-democracy Diaspora elements and work furiously to ensure our dialogue and consultations process will fail? We are confident all of these issues will be adequately addressed in the give-and-take process of dialogue and consultations.


Lessons in Dialogue and Consultations

In the past few weeks, we have learned first hand important lessons in dialogue and consultations. Though none of us are professionals in the field of dialogue facilitation, we have experience in a wide range of professional and human relations areas. Most importantly, we value the life experiences of our many colleagues who have suffered grievously under the current brutal dictatorship. We have learned that dialogue and consultations are two faces of the same coin. Dialogue is a process of understanding and learning from each other. Dialogue becomes silky smooth when we listen to each other respectfully and offer our views with sincerity and civility. We have developed sensitivity to each other's feelings, hopes, and dreams and have become less judgmental and argumentative and more willing to walk in the shoes of those who may not agree with us. We have come to learn that we have a lot in common, and few differences of great magnitude. We have become more open-minded, and willingly acknowledge that we could be wrong about our long held beliefs. We have also learned about the gravitational power of truth to keep us all grounded in common sense and reality.

Reaching the “Tipping Point” for a Sea-Change

Doing little things over time can make a big difference. Our preliminary survey of the Diaspora activist community suggests that a “tipping point” (or critical mass) has now been reached to bring about a sea-change (massive transformation) in the way Diaspora Ethiopians can work together for the good of Ethiopia and the Ethiopian people. There is a pervasive can-do spirit that is palpable; and there is self-confidence that nothing is beyond our means if we tenaciously pursue our common goals with a clear mind and a clean heart. We have much to be optimistic about the motherland in 2009 and beyond; but nothing will come easy on our long walk to freedom. We should be inspired by President John Kennedy who said, “We will go to the moon. We will go to the moon and do other things, NOT because they are easy but because they are HARD.” And so we will dialogue and consult with each other without end to help our motherland not because it is easy but because it is very, very hard. But none of us should doubt that we are assured of victory in the end if each one of us becomes “a flea against injustice.” And if enough of us “fleas” bite strategically, we have the awesome power to make the meanest, nastiest and most vicious junkyard dog uncomfortable, and transform the Ethiopian nation. Wu-yi-yit and Me me-ka-ker Yasteseryal


--
Alemayehu G. Mariam is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at almariam@gmail.com

Meles Zenawi and his interview (Part I)

By Yilma Bekele

Most of you know that Meles Zenawi has recently granted two interviews. We have all read the twenty-second sound bites offered by the media. In the interest of fairness to the interviewee and his subjects, I thought it would be better for all of us to look at it closely and peer into that murky brain of his. The first one lasting almost two hours (110 minutes) was with Ethiopian reporters (most of whom are his cronies who would be given prepared questions). The second interview was with the ferenjis, and lasted about one and a half hours (85 minutes).

Given the length of the interviews my analysis will be done in more than one article. This is the first installment.

I hope most of you agree that two hours is a long time for an interview. It becomes specially long when the interviewee, the fearless one, if not an eloquent leader who repeats himself ad nauseam without even changing his wording. For him, twenty minutes should have been more than adequate. In addition, he is constantly looking to his right as if he has a little monitor that he is reading from or as if someone is feeding him talking points. If they were, it was an absolute waste because they were not telling him anything different or worthwhile.

Click on 'Read More.'

He is not comfortable looking directly at the questioner or at the camera to reach his audience. His eyes are either down cast, moving around, or looking towards his desk on his right. His responses were longwinded and the ideas clashed constantly. If you remember Sarah Plain’s interview with Katie Couric, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txfqWzGMgmY) you will get my point. After reading one of her interviews, Dick Cavett wrote on the New York Times “It’s admittedly a rare gift to produce a paragraph in which whole clumps of words could be removed without noticeably affecting the sense, if any.” Due to the length of the responses the listener can forget the question. It is difficult to defend what is universally agreed to be a fiasco and a monumental failure in the annals of the history of intervention.

In his interview with the local reporters he reinterprets the questions, demands more explanations in an attempt to intimidate the individual reporter. Follow up questions are not allowed, which allows him to get away by not answering the original questions.

