According to the National Electoral Board
of Ethiopia, there are 79 political parties registered under Proclamation No573/2008. Of these, only 29% have
country-wide (national) identity whereas 71% are regional parties that are organized
around ethnic lines.
Of those parties dubbed to have national outreach, some such as All Amhara People’s Organization (AAPO), Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Front (EPRDF), Geda System Advancement Party, Oromo Federalist Democratic Movement, and All Oromo People Democratic Party do actually have, as their names indicate, ethnicity as their organizing logic. Several armed groups and parties are also following suit. Stated simply, Ethiopian politics is heavily smeared with ethnicism. On average, each nationality (ethnic group) has got its own political party.
That
means, the political philosophy of the EPRDF (ethnic federalism) seems to have gotten
popularity from the opposition. By necessity, affinity, and/or rhetoric, the
majority of opposition political parties make ethnicism their core. Meaning, ethnic
federalism is what unifies EPRDF and the opposition. Although the former has
got the power/legitimation to enforce the ideology, the latter have been
playing a no-less-than-important role in giving it real life.
Some
people tend to mistakenly trace the commencement of ethnic politics in Ethiopia
to the political participation of the late Professor and accomplished surgeon
Asrat Woldeyes. Following the ratification of the FDRE Constitution and in
response to the rampant persecution and mass killing of the Amharas, which is
still the reality, Asrat was ‘forced’ to form the AAPO. Although the party was
technically formed to ‘fight’ all the injustices made against the Amharas, the
party was tasked to demand and safeguard freedom and democracy at the national
level.
In
fact, Professor Asrat’s public speeches, some of which are available on
YouTube, aimed at ensuring national unity, peace, and freedom. From the
beginning, it was only the great surgeon who opposed the endorsement of the
Constitution on the grounds that it undermined Ethiopia’s interest as an
independent and unified nation. From that point onwards, Asrat attracted a lot
of negative energy from the ruling party. Despite all the odds that happened to
him (e.g. he was fired from Addis Ababa University), Asrat intensified his
struggle for the freedom of the poor. His formation of the AAPO was not in
support of ethnic politics but was an immediate reaction to the massacre of the
Amharas. Had Asrat been allowd to lead his life and career, we would have seen
the immediate ‘translation’ of the AAPO into a national party.
Ethnic
politics in reality has its roots in the now Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).
The founders of this party happened to champion the interest of the Tigray
people. After the 17 year protracted war with the Derg, with strong support
from the West and with a little bit of luck, they managed to emerge victorious.
At the eve of the victory, ‘sister’ political parties were formed representing
major ethnic groups such as the Amharas, Oromos, and lately the Southern
Nationalities. That fabric metamorphosed into ethnic federalism, which defines current
Ethiopian politics. Consequently, the creator and God father of ethnic politics
in Ethiopia must be the ruling party. The majority of the opposition political
parties just contributed to draw its huge public face- they played a legitimating
role. But what is an important question is not who started it but what unwanted
consequences are there in relation to ethnic politics.
Implications
Seen
at the surface, there seems not to be a problem in practicing politics along
ethnic lines. There are several people who even argue that such model of
politics allows grass-roots-level participation and is an expression of improved
democratic governance, equality, social inclusion, and political consciousness.
Theoretically and potentially, this argument seems to hold some water.
It
is, however, a practical rarity to successfully fight for freedom and
democratic governance while staying dear and near to one’s own ethnicity. I strongly
advocate for democracy, the rule of law, and presence of alternative voices,
but when it comes to ethnic-based political parties, I do have serious
reservations. I rather claim that practicing ethnic politics is not the right strategy
to fight injustices and to bring genuine democracy.
One,
such political fabric bears no fruits so far. Ethnic politics has been on the
horizon since 1991. Political parties proliferated over the years since then. But
their contribution to ‘fighting’ injustices is nearly unnoticeable. The reason
is not only because the ruling party is systematically narrowing down the
playing field but also because of the divided and symbolic nature of the
opposition. The opposition is itself seriously divided along ethnic lines and
some even see each other as potential threats. Ethnic political parties have a
problem going beyond their own localities.
