Opinion – Page 2 – Gondaronline.com

አንድም ሦስቱም መረራ

በዘላለም ክብረት

አፍሪካ ከበደ ገና በአስራዎቹ የዕድሜ መጨረሻ ላይ ያለ ወጣት ነው፡፡ በጣም ተስፈኛ ነው፡፡ ሁሌም ለውጥ እንደሚመጣ መናገር ይወዳል፡፡ ለምን ስሙ ‹አፍሪካ› እንደተባለ ሲጠየቅ ደጋግሞ ወደ መምህር አባቱ ይጠቁማል፡፡ አባቱ ስድስት ልጆች እንዳላቸውና የመጀመሪያዋን ዓለም፣ ሁለተኛውን አፍሪካ፣ ሦስተኛውን ኢትዮጵያ፣ አራተኛዋን ኦሮሚያ፣ አምስተኛዋን ወለጋ እንዲሁም ስድስተኛዋን ደግሞ ሊሙ ብለው ስም እንዳወጡላቸው ለጠየቀው ሁሉ ፈገግ እያለ መናገር አይሰለቸውም፡፡ አፍሪካ በወጣትነት ዕድሜው የትውልድ ከተማው የምስራቅ ወለጋዋ ሊሙ ወረዳ፣ ገሊላ ከተማ ውስጥ የኦሮሞ ፌደራል ኮንግረስ (ኦፌኮ) ጽሕፈት ቤት ኃላፊ ነው፡፡ የተቃዋሚ ፓርቲ አመራር መሆን ብዙ መዘዝ በሚያስከትልበት አገር አፍሪካ በተስፋ ጽሕፈት ቤቱን በራሱ ያቋቋመው ‹የአካባቢው ሰው አማራጭ እንዲኖረው› በሚል ሐሳብ እንደሆነና፤ ከፓርቲው የማረጋጋጫ ፈቃድ ተቀብሎ በጽሕፈት ቤቱ ጊቢ ውስጥ የኦፌኮን አርማ የያዘ ሰንደቅ ዓላማ ከክልሉና ከብሔራዊው ሰንደቅ ጎን የሰቀለ እለት በወረዳዋ የተፈጠረው ትርምስን እያስታወሰ ፈገግ ይላል፡፡ ‹‹አፍሪካ የመረራን ባንዲራ ሰቀለ›› በሚል የወረዳው አመራሮች ተሰብስበው ምን ማድረግ እንዳለባቸው ተወያይተው ለጥቂት ቀናት ከታሰረ በኋላ በፓርቲው ጥረት ተፈቶ ወደስራ እንደገና አንደተመለሰ ይናገራል፡፡ ‹‹የእኛ ጽሕፈት ቤት መክፈት በወረዳው አመራሮች ለሚበደሉ ሰዎች ትልቅ ተስፋ ሁኖ ነበር›› ይላል አፍሪካ፡፡ እንዲያውም አንዳንዶች የመንግስት ሰራተኞች አለቆቻቸውን ‹‹አላሰራም የምትሉን ከሆነ አፍሪካ ጋር ሒደን እንሰራለን›› እያሉ ያስፋራሩ ነበር ይላል፡፡

ለአፍሪካ የፓርቲው መኖር ትልቁ ትርጉሙ ለዜጎች ተስፋ መስጠቱ ነበር፡፡ ከዚህ ተስፋ ጀርባ ደግሞ አንድ ስምን ደጋግሞ ያነሳል፤ መረራ ጉዲና፡፡ ‹‹ዶክተር ጋር ከደወልኩ የማንፈታው ችግር አልነበረም፡፡ የታሰሩ አባላቶቻችን በአንድ ስልክ ወዲያው ነበር የምናስፈታው›› ይላል መረራን እያወደሰ፡፡ በርግጥም አፍሪካ በወጣትነቱ ተስፋ ስለሰጡት ጎልማሳ መረራ ጉዲና አውርቶ አይጠግብም፡፡

የሦስት ጨቋኞች እስረኛ

መረራ ከ21 ዓመታት በፊት በሚያዚያ 1988 የኦሮሞ ብሔራዊ ኮንግረስን (ኦብኮ) ከሌሎች አጋሮቻቸው ጋር ሲመሰርቱ የሚጓዙት መንገድ ረጅም እና አስቸጋሪ ሊሆን እንደሚችል አልገመቱም ማለት አይቻልም፡፡ በኢትዮጵያ ተማሪዎች እንቅስቃሴ ወቅት ከነበራቸው የፖለቲካ ተሳትፎ አንፃር እንዲሁም ኢሕአዴግ ስልጣን ከያዘበት ጊዜ ጀምሮ ለአምስት ዓመታት የኢሕአዴግ አካሔድ ትዝብታቸው ነበር ለዚህ ድምዳሜያቸው መሰረቱ፡፡

የንጉሱን አምባገነናዊ ስርዓት እንደ ዕድሜ አቻዎቻቸው በማርክሳዊ መንፈስ ተለክፈው ተቃውመው በመነሳት ገና በአስራዎቹ የዕድሜያቸው መጨረሻ ነበር በትውልድ አካባቢያቸው አምቦ ለመጀመሪያ ጊዜ እስርን የቀመሱት፡፡እስራቸው አጭርና የማያስቆጭ እንደነበር ይናገራሉ፡፡ እንደማንኛውም የዘመናቸው ወጣት የሶሻሊዝምን ጠበል የተረጩት በዛው ዘመን ነበር፡፡ ‹እኔ› ማለት ትተው ‹እኛ› ማለት የጀመሩበት ዘመን፡፡ መታሰራቸው የፖለቲካ ፍላጎታቸው ጨመረው እንጅ አልቀነሰውም፡፡

መረራ ለሁለተኛ ጊዜ ሲታሰሩ አዲስ መንግስት ተቋቁሞ የእራሳቸውም የፖለቲካ ተሳትፎ በእጅጉ ከፍ ያለበት ወቅት ነበር፡፡ የመላው ኢትዮጵያ ሶሻሊስት ንቅናቄን (መኢሶንን) በዩንቨርስቲ የትምህርት ጊዜያቸው የተቀላቀሉት መረራ፤ ፓርቲያቸው ጨካኙን የደርግ ስርዓት ‹ይስተካከል ይሆናል› በሚል ተስፋ እየገሰፀ ለመደገፍ በወሰነው መሰረት ሁለት ዓመታት ያክል በስጋት ከኖረ በኋላ ደርግ ፊቱን ሲያዞርበት እርሳቸውም እንደ ማምለጥም እንደ ሽፍትነትም አሰኝቷቸው ሲሸሹ ከትውልድ ቀያቸው ብዙም ሳይርቁ ተያዙ፡፡ አሁን አልፎ ሲያስታውሱት የፓርቲያቸው አመራሮች ከመዲናዎ ወጥተው ሱሉልታ ላይ መያዛቸውን አስመልክቶ ‹‹የመኢሶን ሽፍትነት ከሱሉልታ አላለፈም›› ለሚሉት መረራ የእራሳቸው ሽፍትነት በመጠኑም ቢሆን የተሻለ ርቀት ተጉዞ ነበር፡፡

የመረራ ሁለተኛ እስር ግን እንደመጀመሪያ ቀላል አልነበረም፡፡ ከሰባት ዓመታት በላይ ታስረዋል፡፡ የታሰሩበትን ምክንያት በውሉ አልተነገራቸውም፡፡ ጓደኛቸው ‹‹ ‹ቀንደኛው ወንበዴው መረራ ጉዲና ከነሙሉ ትጥቁ በቁጥጥር ስር ዋለ› የሚል ፅሁፍ በወቅቱ አዲስ ዘመን ጋዜጣ ላይ ተፅፎ አይቻለሁ›› እያለ ይቀልድብኝ ነበር ይላሉ ስለተያዙበት ሁኔታ ሲተርኩ፡፡ በርግጥም ይህን መሰል ዜናዎች በወቅቱ በርከት ብለው ይታዩ ነበር፡፡ ‹‹ቀንደኛው ወንበዴ አሊ ፋሪስ ከግብረ አበሮቹ ጋር ተያዘ››፤ ‹‹በጢቾ ማማ አብዱልቃድር የተባለ ቀንደኛ ወንበዴ ከነመሳሪያው ተያዘ››፤ ‹‹በጀልዱ ወረዳ በ19 ወንበዴዎች ላይ አብዮታዊ እርምጃ ተወሰደ›› … የሚሉ ዜናዎች የመንግስታዊው ጋዜጣ የፊት ገፅ አድማቂዎች ነበሩ፡፡ ምንም እንኳን እርሳቸው በታሰሩበት ወቅት የታተሙትን መንግስታዊ ሕትመቶች የፊት ገፆች አስሰን ‹‹ቀንደኛው ወንበዴው መረራ ጉዲና ከነሙሉ ትጥቁ በቁጥጥር ስር ዋለ›› የሚለውን ዜና ማግኝት ባንችልም ግመታው (the claim) ከእውነታው ብዙም የራቀ ነው ማለት አንችልም፡፡

በርግጥ የመረራ የደርግ እስር ቤት የሰባት ዓመታት ቆይታ መረራን እጅግ ቀይረዋቸው ነበር፡፡ እርሳቸው እንደሚሉትም፡

ከአምቦ የተማሪዎች ንቅናቄ ተጀምሮ እዚህ አዲስ አበባ ዩኒቨርስቲም አልፌ፣ ሰባት ዓመት ታስሬ ስወጣ በጣም ካልተገፋሁ በስተቀር የጭንቀት ፖለቲካውን ትቼያለሁ፡፡ ትዝ ይለኛል ‹‹ወደድክም፤ ጠላህም መኢሶን ያሸንፋል!…›› እንዲህ ያለ ነገር በወጣትነታችን ጠንከር ባለ መንገድ ተከራክረናል፡፡ በዚያ ውስጥ የተለወጠ ህይወት ነው፡፡ አክርረህ የፈለከውን ያህል ብታቀርብ ዝም ብሎ ውሃ ልኩን አያልፍም፡፡ ስለዚህ፤ የማክረር ፖለቲካውን የተውኩት በተወሰነ ደረጃ በዚያ ሰባት ዓመት እስራት ነው፡፡ በእርግጥ፤ ብዙ ጊዜ ሞት አጋጥሞኛል፡፡ ከአምቦም፤ ደርግ ጽ/ቤትም፣ ቢያንስ ሶስት፣ አራት ግዜ ከሞት በዕድል አምልጬያለሁ፡፡ … ስለዚህ፤ በተለይ ላለፉት 40 ዓመታት የከረረ ፖለቲካችን የትም አላደረሰንም፡፡ ያ ያለፍንበት ሁለመናዬን ለውጦታል … አንዳንድ ግዜ ማክረሩን እየተውክ ስትመጣ ወደ ተፈጥሮ ትሄዳለህ፡፡

መረራ ሁሌ የሚሉት በአገራችን ፖለቲካ የጠፋውን የመሃል መንገድ ያገኙት በእስር ቤት ነበር፡፡ አክርሮ ጫፍ ላይ መቆሙ ለማንም አይጠቅምም ባዩ መረራ ከደርግ እስር የዛሬውን መረራ አገኙ፡፡ ‹‹እስር ቤት ሰውና እንስሳ ተቀራራቢ መሆናቸውን የተረዳውበት ቦታ ነው›› ለሚሉት መረራ የእስር ቤት መንፈስ ሰባሪነት ቢታያቸውም፤ ነገር ግን ስለእስራቸው ሁኔታ እየተቆጩ ሲናገሩ ብዙም አይሰሙም፡፡

ከደርግ የሰባት ዓመታት እስር ከተፈቱ ከሰላሳ አንድ ዓመታት በኋላ መረራ በድጋሚ ደርግን በተካው ኢሕአዴግ ታስረዋል፡፡ ሕገ መንግስቱ እንዲከበር ቀን ከሌት የሰሩ-የተናገሩት መረራ ‹‹ሕገ መንግስታዊ ስርዓቱን ለመናድ በመሞከር›› በሚል ክስ ቀርቦባቸው በድጋሚ ወደ እስር ተልከዋል፡፡ ‹‹ፅንፍ ይዘን እርስ በርሳችን መበላላቱ የትም አያደርሰንም››፤ ‹‹የእኔ ትውልድ የተሳሳተውን ስህተት መድገም የለብንም›› እያሉ ጠዋት ማታ የሚዘምሩት መረራ፤ ‹‹በቢሊዮን የሚቆጠር ንብረት ለመውደሙ ተጠያቂ ነህ›› ተብለው በእስር ይገኛሉ፡፡ ከትናንት እስከዛሬ በመብት ረገድ በአገሪቱ ውስጥ በመሰረታዊነት የተቀየረ ነገር ላለመኖሩ ከመረራ በላይ ማሳያ የለም፡፡

