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.

ተሃድሶ

ስለ «ተሃድሶ ኦርቶዶክስ» የሚባለውን ንቅናቄ አንዳንድ ሃሳቦች ለማቅረብ እወደለሁ። በመጀመርያ ትሃድሶ በትክክል ምን እንደሆነ አይታወቅም። በጾም ጊዜ አሳ መብላት አግባብ ነው የሚሉ ተሃድሶ ተብለው ሊሰየሙ ይችላሉ። እንደ ፒያኖ ወይም ኦርጋን አይነት የሙዚቃ መሳርያ ከቤተ ክርስቲያን ውስጥ መተቀም ይቻላል የሚሉም እንደዚሁ ተሃድሶ ተብለው ይሰየማሉ። ከቤተ ክርስቲያን ውስጥ ጫማ ማድረግ ክልክል አይደለም የሚሉትም እንደዚሁ። በድንግል ማርያም አማላጅነት አምነው ግን በስብከታቸው ስለሷ ብዙ የማይናገሩ ተሃድሶ ይባላሉ። ቅድስት ድንግል ማርያምን እንደ ክርስቶስ የሚያመልኩ አሉና ይህ መሆን የለበትም የሚሉም ሳይገባ ተሃድሶ ይባላሉ። የጋራ ጾም አያስፈልጉም የሚሉም ተሃድሶ ይባላሉ። በቅዱሳን አማላጅነት አናምንም የሚሉም ተሃድሶ ይባላሉ። ወዘተ። «ተሃድሶ» የሚባለው ስያሜ በተለያዩ አግባብ ያላቸውም የሌላቸውም ምክንያቶች እንጠቀማለን።

ከዚህ ጽሁፍ ግን ተሃድሶ ስል የኢትዮጵያ ኦርቶዶክስ ተዋህዶ ቤተ ክርስቲያን እምነትንም ስርዓትንም መቀየር - በትንሹም በትልቁም - የሚፈልግ አቋምን ነው። ጫማ ከቤተ ክርስቲያን እናድረግ እስከ የቅዱሳን አማላጅነት የለም የሚሉት። እነዚህ እጅግ የተለያዩ አቋሞች እንደሆኑ እራዳለሁ! ጫማ አለማድረግ የ«ትንሽ» ስረዓት ጉዳይ ነው - የእምነት ጉዳይ ቢሆን ኖሮ ከግብጽ በተ ክርስቲያን ጋር እንለያይ ነበር። ትንሽ ስረዓት ቢሆንም ምክነያት አለው - ይህን ስርዓት ለመቀየር የሚጓጓው መንፈስ በቅዱሳን አማላጅነት አላምንም ከሚለው መንፈስ በተወሰነ ደረጃ ግንኙነት አለው። ላስረዳ...

የኦርቶዶክስ ክርስቲያን እምነት በሶስት መስፈርቶች ሊፈተሽ ይችላል። እምነቱ ከጥንት ጅምሮ ያለ ነው፤ እምነቱ በሁሉም ቦታ ይገኝ ነበር፤ እምነቱ በሁሉም ይታመን ነበር። እነዚህ መስፈርቶች ከክርስቶስ ቀጥሎ ከሃዋሪያቶቹ የወረስነውን እምነት አለማጠፍም አለ«ማደስ»ም ከመንፈቅ ትቆጥበን እምነታችንን እንደተሰጠን ይዘን እንድንጠብቅ የሚገልጹ ናቸው።

የኦርቶዶክስ ቤተ ክርስቲያን ሃሳብ እንደዚህ ነው። አዲስ ነገርን - ትንሽም ትልቅም - በቀላሉ አታስተናግድም። ቅዱስ አታናሲዮስ መጽሃፍ ቅዱስ የትኞቹን መጸሃፍት እንደሚያካትት ሲናገሩ አዲስ ነገር ነበር። መጸሃፍ ቅዱስ እነዚህ መጸሃፍቶች ናቸው ተብሎ ተሰይሞ አያውቅም ነበር። ታድያ ይህ አዲስ ነገር ነበር ወይ? በፍጹም፤ ቅዱስ አታናሲዮስ የነበረ ሁሉም በሁሉም ቦታ ከመጀመርያ የሚያምኑበትን ነው ያረጋገጡት። ሌሎች መጸሃፍቶችን የተተውበት ምክንያትም የቤተ ክርስቲያን እረኞች ህዝቡ እነዚህን መጸሃፍት በተሳሳተ መልኩ እያነበበ ወደ ኑፋቄ ሲገባ አይተው ነው።

