Ethiopians protest against Meles at London’s G20 Summit

Abbay Media- Patriotic Ethiopians from UK, Sweden, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland and the US protested during the G20 summit in London against the attendance of Genocideer Meles Zenawi on Thursday, 2 April 2009. They demanded the G-20 countries to stop financing the brutal dictatorship in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian peaceful protesters were the biggest and most visible outside the G20 Summit. For the first time in the struggle for Freedom and Democracy in Ethiopia, the protesters got large media coverage by all Western media outlets such as the BBC, VOA, CNN, Sky, ABC, CBC, German Radio, Bloomsberg, and many other European and Arab medias.
Read the rest here.

The dangers of stoking religious conflicts

By Fekade Shewakena

Some people in Ethiopia on the religious fringes are playing with fire. I have received emails of videos and audios circulating over the internet as evidences of Christians being attacked by Moslems and Christians attacking Moslems in Ethiopia. It appears these documents are being sent out by each group to garner sympathy for their respective cause. I cannot finger point to who started this stupidity as I have no detailed information. But I don’t think it is even important to know who started it. None of it comports with Ethiopia’s history of religious tolerance. I have also heard stories of sporadic attacks by these fringe fanatics in different parts of Ethiopia. The government also has issued incoherent statements about it, in some cases blaming it on its political opponents as it often does. Whatever its magnitude, and whoever the culprit instigating it, these developments are downright scary and extremely disturbing and they should stop.

Click on 'Read More.'

Trying to widen it, parading ugly statements coming out of the mouths of these fringe elements, playing tit for tat and taking it out on the innocent, is plain stupidity and no one is going to benefit from it both spiritually and materially. Forming interfaith groups and having honest and intelligent discussion can help not only stop these fringe elements, but also goes a long way to find the real culprit trying to saw the seeds of discord among the two religions who have uniquely cultivated a long tradition of tolerance and living in peace in Ethiopia. The elders in the leadership of both religions should be reminded that they have a huge responsibility to stop this madness.

Yes, religions have not been treated equally throughout our history in Ethiopia. Christianity has been dominant in Ethiopia for centuries. Yes, there are historical reasons for this inequality. But our Moslem brothers and sisters have every right to demand equality now. It is their country and they deserve no less. We still have to go some length to attain religious equality in Ethiopia but this can only be done by first establishing a system under the rule of law. It has to be clear to all of us that those responsible for the unequal treatment of and inequality between religions were never once the ordinary people of Ethiopia of any faith. It was the rulers who use religion for political ends. Any religious discord in Ethiopia can directly be traced to the manipulative works of the rulers and not to any group of ordinary people. It is undeniable that there is a lot of progress toward religious equality in Ethiopia since the seventies, particularly since the coming of the dergue in 1974. But unfortunately, both Christians and Moslems ended up getting the short end of what we sought.

The dawn of our genuine demand for equality was marked by the 1974 Moslem-Christian historic demonstration in Addis Ababa in support of the demand for the equal treatment of Moslems in Ethiopia. Mengistu and the dergue answered our question by turning out to be equal opportunity killers and oppressors across religions. The Ethiopian Orthodox church lost most of its land and property and turned destitute overnight. Even the pope and many clergy were guillotined. Moslems and Christians were killed by the dergue at the same rates with equal disregard for our lives. This, of course, was not the kind of equality we wanted. But we can say we suffered equally.

The TPLF/EPRDF made a smarter choice than the dergue when it decided to control the administration and management of religious institutions and use them craftily for its political ends. They even made direct and indirect interference in the appointments of the leadership to lead both the mosque and the church. In cases where both the Christians and Moslems attempted to rebel against this meddling demanding independence, the TPLF never hesitated to desecrate the places of worship of both Islam and Christianity and used military force inside both mosques and churches spilling the blood of innocent believers. Have we forgotten? This happened not a long time ago.

I argue that the most serious problem that stands in the way of religious equality in Ethiopia now is the absence of democracy and rule of law. Religious conflicts are minimal or none existent in democracies. This is the key to forming a lasting equality. I met a Moslem Ethiopian friend who participated in a recent demonstration at the Ethiopian embassy in Washington DC. Among other questions, I asked him what they were doing at the embassy and why they did not call Christians to join them in the demonstration. He said the objective of the demonstration was to demand that the Woyane government implement the articles in the constitution as regards religious equality. I asked him the responses they got. He told me that the Ambassador and embassy staff sweet-talked them and thanked them for their peaceful demonstration and even told them that their demonstration was a model for other demonstrations. I only hope my Moslem brothers and sisters who sincerely look for the right answers to their questions have not fallen for this cheap patronization.

In fact Ethiopian Moslems have more serious issues to worry about. They may need to be a little more wary of the government’s unnecessary intervention in Moslem countries to fight so called jihadism and the rhetoric Meles and Bereket use borrowing from the West. They should be bothered by the official use of such terms as Islamists, Islamic terrorism, jihadists etc. If I were an Ethiopian Moslem I would worry more about this kind of incendiary, mercenary government literature than what a lunatic Christian monk out from a monastery speaks of Islam. Thanks to the election of President Obama, these languages are now being discarded even in US officialdom. If our Moslem brothers and sisters think that the statements on religious equality stated in the constitution can be selectively implemented while other parts of the constitution keep being violated by the regime every day, I think they are wasting their time. It is like they are asking the lady to be half pregnant and give birth to a normal child. Either the constitution is respected as a whole or there will be no respect for any part of it. I think both Moslems and Christians should get this clearly. Only the prevalence of the rule of law can guarantee equal treatment.

Ethiopia has enough space to accommodate all religions equally if our rulers do not violate our values and the laws in the books. At different times the regime has used our differences, religious and ethnic, for political purposes. Differences are the nutrition over which the woyane thrive, can’t you see it? A Moslem who demands better for himself cannot get it if the Christian is not guaranteed of the same rights and vice versa. Our rulers, including the TPLF are not worried about giving religions equal playing field. Their preoccupation is over how to use them for their political ends.

The last time I checked the list of the 193 people murdered by Meles Zenawi after the ill fated May 2005 election, it contains an equal mix of Moslems and Christians at least as can be seen from their names.

Decrees and constitutional amendments or oral promises from powerful despots cannot guarantee equality and freedom, only a collective decision by people and an absolute guarantee of the rule of law do. Whether we like it or not we have to learn to share the space God gave us without encroaching on each other’s spaces. So the best place to spend our emotions and energy is on seeking and building democracy and the rule of law. That is the ultimate weapon that would make all of us equal. Despotic rulers have a vested interest in our division and inequality. Read history.

