Financial Strategy of the World Bank for Ethiopia 2006/7
By A Group of Ethiopians
March 2, 2006
Attn: Jill Armstrong
Country Program Coordinator - World Bank
jarmstrong@wb.org
DAG´ S ECONOMIC STRATEGY FOR ETHIOPIA 2006/7
The forthcoming World Bank Country Economic Memorandum 2006 (CEM) on Growth and Governance found that important progress was achieved in Ethiopia during the past decade. Therefore, its Interim Strategy recognizes that, in the absence of direct budget support to Meles´ glaringly undemocratic regime, the Bank is being recommended, on 23 March 2006, not to abandon its critical support for the delivery of basic services which is formally designed to enable the poor people of Ethiopia to break their poverty traps.
Under a range of high-sounding platitudes, some 2.2 billion U.S. dollars, is planned to be given by the World Bank and other Donors, to support the visibly undemocratic tribal regime of Ethiopia, for the coming 2 years, under the apparently innocuous and, in fact, legitimate cover of helping the poor, without nothing directly being said about the obtaining official corruption, glaring governance deficits and violations of democratic principles and practices, which currently are exposing a litany of abuses of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Ethiopian People, including the detention of very many political opponents of the tribal regime.
This recently induced Amnesty International to "demand their immediate and unconditional release and a halt to this attempt by the Ethiopian government to criminalize freedom of expression and prevent legitimate political and human rights activity." It is now trite, the regime of EPRDF in Ethiopia, last year, detained most important members of the opposition, including almost all the leaders of CUDP, and arrested other thousands of opposition members (including some innocent civilians) after two bouts of violence struck Addis Ababa, in July and November, over the disputed results of the 15 May rigged elections. Over 100 people were killed in clashes with police and soldiers.
Meles, not only wrongly, but shamelessly also, accused the opposition leaders of plotting to incite violence, through street demonstrations, to topple him. Democracy, whether one likes it or not, is by nature fickle, and probably it is because of that quality, it is being claimed by left and right! It cannot guarantee a permanent seat of power to anybody, even to the leader of the super-power whose country has a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. But, Meles, while claiming to be a democrat, through and through, wants to stay put as a permanent premier for life! Furthermore, it is to be noted, the said leader of the current regime wants to hide his political weaknesses, by clumsily exposing them worldwide in blunders of gagging the media and press even of foreign countries! Indeed, that is why recently the Foreign Editor of the Observer of London, Tracy McVeigh, was provoked to remark that their famous reporter in Ethiopia, Gilmore, was “seeking to cover the crisis in Ethiopia thoroughly and fairly and the government’s response was to thwart his efforts so that the alarming events in Ethiopia can stay hidden from the rest of world.” And this had further attracted a reaction from Ann Cooper, the Executive Director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, who pointed out that: “this is all the more worrying in the context of the current crackdown on local journalists, at least 17 of whom are in jail for their work.”
At the same time, the Bank, together with other donor partners including (ADB), intend to step up efforts to help the dictatorial regime to provide services in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner—while preserving institutional capital for an eventual scaling-up when conditions are ripe. It is further claimed, given the extent to which Government expenditures are devoted to pro-poor sectors, and in face of the financing gap, the likely adverse consequences for the poor of Ethiopia if Government expenditures are cut below budgeted levels in EFY98, appear to them to be, ipso facto, suggestive of the current proposal and, perhaps, nothing else! This is sad.
AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT BUDGETARY SUPPORT
Consequently the World Bank and other international development partners (DFID, CIDA) have embarked on a rapid preparation of an operation that could be an alternative to direct budget support in the immediate period, and targets basic service delivery — which, in Ethiopia, they misunderstand, or otherwise, is the responsibility of sub-national governments (not to call them provincial, local or district authorities), falsely taking it for granted that those formal bodies exist and operate independently of the regime, against which economic sanctions are currently being applied by suspending direct budgetary support, inter alias, to enforce genuine democracy, the rule of law and good governance. We find it a bit absurd to expect better results from more ignorant or incapable subordinates than the failed good governance of the highest officials of the current regime, which is even getting advice of experts!
