Africa needs leaders, says Makeda Tsegaya. Africans have known this for years and have long campaigned for more democratic governance. The best service the world could give Africa would be to support their struggles to transform leadership on the continent.

Last weekend saw a large number of gatherings in London and nine other cities around the world for a rock concert aimed at mobilizing support for the ‘Make Poverty History’ campaign. Hundreds of thousands of marchers in Edinburgh echoed the political message of this concert, namely debt-relief, fair trade, and better and more aid for Africa and other poor regions of the world. Others expressed their views on the subject via text and e-mail messages. Judging from the sample of messages transmitted via the international media, many seemed to be supporting the cause of the rock concert, while others doubted the efficacy of such campaign on a continent plagued by authoritarianism and corruption. Yet, a few others appeared to give the impression that poverty in Africa is a problem endemic to and created by the continent. As such, the role of developed nations in engendering the problem is hardly, if ever, interrogated. This article intends to bring a few points into the limelight based on the political messages of the campaign with a view to making a positive contribution to the on-going debate regarding the perception and eradication of poverty in Africa.

Indeed, supporters of “Make Poverty History’ have raised the profile of important issues that have significant implications for development in Africa, particularly fair trade and debt-relief. However, a critical factor for poverty eradication in Africa that was missing from the campaign is responsive governance. In fact, the lack of accountable governance and committed leadership in Africa have been the main source of misery and abject poverty on a continent blessed with so much riches. A continent that is still plentiful despite years of massive exploitation from people within and outside the continent. In fact, many Africans are beginning to realize that their vulnerability is a predictable outcome of years of tyranny and not a punishment from God or a biblical curse on the continent. This realization is now leading to a widespread demand for democratically elected leaders. Leaders, who genuinely strive to work in the interest of the people to create better opportunities for employment and economic growth, access to quality education and health care services, and most of all who are accountable to their constituencies and not to domestic cliques or external actors. They are determined to end poverty and a miserable existence sustained by an act of charity year after year.

Nonetheless, as surprising as this may sound to those who cannot imagine Africa beyond making appeals for humanitarian assistance and peacekeeping forces, such desperately needed changes have, indeed, began taking their course on the continent. African civil society organizations are thriving and concerned citizens are promoting freedom, liberty and true independence individually and collectively. Africans are now more convinced than ever before that without a dramatic change in governance and leadership, no development model can bear fruit on their continent.

With this realization, more and more people are exerting utmost pressure on dictators and corrupt leaders within the bounds of legality and peaceful resistance. A recent electoral process in Ethiopia exemplifies a situation in which citizens took advantage of a small window of opportunity to peacefully challenge tyranny, abject poverty, starvation and war. Unfortunately, their efforts to bring peaceful transformation were frustrated by despicable tyranny, which responded to the resistance via mass killings and torture. Yet, the world watched in silence and ignored the plight of Ethiopians for justice. Isn’t it ironic that the world continues to reward dictators and megalomaniacs in Africa on whose watch millions have perished due to starvation, poverty and war? Does the world genuinely believe in ‘making poverty history’ in Africa without the transfer of power from the hands of a few ruthless and self-centered individuals to the people? I hope we do not have to wait for another rock concert in twenty years to find the answers.

The demand for good governance in Africa should not be viewed as a far-fetched intellectual exercise. It is a reasonable demand, as it determines the fate of millions facing unfair and preventable tragedy. It is possible to transform the life of Africans by promoting good governance, which ensures inclusiveness, accountability, and full participation of the people. However, the world should not be deceived by dictators, who often change their tactics to resemble democratic norms, while their underlying motivation is to maintain power at all costs. In fact, the underlying realities in most African countries and the plight of the people are more accurate measures of the extent of democratic reforms than superficial declarations from dictators. Poverty eradication will be an empty declaration as long as dictators and corrupt rulers in Africa are allowed to continue oppressing the people and abusing domestic and foreign resources. It is apparent that the leaders of democratic nations can use political and economic support as leverage to put pressure on dictators to accept the will of the people.