Or learn from me, a Christian and Tahir, my Muslim childhood friend. We were about six or seven year olds then. Tahir and me, both of us were born in Debr Sina, that beautiful town at the foothills of Tarma Ber in northern Shewa. We were neighbors. Our mothers were friends. Tahir and me always play together and love soccer a lot. We eat in each other’s homes. Our mothers and everybody in our homes cares much not to mix our plates. Living in our neighborhood was also a bully named Negash. Negash is a little older and bigger than both me and Tahir. There was hardly any kid who hasn’t tested Negash’s boots on his butt (the calchio). He sometimes beats you for no reason and calls you any name he wants. Negash also loves to have us fight with one another. He often asks, “Which of you two is stronger?”- “mann yashenifal”, he would say, and goads us to wrestle and fight. Tahir and me have wrestled more than once to show him which one of us are stronger. Negash does this to many kids in the neighborhood. One day, while I and Tahir were playing “goalkeeping” with the rubber ball Tahir's father gave us from his store that morning, Negash came. Negash grabbed our ball and kicked it hard that after making some bounces it ended up in the compound of people who had a dangerous dog. Both Tahir and I who have not even had fifteen minutes with our new precious ball were mad as hell and demanded that Negash gets our ball back for us. Tahir and I have grown in a community where boys were not allowed to cry and run home to seek help or hide. We had to stand on our feet and fight. Going home crying will result in you getting whipped more. I picked up a few stones and demanded that Negash gets our ball back. Tahir too filled his pockets with stones and held two big ones in both hands. While Negash was taking strides to catch and beat us, we rained our stones on him and knocked him down. We frisked his head and he was full of blood. We did not want to take a chance and wanted to make sure that he doesn’t get up and beat us. Negash was crying in his pool of blood when we were all over him giving him the calchos he loves to give to others. Some adult passerby stopped us and Tahir and me went home with our heads up but without our precious ball. Negash was taken to the clinic by his family. Our family and Negash’s heard the story of what happened. Tahir and me told our story to our families as is. Negash’s family pressed charges against our families. Finally, other people in the neighborhood intervened and made peace, I hardly remember how they did it. On the day of peace the three of us were made to kiss one another’s chicks and told to never quarrel again. From that day on, Negash became a different person for us. He started respecting not only Tahir and me but also his other victims in the neighborhood.

That, my friends, is how you sometimes get your freedoms back.

Landlocked Ethiopia ponders road links with Kenya, Sudan

ADDIS ABABA (Reuters) - Landlocked Ethiopia is forging better road links with its neighbours Sudan and Kenya to ease dependence on the Red Sea port of Djibouti, a government official said yesterday.

“The road linkage with Kenya and Sudan would help landlocked Ethiopia export and import goods through Mombassa and Port Sudan ports at relatively less cost than Djibouti,” said Samson Wondimu, head of public relations at the Ethiopian Road Authority (ERA).

Ethiopia had to pay an extra $22mn in 2008 on top of the $700mn it pays annually in port fees to Djibouti. The Red Sea port has served as Ethiopia’s main sea gateway since it lost Assab and Massawa when Eritrea won independence.

Ethiopian businessmen have appealed to the government to seek alternative, cheaper routes through which they can export and import goods, according to the Addis Ababa Chamber of Commerce and Sectoral Association.

Samson said Ethiopia had completed preliminary study to asphalt the 310km road linking Hager-Mariam with Moyale, the border town with Kenya to the south. The African Development Bank (AfDB) has reacted positively to Ethiopia’s $100mn loan request to upgrade the highway to Kenya, he said.

The road south from Moyale, however, is unsurfaced for more than 500km until it reaches the Kenyan town of Isiola and is one of the worst highways in the country. The government has recently begun improving a stretch north of Isiola.

Ethiopia has already built a modern 880km highway linking the capital with the town of Metema on the northern border with Sudan, he said. This provides an outlet via Port Sudan.

“This highway serves for the export of Ethiopia’s oil seeds and for the import of fuel,” he said.

Ethnicity and the tilting balance of Ethiopian politics

By Messay Kebede (Ph.D.)

We know that the genesis of ethnic conflicts and mobilization in Ethiopia sprung from Haile Selassie’s policy of nation-building. Not only did the policy mean centralization and authoritarianism, but also the integration of different ethnic groups through the imposition of the dominant Amhara culture. However, the lack of necessary reforms, notably, the maintenance of a system of land ownership reducing the southern peoples of Ethiopia to tenants, and the failure of the private sector, together with the proliferation of obstacles to economic progress, mostly due to corruption and nepotism, created an acute scarcity of resources. Access to these scarce resources depended on the control of state power, which was then used to include some groups and exclude others. The outcome was that the Amhara elite group, especially of Showan origin, by far benefited from the protection of the imperial state.

Though the sense of exclusion increasingly invited elites of excluded ethnic groups to mobilize around ethnic criteria, the prevailing tendency became the search for a solution through the revolutionary ideology of Marxism-Leninism. Leaders of the Ethiopian student movement and intellectuals felt that enough revolutionary force could be gathered through the mobilization of class solidarity rather than through ethnic alignment. The establishment of socialism would consequently lead to the dissolution of ethnic dominance and to the equal treatment of all ethnic groups. Because the struggle opposed an alliance of various classes to the imperial state and the nobility, the Ethiopian Revolution became a multiethnic uprising expressing class interest rather than ethnicity.

Click on 'Read More.' The intrusion of the Derg with its dictatorial and violent methods of ruling alienated many revolutionaries. Above all, far from decentralizing power, the Derg significantly increased the power of the center to the detriment of regional entities, thereby failing to bring down the dominance of Amhara elite and culture. What is more, the Derg’s socialist policy brought all resources, including land, under state ownership and control, while further intensifying scarcity by the application of a flawed economic policy. The result was enhanced ethnic mobilizations by all those who felt excluded or marginalized.

By stirring up dormant or suppressed identities involving ascriptive criteria, such as common ancestry and language, the ethnicization of politics mobilized the powerful sentiment of solidarity, thereby becoming an effective tool of political mobilization for all those who longed for access to state power as the only means of controlling the distribution of scarce resources. That was indeed one advantageously mobilizing force to fight against the Derg, given the fact that the Derg had appropriated the language of class struggle and had effectively leveled class disparity through a generalization of poverty.

Ethnic mobilization proved efficient by granting victory to the TPLF and EPLF over the Derg. It brought about the secession of Eritrea and the establishment of ethnic federalism under the control of the TPLF. The irony, however, is that this very victory of ethnic politics calls for multiethnic mobilization because of the inherent drawbacks of ethnicization flowing from its gregarious nature. This is what opposition parties and their leaders understood when they speak of the imperative need of unity.

