Monday, October 13, 2014

የተዋረደው ሰንደቅ አላማ ‹‹የክብር›› ቀን (ጌታቸው ሺፈራው)


ጌታቸው ሺፈራው
በዓለማችን ተፅዕኖ ፈጣሪ ከሆኑት ሰንደቅ አላማዎች መካከል የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ በቀዳሚነት ይገኝበታል፡፡ በጸረ-ቅኝ ግዛት ትግሉ ወቅት በመላው ዓለም የሚገኙ ጥቁሮች ከነጻነት ምልክትነቱም በተጨማሪ አንዳች ኃይል ያለው አድርገው ወስደውታል፡፡ በተለይ ከቅኝ ግዛት ትግሉ በኋላ በርካታ የአፍሪካና የካሪቢያን አገራት የኢትዮጵያን ሰንደቅ ምልክታቸው አድርገው ተጠቅመውበታል፡፡ ከዚህም የተነሳ በሰንደቅ አላማ ላይ ጥናት የሚያደርጉ ምሁራን የኢትዮጵያን ሰንደቅ አላማ የአፍሪካ ሰንደቅ አላማዎች ዘር ይሉታል፡፡
10482065_596327470492915_3458501353410632231_nየኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ ተጽዕኖ ፈጣሪ ከሆኑት ከዓለም ሰንደቅ አላማዎች ቀዳሚው እንደመሆኑ ለሌሎች ህዝቦች ተጽዕኖ ፈጣሪ ሆኖ በራሱ መሪዎች የተዋረደው ብቸኛው ሰንደቅ አላማም ሳይሆን አይቀርም፡፡ በርካታ የአፍሪካና የካሪቢያን አገራት የኢትዮጵያን ሰንደቅ አላማ በምልክትነት ሲወስዱ የወቅቱ የኢትዮጵያ ገዥዎች ግን የኢትዮጵያውን ሰንደቅ አላማ ቀለም ትተው ከአውሮፓና ከአረብ አገር የተዋሱትን ሰንደቅ አላማ ክብር ከነበረው የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ ጎን ያንጠለጥሏቸዋል፡፡
ሻዕቢያና ጀብሃ ሰንደቅ አላማውን ለማዋረድ (ጨርቅ ለማስመሰል) ከዓረብ አገራት በእርዳታ ያገኙት የነበረውን ዱቄትና በሰሜን ኢትዮጵያ የሚበቅለውን በለስ ቋጥረውበታል፡፡ ከሻዕቢያ ስር ሆኖ የጎለመሰው ህወሓት የኢትዮጵያን ሰንደቅ አላማ ስለማዋረድ ከሻዕቢያ ልምድ ቀስሟል፡፡ በመሆኑም እሱም እንደ ሻዕቢያ የዱቄት መቋጠሪያ አድርጎት እንደነበር ይነገራል፡፡ አቶ መለስ ዜናዊ ሰንደቅ አላማውን ‹‹ጨርቅ›› ያሉትም ከምንም ተነስተው ሳይሆን በአንድ ወቅት ሻዕቢያ ባስተማራቸው መሰረት እንደ ጨርቅ ሲጠቀሙበት ስለነበር ነው፡፡ ህወሓት/ኢህአዴግ ሰንደቅ አላማውን የማዋረድ ታሪክ ገና ከጫካ የጀመረ በመሆኑ ለሰንደቅ አላማው ያላው ንቀትና ጥላቻ በዚሁ መልኩ ደሙ ድረስ ዘልቆ ገብቷል ማለት ይቻላል፡፡ ለዚህም ነው አከበርኩ እያለ እንኳን ማክበር ያልቻለው፡፡
ህወሓት/ኢህአዴግ መጀመሪያ ላይ ንጹሁን ከዛም በኋላ ውሃማ ሰማያዊ ክብ ያለበት፣ በቅርቡ በ654/2001 ዓ.ም በወጣው የሰንደቅ አላማ አዋጅ ደግሞ ደማቅ ሰማያዊ መደብ ላይ ያረፈ ክብ ያለበት ሰንደቅ አላማን የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ አድርጎ እየተጠቀመበት ነው፡፡ በዚህም መሰረት በቅርብ አመታት የሰንደቅ አላማ ቀን በዓል እያከበረ ነው፡፡ ከውስጥ ያልመነጨን ነገር መተግበር አይቻልምና አከብራለሁ እያለም እያወረደው ዛሬ ድረስ ደርሷል፡፡ በሌላ በኩል ገዥዎቹ ለሰንደቅ አላማ ክብር የሌላቸው መሆናቸውና የአሁኑ ሰንደቅ አላማ (በተለይ መሃል ላይ ያለው ምልክት) ያለ ህዝብ ፈቃድ መለጠፉ አሁን ‹‹የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ›› የሚባለው ህዝቡም ከላይ የተጫነበት እንጂ የራሱ እንዳልሆነ በማመኑ በሁሉም ወገን ክብር ተነፍጎታል፡፡
የዚህ ጽሁፍ አላማም ኢህአዴግ ለሰንደቅ አላማው አዋጅ አውጥቶ፣ የክብር ቀን ቆርጦ አከብረዋለሁ ቢልም ለይስሙላህ እንጂ ክብር እንደማይሰጠው ለማሳየት ነው፡፡ በሰንደቅ አላማው አዋጅ በአንቀጽ 6/1 መሰረት ‹‹ሰንደቅ አላማው ከላይ አረንጓዴ፣ ከመሃል ቢጫ፣ ከታች ቀይ›› ይኖረዋል ይላል፡፡ መሃል ላይ ያለው ኮከብ አቀማመጥንም ያስቀምጣል፡፡ ነገር ግን በየ ካፌው ሌላ ሰንደቅ አላማ (መሃል ላይ ክብ ያለውን) ከሌለው ንጹህ ሰንደቅ አላማ በማዳቀል (በክር ተሰፍቶ) የተሰቀሉት ይበልጣሉ፡፡ ምንም እንኳ በየካፌው ሰንደቁን መስቀል የማይፈቀድ ቢሆንም፣ ህጉ ተጥሶ በዘፈቀደ ተንጠልጥሎ ይገኛል፡፡
በአዋጁ ከተቀመጠው ቀለምና አቀማመጥ ውጭ የተሰቀለ ሰንደቅ አላማ በእስርና በገንዘብ እንደሚስቀጣ ተደንግጓል፡፡ ሆኖም ግን አዋጁን የደነገጉት አካላት አይጠቀሙበትም፡፡ ለአብነት ያህል አቶ መለስ ዜናዊ ከመሞታቸው ከወራት በፊት ኬንያ ላይ ሰንደቅ አላማውን ከላይ ወደታች ገልብጠውት ታይተዋል፡፡ በአዋጁ መሰረት አቶ መለስ ዜናዊ ቢያንስ በገንዘብ 3000 ብር አሊያም አንድ አመት እስር ይጠብቃቸው ነበር፡፡ ሆኖም ግን አቶ መለስ ዜናዊ ምንም ሲባሉ አላየንም፡፡
በዚሁ በማይከበረው አዋጅ 6/2 መሰረት ‹‹ቀለማቱ ብሩህና ደማቅ መሆን አለባቸው›› ይላል፡፡ ነገር ግን የተለያዩ ቁልፍ የ‹‹መንግስት›› ተቋማት ሳይቀሩ ይህን ህግ በሻረ መንገድ ሰንደቅ አላማውን ሲያውለበልቡ ይታያሉ፡፡ ለአብነት ያህል በሽብርተኝነት ተጠርጥረዋል ተብለው የሚታሰሩ ኢትዮጵያውያን የሚቀርቡበት የአራዳ ችሎት ለረዥም ጊዜ የተጠቀመበት የተበጣጠሰ ሰንደቅ አላማ (ሰሞኑን ቀይረውታል) በምሳሌነት ማንሳት ይቻላል፡፡ ከዚህም ባሻገር እስከ ቅርብ ጊዜ ድረስ ፓርላማ ያረጀና የተቀዳደደ ሰንደቅ አላማ ያውለበልብ እንደነበር ይታወቃል፡፡ ሁለቱን መስሪያ ቤቶች ጨምሮ በበርካታ የመንግስት መስሪያ ቤቶች ሰንደቅ አላማው ማታ ሲወርድ አይታይም፡፡ በአራዳ ችሎትና ፓርላማውን የመሳሰሉት ምን አልባትም ከአመት በላይ ሰንደቅ አላማው ሳይቀየር ስለተሰቀለ ነው እንደዛ የተበጣጠሰው፡፡ ለይስሙላ የወጣው አዋጅ ግን ጠዋት 12 ሰዓት ተሰቅሎ ማታ 12 ሰዓት መውረድ አለበት ብሎ ደንግጓል፡፡
