Introduction
To fairly handle such a sensitive issue as national dialogue in Ethiopia holistically, at least three broad features must be tackled: (1) The organizational aspects, and these cover a lot of critical grounds, such as: decisions related to inclusive participation; codes of conduct; decision-making mechanisms; etc. (2) The content or the menu at the discussion table. (3) The outcomes and their implementations. The discussions in this humble paper cannot do justice to all issues in depth, given the limitations, but aspire to add to the on-going discourses.
Preconditions for successful National Dialogue
There are, across the literature, several criteria proposed for successful conduct of national dialogues. They are so ubiquitous that one would able to develop a generic set of vitally relavnt preconditions to guide the formation, conduct, and implementation of outcomes, of any national dialogue exercise. Here are some of them.
1. Consensus: National dialogues are necessitated, to begin with, by lack of consensus within a given national polity, about how a nation should be organized, and conduct its affairs. A national dialogue represents admission of failures. Hence, in order to come out with an outcome enjoying consensual support from all relevant stakeholders, we should secure, from the start, consensus in relation to the formation and makeup of the body that convenes the dialogue. Ours has drifted away badly from this stakeholder approach to organizing a mutually agreed upon commission. The commission is not been seen as representative enough. Hence it suffers from legitimacy deficits.
2. Participation: For a national dialogue to succeed, it should carry on-board all relevant players. A dialogue that fails to garner the support and participation of key stakeholders is doomed to fail. Here too, we have failed miserably. The main actors in the opposition are not there. Several members of our principal elites have voiced their opposition bitterly. To complicate things, the EPRP has withdrawn from the convention, citing that the National Dialogue Commission (NDE) is not neutral enough, and that its suggestions have been ignored totally. Already, the NDE is being characterized as Trojan horse for PM Abiy. For example it is claimed that various social forces, like women and youth, have been taken on-board. But, closer scrutiny would reveal that they are from PP’s Women and Youth Leagues.
3. Internal and External Support: For any national dialogue to have a fighting chance at success, internal support is crucially critical. The same can be said about external support too. External support is very important, as external players could facilitate and finance the implementation of agreed outcomes. Also, many a stakeholder could have external ties that could influence their roles in the dialogue. The absence of major players has generated skepticism on the most part of the populace, resulting in low internal support for the current dialogue. On the contrary, there seems external support for the NDC convened dialogue. At least the Americans seem to be on-board. Massinga is on record saying that, even with its imperfections, joining the national dialogue bandwagon is worth trying. The Americans are notoriously famous for seeking quick fixes even to complex situations. It might also reflect their reading of the Ethiopian landscape. They seem to be convinced that, there is no currently credible replacement for Abiy Ahmed. This, sadly, could encourage Abiy to gallop the NDC in manners he sees fit to his ambitions.
4. Procedures: the processes manifested at the dialogue hall are too important that, they can make or break efforts. Correctly organized, they could help in identifying key issues that should be tackled, and come out with proposed solutions that meet at least the minimal expectations of the principal stakeholders. Ideally they should result in a win-win outcome, where no one would feel left out. Let us wait and see, but as the already stated absence of crucial stakeholders would suggest, some key issues could not be as deeply discussed as would be the case, had these missing key players and elites were in attendance. As things stand now, it would likely be a process wherein the Prosperity Party would talk to the Prosperity Party.
5. Outcomes and Implementations: According to various studies, reaching consensual outcomes among relevant stakeholders is a reachable goal. What would be problematic would relate to their implementation, because there would be divergent expectations, interpretations, and prioritizing, among the key players. Again, let us wait and see, but unless Ethiopia is pacified, outcomes, no matter how lofty they are, would not be fully implemented for lack of the prerequisite environments. Of course, whether this dialogue would come out with outcomes that would be accepted by the general populace cannot be a foretold conclusion. In as much as the excluded forces have large following, it is difficult to envisage the national dialogue coming with outcomes that would be accepted by a decisive margin.
The need for a National Dialogue in Ethiopia: The Historical Context
Historically we he have a checkered past. We don’t even have an agreed upon history of our past. Regionally written history textbooks tell widely differing histories. One region’s hero would be somebody else’s villain.
For some, Ethiopia is romantically described as a nation that existed for at least 3000 thousand years; full of colorful characters like Queen Saba (Sheba), Menelik I, Ezana, Libne-Dingil, Tedros, Menelik II, Haile Selassie; and equally full of historic events like the unsubstantiated bringing of the Ark of Covenant to Ethiopia, the repulsion of fellow “African invaders” like that of Ahmed bin Ibrahim al-Gazi, aka pejoratively Mohamed Gragn and Oromo’s expansionist warlords; and heroic resistance against European invaders led by Emperors Tedros and Menelik II,; and the unique status of being the only un-colonized African country. Where the truth ends, and myth takes over, is left to individual orientations and imaginations.
For others, Ethiopia is a recent product of, mainly, Menelikian legacy, whereby the Semitic tribes, basically the Amhara, with the occasional support from their junior Tigrayan rivals-turned-partners, subjugated and ill-treated the Cushitic, Omotic, Nilotic and other ethnic groups.
