By: Desalegn Lidetu 05/14/10
How marvelous to see lesser animals putting
up camouflage to fend off assumed or real danger coming in their ways! Have you
observed closely how, for instance, some cats puff
their bodies up in the face of a sneering dog close by? It’s a whiff-whiff vs. raf-raf standoff, which often ends up in dog chasing cat.
One of these days I saw a cat in the act of
doing a double trick against a really big dog. It perched on top a stump while
at the same time keeping its body inflated to such an incredible proportion
that it somehow managed to appear nearly as big as the dog. In any case, it was
trying, I suppose, to persuade its adversary of both its size and its
importance. Its object, I guess, was either to scare the dog away or to bore it
to death.
The dog didn’t budge but rather kept on with
its scrutiny. This might be – may I presume? – due to
its awareness the cat wouldn’t be able to hold on to that awkward position for
to long. For such should take it to exhale through the ears
and eyes sooner rather than latter, which would be too painful for the faker to
bear. This was proved right when suddenly the cat puffed out its body
back down to normal, jumped off the stump in what seemed a failed attempt at
somersault and run away showing what some cats have been made to really look
like.
(But I’m sure many of us are used to seeing
cats and dogs lazing their days on same ground. Oh, kitty, kitty, how it makes
you look more ugly than a bulldog when you bloat your butts up! Know thyself
and you’re just fine.)
At any rate – and I’m just warming up to talk
about one aspect of our current politics – it doesn’t rain cats and dogs
without a thick cloud hanging low in the sky for a foreboding. Or, does it?
Camouflage in politics, I’m afraid, is more
irksome than marvelous.
A minor incident though it was, the scuffle
that occurred two weeks ago between two groups of the Unity for Democracy and
Justice (UDJ), a.k.a. Andinet, can be looked at as
portending what may go amiss. In less than two weeks now, Ethiopians will’ve mandated a party of their choice for a five-year
term.
If there is one thing citizens hate to see in
this 4th-round election, that is violence or any sign of it. The more so because what came in the post-2005 polls is still fresh
in our minds. We’re in a crossroads and we can show the world our true
salt.
In this regard, one can only hope that the
clash between two groups of Andinet party is not a
dress-rehearsal. There’re some signs to fear it may be, though. Because the
fight in which two people were reported injured did not occur out of the blue,
though abrupt. And it would be foolish to think that the clash or at least the
major cause for it was limited to one party alone. This writing tries to add a
perspective or two to the relevant background analyses on the issue at hand.
UDJ in UJDD
The fight broke out when Prof. Mesfin Woldemariam led a group to
Andinet’s (UDJ) headquarters and tried to take over
office from the party’s existing leadership. This came several months after the
professor, one of Andinet’s founders, was banished
from the party’s leadership. By that time Andinet was
already brought under the fold of the Unity for Justice and Democratic Dialogue
(UJDD) which is a coalition of eight parties. Evidently, there have been a
number of long-standing causes that Andinet seems
unable to address. It turns out, the unsettled issued around Andinet’s fallouts are becoming more complex at the passing
of each day.
This means, we could not longer see disputes
arising from within Andinet party as being confined
to it. In fact, When Andinet sneezes, UJDD cries.
This has been the case for well over a year now, ever since shortly after the
formation of Medrek. This was the reason behind the
public statements the members of the leadership of Medrek
have given in the aftermath of the clash. And theirs was a barking up of the
wrong tree because their accusations were misdirected. It is not surprising, therefore, that the stand the leadership of Medrek has taken on the matter was visibly eschewed to one
side. They had to speak in defense of the group who’re still holding Andinet’s office as top echelon execs of the party. It’s no
secret that most of these high-ranking Andinet party
execs are also holding most of the key positions in the larger coalition.
The question of how much of or to what extent
the events that led up to last week’s stand off could be looked at as an
entirely intra-party affair is thickly shrouded in a haze.
The immediate cause to the clash obviously
began at a controversial assembly Prof. Mesfin et.al
summoned a week earlier. The assembly convened on the premises of a secondary
school ended up electing the professor as vice president of Andinet
party. Though the existing Andinet leadership called
the assembly illegal, the professor moved on to taking over the party’s office.
Confrontations ensued resulting in feast throwing, stone throwing.
But the root causes runs deeper; the genesis
of it began much earlier. Far and beyond, one need not forget the very grounds
on which the very seeds for Medrek’s existence as a
coalition entity had been sown. They were sown on controversial grounds and
under precarious circumstances. It came into being in the face of objections
and at times uncertainties as reverberated across Andinet’s
rank and file. From the outset, prof. Mesfin et.al seemed to have represented this side of the
divide. It seems that he left no stone unturned to nip the coalition in the
bud. He failed. Because stakes were high.
Almost from day one of the formation of UJDD,
there has been division in the leadership of Andinet
as to the future course of UJDD as well as on the issue of terms by which the
party should’ve been able to use its prerogative to part with the coalition.