ከዶናልድ ሌቭን አምስት አስቆጭ የ50 ዓመታት እድሎች (five missed chances) ጋር በተመሳሳይ መረራ የአሁኗን ኢትዮጵያ ለመረዳት በተለያዩ ጽሁፎቻቸው መቶ ሃምሳ ዓመታትን ወደኋላ ተጎዘው ማየት ይመርጣሉ፡፡ መረራ ያለፉት መቶ ሃምሳ ዓመታት አገሪቱን ከማጠናከርና ሁሉም ዜጎች እኩል ዜግነት ተሰምቷቸው እንዳይኖሩ ያደረጉ አምስቱ ታላቅ ኪሳራዎች (the five grand failures) ነበሩ ይላሉ፡፡ ከቴዎድሮስ እስከ ምኒልክ፣ ከምኒልክ እስከ ጣሊያን የማይጨው ሽንፈት፣ ከጣልያን ወረራ ማግስት እስከ የዘውዳዊው አገዛዝ ማብቃት፣ የወታደራዊው መንግስት ዘመን እንዲሁም ኢሕአዴግ ስልጣን ከያዘበት ጊዜ ጀምሮ እስከአሁን ያሉትን አምስት የዘመናት ክፋዮች በተለያዩ የራሳቸው ምክንያቶች ለአገሪቱ መዳከም እና ለዜጎች ተስፋ ማጣት መሰረት ናቸው፤ ሁሉንም የአገሪቱን ልጆች ከማቀፍ (inclusiveness) ይልቅ፤ አንዱን አቅፎ ሌላውን የሚገፉ ሁነው አልፈዋል፤ አሁንም ቀጥለዋል ባይ ናቸው፡፡ ስርዓቶችን ለመተቸት የማይቸኩሉት መረራ ከነዚህ አምስት ውድቀቶች በሦስቱ በግል ደረጃ ታስረው ተሰቃይተዋል፡፡ አሁንም በእስር ቤት ከሺዎች የአምስተኛው ውድቀት ሰለባዎች ጋር የጎልማሳ እድሜያቸውን እየገፉ ነው፡፡

ሦስቱ መረራዎች: ምሁር፣ ፖለቲከኛ፣ አራማጅ

የምሑራን ፖለቲከኛነት (Intellectual Politician) ብዙ አወዛግቧል፤ እያወዛገበም ነው፡፡ ‹‹ምሁራን የፖለቲካ ተሳታፊዎች መሆን የለባቸውም›› የሚለውን ሃሳብ በዋናነት የሚያራግቡት አካላት ከስኬታማነታቸው ጋር በተያያዘ ትችታቸውን ያቀርባሉ፡፡ ምሁራን ሃሳባቸው ውስብስብ (complex) አድርገው ስለሚያቀርቡት ፖለቲካ ከሚፈልገው ከብዝሃው (irrational actors) ጋር በሚያግባባ ቋንቋ መነጋገር አይችሉም፤ መልዕክታቸውንም በሚገባ ማስተላለፍ አይችሉም፡፡ በዚህ ሁኔታ ደግሞ ስኬታማ የፖለቲካ ሕይወት አይኖራቸውም የሚለው የመጀመሪያው ነው፡፡ ትችቱ ብዙ እውነታ ቢኖረውም እንደ መረራ ያሉት ላይ ሲደርስ ውሃ የማያነሳ ሁኖ እናገኘዋለን፡፡ ‹‹አካዳሚውንም ፖለቲካውንም በሚዛናዊነት ለማስኬድ ሞክሬያለሁ›› የሚሉት መራራ በግብራቸው ሲመዘኑ ይህ አባባላቸው እጅግ እውነት እንደሆነ መረዳት ይቻላል፡፡ እርሳቸው ‹መለስተኛ ጦርነት› በሚሉት የኢሕአዴግ የምርጫ ወቅት እንደ ሰለጠነው የዴሞክራሲ አገራት ምርጫ የምርጫ ክልላቸውን በአራት አቅጣጫ እየዞሩ ሕዝብ የሚቀሰቅሱ ፖለቲከኛ፤ በምርጫ ክርክር ወቅት እንደ ምሁር እነሮበርት ዳሃልን እየጠቀሱ – እንደ ፖለቲከኛ ሰፊው መራጭ ሕዝብ በሚገባው ለዘኛ ቋንቋ (witty) እየተናገሩ መራጭ የሚጠሩ ምሁር-ፖለቲከኛ፤ አባላት ታሰሩ በተባሉ ቁጥር እንደ አራማጅ (activist) ሰልፍና ዘመቻ የሚመሩ ሰው ናቸው መረራ፡፡

‹‹በአጼው ጊዜ ድንጋይ ከሚወረውሩ ተማሪዎች አንዱ ነበርኩ›› የሚሉት መረራ አሁን ጎልማሳ ምሁር እስከሆኑበት ጊዜ ድረስ መሬት ላይ ስራ ከመስራት ውጭ መናገሩ ብቻ ለውጥ የለውም በማለት እስከታች ወርደው መቀስቀስ ማደራጀትን በዋና ግብነት ይዘው የኖሩት:: አምስቱ የኢሕአዴግ መዋቅሮች (the five-tiers of government) ማለትም፡ ፌደራል መንግስት፣ የክልል መንግስታት፣ ዞኖች፣ ወረዳዎችና እንዲሁም ቀበሌዎችን በቻሉት መጠን እንዴት ሰብሮ መግባት እንደሚቻል እንደፖለቲከኛ ሲወጥኑ እንደ አራማጅ መሬት ወርደው ሲለፉ፣ እንዲሁም እንደ ምሁር ሲጽፉ ሲናገሩ ኑረዋል–መረራ።

ኢሕአዴግ የመረራን አንድም ሶስትምነትን አልወደደውም፡፡ ለዚህም ይመስላል መረራ አንድ ነገር በተናገሩ ቁጥር ትችትና ስላቅ የሚያዘወትረው መንግስታዊው አዲስ ዘመን ጋዜጣ በተለያየ ጊዜ ምሁርነታቸው ላይ ‹‹የሻዕቢያው ባለሟል ዶክተር››፤ ‹‹ዘርጣጩ ዶክተር››፤ ‹‹ጥገኛው ዶክተር››፤ ‹‹ፊደላዊ ምሁር›› እና የመሳሰሉትን ስድብና ስላቅ ሲያወርድባቸው የሚታየው፡፡ ሌላው ቀርቶ በልፋታቸው ያገኙትን የዶክተርነት ማዕረግ እንኳን በሹማምንቱ የሚፃፉት ጽሁፎች ‹ዶክተር› የሚለውን ማዕረጋቸውን በተጠራጣሪነት በትምዕርተ-ጥቅስ ውስጥ ነው የሚጠቀሙት፡፡ በሳል (seasoned) ፖለቲከኝነታቸውን በማጣጣል ‹‹ፖለቲከኛው ኮሜዲያን››፣ ‹‹የዶክተሩን ዘፈን አንድና አንድ ብቻ ነው — ሥልጣን›› የመሳሰሉትን በማለትም የመንግስት አካላት ይዘባበቱባቸዋል፡፡

ፕሌቶ ምሁርና ፈላስፋን በለየበት መልኩ መረራ ምሁር ነው:: ምሁር እውቀቱን ለጥቅም የሚገለገል ነው ነበር የፕሌቶ የምሁር ትርጉም ከፈላስፋ አንፃር ሲቀመጥ፡፡ በሌላ አነጋገር መረራ ከምቹ የምሁር ዳተኞች (Ivory-tower Intellectuals) በተለየ መልኩ የተማሩትን እንደ ምሁር የሚያስተምሩ፣ ያወቁትን ‹ይህች መከረኛ አገራችን› የሚሏትን አገር ለማሻሻል የሚጠቀሙ እንዲሁም እንደ አራማጅ እውቀታቸውን መሬት ወርደው ለመተገበር የሚዘምቱ ናቸው፡፡ የመረራ የግማሽ ምዕተ ኣመታት ሁሉን አቀፍ ተሞክሮን አይተን ‹ዓላማቸው ስልጣን ብቻ ነው›፣ ‹ምሁርነታቸው ፊደላዊ ነው› … እያለ የሚተችን ስርዓት ከመታዘብ ባለፈ ምን ማለት እንደሚቻል ግራ አጋቢ ነው፡፡

ሦስቱ የመረራ ትዝብቶች: የፌደራል ሥርዓት፣ የብዝሃ-ፓርቲ ዴሞክራሲ፣ የነፃ ገበያ ሥርዓት

ከአርባ ዓመታት በላይ የኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካን በንቃት እንደተከታተሉት መረራ የአሁኑን አሳሪያቸውን ኢሕአዴግን በሚገባ የሚያውቀው ሌላ ሰው የለም ማለት ግነት አይሆንም፡፡ መረራ ኢሕአዴግን እንዲሁ በጭፍን አልጠሉትም፡፡ ቀርበው አይተው ምን ይዞ-ምን ያስፈፅማል የሚለውን ገምግመው ነው የኢሕአዴግ ተቃውሞ-ትዝብታቸውን በተለያዩ መንገዶች የሚያቀርቡት፡፡

ኢሕአዴግን መቃወም እንዴት እንደጀመሩ ሲጠየቁ ሰከን ብለው ‹‹ጫካ እያሉ እደግፋቸው ነበር›› የሚሉት መረራ ሐሳባቸውን ሲያብራሩም ‹‹[ኢሕአዴግ ስልጣን በያዘበት ወቅት የገባው] ቃል ኪዳን ጥሩ ነበር። የብሔረሰቦችን እኩልነት እናመጣለን። ዴሞክራሲያዊ ስርዓት እናመጣለን። የእዝ ኢኮኖሚን አስወግደን በተሻለ መንገድ የገበያ ስርዓት እንድንመራ እናደርጋለን ያሏቸው ቃል ኪዳኖች [ሁሉ] በጣም ጥሩ ነበሩ›› በማለት ነው፡፡ ነገር ግን ይህ ተስፋቸው ለመጨለም ብዙም ጊዜ አልፈጀትም፡፡ በኢሕአዴግ ተከፍተው ተቃውሟቸውን ስለጀመሩበት ሁኔታ ሲናገሩ ‹‹ከኢሕአዴግ ጋር የተለያየነው ‹ከጁላዩ ኮንፈረንስ› በዃላ ነው›› ምክንያቱም ‹‹የጁላዩ ኮንፈረንስ የሚባለውም የኢሕአዴግ ሰርግ ነበር›› ይላሉ፡፡፡፡ ‹የጁላዩ ቲያትር› እያሉ በተደጋጋሚ የሚጠሩት የሽግግር መንግስቱ ጉባኤ ኢሕአዴግ ካለፉት አስከፊ ስርዓቶች የማይሻል መሆኑን ያመላከታቸው እንደሆነ ይገልፃሉ፡፡ ከዚህም ተነስተው ‹‹ከዚህ በኋላ ኢሕአዴግ የትም አይደርስም የሚል መደምደሚያ ላይ የደረስኩት ለዚህ ነው›› ይላሉ፡፡

ኢሕአዴግ የሚመራውን ስርዓት ለመታገል ወስነው ከጓዶቻቸው ጋር የኦሮሞ ብሔራዊ ኮንግረስን (ኦብኮ) ሲመሰርቱ ኢሕአዴግ የአምስት ዓመታት ዕድሜ አስቆጥሮ የነበረ ሲሆን የፌደራል ስርዓትና በይዘቱ ክፉ የማይባል ሕገ-መንግስት አፅድቆ ነበር፡፡ ‹‹ኢሕአዴግ በመጀመሪያዎቹ ዓመታት በሕዝብ ልብ ውስጥ ገብቶ ነበር ብለው ያምናሉ?›› ተብለው ሲጠየቁ መረራ ገላጭ በሆነ መልኩ ‹‹ተንደርድሮ ነበር ባይ ነኝ›› ይላሉ፡፡ ተንደርድሮ ሕዝብ ልብ ውስጥ ከመግባት ይልቅ ግን በሒደት እንደታዘብነው የሕዝብ ልብን የሚወጋ ስርዓት መሆኑ ነው የመረራ ተስፋን ያጨለመው፡፡