Under these circumstances, it is claimed, without consulting the people, let alone the opposition, that the proposed operation is in accordance with the consensus of the Development Assistance Group (DAG,), which recognizes the need for Ethiopia to address political governance issues, while avoiding any deterioration or reversal in the hard-won, fragile gains in development outcomes. The claim of gain in development, when per capita income is obstinately stagnant, is debatable.
WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO POSITIVE MEASURES
Nonetheless, of course, if there are some positive improvements, that are inductively verifiable, we hasten to support them. For example, we have nothing against the confirmed claim that, last year, DPC growth of 8.9 % was scored, and that was positive, even though it is admittedly fragile, and could, probably, have been doubled by the opposition, had it assumed power in 1991. It must be understood that the main opposition parties are genuinely committed to attain the internationally agreed Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Provided funds will not be misused, we are not opposed to resources being made available for the development of Ethiopia, specially for projects to alleviate poverty or to improve healthcare services. Nevertheless, we take proper note that there is every indication that the funds allocated will be misappropriated and will be used to meet the direct budgetary shortfall the Bank is expecting. In this context we welcome the initiation by ADB President Donald Kabenuka of clean-water projects, on 27 February 2006, if care will be exercised in the proper use of the resources.
Why should such a regime as of Meles be helped or saved from the direct consequences of his uncouth actions and undemocratic oppressions? Nobody dared to answer this question clearly. We are noting with sadness at external attempts to sustain an oppressive regime on the yoke of the Ethiopian people, at the expense of tax-payers money of several friendly peoples, who are not even formally informed how their resources, at times, are being misused! We may remind their peoples of what has been happening during election times. Hopefully, these points may be used to score political points, if not to unseat those who have been hiding the truth. To cover up this reality, it is thus being advocated: “Given the extent to which Government expenditures are devoted to pro-poor sectors, and in face of the financing gap, the likely adverse consequences for the poor of Ethiopia, if Government expenditures are cut below budgeted levels in EFY98 are clear.” They are not, unless a completely wrong assumption is resorted to, that if the opposition would be in power, it will neglect the plight of our poor people.
Knowingly or otherwise, an untenable pseudo-logical claim was advanced by pointing out that the targets of the basic service delivery are at local levels, when it is also admitted that they are under ministerial directives. The proposed operation, as noted earlier, is in accordance with the consensus of the DAG (Ethiopia’s major development partners), which recognizes the need for Ethiopia to address political governance issues, while avoiding any deterioration or reversal in the hard-won, admittedly fragile gains in development outcomes.
We resent the impropriety that the decisions on the economic fate of the Ethiopian people are reached by outsiders, in complete and deliberate disregard of the views of the people in general and in particular of the opposition, which reflects, in reality, the disposition of the overwhelming majority of Ethiopians in the country as well as in Diaspora, who are composed of an impressive range of intellectuals and experts in all fields.
YOU CANNOT HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT!
But, the ruling regime, in Ethiopia, is trying to have its cake and eat it. It wants to get at donors funds as quickly as possible, inter alias, by making any kind of promise, for it is customary for it not to be bound by any commitment, and by trying to hide the truth about a plethora of its misdeeds. At the same time, the Bank, together with other donor partners, tried a pretence of exercising legitimate care, by relying on Meles to step up efforts to help his officials “to provide these services in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner—while preserving institutional capital for an eventual scaling-up when conditions are ripe.”
On 21st of February 2006, EU has already signed an agreement with the regime to provide some 10 million euros (11.9 million U.S. dollars) for professional and civic associations in Ethiopia. But, according to the forthcoming World Bank Country Economic Memorandum, on 23 March 2006 (CEM) on Growth and Governance, that constitutes a fraction of 0.002% of the massive encouragement that may be put at the disposal of the current regime, if and when the report gets unguarded approval.
THE INTERESTS OF THE ETHIOPIAN PEOPLE
Naturally, we who have the interests of the Ethiopian people next to our hearts, reiterate that we are not opposed to efforts to obviate poverty and enhance development, if there is a realistic chance that the said funds will be exclusively and effectively used for the oft claimed healthy purposes. But, we know under the current uncouth regime, those ends will not be fully attained, and nobody can convince us otherwise, any longer. If one is disposed to gain benefit from deplorable experience, one must avoid its repetition and this logically constitutes the bottom-line. It is, therefore, submitted,, that this disposition cannot not be reasonably assailed diplomatically, rationally or legally, let alone morally.