On both interviews, he was unwilling to refer to Judge Bertukan by her name and referred to her as ‘the individual’ in English or ‘gelesbua’ in Amharic. I assume it is his way of trying to dehumanize her. I find it very disrespectful to refer to the leader of the largest opposition party, and a potential future Prime Minster of Ethiopia, in such way. Thus, to give him back his own medicine, I will refer to Ato Meles as ‘the individual’ in this article. I believe the correct way to address him will be Don Meles since he is the head of the TPLF crime family and I believe that this is the way that they the refer to each other in the syndicate.

I want you to know that sitting through the two interviews was one of the ugliest jobs that I have ever performed. As an immigrant, I have done plenty of ugly jobs that I would not want to repeat. But as one of my bosses used to say, “It is a dirty job, and some one has to do it.” In the interest of informing my fellow Ethiopians, I sacrificed myself. I also want you know that by the time I was done with listening to the interview my brain was a basket case, confused, angry and very sad for my country. So without further ado here is ‘the individual’ dispensing his ideology, world-view and clarification to the outside world regarding his misconceptions, ill conceptions and outright lies.


On the invasion of Somalia

Question #1 ferenji Reporter:

“The Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in a statement have described the intervention in Somalia as successful, I want you to elaborate more about that given that that Sheik Ahmed is now the President of the Transitional Government and was declared two years ago as a Jihad in Ethiopia and radical Islamists are in control of much of Southern Somalia. So has the Ethiopia’s intervention positively affected things on the ground there for Ethiopia and second could you define more clearly the cost to Ethiopia that the intervention. I know that Ethiopia has a highly developed statistical agency and if you go to the agency that they will give you the result of the harvest down to single last quintal so I was wondering if you could tell us how many causalities the Ethiopian forces suffered there both in death and injuries and the cost in dollars?”

Answer ‘the individual’:

“Our operation in Somalia has been highly successful for two reasons. 1st we made that clear when the intervention was initiated. We did not think that Al Shahab offensive…would be an isolated act. We indicated that there are three important forces involved. 1st the Eritreans government as the organizer of what we call ‘front of destabilization’ in the Horn of Africa. 2nd. The Jihadists in Somalia at that time who were with their victories achieved and appear to believe that nothing and nobody could stop them anywhere and 3rd it was those Ethiopian groups in Ethiopia armed groups who are supported, trained, equipped by Eritrea. The idea and strategy was that the Shehab will be the tip of the spear and some armed Ethiopian elements will join it this will be combined with the activities of the so called civil disobedience in Ethiopia and you have to remember it was a few months after the civil disobedience program in Ethiopia had subsided. This is happening nine months after that and it was hoped that this pressure begins to weaken the resolve of the government the final blow will come from Eritrea…I think two years after we can confidently say that the conspiracy has been successfully foiled…elements of destabilization inside the country…the Jihadists…and the Eritrean government are weaker than two years ago….let us leave the statistics to the statisticians….”

After this he goes on for another 15 minutes to talk about mounting and dismounting horses and the usual diatribe against terrorism.

That is his story and he is sticking by it. Unfortunately it does not jibe with reality. The whole theory and explanation is based on ideas that reveal themselves during deep hallucinations that can be a byproduct of chewing Kat. ‘The individual’ and his friends have conjured up an alternate reality. It is wrong on every count and there is no data that will support such a claim. The listener is forced to assume that the interviewee needs help. To say delusional is an understatement. It is a sure sign of paranoid personality disorder.

Ethiopia and Somalia’s enmity goes way back in history. Somalia gained its independence in 1960. Border disputes erupted into war in 1964 with the Imperial regime. Another war between the two countries was fought in 1977. It was a war that involved the two super powers toying with these two Stone Age nations. It was fought with Soviet and American weapons of destruction. Tanks and Soviet Migs were the preferred weapon of these two poor nations who cannot even feed themselves. The Cubans were thrown in to spice up the confrontation. Breznev flexed his muscle and Carter blinked. We were royally screwed. In 1977 the dictator Siad Barre died and Somalia started its downward spiral. It has never been the same.

The Bush administration and the war against ‘terrorism’ again converged on the horn and the Ethiopian minority government was happy to exploit that.

Thus when the TPLF regime invaded Somalia there wasn’t an organized and able force to contend with. The US was broadening the war against al-Qaida and it assumed that Somalia, due to its failed state status, could be used as a base. According to the New York Times ‘the operation was likely discussed during the visit …of General John P. Abizaid, commander of the US Central Command (Centcom), to Ethiopia. According to the New York Times, Zenawi assured Abizaid that Ethiopia could cripple the Islamists forces “in one to two weeks ….Abizaid was well aware that an Ethiopian invasion would “create a humanitarian crisis across the Horn of Africa” according to Centcom officials. US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Frazer has also admitted that, “If this thing goes to a military fight, it’s a bloodbath.”

