|
|
|
|
|
This week on 30 June 2009 the deputy chairman of the Al-Shabab administration in Kismayo announced that Al Shabab will launch attacks on Ethiopia and Kenya while emphasizing that its main target is Ethiopia. The deputy chairman, Abdikani Moahmed Yusuf, who took his saber-rattling to its highest level by declaring Jihad, was clearly trying to incite the people of Somalia to support Shabab's call for attacks inside Ethiopia claiming that this is the best chance to do so. Al-Shabab administration in Kismayo has for quite some time now been threatening Kenya; its recent Jihad against Ethiopia is part of its campaign. As Government Communication affairs minister Ato Bereket Simon said, the declaration of Jihad by Al-Shabab does not currently constitute a clear and present danger to Ethiopia; however, it will continue to monitor the situation attentively. At the moment what matters is not the capacity—or lack thereof—of Al-Shabab to launch an invasion on Ethiopia as it currently claims; the question rather is what needs to be done in order to stem the tide of terrorist violence in Somalia before it spirals out of control. Al-Shabab does not basically have a significant popular base among the majority of the Somali society who find themselves at the receiving end of its terrorist acts. Opposition to Al-Shabab, unlike before, emanates from its own adventures. It is evident in many parts of Somalia that people are getting a sense of what kind of administration could be in store for them—and the nature of relationship Somalis will have with their neighbors and with the international community—in the event that Al Shabab takes over the country. It is to be recalled that recently Al-Shabab killed and claimed responsibility for the death of the TFG Minister of National Security and nearly 100 innocent clan elders and civilians in Beledweyne town in a terrorist car bomb attack. The same way Al-Shabab beheaded MP Eng. Hussen Addow in Mogadishu and left his body to rot for two days after which the clan elders of the deceased MP had to negotiate even to collect the corpse for a decent burial. Al-Shabab has also last week amputated four teenage Somalis in Mogadishu who were accused of minor theft. It has also imposed a strict order in Jowhar town to the effect that all women cover themselves from head to toe. There are many instances that can help explain what Al-Shabab is up to and the majority of Somali people are expressing their objections to it in different ways. Many now realize that Al Shabab's nature and agenda does not offer the way forward for Somalia. But the terrorist activities of Al Shabab could spiral out of control unless a concerted action is taken by all stakeholders. The Government of Somalia must be assisted to come out strong and capable enough to offer minimum protection to its people against Al-Shabab so that the people of Somalia would have a chance to act. Unless the international Community comes up with quick and practical support to the TFG and the majority of Somalis, there will, slowly but surely, come a time when Al-Shabab, supported by foreign Mujahidins and rogue states such as Eritrea, might develop the capacity to implement what it is trying to do today. There is enough evidence now that the threat posed by extremists in Somalia is not confined to the country's borders. It is not limited to its neighbors only either. It has the potential to go beyond the sub-region and the way to tackle the threat has to be through an international effort. President Sheikh Sherif Sheikh Ahmed made it clear on 28 June 2009 that the aggression being launched against his government and the AMISOM is carried out by Hassan Dahir Aweys under the direct guidance of Eritrean officers present in Mogadishu. The president also confirmed that members of Al-Qaida are participating on the on-going conflict in Somalia and this same fact has been announced by many intelligence agencies and the media throughout the world. It is worth noting that in the fighting that took place on 01 July 2009 in Mogadishu, among 10-15 killed AL-Shabab combatants, the TFG forces were able to identify the bodies of three foreign fighters. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that Al-Shabab is fully supported by the Eritrean government, foreign Jihadists, Al-Qaida and it also receives a substantial amount of financial support from some Middle Eastern countries. All this can be a harbinger of more danger unfolding in Somalia. It is hoped that the international community will fully understand the extent of it. What is important at the end of the day is the need to take action in support of the TFG on the one hand and curtail, through appropriate sanctions, the destructive interventions of irresponsible states such as Eritrea who openly sponsor terrorism.
************** Eritrea vows to further destabilize the Horn This week the president of Somalia sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed made it clear that Eritrea’s military officers are leading Dahir Aweys' extremist forces in the recent campaign to overthrow the TFG. On the other hand President Ismail Omar Guelleh of Djibouti on the occasion of the national day of his country called on the international community to punish Eritrea for being behind all the security problems in the sub region. It should be recalled that IGAD has also called on the UNSC to impose sanctions on Eritrea. While Asmara has been condemned by IGAD and the AU for its support for terrorism in Somalia and singled out for sanctions by the UNSC, the Government of Eritrea seems to be determined to wreak further havoc in the region. The Eritrean Government has time and gain expressed its determination and commitment to the overthrow of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia. While the region is united in its rejection of Eritrea's alliance with terrorism in the region and its continuous efforts to overthrow the legitimate TFG in Somalia, Eritrea unashamedly came out in public to criticize any support given to the TFG. A case in point was the recent announcement by the USA of its support to the TFG which provoked an immediate angry reaction from Asmara. The Eritrean Government criticizes the US initiative because it feels that it may stand in the way of success of its destabilization project in the region. There is no national interest that Eritrea can serve by acting the way it does. The regime is engaged in the destabilization of the Horn region to keep the people of Eritrea on a continuous war footing aimed at stopping crucial domestic issues from being raised at home. The issues of good governance, economic development, constitutional system of government and elections, press freedom and the like are indefinitely postponed in Eritrea giving the excuse that the country could not take its eyes off the enemies around it. For those who are young and able the choice has become to flee the country in their thousands. Those who are unable to flee are suffering under the police state. This has been captured by the recent article in the Economist (July1, 2009) which compares governance situations in various countries as computed by the World Bank. The article puts Eritrea in the Category where governance conditions have worsened sharply. Indeed the main victims of the regime in Eritrea are the people of Eritrea. But the region is suffering from the actions of the regime as well. Therefore, any measure taken by the UNSC would primarily benefit the people of Eritrea as well as the people of the Horn region.