Under the proposed agreement, as briefly noted earlier, the stated sum of funds are intended to be provided for local authorities, their auxiliaries and the civic and professional associations beginning during the current European Year. It is officially stated that all of them will be controlled by certain ministers of the known dictator. The ill-fated design is reposed on a most unreliable colonnade of a proven dictator, who is shamelessly at ease in denying facts, and putting no wait on any of his plethora of previous promises.
DO NOT SAVE THE CULPRIT IN THE NAME OF THE POOR
Since the current abuse of democratic rules and violations of human rights by the tribal regime has been too glaring to hide and untenable to deny, some measures of international sanctions are in place, possibly to induce some control in the ungainly behavior of the said regime, but the currently proposed assistance appears to be more to save the culprit than to help the unfortunate poor in practical terms. In fact, the removal of the current immoral, incompetent and “visibly undemocratic” regime will enhance the reduction of poverty, through the agency of their successors, who are in the opposition. Here, it would be proper to invite attention to the pertinent fact that the genuine leaders of the opposition including the falsely detained leaders of CUDP are more committed to the alleviation of poverty in Ethiopia than the tribal regime or even the donor community. Therefore, although all honest measures designed to do away with poverty will be supported now and in the future, including the implementation of the positive programs of the World Bank and the Donor Community, each and every harmful suggestion shall be rejected, on its objective merits.
We feel that, at present, the best solution for most problems is to work out a program of action to apply tensile pressure on the Ethiopian regime, that was defeated, to hand over power to the real winners of the 15 May 2005 elections. The Ethiopian people have waited far too long for this democratic and legitimate opportunity. However, now, we are aware that, in the absence of direct budget support, the Bank is not disposed to abandon its critical support to the tribal regime for the delivery of basic services which, here again, purportedly to enable poor people to break from their current poverty traps. It certainly sounds innocuous and even beneficial, were it realistic.
The proposed funds are designed to be managed by the current corrupt officials. To spread the control over budgetary disbursement widely on paper, using EPRDF cadres and phantom tribal leaders will reduce by nil, any aspects of the interference of the dictator over the use of the resources, in practice. Have not weapons given by US (the case of the U.S. issue Humvees) to fight terrorists had been manifestly employed against innocent civilians? What was the punishment for that breach of contract and faith? Where is the water-tight mechanism that would deter the misuse of the massive funds?
DEVOLUTION OF POWER & RESOURCES
Here again, we support the advocacy for devolution of power and resources downwards in Ethiopia, as anywhere else, and proper suggestions in this regard are to be welcomed. In fact such a policy besides being beneficial, healthy and development oriented, it appears to be even so fashionable as to be an active platform for conducting lively political discussions worldwide, including in UK. There, no political party is now questioning the legitimate need for devolution but on means for its attainment politicians, as usual, are verbally scuffling, at times over anorexic nuances. For example a British right-winger, David Cameron advocates “to grant voluntary groups a bigger role” while the leftist, Alan Milburn, emphasizes that “people want more control over their lives”. Both are right and semantically mean the same thing. (BBC, 21 February 2006).If and when anybody suggests for others, what it wants for itself, one need not be suspicious of hidden agendas, without more. But, we must exercise care in choosing the appropriate means and methods for effecting power devolution in Ethiopia.
AN ALARMING PROPOSAL
However, the World Bank´s agenda at the 23 March meeting of the Board contains an alarming proposal that, in the field of social accountability, the overall management and coordination of the activities “will be contracted to an agency outside of government structure with the technical expertise and experience in implementing and/or managing accountability initiatives in basic services. Reporting to the WB/MDTF, the Management Agent (MA) will be responsible for overall program implementation, financial management and procurement, providing and/or organizing technical assistance and capacity building, networking, and facilitating support as needed.”. Unless the Agency is composed by competent Ethiopians, in Ethiopia or abroad, the proposal will constitute the narrow edge of the wedge of a new colonialism, and as such, it cannot be accepted by decent Ethiopians.
