ስለ የለማ መገርሳ ምሳሌ የሆነ ንግግር

ለማ መገርሳን አላውቃቸውምም ባውቃቸውም ስለማንነታቸው ምንም ማለት አልችልም፤ ይህ የእግዚአብሔር ጉዳይ ነውና።
ሆኖም አቶ ለማ ይሚሰጡትን ንግግሮች አድምጬ እጅግ ጥሩና አስተማሪ እንደሆኑና ለሉላችንም አስፈላጊ መልክቶች እንደሚያስተላልፉ ተገንዝብያለው።

ከባህር ዳር በበአዴን ስብሰባ የተናገሩትን እኚህን ዋና ነጥቦችን ላተንትን፡

1. ትህትና፡ አቶ ለም አንድም እሳቸውም ድርጃታቸውም የሰራውን ነገር አልወደሱም። አንድች። በአንጻሩ ያሉትን ችግሮች አለ ህፍረት ሙሉ በሙሉ ዘርዝረው በተዘዋዋሪ ሙሉ ሃላፊነት ተቀብለዋል። ማን ፖለቲከኛ ነው እንደዚህ የሚለው? ይህ ለሁላችንም እጅግ ታላቅ ምሳሌ ነው። ጣት ከመጥቆም ወደ ራስ ማየት ነው የችር መፍቴ።

2. ሃላፊነት፡ ላሉት ችግሮች ሃላፊነት ወሰደው ለመፍትሄውም ሃላፊነት ወስደዋል። እንደዚህ መደረግ አለበት ወይም እነዛህ እንደዚህ ማድረግ አለባቸው ሳይሆን እንደዚህ ማድረግ አለብን ነው ያሉት። ታልቅ ምሳሌ የሆነ አባባል ነው።

3. ኢትዮጵያዊነት፡ አቶ ለማ የኢትዮጵያዊነት እንዳለና እንዳልጠፋ፤ ለሰላምና ብልጽግና እንደሚያስፈልግ አስረግጠው ተናገሩ። 20 ዓመት በፊት ነውር የነበረውን «ኢትዮጵያዊነት» አኩሪ እንደሆነ ገለጸ። ይህ አባባል፤ በተለይ ከአንድ ኦህዴድ መሪ፤ እጅግ ጥንካሬንና ለእውነትና ሰላም መሻትን ያሳያል። ሌሎቻችንም እንደዚህ ብናስብ ይበጅ ነበር!

4. መልካም አስተዳደር (ሙስና)፡ የመንግስት ሹማምንት «ብቸኛይ ስልጣን» ስላላቸው ነው ችግሩ ብለዋል አቶ ለማ። ሚዛን ከህዝብ ወደ ሹማምንት ከመጠን በላይ አመዝኗል አሉ። ይህ ኢሃዴግን በተለይ የ100% ውሳኔውን የሚተች አነጋገር ነው። ኢህአዴግ ብችኛ ስልጣን ሊኖረው አይገባም። ወይም የፖለቲካ ውድድር በተወሰና ደረጃ ቢሆን ግድ ነው ማለቱ ነው። ከአንድ የኢህአዴግ አመራር አስደናቂ አባባል ነው።

5. ስለ ወጣቶች ሲናገሩ ከፖለቲካ ወደ ማህበራዊ ጉዳይ ከፍ አሉ። ወጣቱን ለቴለቪዥንና ኢንተርኔት መተው ሳይሆን ማሳደግ እንዳለብን አስታወሱን። ከዛም በላይ ግን የወደኩላቸው ቤተሰብ ዋና መሆኑን ማስረዳታቸው ንው። ማንም ኢትዮጵያዊ ምህር ቤተሰብን ከትምህርት በዚህ ማንገድ ሲያስቀድም ስምቼ አላውቅም። ትምህርት ትምህርት ትምህርት ነው የሁላችንም ጭህወት። ግን ትምህርት መሳርያ ነው ቤተሰብ ማንነት ነው የሚለውን  ከዚህ በፊት ማንም ሲል ሰምቼ አላውቅም። እጅግ ጠንካራ ምልክት ነው ያስተላለፉት፡

6. በእህአዴግ ዘመን በተለያየ መድረክ የተዘለፉት ምሁራን እንዳ ማንኛውም የህዝብ ዘርፍ ለሃገሪቷ አስፈላጊ እንደሆኑ ሲያሳስበን አቶ ለማ አንድ ጉዳትን ያመጣ ቁስል አዳነ።

7. የጎሰኝነት ለሁሉም ያለው አደጋ አስረግጠው ተናገሩ። ያመጣው ጥላቻና ቅሬታ ለሁሉ ሰውና ለሃገሪቱ ጎጂ መሆኑን ማስረገጣቸው ለሁላችንም ታላቅ ማስተንቀቂያና ምሳሌ ነው። አንድነት ደግሞ የሁሉ ችግራችን ቀድሞ መፍቴ መሆኑን ገለጹ። እውነት ነው። ማንም ችግር አለአንድነት ሊፈታ አይችልም፡

8. በታሪካችን ማፈር ሳይሆን ኮርተን ጥሩውን እንደምሳሌ ወስደን መጥፎውን አስወግደን ግን ሃላፊነቱን በጋራ ተቀብለን መኖራለብን። ይህ ታላቅ የአንድነት መንገድ ነው። ታሪቅ የኔ ወይም የሱ ሳይሆን የጋራ አድረግን መያዝ አንድነትን ይየሚያዳብር ነው።

እግዚአብሄር አቶ ለማ እንዳለው ያድርግለት። ከባድ ስራ ነው ያለው። የኦህዴድ መሪነት ከባድ ስራ ነው ከጎሰኞች ጋር የሚያጋፍጥ ነውና ሚዛን ጠብቆ ነው መራመድ የሚችለው። በዚህ ጉዞአው ሁላችንም ፍርድ ሳይሆን ድጋፍ እንድንሰጠው ይገባል ብዬ አስባለው።

ማንን እንሰዋ

በ2012 ጠቅላላ ስብሰባቸው የቻይና ኮምዩኒስት ፓርቲ መሪዎች ለህልውናቸው ብለው በሙስና ላይ ታላቅ እርምጃ መውሰድ እንዳለባቸው ተረድተው የእርምጃ ውሳኔ ወሰዱ። እርምጃቸው ሺ ዢንፒንግን  መሪ (ፕሬዚደንት) መሾምና የጸረ ሙስና «ሚኒስቴር»፤ ክፍል ወይ ቢሮ ሳይሆን ሚኒስቴር» ማቋቋም ነበር። ፕሬዚደንት ሺ ሙስናንና ጸረ መልካም አስተዳደርን እዋገለሁ ዋናው ጉዳዬም አደርገዋለሁ በማለት ለምርጫ ቀረበ። የኮምዩኒስት ፓርቲ ሹማምንት ይህን አውቀው ተስማምተው መረጡት።

ልምን? የጸረ ሙስና ዘመቻ እራሳቸውን ሊጎዳ ሊያከስር ሊያሳስርም እንደሚችል እያወቁ እንዴት የጸረ ሙስና ዘመቻ እንዲካሄድ ፈለጉ? ምክነያቱ ሙስና ፓርቲውን (አባላቱን) እጅግ እየጎዳና ህልውናውን ሊያጠፋ እንደሚችል ስለተረዱ ነው። የተለያዩ መሪዎቻቸውም በዪፋ እንደዚ ብለው ግመው ተናግረው ነበር፡ « ፓርቲአችንም ሀገራችን በሙስና ምክነያት ሊፈርሱ ይችላሉ» ብለዋል።

ስለዚህ ፓርቲው ፈርሶ ሁላችንም ከምንሞት ሙስናን ቀንሰን ህዝባችንን አባብለን ፓርቲው ይትረፍ አብዛኞቻችን እንትረፍ ግን አንዳንዶቻችን በተለይ ሙስና ውስጥ እጅግ የሰመጡት ደግሞም የማንፈልጋቸው ባልደረቦቻችን ይውደቁ ይታሰሩ። ይህ ነበር የቻይና ኮምዩኒስት ፓርቲ ሹማምንት አስተሳሰብ ፕሬዚደንት ሺን ሲመርጡት። ሰውነታችን ሙሉ በሙሉ ከሚሞት ትንሽ እንድማ ነው።

ከመረጡት በኋላ ሃይሉን ማንቀሳቀስ ጀመረና አብዛኛው ካሰበው በላይ ደም ፈሰሰ። ብዙ ሰው ተሰወ። እንግዲህ እንደዚህ አይነቱ ሰፊ እቅድ ሁልግዜ እንደተጠበቀው አይሄድም። ሆኖም ፕሬዚደንት ሺ ተእልኮዋቸውን በሞላ ጎደል አሟሉ።

እንዲሁም በኢትዮጵያ ከህወሃት ጠቅላላ ስብሰባ የሚካሂደው በችይና ኮምሁኒስት ፓርቲ 2012 ስብሰባ የተካሄደው ነው። ሙስና እየገደለን እንደሆነ እናውቃለን፤ ሙስናን ማጥፋት አለበን፤ ግን ከማህላችን ማንን እንሰዋ?! ፖለቲካው በዚህ ዙርያ ነው። ስብሰባውም ሳምንታት የሚፈጀው ለዚህ ነው! ህወሃት መትረፍ ከፈለገ ይህን እርምጃ መውሰድ አለበት ግን ውሳኔው ከባድ ነው።

በኔ ሚስኪን እይታ የተወሰኑ ዋና ሹማምንት መውደቅ አለባቸው። እስር ይሁን በሙስና የተገኘውን ሃብት መንጠቅ ይሁን ተገቢውና ውጤታማ እርምጃ አላውቅም ግን ህዝቡ ይህን ይጠብቃል። መዋቀሩም ይህ መድሃኒት ያስፈልገዋል። የወደፊት ሙሰኞችን ተጠንቀቁ ይቅርባትሁ የሚለው ምልእክት በትክክል የሚደርሳቸው ታላላቅ ሹማምንት ከወደቁ ብቻ ነው።

ከዛም ቀጥሎ ግን ከዚህ በፊት እንደጠቀስኩት የሙስናን ደረጃ በቋሚነት ዝቅ አርጎ ለመጠበቅ የ100% መመሪያውን ኢህአዴግ መሰረዝ አለበት። ከፌደራል ምክር ቤት እስከ ቀበሌ የኢህአዴግ ሹማምንት ስራውን በደምብ ካልሰራ በህዝብ ድምጽ ብልጫ ከስልጣን ሊወርድ እንደሚችል ማወቅ አለበት። ይህ ነው ዋናው የሙስና መቋቋሚያ መንገድ።

አቶ ለማና አቶ ገዱ

ይህ የአቶ ለማ መገርሳና የአቶ ገዱ አንዳርጋቸው ንግግር ግዥ ፓርቲው ኢህአዴግ ውስጥ የአንድነት አስፈላጊነትና የኦሮምኛ ከአማርኛ እኩል የሀገር ቋንቋ መሆን ጥቅም (ይህንና ይህን አንብቡ) የሚረዱ ወገኖች እንዳሉ ብቻ ሳይሆን ይህን ጉዳይ ለረዥም ጊዜ ያሰላሰሉበት እንደሆነ ዪገልጻል። አቶ ለማና አቶ ገዱ ለንግግሮቻቸው ሊመሰገኑ ዪገባል።፡ ያንጸባረቁት አቋም ጥሩና ተስፋ ሰጭ ነው።

ሆኖም ወደ ተግባር ስንሄድ ይህን ልውጦች፤ አንድነት፤ መልካም አስተዳደር፤ ህብረተሰባዊ መሻሻሎች ብተለይ በወጣቶች ስነ መግባር ዙርያ፤ የወላጅና የሃይምናኦት መሪዎች በልጆቻችን ጤንነትና ደህንነት ሃላፊነታቸውን መዋጣት፤ ወዘተ አቶ ለማና አቶ ደጉ ሊፈጹሟቸው ይችሉ ይሆን?

