Ethiopia needs bite and bark policy

By Efrem Berhane

Dec 11, 2006 — With enemies encroaching from various angles, the Ethiopian government appears to be stepping into an obvious “booby-trap” situation. On the one hand, you have an aggressive Shabia regime supporting any opposition to Meles’ power base in an attempt to fulfill its ambitions of greed and domination within the region. On another hand, you have an Islamic movement attempting to restore some resemblance of governance to a disorderly Somalia and coming at odds with finally (as if another hand needs to get involvement), an external power, namely the U.S., which wants to dictate power relations in the region by containing the spread and growth of anti-U.S. sentiment.

Through commentary here and within thee Ethiopian media, the dialogue over “Islamic threats” and “Al-Qaeda” appears to come straight from the halls of Washington as if Ethiopian interests are inextricably tied to America ’s goals. Nevertheless, the Ethiopian government should heed an important lesson from the outcome in Iraq . By meddling in the Somalia and serving as a proxy for U.S. interests, the TPLF hold on power will both be de-legitimated and withered. An Ethiopian ideology which also entertains the notion of “pre-emptive military striking” could lead to suicidal decay.

Another impending prospect that should motivation a swift change in policy, is that once the current American President (Bush) is out of office, Ethiopia will find itself abandoned by the Americans. Therefore, is a year or so enough time to accomplish policy objectives in Somalia? I don’t think so.

Maybe following the U.S. in another aspect makes more sense for Ethiopia. Instead of continuing on a path that leads towards isolation in the region, look at how the U.S. is now considering the possibility of sitting down and holding talks with Iran and Syria . It not, what happens when the funding (and military assistance) disappears as Americans decrease support for what many believe is unrealistic objectives with regard to Islamic states?

Instead of attempting to bolster relations with a disappearing American financial backer, the Ethiopian government is better scrapping its war footing and barking through diplomatic channels to “influence” developments in Somalia . Like the Americans, the government should look for ways to sit down and discuss issues with the Islamicists, directly or indirectly.

This course of action may also be effective in driving a wedge between the Islamicists and Asmara . In fact, it is likely that the Islamicists are accepting Eritrean aid as a result of Ethiopia’s willingness to serve as a US proxy in the region and that if Somalis were able to determine matters internally, the region would be more stable and the threat to Ethiopia minimal.

So why is Ethiopia so willing to invade Mogadishu to keep these so-called “radicals” from coming to power when these “radicals” have never attacked it, whereas it has rejected calls by military advisors to invade a hostile Asmara which appears bent on destroying the Ethiopian regime? And what happens when the U.S. leaves Iraq with its tail between its legs like it did previously in Somalia? Again, the Ethiopian government will be left to fend for itself of course.

The current Iraq war has demonstrated that military might means very little when a people, regardless of how armless they may be, are determined to defeat you. Imagine what that situation would look like if there was harmony between Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish groups. Somalis appear to have a united front aimed at controlling their own destiny and willing to sacrifice, in loss of life, to accomplish that objective. Like the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Ethiopia might now be creating massive pool of enemies who were probably neutral up until now. It has done a good job of mobilized recruits for the Islamicists who associate Ethiopia with the “Great Satan”.

Given the arrogance of the region in Asmara, which always fails to recognize that a shift in Addis could very well lead to the end of Eritrea (if the hard-core Kinijit have their way), it may be necessary to let the big dogs out and chase the “little kitten with the loud roar” from is kitty house to the beaches of Oakland. That is where the focus of the bite should aim because that is the ultimate problem for the region. It is the litmus test for all stability aims in the region.

Although I wonder what secret negotiations are taking place and what obvious level of coordination exists between Kinijit, Shabia and Somalia, I would still advise Ethiopian policymakers to make the difficult but necessary decision and back down in Somalia . Otherwise the momentum would lead towards a very costly quagmire which we cannot afford at this time and serve as a solid recruiting arena for “anti-Ethiopian extremists” which I don’t think the Islamicists in Somalia are to this point. Though they may harbor hatred for America, they may still be willing to cooperate in a diplomatic resolution with us. We can’t and shouldn’t go around the world sacrificing ourselves in defence of American interests. If the U.S. wishes to start futile wars which are not in just and not in the interests of world harmony, let it. Let us focus on the development strategy made by our leaders and sacrifice ourselves to make a better Ethiopia instead.

* Efrem Berhane is a Professor of International Studies at an American University. he can be reached at [email protected]