በአዋጁ 6/3 የሰንደቅ አላማው ወርድ የቁመቱን እጥፍ ይሆናል ይላል፡፡ በሌላ የአዋጁ ክፍልም ለህንጻዎች መሸፈኛ መሆን የለበትም ይላል፡፡ ነገር ግን በተለያዩ ካፌዎች፣ ባንኮችና የመንግስት መስሪያ ቤቶች ሰንደቅ አላማው አብዛኛውን የህንጻዎች ክፍል ሸፍኖ ይታያል፡፡ (የፈተናዎች ድርጅት ህንጻ፣ የአዲስ አበባ አስተዳደር ትምህርት ቢሮ፣ አዋሽ ባንክ ላይ ማየት ይቻላል) ይታያል፡፡ በእነዚህና በሌሎች መስሪያ ቤቶችና ህንጻዎች ሰንደቅ አላማው የህንጻዎቹን አብዛኛ ክፍል ሸፍኖ (ማስጌጫ ሆኖ) ይታያል፡፡
የሰንደቅ አላማው አዋጅ አንቀጽ 10 ሰንደቅ አላማው 6 የተለያዩ መጠኖች እንደሚኖሩት ይገልጻል፡፡ 1ኛ. 210 በ420፣ 2ኛ 150 በ300፣ 3ኛ 135 በ 270፣ 4ኛ 105 በ 210፣ 5ኛ 90 በ180፣ 6ኛ 21 በ 42 ናቸው፡፡ አንደኛው በከፍተኛ አደባባይ ላይ የሚሰቀል ነው፡፡ ሁለተኛው በመካከለኛ አደባባይ ይሰቀላል፡፡ ሶስተኛው በመስሪያ ቤቶች፣ በከፍተኛ የትምህርት ተቋማት፣ በትልልቅ የመንግስት ህንጻዎችና የድርጅቶች አደባባዮች የሚሰቀል ነው፡፡ አራተኛው በትልልቅ ህንጻዎች ይሰቀላል፡፡ በከፍተኛ መርከቦችና በሰልፍ ጊዜ በክብር ዘብ ይያዛል ይላል፡፡ አምስተኛው የውጭ አገር እንግዶችን ለመቀበልና በበዓላት በየ መንገዱ የሚውለበለብ ነው ይላል፡፡ በስድስተኛ ደረጃ የተቀመጠው ሰንደቅ አላማ መጠን በፕሬዝዳንቱ፣ በጠቅላይ ሚኒስትሩና በአምባሳደር ጽ/ቤት ጠረጴዛ ላይ እንደሚቀመጥ ይደነግጋል፡፡ ከዚህም በተጨማሪ በጠቅላይ ሚኒስትሩ፣ በፕሬዝዳንቱና በአምባሳደር መኪና ላይ 20 በ 30 ሴንቲ ሜትር የሆነ ሰንደቅ አላማ ይሰቀላል ይላል፡፡ ከተደነገገው ህግ ውጭ በሌሎች የመንግስት መስሪያ ቤቶችም (በተለየ ህግ ካልተከለከለ በስተቀር) ይሰቀላል ይላል፡፡ በካፌ፣ ጸጉር ቤት፣ ስጋ ቤት፣….ይሰቀላል ብሎ የሚደነግግ ነገር የለም፡፡ ለዛሬው በዓል ግን እነዚህ ቤቶች በተለያየ ቁመትና ወርድ ሰንደቅ አላማ ከቀበሌ ታድሏቸው በየ ቦታው አንጠልጥለውታል፡፡
ትልቁ ሰንደቅ አላማ (210 በ420) በአደባባይ የሚሰቀለው ነው፡፡ ይህ ማለት ደግሞ ትልቁ ከ2 እስከ አራት ሜትር ተኩል ብቻ እንደሚሆን የሚያሳይ ነው፡፡ ሆኖም የመንግስት መስሪያ ቤቶችና ባንኮች አብዛኛውን ህንጻቸውን ያስዋቡት እንዳለ ሆኖ ለዛሬው በዓል የቀበሌ መዝናኛዎች፣ ካፌዎችና ሌሎች ንግድ ቤቶች ከአንደኛው በረንዳ ጫፍ እስከ ሌላኛው በረንዳ ጫፍ የሰቀሏቸው ሰንደቅ አላማዎች በአንደኛ ደረጃ ከተቀመጠው በብዙ እጥፍ የሚበልጡ (የሚረዝሙ) ሆነው እናገኛቸዋለን፡፡ በተለያዩ ንግድ ቤቶች አንዳንዶች ከግራ ቀደ ቀኝ አረንጓዴ፣ ቢጫ ቀይ አሊያም በተገላቢጦሹ ሰቅለውታል፡፡ ካድሬዎቹን ለማስደሰት እንጅ የሚያምኑበት ብዙዎቹ ባለመሆናቸው አንዳንዶቹ ታዛው ላይ፣ ሌሎቹ መስኮት አሊያም ያገኙት ቦታ ላይ መሬት እስኪነካ አንዘላዝለውታል፡፡
በአዋጁ አንቀጽ 16 የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማ ከላይ በተደነገገው መሰረት አንድ አይነት ነው ይላል፡፡ ነገር ግን ለዛሬው በዓል ከተሰቀሉት መካከል በአሁኑ አዋጅ የተቀየረው መሃሉ ላይ ውሃማ ሰማያዊ ያለበትም በስፋት ተሰቅለው ይገኛሉ፡፡ አንቀጽ 17 ሲያረጅ፣ ሲበላሽ ወይንም በሌላ መንገድ በክብር ይቃጠላል፤ ይቀበራል ቢልም ይህ ግን ሲሆን አይታይም፡፡ አንቀጽ 18 ሰንደቅ አላማው ከክልል ሰንደቅ አላማዎች ጋር የሚሰቀልበትን መንገድ የተዘረዘረበት ነው፡፡ ከፍ ብሎ መሰቀል አለበት፡፡ ከሁለት ጋር ቢሆን መሃል ላይ ይሆናል፡፡ ከሁለት በላይ ከሆኑ በስተቀኝ በኩል መጨረሻ ሆኖ ይውለበለባል፡፡ ይህም ቢሆን ሰንደቅ አላማው ውስጣቸው በሌለው ገዥዎች ዘንድ የሚታወስ አይደለም፡፡ ለአብነት ያህል ስድስት ኪሎ አካባቢ የሚገኘው የኦሮሚያ የፍትህ ቢሮ ላይ ሁለት የኢትዮጵያ ሰንደቅ አላማዎች ያውም ያሰቃቀሉን ህግ በማያሟላ መልኩ ከክልሉ ሰንደቅ አላማ ዝቅ ብሎ ተሰቅሏል፡፡
አንቀጽ 22 በማኝኛውም ጊዜ ሰንደቅ አላማው ዝቅ ብሎ አይውለበለብም ይላል፡፡ እነሱ ግን በየ ጉራንጎሩ ሲፈልጉ ገልብጠው ያውለበልቡታል፡፡ ምንም እንኳ በፕሬዝዳንቱ፣ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትሩና አምባሳደሩ መኪና ብቻ እንደሚውለበለብ ቢደነገግም ለዚህ በዓል ሲባል ታክሲና ባባጆች ሳይቀር እንዲያውለበልቡ ታድሏቸዋል፡፡
አንቀጽ 22 ሰንደቅ አላማ በቀብር ወቅት መሆን ስላለበበት ሁኔታ የሚገለጽበት ነው፡፡ በአንቀጹ ‹‹ቀብሩ ከመፈጸሙ በፊት በአስከሬን ሳጥኑ ላይ ያረፈው ሰንደቅ አላማ በተገቢው ስነ ስርዓት ተጣጥሮ መነሳት ያለበት ሲሆን በማንኛውም መልኩ መሬት መንካት የለበትም›› ይላል፡፡ ነገር ግን በአንድ ወቅት ጨርቅ እንዲመስል ዱቄት የቋጠሩበት፣ ከዛም ጨርቅ ብለው የዘለፉት፣ እንዲሁም በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ ገልብጠውት የታዩት አቶ መለስ ዜናዊ አስከሬን ላይ ሲቀበር ሁላችንም በቴሊቪዥን ያየነው ኃቅ ነው፡፡
ህወሓት/ኢህአዴግ በሰንደቅ አላማው ላይ ይህን ያህል ኃጢያት ሲሰራ አንድም ቀን ይቅርታ ጠይቆ አያውቅም፡፡ ይህን ሁሉ ሲሰራ ማንም ጠይቆት አሊያም ተቀጥቶ አላየንም፡፡ በተቃራኒው ግን ለሰንደቁ እንደቆመ ለማሳየት ይሞክራል፡፡ የዛሬው በዓልም ለማያምንበትና በውስጡ ለሌለው ሰንደቅ አላማ ክብር እሰጥበታለሁ የሚለው እንዲህ ከራሱ ህግ ጋር እየተቃረነ እና እያዋረደው ነው

