Blog 14. ሰብዓዊ መብቶችና ያገራችን ሁኔታ ፤ በባይሳ ዋቅ-ወያ

ሰብዓዊ መብቶችና ያገራችን ሁኔታ ፤ በባይሳ  ዋቅ-ወያ

Blog 13. Declaration of Ethiopian Stakeholders Convention: Dallas Texas:

የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ጉባኤ መግለጫ:   መስከረም 29,2010 (October 8,2017)
Unity is our Destiny

“አገሬ ተባብራ ካልረገጠች እርካብ 
ነገራችን ሁሉ የእምቧይ ካብ፤ የእምቧይ ካብ”
ቀኝ ጌታ ዮፍታሄ ንጉሤ”

ባልፉት 26 ዓመታትና በተለይም ባለፉት ወራቶች የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ የሚደርስበትን ግድያ፤ እስር፤ መፈናቀል፤ ስደትና ረሃብ ያሳሰባቸው ተቆርቋሪ የሆኑ የኢትዮጵያ ማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ተሰባስበው ኢትዮጵያ ሃገራችን የተደቀነባትን እጅግ አስጊ የሆነ ስርዓት ወለድ አደጋ በጽሞና ሲመራመሩና የመፍትሄ ሃሳቦችን ሲያፈላልጉ ቆይተዋል።ይህ አስቸኳይ እና አሳሳቢ ሁኔታ ትኩረት እንዲሰጠውና ሁሉም የኢትዮጵያ ባለድርሻዎች (Stakeholders)፤ በተለይ በዓለም ዙሪያ የሚገኙ ማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ኃላፊነቱንና ባለቤትነቱን ተቀብለው እንዲረባረቡበት ለማድረግ ያስገደደን ዋና ምክንያት የሰብአዊ መብቶች መረገጥና በኦሮምያ፤ በአማራ፤ በኮንሶና በሌሎች አካባቢዎች የሚካሄደው ህዝባዊ አመጽና ዐመጹን ለማቆም ህወሓት የሚወሰደው፤እርምጃ ከ1,000 በላይ የሚገመት፤ በአብዛኛው የወጣት ኢትዮጵያዊያን መጨፍጨፉ፤ በብዙ ሽህ የሚገመት ሰላማዊ ሕዝብ መታሰሩና እንዲሰወር መደረጉና ሀገሪቱም እንደሀገር ለመቀጠል ፈታኝ ሁኔታ ላይ መገኘቷ ነው። ይህ ጭካኔ የተሞላበትና ኢ-ሰብአዊ የኃይል እርምጃ በተባበሩት መንግሥታት የሰብአዊ መብቶች ሕግ የተከለከለ ነው።ዛሬ በኢትዮጵያ እስር ቤቶች በአሰቃቂ ሁኔታ የሚገኙት ኢትዮጵያዊያን ብዛት በአገራችን ታሪክ ታይቶ አይታወቅም።

በአሁኑ ወቅት፤ በወንድማማቹ በኦሮሞውና በሶማሌው ኢትዮጵያዊ ወገኖቻችን መካከል የሚካሄደው የእርስ በርስ ግጭትና የሕዝብ መፈናቀል የህወሓት/ኢህአዴግ ብሔር-ተኮር ፖለቲካና በጎሳ ላይ የተመሰረተ የፌደራል አገዛዝ ውጤት ነው። አገዛዙም አገሪቱን ለማስተዳደር ብቃት እንደሌለውም በጉልህ የሚያሳይ ነው። ይህ ሁኔታ ሊቀጥል አይችልም። የኢትዮጵያና የ105 ሚሊየን ዜጎቿ መስረታዊ ችግሮች በተናጠል በሚካሄድ የተበታተነ ትግል ሊፈቱ እንደማይችሉ ካለፈው ተመክሯቸን ሰለተማርን የማህበራሰባዊው ድርጅቶች አስተባባሪ ኮሚቴ በመላው ዓለም የተመዘገበ ማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ተገናኝተው እንዲመካከሩና እንዲተባበሩ ሁኔታዎችን ሲያመቻች ቆይቷል።

በዚህም መሰረት ከመስከረም 27 እስከ 28 ድረስ በዳላስ ከተማ በተካሄደው የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ተወካዮች ጉባኤ ሰፊ ውይይት ተካሂዶ በአበይት የአገር ጉዳዮች ላይ ከጋራ ስምምነት ለመድረስ ተችሏል። አስኳሎቹም የሚከተሉት ናቸው።

1. የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ከአሁኑ የአምባገነን አገዛዝ ወደ ዲሞክራሳዊ ስርዓት መሸጋገር እንዳለበት በማመን፤ ለዚህም ሽግግር መሳካት ብሄራዊ የሆነ የዓላማ አንድነት ስለሚያስፈልግ፤ ለውይይት የሚያገለግል መሰረታዊ ሰነድ (Framework) ስለተረቀቀና ለውይይት በሚረዳ መልኩ ስለቀረበ፤ ጉባዔው ሰነዱን መርምሮና አሻሽሎ ለባለድርሻዎች ጉባዔ እንዲቀርብ ወስኗል።

2. የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶቹ ሰፊ ውይይት አድርገው የጋራ እሴት በሆኑት በኢትዮጵያ ቀጣይነትና ሉዐላዊነት፤ በኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ አንድነትና በዜጎቿ እኩልነት፤ በሕግ የበላይነት፤ በሰብአዊ መብቶች መከበር እና በዲሞክራሳዊ ስርዓት አስፈላጊነት የማያወላውል የጋራ አቋም እንዳላቸው አረጋግጠዋል።

3. የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ከላይ ለተጠቀሰው የጋራ ብሄራዊ ዓላማ ስኬታማነት በመተባበር ድርሻቸውን የመወጣት ግዴታ እንዳለባቸው በማመን እንቅስቃሴያቸውን በጋራ አጠናክሮ ለመምራት የሚያስችላቸው የትብብር የመግባቢያ ሰነድ ተፈራርመዋል።

4. ለማህበረሰባዊና ለፖለቲካ ድርጅቶች፤ ለእምነት ተቋማት እና ለምሁራን ተሳትፎ እንዲጠቅም እና የጋራ ራዕይ ለማጎልበት እንዲረዳ የተዘጋጀው የዜጎች መብት የቃል ኪዳን ሰነድ (Citizens Charter/ Bill of Rights) ውይይት ተደርጎበት ጉባዔው ተቀብሎታል።

5. በቃል ኪዳን እና በመሠረታዊ ሰነዱ የተጠቀሰው የግለሰብ፤ የዜጎች ሙሉ መብትና ተሳትፎ መከበርና ተቋማዊ መሆን ለዲሞክራሲ ስርአት መመስረትም ሆነ ቀጣይነት አስተማማኝ መመሪያ ከመሆኑም በላይ የቡድን መብቶችን መከበር በምንም መልኩ የማይጻረር መሆኑንና ሰነዱን ማዘጋጀት ብዙ ምሁራንና ባለሞያዎች የተሳተፉበት መሆኑን በመገንዘብ፤ ጉባዔው ተወያይቶ ተቀብሎታል።

6. የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ተወካዮች በውይይት ከደረሱባቸው ግንዛቤዎችና ውሳኔዎች መካከል አንዱ የተበታተነው ጥረታቸው አመርቂ ውጤት ለማስገኘት ባለመቻሉ ለጋራ ብሄራዊ አላማ እየተጋገዙ አቅምን ማጎልበት አስፈላጊ እና ወሳኝ መሆኑ ነው።

7. በመሆኑም፤ የኢትዮጵያ ባለድርሻዎች የሆኑ የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ባንድ ድንኳን ውስጥ(One Inclusive Tent) ለመሰባሰብ፤ ለመረዳዳት፤ አብሮና ተባብሮ ለመስራት የሚያስችል መግባቢያ ሰነድ፤ ተፈራርመው መዋቅርና አመራር እንዲኖር(Consortium) “የኢትዮጵያ ማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ትብብር”ን በመመስረት ፤ በመዋቅሩ፤ በአመራሩና በወደፊት የስራ ትኩረቱ ላይ ስምምነት ላይ ደርሰዋል።

8. የማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ትብብር ዋና ዓላማና ግብ በኢትዮጵያ የሚካሄደውን እና የሕዝቡ አይነተኛ ጥያቄ የሆነውን ወደ ዲሞክራሲያዊ ስርዓት የመሸጋገሩን ሂደት ለማፋጠን፤ ሁሉም ባለድርሻ የሆኑ ድርጅቶች፤ ተቋሞችና ግለሰቦች እንዲተባበሩ ለማድረግ፤ የእውቀት፤ የመረጃ፤ የአቤቱታ፤ የገንዘብ፤ የዜና ስርጭት፤ ተመሳሳይና ተደጋጋፊ አቅምን ለማጠናከር እንዲሆን ጉባዔው ተስማምቶበታል።

9. የማበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ትብብር የፖለቲካ ፓርቲዎችን መቀራረብ አስፈላጊነት እና ወሳኝ ሚና በማጤን የሚመለከታቸው ሁሉ ለትብብሩ መጠናከር እና ስኬታማነት ልዩ ትኩረት እንዲሰጡት ለማበረታታት፤ ለመጎትጎት እና የተጠናከረ ክትትል ለማድረግ ወስኗል።

10. በማህበረሰባዊ ድርጅቶች ምስረታ እስካሁን ያልተሳተፉ እና ተመሳሳይ አላማ ያላቸው ድርጅቶች የትብብሩን መርሆዎች እና አላማዎች ተቀብለው እንዲሳተፉ ጉባዔው ወገናዊ ጥሪ ያቀርባል።

ኢትዮጵያዊነት እና የዜጎቿ አንድነት ይለመልማል። የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ በተባበረ ክንዱ መብቱን እና ሉዐላዊነቱን ያስከብራል።

Blog 12. Building Civic Institutions for Democratic Governance in Ethiopia by Dr. Erku Yimer

I. Introduction

Building sustainable and stable democratic governance including its growth and development goes hand in hand with growth and development of civic institutions. Ever since the enlightenment period of the 18th century Europe, civil society has risen as independent entity between family and the feudal state. Since then, civil societies have remained the backbone of democratization, good governance, socio-economic development and advocacy for human rights.

Civil societies as developed, practiced and maintained in Western cultures, generally seek to attain social power, relational power that will influence public policy. They usually run parallel and separate from the state. They are generally characterized as the “third force” coming between the state/market and the individual/family and protect the individual from the paramount power of the state. Needless to say the critical role they play in Western societies is very well recognized and established.

This paper attempts to help clearly understand civic organizations including their purposes, focus and modalities as practiced in Western societies and create basic and common understanding among Ethiopian Civic Society Groups of the nature of civic organizations and the role they play in democratization of society. This also may help avoid confusion and misunderstanding that are apparent in the Ethiopian civic movement and contribute toward unity formation of CSOs.

The paper also examines the scope and diversity of Non Profit Organizations (NGOs)/ Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in Ethiopia including the traditional organizations like Idir and Shimglena/Mehal Sefari as practiced in various regions of Ethiopia. The role NGOs played in relief, rehabilitation and development and the challenges facing them will be briefly highlighted. Proliferation of NGOs began during 1973/74 and expanded again during 1983/84 devastating famines. When it comes to traditional societies like Ethiopia, civil societies are at a very rudimentary stage in a way practiced in Western societies. However, along with the advancement of technology, the world has become closer than ever before. Western ideas and institutions have penetrated almost every corner of the earth. Many believe the disseminations of Western technology, ideas and institutions have partially or fully arrested the natural growth and development of traditional institutions in many Third World Countries. Ethiopia is no exception. In fact, through the introduction of modernization and urbanization, in less than a century, traditional institutions have been crippled and their growth and development almost arrested. This can be seen in the domination of Western Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) organizing methods and program operations in many aspects of socio-economic life of the people.

The Paper also examines the informal/traditional “civic” organizations such as Idir and Shmiglena, develops a framework of the role of civic societies based on these Ethio-centered traditional institutions play, and explore their potentials, if nurtured, the purposes of civil society thy serve in the modern sense. Developing ways and means of incorporating and integrating some carefully selected and important modern civic functions into Idir and Shimglena is considered.

In fact, many people mention Idir, Equb, Shimglina (mediation) Afersata, and Awchachgne (consultative), Shengo (advisory), Mehal Sefari (third force or neutral force), Debo (labor sharing) and the like as traditional institutions that Ethiopians used to address their socio- economic and political needs. The most persuasive argument comes in terms of building Idir and Shimglena to addressing our participatory, reconciliation and democratization needs. Proponents argue that these institutions are widespread, participatory and are embraced by many Ethiopians in spite of their ethnic, language and geographical affiliations. Idir and Shimgilena promise to be the cultural bases of building a strong civic society that can emerge as an advocacy agent “third force” for human and democratic rights and general wellbeing of society.

II. What Are Civil Societies?

Many people use Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Civic Society Organizations (CSOs) interchangeably. Some also want to make a distinction at least in focus between NGOs and CSOs. However, CSOs is a common term used for NGOs or Community Based Organizations (CBOs). What do they mean? Horn Consult (2003:3) defines Civil Society Organizations or CSOs as “non-state voluntary associations around which people get organized to further specific needs and agendas of public interest, and that can act as catalysts for democratic reform, and in doing so, enter into a debate with other groups and institutions for which these issues are also important”. They may be different from NGOs that provide relief, rehabilitation and development services only in their focus on democratic governance, advocacy for human and democratic rights. On the other hand, Community Based Organizations or CBOs tend to be membership and geography driven organized at a certain geographical location at the local level whose constituencies include self-help groups such as Idir; Debo, farmer’s cooperatives, Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) and Mutual Assistance Associations (MAAs) that may lobby and pressure government for better service delivery.

The word Civil comes from the Latin word Civicus to mean "citizen". Basically, Civic organizations are voluntary associations with a goal of improving the general wellbeing of a citizenry. Voluntarism, legal, participation in public affairs and interests are the essences of civic organizations. Participation in Civic work is seen as a process of setting free the abundant human energy, creative and inexhaustible resources of citizens from restrictive behaviors and forces for purposes of improving the general wellbeing, human and individual rights and creating profound awareness of the rights, responsibilities and duties of a citizenry. Participation in civic activities is civilizing process that can set free the best of what organized people can offer to their citizenry and to themselves. Committed participation that comes out of a free will can achieve miracles, empowers participants and achieve desirable social goals.

UNDP (1993) saw CS as a sphere in which social movements become organized representing many diverse interests. World Bank (2006) sees CSOs as a wide array of non-profit non- governmental organizations that have presence in public life expressing the interests and values of their members and others based on ethical, cultural, political, religious, scientific or philanthropic considerations. John Samuel (1998) identifies “major and common characteristics of CSOs as autonomy or independence, plurality, voluntarism, trust and solidarity”.

Civil Societies are historical and not universal category of human existence (Andre Betteille, 2003). As John Locke would say that society existed before government and civil society thrives outside the state structure (Alexis de Tocqueville). Civic societies are institutions in which citizens organize voluntarily to participate in activism for improving aspect/aspects of social life of the community, independently of government control. Memberships to civic organizations are based on accepting and agreeing to promote the basic principles for which the civic organization stands. They are usually non-profit and politically non-patrician. In a civic society, “members influence policies by lobbying the government, or putting in direct appeals, petitions and demonstrations. They put pressure and persuade politicians that control power, as necessary” (Ethiopian National Congress Web Site).

In democratic countries, political organizations tap the organized human resources of civic societies to solicit ideas and support, or even to recruit manpower. Even political parties use the offices of civic bodies to prevent and/or to resolve conflicts. “With the passing of personal rule by tyrants or absolute monarchs, it has become the norm for the expanded base of public activism, namely civic movements, to participate in such an alliance with governments on issues of development and human rights policies” (Ethiopian National Congress Web Site).

It is critically important to understand Civil Societies (CS) as practiced in the Western world in order to selectively determine the adaptability of their functions into traditional systems. In the role a civic movement plays in democratization of a country, it is a process that sets in motion the best of what organized citizens can offer to their citizenry and to themselves. In general, CS operates and mediates in vast arenas of social life between the individual/household and the state/market.

“While the ultimate aim of civic societies is inclusion, in principle, the society usually does exclude organizations that operate primarily outside the law” (Carolyn Elliot, 2003). The history of CS is inseparable from the history of the middle class. Civil Society is often based on the middle classes. It flourishes and thrives in situations where the middle class is the prominent section of the population and in those groups with less dependency for survival. CS is perceived in some circles as anti-state and even anti politics itself. Beteille emphasizes, “A society with individuals at one end or state on the other is difficult to live in but also to imagine.”

Civic society should be independent not only from the state but also from parties, economic blocks, members by birth, such as family, clan, ethnic and religious groups. Although CSOs are independent from state/market but are oriented toward and interact with the state and political sphere (Bizusew Mersha: July 2009). Civil society come at the forefront as advocate for civil rights, egalitarian transformation of society, as opposing repressive regimes; or as defying predatory states. They should be seen as generating influence over the state but not the conquest of state power. CS exists in some cases in opposition to the state (Hegel). CS requires the legal vigilance and regulatory safeguards of an engaged citizenry and a civilized state and must be examined by the three fold relationships between state, citizenship and mediating institutions.

III. Civil Society’s Role in Democratization:

The work of civic organizations can be understood in terms of their engagements and greater activism in civil virtue, participation and knowledge. “Generally, the notion of civil society is restricted to those associations which are not closely identified with an effort to win state power that they have little or no autonomy from political movements or parties” (Mamo Tirfe)

Civil Virtue is the moral principle of a civic movement in developing and enhancing the fundamental values of democracy, social justice, individual and human rights, equality and the public good. Involving diverse groups of people for the common good, with the purpose of binding them into an integral democratic polity, is the underlying principle of civil virtue. Civic Organizations help to educate citizens about their rights and responsibilities and they help combat or change policies that lack these principles of civil virtue.

One cannot bring democracy by mere public declarations and pronouncements. Democracy without active civic participation becomes a hollow idea or empty policy declaration behind which dictators of every color and hue cover them to maintain power. The range of civic participation and involvement is varied and vast. At the minimum it includes educating people about public affairs, political issues, civil rights and duties; increasing citizens’ participation; advocating and lobbying governments; preventing conflicts as well as resolving conflicts through facilitation, negotiation and mediation; scrutinizing and challenging the power of the state; developing democratic culture of tolerance, moderation and willingness to compromise.

Abraham Lincoln, in his Gettysburg address, 1863 defined Democracy as “government of the people, by the people, and for the people”. He added, “Democracy is not designed for efficiency but for accountability” (Melvin Urofsky, 2000). Urofsky states that in societies where there is genuine democratic governance, the following core principles guide the democratic process.For civic organizations to be effective and influence policies the rights of individuals must be respected and codified in the constitution; there has to be periodic democratic elections; there has to be genuine separation of power between the executive, legislative and judiciary; minority rights must be respected and protected by law; and there has to be freedom of the media.

The idea of CS has become inseparable from democracy. Building democracy is about the promotion of local and civil institutions. The more dense and vibrant civil society and social capital, the better the democracy and democratization. Civil society has been a magic bullet for development and democracy. The relationship between civil society and democracy is inherently political, inseparable from the nature of the state and the political forces arising from society. For democracy to work there must be free and fair election, accountable government and civil and political rights. Participation and empowerment deepens with civil society.

Civic Organizations also help educate the citizens about their rights and responsibilities and help combat or change restrictive policies and forces. For democracy to work and democratic institutions to flourish, the existence of civic organizations is a pre-requisite. Civic groups can defend their interests from oppressive and unjust policies and resist the illegal practices of a government or a group and act as a check to balance the law with the practice as well as influence policies that advance and promote the peoples’ interests.

IV. Ethiopian Traditional Civil Societies

Traditional voluntary organizations such as Debbo (labor sharing) Mahber, Senbete (religious), Idir (life insurance/mutual assistance) equib (capital accumulation) are ages old in Ethiopia.

Some of the traditional civil societies that people speak of as potentially useful for purposes of building democratic institutions and socio economic development are Shimglena, Equb and Idir. Many others that are thought to be useful in this regard have become defunct or replaced by peasant and urban associations. Those defunct are Debo, Gobez Aleqa, Afersata, and Shengo. For all practical purposes, these institutions have been destroyed by Derg and replaced by cadre led and party controlled institutions such as Urban and Peasant Associations. The destruction of these traditional institutions has robed the Ethiopian society its locally grown means of managing their lives. The same, urban and peasant associations are being used by the current regime for purposes of control, taxation and resource distribution.

In addition, faith related prophets (Bahitawis or Kalichas) pause themselves as messengers of God raising issues of injustice and abuse of power by the rulers. They advise the rulers if they don’t mend their abusive rules, the wrath of God will fall upon and destroy them. In most cases, the rulers pay attention and correct or lesson their abusive rules. This has an advocacy element in the modern sense of human right program activities. Ancient rulers believe in God or in something supernatural and take the words of the prophets at heart. Also, young boys and girls who attend the cattle or domestic animals are believed to have the power of predicting of what will come in the future. All these traditional ways of advocacy and venue of freedom of expressions are all gone. Even if they exist, their values have lost power and meaning.

Here, it might be helpful to offer brief definitions and explanations of the nature of these so much talked about traditional institutions, specifically, Shimglena/Mehal Sefari and Idir.

a). Mehal Sefari/Shimglena: What does Mehal Sefari mean? The literal meaning of it is “the one that camps at the center.” The word is loaded with militaristic conceptions of camping. The one that camps at the center is usually the leader. But its other meaning is someone who takes centrist or neutral positions on issues is characterized as Mehal Safari. The idea of Mehal Sefari is often mentioned as a traditional resource that could have played the role of civil society had it been allowed to develop by the powers that were. The Mehal Sefari version of advocacy and struggle for justice was usually played by religious hermits who come out of their solitary confinement to warn against violators of God’s laws in their governance and administration of justice.

In history, Mehal Safari has played two important roles in the political life of Ethiopia. One was in the pre-Zemene Mesafint, when Empress Mentwab wanted to rule as Empress long after her husband Emperor Bakafa died and would not let her daughter in law have the title of Empress. She even wanted to continue retaining the title of Empress during her grandson rule as well. It was during this time that the Gondar clergy and gentry interfered and negotiated the relinquishing of power that she had hold for over 25 years.

Another event in which Mehal Safari has influenced political decisions was at the turn of the 20th century when Mehal Safari demanded that the ministers be discharged from their responsibilities due to their corruption and in-competency. It was reported that Mehal Sefari’s demand were met swiftly. Those incidents and many others that Mehal Sefari stood up for what is right and remained neutral in mediating the issues at hand are idealized as a force for justice equated to what we call now civic force. Many people talk about bringing back the spirit of Mahal Safari to organize, advocate, mediate and solve complex problems we are facing.

However, in the days of left politics, Mehal Sefarinet was the most despised and shameful behavior primarily assigned to opportunistic individuals. It was portrayed like someone standing/sitting on the fence ready to fall on the side of victory. But the centrist or neutral idea of its meaning is lost in the rhetoric of political contenders. Because of that “either here or there” conception of political positions that many political players took, its meaning of independence and neutrality has been totally lost. In an effort to positively change the negative meanings that the left has assigned to Mehal Sefari, there is some consideration to revitalize the role of Mehal Sefari in the political life of Ethiopia. With the growth and development of the third force, such “black and white” positioning of parties may dissipate from the political scene of Ethiopia.

Shimglena, widely practiced even today is still functional and handles or interferes on any issues of contention from husband and wife problems to complex issues of resettling political differences. Its difference with Mehal Sefari is a matter of focus. Mehal Sefari dwells on political conflicts. Otherwise, both are neutral and advocate for a peaceful and fair resolution of conflicts. Shimglena is a process of managing differences. Differences are unavoidable in social life and happen between individuals, groups and organizations. The incorrect handling of differences has always led to serious division of groups and organizations resulting in crisis and violence. Many of the problems Ethiopia is facing now are results of incorrect handling of differences. One can say that incorrect handling of differences has marred the fabric of Ethiopian society. The way to crisis is paved in most cases by incorrect handling of differences. When differences are managed correctly, facts are not misrepresented or distorted, labeling and defamatory remarks are minimized and the sadistic or vengeance impulse of the group or individual contained, that is when crisis is averted. Shimglena provides an opportunity for correct handling of differences.

b). Idir is still functional and serves a useful purpose in the life of the Ethiopian people. Mamo Tirfe calls it a life insurance. He states that these traditional associations (Idir and Equib) are based on participatory principles as a result they tend to “promote accountability, transparency, tolerance and dialogue.”In addition, they tend to foster friendship among members. Survival and mutual security and ceremonial associations number more than 200,000 (Costantinos, 1996b). The Ministry of Capacity Building (MCB) 2004 states that the scale of civil society in Ethiopia is large because there are 39 million members of idirs in the country, while equbs (community savings and credit associations) have 21 million members.

'Equb' and 'Idir' can be used as a basis for doing business and mutual aid and caring purposes, in that order. The commitment of people to these traditional organizations should indeed be expanded and enhanced to include some advocacy content on socio-economic issues. However, our valuable traditional systems of caring for one another in the context of 'Idir', for instance, not only are sustained, but also reinforced.

Although Idir can be considered as a third force – between government and family- to address emergency needs such as death, it is essentially local and membership driven. Examining this traditional institution in its totality and upgrading its roles and incorporating aspects of contemporary civic practices and ideas including actions such as advocacy to influence public policy outcomes, creating public awareness of rights and responsibilities, increasing public participation in the affairs of the country and enhancing the democratization of the country could be important considerations.

V. Status of Civic Organizations in Ethiopia and Diaspora

Civic institutions in Ethiopia are not only undeveloped but also in disarray. There is little agreement on what their rolls and functions in the socio-economic and political life of Ethiopia.“There is little agreement as to where civil society plays a role in a public realm between family and government or whether individuals representing others can be considered a civil society” (Lishan Adam 2006).Adam adds that “There is a general consensus on the fact that civil society stands as a key force of development and it includes myriads of public voice advocates and actors.” “A very close examination of civic organizations in Ethiopia shows that they are built around poverty and famine issues facing the country.”

Desalegn Rahmato, in his writing of Civil Society &Democratization in Ethiopia argues that “Civic bodies have a public function beyond their specific objectives but this is not the case with informal institutions. The more civil society organizations emerge the more social capital is formed. Civic tradition is such more than capital formation. It involves social awareness and civic responsibility.” However, many vigorously argue that for civic institutions to be effective and fully serve the needs and interests of the Ethiopian population, must be based on traditional organizations, such as Idir or Mehal Safari by upgrading and nurturing them and building their organizational capacities.

people freely exercise their rights and initiate policies that they think are beneficial to the people.

b)Development of Civil Society in Ethiopia:

Before the 1974 Revolution, voluntary and organized civic activities were scanty and inadequate. The first charitable organization named "Yefiqerna Agelgilot Mahber" was established on Tahsas 16, 1918 under the chairmanship of Hakim Workineh and the Ethiopian Red Cross Society came into existence on the eve of the Italian invasion in 1936. Among later ones were the Ethiopian Teachers’ Association (ETA) that formed 1949 and the Confederation of Ethiopian Labor Unions (CELU) in 1962. Later, the Ethiopian Human Rights Council (EHRCO, renamed HRCO) in 1991, the Ethiopian Free Journalists Association (EFJA) in 1993 and The Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association (EWLA) in 1995 and many others were founded.

Following 1973/74 famine, The Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA) was established focusing on relief and rehabilitation until 1995. In 1995, there was a major shift in focus from relief and rehabilitation work to development. In 2007 there were about 4000 CSOs and the overwhelming majority working in the field of socio-economic development. Although CSOs are backbone to building democracy, those few right based CSOs are seen by the current government as political opposition. According to the registry of Ministry of Justice (2007) a total of 2,305 organizations have acquired legal registration. Local NGOs accounted for 75% (1742) of the total while International NGOs were 234.Until 2009, bureaucratic registration processes were painstaking. For example, Ethiopian Human Rights Council (EHRCO) formed in 1991 but got its license seven years later. A very close examination of civic organizations in Ethiopia shows that they are built around poverty and famine issues facing the country. Nonetheless, of late, we were observing encouraging emergence of civic movements that have started to actively address their missions. Unfortunately, the most intrusive and oppressive law was applied in 2010 against COs that gave the final blow to arrest the growth and development of civic organizations.

According to CRDA, the development of NGOs/CSOs in Ethiopia exhibit three phases: full engagement in relief and humanitarian work; the de-linking of relief and humanitarian work and focusing on basic services provision; engagement in governance, advocacy and human rights in addition to the service delivery. The history of NGOs in Ethiopia directly correlates with the droughts and famines of 1973/74 and 1983/84. These horrifying famines produced earnest response from the international community, bilateral and multilateral donors, and international NGOs (INGOs) for assistance and relief operations. Also, the number of local NGOs (LNGOs) increased dramatically during those days particularly after 1990.

Nonetheless, of late, we were observing encouraging emergence of civic movements that have started to actively address their missions. Civic Organizations such as Ethiopian Human Rights Council (EHRCO), that exposes human rights violation and the Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association (EWLA), for instance, engage primarily in women rights; number of professional associations, like Ethiopian Teachers Association and Ethiopian Economists Associations were also engaged on advocacy issues.

We have seen how the Ethiopian Human Rights Council has been challenging the current government of Ethiopia to respect its own laws. It has been one of the most critical voices of the prevailing undemocratic practices of the current government. Can we imagine if there were many other civic organizations such as EHRCO and each advocated for its interests with some vigor and determination, the situation in Ethiopia would have been much different and better. The history and development of NGOs in Ethiopia directly correlates with the occurrence of droughts and famines during 1973/74 and 1983/84. These horrifying famines produced earnest response from the international community, bilateral and multilateral donors, and international NGOs (INGOs) for assistance and relief operations. Ethiopian NGOs existed before the 1973/1974 famine, but subsequently the number of local NGOs (LNGOs) has increased dramatically since 1990.

Many LNGOs have been bogged down, particularly advocacy groups in lengthy procedural issues (registration and licensing) with the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). Advocacy CSOs have greater difficulty than developmental and humanitarian NGOs. Most NGOs were created by individuals, and did not grow out of popular support. They lack constituencies, and are viewed as “providers” while the communities where they work are the “recipients.” They are seen as “cash cows,” donor focused, and not constituency based. The sector is young and weak compared to other African countries such as Kenya and South Africa. Most LNGOs receive funding from external sources, and donors have looked to them for ways to assist ethnic-based communities using host-country nationals who know the cultures and terrains (Horn Consult 2003).

Problems and Challenges Facing Civil Societies in Ethiopia are numerous. During Derge’s oppressive rule, many of the traditional systems that could have been the seed for growth and development of civil society were destroyed. Derge not only suppressed many of the traditional civic societies, but also replaced them with party organizations of its own creation. It also removed and curtailed any opportunity for civil organization to grow and develop. Currently, the few that have survived and continue to engage in participatory activities face many challenges. Sisay Gebre-Egziabher (2003) lists many of the challenges civil society face in Ethiopia today.

• Government considers them as political involving in political agitation.
• Bureaucratic registration processes are painstaking. For example, Ethiopian Human
• Rights Council (EHRCO) formed in 1991 but got its license seven years later.
• Ethiopian Free Press Journalist Association (EFPJA) formed 1993 but got registered
• eight years after.
• Government interference on the activities of the civic organizations.
• Lack of awareness on the issues of human rights on the part of the general public.
• Absence of independent and effective judiciary.
• No longitudinal cooperation and solidarity among civic organizations. For instance
• Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA) an umbrella organization for NGOs operating in Ethiopia does not accept civic organizations that advocate for human rights.
• Traditional ones tend to be geographical and their services limited only to their memberships.
• Most recently the law that was promulgated in 2009 restricts to only 10% of the revenue particularly those CSOs that have missions of advocacy for human and democratic rights of individuals and groups. That is a final blow to arrest the growth and development of civic organizations.

A major critique by Ethiopian researchers (e.g., Rahmato 2002) and government, Ministry of Capacity Building (MCB 2004) is that of most LNGOs and INGOs are too urban-based. Seventy to eighty percent are located primarily in Addis Ababa, and 90% of the remaining activities outside the capital are in the four largest regions: Southern Nations and Nationalities Peoples Region (SNNPR), Amhara, Oromia, and Tigray.

Data collected by The AD Hoc CSO/NGO Task Force in 2008 shows the number of NGOs with ongoing projects by Region (table 1) and NGO projects in the country and resource flows by sector (Table 2).

Earlier in 1973/74 and 1983/84, the Non-Governmental Organizations were predominantly foreign and internationally based. They came to save lives and advocate for famine relief on behalf of the famine victims to individual governments, international humanitarian organizations and United Nations Organizations. Gradually, NGOs started to emerge domestically. Now there are hundreds of domestic NGOs and many have formed an umbrella organization known as Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA). There are 253 NGOs under CRDA now.

Although the name sounds Christian, the membership includes Muslims and other faith based organizations. The NGOs operating in Ethiopia, foreign or domestic, their primary focus is relief and development. They do not accommodate in their membership those NGOs that are Rights based organizations such as Ethiopian Human Rights Organizations due to the fact such organizations criticize government policies and practices pertaining human rights. Right based organizations have boldly come out against the policies and practices of the government. They are branded as political and associating with them is refrained. Many of the NGOs are timid and awfully afraid to utter a word against government policies. They even don’t see any value for right-based organizations.

The trend is such that the irresistible notion of civil society is limited only to relief and development work. This conception make it difficult for right based organizations such as Society for the Advancement of Human Rights (SHARE), Ethiopian Human Rights Council (EHRCO), Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association (EWL), Ethiopian Free Press Journalist Association (EFPJA), Ethiopian National Congress (ENC) and many others to fully address their mission.

The difficulties of understanding about civic movements can be best explained in relation to the formation of the Ethiopian National Congress (ENC) in 1997. ENC’s was no doubt a milestone in the history of Ethiopian civic movements. Its formation as a civil organization heralded the coming of age of the public in the political life of the country. ENC strongly embraces the idea of advocacy on important issues that affect the country and its people. In 1997 it came out declaring policies that challenge the undemocratic policies of the government. While advocating for human and individual rights of people, ENC fully embraced the idea of uniting the political opposition for national unity and establishing democratic governance. However, many people have misunderstood its work with the opposition political parties, and remain so even to this day. They perceive the activism of the ENC for social justice, national unity and the unity of the political opposition as an activism of a political organization. Challenging government policies, once considered only the purview of political organizations, is seen to be beyond the jurisdiction of what the ENC should be doing.

It should be clear from the outset that such political activism does not by any means change the character of ENC as a civic organization. It should be clear that the ENC has no political program. Nor does it aspire for political office. It seeks to attain social power and relational power with which to influence public policy. Ultimately, that is the strategic interest and goal of ENC as a civic organization. That is exactly what ENC would like to do and is doing.

b) Development of Civic Societies in the Diaspora:

The development of civic organizations in the Ethiopian Diaspora has been dependent on three important factors. One is the feelings and attitudes of people toward resettlement; the other is the size of the Ethiopian population in the Diaspora; and the third one is the organizing experiences, values and traditions that people bring from Ethiopia.

1. In earlier times the majority of people felt that their lives here is transitory. The tendency was

not to be enthusiastic about building civic organizations here. They preferred not to involve themselves in civic activities in their host country. Instead some opted for activities that will help facilitate their return home to Ethiopia. In many ways this involves political activities. This was particularly true with the students prior to 1980. Now, if people accept permanent resettlement in their host country, the tendency is to organize around their interest areas such as churches, businesses, mutual assistance associations or other educational and charitable activities like Ethiopian American Foundation (EAF). Many people directly relate the proliferation of MAAs after 1984 to this acceptance of permanent residency.

2. The size of the Ethiopian population has a direct bearing on the range and scope of civic organizations that are developed. The Ethiopian population in the USA is estimated to be 500,000 – 700,000. What we know for sure about Ethiopian population in the USA is that there were about 3,000 students and illegal immigrants before 1980 and there have been more than 115,000 Ethiopian refugees resettled since 1980. The rest are political asylees and immigrants. The number and nature of civic organizations could therefore be influenced by the size and demographic characteristics of the population. There has not been a critical mass of people to form civic organizations in many cities in the USA.

3. For good or bad, people take their traditions and values to wherever they go. Not only do they bring their traditions and values, they are invariably affected by what is happening in their homeland as well. Civic organizations, by their very nature are voluntary organizations. Voluntary work and voluntary organizations in Ethiopia are not that developed. So, there is very little experience that people can bring from their culture to develop civic organizations. Furthermore, because of the negative experiences people have gone through in the past forty or so years as regards to organized activity, many have developed mistrust, cynicism and apathy. It is not surprising to find slow development of civic organizations considering the fact that the size of the population is relatively small and new, and that skepticism and cynicism are rampant among the Ethiopian population in the Diaspora.

Types of Civic Organizations in the Diaspora

The kind of civic organizations that have been developing among Ethiopian Americans and that have measurable impact on the Ethiopian Diaspora are Mutual Assistance Associations (MAAs). Many of them came into being after 1984 in many cities where Ethiopian population numbered 200 or more. About 17 of them have been in existence at one time or another. But, presently there are about 14 MAAs in existence of which only 7-9 are functional. The formation of these MAAs is related to the 1980 Refugee Act and the resettlement of Ethiopian refugees in the United States. Since 1992, the resettlement of Ethiopian refugees has significantly diminished. That is why many MAAs became defunct and the surviving MAAs are facing serious challenges.

The MAAs in most cases are engaged in providing necessary, basic and developmental services to their constituencies. The services they provide include cultural adjustment counseling, employment, children and youth development, housing, immigration, health outreach, English as a Second Language (ESL), entrepreneurial training, micro-loan and advocacy for a variety of needs and interests for their constituency both nationally and internationally. Essentially, service and advocacy are the major focus of this group of civic organizations.

The second group of civic organizations that are developing slowly can be referred to as special interest civic organizations. The Ethiopian American Foundation, Relief Organization for Ethiopia, Ethiopian Arts and Cultural Center, People to People (P2P) and the like can be classified in this group of civic organizations. Although national in scope, this group of organizations has certain defined missions based on interest and profession. They want to address specific areas of needs that are manageable and limited in scope.

This group of organizations is in their formative stages and most of them came into being after 1991. They are relatively new and there is limited information on their status, their impact both in the Diaspora and in Ethiopia.

The third groups of civic organizations that are developing at a faster rate are Advocacy organizations. They advocate against certain policies and for human rights, democratic rights, for national unity, against ethnic federation etc. Their social activism and public pronouncements seemingly put them in the category of political organizations. Peace and Democracy for Ethiopia, Mahidere Andnet, Ethiopian National Congress, Shengo, Amde Hibret, SOCEPP, Ethiopian American Council (EAC), Ande Ethiopia, International Action Committee, Ethiopian American for Democracy (EAD), recently Ethiopiawinnet: For the Defence of Citizen Rights etc. can be categorized in this group of organizations.

Their advocacy work has successfully exposed the gross human rights abuses and illegal activities of the regime in Ethiopia. Challenging government policies, which was once considered the purview of political organizations, is also taken up by civic organizations. However, these organizations have no political program and are not aspiring for political power. They want to amass social power, relational power that will influence public policy. Ultimately, that should be the strategic goal of civic organizations in Ethiopia.

Recognizing and realizing the importance of civic organizations and the tremendous contribution that they can make for a society is important. At this difficult time in Ethiopian history, forming civic organizations and addressing the grave problems facing the Ethiopian people is greatly expected from Ethiopians throughout the Diaspora. Here, I would like to quote Martin Luther King. "The ultimate measure of a person is not where he/she stands in moments of comfort and convenience but where he /she stands at times of challenge and controversy." Ethiopia needs our help and we can best deliver that help by organizing and advocating for changes toward the best interest of our people. The chart below might help to detangle the maze or the confusion about our understanding of civic organizations.