The ethnic paradigm gave birth to ethnic parties that do not allow any competition. It created a situation of dependent parties controlling the various regions under the close supervision and assistance of the central state dominated by the TPLF. The defeat of the TPLF means the demise of these dependent parties and their regional control. A struggle confined to the regional political scene is thus unable to counter the alliance between the central state and the dependent parties: the struggle must go national.

Moreover, political mobilization over ethnic issues has come to an end with the acquired rights, such as the rights to use and develop local languages, to be administered by one’s kin, even to secede. Whether we like it or not, just as class struggle had ceased to be rallying under the Derg, so too ethnicity has lost much of its mobilizing power in Ethiopia, with the exception, of course, of those parties still targeting secession. This is so true that the only ideological defense of the EPRDF is to say that its removal would entail the cancelation of the acquired ethnic rights, and hence the danger of extended ethnic confrontations.

The crucial issue that remains, however, is the huge task of democratizing the ethnic state, as shown by the dictatorial outcome of the Eritrean secession and the hegemonic practice of the TPLF. To move toward democratization means to raise issues of individual freedom and liberty, of economic development and its equitable distribution; it also means the promotion of national sovereignty and unity on which depend the prosperity and safety of all ethnic groups. All these themes are associated with individual freedom, and so are essentially cross-ethnic. For instance, the right of individuals to elect representatives of their choice is not concerned with the fact of being Amhara, Tigrean, Oromo, Gurage, Christian or Muslim: any multiparty competition within the ethnic regions requires the liberation of freedom as an individual characteristic.

Such was the profound meaning of the rise of Kinijit: it was the return of individual freedom back to prominence, the resurgence of individual rights after the primacy given to group rights or solidarity. It springs to mind that the struggle for individual rights can intensify and unit opposition forces only if the acquired ethnic rights are not questioned. Any attempt to return to unitary state -- as opposed to federal structure -- will only bring back mobilizations around group rights.

Putting the cart before the horse

By Yilma Bekele

Commodity is one of those terms open to many interpretations. The Marxists have their own definition of what a commodity is. To the Marxist, using the labor theory of value, ‘a commodity is any good or service produced by human labor and offered as a product for general sale on the market.’ In today’s economy a ‘commodity exchange is where farm produces (coffee, wheat, cocoa) or raw materials (oil, metals) are traded.
Commodities exchange trading is where they trade on future products on commodities. A Sidamo coffee farmer can sell a future contract on his coffee beans that will not be ripe for a few months more or an Ada teff farmer can sell a future on his harvest next season. This sort of contract protects the farmer from price drops and the merchant from price rise.

A few of the world famous exchanges are Chicago Mercantile Exchange (agriculture, metals, energy), Kansas City Board of Trade (agriculture), Dalian (China) Commodity Exchange (agriculture), and Brazilian Mercantile and futures Exchange (agriculture, biofuels). Click on 'Read More.'

Meanwhile, a stock exchange is where a ‘corporation or mutual organization provides a trading facility for stockbrokers and traders to trade stocks and securities. A stock exchange is used by corporations and companies to raise capital by selling shares, grow by acquiring other companies and generally make money circulate instead of sitting in a savings account or under a mattress.

The Chicago Board of Trade was established in 1848. Up until then most future contracts were not always honored both by the buyer or seller. The new Board was designed to minimize credit risk. The members of the Board set up the rules and run their organization independent of the long arm of the State.

Please note that the common theme in the above story is the founding of the exchange was purely a voluntary act by the traders. It was created to facilitate trade and protect both the farmer and the merchant from unscrupulous individuals.

Now we come to our infamous ‘commodity exchange’ that appeared out of the blue with much fanfare in 2008. Major wire services wrote gushing reports about it. Bloomberg quoted the new director, Reuters sent out alerts and even VOA commented about it. They all agreed it was a giant step for Ethiopian farmers. They dutifully reported what was handed to them.

As usual ‘donor’ countries poured in money (ten million in two weeks were pledged) to help set it up. A building was erected to mimic the Chicago exchange. An electronic system was put in place and warehouses were built. Thus for all practical purpose, the physical structure was in place.

I am glad you can see what I am leading to. We Ethiopians are most familiar with this scenario unfolding in front of our eyes. We know it is not going to work. We have seen this ‘theatre’ before.

The question is did those that set up the system really thought that it would work? When you consider that there are no free farmers in the country, that there is absolutely no trust in the government or its institutions, that there is no law other than the word of Meles Zenawi, the prime minister, and no free media to exchange information how in the world could you have such a purely capitalist enterprise function in a closed society.

If it does not work, why set it up? Simply put, the intention was never to help farmers or merchants. It was just another TPLF mechanism for more control of what is left of the independent business. They said it themselves. The Newsweek reporter Jason McClure quotes the director Exchange Director Eleni Gabre-Madhin as saying: "Traders other than large growers and co-operatives that sell directly to international buyers will be forced to use the bourse."

So the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange (ECX) was inaugurated with lots of fanfare. Peter Heinlein of VOA wrote again quoting the director: “The opening of the new exchange has unleashed a torrent of entrepreneurial spirit." So what happened? Let us just say they threw a party, and no one showed up!

They passed a law in August to regulate the coffee industry. In other words to nudge the independent merchants to submit to the authority ECX. The prime minister went to parliament and threatened to ‘cut the hands’ of the merchants that refused to deal with ECX. Again the premier threatened to confiscate all coffee that is not under the control of ECX. Hoarding was the reason given for this draconian action.

Coffee is Ethiopia. Coffee was our number one export during the Emperor’s reign. Coffee sustained the brutal Derg. Coffee is the TPLF regime's lifeline. Control of the trade of coffee is a must for the minority regime. ECX was a vehicle to take control of the independent merchants and drive them out of the coffee business.

Our merchants and farmers were too smart for that. They refused to be led to the slaughterhouse willingly. No amount of threat and coercion was effective against those that have survived numerous trials and tribulations the last thirty years. TPLF was forced to show its ugly face in broad daylight. The Ethiopian people are not new to government confiscation of property, wealth and their children. It is just another criminal action by a government against its own citizens.

So as usual, we heard the news and we sighed. We are so used to TPLF abuse and disrespect it did not raise an eyebrow, let alone indignation. When they killed [Ethiopian Teachers Association] activist Assefa Maru, we were quiet. When they murdered Professor Asrat Woldeyes, we shrugged it off. When they arrested Bekele Jirata, we were silent. The arrest of opposition leader Judge Birtukan Mideksa did not bother most of us. Thus confiscation of tons of coffee from private warehouses is just another chapter in our saga of humiliation by the illegal regime.

