First, the writers do not even appear to know the party that is headed by Ato Hailu: it is called All Ethiopia Unity Party, AEUP for short. AEUO is new to us and it should be unknown to UEDF and its strong supporters, like Getachew and Solomon, as well.

If there is a minimum program, why don't you come up with it ?. Why are you folks shying away from the political program that was prepared for JADE and was reportedly presented by Dr. Beyene at that inaugural conference last July, and was accepted by the Congress ? Why is it a secret, and why do you propose these few lines as an extract from UEDF's minimum program, since " include the following " means just that ?

You may know that these 8 topics can have significantly varying colors when broken down into operational details. The minimum political program that was presented by Dr. Beyene, and thereby approved, would have answered almost all concerns. However, neither UEDF's web-page nor Getachew and Solomon have the courage to come up with it ; Getachew and Solomon also introduce their message with a reference to the "… front's minimum program…". Where is it ?

Isn't transparency a goal of UEDF ? Isn't transparency an integral component of a democratic system ? Then, why is all this hide-and-seek ? Why do you blame AEUP for obstructing when all the obstruction is imported from abroad ?

From interviews given by Ato Hailu Shawl to the local press, and your letter in Ethio-media, your summary of the "The obstructions thus far played by Ato Hailu and AEUO leadership are expressed in forms of:

a. challenging the minimum program and the structures of UEDF to the adoption of which his organization was a party; b. complaining that the front's goals are not clearly stated; c. alleging that the front is replacing individual organizations; d. faulting the struggle so far as not focused on the upcoming elections e. objecting to the formation of support committees f. opposing the establishment and operation of a foreign office in Washington DC… " are not too bad, except the false twist in (f) which, I think, grossly misrepresents AEUP's concerns.

I have never heard AEUP leaders say that they object to the establishment and operation of a foreign office abroad. What they have been saying to the local media is that the foreign office dictates policy, and it is the de facto Head Office of UEDF, and that is objectionable to AEUP and to those of us who follow developments within the UEDF coalition in the local media.

Don't you see that it is wrong to manage the political struggle from Washington, D.C. when all the principal players in the political struggle are in Addis Ababa ? Don't you see an urgency in the preparations to be made by the political opposition for the elections in 2005 and that a united and well-coordinated struggle has no other option, and that such a struggle can be managed effectively only by political parties within the country ?

I believe that AEUP does, in fact, appreciate the coordination of the political struggle in the Diaspora and that within our Homeland. The struggle in the Diaspora can provide support for that in our Homeland, but not the reverse. That is where the problem lies since those of you in the Diaspora appear to think that you have to lead and not support the political struggle, and that brings us back to the unyielding and youthful mentality of the 1960s and 1970s.

Is it not true that the UEDF Constitution drafted in Washington after the Conference in July gives excessive powers to the Vice-Chairman and the Deputy Secretary in the USA ? Is that how you see a foreign office operating ? Is this how embassies are run all over the globe, if I may stretch the parallel a little ? Which country's ambassador formulates national policies and sends out instructions to his foreign minister or Head of Government ? The Washington office of UEDF has been known to do exactly that repeatedly by giving instructions to AEUP and others!

Is it not also true that the same UEDF constitution provides for the top leadership of UEDF to come, by a poorly-crafted rotation, only from SEPDC, ONC and EPRP ? How about EDUP and AEUP ? Is being multi-national a criterion for exclusion from UEDF leadership, and did your Congress agree on that ? These are grave concerns of the Ethiopian public as well.

All that AEUP appears to have done is to ask questions, and that is not a crime, or is it ? Are the questions listed above, with the exception of the misrepresented (f), too many to ask for a founding-organizing member of UEDF that is paying a very heavy price in the political struggle to democratize Ethiopia ? Indeed, if UEDF is not internally democratic, as it appears to be today, how can Ethiopia have faith in a group which does not even listen to founding members who have genuine concerns ?

Let us all try to learn from all past failures of the elite, and move forward if we are honestly committed to the betterment of the lot of Ethiopia and Ethiopians. Let us make our games transparent and fair, and we are sure to succeed in the elections in 2005, and bring the Diaspora back home.

Otherwise, you will be no better than the dictators that you have habitually condemned so far ! This is a new and important political culture that the elite of today and those of yesterday need to cultivate, and they also need to know that there is no monopoly of knowledge, and the " I know all " attitude should be gone with the 1960s and 1970s.

I fully agree with Getachew and Solomon that "The current Ethiopian situation demands more focused struggle..." . Indeed, let us focus and urgently reorganize the opposition accordingly if we all want to save our country from the increasingly shocking existence that we have observed over the last 30 years. If it cannot manage itself democratically, then UEDF can never be useful to Ethiopia !

Lastly, let me conclude by pointing out that, to me, AEUP is not obstructing UEDF, but it certainly appears to have genuine concerns, as more or less correctly recognized by the UEDF insiders, Getachew and Solomon. The solution is simple: address those AEUP concerns, agree on who should do what, how, where and when, all the time focusing on the upcoming elections in 2005 since UEDF has only short-term goals and no more ! If you are worried about power, let that be decided by Ethiopians once we have achieved a democratic Ethiopia in 2005.

In the absence of an acceptable minimum program, it is meaningless for Getachew and Solomon to think that "… the UEDF will ensure in coordinating and selecting parties that should run for specific offices and regions to maximize victory for the opposition and advance the democratic struggle.".

Doest this make sense when the opposition is so highly divided, and there is no agreed minimum program ? For example, what can UEDF do when a multi-ethnic party and a purely ethnic party plan to compete in the same constituency under totally different agenda ? Which one will UEDF ask to back out, and who will listen to it ?

Several questions have been asked . Are they too many to ask of democratic fellow countrymen ?