Democratization of a society without civic institutions is expecting what was never before and that will never be in the future. However, the problem faced by civic movements in the country rests not only on their limited development but also on the lack of understanding what their roles and functions are and should be. The public understanding of civic movements, including some proponentsof civic movements, is scanty. It lends itself to confusion and different expectations.

(c). Some Suggestions to Upgrading Traditional Associations.

The first thing to do before upgrading traditional civil institutions would be to bring together modern civic organizations and traditional institutions for purposes of reaching an understanding how traditional civic organizations function. The lack of understanding of civil societies’ roles and areas of engagement and absence of a new strategic alliance between the various civic bodies in Ethiopia is a draw back to the growth and development of civil organizations. To develop a conceptual framework of forming an umbrella organization or a coalition of civic organizations in Ethiopia and in the Ethiopian Diaspora should be a priority.

Organizing and organizations are universal human experiences. The idea of organizing is to govern, strengthen, guide and codify human relationships and build POWER. No matter the size, level, sophistication, goal, form or structure, organization is one of the most basic elements of human existence and survival. It is really hard to think of human growth and development, and civilization in general, without people coming together to work in unison and solidarity. Coming together and establishing a defined relationship for mutual benefit is what organization is is all about. The need for organizing arises from the need to solve problems by pooling in human resources.

It is extremely important to realize, or be aware of, the need to organize for the purpose of national survival and solve the chronic or emerging problems, open opportunities and struggle for our rights to provide good education to our children or to influence policies affecting Ethiopia as a whole.

Organizing and coalition formation requires knowledge and skill. Throughout history we have seen the development of huge and sophisticated organizations and institutions. The family, the

first and smallest institution is credited for the continuity of human life through a form of organization (relationship) called marriage. This is just to indicate or affirm the importance of organization in human life, for growth and development, for survival and for enjoyment and continuity. Organization is therefore not only a human invention for assuring human survival; it is also a human condition or nature that evolves from the human existence.

Of course, forming coalitions is building relationships among various civic organizations for more influence and power that can be put to bear on governments. That relationship if handled carefully and appropriately transforms itself to Power. As it is established and very well known today, Power is the ability to do what one wants to do.

So far, the role of civil organizations in the socio-economic and political life of Ethiopia has not only been negligible but also limited in scope. There have been few independent civil organizations with defined and articulated political interests. Advocacy for political interests, democratic and human rights, policy changes and national unity in the manner few CSOs are actively working now has not been popular. Such missions and activities were once assumed to be the purview of political organizations. So, most civic organizations created independently spell out their mission as non-political, and pursue policies that separate their mission from political parties.

What is not talked about and very well understood is the spillover effects of coalition formation process. In the processes of forming unity, there is communication and understanding of each other. However, the critical benefit is the democratic values and traditions that are being developed in the processes. Unity can be forged by means of force; that may not last long; it may create compounded problems; but unity based on democratic processes last longer and addresses the democratic needs of various groups involved. The formation of a coalition of civic organizations involves negotiation; mediation and consensus building based on democratic principles.

After the coalition is formed, it is absolutely necessary to commission a study group composed of anthropologists, sociologists, economists and other disciplines to study and recommend the ways and means these traditional associations can be upgraded to become full-fledged civic organizations. The task assignments could be for example how to structure and institute Shimglena becomes a mediating and conflict resolution body in the country. The study should use and focus the active participation and input of traditional institutions as forums for learning and defining and redefining problems. Encourage groups to view the problems that engulf them and connect and network with others to strengthen their responses to the hurdles they encounter each day.

In the case of Idir, the structure is there. What it may need is perhaps expanding its scope and areas of interest. It could be to add and expand its functions so as to include advocacy and development functions. Some Idirs in Addis are already involved advocating for improved supply of water, electricity and better schools for their members and neighborhoods in addition to supporting member during the time of sorrow and happiness.

V. Conclusion

It must have been clear by now that democratic governance can neither triumph nor come about

without active and committed participation of civic organizations. The status of civic organizations both in Ethiopia and Diaspora is at an embryonic stage requiring earnest efforts particularly on the part of new and emerging civic organizations to form and work together with home grown traditional institutions. These emerging civic organizations, first, have to form alliance with traditional ones, learn from them as well as teach for developing workable and realistic goals of democratizing the Ethiopian society.

References

Adam, Lishan, “Fostering the Capacities of the Ethiopian Civil Society to Influence Information and Communication Technologies (ICTS) Policies”, the Association of Progressive Communications papers: African Country Research Papers.
Anita Spring, MSI and Bob Groelsema, “Enhancing Civil Society Organizations and Women’s Participation in Ethiopia: A Program Design for Civil Society and Women’s Empowerment “, Produced for USAID/Ethiopia and USAID Center for Democracy and Governance August 6, 2004

Bratton, Michael (1989), Beyond the State: Civil society and Associational Life in Africa, World Politics, XLI, 3:407-30.
Betellie, Andre (2003), ‘Civil Society and its institutions’, in Carolyn, M. Elliot (ed.), in Civil Society and Democracy, New Delhi: Oxford University press.
Bizusew Mersha: Mapping a Civil Society Organization on the Ethiopian Side of Karamoja Cluster, July 2009).
Constantions, B.T. (1996b). “Mechanisms for Relating to and Mapping Local Institutions: A Pilot Study on NGOS – community based and civic society organizations in Ethiopia: Findings and recommendations” Addis Ababa: Center for Human Environment and Development Studies.

Constantinos, B.T., J.J. Von Gennip, et al. (1996d). “ A Feasibility Study to Establish the Ethiopian Institute of Democracy.” Addis Ababa: Royal Netherlands Embassy and the commission of the European Union.
de Tocquville, Alexis (1969), Democracy in America 2, New York: Harper and Row.
EHRCO (1995), Democracy, Rule of Law and Human Rights in Ethiopia, Ethiopian Human Right Council, Addis Ababa: Commercial Printing Enterprise.

Elliot, Carolyn M., (ed) (2003), ‘Civil Society and Democracy: A Comparative Review Essay’, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Gebre-Egziabher, Sisay (2002) “The Role of Civil Society Organizations in Ethiopia”, a paper Presented at the 5th International Conference, Cape Town: SA University.

Haggard, S. and R. Koufman (1995), The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hefner, Robert (2003), ‘Civil Society: Cultural possibility of a Modern Ideal’, in Carolyn M Elliot (ed), Civil Society: and Democracy, New York: Oxford University press

Horn Consult. 2003. Constituency Building: Diagnostic Survey on Ethiopian NGOs. Addis Ababa. CRDA and Oxfam.
Rohmato, Desalegn, (2002) “Civil society and Memorization in Ethiopia: The Challenge of Democracy from Below”, in Bahru Zewde on S. Passewang (eds.), Uppsala, Nordieta Afuka Institute and Addis Ababa, Forum for Social Studies
Rahmato, Desalegn (1991), “Investing in Tradition peasants and rural institutions in Post Revolution Ethiopia”, Socologia Ruralis.
Sisay Gebre-Egziabher (2003), “Challenges faced by local NGOs in Ethiopia with the global shift in development approach: from need based to right based approach” Atlas Convention Inc., September 30, 2003.
Taylor, Charles (2003), ‘Models of Civil society’, in Carolyn M. Elliot (ed), Civil Society and Democracy, New Delhi Oxford University.
Tester, K. (1992), Civil Society, London: Rutledge.
Urofsky, Melvin I. “The Root Principles of Democracy”, US Department of State: International Information Programs, Democracy papers.

List of Ethiopia Diaspora Civic Organizations (Most don’t exist or dysfunctional now)

1. Action Professional’s Assoc. for the People: http://www.apapeth.org/
2. Anuak Justice Council: info@anuakjustice.org : obang@solidaritymovement.org
3. Christian Relief & Development Association: http://www.crdaethiopia.org/index.php
4. Citizens Charter: C/o Dr. Berhanu Abegaz; bxabeg@wm.edu
5. DeirSultan: http://www.deirsultan.com/
6. Dejen Ledemocracy/Constituents for Democracy-Dallas-Fort Worth: C/O Ato Teferawork Assefa.
7. Devinet: C/o Abebe Chekol : Abebe.chekol@et.britishcouncil.org
8. EINEPS: Ethiopian Institute for Nonviolent Education and Peace Studies
9. Eskemeche: eske.meche@yahoo.com
10. EthioAmericans for Change/Facebook http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14221870779
11. Ethiopia and Sudan Border Issue Committee
12. Ethiopia Civil Society Empowerment: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/ETHIOPIAEXTN/0,,conte ntMDK:20225837~menuPK:3949500~pagePK:1497618~piPK:217854~theSitePK:295930,00.html
13. Ethiopia Somali Advocacy Council: http://www.galbeed.com/
14. Ethiopian Air Force Association:
15. Ethiopian American Civic Advocacy (EACA): www.eacamoveon.org (Dr. Mekdes B Kassa-Chair - eacadvocacy@gmail.com)
16. Ethiopian Common Borders/ facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=78789966124&ref=mf
17. Ethiopian Democratic Action League (Tegbar)
18. Ethiopian Economics Association: http://www.eeaecon.org/Index1.php
19. Ethiopian Forum for Peace, Development & Democracy: info@truthaids.org
20. Ethiopian Human Rights Council: http://www.ehrco.org/
21. Ethiopian National Congress: http://ethiopiannationalcongress.org/Home.asp
22. Ethiopian National Priorities Consultative Process: www.enpcp.org
23. Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahdo Church: http://www.eotcholysynod.org/
24. Ethiopian Veterans Association: http://www.ethiox.com/press3/EVA12022005.pdf
25. Ethiopian Women for Peace and Development (EWPD): ewpd@ewpd.info
26. Forum for Social Studies: http://www.fssethiopia.org.et/

27. Gasha for Ethiopians: admin@ethiopiangasha.org
28. Global Alliance for Justice: http://www.globalallianceforethiopia.org/
29. HUNDEE: http://www.wiserearth.org/organization/view/6d64bf626dfcb53b08aba22c0be4c251
30. International Ethiopian Women’s Organization: http://ethiopianwomenorganization.com/
31. Mahdere Andinet Ethiopian Association
32. Network of Ethiopian Scholars: http://ethiopianpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/07/network-of-thiopian- scholars-nes.html
33. Ogaden Human Rights Committee: http://www.ogadenrights.org/
34. OSSREA: Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (HQ in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia) : ossrea@ethionet.et
35. SOCEPP – Germany based: http://www.socepp.de/
36. SOCEPP –Canada based: socepp-can@humanrightsethiopia.com
37. Solidarity Committee for a new Ethiopia
38. Sustainable land use forum: http://www.sluf.org.et/
39. T’Kur Abay Resource center: http://www.ethiopians.com/abay/
40. Tatek Ethiopia: Tatekethiopia@hotmail.com
41. Tatek Lenesanet: http://www.ethiox.com/press3/EVA12022005.pdf
42. The Crown Council of Ethiopia: http://www.ethiopiancrown.org/

Blog 11. The Rich Legacies of Writing of the EOC

በኢትዮጵያ ኦርቶዶክስ ቤተ ክርስቲያን የጽሑፍ ቅርስ ላይ ከአለኝ ትዝብት

ዶ/ር ጌታቸው ኃይሌ 

እኛ የኢትዮጵያ ኦርቶዶክስ ቤተ ክርስቲያን ምእመናን የትልቅ ታሪክ ችቦ ተሸካሞች ነን። ችቦውን መሸከም መስቀለ ሞቱን የመሸከም ያህል ይከብዳል፤ ግን የኩሩው ማንነት መታወቂያችን ስለሆነ ከባዱን ሸክም በደስታና በጸጋ እንሸከመዋለን። ስለችቦውና ስለ አቀጣጣዮቹ ተናገር ስላሉኝ ተደስቻለሁ። ቅዱስ ዳዊት “ተፈሣሕኩ እስመ ይቤሉኒ ቤተ እግዚአብሔር ነሐውር” (ወደእግዚአብሔር ቤት እንሂድ ስላሉኝ ተደስቻለሁ) ባለው አነጋገር ስለተጠቀምኩ መንፈሱ እንደማይወቅሰኝ እለምነዋለሁ።

ትልቁን ታሪካችንን በመመዝገብ የትልቅ ሕዝብ ቀጣዮች መሆናችንን የነገሩን የቤተ ክርስቲያን ሊቃውንት ናቸው። ባለውለታዎች ስለሆኑ፥ ኑ እናመስግናቸው፤ ቅዱሳን ስለሆኑ፥ ኑ እንዲጸልዩልን እንለምናቸው።

“ሊቃውንት አባቶቻችን ምን ምን መዘገቡልን?” የሚለውን ጥያቄ ለመመለስ ጥናቱ እንደቀጠለ ነው። በዚህ ጥናት ላይ የምዕራባውያን ምሁራን ተሳትፎ ከፍ ያለ ቦታ ይዟል፤ አድናቆትም አለኝ። የምዕራባውያን ምሁራን በምርምራቸው የሚያደርጉትን ስሕተት ሁሉ ከክፋታቸው እንደመነጨ አድርጌ አላየውም። ለምሳሌ በኪዳነ ወልድ ክፍሌ ስም የሚታወቀውን መጽሐፈ ሰዋስው ወግስ ወመዝገበ ቃላት ሐዲስን የሚመጥን የግዕዝ መዝገበ ቃላት በኢትዮጵያ አልተጻፈም። የዚህ ድንቅ መጽሐፍ መሠረት ጀርመናዊው ዲልማን በላቲን ቋንቋ ያዘጋጀው የግዕዝ መዝገበ ቃላት ነው። እኔም ማስረጂያ ይዤ እንዲያርሙ የምጠይቃቸውን እርማት፥ በማልቀበለው ምክንያት እምቢ ያሉበትን ጊዜ አላጋጠመኝም።

የምዕራባውያን ምሁራን የግዕዝን ምንጮች ከሚመረምሩበት ምክንያት አንዱ፥ በዓለም ላይ የጠፉ የጥንት የክርስትና ሃይማኖት ምንጮች ኢትዮጵያ ገዳማት ውስጥ ይገኙ እንደሆነ ለማወቅ ነው። ክርስትና የዛሬውን መልክ እስኪይዝ ብዙ እንቅፋቶችን አልፏል። እንቅፋቶቹን ከፈጠሩት ምክንያቶች አንዱ ብዙ የክርስትናን ታሪክ ዘጋቢዎች መነሣት ነው። እዚህ ላይ “በእኛ ዘንድ የተፈጸመውንና የታመነውን የሥራውን ዜና በሥርዐት ሊጽፉ የጀመሩ ብዙዎች ናቸው” ያለውን የቅዱስ ሉቃስን ምስክርነት መጥቀስ ይቻላል። የጥንቶቹ ሊቃውንት ከውዝግብ ለመውጣት ሲሉ ጥቂቶቹን መጻሕፍት መርጠው የቤተ ክርስቲያን ሕጋዊ መጻሕፍት አድርገው አወዛጋቢ ነገር ያለባቸውን ሌሎቹን ኮነኗቸው፤ አጠፏቸውም። ዛሬ የሃይማኖት ተመራማሪዎች እነዚህ የተኮነኑ መጻሕፍትና በሌላ ምክንያት የጠፉ ስለክርስትና ታሪክ የሚነግሩን ነገር ይኖራል በማለት ይፈልጓቸዋል።

በመጠኑም ቢሆን ተገኝተዋል። በጣም የታወቁትን ልተውና አንድ አሜሪካዊ ተማሪ በቅርብ ቀን ስላገኘው የጥንታዊ ድርሰት ብጣሽ (fragment) ልናገር። ሙሴና የፈርዖን ጠንቋዮች ታምራት በመሥራት ይወዳደሩ እንደነበረ እናስታውሳለን። አንድ ያልታወቀ ደራሲው ስለፈርዖን ጠንቋዮች የደረሰው ጥንታዊ ድርሰት 

ኖሯል። መኖሩ የታወቀው የድርሰቱ አንድ ብጣሽ በግሪክኛው ተገኝቶ ነው። ይህ ተማሪ ያገኘው የግዕዝ ብጣሽ ብራና ግሪክኛው ውስጥ ያለውን የሚመሰክርና የጐደለውን የሚያሟላ ነው። ተማሪው ከማግኘቱ በፊት እንዲህ ያለ ድርሰት በግዕዝ መኖሩን ማንም አያውቅም ነበር። ይቺ ብጣሽ የብራና ጽሑፍ መገኘት ያደረገው አስተዋጽኦ በብጣሹ መጠን የሚገመት አይደለም።

በግሌ ወደ አጋጠሙኝ ሁለት ጉዳዮች ልሻገር። አባ ባሕርይ መዝሙረ ክርስቶስን ሲደርሱ ከጠቀሟቸው ብዙ መጻሕፍት ውስጥ አንዱ ከሊላ ወድምና የሚባለው መጽሐፍ እንደሆነ ነግረውናል። እኔም ድርሰቶቻቸውን ስተች አንሥቼዋለሁ። መጽሐፉ በብዙ ቋንቋዎች ተተርጒሞ ሳለ በግዕዝ ስላልተገኘ፥ ሊቃውንቱ የመነኵሴውን ቃል መጠራጠር ጀምረው ነበር። ግን መጽሐፉ ራሱ ባይገኝም፥ የሐይቅ ገዳም መጽሐፉ እንደነበረው ማስረጃ አግኝቻለሁ፤ መዝገባቸው ከመዘገባቸው መጻሕፍት አንዱ ከሊላ ወድምና ነበረ። መጽሐፉን አይተውት ይሁን ወይም ስሙን ከመዝገብ ላይ አግኝተውት ይሁን ባይታወቅም፥ ሊቀ ጠበብት አክሊለ ብርሃን ከአዘጋጁት የመጻሕፍት መዝገብ ውስጥ አግብተውታል።

ሁለተኛው፥ ዮሴፍ ወአስኔት የሚባለውን መጽሐፍ የሚመለከት ነው። ይህም መጽሐፍ በብዙ ቋንቋዎች ተተርጕሞ ሲገኝ በግዕዝ አልተገኘም። ግን አባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ መጽሐፈ ምስጢር በሚባለው መጽሐፋቸው ውስጥ እመቤታችንን “ንህብ ዘአስኔት” (የአስኔት ንብ) ብለዋታል። አስኔት ንብ እንደነበራት የሚነግረን ምንጭ ዮሴፍ ወአስኔት ብቻ ስለሆነ ደራሲው አባ ጊዮርጊስ መጽሐፉ እንደነበራቸው--ኢትዮጵያ እንደነበራት--ታምኖበታል። እዚህም ላይ ትንሽ አስተዋፅኦ አድርጌያለሁ።

ከእኛ ሊቃውንትም ብላቴን ጌታ ኅሩይ ወልደ ሥላሴና ሊቀ ጠበብት አክሊለ ብርሃን ምን ምን መጻሕፍት እንዳሉን በዝርዝር ጽፈዋል። ግን በቂ አይደለም። ምርምሩ ይቀጥላል። ምኞቴ በዚህ በተቀደሰ ተግባር ብዙ ወጣት ኢትዮጵያውያን እንዲሰማሩ ነው።

አባቶቻችንን የማደንቀው ለግዕዝ ያንን ሁሉ የሃይማኖት መጽሐፍ የመቀበያ ችሎታ ማስታጠቃቸው ነው። ይህ የሚያመለክተው ግዕዝ ከአክሱም ዘመነ መንግሥት በፊት ዳብሮ እንደነበረ ነው።

ለምሳሌ ግዕዝ “ተቆጣ” ለማለት ከአራት የማያንሱ ቃላት እንዳሉት በአጋጣሚ አይቻለሁ፤ “መአከ” (“ተምእከ”)፥ “መጐጸ” (“አመጐጸ”)፥ “ተምዐ” (“ተምዕዐ”)፥ “ተቈጥዐ”።

አማርኛ የሌለው አንዳንድ ቃላትም አጋጥመውኛል፤ ለምሳሌ፥ “ሕልበት” (nostril)፥ “ምንሀብ” (factory). አለቃ ኪዳነ ወልድ ክፍሌ “ሕልበት”ን መተርጐሚያ አማርኛ ቢያጡ፥ “የአፍንጫ ጉንጭ” አሉት።

የግዕዝን ችሎታ ብናውቅ ኖሮ፥ “bank” የሚለው የእንግሊዝኛ ቃል አማርኛ ውስጥ አይገባም ነበር። “ባንክ” በመሠረቱ የገንዘብ መለዋወጫ ጠረጴዛ (bench) ነው። የሉቃስን ወንጌል ስናነብ ምዕራፍ ፲፱ ላይ ጌታችን የሰጠን አንድ ምሳሌ እናገኛለን። እንደምሳሌው፥ አንድ ጌታ ከአሽከሮቹ ለዓሥሩ ነግደው እንዲያተርፉለት ዓሥር ምናናት ከፋፍሎ ሰጥቷቸው ነበር። በመጨረሻ ሁሉም ገንዘቡን ከነትርፉ ለጌታቸው ሲያስረክቡ፥ አንዱ ብቻ የወሰደውን ሳይነግድበት ሳያተርፍበት እንዳለ ከትቶ እንዳለ ለጌታው መልሶ ሰጠው። ጌታው አዝኖና ተቆጥቶ እንዲህ አለው፤

“ወለምንት ኢያግባእከ ወርቅየ ውስተ ማእድ”
([ላለመነገድህ ምክንያት ካለህ] 
ታዲያ ገንዘቤን ለምን ከማእድ አላስገባህም?”

ምንጩ ግሪክኛው የሚለውም “ትራፔዛ” (ጠረጴዛ) ነው። ታዲያ የአማርኛው ትርጕም ከላይ እንዳመለከትኩት መሆን ሲገባው፥ የመጽሐፍ ቅዱስ ማኅበር ትርጉም “ባንክ”፥ የኦርቶዶክሶቹ “ለዋጮች” ይላል። ግን ቀደም ብሎ “ማእድ” እንዳለ ከግዕዝ ወደ አማርኛ ቢተላለፍ ኖሮ “ባንክ” የሚለውን የእንግሊዝኛ ቃል ምንም ሳይጕድልብን ልናስቀረው እንችል ነበር።

የዮሐንስ ወንጌልን ሳነብና ፥ ምዕ 19፤ ቍ. 24 ላይ ስደርስ ደግሞ፥ ስለ ግዕዝ የቃላት ብልጽግናና ስለአባቶች ጥንቃቄ የገረመኝና እኛን ልጆቻቸውን የሚወቅስ ነገር አጋጠመኝ፤ ጥቅሱን እንዳለ ልጥቀሰው፤

ወሐራሰ ሶበ ሰቀልዎ ለኢየሱስ ነሥኡ አልባሲሁ ወረሰይዎ አርባዕተ ክፍለ ለአሐዱ ሐራ ክፍለ። ወክዳኖሂ እልታኀ ዘአልቦ ርፍአት ዘእምላዕሉ እኑም ኵለንታሁ። ወተባሀሉ በበይናቲሆሙ ኢንግምድ ወኢንስጥጥ አላ ንትፋሰስ ለዘረከቦ ይርከቦ። ከመ ይብጻሕ ቃለ መጽሐፍ ዘይቤ። ተካፈሉ አልባስየ ለርእሶሙ ወተዓፀው ዲበ ዐራዝየ።

ወታደሮቹ ኢየሱስን ከሰቀሉት በኋላ፥ ልብሱን ወስደው ለእያንዳንዱ ወታደር አንድ ክፍል እንዲደርስ አራት ቦታ ከፈሉት። መርፌ ስላልነካው ከላይ እስከታች አንድ ወጥ ሆኖ ስለተሠራው ስለ ፈርጅ ቀሚሱ ግን እርስ በርሳቸው (እንዲህ) ተባባሉ፥ “ዕጣ እንጣጣልና ለደረሰው ይድረሰው እንጂ አንቅደደው”። ይህም፥ “ልብሶቼን ለራሳቸው ተከፋፈሉት፤ በቀሚሴም ላይ ዕጣ ተጣጣሉ” ያለው የመጽሐፍ ቃል ይፈጸም ዘንድ ነው።)

እንግሊዝኛውም እንደ አማርኛው ከሁለቱም ቦታ “ዕጣ ተጣጣሉ” (“cast lots”) ነው የሚለው።

. . . So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see who will get it.” This was to fulfill what the scripture says, “They divided my clothes among themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots.”

በግዕዝ ግን አነጋገሩ የተገለጠው በሁለት የተለያዩ ሐረጎች መሆኑን ልብ እንበል፤ በ “ተፋሰሱ” እና በ “ተዐፀዉ”። ለምን እንዲህ ሆነ ብየ የግሪኩን ምንጭ ባየው፥ እውነትም ሁለቱ ሐረጎች በግሪክኛውም የተለያዩ ናቸው፡lachomen እና ebalon kleeron።

********

ባሁኑ ሰዓት ጥሪየ አድርጌ የያዝኩት አባቶቻችን ከውጪው ዓለም ምን ተረጐሙልን፥ እነሱስ በተረጐሙት ላይ ምን አከሉበት የሚሉትን ሁለቱን ጥያቄዎች መመለስን ነው። አምሳያቸው እውጪ አገር ካለ ከውጪ የተተረጎሙ ናቸው ማለት አያስቸግርም። ደንቃራ የሆነብኝ አንዳንዶቹን የግዕዝ መጻሕፍት “ከምዕራቡ ዓለምና ከመካከለኛው ምሥራቅ ጠፍተው ነው እንጂ፣ ትርጕም ናቸው” የሚለው አነጋገር ነው። እርግጥ ከሌላው ዘንድ ጠፍተው እኛ ዘንድ የተገኙ አሉ። ይኸም ቢሆን አባቶቻችንና ቤተ ክርስቲያናችንን የሚያስመሰግን ነው። 

ሆንም እኛ ተቀባዮች ብቻ ባንሆን እንመርጣለን፤ ለነገሩ ተቀባዮች ብቻም አይደለንም። ይኸንንም ለማሳየት ለዛሬው ንግግሬ ሁላችሁም በምታውቁት በመጽሐፈ ቅዳሴያችን ላይ አተኩራለሁ።

የዶክተር ገብረ ጻድቅ ደገፉና የኔ መምህር ቄስ ማርቆስ ዳውድ የመጽሐፈ ቅዳሴውን እንግሊዝኛ ሲያሳትሙ፥ እመቅድሙ ውስጥ እንዲህ ብለው ጽፈዋል፤

“It is said by the Ethiopian Church authorities that they received their liturgy of fourteen Anaphoras from the Church of Egypt. The Church of Egypt confirms this but has, unfortunately, lost most of the fourteen.”

(በኢትዮጵያ ቤተ ክርስቲያን ባለሥልጣኖች ዘንድ ዓሥራ አራቱን የቅዳሴ መጻሕፍታቸውን ከግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን እንደወሰዱ ይነገራል። የግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን ይኸንን ታረጋግጣለች። ግን መጥፎ ዕድል ሆኖ ከዓሥራ አራቶቹ አብዛኛዎቹ ጠፍተውባታል።)

የግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን የጠፉባት የቅዳሴ መጻሕፍት ቍጥር የሚታወቀው ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ባሉት መጻሕፍት ቍጥር መሆኑ ነው። እንዲህ ከሆነ፥ ከዓሥራ አራት ሊበልጡ ነው። ምክንያቱም ቄሱ አልሰሙም እንጂ፥ ቅዳሴዎቹ ወደኻያ ይጠጋሉ። መምህሬ ቄስ ማርቆስ ዳውድ ይህን መቅድም ሲጽፉና ትርጕሙን ሲያሳትሙ እያወቁ ሁለት በደል ፈጽመዋል፤ (1) “የግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን ይኸንን ታረጋግጣለች” ያሉት ማስረጃ ሳይኖራቸው ነው። (2) መጽሐፈ ቅዳሴውን የተረጐመላቸው አብሮ አደግ ወዳጄና ጓደኛየ ዶክተር ገብረ ጻድቅ ደገፉ ነው። ግን እኝህ መንፈሳዊ አባትና መምህር ይኸንን ሐቅ ጨቁነውታል፤ የገብረ ጻድቅን ስም ለምስጋና እንኳን አላነሡትም።

ከታተመው መጽሐፈ ቅዳሴ ውስጥ ያሉት የቅዳሴ ጸሎቶች (አኰቴተ ቍርባን) ዓሥራ አራት የሆኑት ለኅትመት የተመረጠው የብራና ቅጂ ውስጥ ያሉት ዓሥራ አራት ስለነበሩ ነው። ካህናቱ እንደምታስታውሱት፥ ቅዳሴ ጎርጎርዮስ (ነአኵቶ ለገባሬ ሠናያት--ነአኵተከ እግዚኦን አይደለም) የሚያነሣው ሊቀ ጳጳሱን አባ ዮሐንስን (፲፮ኛው 1676-1718) እና ጳጳሱን አባ ሲኖዳን (1671-1693) ነው። የእትሙ ምንጭ የተቀዳው በነሱ ዘመን በ1676 እና በ1693 መካከል በነበረው ዘመን ነው ማለት ነው።

ያደረግሁት ምርምር “ጥሩ ዕድል ሆኖ ከዓሥራ አራቶቹ አብዛኛዎቹ” ከግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን የመጡ ሳይሆኑ፥ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ ድርሰቶች መሆናቸውን አረጋግጦልኛል። አባ ጊዮርጊስ በአፄ ዳዊትና በአፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ ዘመን የኖሩ ብዙ መጻሕፍት የደረሱ ታላቅ የቤተ ክርስቲያን ሊቅ ናቸው። ከድርሰቶቻቸው ውስጥ ኆኅተ ብርሃን፣ አርጋኖነ ውዳሴ (= አርጋኖነ ድንግል)፣ ውዳሴ መስቀል፤ መጽሐፈ ብርሃን፣ ጸሎተ ፈትቶ፣ ፍካሬ ሃይማኖት፣ መጽሐፈ ምስጢር የሚባሉ መጻሕፍት ይገኛሉ።

ደራሲያቸው ያልተረጋገጠውን አኰቴተ ቁርባኖች የመረመርኩትና የጥናቴን ውጤት ለኅትመት የላክሁት እነዚህ መጻሕፍት የተጻፉበትን ስልት መሣሪያ በማድረግ ነው። ምርምሬን የጀመርኩት ውበቱን ምዕራባውያን በመሰከሩለት ድርሰታቸው በአርጋኖነ ውዳሴ ነው። ግን መጀመሪያ አርጋኖነ ውዳሴ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ እንጂ፥ እንደሚታመንበት “የአርመናዊው ጊዮርጊስ” (“Giorgis the Armenian”) እንዳይደለ ማስመስከር ነበረብኝ። ያስመሰከርኩበት ጥናት የምዕራባውያን ሊቃውንት ቀንድ የሆነ ሊቅ፥ ‘The erroneous dating of the Arganonä Wəddase . . . as well as its false attribution to un unknown “Giorgis the Armenian” have been conclusively refuted’ ሲል ፍርዱን መዝግቧል። 

ይኸ በራሱ አንድ አስደሳች የድካም ውጤት ነው። እርግጥ በኛ ዘንድ አርጋኖነ ውዳሴ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ መሆኑን የሚጠራጠር የለም። ግን የኢትዮጵያ ታሪክ በምዕራቡ ዓለም በሰፊው ስለሚጻፍ፥ ልጆቻችንም እነሱ ዘንድ ስለሚማሩ፥ ታሪካችንን በተገኘበት ቦታና ጊዜ ሁሉ ማስተካከል ግዴታችን ነው። ከቅዳሴዎቹ አብዛኞቹ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ መሆናቸውን ለማሳየት የምጥረውም ከግብፅ ቤተ ክርስቲያን የመጡ ናቸው ተብሎ በሀገራችን ሳይቀር ተቀባይነት ያገኘውን የተሳሳተ እምነት ለማስቀረት ነው።

አርጋኖነ ውዳሴ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ መሆኑ ከተረጋገጠ የአጻጻፋቸው ስልት ምን እንደሚመስል ላሳይ። በድርሰቶቻቸው ላይ ሁሉ በተለይ ከዚህ በታች ያሉት ባሕርዮች ጎልተው ይታያሉ፤

1. ይዞታቸው እንደ መጽሐፈ ምስጢር ነገረ መለኮት ማስተማሪያ ናቸው፤
2. በጀመሩበት ቃል ብዙ አረፍተ ነገሮች ያከታትሉበታል፤
3. በአረፍተ ነገሩ መጀመሪያ ሐረግ ላይ ያለውን ሐሳብ በሁለተኛው ሐረግ ያጠነክሩታ፤ 4. በአረፍተ ነገሩ መጀመሪያ ሐረግ ላይ ያለውን ሐሳብ በሁለተኛው ሐረግ ያፈርሱታል፤ 5. አረፍተ ነገሮቹ ቤት የሚመቱ የማይመቱም ቅኔዎች ናቸው፤
6. ካለው ግስ ላይ አዳዲስ ቃላት ይፈጥራሉ፤
7. ለኛ ባልታወቁ የውጪ ቃላት ይጠቀማሉ፤
እነዚህ የአጻጻፍ ባሕርዮች በብዙዎቹ ቅዳሴዎች ላይ ይታያሉ።

ቅዳሴ በመሠረቱ ከጸሎተ ሃይማኖት አልፎ ነገረ መለኮት መተቻ አይደለም። ብዙዎቹ ቅዳሴዎቻችን ግን እንደ አባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ ድርሰቶች እንደ መጽሐፈ ምስጢር እና እንደ ፍካሬ መለኮት መለኮትን በሰፊው ይተቻሉ። ሁሉንም የአባ ጊዮርጊስን የአጻጻፍ ባሕርዮች ለማሳየት ከሁሉም ምሳሌ መስጠት መጽሐፈ ቅዳሴውን መገልበጥ ይሆናል። ግዕዝ የማያውቀውንም ያሰለቸዋል። ሆኖም ከዚህ በታች ያሉትን ብቻ እንመልከት፤

ከአርጋኖነ ውዳሴ ለምሳሌ፤

ኪያኪ፡ ረከብኩ፡ ምጒያየ፡ እሙስና፡ (ከብልሸት መሸሻ አንቺን አገኘሁ ፡)
ኪያኪ፡ ረከብኩ፡ ምጒያየ፡ እምአፈ፡ አናብስት፡ (ከአንበሶች አፍ መሸሻ አንቺን አገኘሁ፡)
ኪያኪ፡ ረከብኩ፡ ምጒያየ፡ እምአፈ፡ ተኵላተ፡ ዐረብ፡ (ከዐረብ ተኵላ አፍ መሸሻ አንቺን አገኘሁ፡) ኪያኪ፡ ረከብኩ፡ ምጒያየ፡ እምቃለ፡ ዘይጽዕል፡ (ከተሳዳቢ ቃል መሸሻ አንቺን አገኘሁ፡)
ኪያኪ፡ ረከብኩ፡ ምጒያየ፡ እምእደ፡ ኵሎሙ፡ ጸላእትየ፡ (ከጠላቶቼ ሁሉ እጅ መሸሻ አንቺን አገኘሁ፡)

(1) ከቅዳሴ ማርያም፤

አኮ ዘቦቱ ለመለኮት ክበብ . . . አላ መንክር. . . ።
(መለኮቱ ክበብ የለውም . . . አስደናቂ እንጂ . . .።)
አኮ ዘቦቱ ለመለኮት ግድም ወኑኅ . . . አላ ምሉእ . . .። 
(መለኮቱ አግድሞሽና ርዝመት የለውም . . . በሁሉም ዘንድ የሞላ ነው እንጂ . . .)
አኮ ዘቦቱ ለመለኮት ምስፋሕ . . . አላ ውስተ ኵሉ . . .።
(መለኮቱ መስፋፊያ ቦታ የለውም . . . ግዛቱ በሀገሮች ሁሉ ነው እንጂ . . .)
 አኮ ዘቦቱ ለመለኮት ዘበላዕሉ ጠፈር . . . አላ ጠፈር ውእቱ . . .።
(መለኮት በላዩ ጠፈር የለበትም . . . እሱ እራሱ ጠፈር ነው ኢንጂ . . .)

ይህ ጥቅስ (1) ነገረ መለኮት ነው፤ (2) አረፍተ ነገር በጀመረበት ቃል (አኮ) አረፍተ ነገር ይደጋግማል፤ (3) በመጀመሪያው ሐረግ ውስጥ ያለውን ሐሳብ በሁለተኛው ሐረግ ያፈርሰዋል (አላ)።

(2) ከቅዳሴ ዮሐንስ ወልደ ነጐድጓድ፤

አልብከ ጽንፍ ወአልብከ ማኅለቅት፤ (ዳርቻ የለህም፥ መጨረሻም የለህም፤)
አልቦ ዘረከቦ ወአልቦ ዘይረክበከ፤ . . . (ያገኘው የለም፥ የሚያገኝህም የለም . . .፤)
አልብከ ጥንት . . .፤ (መጀመሪያ [origin] የለህም. . .፤)
ፈጠርከ፡ ኵሎ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትትቀነይ፤ (ሳትገዛ ሁሉን ፈጠርክ፤)
ትጸውር፡ ኵሎ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትደክም፤ (ሳትደክም ሁሉን ትሸከማለህ፤)
ትሴሲ፡ ለኵሉ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢታሐጽጽ፤ (ሳታጓድል ሁሉን ትመግባለህ፤)
ትሔሊ፡ ለኵሉ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢታረምም። (ዝም ሳትል ለሁሉ ታስባለህ፤) ትሁብ፡ ለኵሉ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትቀብል ፤ (ሳትጐድል ለሁሉ ትሰጣለህ፤)
ታረዊ፡ ለኵሉ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትነጽፍ፤ (ሳትጠግ ሁሉን ታጠጣለህ፤)
ትዜከር፡ ኵሎ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትረስዕ። (ሳትረሳ ሁሉን ታስታውሳለህ፤)
ተዐቅብ፡ ኵሎ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትነውም፤ (ሳትተኛ ሁሉን ትጠብቃለህ፤)
ትሰምዕ፡ ኵሎ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትጸመም፤ (እምቢ ሳትል ሁሉን ትሰማለህ፤)
ተኀድግ፡ ለኵሉ፡ እንዘ፡ ኢትነሥእ። (ሳትወስድ ለሁሉ ትተዋለህ።)

በተለይ እነዚህን ቀጥሎ የጠቀስኳቸውን ሁለት ጥቅሶች ብናስተያያቸው ሁሉም ከአንድ ሰው አእምሮ የወጡ ከመሆናቸው ላይ እንደርሳለን፤

(ሀ) ከዮሐንስ ወልደ ነጐድጓድ፤

ነሥአ፡ ኅብስተ፡ በእደዊሁ፡ ቅዱሳት፡ ወብፁዓት፡ ሕፄሃ፡ ለመርዓትከ፡ ወኅዳጋቲሃ፡ ለእንተ፡ ኀደጋ፡ ምኵራብ። (በቅዱሳትና ብፁዓት እጆቹ ኅብስት አነሣ።

(ኅብስቱ] ለሙሽራህ [ለምእመናንህ/ለቤተ ክርስቲያንህ] ማጫ፥ ለፈታሃት ለምኵራብ መፋቻ ሆኗል።)

(ለ) ከውዳሴ መስቀል፤

መስቀል፡ ዘኮነ፡ ሕፄሃ፡ ለመርዓትከ፡ ወኅዳጋቲሃ፡ ለእንተ፡ ደኃርካ፡ በምኵራብ።
(መስቀል የሙሽራህ [የቤተ ክርስቲያንህ] ማጫ በምኵራብ ለፈታሃት [ለሕዝበ አይሁድ] መፍቻ ሆኗል።)

(ሀ) ከዮሐንስ ወልደ ነጐድጓድ፤

ኅሩም፡ አንተ፡ ወሀሎከ፡ አብ፡ ቅዱስ። ኅሩም፡ አንተ፡ ወሀሎከ፡ ወልድ፡ ቅዱስ። ኅሩም፡ አንተ፡ ወሀሎከ፡ መንፈስ፡ ቅዱስ።

(ለ) ከመጽሐፈ ምስጢር፤

ኅሩም፡ አብ፡ ዘኢያስተርኢ፡ በህላዌሁ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ዳእሙ፡ በራእየ፡ ትንቢት፡ ለነቢያቲሁ።
ኅሩም፡ ወልድ፡ ዘኢያስተርኢ፡ በመለኮቱ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ዳእሙ፡ በትስብእቱ።
ኅሩም፡ መንፈስ፡ ቅዱስ፡ ዘኢያስተርኢ፡ በካልእ፡ ግርማሁ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ዳእሙ፡ በንጻሬ፡ ዘይትፈቀድ፡ በዘይረድኦሙ፡ ለቅዱሳን።

እነዚህ በ(ሀ) እና በ(ለ) የተጠቀሱ ኀይለ ቃሎች ከአንድ ሰው እንጂ ከተለያዩ ሰዎች አእምሮ የወጡ አይደሉም።

(3) ከአትናቴዎስ ቅዳሴ፤

ሰብእሰ፡ እንዘ፡ ክቡር፡ ውእቱ፡ . . . (የሰው ልጅ ክቡር ሆኖ ሳለ . . . ) ሰብእሰ፡ እንዘ፡ ንጉሥ፡ ውእቱ፡ . . . (የሰው ልጅ ንጉሥ ሆኖ ሳለ . . . ) ሰብእሰ፡ እንዘ፡ ባዕል፡ ውእቱ፡ . . . (የሰው ልጅ ሀብታም ሆኖ ሳለ . . . ) ሰብእሰ፡ እንዘ፡ ልቡስ፡ ውእቱ፡ . . . (የሰው ልጅ ብርሃን የለበሰ ሆኖ ሳለ . . . ) ሰብእሰ፡ እንዘ፡ መላኪ፡ ውእቱ፡ . . . (የሰው ልጅ ገዢ ሆኖ ሳለ . . . )

ኦአዳም፡ ምንተኑ፡ ረሰይናክ፡ . . . (አዳም ሆይ ምን አደረግንህ . . .?)
ኦአዳም፡ ምንተኑ፡ ረሰይናክ፡ . . . (አዳም ሆይ ምን አደረግንህ . . .?)
ኦሔዋን፡ ምንተኑ፡ ረሰይናኪ፡. . . (ሔዋን ሆይ ምን አደረግንሽ . . .?)
ኦአዳም፡ ወሔዋን፡ እስመ፡ አኮ፡ . . . (አዳምና ሔዋን ሆይ ልንነቅፋችሁ አይቻልም. . .) ኦአዳም፡ ወሔዋን፡ አንትሙሰ፡ . . . (አዳምና ሔዋን ሆይ እናንተስ . . .)