Starting an exchange without the goodwill and participation of the people affected is not rational. Imposing from above is a recipe for failure. Merchants are in business to make money. They buy low and sell high. Selling for less than the cost is suicide. Now the government has the coffee, what is next? International coffee price is depressed due to the market meltdown. What is TPLF’s next move? Of course they can sell it for any price since they did not pay for it. How about next season? The smart merchant is pushed out of the business; what is left is cadre merchants. Good luck Ethiopia.

Somali opposition leader quits Eritrea for Sudan

By Ibrahim Mohamed

MOGADISHU, March 31 (Reuters) - Somalia's hardline Islamist opposition leader Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys has quit self-imposed exile in Eritrea for neighbouring Sudan and may return to Mogadishu soon, Somali media said on Tuesday.

Aweys, 62, is on a U.S. list of terrorism suspects. He is a former chairman of the Islamic Courts Union that ruled Somalia's capital in 2006 until being ousted by Ethiopian troops.

He worked alongside his country's moderate Islamist president, Sheikh Sharif Ahmed, in the Islamic Courts and they later founded the Alliance for the Re-Liberation of Somalia.

Earlier this year, Ahmed was elected president by lawmakers at U.N.-hosted talks in Djibouti.

Radio stations in Mogadishu said Aweys was in Khartoum and held talks on Tuesday with two senior Sudanese officials. They said he was expected to fly to the Somali capital later to offer his support to Ahmed's new administration.

The endorsement of Aweys would be a boost for Ahmed, who faces the daunting task of trying to establish a new national security force and persuade heavily-armed Islamist guerrillas to back his government in the interests of peace.
Click on 'Read More.'
But it could prove difficult for the United Nations and Western countries, which were once wary of Islamists being in power but now see Ahmed as the best hope for bringing peace to the failed Horn of Africa state after 18 years of violence.

A close ally of Aweys in Mogadishu, who asked not to be named, told Reuters Aweys was expected to arrive in the city within two weeks. The ally said Awey's plans were not yet clear, but he denied he had met any Sudanese officials.

One senior Somali source in Sudan confirmed Aweys was in the country, and said it was possible Ahmed might travel to Khartoum to meet him there. He gave no other details.

In a Reuters interview by telephone from Asmara earlier this month, Aweys denounced Ahmed as just another Ethiopian stooge and said he was a traitor to the Islamic faith. [ID:nL4915892]

Aweys is on the U.S. list of foreign terrorists, as is the hardline Islamist insurgent group al Shabaab, which controls much of southern and central Somalia. Ahmed has been pushing to have Aweys removed from the list.

Washington accuses Somalia's hardline Islamists of having ties to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda and fears the chaotic country could be used by foreign groups to destabilise the region.

Fleecing the G-20

By Alemayehu G. Mariam
The Sky is Falling!

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants the G-20 (or Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the world’s largest economies) to help cash-strapped African countries manage their balance of payments (money going from one country to all others) as their incomes from foreign investments and aid, remittances and commodities prices vanish in with the collapsing global economy. In mid-March, Brown invited a number of African leaders to meet with him in anticipation of the scheduled G-20 meeting in London on April 2. The hype preceding the G-20 meeting was full of hectoring moralism by the designated panhandler-for-Africa, the dictator in Ethiopia:

“Africa was beginning to stand up and now it is being knocked down again by this crisis, which is not of Africa’s making. That is one of the biggest tragedies. They [G-20] should care about Africa because it is in their interests. Some African countries could go under and that would mean total chaos and violence. In the end the cost of violence is going to be much higher than the cost of supporting Africa… We are talking about the range of money that is being spent on the mid-sized banks [in the U.S.]. Consider Africa as one of those banks… Any stimulus money spent in developed countries is going to have less global impact than if the same amount of money were to be spent in Africa… One of the problems at the moment is that the situation is so volatile… It keeps changing every week. It destabilises everything, including one’s thinking. If we knew where the bottom was we could start thinking as to how to get out of it….”

Not long ago the same dictator triumphantly proclaimed a 12.8 per cent annual growth rate in Ethiopia, and casually dismissed the effect of the global economic turmoil: “The crisis will more or less have little effect on the [Ethiopian] economy since our financial sector is not attached to the global system. Had it been the case, we would have suffered much.” Click on 'Read More.'

Others were parroting the same theme of impending African gloom and doom. Egyptian finance minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali mournfully warned, “In the case of Africa, people are going to die. We are talking about lives, not just somebody who will have to drive a smaller car.” Tanzanian president Jakaya Kikwete was quick to shift the blame: “This is a very unprecedented problem. Africa is a victim. We are not responsible for its genesis but all of us are suffering.” Even the sober Kenyan prime minister Raila Odinga joined the verbal joust by invoking the specter of marching African hordes: “When there are problems in Africa, Africans will vote with their feet by coming to Europe.” It was like a chorus of African Chicken Littles clucking: “The sky is falling! The sky is falling! We must go and tell the king!”

Will Accept Cash, Check, Credit Card or Gold to Bailout Africa!

The G-20 claims to be “an informal forum that promotes open and constructive discussion between industrial and emerging-market countries on key issues related to global economic stability.” The G-20 money men and the chiefs of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank will be discussing ways of helping the poorest counties in the world, while coordinating strategies to alleviate their own deepening economic crises. Pleading the African case for more money will be the dictator in Ethiopia. His message is a simple one: Africa needs more money. That money is readily available in the form of gold bars stashed at the IMF. Sell the gold stash and hand over the cash to African governments to cushion the effects of the global economic downturn. As of this past January, the IMF held 3,217 metric tons of gold (valued in excess of $43 billion), according to the World Gold Council. “Gold prices are doing well now so a slight correction to mobilise resources for Africa would not be that difficult,” suggested the dictator in Ethiopia. If the G-20 takes the bait, Africa’s “leaders” will be standing ready with pick and shovel in hand to dig into the IMF pot of gold and dig themselves out of economic trouble.

But in Ethiopia’s case there is something creepy — a weird feeling of de ja vu — about all of the gold talk and bailout metaphor of “considering Africa as one of the mid-sized banks”. Exactly a year ago we were shocked by the revelation that gold bars worth over 16 million dollars had simply walked out of the bank vaults in Ethiopia in broad daylight.[1] The official story was that unsuspecting Ethiopian bank “officials” were bamboozled by a gang of crooked international gold dealers who literally sold them spray-painted lumps of iron as 24-carat gold bars. The bank “officials” got ripped off because they made the common mistake of believing “all that glitters is gold.” According to the “Anti-Corruption Commission” of the ruling regime, some 26 suspects are in custody. No one has been prosecuted for this spectacular crime (and the matter has been quietly swept under the rug for the past year). Now they are talking about “mid-sized banks”, selling billions of dollars worth of IMF gold and sharing the loot among African dictators. It feels like a set up for another bank job.

