I want first of all to say that the efforts being made by the Shengo to bring different groups and genuinely concerned individuals together are truly appreciated. And organizing meetings and conferences which are aimed at publicizing its objectives and progresses, and encouraging exchanges of ideas is a very desirable thing to do.
I am reflecting this observation and impression; because I sincerely believe that expressing our views and comments (big or small) about the political and socio-economic quagmire our country is experiencing is not only the right thing to do, but also a very desirable and important thing to do. I have a feeling that there should be for opposition political movements and civic groups as well as genuinely concerned individuals to engage in critical but constructive conversations, not the other way round. The culture of attempting to glorify one’s role by undermining the role of others should be discouraged, if not be avoided.
I was listening to Addis Dimts Radio of Abebe Belew’s general comment (10/26/13) on the atmosphere of the meeting, and his view about the way forward. I sincerely appreciate how he tried to make sense how the seemingly unhealthy perception between the Shengo and Ginbot-7 should be dealt with amicably, not mistrustfully. And he has informed us that he has invited two representatives from the two sides to his next radio program to have conversation from the perspectives of their organizations. That is the way it should be if we want to make a well-informed comments and to extend any support we may afford.
I had a chance to attend the public meeting of the “Shengo” organized by the DC Metro coordinating committee on October 20 – 2013.The meeting was scheduled to start at 2: pm. When I arrived at 3:10, there were about 15 attendants. The panelists did not arrive yet. The program started at 3:30 when the panelists arrived and were seated in their respective chairs. They were: Professor Achamyeleh Debela, Dr. Aklog Birara and Woizero Tsigie Mulugeta. There were about 35 – 40 attendants who I think were genuinely eager to listen what the organizers and the panelists had to say. I also sensed that the attendants looked interested to participant actively during the question and answer (discussion) time. Although I felt seriously disappointed about one and half hour late start, I had to be patient hoping that the meeting would be desirably fruitful as far as the desperately needed contribution from the Shengo to the very critical struggle for political freedom, rule of law and socio-economic justice going on in our country is concerned. Now, let me proceed to my comment on the issues raised by the panelists and the discussion:
We were introduced with the panelists and the topics they presented and discussed on. The introducer stated that our country is in danger; and he underlined that the very objective of the meeting was to discuss on the issue of how we should stand together in perusing a united struggle and subsequently to bring about a common solution. Although this was and is a very common statement in any political forum, I had a sort of feeling that the presentations and the discussion would be positively interesting and inviting. Did they turn out to be the case or….? Let me continue:
Professor Achamyeleh Debela gave a brief description about the mission, objective and function of the Shengo. I strongly believe that it is the right thing to reiterate the very compelling reason that has brought the Shengo into being, and its mission to stick with and its objectives to accomplish. However, I would say that since the Shengo has already celebrated its first anniversary and the publicity of what it stands for has been conducted via various media, not to mention its web site; it would have been better just to highlight about it and take more time on the challenges and opportunities and the way forward in a much more concrete manner. My point of observation is that especially for very highly qualified persons such as Professor Achamyeleh Debela, it should have been better to devote their time and resources on issues pivotal to the ongoing struggle and the efforts being made by the Shengo to deal with those issues. I did not have an impressive impression about assigning the Professor to go through mere description of missions, objectives and functions of the Shengo. Once again, do not get me wrong that what I am saying is that it was not necessary to highlight those missions/objectives/functions). What I am trying to say is that it sounded not productive to devote all his presentation to mere description of what the Shengo stands for and which is of course written in black and white; and any interested person can refer. Underscoring the serious challenges our country is facing, Professor Achamyeleh declared that the door is open to those who share the concerns and objectives of the Shengo. Unfortunately, he did not say anything about the need for the Shengo to take courageous initiative to knock at the doors of other groups. Yes, good intention is great; but interpreting that great intention into practical terms by going extra-mile is much greater. He did inform the meeting that two civic associations have joined the Shengo. But, he did not tell about the influence and seriousness of those groups. Yes, it is desirable to bring all those who want to play their parts. But, I sincerely believe that bringing in only the easiest ones, not those who have significant role in the process of the struggle but who may have legitimate differences of views with ours is a serious weakness.
