Thursday, 29 November 2018

Corruption in Ethiopia

By Belihu Amare

Hailemariam Desalegn was Prime Minister (PM) of Ethiopia from 2012 to 2018. Previously he served as Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) and Minister of Foreign Affairs under PM  Meles Zenawi for 2 years. After the death of PM Meles in August 2012, he became Prime Minister and Chair of the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF).

Article 75 of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) deals with a single Deputy Prime Minister. According to this article “The Deputy Prime Minister shall: (a) Carry out responsibilities which shall be specifically entrusted to him by the Prime Minister. (b) Act on behalf of the PM in his absence.  The DPM shall be responsible to the PM.”

However, PM Hailemariam appointed two extra DPMs. The Prime Minister can’t create ministerial posts or executive offices by himself. Although the parliament has no any constitutional provision that allows it to elect three DPMs, the appointment was of the additional 2PMs was approved by the Parliament. 

PM Hailemariam justified the reason for the need to have three DPMs is to reduce the workload has and thus, he will focus on mega projects and coordination of cabinet members.

The Opposition Parties argued according the Ethiopian Constitution the country could not have more than one DPM. If the government cannot correct this, they even threatened to go to the court.  

Although the PM has 3DPMs that were expected the enabled him to have more time to follow up the implementation of the mega projects, he was not able to monitor the performance of the mega projects. At the end of the day the big mega projects were not completed as per plan. For example, it was planned starting 2014, Ethiopia will start exporting Sugar. But until 2017 Ethiopia was importer of sugar. Similarly, the other mega projects (GERD and fertilizer factories) are not yet completed. The country has lost billions of dollars that were expected to be earned from the export. It is assumed the lost opportunity is not less the embezzled money. In the contrary millions of dollars are paid for sugar import. Similarly, if the fertilizer factories were completed, we could have saved the millions of dollars we are paying for fertilizer import. 

One of the main reasons for the poor performance of the mega projects is lack of supervision and networked corruption. It is shocking to hear the extent of the damage.     

It is good job to bring the corrupt government officials to court by the Attorney General. But it looks the measure is restricted to limited individuals and one organization, METEC. Every individual suspected of crimes in all federal institutions and regions should be held accountable. 

So far, many individuals that have relationship with the corruption in METEC are arrested. But when we say METEC it includes the board and even PM Hailemariam. The Board of Directors of METEC is the second highest governing body, after the PM. 
Responsibilities of the board members include overseeing the overall management of the institution. They are required to actively involve in defining and monitoring the overall activities of the institution. They have to be informed of the ongoing operations and issues of the institution. They are required to approve the plan and budget of the institution and monitor if the implementation is according the approved plan and budget.

PM Hailemariam is also responsible for damages done in this respect. According to Article 74, of the Constitution of Ethiopia, his Powers and Functions include: 

1.      The Prime Minister is the Chief Executive, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, and the Commander-in-Chief of the national armed forces. 
2.      He supervises the conduct and efficiency of the Federal administration and takes such corrective measures as are necessary. 

It is hard to believe the purchase of the said ships and airplanes by METEC was done without the knowledge of the board and the PM. Who knows they may have authorized or endorsed the purchase. Or they may know the issue but preferred to be passive. In whatever case they are responsible, because they are the highest decision-making body and are entrusted to protect resources of the country. 

The other complicated issue is in Ethiopia’s largest ever anti-corruption sweep over 60 suspects (senior government officials, business people and brokers) were arrested in 2016 and 2017 for their involvement in deals that allegedly led to the embezzlement of Billions of Birr. State entities whose officials are involved include: Addis Ababa Roads Authority, Ethiopian Roads Authority, Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise, Ethiopian Sugar Corporation and Deputy Minister of Ethiopia Finance and Economic Cooperation. Some of the business people had escaped from the country when they heard the decision of the government. 

The Ethiopian Government has indicated that the large-scale anti-corruption investigation and arrest of high-profile individuals is part of the Ethiopian government’s reform agenda, which was started at the end of 2016 following mass protests in different parts of the country.

As part of his peace deal PM Abiy has pardoned or made to be pardoned all the senior government officials and business people that were arrested in 2016 and 2017.  Both the cases of METEC and these officials and business people is quite the same. Both are corruptions that involve billions of Dollars. The big question is:

1.      How is the government going to reconcile the difference between the arrest in 2016/17 and those in 2018? Is it possible to pardon some and arrest others?
2.      Is the Attorney General going to bring back to prison the once pardoned officials or individuals?
3.      What about the top leadership that are entrusted to supervises efficiency of the Federal institutions? Do they have special immunity?

Pardoning others that were imprisoned by the previous government (PM Hailemariam) and arresting people with the same case by the current government (P.M Abiy) does not make sense. It does not look legal. Where is the transparency?

Every Ethiopian must appreciate all arrests based on evidence, but there should not be partiality between people with similar crimes.  All responsible government officials and business organizations should be treated equally. We would like to hear the response of the government to the above issues.

God bless Ethiopia!! 

(Source : Aigaforum)

የጎራ መለየት ጨዋታው ተጀመረ!

