What's Ethnic Nationalism? Again...

I've written often on the subject of ethnic nationalism (http://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.ca/2016/11/some-basics-on-interacting-with-ethnic.html and other articles). Because I think it has become, since the Dergue and especially the EPRDF, the most important issue in Ethiopian politics, as well as the most dangerous in terms of political instability and general social disruption.

 

I recently had a discussion with some friends on the issue, and we found ourselves trying to form a common understanding about what ethnic nationalism means. I mean, if it is the most pressing issue in Ethiopia, then of course it would help if we could all have, at least to some extent, a common understanding of what it means. In practical terms, not theoretical.

 

Coming up with a common understanding was a difficult slog, even though my interlocutors, the friends with whom I was talking, are, to put it broadly, Ethiopian nationalists. Like me, they are not fond of ethnic nationalism as it is in Ethiopia today. But, in our discussion, I took the side of ethnic nationalism, so to speak, and they the side of Ethiopian nationalism. They presented to me the following well worn arguments against ethnic nationalism:

 

1. Identifying people by ethnicity is a form of discrimination. Why should an Oromo having more rights than an Amhara, just by virtue of being Oromo? This is discrimination and is backward or immoral.

 

2. Yes, there are different ethnic groups and languages in Ethiopia, and all of them should be recognized as part of reality, but organizing around ethnicity is exclusionary.

 

3. There is a history of war and oppression in Ethiopia, but it was not based on ethnicity per se, but on conquest and land. There were wars amongst ethnic groups (Gondar and Shoa, Guji and Borena), not just between ethnic groups.

 

4. The Southern expansion (invasion) of southern Ethiopia was not an Amhara invasion, not an ethnic invasion, but an invasion by the Ethiopian government, specifically the Kingdom of Shoa, which included not only Amharas but others, including Oromos.

 

5. The Southern expansion was but the latest of many wars in Ethiopian history. Perhaps the most significant were the Oromo expansion (invasion) and the Muslim (Adal) expansion (invasion!).

 

6. In more recent history as well, the Ethiopian government has never discriminated on ethnicity. Yes, Amharic was the national language, but one national language had to be chosen. This cannot be considered ethnic discrimination.

 

7. In terms of economic opportunity, there was no ethnic discrimination. Access to government-sponsored post-secondary education was open to all, and in fact it was the policy of Emperor Haile Selassie to include students from all regions and all classes, as long as the students were capable.

 

8. Ethnic nationalist policies such as separation or autonomy of ethnic regions would result in disaster for the economy.

 

and so on. You get the picture.

 

These are good and valid arguments. They make sense. Yet they seem not to matter to ethnic nationalists. But they should matter, my friends said, these are rational arguments - any rational person would more or less agree with them. So we just have to argue more?

 

In order to try and get them to empathize with ethnic nationalists, I asked them to consider the following scenario. What if two hundred years ago Italy had invaded and occupied Ethiopia. And what if they had brought about a good deal of development and governed without ethnic discrimination or racism. Would we not, today, after 200 years, still want them to leave Ethiopia? Would we not consider them to be sufficiently 'different' from us? Would we not want to change the textbooks to reflect our version of history, which would mean portraying the Italians as colonizers, as a category morally inferior to us, even though we too had made war at different times in history? Etc.

 

This scenario exercise did not work - it did not convince my friends. I didn't think it would. I think it was too abstract - too removed from reality - and not similar enough to the reality in Ethiopia. The Italian relationship with Ethiopia cannot be compared with the relationship of different ethnic groups within Ethiopia, which even in war interacted in a ways much different to the interaction between Italy and Ethiopia.

 

My next try was to simply assert that ethnic identity is a human condition that supersedes the 'rational' arguments above. Why does an Ethiopian in America choose to be in community with fellow Ethiopian-Americans rather than mainstream Americans? After all, a human being is a human being. If I am interested in football, then I share these interests with anyone, no matter what his ethnic group, who has the same interests. If I am a parent, then I share the same interests around parenting as any parent of any ethnic group. Yet, there is an attraction to other Ethiopians, based solely on ethnicity. This is simply because ethnic identity is a fundamental part of being human. It may not make sense in certain contexts, but it is a reality that we have to work around, rather than bash our heads against.