Of course the conquerors and the conquered had some brilliant moments in history in when they coalesced for common efforts like resisting the Italian aggressions in the late 19th century at Adwa, and in the years 1935-41. But basically, Ethiopia, as we know it now, was formed by the dynamics of domestic expansions from North to South during the eras of Menelik’s and Haile Selassie’s feudal rules. While surely the peasants in Amhara lacked basic human rights as we understand them now, and led a miserable meager subsistence, our compatriots to the South were subjected to additional brutal political and cultural subjugations. Of course, part of their elites, like the now infamous Ras Gobena, were comprador elements who co-subjugated their brethren.
Overtime, the very modus vivendi under a single flag resulted in various socio-economic interactions that brought the notion of a unified Ethiopia. Trade and other economic activities, travels, intermarriages, social interactions, serving and fighting under one Ethiopian national army, proselytizing by the EOTC and other dominions, cheering athletes from all sorts of ethnic backgrounds, …etc. inculcated the notion of Ethiopianity and infused the sense of Ethiopianess into most of the people in our country. But, parallel to these positive trends, there were understandable senses of marginalization and second-tier citizenship and the resolve to address past and present grievances militantly. We live under such unresolved tensions. Subsequent governments have either aggravated the problems or have come out with iatrogenic solutions, thereby exacerbating the very problems they were trying to resolve.
The Derg military dictatorship, which eventually masqueraded as a Marxist group, had militarist mentality and tried to solve problems with military strategies and tactics. Of course, to entrench themselves in power, they undertook several popular reforms, land reform being the most commendable. Had the Derg not taken some reforms that weakened the then prevalent feudal setups and mentalities in the country, the agenda of any national dialogue in Ethiopia could have included much more thorny issues.
The TPLF had, from the very inception of the then transitional government, suffered from dualism of ideals and practices. Fully cognizant of the fact that, an independent Tigray would not survive, once Ethiopia sufficiently regroups; fully aware of the economic benefits to Tigray in a TPLF ruled Ethiopia; and mindful that Isaias is a champion of Ethiopian unity and hence opponent of Tigray’s independence; they opted, rather being sandwiched between two unfriendly neighbors, for a united Ethiopia ruled by a constitution written under their intensive scrutiny. Thus, the constitution and all acts based on that constitution were flawed. We can discern several seemingly well-intended articles in the constitution, with time-bombs embedded in them. A case in point is Article 39 of that constitution. It was written with the second element of TPLfite dualism in mind. If TPLF’ hegemonic grip on power is threatened: Seek independence.
Given the limited scope of this humble attempt, all that went wrong during past and incumbent regimes cannot be enumerated fully. But we can highlight crucial issues that need to be addressed by any national dialogue worth its name.
Important topics for discussion
Our Past history
As indicated, we have contentious history. We need to address this in order to develop new and dynamic understanding of our history. Across the world, there are people who now live, or struggle to live, cordially, despite their far brutal past. We should see things in the context of period history. Our past emperors are products of their times. We cannot expect Emperor Menelik II to be a 21st century role model of good-governances. Equally, we have to acknowledge and learn from his excesses and those excesses of his warlords and viceroys. We are products of our history, and yet we follow disparagingly different avenues in relating to our past. But, we cannot remain prisoners of the past forever by creating, recycling, and promoting self-serving narratives. Let us call a spade a spade, and then march forward. Learning from past grave calamities, and moving forward, is not an option. It must be espoused as sine qua non for our existence as a united nation.
Our Current Object Realities
We can itemize several challenges which should be handled carefully by any national dialogue conducted to solve the current multi-dimensional impasses. A few of them are highlighted below.
1. The current Constitution
Our current constitution has many good articles. But alas, it was written by a group that correctly identified that it would be difficult for the group to dominate a country where one-person-one-vote prevails. To the uninitiated, my observation may be unpalatable, and even find it to be oxymoronic. But if we study the constitution deeply, it was written with TPLFite dualist views and interests in mind. Hence, we have to reform our constitution, but always mindful, without the need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. As for me, I think we have to do away with Article 39. With it in our constitution, it is like living in a house with a ticking time-bomb. It must be replaced with constitutionally affirmed provisions that satisfy fully the various autonomous aspirations of our peoples. There are other contentious articles in our constitution, but their combined adversity cannot equal that of Article 39, as it can lawfully break-up the country.
2. The Center-Periphery balance
By this I mean the multi-dimensional relationships between the Ethiopian Federal Government and the Regional Governments. In a federal system, the health of a country depends on the health of the relationships between the center and its components. The center represents the strength, unity, and continuity of the country, while the regions signify aspirations of self-rule and cultural autonomy. Giving both sides their respective due is important. That trick has been elusive so far in our country. Various consequences of this imbalance could be cited. The problem of the so called Liyu Hayl Police is a good example. The TPLF used that very outfit to do what it deed in the evening of November 3, 2020. The Oromo Regional authorities used their police to curb the movement of Amhara from and to Addis Ababa. Though the Liyu Hayl Police is officially allegedly disbanded, it has found perpetuity under several guises.