አይችሁሉም ወይም እጅግ ይቸገራሉ አንዳንድ መሰረታዊ መዋቀራዊ ለውጦች ከሌሉ። እነዚህ ችግሮች ዛሬ ያሉት በግለሰብ ድክመቶች ብቻ ሳይሆኑ በመዋቅር ድክመት ነው። በተለይ የአውራ ፓርቲ ፖለቲካ ስርአት ለውቶችን እጅግ አፍኗል። ሌላው በዋንነት ሁለተኛው ችግር በኢህአዴግ ውስጥ የህወሃት የበላይነት መጠን ነው። እነዚህ ሁለቱ ነገሮች በመጠኑ መስተካከል አለባቸው።

የመጀመሪያውን ለማስተካከል ለባለስጣን («ህዝብ ተወካይ») ምርጫዎችን በመጠኑ ነጻ መደረግ አለበት። ሙሉ ነጻነት እንደማይሆን፤ ከአውራ ፓርቲ አገዛዝ ጋር እንደሚቃረን እረዳለሁ። ግን አውራ ፓርቲ 100% ማለት አይደለም።  100% ይባለስጣን ችለተኝነት ያመጣል። ቢሰርቅም ስልጣኑን ለማይሆን ነገሮች ቢጠቅምም ምንም አይደርስብኝም ብሎ። ግን ከስልጣን መውረድ የተወስንም ቢሆን እድል እንዳላቸው ሲረዱ ጥንቃቄ ይጨምራሉ። ስለዚህ ከ 100% ወደ 80 ወይም 70ም አስፈላጊ መሰለኝ።

ሁለተኛው ጉዳይ ይከብዳል። ከብአዴን ኦህዴድና ሌሎቹ ጅግንነትም ብልጠትም ይጠይቃል። ከህዝባቸው ጋር ያላቸውን ቅርበት ማጠናከር ግድ ነው። ይህ ነው ኢህአዴግ ውስጥ ስልጣናቸውን የሚጎለብተው። አሁንም ላለፉት ሶስት ዓመታት የዚህን ፍንጭ እያየን ነው ነገር ግን መጠንከር አለባቸው። መልካም አስተዳደር ለነሱ የህይወትና ሞት ጉዳይ ነው። መልካም አስተዳደር አቋማችንና ግባችን ነው ብለው ቢይዙትና በዚህ ጉዳይ ቆራጥ ቢሆኑ ከህዝቦቻቸው ጋር አንድነት ያመጣሉ። በዚህ ጉዳይ እጅግ ታላቅ ሳ መሰራት አለበት።

በተዘዋዋሪ ከላይ የጠቀስኩት በሙሉ ይሚቻል ነገር ነው። ደም አያፈስም ጦርነትም አያስነሳም። ትንሽ ብልጠት ብቻይ ነው የሚያስፈልገው። ማንንንም አይጎዳም ከሙስናና ጎጂ አስተዳደር መሪዎች በቀር። አይ፤ ማድረግ የሚቻል ነው።

እግዚአብሔር ይርዳቸው። እኛንም ከዳር ቆመን አንገታችንን ደፍተን የምንታዘበው ወይም የምናጨበችበው የምናዝነውም ከዳራችን ወደ መሃል ገትብተን የመፍትዬው አካል እንድንሆን ይርዳን!

ምርጥ ንግግር ከአቶ ለማ መገርሳ

ምርጥ ንግግር (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aim-D4EKMlI)።

1. በመጀመርያ በንግግሩ የጎሳ ብሄርተኝነትና የሱ መዘዞች አንዱ ዋና የኢትዮጵያ ችግር መሆኑን አምኗልም አስረድቷልም።

2. የኢትዮጵያዊነት መንፈስ ወይም ርዕዮተ ዓለም ለሁሉም ኢትዮጵያዊ ለህልውናው አስፈላጊ መሆኑን አሳየ።

3. ህብረተሳባዊ ችግሮች እንደ ስረዓትና ስነ መግባር ማጣት እያመለጠን (runaway) እያለ የሆነ ችግር መሆኑን ተረድቷል። በዚህ ረገድ የህብረተሰብ - ወላጅና የሃይማኖት መዋቅሮች - በዋናነት ሃላፊነት እንዳለበትም መገነዘቡ ትልቅ ነገር ነው። በርካታ ዪትዮጵያ ምሁራኖች በዘመናዊነት ርዕዮተ ዓለም ተለቅፈው መንግስት ሁሉን አዋቂ ሁሉን ማድረግ የሚችል ይመስለዋል።

4. መልካም አስተዳደርም አለመኖሩ (በሌላ አባባል የሙስና ከሙስና ጋር የተገ መብዛት) ሌላው ዋና ችግር መሆኑ የብአዴን ስብሰባ ላይ መቶ መናገሩ ትልቅ ነገር ነው። ባአዴን ከህዝቡ ጋር ያለው ዋናው ችግር በዚህ ዙርያ ነው። እርግጥ የወልቃይትና ሌሎች ከሌልች ክልሎች የሚያገናኗቸው ቢኖሩም ዋናው የብአዴን ችግር መልካም አስተዳደር ነው። ወንድ ሆነው ይህን እንቅፋት ቢያሸንፉና ጭቆናና ሙስናን ቢያጠፋ ከህዝቡ ጋር አንድ ይሆናል ሀገራዊ ሃይሉም እጅግ ያይል ነበር።

እግዚአብሔር አቶ ለማ መገርሳን በዚው መንገድ እንዲቀጥል ዪርዳው።

Courageous Ethiopians

My previous post was from a chapter in Father Arseny: Priest, Prisoner, Spiritual Father, a book about a Father Arseny, a Russian Orthodox priest-monk who was imprisoned for long periods of time in the Soviet gulags (prisons) and who became a known spiritual father to many.  (The book is available in Amharic at bookstores in Addis Ababa.)

Father Arseny, along with much of the clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church who were not outright murdered, was sent to the worst of the gulags to die as a sort of slow death sentence. In the prison were also political prisoners and criminals, all of whom, understandably, hated the Soviet government and thought the government responsible not only for their imprisonment but also for all their problems and the problems of the country.

In the chapter I posted, while in prison, Father Arseny is asked to participate in a discussion among inmates about the Soviet government, and is specifically asked to condemn the Soviets unreservedly for all the suffering they have caused. They expected that he, as a prisoner of the Soviets, and moreover as a clergyman of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was targeted for destruction by the Soviets, would like them express extreme hatred for the Soviets and blame them for everything wrong in the country.

However, Father Arseny, in true Orthodox fashion, points the finger not at the other - at the Soviets - but the self - himself, his fellow clergyman, and the laity. He says, in short, that if the clergy and laity did not rebel so much against God before the revolution, then the revolution would not have even happened. In other words, it was the sins of the Orthodox clergy and laity that brought about the Soviets. His true and courageous stand left his fellow prisoners speechless.

I have met a few such courageous Ethiopians, and I do not count myself among them, who accept responsibility and hold themselves, in whatever capacity, accountable for what has and is happening in Ethiopia. They do not blame the government, past or present, the Woyane or Tigre or ERPDF, or Shaebia, or "Oromos" or OLF, or Amharas or donkeys, or communists or thieves, etc. for Ethiopia's problems. They point the finger at themselves.

And then, because they point the finger at themselves, they do what they can, with whatever minute capacity they have, to set things aright. By taking responsibility, they empower themselves - they do not see themselves as interested bystanders but as stakeholders with a role to play.

Some people ask me what they can do. What can a simple layman do? Well, I say, if (and this is a big if) you consider yourself an Ethiopian (and not an American or Swede or something) , and if you think you have positive ideas, or perhaps a good civic attitude, or positive moral outlook, then live in Ethiopia and let your positive ideas and good civic attitude and moral outlook permeate their surroundings.

Would this be effective, is the next question. What does effective mean? Will it turn the whole country around? No, of course not, but who are we to think that we can. In all humility, I can affect perhaps my family, friends, maybe neighbourhood. That's about it. If I expect any more then I'm being unrealistic at best, delusionally prideful at worst. Why, even our great leaders have much less influence that we think because of the enormous influence exerted upon them.

So we will not turn our country around, but we might help and influence  a person or two or more. And if everyone does that, as Seraphim of Sarov said: "Acquire the Spirit of Peace and a thousand souls around you will be saved."

ከማነኛዉ ወገን ነህ? ቄሱ!

(from Father Arseny: Priest, Prisoner, Spiritual Father)

በመጀመሪያ ወደ እስር ቤት ስትገባ ቀናትን ትቆጥራለህ፣ ከዚያም ሳምንታትን፣ ከሁለትዓመታት በኋላ በሚመጣዉ ጊዜ የምታደርገው ሞትን መጠበቅ ብቻ ነው፡፡ አድካሚ የጉልበት ሥራ፣መራራ ረሐብ፣ እርስ በእርስ መናቆር፣ መደባደብ፣ ብርዱና ከቤተ-ሰብ መለየቱ ያደድቡህናየማይቀረውን ሞት ብቻ እንድታስብ ትሆናለህ፡፡ ስለዚህ አብዛኛዎቹ እስረኞች በስነ-ምግባር ረገድደካሞች የሚሆኑት፡፡

ለብዙዎቻችን የፖለቲካና ለሁሉም የወንጀለኛ እስረኞች ስሜታችን እንደ ሁኔታዉ ግራና ቀኝየሚዋልል ነበር፣ የአለቃው ቁጥጥር፣ የሚሠረቅ ዳቦ፣ እርስ በእርስ መናቆር፣ በተለይ በእስር ቤቱለተመደቡ እስረኞች የተመደበው እጅግ ከባድ የጉልበት ሥራ፣ ልዩዉ የቅጣት ክፍል፣ በረዶየሚሆኑ ጣቶች ወይም በጎረቤት የእስር ቤቱ ክፍሎች ውስጥ የሚሞቱት እስረኞች ስሜትንለመቀያየር ምክንያቶች ነበሩ፡፡ ሐሳብህ ሁሉ ተራና በእነዚህ ላይ ብቻ የሚያተኩሩ ይሆናሉ፡፡ እጅግበጣም የአያሌዎቹ እስረኞች ሕልም እስከሚጠግቡ በልተው ለሁለት ወይም ለሦስት ሰዓታት ያህልመተኛት ወይም ግማሽ ሊትር ቮድካ አግኝተው ሁሉንም ጨልጠው እንደገና ሌላ ተጨማሪ ምግብቢሰለቅጡ በወደዱ ነበር፣ ይሁን እንጂ እነዚህ ሁሉ ባዶ ምኞቶች ብቻ ነበሩ፡፡

