Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is a Teflon African leader

Yohannes Woldemariam
20 Jun 2005 

Should the ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) be phased out, to become viewed as a useful political expedient, whose time has come to an end? Will it relinquish power without plunging the country into an ethnic violence? That is the question in everyone's mind.


Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is a Teflon African leader.

By Yohannes Woldemariam

2005-06-14

Notwithstanding Prime Minister Meles Zenawi's statement that "there is not going to be a 'Rose Revolution,' or a 'Green Revolution,' or any color revolution in Ethiopia after the election"; indications are that Ethiopia is bracing for the next people-power revolt. There is little doubt that the country has come to a crossroads and that a blood-red revolution is brewing. Should the ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) be phased out, to become viewed as a useful political expedient, whose time has come to an end? Will it relinquish power without plunging the country into an ethnic violence? That is the question in everyone's mind. No one can predict what will happen in this extremely tense multi ethnic country with 70 million inhabitants. One potential scenario is a possible compromise, EPRDF may relent and try to appease the key individuals in the opposition, by giving them some cabinet posts. But it is hard to see how this can work in the long run. On many important issues, the EPRDF and the key leaders of the opposition have diametrically opposed agendas. Moreover, Ethiopians are now filled with expectations and may not settle for half fixes and fragile coalitions. Opposition leaders may not even compromise for fear of being disowned by their respective constituencies. All things considered, the political situation is unpredictable and very fluid.

PM Zenawi is one who can be described as a Teflon African leader and so far was able to evade scruitny and from having to answer for his authoritarian rule. Students were massacred in Addis Ababa in April 2001; there were other massacres in Sheko-Mesiunger, Awassa, Shambu Ambo, Nekemte in March and May 2002, of the Anuaks in Gambella in December 2003. The Anuak massacre in particular was dubbed as "a crime against humanity" by Human Rights Watch. But all these crimes were little noticed by the international community and media coverage was scant and almost non existent. In comparison, the latest reported death toll of 36 plus civilian Ethiopian protesters and many more injured has received a wider media coverage. Zenawi's security forces continue to hunt opposition leaders, have assassinated an elected law maker, and have jailed thousands of suspected opponents. PM Zenawi has declared a state of emergency and introduced his trusted Agaazi special forces from his tribe to crush the spreading dissent. A general climate of fear and uncertainty has gripped the country.

Now, as long as you are on the right side of the "War on Terror", it is an ideal time to be a dictator and tyrant. An ongoing hazard of the "war on terror" has been that tyrants like Zenawi would exploit the threat of terror to win indulgence or even support from the Bush administration and Tony Blair's Britain. President Bush's era of regime change for despots the world over is applied selectively. The push for democratic elections when applied consistently must be embraced by well meaning people everywhere. But the Bush agenda is based on a single criterion: US interest and an unenlightened one at that. The world is where it was during the realpolitik of the cold war, except now there is only one unrestrained superpower without a counter balance. Zenawi is perceived as a key ally on the "War on Terror" and is one of Blair?s hand-picked 17 advisors for the Commission for Africa(CFA). Big names like Joseph Stiglitz sing his praise at every opportunity. In his book on Globalization, Stiglitz writes that, "Meles combines intellectual attributes with personal integrity: no one doubted his honesty and there were few accusations of corruption within his government." And the former British ambassador and currently the head of the CFA's secretariat, Miles Wickstead wrote, "Meles is a man with a vision of eradicating poverty and pulling Ethiopia into the 21st century, He knows where he wants to go; we are very supportive of that." Professor Jeffrey Sachs is the advisor to the Secretary General, Kofi Annan in regards to the Millennium Project. The Project has the objective of significantly reducing the hardships of the poorest of the poor by 2015. Sachs is also another Meles admirer. He is quoted to have said that, "Ethiopia has excellent leadership, combined with incredible need. Therefore the urgency and possibility for action are combined." When asked about his relationship with Zenawi, Sachs said that he, works with many African heads of state and that, "in particular, it has been a pleasure working with the PM of Ethiopia."

