US intelligence agencies believe Russia acted covertly to boost Donald Trump in the election race, US officials have told leading newspapers.

A report in the New York Times says the agencies had “high confidence” about Russian involvement in hacking.

A CIA assessment reported by the Washington Post made similar findings.

But Mr Trump’s team dismissed the CIA line, saying: “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.”

Russian officials have repeatedly denied the hacking accusations.

On Friday, US President Barack Obama ordered an investigation into a series of cyber-attacks, blamed on Russia, during the US election season.

The hacks targeted emails at the Democratic Party and a key aide to presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

In October, US government officials pointed the finger at Russia, accusing it of meddling in the campaign.

Now, senior administration officials quoted by the New York Times say they are confident that Russian hackers also infiltrated the Republican National Committee’s computer systems as well as those of the Democratic Party, but did not release information gleaned from the Republican networks.

Intelligence agencies say the Russians passed on the Democrats’ documents to WikiLeaks, the Times reported.

Democrats reacted furiously when email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and Mrs Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, were hacked.

The Podesta emails were revealed by WikiLeaks and posted online.

Image copyrightAP

Quoting an unnamed “senior US official”, the Washington Post said “intelligence agencies” had “identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman”.

At one point in the campaign, Mr Trump publicly encouraged Russia to “find” Mrs Clinton’s emails, although he later said he was being sarcastic.

Democrats claimed the hacks were a deliberate attempt to undermine Mrs Clinton’s campaign.

White House spokesman Eric Schultz said President Obama wanted the investigation carried out on his watch “because he takes it very seriously”.

“We are committed to ensuring the integrity of our elections,” he added.

It is not clear if the contents of the review will be made public.

After widespread protests, a six-month state of emergency started in October. Now, much depends on the next move of leaders who have long used their track record of economic development to paper over widespread human rights abuses and political repression.

By James Jeffrey, Contributor

The Christian Science Monitor

DDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA — For nearly a year, mass protests surged across Ethiopia – and stormed across the world’s headlines – as a movement that began with farmers fighting land grabs outside the country’s capital mushroomed into the country’s most sustained and widespread period of dissent and protests since its ruling party came to power more than two decades ago.

Then, suddenly, it all appeared to stop.

In October, the ruling Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) announced a six-month state of emergency, banning protests and social media and arresting thousands of demonstrators in mass sweeps. The desired effect was almost immediate – demonstrations previously rocking the country’s two most populous regions subsided, and a fragile calm returned.

How long the current calm holds – and where the country’s politics goes next – will depend largely on the next move of the EPRDF government, which has long used its track record of economic development to paper over widespread human rights abuses and political repression.

If it takes heed of the protesters’ calls for more transparent, democratic governance, however, that would go a long way, observers say, to establishing a sustainable peace, giving the country a chance to repair its brand as the safest and most reliable country in the volatile Horn of Africa.

But if it does not, protests may not only resume, but escalate, setting the stage for possible dangerous scenarios ranging from an even more brutal governmental crackdown to more widespread and extreme ethnic conflict, or the rise of another strongman dictatorship.

And for a truly long-term solution, observers note that the government must take much larger steps to release political prisoners, bring opposition groups to the negotiating table, and reform key institutions such as the judicial system.

“The oppressed stay silent but eventually you reach a critical mass and then it boils over,” says Yilikal Getenet, chairman of the opposition Blue Party. “Hundreds have been killed but they keep protesting. They go to protests knowing the risks. So what does that tell you?”

For 25 years, since the 1991 revolution swept the EPRDF into power, Ethiopia has been east Africa’s development darling. Thanks to partnerships between local government and international partners, millions of people have been lifted out of extreme poverty. The EPRDF, meanwhile, has also presided over the most impressive economic and development boom in the country’s history, with average annual economic growth being sustained at more than 10 percent for the last decade, according to the World Bank, and shaped the country into a crucial bulwark of peace and stability in a region studded with conflict.

But statistics that wowed the international community have masked a more complex reality on the ground. During its rule the EPRDF has forcefully and repeatedly cracked down on opposition parties, jailing their leaders or forcing them into exile. The 2015 election produced a parliament without a single opposition representative. Freedom of expression is strictly curtailed, and there is little civil society to speak of. Meanwhile, Ethiopians have grown increasingly angry over government corruption and mass youth unemployment.

At the same time, beneath the surface of the EPRDF’s calls for a united national identity, many here see a transparently ethnic politics. The face of government oppression has become the country’s Tigrayan elite, who come from an ethnic group who form only 6 percent of the population, but played a pivotal role in the 1991 revolution and have gone on to dominate government, business deals, the economy, and the security services.

“The people feel deeply hurt by the corrupt ways of the government that has sought to enrich its officials at the expense of the larger society,” says Alemante Selassie, emeritus law professor at the College of William & Mary and Ethiopia analyst, by email. “They feel left out the so-called Ethiopian economic miracle that the Western press touts ad nauseam despite the grinding poverty all around the country, especially the Amhara region.”

Taking heed?

Last November, such frustrations burst open when government announced plans to expand the boundaries of Addis Ababa into surrounding Oromo villages and farms. The plans touched off massive protests, which soon spiraled outward to include the Amhara, Ethiopia’s second largest ethnic group after the Oromo (together the two groups represent about 60 percent of the population). Numbers killed during protests so far range upward of 600, with thousands more imprisoned, according to the likes of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and opposition groups.

But there are also halting signs government may be taking heed of protesters’ demands. At the end of October, Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn conducted a major cabinet reshuffle, changing 21 of 30 ministerial posts, including bringing in 15 new appointees. Some heralded the move, arguing that the selection of technocrats without party affiliation is a positive signal the party is serious about delivering changes, while others argue the new appointees are just different models of the same old oppressive elite.

“People need to be calm and patient,” says Abebe Hailu, a human rights lawyer who lived through the 1974 downfall of Emperor Haile Selassie and the ensuing military dictatorship that eventually fell in 1991 to the EPRDF’s founders. The events of 1974, he explained, illustrate the bloodshed and danger that can accompany too-rapid regime change here. At the same time, however, the government must accept that it has to make real reforms to satisfy the demands of the population.

The government has promised a long list of further reforms to solve the root causes of the protests, like fighting corruption, reforming the electoral system, and creating a $500 million fund to tackle youth unemployment (though how exactly it will work has not been full explained).

But after a generation of EPRDF rule, many here remain skeptical that change is possible at all from within the ruling party.

“This government has failed the people not once but 1,000 times,” says Merera Gudina, chairman of the opposition Oromo Federalist Congress Party, and who at the start of December was arrested for allegedly violating state of emergency rules. “They’ve broken promise after promise.”

by James Jeffrey

The Ethiopian diaspora in the US has assumed a significant role in politics back home and are shaping political debate through social media and satellite television.