የቤተ ክርስቲያን ስረዓትም በተመሳሳይ ቢጠበቅም ትንሽ ላላ ይላል። ስረዓትን «ታናሽ»ና «ታላቅ» ብለን መከፋፈል ይቻላል ግን ይህ ቅፍፍል ወጥ አይደለም - ታናሽና ታላቅ ዳሮች ሆነው ከመካከል ብዙ አሉ። ታናሽ ስረዓቶች ለምሳሌ ጫማ አለማድረግ፤ ታቦት፤ ወዘተ ከኛ ጋር አንድ ከሆነችው የግብጽ ቤተ ክርስቲያን የሉም። እነሱም የራሳቸው እኛ የሌለን ስርዓቶች አሏቸው። ሆኖም ስረዓትም በቀላሉ አይቀየረም። እንደ እምነት ያህል ባይሆንም ከእምነቱ ጋር እጅግ የተያያዘ ስለሆነ መቀየሩ እጅግ አስፈላጊ መሆን አለበት።

ለምሳሌ የቅዳሴአችን ዜማ የተጻፈው በ6ኛው ክፍለ ዘመን በቅዱስ ያሬድ ነው። ከዛ በፊት የነበረው ዜማ የተለየ ነበር ወይም ዜማ አልነበረም። የቅዳሴ ዜማ የስረዓት ለውጥ በቅዱስ ያሬድ ጊዜ ተካሄደ። ይህ የሚያሳየው ስርዓት መቀየር እንደሚቻል ነው። ግን ከዛ በኋላ እስካሁን ለ15 ክፍለ ዘመን አልተቀየረም። ይህ ደግሞ የሚያሳየው ስረዓት መቀየር ቢቻልም (እንደ ስረዓቱ አይነት) እጅግ በጣም ጥቂት ጊዜ ነው የሚቀየረው። የኦርቶዶክስ አስተሳሰብ ለውጥ ስለማይወድና ጥንቱን ስለሚያስቀድም።

ስረዓት ይቀየር ሲባል ለምን ብለን እራሳችንን መጠየቅ አለብን። ኦርቶዶክሳዊ ለውጥ የሚከላከለው አንዱ ታላቅ ምክነያት አብዛኛው ጊዜ ለውጥ የሚፈለገው ለማይሆን ምክነያት ስለሆነ ነው። እንደዚህ አይነት ምክነያቶች ምሳሌዎች እንደ የመንፈቅ አስተሳሰብ፤ ፖለቲካ ወይም የስልጣን ሹኩቻ፤ ፍርሃት አይነቱ ናቸው።

በዛሬው ዘመን - «ዘመናዊነት» ግዥ ርዕዮተ ዓለም በሆነበት ዘመን - የስረዓት ለውጥ (የእምነትም ለውጥ) የሚገፋፋው ከዘመኑ ጋር አብሮ ለመሄድ ነው። ቅዱስ ያሬድን ያነሳሳቸው ጾም ጸሎትና የዳዊት መዝሙርን በመድገም እግዚአብሔርን ይበልጥ ለማመስገን ፈልገው ነው። በዛሬው ዘመን ግን ብንወድም ባንወድም ብናውቀውም ባናውቀም ከዘመኑ ጋር አብሮ የመሄድ ሃሳብ ተጽእኖ ያሳድርብናል ሳናውቀውም ይገፋፋናል። በዚህ ምክነያት ከበፊት ዘመናት - ከቅዱስ ያሬድም - ይበልት ጥንቃቄ ማድረግ አለብን። ምንም አይነት ስርዓትን እንኳን ለመቀየር በጥያቄ ምልክት ውስጥም ማድረግ የለብንም።

ብለላው ቋንቋ እላይ የጠቀኩትን የቤተ ክርስቲያናችንን አስተሳሰብን መርሳት የለብንም - ለውጥን በታቻለው ምከላከልንና መፈተሽን።

ይህ ብዬ ወደ ተሃድሶ እንመለስ። በቤተ ክርስቲያናችን ስንት የሚሰራ ስራ እያለ ለምንድነው ማደስ የሚታሰበው። ንስሃ ገብተናልን? እግዚአብሔርን በሙሉ ልባችን እንድወደዋለን? ያለንን በሙሉ እንሰጠዋለን? በሰው ላይ አንፈርድምን? ገና እንድወድቃለን እንነሳለን መውደቃችን እጅግ ቢበዛም። እረኞቻችን ታድያ ድሮም እንደነበራቸው ዛሬም እንድንነሳና ለክርስቶስ ለመቅረብ ያለንን ፍላጎት ለማዳበር ብዙ ስራ አላቸው። ይህ ሁሉ ስራ እያለ ስለማደስ ማሰብ ምን አስፈለገ?