ከገብረ ሥላሴ ኣርኣያ

የኢህኣዴግ ኣባል ድርጅት የሆነው ኦዴፓ (ODP) በእነ ሌንጮ ለታ ከሚመራው ኦዴግ (ODF) ጋር ዛሬ ህጋዊ ውህደት ፈጸመ። ቀደም ሲል ኤርትራ ከነበረው ኦነግ ተነጥለው ሌሎች ድርጅቶች መስርተው እየታግልን ነው ሲሉ ከነበሩት ከእነ ከማል ገልቹ ጋር ያልታወጀ ውህደት ማድረጋቸው ይታወቃል። ኣዴፓም (የድሮ ብኣዴን) በኤርትራ ነበርኩ ከሚለው ከኣዴን (ከኣርበኞች የወጣ) ጋር መዋሃዱ ይታወሳል። ሌላው የኢህኣዴግ ኣባል ድርጅት ደግሞ ደኢህዴን ነበር (ነበር ለበል እንጂ) ደግሞ በሲዳማ፣ ወላይታ ሶዶ፣ ከፋ፣ ጉራጌ እና ስልጤ ተከፋፍሎ የየራሱ ክልል የመመሰረት ውሳኔ በየዞኑ ወስኖ ብትንትኑ በመውጣት ላይ ይገኛል። የድርጅቱ ሊመንበርና የሰላም ሚኒስተሯ ወሮ ሙፍሪያት በግምባሩ (ኢህዴግ) ሆነው ማንን እንደሚወክሉ እና የየትኛውን ቡድን ፍላጎት ለሟሟላት እንደሚሰሩ ማወቅ ኣስቸጋሪ ቢሆንም ይህ ጥያቄ መነሳት ያለበት ኣሁን በመበታተን ላይ ካሉት የኣመራር ኣባላትና የድርጅቱ ምክርቤት ነው። በእርግጥ የሚያለፍ ጉዳይ ኣይሆንም።

ይህ በእንዲህ እንዳለ በትጥቅ ትግሉ ሂደት እጅግ ትልቅ መስዋእት በመክፈል ደርግን ላይመለስ በመገርስስ፣ ኢህኣዴግን በመመስረት እና ኣዲስቷን ኢትዮጵያ በመገንባት የኣንበሳውን ድርሻ የሚወስደው ህወሓት ደግሞ ወይ እንደ ሌሎቹ ኣባል ድርጅቶች ያደረጉት ኣይነት ከሌሎች ድርጅቶች ጋር ውህደት ሳይፈጥር  ኣሊያም የግምባሩ ኣባል ድርጅቶች እያደረጉት ስላለው ሌላ ውህደት ምንም ኣይነት ጥያቄም ሳያነሳ በተግባር በፈረሰው ግምባር ውስጥ መቀጠል የመረጠ ይመስላል። ለምን ይሆን? መገመት ያስቸግራል።
ኢህኣዴግን በሊቀመንበርነት እየመሩ ያሉት ኣብይ ኣህመድ እና ተቃዋሚ ድርጅቶች ሰሞኑን ባደረጉት የምክክር መድረክ የለፖለቲካ ድርጅቶች ብዛት እንደ ችግር በመታየቱ ድርጅቶች ውህደት በመፈጸም ኣሁን ያለው ብዛት ወደ ሶስትና ኣራት ድርጅቶች ቢወርድ ለኣገሪቱና ለፖለቲካ ምህዳሩ እንደሚጠቅም በኣፅኖት ሃሳብ ቀርበዋል። የወቅቱ የጎራ መደባለልቅና የኢህኣዴግ እጣ ፈንታ ኣስመልክቶ ነሃሴ ወር ላይ በፃፍኩዋት ኣንድ ኣጠር ያለች ፅሁፍ እንደሚከተለው ብየ ነበር:

‘’ውሎ ኣድሮ ሁሉም የኢህኣዴግ ኣባል ድርጅቶች እስከ ኣሁን የሄዱበት መንገድ እና በየጎራቸው የፈጠሩትን መርህ ኣልባ ግኑኝነት ያልተጠበቀ ውጤት ኣስከትሎ ኣዲስ ኣሰላለፍና ሁኔታ እስኪፈጠር ድረስ ትርምሱ ይቀጥላል። ኣሁን ባለው ሁኔታ ረጅም ርቀት እንደማይሄድ ከወዲሁ በርካታ ምልክቶች እያየን ነው።  በትክክል ለመተንበይ በሚያስቸግር የፖለቲካ ሁኔታ ላይ ሆነንም ቢሆን የኢህኣዴግ ቀጣይ ጉዞ ወዴት እንደሚያመራ ለመገመት ኣይከብድም።’’ ይላል። 

ወረድ ብሎሞ ‘’ተስፋ የሚደረገውና መሆን ያለበት ሁሉም የኢህኣዴግ ድርጅቶች ቆም ብለው ራሳቸውን ከኣባል ድርጅቶች ጋር ማወዳደርን ትተው ውስጣዊ የፖለቲካ ኣቋማቸውን ቢፈተሹና የዓላማ ኣንድነት እና መርህ ላይ የተመሰረተ የፖለቲካ ህብረትና ኣቅጣጫ ቢከተሉ ለኣገርም ሆነ ቆመንለታል ለሚሉት ህዝብ እንደሚጠቅም ኣጠያያቂ ኣይሆንም።’’  ይህ ግን የሚሆን ሆኖ ኣልተገኘም። ራሳቸውን ከመፈተሽና ካማስተካከል ይልቅ ኣንዱ ኣንደኛውን በማጥቆርና በማጥላላት ክህብረቱ ውጭ ሌላ ውህደት ለመፈጸም መርጠዋል። ያውም በዓላማ ከመቃረን በላይ በትጥቅ ትግል ሲፈልጉዋቸው ከነበሩ ድርጅቶች ጋርም ጭምር።
እዚህ ላይ ግን ‘’ኣባል ድርጅቶቹ ሲከተሉት ከነበሩት የኢህኣዴግ የጋራ የፖለቲካ ፕሮግራም ውጭ ለመሄድ ከፈለጉም እንደ ከህደት ሳይሆን እንደ  መብታቸው መታየት ይኖርበታል። ሲጀምር በሁሉም ነገር መቶ ለመቶ ተስማምተው ኣልነበረም ግንባር የፈጠሩት። ሲቀጥል ጊዜ የሚወልዳቸው ኣዳዲስ ሁኔታዎች ጋር ኣመለካከትና ስልት የመቀየር ፍላጎትች ልዩነት እንደሚፈጠሩ ከግምት ውስጥ ማስገባት የግድ ይላል። የፖለቲካ ኣቅጣጫ ለመቀየር ግን በሌሎች፣ ያውም ኣብሮህ በኣንድ ፕሮግራም ጥላ ስር አየታገለ ባለው ድርጅትና እሱ በሚመራው ህዝብ ላይ የፖለቲካ ሴራ መጎንጎን እና ዘረኝነት እንደ መሳሪያ መጠቀም የግድ ኣይልም። ለሁሉም ኣይጠቅምና።’’ በማለት ምክሬን ለግሻለሁ።

