Meles Zenawi's legacy for the Horn of Africa
There is little doubt that Meles Zenawi's political architecture gave
modest advantages to most ethnic groups in the country who were the
subjects of the empire [EPA]
| ||||||||
Zenawi's
regime will be remembered for holding Ethiopia together as one country even
under the centripetal ethnic order.
|
||||||||
Any recent
visitor to Ethiopia would be struck by the ubiquitous billboards
commemorating the late Prime Minister's life, two months after his demise.
Meles Zenawi's photo form the backdrop to the TV screens and adorns the
streets of all the major towns and villages.
These
sights were supplemented by the chorus of Africa leaders that attended the
PM's funeral and who lavished praise on this "dedicated son of African
soil". He was depicted as the untiring leader who toiled for the
upliftment of the indigent peoples of Ethiopia and Africa.
Among this
choir were African presidents and prime ministers whose own policies have
degraded the lives of their people. The least distinguished of these visitors
were the former President and Prime Minister of Somalia whose tenure in power
was marred by their total subservience to the Ethiopia regime.
One
wonders if this orchestrated and well managed public love of the late Zenawi
reflects the thoughts and feeling of the peoples of Ethiopia and the
neighbouring states where the PM's policies had the greatest footprint.
Putting
aside the propaganda of the Ethiopian governing party, the admiration of his
cohort of political friends and partisan Ethiopian critics, most objective
analysts would agree that, unlike the visiting African leaders, Zenawi left
behind a record that deserves critical scrutiny.
Zenawi's
legacy
Zenawi's
legacy can be viewed through two analytical lenses: a) his domestic
footprint; (b) and his regional impact.
To assess
the PM's legacy, we need to understand the political and economic context of
Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa when Zenawi and his party, the Tigray
People's Liberation Front (TPLF), came to power in 1991.
First,
Ethiopia was devastated by a brutal military dictatorship that massacred
hundreds of thousands of people, while it also presided over the catastrophic
famine of 1984 that devastated several regions of the country.
Additionally,
the military regime wasted Ethiopia's meagre and precious resources to
oppress the legitimate struggle of the Eritrean people, as well as others
inside Ethiopia, such as Tigray, Somali and the Oromos, to mention a few.
War, famine and oppression were the hallmark of Ethiopia in 1990, and the
regime was exhausted and had run out of ideas and energy to move the country
beyond multiple calamities.
Then came
the last drive of the Eritrean resistance against the regime since they
already controlled the entire countryside and surrounded the capital Asmara.
Their ally in Ethiopia (TPLF) then pushed towards Addis Ababa and within a
couple of months, it became clear that the regime's days were numbered.
Given the
ethnic character of the TPLF, it was not clear whether its takeover of the
capital will induce a new civil war with the Oromo liberation Front and other
communities. Concerned about the possibility of having another failed state
in the region, with all the attendant problems such as a tidal wave of
refugees, the United States brokered an agreement between the regime and the
TPLF. This pact allowed for a "peaceful" takeover of the capital
and Mengistu's departure for exile.
The TPLF
brought with it a client group of ethnic political parties, the so-called
PDOs (People's Democratic Organisations), who jointly formed what became
known as EPRDF. But there has never been any doubt that TPLF controlled the
levers of power in the country.
The junior
partners of the "coalition" were supposed to provide national
legitimacy for the new ethnic authority, however, the Ethiopian public
largely considered the PDOs as lackeys. The independent Oromo Liberation
Front (OLF), which initially joined the ruling coalition, failed to
understand TPLF's militarist agenda and paid the ultimate price as the latter
swiftly destroyed its military base.
After this
defeat, OLF went underground where it has virtually become inconsequential.
Establishing the new order and consolidating TPLF's power took nearly a
decade after which the regime turned more of its attention to other matters.
After 21
years in power, we can emphatically state that Zenawi's regime has been a
Janus-faced order. Its political rhetoric exuded democracy, peace, national
harmony and development, but behind that façade was a determined security
apparatus that crushed even the most democratic attempts to challenge its
authority.
This
rhetoric proved seductive enough for outsiders, but all indications are that
it has failed to sway a majority of the population. It is these two faces of
the regime that the remaining section of this brief will focus on.
But I must
first provide an explanatory note about the nationalist character of the
regime. I can categorically state that the late Premier Zenawi was an
Ethiopian nationalist, despite the claims of some of the opponents that he
was building Tigray for an eventual secession, if needs be.
Many
critics of the TPLF regime claim that it exploited the resources of most
regions in Ethiopia to develop its home province. There is a grain of truth
to this assertion, but I would suggest that to be a nationalist does not
exclude a regime from internally differentiating regions by privileging some
over others.
