Addis Abeba — A glance at the texts written about Ethiopia to date suffices to show the prominent place that tales of warfare hold in its history. It is also unquestionable that most of these wars were sparked by intrigues for power. This phenomenon has shaped the country's political culture into a culture of war.
The Ethiopian Revolution, which brought an end to the era of the absolute monarchy of the "Elect of God," exacerbated our culture of violence and war. Political parties, emerging from a society structured by such a culture, were unable to move beyond the familiar game of conflict. Indeed, what is most tragic is that even in today's Ethiopia, where the drums of multiparty democracy are being echoed, the activities of political parties show no fundamental change. The leaders who, by historical accident, are guiding the country seem to have learned nothing from the follies of our past. The overall result has pushed Ethiopians to march on the wrong side of history.
The main purpose of this article is to briefly touch upon the chaotic political game the country has endured since the early twentieth century and to show how the government and the political organizations operating in the country can help build a democratic system and extricate our country from its current political predicament.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
A country's party politics originates from and is a reflection of its political culture. The political culture largely determines both the breadth and depth of the role that political parties play. This is not to say that political parties have no influence on a country's political life. The roles of the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, the Chinese Communist Party in China, the Nazi Party in Germany, etc., are good examples of the extent to which political parties can alter their country's political culture. Our own experience demonstrates this same dialectical relationship. Even the deceptive tactics of "organizational work" (dirijit sira) employed by the Derg are a sufficient testament to this, as we can see how much it has corrupted our political culture to date.
Party politics in pre-and post-revolution Ethiopia
The formation of political parties in Ethiopia is deeply intertwined with the history of struggle waged by the country's progressive intellectuals. To start with the history of these intellectuals, the belief that modern education was necessary in Ethiopia began to take root when the Ethiopian monarchs desperately needed interpreters for their relations with Europeans. After the victory of Adwa, the extensive relations established with many European countries created a growing need for people who could interpret languages and negotiate with representatives of foreign governments. The opening of the Menelik II School in 1908, where the future Emperor Haile Selassie was educated, was a step forward for the development of modern education. During these early years of the twentieth century, intellectuals who understood Ethiopia's underdevelopment believed in the necessity of change and began to advocate for it. The likes of Afework Gebreyesus, Gebrehiwot Baykedagn, and Teklehawariat Teklemariam were at the forefront of this first generation of intellectuals.
The second generation of progressive intellectuals emerged after the Italian occupation. After the invasion, Emperor Haile Selassie's primary focus became the creation of a civil and military bureaucracy that would strengthen his power. The task of creating a new civil administration and modern army required a trained workforce. So he began to train numerous students both at home and abroad.
However, the Emperor's dreams were not easy to realize. Haile Selassie's exile to save his life during the Italian invasion was deeply resented, given the traditional history of former Ethiopian kings. Hence, some prominent patriots did not appreciate his return to power on the shoulders of the British. Understanding this reality, Emperor Haile Selassie began to apply his Machiavellian skills. As a result, he began to prioritize those who were in exile like him and those who had betrayed their country by serving the Italians--the banda. In other words, the Emperor preferred the exiles and traitors in giving appointments and titles over the patriots who had shed their blood for their country. Among the renowned patriots who could not stomach Haile Selassie's actions were Belay Zeleke, who was hanged in 1943; Bitwoded Negash, who was detained in 1951 and died in prison; and Dejazmach Takele Woldehawaryat, who spent much of his life fighting to depose the Emperor and was killed in 1969.
It was during this period that our country's political cancer, captured in the following verse, began:
Ethiopia, my country, you are foolish and naive,The one who died for you is forgotten, while the one who killed you prospers.
Although the Emperor thwarted the plots against him for a time, his victory was only temporary. In fact, opposition continued to grow and strengthen.
