Newsweek and US-Ethiopian relations

(MoFA 04/20/09):- Any government can expect to be criticized from time to time, indeed perhaps frequently, but it should certainly also expect that criticisms, especially from a reputable media outlet like Newsweek, might be based on fact not fiction. It is really disappointing that a Newsweek reporter cannot write a piece on Ethiopia without making so many egregious errors. The aim and value of Ethiopia’s relationship with the US and vice-versa can, of course, be a matter of debate, but again one would expect the discussion to be based on a modicum of fact rather than limited to personal, largely inaccurate, interpretation. From the first paragraph the Newsweek article “With a Friend Like This” (April 11), Jonathan Tepperman in the US appears to have made up his mind that every possible slur and innuendo about Ethiopia can be repeated as fact. This is despite the fact that Newsweek has a stringer in Addis Ababa who must be deeply embarrassed by the numerous errors and inaccurate aspersions.

Mr. Tepperman talks of rigged elections, the banning of independent human rights groups, a draconian press law and a Government refusal of an investigation into the Ogaden region. What Mr. Tepperman offers by way of evidence is, of course, mere allegation. These are allegations we have been used to hearing, but mere repetition does not make them any more plausible. No one necessarily expects an article to be fair, just accurate. In previous book reviews and articles, Mr. Tepperman has often tried to appear balanced. In this case, he has most emphatically not succeeded. Indeed, it would appear he has not even bothered to try. Mr. Tepperman has been both sweeping in his judgments of Ethiopia’s Government and its actions. This has resulted in serious errors one of which is the characterization of the religious standing of the country. He is still apparently thinking of Ethiopia in medieval religious terms. What does it take to convince the likes of Mr. Tepperman that this is one of the areas in which Ethiopia has undergone radical transformation?

Mr. Tepperman’s central idea appears to be that Washington isn’t getting what it’s paid for from Ethiopia. There is an underlying assumption here is all too obvious. For him, Ethiopia is America’s errand boy whose services the latter can buy at will. The flip side of such an assumption is also obvious: Ethiopia does not have an agenda of its own and every move it makes should always be interpreted only in terms of American interests. Ethiopia’s own interests are thus relegated to secondary status. If Ethiopia embraces democracy, then it must have done so in order to win the respect of the United States; it holds elections because that is America’s wish; it went to Somalia to do America’s bidding; the Ethiopian army is the Pentagon’s territorial appendage in the Horn of Africa. Mr. Tepperman yet again repeats the completely unsupported allegation, steadily and consistently denied by both countries, that Ethiopia went into Somalia in December 2006 at the US behest. It didn’t. Ethiopia did have genuine security concerns of its own when it intervened in Somalia. Some years ago, Mr. Tepperman felt American liberals should be castigated for failing to support US intervention in Iraq. It is surprising he now finds it difficult to understand Ethiopia’s move into Somalia.

Mr. Tepperman suggests that Ethiopia failed in Somalia with only a “few high-ranking terrorists…eliminated”, though, oddly, he does quote Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister who has pointed out that Ethiopia ‘shattered’ the terrorist elements of Al-Shabaab in Somalia. This largely achieved Ethiopia’s original aim, to break the growing threat of terrorism. In the operations in December 2006 and on a number of subsequent occasions Al-Shabaab, the largest extremist organization, lost hundreds of fighters killed and captured, many from abroad. Al-Shabaab, incidentally, did not just appear in 2007 as a response to Ethiopia’s presence. It was founded originally as a hit squad to kill moderate Somali politicians at least two years earlier by Sheikh Hassan Dahir “Aweys” as part of his efforts to take power in Mogadishu.

Mr. Tepperman is clearly very free with figures as long as they help to buttress his case. He claims Ethiopia had “a cool billion in 2008’ in US aid. We should be so lucky. The briefest investigation of US aid to Ethiopia would note that Ethiopia got less than half that amount in 2007 and again in 2008; and for the third year running well under 500 million was requested this year. It might be added that approximately three quarters of all this assistance was provided under the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative. And despite all allegations of unlimited US military support for Ethiopia, or the comments of some Congressmen, the US military, counter-terrorist, and security assistance to Ethiopia amounted to no more than 1.2% of the total aid provided in 2007 ($US5.9 m.), 0.6% of the estimates for 2008 (US$2.9 m.) and 2.0% (US$9.9m.) of the amount requested this year.

Mr. Tepperman ‘argument’ appears to be that as a result of Ethiopia’s supposed failure in Somalia, Washington should insist on greater democratization in Ethiopia. Even more bizarrely, he then adds that this should be accompanied by reconciliation with Eritrea. A number of points should be raised here. Ethiopia’s democratization process by any rational standards must be a significant achievement. Nor is democratization a project that Ethiopia embarked upon to please the United States. We owe it to our people first and foremost. Second, Mr. Tepperman repeats the Eritrean claim that all problematic Eritrean actions are to be explained by frustration over Ethiopia’s refusal to demarcate the border. As he well knows, Ethiopia agreed to demarcate and normalize relations five years ago. It has been Eritrea which has consistently refused to take any steps in this direction since then. And it shouldn’t really be necessary to point out Eritrea’s aggressive regional activity started long before it invaded Ethiopia in 1998. It went to war with Yemen, crossed the Djibouti border for the first time in 1995/96, and moved into Sudan in 1994.  

The timing of Mr. Tepperman’s article raises a question here. It is not the first time so-called pundits in the US in particular have sought solutions to the Somali problem in the wrong place. One has to wonder whether this is coincidence or is there a pattern to be seen in the statements of ‘experts’ and Congressmen, or in the articles of journalists. It does look as if Mr. Tepperman and others are still prepared to swallow President Issayas’ enduring mantra that the source of every problem lies hidden along the Ethiopia-Eritrea borders.

One could go on at considerable length. Newsweek’s editorial staff and fact-checkers should surely have noticed just how much of Mr. Tepperman’s assertions are at odds with the facts. Of course, Mr. Tepperman has every right to believe that Washington should demand more from its relationship with Ethiopia, though the core of the relationship, as of any other US relationships, should surely be for the mutual benefit of both parties. Ethiopia hopes the US would actually regard the relationship in a rather more nuanced way, and, one might add, over a rather longer time frame than “the days after 9/11”. Indeed, Ethiopia and the US have actually had a constructive relationship for over a century.