Ethiopia in 4 Million Dollar Program to attract Diaspora

Dr. Getachew Feleke from Nassau Medical Center of New York, meets President. Bush at the White House 2006, Ethiopia Diaspora Initiative(Photo:Etharc)

A four-year programme called "Migration for Development in Ethiopia" or MIDEth, is established to contribute to strengthening the government's institutional capacities for the mobilization and utilization of human, financial and other resources of the Ethiopian Diaspora, said IOM. The International Organization for Migration made an agreement with Ethiopian Expatriates Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
A new IOM programme will reach out to the Ethiopian diaspora to assist those eager to share their knowledge and skills to contribute to the development of their country of origin.
The IOM office in Addis Ababa recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ethiopian Expatriates Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to begin the four-year programme "Migration for Development in Ethiopia" or MIDEth, designed to contribute to strengthening the government's institutional capacities for the mobilization and utilization of human, financial and other resources of the Ethiopian diaspora, with a particular focus on the health, education and water and sanitation sectors.
The programme will also enhance the institutional capacities of the private sector, NGOs, grass-root communities, and civil society and foster stronger private-public sector partnerships which will strengthen the confidence-building process between the Ethiopian Government and the diaspora.
Thousands of African professionals, including medical doctors, nurses, accountants, engineers, managers, and teachers leave Africa each year. The main reason for their departure is to improve their living conditions, either by pursuing studies or by seeking better-paying jobs. Others leave their countries fleeing insecurity and/or unstable political and socio-economic conditions.
The resulting brain drain heightens the dependency of African economies by compelling them to resort to costly foreign expertise in many areas, which in turn creates a widening vicious circle.
MIDEth will assist 200 Ethiopian professionals in the diaspora to share their skills through: virtual/tele-work or satellite-based technology systems (tele-learning, tele-teaching and tele-medicine); sequenced/repeated visits; permanent relocation; investments for small and medium-scale community investments; as well as policy, advocacy and transfer of medical equipment, facilities and literature.
"MIDEth is a four-year programme with a total budget of USD 4,487,700. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has provided IOM with half a million US dollars for the first year, but we need donors to come forward and pledge the remaining amount so that this programme can fully succeed. We are confident that there are hundreds, even thousands, of skilled Ethiopians living overseas who are eager to help their country," explains IOM's Chief of Mission in Addis Ababa, Charles Kwenin.
It is estimated that 1.5 million Ethiopians are in the diaspora, the majority in the United States, Canada, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands and the Gulf States.
MIDEth will benefit from IOM's long experience in the Return of Qualified African Nationals (RQAN), and is part of IOM's Migration for Development in Africa (MIDA) which helps to mobilize competencies acquired by African nationals abroad to benefit Africa's development and to assist in strengthening the institutional capacities of African governments to manage and realize their development goals.

Brains, not bullets

Oct 25th 2007
From The Economist print edition

Western armies are good at destroying things. Can they be made better at building them?