Most
critics do not understand that there are two kinds of nationalists: civic and
sectarian nationalists. Civic nationalists genuinely try to treat all regions
and citizens alike and fairly. In contrast, sectarian nationalists protect
the territorial integrity of the country but also establish a hierarchy of
power which privileges certain groups and political factions.
Zenawi and
his regime represented the latter version of nationalism and are not alone in
this regard in the developing world.
Domestic
footprint
Zenawi's
group and those they invited to
take part in the political conference in the early 1990s produced a
constitution which nominally
privileged ethnic identity. They subsequently divided the country into ethnic
provinces.
There
is little doubt that this political architecture gave modest advantages to
most ethnic groups in the country who were the subjects
of the empire, but such gains belied the fact that Addis Ababa
remained the decisive power centre of the country.
More
critically, a small group of TPLF cadre and the security establishment they
strategically controlled have had the final say about all the major issues.
Even when the affiliates of the TPLF became senior ministers, they remained
pliant cadre without a backbone.
I have
witnessed the humiliation that comes with such status. The absence of any
degree of autonomy on the part of those affiliates manifestly demonstrates
that belonging to EPRDF has been like George Orwell's Animal Farm where "All
animals are created equal, but some animals are created more equal than
others".
Despite
cowering their partners and most of the population, Zenawi and his regime can
legitimately claim several major accomplishments. First, the regime has
created a physical infrastructure for the country that is better than what
was left behind by all the previous regimes combined.
The road network that spans to most regions of the country can facilitate
national integration and development if progressively used.
Second,
the number of public universities has increased substantially over the last
decade and this has allowed many young Ethiopians to gain access to some form
of higher education.
Third, the
electrically grid of the country has been expanded and more hydroelectric
dams have been built or are under construction and this has expanded the
country's energy supply. Some of these dams were initiated illegally because
other riparian countries that have a stake in the rivers were not consulted
and no agreements were reached to satisfy all parties. Despite such illegal
and unethical preemptions, the growth in electric production bodes well for
the country's economic growth.
Fourth, an
intensive regime of mineral exploration has been put in place which could
deliver dividends for the country in the long run.
Fifth,
Zenawi and his team have not ameliorated the population's vulnerability to
famine, but fortunately the country has avoided the catastrophic famines that
used to take hundreds of thousands of lives.
Finally,
there has been an increase in the volume of foreign investment in the country
and the rate of economic growth has been substantial despite starting from a
very low base.
The regime's
liabilities are also numerous, but here is a sample of the major ones. First,
in spite of the seemingly smooth transfer of authority to the Deputy Prime
Minister, power is still wielded by individuals without legitimate
institutional anchors. As such, authority in Ethiopia is extremely
concentrated in two nodes that completely overlap: the TPLF core and the
security establishment.
The
ultimate anchor of power is the security apparatus which has been loyal to
the TPLF rather than the country and the constitution. Such concentration of
power has enfeebled all other institutions and has created a political
culture and society deeply marooned in fear rather than genuine loyalty and
respect for national institutions. The political and social consequences of
this republic of fear
are far reaching.
Second,
although the economic sphere has been somewhat more liberalised, loyalty to
the regime is still central to an entrepreneur's ability to succeed. In many
instances, party connections are essential to start a major business, and
important sectors of the economy are dominated by the party and its
friends.
Third, the
republic of fear has suffocated the entire political spectrum through its
unwillingness to tolerate even a minor political opposition. By claiming to
win over 95 per cent of the votes in the last election, the regime has
created a make-believe world where it is adored by all.
Fourth, in
some parts of the developing world, academics are not free to present their
ideas/work regarding their countries' ailments, and Ethiopia appears to be
the model of academic unfreedom. This has been accomplished through the
elimination of tenure or long-term contracts for faculty and the appointment
of political loyalists to top academic positions.
If a
professor indulges in critical analysis of the political and development
affairs of the country, there is little chance that his or her contract will
be renewed. Fear is the life blood of this system and compels productive
academics to either leave the country if they can, or languish in the
margins, or simply become sycophants of the regime to maintain their
livelihoods. Nevertheless, there are a few courageous scholars who have
stayed true to the ethos of the academy and still remain in the country
against incredible odds.
Fifth,
poor people dominate the landscape of Ethiopian cities and towns, and the UN
has reported that over 80 per cent of the building structures of the capital
are of slum quality.
Mindful of
this image, the regime has embarked on urban renewal that will ultimately
remove most of the poor from the city and allocate the "freed"
spaces to shopping malls and investors. It intends to house the indigents
removed from those areas in apartments built on the outskirts of the city
without examining alternative schemes that will keep these residents in their
neighbourhoods.
