|
My take on a Referendum in Tigray Kalayu Abrha 08-06-21 Referendum was never in the vocabulary of Tigray until the ill-advised invasion of Tigray, which unleashed the satanic forces of destruction on the peace loving and law-abiding people of Tigray. It does not mean there were no previous invasions of Tigray. They happened several times before although at comparatively lower scale. Every despot at Arat-Kilo had its share of brutality in Tigray as if the vows to leadership position in Ethiopia included an unwritten statement: "I (Menilik, Haileselassie, Mengistu, Abiy) solmenly swear to weaken or destroy Tigray for the sake of safeguarding Ethiopia". Previous invasions; discrimination, name- calling; and marginalization of Tegaru anywhere in Ethiopia, as if they are unwanted intruders into Ethiopia, was waved by Tegaru as nothing more than a worthless brew of fear and envy. The unflinching confidence in Tegaru about the fact that they form the historical and religious core of the unfortunately misbehaving state of Ethiopia, gave them the false confidence as true Ethiopians. They believed that no one in Ethiopia can claim to be "more Catholic than the Pope" when it comes to the protection of and care for Ethiopia. That has been the basic reason why Tegaru never contemplated separation from Ethiopia as an option to avoid the persistent and age-old attack on their lives, livelihoods, and honor.
Generations came and passed; but the venomous attitudes on Tegaru intensified rather than ebbed. Although Tegaru have never been distracted, by the tormentors, from doing their best for Ethiopia, with the passage of time they have grown into a mood of incomprehension about why all this evil is happening only to them. In a century since Menilik there was no time when Tegaru were not considered as "ants in the pant" of Ethiopian rulers. The years when Tegaru felt physically safe, though not free from verbal attacks, were the 27 years of TPLF-EPRDF tenure at Arat-Kilo. As soon as TPLF was removed from Arat-Kilo the Ethiopian skies came tumbling down on Tegaru with an unprecedented magnitude. The culmination was the barbaric allied invasion of Tigray, the genocide that ensued, and the widespread ethnic cleansing elsewhere in Ethiopia. What can be logically concluded from what happened is that Tegaru cannot feel secure in the absence of Tegaru rulers at Arat-Kilo. It has become a fact derived from the bitter experiences of Tegaru that Ethiopia has grown unsafe for them. If everytime a non-Tigrayan leader grabs power in Ethiopia and posts a billboard in the minds of Ethiopians which states: "Tigray must perish for Ethiopia to flourish", what is the hope of Tegaru in Ethiopia? Over a million Tegaru have established their lives and businesses in all corners of Ethiopia. They have trusted Ethiopia and Ethiopians for so long to embrace them as brothers and sisters. They hoped that Ethiopians would accept them as equals in politics, in economic and social life. As it is the right of any other Ethiopian, Tegaru felt that their ascent to political power and tenure at Arat-Kilo is their right as citizens. Unfortunately, the idea of Tegaru at the Arat-Kilo palace has become like a capital crime. What is propagated in Ethiopia in the last few months is "if Tegaru find their way to Arat-Kilo that will mark the end of Ethiopia". Adding fuel to the fire is the reference by Ethiopia's top leaders to Tegaru as "weeds and cancerous tissues" to be destroyed. Worse still is the strange expectation that Tegaru must die quietly without trying to defend themselves for Ethiopia to survive. Such a vile humor is motivating Tegaru to defend themselves with vigour and bravery that dumbfounded the World. When the armed invasion was miraculously repelled another more difficult invasion is launched with hunger as a weapon. What are Tegaru expected to feel at this point in time where Ethiopians have not only failed them but seem to be glad to see them all dead. Haven't Tegaru fought much more than is expected of any citizen to be Ethiopians and to be embraced as Ethiopians? What more can they do to be accepted like all others as Ethiopians? Without divine intervention there seems to be little left at the disposal of Tegaru to help them be an integral part of the Ethiopian mainstream without losing their identity and surrendering self-rule they sacrificed themselves for. The invasion, destruction, and the direct and indirect genocide on Tigray has become the last straw on the back of Tigray. Tegaru see their future in Ethiopia as bleak. The only option left for Tegaru is to keep a safe distance from Ethiopia and live-in peace even if they go hungry. Tegaru cannot bear the heavy burden of dishonor that is laid upon them with impunity. Although Ethiopians are whining about the "bad things that happened in Tigray" after nine months of deafening silence, it is clear to Tegaru why they suddenly found their tongue now and not before. Endorsement by Tegaru of such sick apologies when defeat has come upon the enemies is a recipe for the next disaster on Tigray. This time they will succeed to destroy it. Referendum is thick in the Tigray air. Political and military