በመጨረሻም ‘’የኢህኣዴግ ኣባል ድርጅቶች ኣሁን እየታየ ያለውን የተዘበራረቀ የፖለቲካ ኣቋም ኣጥርተው ግንባሩም በይፋ ኣፍርሰው ሁሉም ወደየ ጎራቸው የሚቀላቀሉበት ጊዜ ሩቅ ኣይሆንም። እስከ ኣሁን በኣሰራር ያፈረሱት ቢሆንም በኢህኣዴግ ምክንያት የመጣውን ስልጣን ድልድዩ እስኪሻገሩበት ድረስ ግንባሩን በይፋ ማፍረስ ኣልተፈለገም። በእርግጥ ጠ/ሚንስትሩ ኣንዴ ‘’ኢህኣዴግ የትም የለም’’ ሲሉ ኣስፈላጊ ሆኖ ሲገኝ ደግሞ ‘’ኢህኣዴግ ከምን ጊዜ በላይ ጠንካራ ሆነዋል’’ በማለት እርስ በርሱ የሚቃረን ንግግር ሲያደርጉ ተደምጠዋል።’’ የሆነ ሆኖ በኣዋጅ ኣልተነገርም ካልሆነ በስተቀር ግምባሩ በተግባር ፈርሰዋል። በመሆኑም ኣባል ድርጅቶችም ህጋዊ ፍቺ ኣድርገው፣ ያላቸው ንብረት እና ሰነድ ተካፋፍለው ወደየ ጎራቸው በመዋሃድ ኣሊያም ብግል ለቀጣዩ ምርጫ ዝግጅት ቢያደርጉ ይመከራል።  

በዚህ ጸሃፊ ሁኔታን መሠረት ያደረገ ግምት፣ ድርጅቶቹ የሚከተሉትን የኢኮኖሚና የማህበረ ሰብ ልማትን በተመለከተ ለስሙ ካልሆነ በስተቀር የፊልሚያቸው ዋና ኣጀንዳ የሚያጠነጥነው ህወሓት ኢህኣዴግ የሰራትን ፌደራላዊት ኢትዮጵያን ኣፍርሶ የመስራት ጉዳይ ወይም በትንሽ ለውጥ ማስቀጠል ስለሚሆን ቀጣዩን የስርኣት ግንባትን በሚመለከት የኢትዮጵያ የፖለቲካ ሃይሎች በሁለት ጎራ መከፈላቸው ኣይቀርም። በዋናነት የፌደራል ስርኣት የሚከትሉ ድርጅቶች ስብስብ እና ኣሃዳዊ ስርኣትን መከተል የሚፈልጉ ሲሆኑ፣ በተላየዩ ፖለቲካዊና የኣቋም መዋዥቅ ወይም እርግጠኛ ያለመሆን እንዲሁም ግላዊ ምክንያቶች በሁለቱም ጎራ የማይቀላቀል ሌላ ስብስብ ወይም በተናጥል የሚቀር መኖሩ ኣይቀሬ ነው።
 
በኣጭሩ የኢትዮጵያ ዕጣ ፈንታ የሚወሰነው በእነዚህ ሁለት ጎራዎች (ፌደራልሲት እና ኣሃዳዊ ስርኣትን የሚሉ) መካከል በሚደርግ ፍትጊያ ሲሆን ሂደቱ በሰላማዊ ከሆነ ኣገራችን የማስቀጠል ዕድል ይኖራል በተቃራኒው ከሆነ ደግሞ ኣስከፊ እና ተመልሶ ሊጠገን የማይችል የመበተን ኣደጋ ሊያጋጥም ይችላል። ምርጫው የድርጅቶቹና ተከታዮቻቸው ነው። 

( ምንጭ: ዓይጋ ፎረም )

Monday, 26 November 2018

The Gulf Scramble for Africa: GCC states’ foreign policy laboratory, By Will Todman (Center for Strategic & International Studies) Part II

Bolstering Diplomatic Credentials

GCC states have expanded their diplomatic ties with sub-Saharan African states to bolster their growing economic and security interests, while also advancing their ambitions to play a more prominent role in international foreign policy. Gulf states have opened dozens of new embassies across sub-Saharan Africa in recent years and have made assertive diplomatic interventions in African conflicts. The perception of the United States’ withdrawal from the region has partially motivated these interventions. Mediating conflicts is a key element of GCC states’ aim to increase their international prestige, and their perceived neutrality and ability to deploy substantial economic incentives to bolster peace agreements has afforded them some notable successes where others have failed.
In recent years, Qatar has opened the largest number of embassies in sub-Saharan Africa of any state other than Turkey. Qatar built 11 new embassies between 2013 and 2015 while the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait opened nine, six, and two respectively between 2010 and 2018.32 The UAE has announced plans to open embassies in Cote d’Ivoire and Mauritius in 2019, while Qatar also plans to open more embassies in sub-Saharan Africa in the near future.33 As well as the benefits of upgraded diplomatic relations, establishing embassies allows Gulf states to better protect their economic and security interests and coordinate policy more effectively. Prominent Gulf officials have also made an increasing number of official visits to sub-Saharan Africa and GCC states have hosted African dignitaries in recent times. Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir recently conducted 18 shuttle visits to Africa.34



 Abu Dhabi's Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan receives Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed (L) and Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki (R) at the presidential palace in Abu Dhabi on July 24, 2018.