Very very strange! Just because the current Tribal Regime became undemocratic, dictatorial and corrupt, good old Ethiopia is going to abdicate its sovereign right to manage its affairs and handover the main areas of management to an outsider, a foreign company! This calls to mind the fate of Assab in 1869.
We do not need external advisers, to work out these, after liberating the people from the tribal dictatorship.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, we beg leave to submit the following recommendations to be considered by the Board of the World Bank, on 23 March 2006:
- All recently detained political prisoners, including the leaders of CUDP and the free press journalists, must be released unconditionally, unless this occurs ahead.
- Directly or indirectly, please avoid the provision of resources to the current regime in Ethiopia, in any manner or shape that encourages the continuation of its undemocratic transgression and violence against its political opponents, the free press journalists and innocent civilians.
- Order the revision of the current proposal to be worked out in consultation with the genuine leaders of the opposition, and the agreed outcome would be submitted again, with the commitment of all involved that the Project will be faithfully implemented, whoever would be in power for the next decade.
- For implementing the agreed Project, all experts of the opposition and native Ethiopians in Diaspora, who are more numerous than those of the current regime, will be properly used to ensure the success of the Project, specially for reducing poverty and promoting good health and tangible development, quantifiable, inter alias, in the growth of per capita income.
- Please note that, unless the opposition is properly consulted, any agreement reached with the current regime will not bind any future government.
- The agreed project, however, should be insulated from the ongoing application of suspension of direct budgetary support, to be properly used by decent NGOs..
- Commission an Independent Expert Group (IEG 2006) to study the level of good governance deficits of the current regime, that, if any, had negatively affected the outcome of the help of the World Bank.
Before concluding, we avail ourselves of this opportunity to thank the World Bank and its donor Partners, for the beneficial assistance they have been providing to the people of Ethiopia, for years.
Yours faithfully,
Mr Zaude Hailemariam, former Ethiopian Ambassador
Professor Nebiat Tafari
Dr Girma Abebe
Dr Teshome Amare
Mr Hailu Gebreyonnes
Mr Seyoum Haddis Alemayehou
Mr Ketema Demie
Dr Kifle Jote
Mrs Asqual Tafari
Ms Lulit Mesfin
Mr Sintayehu Tsehai
Mr Mekonnen Demeke
Mr Abebe Wondemeneh
Mr Mulugeta Tibebu
Mr Yohannis Agonafir
ETHIOMEDIA.COM - ETHIOPIA'S PREMIER NEWS AND VIEWS WEBSITE
© COPYRIGHT 20001-2006ETHIOMEDIA.COM. EMAIL: webmaster@ethiomedia.com
Attn: Jill Armstrong
Country Program Coordinator - World Bank
jarmstrong@wb.org
DAG´ S ECONOMIC STRATEGY FOR ETHIOPIA 2006/7
The forthcoming World Bank Country Economic Memorandum 2006 (CEM) on Growth and Governance found that important progress was achieved in Ethiopia during the past decade. Therefore, its Interim Strategy recognizes that, in the absence of direct budget support to Meles´ glaringly undemocratic regime, the Bank is being recommended, on 23 March 2006, not to abandon its critical support for the delivery of basic services which is formally designed to enable the poor people of Ethiopia to break their poverty traps.
Under a range of high-sounding platitudes, some 2.2 billion U.S. dollars, is planned to be given by the World Bank and other Donors, to support the visibly undemocratic tribal regime of Ethiopia, for the coming 2 years, under the apparently innocuous and, in fact, legitimate cover of helping the poor, without nothing directly being said about the obtaining official corruption, glaring governance deficits and violations of democratic principles and practices, which currently are exposing a litany of abuses of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Ethiopian People, including the detention of very many political opponents of the tribal regime.
This recently induced Amnesty International to "demand their immediate and unconditional release and a halt to this attempt by the Ethiopian government to criminalize freedom of expression and prevent legitimate political and human rights activity." It is now trite, the regime of EPRDF in Ethiopia, last year, detained most important members of the opposition, including almost all the leaders of CUDP, and arrested other thousands of opposition members (including some innocent civilians) after two bouts of violence struck Addis Ababa, in July and November, over the disputed results of the 15 May rigged elections. Over 100 people were killed in clashes with police and soldiers.