እጅግ በጣም ትቂት የፖለቲካ እስረኞች በተቻላቸው መጠን ርኅሩኅ ሆነው ለመቆየት ሞከሩ፣ራሳቸውንም ከሌላዉ በመለየት፣ እርስ በእርስ በመደጋገፍና ራሳቸውን ወደ ተራ የወንጀለኛ እስረኞችዝቅ ላለማድረግ እየጣሩ ነበር፡፡ በተቻላቸው መጠን የእስር ቤቱ ደንብ በሚፈቅደው መሠረትራሳቸውን በማያዋርድ ሁኔታ ይኖራሉ፡፡ እነዚህ ሰዎች ከእስር ቤቱ የበረንዳ ማዕዘን ላይ ቆመውቃለ-ተናብቦ/ሌክቸር ያደርጋሉ፣ ግጥም ወይም አጭር ሳይንስ-ነክ ጽሑፍ ያነባሉ፣ አልፎ አልፎምየትም ባገኙት ብጣሽ ወረቀት ሳይቀር ማስታዎሻ ይጽፋሉ፡፡ በሆነ ርእሰ-ጉዳይ ላይ ሞቅ ያለ ክርክርይነሣል፣ ይሁን እንጂ እጅግ በጣም የሚጦፈው ፖለቲካን አስመልክቶ የሚደረገው ክርክር ነበር፡፡አልፎ አልፎ የወንጀል እስረኞችም ሳይቀር በክርክሩ ይቀላቀሉ ነበር፤ ፖለቲከኞች በፖለቲካ ረገድብዙም ፍላጎት አይታይባቸውም፣ ይሁን እንጂ አልፎ አልፎ ፍላጎቱ ነበራቸው፡፡ ሰዎች በስሜትየሚቃወሟቸውን በጥላቻ ይከራከሯቸው ነበር፡፡ አባ አርሴኒ በዚህ ክርከር ፈጽመው አይሳተፉም፡፡ነገር ግን ከዕለታት አንድ ቀን ያለፍላጎታቸው ተጎትተው ገቡ፡፡

ምንም ጊዜም እስረኞች ሐሳባቸውን ለመግለጽ ይፈራሉ፣ ይሁን እንጂ ወደሞቀ ክርክርውስጥ ሲገቡ ፍርሃት ሊያስከትል የሚችለውን ነገር ሁሉ ይረሱታል፡፡ በክርክሩ ከሚሳተፉት መካከልትቂቶቹ የአሰብሁትን መናገር ሳልችል ድምፄ ታፈነ፣” ይላሉ፡፡

እስረኞች ተቆጥረው የእስር ቤቱ በሮች ተቆለፉ፣ ከግድግዳዉ በስተጀርባ ነፋሱ እየነፈሰነበር፤ ግግሩ በረዶ መስኮቶችን እንዳይከፈቱ አደረጋቸው፣ ክፍሉ የታፈነና ዕርጥበት-አዘል ነበር፣ሆኖም ግን ውስጡ ሞቃት ነው፡፡ አምፖሎቹ ከሚፈለገው ከግማሽ በታች ብርሃናቸው መጠን ባነሰያበሩ ነበር፡፡ እነዚህ ሁሉ ትካዜና ሐዘን እንዲኖር ያደርጋሉ፡፡ በመሆኑም ሰዎች ብቸኛ ይሆናሉ፡፡እስረኞቹ በአንድነት ተሰበስበው መነጋገር፣መከራከርና ያለፈውን ማስታወስ ጀመሩ፡፡ ወንጀለኛእስረኞች ካርድ ወይም እንዶሚኖ ለብር ወይም ለመቁኑን እየተጫወቱ ነበር፡፡ አባ አርሴኒ ካረፉበትአልጋ አጠገብ የተሰበሰቡ እስረኞች በመንግሥት ላይ ያላቸውን አመለካከት ርእሰ-ጉዳይ በማድረግኃይለኛ ክርክር አደረጉ፡፡ በ15 ደቂቃዎች ውስጥ 20 የሚሆኑ ሰዎች ወደ ክርክሩ ተቀላቀሉና ክርክሩጦፈ፡፡ አንዱ የአንዱን ንግግር በማቋረጥ ሥጋት ጨመረ፡፡ ከተከራካሪዎች መካከል ቀድሞ የፓርቲአባል የነበሩ፤ ከልዩ ልዩ የሕይወት ተሞክሮዎች የተማሩ ሰዎች፤ በጣም ትቂት ቭላስቶቭትሲዎችናx1ሌሎችም ነበሩ፡፡ “እዚህ ያለነው ለምድነው? ለምንም! ፍትሕ የት አለ? ሁሉም መረሸን አለባቸው!”በማለት ፊታቸውን አኮሳትረው ይጮሁ፡፡ አራት ወይም አምስት የሚሆኑ ቀድሞ የፓርቲ አባልየነበሩ በነገሩ ባለስማማታቸው “አሳዛኝ ስሕተት እየተፈጸመ ነው” በማለት ገለጹ፡፡ እንደአበባላቸውከሆነ እየሆነ ያለው ሁሉ እራሱ ስታሊን በማያውቀው በትቂት ሠርጎ-ገቦች በመሞኘት የሚፈጸምመሆኑን ገለጹ፡፡

“የሩስያ ሕዝብ ግማሹ በእስር ቤት ታጉሮ ሳለ ተታለልን! አስተዳዳሪዎቹም እንዲደመሰሱታቀደ!” በማለት አንድ ድምፅ ጮኸ፡፡

ስታሊን አሳምሮ ያውቃል፣ የራሱ ትእዛዝ ነው፣” አለ ሌላዉ፡፡

ስታሊንን በመግደል አሲርሃል ተብሎ የተያዘው ከስረኞቹ አንዱ እጅግ በጣም በመበሳጨቱድምፁ ተቆራረጠ፡፡ ትቂት ቭላስቭትስኪዎች ማነኛውንም ሐሳብና በመቃወም ጮኹ፡፡

“እነዚያ የፓርቲ አባላት መሰቀል ወይም መረሸን አለባቸው!” አለ ሌላ አንድ ሰው፡፡ከ1917 ዓ/ም ጀምሮ ዋና የቮልሼቪክ ፓርቲ አባል የነበረ አንድ ሽማግሌ ሰው በመጀርመንጦር ሠራዊት ውስጥ ካገለገለ ሰው ጋር ተደባደበና በኃይል መሳደብ፡፡

“አንተ ባንዳ ነህ!” ብሎ ጮኸ፡፡ “መረሸን ነበረብህ፣ ነገር ግን በሕይወት እስካሁን አለህ! እኔራሴ እንዳተ ያሉትን ባንዳዎች እረሽናቸዋለሁ ወይም እሰቅላቸዋለሁ፡፡ እስካሁን ድረስ ወደናንተባለመዝቴ አዝናለሁ፡፡ ስሕተትም ፈጽሜያለሁ፣ ይሁን እንጂ አንተ ባንዳዉ በዚህ እስር ቤት ውስጥከኔ ጋር ትሞታለህ ብየ ተስፋ አደርጋለሁ፡፡

“እኔ ባንዳ ነኝ? እኔ የሶቭየትን መንግሥት ከሚደግፉት አንዱ ነኝ!” “ማለት ትችላለህ፣ ነገር ግን አንተም ባንዳ ነህ፣ ለዚህ ነው መንግሥት እዚህ እስር ቤትያመጣህ፡፡”

በርቀት የነበሩ ሰዎች ሳቁ፣ ሆኖም ግን ክርክሩ በሞቀ ሁኔታ ቀጠለ፡፡ አንድ ሰው ድንገት“አብያተ ክርስቲያናትን አውድመው ሃይማኖትን አጠፉ፡፡ በዚህ ጉዳይ ላይ አንድ ሰው ካጠገቡ ቁጭ(1) ያሉትን አባ አርሴኒን አስታወሰና “ደህና፣ ፒዮትር አንድሬየቪች ንገረን፣ ባለሥልጣናቱን እንዴትታያቸዋለህ?” ሲል ጠየቀ፡፡

አባ አርሴኒ ዝም ብለው ክርክሩን ሲያዳምጡ ቆዩ፣ ነገር ግን አሁን ያለፍላጎታቸው ወደክርክሩ ጎትተው ከተቷቸው፡፡ አባ አርሴኒ ምን እንደሚመልሱ ግልጽ ነበር፡፡ በእስር ቤቱ ውስጥ ብዙየተሰቃዩ ሰው ስለነበሩ የአባ አርሴኒ ጓደኞች ተጨነቁ፡፡

በጂትሎቭስኪ የሚመሩት ቭላስቭትሲዎች ከሌላዉ እስረኛ ራሳቸውን አግለው እየኖሩ ነበር፡፡የሚፈሩት ምንም ነገር አልነበረም፤ በምን ምክንያት እንደተያዙ ያውቃሉ፣ የሕይወታቸው ፍጻሜምቅርብ እንደሆም ይገምታሉ፡፡ ከነርሱ አንዱ “እንግዲህ በል አፍስሰው ቄሴ!” አለ፡፡

አባ አርሴኒ ላፍታ ዝም አሉና “የጦፈ ክርክር ስለያዛችሁ ክርክሩ ወደ ጭቅጭቅ ተቀየረ፣ሊትቆጣጠሩት ወደማትችሉት ደረጃ ደረሰ፡፡ በእስር ቤት መኖር አስቸጋሪ እየሆነ በመምጣቱሁላችንም ፍጻሜያችን ምን እንደሚሆን እናውቃለን፡፡ ክርክሩም መራራ የሆነው ለዚህ ነው፡፡የማይረሸን ወይም በሕይወት የሚተርፍ የለም፡፡ ሁላችሁም ባለሥልጣናቱን፣ ትእዛዛቱንና ሰዎችንትዎነጅላላችሁ፤ ሌላውን ለማስቆጣት ጎትታችሁ ወደ ክርክሩ አስገባችሁኝ፡፡

“ኮሚኒስቶች ምዕመናንን አስረዋል፣ አብያተ ክርስቲያናትን ዘግተዋል፣ ሃይማኖትን ትተዋልብላችኋል፡፡ አዎ፣ ላዩን ሲታይ እውነት ይመስላል፤ ነገር ግን እስቲ በጥልቀት እንመልከተው፣ያለፉትን ጊዜያት በጥልቀት እንመልከት፡፡ ከኛ ከሩስያውያውን ሕዝቦች መካከል ብዙዎቹሃይማኖታቸውን ክደዋል፣ ባለፉት ዘመናት ውስጥ ለነበሩ አባቶች ክብር መሥጠት አቆሙ፡፡በመሆኑም ብዙ መልካምና ብርቅ ነገሮችን አጠናል፡፡ በስሕተት ጎዳና እየሄደ ያለ ማነው?ባለሥልጣናቱ ብቻ ናቸውን? አይደሉም፣ እኛም ራሳችን በስሕተት መንገድ ላይ ነን፣ ስለሆነምአሁን ራሳችን የዘራነውን እያጨድን ነው፡፡

“በምሁራኑ፣ በመኳንንቱ፣ በነጋዴዎችና በሲቪሉ ማኅበረ-ሰብ የተደረጉትን መጥፎምሳሌዎች እናስታውስ፡፡ እኛም በቤተ ክህነቱ ዘርፍ ያለን ሰዎች የበለጠ ክፉዎች ነበርን፡፡“የካህናቱ ልጆች አርቲስቶችና አብዮተኞች ሆኑ፣ የካህናቱ ቤተሰቦች አባቶቻቸው በየምክንያቱበመዋሸታቸው እምነት ስላጡባቸው ካህናቱን ከነሃይማኖታቸው ናቋቸው፡፡ ከአብዮቱ ረጅም ዓመታትአስቀድሞ ካህናቱ ለነፍስ ልጆቻቸው ታማኝ እረኞች አልነበሩም፡፡ ቅስና እንደማነኛውም የሙያ ዘርፍበመቆጠሩ ካህናቱ በሀልወተ-እግዚአብሔር የማያምኑና ከቤተ ክርስቲያን በሚገኘው ገንዘብ እየጠጡየመጠጥ ሱሰኞች ሆኑ፡፡

“ካገራችን ገዳማት መካከል አምስቱ ወይም ስድስቱ የክርስትና ማዕከሎች ነበሩ፤ የቫላምገዳም፣ ኦፕቲና ፑስቲን ከነታዋቂ መምህራኑ/ስተራርትሲx2 ፣ ዲቬዮቭስኪ ኮንቬንትና እንዲሁምየሳሮቭ ገዳም ይገኛሉ፡፡ ሌሎችም ገዳማት አሁን እምነት-አልባ በመሆናቸው የሃይማኖተኛ መነኮሳትመገኛ ሳይሆኑ ተራ የማኅበረ-ሰብ መጠራቀሚያ ሆነዋል፡፡