EyevineANOTHER debate to do with Iraq and Afghanistan is building in America, one that could have important consequences for the West. This debate is being conducted in the Pentagon—and it has to do with the future shape of America's armed forces. With its far-flung alliances and commitments, the superpower rightly wants a “full spectrum” of military capabilities to deal with everything from an all-out war to a small policing action. But precisely what the mix should be is increasingly contentious—and could prove expensive.
If the biggest threat comes from rising powers, such as a belligerent Russia or a pushy China, America and its allies will need to invest in aircraft, ships and advanced weapons to cope. If the greatest challenge is the fight against militants and insurgents around the world—seen by some as a new and different “fourth generation” of warfare (see article)—then they will need more boots on the ground and, crucially, different sorts of soldiers wearing them. Sadly for taxpayers everywhere, the emerging answer from America is that a modern power needs to prepare for both challenges. But there has been a clear swing towards manpower from technology.
The troops, they are a changin'
The change has been striking. The “transformation” advocated by Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush's first defence secretary, envisaged that the armed forces would be slimmed down and money invested in “smart” weapons, reconnaissance systems and data links. Speed, stealth, accuracy and networks would substitute for massed forces. The army's idea of its “future warrior” was a kind of cyborg, helmet stuffed with electronic wizardry and a computer display on his visor, all wirelessly linked to sensors, weapons and comrades. New clothing would have in-built heating and cooling. Information on the soldier's physical condition would be beamed to medics, and an artificial “exoskeleton” (a sort of personal brace) would strengthen his limbs.
The initial success in toppling first the Taliban in Afghanistan and then Saddam Hussein in Iraq seemed to vindicate such concepts. But the murderous chaos in Iraq, and the growing violence in southern Afghanistan, have shown that America is good at destroying targets, and bad at rebuilding states. Firepower is of little use, and often counter-productive, when the enemy deliberately mingles among civilians.
Robert Gates, Mr Rumsfeld's successor, is thus presiding over something of a counter-revolution. Technological tricks are not being abandoned. But the army is to get a bigger share of the defence budget and has been told to recruit more soldiers with it. Precisely because America is so powerful against conventional armies, Mr Gates expects its enemies to rely on asymmetric warfare. In other words, America must expect to fight protracted, enervating counter-insurgency wars that offer no clear-cut victories and risk the prospect of humiliation.
A new manual on counter-insurgency co-authored by the man now in charge of the war in Iraq, General David Petraeus, overturns the notion that America doesn't “do nation-building”. Counter-insurgency, it says, is “armed social work”. It requires more brain than brawn, more patience than aggression. The model soldier should be less science-fiction Terminator and more intellectual for “the graduate level of war”, preferably a linguist, with a sense of history and anthropology.
The indirect approach
In general, the shift from technology to manpower is welcome. Some sceptics will argue that America's first future priority should be to avoid smallish wars of choice altogether. Even if that were sensible, history suggests it is unlikely to happen: American troops have kept on getting involved in foreign conflicts. The military planners' job is to cope with the likely, not to restrict democratically elected politicians' options.
From that perspective, two doubts come to the fore. The first is whether the Pentagon is right to focus so heavily on creating more combat brigades. With American units serving 15 months in the field and a year at home at best, the army understandably wants more front-line soldiers to ease the strain. But large armies have often found it extremely hard to fight guerrillas in far-away places—ask the French in Algeria, the Russians in Afghanistan and, not least, the Americans themselves in Vietnam. With the possible exception of the British in Malaya, it is hard to think of many insurgencies in modern times that have been crushed by a Western occupying power.
Post-colonial politics, stronger concerns for human rights, the rapid dispersal of news: all these (good) things make today's conflicts even harder to win for occupiers. So it may well be better to step back and work through local allies. Few insurgencies have unseated existing governments. In the “war on terror” most of the important al-Qaeda suspects have been rounded up for America by local allies. Strengthening local forces is the best way of salvaging Iraq and Afghanistan, and may help avoid the need for future interventions.
To be fair, the Pentagon talks about building “partner capacity”, but it may need more radical steps—in particular creating new specialist units to train allies, embed Western soldiers in local forces to improve their performance and be able to call in airstrikes, and help organise civil reconstruction. Generals complain about splitting the army, but they already oversee a myriad of specialist units. It is at least worth trying.
The other lingering concern with the shift in focus from destruction to construction has to do with skimping on conventional weaponry. At the margin, it is certainly worth putting more money into manpower at the expense of some futuristic projects. The prospect of an all-out war with Russia or China is distant for now; the risk of losing in Iraq and Afghanistan is acute. But raiding other defence programmes can only go so far. At 4% of GDP, America's defence spending is low by historical standards: it was 9% during the Vietnam war and 14% during the Korean war. The problem is worse in Europe: many of America's allies spend less than the 2% minimum target set by NATO. If the West wants to build a smarter army of the future, it will have to pay for it.