In the Hole and on the Dole

African governments have been in the hole and on the dole for years. Since the 1970s, they have been sucking up massive amounts of economic aid and loans from the West and the international lending institutions. Much of that money has been lost to corruption. According to a 2008 World Bank study, it is estimated that “25 percent of GDP of African states is lost to corruption every year [in excess of one-half trillion dollars], with corrupt actions encompassing petty bribe taking done by low level government officials to inflated public procurement contracts, kickbacks, and raiding the public treasury as part of public asset theft by political leaders. Some $20 billion to $40 billion in assets acquired by corrupt leaders of poor countries, mostly in Africa, are kept overseas.” [2] Massive corruption has given rise to a parasitical ruling class in Africa – a “pluto-kleptocracy” (government of rich thieves). The World Bank and the IMF complain in their so-called confidential reports that specific African countries have used loans made available to them as “mechanisms for regime maintenance,” allowing the ruling parties to set up “slush funds” to pay for patronage and a military buildup. By 2005, Africa had a debt of $295 billion after repayments of $550 billion for loans it had received over the preceding three decades. Under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative, thirty-three African countries were eligible for debt relief of about $80 billion by 2006.

But the corruption situation in Ethiopia is more acute. In 2007, when Ethiopia’s auditor general, Lema Aregaw, reported $600 million in public funds missing form regional coffers, the dictator fired Aregaw and publicly defended the regional administrations’ “right to burn money.” When Gebru Asrat, a former top official and party member of the of the ruling regime made the accusation that “the people are sick of the corruption, about the lack of government services, and they only support Meles out of fear,” he was swiftly excommunicated from the regime’s officialdom. When the IMF, the World Bank and other donors demanded privatization, the regime leaders sold off some of the most profitable state enterprises to their friends, relatives, henchmen and cronies.

Bailing Out the People of Africa v. Bailing Out Toxic African Dictators
The basic argument African dictators are making for a G-20 bailout package is a moral one: Unless G-20 taxpayers assume the responsibility for Africa’s economic problems by selling IMF gold and increasing aid, Africans will die by the millions and violence will consume African societies. This is a manifestly false and self-serving moral dilemma manufactured by African dictators to save their own skins. They know that economic problems often trigger social upheavals which result in the sweeping away of corrupt dictatorships.

The G-20 have a superior moral counter-argument to make: It is immoral for G-20 taxpayers to finance African dictators who persecute their people, trample on their human rights and mismanage their economies while keeping themselves and cronies filthy rich from stolen loan and aid money. If African governments want aid and loans from the G-20, they must agree to be held accountable for their acts and omissions in upholding the rule of law, protecting the human rights of their people, institutionalizing democratic practices and processes, releasing all political prisoners, allowing the free functioning of civic institutions and the independent media and ensuring judicial independence. Giving more money to morally, economically and politically bankrupt African dictators without the strings of democratization, human rights and accountability attached is like giving blood transfusions to a corpse whose blood has been sucked dry by vampiric brutes. African economies will remain on life support so long as the G-20 member countries blindly support African dictators and remain willful accomplices to their crimes and corruption.

Can’t Do Structural Adjustment When You are Shackled to Debt and Poverty

Multilateral lending institutions and Western donor governments providing aid need to re-think the way they do business in Africa. The IMF and World Bank must be transparent themselves in their loan programs. They must provide honest accounting of the success and failure of the programs they support in Africa. It is reprehensible for them to praise African dictatorships in public for their economic policies, and in their confidential reports rip these same governments for massive corruption, mismanagement, fraud, waste and abuse of “development funds”. The fact of the matter is that for many African dictatorships piling up billions in debt is like walking to the neighborhood kiosk and getting cigarettes on credit from the store keeper. They will pay it back in nickels and dimes if they get the money; if not, the store keeper will be stiffed. Their mentality is that IMF and World Bank loans are “free money”. Get as much free money as possible, and let someone else in the future worry about paying it back.

The G-20 and the multilateral lending institutions need to reform and fix what is a manifestly callous lending system. They need to re-examine the devastating consequences of their misguided policies that elevate organized greed over individual need. For decades, they have been preaching the gospel of “structural adjustment” (requiring loan recipients to privatize, deregulate, reduce trade barriers and adopt one-size-fits-all free market policies) which places a much higher premium on constructing shiny glass buildings, fancy urban highways and export-oriented industries than meeting the survival needs of ordinary people (food, medicine, clean drinking water, etc.). Millions of Africans die from starvation, preventable diseases, environmental contamination and abysmally poor governance as the international money lenders tether African economies to their structural adjustment policies.

Fleecing the Golden Twenty?

The whole IMF gold sale thing may be a touchy affair for Gordon “Golden” Brown, who as Chancellor of the Exchequer a decade ago sold well over 60 per cent of U.K.’s gold reserves at fire sale prices and earned his nickname. At the time, his actions were roundly criticized as a “disastrous foray into international asset management”. The simple message for Golden Brown and the G-20 financiers should be: “Give Africans a strong hand in establishing democracy and getting rid of dictatorships, and you will never have to worry about giving them handouts!”

The proposed quick sale of IMF gold as a magic elixir to fix Africa’s current economic troubles is snake oil gimmickry. Any such sale requires approval of 85 percent of the 185 IMF member countries. The U.S. alone has 17 percent of these voting rights (enough to veto any decision), and there is no realistic chance that President Obama or Congress will approve a daylight fleecing of the IMF to support dictatorships in Africa. As the U.S. faces a budget deficit forecast of $1.8 trillion in 2009 and $1.4 trillion in 2010, it is unlikely that the U.S. will provide significant direct bailout money (not even in the “range of money that is being spent on the mid-sized U.S. banks”) to African dictators. There are proposals currently floating around the G-20 to infuse the IMF with bailout money for developing economies in the range of one-half trillion dollars, but that may be a pipedream as the world’s largest economies struggle to manage their own problems. Against this background, the plea for deliverance on the G-20 stage, to paraphrase Shakespeare in King Lear, is a farcical demonstration of the excellent foppery of dictators who after plundering the riches of their nations, make guilty of their disasters the sun, the moon, and stars.