Clashes between police and protestors at Ethiopia’s Irreecha festival on October 2 this year left more than 100 people drowned or crushed to death. Soon after, social media sites were abuzz with claims that a police helicopter had fired into the panicking crowds.

A helicopter had in fact been circling above the grounds. But it was dropping leaflets wishing participants a happy festival.

After the incident, overseas activists called for “five days of rage.” During the following week, foreign-owned factories, government buildings and tourist lodges were attacked across the Oromo region. On October 9, the government declared a six-month state of emergency.

Members of the large Ethiopian diaspora in the US, who have long used the internet to try to influence politics at home, follow events in Ethiopia very closely.

Successive waves of emigration have formed a worldwide Ethiopian diaspora of around two million people. The largest communities are in the US, with estimates varying from 250,000 people to about one million.

An abuse of freedom of speech?

“They live in a secure democracy, send their children to good western schools, and are at liberty to say whatever they want to cause mayhem in Ethiopia,” said one foreign official who works for an international institution and who asked to remain anonymous. “They call it freedom of speech and they abuse it to their hearts’ content,” he added.

But the growing movement of writers, bloggers, journalists and activists working in tandem with diaspora satellite television channels which broadcast from the US don’t see it that way.

“The role of the diaspora is consciously being inflated by the regime to duck its responsibility for the debacle at home,” says Hassan Hussein, an Ethiopian academic and writer based in the United States. “Western diplomats echo the regime’s spin and exaggerate the role of the diaspora to justify their cosy relationship with a regime lacking popular legitimacy,” Hussein adds.

Either way, the diaspora is shaping coverage of the protests that began a year ago, when protests by Oromo farmers against land grabs mushroomed into a movement against the ruling Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF). In August, Ethiopia’s second-largest ethnic group, the Amhara, joined the protests.

And diaspora influence goes beyond media coverage. The political opposition in Ethiopia is weak and divided. Its effectiveness has certainly suffered due to oppressive government tactics.

“Nearly all of their political party funds come from the diaspora and the diaspora is not going to pay for an opposition that cozies up to the EPRDF,” the anonymous foreign official said.

“Opposition groups come to the diaspora for money because they could not ask their constituents and supporters for money lest they will endanger their safety,” Hassan Hassan says. “If there was a level playing field for them and the political space was opened up, these groups can raise lots of money [locally].”

No room for compromise

As a result, Ethiopian politics remain utterly polarized with no room for negotiation or compromise. The clearest example of this occurred after Ethiopia’s crucial 2005 parliamentary election.

The opposition did much better than expected and won a significant number of seats. But due to allegations of vote rigging some opposition candidates refused to accept the mandate – after the diaspora put pressure on them.

“Because of that decision we lost everything, and people lost hope,” said Lidetu Ayele, founder of the opposition Ethiopia Democratic Party. “We had hundreds of seats then. Who knows what we might have now.”

Government media has little credibility

Deji Olukotun of Access Now, which campaigns for the digital rights of users at risk around the world, feels the government is hurting itself by trying to fight the problem through restricting internet access: “These technologies are here to stay, and governments should embrace their promise rather than curtail them,” he said.

Other people involved in Ethiopia’s online media scene, such as Addis Ababa blogger Daniel Berhane, point out that rather than just complain about social media, the government could embrace it to counter disinformation spread by diaspora activists. But evidence suggests that the authorities do not really grasp what is at stake. Instead, they rely on the control of traditional media, such as radio and television, and block social media.

“The government is too obsessed with control – control of the information, its delivery, etc.,” Berhane said. “Government media is part of the problem, with those involved more concerned about pleasing ministers than being professional. So you get sloppy reporting undermining its credibility.”

Social Media blockades are hurting the economy

At the same time, the government has prevented a truly independent local media from developing. That leaves Ethiopians fed up with state media and turning to diaspora news in all its myriad forms, ranging from Facebook posts to Ethiopian Satellite Television, more commonly known as ESAT.

“The problem is that they take a lot of things as fact when they read about them on social media which they would view as gossip if they had heard it by word of mouth”, said Lidetu Ayele.

Meanwhile, government-imposed internet restrictions continue to have varying negative impacts, from local businesses to foreign embassies to international aid agencies to ordinary Ethiopians.

Internet shutdowns in Ethiopia between mid-2015 and mid-2016 lost the economy about $9 million (eight million euros), according to a recent study by the US-based Center for Technology Innovation.

“Censoring the Internet is not a solution to the protests or resistance,” says Moses Karanja, an Internet policy researcher at Strathmore University in Nairobi. “It is a blockage to any democratic trajectory of a country.”

Exclusive Interview with Ato Tekle Yeshaw of Moresh Wgene

By Berhane Tadese, New York City
December 12, 2016
 
Hosted by Ethiopian Community Mutual Association (ECMAA), Dr. Fikre Tolossa came to New York City on Saturday, December 10, 2016 to talk about his new book entitled “True origin of Oromos and Amharas”. Dr. Fikre Tolossa is a poet, playwright and an author. His new book has new revelation on Amharas and Oromos origin that  have never read anywhere else. The book also explained that the name Ethiopia is derived from “Ethiops”, descendants of one common origin. He dismissed the name Ethiopia as originating from the ancient Greek. Many previous books written about Ethiopia’s history do not focus and address true origin Amhara and Oromo groups. They describe the Amharas and the Tigrians in the north as a Semitic group and the Oromo and the other southern ethnic groups as Cushitic. Dr. Fikre Tolossa’s new book challenge this assertions and describe the origin of the various ethnic groups in Ethiopia as decedents of the ten brothers of the same family. He tries to uncover the origin of Ethiopia going back to 4000 years.

Today the face book generations politics focus in current ethnic power politics rather than the common history of the various ethnic groups of Ethiopia. Now, Dr. Tolossa’s untold history of Ethiopia discover the common heritage and origin of the Amhara and Oromo people. It is an unprecedented revelation for most ordinary Ethiopians. The academicians and historians are now set in motion to examine his researched findings.  Dr. Fikre presented his work as educational contribution to the new generation. He claimed that all ethnic groups as Ethiopians faced many challenges. He referred historical instances where the gallant Ethiopian people stood side by side to defend the country from foreign invaders. The book also asserts that the current distorted view of Ethiopian history in some quarters  imply that the Amhara’s ruled Ethiopia by force imposing their power and will on Oromos and other ethnic groups as false presentation of history of Ethiopia. In fact Dr. Tolossa in his book demonstrates that the roles and contribution the Oromos made in the making of Ethiopian state and history. He states that the kings of Ethiopia during the last 700 years were or have an Oromo ethnic back ground.

In addition the book covers several significant topics on current Ethiopian issues such as:

• The impact of the of the late 1960^th Ethiopian student movements on current ethnic politics in Ethiopia.
• The history and use of Latin alphabet for Oromo language and engage the reader to examine whether the Geze alphabet would be better than the Latin alphabet for the writings of Oromo language.