Sheikh Al Amoudi: Man with a Vision for Ethiopia

Engineer Ghirma

Very few people that I have read about or heard about have done as much for
his or her country as Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi.
Sheikh Al Amoudi appeared on the Ethiopian scene with a mission to make
profound difference in the lives of Ethiopians; and my God, he has delivered!
Sheikh Al Amoudi has invested more than $1,000,000,000 (one billion) of his
hard earned money in Ethiopia to date; which he had accumulated as an
entrepreneur overseas. His ultimate objective, as he publicly stated, is to
invest 40% of his vast wealth in Ethiopia. Considering that he is listed as the
eighty-sixth richest person in the World by Forbes magazine, with net worth
of $8,000,000,000 (Feb. 9, 2007), Sheikh Al Amoudi is a long way from his
desired and planned vision for Ethiopia. May God/Allah bless his kind heart
and his creative mind.
Sheikh Al Amoudi’s investments are tailored to fill a need of one kind or the
other by Ethiopia. He is focused in both the short and long term investment
needs of Ethiopia. Sheikh Al Amoudi is committed to play a major role in P.M.
Meles Zenawi’s determination to elevate Ethiopia and attain the goal of
becoming among middle-income nations in the next twenty years. There is no
doubt in my mind that this goal will be achieved ahead of schedule, based on
the prevailing momentum. What sheikh Al Amoudi had started is being
emulated by a wave of other Ethiopian entrepreneurs from the Diaspora,
while fat cats like Al Mariam remain determined to continue on their
destructive path. This pretender (Al Mariam) has been barking at Senator
Sinhofe for something that was taken out of context. However, I see it for
what it really is; it was just a silly act played for the benefit of his silly/vocal
audience. It won’t work! Besides, I know first hand at least of one local NGO
called Godanaw Rehabilitation Integrated Project (GRIP) which is doing
marvelous works for young unwed mothers, and Ethiopian youth in general.
The cursed CUD/DERG/Neftegna coalition is determined to prevent Ethiopia’s
aspirations to achieve victory against poverty and backwardness. They are
working day and night to place all kinds of hurdles in the path of Ethiopia’s
march toward prosperity; HR 2003 being one of such hurdles. However, it will
all be in vain. It is like attempting to stop a moving train by standing in the
middle of its path. They will be crushed. Their mentality is based on a
donkey’s curse: Well, CUD the hate monger incarnation of DERG is dead, and Ethiopia will continue to bloom ever more beautifully by the grace of God/Allah and the goodwill of Ethiopians like Sheikh Al Amoudi. The appearance of EPRDF on the Ethiopian scene is one of the best things that have ever happened to Ethiopia; and Ethiopian Nations and Nationalities know it deep inside.
Any apology from CUD leadership for an assault against people of any
Nationality within Ethiopia, in this case against the people of Tigrai has left a permanent scar on all Ethiopians. The idea thatsomebody in leadership position can walk away from such a criminal act with a flimsy apology is ridiculous. I believe CUD has also made condescending comments about the people of Amara (Lalibela) in the past, in reference to Ato Lidetu Ayalew. Tomorrow it could be against the Oromo, Gurage, Welayita, Adere…whomever they have gripes with. An assault against any of
us is assault against all of us. It is incumbent upon all God fearing people
among us to observe each and every move of these predators, whose only hope
to ever hold the reigns of power, is through the politics of division and hate
(http://www.ethioobserver.net/The%20Silent%20Majority.pdf). When all
Nationalities of Ethiopia are united, CUD the bearer of doom and gloom, will
fail miserably. The extent of CUD’s hate of the Ethiopian people has no
bounds. It includes condemnation of Sheikh Al Amoudi’s investments in
Ethiopia, and characterization thereof as “targeted” to benefit Saudi Arabia!
I say to the fat cats of CUD: “Please bring your money to invest in Ethiopia
even if it benefits your HR 2003 sponsors! Ethiopia will accept your
investment with open arms”!
I would like to thank Sheikh Alamoudi from the bottom of my heart. Ethiopia
is grateful to him. He tolerated all of the insults that CUD
leveled at him for following his heart to do great things for the Ethiopian
people. The despicable Elias Kifle of Ethiopian Review even branded Sheikh Al
Amoudi as financial supporter of “terrorist” Weyane! The CUD traitors, who
are in bed with OLF, ONLF, UIC and PFDJ, and whose heroes are Osama bin
Laden and Isaias Afwerki to name just two, are the real terrorists! EPRDF
won the 2005 election by a land slide, and therefore there isn’t a damn thing
CUD/DERG can do about it! Sheikh Al Amoudi, who is one of my heroes,
advised them to change their ways and join in the fight against poverty, which
they have ignored to heed. I can imagine the blood-tainted tears that CUD is
shedding, in reaction to the phenomenal development Ethiopia is registering.
The DERG incarnate CUD must be in excruciating pain and in agony. For a brief biography of Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi, and some of
his investment activities in Ethiopia, as well as his contributions in the field of
sports, please follow the link below:
http://www.ethiosports.com/Sheikh_Mohammed_Hussein_Al_Amoudi.html