ያወጣውን ሕግ የማይኖረው ኢህአዴግ ከሕዝብ ጋር ለመጣላት ረጅም ጊዜ እንዳልወሰደበት የሚያትቱት መረራ በተለይም ግን በሦስት ጉዳዮች ላይ ኢሕአዴግ የተነሳበትን ዓላማ ስቶ እንደወደቀ ይገልፃሉ፡ የፌደራል ስርዓት ፣ የብዝሃ-ፓርቲ ስርዓት፣ የነፃ ገበያ ስርዓት፡፡ ለመረራ ኢሕአዴግ የፌደራል ስርዓትን በሞግዚት አስተዳደር፤ የብዝሃ-ፓርቲ ዴሞክራሲን በይስሙላ የዴሞክራሲ ስርዓት እንዲሁም የነፃ ገበያ ስርዓትን በመንግስታዊ ካፒታሊዝም ተክቶ ከሦሰት ያጣ የምርጫ አምባገነን (electoral authoritarianism) ሥርዓት ሁኗል፡፡ ለዛም ነው መረራ ከ20 ዓመታት በፊት የኢሕአዴግን በሕግና በመርህ አልገዛም ባይነት ተመልክተው ‹‹የኢሕአዴግን ልብ እግዚአብሔርም አላወቀውም ሳይንስም አልደረሰበትም›› በማለት የሥርዓቱን መርህ አልባ አይገመቴነት (unpredictability) የገለፁት፡፡

ኢሕአዴግ በየዘመናቱ ተለዋዋጭ፤ ስልጣኑን እስከ አስጠበቀለት ድረስ ምንም ከማድረግ የማይመለስ ሥርዓት ነው ባይ ናቸው መረራ፡፡ ኢሕአዴግን ሦስት አስርት ሊደፍን ጫፍ ላይ በደረሰው የሥልጣን ዘመኑ መመዘን የሚመርጡት መረራ ‹‹ኢሕአዴግ …›› ይላሉ ‹‹ኢሕአዴግ እስከ ምርጫ 97 ድረስ ‹‹ፈሪሃ እግዚአብሔር›› እንኳን ባይኖረው ‹‹ፈሪሃ ፈረንጅ›› ነበረው፣ ነውር የሚባልም ነገር ትንሽ ነበረው፡፡ ከ[97] በኋላ ግን ነውር ተወ›› ባይ ናቸው፡፡ አክለውም ከምርጫ 97 በኋላ ያለው ኢሕአዴግ የተነሳባቸውን ቀልብ የሚስቡ መርሆች ብቻ የተወ ሳይሆን በዓለም ላይ ብዙም ያልተለመዱ አዳዲስ የአፈናን ዘዴዎችን ይዞ የመጣ ሥርዓት ነው ባይ ናቸው፡፡ መረራ በፃፏቸው የተለያዩ የምርምር ሥራዎች ላይ ‹‹የኢሕአዴግ ፈጠራ›› (the EPRDF novelty) በማለት የሚጠሯቸው ዓለም ላይ ብዙም ያልተለመዱ የአገዛዝ ዘዴዎችን ይተነትናሉ፡፡

ከዚህም በመነሳት ኢሕአዴግ የፌደራል ሥርዓቱን ወደ የሞግዚት አገዛዝነት የቀየረው ባልተለመደ ሁኔታ ሕዝባዊ ዴሞክራሲያዊ ፓርቲዎችን (በእንግሊዝኛው People’s Democratic Organizations (PDOs) ከማዕከል ሆኖ በመፍጠር ክልሎችን በቁጥጥር ስር አድርጎ የተዘረጋው የፌደራል ሥርዓት የሞግዚት አስተዳደር እንዲሆን በማድረግ ነው ባይ ናቸው፡፡ የብዝሃ-ፓርቲ ዴሞክራሲያዊ ሥርዓትን ደግሞ የምዕራቡን ዓለም ሊበራል ዴሞክራሲ መርሆዎች ወረቀት ላይ ተቀብያለሁ በማለት ከምስራቁ ዓለም አብዮታዊ ዴሞክራሲ እየማለ የትም አገር ባልተለመደ ሁኔታ እሳትና ውሃን አዳቅሎ ለመራመድ ሲሞክር የአገሪቱን ዴሞክራሲ የይስሙላ አድርጎታል ባይ ናቸው መረራ፡፡ መረራ ሦስተኛው የኢሕአዴግ ፈጠራ የሚሉት የነፃ ገበያ ሥርዓትን ተጠቅሞ ኢኮኖሚውን እንደፈለጉ ለሚጋልቡ የፓርቲ ስሪት ነጋዴዎች አስረክቦ ካፒታሊዝምን የሚዘመር፤ ግን የእዝ ኢኮኖሚ የሚተገብር ቢሮክራሲ መፍጠሩን ነው፡፡ ኢሕአዴግ እነዚህን ድቅል ባህሪያቱን መተውን የሚጠራጠሩት መረራ፤ እነዚህን ባህሪዎች የያዘ ስርዓት ደግሞ አገሪቱንና ሕዝቧን ዘላቂ ሰላምና ዴሞክራሲ ያመጣላታል ብለው አያምኑም፡፡

ሁሌም ቢሆን ‹‹ኢሕአዴግ ዳኛም ተጫዋችም ነው›› የሚሉት መረራ፤ ሥርዓቱ በቃሉ የማይውል መሆኑን ሲገልፁ ‹‹እግዚአብሔር ከሰማይ ወርዶ ለሕዝቡ ‹‹ኢሕአዴግን እመን›› ብሎ ቢናገር እንኳ ሕዝቡ የሚያምን አይመስለኝም›› የሚል ብይን ይሰጣሉ፡፡ ከመታሰራቸው ከጥቂት ሳምንታት በፊት መንግስታዊው አዲስ ዘመን ጋዜጣ ‹‹በውጭ አገር ያሉ ፖለቲከኞች ይሄን ይሄን ብለዋል›› ምን ይላሉ በሚል ለትንኮሳ በጠየቃቸው ወቅት የሚታገሉትን አካል በሚገባ የሚያውቁት መረራ «አንድ ሰው […] ኢትዮጵያ ትበታተናለች ስላለ ኢትዮጵያ አትበታተንም። ኢትዮጵያ ከተበተነች ኃላፊነቱ በዋናነት ደግሞ የኢሕአዴግ ነው» በማለት ለገዥው ሥርዓት ተጠያቂነትን አዙረው መስጠትን ያውቁበታል መረራ፡፡ ‹‹ለቲያትር የሚሰለጥኑ›› የሚሏቸውን የኢሕአዴግ ካድሬዎችም ሆነ ራሱ ኢሕአዴግን ሲተቹ ዘልቆ በሚያቃጥል ቋንቋ ነው፡፡ ፓርቲያቸው በመሬት ባለቤትነት ጉዳይ ያለውን አቋም አስመልክቶ ‹‹መሬት በሕዝቡና በመንግሥት ይተዳደር ማለታችሁ ከኢህአዴግ ጋር ያመሳስላችኋል ማለት ነው?›› ተብለው ሲጠየቁ እድል የማያባክኑት መረራ በፍጥነት ‹‹ይህ ቢሆንም ኢህአዴግ ግን መሬትን ለካድሬዎች ነው ያደረገው›› ብለው ነገሮችን ቶሎ ወደ ኢሕአዴግ ሥርዓት ይገፉታል፡፡ ይህን የመረራን አይበገሬ የረጅም ዘመን ተቃውሞ ለማጣጣል በሚመስል መልኩ የገዥው ስርዓት የተለያዩ ድምፆች ‹ምላሳቸው ወጌሻ ያስፈልገዋል›፣ ‹ያገኙትን ቃላት በመመለጠፍ የሚታወቁትና ያልተገራ ምላስ ባለቤት›፣ ‹ዘርጣጩ ዶክተር› እና የመሳሰሉትን ተራ ስድቦች በመንግስታዊ ሚዲያዎች ሲያዘንቡባቸው ይታያል፡፡

ኢሕአዴግ ደርግን ማስወገዱን በመልካም የሚወስዱት መረራ ‹‹ቢያንስ ቢያንስ ግን ደርግን ስንታገል ለነበርነው ኃይሎች ደርግን ማስወገዳቸው በየትኛውም ሚዛን ትልቅ ድል ነው›› ይላሉ፡፡ ‹‹[ነገር] ግን ደርግ የሰራውን ስህተት በቪዲዮ እያየ እሱኑ መድገሙ ትልቅ ወንጀል ነው። ይህን ስህተት ካላረመ [ኢሕአዴግ] ከደርግ የተሻለ የታሪክ ስፍራ ይኖረዋል የሚል ግምት ለመስጠት ያስቸግራል›› በማለት ኢሕአዴግን ይበይኑታል፡፡ የኢትዮጵያን ያለፉት አርባ ዓመታት የፖለቲካ ታሪክ ለሚከታተል ሰው ከዚህ የመረራ ፍርድ የተሻለ ፍትሃዊ ፍርድ ለመፍረድ ያስቸግራል፡፡

መራራ የሚማፀኗቸው ሦስት አይነት ልኂቃን

በአንድ አገር ውስጥ ለሚፈጠረው በጎም ሆነ መጥፎ ነገር እንደ አገሪቱ ልኂቃን (elites) ወሳኝ ሚና የሚጫወት የሕብረተሰብ ክፍል እንደሌለ መረራ አበክረው የሚናገሩ-የሚፅፉበት ርዕሰ-ጉዳይ ነው፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ ገዥውን ስርዓት ከመንቀፍ-መውቀሳቸው ባለፈ በአገሪቱ እጣ ፋንታ ላይ ወሳኝ ሚና ይጫወታሉ/እየተጫወቱ ነው ብለው የሚያምኗቸውን የሦሰት ዘውግ ልኂቃንን አገሪቱ ለገባችበት ማጥ ተጠያቂ ያደርጋሉ፡፡

‹‹እውነት እንነጋገር ከተባለ›› በማለት የሚጀምሩት መረራ በመጀመሪያ ‹‹የትግራይ ልኂቃን … የሚባሉት፤ ሰማይ ምድር ገብተው [አሁን የያዙትን ስልጣን] ለመጠበቅ እንደሚንቀሳቀሱ ይታወቃል፡፡ እግዚአብሔር ይወቀው እንጂ ለዛሬው እሱ ነው ዋናው ስራቸው›› የሚሉት መረራ የትግራይ ልኂቃን አሁን ያላቸውን የበላይነት ላለማሰነጠቅ ግብግብ ውስጥ እንደሆኑ ይገልጻሉ፡፡ አስከትለውም ‹‹የኦሮሞ ልኂቃን የሚባሉት አሁንም ቢሆን ብዙ ቦታ ኢትዮጵያ የምትባለውን መስማት አይፈልጉም፡፡ ኢትዮጵያ የምትባለውን በሀገር ደረጃ ለውጦ ለሁላችንም የምትሆን ኢትዮጵያን ለመፍጠር ሲንቀሳቀሱ አይታዩም›› በማለት ‹‹የኦሮሞ ልኂቃን በአገሪቱ ሁኔታ ላይ አኩርፈው እሰከመቼ ይዘልቃሉ;›› በሚል ይጠይቃሉ፡፡ መረራ በልኂቃኑ ላይ ያላቸውን ትችስ ሲያሰልሱም ‹‹የአማራ ልኂቃን የሚባሉት ደግሞ ‹‹ኢትዮጵያን የፈጠርኩ እኔ ነኝ›› በሚል አይነት፤ ከዚያም፤ ከላይም፤ ከታችም፤ ከዚህም፤ ከሁሉም ቦታ ‹‹እኛ የፈጠርናት ኢትዮጵያ ልትጠፋብን ነው›› ወደሚል፤ አንዳንድ ጊዜም ‹‹የኢትዮጵያዊነት ሠርተፍኬት ሰጪና ከልካይ እኔ ነኝ›› ብሎ፤ ራሱን ሰይሞ ማዶ ቆሟል›› በማለት ‹‹የአማራ ልኂቃን ‹አገሪቱ የእኛ ናት ብለው› እስከመቼ ነው የሚቀጥሉት?›› ብለው ይጠይቃሉ፡፡

የአገሪቱን ውጣ ውረድ የበዛበት ታሪክ ከሰፊው ሕዝብ አኗኗር ይልቅ በየዘመኑ የሕዝብ ወኪል ነን ብለው በወጡ ልኂቃን መነጽር ለሚመለከቱት መረራ የነዚህ ሦስት ልኂቃን እሰጥ አገባ የሁሌም ጭንቀታቸው ነው፡፡ ‹‹በግልፅ ቋንቋ …›› ይላሉ መረራ ሐሳባቸውን ሲያጠናክሩ፤ ‹‹በግልፅ ቋንቋ የትግራይ ልኂቃን ስልጣኑን የሙጥኝ ካሉ፣ የአማራ ልሂቃን ‹ትናንትን እመልሳለሁ› የሚሉ ከሆነ፣ እንዲሁም የኦሮሞ ልኂቃን ‹ከኢትዮጵያ እገነጠላለሁ› እያሉ የሚቀጥሉ ከሆነ ለልጆቻችን ስቃይን ነው የምናወርሳቸው›› በማለት መጭው ዘመን የነዚህ ሦስት ዘውግ ልኂቃን ግንኙነት ላይ የሚመሰረት እንደሆነ አጽንኦት ይሰጣሉ፡፡ የአገሪቱ የቅርብ ዓመታት የታሪክ ዕዳም የነዚህ ልኂቃን ቁርሾ እንደሆነ ይናገራሉ መረራ፡ ‹‹[በእኔ እምነት] ኢትዮጵያ አስቸጋሪ ችግር ውስጥ የገባችው […] ከሁሉም በላይ በእነዚህ ሦስቱ የትግራይ፣ የአማራና የኦሮሞ ሊኂቃን በሚፈጥሩት ፍጭትና ግጭት ነው፡፡ አገሪቷን ወደሌላ አቅጣጫ እንጂ የጋራ አቅጣጫን ወደምንገፋበት አላመጣንም፡፡ ላለፉት 40 ዓመታት በእሱ ላይ ነው የኖርነው […] [በዚህም ምክንያት] ስለወደፊቷም ኢትዮጵያ የጋራ አመለካከት ለመያዝና መፍትሔውም ላይ አንድ መሆን አልቻለንም፡፡››