The 2018 Jeddah Peace Agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea is Gulf states’ most recent mediation success, but they have facilitated peace negotiations in sub-Saharan Africa for more than a decade. As well as aiming to end bloodshed and instability, GCC states have engaged in peace negotiations to bolster their international prestige (as states have done throughout history), to gain influence in strategic locations, and to create new economic opportunities.35 Shortly after Qatar negotiated a ceasefire between the Sudanese government and the largest opposition group in Darfur, the Justice and Equality Movement, it bought swathes of agricultural land in Sudan to improve its food security.36
Part of GCC states’ success in mediation is a result of their ability to offer significant economic incentives. When Sudan and Chad signed a reconciliation deal to stabilize Darfur and neighboring areas of Chad in Saudi Arabia in 2007, the Sudanese minister of state for foreign relations said that Saudi Arabia had promised to “help Sudan and Muslims everywhere,” hinting at promises of financial assistance without providing details.37 Saudi Arabia and the UAE recently pledged large aid and investment packages to Ethiopia and Eritrea while mediating an end to the 20-year conflict. The UAE announced it would provide a total of $3 billion in aid and investment to Ethiopia in June 2018 and unveiled plans to build an oil pipeline between Ethiopia and Eritrea shortly thereafter.38
The perception that Gulf states are relatively neutral in African conflicts has bolstered their success in mediation. They do not carry the weight of the legacy of European colonialism, for example. The UAE maintained ties with Eritrea when it was isolated by the international community, bolstering its image as a balanced negotiator between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Qatar has strived to develop a reputation as an honest and reliable powerbroker by mediating various conflicts across the Middle East and Africa and has played a prominent role in negotiations between Eritrea and Sudan, Chad and Sudan, and Eritrea and Djibouti. However, some of these mediation attempts have failed to achieve lasting peace resolutions because of its limited power projection capabilities, a lack of professional personnel on the ground, and a broader lack of experience of mediating highly complex conflicts.39
The perception that Gulf states are relatively neutral in African conflicts has bolstered their success in mediation.

The Opportunities, Risks, and Limits of GCC influence

Gulf states have leveraged their growing economic, security, and diplomatic influence in sub-Saharan Africa to push back on their rivals’ influence and gain international backing in their own disputes. They have promised aid and investment, offered to enhance security cooperation, and even agreed to improve African migrants’ rights in GCC states to encourage sub-Saharan African states to give them diplomatic support. Gulf states successfully used these tools of influence to convince African states to downgrade their ties with Iran, thereby containing Iran’s presence in the Horn of Africa. But African states have been most significantly affected by the fallout of the 2017 intra-GCC dispute, as it highlighted the risks and opportunities created by Gulf states’ zero-sum rivalry. The Gulf crisis also revealed limits to GCC states’ influence, showing that they have not yet managed to achieve the loyalty of most African states.
Saudi Arabia has long sought to contain Iran’s influence in Africa, particularly in East Africa. Iran developed a military cooperation and intelligence sharing relationship with Sudan, using it as a shipping point for arms to Iran’s partners and proxies in the Middle East until 2015.40 Saudi Arabia’s offers of substantial diplomatic and economic incentives to break ties with Iran proved sufficient. It helped free Sudan from its diplomatic isolation and deposited $1 billion in Sudan’s central bank in 2015, shortly before Sudan cut ties with Iran.41 Saudi Arabia also signed a security agreement with Djibouti as it finalized a deal to build a military base there, enhancing its military projection capabilities and further countering Iran’s influence.42 These diplomatic, economic, and security tools have reduced Iran’s influence in the Horn of Africa significantly.
The Gulf crisis also revealed limits to GCC states’ influence, showing that they have not yet managed to achieve the loyalty of most African states.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have had less success in containing Qatar’s influence in Africa, and the intra-GCC rivalry has had a destabilizing impact on parts of the Horn of Africa. When the Quartet powers of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt broke ties with Qatar on June 5, 2017, they sought the backing of sub-Saharan African states. Comoros, Eritrea, Mauritania, Mauritius, and Senegal all stood with the Quartet and cut ties with Qatar, while Chad, Djibouti, and Niger downgraded their ties. Many of these states received aid and investment from Saudi and UAE bodies in the following months, indicating that even if they were not offered these incentives as a direct exchange for their diplomatic solidarity, they received economic rewards shortly afterward. The King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center provided over $250 million in aid for refugees in Djibouti in August 2017, and Saudi Arabia signed agreements to advance trade, investment, and tourism cooperation with Mauritius the following month.43 Meanwhile, the Abu Dhabi Fund for Development made $50 million available for Emirati companies wishing to invest in Chad and gave Comoros a grant of over $10 million to bolster its electricity network.44
However, prominent states in sub-Saharan Africa resisted Saudi and Emirati pressure and remained neutral, revealing limits to GCC states’ influence in the region. Despite receiving significant investment packages from Saudi Arabia in the years preceding the Gulf crisis, Sudan refused to take sides in what its foreign ministry described as a “sorrowful development” and offered to mediate instead.45 Qatar was a prominent investor that Sudan could not afford to lose. South Africa also opted to remain neutral, with the South African ambassador to Doha saying his country would resist pressure from the UAE and Saudi Arabia to isolate Qatar because doing so would be “against the values Mandela fought for.”46 The Nigerian foreign minister stated that he had come under pressure from both sides to back them but reaffirmed Nigeria’s neutrality.47 The president of the African Union, President Alpha Condé of Guinea, wrote to King Salman of Saudi Arabia calling for dialogue and expressing support for Kuwaiti mediation.48