The ultimate objective of sanction is not to hurt the people but to exert pressure on dictators and tyrants. Therefore, sanction can be effective when it is applied to support a struggle that is spearheaded by the people. Regrettably, such a powerful tool is not used when the condition is ripe. For instance, providing any kind of support to the ruling party in Ethiopia now would send the wrong message to Ethiopians who are struggling to end years of oppression and poverty. Ethiopia is a country that continues to inspire rock stars twenty years after its first agonizing images of famine hit the screens of the world at Live Aid in 1985. After twenty years, the agony of Ethiopians has multiplied with over 14 million (20%) of the population declared as ‘drought-affected’ in 2003. Hence, it is clear that the vulnerability of Ethiopians multiplied under oppressive and incompetent leadership. There is no better time than now for the world to recognize that it is not more aid that can change the situation in Ethiopia. Ethiopians have long realized that without democratically elected, committed and able leadership, no volume of aid can save their children dying from starvation, preventable diseases, poverty and war. Their full and remarkable participation in the elections of May 15 was their way of saying enough to starvation and enough to poverty. What they need from the world is enough pressure on the ruling party to respect the rule of law and transfer power to elected leaders.

Evidently, Ethiopia is also affected by the debt burden and unfair trade like any other African country. Still, the proliferation of massive human tragedy in the country cannot be explained without thoroughly examining issues related to debt burden and unfair trade. In other words, one needs to raise questions like how are loans utilized, what kind of development and trade policies are in place and to what extent are they implemented, how are resources from domestic and outside sources managed, and what is the level of the public’s participation? Clearly, these questions force us to examine the nature of governance and leadership in the country. Simply put, increasing aid is not going to prevent Ethiopian or other African children from dying. I am not summarily denigrating the value of aid. It is apparent that appropriate, well-targeted and judiciously administered aid could enhance economic growth. Nevertheless, experience shows that some form of aid in Africa seems to be doing more harm than good. Hence, the role of aid in promoting development in Africa should not be overestimated. The benefits of aid are short-term and the best aid can achieve is to fill gaps and not to be the driving force in development. On the contrary, aid can impede the development of good governance by giving a false impression that needs are met which, in turn, erode accountability by legitimizing dependency on foreign aid.

Conversely, it is indisputable that trade is at the core of economic growth and prosperity; hence, it is appropriate and legitimate that Africans demand fair trade. However, as an important player in international trade, Africa must have the power to make trade a ‘fair game’. In other words, Africa needs to be equipped with the right tools to ensure that trade becomes a ‘fair game’. Fist of all, Africa must have competent and independent leadership that is capable of harnessing its human and capital resources in developing its own macroeconomic policies. This includes making informed decisions on what to trade with whom and in what form. At the same time, Africa needs to have accountable leadership that refrains from engaging in illicit trade with external ‘actors’ for shameful personal gains. Africa must also metamorphose from a raw-material supplier to a genuine trader in order to fully benefit from its trade, thereby, creating employment opportunities and securing better terms of trade. Simultaneously, Africa needs powerful and ingenious entrepreneurs, well-trained and smart negotiators, efficient producers, far-sighted and creative policy makers and so on to take full advantage of international trade. In fact, Africa already has some of this expertise on the continent and its vast Diaspora around the world. This is why visionary and competent leadership is imperative in Africa to harness existing skills and knowledge in order to create wealth and equitable distribution of income among responsible and hard working citizens.

It sum, it is evident that Africa’s most deadly pandemic is lack of committed leadership. Africa needs to have leaders, elected by the people to work for the people. Therefore, the world could do a great service to Africans by supporting their struggle to transform leadership on the continent. Moreover, providing political and economic support to dictators when it is clear that they are not working in the interest of the people is not only morally unacceptable but also an unforgivable crime to humanity.

* Makeda Tsegaye is an Ethiopian woman with a Masters degree in International Peace Studies (with specialization in Economic Development and Peace) currently working for an international development agency in Nairobi, Kenya.

* Please send comments to

Ethiopia remains tense after security forces opened fire on post-election demonstrators, killing up to 40 people. Makeda Tsegaye paints a picture of a brutal regime - whose Prime Minister served on UK Prime Minister's Commission on Africa - that will stop at nothing to retain its grip on power and asks how many more millions of people have to starve in Ethiopia before the world realizes that the root causes of the problem is not lack of rains but failed economic policies that are making people more vulnerable?