With such advocates in high places, Zenawi probably began to think that he could act with impunity. Rather than reach out to his opponents, he is still desperately trying to shore up his position. But it appears that Ethiopians have had enough of his shenanigans; it is clear that he can only retain power by means of intensified repression.

Meles Zenawi is not a "new breed of African leader," whatever the Clinton administration meant by that phrase. He is an old wine in a new bottle. He is a better schmoozer than his dictator predecessors like Mobutu, Mengistu and even his contemporaries like Mugabe and Issaias. In particular, I believe he benefits enormously from being compared with President Issaias Afeworki. Issaias has won the distinction for brutalizing Eritreans and for his lack of diplomatic skills. His rule can be described as the super-presidential republic, where the president decides everything. Opposition and newspapers are banned, dissenters are in solitary confinement or out of the country, the economy is in ruins, and corruption is widespread at every level of government. In contrast, Meles is no less a dictator, no less corrupt, but has been good at hiding his tracks, is a quick learner and has understood the value of image building and looking presentable to his benefactors. To achieve the desired image, in addition to recruiting powerful advocates like Stiglitz, Zenawi hired Zemi Communications of New York, a U.S. public relations firm. His overnight conversion from a peculiar Albanian brand of Marxism to liberal economics was a part of this elaborate ploy to dupe the international financial institutions and entrench himself in power.

In reality, democracy for Mr. Zenawi is another word for insurgency. He has been in power for fourteen years and there is no doubt that he favors the president-for-life model. The real question now is: will people power manage to dislodge him from Menelik palace? He is a crafty fellow, but it's conceivable that he may be running out of tricks this time. Will he pay a price? Or will he wiggle his way out of this one? To a significant degree, it will depend on what his Western sponsors decide to do. Will they view him as a liability or will they continue to ignore his crimes and subsidize his regime? Only time will tell.

One indication that Tony Blair may have become embarrased by PM Zenawi is that Britain has suspended a planned increase in aid to Ethiopia over post-election violence. According to Britain's International Development Minister Hilary Benn, $35 million in aid has been put on hold while Britain waits to see how the situation in Ethiopia develops. But Zenawi is already trying to distance himself from the atrocities committed by his troops. The Financial Times (6-16-2005) reported that "Mr Benn said he received assurances from Meles Zenawi, an investigation would be held into the shooting of demonstrators and the report made public." I hope that Mr. Benn is not buying that, a criminal investigating the crime he committed is not going to reveal any truth. Zenawi should not be allowed to save face by scapegoating some poor soldiers who were only following orders.

To be sure, the British action is better than nothing. One must however wonder as to how genuine and sustained the pressure will be? A cynic like me will still wonder, if this is just to appease and placate the growing opposition or a reconsideration and re-evaluation of British policy? Despite all that is going on, Ethiopia is set to have its debt cancelled under an agreement with President Bush that will forgive $18.3bn owed to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and others. It is going to get the lions share of a significant portion of an extra $674m in help from the US for famine relief and 70m pounds in food aid from Britain. The question anybody who cares about the suffering of famine victims should be asking is: where will this money go? Aid is fungible. It releases other resources for the regime to buy weapons. According to a BBC report, "The country has a great deal of weaponry left over from Soviet times, which Russian specialists continue to maintain. At the end of the 1990s, Addis Ababa acquired 12 Su-27s (from Russian air force resources), four second-hand Mi-24D helicopters, eight Mi-17 military-transport helicopters, and 10 self-propelled 152-mm 2S5 artillery guns? In 2002 Ethiopia resuscitated a 200m-dollar contract concluded with Russia in 1999: Rosoboronekspport [Russian state arms exporter] supplied seven Su-27 fighters worth more than 100m dollars and Rostvertol [Rostov helicopter plant] supplied several Mi-35 combat transport helicopters for 25m dollars. In 2003 an agreement was reached for Rostvertol to supply Ethiopia with another 10 Mi-35s. Ethiopian Foreign Minister Mesfin Seyoum visited Moscow in January [2005] and agreed on supplies of a new consignment of Su-27s to Addis Ababa." In a roundabout way , aid therefore is rewarding the regime for its reckless behavior.