This book presents a new and fresh perspective on Ethiopian history using ancient Ethiopian documents as its primary source. I urge all Ethiopians interested in the history of Ethiopia to get hold of the book and read it.

This presentation was held at 220 Manhattan Avenue in New York City. Quite a good number of people from New York metropolitan area attended the presentation. At the end of the meeting the author gave answer to several questions raised by the attendees. The Ethiopian community mutual assistance association (ECMAA) regularly invites Ethiopians and interested individuals in the metropolitan area to attend events, book reviews and presentations. It sponsors on relevant topics of Ethiopia. Stay tuned!

Tilahun Gugsa and Helen Tadese, no more in matrimony.

Author’s Note: This is the sixth installment in a series I have called “What Do WE Want and Do NOW?”.  The serialized commentaries have three aims: 1) take stock of the impact of the recent uprisings in Ethiopia against the backdrop of the extreme repression (“state of emergency”) unleashed by the Thugtatorship of the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (T-TPLF); 2) challenge Ethiopians, particularly Ethiopian intellectuals, to think outside the box, indeed with no box at all, about going  forward, and 3) propose some ideas that may be useful in charting a future course of action given current circumstances. “We” have met the enemy and he is us!

Part I, HERE; Part II, HERE; Part III, HERE; Part IV, HERE. Part V, HERE. 

XVII. “WE” never miss an opportunity to miss an OPPORT-UNITY!

Today, we have extraordinary opportunities to work together to bring down the Thugtatroship of the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (T-TPLF) from power and lay the groundwork for the construction of the New Ethiopia. The gnawing question in my mind is, “Will “WE” seize the day?” Will “WE” strike while the iron is hot or fall back into that old habit of never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity?

What saddens and aggravates me the most is that  “WE” never miss an opportunity to miss an OPPORT-UNITY!

What I have personally observed over the past decade among the “opposition” (and even the T-TPLF) is the fact that “WE” never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. There have been many opportunities to get things right and do right by the people of Ethiopia. But every time, “WE” have let the opportunity go to waste. Let me illustrate. Over the past decade, various political parties have formed coalitions and mobilized Ethiopian society for electoral participation and other opposition activities. Their unity to speak in one voice was inspirational. That singular voice raised the hopes and aspirations of the Ethiopian people and struck terror in the hearts of the T-TPLF. For the first time in 2005, that coalition brought a  glimmer of hope for democracy and freedom for Ethiopians. But all that was short-lived. Just as those parties came together swiftly, they also broke up just as quickly and went their separate ways. If that coalition had remained strong and united, the T-TPLF today would be in the dustbin of history where it properly belongs. But the personal ambition of those craving power overpowered the needs of those disempowered by the T-TPLF for so long. Those jockeying for power let down the Ethiopian people hard. Will history judge them among the unforgiven? But that was a generational opportunity that was missed.

Today, we have an opportunity to build a mass-based inter-ethnic and inter-religious coalition to take on a bewildered, alarmed and frightened T-TPLF hiding behind the skirt of its “state of emergency” declaration. The spirit of defiance, audacity and rebellion is visible in the faces of the people of Ethiopia who are sick and tired of being sick and tired of the T-TPLF. The spirit of cooperation and collaboration to rid Ethiopia of the T-TPLF manifests itself more conspicuously every day in the T-TPLF police state. The time is right and the stars are aligned just right to fight the T-TPLF as a unified force.

But it seems “WE” are poised once again to miss another  opportunity of a lifetime. “WE”, particularly in the Diaspora, are bogged down talking about the singular importance of ethnicity and how power should be configured along ethnic lines. The self-appointed ethnic chiefs and champions of “ethnification” of politics are babbling the venomous rhetoric of hate and resentment. Ironically, these self-appointed chieftains are so blinded by ambition and starved for power, they have become political caricatures. They are indeed political jokes, but as we have seen in the recent U.S. presidential elections jokes have a way of becoming cruel ironies.

“WE” must use every opportunity to oppose those preaching ethnic division and sectarianism with as much vigor as we oppose the T-TPLF. The difference between the T-TPLF and those who mindlessly advance the T-TPLF cause of ethnic division is the difference between two sides of a coin. It is the difference between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. They are one and the same. They want to displace the T-TPLF so that they can take over and become the new and improved T-TPLF by another ethnic label. The right opportunity exists right now to sideline the prophets of ethnic division and hatred and build a genuine inter-ethnic and inter-faith alliances to ensure that the hate-mongers and those who sow the seeds of discord, strife and factionalism are exposed for what they truly are.

“WE” now have the opportunity to get real leadership to guide the opposition movement in standing up to the T-TPLF and those who advance the T-TPLF cause by a different ethnic label. Here, I am not particularly referring to “political leaders”. I am broadly addressing civic society leaders – faith and community leaders, academics and activists, youth and women’s groups leaders, leaders of professional and trade organizations, etc.–  who have missed, time and again, the opportunity to provide leadership.

In my June 2012 commentary, “Ethiopia: Unity in Divinity!”, I praised and encouraged leaders of the Islamic and Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo faiths in Toronto, Canada who joined hands to show their unity  in defending the ancient monastery of Waldeba in northern Ethiopia from destruction by foreign investor commercial agricultural enterprises. In my August 2015 commentary, “Ethiopia: Our Need for Unity in Divinity Facing Adversity!”, I appealed to members of the Christian and Islamic faiths to come together and fight evil. In support, I cited  divine authority. In Romans 8:31 is written, “What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?” In the Qu’uran, Surat ‘Āli `Imrān 3:103 is written: “And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers.”

We are divinely ordained to be ONE people. “WE” must reject the false gods of Stalin and Lenin who said “WE” are “nations, nationalities and peoples.”

Carpe diem! Seize the day!

XVIII.  “WE” must change ourselves before “WE” can change Ethiopia

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. reminded us that, “Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom.” But where does change come from? Gandhi counseled, “If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him… We need not wait to see what others do.” Simply stated, “Be the change you want to see in the world.”

Change is scary, uncomfortable and difficult. Change requires that we leave our comfort zones. Most people are resistant to change because they fear the unknown, they are risk averse and they doubt themselves. Change is often stressful even when positive. Because change is perceived as inherently uncertain, most people would rather accept what comes to them passively than act decisively and stop striving towards what they want. Change begins  incrementally in the way we think. I believe it comes from asking ourselves tough questions and answering them honestly.

To change one must ACT, that is Attitude Can change Things.

When I decided to become a human rights advocate and defend the victims of the T-TPLF, I had to undergo a radical transformation in my attitude. It was a simple act in itself, but extraordinarily difficult to achieve. I had to change from someone who is indifferent to the plight and suffering of others to someone who is compassionate and caring to those victimized by injustice wherever they may be.  So my first step in my ongoing process of self-transformation was to no longer be indifferent.

