On optimism, ADF and political realities


Opposition leaders give hugs each other after signing an agreement to work together. Many Ethiopians welcome the formation of AFD with a sigh of relief vis-à-vis the the rule of Meles Zenawi that is fraught with ethnic fragmentation and the grim prospect of an eventual break-up.
I think the supporters of the ADF idea and movement as the harbinger of a new political era in Ethiopia are mainly driven by idealism and optimism that such a seemingly unprecedented collaboration between opposition forces and fronts would bring about a major change in Ethiopian politics and a rosy scenario of cooperation. While such optimism about positive outcomes through a unique Conference in which all of Ethiopia's political problems would be hammered by OLF and CUDP is a promising start, it is very strongly counter-intuitive to believe such a magic solution to Ethiopian political problems would be a political reality. Most people who project optimism and idealism need to counter-balance their uncritical belief and support with political reality.

Idealism aside, politics always has been and remains an iterative game and political actors including political parties and the political leaders always, always, always endeavor to prevail and maximize their respective gains in the game. Only when the game is leading to equilibrium do the political actors enter into the bargaining process. Even bargaining itself is like a haggling and whenever possible involves crafty manipulations of payoffs and punishments as part of the game. That is why politics mostly remains the art of employing and managing conflicts most of the time through bargaining, arm twisting, duping, rewarding, punishing, and occasionally using violence to maximize the gains and advantage of a "we" group against that of the "they" group.

When the bargaining brings some acceptable level of expected gain to parties, equilibrium and continuity of the status quo (the present state of affairs) prevails. When no equilibrium out of the bargaining is arrived at, a political conflict either to keep or to change the status quo ensues. So, a rosy cooperation in politics as tons and tons of writings, analyses and declarations in favor ADF imply may not be easily likely.

First, by its very nature, the thorny and nefarious nature of Ethiopian political problems do not warrant edict of a conference-based final or lasting solution (or solutions). Nevertheless, attempting at least to talk about it, if such intent is really genuine and gradually more inclusive, should be considered a good first step of 1000 miles!

The second problem is the essentially irreconcilable ultimate strategic objectives of the parties to ADF, notably, the OLF and ONLF vis-à-vis the CUDP. A lot has been said about this, but supporters of ADF want to dismiss this issue with out a critical evaluation as much as they urge accepting the ADF with out any critical evaluation of 1) its strategies, 2) seemingly mutually discordant political objectives, and 3) the chosen courses of action, i.e. the conference, as well as many other issues.

Thirdly, what is the nature of the political game each party to ADF intends to play? What are the anticipated short-term and long-term gains they are counting on to maintain equilibrium? Is it the Alliance of apples, oranges, pineapples, etc based on the adage of "the enemy of your enemy is my enemy" or is it something more fundamental based on a change of heart and ideology to really commit to democratically and peacefully solve Ethiopian problems? And then, at what level will any of the actors withdraw cooperation? How are the rules of the game structured and what are are the stakes for actors or groups in the game? What is defined as the status quo in this conference, by whom, and on what part of the status quo would they agree or disagree to change or retain? What are the bargaining powers of each actor/party (what are the issues the parties trying to leverage each other: is it the size of population claimed to be support base or military strength or popular support of political programs etc?) and which group vies to place a greater share in the pie? Finally, how do they envisage importing the grand solutions to the Ethiopian body politic?

The fluid and dynamic intentions of political actors and leaders and the wildly combative nature of political game in Ethiopian politics caution us to be more careful and to critically consider political undertakings that are generally top-down in their approach and implementation. Such political marriages of convenience among vocally irreconcilable groups have been so common in Ethiopia - be it in the heydays of collusions and collisions in the early period of the Derg Military autocracy, or the various phases of duplicities and duplications overnight manufactured PDOs of the TPLF hegemonic ethnocracy . None of them worked into a genuine cooperation. All of them wanted some mode of legitimizing their regime's rule, or impose one's political sophistry and intolerant ideology on everybody, and entrench a system of economic pillage against the Ethiopian population.

The CUDP has started as a popular pan-Ethiopian, multi-national, democratic, peaceful voice that - in spite of lots of shortcomings and inexperience - has waged Ethiopia's First Democratic Wave. Its political success at broad-based mobilization and the iron-discipline of the leadership to put itself in danger to defend their belief in the democratic principles, political liberty, and a yearning to stave off the scourge of poverty, famine, pestilence, corruption, and death of hope has sparked a new awakening. However, this success does not preclude the need for a critical assessment of CUDP's strategic decisions, tactical moves, successes as well as setbacks. CUDP needs to be more transparent about its political objectives, strategies and choice of avenues of political struggle, as it has been so transparent, vivid, open and popular force. The moment it degenerates into secrecy, intrigues, and backdoor deals and manipulative games, it will cease to be the torch bearer of the many, irrespective of identities, social class, religion etc as it remained to have been so far.

For all those who carefully read the political manifesto of the CUDP, and then carefully juxtaposed it with OLF express objectives, it would be seem painstaking to draw a substantial intersection of political objectives about the nature of the state and its continuity, and political philosophy of organizing the Ethiopian society and economy. Simply, it seems to be requiring a gargantuan political engineering to translate the contending positions into a political equilibrium. So would a Conference or a series of Conferences engender the desired political harmony and relegation of the sticking issues of difference to wither? Only time will tell, but for now, it is suffice to say that the generic Alliance for Freedom Democracy seems to need all the optimism the-at-least 70 million Ethiopians can provide, to be a specific Ethiopian political reality.

-------------
The writer can be reached at akliluabraham@gmail.com


ETHIOMEDIA.COM - ETHIOPIA'S PREMIER NEWS AND VIEWS WEBSITE
© COPYRIGHT 20001-2006ETHIOMEDIA.COM.
EMAIL: webmaster@ethiomedia.com

BACK TO ETHIOMEDIA FRONT PAGE