Meles, not only wrongly, but shamelessly also, accused the opposition leaders of plotting to incite violence, through street demonstrations, to topple him. Democracy, whether one likes it or not, is by nature fickle, and probably it is because of that quality, it is being claimed by left and right! It cannot guarantee a permanent seat of power to anybody, even to the leader of the super-power whose country has a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. But, Meles, while claiming to be a democrat, through and through, wants to stay put as a permanent premier for life! Furthermore, it is to be noted, the said leader of the current regime wants to hide his political weaknesses, by clumsily exposing them worldwide in blunders of gagging the media and press even of foreign countries! Indeed, that is why recently the Foreign Editor of the Observer of London, Tracy McVeigh, was provoked to remark that their famous reporter in Ethiopia, Gilmore, was “seeking to cover the crisis in Ethiopia thoroughly and fairly and the government’s response was to thwart his efforts so that the alarming events in Ethiopia can stay hidden from the rest of world.” And this had further attracted a reaction from Ann Cooper, the Executive Director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, who pointed out that: “this is all the more worrying in the context of the current crackdown on local journalists, at least 17 of whom are in jail for their work.”
At the same time, the Bank, together with other donor partners including (ADB), intend to step up efforts to help the dictatorial regime to provide services in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner—while preserving institutional capital for an eventual scaling-up when conditions are ripe. It is further claimed, given the extent to which Government expenditures are devoted to pro-poor sectors, and in face of the financing gap, the likely adverse consequences for the poor of Ethiopia if Government expenditures are cut below budgeted levels in EFY98, appear to them to be, ipso facto, suggestive of the current proposal and, perhaps, nothing else! This is sad.
Consequently the World Bank and other international development partners (DFID, CIDA) have embarked on a rapid preparation of an operation that could be an alternative to direct budget support in the immediate period, and targets basic service delivery — which, in Ethiopia, they misunderstand, or otherwise, is the responsibility of sub-national governments (not to call them provincial, local or district authorities), falsely taking it for granted that those formal bodies exist and operate independently of the regime, against which economic sanctions are currently being applied by suspending direct budgetary support, inter alias, to enforce genuine democracy, the rule of law and good governance. We find it a bit absurd to expect better results from more ignorant or incapable subordinates than the failed good governance of the highest officials of the current regime, which is even getting advice of experts!
Under these circumstances, it is claimed, without consulting the people, let alone the opposition, that the proposed operation is in accordance with the consensus of the Development Assistance Group (DAG,), which recognizes the need for Ethiopia to address political governance issues, while avoiding any deterioration or reversal in the hard-won, fragile gains in development outcomes. The claim of gain in development, when per capita income is obstinately stagnant, is debatable.
Nonetheless, of course, if there are some positive improvements, that are inductively verifiable, we hasten to support them. For example, we have nothing against the confirmed claim that, last year, DPC growth of 8.9 % was scored, and that was positive, even though it is admittedly fragile, and could, probably, have been doubled by the opposition, had it assumed power in 1991. It must be understood that the main opposition parties are genuinely committed to attain the internationally agreed Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Provided funds will not be misused, we are not opposed to resources being made available for the development of Ethiopia, specially for projects to alleviate poverty or to improve healthcare services. Nevertheless, we take proper note that there is every indication that the funds allocated will be misappropriated and will be used to meet the direct budgetary shortfall the Bank is expecting. In this context we welcome the initiation by ADB President Donald Kabenuka of clean-water projects, on 27 February 2006, if care will be exercised in the proper use of the resources.
Why should such a regime as of Meles be helped or saved from the direct consequences of his uncouth actions and undemocratic oppressions? Nobody dared to answer this question clearly. We are noting with sadness at external attempts to sustain an oppressive regime on the yoke of the Ethiopian people, at the expense of tax-payers money of several friendly peoples, who are not even formally informed how their resources, at times, are being misused! We may remind their peoples of what has been happening during election times. Hopefully, these points may be used to score political points, if not to unseat those who have been hiding the truth. To cover up this reality, it is thus being advocated: “Given the extent to which Government expenditures are devoted to pro-poor sectors, and in face of the financing gap, the likely adverse consequences for the poor of Ethiopia, if Government expenditures are cut below budgeted levels in EFY98 are clear.” They are not, unless a completely wrong assumption is resorted to, that if the opposition would be in power, it will neglect the plight of our poor people.