Wow….racism, really?

By Hailu Nega


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Al Mariam,

I gathered you are or were a staff member at a higher learning institution. I am, therefore, going to try to appeal to your reasoning abilities to help us draw different conclusion than what you did about the senator’s statement. Senator Inhofe went, saw and then spoke. Unfortunately, part of what he saw was ugly. You are calling the description of ugly fact racism. In a scientific world, one would want every detail of the subject in order to draw a complete and accurate picture. Wax and Gold does not apply.

Let me make two points very clear to you and others like you who are crying wolf.

Babies are damped (pardon the insensitivity, I guess a “civilized” person like yourself may prefer “abandoned”) not only in Ethiopia and Africa, but also in developed countries, including the USA.
I am going to describe a scene around a municipality dumpster in Addis Ababa. I am sure it will make you sick. It has, however, nothing to do with racism but a lot to do with realism of poverty in your country. It is a typical scene and if you still insist for evidence, I will get you a picture from Addis Ababa: the municipality garbage dumpster is the feeding ground for homeless children, goats, crows, vultures and dogs; yes starving stray dogs. Are you beginning to get the picture? Unfortunately, it is also a common damping site of teenager-birthed babies. Now tell me if the stray starving dogs will spare dead and nearly dead babies.
I guess the above description makes me a super racist or perhaps one of those “non-Ethiopian” nationalities trying to destroy the Ethiopian image. Where have you been and what in God’s name are you trying to pull? Are you and your vocal friends trying to cover up the ugly realty of abject poverty in Ethiopia or scare the world to submit to your views only? I am now beginning to understand why the Ethiopian Diaspora has capitulated into silence and has allowed you and your likes to dominate the US political and social scene. You have successfully scared them off with rabid accusations like this from expressing their differing views and taking steps to help their.

I hope Ethiopians and Ethiopian-Americans will read and circulate this short note and speak out. Judging from the articles you have authored and pictures you have posted on the internet, Ethiopia is nothing but a flag and a map to you. I guess it is easier for you to glorify inanimate objects than deal with real people and their problems. No sir, Ethiopia is any of those but a wonderful and beautiful mosaic of nations and nationalities. Unfortunately, most are poor but honest and hard working people, trying very hard to pull out of poverty on their own. And yes, homeless underage mothers are part of the society and do like anywhere else in the world abandon babies. Mr. Al-Mariam sir, abject poverty, and trust me that is not government created either, is the root cause of shocking occurrences like this.