እንዳልኩት የዘመኑ ርዕዮተ አለም በፍጹም ሳናውቀው ከባድ ተእጽኖ ያደርግብናል። ካቶሊኩንና ፕሮቴስታንቱን እያየን ሳናውቀው በአፋችን እንደተሳሳቱ እየተናገርንም በልባችን አንዳንድ ነገሮቻቸው በነበር ብለን እንመኛለን። ስነ ስረዓት፤ ንጽህና፤ ፍልስፍና፤ ሃብት፤ ብልጠት፤ ስነ መግባር ወዘተ። ቤተ ክርስቲያናችን ትታደስ ስንልም እንደነዚህ ትንሽ ትሁን ማለታችን ነው። ምንጩ ይህ ነው አደጋውም ይህ ነው።

ታድያ እንደዚህ ስንል ሌላው አብዛኞቻችን በተለይ ካህናቶቻችን በተለይ እናድስ የሚሉት የማናውቀው ነገር ምህ ያህል ካቶሊኩና ፕሮቴስታንቱ - በተለይ ፕሮቴስታንቱ - ችግር ውስጥ እንዳለ ነው። «ፔንጤ» የምንላቸው በትክክሉ «ኤቫንጄሊካል» የሚባሉት ለምሳሌ ባለፉት 50 ዓመታት ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ቢያድጉም ባሁኑ ጊዜ በምንጫቸው ሃገር አሜሪካ እየመነመኑና ታላቅ አደጋ ላይ ናቸው። መሰረታው እምነታቸው የግል ስለሆነ - ቤተ ክርስቲያን ሳይሆን ግለ ሰብ ነው ሃይማኖቱን ብቻውን ከመንፈስ ቅዱስ ጋር እይሚያውቀው ብለው ስለተነሱ - አሁን እስከ 30,000 አይነት ክፍፍሎች አላቸው። ስንቶቻችን ነን ይህን የምናውቀው። የቆዩት ፕሮቴስታንቶች (በኢንግሊዘኛ «ሜይንላይን» ይባላሉ) እንደ አንግሊካን ደግሞ ከሁሉም ክርስቲያን ከሚባሉት የመነመኑና ምእመናን ያጡ ናቸው። ይህን ስንቶቻችን ነው የምናውቀው? አሜሪካን ሀገር ትልቁ የክርስቲያን ፍልሰት ከፕሮቴስታንት ወደ ኦርቶዶክስ እንደሆነ ስንቶቻችን ነን የምናውቀው? ባንዳን የኦርቶዶክስ ሃገረ ስክበቶች አብዛኛ ካህናት ከፕሮቴስታንትነት ውደ ኦርቶዶክስ የተቀየሩ እንደሆነ ስንቶቻችን እናውቃለን? ኦርቶዶክእነሱ ወደ ኦርቶዶክስ ይመጣሉ እኛ ደግሞ ወደነሱ መሄ እንፈልጋለን!

ክሃገራችን ውጭ ብንመለከት ይበጀናል። ውጭ ሃገር ያለነው - በተለይ ካህናት - ስራችን ብለን ዙርያችን እንመልከት። የክርስትና ድርጅቶች አካሄድን እንመልከት። ዛሬ ከምንጩ አሜሪካ እየጠፋ ያለው ፕሮቴስታንት ሃይማኖት ነገ ኢትዮጵያ በዚሁኑ ምክነያት እንደሚጠፋ እንወቅ። ባለፉት ዓመታት በሃገራችን የተከናወነው የኦርቶዶክስ ወደ ጴንጤ ፍልስትን ብቻ አንይ። ሃገራችን ውስጥ እራሱ እነዚህ ድጅጅቶች እንዴት ቀንበቀን እየተፈረካከሱ እንደሆነና እየተባዙ እንደሆነ እንይ።

ምን አልባት ዞር ዞር ብለን ይህን ሁሉ ካየን የፕሮቴስታንት አደጋም የዘመኑ ፈተናንም ልንረዳው እንችላለን። ይህን ተረዳነው ማለት ደግሞ እንታደስ የሚለው ስሜት ይቀንስልናል። አስተያየታችንን ያስተካክላል ሚዛናዊም ያደርጋል።