After what happened in Ethiopia last week, I would be surprised if anyone had difficulty in understanding the true nature of the ruling party and its leadership.

Is it surprising that the security forces of the Ethiopian Prime Minister, who was appointed to the Commission for Africa by the UK, and is viewed by the US as a key ally in combating terrorism and a stabilizing force in the strategic Horn of Africa, killed over 40 innocent civilians, arrested thousands, instigated violence and hatred in the country? Is it surprising that in spite of these acts, the ruling party perceives itself as not guilty? Is it surprising that the Prime Minister extended the ban on peaceful demonstrations by another month despite protests that this edict was entirely unconstitutional and illegal? Is it surprising that his security forces killed opposition party members outside the capital two days after signing the European Union-brokered peace pact on June 10 to peacefully resolve election-related disputes?

None of these is surprising to Ethiopians who endured 14 long years of similar persecutions, economic hardships and man-made disasters under a deceptive, incompetent and clearly authoritarian leadership.

This was not the first time that the ruling party killed peaceful demonstrators. For instance, in 1992 and 2001, security forces opened fire on Addis Ababa University students who peacefully demonstrated against the ruling party's failed policies, killing more than 35, wounding over 400, and arresting and torturing hundreds of students, while 22 university professors were sacked.

In 2002, security forces shot protestors in Southern Ethiopia, killing over 35 people. While these are examples from urban areas only, it should not be difficult to imagine the situation of dissidents in remote areas where little is known due to lack of communication and the absence of human rights activists.

In spite of all these, the ruling party never admitted its mistakes apart from giving shamefully lame excuses for its irresponsible and barbaric acts. For example, in 1992 its excuse was that its riot police did not have the right equipment to disperse peaceful demonstrators. However shocking such an irresponsible statement seemed to many families who lost their loved ones, the ruling party could simply get away with it without any form of accountability. Just last week, another round of killings claimed the lives of over 40 civilians. Appallingly, the ruling party labeled these civilian victims as 'unemployed hooligans', as if to imply that their lives were worth nothing.

Despite the rhetoric that Ethiopia is 'democratic', persistent abuses of civil and political rights, and lack of an inclusive and responsive political system characterizes the current regime. In fact, the regime is typified by what Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way (2002, pp. 51-65)[1] describe as 'Competitive Authoritarianism', which is a hybrid regime where formal democratic institutions are widely viewed as the principal means of obtaining and exercising political authority. However, the incumbents violate those rules so often and to such an extent that the regime fails to meet conventional minimum standards for democracy.

Although the Ethiopian regime may have appeared to be an economic and political reformer in the past, a closer review of its policies reveals otherwise. Notwithstanding its rhetoric about liberal economic policies and privatization, the ruling party and its benefactors control key economic sectors. In fact, strategic control of the economy is one of the tactics that the ruling party employed to manipulate the political process in the country.

For instance, state-owned land was viewed as a key instrument to control the political opinions of eighty-five percent of rural Ethiopians who are entirely dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods. There were reports from many rural constituencies that prior to the recent elections, cadres of the ruling party were threatening to deny those who voted for the opposition parties access to land. The ruling party's false confidence in winning the elections in most rural areas was thus prompted by this unlawful act. Nevertheless, none of these threats made sense to millions of desperate farmers who hardly benefit from their 'less-than-a-hectare' land and whose lives are largely sustained by relief rosters year in and year out. On the contrary, most people viewed the election as an opportunity for ensuring a productive life whereby responsible citizens could earn a living and lead a dignified life. The ruling party was blind to this reality owing to its gross underestimation of the intellect and pride of the rural people.

Ironically, it is also this grave miscalculation of the ruling party that provided the platform for the participation of opposition parties in the recent elections. However, the fact that opposition parties were able to mobilize millions of supporters within a short period of election campaigning, despite massive harassment and intimidation, sent an important warning signal to the ruling party. Hence, it immediately got busy retracting its seemingly democratic gestures. It did not stop there. Terrified by the stiff resistance from the people who are determined to decide their future, its true nature became self-evident. In effect, it was forced to reveal its real identity to the world that it only managed to appear democratic aided by a situation in which it could control the playing field by selecting its own team, the referees and even the spectators. In the absence of any or all of these, it had to resort to the original tactics of any dictatorship, which is typified by mass killing, arrests, torture and so on. In fact, the ruling party was panic-stricken that it started to take any measure that appeared to support its desire to salvage its greed for power. It was interesting to see how in the course of last week, it even targeted every possible means of effective communication including disrupting cellular phone services. Toward the end of the week, the state-controlled telecom agency announced that due to technical problems it was no longer able to provide SMS (text messaging) services. It is to be noted that, in the absence of other media, Ethiopians were exchanging information of a political nature through text messaging.