leaders of Tigray are mentioning it in their speeches or interviews without details. Some of them don't use the word referendum directly but prefer to say: "The future of Tigray shall be decided by the people". Some acrid politicians in Ethiopia are expecting a declaration of independence by Tigray once TDF's military victory is complete. They wish to get rid of the "cancer" so easily and live happily ever after. These fools have to be told that Tigray may be independent at some future date, but it has no plan to run away now. It has a lot of housekeeping to do, a lot of dirty dishes to wash and a lot of garbage to dump! Without such acts of sanitation Tigray cannot have a healthy meal for now and in the future. Tigray is told in black and white, in the last three years and more boldly now, that it can remain a part of Ethiopia only as a political non-entity. The lesson Tigray learnt has been extremely costly because of its previous resistance to loud and clear messages. Professor Tronvoll said the military tactics of the TDF must find themselves in the textbooks of military schools. This is quite a learned observation; but that is not all! Tigray's law-abiding culture must also be a lesson for the world to help it guide its actions. Tigray is too civilized to be guided by the Laws of Hammurabi: "an eye for an eye". It is swallowing its anger and acting lawfully when dealing with POW and civilians in spite of the cruelties that were done to it. The same lawfulness holds true in the decision-making process for determining the future of Tigray. For best effect, the rule of the game must be adhered to in the referendum to decide on Tigray's future. If in the referendum a "Yes" majority goes for independence, there are a number of big and small chores to be attended to. The most glaring among these are: recognition by world states and membership to the United Nations. African Union and EGAD membership is a matter of convenience to be decided at a later date. If world states are to recognize Tigray as an independent state, they have to get the consent of a government in Ethiopia. This is a seriously taken diplomatic protocol. Many world states that could possibly and beneficially recognize Tigray as an independent state have embassy-level diplomatic ties with Ethiopia. It would be a gross interference into the internal affairs of Ethiopia if those states recognize Tigray without Ethiopia's permission. The same is true to UN membership of Tigray. Without such recognition by Ethiopia direct foreign investment, direct flight, direct loans and development assistance, and other needs of Tigray to stand firm as a new state are not possible. Tigray with an independence-vote either chooses the path Eritrea and South Sudan took or the manner by which Somaliland remained just a lame de-facto state. With such bitter enmity with Ethiopia how is it possible to get Ethiopia's consent for Tigray to be diplomatically viable? The only way is to do the referendum based on the Constitutional provision Tigray cannot force itself out of Ethiopia and suffer as an unviable state. We are not planning to runaway and hide in some dark cave. I am sure we are not trying to please our enemies by failing to be any meaningful state. With certainty we are not trying to jump from the frying pan into the fire! Science knows no measure to what happened in Tigray. If we are to prevent similar calamities in the future, we have to be sober and think of the future generations of Tigray who should not be exposed to such danger. The referendum should be based on the relevant article of the constitution, namely Article 39. If the referendum is based on the basis of this article Ethiopia will have the obligation to recognize the result of the referendum. This implies that it permits Tigray to be recognized by world states and its membership in the UN. An inevitable question arises as to how this is to be realized when the existing leadership ruling Ethiopia has compromised the constitution and wants it to be banned in some way. Tigray has already suggested a way by putting the "Setting up of a transitional government", as a precondition for cease fire, replacing the existing leadership which has lost its direction when it comes to maintaining a constitutional order in Ethiopia. Any next transitional arrangement in Ethiopia can only be set up based on the existing constitution. The constitution cannot be changed by a transitional government. It requires the decision of the national and regional councils (Article 105-2). Given the popularity of the federal arrangement among regional states it is highly unlikely that the constitution will be significantly modified. The entire legal process to hold a referendum may last for a few years, in view of the three years required between the regional council decision and the referendum. There is a lot of work to be done to rehabilitate Tigray in the meantime, which is indispensable whatever the result of the referendum will be. In the current political and military mood in Ethiopia Tigray would need to be patient for the long haul. It should be slow and steady like the tortoise to win the race into a bright future. If the