ኦአዳም፡ ወሔዋን፡ አንትሙሰ፡ . . . (አዳምና ሔዋን ሆይ እናንተስ . . .)

ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ ቀዳማዊት፡ ይእቲ፡ ወአኮ፡ ደኃራዊት፡ . . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ ደኃራዊት፡ ይእቲ፡ እንተ፡ ትሰፍን፡ ለዓለም።. . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ ለአብርሃም፡ ተከሥተት፡ . . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ ለሙሴ፡ በደብረ፡ ሲና፡ ተከሥተት፡ . . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ በነቢያት፡ ተዐውቀት፡ . . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ ቅድስቱ፡ ለአብ፡ ቡርክቱ፡ ለወልድ፡ ልዕልቱ፡ መንፈስ፡ ቅዱስ። ኦ፡ ባዕዳት፡ ዕለታት፡ እንተ፡ ባቲ፡ ተአመርክን፡ . . .
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ እንተ፡ ባቲ፡ ብሊት፡ ተፀርዐት፡ ወሐዳስ፡ ጸንዐት።
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ እንተ፡ ባቲ፡ ሙቁሓን፡ ተፈትሑ፡ ወአግብርት፡ ግዕዙ።
ኦ፡ ዛቲ፡ ዕለት፡ እንተ፡ ባቲ፡ ምዝቡር፡ ተሐንጸ፡ ወሰይጣን፡ ተኀጕለ። 

(4) ቅዳሴ ኤጲፋንዮስ፤
አልቦ፡ ጥንት፡ ለህላዌሁ፤ (አነዋወሩ መጀመሪያ የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ማኅለቅት፡ ለክዋኔሁ፤ (አኳኋኑም መጨረሻ የለውም፤)
አልቦ፡ ኍልቍ፡ ለመዋዕሊሁ፤ (ዘመኑ ቍጥር የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ሐሳብ፡ ለዓመታቲሁ። (ዓመቶቹም ልክ ቍጥር የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ርስዓን፡ ለውርዛዌሁ፤ (ጕልምስናውም እርጅና የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ድካም፡ ለጽንዐ፡ ኃይሉ፤ (የኀይሉ ጥንካሬ ድካም የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ሙስና፡ ለመልክኡ፤ (መልኩም ብልሹነት የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ጽልመት፡ ለብርሃነ፡ ገጹ። (የፊቱም ብርሃን ጨለማ የለውም፤)
አልቦ፡ ድንጋግ፡ ለባሕረ፡ ጥበቡ፤ (የጥበብ ባሕሩ ዳርቻ የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ መስፈርት፡ ለሣህለ፡ ትእዛዙ፤ (የትእዛዙም ምህረት ልክ የለውም፤)
አልቦ፡ ዐቅም፡ ለስፍሐ፡ መንግሥቱ፤ (የመንግሥቱ ስፋት መጠን የለውም፤)
ወአልቦ፡ ወሰን፡ ለራኅበ፡ ምኵናኑ። (የግዛቱም ስፋት ወሰን የለውም፤)

ከዚያ ይህ ይቀጥላል፤

ሥውር፡ ውእቱ፡ (ሥውር ነው)
ወምጡቅ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ምጡቅ ነው)
ነዋኅ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ረጂም ነው)
ቀላይ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ጥልቅ ባሕር ነው)
ልዑል፡ ውእቱ፡ (ልዑል ነው)
ወእሙቅ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ጥልቅ ነው)
ጽኑዕ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ጠንካራ ነው)
መዋዒ፡ ውእቱ፡ (አሸናፊ ነው)
ጠቢብ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ጥበበኛ ነው)
ማእምር፡ ውእቱ፡ (ዐዋቂ ነው)
ኃያል፡ ውእቱ፡ (ኀይለኛ ነው)
ተባዕ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ጀግና ነው)
ክቡር፡ ውእቱ፡ (ክቡር ነው)
ከሀሊ፡ ውእቱ፡ (ቻይ ነው)
ዋሕድ፡ ውእቱ፡ (አንድዬ ነው)
ወብሑት፡ ውእቱ፡ (ብቸኛ ነው)
መንክር፡ ውእቱ፡ (አስደናቂ ነው)

ከዚህ በታች ያለውን በማነጻጸ የእግዚአብሔርን አገላለጽ እንመልከት፤

ኄር፡ ዘእንበለ፡ እከይ፤ (ክፋት የለለበት ደግ፤)
ወየዋህ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ በቀል፤ (በቀል የሌለበት የዋህ፤)
ወዕጉሥ፡ ዘንበለ፡ መዓት፤ (ቁጣ የሌለበት ታጋሽ፤)
 ጻድቅ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ኃጢአት፤ (ኀጢአት የሌለበት ጻድቅ፤) 
ወንጽሕ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ርስሐት፤ (እድፍ የሌለበት ንጹሕ፤)
ወራትዕ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ጥውየት፤ (ጠማማነት የሌለበት ቅን፤)
ወሃቢ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ክልአት፤ (ንፍገት የሌለበት ሰጪ፤)
ወጸጋዊ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ደንፅዎ፤ (ስስት የሌለበር ለጋሽ፤)
ሠራዬ፡ ኃጢአት፡ ዘእንበለ፡ በቀል፡ ወቂም፤ (በቀልና ቂም የሌለበት ኀጢአት ይቅር ባይ፤)
መጽያሕት፡ ዘእንበለ፡ ማዕቀፍ፤ (እንቅፋት የሌለበት ጥርጊያ ጎዳና፤)
ወዐሠር፡ ንጹሕ፡ ዘእንበለ፡ አሥዋክ። (እሾኽ የሌለበት ንጹሕ ፈለግ፤)

ቅዳሴ ማርያምና ቅዳሴ ጊዮስቆሮስ የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ድርሰቶች ለመሆናቸው ምንም ጥርጥር የለውም። ቅዳሴ ያዕቆብ ዘሥሩግና ቅዳሴ ቄርሎስም የሳቸው ሳይሆኑ አይቀሩም።

ሌላው የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ዘጋስጫ ሥራ መታወቂያ ካለው ግስ ላይ አዳዲስ ቃላት ይፈጥራሉ። በቅዳሴ ማርያም ውስጥ የሚገኙ ቃላት “አማዕበለ” (ማዕበልአነቃነቀ)፤ “መስግዲ” (አሰግድ)፤ “መትሐቲ” (ዝቅ አርጌ)፤ “መቅንዪ” (አስገዥ) የአባ ጊዮርጊስ ፍጥረቶች ናቸው።

ለኛ ባልታወቁ የውጪ ቃላት ይጠቀማሉ ብያለሁ። በሥነ ጽሑፍ ውስጥ “ፒላስ” (ድንኳን) የሚለው ቃል የተገኘው ሦስት ቦታ ብቻ ነው፤ 1. በመጽሐፈ ምስጢር፤ 2. በአርጋኖነ ውዳሴ፤ 3. በቅዳሴ ቄርሎስ፤

“ሜሎስ” (እሳታዊ) የሚለው ቃል የተገኘው ሦስት ቦታ ብቻ ነው፤ 1. በመጽሐፈ ምስጢር፤ 2. በቅዳሴ ያዕቆብ ዘሥሩግ፤ (3) በቅዳሴ ቄርሎስ፤

እመቤታችን “ታቦት ዘዶር”/ “ታቦተ ዶር” የተባለችው 1. በቅዳሴ ማርያም፤ 2. በመጽሐፈ ምስጢር ውስጥ ብቻ ነው።

የግዕዝ ሥነ ጽሑፍ ቅርሳችን ተዝረክርኳል። እስካሁን የደረሱለት ምዕራባውያን ብቻ ናቸው። የኛ ዝምታና ቍጭት- አልባነት ባለማወቅና አስታዋሽ በማጣት ይመስለኛል። ቢያውቅና አስታዋሽ ቢያገኝ ቍጥሩ ከአምሳ ሚሊዮን የማያንስ ሕዝብ የማንነቱ መታወቂያ ቅርሱ ሲወድም ዝም ብሎ አያይም።

ሳንውል ሳናድር “የኢትዮጵያ ሥነ ጽሑፍ ቅርስ ድርጅት” ማቋቋም አለብን። ድርጅቱ መጻሕፍቱ የሚጠበቁበትን ዘዴ ይፈልጋል፤ ለሚመረምሯቸው ተማሪዎች የገንዘብ እርዳታ ይሰጣል።

ማስታዎሻ፦

መጀመሪያ በኢትዮጵያ ኦርቶዶክስ ተዋሕዶ መድኃኔ ዓለም ቤተ ክርስቲያን ኒው ዮርክ ከተማ (የተራድኦ ድግስ ምሽት፥ ኅዳር ፬ ቀን ፳፻፯ ዓ. ም. = November 14, 2015) የቀረበ ንግግር። For questions or comments, you may contact the author at ghaile@albanytel.com. 

Blog 10. The Fascist Invasion of Ethiopia and the Pope by Rev. Dr. Mikre-Sellassie G. Ammanuel (2015)

The Attitude of the Vatican

The Vatican took a somewhat equivocal attitude throughout the Italo-Ethiopian conflict. The pope, Pius XI, tried to display a kind of neutrality in all his official political positions regarding the Italo-Ethiopian dispute. He kept silent while Mussolini was making military preparations for war against Ethiopia and while the League of Nations was trying its best to bring peaceful settlement to the dispute.1 The Pope neither spoke in support of the League’s attempt to avert hostility and the subsequent war between the two belligerent countries nor did he himself take any initiative to bring peace while church leaders in different countries strongly expressed their concern about the matter and appealed to the League of Nations to do everything possible to bring peace.2

G. W. Baer, commenting on the Vatican attitude, has the following to say:

The Holy See did not warn or condemn the potential aggressor or offer succor to the intended victim; nor did it support the efforts at mediation or the principles of international law. ... Unlike his predecessor Benedict XV

Pius XI gave no encouragement to the League of Nations, whose ethical and juridical foundations corresponded so closely to Christian precepts.4

Many expected in vain that the pope would intervene and try to reconcile the two belligerent countries. He might have exerted his influence on Mussolini to settle the differences by arbitration as Ethiopia was ready to do so in accordance to the terms of the Treaty of Friendship of 1928 signed by the two countries.5 Wm. J. W. Roome was sure that “one word from the Pope would have nipped Mussolini’s bandit-raid at the start. That word was never spoken.”6

Many attempts have been made to find excuses for the Pope’s silence at this critical time. The late Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, Hensley, devoted an address especially to this and said:

What can the pope do to prevent this or any other war? He is a helpless old man, with a small police force to guard himself and the priceless treasures of the Vatican. ... Can he denounce a neighbouring Power, a power armed with absolute control of everything and with every modern instrument of force? It is said that he could excommunicate. Yes! And thus make war with his dictator-neighbour inevitable, besides upsetting the peace and the consciences of the great mass of Italians with the result of a fierce anticlerical outbreak.7

Actually, that the Pope was a helpless man “with a small police force to guard himself” was irrelevant to the real issue. The Pope was never expected to give any military support against Mussolini. What was actually expected of him was a purely moral leadership, a true Christian witness, a condemnation of injustice.8 Commenting on the untrue neutrality of the Pope, the New Times and Ethiopia News said:

The Vatican is now a temporal power and as such it has the right to political neutrality, but it must be driven home that the Pope’s temporal function arises out of an antecedent moral power, and that the Pope has no right to moral neutrality. When a clear moral issue and principle is at stake, the world has the right to expect a peculiar and particular leadership from the Pope, otherwise his temporal power is just Gilbert an. 

Another excuse brought forward by some writers for the Pope’s silence and tolerance of the Fascist action of aggression against Ethiopia which created an international moral crisis was his obligation to the Lateran Treaty of 1929 signed between Pope Pius XI and Mussolini ending the fifty-years-old quarrel between Italy and the Holy See. By this Treaty the Pope was re-established in his dual capacity as both a spiritual leader of a world-wide Church and a temporal prince of the independent State of the Vatican. In his political capacity as a temporal prince, the Pope agreed, by article 24 of the Treaty that the Holy See should remain “extraneous to the temporal competition between the other states and to the international conferences summoned for such an object, unless the contending parties agree to appeal to its mission of peace.”10 Criticizing those who condemned the Pope for his silence and even support to the Fascist policy particularly during its aggression against Ethiopia, Daniel Binchy said: “Had there been no Lateran Treaty the Vatican would have remained neutral in the Second Abyssinian War as it had already done in the first.”11 But it is impossible to ignore the fact that the Holy See had reserved to itself in the same article 24 of the Treaty “the right to make its moral and spiritual protest heard.”12 And, therefore, the Papacy could not be bound by this article not to speak on the question of moral issue. The Ethiopian case was undoubtedly a moral issue, a weak being attacked by a mighty power.

There were, however, some other reasons for the Pope’s failure to condemn the Italian aggression, which probably shows his actual position at the time. First, it was reported that Pope Pius XI was afraid that by condemning the Italian aggression he would provoke conflict in the Italian Catholic Church between the Pope and his immediate circle of cardinals, on one hand, and the vast mass of Italian clergy, who had shown themselves ultrapatriotic, on the other.13

The Second reason for the Pope’s pro-fascist attitude is that the Pope, disturbed at the strong anticlerical movement in Italy, did not wish to do anything which would weaken Fascism lest this should mean the return of anticlericalism. ‘Bolshevism’ and anticlericalism were regarded in the Vatican as the only possible alternatives to Fascism.14 Pope Pius XI was apparently worried about the spread of communism in Italy and other countries and about its menace to Christianity in general and to his church in particular. He was convinced that “democracy was too feeble and incoherent to serve as a dam against the communist tide,” said D. Binchy, “and a strange irony made him turn to the new form of authoritarian government as offering the only hope of successful resistance” against communism.15 “The Pope thus made the Church’s peace with Fascism,” said G. W. Baer, “and accepted Mussolini as a man of Providence, a man not deluded by liberalism.”16 The Catholic Times justified the Pope’s friendly attitude towards the Fascist regime of Italy on the same ground and said: 

... the Pope was right to be patient with the crudities of jejune Fascism, to be patient even now with the excesses of Nazism. ... He has borne with insults in Italy, with fanaticism and persecution in Germany, because he sees that Fascism and Nazism and Imperialism, though their excesses are evil, are in any case an incomparably smaller evil than Communism. ... Our mission, the mission of salvation for Europe, is to establish a united anti-communist Front. We must restore friendly relations with Italy and Germany, even at a great sacrifice.

The third reason for the Pope’s pro-Fascist attitude is thought to be the fear that Mussolini and his Fascist colleagues might themselves turn anticlerical and adopt the Nazi methods if defied by the Church.

The fourth and the main reason for the Pope’s pro-Italian attitude during the Italo-Ethiopian conflict could be found in that the Pope hoped to see the spread of Roman Catholicism in Ethiopia, and “he felt sure,” said Wm. Teeling, “that would only be possible with the support of Italy.” Teeling added that “it is equally true that he [the Pope] has thrown his weight on the side of the totalitarian leaders, and he has felt that the imperial policy of Italy must mean an advance for his own Church in the conquered territories.” It was on this very assumption that Cardinal Archbishop Schuster of Milan exalted the Italian army in a speech on the 28th October, 1935, a few days after the war broke out, saying that they “are opening the gates of Ethiopia to the Catholic faith and the Roman civilization.”

In an interview by the press on October 22, 1936, about six months after the conquest of Ethiopia, Cardinal Tisserant spoke about the brightest prospects for the Catholic mission in the occupied empire. The Cardinal said:

With the conquest of the empire a vast field is opened to Catholic Missions whose work has hitherto been hampered in Abyssinia by the unyielding opposition of the Monophysite clergy. ... The work of the Catholic missionary will nobly go hand in hand with the civilizing actions which Italy, under the Fascist Government, has already begun.

Cardinal Tisserant disclosed the programme of missionary activities to be undertaken very soon in Ethiopia. 

Although the Pope looked unwilling to be involved in the Italo-Ethiopian dispute and thus kept silent to prove his formal neutrality, his whole attitude throughout the conflict and his occasional speeches referring slightly to the conflict clearly indicate that the Vatican was on the side of Mussolini and supported the Fascist policy. In a few occasions the Pope broke his silence and expressed his mind on the conflict; but never spoke out against what was clearly an unjust war.

On June 15, 1935, about 7,000 veterans of the First World War were gathered in Rome from all parts of Italy in one of those mass demonstrations organized by the Fascist government by which Mussolini was arousing the war spirit of the people. Pope Pius XI granted an audience to these veterans and celebrated mass in their presence. This was thought to have given an encouragement to these men, many of whom were going to fight in Ethiopia, on one had, and moral support to the Fascist government on the other.22

It was on July 28, 1935, that Pope Pius XI made his first public reference to the impending war between Italy and Ethiopia. He considered the time “historically solemn and important” and proclaimed the “moral worth” and eventual beatification of Giustino de Jacobis, an Italian missionary who had preached Catholic faith in Ethiopia from 1838 to 1860 and was the first Apostolic Vicar to Ethiopia.23 Nothing exceptional had ever been heard of de Jacobis before and previously no one ever thought of him as a case for beatification. According to the Roman Catholic rules and practices only those Christians who have given proofs of exceptional virtue during their lives and shown miracles after their death are considered for canonization and this is done after a long process of thorough examination.24 But de Jacobis had died a natural death at the age of 60 without suffering any harm in his apostolate. Professor G. Salvemini commented that “Brother Justin can hardly have performed any miracles in view of the fact that seventy-five years elapsed before Pius XI admitted him to first grade in the career.”25 What was the significance of this ceremony? Why did Pius choose specifically this time to extol the virtues of this friar? One can only assume that the Pope wished to emphasize the significance of the Italian war and the eventual occupation of Ethiopia for the expansion of the Catholic Church there. The Pope was reported to have exhorted in his speech those priests present at the ceremony “to follow the very high example of heroism” of De Jacobis when they arrived in Africa.26 On the other hand, Professor Salvemini believes that the ceremony should be “construed as propaganda for Mussolini’s war.”27

In a speech at the ceremony the Pope said:

Between Italy and Abyssinia there crossed a cloudy sky, of which no one is able to evade the presence, the significance, indeed the mystery, because there is yet more cloudness to come. ... We trust, we will always continue to trust, in the peace of Christ within the reign of Christ, and we cherish full faith that nothing will happen except according to truth, according to justice, according mercy. 

He did not say a word appealing to the countries concerned to refrain from war and settle their differences in peace.

On August 27, 1935 Pope Pius XI granted an audience to an international congress of Catholic nurses at Castel Gandolfo and addressed them making special reference to the Italo-Ethiopian conflict. He said:

We see that abroad there is talk of a war of conquest, of a war of aggression. ... A war which is only a war of conquest would be clearly unjust war. ... On the other hand, it is said in Italy that the war of which there is question would be a just war, because it is a war of defense, to secure the frontiers against repeated and incessant attacks, a war becomes necessary because of the expansion of a population which is daily increasing, that it is a war undertaken to defend or assure the material security of a country, that such a war justifies itself. It is, however, true, and we cannot but reflect on this truth, that if there is this need for expansion, if there is this need to defend the frontiers ... we can only wish that some other means than war can be found to resolve these difficulties. ... If the need of expansion is a fact which must be taken into account, the right of defense has its limit and must observe certain moderation in order to be itself blameless.29 (underlining is mine)

The speech was widely reported both in Italy and abroad and was taken everywhere to be a distinct tribute of sympathy for Italy’s desire for expansion. The foreign press, therefore, sharply criticized the Pope for this while the Fascist papers praised him highly.30 In his expression “it is said in Italy that the war ... would be a just war because of the expansion of a population ...,” the Pope clearly reflected Mussolini’s point of view and argument for his war against Ethiopia, and he seems to have believed that the war was just and, therefore, entreated only for “limits and moderation.” It is also interesting to note that Pope Pius appears to have recognized that “the need for expansion is a fact which must be taken into account,” and endorsed the Fascist expansionist policy. Committing on this address of the Pope, Salvemini writes:

To anyone reading without close attention, Pus XI’s address to the nurses gives an impression of condemning not only war but also this particular war as an abominable crime. In actual fact it does not condemn the imminent war. It condones it as a war of self-defense. In addition it puts in a plea for indulgence and leniency, should Mussolini, in the exercise of his rights of self- defense, exceed the limits of moderation. 

In this address the Pope did not make a slightest mention of the moral obligation of keeping treaties and of the pledge of arbitration which bound Italy to Ethiopia.

Again on September 7, 1935, at the very day when the Assembly of the League of Nations was about to discuss the Italo-Ethiopian conflict at Geneva, the Pope made another pronouncement in reference to the conflict. A group of about 15,000 ex- servicemen gathered in Rome to demonstrate in favour of the Franco-Italian solidarity and in support of the Ethiopian policy of Laval and Mussolini. In an audience, the Pope addressed the ex-servicemen and assured them that he was praying for peace. In actual fact the Pope spoke to the group not as a father of very many Christians of the World or as the head of an international organization, the Catholic Church, but as an Italian and specially as a patriotic Italian. Among other things he said:

Together with peace we desire that the hopes, requirements and needs of the great and good people, our people, may be recognized and satisfied, that its rights be recognized and assured but with justice and peace.

Here the Pope very clearly expressed his love and wholehearted support to Italy and the Fascist government. He no more used any diplomatic languages in his speech to indicate his view on the question. He spoke distinctly and wished that “the hopes, requirements and needs [needs of expansion] of the great and good people” of Italy be fulfilled. “Justice and peace,” said Salvemini, “were brought in at the end to sugar the pill.”

When the Fascist government organized an unprecedented mass rally throughout Italy on the afternoon of October 2, 1935, the eve of the day when the Italian invasion of Ethiopia began, the bells of all the churches in Italy rang out to mobilize the people for the rally and also to celebrate the occasion. The Rome correspondent of the London Times reported that the peals of the bells “from one thousand towers” in Rome broke the air, and that the Campanone (the great bell) and the five minor bells of St. Peter’s had also tolled at the moment of Mussolini’s speech announcing the invasion of Ethiopia. 

But Daniel Binchy, basing himself on the argument made by the Osservatore Romano,36 rejected the news as “a complete misapprehension” and stated that the bells of St. Peter’s sounded for the daily vesper at 3:30 pm.37 On the other hand, Salvemini, who strongly accused Pope Pius XI of partisanship by supporting Mussolini, argued that one can find from the manual of St. Peter’s that the vesper hour on October 2, 1935 fell at 4:15 pm. and not earlier. He writes:

The writers of the Osservatore Romano tried to conceal the Pope’s responsibility by a denial of a fact which they well knew to be true. They lied ad majorem Dei gloriam.38

Salvemini said that a Roman lady who had for many years lived in the vicinity of St. Peter’s and who knew “the habits of those bells” assured him that the vesper hour was announced “by very few peals of only one of the small bells.” But “on October 2, 1935, all the bells rang out long and loud together with the other Roman bells throughout the entire period of the ‘mobilization.’ ”39

“According to canon law”, says Salvemini, “church bells may not be used for profane purposes except with the explicit permission of the Bishop.”40 He added that “the diocese of Rome is the diocese of the Pope” and therefore, “had he not given his consent, those Roman bells would not have sounded” during the Fascists demonstration of the Ethiopian invasion.41

When the League of Nations imposed sanctions against Italy because of its aggression against Ethiopia in violation of the League’s Covenant, most of the Catholic bishops, clergy and Catholic press strongly condemned the League’s decisions.42 Sanctions were described by them as immoral.43 The Vatican which was certainly hampered and embarrassed by the sanctions was reported to have acted behind the scenes to have sanctions lifted and, therefore, the Pope’s envoys in South America used all their influence with the Catholic South American States “to induce them to vote in Geneva to have sanctions raised.”44 Subsequently, when the Italian aggression was discussed in the League of Nations and members expressed their loyalty and support to the obligation or the Covenant of the League, the representatives of the Latin American States “were reluctant to declare themselves. Their feelings for Italy were cordial.”45

The Osservatore Romano, the official organ of the Vatican, which contrived to preserve a precarious neutrality towards the Italo-Ethiopian conflict, maintained “a general attitude of hostility towards sanctions or any measures likely to prove uncomfortable to Italy.”46 The paper never admitted that Italy was guilty of an act of aggression.47

On the other hand, the Vatican was accused of having given a substantial financial support to the Italian Government towards the expenses of the Ethiopian campaign.48 A certain A. E. Guillaume stated in an article in the Paris Revue Politique et Parlementaire that during the ten months from August 1935 to June 1936 the Vatican had given at least five hundred million Francs to the Italian Government. He asserted that a large part of the sum had been derived from the contributions known as “Peter’s Pence,” which was collected from outside Italy. This, the informant said, had been brought to Italy in foreign currency in the Vatican diplomatic bag.49 I am not able, however, to test the accuracy of this report. But, it was commonly believed that the Vatican gave essential support to the Italian lira by bringing into the country foreign currency it held abroad.50 Apparently the main revenue of the Vatican in those days was derived from the “Peter’s Pence,” the vast bulk of which used to come from outside Italy.51

It is worth noting that Dr. J. H. Warnshuis, Secretary of the IMC in New York, expressed great concern that “the Church of Rome is working in complete understanding with the Government [Italian] in regard to the present adventures in Africa with the full expectation that the Roman Church will have full freedom of missionary action in the conquered provinces or in all of Ethiopia if Italy takes it all.” Referring to the Vatican financial support to the Italian Government at the same time, Dr. Warnshuis said:

It seems that the Church has given orders to various Catholic organizations in Italy holding funds to subscribe to Italian defense bonds. It is not known how large these subscriptions are but there are those in Italy who believe that this constitutes one of the very important sources of money for enabling Italy to carry on the present conflict in Africa.52 

It is perhaps unfair to pass judgment on the Pope, for the obvious reasons, for not joining the world in condemning the use of poison gas and the deliberate bombardment of the Red Cross ambulance units by the Italian army in Ethiopia in breach of the international covenant to which Italy itself subscribed. But it is not surprising that many sharply blamed and criticized the Pope when he publicly expressed his joy at the victory of the Italian army over Ethiopia and described it as a “happy triumph.” On May 12, 1936, just ten days after Emperor Haile Sellassie left Ethiopia for exile and the Fascist army occupied Addis Ababa, the Pope, addressing the world Exhibition of the Catholic Press, said that “it has almost exactly coincided with the happy triumph of a great and good people for a peace which we desire.”53 (Underling is mine)

The news of this joyous statement about the victory of the aggressor by Pope Pius XI created great excitement and indignation in almost every country and was regarded as a distinct tribute of sympathy for Italy’s victory over Ethiopia and the foundation of the Italian Empire in Africa.54 In Italy “the Fascist press welcomed the speech with delirious enthusiasm as a kind of posthumous benediction of Italian policy and Italian arms.”55 But in other countries, specially in Britain, the Pope’s speech met with great denunciation. In an address to the Diocesan Conference, the Angelical Bishop of Southwark said:

I say with a sad heart, a victory won by flagrant breaking of covenants, by bombs deliberately flung on Red Cross Hospitals, by mustard gas scattered to torture defenseless noncombatants, has been hailed as ‘the happy triumph of a great and good people.’ In the name of Christ, we must most clearly disassociate ourselves from such an utterance, lest it be thought we think lightly of covenants, and admire the successful bully.56

The Catholic press in other countries was greatly embarrassed by this pronouncement of the Pope.57 Some writers, however, tried to assert the Fascist authorities constantly brought all possible pressure on the Pope to induce him to come out wholeheartedly for Italy and make an open declaration in favour of their policy.58 But Daniel Binchy asserts that Pope Pius was not a man to yield to pressure from any quarter. He said:

The decision to speak was his won, and there can be little doubt that it was the Italian in him that prompted his words: it was Achilles Ratti, the patriotic son of Lombardy, rejoicing with his country in her hour of gladness. ... Pius XI’s love of Italy was always deep and abiding; on this occasion it led him to make an imprudent utterance.59 

As the Pope maintained such a feeling towards Italy it is not surprising to see him turning a deaf ear to the atrocities carried out by the Fascists on the people of Ethiopia especially on February 19-21, 1937. Not only non-Catholics but also Catholics throughout the world looked in vain for some pronouncement from the Pope on this evil act of Fascism against innocent people of Ethiopia.60

It is not surprising to see that the success of the Fascist venture in Ethiopia was immediately followed by the Vatican recognition of the Italian conquest and their subsequent rule of Ethiopia, and “the example was followed within a relatively short period of time by other powers, including those who had far more reason for withholding recognition.”61 And moreover, when the Queen of Italy was proclaimed Empress of Ethiopia Pope Pius presented her with his Golden Rose.62 But, although Mussolini made every effort to induce the Pope to crown Victor Emmanuel as Emperor of Ethiopia, the Pope refused to do so probably for political reasons.63

The Attitude of the Italian Hierarchy

Members of the Italian hierarchy and the clergy apparently took a clear position in favour of the Italian war against Ethiopia and gave every possible support, moral and material, to the Fascist leaders and the army in their adventure of invading Ethiopia.64 At every opportune occasion they made chauvinistic speeches in favour of Mussolini’s policy of war. Salvemini gave a selected list of 103 bishops and archbishops of Italy who had every now and then made bellicose speeches in support of the Italian war against Ethiopia.65 At the opening or closing of numerous diocesan and other religious conferences, held in Italy from the spring of 1935 onward, declarations of loyalty to Mussolini and support to his policy were made with fervent enthusiasm by the clergy. A National Eucharistic Congress, held at Teramo on September 5, 1935 and attended by a papal legate, 19 archbishops and 57 bishops, passed by acclamation a message to Mussolini which says:

Catholic Italy prays for the ever-increasing greatness of the beloved mother country, rendered more compact and stronger by your government. ...66

Mussolini made every effort to induce the Pope to bless the departing armies and their colours. Although the Pope did not do this himself, yet he did not at all try to stop the Italian bishops up and down the country from going on Fascist platforms and doing everything possible to encourage and bless the departing regiments.67 The Osservatore Romano gave the following explanation or reasons for the attitude of the Italian bishops in doing this:

Just as a Christian mother blesses her son who leaves for distant and dangerous regions, so the church gives its sons, leaving for war, the viaticum of its prayers and wishes for both body and soul. Ignorance and ill will alone can distort this fact.68

The Italian hierarchy not only blessed the departing regiments and their colours, but also delivered war-mongering speeches and wrote circular letters justifying the Italian war in Ethiopia, and protesting against the League of Nations and Great Britain for imposing sanctions against Italy.69

Apparently the Italian hierarchy viewed the conquest of Italy on Ethiopia as a missionary enterprise.70 The Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, Monsignor Schuster, speaking in his Cathedral on October 28, 1935, the 15th anniversary of the March on Rome, said that “the commemoration of this event is not a mere political celebration but an essentially religious festival.” He exhorted his audience to cooperate fully in this national and Catholic work, more particularly at the present moment when, on the plains of Ethiopia, the Italian standard carries forward in triumph the Cross of Christ, smashes the chains of slavery, and opens the way for the missionaries of the Gospel. ...

He then exalted the Italian army as:

the gallant army which, in fearless obedience to the command of the fatherland, is opening the gates of Ethiopia to the Catholic faith and the Roman civilization.71

Speaking again on the 16th anniversary of the March on Rome Cardinal Schuster hailed the March as having “prepared souls for the redemption of Ethiopia from the bondage of slavery and heresy and for the Christian renewal of the ancient Empire of Rome.”72 The Cardinal Archbishop of Palermo was reported to have followed the example of his colleague Cardinal Schuster in making warlike speeches. In his speech delivered at the ceremony of presentation of colours to a Sicilian artillery regiment, the Cardinal said inter alia that sanctions were unchristian and that the Italian armies were bringing Christianity and civilization to Africa.73

In a speech on November 18, 1935, the Archbishop of Brindisi condemnedthe action which Great Britain’s cold egotism and haughtiness have organized to injure Italy and to support the semi-barbarous and slave-owing king who holds an unpopulated and miserable territory four times the size of Italy.74

The Bishop of Nocera Umbra in a pastoral letter to the faithful of his diocese considered the Ethiopian war just and holy.75 Similarly the Archbishop of Taranto in a speech on February 23, 1936 justified the Fascist invasion of Ethiopia saying:

The Italian victory would open Ethiopia, a country of infidels and schismatics, to the expansion of the Catholic faith; therefore the war against Ethiopia should be considered as a holy war, as a crusade.76 (underlining mine)

The most striking act of the Italian clergy was the handing over of the sacred objects of gold and silver by a number of churches to the Fascist authorities to meet the financial strain of the war.77 A. C. Jemolo writes that on a specially proclaimed “Day of Faith” the clergy and the laity zealously collected gold and silver, and “in a number of churches some of the ex-veto offerings, the oldest and most dilapidated, were handed over to the state.”78 The editor of the New Times strongly condemned the Italian clergy for having “sold their crosses and contributed the money to the Italian treasury, in order that more ammunition might be sent to Ethiopia for the destruction of the Christian people.” The Bishop of Civilta Castellani, speaking in the presence of Mussolini on December 8, 1935, thanked God for allowing him to see “these days of epic grandeur,” and approaching Mussolini slipped off his golden pastoral chain and handed it to him “with the Fascist salute.”80 Then the Bishop of San Miniato declared to the Duce that “for the victory of Italy the Italian clergy are ready to melt down the gold of the churches and the bronze of the bells.”81 And moreover, very many members of the Italian hierarchy surrendered their Episcopal rings and pectoral crosses to the Fascist authorities as a personal gesture of patriotism and expression of sympathy towards the Fascist policy of the Ethiopian war.82 The report by The Tablet that “the Vatican interfered to forbid the Italian bishops to give up their pectoral crosses to the government” cannot be substantiated.

One can ask why the Pope, who claimed he was maintaining neutrality on this war, did not check and instruct his Italian bishops to abstain from such warlike and ultrapatriotic pronouncements. It is evident that the Pope, besides his being the head of the Catholic Church in general, is the Primate of the Church of Italy in particular. This, according to Binchy, makes his administrative relationship with the Italian Church and its bishops closer and more intimate, “not only in practice but also in Canon Law.” Therefore, he could have “exercised a more direct and extensive control over the hierarchy of Italy than in other countries.” The Pope could have effectively intervened and at least privately intimated the Italian bishops to refrain from such an active involvement in the war propaganda if he really wished to do so. One would be compelled to believe that the absence of such intervention by the Pope would only mean that he silently approved the behaviour of the Italian hierarchy. That is why many violently accused the Holy See of having encouraged the Fascist leaders and supported the Fascist cause by tolerating the chauvinist speeches and behaviour of many members of the Italian hierarchy and of the Cardinals. 

Blog 9. Thoughts on Economic Reform by Dr. Berhanu Abegaz (2015)

ኢትዮጵያ ከጠባብና ከአግላይ የኢኮኖሚ ስርዓት እንዴት ትገላገላለች?