But what does it mean to be “indifferent”?  Elie Weisel explained, “For the person who is indifferent, his or her neighbor are of no consequence. And, therefore, their lives are meaningless. Their hidden or even visible anguish is of no interest. Indifference reduces the other to an abstraction…. To be indifferent to that suffering is what makes the human being inhuman.” (Emphasis added.)

As I have previously written on a number of occasions, it took a catastrophic event to transform me from an inhuman being to a human being. For years, I watched and intentionally turned a blind eye to the crimes and injustices committed by the late Meles Zenawi and his murderous gang of thugs. It was easier for me to shrug it off, write off Ethiopia and the continent as a lost cause. I shared the abysmal pessimism of The Economist that Africa is a “hopeless continent” facing unending wars, corruption, bad governance and human rights violations. I even shared The Economist’s conclusions, “No one can blame Africans for the weather, but most of the continent’s shortcomings owe less to acts of God than to acts of man. These acts are not exclusively African—brutality, despotism and corruption exist everywhere—but African societies, for reasons buried in their cultures, seem especially susceptible to them.”

When I decided to join the struggle for human rights in Ethiopia in 2005, I consciously decided to change my attitudes, perspectives and views. It was not an epiphany or some great revelation. It was an act of simple introspection. I asked myself why I am so indifferent to the plight and suffering of the Ethiopian people, the people of the continent. Why am I so disinterested, apathetic, uninvolved, nonchalant, uncaring and neutral about the people? A complete transformation in my thinking occurred when I asked myself a very simple question: If I do not speak up against Africa’s murderous dictators, if I do not stand up and defend the victims of those criminals against humanity, who will?  Elie Weisel observed, “There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.”

I know I am powerless to prevent the crimes against humanity committed by and continue to be committed by the T-TPLF, but I am never powerless to protest their crimes against humanity in the court of international public opinion.

The Meles Massacres of 2005 were defining moments for me as an individual. I had to make a choice. The easy thing for me to do at the time was to shake my head in disbelief, cover my eyes in horror, roll my eyes in disgust and purse my lips in sorrow and move on to something else. That would have been tantamount to capitulating to evil and turning a blind eye to monstrous crimes committed against innocent human beings. My other choice was to muster the energy and courage to stand up and speak up against the personification of pure evil. I now live by the timeless maxim: “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men and women to do nothing.” Affirmatively stated, I believe all that is necessary to triumph over evil is for all good men, women and young people to do something.

I suspect in the course of human events, most people face their own “defining moments”. Often that “moment” is a point in time when a person gains a certain clarity about things and becomes enlightened to see right through one’s clouded judgment. Those defining moments are often random events beyond one’s control but define us as the persons we truly are. Almost invariably, those  moments come in the form of a clear choice: to be or not to be; to do or not to do; to speak up or to remain mute; to turn a blind eye to keep one’s eye wide open; to stand up for right or lie down with wrong; to be a human being or an inhuman being.  By making the right choice we define the moment; and by making the wrong choice or not choosing at all, we allow the moment to define us.

I changed from an inhuman being to a human being as a result of the inhumanity of Meles Zenawi and his murderous gang of inhuman thugs.

There is a great lesson and warning to future generations of Ethiopians in the Meles Massacres of 2005.  To forget the crimes of yesterday is to invite new crimes tomorrow. To paraphrase Elie Weisel, we must seek justice for the victims of yesterday not only because it is the right thing to do, but also to protect the youth of today, and the children who will be born tomorrow from similar injustice and wrong. We do not want the past to become the future of our children and grandchildren. That is why all of the criminals responsible for the 2005 massacre must be held accountable. That is why all of the criminals responsible for the 2016 Irreecha Massacres and all of the other massacres must be held accountable. Delaying justice to the Ethiopian massacre victims is to invite the harsh verdict of history upon ourselves and future generations: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

On a lighter note, to change oneself, all one has to do is to look at the (Wo)man in the mirror as the late great Michael Jackson sang: I’m starting with the man in the mirror/ I’m asking him to change his ways/ And no message could have been any clearer/ If you wanna make the world a better place/ Take a look at yourself, and then make a change…

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.”

XIX. “WE” must be independent thinkers and “non-conformists”.

Over the past decade, one of the most perplexing things I have noticed is that “WE”, the vast majority of “US”,  are not independent thinkers. “WE” lack intellectual autonomy. By that I mean several things. “WE” tend to be conformists. “WE” tend to venerate and trust authority figures and those with all sorts of acronyms after their names. “WE” tend to follow cultish personalities. “WE” tend to let our friends and others dictate what “WE” should believe and do. “WE” tend to be easily led by others with strong opinions.

Simply stated, the vast majority of us are conformists. Even “OUR” leaders are conformists. They remain followers. “WE” do not show confidence in “OUR” beliefs, values, and way of thinking. “WE” tend to be dependent on others for the direction and control of “OUR” thinking.

When I say we must be independent thinkers, I mean several things. “WE” must be critical thinkers and must never passively accept the beliefs of others. We must never mindlessly accept what we hear and read. We must always question and demand to see evidence and never accept simply on representation. Independent thinkers are evidence-based thinkers. “WE” should always consider alternative perspectives and value other points of view, but in the end “WE” must make a critical analysis and evaluation and make informed judgment on issues.

When we are not independent thinkers, we become susceptible to group think and herd mentality. This well-known psychological phenomenon often occurs when individuals seek harmony or consensus in a group setting. This often results in avoidance of  critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating the group’s view from outside influences. Individuals avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions. It leads to dysfunctional decision-making and those with influence in the group present themselves as having special abilities and competence and undermine those who question and offer alternatives. The independent thinkers who challenge the group leadership are often persecuted and driven out.

Groupthink and herd mentality are dangerous. Collective rationalization leads to closing of the mind and blind righteousness in one’s cause while being blindsided to what could be wrong. Dissenters are ostracized and new ideas that do not conform to the prevailing orthodoxy are suppressed. Individuals exercise self-censorship out of fear and expression of doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are strongly discouraged. Individual members are pressured into accepting the illusion of unanimity.

I have observed the pressure to root out independent thinkers and nonconformists in a variety of social and political settings in the “opposition”.  I have observed it during the student movement decades ago and I continue to observe it in many “opposition” group settings today.  It is a self–defeating practice and eliminates the possibility of a new generation of leaders and political activists from rising.

I cannot understate the importance of becoming and cultivating independent thinkers and “non-conformists”. When I speak of being a “non-conformist”, I use the term in the sense of Dr. King who challenged those struggling in the civil rights movement to become “non-conformists”. Dr. King was not concerned about “non-conformity” for its own sake. He said, “Nonconformity in itself may not necessarily be good and may at times possess neither transforming nor redemptive power.” But he was concerned about the “crowd pressures [that] have unconsciously conditioned our minds and feet to move to the rhythmic drumbeat of the status quo.” He complained of the “mass mind” that has “cultivated” the herd mentality.  He declared, “We are not makers of history; we are made by history… ‘In this world a man [woman] must either be anvil or hammer,’ meaning that [s]he is either a molder of society or is molded by society.  Who doubts that today most [wo]men are anvils and are shaped by the patterns of the majority?”