መረራ ያላቸውን ተስፋ ከነዚህ ተፎካካሪ (competing) ልኂቃን ውጭ ይመስላል፡፡ ለዛም ነው ‹‹በእውነት ለመናገር የደቡብ ሊኂቃን ላይ ብዙ ችግር አላይባቸውም›› የሚሉት፡፡ የኢትዮጵያ ልኂቃን የፖለቲካ አሰላለፍ በትግራይ ልኂቃን የበላይ ነን (hegemonic) ባይነት፣ በአማራ ልኂቃና ትናንት ናፋቂነት (nostalgic) እንዲሁም በኦሮሞ ልኂቃን እገነጠላለሁ (secessionist) ባይነት ምክንያት መታለፍ ያለበትን ወንዝ መሻገር ባለመቻሉ ወንዙ ከጊዜ ወደጊዜ እየሞላ መሻገር የማይቻል እንዳይሆን የመረራ ስጋት ነው፡፡

መረራ መፍትሔ ነው ብለው ለረጅም ጊዜያት የያዙት ‹የመሀል መንገድ ፖለቲካም› የሚቀዳው ከዚህ ለረጅም ጊዜ አብሯቸው ካለ ፍራቻ እና ስጋት ይመስላል፡፡ ለዛም ነው ሁሉም ወደ መሀል መጥቶ ‹‹ … አንዱ ሌላውን ለመግዛት ያለውን ሕልም ካላቆመ ዴሞክራሲያዊ ሥርዓትን በኢትዮጵያ ለመገንባት የሚደረገው ትግል ከሕልምነት የሚያልፍ አይመስለኝም›› የሚሉት፡፡ የሦስቱ ዘውጎች ልኂቃን ወደመሃል መጥተው በሚያኗኑሯቸው ጉዳዮች ላይ ተስማምተው ካልቀጠሉ ያገሪቱ ሕልውና ያሳስባቸዋል፡፡ እርሳቸው በሚወክሉት የኦሮሞ ሕዝብ መሃል ባሉ ተፎካካሪ ኃይላት መካከል ሳይቀር የመሃል መንገድ ጠፍቷል በማለት ፓርቲያቸውን እንደመሰረቱት ነው የሚገልጹት፡፡

ይሄን የኦሮሞ ፖለቲካ ውስጥ ያላቸውን የመሃል መንገድነት ሲያስረዱም ‹‹የኦሮሞ ፖለቲካ ውስጥም ሁለት ጫፎች አሉ፡፡ እኛ እዚህ መሐል ነን፡፡ መሐሉን እንዲሰፋ ደግሞ እየገፋን ነን›› በማለት ነው፡፡ ይሄም ማለት ‹‹በአንድ በኩል የመንግስት የገዥው ፓርቲ አሽከር ነው የምንለው ወይም የኦሮሞ ህዝብ አብዛኛው የሚለው ‹‹ኦህዴድ›› አለ፡፡ ጠዋትና ማታ የሚያስበው ኢህአዴግን ማገልገልና ኢህአዴግ ሥልጣን ላይ እንዴት ይቆይ እንጂ የኦሮሞ ጥያቄ የሚባለውን፤ መጀመሪያውንም ያንን ይዞ መፈጠሩን እርግጠኛ አይደለሁም፡፡ አሁንም ቢሆን ያንን እየገፋ አይደለም›› በማለት ገዥውን ኦሕዴድ አምርረው የሚተቹት መረራ፤ ‹‹በሌላ በኩል ደግሞ …›› ይላሉ፤ ‹‹በሌላ በኩል ደግሞ የኦሮሞ ብሔርተኞች ኦነግን ጨምሮ ሌሎች አሉ፡፡ እነሱ ደግሞ ‹‹ኢትዮጵያዊ›› የሚባለውን የጋራ የፖለቲካ አጀንዳ መያዝ አቅቷቸዋል፡፡ ያንን የጋራ የፖለቲካ አጀንዳ ይዞ ለኦሮሞውም፣ ለተቀረውም የኢትዮጵያ ህዝብ የሚሻል የጋራ አጀንዳ መግፋትም አልተሳካላቸውም›› ብለው ይተቻሉ፡፡ ሐሳባቸውን የሚያሳርጉት ‹‹እኛ (ፓርቲያቸውን ማለታቸው ነው) እዚህ መሐል ነው ያለነው›› በማለት ነው፡፡

መረራ ‹‹አመቻማች የመሃል መንገድ መርጣችሁ በሰላማዊ ትግል ስም ለገዥው ሥርዓት ቅቡልነት ከመፍጠር ያለፈ ምንም እየሰራችሁ አይደለም›› ሲባሉ፤ ‹‹በርግጥ አንዳንዶች ሠላማዊ ትግል እያላችሁ፤ ሠላማዊ እንቅልፍ ላይ ናችሁ›› ይሉናል በማለት በራሳቸው ላይ እየቀለዱ፤ ነገር ግን ‹‹የፅንፍ ፖለቲካ የአገሪቱ ያለፈው ግማሽ ምዕተ ዓመት እዳ ሁኖ ቆይቷል ከዛ መውጣት መጀመር አለብን›› እያሉ ከመናገር አይቦዝኑም፡፡ የሚማፀኗቸው የሦስት ዘውግ የፖለቲካ ልኂቃን ተስማምተው ማየት የዘወትር ሕልማቸው ነው፡፡ እውን መሆኑ ግን እራሳቸውን ጨምሮ ለብዙዎች አስጨናቂ ጉዳይ ነው፡፡

የመረራ ሦስት መፍትሔዎች: ዴሞክራሲ፣ ‹ሃቅ›፣ ትብብር

ይሔን ጽሑፍ ስጽፍ መረራ በሕይወት ዘመናቸው የፃፏቸውን ከአስር በላይ ‹አካዳሚያዊ› ፅሁፎች፤ አራቱን መጽሐፎቻቸውን እንዲሁም ባለፉት ሐያ ዓመታት ውስጥ በተለያዩ ሁኔታዎች የሰጧቸውን ከሐያ በላይ ቃለ-ምልልሶች ለማየት ሞክሬያለሁ፡፡ መረራ የፃፏው አካዳሚያዊ ፅሁፎችም ሆኑ በተለያዩ መድረኮች ያቀረቧቸው ጽሑፎች ከሶስቱ ውጭ (ሁለት የኦሮሞ የፖለቲካ ኃይሎችን የተመለከቱ እንዲሁም አንድ የጉራጌ ባሕላዊ ተቋማትን የተመለከተ) ሁሉም ጽሑፎቻቸው ባንድም ሆነ በሌላ መንገድ የሚያተኩሩት በዴሞክራሲ፣ ምርጫ እና የሽግግር ጉዳዩች ላይ ነው፡፡ በጽሑፎቻቸው እና በቃለ-ምልልሶቻቸው አንድ መረዳት የሚቻለው ነገር የመረራን እውናዊነት (Realist) ነው፡፡ በጽሑፎቻቸው የሚያዘወትሯት ‘modus operandi’ የተባለች የላቲን ሐረግ የሰውየውን የትኩረት አቅጣጫ አመላካች ነች፡፡ የፖለቲካ ጉዳዮች ላይ ከመብሰልሰል ይልቅ ለተግባራዊ መፍትሔ የሚተጉ ናቸው፡፡ ምሁሩ መረራ ፖለቲከኛው መረራን ለተግባራዊነት የሚረዱ ናቸው፡፡

የአገሪቱን የፖለቲካ ሒደት ስለማስተካከል በማሰብ መረራ በሐሳብ ደረጃ በሥራዎቻቸው ሁሉ የሚያተኩሩባቸው ሦስት መሠረታዊ ነጥቦችን ነው፡፡ ዴሞክራሲ፣ ሃቅ፣ እና ትብብር፡፡ ይህን ሐሳባቸውን በአንድ አንቀጽ ሲጠቀልሉት ‹‹ፖለቲካ በአጠቃላይና የአገራችን ፖለቲካ በተለይ እስከገባኝ ድረስ፣ የአገራችን ፖለቲካ ከገባበት ቅርቃር ውስጥ የሚወጣው ወይ እኛ ኢሕአዴግን ከገባበት ቅርቃር ለማስወጣት የሚያስችል የተባበረ ትግል ውስጥ በቁርጠኝነትና በሐቅ መግባት አለብን፣ ወይ የኢሕአዴግ መሪዎች ከንጉሡም፣ ከደርግም ተምረው ከሌሎች ኃይሎች ጋር ብሔራዊ መግባባት ፈጥረው አገሪቷንና ሕዝቦቿን ለመታደግ የፖለቲካ ቁርጠኝነት በማሳየት እውነተኛ ዴሞክራሲን ሲያሰፍኑ ነው›› በማለት ነው፡፡

መረራ ዴሞክራሲ ሲሉ በዋናነት ኢሕአዴግ በወረቀት ቃል ገብቶ በተግባር የወደቀበትን በአገሪቱ የዴሞክራሲ መሠረት መዘርጋትን ነው፡፡ የቱንም ያክል የኢሕአዴግ መሪዎችና ሰነዶች ዴሞክራሲ ዴሞክራሲ ቢሉም በተግባር ግን ፈላጭ ቆራጭ እስከሆኑ ድረስ የራሳቸውን ወንበር አስጠብቀው ለራሳቸው ልጆች የተዳከመችና ኢ-ዴሞክራሲያዊ አገር አስረክበው ነው የሚያልፉት ባይ ናቸው መረራ፡፡ ሌላው መረራ ዴሞክራሲን በመፍትሔነት የሚያቀርቡለት አካል የተቃውሞ ኃይሉን ነው፡፡ የተቃውሞ ኃይሉ ሊለወጡ ከማይችሉ/ከሚያስቸግሩ የልዩነት ወንዞች ተሻግሮ ዴሞክራሲን በሐሳብ ደረጃ እንደ ግብ ቢይዝ ልዩነቶችን ማጥበብና ገዥውን ሥርዓት መግፋት አይሳነውም ይላሉ፡፡

ሌላው የመረራ የመፍትሄ ሐሳብ ደግሞ ፖለቲካ ከሚተገበርበት አግባብ አኳያ የሚያቀርቡት ሐሳብ ነው፡፡ መረራ በተለያዩ ሥራዎቻችውና ቃለምልልሶቻቸው ‹ሃቅ› የምትል ቃል ሲጠቀሙ ይስተዋላል፡፡ ሐቀኛ ዴሞክራሲ፣ ሐቀኛ ፌደራሊዝም፣ ሐቀኛ ምርጫ፣ ሐቀኛ ተቃዋሚ … የመሳሰሉት፡፡ አንድ ሐሳብ ምን መልካም መስሎ ቢታይ ስለእውነት በእውነት የማይተገበር ከሆነና ሕዝብን ለማታለያነት የሚውል ከሆነ በረጅም ጊዜ ሂደት እጅግ አደገኛ መዘዝ ይዞ ይመጣል ባይ ናቸው መረራ፡፡ አዘውትረው ‹‹ዩጎስላቪያ የተበተነቸው እኮ በውሸት ፌደራሊዝም እና በውሽት ዴሞክራሲ ጦስ ነው›› ለሚሉት መረራ ፖለቲካ ያለሐቅ በጣም አደገኛ እንደሆነ ከመናገር ተቆጥበው አያውቁም፡፡