As you have your own definition of democracy, which accepts a flag and a map, but not the people they represent, it is apparent that you also have a variant definition of racism. Those who dare point out ugly facts are racists in your eyes. I realize the message that babies are abandoned by their teenage mothers and get eaten by dogs is stomach churning and nauseating and add whatever superlatives and descriptors you would want to. Nonetheless, the fact still remains that it did and does happen in Ethiopia. Your anger and accusation of the person who said it after he witnessed it will not erase the incident.

So, why sir are you trying to turn this into such a controversy? You and I know better that it will not get you support, but stands to discredit you by those better informed. If your intent is to scare those less informed you should perhaps be considered a racist yourself. It is extremely presumptuous and unfortunate. if your intent is to scare the remaining members of the senate from speaking out against HR 2003. I have a better and plausible explanation, yes, it is partly to destroy the credibility of the first US senator for speaking out against your HR 2003, but more importantly, you are trying to rally disintegrating party around drummed up controversy.

The poverty and hardship of Ethiopia will not disappear because you wished it or are ashamed of it. We, the supposedly educated but intolerant and hateful Ethiopians in America should be ashamed of ourselves because we failed to lift a finger to accelerate the rate of poverty reduction in our birthplaces. Worse yet, we have taught our children to hate and portrayed to them Ethiopia as the nation it is not instead of what it is and what it will likely be. Your articles of hate and arrogance dear professor are my references and I do not have to provide any. However, should you, dear professor insist about the lack of evidence of what I described above, I will get you a picture…it is your call.

Hailu Nega

UN Headquarters buildings: A monument to modernism architecture

New York
Have you ever taken a moment to consider how the building around you influences your perception of what it houses? A dark artificially lit building with many walls and closed doors might make you feel uneasy, as if what goes on there is very secretive. A well lighted office with a great deal of steel and high ceilings with windows looking down onto the city far below may imply a sense of power within that office.
The architecture of a building, an office or a room can – if well designed - create your first impression of that organization and influence your opinion of it. So what does the architecture of UN Headquarters say?
When designing UN Headquarters in New York the international team of designers wanted the architecture of the building to reflect the organization's goals. That is to say, they wanted an open, transparent environment where nothing is hidden. They wanted the construction of the building to convey that feeling to all who enter even if it’s just a subconscious impression. So they turned to modernist architectural design.
“The reason why modern architecture is so perfect for the UN is that it’s about honesty, it’s about transparency and it’s about openness,” said Peter Wendeborn, the architect who gave a small group of staff a tour of the UN Headquarters on 4 October. He went on to say that the UN Headquarters buildings are “A monument to modernism architecture.”
Before modernist architecture – and before the UN Headquarters buildings – buildings were built in a more enclosed fashion. Imagine a building being designed as a block, and then all the offices or apartments were carved out of that block. There are walls everywhere and hallways like tunnels from one room to the next. You can only see what is in the room with you, and all the duct work and support structures are hidden in the walls and ceiling. At the time Headquarters was being conceived this is how buildings were designed.
However, when designing UN Headquarters, a completely new direction was taken. The design team didn’t want people to be separated from each other or the work of the organization to be hidden behind walls. They wanted to create a feeling of transparency and openness. They wanted people to be together and see what others were doing. So instead of building Headquarters as a block and carving out the space within, they decided instead to use columns to completely open up the space.
When one walks into the visitors entrance at Headquarters we see an open space and we are able to look up to the higher floors. We can see where the structure of the balconies meets the structure of the floor. We are able to see the pillars supporting the structure and the exposed ductwork in the ceilings. There is literally nothing hidden.
For that matter consider the shape of the pillars in the lobby. If you look at them you will notice that they take on the shape of a steel I-beam which is what they are. The I-beams were welded into place and then encased in concrete. However, the concrete was poured to match the shape of the I-beam in order to remain architecturally honest.
Honesty and openness are the key themes to the design of the UN buildings. It’s an attempt to strip away the enclosed nature of government or office buildings and show the actual workings behind it. Consider the walls of glass allowing people to look into the General Assembly Building or our workspace in the Secretariat. When you walk through the UN Buildings you always have a sense of where staff are, and where the work spaces are. The buildings honestly lay out where everyone is and where they begin and end.
Consider the layout of the original three buildings in New York. Of the eleven architects who worked on the Headquarters design, two emerged as key players. They were Oscar Niemeyer from Brazil, and Le Corbusier from France. They both had different ideas on how to connect the General Assembly Hall, Conference Centre and Secretariat building. Le Corbusier had the idea of building a block that the individual buildings would emerge from. However, Oscar Niemeyer had an idea that the compound would be laid out on a plain or plateau and each of the individual buildings would be separate.
Interestingly enough both of these contradictory ideas were combined into the layout we have today. Each building is distinct and separate, yet they all clearly connect. However, when they do connect you can see it, as if these completely different buildings were simply pushed together. You can see when you walk from the Conference Centre into the Secretariat how the walls change suddenly and dramatically.
The windows of the Conference Centre end abruptly against the outside wall of the Secretariat building. It is as if the Conference Centre was slammed up against the Secretariat building and they were not built together. You know you are entering another building. They remain two distinctly different buildings, yet they combine with one another, and the buildings come together as the cultures of the UN come together; distinct, yet functioning seamlessly together.
The buildings are more than just a place where the work of the UN is done; they are meant to be an expression of what we stand for. In the coming months, as the Capital Master Plan prepares to get underway, iSeek will look at some of the individual architectural spaces and rooms of UN Headquarters and eventually other duty stations.