የተማረ ገደለን

የኢትዮጵያ ወዳጅ ዶናልድ ሌቪን (ነፍሳቸውን ይማረው) ከ50 ዓመታት በፊት ጅምሮ ባህልንና ማንነትን የማያከብርና የሚክድ ህብረተሰባዊ ለውጥ አገር አፍራሽ ነው እያሉ ኢትዮጵያዊያንን ያስጠነቅቁ ነበር። ኃይለ ሥላሴ ወደ ምዕራብ አገር የላኳቸው ተማሪዎች በኢባህላዊ የሆነ  ከራስ ጋር የሚያጣላ ርዕዮት ዓለም ተነክረው ወደ አገራቸው ሲመለሱ በአስተሳሰባቸው ሰውዉን አስተንግጠዋል። አቶ ዶናልድ ሌቪን አንድ ያጋጠማቸውን እንደዚህ አስታወሱ ነበር፤ አንዱን «የተማረ» ምሁራንን እንደዚህ ብለው ጠየቁት «እንደምትመኘው የሶሽያሊስት አብዮት ቢካሄድ በሚሊዮን የሚቆጠር ህዝብ እንደሚሞቱ ታውቃለህን?» ይህ የተማረ ምህር «በ10 ሚሊዮንም ቢሞቱ ይህን ርዕዮት ዓለምን ለማድረስ ስለሆነ ያዋጣል» ብሎ መለሰላቸው። ከራስ ባህል፤ ወግ፤ ትውፊት፤ ምንጭና ማንነት መራቅ እንደዚህ አይነቱን ቅዠታዊ አስተሳሰብ ነው የሚያመጣው።

ዛሬም ይህ አይነት የቀለም ትምህርት አምልኮ ለኢትዮጵያ ዋናው አጥቂና ጠላት ነው። የምዕራብ ዘመናዊ የቀለም ትምህርት በአገራችን እንደ ጣዎት እንደሚመለክ የሚገልጸው በኃይለ ሥላሴ ዘመን የተሰየመው አባባል «የተማረ ይግደለኝ» ነው። ይህ ዛሬም በኢትዮጵያዊያን ጭንቅላት ይንጸባረቃል። ፖለቲካችንን ካየን አብዛኛው የሚንጸባረቁት ሃሳቦችና አስተያየቶች ከኢትዮጵያ ውጭ የመነጩ ናቸው። የኛ ምሁራኖች እነዚህ ሃሳቦችን እየሰገዱላቸው ኢትዮጵያን ወደ እኒዝህ ርዕዮት አለምን ማስተካከል ይፈልጋሉ። ቢያንስ መደረግ የነበረበት እነዚህን ርዕዮት ዓለሞችን ለኢትዮጵያ እንዲሆኑ ማስተካከል።

ይህ አቋሜን የሚደግፉ አንዳንድ ማስረጃዎች እንመልከት። በመጀምርያ ወደ ኋላ ሄደን የኃይለ ሥላሴ መንግስትን ተመልስን እንመልከት። የዛን ጊዜ ውጤቶች ዛሬ ከፍተኛ ሚና እየተጫወቱ ስለሆነ። በሳቸው መንግስት ዘመነ የምዕራብ «ዘመናዊ» ትምህርት በኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ተስፋፋ። ተማሪዎች በሞላ ጎደል አለምንም መበረዝ ቀጥታ የምዕራብ ትምህርት ነበር የሚማሩት። ስለአገራቸው ጥቂት ውይም ምንም ነገር ሳይማሩ ይመረቁ ነበር። ለምሳሌ ስለ ዓለም ዙርያ መልክአምድር ተምረው ስለኢትዮጵያ መልክአምድር ምንም አያቁም ነበር! ስለራሳቸው ታሪክ፤ ትውፊት፤ ባህልና ሃይማንቶ አይማሩም ነበር። ሳይታወቅ ግራ የገባው ከፊል ኢትዮጵያዊ ከፊል ፈረንጅ የሆነ ትውልድ ተወለደ። የዝቅተኛ መንፈስ ያደረበት ትውለድ ተፈጠሪ። ሳያውቀው እራሱን የሚንቅና የሚጠላም ትውልድ ተፈጠረ። ግን ከዚህ ትውልድ ልጆች መካከል ግማሾቹ ኢትዮጵያዊነታቸው ቢሸረሸርም ለኃይለ ሥላሴ ታማኝ ነበሩ በሳቸውም «የዘመናዊ ስልጣኔ እቅድ» ይስማሙ ነበር። ሌሎቻቸው ግን እንኳን ታማኝ ለመሆን ጠላት ሆነው ተገኙ። አገሪቷን ያስከወሰ አብዮትን አስነሱ። ሁላችንም እንደምናውቀው ይህ አብዮት በአገራችን አስፈላጊ የሆኑ ለውጦችና መስተካከሎች ከማምጣት ፋንታ በጸረ ኢትዮጵያ የሆነውን በምዕራባዊያኑ ርዕዮት ዓለም በኮምዩኒዝም ስር አገራችንን እንድትወድቅ አደረጋት።