Meanwhile, Qatar pushed back by exerting its own influence. The Qatari emir toured Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, and Senegal in December 2017 in a challenge to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Qatar’s agreements to cooperate on counterterrorism with Burkina Faso and Mali were particularly significant, as one of the Quartet’s principal accusations against Qatar was its support for terrorism abroad.49 Senegal and Chad reinstated diplomatic relations with Qatar in August 2017 and February 2018 respectively.50
Some African countries have managed to benefit from the dispute by enhancing economic ties with Gulf states on both sides of the GCC feud, in effect playing them off against each other. South Africa increased its commercial trade with Qatar by 70 percent after the blockade was imposed and specifically offered to help Qatar overcome its subsequent food insecurity resulting from regional isolation.51 Meanwhile, South Africa accepted a $10 billion investment pledge from the UAE, focusing on the mining and tourism sectors, and an additional $10 billion pledge from Saudi Arabia, focusing on its energy sector.52 Sudan has also continued to receive investment from both Qatar and Saudi Arabia since the blockade. In March 2018, Qatar and Sudan signed a $4 billion deal to manage a Red Sea port jointly, and the Saudi ambassador to Sudan announced in October 2018 that the Kingdom now invests more than $12 billion in Sudan.53 Ethiopia has benefited from new investment pledges from various Gulf states, as well as negotiating improved rights for its migrant workers in the UAE.54 These African states have managed to benefit significantly from Gulf states’ attempts to woo them, while resisting GCC states’ attempts to force them to take sides.
Some African countries have managed to benefit from the dispute by enhancing economic ties with Gulf states on both sides of the GCC feud.
Yet, the zero-sum rivalry between GCC states has also carried great risks for more vulnerable African states. Somalia came under intense pressure to choose a side in the dispute. It enjoyed close ties with Qatar’s ally Turkey, which donated more than $1 billion in aid, but was also highly dependent on Saudi Arabia, its largest export partner, and enjoyed a close security partnership with the UAE. When Somali president Farmajo refused to support Saudi Arabia and the UAE, reportedly turning down a large aid package, a diplomatic spat escalated resulting in the UAE increasing its support for Somalia’s federal states and ending a military training program. The European Parliament passed a resolution condemning the UAE and Saudi Arabia for depriving Somalia of regular budgetary support payments, saying the move destabilized the country by weakening the government’s ability to pay its security forces.55 Emirati officials said support would only be reinstated when Farmajo apologized for his “unfounded allegations.”56 The threat of instability also arose in Djibouti when Qatar withdrew its peacekeeping forces from the Eritrean border in retaliation for Djibouti’s and Eritrea’s support of the Quartet in the dispute.57 Eritrea claimed control over the disputed territories of Mount Dumeira and the island of Dumeira, prompting the UN secretary general’s spokesperson to warn that the GCC conflict was affecting the African side of Bab al-Mandeb.58

Outlook

GCC states’ interventions in sub-Saharan Africa bring important opportunities for African states, and some have even benefited from Gulf rivalries. Several sub-Saharan African states have seized the opportunity to expand their economic ties with states on both sides of the dispute, effectively playing them off against each other. More broadly, Gulf states will likely continue their efforts to expand their trade and investment with sub-Saharan Africa as they pursue their economic diversification plans. Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s successful mediation of the Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict may also encourage Gulf states to use their growing influence to expand their role as powerbrokers in Africa or beyond. Emirati officials, for example, suggested that the UAE would be well-placed to negotiate the dispute over the Nile between Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia and is ready to do so.59The Saudi minister of state for Africa recently indicated support for more assertive interventions throughout Africa. He stated that Saudi Arabia’s lack of engagement in Africa had created opportunities for other states to “cause troubles” and remarked that Saudi Arabia was now “on the right track” to deepen ties with every African country. 60Meanwhile, Emirati officials said the UAE did not need to change its approach but intended to continue to deepen and broaden ties across Africa. 61
But as GCC states’ economic and security interests in Africa grow and their interventions become more assertive, the impact of their rivalries in Africa is becoming increasingly damaging. Their zero-sum rivalry has provoked retaliations, which have dangerously destabilized vulnerable parts of Africa. New tensions are also arising. Although GCC states have effectively contained Iran’s influence in East Africa, Iran maintains influence in West Africa, which is increasingly the site of Arab Gulf interventions. Tensions between Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey in the Horn of Africa are also rising. Turkey has increased its interventions in Africa substantially in the past 15 years. Since 2003, Turkey has increased its trade with Africa six-fold to $17.4 billion, built 29 new embassies, and opened its first overseas African base in Somalia. 62 Turkey’s attempts to bolster its presence in the Red Sea by restoring the Sudanese port on Suakin Island create an additional source of tension with Gulf states.63 For Saudi Arabia, the stakes are getting higher. Meanwhile, the United States’ reduced commitment to the region means it is missing opportunities to mitigate the consequences of regional crises.


Implications for policymakers in the United States

As GCC states consolidate their status as important actors in sub-Saharan Africa, new opportunities are emerging for the United States to cooperate with its Gulf partners in the region. U.S. policymakers could further capitalize on GCC states’ desire to prove their credentials as serious partners in counterterrorism to share the burden of the security role in sub-Saharan Africa. Similarly, opportunities to collaborate on conflict mediation exist. Peace negotiations could benefit from a combination of GCC states’ ability to offer African actors substantial economic incentives and U.S. diplomats’ extensive experience with the history and complexity of African conflicts. Gulf states can also help advance the United States’ development goals in sub-Saharan Africa. More extensive collaboration in building infrastructure and urban development would be especially worthwhile.
U.S. policymakers could further capitalize on GCC states’ desire to prove their credentials as serious partners in counterterrorism to share the burden of the security role in sub-Saharan Africa.
However, as GCC states’ presence in sub-Saharan Africa continues to expand, U.S. policymakers should expect them to act increasingly independently and less in concert with Western states. Gulf states have not always shared the United States’ emphasis on and concern for governance issues in Africa. Differing approaches and priorities could increasingly prove an obstacle to collaboration attempts, and given Gulf states’ relative success in Africa, there is no reason to assume they would wish to adjust to the U.S. approach. The potential for intra-GCC rivalries to affect Gulf states’ policies in sub-Saharan Africa also represents a challenge to collaboration with the United States, as U.S. policymakers may find it harder to predict Gulf states’ behavior and reach consensus between them.
More broadly, the United States could learn from GCC states’ economic approach to Africa. The United States is currently ceding opportunities for economic investment in Africa to other powers, including China, Turkey, and the Gulf states. Part of the reason for the United States’ disengagement from Africa may be that it does not fear security threats emanating from Africa to the same degree Gulf states do. However, that should not prevent the United States from sharing Gulf states’ view that Africa is an important area for economic growth.