“አሁን ሰዎች ከነዚህ ገዳማት ምን ይማራሉ? ምን ዓይነት ምሳሌ የሚሆን ነገርስ ተቀመጠ?“ልጆቻችንን በተገቢው መንገድ አላሳደግናቸውም፣ ጠንካራ የእምነት መሠረትአላስቀመጥንላቸውም፡፡ እንግዲህ ይህን ሁሉ ልብ በሉ! ለዚህ ነው ሰዎቻችን ፈጥነው ሁላችንንምየረሱን፣ ካህናቶቻቸውን ረስተዋል፣ እምነታቸውንና ቤተ ክርስቲያናቸውንም በመርሳት ለማፍረስቆርጠው ተነሡ፣ እንዲሁም የጥፋት ዘዴ በመቀመር ካህናቱ የጥፋት መሪዎች ሆኑ፡፡

“ይህን ሁሉ ልብ ካልነው ጣታችንን ወደባለሥልጣኖቻችን ብቻ አንቀስርም፣ ምክንያቱምየእምነት-አልባ ዘሮች ራሳችን ባዘጋጀነው አፈር ላይ ተዘሩ፡፡ ከዚያም እነዚያ ዘሮች ተራቡ፤ እናምመታሰርን፣ መሰቃየትን፣ የንጹሐንን ደም መፍሰስ አቆጠቆጡ፡፡ ይሁን እንጂ በሀገሬ ውስጥ የሆነውሁሉ ቢሆንም ዜጋዋ ነኝ፡፡ ካህን እንደመሆኔ መጠን ሀገራችንን የመጠበቅና የመርዳት ኃላፊነት(2):: እንዳለብን የነፍስ ልጆቼን እመክራለሁ፡፡ አሁን እየተፈጸመ ያለው መቆም አለበት፤ በፍጥነትመስተካከል ያለበት እጅግ ታላቅ ስሕተት ነው፡፡”

“ስለዚህ የኛዉ ቄሴም ኮሚ ሆንሃላ! አለ አንድ ሰው “ኮሚኒስት” የሚለውን ኮሚ ብሎበማሳጠር፡፡ ቅዱስ ትመስላለህ፣ ይሁን እንጂ አንተ በሁለት ቢላዋ የምትበላ አራጆ ነህ፣ ለካስ ቅስቀሳእያካሄድህ ነው! ለባለሥልጣናቱ እየሠራህ ነው!” አለና አባ አርሴኒን በመጥፎ ሁኔታ ገፍትሮከሚከራከረው ሕዝብ መከካከል አስወጣቸው፡፡

ክርክሩ በጦፈ ሁኔታ ቀጠለ፣ ነገር ግን ብዙ ሰዎች ቡድኑን እየተውት ወጡ፡፡

ከዚህ ጊዜ ጀምሮ ትቂት እስረኞች አባ አርሴኒን መበቀል ጀመሩ፡፡ በምሸት ደበደቧቸው፣አንድ ሰው ባልጋቸው ላይ የፊኛዉን ፈሳሽ ለቀቀባቸው፣ ሌላዉም ደግሞ መቁኑናቸውንሠረቃቸው፡፡ እኛ የርሳቸው ጓደኞቻቸው ደግሞ ካጥቂዎቻቸው ለመታግ ሞከርን፡፡ ሆኖም ግን አጥቂቡድኖቹ አመለ-ብልሹዎች ስለነበሩ ማነኛውንም ጉዳት የማድረስ አቅሙ ነበራቸው፡፡ባንድ ምሸት ጆራ ግሪጎሬንኮ የሚባል ከኪየቭ የመጣ ሰው አባ አርሴኒን የቭላሶቭቲዎች መሪወደ ሆነው ጂሎቭስኪ ወሰዳቸው፣ ጂሎቭስኪ ካልጋዉ ላይ ተጋድሞ ከጓደኞቹ ጋር እያወራ ነበር፡፡“ቄሴ፣ ከኛ ወገን ነህን ወይስ ከኮሚኒስቶች? ለእስር ቤቱ ባለሥልጣናት እየሠራህ መሆኑንደርሰንብሃል፣ ኑዛዜ ትቀበልና አሳልፈህ ለነሱ ትሠጣለህ፡፡ አሁን ምን እንደምናደርግህ እኛ ብቻ ነንየምናውቅ፣ ትምህርት ሊሆንህ የሚችል ምት እንመታሃለን፡፡ እንሂድ ጆራ! በቅድሚያ ግን ቄሴየሚለውን እንስማ፡፡”

ጆራ ግሪጎሬንኮ በሁሉም ሰው ዘንድ የተጠላ ነበር፡፡ አጭር፣ ወፍራምና ትክሻዉ ሰፋ በማለቱአንገት የሌለው ይመስላል፣ ፊቱ ጠባሳ ስለበዛበት መልከ-ጥፉ ሲሆን በሆነ ባልሆነው የሐሰትፈገግታ ፈገግ ይላል፡፡ ይህ ተዳምሮ ሰውየውን አስቀያሚ አድርጎታል፡፡ ምንም እንኳን የቭላሶቭአባል በመሆኑ ብቻ በእስር ቤቱ ውስጥ ቢገኝም በጀርመን ሠራዊት ውስጥ በመረሸን ተግባር ላይየተሳተፈ ነው የሚል የሐሜት ወሬ ይወራበታል፡፡ አባ አርሴኒ በዕርጋታ ወደጂትሎቭስኪተመለከቱና “በሰዎች ሕይወት ላይ መወሰን የሚችለው እግዚአብሔር ብቻ ነው፤ አንተ አይደለህም፡፡የአንተ ቡድን አባል አልሆንም፣” አሉት፡፡ ከዚያም ከጂትሎቭኪ በተቃራኒ ካልጋው ላይ ቁጭ አሉና“ልታስፈራራኝ አትሞክር፡፡ ለኡኡታ፣ ለድብደባና ለሞት ዛቻ ቤተሰቡ ነኝ፡፡ በዚህ ዓለም ላይየምኖረውን ጊዜና የእያንዳንዳችንን ዕድሜ በሚወስን በእግዚአብሔር ያለምንም ቅድመ-ሁኔታአምናለሁ፡፡ የምሞትበት ጊዜ አሁን ከሆነ የእግዚአብሔር ፈቃድ ነው፡፡ እኔም ሆንሁ አንተ ይህንመለወጥ አንችልም፡፡ ሁላችንም እንደሥራችን ሊፈረድብን ወደእግዚአብሔር ፍርድ መቅረባችንአይቀርም፡፡

“በእግዚአብሔርና በደጋግ ሰዎች መልካም ሥራ አምናለሁ፣ እስከመጨረሻዋ እስትንፋሴድረስ በዕርግጥም አምናለሁ፡፡ አንተስ? አምላክህ የት አለ? እምነትህስ የት አለ? ስለሚሳደዱትአሳዳጆች ብዙ ትናገራለህ፣ ነገር ግን እስካሁን ራስህ እያሳደድህ ነው፣ እያዋረድህና እየገደልህ ነው፡፡እጆችህን ተመልከት፣ በደም ተጨማልቀዋል!”

ጂትሎቭስኪ እጆቹን አነሣና በተለየ ሁኔታ አተኩሮ አያቸው፤ ከዚያም ወደአባ አርሴኒተመለከተ፡፡ እጆቹን ከጭኑ ላይ አሳረፋቸውና በጣቶቹ ሲጥጥ የሚል ድምፅ በፍጠር “ስለማላውቀውማነኛውም ነገር ለመናገር አትሞክር!” አለና አባ አርሴኒን እንደገና በጥልቀት ተመለከታቸው፡፡ግሪጎሬንኮ ከላይኛው ተደራቢ አልጋ ላይ ሆኖ “አርካዲ ሴሚዮኖቪች፣ ቄሴ በሃይማኖት በዐልየሚያስተምር ሰው ይመስላል፤ ለምን አሁን ገድለን አንገላገልም?” በማለት በብስጭት ተናገረ፡፡

“ዝም በል፣ ግሪንጎሬንኮ!” ሲለው መለሰና ጂትሎቭስኪ “ወደውስጥ ከማስገባታችን በፊትየሚለውን ሁሉ ይበል፡፡ ቄሶች ማነብነብ ሥራቸው ነው፣ ልክ እንደኮሞኒስት ካድሮዎች፣” አለ፡፡

አባ አርሴኒ ቀጠሉ፤ “አንድ ሰው አንድ ቀን አንተን ሃይማኖተኛ ነበረ አለኝ፣ ግን ለምንታምናለህ? ሰዎችን አሰቃይተህ የገደልህ በማን ስም ነው? ስለዶስቶቭስኪ--ስትናገር አስታውሳለሁ፣በጣም የምትወደው ደራሲና የሩስያውያን ነፍስ መሆኑን ተናግረሃል፤ “ዘ-ብራጊስ ካራማዞቭ”በተሰኘው መጽሐፉ የዞሲማን ቃለ-ምክር እጠቅሳለሁ፡፡ ከመሞቻ አልጋዉ ላይ ሆኖ በዙሪያዉከበውት ለነበሩ ሰዎች እንዲህ አለ፤ “ከሀድያንን፣ ክፋት የሚያስተምሩትን፣ ማቴሪያሊስቶችንናክፉዎችንም ሳይቀር አትጥሏቸው፣ ምክንያቱም ከእነርሱ መካከልም ትቂቶቹ በእውነት ርኅሩኆችአሉና፣ በተለይ ደግሞ በዘመናችን፡፡ የእግዚአብሔርን ሰዎች ውደዱ፡፡ እመኑና ታላቅ የእምነት ደረጃይኑራችሁ፡፡ ለሁሉም ሰዎች መልካም ሥሩ፣ ስቃዮቻቸውን በመሸከም ዕርዷቸው፡፡ እያንዳንዱ ሰውስለሕይወት እንደገና እንዲያስብና ስህተቱንም እንዲያርም ጊዜ አለው፣ ይህን ማድረግም ይገባዋል፡፡ይህን ከተናገሩ በኋላ አባ አርሴኒ ተነስተው ወደአልጋቸው አመሩ፡፡ ነገር ግን ግሪጎሬንኮከአልጋዉ ላይ ዘለለና አባ አርሴኒን አንገታቸውን አነቃቸው፡፡ በዚያ ቅጽበት በተሰበሰቡት ሰዎችመካከል አንድ ረጅምና ጠንካራ ሰውየ እየተጎማለለ ብቅ አለ፣ ይህ ሰው በእስር ቤቱ ውስጥ“መርከበኛዉ” በሚል ስም ይታወቃል፡፡ ኦዴሳ ላይ በፖለቲካ ምክንያት ተይዞ ለአስራ-አምስትዓመታት በዚህ እስር ቤት ውስጥ እንዲቆይ እስከተፈረደበት ጊዜ ድረስ በእርግትም መርከበኛ ነበር፡፡”ግዴለሽ፣ ደስተኛና ጥሩ ጀግና ሰው ነበር፣ እንደማናችንም በእስር ቤት ቢቆይም ጤናማ የሰውነትአቋሙን እንዳለ ነበር፡፡

መርከበኛዉን ከበው የሚመለከቱትን ሰዎች እየገፈተረ መጣና ግሪጎሬንኮን ያለማመንታትአነሣና በዕቃ እንደተሞላ ጆንያ ወደጂትሎቭስኪ ቡድን አባላት ወረወረው፡፡

“ስማ አንተ ምናምን! አሁን ሩስያ ውስጥ እንጂ ጀርመን ውስጥ አለመሆንህን ልታውቅይገባል!” አለና ወደጂትሎቭስኪ ዞሮ ያለማመንታት በኦዴስያኛ የአነጋገር ዘይቤ “የኔ ክቡር ሆይ፣ጓደኞችህን ፀጥ ብታሰኛቸው ይበጃሃል! ያለበለዚያ ማንቁርታችሁን እዘጋዋለሁ፡፡ ሁላችሁም ፀጥበሉ!”