በሦስተኝነት መረራ እንደመፍትሔ በተደጋጋሚ ሲጠቅሱ የሚታዩት የመተባበርን ጠቀሜታ ነው፡፡ ‹‹ለእኔ ርዕዮተዓለም ያን ያህል አያስጨንቀኝም›› ለሚሉት መረራ በሚያግባቡ መሠረታዊ ጉዳዮች ላይ ከማንም ጋር አብረው የመስራት አስፈላጊነት ለነገ የሚባል ጉዳይ አይደለም፡፡ ለዚህ ጥሩ ማሳያ ይሆን ዘንድ ከተመሰረተ አስር ዓመት ገደማ ያስቆጠረውን የእርሳቸው ፓርቲ በአሁኑ ወቅት አባል የሆነበትን የኢትዮጵያ ፌደራላዊ ዴሚክራሲያዊ አንድነት መድረክን (መድረክ) እንደምሳሌ ያነሳሉ፡፡ ‹‹መድረክ ውስጥ….›› ይላሉ መረራ መድረክ ውስጥ […] ‹ሶሻል ዴሞክራት ነን› የሚሉ አሉ፤ ‹ሊበራል ዴሞክራት ነን› የሚሉ አሉ፡፡ ‹ሁሉንም አንቀበልም› የምንለው[ም] አለን››፡፡ በመሆኑም ለመተባበር በሁሉም ጉዳዮች ላይ የግድ ተመሳሳይ አስተሳሰቦች እንዲኖሩ አይጠበቅም ባይ ናቸው፡፡

ይሄን ሐሳባቸውን ሲያጠናክሩም ‹‹የሁላችንም የፖለቲካ መንግሥተ ሰማያት ሁላችንንም በእኩልነት የምታስተናግድ ዴሞክራሲያዊት ኢትዮጵያን ለመፍጠር ለነገ የምንለው መሆን የለበትም። የጋራ የታሪክ ፈተናችን ለማለፍና የጋራ ሕልማችን ዕውን ለማድረግ የሰከነ፣ በአቅም ላይ የተመሠረተ፣ የተደራጀ እና የተባበረ ትግል ውስጥ በሐቅ፣ በፍጥነትና በቁርጠኝነት መግባት አለብን›› ይላሉ፡፡ እንዴትና የት የሚለው ጥያቄ አብሮ በመሥራት የሚመለሱ ጉዳዩች እንደሆኑ ያስራዳሉ መረራ፡፡

መራራ ጉዲና ከአርባ ዓመታት ለላቀ ጊዜ የኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካ ውስጥ ቀጥተኛ ተሳታፊ ሆነው እንደ ምሁር፣ ፖለቲከኛ እና አራማጅ እርሳቸው እንደሚሉት ‹በገባቸው መጠን› መጭው ዘመን ጥሩ እንዲሆን ለፍተዋል፡፡ መረራ ስለመታሰር በተደጋጋሚ ሲጠየቁ ‹‹ኢሕአዴግ እኔን አስሮ ምን ይጠቀማል›› እያሉ በቀልድ፤ ‹‹እኔ ብታሰር የታገልኩለት ሕዝብ ትግሉን ያስቀጥለዋል›› በማለት በቁም ነገር ይመልሳሉ፡፡ አሁን በሠላማዊ ትግል የቆረቡት መረራ ከብር 1.4 ቢሊዮን በላይ ንብረት መውደምና የሰው ህይወት መጥፋት ምክንያት የሆነ ነውጥ አስነስተዋል ተብለው ታስረው ከባድ ፍርድ ከፊታቸው ይጠብቃቸዋል፡፡ በርግጥም እርሳቸው አርአያ ሆነዋቸው በአስቸጋሪ ሁኔታ ውስጥ የሰለጠነ የፖለቲካ ሒደትን ገና በለጋ ዕድሜያቸው ለመምራት ለተቀላቀሉት እንደ አፍሪካ ከበደ ላሉ የነገ የአገሪቱ ተስፋዎች የመረራ እስር ልብ የሚሰብር ነው፡፡ መረራ በአንድ ወቅት ከፖለቲካውስ ራስዎን የሚያገሉት መቼ ነው? ተብለው ሲጠየቁም የሰጡት ምላሽ እንደ አፍሪካ አይነት ወጣቶችን ለማን ትቼ? በሚል መልኩ ‹‹አሁንም ቢሆንም ከፖለቲካው ጡረታ ብወጣ አልጠላም፡፡ ነገር ግን እኔን አምነው እዚህ ትግል ውስጥ የገቡ ሰዎች በተለይ ወጣቶች አሉ፡፡ አንዳንዶቹም እስር ቤት ነው ያሉት፡፡ እኔ ኑሮ አልተመቸኝም ብዬ ጥያቸው አልሄድም›› ነበር ያሉት፡፡ አሁን መረራ ‹‹ኑሮ አልተመቸኝም ብዬ ጥያቸው አልሄድም›› በማለት ቃል የገቡላቸውን ወጣቶች በእስር ቤት ተቀላቅለዋል፡፡ ነገር ግን በአይበገሬነት ሰላምንና ለውጥን ለሚሰብኩትና ለሚኖሩት መረራ እስራቸው የአካል ነው፡፡ ሐሳባቸውማ ዛሬ ብቻ ሳይሆን ነገም አገሪቱን የሚያክማት መድሃኒት ነው፡፡

***

ለዚህ ጽሑፍ በቀጥታና በተዘዋዋሪ የተጠቀምኳቸው መጽኃፍት፣ አካዳሚያዊ ጽሑፎች፣ እንዲሁም ቃለ-መጠይቆች እንደ ጊዜ ቅደም ተከተላቸው የሚከተሉት ናቸው:

መጽኃፍት

1. Ethiopia Competing Ethnic Nationalisms and the Quest for Democracy (2003)

2. Ethiopia: from Autocracy to Revolutionary Democracy, 1960s-2011, (2011)

3. የኢትዮጵያ ፖለቲካ ምስቅልቅል ጉዞና የሕይወቴ ትዝታዎች: ከኢትዮጵያ ተማሪዎች ንቅናቄ እስከ ኢሕአዴግ (2005)

4. የኢትዮጵያ የታሪክ ፈተናዎች እና የሚጋጬ ሕልሞች (2008)

‹አካዳሚያዊ› የምርምር ስራዎች

1. The Ethiopian Revolution 1974-1987: A Transformation from an Aristocratic to a Totalitarian Autocracy, Book Review (1994)

2. The Elite and the Quest for Peace, Democracy, and Development in Ethiopia: Lessons to be learnt (2001)

3. Ethiopia: a Transition without Democratization (2003)

4. The Problematic of Democratizing a Multi-cultural Society: The Ethiopian Experience (2007)

5. Ethnicity, Democratisation, and Decentralization in Ethiopia: The Case of Oromia (2007)

6. The Ethiopian State and the Future of the Oromos: ‘Self-Rule vs. Shared-Rule’ (2008)

7. Civil Society and Transition Politics in Ethiopia (2009)

8. Party Politics, Political Polarization and the Future of Ethiopian Democracy (2010)

9. Traditional Institutions of the Gurage people (2010)

10. Elections and democratization in Ethiopia, 1991–2010 (2011)

11. የኢትዮጵያ የታሪክ ፈተናዎች፤ አልታረቅ ያሉ ሕልሞችና የኢሕአዴግ ቆርጦ-ቀጥል ፖለቲካ (2016)

ቃለ-መጠይቆች

1. ‹‹ቃለ – መጠይቅ ከአቶ መረራ ጉዲና ጋር›› – ጦቢያ ፤ መስከረም 1991

2. ‹‹ብሄራዊ እርቅን መሸሽ እንደ መንግስቱ ኃይለማርያም ለመጥፋት ካልሆነ በቀር …›› – ኢትኦጵ፤ ጥር 1992

3. “Hiber Radio Exclusive Interview with Dr. Merera Gudina” – Hiber Radio, September 2013

4. ‹‹Dr. Merera Gudina talks about his new book “Ethiopia’s chaotic political journey and my memoirs: from the Ethiopian students’ movement up to EPRDF›› – SBS Amharic, November 2013

5. ‹‹ከፕ/ር መረራ ጉዲና ከኢትዮ-ቻናል ጋር ያደረጉት ቃለ ምልልስ›› – ኢትዮ-ቻናል መጋቢት 2005

6. ‹‹ዜጐች የተሰደዱት መንግስት የሥራ ዕድል ባለመፍጠሩ ነው›› – አዲስ አድማስ፤ ሕዳር 2006

7. ‹‹ሥልጣን ወይም ሞት’ ተብሎ የሚገፋበት መንገድ ማንንም አልጠቀመም›› – ዕንቁ መፅሔት፤ ሕዳር 2006

8. ‹‹ግድቡ አይሳካም፣ ተቃዋሚዎች ከግብጽ ሊተባበሩ ይችላሉ›› – አዲስ ዘመን፤ ሐምሌ 2006

9. ‹‹ከመድረክ መሪ ዶ/ር መረራ ጉዲና ጋር የተደረገ ቃለ-መጠይቅ›› – ቪኦኤ፤ ሐምሌ 2006

10. ‹‹ኢሳት ጠመንጃ የለውም፣ የትጥቅ ትግልም እያካሄደ አይደለም›› – አዲስ አድማስ፤ ሕዳር 2007

11. ‹‹ከኦሮሚያ አንፃር፤ ከኢሕዴአግ ደርግ ይሻላል›› – ሰንደቅ፤ ታሕሳስ 2007

12. ‹‹ለ6 ወር ያስተማርኩበት ደሞዝ አልተከፈለኝም›› – አዲስ አድማስ፤ ጥር 2007

13. ‹‹ወጣቱ ትውልድ ፖለቲካውን መነገጃ እንዳያደርገው ሥጋት አለኝ›› – ሪፖርተር፤ ሚያዚያ 2007

14. ‹‹እድገት እየተባለ የሚለፈለፈው ካድሬ በሚሠራው ቤትና በሚያስገነባው ሕንጻ ቁጥር ነው፤ ሕዝቡ አንድ ክረምትም ያለችግር ማለፍ አልቻለም›› – የቀለም ቀንድ፤ ጥቅምት 2008

15. ‹‹በበኩሌ ከዚህ በኋላ ለማየት የምጓጓው ኦሕዴድ የሚባለው ድርጅት ከኦሮሞ ሕዝብ ጋር እንዴት እንደሚኖር ነው›› – የቀለም ቀንድ፤ ታሕሳስ 2008

16. ‹‹ከሁሉ በፊት ይህን ሁሉ አገራዊ ምስቅልቅል የፈጠሩት አካላት ተጠያቂ መሆን አለባቸው›› – የቀለም ቀንድ፤ መጋቢት 2008

17. ‹‹ዶ/ር መረራ ጉዲና፤ ስለ አዲሱ መጽሐፋቸው “የኢትዮጵያ የታሪክ ፈተናዎች እና የሚጋጩ ሕልሞች” ይናገራሉ›› – ኤስቢኤስ አምሃሪክ፤ ሚያዚያ 2008

18. ‹‹ኢሳት በዚህ ሳምንት፡ ዶር መረራ ጉዲና›› – ኢሳት፤ ሐምሌ 2008

19. “EthioTube አፈርሳታ – Oromo Federalist Congress Chairman Dr. Merera Gudina” – EthioTube, August 2008

20. «ለተቃዋሚ ፓርቲዎች መዳከም ምክንያቱ የኢህአዴግ ስውር እጆች ናቸው» – አዲስ ዘመን፤ ሕዳር 2009

Teddy Afro: ‘Because of our government, our country is divided’

The Guardian

The musician’s latest album, with songs hailing Ethiopia’s glorious past, is the fastest-selling record in the country’s history. But his political views have made him enemies at home

Teddy Afro … somewhat unintentionally, a flag-waver for the Ethiopian opposition. Photograph: Mulugeta Ayene/AP

Tewodros Kassahun’s manager meets me on a quiet suburban road inside a gated compound. With their neoclassical mansions, manicured lawns and white picket fences, compounds such as this are a rarity in Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, and this one is as grand as it gets. Still, I’m underwhelmed as we turn in to the driveway of the house, which, by contrast with its neighbours, is relatively modest. This is, after all, the home of the biggest star in Ethiopian musical history: Teddy Afro.

He greets me in the living room, padding around in a tracksuit and socks. The house is in a bit of a mess, and he apologises – they’re clearing up the remains of an album launch party over the weekend. He and his manager are in high spirits. Three days earlier, they released Ethiopia, his fifth studio album; it had a record $650,000 recording budget, was the fastest-selling record in the country’s history, and topped Billboard’s world albums chart. Teddy’s relief is palpable – the release was beset by delays – as he settles into a chair and begins outlining his philosophy. “Art is closer to magic than logic,” he says, beaming cheerfully.

It is difficult to overstate Teddy Afro’s popularity and importance in Ethiopia today. “His level of celebrity is simply unprecedented,” says Heruy Arefe-Aine, the organiser of the country’s Ethiopian Music festival.