Dr. King proclaimed, “The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists, who are dedicated to justice, peace, and brotherhood.  The trailblazers in human, academic, scientific, and religious freedom have always been nonconformists.  In any cause that concerns the progress of mankind, put your faith in the nonconformist!”

To be continued…

Hewan Wondiyfraw describes her late uncle, Henok Belete, as a kind, quiet man who was very close to God.
When the police came to her door around midnight on Dec. 1 to notify her family of his death, she says her mother was so shocked she couldn’t even cry.

Belete, 37, had a history of depression and schizophrenia, Wondiyfraw said, and he died after being hit by a GO train at Guildwood Station.

The family says it was a suicide — one that has taken them by surprise.

“I had just seen him for Thanksgiving,” said Wondiyfraw, “he seemed totally fine.”

Panel discussion One Community, One Tournament Pt 2 SBS Amharic

Panel discussion One Community, One Tournament Pt 2 SBS Amharic

In my most recent  article titled “What is the Ultimate Goal of the Oromo Movement”[1], I argued for the view, given the evidence, the ultimate goal of the Oromo movement is to seek and establish an independent Oromo nation as a sovereign state. This piece is a sequel to the article I mentioned above. In this piece I argue for the following view: Some Oromo elites raise the issue of referendum for the Oromo people as a means to achieve the ultimate goal of the Oromo movement, which is the establishment of Oromia as an independent, sovereign nation. Below I offer reasons for this view.  Now to the question: Who is seeking a Referendum? The Oromo people or some Oromo Elites? A short answer to these questions is that those who are seeking referendum for the Oromo people are some Oromo elites. For evidence that supports this claim one needs to watch media interviews and discussions by some of the Oromo elites.

It must be noted that a referendum as an ultimate solution to the problems of the Oromo people is not at the center of the debate in the Oromo movement for the same reason that the ultimate goal of the Oromo movement, an establishment of Oromia as an independent, sovereign nation, is not at the center of the debate. In my view, the reason is clear, i.e., it is to avoid risking a potential backlash. I concluded the article mentioned above as follows: “It is for the Oromo elites to show that either they accept the claim I have argued for or they reject it or they show another more plausible explanation of the evidence on which my argument is based. If they accept it, that is an important clarification for the Oromo people as a whole and for the other peoples of Ethiopia. If they reject my claim, then it is also important for them to show where the mistake is. That would also add clarity to the ultimate goal of the Oromo movement. Now the most important question is: What is the official, ultimate goal of the Oromo movement according to the Oromo elites, if it is different from what I argued for above, i.e. seeking an establishment of Oromia as an independent, sovereign nation?” Until this moment, I have not seen a published response to my question.

Now returning to the current topic, from the outset, I want it to be absolutely clear that I am NOT against referendum for the Oromo people or any other group IF AND WHEN it is an actual expression of the will of the people. One of the purposes of this article is to trigger a conversation and a public debate and discussion on the issue of referendum when some Oromo elites raise referendum as an ultimate solution to solve problems for the Oromo people. It should also be clear from the outset that to raise the question who is seeking a referendum when it comes to the Oromo people should not be seen as standing against the will of the Oromo people. That is because this article is not a response to the Oromo people who are seeking referendum since I am not aware of the Oromo people in general who are seeking referendum for the Oromo people to decide a secession of Oromia. This article is about the views of some of the Oromo elites who advance the issue of a referendum as an ultimate solution to problems of   the Oromo people. I contend that identifying the desire for a referendum by some Oromo elites with the desire for a referendum of the Oromo people in general at this point in time is unjustified because there is no adequate evidence to support the view that the Oromo people are seeking referendum to secede from Ethiopia or to establish Oromia as an independent sovereign state. One can check all available evidence regarding the demands of the Oromo people especially in the last one year so to see if seeking referendum as a basis for secession of Oromia is among the demands. As far as I can tell, the evidence does not support the view that the Oromo people are actually demanding referendum to decide the future of Oromia. Having said this in light of the publicly available evidence, I am not suggesting that there are no Oromos in Oromia who seek referendum to achieve the secession of Oromia. My point is specific in that among the frequently stated demands of the Oromo people during the yearlong protest the demand for a referendum to decide secession of Oromia is not among them. Furthermore, it has to be noted that a demand for self-determination, or self-rule for Oromia has been made mostly by Oromo elites, but often without expressing the demand for self-determination or self-rule as identical to a demand for Oromia to be an independent, sovereign nation.

Why then Referendum?

Let us reflect for a moment regarding the question of referendum and why it is raised by some Oromo elites.

First, it has to be noted that there are Oromo elites who make a case that there was an independent nation called Oromia that has been colonized by the Abyssinian/Ethiopian Empire. A discussion on whether referendum is an ultimate solution to the problems the Oromo people face and have been facing for a long time is predicated, to a significant extent, on adequately answering the question whether the Oromos have been colonized. The question whether the Oromos have been colonized is contentious and should be debated, but to offer a referendum as an ultimate solution to resolve the issues the Oromo people face is begging the question against those who argue against the claim that the Oromos have been colonized. Note that not all Oromo elites share the view that the Oromo people have been colonized.  Hence, to make a reasonable case for the referendum for the Oromo people requires making a reasonable case for the view that the Oromos have been colonized. Now note this: Even if a reasonable case can be made for the view the Oromos have been colonized, it does not follow from this that referendum is the only or the best solution for the problems the Oromo people have faced and still face. One can argue that democratizing Ethiopia as a whole where human rights are protected and where there is economic justice for the Oromo people along with the rest of the people of Ethiopia  is what is needed. One can argue that if the Oromo people play a vital role in a democratic Ethiopia where their culture is respected, where Afan Oromo is an official language, and if all their just demands are met, why would referendum even be raised?  But that argument is not the focus of this piece.

Second, one of the most important issues that needs to be addressed regarding a referendum to achieve the ultimate goal of the Oromo movement, i.e., the independent, sovereign nation, Oromia, is distinguishing the will of the people on the ground and the will of those elites who speak on behalf of the people. Now which “people” are we talking about in this context? Obviously, proponents of referendum would say by “the will of the people” they are referring to the will of the Oromo people in general. But this view needs to be clarified. Is it the case that NOW the majority of the Oromo people are demanding a referendum to seek secession of Oromia from the rest of the country? In light of publicly available evidence, the answer to this definitely is no. As far as I can tell, a poll has not been conducted that shows the majority of the Oromo people seek a referendum to decide the future of the Oromo people. If there is data that show that the demand for a referendum is the demand of the majority of the Oromo people that will help. Those Oromo elites who propose referendum as an ultimate solution to solve the problems of the Oromo people are most welcome to share such data or evidence to support seeking a referendum is based on the demand of the majority of Oromo people.