የጂትሎቭስኪ ቡድን አባላት ተንቀጠቀጡ፤ ብዙ እስረኞችም መጡና አባ አርሴኒንናመርከበኛዉን ለማገዝ በተጠንቀቅ ቆሙ፡፡

መርከበኛዉ ወደግሪጎሬንኮ መጣና “ፒዮትር አንድሬየቪችን መንካት አትችልም! አንድ ነገር ቢሆኑእኔ በግሌ ስለእርሳቸው እገድላሃለሁ፣ ከመግደሌ በፊት ስስ ብልትህን መትቼ በመጣልእጫወትብሃለሁ፣” አለው፡፡ ከዚያም አባ አርሴኒን ጠራቸውና “ፒዮትር አንድሬቪች፣ እንሂድ! አሁንአስጨንቀናቸዋል፡፡ ለእርስዎ የተለየ አክብሮት አለኝ፡፡ በሰላም ደግመን እንደምንገናኝ ተስፋአደርጋለሁ፡፡”

በሦስት ሳምንታት ውስጥ ጆራ ግሪጎሬንኮ ወደሌላ እስር ቤት ተዛወረ፡፡ ከዚያ ጊዜ ጀምሮጂትሎቭስኪዎች ፀጥ አሉ፣ ለሰዎችም ከበሬታ ማሳየት ጀመሩ፡፡ ክርክሩ ግን እንደቀጠለ ነበር፣ አባአርሴኒ ግን ከዚያ ጊዜ ጀመሮ በክርክር መሳተፋቸውን አቆሙ፡፡

(1)  ቭላሶቨትስ በጄነራል ቭላሶቭ ስር ይታዘዙ የነበሩ ሩስያውያውን ወታደሮች ሲሆኑ ከውጭ ሆነው ኮሚኒዝምን ለመዋጋትከጀርመን ጦር ሠራዊት ጋር ተቀላቀሉ፡፡ ጦርነቱ በጀርመኖች ተሸናፊነት በመደምደሙ በመጨረሻ በጦር ቃል-ኪዳን ተባባሪሀገራት ወደሩስያ እንዲመለሱ ተደረገና ከሞላ-ጎደል ሁሉም ሲሰቀሉ የቀሩት ደግሞ ወደልዩ የሞት ካምፕ ተላኩ፡፡


(2) ስተራርትስ “ስታሬትዝ” ለሚለው ቃል የብዙ ቁጥር ሲሆን ትርጉሙ ሰዎች ሃይማኖታዊ ምክር ለማግኘት የሚሄዱበትታዋቂ መምህር ማለት ነው፡፡ የኦፕቲና ገዳም እንደነዚህ ዐይነት መምህራንን በማፍራት የታወቀ ነው፡፡ 

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.

The News Makes Us Dumb (and serfs)

My father was, I think it's safe to say, an intellectual - an Ethiopian intellectual. Like in many homes of Ethiopian intellectuals, in our home, amateur politics and philosophy was often the topic of conversation. Between my father and I, our friends and guests, during visits, lunches, and dinners, it was a time when, where two or three (Ethiopian men) are gathered, politics is present.

We also watched the news. Not much else. Maybe a comedy here, and perhaps a cowboy and Indian show for nostalgia's sake. But news was king. And when we moved to North America, then we really got our fill of news. And plenty of political commentary.

As you might expect, we thought of ourselves as quite smart. We were the news watchers. We knew what was going on. We were serious. We were cosmopolitan. We were intellectuals. Our neighbours couldn't even point out Mexico on a map, and there we knew most of the world capitals. We even watched the US presidential debates - of the nominees! How smart we were.

Of course, this was all nonsense. We followed "the news" in exactly in the same way as the housewife followed soap operas or the youth followed sports. We were passive onlookers onto an activity on which we had no influence and had no stake, but fooled ourselves into thinking that merely watching meant something! But no, the news, was really a form of entertainment - mindless (and heartless) entertainment and escapism. Gossip that pretended to be something else. Passive and numbing brainwashing. No better than a soap opera. Actually worse - most soap opera watchers are under no illusion that they are doing something worthwhile!

Today, I don't watch TV and don't follow the news. On the internet, once in a while I quickly browse the headlines on a few sites - none of them mainstream. But sometimes, I find myself entranced and feeling the urge to delve a little into the news/gossip, and I have to stop myself.

Nevertheless, it was on the internet of course that I stumbled upon this old article: Why The News Makes Us Dumb. I encourage you all to read it. And turn off the news. Never watch CNN; if you see it on a television screen where you happen to it, flee!  Don't let your mind be colonized. If you have the spare time to burn, go have a chat with your neighbour. It would do you and him much more good than staring at the TV.

The Ethiopian Intellectual - Lost and Adrift

A Facebook post that I read yesterday reminded me of something that's been repeated in Ethiopian intellectual circles for decades, but still bears repeating because the problem its speaks of is still among our major problems, if not the most important problem in Ethiopia.

With age and experience, being a product of 'modern' education, that is, modern as an ideology, with every passing year I realize more and more how much our minds - the minds of Ethiopian 'intellectuals' (the quotes are for me) - have been colonized by what we might call modern or foreign (mostly Western) education. Even those of us who decry modernity's influence on Ethiopia, who decry our maladaptation of foreign mindsets, theories, and practices, are so much formed by these influences that are foreign to Ethiopia that we even express our concerns in foreign terms!

The problem with the foreign and modern mindset is not just that it is foreign and modern. The problem is that it is alien and therefore goes against the inertia of thousands of years of  Ethiopianness - however one defines Ethiopianness.

Let's take the idea of the modern 'democracy', an idea that most of us have fallen in love with at some time or another,  as an example. First of all, to even define and understand the idea properly, one would need to be immersed in the context in which the idea evolved. That is, an Ethiopian academic born and raised in Ethiopia, even if he was educated in the West, and even if his father, and even his grandfather, were products of Western education, cannot understand the idea of democracy in a way that a Briton or American can. The Ethiopian's understanding will always be somewhat superficial and so his application of these ideas will always be somewhat flawed.

Secondly, at the level of the society at large, not just the Western educated intellectuals, the understanding of democracy would be even more superficial because the idea, as it is, is so foreign. I say 'as it is', because of course there are ideas within democracy that are also part of Ethiopian tradition, or that are even universal, but the total idea of Western democracy remains foreign and difficult for the Ethiopian to fully absorb, let alone practice.

Third, and most importantly, the foreignness of Western democracy means that, sui generis, it cannot be a good fit in Ethiopia. That is, it did not evolve out of Ethiopian tradition, to address Ethiopian needs, to address Ethiopian problems, etc. It may have excellent ideas - it may itself be an excellent idea - but, as a whole idea, it remains foreign and as such cannot be a  prescription for an Ethiopian problem or any Ethiopian problems. That is not to say that something that looks like democracy may not be good for Ethiopia, but this something, whatever it is, will not come about by bringing the idea of democracy into Ethiopia, or adjusting it to Ethiopia. It will come about by looking at Ethiopia as it is and thinking about what social change, if any, would be good for it.

Ironically, those intellectuals who have warned us against being colonized by Western mindsets were often foreigners themselves. One of them, the great Donald Levine, summarised these sentiments in one of my favourite quotes:

“The vitality of a people springs from feeling at home in its culture and from a sense of kinship with its past. The negation of all those sentiments acquired in childhood leaves man adrift, a prey to random images and destructive impulses… The most productive and liberating sort of social change is that built on continuity with the past.”

Levine used to always recount a conversation he had with a modern Ethiopian intellectual or student in the 1960's. This student, presumably upset by the injustice of the policies of the Imperial Government, and at the same time suitably brainwashed, like most of his contemporaries, by some version of communism, remarked to Levine that the best thing for Ethiopia would be communism. Levine, like an elder of sorts, reminded the modern Ethiopian that communism requires revolutions that usually cost tens of thousands of lives. The modern Ethiopian replied that let alone tens of thousands of lives, millions of lives would not be too great a sacrifice to bring about communism to Ethiopia! Levine, as a lover of Ethiopian tradition, was shocked and alarmed to hear such a sentiment from the cream of Ethiopia's crop.

You see, Ethiopian intellectuals, given a background of relative poverty and backwardness from the point of view of the world today and the inferiority complex that comes with it, in order to run as fast as we can away from our seemingly insurmountable problems, run blindly, like a deer chased by a lion, into the arms of foreign ideas and ideologies. And then, we quickly become more Catholic than the Pope, so to speak. We become the most radical Communists, or radical ethnic nationalists, or worshippers of 'democracy', etc. We become so attached to these 'pretty', foreign, ideas. This, if not anything, illustrates how dangerous and incompatible foreign ideas are with being Ethiopian.

So I, myself, I try to flee back, back to being Ethiopia. I try my best to cling to my childhood sentiments, so to speak, even if my modern mindset rebels. It is the safe, the tried and true, the resilient and robust approach. I ask Ethiopian intellectuals to do the same. And I hope and pray that those not infected by modern education can avoid the infection!

ኢሳት፤ ተስፋ የሚሰጥ ወይም የሚያስቆጥ?