stubbornness of the political forces in Ethiopia continues Ethiopia would disintegrate and Tigray needs no referendum. Independence will not be a matter of choice but a self-evident reality. Independence resulting from disintegration like that of Yugoslavia and Soviet Union does not require an internal due process to get recognition by world states and the UN. Tigray does not pray or work for the disintegration of Ethiopia; but it has no reason to try to prevent it from happening either. Tigray relegated to the status of a "step-daughter" will not fret for the unity of Ethiopia; but it is less interested to get its independence from the ruins. If Tigray goes for independence, it must prefer to have neighbors as trading partners. For Tigray, failed states as neighbors are more of a curse than a blessing. Referendum must be conducted with the voters having a complete knowledge of what they are doing. Referendum on the fate of nation states is in most cases irreversible. Political agitation appealing to emotions is misleading. Since one generation is deciding as valid for future generations as well, scenarios as far into the future as possible must be built in order to minimize regrets. Political parties may have different (opposing) options for the people to choose from. This is what normally happens; but it should be the people who have to choose beyond party political stand points. Both options- Union and Independence- are most likely to result in later regrets if they are done in a hurry and due to myopia in party politics. It is most preferred to hold inter-party dialogue and reach some consensus about such a matter of great importance. There is blanket criticism on cessation as a reaction against oppression in a particular political context. Although it is often said small is beautiful, portable, and manageable, it is more complex in societies than in miniaturized computers such as palm tops. It does not mean smaller states are better than larger ones: Luxemburg is more efficient than France or USA is not like comparing a lap-top and a mainframe. Some say larger states are more viable than small states; but it all depends. Isn't Hong Kong more viable than many much larger states? Aren't there large states like Russia that are more viable than small states like Djibouti? In his interview with Betelehem Dr. Aregawi Berhe, a staunch advocate of the unitary system, reduced the huge issue of secession to a worthless reduction in size on both sides. He thinks that a bigger state is more viable than a smaller one. He may be right in one context and wrong in another context. Secession is a political issue not a matter for geometry. It is what leads to secession that matters not how big or small a political unit is. He was commenting on the quest for the independence of Tigray, and he put it as follows: "If Tigray secedes it will be small; so would Ethiopia be smaller. This implies that secession of Tigray is a disadvantage for both. This could be true only if there is any magic ingredient in their sizes that determines their fate as separate states. Aregawi rightly says that "if people are oppressed, they are likely to rebel". What he failed to admit is that secession is one of the outlets from oppression regardless of the sizes of political units. He is of the conviction that fighting the oppressive system and ending its rule is more rational than secession. Aregawi argues that problems that led to secession are not solved after secession. He cites examples like Eritrea and South Sudan whose problems worsened after secession. Rejecting secession completely he blames the advocates of secession as "selfish elite, who don't believe in dialogue and who have lost hope in regular politics". We don't deny that there could be politicians who would go for secession in spite of the fact that other options are available and feasible. They may advocate secession for their own benefits rather than as a last resort solution to the problems of the people they lead. However, in Tigray, it is the opposite. The elite would benefit more by other solutions than the secession of Tigray. The economic elite of Tigray is concentrated in Addis Ababa so much that secession as a solution for the Tigray-problem is just a matter of great sacrifice on the part of the elite. So, if secession is the only solution to the problem it would be a solution advocated by ordinary Tegaru who have always been the targets of brutality from Arat-Kilo rulers. This is the reason why we must leave the decision to the should be well-informed Tigray populace. When we think of secession as a solution for Tigray the
issue of nearly a million Tegaru elsewhere in Ethiopia is often not given due
attention. This economically important section of Tegaru does not have a single
handle to be picked up and be taken to Tigray in one stroke. It is economically
and socially so deeply rooted that moving this group of Tigray and settling it
without drastically harming it can be managed only by God himself. Eritrea was
supported into secession by Ethiopia; but this did not prevent the disorganized
deportation of Eritreans from Ethiopia with their businesses and careers
wrecked.
|