Obang Metho addresses at 2014 Annual meetings of the IMF and WB


Address by Obang Metho, Executive Director of the SMNE, to the Civil Society Policy Forum at 2014 Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank Group (WBG), Washington, DC
Obang Metho
Obang Metho
Thank you for inviting me to share in this panel discussion on “The Role of World Bank Indicators in Agricultural Development.” Today’s discussion is very relevant in that the World Bank is investing billions of dollars into agribusiness. Various new tools have been designed to measure and assess whether or not these investments are assisting the farm sector, including smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa, resulting in improved food and livelihood security for the people. The question today is whether or not these new tools, used as indicators of the degree of success of WB projects, are accomplishing the intended goals of guiding and strengthening agribusiness in Africa?
These are some of the key questions to be answered:
First, are these indicators providing more accurate, credible and critically-needed information in regards to how these WB investments are actually working on the ground? 
Secondly, are these indicators effective in enabling better decision-making among policy makers, resulting in more success-driven policies? 
Thirdly, have the compliance requirements and outcomes of various indicators increased transparency and accountability among implementers of these projects, from local managers to federal officials in participating countries?
Fourthly, what other indicators or factors should be included in order to ensure the best outcomes for improving long-term self-sufficiency and sustainability of food and livelihood security for the people of Africa?
Re-establishing the Basics:
The World Bank is an international development bank that has poured huge amounts of aid into Africa and its development that has benefited millions of people on the continent. Its stated goals are to:
  1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
  2. Achieve universal primary education
  3. Promote gender equality and empower women
  4. Reduce child mortality
  5. Improve maternal health
  6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
  7. Ensure environmental sustainability
  8. Develop a global partnership for development
No country need participate; however, if a country chooses to do so, certain requirements are expected, whether or not one agrees with them. The WB, as a public institution, is accountable for how it delivers its financing.
This includes the responsibility of ensuring proper use of WB funds that result in improved lives for the people. At times the WB has received criticism from civil society, partner countries and others, sometimes resulting in the bank making positive changes. 
The creation of these new tools to measure the efficacy of WB projects may be an outcome on the part of the WB to the call for increased transparency and accountability from its borrowers.
Where large amounts of funds are passed between givers and receivers, there is vast opportunity for misuse, abuse, waste, theft, and corruption, especially when such projects to be are carried out in remote regions of the world among some of its most voiceless people. This includes the danger of WB funds being used to shore up the power of dictators, who then use their power against the very people the WB has targeted as primary beneficiaries, undermining the achievement of the bank’s primary goals. This is especially true in countries where transparency and accountability are lacking, where institutions are weak and where authoritarian governments, like we have in Ethiopia, believe they should “call all the shots” without interference from the people, donors or groups like the World Bank, the IMF, and the African Development Bank. These countries that do participate should enter into partnership with the WB knowing the expectations; however, in many cases, the WB and others have found information gathering to be “like pulling teeth,” exerting reverse pressure on the WB to ease up on regulations, expectations, transparency and accountability, the very purpose for the indicators.
Clearly, the indicators are only as good as the accuracy of the information provided through them; however, the bank’s efforts to better track compliance provides a model for countries where watchdog institutions have been silenced or hijacked by those in power, again, like in Ethiopia. In these cases, the WB indicators may be one of the few sources of pressure for accountability; yet, reportedly, plans have recently been proposed to weaken key WB guidelines and requirements, some of which have been in place for thirty years, and which provide needed protections to the people.  These plans, if adopted, will reduce transparency and accountability, exactly what is most needed.  
The plan itself has not been released to the public, but reportedly, changes made would water-down important safeguards and requirements among recipient partners, some of which, like Ethiopia, are already in active non-compliance. Some of the areas affected are believed to include: upholding basic freedoms, the exercise of democratic principles, respect for human rights, ensuring environmental sustainability, enforcing the rule of law, increased transparency and accountability and adherence to WB guidelines and international laws regarding indigenous peoples’ rights. By discarding these critically important guidelines, the WB fails to address many of the key obstacles to achieving their goals. Who will be hurt if the WB caves in on these key principles? It will be some of the world’s most vulnerable people.
Concerns that the WB is caving in to pressure from African despots has resulted in an outpouring of criticism from civil society, especially from places where some semblance of civil society still exists.Maintaining its primary mission and principles will require the bank to take a strong moral stand against weakening safeguards and compliance. This is especially true in recipient countries, like Ethiopia, who resent any expectations of having to prove compliance, feeling entitled to receive endless WB funds and to use them in whatever way they please.
It is our contention that WB indicators, especially in more authoritarian countries, like Ethiopia, should instead be more intensely scrutinized for accuracy if the WB is to utilize its funds for the betterment of the people. These indicators can be useful only to the extent that they reflect the truth on the ground and to the extent that the WB holds recipients of WB financing accountable for meeting their requirements and guidelines. Weakening of the WB requirements or failing to uphold current WB guidelines and regulations can actually do harm or significantly interfere with achieving successful outcomes for the people on the ground. 
Case example: Ethiopia
Ethiopia has received substantial funds, in the billions, from the World Bank; however, in a country like Ethiopia, the accuracy of the information provided by them in formulating these indicators should be questioned. WB indicators should depend on facts, but in Ethiopia, there are no independent institutions.
The role of the media of doing investigative reporting has been stifled by the government as journalists, bloggers, editors and activists have been imprisoned for challenging government assertions. The justice system, the police and federal security officers and financial institutions are under the control of the one-party government. Laws are used as weapons, criminalizing dissent. Civil society, the watchdogs of government, is non-existent. Reports of rapid economic growth, placing Ethiopia among the top-performing economies in the world, come from the same source, the Government of Ethiopia, which undermines any institutional independence. Who can challenge their figures and get away with it?
Claims that Ethiopia has met its Millennium Development Growth or statistics that claim progress in attaining WB goals and requirements heavily depend on the government’s own statistics and reports. The bank is implicated in this wherever the regime’s indicators are accepted without question or careful verification as this government has no system of checks and balances. The government has huge incentive to fit the results to match whatever the bank needs in order to continue to bring in the funds.
Keep in mind, the current government of Ethiopia is controlled by the elite in one ethnic group that makes up only 6% of the population of Ethiopia. They have been in power for 23 years and some experts predict that this country could implode into ethnic-based violence due to the increasing resentment towards this minority run regime; however, the same unpopular government claimed a 99.6% win over the opposition in the last national election after closing all political space.
Even then, the results are absurdly out of line with reality. Out of 547 seats in the Ethiopian Parliament, only one is held by a member of the opposition. In the local elections, the same government led party claimed they won almost 100% of the vote. Does that seem like a credible electoral result in this environment? Little opportunity is given to any members of the opposition, even the one member of Parliament. That member is only allowed the floor for three minutes in any debate.
In the coming national election in 2015, no independent observers are to be allowed and the election board is under the control of the one-party state. Of course, this will enable the same “cooking up of the numbers” as was done at the last election. This is all indicative of the degree of control this regime exercises over all information, including the manufacture of a constant flow of propaganda. Could the WB indicators escape this kind of statistical manipulation?
 
Government officials claim that when they came to power in 1991, 60% of the Ethiopian people did not have food security and that it is now reduced to 40%; but in reality, they can say whatever they want because no one makes them accountable. How can conditions be so dramatically improved when so many of the most land-dependent smallholder farmers are being forced off their land, their only means of livelihood?
In my own home region of Gambella, in the fertile area of southwestern Ethiopia, over 70,000 indigenous people out of a total population of approximately 300,000 were evicted from their land, without consultation or compensation, contrary to WB guidelines. The indigenous people, who used to be able to support themselves, are now more food insecure than ever. People, who used to live independently, are now either hungry or must depend on handouts. Others depend on financial assistance from relatives in the West. These remittances, coming from relatives outside the country, now account for a large part of the GNP. Is this increased food security? 
Still others have left the country for refugee camps or put their lives in the hands of human traffickers. The desperation of many Ethiopians accounts for huge numbers of refugees leaving the country every day. Are these cases included in these indicators? It is doubtful.
A recent report of loans made for investments in Gambella included a list of 77 investors, their names, the amount of each loan and the terms. Another 61 loan applications were pending. Out of 138 names, not one carried a name easily identified as typical of an indigenous person from Gambella. It may also be interesting to note that the number of millionaires in Ethiopia rose from 1,300 in 2007 to 2,700 in 2012, a period of rapid leasing of agricultural land in this and other regions to foreign and regime crony investors. 
At the same time, the amount of illicit capital leakage leaving Ethiopia has rapidly risen. It is obvious some are “getting rich quick” in Ethiopia, but it is not the people. Do the indicators show this? It is doubtful.
Instead, in the case of Gambella, the indigenous people are blocked from access to leasing land even though the land is already legally theirs as part of the rights of the indigenous in the Ethiopian Constitution. Even groups in the Diaspora who attempted to join together to pay the cost to lease the land where their families lived back home were denied access to the land. Instead the land was leased to a large foreign investor. Reportedly, this investor is using large quantities of water to grow rice that will impact others down river and has exported most of the rice to Saudi Arabia. Even when the indigenous are able to farm their land; improvements and new technology are out of reach due to not having land ownership to use as collateral because the government claims to own all the land in Ethiopia. It is a huge obstacle. Certification programs to increase land security, therefore food security, are not available in Gambella and several other regions in the country.
Double digit economic growth is claimed in Ethiopia, but if this is the actual case, should it not be supported by increased availability of electric power and other infrastructure, but even in the capital city, outages occur regularly and in many places electricity is unavailable. Access to clean water, even in Addis Ababa, is often not available. These things are not mentioned. The targeted beneficiaries of WB development and increased food security program have been mostly left out due to a lack of transparency and accountability by the government as well as due to many of these obstacles. On the other hand, the elite are gaining the benefits, accounting for most of any economic growth, but it does not trickle down to the people. That is why these indicators must be questioned.
 
Recommendations:
What the bank needs are more safeguards, not fewer. The bank does not have to accept the statistics given by a government, like in the case of Ethiopia, where evidence of the manipulation of data and statistics exists. Instead, the WB should require greater transparency and accountability.
If the government does not want to comply, there should be real consequences. If the WB does not demand it, then it is not just undermining the goals of their own organization, it is increasing insecurity, the exploitation of their target beneficiaries by the powerful, and decreasing the freedom and well being of the people. Where freedom is denied to the majority, we cannot hope to attain genuine economic growth or sustainable development by underwriting the means for the elite to stay in power. Indicators must be accurate, based on verifiable facts in order to enable the most vulnerable peoples’ participation in a free market where opportunity is available not only to the families, cronies, and tribe of one exclusive group.
Currently, there is a move to ease restrictions on money, trade and aid as various international players vie for a piece of Africa. Increased willingness to cater to African strongmen at the expense of democratic ideals, human rights and inclusive development is putting the African people at risk. Some are gravitating toward the Chinese model of aid, development and trade where such values as human rights, basic freedoms and protecting the environment are “non-issues.”
The WB should not take the short-cut, forgetting about these issues that are so important to Africans. It is a moral question that requires standing firm to the original goals of the bank. Are these goals just rhetoric or meaningful policy guides?
Reportedly, 15 million people around the world are displaced every year in the name of development. The majority of them are among the most vulnerable people in our world—those who should benefit the most from these development projects. This must change. If the bank does not require transparency and accountability, the indicators will be flawed and used as propaganda against the people like as in Ethiopia. WB indicators, if incorrect, still gain further legitimization when they are repeated and utilized by the international community and others who believe in their authenticity. It traps the neediest in a cycle of poverty.
 We can assume that there will always those individuals, groups and governments who seek to personally benefit from programs meant to help others. When the WB fails to ask the right questions or to verify the findings presented as indicators, the problems of the people are compounded.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, I will attempt to answer my initial questions, using Ethiopia as an example.
  1. Unfortunately, current WB indicators in countries like Ethiopia cannot be trusted to be accurate, objective or credible in many cases. The information they provide can lead to erroneous conclusions as they fail to reflect what is happening on the ground.
 