Knowingly or otherwise, an untenable pseudo-logical claim was advanced by pointing out that the targets of the basic service delivery are at local levels, when it is also admitted that they are under ministerial directives. The proposed operation, as noted earlier, is in accordance with the consensus of the DAG (Ethiopia’s major development partners), which recognizes the need for Ethiopia to address political governance issues, while avoiding any deterioration or reversal in the hard-won, admittedly fragile gains in development outcomes.
We resent the impropriety that the decisions on the economic fate of the Ethiopian people are reached by outsiders, in complete and deliberate disregard of the views of the people in general and in particular of the opposition, which reflects, in reality, the disposition of the overwhelming majority of Ethiopians in the country as well as in Diaspora, who are composed of an impressive range of intellectuals and experts in all fields.
But, the ruling regime, in Ethiopia, is trying to have its cake and eat it. It wants to get at donors funds as quickly as possible, inter alias, by making any kind of promise, for it is customary for it not to be bound by any commitment, and by trying to hide the truth about a plethora of its misdeeds. At the same time, the Bank, together with other donor partners, tried a pretence of exercising legitimate care, by relying on Meles to step up efforts to help his officials “to provide these services in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner—while preserving institutional capital for an eventual scaling-up when conditions are ripe.”
On 21st of February 2006, EU has already signed an agreement with the regime to provide some 10 million euros (11.9 million U.S. dollars) for professional and civic associations in Ethiopia. But, according to the forthcoming World Bank Country Economic Memorandum, on 23 March 2006 (CEM) on Growth and Governance, that constitutes a fraction of 0.002% of the massive encouragement that may be put at the disposal of the current regime, if and when the report gets unguarded approval.
Naturally, we who have the interests of the Ethiopian people next to our hearts, reiterate that we are not opposed to efforts to obviate poverty and enhance development, if there is a realistic chance that the said funds will be exclusively and effectively used for the oft claimed healthy purposes. But, we know under the current uncouth regime, those ends will not be fully attained, and nobody can convince us otherwise, any longer. If one is disposed to gain benefit from deplorable experience, one must avoid its repetition and this logically constitutes the bottom-line. It is, therefore, submitted,, that this disposition cannot not be reasonably assailed diplomatically, rationally or legally, let alone morally.
Under the proposed agreement, as briefly noted earlier, the stated sum of funds are intended to be provided for local authorities, their auxiliaries and the civic and professional associations beginning during the current European Year. It is officially stated that all of them will be controlled by certain ministers of the known dictator. The ill-fated design is reposed on a most unreliable colonnade of a proven dictator, who is shamelessly at ease in denying facts, and putting no wait on any of his plethora of previous promises.
Since the current abuse of democratic rules and violations of human rights by the tribal regime has been too glaring to hide and untenable to deny, some measures of international sanctions are in place, possibly to induce some control in the ungainly behavior of the said regime, but the currently proposed assistance appears to be more to save the culprit than to help the unfortunate poor in practical terms. In fact, the removal of the current immoral, incompetent and “visibly undemocratic” regime will enhance the reduction of poverty, through the agency of their successors, who are in the opposition. Here, it would be proper to invite attention to the pertinent fact that the genuine leaders of the opposition including the falsely detained leaders of CUDP are more committed to the alleviation of poverty in Ethiopia than the tribal regime or even the donor community. Therefore, although all honest measures designed to do away with poverty will be supported now and in the future, including the implementation of the positive programs of the World Bank and the Donor Community, each and every harmful suggestion shall be rejected, on its objective merits.