በደርግ ዘመነ መንግስት ደግሞ አብዛኛው የኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ ንቅናቀዎች የጸረ ኢትዮጵያ አቋምና ርዕዮት ዓለም ይዘው ነበር የሚራመዱት። ጸረ ሃይማኖት ነበሩ። ጸረ ባህልና ጸረ ትውፊት ነበሩ። እርግጥ በዛን ዘመን ሙዚቃ ጭፈራ ወዘተ «ትስፋፍቷል»። ግን የተስፋፋው በምዕራባዊያን አመለካከት ዘንድ ነው - ስር የሰደደ የማንነት የሆነ ሳይሆን እንደ ልብስ ከላይ የሚለበስ ወይም እንደ ቴአትር የሚታይ ነበር። በመጀመርያ ኮምዩኒስት ነን፤ ግን እስክስታ የምንጨፍር ኮምዩኒስት ነን! በጠቅላላ አብዛኛው ፖለቲከኞችና ምሁራንም የኢትዮጵያ ማንነት መቀየር አለበት ብለው የሚያምኑ ነበሩ።

በኢህአዴግ ዘመን ይህ ወደ ውጫዊ አመለካከት ማድላት ወደ ጸንፍ ደረሰ። በሶሺአሊዝም የተሞላ በጎሳ የተመሰረተ ጸንፈኛ ህገ መንግስት በኢትዮጵያ ተጫነባት። ይህ ክስተት ከኢትዮጵያዊ «የተማረ» ኃይል በተደጋጋሚ የሚታይ አንድ ጸባይን በደምብ ያብራራል። ይህ ጸባይ ጸንፈኝነት ነው። የኢትዮጵያ መሰረታዊ ችግር የብሄር እኩልነት ነው ብሎ ቢታመንም ቋንቋ፤ ባህል፤ መልክአ ምድር፤ ጎሳም የሚያካተት ግን ለዘብተኛ የሆነ ህገ መንግስት ሊመሰረት ይቻል ነበር። ግን ያኔ የነበሩት ኃይሎች ጸንፍ ካልያዝን አሉ! በምድረ ዓለም ታይቶ የማይታውቅ አይነት ህገ መንግስት - ከሶሺያሊስት በላይ ሶሺያሊስት የሚያሰኝ ህገ መንግስት ካልደነገግን አሉ። ጭራሽ ከደቡብ አፍሪካ በቀር የሌለውን ጎሳ በመታወቅያ ጀመሩ! ሁላችንም እንደምናውቀው እስካሁን ይህ መርዝ ነው እያሳመመን ያለው።

ይህ ሁሉ ሆኖ የአገራችን ገዥም ተቃዋሚም ፖለቲከኞችና ምሁራን አሁንም ውጫዊ በተለይ ምእራባዊ አመለካከት ነው ያላቸው። ገዝ ፓርቲ «ዘመናዊነት» የሚባለው አመለካከት ነው ያለው። ሃይማኖት ኋላ ቀር ነው። እግዚአብሔር ሳይሆን ሰው ነው የዓለም ቁንጮ። ባህል፤ ትውፊትና ወግ ውሸት ናቸው። ህዝብ ባህልን ትቶ ወደዚህ አይህነት አመለካከት እስኪ ገባ ድረስ እንደ ያላደገ ህጻን ነውና እኛ ስልጣን ተቆጣጥረን ልናሳድገው ይገባል። ካደገ በኋላ፤ ማለት እንደኛ የ«ዘመናዊ» አስተሳሰብ ካደረበት በኋላ - ስልጣናችንን እንለቃለን። በሌላ አባባል ኢትዮጵያዊነቱን አርግፎ ከኛ ይበልጥ «ያደጉትንና የሰለጠኑትን» ምእራባዊያን ከመሰለ በኋላ ነው ሰው የሚሆነው። ይህ ራስን ማንነትን መጥላት ካልሆነ ምንድነው?

ተቃዋሚው ደግሞ እንደ አሜሪካ ወይም እንደ አውሮፓ እንሁን ነው! (በጅምላ እየተናገርኩኝ ስለሆነ ይቅርታ።) የኢትዮጵያዊነት ራዕይ የለውም። እርግጥ አንዳንድ ጥሩ የሆነ ሃሳቦች እንደ ገዳ አሰራር አጥንቶ በተወሰነ መጠቅም ተነስተዋል። አንዳንዱም ደፋር የንጉሳዊ አስተዳደር (በወግ ደረጃ ብቻ ቢሆንም) ይመለስ የሚሉ አሉ። እነዚህ ሃሳቦች በርካታ ውይይትና ክትትል ያስፈልጋቸዋል ከነዚህ አይነቱ ባህላዊ መንገድ ነውና የአገራችን ውበት የሚመለሰው።