At-a-glance: Booker shortlist 2007

Judges including Last King of Scotland novelist Giles Foden and actress Imogen Stubbs selected the shortlist for this year's Booker Prize for Fiction, which is being awarded on Tuesday evening.
Here is a quick guide to the six authors who have made it onto the list this year, and the books for which they have been nominated.
Nicola Barker - Darkmans
href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg__dXqQkRtGdUkMr54NcEG0HUyrsfhCQg3u7ALx-LiJ1k5s1oRODI4kK1S5DVJmMQ0kFUfw7zAUZnjEKMsTiIYPD0-huKyyPcPSaqcl52ie1d_ixjJbfpXSip4Qt77x7ssXfr6F7UQzVI/s1600-h/_44100897_barker_203.jpg">
British-born Barker spent her childhood in South Africa, returning to the UK at the age of 14. She was longlisted for the Booker Prize in 2004, for Clear: A Transparent Novel.
Darkmans sees a dysfunctional family in Ashford, Kent, haunted by John Scogin, Edward IV's court jester.
Anne Enright - The Gathering
Anne Enright
The Irish author has published three previous novels including the Whitbread-nominated What Are You Like? in 2000. She has also released Making Babies, her light-hearted diaries of motherhood.
The Gathering is about an Irish woman who is prompted by her brother's suicide to revisit three generations of bleak history of her large, dysfunctional family.
Mohsin Hamid - The Reluctant Fundamentalist
Mohsin Hamid
Hailing from Pakistan, Hamid studied at Princeton and Harvard in the US before working as a management consultant in New York.
In The Reluctant Fundamentalist, his second novel, a Pakistani Princeton graduate becomes a high-flyer in Manhattan. But he discovers a different side to his adopted home and his own beliefs after the 11 September attacks.
Lloyd Jones - Mister Pip
Lloyd Jones
New Zealander Lloyd Jones has been gathering attention and acclaim since his first novel was published 22 years ago.
Mister Pip, about a girl on a war-torn South Pacific island who becomes enthralled by Charles Dickens' Great Expectations, won the Commonwealth Writers' Prize Overall Best Book Award 2007.
Ian McEwan - On Chesil Beach
Ian McEwan
A Booker favourite, McEwan has been shortlisted for the award three times, winning in 1998 for Amsterdam. Many of his novels have been adapted for the big screen, with Atonement, starring Keira Knightley, in the cinemas at the moment.
Set in 1960s England, On Chesil Beach tells the story of Edward and Florence, a young couple anticipating the first night of their honeymoon - and the impact it has on the rest of their married lives. It is the bookmakers' favourite for the prize.
Indra Sinha - Animal's People
Indra Sinha
Sinha was born in India and educated in the UK, where he went on to become an advertising copywriter and published a translation of the Kama Sutra.
The 1984 industrial disaster in Bhopal forms the setting for the story, about a man who was left with mental and physical defects after such a catastrophe. It is partly based on the life of Sunil Kumar, who committed suicide aged 34 last year.