The US decided to do preventive action and fight al-Qaida away from its homeland, the Eritrean government wanted to give their cousins to the south a bloody nose and the Ethiopian regime leveraged its front line status and sacrifice to silence the talk of democracy and human right at home. The foreign policy was made to serve the needs of the Defense Department’s war on terror. Ordinary Somalis and Ethiopians were caught in this ugly web.

‘The Individual’ allowed general elections in Ethiopia and lost miserably. He was forced to declare a state of emergency and his special forces killed unarmed civilians protesting his broad day light thievery of the elections in both June and November of 2006. He jailed over forty thousand civilians all over the country, including all the leaders of the opposition party that won the parliamentary elections. He imprisoned freely elected representatives of the people.

Due to protest by the Diaspora, the European Union, the US Congress and the silent protest by the Ethiopian people the minority government was cornered. The invasion of Somalia was a godsend. When ‘the individual’ says that they bought time and space, he is correct. His TPLF party was running out of options, and the silence of his US and European benefactors allowed him to tighten the reigns around the neck of Democracy in Ethiopia. The interviews were directed at the party of the faithful and not to the rest of us.

TPLF forces intervened to install the so called ‘transitional’ government by destroying the emerging ‘Islamic Court’ movement that was brining peace and stability to a war weary population. The invasion turned out to have unimaginable consequences to both Somalis and Ethiopians. We were both victimized. Our Somali brothers and sisters were condemned to hell on earth. According to the international aid group Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), more than 10,000 people have died due to the invasion, and more than one million have been left homeless with over 3 million on the brink of famine. This is what the ‘individual’ calls a success story.

The TPLF army was forced to retreat back across the boarder with the Islamists at their heels. It was a very hasty departure with a lot of US surplus arms left behind. Woyane Generals were in Addis while their poor peasant southern army was left behind to fend for themselves.

If you notice the question regarding the loss of life and money was hush hushed. That is not important to our fearless leader. He has sacrificed thousands Tigreans recruited to fight for Eritrea’s Independence, he is responsible for the death of over eighty thousand Ethiopians for a worthless conflict over Badme and now god knows how many of our people perished in the deserts of Somalia in the service of the US and TPLF mafia.

In an emerging democracy the people are not mature enough to be told how many of their brethren died in the service of their country or how much of their money was spent towards carrying out their will. The few that govern on their behalf will decide on such matters. It is very unnerving to watch ‘the individual’ smiling while dismissing such an important issue, as if it is incidental matter.

Today Sheikh Sharif, who is the founding member of Islamic Courts, is the new President of Somalia. The Eritrean government is still in power and the Ethiopian oppositions are still waging all sorts of struggles to get rid of the minority TPLF government. ‘The individual’ is wrong on all points!

In a real Democracy leaders that miscalculate and bring disaster onto their nation, either bow out gracefully or are unceremoniously kicked out of power. Those with an iota of conscience will beg for forgiveness from their people and spend the rest of their productive live making amends. In a few traditional cultures, they commit Hara Kiri, as in Japan, or suicide, as Emperor Tewodros did Ethiopia to demonstrate enormous psychological courage, which is a way of winning back some measure of honor even in defeat.

Alas no such luck here. We are surrounded by paper tigers or wanna be dictators that present a fierce and brave image hiding behind their specially trained security forces, high walls and underground bunkers even in their lavish palaces. When the going gets tough, they fly the coop and leave their minions to face the music. I hope the minions are listening because there is no airplane big enough to haul your criminal behind out of Africa.

Resources used in preparing this article:

http://www.hrw.org/home?t=africa&c=ethiophttp://www.hrw.org/home?t=africa&c=ethiop
http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/
http://www.nytimes.com/
http://www.ethiomedia.com/abai/ethiopia_inquiry_commission.html
http://www.oduu.com/news/index.php?news_id=1143
---
The writer can be reached at yilma@pacbell.net

Timeline: Binyam Mohamed

guardian.co.uk,

1978: Mohamed is born in Ethiopia on 24 July.


1994: He arrives in the UK, aged 16, with his family, who seek asylum because of their opposition to the then-government of Ethiopia. This is refused.