Two, forming
ethnic parties is thus limiting, both physically and psychologically. The parties
are known only to their respective ethnic groups and to the Electoral Board. The
Oromo-based parties, for instance, hardly work in Northern Ethiopia. All the
promotion and campaigning is done within their own localities only. They could
not compete or win members, resources and names elsewhere within the country. They
are thinking within their own boxes.
Three,
ethnic parties just confuse the general Ethiopian public. Several ethnic groups
each have more than two political parties. It is made unnecessarily confusing to
join or support either party. They just frustrate the public. Several people
seem to consider opposition parties as hopeless, powerless, disorganized, and
fragmented and the like. This kills public motivation to get involved in
politics. Ethnic parties retard and at best kill opposition politics much
more than what EPRDF does to the latter.
Four,
ethnic politics falsely communicates the presence of freedom and political
participation and inclusion. There are several who think that forging a party
of some kind is itself a success. Their leaderships, who seem to secure
tenurships, roam around villages when elections are around. They proudly talk
how their ethnic groups are represented in Ethiopian politics. This sends a
false signal to at least people external to Ethiopian politics; they are in
fact the voiceless voices. They are noises that constantly irritate the public.
Five,
national agendas and interests are being undermined mainly because of ethnically-charged
politics. Parties tend to exclusively focus on their own constituencies’
practical matters, albeit unsuccessfully. It is hard to get ethnic parties that
raise issues related to Ethiopia’s borders, state of the education sector,
unemployment and standard of living, individual freedom, the exodus of the
youth to foreign lands, the Ethiopian Diaspora, Ethiopian history and future. Because
of the obsession and compulsion with ethnic politics, our future integrity and
prospect as a nation seem to be less discussed.
Six,
ethnic politics contributes little or no to future peace and cooperation. The more
parties love their own ethnic groups and cultures, the less they stand on the common
platform- being Ethiopian. Along with other aggravating conditions, ethnic
politics could be considered a recipe for future conflict and war among the
over 80 nationalities.
Concluding remarks
Ethnicism
seems to define Ethiopian politics. It is a common denominator to the ruling party
and the opposition. The two, precisely speaking, have a lot in common than
their differences. If they differ at all, it is related to getting supremacy and
power. The less the difference exists between the ruling party and the
opposition, the more frustrating and meaningless would be the political
struggle. That is mainly why we do not see any promising development both from
Ethiopia and abroad. If the opposition really care about and for Ethiopian
politics, they must think and act out of their boxes- their ethnicity. Ethiopia
is much more than the sum of all the political parties and ethnic groups.
Bless you Dr. Really you have been tell us how much boring and unfruitful our politics. The opposition parties never succeed, if they can't raise out from such fucking political system.
ReplyDeleteKeep such a very good observation up! I am looking your post always.
In my opinion, ethnic politics does deeper damage to democratization than you described.
ReplyDelete1) It narrows the definition of diversity to linguistic diversity. The diversity that is the basis of multi-party democracy is DIVERSITY OF OPINION. In the current setup, if you are from Tgrai, you have to support TPLF because it "represents" your ethnic group. That is the end of democracy as I understand it.
2) "Ethnic nationalism" is a fake concept. If we are honest to ourselves, there is no nationalism that stands on its two feet without an enemy image. In the case of ethnic nationalism, the enemy is going to be another ethnic group in the same country. This will erode unity in the long run.
In my opinion, the best arrangement is a federal setup that is not constrained by linguistic borders, but at the same time promotes diversity by protecting and nurturing the various languages and cultures of the country.
Would you please advocate for a common forum of all opposition parties. Otherwise, they will live for ever and die without any victory.
ReplyDeleteΕverything is verу open wіth a rеally clear dеѕcription of the іsѕues.
ReplyDeleteIt wаs ԁefinitely іnformative.
Your website is verу helpful. Thanks for sharing!
Have a looκ at my homepagе ... fairly Legal incense wiki
you are an idiot fanatic naftagna son who grew up by drinking the blood of the Ethiopian poor ethnic nationalities. by far the EPRDF agenda is better than your fathers and pro fathers agenda. you bloody stop you stinging pens writing these fallacious propaganda. you are not a blogger, you are just stone headed son of naftegna
ReplyDelete