Teddy Afro – Ethiopia

Ethiopia has long had a remarkably unified pop music culture – a national canon heard on buses and in bars across the country – but even in this context, Teddy stands out. He is the only artist of his generation to have risen to the level of Mahmoud Ahmed and Aster Aweke, the two greats of post-1960 Ethiopian pop, but at home at least he has comfortably outrun them both. Moreover, his significance reaches well beyond national borders: his popularity among the 2-million-strong Ethiopian diaspora, especially in the US, is unparalleled. The Ethio-Canadian R&B singer the Weeknd has cited him as a major influence.

But he is also a controversial figure. In 2008, he was imprisoned for a hit-and-run offence, which he has always denied he was responsible for. Many regard the jail sentence as a politically motivated move by Ethiopia’s authoritarian government, and a reaction to his 2005 album Yasteseryal, released in the year of a hotly disputed election. The lead single, whose video featured archive footage of the former emperor Haile Selassie and the bloody revolution that followed his reign, was interpreted by many as an indictment of everything that followed the emperor’s demise, including the current regime.

He became, perhaps somewhat unintentionally, a flag-waver for the Ethiopian opposition, a reputation he has maintained. The song is still, for all practical purposes, banned.

He makes for an unlikely political radical, and indeed his manager makes clear from the outset that politics is off the agenda. But he is nonetheless keen to explain the new album’s message. Lyrics are everything in Ethiopian music, and his – rich in idiom, allusion and wordplay – have excited his fans ever since he broke on to the scene in the early 00s. He argues that the country, under a state of emergency after violent anti-government protests last year, is slipping backwards. “We used to be a model for Africa,” he says, “but, because of our government, our country is divided.” The album is a call for unity and the rehabilitation of Ethiopia’s glorious past. “This younger generation is in a dilemma about their history,” he continues. “I feel a responsibility to teach them about the good things from their history. They should be proud of their achievements.”

Teddy Afro on stage in New York. Photograph: Jack Vartoogian/Getty Images

Glancing references to the government aside, this is fairly inoffensive stuff. But in fact the politics are tricky. At the centre of the album is the story of Emperor Tewodros II, a 19th-century warrior-king whose rule is often seen as marking the beginning of modern Ethiopian history. “He fought and died for this country,” says Teddy, gesturing at a painting of the monarch on the living room wall, and pointing out that they share the same name. But the problem for many of Teddy’s critics is that his is a fiercely disputed view of that history. To many modern Ethiopians, Tewodros represents feudalism and imperialism. To some, his rule was characterised by the conquest and subjugation of other ethnic groups. But to his supporters, he united the country and resisted European colonialism.

Teddy’s previous album, Tikur Sew, released in 2012, did something similar for an even more controversial figure, Emperor Menelik II, hero of the Battle of Adwa in 1896, which saw the defeat of the invading Italians, but also the man responsible for the conquest of much of modern-day Ethiopia. Teddy, like Tewodros, Menelik and Selassie, hails from the Amhara region; his critics see him as peddling a sort of nostalgic Amhara nationalism. His living room also contains an original sword belonging to Menelik, the old imperial flag, and a photograph of Selassie. “The younger generation need to know what our fathers did for this country,” he says. “It is clear that Menelik fought for Ethiopia, for unity, and against colonialism.”

Teddy Afro – Semberé

Although the album Ethiopia contains an eclectic mix of influences (the second track, Semberé, could be by Manu Chao), and lyrics in several of Ethiopia’s 88 languages, Teddy remains in many ways an Amhara musician. He recalls sitting as a young child on the knee of Hirut Bekele, a popular Amhara vocalist from the 60s and 70s, as she performed in small clubs in Addis Ababa. “She was like a queen,” he remembers. His early work was reggae-infused but in his recent albums he has returned to a more recognisably Ethiopian sound, though funkier and insistently catchy. Traditional vibrato vocals, the itchy triplets of traditional Amharan rhythms, highly polished synth-heavy production: all this is the language of modern Ethiopian pop.

The latter has often been a source of frustration to Ethiopia’s musical old guard, who lament the lack of instrumentation among the younger generation, although Teddy points out that a live band plays on the album’s final track. He is a child of two musicians – his mother was a dancer who toured the world, his father a songwriter for a police orchestra in 50s Addis Ababa – but he came of age in the 80s under the military regime known as the Derg, when live music all but disappeared as a result of a strict overnight curfew that lasted for 16 years. Like most pop stars of his generation who began their career amid the heady post-Derg optimism of the late-90s club circuit, Teddy sings and plays keyboard.

It is perhaps for this reason that Teddy is almost unheard of beyond Ethiopia and its diaspora. Despite its distinctly Ethiopian vernacular, his music is still pop: cosmopolitan and perfect for dancing to. Musicians such as Mahmoud Ahmed or Mulatu Astatke (the father of Ethiopian jazz) appeal to western audiences drawn to a more exotic sound, complete with live bands. Teddy doesn’t offer that. But in any case, his focus is closer to home. “This is a dangerous time,” he says. “My priority now is Ethiopia.”

WHY IS EPRDF APPEASING THE OROMO EXTREMIST ELITES?

By Yared Gizaw

The Oromo extremist elites have repeatedly told us that their vision for Ethiopia is as follows:

Option 1: Recreate/restructure Ethiopia under the domination of Oromos’ in which:

– Oromo language and culture to be dominant with “Wake Fatah” as dominant religion.

– New name and flag for Ethiopia

– Addis Ababa (Finfine) the center for Oromia

– Every Ethiopian to be under their dominion

Option 2: Free/independent Oromia (including Finfine) after disintegrating Ethiopia -this is a fall back scenario, if they could not achieve Option 1

As they know very well that Option 2 is impractical and not feasible, they are working very hard to realize Option 1 in an incremental manner. More than 20 years ago, they secured the “Oromo land” with Latin alphabet written language and they have been busy to create a unique non-Ethiopian identity for themselves. Their next move is to strengthen their foothold on Addis Ababa, wait for an opportune time when the Federal Government is destabilized/weak, and declare their dominance. They have been asking for our arms and legs so far but they will not be satisfied until they fully swallowed all of our body. Actually, the Oromo extremist elites are never satisfied until they “Oromize” the whole Ethiopia.

The Oromo extremist elites have the following myths and false concepts in their mindset, which have shaped their vision of their future role/position in Ethiopia.

They perceive themselves as a majority ethnic group( that is not true they need at least 51% share among the Ethiopian population to be majority even in that case it is unconstitutional to claim dominance )
They contribute higher share to the GDP( that is true but they are also getting the biggest share of the Federal Government Budget support and Foreign Direct Investment and the Oromo population have been enjoying better economic dividend than other regions as most of investments and job creation are around Addis Ababa). However, as industrialization and economic development expands throughout the country and natural resources(such as oil and gas) start to be exploited in various regions, the GDP variation among the regions will narrow
They claim that they have been marginalized economically, socially and politically( that may have been true until Emperor Haile Selassie time but after that it is not true, actually EPRDF allowed them to have their own territory ( 1st time in their history, under unified Oromia) and they were allowed to freely develop their language, culture and religious practices over the last 26 years(including the recent registration of Irrecha annual anniversary by UNESCO as intangible asset)
They feel that they have higher negotiation power than other regions on the Federal government and they should use that to arm-twist the Federal government to achieve their Option 1 vision (They have the myth that Ethiopia cannot survive without Oromia or if Oromos’ revolt Ethiopia will be paralyzed). However, the fact is that even though they have tried to paralyze Ethiopia over the last two years, they have failed and they shall continue fail.

They have the victim mindset claiming that Emperor Menelik had killed huge number of Oromos’ who resisted his expansion agenda, however they tend to forget the atrocities committed by their nomadic ancestors on the original citizens of today Oromia, some 400 and 500 years ago. It is recorded in history that the nomadic Oromos’ expanded their ‘territories to the northern part of Ethiopia through war and domination but failed to fully dominate it ( actually they were ultimately swallowed and melted into the Ethiopian time tested and sophisticated governance system). It looks the Oromo extremist elites are again trying to fulfill the unrealized dream of their ancestors to dominate Ethiopia.
For those Ethiopians who may feel my views, I reflected above on Oromo extremists are too exaggerated or not true, below is the front picture of the Oromia Cultural Center in Addis Ababa, which was inaugurated about two years ago, as proof. See how the widely spoken and constitutionally recognized working language of Ethiopia is written intentionally below both the Oromifa and English and with very small letters. This is the reflection of what they intend to do to anything non-Oromia Ethiopian assets and heritages. For your information if you write Amharic name of your business over/prior to the Oromifa name in the Oromia State, you will be immediately forced to change it. Why did the Addis Ababa city administration and the Federal Government have given blind eye to this gross violation of the constitution on the naming of the Oromo Cultural Center? Could it be to appease the Oromo extremist elites?

As a conclusion I strongly oppose most of the Council of Ministers approved draft legislation on Oromos rights on Addis Ababa, as summarized below

Provision in Draft Law

Reason for Rejection/Opposing

Culture, language and arts:● To ensure that Oromo residents in the city can benefit from the “special interest” provisions stipulated in this proclamation, Afaan Oromo shall serve as a working language of the City Administration.

● To reflect Oromo people’s identity and to commemorate historical events relevant to the region’s people, the original names of public squares, roads and neighborhoods.

● The city administration will facilitate conditions for the construction and promotion of theaters, entertainment venues, and cultural and art centers that reflect Oromo culture and history in the city.

● The city administration will work with Oromia state authorities to make sure that museums in the city carrybooks and other artifacts on Oromo history and culture.

● With relation to Oromia state, the city’s previous Oromo name, Finfine, will have equal legal recognition as the name Addis Ababa. The particulars on the usage of the two names will be determined by a regulation

Land provision:

● The Oromia state will be given land on which it can erect buildings for government activities and public services free of lease payment.

Job opportunity:

● Youth residents of Oromia towns and rural areas surrounding Addis Ababa will be made beneficiaries of the job opportunities in the city.

● Youth residents of Oromia towns and rural areas surrounding Addis Ababa will be made beneficiaries of the job opportunities that arise from water development, waste disposal, recycling, basin development, transport services and the likes.

● Health care: Oromo residents of towns and rural areas surrounding Addis Ababa shall be entitled to access health care services at government hospitals and medical facilities like any resident of the city.

Provision of Market places:

● The city administration shall establish market places, covering the cost, where farmers’ cooperatives from Oromia can sell their produce.

Condominium housing provision:

● Officials and employees of Oromia will be included, having a certain quota, in the lottery drawings of government-owned condominium housing in Addis Ababa.

Compensation and permanent rehabilitation

● Farmers in the city administration, who are displaced due to development activities, shall be entitled to compensation adequate for “permanent rehabilitation”.

– What if other citizens in Addis Ababa ask to be served in their languages, we need to minimize issues that divide us rather than expand them. What about the rights of non-Oromo speaking but majority population in Adama (Nathret), Bishoftu (Debre Zeit) etc?

– It is clear that this provision has no any historical merit, as there were no squares, roads and other sites in Addis Ababa during Minilik time. This decision will further bring division and conflict.

– We have only 20% of the population in Addis Ababa as Oromo. What about the history, heritage and culture of the remaining 80% population who have worked hard to bring Addis Ababa where it is today?

– Same as above

– Using two legal names for Addis Ababa (Addis Ababa is a unifying melting pot for all Ethiopians and an anchor for the Federal government) will be confusing and no need to give it two names/brands. Imposed change of name/brand will be the source of perpetual conflict. If required, Oromia state could issue a law to recognize Finfine equal to Addis Ababa in it own territory.

– As of today, Oromia has no constitutional right to use Addis Ababa as its base.

– Unless the Ethiopian government is unknowingly facilitating the creation of an apartheid system, job opportunities anywhere in Ethiopia should be available equally to all Ethiopians based on competency. This provision is against the Constitution.

– Does that mean Ethiopians form other than Addis Ababa & its surrounding will be discriminated?

– What about Farmers Cooperatives from other parts of Ethiopia (Southern Ethiopia, Gojjam, Afar, Debre Berhan etc). This will create an apartheid system where one Ethnic group having undue comparative/competitive advantage. A potential for conflict!

– Officials in Oromia have been acquiring and selling lands in different parts of Oromia. This is an additional gateway for corruption.(The practice have been an Oromia official from Bishoftu/Dukem will swap land with an Oromo official in Shashemene or Adama and through that arrangement so many of the Oromia officials are now investors).

Which countries will have the largest economies by 2100?

Robert Parker, CEO at Holborn Assets (1999-present)

Answered Apr 29

This is the political map of Europe in 1800

and the world map

And here is Europe in 1919:

and the world map:

Something changed in 100 years?

Well, the entire world was changed. A lot of monarchies and empires fell and a lot of new countries appeared – Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, etc in Europe. And many new countries around the world, including the US in its form! Big changes in 100 years, right?

Now, here is Europe today:

and the world:

Big changes in 100 years?

Well, yes – you can see the European Union, there is no USSR, many new countries appeared in Africa and Middle East, etc.