Among those sent abroad for education after the Italian occupation were a few who, upon their return, understood that the country was, as some say, 'sleeping on the mattress of history,' i.e., boasting of a three-thousand-year history, but remained 'backward.' Girmame Neway, who would later become the leading political actor in the 1960 coup attempt, was part of this emerging group. Although Girmame, his brother, and all the key players in the coup were killed, their attempt made a significant contribution to the birth of the Ethiopian Student Movement (ESM), which would play a major role in deposing Haile Selassie's regime. One thing must be noted here. Until the coup attempt, the anti-Haile Selassie struggle consisted of plots hatched by individuals and palace intrigues that were never far from the power corridors. After the coup attempt, however, the direction of the opposition took a step forward and began to take on an organized form. At that time, while the ESM was being formed, ethnonational and regional movements were also being created.
The sudden eruption of the Ethiopian Revolution threw the existing political organizations into confusion....."
To be sure, it was the ESM that provided most of the leadership for the many political parties and national liberation fronts that were formed at the time. It is indisputable that multi-ethnic movements like MEISON and EPRP, as well as ethnonational liberation fronts like the EPLF, TPLF, OLF, etc., were conceived by intellectuals who gained their initial political consciousness within ESM. It must also be noted that the divisions that began to sprout within ESM are what led to the chaotic political situations that continue to affect us today.
The main feature of the ESM at the time was its rapid transformation from a reformist stance to a radical one. It was the students of the University College of Addis Ababa who supported the coup. A year later, the college was restructured into Haile Selassie I University. The arrival of scholarship students from newly independent African states, filled with a fresh spirit of change, and the anti-imperialist struggles taking place across the Third World at the time contributed not only to the formation and strengthening of the ESM but also to its adoption of radical ideas. The university students gradually moved from raising issues about their bread, dormitories, and localities to national questions. Of all their demands, the most telling was when the university students marched in a peaceful demonstration in 1965 with the slogan "Land to the Tiller". This signaled EMS's shift from reformist demands to a radically pro-change position. From that point on, the student movement rapidly spread to Ethiopia's secondary schools, and socialist thoughts became its ideology.
On the organizational front, the formation of the University Students' Union of Addis Ababa (USUAA) at home and the radicalization of Ethiopian student unions in Europe and North America led to a widespread anti-feudal struggle. The principal slogans articulated by these student movements were "Land to the Tiller," "the equality of all nationalities," and "the right to organize must be respected."
Haile Selassie's government, deeply alarmed by the growing strength of the student movement, mobilized its resources to divide and destroy the movement. It deployed informants (joro tebi, lit. "ear-lickers") around the student movement and went as far as arresting and killing student leaders. However, it could not crush the movement. But the repression made a non-trivial contribution to the tragic divisions that followed. Let's examine this in depth.
First, differences began to emerge between students who wanted to continue their education and those who were revolutionaries. This led to the creation of two student camps: Revo (revolutionaries) and Sebo (saboteurs). The division was not limited to home. Many student leaders, fleeing the repression and believing the outside world would be a better stage for struggle, went abroad. As a result, a wide rift began to form among Ethiopian students abroad.
Although everyone sang, "All the partisans go to the bush, like Ho Chi Minh, like Che Guevara," it became clear that they were not speaking the same language. Their differences revolved around the tactics and strategy for advancing the student movement and the question of nationalities. The blind struggle for power led to a politics of mutual destruction. The growing strength of the Eritrean fronts contributed its part, pushing the divisions within the ESM to a point of no return. MEISON and EPRP, born out of the ESM, were conceived in this kind of political atmosphere. It was during this historical moment that the Ethiopian Revolution suddenly exploded, beyond the control of any of these forces.