The leadership dent in Andinet which had been there
for long was ever widening until around the end of last year. At some point
when the rank and file of the party began to express their doubts as to the
plausibility of the coalition, or at least the wisdom of Andinet’s
joining the political marriage, a two-prong division became more visible. The
party supporters on a couple of occasions including during a meeting in Debremarkos not only posed questions but had brought forth
some strong arguments against the move, which the party’s leadership had
already taken without having adequately consulted with the members at the
grassroots level. As it were, one of the most strong points raised was the
diametrically opposite agenda some of UJDD’s member parties pursue concerning a
number of fundamental political issues as against that which ANdinet says it upholds. What has this party has in common,
say, with UEDF or OFDM or ONL. This and several other predicaments and
anomalies have been being cited in the writings by pundits as well as by local
newspapers. Prof. Mesfin represents this side of the
picture.
Apparently, he was in for defeat, though he
might not know it initially. In order to get a clear understanding of the
relationships between the professor’s stand in this matter and the consequence
he would soon be facing in lieu of his having insisted on a need for the party
to at least consider members’ voices that the coalition held in store more cons
than pros, we should glance towards those very grounds on which the idea for
what would later come to be Medrek was conceived.
The present election was the core issue and
there were a few p[arties feeling apprehensive of the
challenges ahead vis a vis
the realities of their standing as separate entities, which each knew full well
didn’t compare with the organizational strength of the ruling party.
Hence, the first germ was born of a loom
which we can name for now as Commonly Shared Apprehensiveness.
Another most compeling
factor was a zeal the leaders of Andinet, UEDF, OFDM
and ONL have been feeling to do something either to see EPRDF off as a majority
government or to get it in a power-sharing deal. To achieve the former goal
takes what each of them is far short of having entering the electoral contest
as separate entities. They knew they would need to join forces and to attract
as many more as they could find, and thereby to expand their electorate base by
sewing across their separate selves into a singly brand. What else could be a
better way of shattering the ruling party in the field of electoral contest
than a coalition? After all didn’t they have 2005 to look back to to see what a coalition can do? What a four-party coalition
in 2005 can do, one in 2010 can do! And for this, the more the member parties
the better. Also the bitterer sounding voices, the better. Incidentally, there
were a few parties to easily lure into the mix. New comers such as Arena Tigray would be quick-footed to be part of a coalition for
obvious reasons. There were also two prominent individuals who would leave no
stone unturned to be part of a stronger political muscle, whose flexing should
result in their being vindicated against EPRDF, from whose bosom they had come
to be known as public figures, from whose bosom they were uprooted. It seemed
that these individuals never called to mind what should’ve been a more
dignified way of kissing the doors of politics goodbye. (“To err is human,” is
alright. But how many times must a politician err before he or she would’ve
felt the need to retire, if not the need to do so with an expression of public
apology. Where is the line drawn which should set the limit for acceptability
of one’s remaining active in one’s political career?)
At any rate, a year-and-a-half ago, the
forenamed parties and two individuals seemed pretty much to have felt a need to
put up a much tougher electoral challenge under a coalition against the ruling
party than they could as separate entities. Knowing that they would have
nothing to lose but everything to gain in being part of a larger political
grouping, the two individuals have been credited with putting most of the
groundwork on which the coalition as we know it today finds its cradle. One
English-language weekly in one of its most recent issues published an article
in which these two ex-government officials are described as “mavericks” of
alliance formation.
Hence, a second germ born of a loom which we
can call Commonly Felt Desire for taking over
executive power.
Now combine the two germs and we get a
Coalition of six parties and two personalities of renown. This was the
predecessor to what soon latter came as UJDD, a.k.a. Medrek,
in a final shape of a coalition of eight parties after inclusion of two more
parties, plus baptism of the two individuals as new comers into Andinet’s ranks, minus a chunk of Andinet
made irrelevant.
A chunk of Andinet
made irrelevant? Yes, indeed! Without a need to go into detail, one can see
that those two “mavericks” did not work their ways through the formative days
of UJDD for naught. They would kill – note the metaphoric use of “kill” – to
keep their Medrek intact. It’s their only ticket to
we know where. Any voice against the coalition would be hushed. Any move for a
member party to go its separate way would be stopped. In this connection, one
can see, therefore, that if those two individuals should be called “mavericks”
it is more for their being able to gag and drag as many influential voices as
they could around and get them to stand put than for their being able to help
form a strong and credible political organization.