በብዙሃኑ ደረጃ ደግሞ ቤተሰብ ልጁን የምእራባዊ ባህልና ቋንቋ ለማስተማር ይሯሯጣል! ለልጁ ከቀለም ትህምሕርት በላይ በዚህ ዓለም ምንም የለም የሚል መልክት ነው ደጋግሞ የሚያስተላልፍለው። ልጁም የቀለም ትምሕርትን ጣኦት አድርጎታል። ከዛ በኋላ የልጁ አኗኗር ግራ የገባው ሲሆን፤ ትምሕርትና ስራ አለው ግን በሌላው ንሩው ያልተረገጋ መሰረተ ቢስ የሆነ ሲሆን - ወላጅ ግራ ይገባዋል። የዛሬው ትውልድ እንደዚህ ነው እንደዛ ነው ብሎ ያማርራል። ታድያ ባህሉን ያልወረሰ ሰው ሁልጊዜ ኑሮው እንደሚናወጥ አናውቅምን?

በትህትና ባይመስልም ግን የትህትና ምክሬ እንደዚህ ነው። በመጀመርያ የዘመናዊ ትምህርት ምን ያህል ጸረ ባህል፤ ጸረ ትውፊት፤ ጸረ ማንነት፤ ጸረ ኢትዮጵያ እንደሆነ እንረዳ። ሞያ፤ ሳየንስና ቴክኖሎጊ ችግር የለውም ከጥንትም የነበሩ ዘርፎች ናችሀው ከምንምም ጋር አይጋጭም። አደገኛው ግን «ዘመናዊነት» የሚባለው ርዕዮት ዓለም ነው። ቅድም የጠቀስኩት ጸረ ሃይማኖትና ጸረ ባህል የሆነ አስተሳሰብን እንደ መርፌ ይወጋል። ይህን አውቀን ስንዴውን ከንክርዳዱን መለየት አለብን። ጠቃሚውን ትምህርት እየተማርን ጎጂውን እራሳችንን እንድንጠላ የሚያደርገውን ለይተን አውቀን እንተው። የምንማረውን በባህልና ሃይማኖታችን መነጽር ወይም አመለካከት እንማረው። ለልጆቻችንም እንደዚሁ።

ይህ ነው ምክሬ። ዶናልድ ሌቪን እንዳሉት - ክሁሉ ጥቅሳቸው ይህን ነው እጅግ የምወደው - "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…" ከኔ የምትሻሉት ተርጉሙት!

መደጋገም አለመሻሻል

እንደጠበኩት የ2008-2009 የህዝብ ዐመፅ ተረጋግቷል። የተረጋጋው መንግስት የአስሸኳይ አዋጅ ስላወጀ፤ የማይሸነፍ ኃይልና አቅም ስላለው፤ ህዝቡ አቅም ስለሌለው፤ ህዝቡ ስለተከፋፈለ፤ አብዛኛው ህዝብ ኢህአዴግን ስለሚደግፍ፤ ወዘተ አይደለም። ዐመፁ የመነመነው ህዝቡ በተለይም የፖለቲካ መደቡ የኢትዮጵያ የመንገስት አገዛዝን ለመቀየር የሚያስፈልጉ ቀድመ ዝግጅቶች ስላላሟሉ ነው።

እነዚህ ቀድመ ዝግጅቶች ምንድናቸው? አንድ አገዛዝን ለመቀየር በመጀመርያ አማራጭ መቅረብ አለበት። አማራች የፖለቲካ ራዕይ ወይም ሰፊ አመለካከት፤ ርዕዮት ዓለም፤ መዋቅርና ኃይል ያስፈለጋል። ከዛ በኋላ ነው ህዝቡ በሰላም ወይም በዐመፅ፤ በቀስታ ወይም (ቢቀርብን ይሻላልንጂ) በአብዮት፤ ካሉት የመንግስት አስተዳደር አማራቾች የሚመርጠው።

ላለፉት 25 ዓመታት ግን የኢህአዴግ ተቃዋሚዎች፤ ማለት ህዝብም የፖለቲካ መደቡም፤ እነደዚህ አይነት የፖለቲካ አማራጭ ማዘጋጀት አልቻለም። በመጀመርያ የፖለቲካ አመለካከቱም ርዕዮት ዓለሙም የተበታተነና ያልሰከነ ነው። የተለያዩ አመለካከቶች አሉ ከጎሰኝነት እስከ አንድነትና ሌሎች ከመካከል። ይህ ልዩነቶች ተገቢ ቢሆንም እነዚህ አመለካከቶች እንደሆነው ሆኖ ለመስማማት ተስማምተው አብሮ መስራት አልቻሉም። ይባስ ተመሳሳይ የፖለቲካ አስተያየት ያላቸው እርስ በርስ በተራ ምክነያቶች እየተጣሉ አይስማሙም። በኦሮሞ ብሄርተኞች መካከል ወይም በኢትዮጵያ ብሄርቶኞች ወይም የአንድነት ፖለቲካ ደጋፊዎች መካከል ያለው አለመስማማትና አብሮ አለመስራት ነው ዋናው ችግር። ለመድገም ያህል በጎሳና በአንድነት አመለካከት ያለው አለመስማማት አደለም ትሉቁ ችግራችን። ዋናው ችግራችን አንድ አመለካከት ያላቸው ወገኖች ትስማምተው መስራት አለመቻላችን ነው። የኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ ችግር በአንድ አረፍተ ነገር ለመቋጨት ከተፈለገ ይህ ነው። በዚህ ምክነያት የኢህአዴግ ተቃዋሚ አንድ የሆነ ወይም ሁሉን አቀፍ የሆነ የፖለቲካ አማራጭ አመለካከትና ርዕዮት ዓለም ለ25 ዓመት መገንባት አልቻለም።