_______________________________

[1] http://www.ethiomedia.com/abai/all_that_glitters_is_gold.html
[2] http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1110315015165/wps4609_BeyondAid.pdf

Why no-one speaks out: Politics and human rights in Ethiopia

Mitmita- Ethiopia has no independent judiciary, no free press, no civil society, and individual liberties have been severely curtailed, so why isn’t Meles Zenawi a persona non grata in the international community, asks human rights activist Mitmita. Birtukan Mideksa, a former judge who was charged with treason and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2005, is just one of many people jailed for exercising their fundamental rights, in this case the freedom of speech, says Mitmita. Mideksa is in solitary confinement in Kaliti Prison for allegedly violating the terms of a government pardon granted to her in 2007. The accusations are based on her failure to retract statements made in a speech that she was released from prison through a politically negotiated settlement rather than a formal legal pardon. Western failure to condemn abuses by Zenawi’s government for the sake of their own strategic interests, says Mitmita, comes at the expense of the rights of ordinary Ethiopians.

Click on 'Read More.' In the barbed wire existence that is Kaliti Prison, past the mocking eucalyptus trees swaying in the cerulean Addis skies, beyond the square outdoor cages reserved for visitors, away from the prison guards whose hands callously sift through the contents of your food basket, in solitary confinement is a thirty-four year old political prisoner. It is her second stay since 2005 within the infamous walls of the prison that lies on the outskirts of the Ethiopian capital.

Ms Birtukan Mideksa’s crime, according to the Ethiopian government, is violation of the terms of her 2007 pardon. She was arrested in 2005, in the post election upheaval during which 200 individuals were killed by government forces and more than 100 opposition political leaders and elected parliamentarians, human rights defenders, journalists, attorneys and civil society members were imprisoned. She was tried, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The charge was treason. International outrage followed. Massive campaigns from around the world drew attention to the case. Amnesty International and other NGOs declared the defendants were prisoners of conscience who had been imprisoned solely for the expression of their fundamental rights.

In 2007, Ms Mideksa and her co-defendants were released as part of negotiations between elders and the Ethiopian government, which allegedly resulted in the following: Signed confessions by Ms Mideksa and others, and a pardon granted to them by the government. The terms and parameters of the pardons as well as the confessions remain murky. What is known and evident is that Ms Mideksa’s December 2008 arrest resulted from the exercise of her right to free speech.

Outside of the two square metre prison cell that she now inhabits, the political prisoner is a former judge, a mother to a four-year-old daughter and the head of an opposition political organisation (arguably Africa’s only woman to hold such a position). In juggling these roles, she was working to avoid the minefields that accompany exercising your rights in Ethiopia. How does a woman who presided over high profile cases as part of the judiciary end up in solitary confinement serving a life sentence for a second time in the span of two years? The answer lies in the tortured reality that is life in Ethiopia.

By all accounts, the country has no independent judiciary, no free press, no civil society, and individual liberties such as freedom of speech, association et al have been severely curtailed if not eliminated. Even artists don’t enjoy freedom of thought – their expressions can’t stray from the party lines. For example, Teddy Afro, a popular singer, is serving time for an alleged hit and run, though his lyrics and pro-democracy stance suggest that the accident might have been mere subterfuge.

A famed author once noted the degree of civilisation in a society is measured by the condition of its prisons. One can add to that a society’s education system. Both are in tatters in Ethiopia. Of the latter, one need only examine Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s policies – tenth grade graduation was considered completion of high school. It is no wonder then that by any economic index, the country lags behind and is an utter development disaster.



The prison system, certainly since 2005 but most likely prior to that date, hosted a who’s who of Ethiopia’s intelligentsia, artist community and human rights defenders. That certainly doesn’t make it unique – totalitarian regimes are apt to discredit those who defy them. Those who were not imprisoned were slaughtered in broad daylight. In the Ogaden, the violence committed by government sources was so egregious that human rights groups have labelled them crimes against humanity. This brand of leadership has not only been exported to neighbouring Somalia but the US also allegedly used Ethiopia as a location for one of the CIA’s extraordinary rendition prisons.

Which brings us back to Ms Mideksa. Solitary confinement, according to Amnesty International, puts Ms Mideksa at risk of ill-treatment and torture. Ms Mideksa has been denied access to counsel and to medical treatment. She is at risk – if not already exposed – to abuse at the hands of prison guards. To be a woman political prisoner is something altogether quite different. The potential for suffering is innumerable.

The world, outside of those who concern themselves daily with the goings-on of Africa, has turned a deaf ear to her and to Ethiopia’s suffering. The leadership’s consistent flirting with disaster – whether it is famine, the ill-fated foray into supposed electoral politics in 2005, or the misadventures in Somalia – provides a clear image of a ruling party holding a nation in an extricable iron grip. Yet somehow the fate of a Mugabe or a Bashir of the Sudan doesn’t befall Meles Zenawi. There has been no international condemnation, no arrest warrants and he certainly isn’t a global persona non grata.

Unlike other dictators, the head of Ethiopia has had an air of legitimacy conferred upon him – to the point that Westerners need to be reminded of his true colours, demonstrated during the 2005 elections. The Prime Minister’s policy appears to be twofold: Firstly, to convey an indispensable willingness to protect the interests of the West in the Horn of Africa and secondly, to display the accoutrements of democracy and free market economics without actually implementing any of the institutions or responsibilities that accompany both.

And it seems his strategy has worked like a charm. Except for a rare rebuke or a slap on the wrist, the West – especially the primary funders of the Ethiopian regime – generally turn a blind eye to the massive human rights violations besieging the nation. Which is not surprising: Even Ethiopians seem tired of Ethiopia’s same old problems. It is much easier to tune out something that has been going on for far too long. For those in need of a crash course in Ethiopian political history, consider the following:


*Prior to 1974, Ethiopia was ruled by a succession of kings and emperors and was essentially a feudal state. The United States was an ally.
*1974 brought a faux Marxist/Leninist military junta, which terrorised the nation for close to two decades. Highlights include the red and white terrors, during which almost 100,000 civilians are said to have been disappeared. The Soviet Union and its bloc were Ethiopia’s allies.
*That dictatorship was ousted by a ragtag band of guerrilla fighters, which included the current Prime Minister. Though the origins of this group were also Marxist Leninist, the group’s chameleon-like nature allows it to don the cloaks of whatever political formation is most expedient. This group has been in power since 1991. Under their ruthless policies, the number of the disappeared is unknown.
*Today, almost two decades later, the United States is an ally again and Ethiopia has earned the coveted designation of ‘partner in the global war on terror’. This status is lamentable if not outright laughable – how can a government unable to provide access to clean water, overcome consistent food insecurity, or curb its penchant for liquidating political opposition be entrusted to battle terrorism in the Horn of Africa?