There is a serious question that needs to be addressed about the will of the rest of the Ethiopian people when debating and discussing whether a referendum is an ultimate solution to the Oromo people. As everyone knows, what happens in the Oromia region will have consequences for the rest of the people of Ethiopia. In this case, a referendum for Oromia to secede from the rest of Ethiopia will bring to an end to Ethiopia as a sovereign nation. Obviously, the people of Ethiopia, including Oromos who do not support secession, have interest in the fate of Ethiopia as a country. That means, a referendum will not happen in a vacuum since it will have a ripple effect for the rest of Ethiopia. It will affect the interests of both pro-secession Oromos and those who are pro-unity and pro-territorial integrity of the sovereign nation called Ethiopia. That means, the will of the people of Ethiopia, both Oromos who want to remain as an important part of Ethiopia and the rest of Ethiopians who are in favor of a united Ethiopia must be taken into account in deciding the future of Oromia and Ethiopia. That means, to argue for the view that the will of the people must be respected must be clearly stated because there are several groups of people whose interest and will or desire matters. Furthermore, owing to its geographical location, Oromia is home for many non-Oromo Ethiopians and their will or desire along with the desire of those who are pro-unity Ethiopians must be taken into account, including people in Addis Ababa. Obviously, the will of the people of Addis Ababa needs to be taken into account if and when a referendum becomes real. To sum up, when we talk about a referendum to achieve a secession for Oromia, the will of the pro-unity Ethiopians, including the people of Addis Ababa, non-Oromo Ethiopians who live in Oromia, and Oromos who want to remain with the rest of Ethiopia must be taken into account.

Third, in this connection, it is common to hear from the proponents of referendum that referendum in other parts of the world is used as an example to make a case for referendum for the Oromo people. But this must be clarified. To make a case for referendum using examples of referendum elsewhere must take into account the similarities, differences, and the historical context that justifies a need for a referendum before modeling it for the referendum of the Oromo people. An argument from analogy can be good, or strong, and hence justified only when the similarities between things compared outweigh dissimilarities. That means, when proponents of referendum use  examples of  referendum elsewhere to support their argument for a referendum for the Oromo people such arguments  must be challenged, not because one is against the will of the people, but because the analogy can be  bad and does not reflect the reality on the ground. To expose a shaky ground on which a case for referendum is made can be a good a thing for the people since it is far better for people to make a life-changing decision better informed than otherwise. In this connection, we must guard against views copied from other countries before putting them to experiment in Ethiopia. We, as a society, are victims of imported ideologies and it is the responsibility of the elite to make sure the people of Ethiopia, in general, and the Oromo people, in particular, do not end up serving as another ground to experiment failed ideologies or flawed theories that do not serve the interest of the people.

People Know What They Want

It is crucial to understand what proponents of referendum often say when anyone raises any question about referendum for the Oromo people. It is common to hear at least two objections from proponents of a referendum when anyone raises any question about referendum for the Oromo people. One of these objections is that to raise any question about referendum is to stand against the will of the people. But that need not be the case and in my case I have already made it clear that if and when people express their will to decide what they want I, for example, have no objection whatsoever. To debate the value of referendum should not be discouraged at any rate. The other objection goes as follows: Who are you to tell the people what is good for them? The people know what they want or what is good for them? It is important to note that those who often raise these objections are also other elites—-how can they be “the people, all the people”? But it is not productive to respond to them likewise, because such a response does not advance the debate.  An attempt to understand what they are trying to communicate and to address the issue properly is more important. I conclude this piece with a reflection on the role of the elite, both the pro-referendum Oromo elites and pro-unity elites on the future of Ethiopia insofar as the issue of referendum for the secession of Oromia is concerned. This reflection also serves as a response to the objection, who are you to tell the people what is good for them?

The claim that “people know what they want or what is good for them” needs to be handled with extreme care. If one claims that people in general do not know what is good for them that would mean that people are ignorant.  That is wrong because it is false. In general, people do know lots of things—they do not need experts about every decision they make. What needs to be noted in this context is not a general claim that people know what is good for them. The kind of knowledge that is attributed to people is the key in understanding the claim that people know what is good for them. As the context suggests, the content of knowledge in question is about socio-economic, legal, political, etc., issues that are essential for a society to flourish. When understood in such terms, it is correct to say that people, in general, do not possess expertise when it comes to knowledge of the complexity of socio-economic, political, and legal issues that a society needs for its flourishing to the extent the elites possess the relevant knowledge in question. Accordingly, it is a matter fact that the elite, those with expertise in various issues that affect a society, play significant roles, but the roles could be negative or positive or a mixture of both. I conclude this piece with a call to the elites in pro-referendum camp as well as the proponents of a united democratic Ethiopia with non-secessionist Oromos on their side going forward to make their case to inform the public regarding the pros and cons of referendum if referendum is going to be real.

The Role of the Elite

The pro-referendum Oromo elites have every right to advance and argue for their view, but that does not mean their view is a reflection of the views of the majority of the Oromo people now on the ground at the moment. Their role, among other things, is to offer compelling reasons why a referendum for secession of Oromia is a good thing for the Oromo people. If the majority of the Oromo people do not want secession as a good thing, at the moment, on what grounds would the referendum proponents argue that secession is a good thing for the Oromo people? Since elites play a role as opinion shapers, it is possible for referendum advocating Oromos to shape the views of the Oromo people on the ground. But the question that such elites must answer is this: Why should the Oromo people choose referendum for secession of Oromia when other options can bring about the desire or the will of the Oromo people?  To make a case for the will of the people to be respected, say,  in making a case for referendum,  should be distinguished from instilling in people a view and an option that might not be good, all things considered.  If, as a considered judgement, a referendum for the secession of Oromia will not bring about what is good for the people, it is the responsibility of the elite to seek another option which can bring the good for the Oromo people. It is the role of the elite to make known all available options for the Oromo people to make an informed decision.  Ultimately, it is incumbent on advocates of referendum to make a compelling case why secession of Oromia based on a referendum is a better option for the Oromo people.