Now, you can see big changes in every 100 years – do you know what the situation would be in the next century?

I guess no one knows.

Maybe there will be no country by 2100, but a one world government?

World government – Wikipedia

Meet the world’s most powerful doctor: Bill Gates

By Politico

Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates | Stephen Voss/REDUX

Some billionaires are satisfied with buying themselves an island. Bill Gates got a United Nations health agency in Geneva.

Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom. This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda, one that could grow as the U.S. and the U.K. threaten to cut funding if the agency doesn’t make a better investment case.

The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s. Rather than focusing on strengthening health care in poor countries — that would help, in their view, to contain future outbreaks like the Ebola epidemic — the agency spends a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers, such as the effort to eradicate polio.

Concerns about the software billionaire’s sway — roughly a quarter of WHO’s budget goes toward polio eradication — has led to an effort to rein him in. But he remains a force to be reckoned with, as WHO prepares to elect one of three finalists to lead the organization.

“All of the candidates are going to have to ally with him in some way,” said Sophie Harman, associate professor of international politics at Queen Mary University of London. “You can’t ignore him.”

Evidence of Gates’ unprecedented influence abounds in ways subtle and showy.

“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20” — Geneva-based NGO representative

Already a decade ago, when Gates started throwing money into malaria eradication, top officials — including the chief of the WHO’s malaria program — raised concerns that the foundation was distorting research priorities. “The term often used was ‘monopolistic philanthropy’, the idea that Gates was taking his approach to computers and applying it to the Gates Foundation,” said a source close to the WHO board.

The billionaire was the first private individual to keynote WHO’s general assembly of member countries, and academics have coined a term for his sway in global health: the Bill Chill. Few people dare to openly criticize what he does. Most of 16 people interviewed on the topic would only do so on the condition of anonymity.

“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20,” a Geneva-based NGO representative said, calling Gates one of the most influential men in global health.

The member country delegates POLITICO spoke to did not voice particular concern over Gates’ influence and were confident he is well intentioned.

However, his sway has NGOs and academics worried. Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation’s money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO’s role in setting standards and shaping health policies.

Others simply fear the U.N. body relies too much on Gates’ money, and that the entrepreneur could one day change his mind and move it elsewhere.

Gates and his foundation team have heard the criticism, but they are convinced that the impact of their work and money is positive.

The opening of the World Health Assembly in 2016 in Geneva | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

“It’s always a fair question to ask whether a large philanthropy has a disproportionate influence,” said Bryan Callahan, deputy director for executive engagement at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. “When it comes to the priorities that the foundation has identified and that we choose to invest in, we hope that we are helping to create an enabling environment,” he said.

Steve Landry, the Gates Foundation’s director of multilateral partnerships, said the foundation provides “significant funds” to program teams that then decide how to use them best.

Strings attached

The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000, as countries have grown reluctant to put more of their own money into the agency, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis.

Dues paid by member states now account for less than a quarter of WHO’s $4.5 billion biennial budget. The rest comes from what governments, Gates, other foundations and companies volunteer to chip in. Since these funds are usually earmarked for specific projects or diseases, WHO can’t freely decide how to use them.

Polio eradication is by far WHO’s best-funded program, with at least $6 billion allocated to it between 2013 and 2019, in great part because around 60 percent of the Gates Foundation’s contributions are earmarked for the cause. Gates wants tangible results, and wiping out a crippling disease like polio would be one.

But the focus on polio has effectively left WHO begging for funding for other programs, particularly to prop up poor countries’ health systems before the next epidemic hits.

The Ebola crisis of 2014, which killed 11,000 people in West Africa, was a particularly bruising experience for WHO. An emergency program drawn up in the wake of the epidemic has so far received just around 60 percent of the $485 million needed for 2016-2017.

Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.

Outgoing WHO boss Margaret Chan has also had to scale back her attempt to get countries to increase mandatory contributions for the first time in a decade. Chan initially hoped for a 10 percent hike, but WHO will end up asking for just 3 percent more this month after some countries objected.

That makes the Gates Foundation’s input all the more important. “They come with a checkbook, and with some smart ideas,” said Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Most of the Gates Foundation’s influence in the WHO is very discreet, she said, adding that it can also decide to take initiatives outside of the organization, as it did with GAVI, which helps the poorest countries buy vaccines in bulk at a discount, or with a recently launched Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an alliance to develop vaccines for emerging infectious diseases.

In January, 30 health advocacy groups penned an open letter to WHO’s executive board protesting against making the Gates Foundation an official partner of the agency because its revenue comes from investments in companies that are at odds with public health goals, such as Coca-Cola.

The Gates Foundation says it operates as a separate entity from the trust, thanks to a “strict firewall,” and that it remains independent from its investments, which strictly exclude the tobacco, alcohol or arms industries.

Fencing off big money

Worries about the growing role of private money led member nations to agree, after several years of negotiations, on a new policy governing how it engages with entities such as private foundations, companies and NGOs. It is currently being rolled out across the agency.

Despite the criticism, WHO’s board granted the Gates Foundation “official relations” status. In practice, several sources said it does not change much to the relations WHO already had with the foundation.

Gaudenz Silberschmidt, WHO’s director for partnerships, said the new status is based on a three-year collaboration plan: “That means we have a solid planning and we and member states know what we are doing with them.”

The U.N. body also changed four years ago the way its budget is approved, to ensure member countries set its priorities. That means Gates can only put money into projects the 194 members support; the foundation cannot pitch a new one out of the blue and ask WHO to work on it right away just because it is providing the money.

Candidate for the WHO director general position Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

These changes have calmed some criticism of its growing influence over the health body, Silberschmidt and two sources close to the WHO board said.

The foundation also seems to have got the message. Its representatives meet five to six times a year with other major donors to discuss the WHO’s priorities, and how it can support them, Landry said.

Two representatives of major donor countries confirmed the foundation’s envoys had been very cooperative in recent years. “They’re much more inclusive. They bring in other stakeholders, talk to member states to really try to build consensus,” said one delegate.

With the best intentions

Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.

The final three candidates include Sania Nishtar, a cardiologist from Pakistan who has pledged to take the agency “back to its former glory”; David Nabarro, a British physician and former U.N. special envoy for Ebola; and Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who has served as health minister and foreign minister in the Ethiopian government.

“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things” — Geneva-based diplomat

Tedros, who like many in Ethiopia goes by his first name, is supported by the African Union. He has promised to reform the organization to better deal with crises like Ebola and to push for universal access to health care all over the world.

Last year, a French diplomat suggested that Gates also supports Tedros, having funded health programs in his country when he was health minister. Several foundation officials have denied this, saying that the foundation cannot take a position given that it is not a voting member country and thus has to remain neutral.

The new WHO boss will be selected by the member countries who have paid their membership fees on May 23, at an annual meeting in Geneva.

Still, most country representatives who agreed to speak anonymously on the topic said they were not particularly concerned with the Gates Foundation’s influence on WHO.

“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things,” said one Geneva-based diplomat.

Outgoing WHO chief Margaret Chan | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

“As far as I can tell, people are really happy with anyone who is giving money,” said another.

One big unknown is what will happen with the foundation’s money once it meets its target of eradicating polio, which started in the late 1980s and now appears to be nearing its goal. Chan has warned that if the polio money dries up in 2019, the global health body will be on the lookout for even more money.

The Gates Foundation’s Landry said his colleagues were working with WHO and its polio team on a “transition plan” to ensure the programs currently funded by the polio effort don’t run into trouble once the money stops flowing. WHO is due to present a report on it to member countries in May.

“The foundation’s impact on the WHO is enormous,” said Garrett, of the Council on Foreign Relations. “If they weren’t there, if they walked away with their money, the deleterious impact would be profound, and everyone is all too aware of that.”

Why Are Black People Obsessed With The Bible That Was Used To Enslave Them?

By Jean Gasho |Modern Ghana

When I became a born-again Christian in 2008, I started studying the bible word for word. I would spend hours a day reading all commentaries for all the verses I studied.

The more I studied the bible the more I realized that most of the Christians around me did not believe everything that was in the bible. It was either they did not know half of the bible or they knew and chose to ignore. As a person who always thought deeply about things, it was crystal clear to me that half of the bible was very disturbing to the human mind. If today people lived by the bible rules from Genesis to Revelation, they would be deemed mentally unstable, barbaric or even evil.

If a man raped a woman, their punishment was to marry the woman by paying a dowry to the father. It was irrelevant whether the woman loved the man or not. There was no such thing as human rights as we know today. In wars, the Israelites would kill their enemies, including the women and children without mercy, and would take the virgins to be their wives.

Bible character Lot offered his own virgin daughters to be gang-raped by men of Sodom so that the angels of the Lord would be spared. But in the eyes of God, he was a righteous man.

There are a lot of other practices and laws in the bible which today are seen as beyond barbaric. The Christians of today will skip all those disturbing scriptures and cherry pick on the ones which are positive and makes them feel good, both in the New And Old Testament.

One of the biblical scriptures that remain untouched today is SLAVERY. The hard truth is that both in the New and Old Testament, slavery was never condemned by God. The biblical era itself was an era of slavery. Slave masters were told how to buy slaves and how to treat them. In the New Testament, slaves were simply ordered to obey their masters. Jesus Christ himself was mute on the issue of slavery, He never said a word against the practice, which was very common in His day. He could have simply told the slaves of His day to start social movements to fight against the injustices of slavery. Slaves could have started a “Slaves Lives Matter” movement, protesting in the streets, but Jesus Christ never encouraged such.

The new Christians themselves had slaves. In the book of Philemon, the Apostle Paul sent a slave who had escaped back to his Christian master, because it was the “right thing” to do.

When I first became a Christian, I remember writing about the topic of slavery according to what the bible said, and the article was obviously not well received.

Now, this brings me to the black man, the white man, and slavery. Today black people are always looking for answers as to why they are still suffering and why they were enslaved. But the truth is the white men did not introduce slavery to the world. It was there since the beginning of time. In fact in Africa, slavery was rife way before the white men landed there. Black people had black slaves. When the white men got to Africa, they were introduced to the concept of slavery by the black men. It was the black people/black masters who sold their own slaves to white people. Black people were fighting each other, tribe against tribe, enslaving the defeated tribes. The white men simply saw an opportunity and beat the black people at their own game.

The whites had something the blacks did not have, the BIBLE. The good book gave them the authority to overpower the black race. The white men taught the black men the bible, and with scriptures like these, they were justified to enslave. “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Colossians 3:22”

Today the black men still cry that they were enslaved by whites, but will not accept the fact that they played a huge part in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. In no way am I saying the white men were justified in what they did, but I believe the bigger blame is actually with the people who sold their own brethren into slavery. Who is more to blame, the slaves who bought Joseph or his own brothers who sold him into slavery? Black people will never get anywhere unless they stop preaching half-truths about racism, colonization, and slavery. We have to confront our own history and deal with it.

Our forefathers allowed themselves to be indoctrinated by the bible so that they could be enslaved. They were not smart enough to think for themselves at this point. They were even more in numbers than the whites, yet with the bible, they were conned into slavery, in one of the greatest evils ever done to mankind.

If black people are asked to think critically when holding the same bible that enslaved them, they refuse to question whats in the bible as they fear they will be sinning against God.

The white slave masters were bible believing “sincere” Christians. They went to Africa to spread the gospel and saw an opportunity to enslave black people to make their lives better using the very gospel they were spreading.

Today the white man has finished with the bible, in fact they are finished with God. They have removed God from their schools and systems. They are now the masters of atheism. They call the bible an evil uncivilized book. However, they are still reaping the benefits of what the bible gave them, slavery and colonization. They are the most privileged people in the world, and the only reason why they are privileged is because their forefathers used the bible to enslave black people and better their lives, and that is the inheritance of white people.

As for black people, still divided today, still suffering as hell, still experiencing the after-effects of colonization which will probably never end, they will hold and defend the bible till death. The blacks are forever trying so hard to get to where the white man is today, but no matter how the blacks try, they are not able to catch up. Africa seems to be getting worse by the day, black people are going mad with Christianity, some even drinking sewage because their pastor says so. Last year in Nigeria a pastor and his congregation were burnt to death after he poured petrol on himself and the congregation and lit the room on fire saying God would not allow them to burn.

Even though I am a black woman, I fail to understand black people. All I know is there is something seriously wrong with them, and it only comes out when they hold the bible. I do not understand why we are now the main defenders of the religion that was used to enslave us? I do not understand why it is only us who refuse to put the bible down for even 10 minutes just to “think”. I do not understand why we moan about racism, slavery, and oppression when the bible we love so much clearly does not condemn it.

If you want to be where the whites are today, the only solution is to do what the white people do today; which is to question everything and think. Remove the bible from your head for just one hour and question and think. It’s not being demon possessed and it’s not being evil, its called freedom. Unless you will ever get to this place, as black people you will forever be in chains. And it is clear to me that even in 2017, black people are not ready for freedom.