ብርሃኑ አበጋዝ* 

ይህን ጥያቄ ባጥጋቢ ለመመለስ መጀመሪያ ያገሪቱን ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ በመመርመር የችግሩን መንስዔ መረዳት ያስፈልጋል። ኢትዮጵያ አራት አይነት የፖለቲካና የኢኮኖሚ ትሥሥራዊ ችግሮች ያሏት ይመስለኛል። ከነዚህ ሁለቱ ለመረዳትም ሆነ ለመፍታት አንዱ እጅግ ከባድ ሲሆን ሌላው ደግሞ እጅግ ቀላልነት ያለው የፖሊሲዎች አፈጻጸም ችግር ስለሆነ ለዛሬ እንተዋቸው። የቀሩት ሁለቱ ግን ዛሬ የምዳስሣቸው ናቸው። ከነዚህም አንዱ ለመረዳት ቀላል ስማስወገድ ከባድ የሆነው “ሙጀሌያሙ የፖለቲካ ስርዓታችን” ነው። ሁለተኛው ደግሞ ለመረዳት ከበድ ቢልም መፍትሔው ግን ቀለል ያለው “የመዥገር ኢኮኖሚ ስርዓታችን” ነው።

ስለዚህ ብዙዎቹ የአገሪቱ መሰረታዊ ችግሮች ያን ያህል ውስብስብና ሚስጥራዊ ሳይሆኑ እንደአሳና እንደ ዉሃ የተጋረዱ ግልጽ-ነገሮች መሆናቸውንም መርሳት የለብንም። አንድ ሽማግሌ አሳ ሁለት ትንንሽ አሳዎችን ሲያልፍ “ልጆች፦ከመጣችሁበት አካባቢ ለመሆኑ የዉሃው ሁኔታ ምን ይመስላል?” ብሎ ይጠይቃቸዋል። እነሱም ዘግተውት ትንሽ እንዳለፉ አንዱ ጎረምሳ አሳ ሌላውን “ለመሆኑ ውሃ ምንድን ነው?” ብሎ ጠየቀው ይባላል።

ለማለት የፈለግኩት ህዝቡ የሚጎድለው የችግሮቹና የመፍትሔዎቹ ግልጽነትን አለመረዳት ሳይሆን አቅምና ዘዴን ማግኘት ነው። እኛም አንዱ ልናበረክት የምንችለው እንደ እውቀታችን ፍሬያማ ሃሳቦችን በማቅረብ እንጅ ስለድህነቱ በማላዘን አይመስለኝም።

እንደኔ አስተያየት የአገሪቱ የፖለቲካና የኢኮኖሚ መቆርቆዝ ኣንኳሮቹ ታሪክ-ሰደድ ምክንያቶች ባጭሩ ሁለት ናቸው፦ 

• ባንድ በኩል ያገሪቱ መልክዓ ምድር በውሃ እጥረትና በአፈር ይዘቱ [እንደ ኣውሮፓና ምስራቅ እስያ] ከፍተኛ ቁጥር ያለው የገዢ ክፍልን የሚደግፍ ትርፍ ምርት ለማቅረብ አልቻለም። ስለዚህ ለዘመናት የቆየው የግብርና ስርዓት ‘ጉልታዊ’ እንጅ እንደሚባለው ‘ፊዩዳላዊ’ አልነበርም። ፊዩዳል ማለት የመሬት ከበርቴ ብቻ ማለት አይደለም፤ምርት አጎልማሽና ወደ ካፒታሊዝም መሸጋገሪያ መንገድ ጠራጊ ማለትም ነው።
•  በሌላ በኩል በቀይ ባሕርና በአባይ ስትራቴጅያዊነት ምክንያት በኦቶማንና በግብዕ ተከበን ከሰፊው ዓለም ርቀን፥ በውስጥ የህዝብ ፍልሰቶች እየታመስን ራሳችንን ለውጭ ሃይሎች አጋልጠን እስካሁን ኖረናል። ገዥዎቻችንም እንደተራቡ አይጦች በተገኘችው ትርፈ-ምርት ላይ ሲረባረቡ ኖሩ። የውጭ እርዳታ ይጨመርበት እንጂ ስርዓቱ ዛሬም አልተቀየረም። ትርፍ ማምረት የሚችለው ገበሬውም ከሌለኝ ምኔን ይሰርቃሉ በሚል ትክክለኛ አስተሳሰብ በእጅ-ወደአፍ ኢኮኖሚ ኖረ፤የነቃው ልጁም ቄስነትን ወይንም ወታደርነትን መረጠ፤ የገሙ-ጎፋና የከፋ ከብት-አርቢ ወገኖቻችንም ‘ከብትን ማግበስበስ ዘርፎበላን ለመጋበዝ’ የሚል ዘይቤ አላቸው ይባላል። እውነታቸውን ነው።

በነዚህና በመሳሰሉ ምክንያቶች በጦርነት ተወሽቀን የኢንዱስትሪ አብዮት ባቡር እስካሁን ድረስ እንዳመለጠን ግልጽ ይመስለኛል። ስለዚህም ነው የፖለቲካ ባህላችን “የመንግስት አውታርን ማርከህ ክበር፤ ተሹመህ ብላ፤አስፈራራው በባንክና በታንክ” በሚሉት የዘርፎበላ አስተሳሰቦች ተቀርቅሮ የቆየው። የአገሪቱን ኢኮኖሚያዊ አሰላለፍ በቅንነትና በብልህነት ለማስተካከል እስካልቻልን ድረስ ከዚህ የተለየ የፓለቲካ ባህልን በሞራል ድስኩር ልናፈራው እንደማንችል ምርጫ-2007 የደመደመው ይመስለኛል።

ሁለተኛው ጥያቄ የዚህ ‘የምንልክን ግቢ ማርክ ካልሆነልህም ተገንጥለህ አዲስ ዘውድ ግዛ’ ፍካሬ-ማርያም ዘንድሮ መልኩ ምን ይመስላል የሚለው ነው። እንደኔ አስተያት በዘመነ- ወያኔ ስር-የሰደደው ‘የቀበሮ በግ-እረኝነት’ ስርዓት ሶስት ገጽታዎች ይታዩበታል። ገዢው ፓርቲ የአትራፊ ኩባንያዎች በቀጥታም ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ መንገድ ባለቤት ነው፤ መንግስት የመሬት ፍጹማዊ ባለቤት ነው፤እንዲሁም በሶስቱም ድህረ-ጣሊያን መንግስታት የተተለሙ የእድገት ፕሮግራሞች በምርታማነት ሳይሆን በድጎማነት የተገደቡ ናቸው።

1ኛ) የገዥ ፓርቲ በመንግስት ኮርፖሬሽኖች ላይ ካለው የቀጥታ ቁጥጥር አልፎ የራሱን ኩባንያዎች ማስፋፋቱ የጭረታውን፥የፊናንሱን፥የፈቃዱንና፥ የታክሱን አፈጻጸም ከእኩላዊነትና ከዉድድራዊነት ወደ አድሏዊነት ከልሶታል። ይባስ ብሎም ገዢው ፓርቲ በሚሊዮን የሚቆጠሩ ጀሌዎቹን የሚደጉምበት ትልቅ ካዝና ስለሚያስፈልገው ህብረተሰቡን ጠልፎት ይገኛል።

2ኛ) የደርግ መንግስት ጭስኝነትን ያጠፋ መስሎት ርስትነትን አጠፋ። ለእኩላዊ ማከፋፈል አስፈላጊ ያልሆነ፥ ገጠሬው ትርፍ ኣምርቶ በነጻ ሸጦ የመክበር ዋስተናን ያልሰጠ፥ መሬትና ሰው ወደተሻለ ቦታ ወይንም የስራ መስክና ዘርፍ እንዳይሸጋገሩ አንቆ የያዘ የመሬት አዋጅ አስተናገደ። ወያኔ/ኢህአዴግም ይህን ቁጥጥራዊ የመሬት ስርዓት በደስታ ወርሶ እንኳን ኢንዱስትሪን ሊገነባ የምግብ ዋስትናን እንኳ እስከዛሬ ሊያጎናጽፈን አልቻለም። በዚች በዛሬ ቀን አስር ሚሊየን ህዝባችን ተርቦ-ውሎ ተርቦ-ያድራል።

3ኛ) ‘የቀንደኛ-ፓርቲ-መር’ ልማታዊነት ተብሎ የሚጠራው የወያኔ/ኢህአዴግ የልማት ስትራቴጂ ብዙ ዘርፍ ያለው ሌላው የእድገትና የዲሞክራሲ ማነቆ ነው። እንዱ ዘርፍ “አብዮታዊ ዲሞክራሲ” የሚል ሌኒናዊ ስም ተሰጥቶት ፓርቲው የሰፊው ሕዝብ ሞግዚትና አፈቀላጤ ሆኖ መቅረቡ ነው። አልፎም መንግስት የፓርቲው አገልጋይና ታዛዥ እንዲሁም ተቋማቱ በችሎታ ሳይሆን በታማኞች የተሰገሰጉ መሆናቸው ነው። ሶስተኛው ይህ የድጎማ ፖለቲካ ብዙ ገንዘብ ማፍሰስን ስለሚጠይቅ በተራ ሙስና ብቻ ሳይሆን በተቋማት ደረጃ ትርፍና ኪራይ ሰብሳቢ ኩባንያዎችን በማቋቋም እንዲሁም የመንግስትና የርዳታ ገንዝብን በማሸጋሸግ የሃገሪቱን ንብረት በህግ-አስመሳይ የዘረፋ ዘዴዎች ለደጋፊዎች መቸርቸር ለገዥ እድሜ ማራዘሚያ ቅድመ-ሁኔታ መሆኑ ነው።

ቀጥሎም የመደብ-ጦርነት መዶሻ ስለዶመዶመ የሶሻሊዝም ህብረ-ብሄር ግንባታን ትቶ በስሜታዊ የዘርና ሃይማኖት ክፍፍል ሕብረተሰቡን ማመስን መረጠ። ዶ/ር ሃይሌ ላሬቦ በቅርቡ ይህን የፓለቲካ ቅኝት “ከመደብ ጥላቻ ወደ አማራ ፍራቻ” በማለት የማትረሳ ስያሜ ሰጥተውታል።

የጎጣዊ ስርዓት ዘላቂነት የሌለው የኢኮኖሚ ዕድገትን ለጊዜው ቢያመጣም፥ ቋሚና ጠንካራ የእድገት ሞተርን ያቀፈ የእንዱስትሪ ትራንስፎርሜሽን ኣላመጣም፥ ሊያመጣም አይችልም። የአስተዳደሩም ዘዴ ብሄራዊ አንድነትንና ኢትዮጵያዊነትን ማዳከም 

ሶስተኛው ጥያቄ እነዚህ ተቋማትና ስልቶች ምን ጉዳት አስከተሉ የሚለው ነው። መልሱም፦ ስለሚያስፈልገው ጠንካራ ማእከላዊ የመንግስት ኣዉታር ከማቋቋም ይልቅ እንዳይሞት- እንዳይሽር ሆኖ የሚያነክስና ለቁጥጥር የሚያመች የጠለፋ መዋቅርን ዘርግቷል።

ስለዚህ ትልቁ ጥያቄ ለውጥ ማስፈለጉ ሳይሆን በአገራችን ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ ምን አይነት የተቋምና የስልት ለውጦች ያስፈልጋሉ? እንዴትስ ይተገበራሉ? የሚሉት ናቸው። የምትጠራጠሩ ካላችሁ ሁለት ግንዛቤዎችን ላንሳላችሁ፦

• ከ1870 እስከ 1970 ድረስ ኢትዮጵያ በነፍስ-ወከፍ ገቢ ቻይናን አሳምራ ትበልጣት ነበር። ባለፉት አርባ አመታት ግን ቻይና ችሎታዋንና እድሏን አቀናጅታ መጠቀች። አሜሪካንንም በብሄራዊ ኢኪኖሚ ግዙፍነት ከኋላ መጥታ ዘንድሮ በመቅደም በ1800 አ.ም. በአለም ኢኮኖሚ የነበራትን የብሄራዊ-መጠን አንደኛነት አስመልሳለች። ይህ ለኛ ትልቅ ተስፋ ሰጭ ነው።
• እንዲሁም የፖለቲካ ወሬ-ወፍጮ እየተባለ የተሰለቀበት የኢትዮጵያ ወጣት ሳይወድ- በግድ ተስዶ ባርባ አመታት ውስጥ አዲስ ዲያስፖራ ቆርቁሮ ያሳየው አኩሪ የትምህርትና የኑሮ እድገት የችግራችን ስር-መሰረት ምን እንደሆነ በገሃድ አሳይቶናል።

በዚህ አኳያ አንድ ትልቅ ሹመት ያለው አሜሪካዊ ወዳጄ ከኢትዮጵያ በተመለስኩ ቁጥር የባለሁለት-ግጽታ ህዝብ መሆናችውን እየተገነዘብኩ እገረማለሁ፣ እስኪ ይህን እንቆቅልሽ ግለጽልኝ አለኝ። እኔም ይህ የታሪክ ላቦራቶሪ የሚያሳየን አሳፋሪ የድህነታችን ስር-መሰረቱ የተፈጥሮ ችሎታችን ውሱነት ሳይሆን የአስተዳደር ስርዓታችን ስንኩልነት ነው አልኩት።

በርግጥ አጥጋቢ መልስ አልተሰጠሁትም። ደግነቱ መፍትሄውስ አላለኝም። ከአቶ ‘በለው’፣ ከወ/ሮ ‘ብላው’ና ከጋሸ ‘ግዛው’ ሰንሰለት ወጥተን ወደ ሰርቶ-መክበር አትጊ ስርዓት እንዴት እንደምንሸጋገር እስካሁን ሚስጥሩ ገና አልተገለጸልንም። የዚህ ጥናታዊ ውይይት ጉባኤ ዋና አላማም በመፍትሄ ፍላጋ ላይ የሆነው ይህን ድክመት ለመቅረፍ ታስቦ ነው።

በቀረበው የመንደርደሪያ ወረቀት እንደምታዩት የስጠሁት የመፍትሄና የተሃድሶ መልስ ባጭሩ እንደሚከተለው ነው። ይህም አስተሳሰብ ስሜታዊ ሳይሆን ለ40 አመታት (ማለት ከመሬት አዋጅ ጀምሮ) ከትምርታዊና ጥናታዊ አለም ያገኘሁትን እውቀትና ግንዛቤዎች የሚያንጸባርቅ ነው። 

የኢኮኖሚ ስርዓቶች በሁለት መስፈርቶች ይገመገማሉ፦ አንዱ የሃብት ባለቤትነት (ማለት--መንግስታዊ፡ግላዊ፡ማህበራዊ) ሲሆን ዋናው ግን በሃገር ጉዳዮች ላይ ማን የወሳኝነት ስልጣን ይኑረው የሚለው ነው። በዚህ አንጻር ከኢትዮጵያም ሆነ ከስኬታማ ታዳጊ አገሮች የቀሰምናቸው ትምህርቶች እንደሚያሳዩን፦

1ኛ) አብዛኛዎቹ የአምባ-ዣንጥራሮች የሚባሉት የመንግስት የእርሻ፤የእንዱስትሪ፤ የንግድ፤ የአገልግሎትና የፊናንስ ኩባንያዎች ቢያንስ በጋርዮሽ ቢበዛ ደግሞ በግላዊ- ተናጠልነት እንዲሰሩና የገባያ ተወዳዳሪ እንዲሆኑ መደረግ አለበት። ይህም ማለት መንግስት የግል ባለሃብቱ የማይችላቸውን አስፈላጊ ኩባንያዎችን ፍጹም አያቋቁም ሳይሆን የዘመናዊ መንግስት ብኩር ተልዕኮው ውድድራዊነትን ማስፋትና የግለ-ኢኮኖሚውን መሪነትን ማጎልመስ መሆኑን ለመጠቆም ነው።

2ኛ) በህግ-አልባና በስርቆት የተቋቋሙት የገዢው ፓርቲና የግብረ-አበሮቹ ኩባንያዎች ያለምንም ጥያቄ (ነገር ግን በጥንቃቄ) ተዘጋጅተው በሃራጅ መሸጥ እንዳለባቸው ነው።

3ኛ) የገጠር እርሻና ግጦሽ መሬቶች በ1967 የመሬት አዋጁ ክፍፍል መሰረት ወደ ግል-ርስትነት መሸጋገር አለባቸው እላለሁ። የጎሳ አርበኞች ነፍጠኛን ሊያመጣብን፤ተራማጆች ደግሞ ገበሬውን መሬት-አልባ ሊያደርገው ነው ብላችሁ ሳታስቡ አልቀራችሁም። በኔ ግምት ይህ እርምጃ ‘የመሬት-ላራሹን’ መርህ በማክበር የመሃልና የደቡብ ክፍለሃገር ኢትዮጵያዊያኖች እንደ ሰሜኑ ህዝብ የርስት የመሬት ባለቤት ስለሚያደርጋቸው ነው።

በመሬት አዋጁ መሰረት ያልኩት አውቄ ነው። እንደምስታውሱት ‘አብዮት ጠላቶቿንም ልጆቿንም አብራ ትበላለች’ ይባል ነበር። የኛ አብዮት እርም-ሳትል ያልበላችው ወጣት ስለሌለ ወደፊት የወረስነውን ጎጆ በናቅን ቁጥር እሳት-እንልቀቅበት የሚለው ጮርቃና ስርዓተ-አልባዊ አስተሳሰብ ወደአገራችን ሁለተኛ እንደማይመለስ ተስፋ አለኝ። በነገራችን ላይ ዘንድሮ ደግሞ ‘አብዮት፣ ልጅና፣ የዘመኑ ቄሶች በሰው ግንዘብ ያለቅሳሉ’ መባል ተጀምሯል።

ይህ ቀልድ-ነክ አነጋገሬ ቁምነገርን ለማስመር ነው። በአብዮት ስም ህጉ የፈቀደላቸውን ድርሻ ለተቀሙ ዜጎች ሁሉ ምንም ቢዘገይም መሬታቸውን ወይንም ካሳቸውን መስጠት ፍትሕን ለማስከበር ብቻ ሳይሆን የቀምቶ-በላንና የቂም-በቀል ፖለቲካንም ለማክተም ይረዳል ብየ ስለማምን ነው። በተጨማሪም ርስቱን ሸጦ እንደመንጋ ወደመሸታ ቤት የሮጠ ህዝብ አይተን አናውቅም፤ብልሁ ገበሬ ሲራብ እንኳን ለወለድ-አግድ ይሰጣል እንጅ ርስቱን አይሸጥም። የመንግስት ብልጣብልጥ አቀንቃኞች እንደሚተነብዩት ሸጦ የፈለገውን ቢያደርግበትም እንኳ የራሱ መብትና ሃላፊነት ሆኖ መታየት አለበት። ሕዝብን ንቀን በኛ ራስን-ሿሚ እብሪተኝነት፣ ዱሮ ሶሻሊዝመን ዛሬ ደግሞ ሊበራል ዲሞክራሲን እንገነባለን ማለት በመሃይም እናቶቻችን አነጋገር ዘይቤ “ለመሆኑ ምን ቋንቋ ነው” ያስብልብናል።

ይህን ስል የመንግስት መሬት አይኑር ማለቴ አይደለም። ለህዝብ መዝናኛ የሚሆኑ፣ ትልልቅ ማእድኖችን የያዙና፣ የአግልግሎት ጣቢያዎች የሚሆኑ ቦታዎች ሁሉ መንግስታዊ ቢሆኑ መልካም ነው። አብዛኛዎቹ የእትዮጵያ ወንዞች የወዳጅ-ጠላት በመሆናቸው ካለብዙ ኢንቨስትመንት ሊከፈቱና መስኗዊ ሊሆኑ ስለማይችሉ መንግስት በባለቤትነት ትልቅ ሚና እንደሚኖረውም እምብዛም አያከራክረንም።

4ኛ) የከተማ መሬትን በሚመለከት ሁለት አስተሳሰቦችን ማብጠልጠል ያስፈልጋል። በአንድ በኩል የህግ በላይነት በሰፈነባቸው አገሮች (ለንደን ከተማ አንድ ምሳሌ ነው) የከተማ መሬት የመንግስት ሆኖ በረዥም-ጊዜ ውል ባለቤቶች ሁሉ እንደልባቸው መሸጥ፣መለወጥና ማስተላለፍ ይችላሉ።

የኢትዮጵያ ሁኔታ ግን ከዚህ ይለያል። አንደኛ በድህረ-ሶሻሊዝም ዘመን በአውሮፓና ሩስያ እንደተፈጸመው ያላግባብ የተወረሱትን የመመለስ ወይንም የመካስ ጥያቄዎች መስተናገድ አለባቸው። ሁለተኛ አስተማማኝ መንግስታትን እስክናፈራ ድረስ ጥበቃ እንዳለብን ተገንዝበን ዜጎች በትጉህነት ያፈሩትንና ያከማቹን ሃብት የፖለቲካ ጅቦች እንዳይቀሟቸው ለማድረግ ስለሚረዳ ነው። ለዲሞክራሲ ግንባታም ኢኮኖሚያዊ ይዘቶች ታላቅ አስተዋጽኦ ስላላቸው ለዜጎች አስተማማኝ የሃብት ባላቤትነትን ማልበስ ታታሪነትን ከማጎልመስ አልፎ ጭቆናን መካላከያ አቅማቸውን እንደሚገነባ የታዳጊ አገሮች ልምድ ያስተምረናል። የሊበራሊዝምም አንዱ ምሰሶም ይህ ይመስለኛል።

የእድገት ስልትን በሚለከት በወረቀቱ ላስረዳ እንደሞከርኩትና የምጣኔ-ሃብት ምርምሮች እንደሚያሳዩን ጥራት ያለው አማራጭ ስልት ሁለት አብይ ባህሪዎችን ማቀፉን ለማሳየት ሞክሬአለሁ፦

•  አንዱ ምሰሶ የመንግስትና የግል-ሃብታም ክፍሎች በፉክክር ሳይሆን እጅና ጓንቲ ሆነው በአጋርነት መስራት ነው። ሁለቱም አንካሳ በሆኑባት ደሃ አገር ተደጋግፈው በልማት ላይ እንደመረባረብ በአስመሳይ ነጻ-ገባያ ጥላ ስር እንደጠላት መተያየታችውን ያቁሙ። ይህም የአፍሪካዉያን ትልቁ ድክመት ነው። የምስራቅ እስያ ልማታዊ ስትራቴጂ የሚባለውም ቻይናም በቅርቡ መከተል የጀመረችው ስልት በመሰረቱ አጋራዊ ነው። 
• ሌላው ምሰሶ ያልኩት በገጠርና በከተማ የተሳሰረና በሁሉም ክፍለ-ግዛቶች እንደስጦታቸው የአቅም ግንባታ ድጋፍ እየተለገሳቸው የአግሮ-ኢንዱስትሪና የአገልግሎት ስራ ክፍፍሎችን ያቀፈ የእድገት ስልት መተለም ነው። ለዚህ የእድገት ስልት ታላቋ አዲስ አበባና አካባቢዎቹ ቁልፋዊ ሚና አላቸው።

በጠቅላላው ኢትዮጵያ ካለችበት የኢኮኖሚ አጣብቂኝ እንድትወጣ የሚያስችላት ማምልጫ አይኑን ለገለጠ ሁሉ የሚታይ የአደባባይ ሚስጥር ነው። ቁልፉ የፓለቲካ ፈቃድኝነት ነው። ለበትረ-መንግስት ጠለፋ የተሰማራውን ገዥ ፓርቲ ብቻ ሳይሆን ለተመሳሳይ አገዛዝ ስርዓት የሚቋምጡትንም ተቃዋሚ ቡድኖች ከዚህ ዝቃጭ አስተሳሰብ እንዲጸዱ መምክርና ማስገደድ ነው። ባጭሩ ለህዝቡ በአለም-አቀፍ ኮንቬንሽኖት የተደነገጉት የግለሰቦች ነጻነቶች ይከበሩለት፤ ያላዋቂ ሳሚ አብዮታዊ ዲሞክራቶችና ልማታዊ ሃብታሞችም እባካች ተረረጋጉን እላለሁ። ሕዝቡ እፈለገበት ቦታ ሄዶ ይስራና በሰላም ይኑር፣በፈለገበት የስራና መስክ ይሰለፍ፣ የሃብት ባላቤትነቱም አስተማማኝ ዋስትና ያግኝ። እነዚህ በሰለጠነው አገር መሰረታዊ እሴቶች ናቸው።

ለዚህ ታላቅ ምኞት ፍሬያማነት የሚያስፈልጉን ለግንባታ አቅመ-ጠንካራና ለሕዝብ ታዛዥ መንግስት፣ ውድድራዊ የገበያ ስርዓት፣ ሰርቶ-ከባር ባለሃብቶችና፣ አገር-ውዳድ ዲያስፖራዎች ናቸው። እነዚህን ስልጣኔያዊ ተቋማት እንዴት እንደምንገነባቸው አዋቂዎቻችን ይምከሩበት። 

Blog 8. Peace and Reconciliation by Dr. Getachew Haile (2015)

መጀመሪያ የመጀመሪያውን፤ ዕርቅና ሰላሙን

ጌታቸው ኃይሌ 

በዛሬው ጉባኤያችን ላይ በአካል ለመገኘት ብችል ምንኛ በተደሰትኩ ነበር። ብገኝ ኖሮ የማቀርበውን ሐሳብ በሩቁ ሆኜ በጽሑፍ እንዳቀርብ ከተፈቀደልኝ፥ ከአሁን በፊት በስብስቦችና በብትን ያቀረብኩትን እንዳዲስ ላቅርብ።

የኢትዮጵያዊነት ማኅበራችን ተልእኮ የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ለኑሮው በአንድነት አይቶ በአንድነት የፈታው ሕልም እንዲደርስ ማድረግ ነው። ሕልሙ በነፃነትና በሰላም እየበለጸጉ መኖር ሲሆን፥ ከታየና ከተፈታ ብዙ ትውልዶች አልፈዋል። ግን አልደረሰም። ለምን አልደረሰም ብለን ብንጠይቅ፥ ሁላችንም የምንስማማበት መልስ ያለ አይመስለኝም። መንፈሳዊ ሕልም እና ሥጋዊ ሕልም የተለያዩ ናቸው። መንፈሳዊ ሕልም ከላይ ኀይል ይላካል፤ እንደ ዮሴፍ ስጦታ ያለው ሕልም ፈቺ ይፈታዋል፤ ተስፈኛው ቁጭ ብሎ ሕልሙ እስኪፈጸም ይጠብቃል። ጊዜውን ጠብቆ ሕልሙን በላከው ኀይል ይፈጸማል።

ሥጋዊ ሕልም ግን ከነትርጒሙ ከሰው አእምሮ ይፈልቅና በሰው ኀይል ከሥራ ላይ ይውላል፤ ይደርሳል፤ ይፈጸማል። እንዲህ ከሆነ፥ ጥያቄው መሆን ያለበት፥ “ሕልሙ ታልሞ ከተፈታ ብዙ ጊዜ ከሆነው፥ ገና ከሥራ ላይ ያልዋለው ለምንድን ነው? ከሥራ ላይ የሚያውል የሰው ኀይል ጠፍቶ ነው ወይስ ዘዴው አልገለጽላችሁ ብሎን ነው?” የሚል ነው። መልሱ ሁለተኛው ይመስለኛል። የሰው ኀይል አለ፤ ሕልሙ ከታለመና ከተፈታ ጀምሮ ሕልሙን በሥራ ላይ የሚያውሉ ኀይላት ተነሥተው ተፋልመዋል። ትግሉ በተለይ የተፋፋመው ከተማሪዎቹ ንቅናቄ ጀምሮ ቢመስልም፥ የተጀመረው በብዙ ዓመታት ቀደም ብሎ ነው። አሁንም በሰልፍ ላይ ነው። በአሁኑ ሰዓት እንኳን፥ በትጥቅ፥ በዜና ማሰራጫ ፥ በጽሑፍ፥ በፖርቲ እንደሚካሄድ እናውቃለን። ትግሉ ውጤታማ ካልሆነ፥ አመርቂው ዘዴ ቢጠፋን ነው። 

የታሰበውና የተሞከረው በጥንቱ ሥርዓት የተቋቋመውን መንግሥት አፍርሶ በአዲስ ሥርዓት ለመገንባት ነበር። ግን አንደኛ፥ የጥንቱ ሥርዓት ገጽታው አንድ ዓይነት መሆኑ (ንጉሣዊ አስተዳደር መሆኑ) የአዲሱ ሥርዓት ገጽታ ብዙ (ሕገ መንግሥታዊ የንጉሥ አስተዳደር፥ ዲሚክራሲያዊ ሊበራል ወይም ኅብረሰባዊ ሪፐብሊክ) ሊሆን እንደሚችል፥ ሁለተኛ፥ ጎሳዎች የየራሳቸውን መንግሥት የማቋቋም ፍላጎት እንዳላቸው እንዳንገነዘብ አድርጎናል። ስለዚህ፥ በፈረሰው ቤት ምትክ ሁል-አቀፍ አዳራሽ የመሥራት እርምጃ ልንወስድ አልቻልንም። የኢትዮጵያን ሕዝብ ምኞት ጎሰኞች አጨናገፉት።

ትግላችን ይቀጥላል። ግን መጀመሪያ የእስከ ዛሬው ትግል ለምን ውጤታማ አልሆነም? ብለን መጠየቅ አለብን። ለትግል ጕዞ የጀመርነው መንገድ የት የሚያደርስ ነው? ልንደርስበት የምንፈልገው አገር ስሙ ማን እንደሆነ ጉዟችንን ከመጀመራችን በፊት ማረጋገጥ አለብን።

የእስከ ዛሬው ትግል ብዙ ሰማዕታት አፍርቶ ሳለ፥ ውጤታማ ያልሆነበት ምክንያቶቹ ብዙ ሊሆኑ
ይችላሉ። አንዱን ምክንያት እንደመሰለኝ ገምቼ፥ የመሰለኝን መፍትሔ “በኢትዮጵያ ሰላም የሚያመጣ የአማራ የተራድኦና የዕርቅ ድርጅት ያስፈልጋል” በሚል ርእስ በቅርብ ጊዜ ለሕዝብ አቅርቤ ነበረ። በዛሬው ጽሑፌ የማቀርበው ትችት ከዚያኛው ጽሑፍ ይዞታ አንዱን ክፍል ገንጥሎ የሚከልስ ይሆናል። በፊት ያቀረብኩት ጽሑፍ የሚለውና አሁን እንደገና ላብራራው የምፈልገው፥ የትግሉ ዘመቻ የተካሄደው
የተለያየ ዓላማ ባላቸውና በማይግባቡ፥ እንዲያውም በተካሰሱ ሠራዊቶች ነበር፤ አሁንም ነው የሚል አስተታየት ነው። ከሳሾች “አፈ ጎሳ” ነን የሚሉ በጎሳ ላይ የተመሠረተ የፖለቲካ ድርጅት ያቋቋሙ ኢትዮጵያውያን ሲሆኑ፥ ተከሳሾሹ አሁን ግልጽ እንደሆነልኝ፥ ኢትዮጵያዊነትን አጥብቀው የያዙት
ናቸው። ከሳሾቹ ተከሳሾቹን አማርኛ ስለሚናገሩ “አማሮች” ይሏቸዋል። የክሱ ጭብጥ፥ በኢትዮጵያ ታሪክ ጎሳዎች ተበድለዋል፥ ተጨቁነዋል፥ አንዳንዶቹም ተሽጠዋል። ይኸንን ሁሉ ወንጀል የፈጸመው የአማራ ሕዝብ ነው፤ የሚል ነው።

እነዚህ ከሳሾች ወደኋላ እየሄዱ እሮሮና ዋይታ፥ ቁጭትና በቀል፥ ቀለል ሲል ደግሞ ስድብ ያሰማሉ። መፍትሔያቸው አማራን ማሳደድ፥ መግደል፥ ንብረቱን መዝረፍ፥ ከዚያም አልፈው “የሰፈርንበትን መሬት ይዘን ከኢትዮጵያ እንለያለን” የሚል ነው። “የበደሉ ዓይነት ይለያይ ይሆናል እንጂ ያልተበደለ የለም” እያሉ ብዙዎች ቢያስታውሱም፥ ቁጭቱና ቁጣው አልበረደም። በአንድ በኩል፥ “እኛ በተለይ ተበድለናል” የሚሉና በሌላው በኩል፥ “የተበደልነው ሁላችንም ነን” የሚሉ ወገኖች ድምፃቸውን በየቤታቸው ሆነው ያሰማሉ፥ ይወነጃጀላሉ እንጂ፥ ለመግባባት፥ ያም ካልሆነ ለመሰማማት፥ ተቀራርበው የተነጋገሩበት ጊዜ መኖሩ ትዝ አይለኝም። ላቀርብ የምፈልገው ሐሳብ ተቀራርበን እንወያይ የሚል ነው። ልዩ በደል ደርሶብናል የሚሉ ወገኖችን ከሁሉም የባሰ የሚያስቆጣቸው፥ “ይህ ችግር መጀመሪያ የተማሪዎቹ ንቅናቄ፥ አሁን ደግም ወያኔዎች የፈጠሩት ችግር እንጂ፥ ሁላችንም በሰላምና በእኩልነት አብረን የኖርን ሕዝብ ነን” የሚል ሐሳብ ሲሰነዘር ነው። በነሱ እምነት፥ በደሉን ተማሪዎቹና ወያኔዎች አጎሉት እንጂ፥ መኖርስ አብሮን የኖረ ነው። ልዩነቱ እኛን የሚሰማንን ያህል አማራው ወይም በኢትዮጵያዊነት የሚያምነው ሕዝብ አይሰማቸውም ነበር ይላሉ።

በዚህ ነገር ላይ ከሳሾችም ተከሳሾችም እውነት አላቸው። ለአንዳፍታም ቢሆን የከሳሾቹ ጠበቃ ልሁንና፥ ከተማሪዎቹ ንቅናቄ በፊት የጎሳዎች ማጕረምረም እንደነበረ መካድ እንደማይቻል፥ ለማሳየት ያህል፥ አንዳንድ ድርጊቶችን ከታሪክ ሰነድ ውስጥ እናስታውስ፤

ትውስት አንድ፤ ከኢትዮጵያው አፄ (ማለት ከንጉሠ ነገሥቱ) ሥር ንኡሳን ነገሥታት እንደነበሩ እናስታውሳለን። ከነዚህ አንዳንዶቹ የእስላም ነገሥታት ነበሩ። ከ1426 እስከ 1460 የነገሠው አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ የኢማም በድላይን ወረራ ለመመከት ዘመቻ ሲያውጅ፥ በሥሩ ካሉት ነገሥታት አንዱ የእስላሞች ንጉሥ ለእርዳታ ልምጣልህ ብሎ ቢልክበት፥ “ግዴለም ካለህበት አትነቃነቅ” ብሎ መለሰለት። ታሪክ ጸሐፊው ምክንያቱን እንደመዘገበው፥ አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ እርዳታ ሳይፈልግ ቀርቶ ሳይሆን፥ ከኢማም በድላይ ጋር ሲዋጋ የእስላሙ ንጉሥ ለእርዳታ የመጣ መስሎ ከኋላው እንዳይመታው ፈርቶት ነው። አንድ የሀገር መሪ ከሀገር ጠላት ጋር ሲዋጋ እንዴት የሀገሩን ሰው ከድቶ ከጠላት ጋር ይወግናል ብሎ ይፈራል? ከመዝመታችን በፊት መጀመሪያ ለዚህ ጥያቄ መልስ መስጠት አለብን።

ትውስት ሁለት፤ ከኢማም በድላይ ቀጥሎ በኢትዮጵያው አፄ ላይ ያመፀው ኢማም አሕመድ ግራኝ ነበር። በዚያን ጊዜ ፈላሻ የሚባሉት ቅማንቶች ለወራሪው ለኢማም አሕመድ ግራኝ እርዳታ እንደሰጡት ተመዝግቧል። አንድ የሀገር መሪ ከአማፂ ጋር ሲዋጋ እንዴት የሀገር ሰው መሪውን ይከዳል? የጋራ ሀገር ጠላትን ለማስወገድ የትግል ክተት ከማወጃችን በፊት መጀመሪያ ይኸን ዓይነት መሰናክል ትግላችንን እንዳያሰናክልብን አሁኑኑ አስፈላጊውን መፍትሔ መፈለግ አለብን።

ትውስት ሦስት፤ በጻድቁ ዮሐንስ ዘመን (1660-1674) የኖሩ አባ አካለ ክርስቶስ የሚባሉ አንድ መነኩሴ ነበሩ፤ ገድላቸውን ሳነብ በውስጡ በግዕዝ የተመዘገበውን ወደአማርኛ ተርጕሜ ከዚህ በታች የጻፍኩትን አገኘሁ፤

በዚያን ዘመን አራ ደንጐራ ከምትባል ሀገር የሚኖሩ ወታደሮች ነበሩ። ማተባቸውን ከአንገታቸው ላይ ፈትተው በየ ጦራቸው ላይ ሰቅለው ወደ ብፁዓዊ አቡነ አካለ ክርስቶስ መጡና እንዲህ አሉት፤ “አባት ሆይ፥ ዱሮ አረማውያን ስለነበርን ሕዝበ ክርስቲያኑን እንበቀላቸው፥ ቤተ ክርስቲያን እናቃጥል ነበር። ዛሬ ግን በእግዚአብሔር ምሕረት መንፈሳዊት ጥምቀትን አግኝተን፥ ከሕዝበ ክርስቲያኑ ጋር ተደባልቀናል። በክርስቲያን
ሕግም ከእነሱ ጋር አንድ ሆነናል። ቤተ ክርስቲያንን ወደናታል። በማቃጠል ፈንታ ወደሷ ሄደን ልንገነባት ድንጋይ፥ እንጨት ውኻ በመሸከም ደክመናል። ከዚህ ሁሉ በኋላ፥ እነሆ እንደኛው ያሉት ጓደኞቻችን ወታደሮች ከሀገራችን በኃይል ያባርሩናል። ወደቀድሞው ባህላችን እንድንመለስም ያስገድዱናል። በጸሎትህ አትርሳን። ከተቻለህም ከእጃቸው አውጣን።

አዲስ ክርስቲያኖች ከሕዝበ ክርስቲያኑ ጋር መዋሐድን በአክብሮት ሲፈልጉ፥ መበረታታት ሲገባቸው፥ የመንግሥት ወታደሮች መሬታቸውን ከቀሟቸው፥ በአረመኔነታቸው ጊዜማ ግንኙነታቸው ምን ይመስል ነበር ?

ትውስት አራት፤ የሀገር ጠላት ሲነሣ፥ ሕዝቡ እንደሚተባበር በማስረጃነት የሚጠቀሰው የአፄ ምኒልክ አመራርና የ1888 ዓ.ም. የአድዋ ድል ነው። ማስረጃነቱ የማይካድ ነው፤ ብዙዎች ተባብረውበታል። ሆኖም ሁኔታው በሚገባ አልተመረመረም። ለምሳሌ፥ አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ የፈራውን አፄ ምኒልክም ፈርተውት ነበር። ታሪኩን ታሪክ ጸሐፊያቸው ጸሐፌ ትእዛዝ ገብረ ሥላሴ እንዲህ ሲሉ መዝግበውታል፤

አጼ ምኒልክ ግን ወደ ትግሬ [ወደ አድዋ] ሊዘምቱ ካዲስ አበባ ተነሥተው አምባሰል ሲደርሱ (የመሐመድ አንፋሪ ቱርክ ባሻ አብደርሁማን ክፋት ማሰቡን) በሰሙ ጊዜ ከንጉሠ ነገሥቱ ጋራ ወደትግሬ ሊዘምቱ የነበሩትን መኳንንት ራስ ወልደ ጊዮርጊስንና ደጃዝማች ተሰማን (ከግዛት) አገራቸው መራቅ የተነሣ ወደኋላ ቀርተው ነበርና ወደ አውሳ እንዲዘምቱ እንዲህ ብለው ላኩባቸው።  

“ከኔ ጋር ያለው ሠራዊት ብዙ ነው ልክና መጠን የለውም። እግዚአብሔር ካልተለየን በትግሬ በኩል ላለው ጦር ይበቃል። እናንተም ወደ አውሳ ዝመቱ” ብለው አዝዟቸው። . . . እነዚህም ሁለት መኳንንቶች ታንኮበር ወህኒ አዛዥ ወልደ ጻድቅን ጨምረው በታዘዙት ወደ አውሳ ዘመቱ።

የዘመኑ መፍትሔ ያመፀን እንደዚህ ማስገበር እንጂ ማባበልና ማሳመን፥ ብሶቱን መስማትና መፍትሔ መፈለግ አልነበረም፤ ግን እስከመቸ ለጠላት ስንመች እንኖራለን?

(ታሪኩን ለማሟላት ያህል፥ አፄ ዮሐንስም ወደ ጉራሌ በዘመቱ ጊዜ፥ አውሳን እንውጋ ብለው ነበር። ግን አውሳ በዚያን ጊዜ ለሸዋ ንጉሥ ይገብር ስለነበረ፥ ታሪክ እንደሚነግረን፥ “አጼ ምኒልክ ካያቴ ከቅድም አያቴ እስከኔ ድረስ ከፈቃዴ ወጥቶ የማያውቅ ዜጋዬ ነው ብለው አገሩን ከጥፋት አዳኑት። እስከዚህ ቀን ድረስ ካጼ ምኒልክ ፈቃድ አልወጣም ነበር። ኋላ ግን አብድርሁማን የሚባል የተጐሬ አዳል” ከጣሊያኑ ከአንቶኔሊ ጋር ተስማምቶ ሱልጣን መሐመድ አንፋሪን አስከዳ።)

ትውስት አምስት፤ ሁለተኛው የኢጣልያ ወረራና የማይጨው ጦርነት ታሪክ (1928 ዓ.ም.) የቅርብ ጊዜ ትዝታ ነው። በዚህ ጦርነት ጊዜ ራያዎች እንደከዱ ተመዝግቧል።) የነሱ ክዳት ለድል ማጣታችን ምክንያት ባይሆንም፥ በዘማቹ ላይ የማይረሳ ጉዳት አድርሷል። “ሠርገኛ መጣ በርበሬ ቀንጥሱ” እንዲሉ፥ ንጉሠ ነገሥቱ በጦርነቱ ላይ እያሉ የራያ መሪዎችን አስጠርተው ከፋሺስት ወራሪዎች ጋር እንዳይሰለፉና አገራቸውን እንዳይበድሉ አባብለዋቸውም ነበር፤ አልሰሙም። የራስ ወገን ከኋላ እንዳይወጋ እስከ መቸ ሲገላመጡ መኖር ይቻላል?