Woizero TSegie Mulugeta’s subject of discussion was “the Participation of Women and Youth from the Perspective of the Shengo.”I have observed that she is a genuinely involved member of the leadership. I had an impression that she is with a reasonable knowledge and information about what is going on in Ethiopia. She has tried to support her argument about the plight of the Ethiopian women and youth with critical issues such as human rights violation, socio-economic quagmire, the politicization of micro- finances, environment degradation, water shortages, the rampant practice of rape and etc. Although it may not seem important, I observed her struggling to express her thoughts in such a way that participants (audiences) could understand without struggling to have a sense of coherent flow of ideas.
The noticeable problem I observed was that Wizero Tsegie Mulugeta did not clearly demonstrated what and how the Shengo is doing in this respect (women and youth) in practical terms. She couldn’t go beyond saying that the Shengo has stood firm to provide a road map in this regard (the participation of women and youth). This was not of course different from making a very general statement. I think the audience was expecting to hear if there was any concrete step taken, if not what that road map looks like. That is why the panelists had to deal with some very critical comments and questions.
Dr. Aklog Birara discussed on the subject of, “The Struggle Ahead and the Importance of Societal Participation in the Struggle.” He stated that the ruling party has continued being a regime of disregarding its own constitution. He did not take much time on blaming the ruling party. He stressed that we (he specifically meant the politicians) are the problems. He recalled the 1970s “right and left wing” political thinking which he believes has contributed to the failure in creating a responsibly patriotic generation. Although I feel that this commonly mentioned “left and right” political experience is over-emphasized, sometimes as kind of excuse; I had a sensible impression with starting his discussion by reminding us not disregard the influence of the political sentiment of that time no matter its level of negativity is.
He outlined the issues of having a common vision, the necessity of reversing the demographic catastrophe, the need to get our vision materialized, the need to look into the culture of being captives of mere talks and counter-talks via various media. Needless to say, these are the issues to be dealt with seriously and courageously. The question is, whether those opposition groups including the Shengo and genuinely concerned intellectuals have gone beyond reciting those critical issues. Have they tried to sacrifice their self-centered interests in such a way that their knowledge and resources could be devoted to deal with those issues and take the struggle forward?
He outlined the issues which should bring us together as a step to move forward: Human rights, the land issue (rural and urban), religious freedom, forced displacement (eviction) based on ethnicity, the inseparability of development and human rights, abject poverty (unbearable cost of living).
He concluded his presentation by outlining the following points of what is to be done: Inclusive participation (like women and youth), conducting analytical and critical study on the question of why we could not be successful (by and to the Shengo), and the need to reaffirm that the struggle is in Ethiopia, not from Washington or from Asmara, and he concluded by saying that focusing on the political mentality of talking about people, not issues has no use.
I would like to say that all the issues and ideas discussed by Dr. Aklog Birara were valuable as far as the exchange of ideas and views that are aimed at the need to take the struggle forward is concerned. But, I would like to say that I did not get kind of impression that he was able to make a strong relevance between the challenges and issues he articulated and the concrete steps/progresses taken by the Shengo. I do not think the issues and ideas he raised are innovative in the real sense of the term. To my understanding, being innovative is coming up with creative (new) ideas and methods and steps that are instrumental in dealing with the issues we are talking about. I do not think making an appeal for working together is essentially innovative. I do not think speaking about freedom religion and the challenges women and youth are facing is a new or creative idea as such. I do not think declaring that the struggle should be within Ethiopia which is of course a very common knowledge is an innovative idea being promoted by the Shengo only. I do not think calling for the creation of responsible and patriotic generation necessarily is an innovative thinking. Let me once again stress that being innovative is the willingness and capability to lay- out specific and feasible ways and means that are instrumental in the process of taking the struggle forward.
I do not want to go into all the questions and comments raised. But, I want to express my observation about a couple of them. One of those questions which I found interesting and legitimate was if the Shengo has taken any strategically and tactically important progress since its inception. In other words, as a real sense of leadership is to be innovatively far-sighted to lead the people to the right direction during the time of political crises, expecting the Shengo to do so is quite legitimate and healthy. Well, I equally should say that those who tried to challenge the Shengo were/are supposed to acknowledge the efforts being made by the Shengo( be it small or big) before they trying to jump to criticism. But, this way of approach by some participants was not supposed to make the panelist and other members of the Shengo defensive responses. We were told about how the culture of being offensive and defensive has played a negative role in our political discourse. Unfortunately, this undesirable culture of conversation manifested itself in the question and answer (discussion) period of the meeting.