The sudden eruption of the Ethiopian Revolution threw the existing political organizations into confusion, while new political groups began to spring up like mushrooms, further worsening the situation. What created the most chaotic situation of all was the Derg's seizure of power amidst the turmoil. It learned socialist slogans with astonishing speed from the progressive political organizations, turning its tools against those same organizations to destroy them. The Derg, exploiting their division, ultimately obliterated the EPRP, MEISON, and all the other groups, including ECHAAT, MALERID, and the Woz League. The socialist countries of the time, especially the Soviet Union, gave their full support to the Derg, which they assumed would emerge victorious. Consequently, the political parties operating in the country lost both the knowledge and the will to tolerate, let alone resolve, their differences. In the political crisis that followed, thousands of Ethiopia's children were slaughtered, imprisoned, and exiled. The revolution was hijacked by Ethiopian soldiers who never knew anything about it. This plunged the country into a devastating and horrific war of the Derg era.
Before concluding this section, it is important to highlight the following key points: First, the divisive and mutually destructive struggles among Ethiopian political groups ultimately exposed the country to the peril of disintegration.
Second, a revolution for which an entire generation made the ultimate sacrifice was tragically aborted, failing to deliver on its promises.
Third, the divisions that originated within the pre-revolution Ethiopian Student Movement (ESM) unfortunately persisted into the post-revolution era, leading to the seventeen years of destruction under the military regime.
Fourth, the EPRDF and the EPLF, who emerged victorious from the political chaos, are now shaping Ethiopia and Eritrea in their respective images.
Fifth, and primarily, what we learn from the history of past Ethiopian political organizations' struggles is not what actions they should have taken, but rather what they decisively should not have done.
Nature of political parties during transitional period and democratic transition process
Our examination of the nature of political parties during the EPRDF era must begin with a fundamental question: What have political parties and the government learned from our historical experience? It is important to confront this question directly.
Two key political developments accompanied the EPRDF's rise to power. First, with the ascendancy of ethnonational movements, the principle affirming the right of nations and nationalities to self-determination--including the right to secession--became a central policy of governance. Second, multiparty democracy, at least in theory, gained broader acceptance.
.......our supposedly celebrated democratic transition has moved from crisis, through crisis, and into crisis."
However, the task of translating these policy pillars into practice was not simple, and our much-lauded democratic transition has been fraught with crisis. As a result, it is no exaggeration to say that our supposedly celebrated democratic transition has moved from crisis, through crisis, and into crisis. There is no better way to prove this reality than to place the actions of the transitional government on the scales of democracy. Let's look at a few.
When the EPRDF ratified its Charter and established the transitional government in 1991, it took steps that had a very negative impact on the democratization of Ethiopia. As is well known, the EPRDF's support for the secession of Eritrea is something that many people have not been able to grasp to this day. The secession of Eritrea came about because of the EPLF and TPLF military victory. It is also unquestionable that their military cooperation was the result of agreement in the field.
Had the referendum and the decisions made after it been implemented not just to enforce the agreements made in the field but in a sober manner that could have protected the national interests of both peoples, their positive aspects would have outweighed their destructive impact on the democratic process. And the referendum would not have buried a time bomb set to explode later. In any case, Eritrea continues to be a problem child of Ethiopian politics.
The EPRDF, which claims to be the sponsor of multiparty democracy, invited those it considered its "friends" to the formation of the transitional government as if it were a private wedding party, while the door was closed to its opponents, like the other preceding revolutions in Ethiopia. I don't think any of us can forget how the train of the revolution traveled along, dropping off the revolutionaries at every stop. As they say, history repeats itself, and today, the train of Ethiopian democracy is dropping off the democrats at every stop. The barring of many multi-ethnic political organizations from participating in the country's political life, the forced exit of the OLF from the transitional government, followed by the exit of the Southern Coalition, and so on, are all facts that indicate a repeat of this tragicomic historical drama.
The second test of the EPRDF's democratic credentials was the 1992 regional elections. The EPRDF's one-party political game in this election was judged as such not only by Ethiopians but also by the international observers it had invited to watch its game. They noted in their reports that the EPRDF was both referee and player and that the process had no connection to a free and fair election. When you add the fact that the EPRDF army, tasked with implementing government policies, the legislative council, and the judiciary, supposedly established to deliver justice, all fell under the control of the EPRDF, you have the political realities that confirm the establishment of the EPRDF's absolute rule throughout the country under the guise of democracy.