As I finish this article, I leave my readers with only two questions. Why are black people so obsessed with the bible, which is the book that caused their suffering? And why is it that they are the only people who when holding the bible refuse to question anything or think?

This Article first appeared on www.jeangasho.com

What is China’s belt and road initiative?

The many motivations behind Xi Jinping’s key foreign policy

The Economist explains

By J.P. | The Economist

OVER the weekend Xi Jinping welcomed 28 heads of state and government to Beijing for a coming-out party, which continues today, to celebrate the “belt and road” initiative, his most ambitious foreign policy. Launched in 2013 as “one belt, one road”, it involves China underwriting billions of dollars of infrastructure investment in countries along the old Silk Road linking it with Europe. The ambition is immense. China is spending roughly $150bn a year in the 68 countries that have signed up to the scheme. The summit meeting (called a forum) has attracted the largest number of foreign dignitaries to Beijing since the Olympic Games in 2008. Yet few European leaders are showing up. For the most part they have ignored the implications of China’s initiative. What are those implications and is the West right to be sanguine?

The project is the clearest expression so far of Mr Xi’s determination to break with Deng Xiaoping’s dictum to “hide our capabilities and bide our time; never try to take the lead”. The Belt and Road Forum (with its unfortunate acronym, BARF) is the second set-piece event this year at which Mr Xi will lay out China’s claim to global leadership. (The first was a speech against protectionism made at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January). In 2014, Wang Yi, the foreign minister, said the initiative was Mr Xi’s most important foreign policy. Its ultimate aim is to make Eurasia (dominated by China) an economic and trading area to rival the transatlantic one (dominated by America).

Behind this broad strategic imperative lie a plethora of secondary motivations—and it is the number and variety of these that prompts scepticism about the coherence and practicality of the project. By investing in infrastructure, Mr Xi hopes to find a more profitable home for China’s vast foreign-exchange reserves, most of which are in low-interest-bearing American government securities. He also hopes to create new markets for Chinese companies, such as high-speed rail firms, and to export some of his country’s vast excess capacity in cement, steel and other metals. By investing in volatile countries in central Asia, he reckons he can create a more stable neighbourhood for China’s own restive western provinces of Xinjiang and Tibet. And by encouraging more Chinese projects around the South China Sea, the initiative could bolster China’s claims in that area (the “road” in “belt and road” refers to sea lanes).

The trouble is that some of these ambitions contradict others: is a dodgy project in central Asia a better place to invest than American government securities? And with different motivations go conflicting interests. There is infighting between the most important Chinese institutions involved, including the ministry of commerce, the foreign ministry, the planning commission and China’s provinces. To make matters worse, China is finding it hard to identify profitable projects in many belt-and-road countries (Chinese businessmen in central Asia call it “One Road, One Trap”). To cap it all, China is facing a backlash against some of its plans, with elected governments in Sri Lanka and Myanmar repudiating or seeking to renegotiate projects approved by their authoritarian predecessors.

As a result the forum—on the face of it a celebration of the initiative—will in reality find Mr Xi seeking to contain a backlash against it. That may seem to justify Europeans in their decision to stay away. But the suspicion that the project will fail could be misguided. Mr Xi needs the initiative because he has invested so much in it. China needs it because it provides an answer of sorts to some of its economic problems. And Asia needs it because of an unslakeable thirst for infrastructure. The belt and road initiative has plenty of problems but Mr Xi is determined to push ahead with it.

Ethiopia’s Star Singer Teddy Afro Makes Plea for Openness

NYT

Image result for Teddy Afro cd

ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia — Teddy Afro, Ethiopia’s superstar singer, is topping the Billboard world albums chart with “Ethiopia,” which less than two weeks after its release has sold nearly 600,000 copies, a feat no other artist here has achieved.

Known for the political statements he makes in his music, an infectious mix of reggae and Ethiopian pop, the 40-year-old Tewodros Kassahun told The Associated Press that raising political issues should not be a sin.

Open debate “should be encouraged,” he said. “No one can be outside the influence of politics and political decisions.”

Ethiopia is an unlikely place for an outspoken singer to thrive. The government is accused of being heavy-handed on opposing voices.

During a visit this month, U.N. human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein expressed concern about the state of emergency imposed in October after months of deadly anti-government protests demanding wider freedoms. Opposition and human rights groups blame security forces for hundreds of deaths, but the government says they largely used “proportionate” measures.

The human rights chief also criticized Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism laws, saying an “excessively broad” definition of terrorism may be misused against journalists and opposition members.

In “Ethiopia,” the songs highlight the diversity of the country’s 100 million people while encouraging national unity. Pointing to Ethiopia’s formative role in launching the African Union continental body in 1963, Teddy said his country should find more cohesiveness at home.

“A country that tried to bring Africans together is now unable to have a unified force and voice,” he said. “The tendency nowadays here in Ethiopia is to mobilize in ethnic lines, not ideas.”

In his new album, Teddy sings mainly in Amharic but incorporates other local languages, which has been well-received by Ethiopians as a call for national unity.

At the same time, some of his songs have been interpreted as carrying political messages against Ethiopia’s ruling elites, leading some fans to say his outspokenness has made him a target.

In 2008, the singer was sentenced to two years in prison for a hit-and-run manslaughter but was released after 18 months in jail. He said he was never inside the car, and his fans suggested it was a politically motivated harassment by the ruling party. Hundreds of Ethiopians protested outside the court during his trial in the capital, Addis Ababa.

Authorities also have frequently cancelled his concerts without explanation. “We have sustained a lot of damages. This is not right,” he said.

Asked if he has any political ambitions, the singer said: “Let me continue doing what I’m doing now and we will see what the future holds for other things.”

The Economist:The differences between the Catholic and Orthodox churches

The Economist explains

TO A non-Christian, or even to a Christian who prefers to keep doctrine and worship as simple as possible, the Catholic and Orthodox churches can look pretty similar. Both use elaborate ceremonies of ancient origin and have multiple ranks of robed clergy; both claim continuity with the dawn of the Christian era; both have rich theological and scholarly traditions and generally, long institutional memories. Only an apparently tiny difference separates the versions they use of the creed setting out their basic beliefs in a triune God of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Why, then, do the two religious bodies not simply unite? On February 12th Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, the head of the Russian Orthodox church, will meet in Cuba. Though not unprecedented in the last ten centuries such a meeting is nonetheless unusual. Why?

Part of the answer is that precisely because both institutions have long memories, differences which emerged many centuries ago still matter. The formal parting between the Christian West and the Christian East occurred in 1054; to some extent it reflected cultural and geopolitical competition between the Greek-speaking “east Roman” empire, in other words Byzantium, and Latin-speaking western Europe where Roman authority had collapsed in the fifth century, but new centres of power had emerged. Tensions rose in the early 11th century when the Catholic Normans overran Greek-speaking southern Italy and imposed Latin practices on the churches there. The Patriarch of Constantinople retaliated by putting a stop to outposts of Latin-style worship in his home city, and the pope sent a delegation to Constantinople to sort the matter out. The delegation’s leader, Cardinal Humbert, excommunicated the Patriarch; the Patriarch promptly did the same to the visitor.

In the run-up to that final rupture there had been growing differences over the pope’s claim to authority over the whole of Christendom, in contrast with the Orthodox view that all the ancient centres of the Christian world (Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem as well as Rome and Constantinople) were approximately equal in status. The Orthodox took issue with the pope for mandating a version of the creed which in their view amounted to a subtle downgrading of the Holy Spirit. To this theological difference was added a massive geopolitical grievance: in 1204 Latin armies ransacked Constantinople, which was still the Christian world’s greatest centre of commerce and culture and imposed a Latin regime for about six decades. In the Orthodox collective memory, this act of betrayal by fellow Christians weakened the great city and rendered inevitable its conquest by the Muslim Turks in 1453. Having gone their separate ways, the Christian West and Christian East spawned different theological traditions. The West developed the idea of purgatory and of “penal substitution” (the idea that Christ’s self-sacrifice was a necessary payoff to a punitive Father-God). Neither teaching appeals to Orthodox Christians. The East, with a penchant for mixing the intellectual and the mystical, explored the idea that God was both inaccessible to human reason but accessible to the human heart.

To the Orthodox believer, Catholic theology seems excessively categorical and legalistic; to the Catholic mind, Orthodox thinking in its mystical flights can seem vague and ambivalent. In a few hours of set-piece discussion in Havana airport on February 12th, the pope and Patriarch will hardly be able to resolve these centuries-old differences. But at least they may understand each other a little better.

Why Africa? Why Now?

By Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi, Saudigazette

WHY are we now so interested in Africa? Why is Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim Al-Thani visiting Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya and South Africa in less than a year? Why had Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir toured a number of African countries, last year, some of which are relatively small, such as Guinea, Benin, Senegal, Tanzania, the Comoros and Burkina Faso, as well as major nations like Ethiopia, Kenya and South Africa, in addition to African-Arab countries — Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Sudan and Egypt? Why are African leaders visiting Gulf capitals in droves? Why Saudi Arabia and Qatar occupy two observer seats in the African Union? And what does the declaration of Sudan’s foreign minister about a new strategic alliance with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states mean?

These are legitimate questions posed by keen international observers about the Gulf convergence, especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar, with Africa. The two oil-rich countries are investing billions of dollars in under-developed and less-stable markets of the sub-Saharan countries. They seem to be channeling investments in addition to political and commercial partnerships to these promising economies as well as moving to contain Iran’s expansion, culturally, politically and culturally.

The same questions have been raised about China’s interest in Africa for decades, especially when compared to American and Western neglect, with the exception of France and Britain which had past colonial ties with parts of the continent.

Africa, according to Wikipedia, is the world’s second largest and second most populous continent, after Asia, with abundant natural resources. With about 30.2 million km (11.7 million square miles) including adjacent islands, it covers six percent of Earth’s total surface area and 20.4 percent of its total land area. With 1.1 billion people as of 2013, it accounts for about 15 percent of the world’s human population.

The continent, the birthplace of humankind, mostly lacks modern infrastructure, skilled human resources and political, security and financial stability. This may have been partially the result of European exploitation of the continent’s wealth and the enslavement of its population. In return, few countries, like South Africa, Kenya, Tunisia and Sudan, had received substantial developmental investments during colonial era.

Over the last decade, Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and United Arab Emirates, have been heavily investing in African countries, especially in agricultural resources. Sudan is the food basket of the Arab world, Ethiopia is the Nile origin with enormous agricultural and pastoral treasures. Both command capable infrastructure and human resources. Africa is promising market for the Gulf petroleum, petrochemical and industrial products, and a rich supplier of raw materials and agriculture.

Politically and culturally, Africa has been the strategic depth of the Arab world. Its nations are either mostly Muslim or have large Muslim communities devotedly linked to the Arabian Peninsula and the land of Two Holy Mosques. And among us live generations of Africans who have migrated for work, education and Haj.

It is no secret that the Iranian incursion in African countries is aiming for ideological, economic and political hegemony. The coup attempts of the Iranian-backed sects against the elected governments of Nigeria, Somalia and the Comoros are evidence of malicious intentions.

Arabs and Muslims cannot afford to lose Africa. It is part of our world — geographically, historically, socially and culturally. Realizing such importance, King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz toured Africa in the 1960s. His visits to the likes of Mali and Uganda turned these countries away from Israel to join the Islamic nation. Saudi Arabia hosted numerous African leaders since then, and our bilateral relations became much stronger.

The Arab League and GCC should design a common cooperation strategy with the African Union at all levels, for all above reasons. We need cooperation councils, like those we have with the European Union and South America, in addition to bilateral strategic councils and agreements, like what we have between Sudan and the GCC, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

We definitely need to diversify our international cooperation and investments. It is not safe to rely exclusively on traditional partners, allies and markets. The oceans of interests shift, the winds of alliance twist and the globe is too large, hospitable and diversified for us to be any limited.

Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi is a Saudi writer based in Jeddah. He can be reached at kbatarfi@gmail.com. Follow him at Twitter:@kbatarfi

Category: Opinion

አንድም ሦስቱም መረራ

Teddy Afro: ‘Because of our government, our country is divided’

WHY IS EPRDF APPEASING THE OROMO EXTREMIST ELITES?

Which countries will have the largest economies by 2100?

Related QuestionsMore Answers Below

Meet the world’s most powerful doctor: Bill Gates

Strings attached

Fencing off big money

With the best intentions

Why Are Black People Obsessed With The Bible That Was Used To Enslave Them?

What is China’s belt and road initiative?

The Economist explains

Ethiopia’s Star Singer Teddy Afro Makes Plea for Openness

The Economist:The differences between the Catholic and Orthodox churches

Why Africa? Why Now?