In conclusion, I want to say that with all weaknesses and difficulties, these kinds of forums have their own teachable experience. But, they should not be repeating themselves over and over and over again. I hope we will make it.
I am reflecting this observation and impression; because I sincerely believe that expressing our views and comments (big or small) about the political and socio-economic quagmire our country is experiencing is not only the right thing to do, but also a very desirable and important thing to do. I have a feeling that there should be for opposition political movements and civic groups as well as genuinely concerned individuals to engage in critical but constructive conversations, not the other way round. The culture of attempting to glorify one’s role by undermining the role of others should be discouraged, if not be avoided.
I was listening to Addis Dimts Radio of Abebe Belew’s general comment (10/26/13) on the atmosphere of the meeting, and his view about the way forward. I sincerely appreciate how he tried to make sense how the seemingly unhealthy perception between the Shengo and Ginbot-7 should be dealt with amicably, not mistrustfully. And he has informed us that he has invited two representatives from the two sides to his next radio program to have conversation from the perspectives of their organizations. That is the way it should be if we want to make a well-informed comments and to extend any support we may afford.
I had a chance to attend the public meeting of the “Shengo” organized by the DC Metro coordinating committee on October 20 – 2013.The meeting was scheduled to start at 2: pm. When I arrived at 3:10, there were about 15 attendants. The panelists did not arrive yet. The program started at 3:30 when the panelists arrived and were seated in their respective chairs. They were: Professor Achamyeleh Debela, Dr. Aklog Birara and Woizero Tsigie Mulugeta. There were about 35 – 40 attendants who I think were genuinely eager to listen what the organizers and the panelists had to say. I also sensed that the attendants looked interested to participant actively during the question and answer (discussion) time. Although I felt seriously disappointed about one and half hour late start, I had to be patient hoping that the meeting would be desirably fruitful as far as the desperately needed contribution from the Shengo to the very critical struggle for political freedom, rule of law and socio-economic justice going on in our country is concerned. Now, let me proceed to my comment on the issues raised by the panelists and the discussion:
We were introduced with the panelists and the topics they presented and discussed on. The introducer stated that our country is in danger; and he underlined that the very objective of the meeting was to discuss on the issue of how we should stand together in perusing a united struggle and subsequently to bring about a common solution. Although this was and is a very common statement in any political forum, I had a sort of feeling that the presentations and the discussion would be positively interesting and inviting. Did they turn out to be the case or….? Let me continue:
Professor Achamyeleh Debela gave a brief description about the mission, objective and function of the Shengo. I strongly believe that it is the right thing to reiterate the very compelling reason that has brought the Shengo into being, and its mission to stick with and its objectives to accomplish. However, I would say that since the Shengo has already celebrated its first anniversary and the publicity of what it stands for has been conducted via various media, not to mention its web site; it would have been better just to highlight about it and take more time on the challenges and opportunities and the way forward in a much more concrete manner. My point of observation is that especially for very highly qualified persons such as Professor Achamyeleh Debela, it should have been better to devote their time and resources on issues pivotal to the ongoing struggle and the efforts being made by the Shengo to deal with those issues. I did not have an impressive impression about assigning the Professor to go through mere description of missions, objectives and functions of the Shengo. Once again, do not get me wrong that what I am saying is that it was not necessary to highlight those missions/objectives/functions). What I am trying to say is that it sounded not productive to devote all his presentation to mere description of what the Shengo stands for and which is of course written in black and white; and any interested person can refer. Underscoring the serious challenges our country is facing, Professor Achamyeleh declared that the door is open to those who share the concerns and objectives of the Shengo. Unfortunately, he did not say anything about the need for the Shengo to take courageous initiative to knock at the doors of other groups. Yes, good intention is great; but interpreting that great intention into practical terms by going extra-mile is much greater. He did inform the meeting that two civic associations have joined the Shengo. But, he did not tell about the influence and seriousness of those groups. Yes, it is desirable to bring all those who want to play their parts. But, I sincerely believe that bringing in only the easiest ones, not those who have significant role in the process of the struggle but who may have legitimate differences of views with ours is a serious weakness.
Woizero TSegie Mulugeta’s subject of discussion was “the Participation of Women and Youth from the Perspective of the Shengo.”I have observed that she is a genuinely involved member of the leadership. I had an impression that she is with a reasonable knowledge and information about what is going on in Ethiopia. She has tried to support her argument about the plight of the Ethiopian women and youth with critical issues such as human rights violation, socio-economic quagmire, the politicization of micro- finances, environment degradation, water shortages, the rampant practice of rape and etc. Although it may not seem important, I observed her struggling to express her thoughts in such a way that participants (audiences) could understand without struggling to have a sense of coherent flow of ideas.