Implications for policymakers in Arab Gulf states

Gulf states often favor a unilateral approach in their interventions in sub-Saharan Africa, but they could benefit from working in partnership with like-minded international powers. As GCC states rapidly expand their global footprint, they will need to commit significant resources to protect it. Although they need to be prepared to step in when instability poses risks to their interests, increasing multilateral cooperation on security would be an effective way of protecting GCC states’ economic interests, while also building the capacity of their own security apparatuses and sharing the security burden. As they increase their mediating role in Africa, Gulf states could also benefit from the experience of countries that have historically had deeper ties with sub-Saharan Africa and more extensive involvement in diplomatic negotiations, such as the United States and European powers. When seeking economic collaborations, Gulf policymakers will need to be sensitive to other powers’ differing priorities. Western donors are particularly sensitive about corruption issues, for example, and are more likely to impose strict conditions on investment activities.
As GCC states increase their interventions in Africa, they must continue to broaden and deepen their ties with African states. To secure their economic interests in an arena of greater international competition, they should enhance their lateral engagement with African governments significantly to ensure that their interventions are meeting African governments’ needs and priorities. Such engagement will help ensure that African governments continue to view them as attractive partners and make interventions safer and more sustainable. Part of this approach should involve building people-to-people ties. GCC states should expand opportunities for educational exchange, training collaborations, and tourism links with countries in sub-Saharan Africa to capitalize on the potential of young people in Africa and enhance their reputation more broadly.
Will Todman is an associate fellow in the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
This brief is made possible in part through the generous support of the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates.
CSIS Briefs are produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
© 2018 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