On the other hand, the elites on pro-unity camp, those who think and believe that the secession of Oromia goes against the interests and the will of the people of Ethiopia, including the Oromo people who want to remain as an important part of Ethiopia as a sovereign nation, must make a compelling case for their view. To make a case for a united Ethiopia as a sovereign nation with the Oromo people as part of the unity need not be seen as a position against referendum per se. The issue is what is good, or the best scenario for the people of Ethiopia, including the Oromos who want to remain part of Ethiopia as a sovereign nation. Obviously, millions of Ethiopians, the majority of Ethiopians want Ethiopia to remain a sovereign nation without the regime in power, with a democratically elected government. This is also the will or the desire of millions of people. That means, the elites on the pro-referendum side for the secession of Oromia face the elites on the pro-Ethiopian unity side, and vice versa, to hear the most compelling cases for their respective views that will inform the decision of the public on both sides. Both groups must make a case for what is good for the people in question. When the Oromo people who hear the best reasons why referendum for secession of Oromia are also given a chance to hear the best reasons why it is better for the Oromo people to remain as part of Ethiopia with a democratically elected government that justly addresses the grievances of the Oromo people, there is nothing wrong for the people to choose what is the best for them. In presenting their arguments to serve their people the elites are expected to present truth with integrity without seeking their own personal agenda. The elites who end up seeking their own interest in the name of the interest of the people on whose names they speak will only end up doing what the regime in power  does—deceiving the people, betraying the people in whose name they speak and advocate issues without actually doing what they do to serve their people. It is my hope that elites on both cams will serve their community with integrity, courage, and conviction. Finally, it is my hope that this article will trigger a national conversation with that exhibits civility.

by Tedla Woldeyohannes, PhD*

Tedla Woldeyohannes teaches philosophy at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville and can be reached at twoldeyo@slu.edu

[1] Available, among other places,  here  http://www.ethiomedia.com/1000codes/7953.html

Voice of Amara Rdio

by Abdur Rahman Alfa Shaban with FP

Ethiopia’s Olympic athlete, Feyisa Lilesa, has been named among the 2016 top 100 global thinkers by the US based Foreign Policy (FP) magazine. Feyisa was classed in the group of thinkers called ‘‘the challengers.’‘

The long distance athlete became famous during the just ended Rio Olympic games after he made an anti-government gesture at the end of his track event. He crossed his arms above his head as he finished the event as a protest against the Ethiopian government’s crackdown on political dissent.

He won the silver medal in the men’s marathon after finishing the 42 kilometer race. He later claimed that his life was in danger. He sought for asylum in the United States and has been living there since leaving Rio.

Given the fact that the Olympic Charter bans political propaganda, demonstrations are a rarity at the games. Nevertheless, Ethiopian runner Feyisa Lilesa snubbed the rulebook in order to call attention to the brutal actions of his country’s security forces.

Under the title, ‘‘For breaking the rules of the games,’‘ FP wrote about Feyisa: ‘‘Given the fact that the Olympic Charter bans political propaganda, demonstrations are a rarity at the games. Nevertheless, Ethiopian runner Feyisa Lilesa snubbed the rulebook in order to call attention to the brutal actions of his country’s security forces.

‘‘As the marathoner approached the finish line in second place, he crossed his arms over his head—an attention-grabbing gesture to show solidarity with his Oromo tribe. In the weeks before the race, the Ethiopian government had cracked down on protests by the embattled indigenous group and killed dozens.

They went on to quote him in an interview with AP news agency as saying, “If I would’ve taken my medal and went back to Ethiopia, that would’ve been the biggest regret of my life.” Adding further that “I wanted to be a voice for a story that wasn’t getting any coverage.”

Feyisa like the twelve others listed in his category were recognized for challenging the status quo in order to put their views across. ‘‘These individuals showed that agitation takes myriad forms,’‘ the FP said.

Aside Feyisa, another African was listed in the same category. Pastor Evan Mawarire of Zimbabwe who championed the #ThisFlag protests through the use of social media platform, Twitter. The FP listed him ‘‘For initiating a democratic movement.’‘

UMEA UNIVERSITY

Ethiopian maternal health researcher Hagos Godefay at Umeå University in Sweden has created a locally feasible method to estimate maternal mortality rates with a bottom-up measurement approach. Providing insights into the effectiveness of local interventions to reduce maternal mortality, the approach will be important for health sector planning and decision-making on local-, regional- and state levels.

Hagos Godefay at the Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health Unit has researched current efforts to reduce maternal mortality in the Tigray Region of northern Ethiopia. He has set out to quantify overall mortality levels, identify specific causes and evaluate local interventions. By using methods that can also be scaled at national level, Hagos Godefay’s results provide a strong empirical basis for decision-making by the Tigray Regional Health Bureau.

“We see encouraging results of improved reproductive health and reduced pregnancy-related deaths in the Tigray region. A key reason for this has been the creation of small local women’s groups of volunteers who act as ambassadors for the benefits of utilizing the existing health services,” says Hagos Godefay.

Women recruited to join the Health Development Army

In the Tigray region, the government have created the Health Development Army, an initiative that seeks to integrate and strengthen the linkages between the community, politicians and the health sector. The overall goals are improved sustainability of health programs and community empowerment. To achieve these goals, the initiative brings together community action, as represented by Women’s Development Groups, and the commitment of the regional political leadership and the health sector itself, represented by the health workforce.

A key aspect of the Health Development Army is the focus on community and social mobilization in Women’s Development Groups. The initiative encourages women in neighboring households to volunteer and organize in so called “1-to-5 networks”, which then form larger networks of 25-30 members. The groups set out to create demand for and increase utilization of existing maternal health services. This is in part accomplished by tackling behavioral barriers and potentially unhealthy traditional practices through community dialogue. The groups also encourage facility-based delivery by preparing cultural porridges and Ethiopian coffee for postnatal mothers at health facilities.

“The goal is to reinforce positive behaviors and locally initiated good practices by celebrating women’s achievements. Creating a conducive environment, where women living in the rural areas can meet and discuss together based on their own agenda, can make a big difference in reducing maternal mortality. This has been one of the more challenging goals, but achieving it demonstrates that women can work together to save the lives of other women,” says Hagos Godefay.

Evaluating a free ambulance services program

In research findings published earlier this year in the Journal of Global Health, Hagos Godefay and his colleagues showed that transport and communication innovations in Tigray and other rural areas of Ethiopia correlated with appreciably reduced maternal mortality. The study showed that a national program providing free-of-charge ambulances, which can be ordered on a 24/7 basis via mobile phones, coincided with a reduction of maternal mortality rates by about 50 percent.

“Despite noticeable achievements in the Tigray region, major challenges remain in many settings in terms of both measuring and reducing maternal mortality effectively,” concludes Hagos Godefay.

###

Hagos Godefay is a Global Health Epidemologist who has been studying the epidemiology of maternal health in Tigray region of northern Ethiopia for several years. Hagos completed his Master’s Degree in Public Health at Gondar University in Ethiopia, and his PhD Degree in Epidemology and Public Health at Umeå University in Sweden. His research interest focuses on the condition of maternal health in rural Ethiopia. He currently heads the Tigray Regional Health Bureau, where he is committed to using his findings to implement several immediate actions and to influence policy making to further reduce pregnancy-related deaths on a regional and national level.