The noticeable problem I observed was that Wizero Tsegie Mulugeta did not clearly demonstrated what and how the Shengo is doing in this respect (women and youth) in practical terms. She couldn’t go beyond saying that the Shengo has stood firm to provide a road map in this regard (the participation of women and youth). This was not of course different from making a very general statement. I think the audience was expecting to hear if there was any concrete step taken, if not what that road map looks like. That is why the panelists had to deal with some very critical comments and questions.
Dr. Aklog Birara discussed on the subject of, “The Struggle Ahead and the Importance of Societal Participation in the Struggle.” He stated that the ruling party has continued being a regime of disregarding its own constitution. He did not take much time on blaming the ruling party. He stressed that we (he specifically meant the politicians) are the problems. He recalled the 1970s “right and left wing” political thinking which he believes has contributed to the failure in creating a responsibly patriotic generation. Although I feel that this commonly mentioned “left and right” political experience is over-emphasized, sometimes as kind of excuse; I had a sensible impression with starting his discussion by reminding us not disregard the influence of the political sentiment of that time no matter its level of negativity is.
He outlined the issues of having a common vision, the necessity of reversing the demographic catastrophe, the need to get our vision materialized, the need to look into the culture of being captives of mere talks and counter-talks via various media. Needless to say, these are the issues to be dealt with seriously and courageously. The question is, whether those opposition groups including the Shengo and genuinely concerned intellectuals have gone beyond reciting those critical issues. Have they tried to sacrifice their self-centered interests in such a way that their knowledge and resources could be devoted to deal with those issues and take the struggle forward?
He outlined the issues which should bring us together as a step to move forward: Human rights, the land issue (rural and urban), religious freedom, forced displacement (eviction) based on ethnicity, the inseparability of development and human rights, abject poverty (unbearable cost of living).
He concluded his presentation by outlining the following points of what is to be done: Inclusive participation (like women and youth), conducting analytical and critical study on the question of why we could not be successful (by and to the Shengo), and the need to reaffirm that the struggle is in Ethiopia, not from Washington or from Asmara, and he concluded by saying that focusing on the political mentality of talking about people, not issues has no use.
I would like to say that all the issues and ideas discussed by Dr. Aklog Birara were valuable as far as the exchange of ideas and views that are aimed at the need to take the struggle forward is concerned. But, I would like to say that I did not get kind of impression that he was able to make a strong relevance between the challenges and issues he articulated and the concrete steps/progresses taken by the Shengo. I do not think the issues and ideas he raised are innovative in the real sense of the term. To my understanding, being innovative is coming up with creative (new) ideas and methods and steps that are instrumental in dealing with the issues we are talking about. I do not think making an appeal for working together is essentially innovative. I do not think speaking about freedom religion and the challenges women and youth are facing is a new or creative idea as such. I do not think declaring that the struggle should be within Ethiopia which is of course a very common knowledge is an innovative idea being promoted by the Shengo only. I do not think calling for the creation of responsible and patriotic generation necessarily is an innovative thinking. Let me once again stress that being innovative is the willingness and capability to lay- out specific and feasible ways and means that are instrumental in the process of taking the struggle forward.
I do not want to go into all the questions and comments raised. But, I want to express my observation about a couple of them. One of those questions which I found interesting and legitimate was if the Shengo has taken any strategically and tactically important progress since its inception. In other words, as a real sense of leadership is to be innovatively far-sighted to lead the people to the right direction during the time of political crises, expecting the Shengo to do so is quite legitimate and healthy. Well, I equally should say that those who tried to challenge the Shengo were/are supposed to acknowledge the efforts being made by the Shengo( be it small or big) before they trying to jump to criticism. But, this way of approach by some participants was not supposed to make the panelist and other members of the Shengo defensive responses. We were told about how the culture of being offensive and defensive has played a negative role in our political discourse. Unfortunately, this undesirable culture of conversation manifested itself in the question and answer (discussion) period of the meeting.
In conclusion, I want to say that with all weaknesses and difficulties, these kinds of forums have their own teachable experience. But, they should not be repeating themselves over and over and over again. I hope we will make it.
No comments:
Post a Comment