  1. Decision-making among policy makers can be impeded by the purposeful distortion of the results, making it unreliable in using it to pursue more success-driven policies. 
 
  1. Because the various indicators cannot be trusted, as in the case of Ethiopia, the WB should demand more transparency and accountability on the part of borrowers. This means that borrowers should not be trusted to do self-evaluation of their projects—another recent proposal. Instead, it should include on-site visits by the WB or independent observers, in order to verify the proper implementation of WB projects. The WB must have the will and the means to require proper use of funds and link that to future financing.
 
  1. To best ensure improved food and livelihood security on the continent, borrowers should show successful progress towards increased land ownership, basic freedoms, respect for human rights, good governance, entrenching the rule of law, political space, independent institutions and increased transparency and accountability. These components should become more, not less, integral to those countries seeking participation in the WB’s projects.
For the WB system to meet its goals, it will require increased scrutiny, modifications, ongoing evaluation—both internal and from partners and shareholders, and their own transparency and accountability, especially in upcoming decisions that may lead to loosening rather than tightening regulations that will affect many of the most voiceless people in our world. 
The regime in Ethiopia has become the darling of the foreign aid community, but it is viewed as a robber baron by its own people, especially the most vulnerable. If no one from the WB challenges Ethiopia’s self-proclaimed statistics, the people will suffer and are already experiencing that. The people themselves will tell you that Ethiopia is exploiting WB loopholes. The privileged elite are in fact doing much better, but food and livelihood security are not improving for the majority. This was not the intention of these funds. 
The opportunity for Africans to rise is coming, but Africans want partners who support inclusive development. It is a challenge for the international community members who want to “do business” and partner with Africans in the coming years to choose between the people of Africa and the authoritarian governments that exploit them. We hope the WB will stand up for the people and remain true to its calling! 

Amb. Girma Birru and Solomon Tadesse: Two Sides of a Coin

by Mihret Feleke

This article is made possible after I heard the interviews given by the EPRDF Ambassador to the US Girma Birru who defended the actions and acclaimed the actions of his embassy staff Solomon Tadesse who shot fired at unarmed protestors in broad day light outside the embassy premises. I am not writing this article to dwell on what happened and deal with what should have been done. Rather, I was deeply ashamed by the Ambassadors repeated and relentless argument in the interview he gave afterwards that regarded the action of the gunman as proper and right while to the mind of all sane people it is none but an outrageous and illegal act never seen in the real world before. What troubles me most with the Ambassadors determination of defending the act is that if he and the TPLF regime believe it is an act of patriotism than a breach of the law and order of the host nation we have no guarantee that this same action will not be repeated again and Ethiopians would not be subjected to similar horrific event. For that, I believe, the Ambassador has to be required to recant his words out of decency to the host nation as well as those Ethiopians who came close to be killed by the gunman.
I was deeply ashamed by the Ambassadors repeated and relentless argument
Girma Birru
Solomon Tadesse who had been posted at the Ethiopian embassy in Washington and fired shots on unarmed protestors had departed from the US to avoid persecution under US laws for the crimes he committed. In addition, we also have learned that the US authorities have issued an arrest warrant for his apprehension when ever and where ever he is captured unless protected by the diplomatic immunity under the Vienna convention, which bestows protection to diplomats of a given nation from being subjects under the laws of a host nation. His case being a pending case that would be pursued when the time comes the post incidence stance taken by the Ambassador has to be the focus and scrutiny of law enforcement agencies as well as other US authorities and Human Rights groups.
The interviews the Ambassador gave to Medias here in the US and back home in Ethiopia is troubling to all rational and law-abiding people who adhere to the principles of the rule of law. On all of the interviews the Ambassador gave, he had not taken responsibility nor admits the action taken by the agent in the embassy as a wrongful act. He rather came out with a determined stance to defend the actions of the agent by saying ‘he has done a right job’ for firing a deadly weapon on unarmed protestors outside of the embassy compound. It is this stance taken by the Ambassador that is equally outrageous as the actions of the agent himself that I made the decision to deal with it in this article and point out the basis that would justify my call for investigation in to the role of the Ambassador to this outrageous act that put the lives of civilians in grave danger and would give a confidence to other incoming agents to commit such acts using their diplomatic immunity.
The US law enforcement agencies of course know a lot about criminal acts and how the law is used so as to incriminate those who break it. In addition, the way the gunman’s case has been handled had been appreciated by so many Ethiopians residing in the US. However, beyond taking the action on the perpetrators the US authorities have to question the open and unambiguous stance taken and conviction held by the Ambassador that undermines the laws and orders of this great nation by implicitly suggesting the action taken by the US authorities is wrong while defending and showing his support to the action of the agent. It is true that although crimes committed by anyone would directly make that person the principal subject to the actions taken it also look in to accomplices and collaborators who have allowed themselves to propagate, defend and congratulate the actions committed breaking the laws of this nation. So as to please the TPLF masters back home and calm their anger caused by the departure of one of their own the Ambassador has chosen to disrespect and undermine the law and order the US.
However, the Ambassador’s relentless defense of the agent calling his actions that could well be considered as serious as ‘attempted murder’ right and proper while obviously the reality is otherwise is a typical example that shows how the system of the TPLF led government works in Ethiopia as well as where ever their agents reside. And considering this incident as an isolated event would also be wrong since such acts are committed by the TPLF regime anywhere and anytime on those who call for the end to its narrow ethnic based politics and the hegemony of a minority group as well as the draconian press law, anti-terrorism and NGO and CSO laws. The actions of Mr. Solomon and the defense of the Ambassador is a microcosm of the general reality in Ethiopia that Ethiopians subjected to day in and day out under the TPLF rule.
The TPLF government that has been in power for more than three decades still engages in practices that can be considered un-characteristic of a government and still has the attributes of a rebel group with characteristics of a terrorist group. We have learned before from the US embassy in Addis Ababa diplomatic message surfaced by Asange that the TPLF government plants explosives, where civilians live, and kill citizens so as to blame killings on opposition groups and meet its political agenda to legitimize its criminal acts committed against opposition groups. The explosions in Addis Ababa and other places in Ethiopia a couple of years ago were the acts of the government itself so as to blackmail the Oromo Liberation Front and use it as an excuse to jail, torture and kill its members. And if the TPLF regime claim that Ginbot 7 planted explosive to kill civilians we all have to first say lets first start the investigation from TPLF itself since it is in its nature to act as one than a responsible government of the people.
Unlike what is in the attributes of any government in the world that work for unity and co-existence, the TPLF government deliberately propagates ideas that widen gaps between different groups creates hatred and animosity so as to protect it minority hegemony and power used as a means of protecting the economic interest of its members as well as its ethnically connected cronies. It is indeed unprecedented and unheard of in any place in the world but in Ethiopia a population that accounts for six percent of the total population controls ninety percent of the nation’s security, police and military high rank positions as well as other federal institutions. In order to sustain such a status-quo the TPLF regime engages itself in any form of action including those adopted by terrorist organizations.
On the interview he gave, the accusation of those unarmed protestors by the Ambassador that his embassy staff member shot a gun on their face as members of terrorist organizations like Oromo Liberation Front and Ginbot 7 is indeed shameful and despicable. This is a usual game TPLF has mastered on which is a deceptive maneuver meant to shift the blame. However, this incident cannot be hidden nor denied since it is committed on broad day light while the whole world is watching. When I say this I am very convinced that let alone in the US, even in Ethiopia no Ethiopian opposition party has ever shot a gun or killed a single civilian to advance its political agenda. No international or regional actors and groups has ever charge no such group committing such crime. The atrocities committed by OLF on ethnic Amharas during the outset of TPLF rule was in fact committed with TPLF being the accomplice than an action committed on its own. But the world knows and Ethiopians have lived it for more than two decades that if there is any group that used violence as a means of advancing political agenda and protect absolute monopoly of power, it is TPLF that has jailed, killed and tortured thousands of civilians and it is still carrying out such acts wherever the oppressive hands of the regime reaches out to.
Keeping aside the regimes two decades old record of killing and torturing as means of running its political agenda the recent shooting by one of the cadre agent of the TPLF regime in the US capital speaks the general fact who have the tendency to engage in acts considered to have terrorist nature. Since the basic underpinning objective of a terrorist group is advancing its narrow and extremist agenda through the use of violence with no regard to civilian life and safety that it exactly what we have seen in TPLF today and yesterday. And if there is any group that should be labeled as a terrorist group it would be no one but the TPLF elites and rank and file in Addis Ababa and every where its agents are working as ‘diplomats’. Although I know the international community fully realizes this undeniable fact I just wanted to reiterate the fact as a way of awakening their conscious so as to invigorate their action in pressuring the regime in Ethiopia to come to its senses and be party of sanity and join the civility and rationality people of the 21st century has embarked on.
The TPLF regime that has itself been terrorizing the nation with no regard to its own constitution and respect to international laws of human rights labeling different peaceful oppositions, free journalists, activists and bloggers as terrorists is a mockery of the highest order. In TPLF controlled Ethiopia demanding human and democratic rights, treatment of all ethnic groups as equal and the demand for the rule of law are considered an act of terrorism that would subject one to be jailed, tortured and killed while TPLF itself being the legislature, police, prosecutor and judge. So many Ethiopians of different walks of life have been slaughtered on the basis of the ‘anti-terrorism’ law and thousands are languishing in Ethiopian prisons as I speak. The belligerent TPLF regime in Ethiopia, however, that does not budge to the call of United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International as well as US government and European Union request to stop using the law as a tactic used to advance political agendas has continued to target Ethiopians on such phony accusations leading thousands to exile for fear of their life.
Therefore, while summing up my thoughts, I would say that as one of the exiled Ethiopians living in the US, I deeply believe the US government would conduct a thorough background investigation in to the people the TPLF government send as diplomats to its embassies. Because, as we have learnt since some years back the TPLF regime has made it a policy to staff all government positions with cadres than professionals. So, the attributes of the regime that reflects violence and cruel treatment as an instrument of protecting power that is used to advance the economic interest of its members and affiliates would be carried to anywhere its agents are sent. The actions of Solomon Tadesse last week and the determination of Amb. Girma Birru defending the action as proper and right by disrespecting US law and its enforcement agencies actions and decisions is a good example. We Ethiopians, who reside in the US who enjoys the freedom and rights this greate nation enshrined to all people who set foot on its soil plead to the US authorities to protect our safety and security from the regime that exiled us in the first place and attempt to extend its hands here in the land of the free and attempt to suppress our voice by the use of a gun.
Thank you
Thank you America!