ይህን ቪዲዮ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUGKE49Lagg) ይመልከቱ። እኔ እጅግ ከምወዳቸው ጋዜጠኛ ሲሳይ አጌና ስለ ኦህዴድና በአዴን ለህወሃት ሙሉ ተገዥነት ይተቻል። ቪዲዮውን ካያችሁ በኋላ እስቲ ንገሩኝ፤ ስለሀገራችን ኢትዮጵያ በተስፋ ተሞላችሁ ወይም ቆረጣችሁ? ይህ ለናንተም ለሃገሪቷም ይበጃል አይበጅም? የፖለቲካ ለውጥ ለዘላለም አይመጣም ወይም አንድ ቀን ይመጣል ያሰኛችኋል? ከዚም አልፎ በሀገሬ ለውጥ ለማምጣት ሚና መጫወት እችላለሁ አልችልም፤ የትኛው ስሜት ይይላል?
ከዚህ በፊት ደጋግሜ እንደጻፍኩት፤
1. የትግራይ ተወላጆች በምክላከያ አናሳ ቁጥር ነው ያላቸው። የሌሎች ጎሳ ተወላጆች ከነኦሮሞና አማራ እጅግ አብዛኛው ናቸው። ይህ ሃቅ ነው። ህወሃትም ፍልጎት ሳይሆን ምርጫ የለውም፤ ትግሬ ቢበዛ ለውግያም ለሰላምም አይበጅም። ስለዚህ ትግሬዎች የስልጣን ቦታዎኦች ተቆጣጥረው ሌሎቹ ሌላውን ይዘዋል። ግን ይህ ሁኔታ ለርጅም ጊዜ አይዘልቅም። ሌሎቹ ወደፊት ግድ ሹመት ያገኛሉ ሰላምን ለመጠበቅ።
2. የደህንነቶ የጎሳ ክፍፍል በዪፋ ባይታወቅም ከሸፈቱ ምስክሮች ዘንድ በርካታ ቲግራይ ያልሆኑ ደህንነት ውስጥ እንዳሉ መረጃ አለን። ሆኖም ከሁሉም የመንግስት አካል ደህንነት ነው በህወሃት ታንቆ የተያዘው። ማንኛውም አምባገነን መንግስት ከሁሉም በላይ ደህንነትን ነው ተጠንቅቆ የሚይዘውና።
3. የትግራይ ህብረተሰብ አሁንም የኢትዮጵያ 8% በላይ አይደለም።
እነዚህ ሃቆች የሚነግሩን ህውሃት ኢትዮጵያን የሚገዛት በበርካታ ህዝብ ፈቃድና ተባባሪነት ነው። ግን በዛው መጠን ፈቃደኛውም ተባባሪውም በሙሉ ልቡ አምኖበት ሳይሆን በአቅም፤ በብስለት፤ በመተባብር፤ ወዘተ ጉድለት ነው የሚያደርኩትን የሚያደርጉት። አቅም፤ ብስለት፤ ትብብር በትንሹም ቢጨእር ያለው አገዛዝ በሰላም ይዘየር ነበር። ስለዚህ ይህ ሁኔታ እንዲፈጥር ነው ማድረግ ያለብን።
ለዚህ ነው ከዚህ በፊትም አሁንም የምለው ከነ የሩሲያ ቭላዲሚር ፑቲን አይነቱ እንማር። ፑቲን ከጎጀውን ከሀዲው የልትሲን መንግስት እየሰራ ውስጥ ለወስጥ ጥሩ ስራ እየሰራ ግን ማንነቱን ደብቆ ሃይሉን አከማቸ። ተቃዋሚ አልሆንም። ለምን፤ እንደማያዋጣና እንደምይሆን ገቡንም ለማሳካት እንደማይሆን ተረድቶ ከመንግስት ውስት በስውር መስራቱ ያዋጣልብሎ ሰራ። የሱም ቢጤዎች ብዙ ነበሩ ጉብዝናና ብልጥነታቸውም እንዲአሸንፉ ረዳቸው።
የኢትዮጵያም ሁኔታ እንደዚህ ነው። በደርግ ጊዜ ታላቅ የሆነ የግዥ መደብ ሞተ እራሱንም አጠፋ አቅምም አጣ። አሁን ያለው አማራጭ ከውስጥ ሆኖ መስራት ነው።
ደግሞ ይቻላል። ከላይ እንደጠቀስኩት ህውሃትም ደጋፊዎቻቸውም እጅግ አናሳ ናቸው። ዛሬም እንደሚታየው ተገዥ ፓርቲዎቻቸውን ኦህድድና በአዴንን እንደፈለጉት በዘላቂነት ማሽከርከር አቅቷቸዋል። ስለዚህ ተስፋ አለን፤ ከሰራን። ከመሸሽ ወይም ከማይሆን የፊትለፊት ግጭት መንገድ ከመያዝ ብልጥ ሆነን ከውስጥ ሃገሪትን መያዝ ነው።

Catalonia - Another Lesson for Ethiopia

The first lesson, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that ethnic politics is not particular to Ethiopia. I make this obvious point because it seems that a lot of my fellow Ethiopianists - those of us who are wary of ethnic politics - continue to think that only Ethiopia is 'plagued' by ethnic politics. No, ethnicity is universal, nation-states have been for the past two hundred years at least universal, and therefore ethnic politics exists in all states to some extent or another, depending on their ethnic demographics and history.

The second is that the root of ethnic politics is ethnic identity, which has existed for the most part of the existence of this world! People naturally have and are fond of their ethnic or national identity, which, by the way, are fundamentally equivalent. If you ask someone who identifies as Spanish what it means to be Spanish, and if you ask someone who identifies as Catalan what it means to be Catalan, the answer will be the same. My language, my culture, my geography, my ancestry, etc.

What about exclusivism - that is, what about an ethnic or state identity that excludes others? Today's clever Catalan secessionist will say that anyone can be Catalan as long as they identify as Catalan and speak or want to speak the language. Quebec separatists have said the same for decades. Secessionists often adopt this position to ensure that they are not attacked as exclusivists or 'racists'. Anyone can become Catalan or Quebecois, as long as... At the end of the day, ethnicity (and nationalism) are fundamentally exclusivist of course. It is a particular language or culture or geography or way of thinking that one has to adopt. So an Ethiopian nationalist can also say that anyone who adopts Ethiopian language, culture, etc., can be an Ethiopian.

A fourth point is that although ethnic identity is natural and the root of ethnic nationalism, ethnic nationalism itself, that is, the need to politically assert ethnicity, can be manufactured. Latent ethnic sentiments can be stoked by clever politics on the part of ethnic nationalist politicians, and stupid politics by those opposing, and this is what we have seen in Spain. Catalans who only a few years ago would oppose secession today are all for it not because anything substantive has changed in Spanish politics, but because of clever and poor marketing.

The fifth lesson - another very important one - is that wealth, 'development', modernity, etc. do not mitigate ethnic identity. In fact they may amplify it. Catalonia, compared to Oromia, is quite rich. And 'educated'. And modern. Yet it is rife with ethnic politics driven by the need to assert ethnic identity. So the assumption by some in Ethiopia that with development ethnic nationalism, especially 'narrow nationalism', will decrease is a false and dangerous one.

The sixth lesson is nothing except demographics can stem the tide of ethnic nationalism. The problem in Catalonia, as was the problem in Quebec until 25 years ago, is that there are too many people who are today or are potential Catalan nationalists. So secession via referendum is always a threat and ethnic nationalism is always the main political issue. This situation exists because there has not been enough Spanish-Catalan assimilation to create a 'mixed-identity' population in Catalonia and, very imporantly, in the rest of Spain. If there were a sizeable mixed-identity population, then Catalan nationalism would be much weaker. So without sufficient assimilation, the threat of ethnic nationalism always exists, and the solution will end up being ethnic strife or, if possible, secession.

This last lesson is what, I believe, the policy of the Government of Ethiopia should be based on. It is what we Ethiopian nationalists have to advocate for. Assimilation is the key to reducing ethnic nationalism and tension in Ethiopia. Note here that assimilation is not one way - it does not mean everyone should assimilate towards one particular ethnicity - for example, 'Amhara'. It means that there should be assimilation towards some merged and mixed ethnicity. In Ethiopia, for example, if there were significant intermigration and intermarriage between Oromos and other Ethiopians, with Oromiffa being spoken in most parts of Ethiopia along with Amharic and a significant mixed population, such demographics would greatly reduce the power of ethnic nationalism and tension such as exists today. In my view, the Ethiopian government (and state governments) must seriously study and implement policies that promote such assimilation, such as for example teaching Afan Oromo in schools in Amhara State and promoting inter-state migration. Such policies will bring about the necessary assimilation that will mitigate ethnic tension.

Using Canada To Understand Ethiopian Ethnic Federalism Today

I am fortunate to have acquired a somewhat intimate knowledge of Canadian politics and have found that, unlike US politics for example, Canadian politics holds wonderful parallels and lessons for Ethiopia in the area of federalism and ethnic federalism. So in this article I will briefly describe the history and nature of Canadian politics and how it can help us understand the Ethiopian political reality today, especially concerning ethnic federalism.

Here’s the (very) brief history… Canada was settled by English and French colonists beginning in the 1600’s. Soonafter, the English and French began warring for control of Canada (and North America as a whole), and around 1770, the English won decisively. However, in order to avoid problems with the large French population that had already settled in what is today known as the province of Quebec, the English government allowed the French to use their own language, worship in their own religion (Catholic), and to keep their own system of law (civil law). Over the following decades and centuries, the English continued to grant Quebec various such levels of autonomy and self-governance, both official and unofficial. For example, Quebec had its own legislature and French and both provincial and federal government services were provided in French and English. Unofficially, almost every second Canadian Prime Minister from 1867 (the official formation of Canada) onwards was French.

Nevertheless, despite such increasing levels of autonomy and recognition of language rights (note that it was always refered to as ‘language’, not ‘ethnic’ rights), ethnic nationalism in the French province of Quebec did not go away. The idea that Quebec was different from the rest of Canada, to the extent that it should secede and be a different country, actually grew over the decades despite increasing political and economic fortunes. So much so that in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, there was a small armed resistance advocating for the separation of Quebec. This was followed by increasing support for even more autonomy and even secession among both the Quebec population and its French elite.

This resulted in two referendums on secession. In the first referendum of 1980, the ‘yes’ side – the secession side - lost by a significant margin. But, the fact that it was held at all and that it gained 40% support scared enough people that the federal government took even further steps to give Quebec more autonomy, to increase the prominence of French throughout the country, and to unofficially increase the amount of money Quebec got from the federal government. Yet, despite this, a second referendum was held 1995, strategically at a time when the economy was in recession and people were angry. This referendum was again won by the ‘no’ side, but by only one percentage point 50.5% to 49.5%! Significantly, 60% of native French speakers voted for secession, but almost 100% of English and other language speakers voted against secession. Thus, despite being a small minority, non-French speakers were the decisive voters in the referendum.

Today, there is little interest in secession in Quebec – or to put it more accurately, it seems impossible for the 40% of Quebec who still support secession to get enough support from the rest of the population to win a referendum.

What are the lessons to learn from this Canadian example for Ethiopia?

Modernization, rather than reducing ethnic nationalism, can actually increase it. As Quebec modernized, became less religious, more affluent, etc. support for ethnic nationalism, manifested in reduction in English and other (non-French) language rights, secession from Canada, etc. actually increased! Modernization and increased ethnic nationalism go hand in hand.

Canada over the centuries embarked on various policies aimed at accommodating and satisfying the demands of French Quebecers such as the granting of extensive language rights, allowing the suppression of English and other languages in Quebec, making French an official language of the entire country despite only a tiny French population outside Quebec, transfering large amounts of federal money to Quebec despite the wealth of Quebec, etc. The political calculation was that if the demands of French Quebecers were met, they would be less likely to manifest their ethnic nationalism in ways that would cause dramatic damage the rest of Canada, such as secession. This shows that ethnic nationalism cannot be defeated by a stick – it requires plenty of carrot.

However, all over the above policies may have slowed the pace of increasing ethnic nationalism, but did not stop it. The results of the 1995 referendum, which almost initiated a process of secession or at least more separated federal arrangement, shows that accommodating ethnic nationalism, though helpful for some time, will not at the end stop the movement.

Ethnic nationalism does not fundamentally mean secession. It is the desire of a certain group for special rights above the rights of the rest of the population, in recognition that this group is a nation, or a pseudo-nation. For hardline ethnic nationalists, this recognition can only be realized within a politically separate nation. For ‘softer’ nationalists, having asymmetric rights within one nation is enough. Having more autonomy than other provinces, having a French-only province, having the federal language use French equal to English, etc. is enough for them to express their nationhood. The common theme however is that it has to have special rights as a group, even though these rights impinge upon the rights of other citizens.

An immigrant to Quebec cannot send his child to English school. English has not official status as a language in Quebec. Anyone in Quebec who does not speak French is de facto a second class citizen. More so than someone who does not speak English and lives in the English parts of Canada. ‘Native’ Quebecers – those who trace their ancestry to the original French Quebecers – are a privileged class in Quebec, even more so that ‘native’ English are in the rest of Canada. These are the practical consequences of ethnic nationalism – asymmetric rights and privilege that impinge on others’ rights.

Quebec nationalists go out of their way to emphasize that theirs is not an ‘ethnic’ nationalism, but a geographic (Quebec) or language-based (French) nationalism. The reason is that ethnic nationalism is seen within Canadian politics as a whole as primitive and potentially discriminatory. Thus when after the failed 1995 referendum one of the leaders of the Quebec separatist movement (truthfully) said that they lost the vote because of English speakers and immigrants, he was roundly denounced by his own side. What he said was true but not the perception of Quebec separatism that separatists wanted to portray. They wanted to portray their side as open to all, especially immigrants, with the common goal of having an independent Quebec. Ethnic nationalism is in a mature political arena seen as too divisive and dangerous by all sides.