Finally,
the collective effect of these liabilities is that public institutions in the
country are beholden to the individuals in power rather that embodying
national ethos. The shameless use of the security forces to retain power or
intimidate the political opposition, and the culture of fear this engenders
means that Premier Zenawi and his regime reinforced institutions the public
fears but they have failed to create legitimacy for the
post-1991institutions.
Without
legitimate institutions that are autonomous from particular leaders, the
country remains in danger of fully sliding into an ethnic political strife.
The
regional impact
The
"winds of change" in the Horn of Africa in 1990/1991 created
opportunities which could have produced a bright future for all. Post-1991,
Eritrean and Ethiopian leaders were cut from the same political cloth since
they closely collaborated in the battle field to dislodge the Mengistu
regime.
Nevertheless,
one major factor separated the two movements: one was mainly a national
liberation movement while the other was primarily an ethnic liberation
project. On the Eastern front, Somalia provided material and diplomatic
support for the leadership of both the Eritrean and Ethiopian liberation
fronts, and the Somali people keenly followed the advances of the two fronts
against Mengisu's military while they also hoped for the fall of the Somali
dictator.
I remember
visiting the border regions of Ethiopia and Somalia after the fall of Siyaad
and Mengistu where I saw the population relish their new freedoms on either
side of the border. The hope was that a new and more progressive political
chapter for the region was in the offing.
But the
new lords of Ethiopia were steeped in a sanitised imperial orthodoxy. During
the first decade in power, Zenawi and his subordinates adopted the same
ethnic political logic, tested in Ethiopia's ethnic provinces, to manipulate
Somali affairs in the old Republic.
The
authorities in Addis Ababa made no effort to reach out to Somali civics, but
instead chose warlords and sectarian political actors as their best
collaborators. Once the Somali people realised Ethiopia's new strategy of
"divide and rule", old animosities resurfaced and the Ethiopian
occupation of parts of the Somali Republic and its invasion of their country
and capital in 2006-08 dashed the last residue of good well. Nearly all
Somali civic nationalists now see Ethiopia as an enduring enemy.
In the
north, the Ethiopian and Eritrean leaders who claimed to be the best of
friends slowly drifted towards conflict and imposed a horrible, costly and
unnecessary war on the population. The goodwill which has been nurtured in
the battlefield of liberation vanished.
After a
devastating war which wasted over 100,000 lives, the two regimes consented to
arbitration. An international boundary commission was set and both
governments guaranteed to accept the commission's findings.
Eritrea
immediately embraced the findings once the commission rendered its verdict.
Unfortunately, Ethiopia is yet to honour its commitment as it introduced new
conditions to the process and the international community has failed to
enforce the commission's ruling. Consequently and unfortunately, the two
countries remain in a virtual state of war.
The
verdict
There is
little doubt that history will judge Premier Zenawi as one of the two major
leaders in Ethiopian history. His regime will be remembered for holding
Ethiopia together as one country even under the centripetal ethnic order
which his regime officially introduced.
Second,
Ethiopian nationalists will celebrate him as the man who invaded Somalia and
occupied Mogadishu. Third, his government will be regarded for developing the
country's physical and educational infrastructure, and for refreshingly
having the ambition of becoming a developmental state.
What
Ethiopian democrats will not forgive is the regime's failing to establish a
political order and national institutions that have earned the loyalty and
respect of the people. The conflation of the regime's interests with the
national cause and the use of the security forces to domesticate the
population is not a sustainable strategy if Ethiopia is to ever evolve into a
vibrant democracy. The republic
of fear must give way to the rule of
law to thwart a more foreboding future.
On the
regional front, posterity will not be kind to the Zenawi regime as it has
totally squandered the opportunity to forge a more peaceful and collaborative
relations with Eritrea and Somalia given the goodwill of these two
peoples.
Allowing
Somalis the opportunity to rebuild their government and society in a
democratic fashion would have eliminated traditional hostilities between the
two countries and boosted their mutuality. Further, this approach would have
shifted hundreds of millions of dollars from the war machine to development
which is desperately needed.
Instead of
building on that goodwill, the regime embarked on a reign of terror to
destabilise Eritrea and keep Somalia in its catastrophic condition. Sadly,
the attempt to impose regional tyranny will ricochet on Ethiopia and shall
perpetuate the misery of all the peoples in the region. It is not too
late to change course and anchor developments on the significant and positive
elements of the last two decades, but will there be the wisdom and the will
in Addis Ababa?
Abdi
Ismail Samatar is professor of geography at the University of Minnesota and a
research fellow at the University of Pretoria, South Africa.
|
Comments
Post a Comment