ትውስት ስድስት፤ ከማይጨው ሽንፈት በኋላ፥ አርበኞች ጥቁር አንበሳ በሚል ስም ተደራጅተው፥ በደቡብ ኢትዮጵያ የትጥቅ ትግል አካሂደው ነበር። አገሬው ድጋፍ በመስጠትና በማበረታታት ፈንታ፥ ከጠላት ጋር ወግኖ ይወጋቸው ነበር። ደቡቡ አዲስ አበባ ላይ ለሰፈረው ጠላት ሩቅ ሆኖ ሳለ፥ አርበኞቹ በዚህ ምክንያት ትግላቸውን ጥቂት ጊዜ እንኳን መቀጠል አልቻሉም። በተቃራኒው በጎጃም እነበላይ ዘለቀና በሸዋ እነአበበ አረጋይ ግን ጠላትን በቅርቡ ሆነው እስከመጨረሻው ድረስ አስጨንቀው ይዘውት ነበር። የሁለቱ ሁኔታ መለያየት ለምን እንደሆነ ሳይሸፋፈን ተጠንቶ መፍትሔ አልተፈለገለትም። 

 ወያኔዎች ኢትዮጵያን ድል የነሡትና እስካሁን ድረስ በወራሪነት ተንፈራጠው በሥልጣን ዙፋን ላይ የተቀመጡት፥ በዚያው ከነሱ በፊት የተነሡ ጠላቶቿ በተጠቀሙበት የጎሳዎች ቅሬታ በመጠቀም ነው። “ከአማራ ጭቆና አድነናችኋል” ለማለትና “አማራ ተመልሶ መጥቶ እንዳይጨቁናችሁ ከእኛ ከባለውሎታዎቻችሁ ጋር ቁሙ” ብሎ ለማሳመኛ ያህል፥ ለጎሳዎች ከሚመኙት ቆንጠር አድርገው ሰጥተዋቸል። ዓባይን ያላየ ምንጭ ያመሰግናል እንዲሉ፥ ለትልቁ ዓላማ፥ ማለትም በነፃነት ለዲሞክራሲያዊ ኑሮ ከዲሞክራቶች ጋር አብረው ለመታገል አላሰቡበትም። ወያኔ የሰጣቸውን የሚያስተያዩት ካለፈው ጋር እንጂ፥ ዲሞክራሲ ሲሰፍን ከሚያገኙት ሙሉ ነፃነት ጋር አይደለም። ባጭሩ፥ “ከማያውቁት መልአክ የሚያውቁት ሰይጣን ይሻላል” የሚለው ፍልስፍና የአእምሮ እስረኞች ሆነዋል። ማስፈታት ግዴታችን ነው።

ወያኔዎች ከጎሳ ድርጅቶች የሚፈልጉት ድጋፍ በአማራ ስም ኢትዮጵያዊነትን ለማጥቃት ነው። ማንም ኢትዮጵያዊ በማንም እጅ መጠቃት የለበትም። ሆኖም የኛ ቁጣ ያተኮረው ከአማራው መገደል አልፎ፥ እንዲገደል ከተወሰነበት ምክንያት ላይ ነው። ወያኔዎች ለጎሰኞቹ የሚሰጡት ምክንያት፥ አማራ ስለበደላችሁ ምቱት ነው። እውነትም እነ ጃራ፥ “እድሜ ይኸንን ዕድል ለሰጠን ለወያኔ” እያሉ ብዙ አማራ የሚሏቸውን አርደዋል። ወያኔዎች ሊደብቁት ያልቻሉት በኢትዮጵያዊነት የሚያምኑትን ለመምታት የገፋፋቸው ድብቅና ሩቅ ዓላማ ግን የኢትዮጵያን ሕዝብ ከፋፍለው፥ አገሪቱን እንደፈለጉ እንዳይጫወቱባት በኢትዮጵያዊነት የሚያምነው ሕዝብ ስለሚያስቸግራቸው ነው። ስለዚህ እነዚህን ኢትዮጵያውያን በቀጥታና በእጅ አዙር መምታት አስፈላጊ ሆኖ አግኝተውታል።

በኢትዮጵያዊነት የሚያምነውና አማርኛ የሚናገረው ሕዝብ ቍጥር ለጊዜው ቀላል አይደለም። እንዲያውም ከአደጋ ላይ የጣለው ብዛቱና እምነቱ ነው። ጎሳዎችን በኢትዮጵያዊነት በሚያምነው ላይ ማስነሣት ሕዝብ ማጫረስ ነው። በኢትዮጵያዊነት በሚያምነው ሕዝብ ለመቆጣት ሁለት ምክንያት አለው፤ አንደኛው፥ አልሞት ባይ ተጋዳይነት ሲሆን፥ ሁለተኛው በአባቶቻቸው ፊታውራሪነት የተገነባች ኢትዮጵያ መጎሳቆሏን አለመቀበል ነው። የምንሰማው እውነት ከሆነ፥ ወያኔዎች የዘመቱት በተወለዱት ላይ ብቻ ሳይሆን ባልተወለዱትም ላይ ነው።

አንድ ሕዝብ እርስ በርሱ ተፋጦና ተጣልቶ አብሮ በሰላም መኖር፥ በሀገር ጠላት ላይም አብሮ መዝመት አይቻልም። ካሁን በፊት ተችሎ እንደሆነ፥ ለዛሬው ችግራችን አርአያ አልሆነንም። ወያኔዎች ጠላቶች እንጂ፥ የጋራ ዓላማ ጠላቶች መሆናቸውን ለመረዳትም ሆነ ለማስረዳት አልቻልንም። የሕዝብ ጠላት መሆናቸውን እምናውቅ እንኳን የየግል ድርጅት ጠላት እንጂ የጋራ ጠላት አላደረግናቸውም። ለምሳሌ፥ አንዱ ወገን ጠላት የሚያደርጋቸው፥ በዐወጁት ሕገ መንግሥት ውስጥ ለጎሳዎች የመገንጠል መብት የሚሰጠውን አንቀጽ 39ን ማወጃቸው ሲሆን፥ ሌላው ወገን ደግሞ ይህ ራሳቸው ያወጁት አንቀጽ የሰጠውን የመገንጠል መብት መንፈጋቸው ነው። ታዲያ ምን ይሻላል? የገራ ጠላት ለጋራ መብት መታገልን አይወልድም። ወያኔዎች አንቀጽ39ን ያወጁት የጎሳዎችን ውገና ከተቃዋሚው ዘንድ ቀምተው ለመውሰድ መሆኑን አንርሳ። የሀገር ጠላት የማንም ወዳጅ ሊሆን እንደማይችል አስረድተን የተወሰደብንን የጎሳዎችን ወገንነት ማስመለስ አለብን።

ይኸንን ችግር ሳንፈታ በጋራ ጠላት ላይ አብሮ መዝመት አይቻልም። የሚያዋጣው ከመዝመታችን አስቀድመን መጀመሪያ በአንዳች ዘዴ ሕዝባዊ ዕርቅ ማውረድ ነው። ስንታረቅ ወያኔዎች በአንቀጽ 39 ደልለው የወሰዱብንን ውገና እናስመልሳለን። የአንቀጽ 39 ምንጩ አለመታረቅ ነው። እርግጥ ሳንታረቅ እንቀር ይሆናል። ሆኖም፥ ብዙ ጎሳዎች ያሉባቸው ሀገሮች (ለምሳሌ ህንድ) ዲሞክራሲን አስፍነዋል። ጥንታዊት ኢትዮጵያም ጎሰኝነት-አልባ የዲሞክራሲ ሥርዓት ልታካሂድ እንደምትችል አምናለሁ።

የምሁራኑ የምስክርነት ጥናቶች መጽሐፍ ሆነው ይታተማሉ። ለመጽሐፉ “መርዶ ለወያኔ” የሚል ስም እናወጣለን።

ልደጋግመውና፥ የትግል መጀመሪያው ዕርቅ ነው። ዕርቅ ከሌለ ከሳሹም ተከሳሹም የወያኔ ሰለባ ሆነው ይቀራሉ። ዕርቅ ከሌለ አብሮ መዝመት እንደማይቻል እየታየ ነው።

የጋራ ግብና የጋራ ዓላማ፤

ዕርቅ ወርዶ ጠላትን የጋራ ከማድረግ ላይ ከተደረሰ፥ የሚቀጥለው ግዴታችን ከጋራ ግብ መድረስ ነው። ጠላትን የጋራ ማድረግ ብቻውን የጋራ ግብ አያስገኝም። የታረቁት ወገኖችን የጋራ ግብ የሚቀይስና ሕገ መንግሥት የሚያረቅ ኮሚቴ ማቋቋም ይኖርባቸዋል። ዕርቅ ሳይኖር፥ ስለ መንግሥት ዓይነት፥ ስለ ሕገ መንግሥት መነጋገር ነዋሪ የማይፈልገው ቤት እንደመሥራት ይቈጠራል። ኮሚቴው ጥናቱን ሲጨርስ ከምሁራኑ የምስክር ወረቀቶች ጋራ አብሮ ይታተማል። ታጋዮች ቃል እንዲገቡ የምፈልገው፥ እድሜው ፓርቲዎች ለውድድር ዝግጁ እስኪሆኑ ድረስ ብቻ የሚቆይ ጊዜያዊ መንግሥት እንዲያቋቁሙ ነው። ያለፉት የብጥብጥ ዘመናት ለሕዝቡ የፖለቲካ ንቃት ስለሰጡት፥ ፓርቲዎች ራሳቸውን ለማቋቋም ከአንድ ዓመት የበለጠ ጊዜ የሚያስፈልጋቸው አይመስለኝም።

ድርጅታችን ሐሳቤን ተቀብሎ በሥራ ላይ እንደሚያውለው ተስፋ አደርጋለሁ። ጉባኤውን እኔው
ልጠራው ብችል ምንኛ ደስ ባለኝ ነበር፤ ግን በአንድ ሰው ብርታት የሚፈጸም አይደለም። ባይሆን ግብረ ኀይሉ ተቋቁሞ ዝርዝሩን እንዳወጣልን፥ ጉባኤውን ለማካሄጃ የሚያስፈልገውን ገንዘብ እማፈላለጉ ላይ እተባበራለሁ። ለሰላም ጉዳይ ዓለም-አቀፍ ለጋሽ ድርጅቶች የእርዳታ እጃቸውን ይዘረጉ ይመስለኛል። 

ለሕዝባዊ ዕርቅ የሚሆን ዘዴ፤

ሐሳቤ፡ ተቀባይነት ካገኘ፥ እንድንሞክረው የማቀርበው ዘዴ አንድ የዕርቅንና የሰላምን ጉዳይ የሚከታተል አንድ ግብረ-ኃይል ማቋቋም ነው። ግብረ-ኃይሉ እንዲያከናውን የምፈልገው፥ የሀገር ጠላት ሁላችንንም የሚያቆረቍዝ ስለሆነ፥ አብረን እንድንዘምትበት፥ በማህላችን ያለውን አለመግባብት ጥቂት ቀናት በሚወስድ ጉባኤ እንድንወያይበት ነው። በጉባኤው ላይ ከሳሾችና ተከሳቾች ለምስክርነት በሚጠሯቸው ምሁራን አማካይነት ጉዳዩ ይሰማል። የከሳሽ የምሁራን ምስክሮች ጥናት ላይ የተመሠረተ የክስ ጽሑፍ ያቀርባሉ፤ የተከሳሽ የምሁራን ምስክሮች በኢትዮጵያዊነት የሚያምነው ሕዝብ እንዳልበደለ የራሳቸውን ጥናት ያቀርባሉ። ቀን ቀን ስንወያይ እንውላለን፥ ማታ ማታ የተለያዩ ሀገራዊ ትርኢቶችና ፊልሞች እናያለን። ግጥሞች ይነበባሉ፤ ቀረርቱ ይሰማል። የከሳሽና የተከሳሽ ወገኖች አብረው ለመጫወትና ለመወቃቀስ ዕድል ያገኛሉ። 

Blog 7. Party Politics (in Amharic) by Dr. Getatchew Haile (2014)

ለዛሬው ድርሰቴ የሰጠሁት ርእስ ሐሳቤን ትንሽ ለወጥ ባለ መንገድ ላቀርብ መነሣቴን ያመለክታል። የጆሯቸው የዕለት እንጀራ “ሰበር ዜና” የሚሉት በአንድ መሥመር ማእድ ላይ የሚቀርብ ትኩስ ወሬ የሆነ ሰዎች አብረውኝ እንደማይዘልቁ እገምታለሁ፤ ግምቴ ቢሳሳት ምንኛ በተደሰትኩ። “ጸዋትው” የ “ጾታ” ብዙ ቍጥር ነው። “ትምክሕተኞች” የምለው አባቶቻቸው በሠሩት የሚያኮራና የሚያስመካ ታሪክ ይህን ቅጽል ያተረፈላቸውን ኢትዮጵያውያንን ነው።

“ጾታ” የሚለው ቃል ሲነሣ፥ ለብዞዎቻችን ትዝ የሚለን የክቡር ብላታ መርስዔ ሐዘን ወልደ ቂርቆስ የአማርኛ ሰዋስው ነው። እንደ ብላታ ያሉ ታላላቅ ሰዎች ሐሳብ አፍላቂዎችና እቃ ፈጣሪዎች ናቸው። ለሚያፈልቋቸው ሐሳቦችና ለሚፈጥሯቸው እቃዎች ስም ያወጡላቸዋል። መዛግብተ ቃላት ቶሎ ቶሎ የሚያረጁት ስለዚህ ነው። ከአሮጌው ይልቅ በቅርብ ጊዜ የታተመውን መዝገበ ቃላት የምንመርጠው ለአዳዲስ ነገሮች የወጡትን አዳዲስ ስሞች (አዲሶቹን ቃሎች ማለት ነው) ቀደም ብለው በታተሙት በአሮጌዎቹ መዛግብተ ቃላት ውስጥ ስለማናገኛቸው ነው።

ክቡር ብላታ መርስዔ ሐዘን ወልደ ቂርቆስ የመጀመሪያው የአማርኛ ሰዋስው ጸሐፊ ስለነበሩ፥ ሰዋስው ላቀፋቸው ብዙ ሐሳቦች ስም አውጥተውላቸዋል። ለምሳሌ፥ ከላይ “ጸዋትው” የሚለውን ቃል “ብዙ ቍጥር” ያልኩት ከእሳቸው የሰዋስው መጽሐፍ የተማርኩትን ይዤ ነው። ብላታ የአማርኛውን ሰዋስው ሲጽፉ መርሕ ያደረጉት የግዕዙንና የእንግሊዙን ሰዋስው ስለነበረ፥ “noun, pronoun, adjective, gender, singular, plural, etc.” ለሚባሉ ቃላት፥ “ስም፥ ተውላጠ ስም፥ ቅጽል፥ ጾታ፥ ነጠላ፥ ብዙ፥ ወዘተ” የተባሉትን የግዕዝና የአማርኛ ቃላት ሲመርጡላቸው፥ gender የሚለውን በ” ጾታ” ተረጐሙት። ዛሬ “ጾታ” የሚለው ቃል በተነሣ ቊጥር በብላታ ሰዋስው ባደገው ትውልድ አእምሮ ውስጥ የሚመጣው gender ነው። ብላታ “ጾታ” ን “gender” የሚለውን የእንግሊዝኛ ቃል መተርጐሚያ አደረጉት እንጂ አልፈጠሩትም፤ የኖረ የግዕዝ ቃል ነው። ግን ግዕዝ የሚጠቀምበት በተለየ ለgender ብቻ ሳይሆን፥ በአማርኛ “ዓይነት” ፥ “ክፍል” ለምንለው ለማንኛውም ልዩነትን ለሚያሳይ ምልክት ሁሉ ነው። ለምሳሌ፥ የግዕዝ ሊቃውንት፥የተለያዩ የዜማ ዓይነቶችን “ጸዋትወ ዜማ” (የዜማ ዓይነቶች ወይም ጾታዎች) ይሏቸዋል። (“ጸዋትው” የ “ጾታ” ብዙ ቊጥር ነው ብያለሁ።) ብላታ መርስዔ ሐዘን genderን በጾታ የተረጐሙት የሰውን ዓይነት (ወንድ ይሁን ወይም ሴት) ሲያመለክት ስላዩት ነው። 

“ጾታ” የgenderንና የዜማን ዓይነቶች ብቻ የሚያመለክት አይደለም። ብዙ ጸዋትው አሉ። እዚህ ጾታን የምጠቀምበት ሰዎችን በተፈጥሮና በባህል የተለያዩ ዓይነቶች የሚያደርጋቸውን ነገሮች ሁሉ ለማመልከቻ ነው። እነዚህ ነገሮች (ወይም ጾታዎች) የሰውየው የግሉ ናቸው። ለምሳሌ፥ አንድ ሰው ጾታው ወንድ ወይም ሴት (ወይም ፍናፍንት) ሊሆን ይችላል። ወንድነቱ ወይም ሴትነቱ (ወይም ፍናፍንትነቱ) የግሉ ነው፤ ይከበርለታል። ከፖለቲካ ውስጥ የመግቢያ ወይም እንዳይገባ የማገጃ መታወቂያ ሊሆን አይችልም። መታወቂያ ሊሆን የሚችለው የሴቶች ወይም የወንዶች ጉዳይ በሚታይበት ጊዜ ብቻ ነው። (የሴቶች ትምህርት ቤት አለ፤ የማዋለጃ ሐኪም ቤት አለ።) ሀገርና መንግሥት ግን የጋራ ስለሆኑ፥ በሀገር ፖለቲካ ወንዱም ሴቱም (ፍናፍንቱም) እኩል ይገባሉ፤ በሕግ ፊትም እኩል ይታያሉ።

አንድን ሰው “ይህ የግልህ ነው” የሚያስብሉት ብዙ ጸዋትው አሉ። ንግድ፤ ነጋዴዎች አንድ ጾታ ናቸው። ግብርና፤ ገበሬዎች አንድ ሌላ ጾታ ናቸው፤ ነገዶች/ጎሳዎች፥ ሐኪሞች፥
አስተማሪዎች . . . የተለያዩ ጸዋትው ናቸው፤ አባ ባሕርይ የዘመናቸውን የክርስቲያኑን ኅብረተ ሰብ ሲያጠኑ በጾታ ዘርዝረዋቸዋል። የጸዋትው አባላት ፖለቲካ ውስጥ ለመግባት ከፈለጉ መብት የሚሰጣቸው ማንነታቸው እንጂ ጾታቸው የሚገልጸው ምንነታቸው አይደለም። በዚያው አስተሳሰብ፥ ጾታቸው የሚገልጸው ምንነታቸው እፖለቲካ ውስጥ ከመግባት አያግዳቸውም። የሀገርም ሆነ የዓለም ፖለቲካ የሁሉም እኩል መብት ነው።

ዋና ዋና ታናናሽ የግል ጸዋትው፤

ከጸዋትው ሁሉ አንዱና እንደዋና የሚታየው ንኡስ ጾታ ሃይማኖት ነው። አፄ ኃይለ ሥላሴ፥ “አገር የጋራ ነው፤ ሃይማኖት የግል ነው” የሚለውን ዓረፍተ ነገር (ወይም ዓዋጅ) ከአስሰሙበት ቀን ጀምሮ፥ ሃይማኖተኛውን ሕዝብ በሕግ ፊት በአንድ በኩል ግለኛ፥ በሌላ በኩል እኩለኛ ስላደረገ፥ ስፍር ቍጥር የሌለው ጊዜ ተጠቅሷል። መልእክቱ መንታ ነው፤ “እንደ ሃይማኖት ያለ የግል የሆነ ነገር የጋራ በሆነ ነገር (በመንግሥት ሥራ) ውስጥ አይግባ፤ የጋራ የሆነ ነገርም (መንግሥትም) የግል በሆነ ነገር ውስጥ አይግባ” የሚል ነው። ግን በዘመኑ ሥልጣኔ በተራመዱ አገሮች ውስጥ ሳይቀር፥ ብዙ የግል የሆኑ ነገሮች የጋራ በሆኑ ጉዳዮች ውስጥ እየገቡ ያስቸግራሉ። በዚያው አንጻር፥ መንግሥትና አንዳንድ ሰዎችም የግል በሆነ ጉዳይ ውስጥ እየገቡ ያስቸግራሉ። ዲሞክራት ሆኖ የዲሞክራሲን ሕግ መጣስ ነው።

የሀገር ጉዳይ የጋራ፥ የጾታ ጉዳይ የግል ሆነው መለያየት ያለባቸው ለምክንያት ነው፤ በአንድ በኩል ሕዝቡ ሀገሩ በምትሰጠው ጥቅም በሰላም እንዳይጠቀም መንግሥት በጾታው ምክንያት በግል ሕይወቱ ጣልቃ እየገባ እንዳያስቸግረው፥ በሌላ በኩል መንግሥት ሁሉንም እኩል ላገልግል ሲል፥ ሰዉ በጾታው ጣልቃ እየገባ ለጾታዬ ካላደላህ እያለ መንግሥትን እንዳያውክ ነው። የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ጾታን የግል የማድረግን ቁም ነገር በሕገ መንግሥት አጽድቆ፥ ሲሆን በውድ አለዚያም በግድ እግዚአብሔርን የሚፈራውንና የሚያከብረውን ያህል እንዲፈራውና እንዲያከብረው ካልተገደደ፥ በዘመኑ ሥልጣኔ የተራመዱ ሕዝቦች ከደረሱበት የብልጽግና፥ የዕውቀት፥ የጤንነትና የሰላም ደረጃ ልንደርስ አንችልም።

ይኸንን ስናገር ጠቢቡ ነቢይ፥ “እሳትና ውኻ አቅርቤልሃለሁ፤ እጅህን ከፈለከው ላይ አሳርፈው” ያለውን እያስታወስኩ ነው፤ ውኻ ቁሻሻን ያጸዳል፥ እሳት ያቃጥላል። ብዙ ሰዎች “ የምዕራባውያን ሕይወት እስከዚህም አያጓጓ” ይላሉ። እውነታቸው ሊሆን ይችላል፤ ለመበልጸግ የሚደረገው መሯሯጥ የመደሰቻ ጊዜ አይሰጥም። ግን በምዕራቡ ዓለም እንደምናየው ዓይነት፥ ኢትዮጵያዊ ገበሬ፥ ኢትዮጵያዊ አገልጋይ፥ ኢትዮጵያዊ ጫማ ጠራጊ ባለመኪና ቢሆን የሚጠላ ያለ አይመስለኝም። 

ወደ እምመኘው ዓዋጅ ልመለስና፥ ሊጸድቅ የሚገባው ሕግ፥ “ሀገር የጋራ ነው፤ ጾታ ግን የግል ነው” የሚል አጠቃላይ ሕግ መሆን አለበት። መቸም ሕገ መንግሥት ሲጻፍ የግል የሚባሉ ጸዋትውን ሁሉ መዘርዘር አይቻልም፤ ብዙዎች ናቸው። ግን ሕጉ በሚጸድቅበት ጊዜ ለምሳሌ ያህል ዋና ዋናዎቹን ብቻ አንሥቶ ማለፍ ይበቃል። ሌሎቹን በአንዳቸው ምክንያት ጭቅጭቅ በተነሣ ቍጥር ነፃውና ምሁሩ ዳኛ፥ “ይህ የጾታ ጉዳይ ነው/አይደለም” እያለ ሊፈርድ ይችላል። ሆኖም፥ ሃይማኖት መነሣት ካለባቸው የግል ጸዋትው አንዱና ቀንደኛው ነው። እርግጥ፥ ሃይማኖት የግል፥ መንግሥት የጋራ መሆናቸውን ሁላችንም ተቀብለነዋል፤ የቀረን በሥራ ላይ ማዋል እንጂ፥ ካሁን በኋላስ የሚያወያይ ጉዳይ አይደለም። ሌሎቹ የግል መሆን የሚገባቸው አለዚያ በባህል ጦርነት የሚያኖሩን ጸዋትወ ልሳን ናቸው። ቋንቋዎች ማለቴ ነው፤ ዝቅ ብዬ አብራራለሁ።

የባህል ጦርነት፤

የፖለቲካ ችግራችንን በጥሞና ብንመረምረው፥ ዛሬም ሆነ በታሪክ የሚያበጣብጠን በሃይማኖትና በቋንቋ የሚገለጸው ባህል ሆኖ እናገኘዋለን። የኢኮኖሚው ብጥብጥ ትናንት የመጣ ነው። ባህልንና ጠባዩን እንወቅ፤ ሰው ባህልን ይፈጥራል፤ ባህል ጸዋትውን ይፈጥራል። ጎሳዎች ሁሉ በአንድ በኩል የባህል አባቶች፥ በሌላ በኩል የባህል ልጆች ናቸው። ሕዝብን ለመከፋፈ የሃይማኖትንና የቋንቋን ያህል ኀይል ባይኖራቸውም፥ ያንድን ሀገር ሕዝብ የተለያዩ ታናናሽ ጸዋትው የሚያደርጉ ሌሎች ብዙ ንኡሳን ባህሎች አሉን። እነሱን ሁሉ፥ አንጋፋዎቻቸውን ሃይማኖትንና ቋንቋን ጨምረን የግል አድርገን እንደግል ካላየናቸው፥ የጦርነት ምክንያት ሆነውን ለበላይነት (የኔ ሃይማኖት፥ የኔ ቋንቋ፥ የኔ . . . ፣ የኔ . . . ፥ ይብለጥ እያልን) ስንፋጅ እንኖራለን። መፍትሔው ባለ ባህሎቹ የግል ባህላቸውን የግል አድርገው እንዲይዙ፥መንግሥትም ባህሎችን ለባለ ባህሎቹ እንዲተው በሕግ ማስገደድ ነው። ባህሎች ሕዝብን የሚጎዱ ወይም የሚያስገድዱ ካልሆኑ፥ መንግሥት ጣልቃ ገብቶ የመከልከል ወይም በየትኛውም አቅጣጫ የመምራት ወይም መሪ የመሾም መብት የለውም። ግን አንዳንዶቹ ግለሰብንም ስለሚጎዱ (ለምሳሌ፥ የሴቶች ግዝረት፥ ከንፈር ላይ የሸክላ ሳህን መትከል . . .) እንዲቀሩ መንግሥት የማስተማር ግዴታ አለበት፤ ማስተማር ጣልቃ-ገብነት አይሆንም።

ባለባህሎቹ ቋንቋቸውን፥ ሃይማኖታቸውን፥ ዘፈናቸውን፥ እስክስታቸውን ለማዳበር ከፈለጉ፥ ሊያዳብሯቸው ሙሉ መብት አላቸው። ግን ከአባላቱ ውስጥ አንዳንድ ሰዎች ያንን ባህል ማክበር ካልፈለጉ፥ (ለምሳሌ፥ የእስላም ሴቶች ፊታቸውን መሸፈን ካልፈለጉ) ወይም አንዱን ባህል ቢተዉት ወይም ትተው ወደሌላው ባህል ቢዛወሩ (ለምሳሌ፥ ሃይማኖታቸውንና ጎሳቸውን ቢለውጡ፥) ወይም ለመንፈሳዊ መሪነት ማንንም ቢመርጡ፥ ማንም ሊከለክላቸው መብት የለውም፤ ጾታ የግል ነው።

ያንኑ ያህል፥ አንዱ ጾታ በሌላው ጾታ (ለምሳሌ ክርስቲያኖች በእስላሞች ጉዳይ፥ እስላሞችም በክርስቲያኖች ጉዳይ) ውስጥ እየገቡ እንዳያስቸግሩ በጥብቅ መከልከል አለበት። ተናካሽ ውሻችንን፥ ተዋጊ በሬያችንን እንያዝ። ይኸንን እንደ ሃይማኖት አጥብቀን ካልያዝን፥ ትግላችን ለዶሞክራሲ ነው የምንለው በከንቱ ነው። ትግላችን ለግል ጾታችን (ለጎሳችን፥ ለሃይማኖታችን . . .) ብቻ ከሆነ፥ ድኽነት እንጂ ድኅነት አይኖረንም። “ብላ ባለኝ እንዳባቴ በቆመጠኝ” የሚባልባት ሀገር ይዘን እንቀራለን።

ጸዋትወ ልሳን (ቋንቋዎች)፤

ቋንቋና ሃይማኖት ሕዝብን የሚከፋፍሉና የሚያጋድሉ ጸዋትወ ባህል ናቸው ብለናል። ሃይማኖት የግል ሆኖ ሳለ፥ ሰዎች በጋራ ማምለክ መብታቸው ከሆነ፥ ቋንቋንም የጋራ መግባቢያ ማድረግ የማይደፈር ሰብአዊ መብት ነው፤ ይኼ አያከራክርም። ሆኖም ብሔራዊውን ቋንቋ በሁሉም ዘንድ እንዳይታወቅ የሚያሰናክል መስሎ ስለታየ፥ ሌሎቹ የኢትዮጵያ ቋንቋዎች መጻፊያ እንዳይሆኑ የተከለከሉበት ዘመን ነበር፤ አሁን ቀርቷል። 

ቋንቋ ሁለት የተያያዙ ጠባዮች አሉት፤ አንደኛ፥ ቋንቋ የአንድን ሀገር ሕዝብ በአንድ በኩል ብዙ ታናናሽ ጸዋትው (ኦሮሞ፥ ጉራጌ፥ ሱማሌ፥ አደሬ፥ ትግሬ፥ . . .) በሌላ በኩል አንድ ዓቢይ ጾታ (ጀርመናዊ፥ ፈረንሳዊ፥ ግብጻዊ፥ . . .) ያደርጋል። አንድን ሕዝብ ታናናሽ ጸዋትው የሚያደርጉ ቋንቋዎች ተናጋሪያቸው ሳያውቅ በአእምሮውና በአንደበቱ ውስጥ የሚበቅሉ ናቸው። ተናጋሪው ሲያድግ በሕፃኑ አእምሮና አንደበት ውስጥ አብረው ያድጋሉ። ሰውየውም ከዚህ ከአብሮ-አደጉና ከታማኝ አገልጋዩ ጋራ ፍቅር ይወድቃል፤ ከቀየው ጋር ፍቅር እንደሚወድቅ ማለት ነው። የማንነቱ መታወቂያው ይሆንና ያደላለታል። የልጁ አሳዳጊና ቋንቋ አውራሿ እናቱ ስለሆነች፥ ይህ ቋንቋ “የእናት ቋንቋ” ወይም (የልጁ መጀመሪያ ቋንቋው ስለሆነ) “አፍ መፍቻ ቋንቋ” በመባል ይታወቃል። “በእናት ቋንቋ” (“በአፍ መፍቻ ቋንቋ” ) ምክንያት የአንድ ሀገር ሕዝብ ብዙ “ጸዋትወ ነገድ” ይወጣዋል። የነገድና የጎሳ መነሻ (ጥንተ መሠረቱ) ዘር ሊሆን ይችላል፤ እየመሰለንም የዘራችን መታወቂያ ላደረግነው ቋንቋ ጥብቅና እንቆማለን። መታወቂያችን መሆኑ እርግጥ ነው፤ የዘራችን መታወቂያ መሆኑ ግን ቀርቷል። ዘር ስለተደበላለቀ፥ ዛሬ ያ ቀርቶ፥ የጎሳ መሠረቱ ቋንቋ ሆኗል። ቋንቋ እየገፋ፥ ንጹሕ ዘር እየጠፋ ሄዷል። እነዚህ ቋንቋዎች የዘር ቋንቋ ያልተባሉት፥ ቢባሉም ስሕተት የሚሆነው ስለዚህ ነው። “ቋንቋዬ ዘሬን ይነግረኛል” የሚል ሰው ካለ፥ ሊሳሳት እንደሚችል ልብ ይበለው። “አማራ ነኝ፤ ኦሮሞ ነኝ፤ ጉራጌ ነኝ፤ . . .” የምንለው ማንነታችንን ባህላችን ወስኖልን ነው።

ሁለተኛ፥ “የእናት ቋንቋ” (“አፍ መፍቻ ቋንቋ” ) ብዙ ጸዋትው ያደረገውን የአንድን ሀገር ሕዝብ አንድ ቋንቋ ነግሦ፥ አንድ ዓቢይ ጾታ ያደርገዋል። ለምሳሌ፥ “የእናት ቋንቋዎች” (“አፍ መፍቻ ቋንቋዎች”) እነ ስፓንኛ፥ ጣሊያንኛ፥ ፈረንሳይኛ፥ ጀርመንኛ፥ ዓረብኛ፥ ኦሮምኛ . . . ብዙ ታናናሽ ጸዋትው ያደረጉትን የአሜሪካንን ሕዝብ እንግሊዝኛ አንድ ዓቢይ ጾታ አድርጓቸዋል፤ አንድ የአሜሪካ ሕዝብ አድርጓቸዋል። እንግሊዝኛ የአሜሪካ ሕዝብ የጋራ መታወቂያ ሆኗል።

አንድ መንግሥት አንድ ቋንቋ፤

በአንድ ሀገር ውስጥ ያለ ሕዝብ አንድ ቤተሰብ የሚሆነው አንድ ዓቢይ ጾታ የሚያደርገው ነገር (የጋራ መታወቂያ) ሲኖረው ነው። ያ ነገር ብዙ ጊዜ ቋንቋ ነው። አንድ ሕዝብ ለመሆን፥ ሁሉ የሚያውቀውና የሚገናኝበት አንድ ሀገር-አቀፍ ቋንቋ ቢኖረው ይመረጣል። ሌሎች መታወቂያዎች ሕዝብን አንድ ለማድረግ የቋንቋን ያህል ኀይል የላቸውም። ግን ሕዝቡ አንድ ሕዝብ ለመሆን የሚግባባበት ቋንቋ አንድ ብቻ መሆን አለበት ወይ? ቋንቋ የሚያስፈልገው ለመግባቢያ ብቻ ከሆነ፥ አንድ ይበቃል፤ የክትና የአዘቦት ቋንቋ አያስፈልገውም። ጾታዎች ከፈለጉ በጾታ ደረጃ በየራሳቸው ቋንቋ እየተናገሩ፥ በሀገር ደረጃ ሁሉም በሚገናኝበት መገናኘት ይችላሉ። ለአንድ አገር አንድ ብሔራዊ ቋንቋ ማስፈለጉ አያጠያይቅም። ለምሳሌ፥ “የእናት ቋንቋዎች” የህንድን ሕዝብ ከአንድ ሺ ጸዋትው በላይ ከፋፍለውታል። እነዚህን ቋንቋዎች የግል መጠቀሚያ ከማድረግ አልፎ ሁሉንም በሀገር-አቀፍ ደረጃ መጠቀሚያ ማድረግ አይታሰብም። ታዲታ ምን ይሻላል?

ለሀገር ከታሰበ፥ ለሀገር የሚሻለው ከብዙዎቹ ቋንቋዎች ውስጥ የትኛው ቋንቋ ይመረጥ ከሚለው ላይ በጥሞናና በኀላፊነት ማትኰሩ ነው። ከብሔራዊ ቋንቋ ምርጫ ላይ የሚደረሰው በሁለት መንገድ ነው፤ አንደኛው መንገድ ታሪክ የተጓዘበት ሂደት ነው። ታሪክን ስንመረምር፥ ከመጀመሪያው ላይ፥ የየጎሳቸውን ቋንቋ ብቻ የሚናገሩ ሰዎች ሲገናኙ በንግግር ለመግባባት ብዙ ይጥራሉ። ዋናው መገናኛቸው ቦታ ገበያ ነበር። ገንዘብ በሌለበት ዘመን ሲገበያዩ ሸቀጥ በሸቀጥ እየተለዋወጡ ነበር። የሸቀጦቹን ስም ሸቀጦቹን ባመጣቸው ሰው ቋንቋ (በነጋዴው ቋንቋ) ለማወቅ ይኸ አጋጣሚ ጥሩ ዕድል ይሰጣል። ነጋዴው ሸቀጡን በራሱ ቋንቋ እየጠራ እንዲገዙት ያስሰማል--” ጨው! ጨው! ዶቃ! ዶቃ! . . .! ይላል።

ሌላው አጋጣሚ የመንግሥት ሥልጣንና የሃይማኖት መስፋፋት ናቸው። ሥልጣኑንና የሃይማኖቱን ዕውቀት የሚያደርሱ ሰዎች አዲስ ነገር አቅራቢዎች በመሆናቸው ሚናቸው የመከበርና የመሰማት ዕድል ይሰጣቸዋል። ቋንቋቸውን ማወቅ ያጓጓል፤ እርምጃም ይወሰድበታል። አቤት እንግሊዝኛ ለማወቅ የነበረን ጒጒት!!