Ms Mideksa’s imprisonment is but a microcosm of the tragedies experienced by the larger population. Fundamentally, her case illustrates the immense power that the Ethiopian government wields over its citizens. Her purportedly offensive statements that led to her arrest were made during a speech in Sweden. Shockingly, her words merely stated facts: That her prior release was not based on a formal legal pardon, but rather a politically negotiated settlement. It was her refusal to rescind these statements that landed her in jail. Since Ethiopia’s state apparatus extends beyond boundaries and across oceans, imagine the control it must wield over the population within its borders. Big African brother is watching. Following the 2005 elections, the government banned SMS text messaging after pro-democracy activists used the tool to organise voters and peaceful rallies. Various Ethiopian blogs, websites and other Internet resources are routinely blocked in Ethiopia. The besieged population is regularly searched before entering malls and restaurants.

Three months into her reinstated life sentence, we must raise some critical questions about Ms Mideksa’s case and the state of Ethiopia as a whole. Are fundamental rights extinguishable at the will of a government? Why isn’t international funding truly linked to a country’s human rights record? Should Western interests, especially purported ‘terrorism’ concerns, supersede the human rights of Africans? And most importantly, where is the outrage?


* Mitmita is a pseudomyn of an Ethiopian human rights activist.

G20 marches begin week of protests in Europe

By Nick Vinocur and Noah Barkin

LONDON/BERLIN (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of people marched in capital cities across Europe on Saturday to protest about the economic crisis and urge world leaders to act on poverty, jobs and climate change at a G20 summit next week.

Chanting "tax the rich, make them pay," protesters marched through London waving banners saying "People before Profit," at the start of a week of protests that reflected growing public anger over bankers' pay and their role in the crisis.
Leaders from the world's 20 biggest economies meet in London on Thursday to discuss how tighter regulation of financial markets, billions of dollars in stimulus measures and credit lines for international trade can help the world economy recover from the deepest recession since the 1930s.

In Britain, trade unions, aid agencies, religious groups and environmentalists joined together under the slogan "Put People First" to demand reforms to make the world's economy fairer.

One group carried a traditional Chinese dragon with the head of a devil papered with dollar bills, calling it "The G20 Monster." Others waved signs reading "Jobs, Justice, Climate." Click on 'Read More.' While the atmosphere was generally carnival-like, some marchers jeered when they passed British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Downing Street offices. Police said up to 35,000 people took part in the march and subsequent rally in Hyde Park.

"This is going to be a summer of rage for the working class," said marcher Bryan Simpson, 20, a clerk from Glasgow.

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said the protesters should "give us a chance" and listen to what politicians plan to do.

"Hopefully we can make it clear to them we are going to walk away from this G20 meeting with some concrete proposals," he told reporters in Chile.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he understood people's concerns, adding, "That is why the action we want to take (at the G20) is designed to answer the questions that the protesters have today."

BLACK COFFIN

The British protest was mirrored in other major EU nations.

About 15,000 people marched through Berlin with black-clad protestors throwing rocks and bottles at police, setting off fireworks and smashing a police car window. Police said several arrests were made.

Up to 14,000 assembled in Germany's financial capital Frankfurt, police said, as part of a two-city demonstration.

About 6,000 demonstrators, mostly students and trade union members, marched in Rome to protest about a meeting of G8 labor ministers in the city.

Most of the marchers were peaceful, carrying placards and chanting "We won't pay for the crisis" and other slogans, but one small group smashed the glass front of a bank, and daubed "give us our money back" on the wall in red paint.

Fire-crackers were let off and banks, insurance companies and estate agents were also covered in paint.

"There has been a total failure of creative finance and of an economy based on the exploitation of workers, financial speculation and tax evasion," said protester Mario Giannini.

In Vienna, police said some 6,500 marched through the Austrian capital under slogans such as "Make The Rich Pay" and "Capitalism Kills." There was no violence.

In central Paris, a few hundred demonstrators gathered in a protest under the slogan "We will not pay for their crisis."

While some G20 protesters in London have adopted slogans such as "Hang a Banker" and "Storm the Banks," organizers of the London march said they had wanted a peaceful day.

A London police spokesman said there was only one arrest, for drunken behavior. However, police have canceled leave in the capital to cope with further protests planned by anarchists.

(Additional reporting by Catherine Bosley in London, Gavin Jones in Rome, Boris Groendahl in Vienna and Adrian Croft in Chile; Writing by Peter Griffiths; Editing by Louise Ireland)

Revisiting Ethio-Eritrean issues

Press Release, 29 March 2009

On March 15, 2009 San Jose hosted a discussion forum on the Ethio-Eritrean issues. The honorable invited guests on this topic were Professor Tesfatsion Medhanie from the University of Bremen, Germany and Professor Daniel Kendie from the University of Henderson in Arkansas, United States. Both scholars have written books on the Ethio-Eritrean issue. The meeting has driven lots of participants and it was a successful event. The Amharic version of what the first speaker, Professor Tesfatsion, presented to the audience will soon be posted on the Internet in its entirety.
In brief, his presentation focused on confederation as the framework for the closest relations possible between the two countries. He dwelt at length on the difference between confederation and federation. But even for this confederal union to be realized, there are some prerequisites. They include political changes in both Eritrea and Ethiopia; this means, among other things, that there have to be governments of national unity in both countries. Besides, there are also psychological barriers on the part of Eritreans as well as Ethiopians that have to be addressed. The elites of both countries have a big role to play in this regard. Professor Tesfatsion emphasized that if the peoples of both countries are satisfied with the process of the confederation, they can in the future voluntarily decide in favor of a closer relationship including federation.

Following that, Professor Daniel Kendie’s presentation focused on the role played by Egypt and other Arab-nations for the secession of Eritrea. He favors not only reinstating the Federal system to Eritrea but also to implement it in other Ethiopia’s sub-regions. In addition, he argued that a confederation allows two countries to sit side by side and is too weak to deal with major issues. Therefore, he stressed that a strong central government is a requirement. His vision of the federal structure also calls for the inclusion of Djibouti, Somalia, and perhaps Sudan.

The discussion was really very interesting and a milestone that brought both Ethiopians and Eritreans under one roof for discussions. On the other hand, both lecturers admitted that this vision may be supported by neither the current Eritrean nor Ethiopian governments. A democratic government is a prerequisite for its possible implementation. Therefore, one has to think beyond the era of the present regimes.

Professor Daniel also told participants that a meeting between Eritrean and Ethiopian intellectuals will be held in the coming days. It includes 15 participants on each side of the isle and he promised to inform us about its outcome. And finally, on the strength of Professor Danel’s recommendations, 3-people on each side were selected to facilitate at least social interactions between the two communities here in San Jose. It’s actually is the first of its kind since the 1998 major conflict between the two countries or even after the separations for that matter.

In sponsoring this discussion forum, we -- the event organizes -- strongly believe that we’ve brought this crucial issue to the forefront. At the same time, we also know that it’s highly controversial. But taking a step towards peace and reconciliation as well as developing vision is a historical obligation. Let other people take it from here.