1 “King Salman Sponsors the Jeddah Peace Agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea” Al Hayat, September 18, 2018, https://bit.ly/2Nmo5Tp.
“Dubai Chamber Report Explores Entrepreneurs’ Role in Bolstering Africa-GCC Economic Ties” Dubai Chamber of Commerce, October 28, 2017, http://www.dubaichamber.com/whats-happening/chamber_news/dubai-chamber-report-explores-entrepreneurs-role-in-bolstering-africa-gcc-economic-ties.
3 “South Africa says Saudi Arabia to invest $10 billion in the Country, Focus on Energy,” Reuters, July 12, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-saudi-energy/saudi-arabia-to-invest-at-least-10-billion-in-southafrica-focus-on-energy-south-africa-presidency-idUSKBN1K22JR.
“Sudan, Qatar to sign $4 billion deal to manage Red Sea port – ministry,” Reuters, March 26, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sudan-qatar/sudan-qatar-to-sign-4-billion-deal-to-manage-red-sea-port-ministry-idUSKBN1H22WH.
5 “China’s Xi pledges $60 billion in financing for Africa,” Associated Press, September 3, 2018, https://www.apnews.com/1fc21c4b22144b26bf1253d8f5c623c1; Judd Devermont, “The World is Coming to Sub-Saharan Africa. Where is the United States?” CSIS Briefs, August 24, 2018, 3, https://www.csis.org/analysis/world-coming-sub-saharan-africa-where-united-states.
Data accessed from the Observatory of Economic Complexity, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/are/show/all/2016/
Data accessed from the Observatory of Economic Complexity, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/import/are/show/all/2016/
8 Wim Plaizier, “Two truths about Africa’s agriculture,” World Economic Forum, January 22, 2016, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/how-africa-can-feed-the-world/.
Author’s interview with Qatari official, October 2018; Eckart Woertz, Samir Pradhan, Nermina Biberovic, and Chan Jingzhong, “Potential for GCC Agro-investments in Africa and Central Asia,” Gulf Research Center, September 2008, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/111335/Potential_for_GCC_Agro_5729.pdf.
10 Michael Wilerson, “Why is Saudi Arabia buying up African farmland?” Foreign Policy, July 15, 2009, https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/07/15/why-is-saudi-arabia-buying-up-african-farmland/.
11 “Qatar invests half billion dollars in Sudan agriculture, food sectors,” Al Araby, June 20, 2018, https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/6/30/qatar-invests-half-billion-dollars-in-sudan-agriculture-.
12 Nick Wadhams, “Kenyan activists fight land deal with Qatar,” The National, June 6, 2009, https://www.thenational.ae/world/africa/kenyan-activists-fight-land-deal-with-qatar-1.517567.
13 In 2011, Saudi Arabia provided the largest donation from a Muslim country to the United Nations’ Somalia famine appeal, swiftly giving $50 million. “Saudi Arabia donates $50 million to save the lives of Somali children,” World Food Programme, August 23, 2011, https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/saudi-arabia-donates-us50-million-help-save-lives-somali-children.
14 For example, Islamic charities have built mosques and wells, funded Qur’anic schools, and built orphanages as well as provided humanitarian relief in Africa. See: African Muslims Agency South Africa website, https://africamuslimsagency.co.za/achievements/.
15 Mayke Kaag, “Gulf Charities in Africa” in Robert Lacey and Jonathan Benthall, Gulf Charities and Islamic Philanthropy in the “Age of Terror” and Beyond (Berlin: Gerlach Press, 2014), 82.
16 Tom Heneghan, “Special Report: Gaddafi’s secret missionaries,” Reuters, March 29, 2012, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-missionary/special-report-gaddafis-secret-missionaries-idUSBRE82S07T20120329.
17 Kaag, “Gulf Charities in Africa,” 79-94.
18 Senegal is the only sub-Saharan African country to have hosted IOC summit, having hosted the 6th and 11th summits in Dakar in 1991 and 2008. “Islamic Summit,” Organization of Islamic Cooperation, https://www.oic-oci.org/confdetail/?cID=6&lan=en.
19 Marko Valenta and Jo Jakobsen, “Nexus of armed conflicts and migrations to the Gulf: Migrations to the GCC from war-torn source countries in Asia, Africa, and the Arab neighborhood,” Middle Eastern Studies, 54:1 (2018).
20 Rashid Abdi, “A Dangerous Gulf in the Horn: How the Inter-Arab Crisis is Fuelling Regional Tensions,” International Crisis Group, August 3, 2017, https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/gulf-and-arabian-peninsula/dangerous-gulf-horn-how-inter-arab-crisis-fuelling-regional-tensions; Valenta and Jakobsen, “Nexus of armed conflicts and migrations to the Gulf”; Preeti Kannan, “UAE to stop issuing work visas to Ethiopian labourers and domestic help,” The National, August 2, 2012, https://www.thenational.ae/uae/uae-to-stop-issuing-work-visas-to-ethiopian-labourers-and-domestic-help-1.398079.
21John K. Cooley, Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America, and International Terrorism (Pluto Press: London, 2002), 15.
22James Bridger and Jay Bahadur, “The Wild West in East Africa,” Foreign Policy, May 30, 2013, https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-wild-west-in-east-africa/.
23 Alex Mello and Michael Knights, “West of Suez for the United Arab Emirates,” War on the Rocks, September 2, 2016, https://warontherocks.com/2016/09/west-of-suez-for-the-united-arab-emirates/.
24 “The United Arab Emirates Joins an Exclusive Club,” Stratfor Worldview, December 8, 2016, https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/uae-joins-exclusive-club.
25 “Djibouti finalizing deal for Saudi Arabian military base,” Financial Times, January 17, 2017, https://www.ft.com/content/c8f63492-dc14-11e6-9d7c-be108f1c1dce.
26 Giorgio Cafiero, “Sudan gets $2.2B for joining Saudi Arabia, Qatar in Yemen war,” Al Monitor, November 23, 2015, https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/11/sudan-saudi-arabia-war-yemen-houthi-economy.html.
27 “Saudi Arabia to sign economic and defense cooperation with Sudan,” Al Bawaba, May 7, 2018, https://www.albawaba.com/business/saudi-arabia-sign-economic-and-defence-cooperation-sudan-1127524.
28 “UAE ends programme to train Somalia’s military,” Reuters, April 15, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-emirates-somalia-military/uae-ends-programme-to-train-somalias-military-idUSKBN1HM0Y5.
29 Kamal Alam and Wajahat S Khan, “Saudi Arabia’s Islamic Anti-Terrorism Effort: A Coalition of the Willing of an Anti-Iran Front?” Royal United Services Institute, December 6, 2017, https://rusi.org/commentary/saudi-arabia%E2%80%99s-islamic-anti-terrorism-effort-coalition-willing-or-anti-iran-front.
30 Of the 41 member countries in the IMCTC, 21 are from sub-Saharan Africa. See: “Member Countries,” Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition, https://imctc.org/English/Members.
31Author’s interview with Emirati official, October 2018; President Trump cited “historic change” in the Middle East with Gulf countries contributing more to counterterrorism efforts “thanks to our approach” in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 25, 2018. See: “Remarks by President Trump to the 73 rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly, New York, NY,” White House, September 25, 2018, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-73rd-session-united-nations-general-assembly-new-york-ny/.