Abebe Gellaw’s Letter to U.S. President Barack Obama


by Abebe Gellaw
Note: Upon the invitation of the Democratic National Committee, I had another opportunity to attend an event with President Obama. He spoke about the opportunities and challenges that his administration is taking up at home and abroad. In the October 10 event held at The W Hotel in downtown San Francisco, I took this opportunity to hand the following letter to a White House aide, who promised to deliver it to the President. In any case, here it is in a form of an open letter to President Obama.
….
President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW,
Washington, DC 20500
Mr. President,
First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to you for taking some bold steps to inspire the future leaders of Africa. The Mandela Washington Fellowship, which aims to bring 500 bright and visionary young African leaders to the White House and Capitol Hill annually for a unique experience and learning, is arguably one of the best initiatives that the government of the United States has ever taken.
I am sure many Africans support such an initiative because the future and hope of the African continent hinges upon new breed of visionary leaders that are willing to boldly take risks to lead Africa out of the darkness of brutal tyranny and corruption into the sunshine of freedom, dignity, justice and democracy.Obama at the W Hotel in downtown San Francisco
Some of these young dreamers and visionaries you are trying to inspire will certainly follow the footsteps of Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi and Mandela. If African nations suffering under tyrannies are to get out of the quagmire of abject poverty, ignorance, corruption, abuse of power and the indignity they are suffering at the hands of its own rulers, a new breed of African leaders with selfless mindsets have to take the lead. However, we should also remember that countless young visionary Africans who could have joined the coveted fellowship cannot even apply because most are thrown in harsh jails, some are killed and many are tortured and abused because of their views and the beautiful dreams they cherish.
Mr. President, it would be disingenuous of me if I am remiss to raise the serious concerns that freedom fighters and activists like myself are expressing in the aftermath of the African Leadership Summit that you hosted last August. While the summit should be applauded as the first ever U.S.-Africa summit aimed at engaging African rulers, the list of guests was truly disturbing.
Just to mention a few among many, Teodoro Obiang of Equatorial Guinea, Gambia’s Yahya Jammeh, Cameroon’s Paul Biya, Jose Eduardo dos Santos of Angola even Ethiopia’s Hailemariam Desalegn, who is the front man for TPLF’s brutal regime, are among the worst human rights abusers in the continent that are shedding the blood of so many innocent people and terrorizing their own people to sustain their tyranny and corruption. Africa’s biggest obstacles to progress and change are its own abusive rulers. Without respect for human rights, progress and development has little meaning because it is not the aspiration of any nation to starve and die dispossessed of dignity in silence and fear.
Mr. President, it is true that some African countries are registering some progress. But in so many countries like Ethiopia, where crony capitalism is on the rise, the hyped up progress and development is driven by a greedy ethnocentric ruling elite. As you very well know, crony capitalism mainly benefits the privileged few at the detriment of the majority.
Mr. President, during your meeting with a delegation of Ethiopian officials that included Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn and Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom last month at the United Nations, you said: “Obviously we’ve been talking a lot about terrorism and the focus has been on ISIL, but in Somalia, we’ve seen al-Shabaab, an affiliate of al Qaeda, wreak havoc throughout that country. That’s an area where the cooperation and leadership on the part of Ethiopia is making a difference as we speak. And we want to thank them for that.” It is indeed a great honor for Ethiopia to get your administration’s commendation for its role in the global war on terror.
However, any careful reading of the annual State Department report on human rights reveals disturbing facts that maybe unintentionally overlooked. It is clear that the greatest threats on the safety and security of the ordinary people of Ethiopia do not come from al Qaeda or al-Shabaab. It comes from the very people who sat with you pretending to be committed to be fighting against terrorism. As a matter of fact, after the fall of the brutal military rule of Mengistu Hailemariam in 1991, it is a tragedy that another tyranny is under the TPLF is terrorizing Ethiopia for over two decades.
The TPLF regime has killed, maimed, tortured and jailed countless Ethiopians during its reign of terror. So many journalists, bloggers, activists, dissidents and freedom fighters are being jailed and tortured accused of fictitious terrorism charges. The award winning journalists Ekinder Nega, Reeyot Alemu, Wubishet Taye, the young Zone9 bloggers, leaders of Muslim rights movement, activists and dissidents like Andargachew Tsege, Andualema Arage, Bekele Gerba, Olbana Lelisa and countless others have been labeled terrorists. They are languishing in rat-infested jails abused, tortured and brutalized. Such a cowardly attack against innocent civilians for speaking out against tyranny is nothing but terrorism.
President Obama, please allow me to quote just two paragraph from the 2013 U.S. State Department Human Rights Report on Ethiopia: “The most significant human rights problems included: restrictions on freedom of expression and association, including through arrests; detention; politically motivated trials; harassment; and intimidation of opposition members and journalists, as well as continued restrictions on print media. On August 8, during Eid al-Fitr celebrations, security forces temporarily detained more than one thousand persons in Addis Ababa. The government continued restrictions on activities of civil society and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) imposed by the Charities and Societies Proclamation (the CSO law).”
“Other human rights problems included arbitrary killings; allegations of torture, beating, abuse, and mistreatment of detainees by security forces;reports of harsh and, at times, life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; detention without charge and lengthy pretrial detention; a weak, overburdened judiciary subject to political influence; infringement on citizens’ privacy rights, including illegal searches; allegations of abuses in the implementation of the government’s “villagization” program; restrictions on academic freedom; restrictions on freedom of assembly, association, and movement; alleged interference in religious affairs; limits on citizens’ ability to change their government; police, administrative, and judicial corruption; violence and societal discrimination against women and abuse of children; female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C); trafficking in persons; societal discrimination against persons with disabilities; clashes between ethnic minorities; discrimination against persons based on their sexual orientation and against persons with HIV/AIDS; limits on worker rights; forced labor; and child labor, including forced child labor. Impunity was a problem. The government, with some reported exceptions, usually did not take steps to prosecute or otherwise punish officials who committed abuses other than corruption.”
Mr. President, I hope you agree with me that the disturbing testimony from the State Department is as bleak as a CIA report on al-Qaeda. It should be noted here that the Tigray People’s Liberation Front was also blacklisted in the Global Terrorism Database of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security before it came to power. Terrorist groups, whether they operate as a government or a band of pirates, have similar objectives and aspirations. They try to cause great fear and impose their will upon others through killings, massacres, tortures, kidnappings and all sort of inhuman tactics.
In the aftermath of the 2005 brutal crackdown, U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy had said, in a statement, “Ethiopia has been an ally of the United States in combating international terrorism, yet it is using similar tactics against its own people…The government’s heavy handed tactics to steal the election and persecute those who sought to play by the rules of democracy, should be universally condemned.”
Mr. President, so many Ethiopians appreciate your effort to help Ethiopia. But the United States should not provide unconditional funds to the tyrants in power that are terrorizing the oppressed people of Ethiopia. The United States should not also lose its unique place as the beacon of hope and freedom. It needs to live up to its core values and creeds. If the United States needs credible allies against terrorism, it has to look into the records of questionable allies and press them to clean their own house first before fighting other terrorists.
Mr. President, as you said: “We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it’s easy, but when it is hard.”
Ordinary people like me will continue to make every effort to stick out reminders and notes so that the government of the United States continues to uphold the foundational values and ideals that have made this country truly great and admirable. I do hope that eventually we will get noticed and our voices will be heard.
We need Freedom! Justice! Dignity! Democracy! and Equality.
Most respectfully,
Abebe Gellaw
Global Alliance for the Rights of Ethiopian