************** HRW's Views on Counterterrorism Draft Law: perpetuation of inherent bias As an indication of the difficulty of maintaining a constructive engagement with Human Rights Watch, the self-styled human rights group has released another politically motivated attack against Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism legislation. While HRW has recognized Ethiopia's legitimate security concerns over terrorism, its assessment of the draft law falls into the same trap HRW has fallen in recent past: inherent bias and preconceived notion that the Government is out to unleash attack against political opponents and civil dissent. It’s been quite some time now since the HRW became hostage to this prejudiced view of developments in Ethiopia. The Government of Ethiopia is fully committed to ensuring full respect of the human rights obligations of the country. It has taken concrete and far reaching measures to advance the enjoyment of human rights in the country. As HRW itself mentions—though only in passing—Ethiopia has faced—and continues to face—terrorist attacks that have claimed the lives of innocent civilians and caused damages to public and private property long before 9/11. Ethiopia has taken numerous measures to combat this global menace. The Government of Ethiopia has also fully recognized that existing penal laws and procedures aimed at tackling ordinary crimes are not sufficient to prevent and suppress terrorist acts. Terrorism as a new and growing phenomenon by its very nature targets civilians and public property to influence public policy or decision or advance a certain ideology. It does not discriminate between its victims on account of age, religion, occupation, political affiliation or social status. It kills and maims children and adults alike without mercy or hesitation. Its ultimate goal is to instill fear in society allowing the heartless and cowardly fanatics the opportunity to impose their agenda on peaceful and law abiding communities. Such acts are not envisaged in ordinary penal laws, procedural and evidence rules; nor are law enforcement agencies empowered or organized in a way that helps to effectively counter them. This makes it imperative that countries like Ethiopia enact a separate legislation aimed at preventing and prosecuting terrorist acts and addressing the rehabilitation of victims of terrorism. Moreover, terrorism with its global reach requires the cooperation among law abiding nations. To undertake such cooperation between judicial and law enforcement agencies numerous treaties are enacted by the United Nations and regional organizations such as the African Union. Ethiopia is a party to most of these counterterrorism international and regional conventions. In drafting the current instrument, Ethiopia has taken into account these treaties and examples of best practices of implementing legislations from around the world. In fact, the draft proclamation has objectives that are the exact opposite of those ascribed to it by HRW. The draft law clearly states that it aims at the protection of the rights of the people to live in peace, freedom and security from the threat of terrorism, provision of adequate legal framework to prevent and combat terrorism, and enable cooperation with other actors to counter terrorism and enforce treaties to which Ethiopia is a party. HRW's so-called "analysis" is replete with harsh generalizations. It cannot be considered a credible commentary on compatibility of the draft law with Ethiopia's human rights obligations. It focuses more on HRW's inherent bias against developments in Ethiopia than on the substance of the draft law. This is most evident in most of its writings which never cease to assign to the Government wicked intentions such as cracking down on political dissent and criminalizing non-violent political dissent. HRW uses its own previous and unsubstantiated allegations of human rights violations to justify its equally unsubstantiated allegations in the present piece too. The definition of terrorism, the substantive and procedural parts of the draft legislation fully comply with the constitution of the county and the international obligations Ethiopia has. The definition is deliberately constructed to identify the most critical and distinguishing features of terrorism and it draws a lot from the legislations of other countries as well as relevant international and regional treaties. This definition cannot in any way be understood to include acts that do not relate to terrorism. The attack on provisions particularly singled out by HRW such as on arrest, search and seizure do not reflect the true character of the legislation. These provisions are designed to ensure that the legal measure mentioned could only be implemented with safeguards and would only be exercised with the necessary judicial supervision. These provisions are carefully designed to strike the right and necessary balance between the enjoyments of rights by individuals with the overriding considerations of public safety and national security. Moreover, these provisions deliberately rely on the language and content of the human rights provisions of the Constitution and international and regional human rights treaties. The institutional and procedural safeguards inbuilt in the draft anti-terror legislation are drawn from best practices of different countries, international legislative guide and model legislation. HRW has chosen to level the usual invectives about what it attributes as ulterior motives of the Ethiopian Government rather than the legal content of the draft law. These safeguards will be applied in addition to the Constitutional protection of humane treatment, and provisions governing the legality and admissibility of any evidence submitted before Court. Advocating and supporting terrorism cannot be tolerated. These are not free speech entitlements by any country’s standard. International law does not support advocating and support for terrorism as part of the right to free speech. Such acts that embolden and encourage terrorism cannot be tolerated as they are meant to sustain terrorism by giving it legitimacy that it does not deserve. It is therefore surprising that there could ever be confusion on the matter. When the draft instrument becomes law, enforcement of the new law would only affect those wishing to commit terror or those who would like to support terror no matter what its disguises. HRW should not have confused peaceful dissent with terror activities. This is simply outrageous. If anything, HRW’s recent statement tells us that groups like HRW are determined to make similar accusations no matter what character the law may actually take. Ethiopia has refuted HRW‘s allegations in the past with concrete on-the-ground investigation. HRW should again revisit its methodology and adopt a more objective outlook towards developments in Ethiopia.