Ethnic nationalism is politically costly. Since its inception, Canada has an extraordinary amount of its political energy on this issue. This energy could have been better spend on the myriad of other matters, such as the economy, trade, government organization, etc. that are everyday political issues in any other nation. The cost has been not only to Canada as a whole, but particularly to Quebec. In Quebec, most issues are sign primarily or at least secondarily through ethnic nationalist implications. Even political parties are organized around this issue, instead of around other ideology or interest groups.

Ethnic nationalist is economically costly. Canada spends significant amounts of money implementing the asymmetrical rights and privileges to Quebec that I mentioned above. The Quebec economy, too, has long been held hostage to the ethnic nationalist movement’s desire to use the economy first and foremost as a tool to promote its ethnic nationalist agenda.

Ethnic nationalism can only be significantly weaked through demographics, including integration and assimilation with the rest of the population. As I said above, though accommodation is often necessary and helpful, at the end of the day, it will only slow the tide of ethnic nationalism, not stop it. If it were not for the changing demographics in Quebec resulting from increasing numbers of immigrants, today Quebec might be a separate country or a very separate province in Canada. Immigrants and their children have increased the population of those whose mother tongue is not French to over 20%, and This group is not only not part of Quebec nationalism, but against it. Whereas accommodation could not defeat ethnic nationalism, demographics has done the job. For now.

These lessons are, as far as I am concerned, very much applicable to today’s Ethiopia. For me, Quebec mirrors Oromia. Oromia, notwithstanding the policies of the EPRDF, is today the one and major Ethiopian state where ethnic nationalism has a significant political impact. Yes, there is ethnic nationalism in other states, but where it is strongest and has to be dealt with ‘specially’ is in Oromia. Oromia, because of history and EPRDF policies, is Ethiopia’s asymmetric state – the one that requires special political attention, the one that is most costly, and the one for whom policies of accommodation, but more importantly integration and assimilation have to  be especially targeted. I will address how I think this should be done in another article.

Our Radical Politicians - Land to the Ruler!

Teshome Guebremariam, the recently departed former legal advisor to Emperor Haile Selassie’s government, once said something to the effect of ‘we said “land for the tiller,” but we ended up with land for the ruler (the government)’. Land to the tiller – a policy of giving tenant farmers land title to the land they rent from large landowners – although a morally, politically, and technically difficult policy, seemed a reasonable and moderate response to the land exploitation situation during the Emperor’s time. Land to the ruler – transferring ownership of all land to the government – nationalizing all land – was a radical and extreme response. Unfortunately, our political elite at the time chose the radical and extreme response. Indeed, at critical junctures during Ethiopia’s modern history, our political elite, especially ‘Haile Selassie’s children’ – those educated from the 1950’s onwards – have too often taken radical and extreme political decisions which have resulted in long term disaster for the nation. This has resulted in repeated disasters and unanticipated and unintended consequences for the nation.

In this article, let us consider that fateful decision to nationalize land, a decision that the Ethiopian people have paid for and continue to pay for dearly. In brief, this policy has resulted in:

1. Artificially high national population and birth rate
2. The recent explosion of rural-urban migration that is chocking our cities
3. Low levels of human capital in rural areas, particularly in the area of farming expertise
4. Low agricultural productivity
5. Extremely high food prices and inflation
6. Food insecurity

How did all this come about? First, the nationalization of land, which included forbidding farmers to sell and buy land, essentially imprisoned our rural population. It meant farmers and their families could no longer move to the city. Let me explain by an example – an example farmer – call him ‘Amde’. In 1975, Amde had seven hectares of land – quite a decent sized holding. If Amde wanted to move to the city, he would need some money – some ‘start-up money’ – to live on until he settled down, found a source of income, etc. Normally, this money would come from selling all or even part of his land – his biggest asset. After all, most Ethiopian farmers in the past and today do not have other assets of significant value. However, thanks to the nationalization of land, the farmer was no longer allowed to sell or trade his land, or even mortgage it. Moreover, if he moved to the city, he most cases he would forego all rights to his piece of land! So not only could he not sell his land for money to live on in the city, but if he moved to the city and then for some reason changed his mind after some time and wanted to return to the farm, he could not do so – his farm would have been taken. Knowing this, farmers in general did not move to the city in numbers that they otherwise would have done. Indeed, the statistics show (I discuss this below) that there was minimal rural to urban migration from 1975 until very recently.

So, what was life like for Amde on the farm? Well, like all rural dwellers, he had many children, let’s say seven children (6.5 was the rural average birth rate around 2007 – keep in mind the Addis Ababa average was 2.2 – a big difference). As his children grew older, he divided his seven hectares into seven pieces – his children got one hectare each. And then his children too had seven children each. His land started getting crowded. As the years went by, country-wide, the average plot size of farmers started approaching one hectare and rural areas started getting congested.

Note that at the time of the 1975 land proclamation, about 85% of Ethiopia’s population, about 28 million people, lived in rural areas. In 2015, 40 years later, about 80% of Ethiopia’s population, or about 80 million people, lived in rural areas! In 40 years, the rural share of the population changed only 5%, but given the naturally high rural birth rates, the absolute rural population skyrocketed. Why? Because for 40 years, farmers, not being allowed to sell their land, did not move to urban areas. If the natural, controlled, and steady rural to urban migration that has occurred and continues everywhere around the world were allowed to happen in Ethiopia, then perhaps by 2015 the percentage of population rural areas would have fallen to 70% or lower. This would have meant more people in urban areas where the birth rate is low, and less people in rural areas where the birth rate is high, and this would have resulted in the overall population in Ethiopia being somewhat lower as well. However, because this natural rural-urban migration was artificially restricted in Ethiopia, the population of the rural ‘prison’ grew and grew, in 40 years from 28 million to 80 million. So this continued high rural-urban population ratio is a major cause of the artificially high national population today.

So what happened to Amde’s family? Recall that his children have one hectare each and seven children each. They cannot divide that one hectare into seven pieces for each of their children – the resulting plots would be too small to sustain a household. So they leave their land to only one of their children, with the remaining six children, having received a high school education thanks to the massive increase in rural public education, forced to try and make their living in the city. This is what is happening today in Ethiopia. The inevitable land deficit that we all expected by that the government ignored is now occurring. Today, millions of farmers have only enough land for one child to inherit – the rest of their children are all migrating to the city.

Hence the explosion in rural to urban migration we see today. Plot sizes have shrunk so much so as to be unsustainable. Most rural children are no longer inheriting land from their parents the plot sizes are too small to be divided. And, even though food prices are extremely high and there has never been a better time to be a farmer, if you have enough land, young people are flooding into urban areas. What we are seeing today is 40 years’ worth of pent up, accumulated, and multiplied rural-urban migration happening virtually at once. And this great rural-urban migration explosion is just starting.

But there’s more to this story – let’s go back to Amde. Amde was not a very productive farmer – he was just did not have the skills nor the desire to farm but farmed only to make a living. But his neighour Gemechu was an excellent farmer who made the most of his plot of land and wished to expand. He was, like any other business person, eager to expand is operations, could not. But, given the government land policy, he could not buy land. Amde would have been willing to sell his land to him and Gemechu would have bought it – they would have agreed on a price, but this was not allowed. So the best Gemechu could do was rent land from Amde on a seasonal basis. Gemechu wished to dig a well, plant trees, and make other long term investments, but he could not since the land was only his for a season and he could not know what would happen in the long term. He also dreamed of a time when he could buy other neighbours’ plots and expand to a level where he could learn mechanized farming, learn about growing fruit seedlings, etc. But his dreams never materialized.

Note that Gemechu was producing 20 quintals of teff per hectare, while the not very productive Amde was producing 10. If Gemechu had bought Amde’s seven hectares and planted teff, the seven hectares would have gone from producing 70 quintals to 140 quintals. Overall agricultural productivity would have increased significantly. Gemechu, with his increased income and taking advantage of economies of scale, would have gone on to greater agricultural exploits. Amde would have been able to buy cheaper teff.

What happened to Gemechu was a travesty that the government(s) of Ethiopia brought on the country’s farmers. By not allowing farmers to be entrepreneurial and to expand, the government stifled farmers’ human capital. This has had not only an economic but also psychological, political, and social impact on farmers. Unlike those in all other commercial sectors, farmers uniquely were restricted from freedom in their business – they were not allowed to expand. As a result, they were indirectly restricted from improving their agricultural skills and education and essentially forced to remain as they were, and to give up hope. Imagine if a mechanic was by law prevented from having a garage bigger than a one-car garage. He would not come close to achieving his potential. If a professor were told that he could never look for another job and he could never conduct research on anything but one subject, he too would never achieve his potential. In fact, he soon stop trying and just mindlessly do his job. Same for farmers. The system made it communism for the farmers, capitalism for the rest.

To add insult to injury, successive governments and NGO’s continued to regard farmers as almost daft – as ignorant and incapable and in need of all forms of paternalism and assistance. It is true that the agricultural sector – that farmers – have not been able to increase their human capital – their knowledge and capacity – but this was and is only because they have been restricted from being able to expand their business. In true communist fashion, the governments’ plan was to hold the most important factor – land – constant, and increase inputs such as improved seeds, fertilizer, agricultural education, etc., with the hope that this would result in greater productivity. Of course it has not worked.

Today, in Ethiopia, agricultural productivity per unit of land is low. Food prices are some of the highest in developing countries. Milk, eggs, butter, meat, and honey are more expensive in Ethiopia than in many Western countries! The agricultural sector has been unable respond to the even the high demand and high prices in today’s Ethiopia that should have resulted in greater investment and productivity. Hence the food inflation – the leading source of inflation in the country – something the government continues to battle.

Back to Amde… The once a decade drought arrived and Amde’s children suffered a tiny harvest. In the old days, when Amde had his seven hectares, he was able to withstand drought because the grain he harvested from his seven hectares was enough for more than one year. But today, Amde’s children have one hectare each with which to provide for their families, and the harvest from one hectare is barely enough for one year. So with this drought, Amde’s children’s families end up all receiving food aid for a year.

So there we have it: An artificially high national population and birth rate, an explosion of rural-urban migration that is chocking our cities, low agricultural human capital in rural areas, low agricultural productivity, high food prices and inflation, and food insecurity. All consequences of the radical land proclamation of 1975. This is one example of the dangers and risks of radical and untried policies being implemented by desperate and immature new political elites. Today’s rulers would do well to learn from this and reconsider the other radical and immoderate policy that is haunting Ethiopia – ethnic federalism.

Alternative Political Elite?

When the Dergue collapsed in 1991 and the EPLF, TPLF, and OLF rode into power, we feared the worst. After all, the EPLF, TPLF, and OLF were nothing but ethnic nationalist rebels – shiftas – as far as we were concerned, bent on destroying or breaking apart Ethiopia.

Now, 26 years later, Ethiopia is still alive – yes, with a lot of problems – but still alive. Even though Eritrea separated and an unadvised ethnicist constitution was enacted, Ethiopia has survived. It has survived in large part because its population, in aggregate, was and remains nationalist and patriotic enough to resist the extremes of ethnic nationalism advocated by the TPLF. The TPLF tried, like Ataturk in Turkey, to drag the population kicking and screaming towards something it did not believe in, in this case, ethnic nationalism, but this only worked somewhat. To a large extent, Ethiopianism is alive and well.

Indeed, we can say that the Ethiopian people have moderated the TPLF. Recall that in the early 1990’s, there was no such thing as a ‘narrow nationalist’ – only ‘chauvinists’. Let alone Oromos, even Tigreans were encouraged by the TPLF to identify as ‘Tigrean first and Ethiopian second’. Today there is no such thing. Much of the TPLF now sees the extreme ethnic nationalism it once espoused as an albatross around its neck.