For more information, please contact:
Hagos Godefay, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University
Telephone: +251914707866 (in Ethiopia); +46764071796 (in Sweden)
E-mail: hgodefay@yahoo.com

Thirteen Years After the Massacre of the Anuak and Still No Justice for Any of Us!

PRESS RELEASE. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 13, 2016. (Vancouver, BC, Canada)—Today is December 13, a day which will remind the Anuak of the painful loss of their loved ones in Gambella on the same date in 2003— thirteen years ago.

It is a Day of Remembrance that is not easy for the Anuak, wherever they are in the world. It is a time that brings back memories of the horrific killing of 424 Anuak in less than three days. Destruction, pillaging and other egregious human rights abuses accompanied the slaughter of these precious lives. It signaled the beginning of a three-year period of regime brutality and intimidation that resulted in the death of nearly fifteen hundred more Anuak. This is a huge percentage among a very tiny ethnic group numbering only about 100,000 people worldwide. Thousands more Anuak fled to refugee camps. At the core was the Tigre People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) regime’s plan to exploit the oil found on their indigenous land. The TPLF is an ethnic minority regime in Ethiopia makes less than the 6% precent of the Ethiopian population and it controls over 90% of the Ethiopian economy.

A few years later, it became clear to the Anuak that they were being eliminated due to their resource-rich land, especially the fertile, well-watered lowlands of the Upper Nile where they have lived for millenniums. Gambella has been said to be the potential bread basket of Ethiopia. At the end of the decade, Gambella had become the epicenter of land grabs in Ethiopia as well as in all of Africa. Some 78% of the most arable land was taken from the local people and given to Tigrayans who were well-connected to the TPLF as well as to foreign investors. An example of the favoritism in distributing these land leases was revealed in documents leaked from the regional government. In those documents was noted the number of persons given land leases from the government and their ethnicity. Out of 165 leases, all were of Tigrayan ethnicity with the exception of three persons, who were from non-indigenous ethnic groups outside of Gambella. Not one Anuak, Nuer, Majanger or other indigenous Gambellan received a lease.  Those persons with leases were then able to obtain government loans based on the collateral of their land, which they did not own according to Ethiopian law. The amount they received totaled 92 million USD.

The situation of the Anuak people did not improve, as the ethnic apartheid regime wanted their resources, but not the people; yet, the genocide marks the day when everything changed. Every year since 2003, the Anuak gather together to remember this tragic day. To those survivors who witnessed the trauma, it still can feel like it happened yesterday. Some who lost their family members have resigned themselves to the fact their loved ones will never come back; yet, they are still dealing with the impact of these losses, often making their lives much more difficult.  Those born afterwards or who were too young at the time to understand what had happened; still find it difficult to grasp how one’s own government could turn on its own people it was supposed to protect.  Instead, the TPLF regime used a prepared list to target many of the leaders in the community. How could regime-led defense forces and militias, the former made up of neighbors, go door-to-door and methodically slaughter the people in front of their families? This is why it is such a painful day to the Anuak.

After 13 years, still no justice has been served; yet, the TPLF-controlled regime still blocks the Anuak from openly commemorating this day, fearing criticism, shame and guilt. Today, we talked to someone in Gambella who shared the frustration of many who are prohibited from assembling together to sing, pray, find comfort, talk and eat together.  This is another reason it remains painful.

The Anuak Justice Council calls on friends of the Anuak, who are commemorating this day throughout the world, to take time to encourage, call, pray and lift up the Anuak at this time. Yet, how many others have their “days” of “remembering” throughout the year. There are so many Ethiopians who have lost their lives both before and after December 13, 2003. For example, think and pray for the families of the more than 1,000 Oromo and Amhara young people who have died this past year. There will be an empty place at the table. Think and pray for those whose loved ones, many of them parents or youth, who are still locked up in jails prisons and detentions centers across the country. The TPLF regime attests to recently arresting and detaining 11,700 persons since the beginning of October when the state of emergency was declared. Add to this number, the many youth who died trying to find refuge and security in a foreign land only to die has they were trafficked, some in the sea, others in the desert, and still more in refugee camps and other hard places. This year alone, the number from this group could reach one to two thousand— or even more. It is so tragic. Let us remember all of these precious lives that have been lost when we remember this day.

For the Anuak of Gambella, like for others who have been targeted and displaced, conditions have not improved, but have actually worsened. The Anuak who fled to South Sudan are living under terrible conditions in a country that has fallen apart. Conversely, it is ironic that citizens of South Sudan are running to Gambella for refuge in the same land where the Anuak could not live in safety. Other Anuak refugees can be found in Kenya and Uganda. Many who were evicted from their land that was then given to foreign investors, remain in Gambella, struggling to survive under inferior conditions to what they had before.

Again, their story and experience is repeated in the lives of Ethiopians across the country. It applies to the people in the Omo Valley, in the Oromo region, to the Afar, to the Amhara and many others, including some Tigrayans who have suffered greatly under the TPLF. Conditions have not improved in the country and the evidence of this has been clearly seen in the rising numbers and intensity of protests throughout the country, particularly led by the Oromo and Amhara youth. It sent the TPLF into panic mode, leading to the declaration of a state of emergency.

In essence, this is not really different from a coup d’etat since it has given the TPLF Central Committee license to do whatever they want, whether it is murder, wide-scale arrests, re-education—another word for torture, censorship, closing down the Internet and media, preventing due process, or denying constitutional rights; all of it justified by the “urgency” to protect “law and order.” Whatever power was in the hands of elected officials, the prime minister, regional authorities and/or others, has now been stripped away, leaving this one-ethnic apartheid committee of the TPLF to openly and non-ashamedly control everything under the justification that they are now protecting the country. To further cover for themselves and provide appearances of legitimacy, they reshuffled positions so there are new and diverse faces seen as the new front; yet, the same TPLF central committee continues to control all decision-making.

Where do we go from here? As we remember this December 13, we should never forget that there are equivalent “December 13ths” for countless individual Ethiopians as well as for many different ethnic groups throughout the country. What we often fail to focus on, despite seeing it before our eyes, is that the perpetrators are one small group; yet the victims are all of us. Victims have failed to realize that the only solution is not to stand as one alone; but instead, as one people for the good of all.

May God help us to understand that when pain is inflicted on one ethnic group; it has been inflicted on the body of Ethiopians. Let us seek God’s way forward towards conflict transformation for all Ethiopians, leading to sustainable and constructive solutions for building peace, well being and reconciliation in our divided society.

_________________________________________________________

If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Mr. Ochala Abulla, Chairman of the Anuak Justice Council (AJC): Phone: +1 (604) 520-6848 E-mail: Ochala@anuakjustice.org

WAZA ENA KUMNEGER 12 Dec 2016

Embi Ale – Workneh Assefa- New Ethiopian revolutionary music 2016

Embi Ale Workneh AssefaGoldie

Voice of meret Ethio Israel weekly news