The Rise and Fall of the “Baksheesh State” in Ethiopia

The rise of the “baksheesh state” in Ethiopia
My long time readers by now know that I mint my own words and phrases whenever I find it necessary to convey my ideas and arguments with greater clarity, precision and creativity.  In this commentary I introduce the concept of the “baksheesh state” (beggar state) to examine the political economy of the ruling Tigrean Peoples Liberation Front (TPLF) regime in Ethiopia.
In various parts of the Middle East and South Asia, there is a tradition of “baksheesh” which has various manifestations. One may practice “baksheesh” by “alms giving” or charity to the poor as part of one’s religious duty.  “Tipping for services rendered” is another manifestation of that custom as is making payment to those in authority “for granting special favors.”  “Baksheesh” also refers to a culture of political corruption and moral bankruptcy where government officials demand “gifts” and “presents” at the highest levels to aggrandize enormous wealth while officials at the lowest levels supplement their meagre incomes with it.
I introduce the concept of the “baksheesh state” to analyze regimes and states that sustain themselves primarily through  international alms (aid + loans) and engage in aid/loan racketeering  (use of legitimate organizations for illegal purposes) through a variety of corrupt practices. Just as I have previously argued that the highest stage of African dictatorship is “thugtatorship”, I argue here that the “baksheesh state” (beggar state) is a predictable mutation of the garden variety African “kleptocracy” where political power is a means for public officials and elite members of the ruling class to accumulate personal wealth by effectively privatizing  and siphoning the public treasury and resources at the expense of the broader  population.
My notion of the African baksheesh state hearkens back to the admonitions of the well-known Nigerian nationalist, author and statesman Chief Obafemi Awolowo who urged constant vigilance against the rise and entrenchment of “beggar states” in post-independence Africa. In 1967, at the 4th Summit meeting of the Organization of African Unity, Chief Awo sternly warned:
Today, Africa is a Continent of COMPETING BEGGAR NATIONS. We vie with one another for favours from our former colonial masters; and we deliberately fall over one another to invite neocolonialists to come to our different territories to preside over our economic fortunes…
… We may continue and indeed we will be right to continue to use the power and influence which sovereignty confers, as well as the tactics and manoeuvres which international diplomacy legitimatises, to extract more and more alms from our benefactors. But the inherent evil remains—and it remains with us and with no one else: unless a beggar shakes off and irrevocably turns his back on, his begging habit, he will forever remain a beggar. For, the more he begs the more he develops the beggar characteristics of lack of initiative, courage, drive and self-reliance.
Democracy has been pithily defined as a “government of the people, by the people and for the people.” In contrast, a “baksheeshocracy” is a government of aid donors and loaners, for aid donors and loaners and by aid donors and loaners. Alternatively, the baksheesh state could be understood as a government of panhandlers, for panhandlers and by panhandlers.
There is little question or debate that under the TPLF baksheesh state in Ethiopia has handily won the race to the bottom to become the #1 African beggar state. Indeed, the TPLF regime is the prototype and archetype of the baksheesh state in Africa today. It is well-established that  Ethiopia has been and remains Africa’s largest recipient of foreign aid.  According to the Development Assistance Group ETHIOPIA, Official Development Assistance given to Ethiopia for 2008 was $3.819 billion, $3,525 billion in 2010 and $3,563 billion in 2011. In 2011, “Britain chose Ethiopia to be its biggest recipient of development aid during the next four years.” The U.S. increased its aid to the TPLF regime from nearly $1.8 billion in 2005 to nearly $3.5 billion in 2008.
International aid donors and loaners subsidize and transfer massive amounts of funds in various forms (humanitarian, development, military, bilateral and multilateral aid, NGO aid, etc.) to baksheesh states such as Ethiopia to advance their own strategic and geopolitical agendas.  They use their “aid” to manipulate and control the small clique of malignant kleptocrats who cling to power by force to enrich themselves by skimming off a substantial portion of the international aid and loans they receive in the name of their people. One of the notorious ways in which donors and loaners manipulate  baksheesh states is by vastly increasing the amount of aid they give to states who enlist in their proxy service. For instance, after the late Meles Zenawi invaded Somalia in 2006, the U.S. increased its aid to his regime from nearly $1.8 billion in 2005 to nearly $3.5 billion in 2008.
The TPLF baksheesh state is hopelessly addicted to aid as a dope fiend is addicted to hallucinogenic drugs. That regime follows the dictum, “Ask not how YOU can handle your country to make it self-sufficient, ask how you can panhandle for your country so that it can never become self-sufficient.” The leaders of the ruling TPLF regard aid as “free money” that flows like the River Nile without end and without conditions.  They are completely oblivious ofChief Awo’s admonition that beggars that beg remain beggars forever. For the TPLF leaders, international aid and loans are manna from the Western gods that will rain upon them just as predictably as the passing of the seasons. There may be less “aid-rain” one year and more another; but the Western gods never, never fail to send the “aid-rains” to the TPLF  baksheesh state. Although it is proverbially said that  “God helps those who help themselves”, the Western aid gods help only those at the top of the TPLF aid-food-chain who help themselves to the unending bounty of the free aid money they  provide them annually.
The effect of unconditional and unending aid on the TPLF baksheesh state over the past two decades has been  devastating. The TPLF bakshseesh state has been assured in words and actions that it does not have to maintain good governance or even pretend to go through the motions of good governance as a condition for aid and loans.  The TPLF leaders know aid money will flow into their pockets regardless of what they do or do not. It is an indisputable fact that after the TPLF regime jailed nearly all of the opposition leaders and journalists, human rights  advocates and civil society leaders following the 2005 election, the U.S. rewarded it by increasing its aid  from nearly $1.8 billion in 2005 to nearly $3.5 billion in 2008.
It is also an indisputable fact that the TPLF baksheesh state in Ethiopia receives free aid money from the Western donors and loaners with no strings attached;  and in rare cases where conditions are set, they are never enforced. As a result, the TPLF masterminds and ringleaders  often use international aid and loans to cling to power by using aid and loan money to maintain  their large patronage system. By cleverly transmuting aid and loan money in their budget, they provide tens of thousands of jobs to their political supporters and increase the size of their security, police and military services. In August 2011, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and the BBC reported the “Ethiopian government is using millions of pounds of international aid to punish their political opponents.”  The Bureau presented compelling evidence of how “aid is being used as a weapon of oppression propping up the government of Meles Zenawi.” The gargantuan political machine they created to buy and steal votes delivered a stunning 99.6 percent victory in the 2010 “election”.
The TPLF baksheesh state is dis-incentivized by the international donors and loaners from striving to become self-sufficient. In March 2011, I wrote a commentary entitled, “The Moral Hazard of U.S. Policy in Africa” arguing that a regime that is heavily dependent on the safety net of foreign aid, massive infusion of multilateral loans and a perpetual supply of humanitarian assistance  will behave differently if it were left to its own devices to deal with the consequences of a mismanaged economy, debilitating corruption and proliferating poverty.  For over two decades, the TPLF baksheesh regime has gone out into the international community with bowls begging for food to feed millions of Ethiopians without being held accountable by the donors and loaners. As a result, the regime has been completely indifferent to the plight of the people. In a candid moment during the 2008 famine in Southern Ethiopia, the late Meles Zenawi tried to absolve himself of responsibility  while revealing his depraved indifference for the welfare of the starving people of Southern Ethiopia. Defending himself against accusations of indifference and ineptitude, Meles said, “That was a failure on our part.  We were late in recognising we had an emergency on our hands.   We did not know that a crisis was brewing in these specific areas until emaciated children began to appear.” Given the inescapable fact that food crises (emergencies) are so pervasive, recurrent and cyclical in Ethiopia, it is mind-boggling to hear a “leader” of a country be so uninformed and clueless to a point where he had to wait for evidence of skeletal children before he is convinced that there is a famine “emergency”.
The unfortunate fact is that even in 2014, the response of the TPLF baksheesh regime would be no different.  “We were late in recognising we had an emergency on our hands…”  Why is it that the regime has been unable to deal decisively with the question of famine, hunger and malnutrition year after year, decade after decade? The answer lies in the fact that the leaders of the TPLF baksheesh state are “Western aid/loan welfare kings and queens” who find it far more profitable to sit on their behinds  and engorge themselves with millions of dollars skimmed from international aid and loans than putting their shoulders to the wheel of economic development and their noses to the grindstone of good governance. They are completely indifferent to alternatives to aid and loans as the long-term solution to poverty. Thus, international aid aids not only in the entrenchment of bad governance in Ethiopia but also poverty itself.
It has been rumored for some time that the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and some of the Western donors have been softly urging the TPLF baksheesh regime to untether itself from the tits of the foreign aid/loan cash cow. Last week, the regime announced with some fanfare that it will be seeking access the international bond markets. It is somewhat encouraging to hear that the TPLF regime expects to get off its duff after sucking on the foreign aid lollipop for nearly a quarter of a century and seek alternatives to panhandling.  The TPLF “Finance Ministry” announced , “We are aiming for late December to early January at the latest as the time for our debut into the international capital markets. Bonds are very much part of the plan to improve infrastructure.”
It is amazing that the TPLF regime finally, after 23 years, had its epiphany and discovered capital markets. It is curious that the TPLF regime was completely unaware of such a financing mechanism  when it launched its illegal  “bond” sales to Diaspora Ethiopians in the United States for nickels and dimes to build the fairy-taled  5,250-megawatt Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on the Blue Nile River. Could the Diaspora bond “sales” possibly be itsy-bitsy baksheesh in their pockets? Just so they know that we know they have not pulled the wool over our eyes, we note that as the  TPLF regime is stage-managing its current public relations campaign for outreach to  international capital markets, it had allowed massive capital flight and illicit financial flows from Ethiopia for nearly a decade. In 2011, Global Financial Integrity reported that “Ethiopia lost $11.7 billion to outflows of ill-gotten gains between 2000 and 2009.” Imagine what $12 billion dollars could have done to propel Ethiopia’s economic development!!!