It is apparent that the current situation in Ethiopia is extremely tense. Given its repeated records of violent confrontation, the ruling party will not refrain from engaging in more brutal and barbaric acts to suppress dissenting voices and the people's struggle for political and economic freedom. The question remains, how many more killings will it take to make a ruler a dictator? How many more millions of people have to starve in Ethiopia before the world realizes that the root causes of the problem is not lack of rains but failed economic policies that are making people more vulnerable?

Last week we heard that the US is set to pledge US$674 famine funds as part of a joint US/UK initiative to 'get Africa back on its feet', of which a large amount is destined for Ethiopia. During the same period, Ethiopians were raising their voices to tell the world that it is the presence of responsible leadership in the country, and not relief assistance, that could fully mitigate the effects of disaster and poverty. While Ethiopians are immensely grateful for the relief support that the US has provided to the innumerable victims of poor governance and resource mismanagement, it has become apparent that charity will not lead to prosperity. If this were the case, Ethiopia would have been Africa's most prosperous nation in the last 14 years. What is needed in Ethiopia is responsible, competent and committed leadership that can create an enabling environment for citizens to work hard and create a prosperous and peaceful Ethiopia.

Ethiopians have long recognized this need and their recent admirable participation in the legislative elections indicates more than ever their determination to change the image of their country and lead a dignified life, wherein the rule of law, accountability, and transparency provide the platform for development and lasting peace. Simultaneously, people are anxious to harness their ethnic and geographic diversity in order to create a better Ethiopia for all citizens. However, it is shameful that a divisive leadership that is not even capable of fully grasping the values of and strengths in national unity is attempting to suppress these noble objectives.

On Monday June 13, 2005, the Prime Minister was quoted as saying in his televised address to the nation that, "there was no reason for riots in Addis Ababa [where] EPRDF has conceded its defeat". This remark clearly indicates the PM's divisive strategy that has threatened to erode the concept of nationalism from the minds of Ethiopians for the last 14 years. Fortunately, his self-centered and anti-development psychology has long been rejected by Ethiopians who embrace unity not only among themselves but also among their fellow African brothers and sisters. It is important that all peace and freedom-loving Africans individually and collectively stand up with their Ethiopian brothers and sisters who are struggling to end the suffering of their fellow citizens and create a bright future for the coming generation.

Notes:

[1] Levitsky, Steven and Way, Lucan A. "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism." Journal of Democracy. (2002) 11:2: 51-65

* Makeda Tsegaye is an Ethiopian woman with a Masters degree in International Peace Studies (with specialization in Economic Development and Peace) currently working for an international development agency in Nairobi, Kenya.

* Please send comments to [email protected]

In May elections, Ethiopian voters made their mark for change, but shortly after the elections the government declared a state of emergency, banned demonstrations and declared victory. Makeda Tsegaye questions why the international community has chose to remain silent about these actions. "Why is the hotly contested election in Ethiopia not getting even one third of the attention that the former Soviet Republic of Georgia received via popular media such as CNN and BBC, which reported the event live from the small European nation? Is it because what is expected from a poor black African nation is nothing but starvation and war?"

Despite being Africa’s oldest independent nation, endowed with adequate natural resources and massive social capital, most people in the world associate Ethiopia with grotesque starvation and war. Indeed, these two unfortunate episodes have easily caught the attention of popular media such as CNN and BBC and the international community. But why is an equally important but rather positive episode not drawing as much attention?