አንድን ቋንቋ በሂደት በብዙ ቦታ እንዲታወቅ የሚያደርገው ሦስተኛው ምክንያት የተናጋሪው ሕዝብ ብዛት ነው። ለምሳሌ፥ በአማርኛ ተናጋሪ ሕዝብ የተከበቡ ቅማንቶች፥ ወይጦዎች፥ ሺናሻዎች፥ ፈላሻዎች፥ ኳኵራዎች፥ ጋግራዎች አማርኛ ሲናገሩ ቢታዩ አያስገርምም። ኦሮሞዎች ከደቡብ ወደሰሜን ሲፈልሱ ያጥለቀለቋቸው ጎሳዎች ኦሮምኛ ተናጋሪዎች፥ መጤዎቹ ኦሮሞዎችም የነባሮቹን ቋንቋ ተናጋሪዎች ሆነዋል። ይኸ ሁሉ ዐውቆ የመጣ የታሪክ ሂደት ነው።

ሁለተኛው መንገድ ሰው-ሠራሽ ሂደት ነው። አንድ ሕዝብ የራሱን መንግሥት ለማቋቋም ሲፈልግና ሲስማማ፥ ከሁሉ አስቀድሞ (1) ማንነቱን፥ (2) የቆመበትን ምድር ዳር ድምበር፥ (3) የሚገናኝበትን ቋንቋ፥ (4) ማንነቱን የሚገልጽበትን ሰንደቅ ዓላማና ብሔራዊ መዝሙር (National Anthem) ይወስናል። በዚህ መንገድ የሚሄዱ ወጣት አገሮች፥ በተለየም ቅኝ ገዢዎች የፈጠሯቸው (ለምሳሌ፥ እንደ ኢንዶኔዢያ ያሉ) አገሮች ነፃ ሲወጡ የሚሄዱበት መንገድ ነው። ግን ሰዎች ለቋንቋ የበላይነት ክብር ስለሚሰጡ፥ በምርጫ ጊዜ ጥቅሙን ከማየት ይልቅ ሁሉም “ማን ከማን ያንሳል? እኔ የምናገረው ቋንቋ ይመረጥ” የሚል ዐድላዊነት ይደነቀርና በጽሞናና በገለልተኝነት መመለስ ያስቸግራል። “ከራስ በላይ ሀገር” የሚለው ሀገር ወዳድነት ሁሉ ይቀርና “ከራስ ቋንቋ በላይ ነፋስ” የሚል መንፈስ ይሰፍናል። ዓለም በተቀራረበበት በአሁኑ ዘመን እንዲህ ማሰብ ደንቃራና ኋላ-ቀር መሆን ነው። ብዙ አፍሪካውያን ዳር ድምበራቸውን ወስነው ሀገር በፈጠሩላቸውና ስም በአወጡላቸው በቅኝ ገዢዎቻቸው ቋንቋ ጸንተዋል።

በኢትዮጵያስ? ኢትዮጵያማ አሮጊት አገር ናት፤ ቊጥሯ ከወጣቶቹ ጋር አይደለም። ራስ-ፈጠር ናት፤ ቊጥሯ ከጥንት አገሮች እንጂ ከአውሮፓ-ፈጠር አገሮች ጋር አይደለም። ሊቃውንቱ ታሪኩን ከምናውቀው የአክሱም ዘመነ መንግሥት በፊት ጀምሮ፥ ብራና እየፋቁ ይጽፉ ነበረ። ለጥንቱ ማስረጃ የሚፈልግ የሎሬል ፊሊፕሰንን ጥናት ማንበብ ይችላል (Laurel Phillipson, “Parchment Production in the First Millennium BC at Seglamen, Northern Ethiopia,” published online: 15 August 2013). ከጥንቱ ወዲህም፥ መጀመሪያ፥ በግዕዝ፥ በግሪክ፥ በሳብኛ፥ በኋላ በግዕዝና በአማርኛ ደብተራዎቹ የመዘገቧቸው ሰነዶች በየቤተ መጻሕፍቱ ይገኛሉ። በሐረርና በወሎ የእስላም ዑለማእ (“ዑለማእ” የዓሊም ብዙ ቊጥር ነው “ደብተራዎች” እንደ ማለት ነው) በዐረቢ ፊደል የጻፏቸው የአማርኛ ሰነዶች ተገኝተዋል። ባጭሩ፥ ኢትዮጵያ መገናኛ፥ በኋላም መተዳደሪያ ቋንቋዋን የታሪክ ሂደት ወስኖላታል። ከብዙ ጊዜ ጀምሮ ያ ቋንቋ አማርኛ ነው።

ግን “ቋንቋዋን ታሪክ ወስኖላታል” ማለት የተያያዘ ችግር የለባትም ማለት አይደለም። ታሪክ ውሳኔውን ካስተላለፈ በኋላ የመጡ ጎሳዎች (ኦሮሞዎች) እና ጥንታውያን ነን የሚሉ ቋንቋቸው ግን እስከቅርብ ጊዜ ድረስ መጻፊያ ያልነበረ ጎሳዎች (ትግሬዎች) ውሳኔውን መቀበል አልፈለጉም፤ እንሱንና ቋንቋቸውን የሚያዋርድ መሰላቸው። ለምሳሌ፥ የተማሪዎቹ ንቅናቄ “የጎሳዎች መብት ይከበር” ይል የነበረው፥ ደርግ ሸንጎውን ሲከፍት፥ የተማሪዎቹን ጩኸት በማስተጋባት፥ “በምን ቋንቋ እንነጋገር” የሚል ጥያቄ አቅርቦ የነበረው፥ የችግር መኖር ምልክት ነው። አማርኛን የአማሮች ቋንቋ አድርገው፥ “ቋንቋቸውን” ብሔራዊ ቋንቋ በማድረግ ከቀጠልን፥ ለአማሮች የበላይነት መስጠት ይሆናል ብለው ነው። በዚህ ምክንያት፥ ቋንቋን የአንድነት ምልክት ማድረግን ታላቅ ክብር ተነግፈናል፤ ሌላም አደጋ አለው። ሁሉም የአማርኛንና የአማሮችን ታሪክ አለማወቅ ያመጣው ብሔራዊ ችግር ነው።

ከአማሮቹ አብዛኛዎቹ አማራ የሚባሉት የጎሳ ቋንቋቸውን ትተው አፋቸውን የፈቱት አብዛኛው ሕዝብ በሚናገረው በአማርኛ ስለሆነ እንጂ በዘር ንጹሕ አማራ በመሆናቸው አይደለም። ምን ማለቴ እንደሆነና አማሮች እነማን እንደሆኑ፥ ባጭሩም ቢሆን፥ እታች “አዲስ አማሮች” በሚለው ንኡስ ክፍል ላስረዳ እሞክራለሁ።

ክልል በቋንቋ፤

ሆኖም፥ አገሪቱ የሕዝብ ስለሆነች ሕዝብ በነፃ ምርጫ የፈለገውን ማድረግ ይችላል፤ ጥያቄው ከሕዝብ ከመጣና ምርጫው በነፃ የሚፈጸም ከሆነ፥ በዲሞክራሲ የሚያምን ሰው የሕዝብን ውሳኔ ማክበር ግዴታው ነው። እንደምገምተው፥ የሕዝቡ ፍላጎት፥ ዲሞክራሲን ዳኛ አድርጎ በነፃነት፥ በእኩልነት፥ በጤና፥ በጥጋብ በተንጣለለ መሬት ላይ ወደ ፊት መጋለብ ነው። ለዚህም የመጀመሪያው እርምጃ አንድነታችንን የሚያሰጉትንና የተንጣለለ መሬት ሊነፍጉን የሚችሉትን የግል ታናናሽ ጸዋትው፥ በሀገራዊ አስተዳደር እንዳይገቡ በጥብቅ መከልከል ይሆናል። ከነዚህም ውስጥ ሁለቱ፥ ለባህል ጦርነት የዳረጉን ሃይማኖቶችና ቋንቋዎች ናቸው ብለናል።

ወያኔዎች ሕዝባችንን በቋንቋ የከፋፈሉት በሀገራችን የተጫረውን የባህል ጦርነት ለማቆም ከሆነ፥ ውጤቱ በተንጣለለው የሀገራችን መሬት ላይ በፍቅር-አልባ ጉርብትና የሚኖሩ ታናናሽ ሀገሮች መፍጠር ነው። ባልና ሚስት ሲጣሉ ማፋታት ትዳራቸውን ማፍረስ ነው። አፋትቶ፥ “አብራችሁ ኑሩ” ማለት ሞኝነት ወይም ሌሎችን ማሞኘት ነው። አንድ ሀገር ብዙ ሀገሮች እንዲሆን ከተፈለገ፥ ከዚህ የተለየ አይደረግም። አንድ ሕዝብ በሃይማኖትና በቋንቋ ከተከፋፈለና ሁሉም የቆሙበት ቀየ እየተከለለ ከታደለው፥ ለአንድነት መቃብር መማስ ነው። ኢኮኖሚ ብቻውን አንድ ሀገር አንድ ሕዝብ አያደርግም። እንዲያውም፥ አለክልሉ የተገኘ ሌላ ሃይማኖት ያለውና በሌላ ቋንቋ የሚናገር ዜጋ እየታደነ ከቀየው ይባረራል (ዘር ማጽዳት ይከተላል) ወይም እንደ ባይተዋር በጥብቅ ክትትል ይስተናገዳል። ይህ ከሆነ፥ የሀገር አንድነት በስም እንጂ፥ እውነትነት አይኖረውም። በላያቸው የፌደራል መንግሥት ማቋቋምና ፕሬዚዴንት መሾም የሀገርን አንድነት አይጠብቅም፤ ለተባበሩት መንግሥታት (UN) ዋና ጸሐፊ ከመሾም አይለይም። “ልገንጠል ካለ፥ በጦር እናስገድደዋለን” ማለት ከሆነም፥ በግድ ሰድዶ በግድ ማሳደድ ይሆናል።

ባሁኑ ሰዓት የኢትዮጵያ ገዢዎች ሀገሪቱን ለምን እዚህ ዳክራ ልትወጣው ከማትችልበት ማጥ ውስጥ እንዳስገቧት በእርግጠኝነት የሚያውቅ ያለ አይመስለኝም። የሰማሁትና ያመንኩትም፥ “የአማራውን ገዢነትና የኦርቶዶክስ ሃይማኖትን የበላይነት ለማስቀረት ነው” ሲባል ነው፤ ግን አይመስለኝም። ፍርሃታቸው ይህ ቢሆንማ ፍቱኑ መፍትሔ፥ “አንድ ድምፅ ለአንድ ሰው” የሚፈቅደውንና ሕዝብ የተዋደቀለትን ዲሞክራሲን ማወጅ ነበር። ይኸንን ቢያውጁ፥ ሕዝቡ ለአስተዳዳሪነት የሚመርጠው ይጠቅመኛል የሚለውን እንጂ፥ የዚህ ጎሳ ሰው ነው ወይም ሃይማኖቱ እንዲህ ያለ ነው የሚለውን አይሆንም።

እንደ እውነቱ ከሆነ፥ የሚፈልጉት ሲገዙ ለመኖርና ሲዘርፉ የሚናገራቸውን፥ ማንንም ሳይፈሩ እንደፈለጉ እንዲገድሉ ነው። አለዚያማ፥ እድሜ ለአማራ ልጆች፥ የኦርቶዶክስ ሃይማኖት የበላይነት አብዮቱ የተጀመረ ጊዜ በአስከፊ ሁኔታ ቆሟል። “አስከፊ ሁኔታ” ያልኩት አብዮተኞች ነን የሚሉ ርእሰ ብሔሩን የመርዝ ጪስ አሸትተው፥ በትራስ አፍነው፥ ርእሰ ኦርቶዶክሱን በሽቦ አንቀው መግደላቸውን በማስታወስ ነው። ካልገዛን አገር ትውደም ከሚል ውሳኔ የደረሱና ታጥቀው የተነሡ፥ የትግራይም ሆነ የማንኛውም ኢትዮጵያዊ ጎሳ የማይደግፋቸው ዱርየዎች ናቸው።

የአማራ ገዢነት፤

የአማራ ገዢነት የሚባለውም በገለልተኝነት መመርመር ያለበት ጉዳይ ነው። መንሥኤው የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት የአማሮችን ቋንቋ (አማርኛን) በመናገሩ ነው። የአሜሪካን መንግሥት ቋንቋ እንግሊዝኛ ስለሆነ፥ ገዢዎቹ እንግሊዞች ናቸው እንደማለት ነው። እርግጥ እንግሊዞች አንድ ጊዜ አሜሪካንን ገዝተው ነበር። አሁን የሉም፤ ያለው ድብልቅልቁ የአሜሪካ ሕዝብ የወረሰው ቋንቋቸው ነው።

የአማርኛና የአማሮች ሁኔታም በከፊልም ቢሆን ተመሳሳይነት አለው። አንድ አማርኛ ከሚናገር ቤተ ሰብ የወጣ ይኩኖ አምላክ የሚባል ጀግና በ1262 ዓ. ም. የኢትዮዮጵያን መንግሥት ከዛጔዎች ወስዶ ዛጔዎች ከመንኮታኰት ያላዳኗትን ሀገር እንደገና አቋቁሟት እንደነበረ ይታወሳል። ይኩኖ አምላክና ቤተ መንግሥቱ አማርኛ ስለተናገሩ፥ “አማርኛ የሀገሪቱ ዋና መገናኛ ሆነ” የሚሉ አሉ፤ ስሕተት ነው። ይኩኖ አምላክ ኢትዮጵያን ከመጀመሪያው ዘመነ መሳፍንት ማውጣቱ፥ እሱና ልጆቹ ሀገሪቷን በዓለም ደረጃ እንድትታፈር ማድረጋቸው፥ አማራ ነኝ የሚለውን ሁሉ የሚያኮራና ትምክሕተኛ የሚያደርግ እውነታ ነው፤ ለዚህም አገር-ወዳድ ሁሉ ያመሰግነዋል።

አማርኛ ግን ይኩኖ አምላክ ከመነሣቱ ከብዙ ጊዜ በፊት ጀምሮ የአብዛኛው የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ መነጋገሪያ ነበር። “በዘር ንጹሕ አማራ ነኝ” የማይለው ይኩኖ አምላክም አማርኛን የራሱና የቤተ መንግሥቱ ቋንቋ ያደረገው ሁኔታ አስገድዶት ነው። ምክንያቱም፥ መንግሥት ያቋቋመው የመገናኛ ዓቢይ ቋንቋው አማርኛ በሆነው ሕዝብ ላይ ነበር። ስለዚህ፥ የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ የቤተ መንግሥቱን ቋንቋ ወሰደ ከማለት፥ ትክክሉ ቤተ መንግሥቱ በሕዝብ ቋንቋ ተጠቀመ ማለቱ ነው። ኢማም አሕመድ (ግራኝ) በዓሥራ ስድስተኛው ምእት ዓመት ወታደሮቹን በኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት ላይ ሲያዘምት በአማርኛ ብቻ እንዲነጋገሩ የመከራቸው ለዘዴው ቢሆንም፥ በዚያ ዘመን አማርኛ ዛሬ የአፍሪካ ቀንድ በሚባለው ክፍለ አፍሪካ የመገናኛ ቋንቋ እንደነበረ ያስረዳል። የተምቤኑ ተወላጅ አፄ ዮሐንስና ከእሳቸው በፊትና ከእሳቸው በኋላ የገዙ የትግራይ መኳንንት (እነሰባጋዲስ፥ እነ አሉላ) ግዛታቸውን ያካሄዱት በአማርኛ ቋንቋ እንደነበረ ትተዋቸው ያለፉት ሰነዶች ይመሰክራሉ። ማወቅ ለሚፈልግ አማርኛ እንዴት እንደተስፋፋና ከግዕዝ ጋር እየተጣላ የሥነ ጽሑፍ ቋንቋ እንደሆነ የሚያስደንቅ ታሪክ አለው። ገለልተኛ ሆኖ ለሚፈርድ ሰው፥ (አገር- ወዳድም ሆነ አገር-ጠላ) አማርኛን ከብሔራዊ ቋንቋነት ለማውረድ አጥጋቢ ምክንያት አያገኝም።

እስቲ እንዳይፈረድብን አድርገን እንፍረድ፤ አማርኛ ተናጋሪው ሕዝብ ላይ የተቋቋመ መንግሥት አማርኛን ትቶ በምን ቋንቋ ይነጋገር? የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት አማሮች ያቋቋሙት መንግሥት ነው ማለት እውነትነት አለው። አማሮች የሚኮሩትና ትምክሕት የሚሰማቸው በሚገባ ነው። አፍሪካውያን አባቶቻቸው ከሌሎች ኢትዮጵያውያን ጋር እየተረዳዱ እንደጥንት ሕዝቦች ብሔራዊ መንግሥት አቋቁመው፥ ከሌሎች ኢትዮጵያውያን ጋር እየተረዳዱ የሀገሪቷን ሥነ ጽሑፍ አዳብረው፥ አልፎ አልፎ ለሌሎች አገሮችም ተርፈዋል። ታዲያ እነሱ በአባቶቻቸው ሥራ ያልኮሩ፥ ያልተመኩ ማን ይኩራ፥ ማንስ ይመካ? መቸም ቢሆን አባቶች ልጆቻቸውን የሚያኮሩት የሚያኮራ ታሪክ ሲፈጽሙ ነው። ያባቶቻችን ታሪካቸው ሲያነቡትና ሲያስነብቡት ያኮራል፥ ያስቀናል። አማሮችን መውቀስና አስተዋፅኦዋቸውን ከአውሮፓውያን አስተዋፅኦ አሳንሶ ማየት ራስን መናቅ ነው። የሚሻለውስ አማራ የብዙ ጎሳዎች ውጤትና መናኸሪያ መሆኑንና የሚያኮራው ታሪኩም የጎሳዎች ሁሉ (የሁላችንም) ታሪክ መሆኑን ተረድቶ አብሮ መኵራት ነው። አለዚያ፥ “ትኮራበት የላት ትንቀው አማራት” ይሆንብናል። የሚያኮራው ታሪካችን የጋራ እንደሆነ ማሳየት ካስፈለገ፥ ሳልሰለች ዛሬም እንደገና ላስረዳ እሞክራለሁ። ግን አንድ አባ ምናሴ የሚባሉ የነገረ መለኮት መምህር እንዳሉት፥ “በክሕደት የተቈራኘ ሰይጣን በደግዳጋ [በሰላም፥ በጤና] አይለቅም።”

ይኩኖ አምላክ ያቋቋመው መንግሥት ቋንቋው አማርኛ መሆኑ ለቋንቋው ለመስፋፋት ረድቶታል ብሎ መገመት ይቻላል። የተሻለው ግምት ግን፥ አማርኛ ለብሔራዊ መሰባሰብና መጠቃለል (National integration) መሠረት ሆኗል ማለቱ ነው። አማርኛ የሰፊው ሕዝብ ቋንቋ ከመሆኑ በተጨማሪ የመንግሥት ቋንቋ ስለሆነ፥ መነሻቸው አማራ ያልሆኑ ሰዎች ቋንቋቸው አድርገውታል። ከዚያም አልፈው የናት ቋንቋ/አፍ መፍቻ ቋንቋ አድርገውታል። በአማራነት በኩል የአንድ መንግሥት፥ የአንድ ሀገር ሕዝብ ሆኑ ማለት ነው። አዲስ ነገር አይደለም፤ ጥንታዊ አገር ሁሉ ብሔራዊ መሰባሰብና መጠቃለል (National integration) የፈጸመው በአንድ ቋንቋና በአንድ ኢኮኖሚ ላይ ነው። መሰባሰብ ካልቀረ፥ በሀገር ቋንቋ ብንሰባሰብ፥ ነውሩና ቁጭቱ ለምንድን ነው? ከሆነ በኋላ መጥቶ “ለምን በእኛ ቋንቋ አልተሰባሰብንም?” የምንል ከሆነ፥ ባቡሩ ጣቢያውን ከለቀቀ በኋላ መጥቶ፥ መራገምና ሁከት መፍጠር ነው። ሲታሰብ፥ አዲሶቹ አማሮች በቍጥር የጥንቶቹን አማሮች ሳይበልጧቸው አይቀርም። በዘር ከሄድን፥ የጥንቶቹ አማሮች አሁን ሁሉም የሉም፤ በሌሎች ተውጠዋል። ያለው የተወረሰው ቋንቋቸውና ስማቸው ነው። በመደበላለቅ ታሪካችን ምክንያት፥ ራሱ ቋንቋቸውና የቀረው ባህላቸውም ተለውጧል። እነሱ ሲዋጡ የተለወጠው ቋንቋቸውና ስማቸው የተረፈው፥ (1) መንግሥቱ በሰላም ወዲያ ወዲህ መጓዝና መነገድ የሚያስችል ጽኑ መንግሥት ስለነበረ፥ (2) የሀገሪቱ ሥነ ጽሑፍ ትውፊት እየዳበረ ስለሄደ ነው። ተመሳሳይ ታሪክ መጥቀስ ይቻላል። ለምሳሌ፥ አግዓዝያን ዛሬ የሉም፤ ተውጠዋል፤ ቋንቋቸው ግን አለ። አግዓዝያን ሳይኖሩ ቋንቋቸው ግዕዝ የኖረው የሥነ ጽሑፍ ቋንቋ ስለሆነና የሀገሪቱ መንግሥት መሠረተ-ጽኑ ስለነበረ ነው።

አዲስ አማሮች፤

“አሁን የጥንቶቹ አማሮች የሉም” ስል፥ “አማሮች ነን” የሚሉት ከመቆጣታቸውና አጥቂዎቻቸው ከመሳለቃቸው በፊት እንዲህ ያልኩበትን ምክንያት እንደገና ላብራራ። እርግጥ፥ “አማራ ነን” የሚሉ ብዙ ሰዎች አውቃለሁ፤ አንዱ እኔ ራሴ ነኝ። ግን እንዲህ ነው፤ አማሮች የሚኖሩበት አምሐራ የሚባል ክፍለ ሀገር ነበረ። ክፍለ ሀገሩም ሰዎቹም አምሐራ ይባሉ ነበር-- ጥንትም ዛሬም ክፍለ ሀገሩንም ሰዎቹንም “ትግሬ” እንደምንል ማለት ነው። ግን የዱሮ አማሮችና ዛሬ አማሮች ነን የሚሉት አንድ አይደሉም፤ በታሪክ ሂደት፥ የሌላ ጎሳ ሰዎችም አማሮች ስለሆኑ፥ ዛሬ አማራ ስንል በዘር መሆኑ ቀርቷል። ልብ በሉ፤ ሐርላ፥ ጋግራ፥ የሚባሉ ነገዶች ነበሩ። ዛሬ “ሐርላ ነኝ” ፥ “ጋግራ ነኝ” የሚል አንድም ሰው የለም፤ ጠፍተዋል ማለት ሳይሆን፥ ቋንቋቸው አማርኛ ምናልባትም ኦሮምኛ ሆኗል፤ አማርኛና ኦሮምኛ ከሚናገሩ ሰዎች ጋር በጋብቻ ተደባልቀዋል፥ ቋንቋቸውንም ወርሰዋል ማለት ነው። እስከቅርብ ጊዜ ድረስ፥ ጎንደር (ስሜን)፥ ጎጃም፥ ሸዋ የአምሐራ ክፍል አልነበሩም። ቋንቋው ግን በነዚህ ክፍለ ሀገሮች ነግሧል፤ ያነገሡትና የነገሠባቸው ሰዎቹም “አማራ ነን” ይላሉ።

እነሱን እንተዋቸው፤ ቋንቋቸው አማርኛ የሆነበት ዘመን እጅግ ሩቅ ስለሆነ፥ ዝርዝሩን መናገር ይጸንነናል። ወደቅርቡ ዘመን እንምጣና፥ ዛጔዎች ሲገዙ ቋንቋቸው አገውኛ ነበር። ዛሬ ልጆቻቸው (ዋግሹሞችና ሌሎቹም) ከማህላችን አሉ፤ ግን አንዳቸውም አገውኛ አያውቁም፤ አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎች ሆነዋል፤ አማራ ሆነዋል፤ በአማራነት ወደአንድ ጾታ ተጠቃልለዋል። “አማራ እየገፋ፥ አገው እየጠፋ ሄደ” የሚል አነጋገር የመጣው ስለዚህ ነው። መሆን የነበረበት “አማራነት እየገፋ፥ አገውነት እየጠፋ ሄዱ” ነበር። ሐርላዎችንና ዛጔዎችን የሚመስሉ ብዙ ነገዶች ነበሩ፤ ልጆቻቸው ሁሉም አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎች (አማሮች) ሆነዋል። ስንቱን እዚህ ልጥቀሰው ማለት ነው እንጂ፥ የጻድቃኖቻችንን ገድል ስናነብ የምናገኘው ይኸንን ነው። ለቅሞ ቢያሳትሙት አንድ መጽሐፍ ሊወጣው ይችላል፤ ግን ጥቂቱን ያላመነ ብዙውን አያምንም። ኦሮሞዎች ወደማህል ኢትዮጵያ ከፈለሱበት ከዓሥራ ስድስተኛው ምእት ዓመት በኋላማ የተደባለቀው የአማራ ሕዝብ የባሰውን ተደበላልቋል። እነዚህ አዲስ አማሮች የአማራን ቋንቋና አባሪ ባህሎች ስለወረሱና ስላዳበሩት፥ “አማራ ነን” ይላሉ፤ ሊሉ የሚገባቸው ግን “አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎች ነን” ነበር።

ግድ የለም፤ ምሥጢሩ እስከታወቀ ድረስ ምንም ቢባሉ ጒዳት የለውም። ግራም ነፈሰ ቀኝ፥ እነዚህ ሰዎች የአማራ፥ የአገው፥ የሐርላ፥ የጋግራ፥ የአርጎባ፥ የሽናሻ፥ የቦሻ፥ የፈላሻ፥ የኦሮሞ፥ የወላይታ፥ የትግሬ፥ የጉራጌ፥ የብጌ፥ የጎንደሬ፥ የጋፋቴ፥ የጎጃሜ፥ . . . ድብልቆች ቢሆኑም፥ እንዳንድ ነገድ ታይተዋል። እነሱም አምነውበታል። ንኡስ ጾታ የሚያደርገውን የየናት ቋንቋቸውን ትተው ዓቢይ ጾታ የሚያደርገውን አማርኛን አፍ መፍቻቸው/የናት ቋንቋቸው አድርገውታል። ኀደግነ ኵሎ ወተለውናከ እንዳሉት፥ ሁሉንም ትተው፥ መንግሥቱን በመከተል ሀገር-አቀፍ ወይም መንግሥታዊ ነገድ ሆነዋል። ግን አስፈላጊነቱ አልታያቸውም፥ ሁኔታውም አልረዳቸውም እንጂ፥ ጥለውት የመጡትን ቋንቋም (አገውኛን፥ ሐርልኛን፥ ኦሮምኛን፥ ወላይትኛን፥ ጉራግኛን፥ ወዘተ.) በተጨማሪ ቢናገሩ ኖሮ፥ (ሌሎች አሁንም እንደሚያደርጉት ማለት ነው) ከዘመዶቻቸው ጋራ የነበረው ቀጥታ የባህል ዝምድናቸው አይቋረጥም ነበር። ስለተቋረጠ፥ ሃይማኖቱን እንደለወጠ ሰው ተራርቀዋል። መራራቅ ብቻ ሳይሆን፥ እንደ ተቀናቃኝ የሚያዩዋቸውና የጎሳ ፓርቲ አቋቁመው የባህል ጦርነት የገጠሟቸው ጥቂቶች አይደሉም። ኢኮኖሚውን መሠረት አድርገን ብሔራዊ ችግራችንን (ድኽነትን፥ ድንቁርናን፥ በሽታን፥ ጭቆናን፥ . . .) እንዳናስወግድበት ትልቁን ጦርነት ባህል ቀለበሰብን። እንዲያውም አንድነታችንን ከአደጋ ላይ ጣለው። የቅድመ አያቶቻቸውን ቋንቋ ትተው አፋቸውን የፈቱት ሰፊው ሕዝብ በሚያውቀውና የኢትዮጵያን መንግሥት ከወደቀበት ባነሡት ሰዎች ቋንቋ (በአማሮች) ስለ ሆነ፥ መንግሥቱን የጠላ ባለሌላ ቋንቋ ሁሉ አብሮ ያገልላቸው ጀመር--” ከኑግ የተገኘህ ሰሊጥ አብረህ ተወገጥ” እንዲሉ። ንጉሣዊው አገዛዝ የተጠላው ግን በአማርኛ ተናጋሪዎች ጭምር ነበር። ምክንያቱም መንግሥቱ ሕዝብን ሲጨቁን አማርኛ ተናጋሪውን ለይቶ አልማረም። ሰዎች በዘልማድ “የኢትዮጵያ ጭቁን ሕዝቦች” ሲሉና አማርኛ ተናጋሪውን ከዝርዝራቸው ውስጥ ሳያስገቡ ሲቀሩ ይገርመኛል።

በአሁኑ ሰዓት አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎች (አማሮች) “ጨቋኞች” ይሏቸው የነበሩትን ያለፉ ገዢዎቻችንን ሲያከብሩ እናያቸዋለን። ይኼ ደግሞ ራሳቸውን ከገዢው ጋር ያሰለፉ ያደርጋቸውና በሌሎች ዘንድ የበለጠ ያስገልላቸዋል። በማህል ቤት ተጠቃሚው ወያኔ ነው። እንደ እውነት ከሆነ፥ አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎቹ ያለፉ ገዢዎችን የሚያከብሩት የአንድነት ታሪካችን መሪዎች ስለነበሩ እንጂ፥ ከገዢው ወገን ስለሆኑ አይደለም። ራሳቸውን ከገዢው ወገን ቢያደርጉ ኖሮማ፥ ንጉሣዊውን አገዛዝ ለመጣል ሲታገሉ ከማንም ይበልጥ እንደ ቅጠል አይረግፉም፥ መንግሥቱም አይወድቅም ነበር።

የአንድነትና የጋራ ታሪካችን፤

የኢትዮጵያ ታሪክ ከፋም ለማ ገዢዎቿ እየመሯቸው የሁላችንም አባቶች የሠሩት መሆኑን በአጋጠመኝ ቊጥር ሳላነሣውና ማስረጃ ለመስጠት ሳልሞክር ቀርቼ አላውቅም። ምናልባት ብናገረውም፥ ሳላጎላው የቀረሁት፥ ታሪኩን የፈጸሙት አማራ የሆኑት ጎሳዎች ብቻ ሳይሆኑ፥ በጎሳቸው (በኦሮምነታቸው፥ በጉራጌነታቸው፥ . . .) ያሉ ሁሉ መሆኑን ነው።

አያቶቻችን ኢትዮጵያን የታሪክ ሀገር ሲያደርጓት ራእይ እየሰጡ የመሯቸው ነገሥታቱ ናቸው። ነገሥታቱ አጠፉም አለሙም ባለውለታችን ናቸው። ዔዛና፥ አብርሃ አጽብሐ፥ ካሌብ፥ ገብረ መስቀል፥ ላሊበላ፥ ይኩኖ አምላክ፥ ዓምደ ጽዮን፥ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ፥ በጠቅላላው የጎንደር ነገሥታት ከጥንት ሀገሮች ጋር ያስሰለፉን የኲራታችን ምንጮች ናቸው። የአፄ ቴዎድሮስንና የአፄ ዮሐንስን ቁጡነትና ርኅሩኅነት እናውቃለን፤ ከሥራቸው አይተነዋል፤ ከቃላቸውም ሰምተነዋል። ግን ወድቃ የነበረችውን የዘመነ መሳፍንትን ኢትዮጵያ መልሰው ማቋቋማቸውን እንዴት አድርገን እንረሳለን? “ምነው ወድቃ በቀረች” ከሚል በቀር፥ ሁሉም ባለውለታ ነው። ኢትዮጵያውያንን በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ ከኩራት ዙፋን ላይ ያስቀመጠውን የአድዋን ድል እንድንነሣ ጦሩን የመሩትን አፄ ምኒልክን እንኳን ያላጠፉትን ያጠፉትንም ቢሆን የማስታወስ ጠባይ ሊኖርብን አይገባም። ኢትዮጵያዊ ውለታቢስ አይደለም። “ኢትዮጵያ ምነው ወድቃ በቀረች” የሚሉ ካሉ፥ አያቶቹን የሚክድ፥ ደማቸውን ደመ ከልብ የሚያደርጉ፥ ራሳቸውን ታሪክ አልባ የሚያደርጉ ናቸው። አለማወቅ ወይም “አባቶቻችን አማራው ባቋቋመው መንግሥት ውስጥ በፈጸሙት ታሪክ ከመኵራት ቢቀርብን ይሻለናል” የሚል ስሜት፥ ከሀገርና ከታሪክ ፍቅር ነፃ አውጥቷቸዋል።

መደምደሚያ፤

አማርኛ ተናጋሪዎችና ሌሎች አገር ወዳድ ተማሪዎች የጫሩትን የዘመናችንን የለውጥ ንቅናቄ ባለሌላ ባህሎች አማሮችን፥ “አብረናችሁ ነን፤ የዲሞክራሲውን ንቅናቄ ግፉበት፤ እንግፋበት” ሲሉ ቆይተው፥ አፋፍ ላይ ሲደርሱ ገፈተሯቸው፤ ከዷቸው፤ ዲሞክራሲን ከዱት፤ የኢትዮጵያን አንድነት ከዱት። ጓደኛንና ሀገርን መክዳትና መካድ የማያሳፍራቸው ሃይማኖተኛ ወገኖች ተወለዱ። “እናንተ ጨቋኞች፥ እኛ ተጨቋኞች ነን፤ ከናንተ ጋር አንድ የሚያደርገን አንዳችም ነገር የለም” የሚል ፈሊጥ አመጡ፤ በዚያው ጸኑበት። “አንድ ሕዝብ ነን” የሚለውን አሳደዱት፤ አንድነታችንን የሚመሰክሩትን ምንጮች ደፈኗቸው፤ ሰነዶቹን አቃጠሏቸው።

አማሮችም በጭቁንነታቸው ላይ ጓደኞቻቸው እነ ሕወሓት (ወያኔዎች) ሲከዷቸውና ሌላ ጭቆና ሲጭኑባቸው፥ የኦሮሞ ፖለቲከኞች በሀገሪቱ ህልውና ላይ ሲዘምቱባት ሲያዩ፥ “የጭቆና የጭቆና የቀድሞው ጭቆና ይሻለን ነበር፤ የቀድሞ ጨቋኞች ሌላው ቢቀር አባቶቻችን ደማቸውን ያፈሰሱለትን የሀገራችንን አንድነት አያስደፍሩም፤ ታሪካችንን አያራክሱም ነበር” ሲሉ ይሰማሉ፤ እኔም ስል እሰማለሁ። ታሪክና ሀገር ህልውናንና ማንነትን ይነካሉ። ስለዚህ ዱርየዎች ታሪካችንን ከታሪካቸው ጋር ሊደመስሱ ሲሞክሩና ሀገራችንን ሲያወድሙ ዝም ብለን አንይ። ትግላችን ምንና ከማን ጋር መሆን እንዳለበት እንወቅ። የምንለው “የዱሮው ይከተት” እንጂ፥ “የዱሮው ይቀጥል” አይደለም። እንደነሱ አለማወቅ ነፃ ያወጣን ሰዎች ስላይደለን፥ የመጀመሪያው ትግላችን “ታሪክ አልባ፥ ማንነት አልባ” ከሚያደርግ ጠላት ጋር ነው። ሀገርን፥ ታሪክን፥ ማንነትን ለማዳን ጥቅመኛ የሆነ ሁሉ፥ አማራ፥ ኦሮሞ፥ ትግሬ፥ ጉራጌ፥ . . . ሳይል፥በሚችለው መንገድና ዘዴ ለመጠቀም መነሣት እንዳለበት ላሳስብ። “ለሀገር የመጣ ነው” የሚለው አነጋገር አያዘናጋን። ለሀገርና በሀገር ላይ የመጣን ያህል የሚያስቆጣና የሚያሳስብ ነገር የለም። አገር ወዳድ ሁሉ የተሳተፈበት የ1888ቱ የአድዋው ድል አድዋ ላይ መደገም ያለበት ጊዜ ከፊታችን ተደቅኗል። ሌሎቹን ጦርነቶች (በረኀብ፥ በድንቁርና፥ በበሽታ፥ በጭቆና ላይ) የምናካሂደው መቆሚያና መቀመጫ ሀገር ሲኖረንና ማንነታችን ሲከበር ነው። 

Blog 5. Federalism and the Constitution by Prof. Alemente G. Selassie (2013)

Slightly more than two decades have passed since the TPLF enshrined ethnicity in the laws and constitution of the country as the foundation as well as the guiding principle of statecraft and inter- ethnic relations. The experience gained during this period of our political history is more than adequate for assessing the wisdom of structuring government on such an emotionally charged, divisive and unstable basis. It provides as well a window to the likely consequences of this form of governance on the future fate of our common citizenship (“Ethiopiawinnet”), inter-ethnic harmony, individual and minority rights, and the state’s ability to enforce the much-vaunted but often ignored dictates of the rule of law.

The recent expulsions of Ethiopians of Amhara heritage from Gura Ferda and Beni-Shangul, the confiscation of their properties and the crime of rape and other forms of victimization inflicted upon them, are not only a negation of the forgoing values but also unmistakable harbingers of worse forms of ethnic oppression, discrimination, and social conflict looming on the horizon. An unmistakable lesson of these experiences of mass atrocity is that the notion of an undifferentiated citizenship holds very little or no sway in the country any longer, thereby condemning ethnic minorities trapped in the wrong titular state to the tender mercies of the ethnic elites in control of these states and the connivance and manipulation of the ruling elites at the center. If citizens who do not belong to the “right” ethnic group can be endangered with impunity in this way merely on account of being “different” from the relevant majority, can it be long before the notion of a common citizenship gradually atrophies and becomes extinct?

Even if this particular result can somehow be avoided, the devolution of political power to ethnic majorities will always put at risk the security, status and rights of those who do not belong to the empowered regional majorities. If, the fundamental political constitutional issue in Ethiopia is how citizens of varying ethnic and cultural backgrounds can coexist harmoniously, the atrocities alluded to above highlight another sobering lesson: federalism, by itself, is not enough as a means for promoting ethnic harmony or for protecting individual rights. This is because the glorification of ethnic identity under the auspices of ethnic federalism is fundamentally and inherently incompatible with the notion of equal rights and a common citizenship. Consequently, the most important immediate political task for all Ethiopians should be to nourish a countrywide sense of identification and belonging and to tamp down the rhetoric and obsessive fascination with the so-called national question that continues to captivate and freeze otherwise intelligent minds. I do realize that this is indeed a tall order under the prevailing political circumstances. But if we are to avoid the two most tragic consequences of ethnic division and conflict- genocide and the break-up of the country- there is no other option but to come together in defense of Ethiopiawinnet and equal citizenship. The danger exposed by Gura Ferda and Beni-Shangul should serve as a wake-up call to action.

In the following pages, I will address four questions that the crimes committed against Amharas in Gura Ferda and Beni-Shangul raise. The first question concerns the ideology that motivates political ethnicity and its underlying aims. I will then briefly note the ways in which the ruling party in Ethiopia has entrenched these aims in the basic law of the country. This is followed up by a brief discussion highlighting the particular ways in which the constitutionalization of ethnicity objectively undermines Ethiopiawinnet and basic human rights as internationally recognized. In particular, these remarks will highlight how this constitutional formula is likely to lead to the most odious forms of human rights violations, namely, ethnic cleansing and genocide. I will conclude by pointing out that upholding Ethiopiawinnet holds the key for forestalling such tragedies and for maintaining social peace and stability, and for promoting democracy and human rights.

Political Ethnicity and Its Aims

Lurking behind the politicization of ethnic identity in Ethiopia is a pernicious ideology: the ideology of ethnic nationalism which the Ethiopian Student Movement, wittingly or unwittingly, popularized under the ill-conceived rubric of the “national question.” For many, this slogan signified nothing more than a demand for a policy of ethnic equality so as to exorcise the cultural milieu of ethnic mistrust and antagonism as well as to encourage ethnic groups to come together, as Lenin would have us believe – naively, as it turned out. But ethno-nationalist ideologues and politicians are rarely satisfied with ethnic equality per se; they demand much more.

Ethno-nationalism has three defining characteristics that reveal the chief aims of political ethnicity and the difficulty of bringing ethnic groups to come together when politicians use ethnicity as a source of political identity. As our own experience demonstrates, citizens who might not have been aware of their ethnicity regrouped under its banner as soon as the state deliberately used it as a source of identity. Thus the first characteristic of the ideology of ethnic nationalism is that nations are to be defined solely in ethnic terms, i.e., in terms of a common history, tradition, and a common language. Secondly, nations should have their own states, so that the nation as so defined and the state should be congruent with each other. Finally, the loyalty of members of a nation should override all other loyalties including loyalty to an overarching countrywide nationalism. Clearly, this notion of nationalism is at odds with the citizen nationalism which Ethiopiawinnet seeks to uphold. Ethiopiawinnet holds that all Ethiopians are part of the same nation irrespective of their ethnic background and are united by a patriotic attachment to a common country in which all enjoy equal rights.

But civic nationalism has to contend with the dangers inherent in the ideology that conceives ethnic groups as “nations.” The main danger inherent in ethno-nationalism is threefold: expansionism,  exclusivism and secessionism. Expansionist ethnic nationalism threatens the territorial integrity of states and sub-states. In the case of Ethiopia, the most obvious example is the expansionism of the TPLF into Gondar and Wollo provinces in fulfillment of the Greater Tigray project.

Ethnic nationalism is also inherently exclusivist and gives rise to various forms of ethnic cleansing, as we have witnessed in Gura Ferda and Beni-Shangul. As one of the most virulent ethno-nationalists, Jawar Mohammed, has told us Ethiopians living in the so-called Oromia must leave the region or “else.” Some may naïvely dismiss or discount Jawar’s threat captured in YouTube as the outbursts of a callow young man. But that would be a mistake. It behooves us to remember that those whose ideology demands blind loyalty to their own community and its self-righteous claims of right, and those who glorify their own ethnic group to the denigration of others are often those who will have no qualms to engage in ethnic cleansing and genocide in the “name” and the “defense” of their ethnic group. Entranced by their ideology and a sense of a past victimization that is often rooted in half- truths and utter lies, they will have little or no compunction to deny the humanity of those whom they regard as the “Other.”

Dyed-in-the wool ethno-nationalists are secessionists to the core as well. The missionaries of ethnic federalism may indulge the belief that their chosen form of governance will satisfy the ethno- nationalists’ desire for self-government and thereby discourage secessionism. But this is a pious hope and a dangerous illusion. The devolution of political power to an ethnic majority is more often than not a political arrangement that risks fuelling the ambitions of nationalist leaders who will be satisfied with nothing short of their own nation-state. Examples of this abound: Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan, Abkhazian in Georgia, Chechnya in Russia, and the Serbian region of Bosnia- Herzegovina. We should not be surprised to see this trajectory replicated in Ethiopia in the future, making the country’s territorial integrity always provisional and contingent, its politics messy and unstable, and the rights of individuals belonging to ethnic minorities precarious.