Forum organizers in San Jose, California

Ethiopia: Reporter's notebook

By Abebe Gellaw

The government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has been tightening its grip on political power after it saw the opposition party gaining ground in the May 2005 general elections — elections marred by allegations of vote rigging and violent crackdowns. The violence unleashed by security forces in the aftermath of the first contested election in Ethiopian history not only claimed the lives of 193 people and caused injuries to 763 others, but it also shattered the hope for a transition to democracy. As a result of the speedy backtracking to what critics describe as outright authoritarianism, Ethiopia's transition to democracy and good governance suffered tremendously. Ethiopia's progress toward democracy had brought significant development funding from the U.S. and Europe in recent years; with that progress stalled, the future of this money is uncertain.

Click on 'Read More.'

New Laws Roll Back Civil Society

Throughout 2008, two controversial draft bills introduced in parliament dominated political conversations. International non-governmental groups such as Human Rights Watch, CIVICUS, Amnesty International and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), among many others, joined local political and civic groups in voicing their concerns over the bills, which critics say were aimed at further curtailing freedom of expression and the work of civil society organizations.
Despite criticisms and condemnations, the parliament, widely accused of being a rubber stamp of the ruling party, enacted the bills into law without any significant amendments. The Mass Media and Access to Information Proclamation became law on December 4, 2008 and the Civil Society Proclamation entered into force a month later.

In a country like Ethiopia, which is heavily reliant on foreign aid, the Civil Society Proclamation forbids local NGOs from accepting more than 10 percent of their budget from foreign sources and bars civic groups and NGOs from engaging in human rights-related activities. "The law will have a crippling effect on civil society in Ethiopia. We are deeply disappointed that Parliament has passed this regressive law, which undermines democratic values and the people of Ethiopia," said Ingrid Srinath, Secretary General of CIVICUS, World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

"The law… will prevent CSOs from taking part in democracy building initiatives and acting as a check and balance against human rights abuses. Key provisions of the law infringe upon freedom of association guarantees in the Constitution of Ethiopia, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and People's Rights," CIVICUS argued in a January 2009 press release.

No "Tampering"

In a recent interview with Walta Information Center, one of the media outlets run by the ruling party, Bereket Simon, Minister of the newly restructured Ministry of Information (renamed the Government Communication Affairs Office), defended the government's decision to ban NGOs and civic organizations from working on issues of human rights. "Bringing money from outside doesn't warrant foreign NGOs and foreign-funded NGOs tampering with Ethiopian politics," he said.

Despite the government's best efforts to defend its restrictive laws and policies, four powerful U.S. senators — Senator Russell Feingold, Senator Johnny Isakson, Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Richard Durbin — wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi expressing fears over what they called, "the erosion of political freedom and rule of law in Ethiopia." They expressed their fear that the law regulating the operation of civil society groups could "undermine the work done by many organizations in areas of human rights, gender equality, child rights, the rights of the disabled and conflict resolution." The senators also noted in their letter that that the re-arrest of Birtukan Mideksa, leader of the Unity for Democracy and Justice Party, was worrying as it, "signaled the government's waning commitment to democratic principles."

Banned in Addis Ababa

CPJ, which named Prime Minister Meles Zenewi's administration as the worst backslider globally on press freedom in 2007, has repeatedly accused the government of strangling the press in Ethiopia. Oblivious to the irony, the CPJ website and CPJ email addresses have since been blocked by the Ethiopian Telecommunications Corporation, the country's official Internet service provider.

Tom Rhodes, CPJ's Africa Program coordinator, said that the new press law, coupled with the restrictive Civil Society Proclamation, would only make matters worse. He said that the government's claim to ensuring good governance and fighting corruption could not be credible in the absence of a robust free press and civil society. He mentioned the fact that CPJ also wrote a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama earlier in 2009, urging him to commit his administration to defending press freedom in countries like Ethiopia where repressive measures and attacks against journalists have crippled the free press.

Dr. Seid Hassan, Professor of Economics and editor of the Journal of Business and Public Affairs at Murray State University, has been researching the effects of corruption on economic development and governance in Ethiopia. In an interview with Global Integrity, he emphasized that the major obstacle to tackling corruption is the government itself. "Despite the fact that the government has set up an anti-corruption commission, funded by Western donors, senior government officials close to the prime minister and his wife that are alleged to have been engaged in unlawful business activities are protected from public scrutiny."

Hassan indicated that a number of companies run by the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray [EFFORT], which is affiliated with the ruling coalition party Tigrayan People's Liberation Front, are not only enjoying preferential status before government regulators but are also weakening the market economy and free enterprise in Ethiopia.

"As these companies are illegally set up as party parastatals, they don't even pay income tax and have free access to cheap loans from the National Bank as well as the Commercial Bank of Ethiopia," Hassan said.

"I have also heard that these party businesses do not even repay what they owe to the banks, which could be true. Such allegations call for sincere investigations."

Hassan points out that the corrupt practices of these businesses have never been investigated by the anti-corruption commission, which has long ignored public outcry. "As far as my research is concerned, Ethiopia is the only country in the world where the ruling party is engaged in profiteering business malpractices [under the guise of humanitarian work]. If this is not corruption, what else can it be?" Professor Hassan asked.

Graft Starts at the Top

Allegations of graft against senior government officials are not uncommon. In a recent news story, "Dignitaries in Business," the African Intelligence publication Indian Ocean Newsletter (ION) named a number of officials who the author says advanced their business interests via abuse of the public trust.

According ION, these include a roster of the country's most senior leaders and their families, which ION says have all been using state power to advance their businesses, speed land transactions, or facilitate the construction of luxury villas. Independent sources confirm that these officials have outside business interests (the Foreign Minister, for instance, is also director of the country's largest cement company). However, verifying the ION claim that state power was abused to advance these businesses is difficult. Ethiopia's restrictive press laws play their part here, as does the lack of conflict-of-interest disclosure laws.

Whether the anti-corruption commission will be able to investigate allegations against senior government officials and party-run businesses is a matter that will pose a test for its credibility.

"In a normal country, the media and civic society play vital roles in exposing and scrutinizing corruption and abuse of political power. In Ethiopia, investigating allegations of corruptions and abuses has been assigned only to a government commission which has been engaged in selective outrage," said Markos Tesfaye, a freelance journalist based in Addis, who works under different pseudonyms for fear of reprisal. He says his priority has now shifted to leaving the country rather than living in fear of persecution and prosecution for doing his job.

"It is very sad that ordinary citizens live in fear without any protection from a government that is violating every rule, including its own constitution," he said.