The TPLF baksheesh state in Ethiopia is so dependent on donors and loaners that its budget (anticipated revenues and expenditures for a given year) depends overwhelmingly on budget support from the loaners and donors. The US, UK, and the World Bank (not  including other European or industrialized countries) have provided 50 to 60 percent of the national budget of the TPLF baksheesh state for years, according to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. In her book, “Dead Aid”, Dambissa Moyo argues that the primary source of revenue (budget) for the TPLF regime is foreign aid constituting  “a whopping 97 percent of the government’s budget.”
Budget support has been the preferred method of delivering multi-donor “development assistance” to many developing countries and particularly to Ethiopia as a poverty reduction strategy.  “Budget support” is supposed to be a kinder and gentler version of the “Washington Consensus”, that  abominable and villainous “neoliberal” economic policy straightjacket devised by the the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and U.S. Treasury Department in 1989 and imposed on crisis–ridden developing economies to presumably stabilize and put them on the path to trade, investment and expanded domestic entrepreneurship. (In an article included in a book edited by the old anti-neo-liberal warhorse Joe Stiglitz, Meles proclaimed, “The neo-liberal paradigm is a dead end incapable of bringing about the African renaissance, and that a fundamental shift in paradigm is required to effect a revival.”)
On the grave-site of the “Washington Consensus” grew the tree of budget support where baksheesh states could seek shelter from the exacting demands of donors and loaners and untether themselves from the attached strings of the Consensus. With budget support, the donors and loaners would no longer impose aid/loan conditions or  demand policy alignments  from recipient countries. Rather, they would select and align their conditions with the recipient country’s strategy on development and poverty reduction. Simply stated, budget support is a clever strategy to conceal the rampant corruption that takes place in baksheesh states and shield corrupt leaders in recipient countries from public accountability and transparency.
In September 2009, Meles “called on international development partners to support Ethiopia’s growth and transformation over the coming five years thorough releasing budget aid.” His harebrained and much vaunted  “Growth and Transformation Plan”, based largely on “development aid” through budget support, is expected to propel Ethiopia into becoming a “middle income country by 2015”. Meles quixotically claimed that by undertaking massive infrastructure construction and large-scale agricultural production, Ethiopia will achieve middle-income status. In its “Country Development Cooperation Strategy, 2011-2015, USAID chimed in declaring, “Over the next five years, Ethiopia can be transformed to a stable, growing economy, with solid social services and a resilient population.”  We are now two months away from 2015 and a year away from 2016 and Ethiopia remains the second poorest country in the world!!!
The “developmental state” v. the “baksheesh state”
On September 25, 2014, President Obama said, “there is no better example of progress in Africa than what has been happening in Ethiopia — one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.” The President’s statement is not only unfounded in any demonstrable fact but also embarrassing because he was merely parroting a canard cleverly fabricated and perpetrated by the late Meles Zenawi.
For the past decade, Meles Zenawi and his disciples have been bragging that their “developmental state” has produced stratospheric economic growth in Ethiopia in the first decade of the 21st Century. In March 2009, Meles crowed that he expected the Ethiopian economy to grow by 12.8 percent. He assured his Parliament in 2010, “We will be seeing an economic growth rate of 10.1 percent this year, while inflation will fall to 3.9 percent.” Such hyperbolic claims were roundly discounted by various international institutions. According to a 2010 report of the Center for Global Development, average growth rates per capita for the period  1996–2008 was 4.1 percent. The International Monetary Fund also stated in 2009 that given the global economic crises, Ethiopia could expect only about 6% economic growth. In November 2007, the Economist magazine reported, “The government claims that the economy has been growing at an impressive 10% a year since 2003-04, but the real figure is probably more like 5-6%, which is little more than the average for sub-Saharan Africa.” The Economist magazine in March 2012  concluded Meles’ claims of “double-digit growth rates predicted by the government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi look fanciful.”
There is no question that Meles cooked the growth statistics as I have demonstrated beyond any doubt in my commentary, “The Voodoo Economics of Meles Zenawi”. In 2011, Meles admitted that “some” of his economic statistics were questionable when he said, “The precision of the (economic) data is disputed, and we have an ongoing conversation ourselves with partners, including the government itself, about some of that data.  But the headline issue, which nobody disputes, is that there has been from a low base tremendous development progress in Ethiopia over the last eight to ten years or so.” Benjamin Disraeli correctly observed that there are “Lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
Meles’ self-styled “developmental state” is actually a thinly-veiled bakshseesh state garbed in neo-socialist ideological rant against “neoliberalism”.  In his  unfinished  “Master’s theses” at Erasmus University, Meles condemned the “neo-liberal state” as a “predatory” “night watchman state”, and defined it as “a state whose intervention in the economy is very limited”. He argued the neo-liberal state is structurally incapable of “overcome[ing] the vicious circles and poverty traps.”
In contrast to the “predatory night watchman neo-liberal state”, Meles’ argued that his “developmental state“ conceives of development as “a political process first and economic and social process later.” Meles’ “developmental state” plans, initiates, implements, monitors and totally controls the development process. It is the only institution with the capacity to “eliminate rent-seeking behavior” [which economists variously define as a system in which “individuals or groups lobby government for taxing, spending and regulatory policies that confer financial benefits or other special advantages upon them at the expense of the taxpayers or of consumers or of other groups or individuals with which the beneficiaries may be in economic competition.”] The private sector is at best a spectator and a passive lackey (not even partner) to the developmental state which has a singularly commanding role in the economy. According to Meles, “without a developmental state, most if not all of these [developing] countries will be stuck in the poverty trap and the substantial business and middle class will not be created.”  Meles’  “developmental state” is the silver bullet that could solve all of Ethiopia’s and Africa’s economic, social and political problems.
In my commentary “The Fakeonomics of Meles Zenawi”, I demonstrated that Meles’ “growth and transformation plan” (the undergirding structural foundation of the developmental state) is nothing more than a make-a-wish list of stuff. It purports to be based on a ‘long-term vision’ of making Ethiopia ‘a country where democratic rule, good-governance and social justice reigns.’ It aims to ‘build an economy which has a modern and productive agricultural sector with enhanced technology and an industrial sector’ and ‘increase per capita income of citizens so that it reaches at the level of those in middle-income countries.’ It boasts of ‘pillar strategies’ to ‘sustain faster and equitable economic growth’, ‘maintain agriculture as a major source of economic growth,’ ‘create favorable conditions for the industry to play key role in the economy,’ ‘expand infrastructure and social development,’ ‘build capacity and deepen good governance’ and ‘promote women and youth empowerment and equitable benefit.’
However, stripped of its collection of hollow economic slogans, clichés, buzzwords and catchphrases, Meles’ growth and  transformation plan is plain sham-o-nomics.  If the “growth and transformation plan” is a sham so is the developmental state!  In 2009 at a high level meeting of Western donor policy makers in Berlin, a German diplomat suggested that Ethiopia’s economic woes could be traced to “Meles’ poor understanding of economics”. (It is a pity the German diplomat was unaware that Meles almost got a Master’s degree in economics from Erasmus University and that he “studied for a degree in Business Administration at the Open University in 1991 (graduating first in his class).”
Meles went to extraordinary lengths to justify the perpetual (dictatorial) rule of the “developmental state” because there is “the need for continuity of policy. Developmental policy is unlikely to transform a poor country into a developed one within the time frame of the typical election cycle. There has to be continuity of policy if there is to be sustained and accelerated economic growth. In a democratic polity uncertainly about the continuity of policy is unavoidable. More damagingly for development, politicians will be unable to think beyond the next election etc. It is argued therefore that the developmental state will have to be undemocratic in order to stay in power long enough to carry out successful development.”
The private sector must totally submit to the “developmental state” because it is that state that has the capacity to maintain a “stable, democratic and at the same time developmental coalition… in a developing country.” The developmental state “must have the ability and will to reward and punish the private sector actors depending on whether their activities are developmental or rent seeking.” In his conclusion,  Meles issued the following mind-boggling but supremely self-serving pronouncement:
Where the circumstances for a developmental state do not exist the chances for a stable democracy to emerge are indeed very remote. Where they exist while there is no guarantee for democracy, there is a reasonable chance for a developmental and democratic state to emerge. In the end, therefore, the chances of a stable democracy in a poor country are related intimately to the emergence of a developmental state and accelerated development associated with it.
Simply stated, Ethiopia can only achieve economic growth, development, democracy, good governance, human rights, etc., IF and ONLY IF it is led by a permanently entrenched political party committed to the ideology of developmental statism under the leadership of one man. It is a stunning theory of political economy coming from an arrogant autodidact!
Meles fancied himself as a prodigious economist and a polymath. Steeped in his youth in the bush in the now discredited political economy of Marxism, Meles (and his disciples) once in power, tried to redeem and rhetorically reinvent himself as the “chief architect” of  “revolutionary democracy” and the “developmental state” in Ethiopia. Incredibly, neither Meles nor his witless acolytes took the opportunity to articulate their  theory and practice of revolutionary democracy or the developmental state. Instead, they have chosen to mount blathering rhetorical attacks on “neoliberalism” while making a beeline to the gilded gates of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the embassies of Western governments with stretched out hands and cupped palms for alms. “Baksheesh, pretty please!!!”
The BIG LIE about the developmental state in Ethiopia
History’s greatest propagandist said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” When that big lie is repeated by the biggest leader in the world, it has the potential to become a big truth. But “A lie however big does not become truth, wrong does not become right and evil does not become good, just because it is repeated by the high and mighty or even accepted by a majority.”
