Is the Ethiopian government using war as a cover to perpetuate its undemocratic rule?
Zekarias Ezra
November 08, 2007
Over the last 20 or so years, dictatorships around the globe have collapsed due to the predominantly nonviolent defiance of people. Examples are abounding from the former Soviet blocks to Asia to Africa. It did happen in Ethiopia too when in 1991 the EPRDF guerrilla forces finally overthrew the Mengistu regime.
The sad fact, however, is that the collapse of dictatorships in these countries certainly has not erased all other problems in those societies: poverty, crime, bureaucratic inefficiency, corruption, violations of basic human rights. In some instances, the downfall of these dictatorships has generally lifted much of the suffering of the people, and has opened the way for the rebuilding of these societies with greater political democracy, personal freedoms and liberties, and social justice. In other instances, these people find themselves in continued subjugation by the newly minted dictators camouflaging as democrats.
Even if they appear as democrats, their actions bring about their true nature. That is why we see in many of these countries, military cliques, ambitious individuals, ‘elected officials’ and doctrinal political parties are increasingly imposing their will. Constitutional and legal barriers, judicial decisions, and public opinion are normally ignored by dictators.
In the end, basic human and political rights will continue to be denied to vast numbers of peoples. Unfortunately, this is generally the case in Ethiopia as well – the subject of this piece.
It is widely reported recently in the media that Ethiopia and Eritrea may once again start another round of war. The press releases that are coming out from the Ethiopian government and the interview the officials have been giving, although denies any intention of starting war with Eritrea, the gist of their message is clear: war will break out but we are not to blame for it.
One of the greatest virtues of democracies is that they do not go to war easily. In other words, the chance of going to war on a whim is less in a democracy because decision makers are restrained by the multiplicity of political structures and voices in policy making. What is more, the leaders fear hurting their electoral chances if a conflict does not have popular support.
It is a whole different story when it comes to dictatorship. The problem of dictatorships is deep. They will not hesitate to go to war if going to war somehow prolongs their eventual downfall. To this writer the aching to go to war on the part of Ethiopia and Eritrea emanates from the undemocratic nature of the countries. To be fair, Ethiopia has a resemblance of a functioning but stifled democracy whereas Eritrea is a naked dictatorship.
The ruling party in Ethiopia has suffered a stunning electoral defeat in 2005 national election. Despite the change in tone, the ruling party appears determined to continue ruling the country by hook or crook. Gauging the people’s pulse, the ruling party knows full well that if a completely free election were to be held today, the people will surely cast their protest vote to throw it out of office.
What is the alternative? The alternative is to go full speed and squash such election defeat and decree marshal law and continue to rule the country or to find a plausible distraction such as the impending war to perpetuate its rule. So, is the Ethiopian government using war as a cover to perpetuate its undemocratic rule? If not, there should not be any reason for Ethiopia to go to war with Eritrea and vise versa. In fact, Ethiopia should agree to the demarcation of boundaries and focus on the hard work of fighting poverty and building a democracy.
The sad fact, however, is that the collapse of dictatorships in these countries certainly has not erased all other problems in those societies: poverty, crime, bureaucratic inefficiency, corruption, violations of basic human rights. In some instances, the downfall of these dictatorships has generally lifted much of the suffering of the people, and has opened the way for the rebuilding of these societies with greater political democracy, personal freedoms and liberties, and social justice. In other instances, these people find themselves in continued subjugation by the newly minted dictators camouflaging as democrats.
Even if they appear as democrats, their actions bring about their true nature. That is why we see in many of these countries, military cliques, ambitious individuals, ‘elected officials’ and doctrinal political parties are increasingly imposing their will. Constitutional and legal barriers, judicial decisions, and public opinion are normally ignored by dictators.
In the end, basic human and political rights will continue to be denied to vast numbers of peoples. Unfortunately, this is generally the case in Ethiopia as well – the subject of this piece.
It is widely reported recently in the media that Ethiopia and Eritrea may once again start another round of war. The press releases that are coming out from the Ethiopian government and the interview the officials have been giving, although denies any intention of starting war with Eritrea, the gist of their message is clear: war will break out but we are not to blame for it.
One of the greatest virtues of democracies is that they do not go to war easily. In other words, the chance of going to war on a whim is less in a democracy because decision makers are restrained by the multiplicity of political structures and voices in policy making. What is more, the leaders fear hurting their electoral chances if a conflict does not have popular support.
It is a whole different story when it comes to dictatorship. The problem of dictatorships is deep. They will not hesitate to go to war if going to war somehow prolongs their eventual downfall. To this writer the aching to go to war on the part of Ethiopia and Eritrea emanates from the undemocratic nature of the countries. To be fair, Ethiopia has a resemblance of a functioning but stifled democracy whereas Eritrea is a naked dictatorship.
The ruling party in Ethiopia has suffered a stunning electoral defeat in 2005 national election. Despite the change in tone, the ruling party appears determined to continue ruling the country by hook or crook. Gauging the people’s pulse, the ruling party knows full well that if a completely free election were to be held today, the people will surely cast their protest vote to throw it out of office.
What is the alternative? The alternative is to go full speed and squash such election defeat and decree marshal law and continue to rule the country or to find a plausible distraction such as the impending war to perpetuate its rule. So, is the Ethiopian government using war as a cover to perpetuate its undemocratic rule? If not, there should not be any reason for Ethiopia to go to war with Eritrea and vise versa. In fact, Ethiopia should agree to the demarcation of boundaries and focus on the hard work of fighting poverty and building a democracy.
Print
Email