************** Odds and Ends :What does it take to get it right about Ethiopia? Ethiopia has myriads of problems to grapple with and only pro-poor policies can extricate it out of these problems. That is why the government has consistently focused on its commitment in the fight against poverty. There are indications that there is much in the way of success that can rightly serve as a source of optimism; but Ethiopia also acknowledges that it has to redouble its efforts to ensure the sustainability of its achievements. As if the challenges that have yet to be met are not daunting enough, however, improving Ethiopia’s image has been very difficult thanks to a ready tendency by media institutions and so-called think-tanks to highlight the negative over the positive. Of course, Ethiopia is no stranger to unfair caricatures. Indeed, a quick perusal of internet sources would reveal that Ethiopia’s name is readily synonymous with one sort of disaster or another, and more often than not, unfairly so. Of course, there are problems and they don’t disappear because we wish them away. But there can be an element of self-fulfilling prophesy in many of the characterizations some media institutions and think-tanks make about developments in Ethiopia. In what could possibly trigger a spate of conspiracy theories among some people, there has been a pattern in which a positive portrayal of Ethiopia’s progresses—decidedly few and far between—are quickly drowned out by a rather noisy story of doom and gloom that will almost certainly follow its heels. In a recent such unsettling sequence, two diametrically opposite reports were out on the state of governance and economic development in Ethiopia. A brief look at the content of the reports would go a long way to help show the point we are trying to make. Foreign Policy magazine and The Fund for Peace (FfP) this week issued the Failed State Index for the fifth time in which Ethiopia is ranked 16th , falling in the “Red Zone”, or the group of countries that are the most vulnerable to failure. The authors of the report claim to have used a total of twelve indicators ranging from demographic pressures to human rights as well as delegitimization of the State. Whatever their motives, the authors of the index clearly have a methodology that appears to aim at failing to show the true picture of any given state. To the extent that they get it somehow right about some countries, it owes more to their ready willingness to be selective about their facts than to the reliability of their methods. Ostensibly, the FfP uses an original tool that it calls Conflict Assessment System Tool (CAST) which helps determine the index. What the tool does is, of course, very interesting. The software is fed with some key words related with the key indicators and it then makes a cursory scanning of electronic resources on the internet. Based on how many hits it can find on any given indicator, the authors can calculate the extent of danger a country is in. It is a form of determining how vulnerable a state is by counting the number of times online articles referred to a country as vulnerable. If we were to take this method to its most absurd limit, it would mean that the less a country allows information about its state of affairs to be available online—say because it has little by way of electronic access or it strips its citizens of an unfettered freedom of writing or speech—the better ranking it can get in the Failed State Index. So much for the scientific nature of the methodology. The people at Foreign Policy could and should have a better use for the funds—funds that, ironically enough, are meant for peace. The government of Ethiopia realizes full well that the country is not out of the woods yet. A lot remains to be done. But it also believes that it has the right combination of policies that have already started to pay significant dividends. What is more there is the political will to ensure Ethiopia’s renaissance through hard work and the strides that the country and its peoples have made in areas of governance and economic development are testament to the inevitability of success. This is not a self-serving claim; it has also been confirmed by institutions that are more serious-minded than half-baked researches based on bogus methodology. As the UN and the World Bank reports this past week clearly indicate, Ethiopia is one of the very few countries who are poised to not only make rapid economic progress but also whose success in political governance has shown continuous positive progress. According to the UN, in Africa only Ethiopia and Cape Verde have a realistic chance to meet the Millennium Development Goals of halving poverty by the year 2015. The World Bank’s assessment of the progress that countries have made in good governance over the last few years clearly shows that Ethiopia is one of the very few that have shown a strong performance. The fact that the two differing characterizations about the same subject appeared in the same week makes the contrast really stark. But what is more interesting is the fact that the indicators used by the UN & World Bank on the one hand, and Foreign Policy & PfP on the other, are basically the same. The results, paradoxically enough, could not be more different. Clearly, the Foreign Policy people were overstating their case when they claimed to have used a scientific methodology to come up with the Failed State Index. No wonder countries that have dismal performers according to the World Bank and the UN appear to fare better in the FP index.
************** |
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Ministry of Foreign Affairs