… I think there’s no better example than what has been happening in Ethiopia — one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. We have seen enormous progress in a country that once had great difficulty feeding itself. It’s now not only leading the pack in terms of agricultural production in the region, but will soon be an exporter potentially not just of agriculture, but also power because of the development that’s been taking place there.
It is embarrassing for the President of the United States to be so misinformed to the point of publicly misrepresenting a simply verifiable fact. Just three weeks before the President made his statement, USAID’s August 15, 2014  report  which completely contradicted him:
Despite a fast-growing economy, Ethiopia remains one of the poorest countries in the world.  It experiences high levels of both chronic and acute food insecurity, particularly among rural populations and smallholder farmers.
Approximately 44% percent of children under 5 years of age in Ethiopia are severely chronically malnourished, or stunted.  This lack of nutrients results in irreversible cognitive and physical impairments. The long-term effects of chronic malnutrition are estimated to cost the Government of Ethiopia approximately 16.5 percent of its GDP every year according to the UN World Food Program (WFP).
If Ethiopia’s economy has been growing by double-digits annually in excess of 10 percent as the TPLF regime claims, but loses “approximately 16.5 percent of its GDP every year”, is it economically developing?  This reminds me of Alice’s conversation with the Queen in Lewis Carroll’s, “Through the Looking Glass”.  “There’s no use trying, one can’t believe impossible things,” said Alice in exasperation. The Queen corrected her. “I daresay you haven’t had much practice. When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” So we must also believe in at least six impossible things about the TPLF baksheesh regime  before breakfast.
For several years now, Meles and his TPLF disciples have been advertising their “Productive Safety Net Programme” (driven by foreign aid in the form of budget support) as the mechanism to end the “cycle of dependence on food aid” by bridging “production deficits and protecting household and community assets”.  In October 2011, Meles told his party faithful:  “We have devised a plan which will enable us to produce surplus and be able to feed ourselves by 2015 without the need for food aid.” His “plan to produce surplus” was to be achieved by “leasing” out millions of hectares of the country’s prime agricultural land to so-called international investors (land grabbers) whose only aim is to raise crops for export.  According to the World Food Programme report (WFP)  (the branch of the United Nations and the world’s largest humanitarian organization addressing hunger and promoting food security), in 2014,  2.7 million Ethiopians and WFP plans to assist nearly 6.5 million vulnerable people with food and special nutritional assistance, including school children, farmers, people living with HIV/AIDS, mothers and infants, refugees and many others.  The humanitarian requirement for 2012 identified 3.76 million people in need of emergency food aid;  in 2011, the number was 4.5 million;  5 million in 2010 and 2009 and 6 million in 2008.34 million Ethiopians–40 percent of the population–are considered chronically hungry.
U.S. food assistance in Ethiopia is administered Ethiopia exclusively through three foreign NGOs (Food for the Hungry (FH), Save the Children (SC) Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and one domestic NGO, Relief Society of Tigray (REST). REST describes itself as the “humanitarian wing of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF)”. As I have demonstrated previously, after the passage of the so-called “Proclamation on Charities and Society”,  “the number of civil society organizations in Ethiopia was reduced from about 4600 to about 1400 in a period of three months in early 2010.  The only domestic civil society institutions allowed to operate in the country are those that are wholly owned subsidiaries of the TPLF or others who have established partnership with individuals and organizations affiliated with the TPLF.  The TPLF administers foreign aid through its subsidiary TPLF REST. Simply stated, the TPLF regime begs for development aid and launders it to enrich its leaders and members of the ruling class through its own “NGO”. Hence, the baksheesh state.
The fall of the baksheesh state in Ethiopia: Can rich beggars eliminate poverty and achieve economic development by begging?
I have previously written that the late Meles Zenawi was Africa’s beggar-in-chief. I did not make the statement out of malice or disrespect to the man but strictly based on fact.  In April 2012, Meles told the China Daily,  “The fact of the matter is that it was the Africans who asked the Chinese to build this conference hall for Africa. It is not the Chinese who offered to build it. We asked them to build it and they agreed and they have delivered, and we have no reason to criticize this.” The Chinese squeezed out $200 million in hard cold cash to build and deliver the African Union Hall.
Simply stated, Africans themselves could have built their own iconic signature building by chipping into an “Africa Union Building Fund”, but why pay out of your own pocket when you can beg or pick someone else’s? To add insult to injury, the tiled silver dome which is the centerpiece of the African Union Hall shockingly resembles a giant overturned beggar’s bowl. That was why I wrote my angry commentary “African Beggars Hall”.  The bottom line is that the  developmental state of Meles and his disciples is based precisely on the same logic: Why bust your behind trying to develop the economy on your own when you can panhandle your way into economic development and growth?
In her book, “Dead Aid”, Dambisa Moyo debunked the fable that the billions of dollars in aid sent and loans provided by Western and other industrialized countries to Africa have helped to reduce poverty and increase growth. She demonstrates that despite billions of dollars in aid and loans, the incidence and severity of poverty in Africa has increased while economic growth has declined. African countries (regimes) have become addicted to aid which has distorted local economies and served as a petri dish for the propagation of corruption. Moyo categorically states no country has ever developed by sucking on foreign aid. She argues, “aid has never created jobs in the African continent.” What aid has done is make lazy and shiftless African governments and regimes even more lazy and shiftless. Moyo argues Africans do not need aid and handouts; they need trade, foreign investments, capital markets, remittances, micro-finance and savings to spur economic growth and reduce poverty. She points to South Africa, Botswana, China, Brazil and India as successful examples of development without massive and unending foreign aid.  For Moyo, Africans need jobs and become entrepreneurs and she places her hopes on Africa’s burgeoning youth population.
Moyo is not opposed to all aid. She has no objections to humanitarian aid given to remediate natural and other disasters. She thinks aid provided by NGO’s is at best “band aid” on serious structural problems. Her objection is to the billions of dollars transferred from Western governments and multilateral institutions and wasted by African governments and regimes. She is correct in insisting that Western aid and loans fuel corruption, encourage African governments to abdicate their responsibilities to provide, education, health care and care for the welfare of their citizens and allow someone from the outside to come in and do their jobs.  It is an undeniable fact that Africans must be able to develop and grow without foreign aid or aid-related assistance.
For debunking the fable of foreign aid driven African development, Moyo was crucified by the international poverty pimps whose very high paying jobs depend on peddling aid as a vehicle for African development. Billionaire Bill Gates characterized Moyo’s book as “promoting evil.” Moyo responded, “To say that my book ‘promotes evil’ or to allude to my corrupt value system is both inappropriate and disrespectful.” Moyo needs to be mindful that no amount of evidence can convince a bleeding-heart liberal with a Messiah complex who has made up his mind that aid is the solution to poverty that aid is not a solution to poverty.
In 2004, USAID issued its CDCS  entitled “Breaking the Cycle of Food Crises: Famine Prevention in Ethiopia.” That  report stated,
Ethiopia, its neighbors and its development partners have collectively failed to break the downward spiral of hunger, poverty and recurring food crises, which is a critical first step in improving the health and economic conditions of present and future generations of Ethiopians…. [S]uccessfully addressing this challenge will require Ethiopian leadership, commitment and the will to change. Evidence on Ethiopia’s performance is compelling and clear. The country has performed badly over the years, even relative to most other African countries, and to East Africa specifically… The poor performance of the economy is not due to drought, but results from the weak economic policies of the country over a sustained period—characterized by low rates of investment in economic growth and agriculture by both government and the commercial private sector, low levels of capacity, and low rates of agricultural and nonagricultural growth. In turn poor economic performance has led to worsening social standardsand created an increasingly fragile state…
In 2014, the TPLF baksheesh state and its development partners have failed to break the downward spiral of hunger, poverty and recurring food crises. That is an undeniable fact!!!
A beggar state for a poor people?
Joseph de Maistre, the French philosopher and diplomat said, “Every nation gets the government it deserves.” Does that mean poor Ethiopians deserve a “beggar government”?
I have often pondered the meaning of de Maistre’s dictum. Logically, in a country where there are democratic elections, it is incumbent upon the voters to be careful who they vote for; and if they vote for incompetent and corrupt officials, they must accept the consequences of their poor choices until such time that they can throw the scoundrels out of office.  What if a people do not have a government but a regime that has imposed itself upon them for decades and clings to power by sheer force and by stealing elections? Do they deserve the regime that is imposed upon them?
In May 2015, Ethiopians will get a regime they don’t deserve and once again they will completely fail in their efforts to get a government they deserve. They will have an opportunity to choose between Tweedle Dee TPLF and Tweedle Dum TPLF. In the end, they are guaranteed to get a Tweedle TPLF baksheesh regime with a victory margin of at least 99.6 percent.
In July 2012, I wrote a commentary entitled, “Ethiopia in BondAid?” I argued that bondage is the state of being bound by or subjected to some external power or control. When people are held in permanent involuntary servitude, they are in “bondage slavery”. When they bound by debt, they are in “debt bondage”. When they are bound by aid, they are in bond-aid.
Before Africa became “independent” in the 1960s, Africans were held under the yoke of “colonial bondage”. “International aid” addiction has transformed Africa’s colonial bondage into neo-colonial bondaid. Could it be reasonably argued that Ethiopians are sinking deeper and deeper into a quicksand of “bondaid” in the second decade of 21st Century?
Perhaps Shakespeare has an inspirational thought for Ethiopia’s poor:
The world is not thy friend nor the world’s law:
The world affords no law to make thee rich;
Then be not poor, but break it…
“Unless a beggar shakes off and irrevocably turns his back on his begging habit, he will forever remain a beggar. The more he begs the more he develops the beggar characteristics of lack of initiative, courage, drive and self-reliance.”  Chief Obafemi Awolowo 
(To be continued…)
Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino and is a practicing defense lawyer.