Ethnicity and the EPRDF Constitution

The Ethiopian Constitution is in essence the expression and implementation of the TPLF’s ethno- nationalist ideology. What the constitution enshrines is not the idea of democracy as a polity of equal citizens, but rather of the creation of a national state for the local majority, ethnically defined. Article 8 unabashedly announces, “All sovereign power resides in the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia” and goes on to provide that “This constitution is an expression of this sovereignty.”

Article 8 sounds the death knell of Ethiopia as a sovereign nation because it locates sovereignty not in all its citizens as a people acting in their individual capacities unimpeded by their particular ethnic affiliations but rather in the various ethnic communities that inhabit the country. In other words, by jettisoning the notion of popular sovereignty based on “We the people” in favor of ethnic group sovereignty, the constitution envisions a state in which each ethnic group (at least the major ones) is privileged to decide its own form of governance, identity, future association with the state, and the rights of Ethiopians subject to its jurisdiction. 

In implementation of this vision, the constitution has divided the country into nine ethnic states with the principal aim of making each state as a vehicle for aggregating and expressing the political, cultural and linguistic identity of the country’s major ethnic groups. The animating idea behind this constitutional edifice is the desire to foster the emergence of ethnic groups as distinct polities, i.e. “nation states “of homogeneous ethnicity. Lest there be any lingering doubt about this intention, Article 39 dispels the doubt and undergirds this goal by proclaiming the unconditional of right of ethnic groups to secession. In addition, to forestall any attempt at revision of the Article, the Constitution ensures its continued effectiveness by requiring the consent of ALL states before any amendment to this provision can be attempted. This essentially means that every state, even the tiny state of Harari has veto power to thwart any revision. As far as I know, no democratic constitution has ever gone down this road and certainly not as far.

The Evils of Ethnic Constitutionalism

Instability is the antithesis of constitutionalism. A well-considered and legitimate constitution should provide a structure of political action, a set of institutions within which political conflict can be resolved through political processes that are accepted as legitimate by the citizenry. Moreover, such a constitution should contain effective guarantees for the protection of individual and minority rights.

Ethiopia’s constitution falls woefully short of these requirements. Far from providing a framework for resolving conflict and protecting minority rights, the constitution instead essentially mirrors the very configuration of ethnic conflict and division that it ostensibly seeks to resolve. Said differently, the constitution provides a framework for the polarization, not the moderation, of contesting ethnic elites and organized polities by devolving political power to majority ethnic groups and encouraging them to form political parties to represent their particularistic interests. At the present time, the TPLF, like the erstwhile Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Communist League of Yugoslavia, seeks to maintain national unity through the tight control it maintains over its ethnic affiliates. The false sense of security that this political modus vivendi does seem to offer, however, belies the underlying reality of ill-will and resentment the party’s ethnic partners feel toward their overlords. It would be the height of naiveté’ to entertain the belief that the various ethnic-based political formations-–inside and outside government--(with a few possible exceptions) are committed to the current lopsided political arrangement which unquestionably serves and benefits the elites of one ethnic group.

It is to be expected, therefore, that the leaders of the subservient components of the federation are biding their time. They will raise their heads, assert themselves, and challenge the ruling power over some question of importance to the challenger when the circumstances appear propitious. This is likely to occur when the local government feels that it has substantial support among its “own” population to challenge action by the center as illegitimate or when it perceives that the center as no longer capable of enforcing its rule. The existence of independent ethnic governments will serve as a means for collating and articulating ethnic demands and grievances against the central government or to urge action toward gaining independent statehood. Under either scenario, what begins as a conflict of interest, over economic questions such as land ownership, for example, may be turned into a conflict of principle over the legitimacy of the federation itself, thus setting the stage for the breakdown of the federal state into a war among its components. Such is the kind of conflict the constitution at bottom configures but provides next to nothing to ensure political legitimacy and stability.

The TPLF constitution is configurative of ethnic conflict in another way and for that reason can never be a recipe for social peace or governmental stability. The sole rationale and impetus for the constitution is the right of ethnic majorities to self-determination each with its “own” territory and government. Ethnic constitutionalism is the hallmark of such a form of state: a constitutional and legal structure that privileges the members of the ethnically defined nation over the other residents of a particular state. It thus envisions government of one kind of people, by that kind of people, for that kind of people, whose sovereignty must be protected against perceived encroachments form all others. Such a system of government institutionalizes ethnic division between those who are members of the sovereign nation and those who are not. As our experience to date demonstrates, the chief motive for “national liberation” is not really to free oneself from domination or perceived domination but rather to acquire the means to dominate and mistreat others. Thus those who are relegated to minority status in an enclave state may be citizens of the country but may not aspire to equality. Under these circumstances, the very premise of the polity may be seen as an inversion of Affirmative Action as practiced in the United States: ethnic constitutionalism institutionalizes invidious discrimination and negative action against minorities, which the constitution has simply defined out of the body politic because they are not considered natives of the regions in which they reside. Constitutionally defining out a targeted population in this way is a serious matter especially where the target group has roots in the territory that go back generations, even centuries, because it deprives the excluded group of their fundamental rights to nondiscrimination and equality.

No group of people will willingly accept relegation to second-class status and exclusion. On the contrary, ethnic minorities (and their co-ethnics elsewhere) are more likely to be encouraged to oppose the majoritarian government which defines them as social and political outcasts and tyrannizes them. Moreover, ethnic constitutionalism necessarily gives rise to two very divergent and conflicting visions of citizenship: national and ethnic. As the experiences of Yugoslavia and the ex- Soviet Union have shown, however, rival citizenships of this kind are a prolific source of social conflict and can hardly coexist- at least not for a long time- in the same political space. These experiences suggest that ethnic minded individuals are far more willing to exchange their national citizenship for ethnic citizenship (recall Jawar’s outburst of “I am first an Oromo” on Al Jazeera) and are willing to kill or die for their ethnic group. Recall also that pride in and loyalty to the ethnic group are salient attributes of ethnic nationalism. The late Meles Zenawi captured this sentiment when he said to the country” I am proud to be born a Tigrayan, the Golden people of Ethiopia.” Furthermore, they illustrate that when the two kinds of nationalism compete, countrywide nationalism is likely to be the loser because it lacks the emotional force that ethnic citizenship can so easily muster. We all know from our own recent history that the struggle between these forms of citizenship has often resulted in disastrous civil wars, economic dislocations, and, more seriously, in ethnic cleansing. 

Thus, from a human rights perspective ethnic constitutionalism is inherently problematic. Even leaving aside for a moment ethnic cleansing and genocide - ominous systemic risks which Gura Ferda and Beni-Shangul have exposed - ethnic constitutionalism is a negation of the various internationally recognized human rights the country has solemnly covenanted to uphold. To begin with, in so far as ethnic constitutionalism empowers a particular ethnic group to control a subunit of the federation, such a group will invariably frame and enforce rules and practices calculated to privilege its members and to subordinate so-called outsiders. Such discrimination violates, for example, the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which specifically outlaws” any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on ... ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing... the enjoyment or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.” Ditto for Article 25 of the Ethiopian Constitution. Notwithstanding these provisions, ethnic discrimination is a daily dirge heard among wide sections of Ethiopian society. Space does not allow me to go into this point in greater detail. Suffice it point out that recruitment to the civil service, the police and other branches of the government is disproportionately from either the ethnic group controlling the center or the ethnic groups that control the sub-states.

Ethnic constitutionalism also violates the guarantee of equal rights to political participation as mandated by international human rights law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for example, recognizes the right of every citizen to “take part in the conduct of public affairs”, the right to vote and be elected in periodic elections, and the “right to have access on general terms of equality, to public service in his country.” Yet, ethnic federalism nullifies these guarantees. In the State of Beni-Shangul- Gumuz, for example, a proclamation passed in 2007 has allocated 55% of the seats of city councils in the state to ethnic groups considered indigenous (i.e., Gumuz, Shinasha, Komo and Mao). The rest of the population of the state are considered outsiders and second-class citizens even though they together constitute more than 40 % of the state’s population. Similarly, in the state of Oromia another proclamation provides that in the so-called First and Second Class Cities, if the number of Oromos residing in these cities are fewer in number than the rest of the resident population, then 50% of the Council seats will be reserved for them along with an additional 20% for Oromos living in the surrounding rural areas. Under both these laws, Ethiopian citizens who are considered non-native to these areas are purposely relegated to minority status.

In the face of such discrimination and exclusion, it is no wonder that citizens are reluctant to exercise their right under international human rights law to move freely in the country and reside wherever they choose to. To be sure the Ethiopian constitution guarantees this right as well but its practical implementation is another matter altogether. Because employment opportunities, political power, rights of political participation and access to economic and business opportunities all depend on belonging to the “right” ethnic group, those that do not belong have no incentive to move into regions controlled by such group, especially now when the political atmosphere has been polluted by ethnic cleansing. 

More worrisome violations of the foregoing rights are the impending danger of ethnic cleansing and genocide. This is no exaggeration. Consider: If ethnic cleansing is already here, can genocide be far behind? My fear is that it cannot be. I base this fear on the simple logic of the ethnic fundamentalist ideology the Ethiopian constitution has embraced. As noted, the driving ideology of ethnic nationalism is rooted in the notion of ethnic homogeneity, which inevitably leads to feelings of separateness and a sense of exclusive ownership of a particular homeland. Ethnic nationalists have two means to accomplish ethnic homogeneity and ensure that the ethnic homeland remains in the hands of sons of the soil: ethnic cleansing and genocide. The first has raised its ugly head several times already in several regions of the country. If allowed to take its natural course this evil is likely to escalate and lead sooner or later to a campaign of genocide. Drawing ethnic boundaries on mixed populations as has been done in Ethiopia is often a recipe for the commission of such crimes. The break- up of a common state is the other major circumstance which often leads to the same result. This is a risk that we can ignore at our own peril.

What to do?

What must Ethiopians who care about the welfare of their compatriots and the unity of their country do to reverse the political tendencies that encourage these evils? Figuring out the answer to this question is the hardest part. Nonetheless, let me offer a few thoughts in this vein. I believe that the first and most important lesson we can glean from our political history of the past 40 years is to recognize the wrong-headed and flawed manner in which the so-called “national question” was formulated and propounded. Many of us considered this foreign-inspired formula as the panacea for our problems of ethnic inequality without ever bothering to undertake seriously a sober study of our own history and political situation. Unlike the ex-Soviet Union and Yugoslavia which were a patchwork of previously independent national communities, Ethiopia’s historical trajectory was one of organic growth around a common nucleus. We all know that before the Woyane came to power, there was no notion of an Amhara or Oromo community each with its own defined region. Contrast that with Ukraine, Georgia or Russia with their defined boundaries even in Czarist times. It is the failure to appreciate this crucial distinction that has led us to repeat the canard that “nations, nationalities and peoples” have the right to secession. But does the seceding unit have title to the territory it seeks to take with it? Has the population that now inhabits a specific territory always controlled such territory? Raising these questions is enough to indicate the answer: we must reverse course and cleanse our politics of ethno-nationalist debris.

A related mistake concerns the fact that little or no thought was given to the need to preserve Ethiopia and Ethiopiawinnet. To the contrary, the task of defending the danger facing these values was left to the government of the day, both in the imperial period as well as under the military regime. Those faint voices which raised concerns regarding the negative consequences of overemphasizing the national question to the detriment of the unity of the country were castigated as “chauvinists” and “neftegnas.” The ruling government and some ethno-nationalists in the camp of the opposition continue to find these labels serviceable even to this day. Sadly the overwhelming majority of us was cowed -- and continues to be so today--by these epithets and proved to be bystanders as the country hurtled down a dangerous path of national destruction. 

It is essential that we rectified this mistake and repaired the damage by standing up forcefully for Ethiopia’s survival as a country and the right of all our people to live and work anywhere in the country and to be treated as equal citizens under law. We can do that only when we come together by bridging minor political and personal differences and when we no longer allow ethnic movements to dominate the country’s politics. After all, the two main social problems of the country – an inequitable land tenure system and ethnic inequality – which might have served to justify the ethnic movements of the 1970s and 1980s do no longer justify ethnic separatism. Whether they do or not, however, the most urgent and central task of all who believe in Ethiopiawinnet is the need to build a powerful constituency to uphold the rights of Ethiopia as a country and the equal treatment of its citizens. Unlike in the past, this task cannot be left to the government of the day. This is what makes the task doubly urgent and overwhelming.

It is also important to recognize that all the talk by all and sundry- individuals and political parties alike- about democracy, human rights and the rule of law is empty sloganeering unless Ethiopia and Ethiopiawinnet are preserved. Indeed a major precondition on the road to the realization of these values is national unity and territorial integrity. This point is so basic and so obvious it needs little or no elaboration.

Finally, it must be pointed out that Ethiopia and Ethiopiawinnet are unlikely to endure so long as the constitution, which is the source of many of the problems briefly identified, is either scrapped or greatly revised to do away with the pernicious notion of ethnic homelands. This is not the place to go into the details of constitution-making or revising. One idea that must occupy a prominent place in such an effort, however, would be to guarantee that all inhabitants of a region, however defined, shall be entitled to all the privileges and rights enumerated in the constitution on an equal and non- discriminatory basis. 

---

The author is Professor Emeritus of Law at the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, VA (USA). This blog is an abridged version of a presentation on the same subject that was given on July 4, 2013 at the public forum organized by Ethiopiawinnet in Washington, DC (USA). 

Blog 4. Rule of Law and Governance (in Amharic) by Dr. Getatchew Haile (2013)

መንግሥትና ሕግ አንዱ ያለሌላው የማይኖር የዓይንና የብርሃን ጋብቻዎች ናቸው። ጋብቻው ሕይወታቸው ስለሆነ፥ ብርሃኑ ቢደበዝዝ፥ ወይም ዓይኑ ቢደክም ብርሃኑ ቦግ የሚልበት፥ ዓይኑ የሚጠነክርበት መንገድ ይፈለግላቸዋል እንጂ አይፋቱም። የታሪክ ተመራማሪዎች የሚታመን ማስረጃ እያቀረቡ፥ ኢትዮጵያ የጥንት ሀገር ናት ብለው ሲያሳምኑን፥ የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ከጥንት ጀምሮ ባለ ሕግና ባለሥርዓት እንደነበረ መመስከራቸውና ማሳመናቸው ነው። የኢትዮጵያን መንግሥት ጥንታዊነት ተቀብለናል። ከተቀበልን፥ ከዚህ በታች ባሉት ሦስት አርእስት ላይ እንወያይ።

1. ከጥንት ጀምሮ ሲወርድ ሲዋረድ ከእኛ ዘመን የደረሰውን የጥንቲቷን ኢትዮጵያ ሕግ ማን አወጣው?
2. ሕጉ የግለሰብን መብት ምን ያህል ይጠብቅ ነበር?
3. ሕዝቡና የሀገሪቱ ባለሥልጣኖች ሕጉን ምን ያህል ያከብሩትና ያስከብሩት ነበር?

መለኮታዊ መንግሥት፤

የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት፥ እንደማናቸውም የጥንት መንግሥታት፥ መሠረቱ መለኮታዊ ነው። ማስረጃው ታሪክ ብቻ ሳይሆን ብዙዎቻችን አምላክ እድሜ ሰጥቶን በሕይወት ደርሰንበታል። ለመለኮታዊ መንግሥት ሕግ አውጪው መለኮት ነው። መጽሐፋችን "ሕግ ይወፅእ እምጽዮን" (ሕግ ከእስራኤላዊት ጽዮን ይወጣል) ይላል። በመጽሐፍ ቅዱስና በቸሩ ቁርኣን ውስጥ ያሉት ሕግጋት ለዚህ እንደ ማስረጃ ይወሰዳሉ። ሲጀመር፥ መሠረታዊ ሕጎችን አምላክ ለነቢይ ሙሴ በቀጥታ፥ ለነቢይ ሙሐመድ በገብርኤል አማካይነት እንደነገራቸውና በኋላ የተነሡ የክርስትና አባቶች ሲኖዶስንና ፍትሐ ነገሥትን፥ የሙስሊም አባቶች ሸሪዓንንና ሐዲስን እንደ ደነገጉ ተምረናል። መለኮታዊ ሕግ በሁሉም ዘንድ ተቀባይነት ሊያገኝ የሚችለው፥ የአንድ ሀገር ሕዝብ ሁሉም አንድ ዓይነት ሃይማኖት፥ አንድ ዓይነት መለኮታዊ ሕግ ሲኖረው ነው። ከአገሬው ሕዝብ አንዱ ክፍል ክርስቲያን ሌላው ክፍል ሙስሊም ሲሆን፥ ሕዝቡ በየትኛው መለኮታዊ ሕግ ይተዳደር? ትልቁና የመጀመሪያው የኢትዮጵያ ሀገራዊ ችግር ይኸ ነበር፤ ምናልባትም ክርስቲያኖች አስተሳሰባቸውን እንደለወጡ ሙስሊሞችም ካልለወጡ በ"ነበር" የሚያልፍ አይመስልም። ንግግሬ ሲቀጥል ምን ማለቴ እንደሆነ ግልጽ ይሆናል።

የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት መሪ የክርስትናን ሃይማኖት እንዲያከብር ጳጳሱ መጽሐፍ ቅዱስ አስይዞ ያስምለው ነበር። ይኸ ቀርቷል፤ ባይቀርም፥ የሚምለው ሃይማኖቱን እንዲያከብር እንጂ፥ የሌላ ሃይማኖት ተከታዮችን የሃይማኖት ነፃነታቸውን እንዲነፍጋቸው አይደለም። ሲነፍጋቸውም አልታየም። ንጉሣዊት ኢትዮጵያ፥ ሙስሊሞች ማንንም ሳይፈሩ በሃይማኖታቸው መሠረት አምላካቸውን የሚያመልኩባት፥ ቤተ ጸሎት (መስጊድ የሚሠሩባት) ሀገር ነበረች። ይኸንን ታሪካችንን የሳዑዲ ታላቁ ሙፍቲ ሸኽ ዐብዱል አዚዝ አል-ሸኽ አሁንም ማርች 16 ቀን 2012 ዓ. እ. "በዐረብ ሰላጤ ያሉ አብያተ ክርስቲያን መፍረስ አለባቸው" ካለው ጋር ስናስተያየው በታሪካችን እንኮራለም። እርግጥ የክርስትና በዓላት በሀገር ደረጃ ሲከበሩ፥ የሙስሊም በዓላት በዚያው ደረጃ አይከበሩም ነበር። መንግሥት ቤተ ክርስቲያን ሲያሠራ መስጊድ አያሠራም ነበር። በፍርድ ጊዜ ግን መብታቸው ሲነፈጋቸው አልተገኘም፤ የንግድ ሥራውማ አብዛኛውን ጊዜ የነሱ ነበር። በየዓመቱ ወደ ኢየሩሳሌም የሚሄዱትን ክርስቲያኖችንና ወደ መካ የሚሄዱትን ሙስሊሞች ንጉሠ ነገሥቱ እኩል ነበር ከፊታቸው አቅርበው የሚሸኟቸው።

የሀገሪቱ ታሪክ እንደመዘገበው፥ የሰሎሞናዊው መንግሥት የተቋቋመ ጊዜ፥ በኢትዮጵያ ምድር የሚኖሩ ሙስሊሞች በኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት ስር መሆናቸውን ገጸ በረከት በማምጣት እያሳወቁ ራሳቸውን በራሳቸው እንዲያስተዳድሩ መብት ተሰጥቷቸው ነበር። የግብጹ ሡልጣን ጀቅመቅ በሥልጣኑ ስር የነበሩትን ክርስቲያኖች መጨቆኑን አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ ሲሰማ የጻፈለት ደብዳቤ የኢትዮጵያ ነገሥታትን ርቱዕ ፍትሕ አክባሪነት ያሳያል። የደብዳቤው ፍሬ ነገር "በእኔ ስር የሚተዳደሩ ሙስሊሞች አሉ። የክርስቲያኑን ሕግ እንዲያከብሩ አይገደዱም። ግብር ከመክፈል ሳይቀር ነፃ ናቸው" የሚል ነበር። ማስረጃ ተጨባጭ ምንጭ ለመስጠት ስል የአፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብን ደብዳቤ ጠቀስኩ እንጂ፥ በክርስቲያን ነገሥታት ዘንድ ርቱዕ ፍትሕ አክባሪነት የተጀመረው በዚያ ጊዜ አይደለም። ክርስትናን የተቀበለው መጀመሪያው ንጉሣችን ዔዛና ለአምላኩ የገባው ቃል፥ "ሕዝቦችን ሳልጨቁን በእውነትና በርትዕ (እገዛለሁ)" ብሎ ነው።

በውይይታችን ርቀን ሳንሄድ በእኛ ዘመን የሆነውን ላስታውሳችሁ እንጂ፥ አልነግራችሁም። ንጉሡ ምንም በመሐላ ቢቀባ፥ ሀገሪቱ የምታከብራቸው ሦስት አርቆ አስተዋይ ሥርዓቶች ነበሯት፤

1. (1)  በዜጋው ሁሉ ላይ የታወጀ የመንግሥት ሕግና የመንግሥት ፍርድ ቤቶች፤

2. (2)  የክርስትናን ሃይማኖት በሚመለከት ክርስቲያኑ ሕዝብ የተቀበለው የቤተ ክህነት ሕግና ፍርድ ቤት፤

3. (3)  የእስልምናን ሃይማኖት በሚመለከት ሙስሊሙ ሕዝብ የተቀበለው የቤተ ኢስላም የሸሪዓ ሕግና ፍርድ ቤት። 

ለወደፊቱም ቢሆን ከዚህ ያማረ መፍትሔ እስኪገኝ፥ በዚሁ መንገድ መሄድ ይሻል ይመስለኛል።
እንዲህ ከሆነ፥ ታዲያ የሁለቱ ታላላቅ ሃይማኖቶች ተከታዮች አብሮ መኖር ያስከተለው ችግር ምንድነው? ርእሰ ብሔሩ ሁል ጊዜ ክርስቲያን መሆን አለበት የሚለው በሌሎች ዘንድ ቅሬታን አስከትሎ ነበር። አሁን ቀርቷል። ክርስቲያኖቹ ወደውም ሆነ ተገድደው፥ አስተሳሰባቸውን ለውጠዋል። የዲሞክራሲ አስተዳደርን የተቀበለ ክርስቲያን፥ ሕዝብ የመረጠውን መሪ በሃይማኖቱ ምክንያት አልቀበለውም ሊል አይችልም።

ዋናው ችግር ያለው እሙስሊሞቹ ትውፊት ውስጥ ነው። የሙስሊሞቹ ትውፊት "እስልምና ሃይማኖትና መንግሥት እንጂ ሃይማኖት ብቻ አይደለም" ይላል። በትውፊቱ መሠረት፥ እስልምና የተሟላ ሃይማኖት ሊሆን የሚችለው መንግሥቱ እስላማዊ ሲሆን ነው። ስለዚህ ነገሥታቱ ለችግሩ መፍትሔ እንዲሆን ያወጁት ሕግ፥ ምንም እንኳ በየትም እስላማዊ መንግሥት የማይደረግ ተራማጅ መፍትሔ መሆኑ ግልጽ ቢሆንም፥ ሙስሊሞቹን አላረካቸውም። ለእነሱ የታያቸውና አማራጭ የሌለው መፍትሔ በትውፊታቸው መሠረት፥ በኢትየጵያ ላይ እስላማዊ አምላካዊ መንግሥት ማቋቋም ነበር።

በአፄ ዓምደ ጽዮን፥ በአፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ፥ በአፄ ልብነ ድንግል፥ በአፄ ሠርፀ ድንግል ዘመን ያመፁ የአደል (አዳል) ንጉሦች ፍላጎታቸውን ስንመረምረው፥ የክርስቲያኑን መንግሥት ከንጉሠ ነገሥቱ ነጥቆ፥ እንደትውፊታቸው እስላማዊ የፈላጭ ቈራጭ መንግሥት ለማቋቋም ነበር።

ንጉሦቹ መዝመትና ማስገበር ነበረባቸው። ትልቁ ግጭት የተፈጸመው፥ እንደምታውቁት፥ በዓሥራ ስድስተኛው ምእት ዓመት ላይ ከግራኝ መሐመድ ጋር ነው። ግራኝ መሐመድ የሚሉት አሕመድ ኢብን ኢብራሂም አል-ጋዚ የሚባለውን ኢማም ነው። ኢማሙ በራሱ ሀገር ሥልጣን ያገኘው፥ የጊዜው ኢማም ለክርስቲያን ንጉሥ መገበሩ አስቆጥቶት እሱን በመገልበጥ ነበር። የዛሬዎቹ ኢትዮጵያውያን ሙስሊሞች ንጉሣዊ አገዛዝ መቅረቱን እንደፀጋ እያዩ፥ ይኸንን አባቶቻቸው በኢትዮጵያ ላይ ሊያውሉት ሲሞክሩ ብዙ ሕዝብ ያለቀበትን ኋላ-ቀር አስተሳሰብ ከአእምሯቸው እንደሠረዙት ተስፋ አለኝ።

ታሪካችን ይህ ሆኖ ሳለ፥ የሙስሊሞች ኮሚቴ በሚያዝያ ወር ለዘመኑ ባለሥልጣናት፥ "የዜጎች ሰብዓዊና ዲሞክራሲያዊ መብቶች የተከበሩባት፣ መልካም አስተዳደር የሰፈነባት ዲሞክራሲያዊት ኢትዮጵያን ለማየት መላው ህዝባችን በነበረው ምኞት ሁሉም ህዝባችን ታግሏል፣ ብዙዎቹም ለዚህ ዓላማ መስዋዕት ሆነዋል። የዚህ ታላቅ መስዋዕትነት ፍሬዎች አንዱ የሃይማኖት ነፃነት እንደመሆኑ መጠን የኢትዮጵያ ሙስሊምም እምነቱን ያለመሸማቀቅ እና ያለመሸራረፍ ሙሉ በሙሉ እንዲተገብር የሚያስችል እድል አግኝቷል" ሲል የጻፈው፥ የዛሬዎቹን ገዢዎች ልብ ለመማረክ ካልሆነ፥ "የኢትዮጵያ ሙስሊም እምነቱን ያለመሸማቀቅ እና ያለመሸራረፍ ሙሉ በሙሉ እንዲተገብር የሚያስችል እድል" ያጣበት ዘመን አላውቅም። ሆኖም፥ "ዲሞክራሲያዊት ኢትዮጵያን ለማየት" ያላቸው ምኞት ከአጋዳይ ትውፊታቸው ለመራቃቸው ቋሚ ማስረጃ ከሆነ እጅ ለጅ ተያይዘን አብረን ለመታገልና አብረን በሰላም ለመኖር እንችላለን። 

ያም ሆነ ይህ፥ የማታ ማታ የበላይ ሕግ የሚሆነው በቊጥር አንድ የተሰጠው ከሕዝብ የመነጨው የመንግሥት ሕግ ነው። እስከዚያ ድረስም ቢሆን ሁለተኛውና ሦስተኛው የሚሠሩት ክርስቲያኑም ሆነ ሙስሊሙ በፈቃዱ ለተቀበለው ክፍል ብቻ ነው። ለምሳሌ፥ "በቊርባን ተጋቡ"፥ "ሴቶች ቆንጆ ፊታችሁን ሸፍኑ" የሚለውን ሕግ መቀበል የማይፈልግ እንዲቀበል መገደድ የለበትም። "የዲሞክራሲ ያለህ" እያልን ከምንጮኽበት ምክንያት አንዱ መለኮታዊ አገዛዝ ሊያመጣው ከሚችል ጭቆና ነፃ ለመውጣት መሆኑን ሃይማኖታዊ ሁሉ ልብ እንዲለው ያስፈልጋል።

ሕግ፡ ይወፅእ፡ እምጽዮን፤

አሁን እንግዲህ እንድንወያይባቸው ወደአሰብናቸው ነጥቦች አንድ በአንድ ልግባ። ከጥንት ጀምሮ ሲወርድ ሲዋረድ ከእኛ ዘመን የደረሰው፥ የጥንቲቷ ኢትዮጵያ ሕግ፥ መሠረቱ አምላክ በጣቶቹ ጽፎ ለሙሴ የሰጠው ዓሠርቱ ቃላት ናቸው። ሕግ አውጪውም ገዢውም እግዚአብሔር ነበር። መንግሥቱን ያቋቋሙት ክርስቲያኖች ሆነው ይሁዲነትን አጠንክረው ይዘዋል። ይህም የሚያመለክተው ክርስትናና ሕጉ ኢትዮጵያ የደረሱት፥ ይሁዲነታቸውን አጠንክረው በያዙ የወንጌል ሰባኪዎች መሆኑን ነው። አምላክ ሕጎቹን የሚያስፋፋውና በሥራ ላይ የሚያውላቸው ነቢያት እያለ በሚያስነሣቸው መሪዎች አማካይነት ነበር።

በማህል ቤት እስራኤላውያን እግዚአብሔር የማይወደው ነገር አማራቸው። በአካባቢያቸው ያሉት ሕዝቦች በንጉሥ ሲተዳደሩ አይተው፥ እኛም ንጉሥ እንፈልጋለንና አንዱን ቀባልን ብለው ነቢያቸውን ሳሙኤልን ጠየቁት። ሳሙኤል ፍላጎታቸውን ለእግዚአብሔር ሲነግረው፥ "ያንተን ሳይሆን የኔን ገዥነት ባይፈልጉ ነው" ብሎ ተቆጣ፤ አዘነም። ከቁጣው ሲመለስ፥ ፈቀደላቸው፤ ግን ከዚህ በታች የጠቀስኩትን ማስጠንቀቂያ ሰጣቸው፤

"ልብ አርጉ፥ በእናንተ ላይ የሚነግሠው የንጉሡ ሥርዓት ይህ ነው፤ ወንዶች ልጆቻችሁን ወስዶ ሰረገላ ነጂዎችና ፈረስ ጫኞች፥ ለጓሚዎች ያደርጋቸዋል፤ በሰረገሎች ፊትም ይሮጣሉ። ለራሱም የሻለቆችና የመቶ አለቆች የአምሳ አለቆችም (የክብር ዘበኞች) ያደርጋቸዋል። ማሳውን የሚያርሱ፥ ሰብሉን የሚሰበስቡ፥ ፍሬውን የሚለቅሙ (የወረገኑ አገልጋዮች)፥ የጦር መሣሪያውንና የሰረገሎቹን ዕቃ የሚሠሩ ያደርጋቸዋል። ሴቶች ልጆቻችሁን ወስዶ ሽቱ ቀማሚና ወጥ ቤቶች፥ ጋጋሪዎችም ያደርጋቸዋል፤ ከእርሻችሁና ከወይናችሁ መልካም መልካሙንም የዘይት ቦታችሁን ወስዶ ለሎሌዎቹ (ለሚንስትሮቹ) ይሰጣቸዋል። ከዘራችሁና ከወይናችሁም ዓሥራት ወስዶ ለጃንደረቦቹና ለሎሌዎቹ ይሰጣቸዋል። ሎሌዎቻችሁንና ገረዶቻችሁን ከከብቶቻችሁና ከአህዮቻችሁም መልካም መልካሙን ወስዶ የራሱን ሥራ ያሠራቸዋል። ከላሞቻችሁ፣ ከበጎቻችሁ ከፍየሎቻችሁም ዓሥራት ይወስዳል፤ እናንተም ባሪያዎች ትሆኑታላችሁ። በዚያች ቀን ራሳችሁ የመረጣሁት ንጉሥ ጭቆና ሲያጠናባችሁ ትጮሃላችሁ፤ በእነዚያም ወራት እግዚአብሔር አይሰማችሁም። ለራሳችሁ ንጉሥ መርጣችኋልና።" 

ይኸም ሆኖ፥ እግዚአብሔር ሕዝቡን እስራኤልን ጥሎ አልጣላቸውም፤ የእሱ ምርጥ ሕዝብ መሆንን ኢትዮጵያውያን እስኪወስዱባቸው ድረስ፥ ነገሥታቱን የሚገሥጹ ሕዝቡን ወደ በጎ ሥራ የሚመሩ ነቢያት ይልክላቸው ነበር። ኢትዮጵያውያን የእግዚአብሔር ሕዝብነትን ሲወርሱ ከጽዮን የሚወጣውን ሕግም ተቀበሉ ይባላል። ኢትዮጵያ ክርስትናን ከመቀበሏ በፊት የአይሁድን ሃይማኖት ተቀብላ ነበር የሚለው ባህል በታሪክ ተመራማሪዎች ዘንድ ሙሉ በሙሉ ተቀባይነት ባያገኝም፥ የጥንቷ ኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት ሕግ የአይሁድና የክርስቲያን ሕግጋትን ያጣመረ መሆኑ አያጠራጥርም። የብሉይና የሐዲስ ኪዳንን ሕግ ይቀበላሉ። የዛሬዎቹ ኢትዮጵያውያን የምናውቀው፥ ብሉያትና ሐዲሳት የሃይማኖት ቅዱሳት መጻሕፍት ሆነው፥ የሕጉ ምንጭ ግን ፍትሐ ነገሥት የሚባለው መጽሐፍ እንደሆነ ነው። ግን ፍትሐ ነገሥት ወደግዕዝ የተተረጐመው አሁን በዓሥራ ሰባተኛው ምእት ዓመት ነው።

እስከዚያ ድረስ የሀገሩ ሕግ ሲኖዶስ የሚባለው መጽሐፍ ነበር። ይዞቱን በአጭሩ ለመናገር፥ ባህላችን እንደሚለው፥ ክርስቶስ ከዐረገ በኋላ ሐዋርያት ተሰብስበው ክርስትናን የተቀበለው ሕዝብ የሚተዳደርበትና እንደ እምነቱ የሚኖርበትን ሕግና ሥርዓት ጻፉ። ተከታዮቻቸው ሊቃውንት እምነትን የሚጋፋ ነገረኛ በተነሣ ቊጥር በጋራ መልስ ለመስጠት እየተሰበሰቡ በዚያው ተጨማሪ ሕጎችና ሥርዓቶች ይወስኑ ነበር። እነዚህ የሐዋርያትና የሊቃውንቱ ውሳኔዎች በአንድነት ተሰብስበው ሲኖዶስ የሚባል መጽሐፍ ወጥቷቸዋል። ቃሉ ሲኖዶስ ስብሰባ ወይም ጉባኤማለት ቢሆንም፥ መጽሐፈ ሲኖዶስ የያዘው የስብሰባዎች መንፈሳዊ ውሳኔዎችን ነው።

የሲኖዶስ ሕግጋት የተጻፉት የግሪክ ቋንቋ የምዕራባውያን ሥልጣኔ መግለጫ በነበረበት ዘመን ስለሆነ በግሪክኛ እንደነበር አያጠራጥርም። በትክክል ያልታወቀው ሲኖዶስ መቸ ወደ ግዕዝ እንደተመለሰ ነው። ሆኖም፥ በአክሱም ዘመነ መንግሥት የተደረሱ ጽሑፎች ሲጠቅሱት ተገኝተዋል። ይህ ሐቅ የሚመሰክረው፥ የጥንቱ የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት የተቋቋመው ፈሪሀ እግዚአብሔር በሚገለጽባቸው ሕግጋት ላይ እንጂ፥ ነፍጠኞች ሕዝቡን እንደፈለጉ የሚበዘብዙበት ሥርዓት እንዳልነበረ ነው።

በኢትዮጵያውያን አስተሳሰብ፥ እግዚአብሔር አንድን ሰው መርጦ ባለሙሉ ሥልጣን ንጉሥ አድርጎ የሚሾመው፥ እንዲወክለውና በእሱ ስምና እሱ በሰጠው ሕግ ሕዝቡን እንዲያስተዳድር ነው። አንድ ጊዜ፥ አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ ስለሰጠው ፍርድ ሲጽፍ፥ "ይኸን ያደረግሁት ለፈጠረኝና ለአነገሠኝ የመንጋው እረኛ ላደረገኝ ለእግዚአብሔር አምልኮት ቀንቼ ነው። እግዚአብሔር የናንተ (የካህናቱ) እና የመንጋው እረኛ አድርጎ ሾሞናል" ያለው በዚህ እምነት ነው። ለመንገሥ በእግዚአብሔር ስም የተቀባውን ማንም እንዳይነካው የደረሰን መንፈሳዊው ሕግ፥ "በእግዚአብሔር ቅቡ ላይ እጅህን አታንሣ" 

ይላል። ለንጉሡ የማይገሠሥ ሙሉሥልጣን ሰጥቶታል። ሆኖም፥ ማስታወስ ያለብን ሙሉ ሥልጣን የሰጠው ሕዝብ የሚበድሉ ወንጀለኞችን በትክክለኛ ፍርድ እንዲቀጣ እንጂ፥ ሥልጣኑን ለግል ጥቅሙ እንዲያውለው አይደለም። ሥልጣን የሰጠሁትን አትድፈሩ ማለቱ፥ "ሹሜን መድፈር እኔን መድፈር ነው" ማለቱ እንደሆነ እስራኤላውያን እግዚአብሔር ባስነሣላቸው በነቢዩ ሳሙኤል ምትክ ንጉሥ ሲፈልጉ ለሳሙኤል የነገረው ያስረዳል፤ "አንተን ሳይሆን በእነሱ ላይ እንዳልነግሥ እኔን መናቃቸው ነው" ብሎት ነበር። በእግዚአብሔር ስም የተቀባ ንጉሥ ሕገ ወጥ ሲሆንና ሥልጣኑን ለግል ጥቅሙ ሲያውል፥ ሕጉ መምዕላይ ብሎ ይኰንነዋል። (አደራ-በላ) አመፀኛ ማለት ነው።

ሕዝባችን በይበልጥ የሚያውቀው ስለ ክብረ ነገሥት ነው። ግን ለክብረ ነገሥት ትልቅ ቦታ የተሰጠው ለምን እንደሆነ የሚያውቅ አይመስለኝም። የታሪኩ አስኳል ታቦተ ጽዮን ወደ ኢትዮጵያ መምጣት ሲሆን፥ ታቦተ ጽዮን የሚሉት ዓሠርቱ ቃላት የተቀረጹበትን የሕግ ሰሌዳ ነው። በየቤተ ክርስቲያኑ ያሉት ታቦታት ከፍ ያለ ክብር የሚሰጣቸው ደግሞ ዓሠርቱ ሕግጋት ያሉበት የታቦተ ጽዮን አምሳያ ስለሆኑ ነው። እንዲህ ከሆነ፥ ኢትዮጵያውያንን "ታቦት ያመልካሉ" ብሎ ከማማት ይልቅ "ሕግ ያከብራሉ" ቢባል እውነትነት ይኖረዋል። አንድን በደለኛ ለማቆም "በሕግ አምላክ" የምንለው ሕግ የሚፈራ አምላክ እንዳለው ሁሉም ስለሚያውቅ ነው። የኢትዮጵያ ንጉሣዊ መንግሥትና ሕዝቡ ሕግን የሚያከብሩት እንደዚህ በከፍተኛ ደረጃ ነበር።

ሰነዶቹ እንደሚመሰክሩት፥ ነገሥታቱን ከሚያጅቡት ባለሥልጣናት ማህል ትልቁን የክብር ቦታ የሚይዙት ሕግ ዐዋቂዎችና ዳኞች ነበሩ። ለምሳሌ፥ ነገሥታቱ ርስት ለገዳማት ሲጐልቱ፥ በሃይማኖት ጭቅጭቅ ጊዜ ዳኝነት ሲቀመጡ፥ በዓላት ሲያከብሩ፥ ከመኳንንቱ ጋር ለምስክርነትና ሕግ ለመጥቀስ ሕግ ዓዋቂ ታላላቅ ሰዎች በቦታው ይገኛሉ። ነገሥታቱ ሥራ በሚሠሩበት ጊዜ በሕግ ዓዋቂ ታላላቅ ሰዎች መታጀባቸው ለሕግ የቱን አክብሮት እንደነበራቸው ያሳያል። በዕለቱ የተመዘገበው ሰነድ ሲመረምር እዝርዝሩ ውስጥ ሁል ጊዜ ዳኞችና ሕግ ዐዋቂዎች አሉበት። የፍርድ ጒዳይ ከንጉሡ ችሎት ሲደርስ ንጉሡ ብቻውን አይፈርድም። ከችሎት ላይ የሚቀመጡ መኳንንትና ሊቃውንት የክብር ተራቸውን ጠብቀው ከታች ወደላይ ይፈርዳሉ። ንጉሡ ሁሉን አዳምጦ የማይሻረውን የመጨረሻውን ፍርድ ይሰጣል። "አለቀ፥ ደቀቀ" ይባላል። ይህ አባባል አማርኛ ውስጥ የገባው ከንጉሡ ችሎት ተነሥቶ ነው።