Let’s All Join Hands and Challenge the Crusaders of Gloom

by Mulubrhan Tsehaye
When it was announced that the CUD leaders were given clemency as a result of the intense negotiations with help of the elders (shimagles), for many Ethiopians, that was welcome news. Ethiopians were relieved to see the CUD leaders out of Kality because their release was seen as a good will gesture towards reconciliation in the spirit of forgiveness that would hopefully give way to a new culture of resolving political differences through peaceful negotiations and a tradition of give-and-take. It was also many people’s hope that the CUD leaders would learn from their previous blunders and drop the confrontational stance and come to the table of negotiation in good faith. To the disappointment of many however, it was not long before the released leaders decided to blatantly recant the official admission of responsibility and most importantly, instead of trying to meet and consult with the people who they claim to stand for and start negotiating with ruling party as many had hoped, they quickly announced that they were preparing to go abroad and solicit a political resolution that might come as a result of an external threat on the ruling party by some foreign forces. Once they arrived in the US and Europe, as we speak, they seem to have decided to become messengers of divisive politics, bitterness and vindictiveness, soliciting lawmakers in the US to pass a punitive measure such as the so-called HR 2003, that is design to chastise the needy and poor people of Ethiopia, the very same people they claim to fight for.
Of course, the majority of Ethiopians are fully aware that the much talked about worthless bill HR 2003 was essentially drafted by few known Diaspora extremists who were political shareholders of the previous military regime; the terror sponsoring state of Shaibya; and other terrorist groups like ONLF, OLF agents. As we all know, the bill was then championed by some ignorant congressmen who were swindled into believing that Ethiopia is some kind of banana republic they can bully and arm-twist into submission for the exclusive purpose of appeasing the few subservient radical Ethiopian buddies who have been soliciting them for some time now. Of course, the chance of it passing through the Senate and the President of the united states is only imaginary. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that despite the outlandish claims of those vocal extremists who have been lobbying and soliciting the two congressmen, the main objective of the bill has nothing to do with helping the process of democratization or human rights preservation in Ethiopia. One can’t help but notice that restricting security assistance to the nation as it states among other things in the bill, is clearly an attempt to open a clear way for the known terrorist groups like the brutal regime in Asmara and its mercenaries, the ONLF, OLF, remnants of Islamic Courts etc to roam the country unabated and plant bombs in any corner they choose and massacre innocent people and eventually destabilize the nation.
The good news is however the vast majority of Ethiopians are very much alert of this devious political plot that was merely geared to derail the new beginning of the reconciliation process and; thwart the process of democratization and poverty reduction endeavors in the country. It is a political defraud that does not reflect the political aspirations and patriotic fortitude of the mainstream Ethiopians who truly are optimistic about the newly created spirit of peaceful negotiations between the main political parties in the country; a step many believe significant in the efforts to promote democratic ideologies with the intention of participating in the on going process of building a democratic society. Thus, in the end, the so-called HR 2003 will evaporate to the thin air just as all the previous noisy funfairs of the few vocal Diaspora extremists did and the ride on the emotional saddle will come to its crushing. As for the Mandela want-to-be CUD leaders who are in the United States, indeed they seem charmed and captivated by all the entertainment in the luxurious hotels; the heroic welcomes with bouquets of flowers at airports; the worshiping arrival chants; the stand ovations and emotionally charged applauses after the sensationalized speeches filled with empty political lectures; and of course, the showers of dollar bills during fundraising events. However, the time is fast approaching where they have to go back and face the people of Ethiopia whom they have betrayed by their failure to take advantage of the presented opportunity for a peaceful settlement of political differences with their adversaries in the spirit of compromise so the country could continue to move forward. They failed to realize that in politics, quite often, winning does not mean that politicians should get everything at once. They seem to fail to realize that there could always be another day for them to try, if the have the perseverance; another chance for them to be heard, if they really have something important to say, another day for them to influence if they have something attractive to offer and perhaps to achieve what they want, if they really deserve it.