 

My clinching argument - clinching as far as I am concerned but perhaps not my friends - was to point out the various ethnic nationalisms in so-called developed countries around in the world - ethnic nationalisms that seem to be increasing in strength as development increases! Quebec would have separated from Canada years ago had it not been for the immigrant population which ruined any chance of a pro-secession referendum vote. Catalonia, supposedly the richest and most 'socially developed' part of Spain is becoming more and more ethnic nationalist. These are just two examples - there are many. This, for me, illustrates that the above 'rational arguments' against ethnic nationalism simply do not work. They do not work. Ethnic identity remains.

 

So what is the solution? Well, is there a problem to begin with? As I've written before (http://asfawdarguemeshal.blogspot.ca/2016/09/curbing-ethnic-nationalism-via_26.html), yes, too much ethnic nationalism, no matter how it's defined, brings about conflict. In fact, one can define excessive ethnic nationalism as one that results in conflict. If we see ethnic related conflict, if we see people protesting for ethnic rights, then we have a problem with too much ethnic nationalism, or ethnic persecution, which is the just the flip side of the coin. This is obvious and evidence around the world shows this. So, yes, it is a problem and we need a solution - we need to curb ethnic nationalism.

 

So if these 'rational arguments' don't work, what works? Before going on to that, let's look at some factors that affect - that can increase or decrease ethnic nationalism.

 

1. Geography: Being on an edge, so to speak, like Eritrea or Catalonia or Scotland, results in greater ethnic nationalism. Being in the middle, like Oromia, curbs ethnic nationalism. Why? Because being in the middle means more interaction and mixing with the rest of the population and it also makes secession more difficult, which forces ethnic nationalists to find ways to live together rather than take extreme positions.

 

2. Economy: In Quebec, when the economy goes bad, people get upset and become more ethnic nationalist! In the case of Catalonia, that's not the case. The effect of economy depends on the context. In the case of Oromia, the ethnic nationalist elites market their ideology partly on "fertile and resource rich Oromia". On the other hand, on the ground, the people of Oromia know how important rich urban centres like Addis Ababa are to them.

 

3. Politics: Repression, poor governance, etc. increases ethnic nationalism, as the case of Eritrea illustrates so well. Who would want to live in an Ethiopia governed by the Dergue? Indeed, Shaebia owes its biggest debt to the Dergue!

 

4. Language and culture: On face value it would seem that expanding the ethnic nationalist groups aspirations when it comes to language and culture would decrease ethnic nationalism. But the evidence is that it might curb ethnic nationalism in the short term, but in the long term, there's no impact. Canada became fully bilingual, increased the economic advantages of Quebec, and implemented other policies Quebec nationalism wanted, and this helped in the short run, but in the long run the francophones in Quebec still voted to separate from Canada.

 

5. Other factors: During the two Quebec secession referendums, one of the things the nationalist (Canadian) side was preoccupied with was trying to prevent some famous Canadian figure from making disparaging public statements about Quebec. One or two such statements, and the polls would swing towards secession!

 

Funny how ethnic nationalism works. Today, take a poll, and 30% may favour secession. A couple of months from now, after a couple of ethnic skirmished in the media, maybe an economic downturn, suddenly 60% are in favour of secession! How do these people change their minds about such a fundamental matter, perhaps a fundamental matter of identity, so quickly? Are they ethnic nationalists or what? Do you see how ethnic identity can be so complex, mild, and yet strong, fickle, and yet long lasting?

 

So, again, what is the solution? Integration and demography. Or as Donald Levine put it in Greater Ethiopia, synthesis. We need in Ethiopia a synthesis of ethnicity, or more accurately to increase the current synthesis. I will give one example of a government policy that can accomplish this - making Afaan Oromo a national language and teaching it equal to Amharic or other languages in schools. Make all federal services available in Afaan Oromo throughout the country, not just in Oromia. Then have at least the large regions such as Amhara Region include Oromiffa equal to Amharic in public schools, so that every child that graduates from school in Amhara region will speak Oromiffa as well as Amharic. Imagine the integration of ethnic groups that this will promote, while at the same time promoting Afaan Oromo throughout Ethiopia as a national language. This will result in a larger integrated population, which will reduce the 'market' of ethnic nationalists. I offer this as a solution because it's the only one that seems to have worked throughout the world throughout history.

 

So, in summary, ethnic identity is fundamental part of the human condition, and its modern consequence ethnic nationalism almost so. No amount of rational arguing against it will reduce it. Too much ethnic nationalism results in conflict, which we see in Ethiopia and other places around the world. The way to moderate ethnic nationalism is to promote integration.