In the first instance, one must really ask why Britain continued to reward PM Zenawi, in the face of his flagrant defiance of the Hague verdict on the border conflict with Eritrea? Why was Meles made one of the 17 Commissioners for CFA, when good governance is a central tenet of the Commission? Blair needs to do a lot more and show a lot more muscle before I can believe that he has made a genuine change of heart. A good way to start would be to suspend Meles from the Commission for Africa. Zenawi must also be told to abide by the Hague verdict on the border issue with Eritrea. Such an action will certainly send a clear message to all dictators. It will encourage serious watchers of Africa to give another look to the CFA. The Zenawi regime, if it survives, must also alter its governance radically, and it should begin by accepting an international inquiry into the election massacres. Unfortunately, so far, the only change one sees today is movement in the wrong direction.

The regime continues to round up opponents, and is refusing to take responsibility for the shooting of unarmed protesters. In light of the fact that Ethiopia is rearming, another devastating war with Eritrea could soon be on the horizons. If this trend continues, Bush and Blair need to to re-evaluate all aspects of their relationships with the Zenawi regime and this includes military relations;US troops have trained with Ethiopian troops that patrol the border with Somalia. To do otherwise further damages America's credibility, as the US puts ever greater priority on the promotion of human rights and democracy abroad.

This does not mean that Bush and Blair simply walk away, for allowing the regime to retreat into isolation poses its own dangers, but it does imply a different kind of relationship, one in which the US explicitly and publicly presses Mr Zenawi to change. Using sticks and carrots to encourage positive change may not be successful, but it would put Bush and Blair on the right side of history in Ethiopia. It would show the Ethiopian people that the support for freedom is principled, not simply based on narrow security interests, and would actually strengthen Western security in the long run. For if we have learnt any lesson from the attacks of September 11 2001, it is that, where repression and despair rule, extremism and violence breed. But if the US and Britain cannot induce change in Ethiopia, at least they avoid a close and continuing relationship with its current government.

==================================

On (June 14, 2005) briefing to journalists by SEAN MCCORMACK, at the State Departmentt suggests that the seriousness of the situation has not been grasped yet. There is no sign of sanctions or any other consequences for Meles yet. Here follows an excerpt from thee Q & A.

QUESTION: Are you referring -- (OFF-MIKE) use excessive force, typically that is applied to police or security forces. You don't specify here. Are you talking about government forces who are conducting operations with excessive force or are you seeking to label that phrasing against opposition to violence, as well?

MCCORMACK: That was, again...

QUESTION: I'm just trying to understand it.

MCCORMACK: No, I understand. I understand.

Again, just reiterate, one, all sides refrain from violence, but we have specifically called upon the government forces and the security forces to conduct themselves in accordance with international principles, which would preclude the use of any excessive force.

QUESTION: Last one from me on this but are you considering any kind of -- other than rhetorical consequences for Ethiopia, if the security forces continue to use excessive force, there are reports saying that an opposition member of parliament was shot dead while sitting around with some friends on Sunday.

So are you considering any kinds of consequences or sanctions for the government? And if not, do you not expose yourself to the suggestion that strategic allies get kid-glove treatment or nothing but rhetorical criticism?

MCCORMACK: Well, I think that we are -- our public pronouncements on this issue as well as our diplomatic pronouncements, we hope, will lead to this process unfolding in a peaceful way, in a way that resolves the tensions that are clearly exist in Ethiopia. And that's where our focus is now.

We always look at what our policies are, whether or not our policies are producing the desired effect, whether or not we need to look at our policies based on what the situations are that are before us and the facts on the ground.

We believe, based on the facts as they are before us, that we are taking the proper course at this point. I think I'll leave at that.

QUESTION: You said, if I just heard you correctly, that you were calling on the government to move forward with an investigation into this quickly and in a transparent manner and that those who were responsible be held accountable. Is that correct?

MCCORMACK: That is correct.



yohannes99@hotmail.com