Despite the privilege of living in some of the world’s democracies that could serve them to learn at least the basics of a democratic process, it is indeed very sad and at times even frightening to see the vocal Diaspora extremists worship personalities without any regard as to what political or economic alternative policies those political personalities represent. It is a well established historical reality that Ethiopians have been known for producing many charismatic leaders and extraordinary heroes and heroines who bravely fought and unflinchingly gave their precious lives honoring the pride of their nation and defending the interest of their people. It is thus an insult to the Ethiopian people’s history of the remarkable patriotism and bravery for these shameless blind Diaspora supporters to try to make us believe that these self-indulgent leaders who clearly have lost their personal dignity and opted to bow for external force are Ethiopia’s national heroes. While the basics of politics demonstrate that any politician who claim to have some basic political principles would know that the real fight for genuine democracy for the people is within the people, the extreme blindfolded Diaspora supporters however don’t seem to have any qualms in labeling these opportunistic leaders as national heroes and worship them like a God chosen saints so long they perceive them as a last ditch in their pursuit for the Minelik’s palace.
It is indeed deeply disappointing for many patriotic Ethiopians to watch the recent spectacle of these CUD leaders and their blind supporters who seem to have no personal integrity and no patriotic conscience in advancing a political contrive that might help their unrelenting quest for power even if it means at the expense of humiliating their people and jeopardizing the national interest of the country. We know that many of these leaders are highly educated individuals thus capable of understanding the extent of the damage their actions could have on their credibility as Politicians and the overall process of democratization in the country but unfortunately, their academic status does not seem to spare them from simply being blinded by the temporary attention they have been getting from their blind Diaspora supporters, forgetting that when the time comes to go back, it is the Ethiopian people not the Diaspora extremists who they have to answer to with a possible justification for their pursuit of a bill that clearly undermines the sovereignty of a free country like Ethiopia and humiliates the proud people who never bowed to any foreign powers in their history.
Ethiopians of all political persuasions with free and independent choice of rational outlook that is focused on preserving and safeguarding the interest of the ordinary people need to get together and organize themselves to contest the threat posed by this self indulging political move that is merely designed to undermine the liberty of our people and challenge the freedom of our sovereign nation. Citizens in and outside Ethiopia cannot afford to sit idle and watch from a safe distance while those few extreme vocal Diasporas are working hard to lobby for passing this bill to its next step in an effort to humiliate the proud people of Ethiopia and undermine the longstanding sovereignty of a nation that is considered the symbol of ancient of civilization. They need to put their respective political interests on hold and team up with their compatriots and write to their respective US Senators to let them know unequivocally that Ethiopia is a sovereign country that is in midst of a treacherous road of transition to multi-party democracy; maintain economic growth and reduce poverty; increase access to basic education and improve health services. What the Ethiopian people entail from their true friends during these rather tough times are not intimidation and arm-twisting but encouragement and support, moral, financial or/and expertise that would expedite the long and challenging course. And yes, a prosperous nation of full fledged democracy and a society free of human rights infringement is a concept every Ethiopian aspires and dreams about but genuine democracy can only be materialized merely by the Ethiopian people within Ethiopia itself. Ethiopians have never bowed to any external interference through out their history and they are not about to take any marching orders from any foreign supremacy of any sort.

Feedback: mulu02@shaw.ca