If we look at the elections under Haile Selassie, the military regime, and the current EPRDF, our dialectical progress seems to be in reverse. To explain what we all know, students angered by Haile Selassie's sham elections once reportedly stuck a "Vote for Me" poster on a donkey, released it around the palace at Arat Kilo, and people passing by herded the donkey until it entered the Emperor's parliament. The military regime, claiming to improve upon the Emperor's elections, had its own handpicked members carry elephant symbols and presented them for competition. The Ethiopian peoples were asked to cast their votes. At the end of the drama, the elephants won, entered the National Assembly (Shengo), ratified a constitution for us, and performed the historic task of making Mengistu Hailemariam the president of the republic. In the EPRDF's election, the Kalashnikov symbols won. They also put on the theater of ratifying a constitution.
On the ratification of the constitutions, there is much to learn from our past history. When we look at the political spectacle surrounding the constitutional assembly, it seems as if the history of the drafting of past Ethiopian constitutions has been repeated, more or less. There are three recurring tragicomic characteristics in the makings of all of Ethiopia's constitutions to date. First, "the constitution is always written by the victor." Second, "it is written to make the power gained by force a permanent private asset." Third, "it is designed to put on a show for the outside world, per the political market of the time."
To be clearer, let's first look at how the constitutions of Emperor Haile Selassie and the Derg were enacted. The constitution the Emperor "gave" to his beloved people in 1931 came after he had emerged victorious from a deeply entangled feudal conspiracy from 1916 to 1930. He had deposed Lij Iyasu in a coup d'état on charges of treason against the country and religion and then, one by one, removed from power even his father's friends who had brought him to power. Finally, using what can only be described as a Machiavellian skill, he removed Empress Zewditu, the last obstacle between him and the throne. The fundamental aims of his constitution were to codify the absolute power he had created through various skills, making it eternally transferable not only to himself but also to his descendants, and to show the Western world that Ethiopia was a country governed by a constitution, just like the civilized world. The so-called revised constitution of 1955, apart from adding a few things to accommodate Eritrea, which had joined in as a federation, was intended to strengthen that same power with the political contempt gained after the Italian occupation.
Skipping the 1974 draft constitution, which was rendered obsolete by the advance of the revolution, and moving onto the Derg's 1987 constitution, we find it had no different purpose or method, except that the claim of being God's representative was changed to having been given a historical responsibility. To recall, Mengistu's 1987 constitution was enacted to transform his provisional military administration into a permanent government. This was after he had, from 1974 to the mid-1980s, eliminated not only the cream of Ethiopia's youth who brought about the revolution but also his own comrades who had come to power with him. And it was after he had established his soldiers' party, which he named the 'Workers' Party of Ethiopia,' in 1984, and set the stage in the socialist tradition. Regarding the outside world, just like the Emperor, Mengistu Hailemariam's aim was to appear as a socialist deacon to the socialist popes he wanted to emulate in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.
As we know, the first constitution's provision that power would be transferred to the emperor's descendants was a moot point. The main article of his constitution, which stated that his majesty was inviolable and could not be deposed due to being anointed by God and his royal blood, did not save him from being dragged from his throne by his own soldiers, taken away, and killed. Mengistu Hailemariam's 1987 constitution was thrown into the dustbin of history before it was even five years old.
I do not think it requires special knowledge of political science to know that our constitution, ratified in 1994, was approved in a manner similar to past constitutions. It is now public knowledge that it was drafted by the victor, the EPRDF, to transition the EPRDF's transitional government into a permanent one.
To understand where we have arrived on our journey of democratic transition and where we are headed, it is necessary to place the EPRDF's actions on a proper scale. Although it is difficult to create such a political evaluation beyond emotion, many political scientists agree on political metrics that revolve around two concepts: political liberalization and democratization processes.
