Ask the Foreign Minister of Ethiopia
By Agazi Y Meckonen
Nov 30, 2005 — The now famous article by Professor Clapham titled “Comments on the Ethiopian Crisis” has created such ire on the part of Meles & Co. they have made their State Minister of Foreign Affairs respond to it in an open letter.
Surely, very shortly after Professor Clapham’s article surfaced on the various websites Paul Henze had made a feeble attempt to address to the critical issues raised and analysis proffered. Certain of this fact, Meles and Co. had to press upon the dear Minister to respond. Unlike the prime Minister, Meles, who noted a disclaimer before his response to H. E. Ana Gomes that he had never written a letter using his name, the State Minister felt no such urge, despite the fact that in the almost twenty years he had been at the Ministry he had never authored an article or note outside of formal speeches and declarations that are surely drafted by the inner circle of the leadership to which I doubt he belongs to.
Be that as it may, a word or two could have been said on the merit of his response if it had any. Unfortunately, reading and re-reading his piece shows that Tekeda seemed to have side tracked issues raised by Clapham and, solely wanted to focus on what he thought were two different assessments of Ethiopia and the EPRDF by Clapham, and if possible, belittle his contributions to the understanding of Ethiopian politics in seemingly subtle and sometimes crude fashion.
How else is one to understand when Tekeda tries to describe Clapham’s first book, ”Haile Selassie’s Government” as a “sequel”, trying to deny it originality or accusing him of being ”downright rude’ for accusing Bereket in making inflammatory statements or questioning his integrity’ as an academic for raising issues that are not to his liking or mentioning that Clapham wanted Meles to comment or look at the paper he was presenting three or four times in one page.
Could it be that Clapham had sought Meles because he thought may be the answers to some of the issues raised could only come from him in as much as Ethiopian Politics was becoming a ?One Man Show”? Could it be that he wanted to alert Meles that all eyes are on him and he should do the right thing? In fact, it would not make any sense to talk to people like Tekeda if one wants to affect change or make the government change course in present day Ethiopia where Meles is Micro-managing everything.
Having been away from academic environment for an extended period of time seems to have taken its toll and must have created a level of confusion on Tekeda’s mind to make him think that a general theoretical piece written about,
”The Challenge of Democratization in Ethiopia” in 2004 ought not diverge from an article written about the Ethiopian crisis in November 2005, irrespective of what has transpired in the interregnum.
It should have been incumbent upon Tekeda as a former academic to realize that a scholar worthy of his name will and should always adjust his assessments of a particular issue if the reality on the ground calls for it.
From the little Tekeda has quoted from what Clapham had written in 2004, Clapham’s current comments seem to be very consistent with his general assessment. Tekeda quotes Clapham as saying,” One key development since 1991 has been the emergence of a genuinely independent press”. Meles’ characterization of the free press (gutter press!) aside, what is one to think when overnight they are shut down by diktat and their editors hunted like common criminals and thrown in jail. Should Clapham still ought to be talking “about the emergence of a genuinely free press”? or may be the emergence of authoritarianism? The same could be said about the independent organizations that Clapham had in mind in 2004 whose fate has ended up being no better than the independent press. Let alone home grown independent organizations, even NGOs have been accused of being Derg agents and some of their leaders have been thrown in jail. It is these and other attendant issues that Clapham had in mind when he wrote in his, as you seem to be fond of, “short” article. It may be because as they say, “Medicine comes in small bottles and is administered with even smaller dosage”?
Having said this, I believe we deserve an answer from Tekeda on the issues that Clapham has raised. No amount of belittling will suffice as a response.
1. Do you, Tekeda, believe that the Meles Government has stayed in power for too long? It has been 14 years and counting. If not how long do you think is too long?
2. It is widely believed, even among reasonable EPRDF supporters/ sympathizers, that the EPRDF’s power base is too narrow. Do you believe this to be the case or not?
3. Do you, Tekeda, agree or not that,” The EPRDF, at least outside of Tigray, has never been able, indeed has never been allowed to develop in to an effective political organization?
4. Do you, Tekeda, agree that” The EPRDF indeed, has never sought to operate as open and democratic organization”?
5. Do you Tekeda agree that, ?the Government’s style of decision making has been equally opaque…genuine discussion has been restricted to a tiny politburo’ and lately, mainly to the PM and one or two of his close confidants?
If for a starter you answer these questions without any attempt at obfuscation, we might then be able to continue this dialogue
P.S: One point I could not pass without commenting is your claim that the EPRDF was willing to hand over the administration of Addis Ababa. To make such a preposterous claim despite Arkebe’s refusal to talk about the transition and, in fact out right refusal to meet with incumbent Mayor Berhanu Nega and his pronouncements in the media, and Meles’ declaration that the opposition will not be allowed to administer Addis Ababa unless their party members also enter parliament, is totally unbecoming of a person of your stature.
* The Auther is an Ethiopian based in USA.