If commendation were possible, the Ethiopian people ought to be commended for this. It is only their strong nationalism and patriotism that has averted disaster and kept the country alive. But what is remarkable is that they did all this without an elite – it was all at the grassroots level. As I said above, in 1991, the EPLF, TPLF, and OLF were the political parties with power. There was no Ethiopian nationalist or Ethiopianist elite to speak of. After all, this elite had committed a long suicide – from 1960 when Haile Selassie’s elite first began to develop suicidal impulses – to the culmination in 1991. Thus when the EPLF, TPLF, and OLF in 1991 began to discuss their future in power, there was no nationalist elite – political or military – to stand up for Ethiopia. It was left to the people – the grassroots – to keep the country alive, and this they did.

Today, still, an Ethiopianist elite is largely absent. This is not surprising – political elites cannot appear overnight – it takes years, maybe generations. Having completed its suicide by 1991, and then having been prevented from rising up since then by the EPRDF, the Ethiopian nationalist elite remains a small, sick, disabled child which has lost all connection to its ancestors.

Is this a result solely of the EPRDF repression of the opposition which we all know about? Certainly not. Were it so, the elite would have strongly manifested itself in the diaspora, outside of the reach of the EPRDF. It has not. Another piece of evidence is the Kinijit fiasco of 2007, which was caused mainly because of elite immaturity and resulting infighting within Kinijit, which was that period’s manifestation of the Ethiopianist elite.

This for me is clear evidence that it is the Ethiopian nationalist political suicide of 1960-1991 that has resulted in its demise. Therefore the idea that many have that EPRDF repression is the cause of the poor state of the Ethiopianist elite, and that if the repression would end all would be fine, is wrongheaded. It was a long and complicated demise and it will take a long and complicated course to resurrect this elite. In the meantime, much of the Ethiopian population remains hungry for nationalist leadership.

So where does this leave those of us Ethiopianists who would like positive change in Ethiopian politics? Those of us who would like a reduction in ethnic nationalism, a reduction in repression, corruption, immorality, and injustice, a platform for safely and constructively discussing and competing policies. Those of us who would like Ethiopia to, at the minimum, be governed by a government that is actually liked by the people. At least a nationalist or populist government. Where does this leave those of us who would like this?

Well, obviously the straightforward path of organizing movements and parties is out of the question. This would result in swift imprisonment and torture, and maybe even death. Since the opposition elite is weak from 50 years of suicide, it cannot hope to directly struggle its way through such repression. This is what the past 26 years of experience shows.

The only possible path is the one that is not direct – the one that involves joining the current political system – joining the EPRDF in other words – and struggling from within. Making the EPRDF itself the vehicle for change since the EPRDF is the only political institution today with the capacity to bring about change and with an experienced elite.

Impossible, the cynics say! The TPLF, representing 8% of the population, will never allow that. Actually, it is quite possible, precisely because if the 92% is only slightly competent, even the superb 8% cannot dominate it. Like Putin worked on the inside and rose all the way to President and changed Russia 180 degrees, those who want change in Ethiopia can do the same. Of course, it will require those who are as wise as serpents and innocent as doves. One has to go along with the party, slowly accumulating political capital and power along the way, not rocking the boat, so to speak, until reaching a level of power which allows him the freedom to enforce his will. At the same time, someone with a good conscience can, while obeying broad party directives, avoid perpetrating injustice and repression, and indeed even rescuing those who might be ill affected by cruel and immoral party cadres. This requires a high level of political maturity and skill – it’s a difficult task. But it remains the only way forward now. Simply waiting for divine intervention or some kind of revolt is akin to doing nothing. Or worse than that – it is waiting for a disaster that we cannot cope with.

So, in my opinion, for those who are interested in bringing positive change to Ethiopian politics, today, there is no other vehicle but the EPRDF. The alternative political elite still hasn’t recovered from 50 years of suicide – it doesn’t exist in Ethiopia nor in the diaspora nor anywhere else. Therefore, rather than beating our heads against a wall trying to do the impossible, trying to mobilize international pressure or trying to build yet another failing opposition movement, let us get in the inside and begin a slow movement of taking over the EPRDF.

The ANDM Disconnect

During and after the 2016 protests, we often heard various ANDM officials claim that one of the main causes of unrest in Amhara State was the ‘disconnect’ between ANDM the party and the people of Amhara State. The people do not consider ANDM as having come from them, as being part of them, as wanting the same things that they want, as representing them, as standing up for their interests, etc. To put it simply, ANDM and the people of Amhara State are not of one mind nor of one heart.

This diagnosis of the unrest is, in my opinion is, not only correct, but perfect – it strikes at the very heart of the matter. Politics is best when a people are, among themselves, of one mind and heart, and when a people and its leadership are of one mind and one heart. Politics is at its worst when a people are divided amongst themselves and divided from their leadership. Division is the single biggest enemy of peaceful and prosperous politics and civil life.

Note that by division I don’t mean that there should not be differences. Differing ideologies, opinions, or even interests, to some extent, are natural. There almost ought to be differing ideologies, opinions, and interests. However, a people and leadership of one mind and one heart have a level of trust and understanding that allows them to handle these differences in an agreed upon peaceful and effective manner. So the differences do not end up resulting in division! The people and their leadership realize that at the end of the day, they have to live together and that therefore their basic interests are intertwined. They have to cooperate on basic issues and must not cross certain lines that lead to division. This is what being of one heart and mind is about.

So, yes, in Amhara State, there is division between the people and their leadership. ANDM is disconnected (was never really connected in the first place) from the people of Amhara State. What’s the consequence of this disconnect? Well, in general, it’s poor governance – ineffective government, corruption, injustice, etc. But specific to Ethiopia’s current political problems, the consequence is a disproportionately weak ANDM and Amhara State, and a disproportionately weak Ethiopian nationalism.

Is this a problem for the EPRDF as a whole? What’s wrong if ANDM is weak, if Amhara State is politically weak, and if Ethiopian nationalism is weak? There are those diehard fundamentalists in the EPRDF who do not see it as a problem. Their answer to every problem and situation is to stay the course because they have been in power for 26 years and they know what they are doing! For them, the 2016 protests are just another temporary setback which will be soon forgotten. But for forward thinking members of the EPRDF, who are well aware that the EPRDF has made numerous changes over its history, the 2016 protests indicate that significant changes are required for the EPRDF to continue in power. And one of these changes is that parties other than the TPLF – such as ANDM – have to shoulder their proper share of responsibility and exercise their proper share of power.

Why can’t the TPLF go it alone, so to speak, as it has for a quarter decade so far? The reason is that it is now clear that the vanguard party developmental state (10 years old) – which today is the EPRDF’s main policy and instrument of survival – and ethnic federalism (23 years old) and are incompatible. Not only incompatible, but a combustible combination – combustible enough to blow up the EPRDF’s hold on power. The EPRDF being a TPLF-led vanguard party, in other words with the TPLF holding most of the power and the other parties such as ANDM being junior partners, cannot sustain the developmental state because the resulting ethnic resentment will be too much handle. Therefore, ANDM (and OPDO and SEPDM etc.) need to have more weight in the EPRDF, so that the EPRDF is no longer a TPLF-led front, and thereby anti-TPLF and anti-Tigrean resentment will be slowly reduced. If ANDM and the others continue to be weak and estranged from its people, anti-TPLF resentment will continue increasing and the EPRDF’s hold on power will be weakened.

In order for ANDM to carry its weight in the EPRDF, it must be reconciled with the people of Amhara State. How can this be done? The first step would be for ANDM leadership to understand and accept that their political survival requires such reconciliation. The second is to bring about reconciliation via good governance and so make good governance the focus of their (perpetual!) mandate. Wait a minute – how is this possible? Corruption and favouritism are natural to the one party developmental state. All politicians in a developmental state have to have clients and networks and patronage, otherwise they will be unable to survive. As we have seen in Ethiopia, trying to achieve good governance is always a losing battle in a one party developmental state. Actually, let alone in Ethiopia, the Chinese Communist Party has for 40 years found it impossible to deal effectively with poor governance. Given this, how can ANDM bring about good governance?

The answer is that ANDM must first realize that 1) their survival is today very tenuous; 2) reconciling with the people of Amhara State their only hope for survival; and 3) given the current political reality in Ethiopia good governance is ANDM’s only way to bring about reconciliation. ANDM has no choice – in order to survive, it must reconcile with its people, and in order to reconcile, it must bring about good governance – peace, justice, transparency, no corruption, no favouritism, and a focus on aligning policy with the interests of the public.

What will the TPLF say about this? Will it not consider an ANDM united with the people of Amhara State as a threat? Will it not interfere in Amhara State? Let me say it clearly – the TPLF does not have a choice in the matter. If ANDM reconciles with its population – or simply just makes the decision to do so – there is nothing the TPLF can do about it. Unless there are federal issues at stake, the TPLF has to leave the management of Amhara State to ANDM. If it interferes, it is going to have to literally colonize Amhara State with Tigreans, something which it has not done to date and which it will not do, since this will result in a revolt it cannot control. Note that the EPRDF had a hard time controlling the 2016 revolt even though it was as much an anti-ANDM as anti-TPLF revolt. But if ANDM is one with the population, then the EPRDF would have to give in to ANDM’s wishes.

Let me add here that even today, the TPLF is not the direct cause of corruption, favouritism, injustice, etc. in Amhara State. The TPLF’s tentacles do not and more importantly cannot directly reach the local level. To put it simply, if the administrators of, say, Debre Marqos woreda, are corrupt and inefficient and do not represent the will of the people, this is a problem between them and the people, and a problem that can be fixed between them. The administrators are not from the TPLF, neither is their security from the TPLF. In most cases the administrators and the security apparatus are neighbours and relatives of the people of Debre Marqos. I use this example to illustrate that if ANDM and the people of Amhara State have the will, it is possible for ANDM to reconcile with the people of Amhara State. There will be no interference from the TPLF.

What will be the consequence of this reconciliation? It means that ANDM will have a significant increase in its political power. That is, it will be able to mobilize its people much more effectively than it can now, and this ability to mobilize is the basis of political power. This increase in political power will mean that ANDM will no longer be a junior partner in the EPRDF relative to the TPLF. This is the key to its survival. Again, understanding that this is the key to its survival is what should motivate it to change.

Will not the TPLF resist? Of course, there will be parts of the TPLF, the old guard, who will resist, but they will be unable to. Why? The TPLF is a minority whose dominance is solely a result of their unity and the disunity of the majority. Just a slight increase in the level of unity amongst the majority is enough to overcome any resistance some factions in the TPLF may try to put up. If ANDM and the people of Amhara State are reconciled, that is, if there is unity in Amhara State, the TPLF simply can no longer dominate. And many in the TPLF know this very well. In addition, note that, as I mentioned above, there is a part of the TPLF that wants to relinquish their dominance because it understands that this dominance is the biggest source of anti-EPRDF resentment and that if this dominance continues, both the TPLF and its Tigrean constituency will be at great risk. The problem is that they don’t see any political force, include ANDM and the other junior partners in the EPRDF, that is ready to take over the power that the TPLF relinquishes. But if ANDM does its job and becomes hand and glove with the people of Amhara State, then TPLF dominance will decrease in an orderly and stable manner, and in a roundabout way the survival of the EPRDF and TPLF will be reassured.

‘One Heart’ (‘And Lb’) should become the new slogan of ANDM. Everyone at all levels should be required so sign on to this. This is the only way for ANDM to repair the disconnect with the people of Amhara State and to become one with the people. This in turn is the only way ANDM can survive. Most importantly, this is key to the survival of the Ethiopian nation.