አንድ የአማራጭ አመለካከት ከሌለ ደግሞ መዋቅር ሊኖር አይችልምና ለዚህም እስከ ዛሬ አማራጭ መዋቅር የለም። ሻእቢያና ህወሃት በደርግ ጊዜ የነበራቸውን መዋቀር እናስታውስ። የዘመኑ ተቃዋሚ እነደዚህ አይነት ነገር በኢትዮጵያ ውስጥም ውጭም የለውም። እነ ሻእቢያ በጄታቸው በሚሊዮን ብር ሲቆጠር የዛሬ የኢትዮጵያ ተቃዋሚዎች በሺዎች ይቆጠራሉ! እንደዚህ አይነት መዋቅሮች ምን ብለው ነው መንግስት የሚወርሱት?

መዋቅር ስለሌለ ደግሞ ኃይል የለም። የተቃዋሚ የህዝቡም ኃይል በሺዎች ነው የሚቆጠረው። በፊሊፒንስ ሀገር የህዝብ አብዮት ሲነሳ ህዝቡ በሚሊኦን ነበር ወደ ሰልፍ የወጣው። አንድ ጥይት ሳይተኮስ  መንግስት በሰላም ተቀየረ። ኢትዮጵያ ግን ውስን ቁጥር ነው ሰልፍ የሚወጣው። የተቃዋሚ የጦርም ኃይል ኢሚንት ነው። ረብሻ ለመፍጠር ያህል አቅም ቢኖራቸው ነውንጂ በዚህ ሁኔታ ከዛ አልፎ የተም አይደርስም።

እሺ፤ የፖለቲካ አመለካከት ወይም ርዕዮት ዓለም የለም። መዋቅርም የለም። ኃይልም የለም። ታድያ ምንድነው የሚጠበቀው? ከ25 ዓመታት በኋላ ተቃዋሚው ጎራ በሞላ ጎደል ምንም መሻሻል አላሳይምም የበፊቱንም ስህተቶች ደጋግሞ ይደጋግማል።

የዛሬውን የምሁራንና የተቃዋሚ መሪዎች ውይይት ሲታይ ከ25 ዓመት በፊት ከነበረው ብዙ ለውጥ የለውም። ምናልባትም ወደ ኋላ ሄደናል። 25 ዓመት በፊት የታተመ ኢትዮጵያን ሪቭዩ መጽየትን ብንመለከት ያው ዛሬም የምንወያይበት ጉዳዮች ያኔም (ያኔ በተሻለ ቋንቋና ብስለት) እየተወያየን ነበር። በውይዩቱ ውይም በመግባባቱ ምንም ለውጥ አይታይም!

ገጣሚው አቶ ፍቅሬ ቶሎሳ 25 ዓመት በፊት በገጣሚ አቅሙ ስለኦሮሞና አማራ ግንኙነት የሚገጥሙትን ዛሬም ይጽፋሉ ያኔም ዛሬም በቂ የተረዳቸው ስለሌለ። አንድ ኦሮሞ ብሄርተኛ ኢትዮጵያ መገነጣጠል አለባት ሲሉ ጉዳዩን እንደተለመደ አድርጎ በበሰለና በሰከነ መንገድ ተመልክቶ የሚገባውን መልስ ከመስጠት ልክ እንደ 25 ዓመት በፊት በድንጋጤ - ይህ ያላሰብነው የጎሳ ብሄርተኝነት እውነት ሊመጣብን ነው እንጂ እያልን - የተበታተነና መላ የሌለው መልስ መለስን ፍረሃትንም አንጸባረቅን። ትናንሽ የስራ አለመግባባት ሲያጋጥማቸው «የአማራ ንቅናቄ ደጋፊዎች» በፖለቲካ አመለካከት የሚጋሩትን ግንቦት 7 ደግሞም ኢሳትን መሳደብ ጀመሩ ልክንደ 25 ዓመት የአንድነት ደጋፊዎች ከላይ የጠቀስኩትን ታላቅ ኢትዮጵያን ሪቪዩ መጽየት ተጣልተው እንዳፈረሱት። ለማስታውስ ያህል ከዛም በኋላ መላው ኢትዮጵያ ወይም መላው አማራ ትብሎ ኃይለኛ ፍጅት ተቅሄደ። ቀጥሎ የቅንጅት ፍጅቶች፤ የአንድነት ፓርቲ ፍጅት፤ ዛሬም የሰማያዊ ፓርቲ ፍጅት! እንሆ ከ25 ዓመት በኋላ ታሪክ እየተደገመ ነው!