3. The Issue of Identities and Regional Borders
These are messy issues, because they were, in most parts, made deliberately messy by those elites who used to call the shots. Any national dialogue will be terribly challenged by these thorny and polarizing contentions. I would wait to hear sane thinking to evolve but I have to admit that, my gut reactions to such issues has been, at least until things cool down and the country is stabilized, calling for federal jurisdiction of over them.
4. The One-Man-One-Vote Dilemma and the Ethnic federation
Minorities fear numbers. There is certain level of justice in the “majority wins” approach, but is fraught with some elements of injustices. If we are to co-exist peacefully as a united nation, we have to address the fears and concerns of the minorities within our fold. The TPLF-dominated EPRDF’s constitution has tried to address some issues arising from these concerns, notably the bicameral parliament, albeit with its trademark dualistic approach to Ethiopian issues. We need far better and genuine measures to foster confidence among all types of minorities. That would include finding ways for representing political parties in the parliament that would curb the cruelty of the-winner-takes-all approach to representations.
Our federation is supposed to address these challenges, but because it was intentionally written with TPLF’s 1975 manifesto of potentially carving out the Republic of Tigray in mind, it is purely ethnocentric. You don’t have to be a genius to relate some of our challenges to this peculiar style of ethnic federation that fosters ethnic divisions, and nurture bitter rivalries. It would be an uphill mammoth task to do away with ethnic federalism and replace it, say for example, with geographic federation. There are deeply entrenched interests parochially enjoyed by the elites of any given ethnic group. They would see to it, it remains in the constitution. But any dialogue worth its name should work to curb the excesses in that particular setup.
Our Vision of Our Future
Ours is an extremely diversified country, situated in a very volatile region, where cordial coexistence is a rare luxury. We suffer not only from our past history, but as well as from our current predicaments. Our intermingled multi-tier messy problems, need coherently sane and frank discussion, wherein listening to the other side’s alternative narratives is as crucially important as presenting one’s own version of truths. For that to happen, points enumerated above, should be given due attention. We should come with solutions that gradually transform our country into a stable country with a fighting chance towards prosperity. No bun intended.
But alas, the current national dialogue does not inspire confidence, nor does it kindle hope. It is a mockery, as Sajid correctly put it in one of his presentations. To begin with, it was constituted without the blessing of the most influential key players in the country. The opening ceremony imparts the sense that it would be influenced by the wishes of the incumbent prime minister. I was ashamed realizing that, people who are supposed to present any “solution under the sky” were applauding cheerfully when he told them transitional government is out of question. Not that I support transitional government. I don’t support such a proposal because I know the government will not accept it, and hence it would be waste of time. But it shows how Abiy will exert his will upon the commission. The fact it is deliberating in the absence of the TPLF, OLF/OLA, Fano, ONLF and an assortment of other armed groups, is testament to the preferred approach of business as usual.
Hence as I wait for a genuine national dialogue in the future, I would like this gathering to come out with implementable propositions that would pave way for enabling environments within the Ethiopian polity. In this vein, I visualize declaration of cease-fire; offer of negotiation to all parties and armed groups; general amnesty and release of political prisoners; freeing up the claustrophobic political atmosphere by widening political spaces and liberalizing journalistic pursuits; promoting reconciliatory vibes across the nation; the leveling of grounds for genuine elections; etc.
Such propositions will have positive impact on the current and future conditions in the country. It would be beneficial to view the outcomes of a national dialogue exercise as relating to the short-term and the long-term. If in the short-term we can achieve these and other related gains out of this flawed attempt at national dialogue, the prospect of convening of another genuine national dialogue in the long-term would be an attainable national aspiration.
Conclusion
The idea of national dialogue is a commendable option. But for it to succeed, it should be genuine. It is not unknown for national dialogue to precede violent showdown among major stakeholders. This is what transpired following the national dialogue in Yemen in 2013-14.
Our current national dialogue is fraught with many anomalies. The most crucial elements are missing. Abiy Ahmed equipped with his Prosperity Gospel ideology is confident that the Almighty will once again side with him and the dialogue will come out with propositions that would cement his grip of power. He is too megalomaniac and power hungry to envisage alternative ways that may reduce his quasi-absolute power. Thus, I don’t expect the national dialogue will come out with the desired outcomes that can keep Mother Ethiopia to be at peace with itself. Nevertheless, some well-meaning Ethiopian patriots participating in the dialogue can direct the dialogue towards outcomes that lessen the multi-dimensional burdens and that lay grounds for a genuine national dialogue in the future. They have to remember that they are convened in an environment and times in which the break-up of Mother Ethiopia, Heavens forbid it, is more than an academic question.
Read more..
Ethiopian National Dialogue Commission: Right Solution, Wrong Timing
Ethiopia Launches Controversial National Dialogue