With regard to the latter, all the founding
members have utterly failed. There have been a number of inherent factors which
had rendered their coalition a very weak political formation, if not a
miscarried one. After all, it came through a solely elitist exercise and
against the clock ticking away. They knew it had to be rushed. To hell with
democratic procedures! To hell with constituents’ concerns! The apparent irony
was that the leaders of the coalition’s parties were to find themselves risking
the loss of voters’ confidence in their frantic bids to come out a challenger
against a widely and deeply fortified EPRDF, the party which spent the best of
the past four years holding open consultations with urban voters including in
Addis Ababa where it had received the “red” card and in the few major cities
where it had faced “yellow” in 2005. In this regard, the talk about Medrek’s being a sole electoral challenger seems to hold
little water, if any.
“Not so,” would say the likes of EDP, which
says its repositioning and re-branding efforts have paid off after the
consequences of what had become of the former CUD in the aftermath of the 2005
elections. Whatever the case may be, one thing is for sure. Ethiopians have
come to understand better than mere external allurements being offered by the
sorts of coalitions that had come and gone. If EDP and AEUO have grown averse
to any prospect of joining forces in another coalition, their aversion is well
justified. EPRDF cannot sound more convincing in saying it faced no challenger
that it can really reckon with. This means if there be a second best among the
oppositions in the current contest, it is way far behind on the trail.
Apparently, though, the present coalition
that came in the shape of UJDD does not seem to have the kind of strength
comparable even to that which the former CUD had appeared to have in the
pre-2005 polls. If the former CUD, which was generally assumed to have had a
measure of harmony in terms of policy matters did not survive disintegration,
how can the electorate this time around be expected to believe in a UJDD, whose
member parties stand world’s apart in fundamental policy issues. Hush!
This was exactly what the leadership of Andinet was called to answer by the party’s own ranks and
files as well as by its presumed supporters in a couple of places for a couple
of times. This was one of several points raised by pundits, independents as
well as the media in criticizing the very edifice of UJDD’s existence? Hush!
How can the electoral put their trust in a
coalition with a half-baked alternative agenda in the evident existence of
basic difference, whose detail the leadership elects to keep in secret from the
public? Hush!
Many unsettled issues. As many hush,hush, hushings plus a
“rejectionist” attitude, plus a show of disdain for competing parties, plus an
overdose of negative campaigning, plus quick-footedness to Embassy portals ….
But the professor knew from the start that
what was looming was an inherently flawed, predominantly elitist practice that
brought the coalition about. He was in it – or was near it. His open cries
against came only after the leadership of Andinet was
called to answer for its decision to join Medrek. In
fact, Medrek would not have come as we know it today,
had it not been for Andinet’s self-promoted “renown”
as the “true heirs of CUD”. See the irony?
At any rate, professor Mesfin’s
sudden shift from elitist to populist in the issue of Andinet
vis a vis Medrek did not seem to have emanated from his love for
“principle” or “democracy” or “the rule of law” as he would like us to picture
the person behind the persona. There must’ve been a deeper play of political
intrigues. He seemed oblivious to what his peers and
those staunch keepers of Medrek were capable of
doing. He didn’t seem to sense that once brought under the fold of Medrek – or ever since a little earlier than that – his
brainchild Andinet already lost much of its clout. When
he ventured to pull Andinet out, he was threatened
with being made altogether irrelevant. And there were these two individuals
more than willing to take up the task of making the professor irrelevant. He
insisted on “principle”, “prerogative for Andinet”,
and he was told to go bite the dust. He didn’t know the shifting allegiances
that already took place within Andinet’s leadership.
When he resisted and look back for backing, he saw instead Engineer Gizachew et.al closing ranks with Dr. Negaso
et.al. For a proof this is what Eng. Gizachew had to
baptize those two “mavericks” with. And he said, “You two guys are more than
individual persons. Each of you is as big as a party in his own right.”
Fast forward to about a fortnight ago. TO the
Wednesday prof. Mesfin
et.al tried to reclaim their lost party. Before police intervened and calmed
the situation, two people were injured and a front windshield of a car battered
from a stone thrown.
The assembly which the prof.
summoned a week earlier might or might not be legal. The appointment of the prof. as vice president of Andinet
might or might not be legitimate. That is for the courts to determine. But
earlier on, NEBE gave legitimacy to the current office holders implying a
proceeding that saw the professor out of the fold of Andinet
or UJDD was accepted. The professor had a right to appeal but he didn’t bring
the case to the courts. In stead, he chose to lie low for quite some time after
he had been purged. Then came the assembly, which the
professor claimed was legal and held in full quorum. Within a
week, the scuffle for office.
Two questions: Why didn’t the professor wait
his belated moves until after polling day? If he felt he couldn’t, why didn’t
he seek endorsement of the assembly and its purported decision from the
competent organs of justice?
For all intents and purposes, it is imprudent
to just barge in people’s office and stir a fight.
To top it all, leaders of UJDD gave a
statement a day after the incident. They accused the government of proxy interference
while on the other hand accusing police of indifference.
This is a white lie, double tongue,
outrageous.
But, a whiff-whiff, all the same. Kitty, come
down to earth!