Ethiopia: A neighbourhood bully or a harbinger of regional stability?
By Kidane Alemayehu
Jan 19, 2007 — The Ethiopian invasion of Somalia and the ongoing stabilization process presents an opportunity to make a sober assessment of the prospects for future developments in the Horn of Africa. Essentially, current circumstances clearly indicate that the sub-region is, again, at the crossroads of history: either a move towards a positive outcome of a strong collaboration between at least Ethiopia and Somalia will be facilitated or a negative impact will result from a possible mishandling of the situation by the two regimes. While a positive outcome would be a historic and a major turning point in the sorry relationship between the two countries, a negative one would constitute yet another disaster that would only enhance the twin enemies of the two nations: poverty and instability.
With Ethiopia’s population of around 77 million and those of Somalia’s and Eritrea’s 10 and 5 million respectively, perpetrating and winning wars against its neighbours is not something to be particularly proud of or brag about especially taking into account the affinity among the people in the region in terms of culture and history. The term: “neighbourhood bully” would, therefore, be quite apt under these circumstances despite alleged involvements of Ethiopia’s external enemies. A bully, by definition, is a coward who takes a special joy in tormenting someone weaker than him/her. There is no doubt that the conflicts that took place in the Horn of Africa in recent years were a result of poor leadership and not, as some suggest, the prevalence of mutual animosity among the people of the region who, after all, share a common history and destiny.
This is the second occasion that the current regime in Ethiopia has engaged in a conflagration against one of its relatively small neighbours. The first one that took place against Eritrea in 1994 was tragic as well as ironic: tragic because about 100,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians perished in that needless war; and ironic because it was the Ethiopian regime itself that mistakenly facilitated Eritrea’s cessation for the ostensible purpose of fostering peace and development between the two countries. They have, however, achieved neither peace nor development as a result of that unfortunate miscalculation. In fact, they continue to be engaged in a state of tension that could result in another mindless and tragic conflict which, in the opinion of this writer, can only be avoided by redressing the historic mistake of disunity and ethnicism.
As regards Ethiopia’s intervention in Somalia, there are differing perspectives on its justification. On the one hand, it can be stated that it did not comply with the UN Security Council Resolution No: 8887 which had provided for a military force that should have been deployed through IGAD from among countries excluding Ethiopia and Somalia’s other neighbours.
There are also those who emphasize that the main reason for the sudden military action by the Ethiopian regime was to divert attention from the heavy pressures it has been reeling under as a result of its rigging of the 2005 national elections, the subsequent killing of peaceful demonstrators, and its consequent increasing rejection by the Ethiopian people.
On the other hand, it is claimed that Ethiopia was forced to act because the Union of Islamic Courts (akin to a mouse that roared at the sight of a lion) declared a jihad against it. UIC was also on the verge of taking military action against Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government which was supported, at its request, by the Ethiopian government. Ethiopia’s speedy success in routing UIC has created an aura of “real politic” which has virtually quieted any meaningful criticism of its military intervention. However, the presumption is that Ethiopia, if the regime’s words are to be believed, will withdraw once the IGAD peace-keeping force will be deployed in Somalia. The question is whether the African Union and IGAD will have the wherewithal to deploy the force in an expeditious manner and whether Ethiopia will comply with its declared commitment. This will further depend on the extent to which the international community would provide the required resources to facilitate the deployment of the force thereby bringing peace to the region, a pre-requisite to the avoidance of conditions that would otherwise promote international terrorism.
It is important to note here the crucial role played by USA in the unfolding situation in Somalia. It is well known that it supported Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia and, furthermore, conducted an air attack in the south. Ethiopia should bear in mind that whatever support it receives from anywhere, Somalia is its permanent neighbour and that any action it takes should be on the basis of the long-term mutual interests of the two nations. USA should also be well advised that in order to wage an effective war against international terrorism in the Horn of Africa, it should address the issues of poverty afflicting the sub-region and also influence the TPLF led regime in Ethiopia to respect human rights and democracy in the country. Whatever partnership may exist between USA and the regime would be meaningless if it is based on a relationship that sustains power by negating the people’s choices including the rigging of elections and the incarceration of the elected members of parliament and the media on phony grounds. Basically, USA ought to recognize that its arch enemies in the Horn of Africa and those of the people in the region are: absence of democracy, abuse of human rights, poverty, and pandemic diseases such as malaria, HIV/AIDS, TB, etc. which are the main elements that breed international terrorism. A region that is rich in natural resources including its agriculture, and water that supplies 86% of Egypt’s water needs, is subjected to frequent famine mainly due to poor leadership and the international community’s inadequate and misplaced response.
Ethiopia’s prompt withdrawal from Somalia immediately after the IGAD force settles in could have a great potential for bringing peace and development in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia would not be seen as an invading force. On the contrary, it is hoped, it would be perceived as a friendly neighbour which contributed to Somalia’s sovereignty, stability and peace. For the first time in the checkered history of the two nations, genuine prospects for a socio-economic and political collaboration could ensue if only the leaders of the two countries would subdue their myopic interests and adopt a far sighted approach of regional integration and harmony for the Horn of Africa including Somalia’s other regions (Somaliland and Punt), Eritrea, and Djibouti.
With the achievement of peace and stability in the area, the available substantial resources including agricultural, water, energy, extensive port facilities, as well as the abundant population could be put to good use for the alleviation of the region’s grinding poverty and diseases. The governments and people of the region as well as the international community could, therefore, be beneficiaries from the extensive economic development activities.
Whether Ethiopia would be seen as a neighbourhood bully or a harbinger of peace would depend on the actions it takes during the coming few months. Based on its actions within Ethiopia and Eritrea so far, the prospects for a judicious use of power for the long-term interests of the poor people in the region appear to be dim. However, it is hoped that in the least, the international community including USA, EU, the UN, the African Union, and IGAD would prevail on the two nations to take advantage of this unique opportunity to move effectively towards peace and development instead of their perennial wasteful conflicts.
* The author is from the Horn of Africa Peace and Development Center. He can be reached at [email protected]