Making exceptions for Ethiopia
January 30th, 2008 | EthioPolitics.com |Tom Porteous
guardian
Meles Zenawi thinks the west’s attitude to Africa is unbalanced and unfair. But his country is being torn apart by human rights abuses
Western policy towards Africa is ill-informed and inconsistent. That’s the message of Ethiopia’s prime minister, Meles Zenawi, in his interview in the Guardian last week. And there’s some truth in what he says. But Meles should be careful what he wishes for.
If the west was better informed about the war crimes and human rights abuses committed by Meles’ military forces in Somalia and Ogaden, western taxpayers might balk at the thought that their governments are providing Ethiopia with hundreds of millions of dollars of military and economic aid.
And if western governments were more consistent and less selective in their reaction to human rights abuses around the world, they might be less inclined to turn a blind eye to Ethiopia’s failure to abide by international norms in pursuit of its military objectives in Somalia and Ogaden.
Last year, Human Rights Watch documented a disturbing pattern of abuses by all sides, including Ethiopia, in the dangerous armed conflict which erupted after Meles sent his army into Somalia to dislodge the Islamic Courts Union, a group which many say has links to international terrorists. In its subsequent struggle with Somali insurgents, Ethiopia has committed serious violations of the Geneva conventions including the carpet-bombing of residential districts of Mogadishu, the deliberate targeting of hospitals and arbitrary executions.
Human Rights Watch has also documented abuses by Ethiopian forces in its simultaneous counter-insurgency campaign against the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) in the Somali region of southeastern Ethiopia. These include the systematic use of rape, torture and execution as a means of terrorising and collectively punishing the civilian population, a partial trade blockade of districts deemed sympathetic to the rebels and the destruction of villages.
There are good reasons why Ethiopia’s western backers do not jump to condemn Meles with the same speed with which they rightly condemn, say, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe or Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir. In his almost 20 years in power, Meles, a former rebel leader, has transformed Ethiopia from a war-torn, famine-prone dictatorship into a relatively stable state which combines elements of both democracy and authoritarianism. He has won plaudits from donors for poverty reduction and good economic stewardship.
Meles’ supporters also make allowances for the fact that he is the key regional player operating in a tough neighbourhood. Somalia is a failed state; Eritrea is a closed dictatorship that has picked fights with most of its neighbours; Sudan defies the UN and the international criminal court in their efforts to secure peace and accountability in Darfur; and now Kenya is slipping into its worst political crisis since independence.
But above all western politicians and diplomats warm to Meles, because they concur with his analysis that he is a bulwark against the spread of Islamist militancy in the Horn of Africa. Meles plays this card well. He is helped by the fact that the influence of political Islam is strong and growing among the large Muslim populations of the region. Furthermore, Islamist militants, some with links to international terrorist organisations, are operating in Somalia, Kenya and elsewhere in the Horn.
But, while these considerations can help to nuance the west’s diplomatic, economic and military relations with Meles, they can be no excuse for the war crimes and gross violations of human rights that Human Rights Watch has documented in Somalia and Ogaden. These unjustifiable acts are not only morally repugnant; they are also counterproductive. They serve to undermine international respect for the rule of law and they are likely to sharpen radicalisation and conflict in what is already one of the most dangerous parts of the world.
The west’s failure to acknowledge the reality of what is going on in these remote and inaccessible places and its failure to call for full investigations and accountability leaves the impression that when it comes to counter-terrorism, anything goes. It is a shortsighted policy that is already backfiring in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon - and it will backfire here too.

5 Responses to “Making exceptions for Ethiopia”
By Dniel on Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
You can write whatever you want but mentioning Meles Zenawi’s comment has no relevance for your argument.
Zenawi said that Demcracy comes from within thus imposing democracy won’t work. Even judged by that-though wrong- approach to African issues,the west lacked consistency.
Tom, Please read thoroughly before you comment next time.
By Daniel on Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
You can write whatever you want
but mentioning Meles Zenawi’s comment has no relevance for your argument.
Zenawi said that Demcracy comes from within thus imposing democracy won’t work. Even judged by that-though wrong- approach to African issues,the west lacked consistency.
Tom,Please read thoroughly before you comment next time.
By Ewnetu on Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
Tom, you have done what is expected of astute journalists. Your last week article was off the mark. I totally agree with your conclusion-Making exceptions for Ethiopia. The west is not getting it.
By enyew begize on Mar 14, 2008 | Reply
Tom,u can say whatever you feel but onething I wanna ask you is that why is that the you british people eager to provide so sensational reports when it comes towards Ethiopia? I think the sense of hatress is flowing through your veins since we defeated the colonizers in ADWA, the stunning victory against european invaders.Now ogaden is your issue and you want to exploit it to disable the starting development in our country.At one time you establish and base a separatist party,in the other time you do whatever you could to create instability in our country.Each time your diplomacy is grooming and is always with hidden agenda.The truth that Ethiopia is a sovereign country is bitter to swallow for you.If you really care for human right why your citizens are involved in the many coups tried or succeded in the whole of the african continent? African blood is your diamond source.if you are really concerned about right and abuse why you kept silent when millions of Rwandan slain of genocide?Now when oil is going to be drilled and when china is working in africa you become human right activist and start talking about ogaden …I think western influence is going to hell with the advent of a united africa and take over of development and armament outsmart by the Russia and China as well.I wanna hear form you when that time happens ,perhaps if you donot throw yourself from your old and imperialistic designed building not to see this advent of neo development excluding the LIMY and YANKEES.
By Leonardino on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply
Good morning, I confess I don´t know too much in the Horn´s, but surely the last comment spoke sense to a mere list of facts. All in all, I support the role Ethiopia is playing in the area. Ethiopia, as it´s not the case of UK or USA, is sharing borders with Somalia and has a right to stabilize or attempt to temporary hand power to a certain elite, perhaps this is more positive than resuffling periodically the case. I use this realistik approach as I think a win-win alternative is nowhere to be found speaking of a peace process in Africa. Leaving Somalia to its grim future won´t do, as much to enhance the Ethiopia´s balkanization. Little countries or bantustans will be all too feeble in the face of the current new scramble for African resources, headed by China and US.
A certain peace, “equilibrium”, status quo, are sometimes against one´s economic interests. Therefore the stabilization that Ethiopia is making, throwing its weight in the events of the region, is not welcome by certain western powers. Sadly, no alternative is produced, it is a mere celebration of the so called “liberty of speech” right. As a matter of fact, this right also implies the duty of another proposal, and also the duty to be present and act.