2000: Mohamed is given exceptional leave to remain in the UK for a further four years. While living in London, he works as a cleaner and studies electrical engineering.


2001: He converts to Islam before travelling to Pakistan and then Afghanistan. There, the US alleges, he attends terrorism training camps and hears lectures by Osama bin Laden. The US charges claim Mohamed went on a bomb-making course and plotted terrorism attacks in Pakistan. His lawyers insist any case was obtained by torture.


April 2002: He is arrested at Karachi airport en route to the UK. Mohamed says he was tortured in Pakistan, in whose custody he was visited by a British intelligence agent. He then says he was taken to Morocco and held for 18 months, during which he suffered more torture.


September 2004: Mohamed arrives at the US prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. He claims that he was transferred first to a CIA facility in Kabul. Click on 'Read More.'

2008


May: Mohamed is formally charged by the Pentagon with conspiring to commit terrorism and war crimes, for which he faces a possible death penalty. Later that month he writes to Gordon Brown asking for assistance to bring him back to the UK. He writes: "I have been held without trial by the US for six years, one month and 12 days. That is 2,234 days (very long days and often longer nights). Of this, about 550 days were in a torture chamber in Morocco and about 150 in the 'Dark Prison' in Kabul. Still there is no end in sight, no prospect of a fair trial."


4 June: The US charges Mohamed with allegedly plotting to blow up apartment buildings in America with radioactive "dirty bombs".


21 August: Mohamed wins a high court attempt to force British security services to reveal secret information on him, including the alleged torture.


27 August: The US state department warns that the disclosure of information connected to Mohamed's alleged torture would cause "serious and lasting damage" to security relations between it and the UK.


21 October: The US government drops war crimes charges against Mohamed and four other Guantánamo detainees. On the same day, the high court in London calls the US refusal to disclose evidence about torture "deeply disturbing".


30 October: It is revealed that the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, has asked the attorney general to investigate possible "criminal wrongdoing" by the MI5 and the CIA over its treatment of Mohamed.



2009


5 January: Mohamed reportedly begins a hunger strike, which lasts until 11 February. Near the end of the protest his lawyers warn that he is close to death.


20 January: Barack Obama becomes US president, and immediately begins moves to close down Guantánamo.


4 February: The high court rules that evidence connected to Mohamed's alleged torture at Guantánamo must remain secret because of US threats about a possible end to intelligence co-operation if the disclosures are made. The following day the foreign secretary, David Miliband, denies the US made such a threat.


15 February: UK officials, among them a doctor, visit Mohamed to see whether he is in a fit state to return home.


20 February: Miliband announces that the US and UK governments have reached a deal under which Mohamed can return to Britain soon.


23 February: Mohamed is flown back to the UK.

Freed Guantanamo detainee says U.S. behind his torture

LONDON (Reuters) - Binyam Mohamed, a British resident held at Guantanamo Bay for more than four years, was released and put on a plane to Britain on Monday and accused the U.S. government of orchestrating his torture.

Mohamed, 30, was due to arrive back in Britain shortly following his release from the U.S. prison camp on Cuba. His statement was issued via his lawyers after his release.

"I have been through an experience that I never thought to encounter in my darkest nightmares," said Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen who has British residency.

"Before this ordeal, 'torture' was an abstract word for me. I could never have imagined that I would be its victim. It is difficult for me to believe that I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next, and tortured in medieval ways -- all orchestrated by the United States government."

The United States agreed to release Mohamed last week after 18 months of pressure from the British government. He is the first Guantanamo Bay detainee to be released since President Barack Obama came to power. Click 'Read More.'

Mohamed was detained in Pakistan in April 2002, where his lawyers say he was held for nearly four months, during which he says he was tortured and abused by Pakistani intelligence officers in the presence of a British intelligence agent.

He was taken to Morocco on a CIA flight in July 2002, his lawyers say, and again subjected to torture and abuse. Morocco has denied holding him and the U.S. government has denied that he was subjected to "extraordinary rendition."

Mohamed has been accused of receiving al Qaeda training in Afghanistan and Pakistan and of plotting to detonate a "dirty bomb" on the U.S. transport network, but all charges brought against him have been dropped and he has never been tried.

In his statement, he accused the British government of colluding with foreign governments during his abuse and torture.

"For myself, the very worst moment came when I realized in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence," he said.

"I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realized, had allied themselves with my abusers."