We feel that, at present, the best solution for most problems is to work out a program of action to apply tensile pressure on the Ethiopian regime, that was defeated, to hand over power to the real winners of the 15 May 2005 elections. The Ethiopian people have waited far too long for this democratic and legitimate opportunity. However, now, we are aware that, in the absence of direct budget support, the Bank is not disposed to abandon its critical support to the tribal regime for the delivery of basic services which, here again, purportedly to enable poor people to break from their current poverty traps. It certainly sounds innocuous and even beneficial, were it realistic.
The proposed funds are designed to be managed by the current corrupt officials. To spread the control over budgetary disbursement widely on paper, using EPRDF cadres and phantom tribal leaders will reduce by nil, any aspects of the interference of the dictator over the use of the resources, in practice. Have not weapons given by US (the case of the U.S. issue Humvees) to fight terrorists had been manifestly employed against innocent civilians? What was the punishment for that breach of contract and faith? Where is the water-tight mechanism that would deter the misuse of the massive funds?
Here again, we support the advocacy for devolution of power and resources downwards in Ethiopia, as anywhere else, and proper suggestions in this regard are to be welcomed. In fact such a policy besides being beneficial, healthy and development oriented, it appears to be even so fashionable as to be an active platform for conducting lively political discussions worldwide, including in UK. There, no political party is now questioning the legitimate need for devolution but on means for its attainment politicians, as usual, are verbally scuffling, at times over anorexic nuances. For example a British right-winger, David Cameron advocates “to grant voluntary groups a bigger role” while the leftist, Alan Milburn, emphasizes that “people want more control over their lives”. Both are right and semantically mean the same thing. (BBC, 21 February 2006).If and when anybody suggests for others, what it wants for itself, one need not be suspicious of hidden agendas, without more. But, we must exercise care in choosing the appropriate means and methods for effecting power devolution in Ethiopia.
However, the World Bank´s agenda at the 23 March meeting of the Board contains an alarming proposal that, in the field of social accountability, the overall management and coordination of the activities “will be contracted to an agency outside of government structure with the technical expertise and experience in implementing and/or managing accountability initiatives in basic services. Reporting to the WB/MDTF, the Management Agent (MA) will be responsible for overall program implementation, financial management and procurement, providing and/or organizing technical assistance and capacity building, networking, and facilitating support as needed.”. Unless the Agency is composed by competent Ethiopians, in Ethiopia or abroad, the proposal will constitute the narrow edge of the wedge of a new colonialism, and as such, it cannot be accepted by decent Ethiopians.
Very very strange! Just because the current Tribal Regime became undemocratic, dictatorial and corrupt, good old Ethiopia is going to abdicate its sovereign right to manage its affairs and handover the main areas of management to an outsider, a foreign company! This calls to mind the fate of Assab in 1869.
We do not need external advisers, to work out these, after liberating the people from the tribal dictatorship.
In conclusion, we beg leave to submit the following recommendations to be considered by the Board of the World Bank, on 23 March 2006:
Before concluding, we avail ourselves of this opportunity to thank the World Bank and its donor Partners, for the beneficial assistance they have been providing to the people of Ethiopia, for years.
Yours faithfully,
Mr Zaude Hailemariam, former Ethiopian Ambassador
AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT BUDGETARY SUPPORT
WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO POSITIVE MEASURES
YOU CANNOT HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT!
THE INTERESTS OF THE ETHIOPIAN PEOPLE
DO NOT SAVE THE CULPRIT IN THE NAME OF THE POOR
DEVOLUTION OF POWER & RESOURCES
AN ALARMING PROPOSAL
CONCLUSIONS
Professor Nebiat Tafari
Dr Girma Abebe
Dr Teshome Amare
Mr Hailu Gebreyonnes
Mr Seyoum Haddis Alemayehou
Mr Ketema Demie
Dr Kifle Jote
Mrs Asqual Tafari
Ms Lulit Mesfin
Mr Sintayehu Tsehai
Mr Mekonnen Demeke
Mr Abebe Wondemeneh
Mr Mulugeta Tibebu
Mr Yohannis Agonafir
ETHIOMEDIA.COM - ETHIOPIA'S PREMIER NEWS AND VIEWS WEBSITE
© COPYRIGHT 20001-2006ETHIOMEDIA.COM. EMAIL: webmaster@ethiomedia.com