Galloping alone in elections to declare victory for oneself brings little benefit beyond making a mockery of democracy."
The measures encompassed by political liberalization include the government's opening of the political market, akin to economic liberalization; the relaxation of repressive structures to enable citizens' free political engagement; the dismantling of the government's monopoly on political activity; the unhindered circulation of diverse ideas within society; and the permission of association and organization independent of government control.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Democratization, however, is a broader and deeper process. It requires the genuine building of new political structures and a new political culture that can serve as a pillar to support and develop them. Such structures must create a conducive environment for free political competition. This means that a free and fair election is, by no means, an issue that can be set aside for a successful democratic transition. It is not only necessary to have an independent judiciary and legislature that can check the power of the executive branch, but a national army that is free from the games of political parties and upholds national interest is also essential.
By these measures, Ethiopia does not seem to have been so fortunate thus far. When the five years of the EPRDF's actions we have raised above are weighed, our much-talked-about democratic journey has not only failed to reach a reliable stage of political liberalization but has also been marked by discouraging events. In particular, the fundamental political question in Ethiopia's political history to date--the transfer of power by ballots or bullets--remains unanswered.
It is necessary to understand a few points about political liberalization here. Most of the time, political liberalization occurs when a regime is shaken and can no longer continue as before, and a new system of governance is struggling to be born and consolidate itself. In other words, it is a political step taken not from the heart, but to find relief. Furthermore, it often results in either the complete collapse of the regime or the consolidation of a new authoritarian system. For this reason, it is important to understand from the outset that the journey to democracy through political liberalization is an extremely narrow opportunity. When we interpret this in the context of Ethiopia's experience, the last six months of Haile Selassie's rule, the early and final years of the Derg, and the EPRDF era more or less reflect political liberalization.
Conclusion
To understand where we have arrived on our journey of democratic transition and where we are headed, it is necessary to place the EPRDF's actions on a proper scale. Although it is difficult to create such a political evaluation beyond emotion, many political scientists agree on political metrics that revolve around two concepts: political liberalization and democratization. Some scholars say that history is a moving film. The history of our country in the second half of the twentieth century truly seems to be a tragicomic film that the next generation will watch with either awe or disgust.
The EPRDF government currently in power, as well as the political parties operating in the country, must recognize that the only way to build a better common home for themselves and for all the people of Ethiopia is to possess the intellectual readiness and political will to learn from our past and solve our problems.
In my opinion, the nation will only find its way out of the political labyrinth it has entered when the following truths are fully acknowledged. First, although Ethiopia is a land of many heroes, it is our entrenched culture of war--which glorifies military triumphs--that has contributed to our status as one of the world's poorest countries.
Second, all concerned parties must understand that the culture of resolving political differences with bullets is a sign of backwardness, not of civilization. All parties must recognize there is no better choice than to present their programs to the Ethiopian people according to the customs and procedures of democracy and to leave the verdict to the people.
Furthermore, we must learn from our past that neither deceiving the public by claiming a mandate from God nor posturing with a self-proclaimed trust from history has, in the long run, benefited anyone. In addition, we must all understand that galloping alone in elections to declare victory for oneself brings little benefit beyond making a mockery of democracy.
Finally--and above all--the "dialogue of the deaf," where each party listens only to itself and dances to its own tune, must end. On this point, I passionately implore the country's pro-change forces not only to desire change but also to commit themselves to an all-inclusive democratic movement to wrench the nation from the political dead-end into which it has fallen. AS
Editor's Note: This article was written by Professor Merera Gudina and presented at a workshop organized by an advocacy group for democracy known as ABUGIDA during the Democracy Congress in November 1994, at the time when the current FDRE constitution was undergoing ratification more than three decades ago. Addis Standard has published this article with the author's permission, as it continues to hold significant relevance and timeliness for contemporary readers.