መፍትሄው ምንድነው? በዋና ጉዳዩ ላይ ስራ መስራት ነው። የሰው ልጅ ችግር እንዳለውና ማስተካከል ካልፈለገ ለመሸሽ ያህል ሌሎች ላይ ወይም በሌላ ጉዳይ ያተኩራል። ዋናው ችግሩ እንዳለ ወይም እየባሰ ይቀጥላልም። እስካሁን የኢትዮጵያ የተቃዋሚ ጎራ  እንደዚህ ነን። በዋናው ጉዳይ ስራ ከመስራት መጣላትና መናቆር ላይ ቆይተናል። ግን ወደ ግብ የምሄድ ፍላጎት ካለን እነዛን አሳሳች ተግባሮችን ትተን ወደ ስራ መግባት አለብን።

እነዚህ ስራዎች ምንድናቸው? የፖለቲካ አመለካከትን ተወያይቶ ቀስ ብሎ ጨምቆ ሰፊ ግን አንድ የሆነ የአገዛዝ አመለካከት አዘጋጅቶ በዚ ላይ መስማማት። ይህ ስምምነት መዋቅር ለመዘርጋት ዋና ቀድመ ዝግጅት ነው። መተዋወቅ፤ መግባባት፤ መስማማትና አንድ ልብ መሆን ግድ ናቸው። ይህ ደግሞ ረጅም ጊዜ የሚወስድ ሂደት ነው። በቅርቡ ባደረጉት ቃለ ምልልስ አቶ ጁኔዲ ሳዶ በአንድ ወቅት ኦኸድድ የ20 የሙሉ ቀን ውይይት ከወቅቱ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስቴር መለስ ጋር እንዳካሄደ ተናግረዋል። ይህ ረጅም ውይይት በተዋቀረ ድርጅት ውስጥ ነበርና አዲስ ድርጅት ወይም ስብስብ ምን ያህል ውይይት እንደሚያስፈልገው እናስብ።

አንድ ሰፊ ግን አስማሚ አመለካከት ላይ ከተደረሰ በኋላ መዋቅር መዘርጋት ነው የሚቀጥለው እርምጃ። ይህ በተነጻጻሪ ቀላሉ እርምጃ ነው የሚሆነው። አንድ ልብ የሆነ ሰው እጅግ ስኬታማ ይሆናልና። ይህ መዋቅር አንድ ድርጅት ብቻ ሊሆን አይገባም። የተለያዩ መዋቅሮች - የታወቁም የህቡ - በተለያዩ የህብረተሰብ ዘርፍ ይቋቋማሉ። በርካታ ሰዎችም ዛሬ ባሉት የሀገሪቱ መዋቅሮች ከነ ኢህአዴግ ውስጥ ሰተት ብሎው ገብተው የራሳቸውን የሚያምኑበትን አቋም በድብቅ ያራምዳሉ።

ይህ መደራጀት እይጠነከረ ሲቀጥል በራሱ ትልቅ ኃይል ዪሆናል። በዚህ ወቅት የጠመንጃ ኃይል አያስፈልግም! እያንዳኑ የሀገሪቷ ዘርፍ በነዚህ የተቃዋሚው ጎራ ሰዎች ሞልቶ ይገኛልና ትንሿ እንቅስቃሴ አገዛዙን በሰላም ግልብጥ ያረገዋል። የነባር መንግስቱ ተራም ቀንደኛም ባለስልጣኖች በግድ ቢሆንም በተቃዋሚው ብስለት ምክንያት አለ ፍርሃት ለውጡን ይቀበላሉ።

በኔ እምነት የኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ መሻሻል ቀደም ተከተል እንዲህ ነው መሆን ያለበት። የተሻለ ምርጫ የለም። ግን ከ25 ዓመት በኋላ አሁንም በተወሰነ ደረጃ ገና አንደኛ እርምጃው ላይ ነን። ስራችንን እንጀምር።