On May 15, 2005, for the first time in the history of the country, some 25 million Ethiopians turned out to vote in the country’s historic parliamentary and regional assembly elections. The huge turnout was prompted by the participation of various political parties who presented an alternative political and economic agenda to people desperate for a change. International observers, including former president Jimmy Carter and his team, and the European Union team led by Ms. Anna Gomez, monitored voting in some of the polling stations. The observers admired the general discipline and peaceful participation of the public, while at the same time highlighting some of the irregularities in the polling stations that they visited.

It is important to note that Ethiopians’ participation in the election, which was characterized by remarkable discipline and peaceful attitude, occurred amid the ruling party’s unconstitutional, illegal and intimidating acts prior to and during the election, including harassment and detention of supporters of the opposition parties mostly in the rural areas. It was these unlawful and clearly undemocratic acts by the ruling party that prompted Human Rights Watch to describe the election as a ‘hollow exercise’ in some parts of the country. Nevertheless, taking advantage of this window of opportunity, Ethiopians have made their demands for a better life and better future clear in an unprecedented way. One week prior to the election, the peoples of Ethiopia demonstrated their support for the opposition parties in the most disciplined and constitutionally approved manner. They repeated the same discipline and peaceful demand for change during the May 15 elections. On the other hand, the opposition parties reported to the National Electoral Board major irregularities in many rural polling stations where their observers were barred whilst expressing their optimism in other areas. What followed this remarkable process is at the crux of this piece.

A day after the election, the ruling party declared a state of emergency in the capital and ordered a month-long ban on demonstrations. Shortly after this announcement, they claimed victory using the state controlled media while admitting defeat in the capital, although votes were still being counted. Worse yet, the National Electoral Board decided to announce results piecemeal, as opposed to publishing provisional results from all constituencies on Saturday May 22, 2005 as originally planned. The National Electoral Board, which is not entirely independent, failed to provide an explanation for the delay. Unsurprisingly, the delay in vote counting elicited major concern amongst the public, especially in light of the ruling party’s repeated claims of victory. In fact, some delayed results appear to have reversed previous results which had been reported in favor of the opposition parties. In the face of all these atrocities, the peoples of Ethiopia could not peacefully protest and defend their votes due to the month-long ban imposed on them by the ruling party. These undemocratic actions of the ruling party are apparent to representatives of the international community within and outside the country. In addition, in March 2005, the international community witnessed the expulsion of three American Civil Society Organizations, namely International Republican Institute, National Democratic Institute and IFES that had been working with the National Electoral Board for not more than two months.

The following questions, therefore, remain: why has the international community chosen to be silent? What are the world’s most democratic nations saying about the ruling party’s unconstitutional and undemocratic measures to tamper with people’s votes? It was quite encouraging to see the European Union‘s press release on May 25, which tacitly condemned the ruling party’s undemocratic and illegal use of the public media, and manipulation of the electoral process in general. How long will it take the US to effectively react to the ruling party’s decision of banning post-election demonstration besides “monitoring the situation closely"? Surprisingly, the best resolution that the 21-member Foreign Ambassadors group could come up with on May 22 was to say that "we ask all political leaders to engage in constructive dialogue.” Are we still talking about political parties? Isn’t it clear that Ethiopians have already expressed their will for a change in the most responsible and peaceful manner? Isn’t democracy about responsible citizens exercising their democratic rights to positively change the course of development and governance in their own country? Or is this version of democracy considered a luxury when it comes to Africa?

What happened to the unwavering support that the peoples of the former Soviet Republic of Georgia enjoyed in their contested election of November 2004? Why is the hotly contested election in Ethiopia not getting even one third of the attention that the former Soviet Republic of Georgia received via popular media such as CNN and BBC, which reported the event live from the small European nation? Is it because what is expected from a poor black African nation is nothing but starvation and war? Would this not be a good opportunity for the global proponents of democracy to demonstrate that people’s peaceful protest can bear results irrespective of their geographic location in the world? Or is this not considered an option at all for Africans ‘whose fate is predetermined as eternal misery and oppression’?

At this historic moment in the lives of many innocent, hardworking and peace-loving Ethiopians, the world owes those starving children, battered mothers and frustrated farmers a REAL answer.

* Makeda Tsegaye is an Ethiopian woman with a Masters degree in International Peace Studies (with specialization in Economic Development and Peace) currently working for an international development agency in Nairobi, Kenya.

* Please send comments to [email protected]