An Unwarranted
Travel Alert to Ethiopia Worth Ignoring
First let us establish the fact that
Ethiopia is one of the safest countries in the world. When people travel
overseas, especially to a developing country such as Ethiopia, they first land
in the capital city, and continue their journey to other parts of the country
if they so wish or have to. And Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, is known for granting
a sense of security a foreigner quite understandably longs for. On its website,
citymayors.com, City Mayors, “... an international think tank for urban
affairs, consisting of professionals working together to promote strong, prosperous
cities and good local government”, has reported in 2004:
Addis Ababa has a population of around four
million, and an eight percent annual growth rate. It is, moreover, a very
cosmopolitan city, with as many as 80 nationalities speaking 80 languages, and
Christian and Muslim communities living together in peace. Most
surprising for such a large city is that the crime rate is extremely low, and
one feels quite safe walking the streets, even after dark. (Italics
added)
If a 2004 statement is passé, how about a
report by Kenyan news correspondent for the Daily Nation, Henry Owuor, who observed in 2009, “In this city, [Addis Ababa],
hardly any violent crime exists and carjackings are very rare.” Well, nearly
non-existent would have been more fitting, but still “rare” will do. And he
quoted a fellow reporter Jason McLure, a
correspondent for Bloomberg news agency, as saying, “Addis Ababa is the
safest city in Africa. If someone tries to pick your pocket, you just shove
them away, they won’t pull a gun or a knife on you.’’
It’d be easy to cite more reports and
personal testimonies of visitors to Ethiopia who have shared their safe and
secure travel experiences, but suffice it to reiterate that Ethiopia, along
with its capital, Addis Ababa, is one of the safest countries in the world to be
for business or pleasure.
The uninformed or the unwilling-to-be-informed
paper pushers in the State Department may argue that the evidences above are for
a non-election season. Still, there are more than enough signs on the wall
indicating that the upcoming election is going to be peaceful.
If so, why are the bureaucrats in the State
Department insinuating otherwise? I obviously can’t speak for them and can’t
quite put my finger on as to what their real concern is. But there always are
the common mistakes and the usual suspects.
First, for lack of a better
term, is pure laziness. Gathering, producing and disseminating accurate or
nearly accurate information requires intensive research and commitment to fact
finding. True, an isolated violence did take place during the 2005 election. And,
of course, it’s regrettable that a loss of lives occurred as a result. After
all, in such a case, even one death is too many. However, did innocent
bystanders get killed during the confrontation? The answer is highly unlikely,
if not absolutely not.
This is not at all to insensitively
imply that those who died brought it on themselves. In fact, I believe, many were
victims who were misled by the likes of Dr. Negde Gobeze’s call – from the safety of their Western homes, of
course – for violence. But the point I’m trying to make here is that people
going about their daily lives – in which category resident and visiting
foreigners in all likelihood fall under – never were in harm’s way. On that
note, it should, in fact, be underlined that no foreigner – resident, visitor
or reporter – became the victim of the 2005 street violence.
More important, in projecting
the likely scenarios that could come into play, it’d only be fair and appropriate
to look into the precaution the government has taken or failed to take to make
sure that the 2005 street violence is not repeated. In this regard, the State
Department, through its Mission in Ethiopia, could easily have learned about the
Ethiopian government’s “Never Again” approach that is standing on guard to ensure
that the upcoming election is conducted in a peaceful and civilized manner.
So, if anything, the State
Department would be doing its citizens with travel plans to Ethiopia a great
favour if it conveys the accurate message that the Ethiopian Government has
learned greatly from the recent history, thus 2005 is NOT deemed to repeat
itself in 2010.
Second is the inability or
unwillingness to screen out information for accuracy. This, I admit, is a gross
generalization, but one of the main problems I see with Westerners is the habit
of believing everything they are told. And, if they have no horse in the race,
there is a tendency to cheer for individuals or groups considered to be the
underdogs or who cry foul the loudest.
And, quite aware of this fact,
opposition party members or supporters prey on diplomats, expatriate employees
of international organizations, foreign correspondents as well as visitors at the
Sheraton, Hilton, embassy cocktail parties and wherever the opportunity
presents itself for manipulating current events and unleashing their misinformation.
Unfortunately, the hearsay, in turn, is transmitted to foreign countries as a
proven fact by well meaning, bleeding heart do-gooders or foreigners with special
interests.
Third is failing to see the
bigger picture. In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attack on the United
States, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told New Yorkers to resume
normal life. Other politicians, including the then U.S. President George W.
Bush followed suit in persuading Americans to go about their daily lives –
work, shopping, entertainment, etc. And the logic behind this was that failing
to do so and changing one’s a way of life would mean caving in to terrorists’
wishes.
This was indeed a thoughtful
idea. The only question is, if Americans were told or reminded the importance
of not surrendering to terrorism only days or weeks after a horrible event that
took the lives of nearly 3,000 people, why are they being subjected to
unnecessary psychological warfare based on a much less significant incident that
took place nearly five years ago? Furthermore, wouldn’t such unwarranted
warning serve as a moral victory for would-be advocates of violence or
terrorists by any other name? I think the bureaucratic heads at the State
Department are failing to see this bigger picture.
Nonetheless, when all is said
and done, what is heartening is the fact that Americans, especially those with
travel plans, are more informed than perhaps their public institutions and
media give them credit for. Still, I’d like to take this opportunity to respectfully
take Americans’ attention from the State Department’s shortsighted and unnecessary
warning to their well respected and beloved President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s memorable
and more meaningful than ever counsel, “… let me assert my firm belief that the
only thing we have to fear is fear itself – nameless, unreasoning, unjustified
terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.”
Indeed, in this interconnected
world, not only is FDR’s guidance internationally relevant, but the State
Department’s warning could be dismissed as “nameless, unreasoning, unjustified”
fear mongering.