An early Christmas wish-list: re-pitching the AFD tent

By Solomon Gebreselassie
May 30, 2006

The areas needing special attention are of procedural and substantive nature. The procedural defects pertain to the manner in which the meeting was convened. The struggle for democracy in Ethiopia over the past 15 years has given us two templates on this score: Template 1 is that of the London Conference of 1990 that culminated in the coronation of TPLF and EPLF and was followed by the July 1991 Addis Abeba Conference where a charter drafted a priori was imposed on the participants, and later on the country at large. Template 2 is that of the formation of the coalition of Ethiopian democratic forces (COEDF), the union of Ethiopian democratic forces (UEDF), and the formation of the coalition for unity and democracy (CUD). Some of the defining features of Template 2 are a mutually agreed agenda, venue, meeting dates and working documents.

Because the political forces behind Template 1, especially TPLF, have chosen a modus operandi of domination, control and exclusion, Ethiopian democratic forces along with the Ethiopian people are still struggling to enshrine democracy and the rule of law in their country. Unfortunately, the formation of AFD belongs in the camp of Template 1. Political entities, such as UEDF, have reported that they were not privy to the preparation of the agenda, working documents and the meeting logistics. This is not a mere procedural concern. In the case of the AFD, it appears the procedural was organically linked with the substantive. Unless political entities consult and jointly deliberate to shape an agenda, how will they trust each other to resolve the outstanding political issues facing the country? Such complex issues as the administrative division of a democratic Ethiopia, and the use of working languages and their scripts await a democratic resolution through compromise, consultation and deliberation. If the framers of AFD start the political enterprise by imposing a secretly prepared document, where is that trust going to come for the big questions?

One substantive issue arising from the statutes the AFD signers ratified is item 8 of Article 1 that states “Actively promote good relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea based on the agreement to be reached between the two sisters”. This is also repeated verbatim in the MOU in the “Tasks” section under “Understanding”. Now, it is an open secret that other than CUD, the other signatories are close allies of the Eritrean government. It is also an open secret that Eritrean independence was achieved in the battlefield, and no political solution has been given to the many issues surrounding it. Given these stark facts, singularly picking out Eritrea for “good relations” at the expense of the traditional and standard foreign relations statement of “having good relations with all countries based on AU and UN conventions” is foolhardy at best and partisan at worst.

Looking at the MOU, one cannot help but notice the conspicuous absence of “unity” from the Preamble whereas the words freedom, justice, liberty and democracy are profusely mentioned. The history of ethnic oppression and suppression of cultural expression in our country cannot be denied. However, it is not too much to ask the secessionist forces in AFD to at least commit themselves in writing to a united democratic Ethiopia where ethnic and national oppression will have no place. That was missing from the AFD documents.

Another wish is the issue of languages. Parties here-to-fore not expressly committed to the democratic unity of Ethiopia on one hand appear to insist on Afaan Oromo to be a working language ( a democratic aspiration though on its own merit), and under the “Understanding’ section of the MOU, #1, it is stated “the parties agree that all Alliance documents shall be prepared in English.” Although English has now been commonly accepted as a medium for technical conferences where Ethiopians and Ethiopianists confer, a European language has never been elevated as a language of preference for “preparing’ any alliance documents”. Again, parties hesitant to commit and contribute to a united democratic Ethiopia are dictating that documents be written in a foreign language when Amharic exists as a working language, and perhaps the issue should have been to include one or more Ethiopian languages as ‘document-preparing languages” rather than conferring that honor to English.

Additionally, under the ‘Understandings” section of the MOU, there is what appears to be a vague reference to the current Ethiopian constitution: “the Alliance shall work to convene an inclusive conference to establish a workable arrangement” (2) and at (3) “the arrangement shall be on the basis of the present framework of the Ethiopian constitution”.

Our most recent history shows that CUD and UEDF were able to defeat the EPRDF at the polls not because of the current constitution, but despite its constraints. However, in the final analysis, we bitterly learned that the institutions arising from this constitution will not let EPRDF lose any election. So, any reference to the current constitution should be prefaced with its undemocratic making and the choking role of the institutions that directly arose from it. On top of this, how can any one adopt this constitution wholesome when it contains controversial articles such as 39 (on secession) and 50 (changing the constitution)?

Some have argued that because AFD is a mere alliance, and not a coalition or union, the current statutes and MOU are harmless. However, this is a spurious distinction as there is no meaningful and established difference between the named types of alliances- they are used interchangeably and there is no hierarchical ranking amongst them.

One hopes the framers of AFD will be amenable to these and similar basic issues citizens raise in the hope of broadening the AFD tent/or reconfiguring a new one so that other parties and civic groups can join without reservation, and that our people can fully support to enhance and advance the democratic struggle in our country. Our synergy must be re-focused on the anti-EPRDF struggle.

The writer can be reached for comments at politicalethicsmoralpolitica@yahoo.com