ነገሥታቱ የሕዝብን ጥቅም ይጠብቁ እንደነበረ ለማሳየት አንድ በአፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ ቤተ መንግሥት የሆነ ነገር ላንሣ፤ የዚያ ጊዜ ቢትወደድና የገኒ ንጉሥ ኢሳይያስ ይባል ነበር። ከንጉሡ ዘንድ ቀርቦ፥ "እነዚህ ሹመቶች አይበቁኝም፤ በነሱ ላይ የጎጃም ንጉሥነትን ደርብልኝ" አለው። ንጉሡም፥ "ቢትወደድ ከሆንክ እዚሁ በመንግሥቱ አደባባይ መገኘት ይኖርብሃል። ታዲያ እዚህ ሆነህ ጎጃምን እንዴት በፍትሕ ልትገዛ ትችላለህ? እዚህ ባለህበት ጊዜ የጎጃም ሕዝብ ቢበደል፥ አምላክ ደሙን ከማን ይቀበል ይመስልሃል? ከእኔ አይደለምን?" ብሎ ሸኘው። የገዢዎቹ ሃይማኖተኛነት ጭካኔያቸውን ለመቆጣጠር ከዲሞክራሲ የበለጠ ኀይል አለው። ሕግን ከሚፈራ እግዚአብሔርን የሚፈራ ሳይሻል አይቀርም። በአንድ ዘመን ንጉሡ ይሙት በቃ የፈረደበትን ሰው እንዲምረው ሽማግሌዎች ቢለምኑት እምቢ ብሎ ነበር። ድንገት በዚያው ጊዜ ፀሐይ ብርሃኗን ነፈገች። (solar ecliple) ይህ የሆነው በእሱ እምቢተኝነት መሆኑን ያመኑ ንጉሡን ስላሳመኑት፥ ይሙት በቃ የፈረደበትን እስረኛ ነፃ ለቀቀው። ትልቁ ችግር ነገሥታቱ ፍጹም ጻድቃን ሲሆኑ፥ ወይ መንፈሳዊነቱ ላይ ብቻ ያተኲራሉ፤ ወይም ገዳም ገብተው ይመነኲሳሉ።

አፄ ዘርአ ያዕቆብ ንጉሥን በግላጭ ለሚገሥጽ ሲኖዶስ ታላቅ አክብሮት ነበረው። የቤተ ክርስቲያንን ሥርዓት ያደሰው፥ ሕዝበ ክርስቲያኑንም ያስተዳደረው ሲኖዶሱ ውስጥ ባሉት ሕግጋት ነው። ኢየሩሳሌም ላለው ገዳማችን የላከው ታላቅ ስጦታ የሲኖዶስ ቅጂ ነበር።

ፍትሐ፡ ነገሥት፥

ከዓሥራ ሰባተኛው ምእት ዓመት ጀምሮ እስከ ሃያኛው ምእት ዓመት ድረስ የሃገሪቱ መተዳደሪያ ሕግ ፍትሐ ነገሥት ነበር። ፍትሐ ነገሥት ፍትሕ መንፈሳዊና ፍትሕ ሥጋዊ የሚባሉ ሁለት ክፍል አሉት። ስሞቹ እንደሚያመለክቱት፥ የመጀመሪያው ስለቤተ ክህነት፥ ሁለተኛው ስለቤተ መንግሥት ነው። ሁለተኛው ክፍል፥ "በሀገራችሁ በሰዎች ላይ በፍርድ ጊዜ ቀጥተኛውን ፍርድ ሳያጣምሙ፥ ፊት አይተው፥ ጉቦ በልተው ሳያዳሉ እንዲፈርዱ እግዚአብሔር የሚሰጣችሁን ዳኞች ሹሙ። ጉቦ የጥበበኞችን ዓይን ሳይቀር እውነትን እንዳያይ ያሳውርና ትክክሉን ቃል ያስለውጣል" የሚለውን መንደርደሪያ ከኦሪት በመጥቀስ ይጀምራል።

ስለ ንጉሥ ሲናገር፥ "ከዙፋኑ ላይ ሲቀመጥ፥ በእድሜ ልኩ አብሮት የሚኖር አምላካዊ ጽሑፍ ካህናት ይጻፉለት፥ ያንን እያነበበ ፈጣሪውን እግዚአብሔርን መፍራት እንዲማርና ትእዛዞቹን እንዲያከብር" ይልና፥ "በመንጋው ላይ በትክክል ይፍረድ፤ ለራሱም ሆነ ለሌሎች፥ ለልጆቹም ሆነ ለዘመዶቹ፥ ወይም ለባዳ አያዳላ" ይላል። በሕጉ መሠረት፥ ንጉሡ ጦርነት ሲያውጅ የሚከተለው ሠራዊት በፈቃዱ እንጂ በግድ አይደለም። ጠላት እንዲያሸንፍ የሚያጋልጥ፥ የተመከረውን ምክራችሁን የሚያወጣ፥ ወይም ወደነሱ ሄዶ መሣሪያ የሚሸጥላቸው ይሰቀል፤ ይቃጠልም" ይላል። ኢትዮጵያን ለመገነጣጠል እንደ ታጠቀው እንደ ሻዕቢያ ያለ ጠላት ጋር የዶለተ ማለት ነው። ሊሰቀሉ የሚገባቸው ሰቃሊዎች ሆነዋል።

የሕግ አክብሮት የተጣሰው የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት አንድነት ተጥሶ ዘመኑ ዘመነ መሳፍንት በሆነበት ጊዜ ነው። የጎንደር ቤተ መንግሥት ዘርፈ ብዙ ወግና ሥርዓት በጥንቃቄ ስለተመዘገበ፥ ከዚያ በፊት የዜጎች መብት እንዴት ይከበር እንደነበረ፥ መዝገቡን እየቀዱ ማሳየት ይቻላል። የሕዝብ መብት እንደ ታቦት ይከበር እንደነበረ፥ ሥልጣኔያችንም የረቀቀ እንደነበረ ለማሳየት በግዕዝ የደረሰንን ሰነድ ወደአማርኛ እየተረጐምኩ ላቅርብ፤ 

ግራና ቀኝ ወምበሮች ለፍርድ በችሎት ሊቀመጡ ሲሉ፥ መጀመሪያ በቅዱስ ያሬድ ቃል በዜማ እንዲህ ብለው ይጸልያሉ፤ "ሃሌ ሉያ፤ ዕዳ በሚከፈልባት በዚያች ዕለት፥ ፍርድ በሚሰጥባት በዚያች ዕለት፥ በዚያች በእግዚአብሔር ዕለት ነፍሳችንን ምን እንላታለን? . . ." ይኸንን ጸሎት ሦስት ጊዜ እስከመጨረሻው ይሉና ትርጓሜውን ከጽራግ ማሠሬ (ከንጉሥ አልባሽ) እና ከሊቀ ማእምራን (ከትልቁ ሊቅ) ይሰማሉ። ከዚያ በኋላ (ዳኞቹ) በንጉሥ ሰቀላ ቤት ለፍርድ በቀኝና በግራ ይቀመጣሉ። ከበሽተኞች፥ ከሴቶች፥ ከመምህራን በቀር ትንሹም ትልቁም ሹምም ብሕትወደድም ደጃዝማችም ተቀምጦ አይፋረድም። ቁጭ ብሎ የሚፋረድ ባለሥልጣን የአክሱም ነብርድ ብቻ ናቸው። 

ትርጓሜ ማለት በግዕዝ የተነበበውን እንደዚህ እኔ ወደ አማርኛ እንደተረጐምኩት ጥሬ ትርጒም ማለት አይደለም። የምጽአት ዕለት ነፍስ በታላቁ ዳኛ ፊት ቆማ፥ እያንዳንዱ ሰው የሠራው ሥራ በጎውና ክፉው ይመዘናል። የሰውየው የዘላለም ሕይወት የሚወሰነው በሚመዘነው ሥራ ነው። ሚዛኑን የሚይዙት መላእክት ስለሆኑ፥ ተዳላብኝ የሚል አይኖርም። ማንም ሰው ወደፈለገበት ሕይወት ለመሄድ ዕድሉ አሁን እንደሆነ ሊቃውንቱ ያስረዷቸዋል። ለዳኞቹ በተለየ የሚጠቅሱላቸው፥ "እንዳይፈረድባችሁ በአድላዊነት አትፍረዱ" የሚለውን የክርስቶስ ቃል ነው። አባ አበክረዙን የሚባሉ መነኲሴ የገዳማቸው አለቃ (አበ-ምኔት) እንዲሆኑ ሲጠየቁ፥ እምቢ ለማለት፥ "እርጉሞች ሆይ፥ ወዲያ ለሰይጣንና ለሠራዊቱ ወደተዘጋጀው እሳት ሂዱ" የሚለውን የጌታ ቃል ጠቅሰው፥ ከዚህ ቃል "በቀር ሰውን እንደማዘዝ የሚያስፈራኝ ሌላ ነገር የለም" ማለታቸው የዕለተ እግዚአብሔርን አስፈሪነት በማስታወስ ነው። ከድርሰቶቻቸው እንደምገምተው፥ አባቶቻችንና እናቶቻችን እግዚአብሔን ያከብራሉ፤ ፍርዱንም እንደማይስት ተወርዋሪ ጦር ይፈሩ ነበር።

በእኛ ዘመን እንኳ የሆነውን ብናስታውስ፥ የበደለ ሰው፥ "በንጉሥ አምላክ፥ በሕግ አምላክ፤ አትሂድ" ከተባለ፥ ሁለቱ ተያይዘው ከዳኛ ዘንድ ይሄዳሉ እንጂ፥ የንጉሥና የሕግ አምላክ ስም ሲጠራ፥ ደፍሮ አይሄድም። የመንግሥት ዳኛ በአካባቢው ከጠፋ ዳኛ አቁመው ይፋረዳሉ። ሌላው ትልቁ ባህላችን ሽምግልና ነው። የሕዝቡ እምነት አሁንም እንደጸና ነው። ትልቅ ችግር የተፈጠረው የማርክሲስት ፍልስፍና የወጣቱን እምነት ስላናጋው ነው። እንደነ መለስ ያሉ ልጆች ከቤተ መቅደስ ገብተው ሲጃራ ከማጉ፥ የሰውን ሕይወት ከትንኝ ሕይወት በላይ ለማክበር ምንም ምክንያት አይኖራቸውም፤ አልነበራቸውምም። ሰው ቢሞት ምናለበት የሚሉና የሰውን ሕይወት ሲያጠፉ ምንም የማይቆረቁራቸው ከሓዲዎች የሚጽፉትን ሕግ አምላክን የሚፈሩ ነገሥታት ከሚገዙበት ሕግ ጋር ማስተያየት ብርሃንን ከጭለማ ጋር እንደማስተያየት ይቈጠራል።

የሰው ልጅ ሌላውን እንዳይበድል የሚቆጣጠረው፥ አንደኛ፥ ፈሪሃ እግዚአብሔር፥ ሁለተኛ፥ በትምህርት የዳበረ የተፈጥሮ ርኅራኄው፥ ሦስተኛ፥ የመንግሥት የጸጥታ ኀይል፥ አራተኛ፥ የተደራጀ የሕዝብ ኀይል ናቸው። እንደነ መለስ ያሉ ሽፍቶች እግዚአብሔር የለም ካሉ፥ ርኅራኄያቸው ሳይለመልም ገና ከእንጪጩ ከተጨናገፈ፥ የጸጥታው ኀይል በእጃቸው ከሆኑ፥ ከአራቱ ውስጥ ሊሆን የሚችለው አንዱ ብቻ ነው፤ የሚፈሩት የሚያንቀጠቅጣቸው አንድ ድርጅት ማቋቋም። ይህ ግዴታ እኛ ላይ ወድቋል። ግዴታችንን ተቀብለን የሚፈሩት ድርጅት ካላቋቋምን፥ ቀን የጐደለበትን ሁሉ አስሰልፈው፥ ሕግ አክባሪ፥ እግዚአብሔርን ፈሪ የነበረውን ሕዝብና ገናና ታሪኩን ሲረግሙና ሲረግጡ፣ ሲቦዘቡዙትም ይኖራሉ። የሚፈሩት ድርጅት ካላቋቋምን፥ ታሪክ እኛን ዳተኞቹንም ከእነሱ እኩል ይወቅሰናል። 

Blog 3. China and Africa by Dr. Berhanu Abegaz (2013)

China and Africa: Axis of the Unloved or Exemplar South-South Partnership? 

China’s determined economic engagement with Africa has raised concerns about human rights being submerged under non-interference, and the tenuous movements toward transparency of public-sector contracts being undermined by secrecy and corruption. A closer look at the involvement of China in Africa so far suggests, however, that the Chinese approach of pursuing narrow geo-economic interests, despite some novelties, hardly differs from that of the “democratic” West, India, or Japan.

Let me begin with the observation that those low income countries which have succeeded in eradicating abject poverty since 1950, most notably in East Asia, have pursued a strategic framework with three props. The first leg is government-led capacity building, human as well as infrastructural, to enhance productivity at home and competitiveness abroad. The second leg is discovery of profitable opportunities at home and abroad by focusing on wealth creation rather than its redistribution. The third prop is sensible development policies, both by national governments and their international partners, that synchronized what a country’s businesses can do (their capabilities) with what they will want to do (the profitable opportunities open to them).

Commonsense tells us that capability without opportunity is a waste of valuable potential—this was the plight of inward-looking China prior to 1978. By the same token, opportunity without capability remains unexploited—this was Africa until 1990 when the openness pushed by the West brought few economic gains. African businesses clearly were not readied to compete globally outside of tropical beverages and minerals.

If we look at the China-Africa relationship through this prism of capability and incentives, we will be in a better position to understand why the two parties and the African public are quite approving of the Dragon on a Safari. China is viewed not as a savior or a predator, but as a self-interested valuable partner.

Africa, with one billion people and a GDP of some $2 trillion, and growing at an annual rate of 5%-6% into the foreseeable future, is economically as big as Brazil or Russia. Economic growth has been robust in 27 of the 30 largest African economies. Just as importantly, it has encompassed myriad sectors, including wholesale and retail, agriculture, transportation, telecommunications, and manufacturing. It is widely believed that real income per person increased 30% in the past decade after shrinking some 10% in the previous twenty years.

This growth momentum is not just a story about natural resources. McKinsey Global Institute persuasively argues that it is broad-based. Only one-third of the economic growth since 2000 is attributable to booming commodity prices. The remaining two-thirds came from productivity enhancing, market-friendly reforms. The provision of more and better public services made up for the remainder.

Bitter memories of crash-landing and two decades of stagnation that followed the commodity price boom of the 1970s do linger. Encouraged by the counterfactual that growth was robust during the post-2007 global financial crisis, serious analysts are now suggesting that Africa has strong long-term growth prospects. They are propelled by external trends in the global economy complemented by notable institutional and policy reforms.

The external factors include buoyant global demand for liquid fuels and minerals which is expected to accelerate. Much of this came from the emerging economies of East Asia which have now matched EU’s share of African trade at 30 percent each. On the supply side, Africa boasts a growing abundance of nature’s riches: 10 percent of the world’s known oil reserves, 40 percent of its gold, and 80+ percent of chromium and platinum.

Africa’s diversification of its financing sources and export destinations is dramatized by the multiple long-term deals with China. India, Turkey, Brazil, and Middle Eastern economies are also forging new broad-based investment partnerships in Africa showing a greater willingness to offer up-front payments, royalties, and to reluctantly share management skills and technology. Cotton exporters like Benin and Mali now have preferential access to the Chinese market.

At the same time, Africa is gaining more access to international capital. The annual flow of foreign direct investment into Africa increased from $15 billion in 2002 to $42 billion in 2012—relative to GDP, almost as large as the flow into China. While Africa’s resource sectors have drawn the most new foreign capital, money has also flowed into tourism, textiles, construction, banking, and telecommunications, as well as a broad range of countries. Parenthetically, political insecurity has induced an estimated $1 trillion dollars of clean and dirty African money to remain stashed away in Western banks. China may be more corrupt and investment-oriented, but African corruption seems to be myopically consumption-oriented and more pernicious.

Domestic factors have also mattered for growth. Africa is urbanizing fast (projected at 50% by 2030--comparable to China and India) and thereby stands to benefit from industrial and knowledge clusters. This depends crucially on closing the investment gap for infrastructure, currently estimated by the World Bank at $50 billion per year. About three-quarters of Africa’s growth in the past came from an expanding workforce which comprises some 40% of Africa’s one billion people. Sustained growth needed to eradicate poverty calls for boosting the one-third share of productivity-driven growth by investing in appropriate education and skills. Unit labor cost in African manufacturing is still more than double that of South Asia and Indo-China because of lower labor productivity rather high wages.

You may also be interested to know that, by the end of this year, the number of “non-poor” households with an annual disposable income of $5,000—above which they start spending roughly half of it on nonfood items—will reach some 100 million. Africa already has more middle-class households (defined as those with incomes of $20,000 or above) and a higher educational attainment than India.

It should then be clear that African policymakers face two strategic challenges. One is creating a smooth path of economic diversification away from subsistence agriculture, low value-added cash crops, and unprocessed minerals toward high-value added manufacturing and modern services. Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Mauritius and S. Africa are exemplar on this front. The other prong is boosting export diversity to ensure a high and steady flow of foreign exchange and deeper interactions with foreign partners.

So, what are Africa’s development needs and what can Africa offer to its development partners? Brazil, Russia, India and China (aka BRIC countries) currently account for 30% of the foreign direct investment in Africa. The statistics are notoriously unreliable but China alone is said to boast an FDI stock of over $100 billion in 2011 with annual inflows accelerating to over $15 billion (or $40 billion if portfolio investments are included). Intriguing is the forecast that these four emerging economies are growing fast enough to overtake the world leaders by 2030 in the size of their home economies: China will surpass the U.S., Russia will be bigger than France, India equal to Japan, and Brazil catching up with Germany. Unhappy with their voice in existing international financial institutions, the BRICS countries (including S. Africa) are contemplating founding their own development bank to rival the World Bank. They think they have the money, the development know-how, and the empathy to serve as more relevantly engaged role models for Africa and S. Asia.

It is clear that China has rediscovered the world since 1980. China has much to offer Africa. It has an invaluable experience in kick-starting a vigorous state-led industrialization drive first through import substitution and then through foreign direct investment in the special economic zones and the coastal cities. As the world’s factory, China has amassed the world’s largest foreign exchange reserves ($3 trillion) and has just matched the United States as the world’s biggest trader at $4 trillion each.

China’s post-socialist model of developmental (commanding-heights) capitalism, dubbed by some as Neo-Mercantilism, is built around government-led partnership with the fledgling private sector. Understandably, this strategy favors investment over consumption which explains why foreign exchange is valuable for importing capital goods. The self-serving criticism of China that it discourages imports of consumer goods overlooks the needs of a rapidly diversifying middle-income economy and hence misses some of the key reasons for East Asia’s brilliant success. China is unlikely to maintain its current growth pace. Its surplus labor has been exhausted, it has prematurely ageing population of 1.35 billion (a peculiarity for a still poor country of just $6000 (or $9000 in PPP) that is induced in large part by its one-child policy. Pressure is intensifying in Europe and North America to bring the higher-paying industrial jobs home.

If China is to avoid the proverbial “middle-income trap,” it will have to upgrade its technology fast, expand its domestic consumer sector, and export its most polluting and labor-intensive manufacturing—precisely the way the Japanese did much earlier. These tasks are also complicated by an inevitable political transition as the growing middle class predictably asserts itself as it did previously in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.

Chinese reintegration into the world economy has taken several strategic forms. Its economic engagement has focused in agriculture (in Latin America), minerals (in Africa, Asia, Canada, and Australia), and portfolio investment (in the U.S.). Chinese investment is distributed in both well-governed states as well as in politically risky (in terms of stability) but temptingly resource-rich countries. While state-owned enterprises have been prominent, a growing number of Chinese private enterprises with little international experience are joining the foray as are individual freelancers. Estimates are that about a million Chinese now work in Africa (excluded from competing with local in small-scale activities in countries such as Ethiopia, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Zambia) while over 5000 African students study in China along with tens of thousands of legal and illegal African fortune seekers in the eastern seaboard. 

Africa certainly cannot offer the high-technology China seeks, but it can help satisfy some of its needs for fuel and fiber. Secondarily, it offers markets for Chinese trinkets, electronics, and cellphones—3 out of 4 households already own cellphones, a penetration rate equal to China and India. Its construction boom also offers business opportunities which is why China is an important player in mineral-poor Ethiopia—FDI in the productive sectors (about $100 million), building roads, rails, power lines, cement factories, hydropower projects, and telecom (financed by both loans-for-contracts deals and by the host government itself). Lacking soft power, China relies on leveraging its huge financial resources, its enviable record as a developmental state, its longstanding support for African independence, and its consistent upholding of the principles of non-interference and multilateralism when intervention becomes necessary to restore order. Like Japan, it also tends to use aid for trade.

Can a rhino and a dragon make love? And does the grass always get trampled in the process? Yes, to both—and the grass is more resilient than is often assumed. Suggestive data shows that China has been the leading trading partner for of SSA since 2009 with the trade turnover rising from $25 billion in 2004 to $166 billion in 2011 and a projected $300 billion by 2015. Angola, South Africa, Sudan, DRC, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Nigeria are the biggest partners.

Inadequate transportation, telecom and power networks are among the leading constraints on African development. Cecil Rhodes’ vision of connecting the Cape to Cairo and the Muslim pilgrim’s prayer of taking a bus or a train from Dakar to Port Sudan have yet to be answered.

Here is how The Economist (2/16/2013) sums up the challenge: “Transport is a perpetual problem in Africa. Potholed roads and missing rail links get in the way of economic growth. Intra-regional trade accounts for just 15% of total commerce, compared with 53% in emerging Asia. Landlocked countries suffer the most. Transport costs can make up 50-75% of the retail price of goods in Malawi, Rwanda and Uganda. Shipping a car from China to Tanzania on the Indian Ocean costs $4000, but getting it from there to nearby Uganda can cost another $5,000 ... Subsistence farmers who sell surplus crops typically receive less than 20% of the market price. The rest is eaten up by transport and transaction costs.”

The Chinese appear to be hard-nosed businessmen and tend to insist on commercial terms. Creative deals involving access to mining investments and construction contracts in exchange for loans and FDI ($46 billion in 2012), the so-called

Angolan Model, have netted large sums for some countries: $14 billion for Angola (oil); 8.5 billion for DRC (iron, cobalt and copper); 8 billion for Guinea (iron ore), $6 billion for Ghana (highways)—and many more for Sudan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Algeria, Libya. The major Chinese institutional financier is the Ex-Im Bank which provides more credit than the G-7 countries combined, followed by the Development Bank, and the National Petroleum Corporation. Managerial capacity rather than money seems to have become the most binding constraint in China on the expansion of its foreign investment.

As noted earlier, and contrary to conventional wisdom, China’s investment is highly diversified encompassing mining, construction, banking, telecommunications, and more recently manufacturing. In 2009, for example, the $100 billion in FDI was distributed as follows: 30% in mining, 22% in manufacturing, 15% in construction and 14% in finance. However, the U.S. still dwarfs China in (resource-seeking) FDI flows to Africa by a factor of 4.

Data on Chinese aid is even less reliable than data on investment. Chinese development assistance is currently small, comprising $3 billion out of $20 billion total annual aid flow. Although we do not know whether it was fully disbursed, China had promised $10 billion in concessional loans and preferential export credits per year for 2009-12—a figure expected to rise to $20 billion annually by 2015. In contrast, World Bank commitments amount to $7 billion per year and U.S. commitments are about $9 billion, including food aid.

Where do we go from here? If the ‘small-government is beautiful’ mantra of the Washington Consensus failed us in the 1980s and the 1990s, the ‘authoritarian developmentalism’ of the Beijing Consensus is too sharp-edged, will a softer government- private partnership (the so-called Barcelona Consensus) be a good sell for emerging Africa? The jury is still out.

I would like to conclude by speculating about potential complementarities between Western preferred forms of economic engagement with that of China. As we have learned from the various programs of preferential access by African firms to EU and U.S. markets, these opportunities cannot be meaningfully exploited unless African firms are nurtured to become globally competitive. In this respect, Chinese investment in infrastructure and now in manufacturing (but not in mega farms) is a huge differentiator. China does raise the probability of Africa successfully matching built-up capability with the opportunity coming from constructive global engagement.

We also know that social protection is important for turning smallholders and micro-enterprises into more productive citizens. Western aid, which has recently focused on the social sectors (basic education, health, gender equality, and food security), also nicely complements the investment from the BRIC countries in the riskier productive sectors historically shunned by Western and Japanese multinationals.

Furthermore, there is much to be gained, in terms of better focus on development, from cooperative multilateralization of development aid. Finally, competition among external partners and greater integration into the world economy provides African policymakers with more “policy space” for pragmatic experiments.

The Commission on Growth has identified five attributes of successful recent developers: macroeconomic stability, openness, commitment to a market-led allocation, investment in the future, and good governance or leadership. Ethiopia typifies the concern with the sustainability of respectable growth due to lingering domestic problems in embracing these attributes. As the Economist (March 2, 2013) aptly puts it: “About 80% of supposedly private business belongs to conglomerates controlled by state loyalists. The late prime minister’s wife runs the main one, EFFORT, which dabbles in everything from banking and shipping to metals, travel and cement, all without public scrutiny. Foreign investors are showing interest, seeing Ethiopia as potentially Africa’s fourth biggest economy after South Africa, Nigeria and Angola.”

Africa’s Achilles Heel is then ultimately political. Escape from the “low-income trap” calls for solving deeper problems: building quality institutions to support indigenous entrepreneurship and to discourage the kind of pernicious corruption that has hobbled Nigeria (having lost some $380 billion so far), restoring law and order in central Africa, reinvesting in human capital especially in the polarized societies of southern Africa, and mounting a successful industrialization drive everywhere. In the final analysis, any African government that does not respect its own private sector and that is not accountable to its civil society cannot spearhead sustained economic success. In the final analysis, Africans are primarily responsible for shaping their own destiny. 

Blog 2. Issues for Bloggers by Admin (2012)

“Civil society” organizations comprise groups of citizens who come together independently to advance the collective interest. “Civic society” activities, on the other hand, refer to the involvement of citizens in governance by serving on state institutions such as school boards. Both forms of citizen engagement are generally distinguished from two other spheres: economic society and political society. The hallmark of civil society organizations (CSOs) then is that they are composed of horizontal, solidaristic groups with cross-cutting ties of ethnicity, and often class and religion.

We are hereby launching a blog as a public square for sharing ideas with “practical” implications for productive civic engagement in a particular area—a “rights-based” civil-society movement (CSM). Here are some thoughts on the kinds of issues and questions that need to be thoroughly investigated and publicly debated if we are to mount a knowledgeable and responsible rights-based CSM in Ethiopia.

We wish to work toward a shared understanding, if not a consensus, on these fundamental issues in the specific context of Ethiopia. A shared understanding or consensus on priority areas of action is critical for the success of the civic leg of the struggle for building and institutionalizing a genuine democratic order. We need to identify viable pathways for widening the “civic space” so that ordinary Ethiopians can transform themselves from passive subjects to responsibly active citizens.

Needless to say, we wish to see this blog as a forum for the discussion of thoughtful ideas rather than as a soapbox for moralizing editorials or for overgeneralized political or social commentaries. The regurgitation of the litany of well-known problems facing the country and the all-too-common refrains of helplessness have had precious little to offer in terms of where the country ought to go or how best to get there. It is, therefore, absolutely essential that the reflections of our contributors embrace objective analyses of such vexed questions as why the country has been prone to successive dictatorships and why our ruling elites behave the way they do, and what to do to reverse these tendencies.

The issues we list below need to be explored soberly and deeply. They also need to be deliberated on with some sense of urgency to help pro-democracy forces to formulate appropriate strategies of resistance and transition to a better political system.

I. The Political System (የአገሪቱ ፖለቲካዊ ስርዓት)

The main goal of the discussion under this heading should be to identify and examine the various ways in which the current regime seeks to stifle the emergence of a strong (and obviously politically threatening) CSM. We know that the TPLF/EPRDF has worked assiduously to obliterate the fledgling independent labor movement, the teachers’ union, lawyers’ associations, students’ unions, and even faith-based organizations. This ethnocentric mono-party regime has, in fact, preserved and refined the communist-like domestic spy network and control apparatus it inherited from the Derg in order to regiment the population down to the neighborhood level. It would thus be useful to investigate the various nefarious ways in which the ruling party’s deep-seated insecurity and obsession with monopolizing all power (political as well as 

economic) has left CSOs bereft of a safe space for civic activity and community building without which no democratic order can take root.

1.1. Attributes of the Political System I: The Killil Model of Governance (የክልል ስርዓት)

Ethiopians used to be baffled by the pervasiveness and display of tribal identity among the many fellow Africans. This was understandable given our long history of a post-tribal political order. Today, political tribalism (unwittingly sanctioned by the Ethiopian Student Movement of the 1960s) is enshrined in TPLF/EPRDF’s constitution and put in the service of an avaricious coalition of ethnic elites. Who are the state elites at the federal and regional levels with vested interest in the post-1994, constitutionalized Killil (kraal) system? What are their attitudes toward a pan-ethnic democratic movement and what resources do they possess to support it, or to decisively stifle it if they find it threatening? What strategies (including promising genuine forms of regional self-administration) should the democratic movement employ to coopt or to neutralize these ethno-regional elites? Which opposition parties are likely to see an organized civic movement as a competitor, as an instrument of checks and balances on political parties, or as a potential ally and equal partner? What do the alarmingly deteriorating livelihood bases of the peasantry and the income polarization in the cities mean for a new reading of the situation in country in post-Meles Ethiopia?

1.2. Attributes of the Political System II: Political Ethnicity and the Identity Syndrome (የዘረኝነት ፖለቲካና የምንድነኝነት ጥያቄ)

Ethiopians have been subjected to a relentlessly pernicious “politics of difference” rather than to the politics of national unity in diversity for the last four decades. Given the salience of multiple identities (Ethiopian, religious, ethnic, regional, occupational, class, gender, etc.), how has the Derg/TPLF technique of ‘managing by conflict’ rather than ‘managing for conflict’ shaped these identities? How valid is the commonly-made observation that political ethnicity and social polarization are becoming common among the youth? More specifically, where is pan-Ethiopian identity the strongest (or the weakest)? What are the effective ways a democratic civic and political movement can employ to convince Ethiopians that multiple identities can be non-conflicting? In the realm of politics, is it sensible to assume that Ethiopian identity is paramount while in the realm of social life other identities may matter more?

1.3. Attributes of the Political System III: Methods of Political Control (የፖለቲካዊ ቁጥጥር ስልቶች)

The TPLF/EPRDF government has fully embraced and embellished the Chinese-style network of control of political and economic life from the federal to the village (goT) levels. It is also betting on the sufficiency of a promise of economic prosperity as a reward for acquiescing to authoritarian rule by a minority. What exactly is the nature of this network of control—where do its strengths and its weaknesses lie? What are the various ways citizens have adapted to, evaded, or resisted the demands of the ruling party and its captive state? Are there any popular agents (religious leaders, elders, civic organizations, political organizations, etc.) left that still enjoy some autonomy to navigate in the constricted space between citizens and the state? How, if any, are the various regions in the country differentiated in this respect (lowland/highland, south/north, city/country, etc.)? Are these structures of control mere epiphenomena that are likely to crumble with the regime or are they being internalized by the new generation into a new political culture of polarization and enduring civic distrust? What are the implications for building organizations and coalitions that are bigger than the personalities who head them?

1.4. The Opposition: Political Organizations and Political Parties (ስለተቃዋሚ የፓለቲካ ድርጅቶች ይዘትና ሁኔታ)

What are the relative strengths and weaknesses of existing political organizations which can realistically be expected to coalesce under the banner of Ethiopiawinnet? And which ones are likely to continue to be 

sectarian and even anti-Ethiopian for various reasons? Which political organizations, especially political parties, view civic organizations as worthy only of capture? Which might view them as independent allies toward constructing a “winning coalition” for democratization? Are there any opposition parties which share the totalitarian ideology of “revolutionary democracy”? Why have the various attempts at unity formation proved to be a failure with an alarming consistency? How credible are such explanations as lack of rigorous analysis of the causes and effects of the political process in specific context of Ethiopia, lack of a sizeable middle class, outmoded conception of leadership, active support of the status quo by the regime’s foreign patrons, or a legacy of low trust—just to name some of the obvious ones?

A related line of inquiry might fruitfully focus on identifying any and all factors in Ethiopia’s political culture and the psychology of its largely pauperized people which seem to have imbued the populace with reverence for or deference to strongmen as well as overly intrusive governments. Relatedly, one might also ask: To what extent does our illiberal culture of hierarchy appreciate self-sacrifice for the common good (human rights for all)?

II. The Connection between Ethnicity and Civil Society ( ዘረኛነትና ሕብረተሰቡ)

We can certainly sharpen the focus on the tension between unity and diversity. The CSM in Ethiopia obviously needs to overcome an immediate and obvious challenge: how does it buck the pull of ethnicity (and increasingly, religion) and build bridges across ethnic cleavages so as to promote citizen behavior conducive to civic engagement and cooperation. A sine qua non for promoting the norms of civic engagement and cooperation is interpersonal trust. People who exhibit these norms engage readily in collective civic pursuits and cooperate more easily with people from different ethnic backgrounds.

But such generalized trust, as opposed to trust in one’s co-ethnics or co-religionists, seems in short supply in an environment of abject poverty and demographic diversity, particularly in a context where the state deliberately promotes ethnic fractionalization in order to divide the people and prolong its rule. In such an environment, it would seem that people are less likely to trust those whom they perceive, rightly or wrongly, to be different from themselves. The implication of this is that people are more likely to bond with members of their own group than to bridge with members of other groups– even when it seems obvious to the neutral observer that all would benefit by cooperation than by fragmentation. After all, this is clearly the lesson that emerges from the current proliferation of ethnic-based parties and movements in the name of democratic pluralism. At least on the surface, the pluralism that the Ethiopian political system boasts is either very thin at best or a shell game at worst. It would seem that the better course of wisdom for all civic-minded Ethiopians is to come together under the fold of a united CSM.

There certainly are countervailing considerations which may inspire hope. First, it is possible that there are many Ethiopians, particularly the millions (arguably, the majority) whose parentage straddles the ethnic divide, who may trust individuals who share their own as well as others from a different background. Second, the assumption that people only trust their own may overstate the phenomenon or may even be erroneous in that members of the same ethnic group may be divided in so far as they profess different political, ideological or economic preferences and interests. Other sources of conflict may also exist which lie beneath the seemingly homogeneous ethnic identity. Finally, all or almost all ethnic groups, regardless of their ethnic background, are at the receiving end of the tyrannical regime that rules their lives. We need coolheaded analyses of the social basis of such seemingly pathological attitudes. Could they be partly real and partly imagined sentiments of grievances which will rise before they fall? Can we identify the propitious conditions which lend themselves to bringing aboard the CSM bandwagon all those who care about human rights, individual liberty, the rule of law, official corruption and abuse, governmental transparency and 

accountability, and the neutrality of procedural institutions such as the Electoral Commission and the judiciary?

2.1. The Civic Movement: Past, Present, and Future (ስለ ማህረሰባዊ/ሲቪል ንቅናቄ)

In light of the above: Which segment of the Ethiopian civic movement, at home and in the Diaspora, is purely social or economic in orientation and which segment can be mobilized to actively support the cause of human and civil rights? Which CSOs are most vulnerable to or have already been politically captured? What stance should diaspora-based supporters take in order to reconcile the narrow organizational focus of a typical Ethiopia-based CSO with the broader national focus of rights-based activism? What are some of the proven effective ways (and seemingly insurmountable obstacles) to link the domestic movement with that in the Diaspora, especially with respect to sustainable financing of major activities? How much credibility do existing rights-oriented CSOs have among the public? Why have the myriad inter-CSO and inter-Party cooperation efforts born so little fruit?

2.2. Nonviolent Struggle for Civil and Political Rights (ስለ ሰላማዊ መብታዊ ትግል)

A nonviolent CSM must put a high premium on meticulous and consultative planning for civil disobedience, a clear vision of where the country should go, and an immeasurable courage to face a ruthlessly violent regime. And yet, misconceptions abound about the effectiveness and sacrifices entailed by a strategy of non-violence. For some, a longing for another round of armed resistance is increasingly becoming irresistible as the regime relentlessly demonizes its opponents—non-violent or otherwise. A distilling of the lessons of experience from countries which have faced comparable circumstances will, therefore, be very helpful.

III. Geopolitical Strategy: The External Actors (የውጭ ሃያላት ስላላቸው ሚና)

What are the major geostrategic interests (terrorism, poverty, safety of sea lanes, oil, Nile waters, etc.) that motivate the puzzling actions of major external actors (U.S., EU, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China, the International Financial Institutions, etc.)? Which of these interests conflict with those of the democratic movement and which ones are congruent? How does a deeper democratization of Kenya and Egypt, the independence of South Sudan, the restoration of central government in Somalia, and the deepening crisis elsewhere (Eritrea, Djibouti, and much of the Middle East) affect the prospects for meaningful political change in Ethiopia? How dependent is the regime on external largess and goodwill, and how well has it turned this subservient position into an advantage? How effectively can the various competing factions within TPLF/EPRDF manipulate foreign clientelship?

IV. Transition to a Post-revolutionary and Post-ethnic Political Order (የሽግግር ጎዳና)

If electoral politics does not work and armed struggle does not deliver on participatory democracy in post-conflict societies like Ethiopia, what path will extricate the country from the current quagmire? We need informed debates on peace, truth and reconciliation; a government of national unity or salvation; a new constitution; dismantling the control structures imposed by TPLF/EPRDF; and freeing up the system of party capitalism and the giveaways of national assets to foreigners. 

Blog 1. Guidelines for Guest Bloggers by Admin (2012)

1. We welcome thoughtful blog submissions from Members as well as non-members for inclusion in this website.

2. The motivation and focus of the submissions should be educational and the nurturing of a democratic civic culture and the promotion of civic society organizations (CSOs) in Ethiopia and its growing Diaspora.

3. Because we are a rights-based organization, our activities can be unavoidably “political,” but we are fiercely independent and unabashedly non-partisan. We, therefore, discourage submissions which seek to provide explicit support for or criticism of specific political organizations or their leaders. Their programs and vision are, however, fair game so long as the analyses are pertinent to issues that are central to public dialog on the means and ends of democratization, and the promotion of respect for the rule of law and human rights.

4. We accept blogs in English or Amharic (as well as in other Ethiopian languages) which are written in a style that is accessible to a general readership, especially in Ethiopia. We are particularly keen on short (2-5 pages), well-reasoned, non-polemical, jargon-free, and evidence-based commentaries.

5. Any and all considered opinions expressed in the blogs posted on this website are not in any way to be construed as the views of Ethiopiawinnet (ኢትዮጵያዊነት).

6. We also welcome comments on blogs or activities reported on this site, but reserve the right to filter out those which violate the spirit outlined in 1-5 above.

7. See Blog #2 for a list of issues and questions about free citizenship we are most interested in exploring and debating. Thank you, and happy blogging!