32 An official in the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (MOFAIC) told the author the UAE opened the following embassies between 2010 and 2018: Ethiopia (2010); Kenya (2012); Guinea (2015); Angola, Mozambique, and Seychelles (2016); Chad and Ghana (2017); Rwanda (2018); it also reopened its embassy in Somalia in 2014 which had been closed since 1992 and opened a consulate in Djibouti in 2012. Data for Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait from Devermont, “The World is Coming to Sub-Saharan Africa.”
33 “UAE to establish Cote d’Ivoire embassy, Tanzania consulate,” Gulf Business, August 13, 2018, http://gulfbusiness.com/uae-establish-cote-divoire-embassy-tanzania-consulate/; “Reinforcing economic and bilateral ties with the United Arab Emirates,” Economic Development Board Mauritius, April 2018, http://www.edbmauritius.org/Newsletter/2018/April/cooperation.html; Author’s interview with Qatari official, October 2018.
34 “Qattan: We have reversed the effects of disturbances and troubles in Africa,” Asharq al-Awsat, September 14, 2018, https://bit.ly/2NGBpBn.
35 Mehran Kamrava, “Mediation and Qatari Foreign Policy,” Middle East Journal, Vol. 65, No. 4, (Autumn 2011), 541.
36 Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, “Qatar’s mediation initiativies,” NOREF Policy Brief, February 2013, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/160109/da1df25567ebd34af26d634892934b03.pdf.
37 “Sudan, Chad sign reconciliation deal in Saudi,” Reuters, May 3, 2007, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sudan-chad-deal/sudan-chad-sign-reconciliation-deal-in-saudi-idUSL037019420070503.
38 “UAE to give Ethiopia $3 billion to ease foreign currency shortage,” Africa News, June 16, 2018, http://www.africanews.com/2018/06/16/uae-to-give-ethiopia-3-billion-to-ease-foreign-currency-shortage/; “Assab to Addis Ababa: UAE plans Ethiopia-Eritrea oil pipeline,” Africa News, August 11, 2018, http://www.africanews.com/2018/08/11/assab-to-addis-ababa-uae-plans-ethiopia-eritrea-oil-pipeline/.
39 Kamrava, “Mediation and Qatari foreign policy,” 556.
40 Gerald Feierstein and Craig Greathead, “The Fight for Africa: The new focus of the Saudi-Iranian rivalry,” Middle East Institute Policy Focus 2017-2, September 2017, 1, https://www.mei.edu/sites/default/files/publications/PF2_Feierstein_AfricaSaudiIran_web_4.pdf; “Iran plays major role in Sudan arms sector, study finds,” AFP, May 12, 2014, https://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-plays-major-role-in-sudan-arms-sector-study-finds/.
41 “Saudi Arabia deposits $1bn in Sudan central bank,” AFP, August 13, 2015, https://gulfnews.com/news/mena/sudan/saudi-arabia-deposits-1b-in-sudan-central-bank-1.1566103.
42 “Djibouti finalizing deal for Saudi Arabian military base,” Financial Times, January 17, 2017, https://www.ft.com/content/c8f63492-dc14-11e6-9d7c-be108f1c1dce.
43 “Yemen refugees in Djibouti benefit from over $250 million in Saudi aid,“ Asharq al-Awsat, August 27, 2017, https://eng-archive.aawsat.com/theaawsat/news-middle-east/saudi-arabia/yemen-refugees-djibouti-benefit-250-million-saudi-aid; “Mauritius and Saudi Arabia to consolidate existing bilateral relations,” Republic of Mauritius, September 12, 2017, http://www.govmu.org/English/News/Pages/Mauritius-and-Saudi-Arabia-to-consolidate-existing-bilateral-relations.aspx.
44 “Abu Dhabi fund allocates $50m for Chad investments,” Arabian Business, September 14, 2017, https://www.arabianbusiness.com/industries/banking-finance/378661-abu-dhabi-fund-allocates-50-for-chad-investments; “ADFD earmarks AED40 million grant to bolster electricity network in Comoros,” WAM (Emirates News Agency), September 23, 2017, http://wam.ae/en/details/1395302634030.
45 “Sudan: Foreign Ministry issues statement on step of Arab countries to cut relations with Qatar,” All Africa, June 5, 2017, https://allafrica.com/stories/201706060265.html.
46 “South Africa rejects Saudi, UAE pressure to boycott Qatar,” Middle East Monitor, July 21, 2018, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180721-south-africa-rejects-saudi-uae-pressure-to-boycott-qatar/.
47 Anthony Harwood, “Qatar: Nigeria Calls for Lift of Blockade,” The Nation, October 4, 2017, http://thenationonlineng.net/qatar-nigeria-calls-for-lift-of-blockade/.
48 Tamba Simika, « Crise du Golfe : Alpha Condé se pose en médiateur » Deutsche Welle, June 12, 2017, https://www.dw.com/fr/crise-du-golfe-alpha-cond%C3%A9-se-pose-en-m%C3%A9diateur/a-39219624.
49 “Qatar boosts ties with Mali, Burkina Faso,” The Peninsula , December 22, 2017, https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/22/12/2017/Qatar-boosts-ties-with-Mali,-Burkina-Faso.
50 “Senegal restores its ambassador to Qatar,” Anadolu Agency, August 22, 2017, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/senegal-restores-its-ambassador-to-qatar/890618; “Chad and Qatar restore ties cut in wake of Arab states rift,” Reuters, February 21, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gulf-qatar-chad/chad-and-qatar-restore-ties-cut-in-wake-of-arab-states-rift-idUSKCN1G515I.
51 “Qatar-South Africa trade rises by 70 percent post siege,” The Peninsula, August 29, 2018, https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/29/08/2018/Qatar,-South-Africa-trade-rises-by-70-post-siege-Envoy; “South Africa keen to assist Qatar on food security needs: Envoy,” The Peninsula, March 18, 2018, https://thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/18/03/2018/South-Africa-keen-to-assist-Qatar-on-food-security-needs-Envoy
52 “UAE pledges $10bn in investment, South Africa says,” Gulf Business, July 15, 2018, http://gulfbusiness.com/uae-pledges-10bn-investment-south-africa-says/ ; Justina Crabtree, “Saudi Arabia to power up South Africa’s energy sector with multi-billion dollar investment,” CNBC, July 13, 2018, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/saudi-arabia-to-invest-billions-in-south-africa-energy.html.
53 “Sudan, Qatar set to sign $4 billion Red Sea port deal,” Al-Araby , March 27, 2018, https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/3/27/sudan-qatar-set-to-sign-4-billion-port-deal; “Ja’afar: The Kingdom’s current investments in Sudan exceed $12 billion,” Al-Riyadh, October 21, 2018 http://www.alriyadh.com/1712329.
54 Nick Webster and Anna Zacharias, “UAE agreement with Ethiopia will further protect rights of domestic workers,” The National, August 14, 2018, https://www.thenational.ae/uae/uae-agreement-with-ethiopia-will-further-protect-rights-of-domestic-workers-1.759812.
55 “European Parliament Resolution on Somalia 2018/2784,” European Parliament, April 7, 2018, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=P8-RC-2018-0323&format=XML&language=EN.
56Author’s interview with Emirati officials, October 2018.
57 “Qatar withdraws troops from Djibouti-Eritrea border mission,” Reuters, June 14, 2017, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gulf-qatar-djibouti/qatar-withdraws-troops-from-djibouti-eritrea-border-mission-idUSKBN1950W5.
58 “Power play, spurred by Iran’s ambitions, make waves in Red Sea,” The Arab Weekly, April 24, 2018, https://thearabweekly.com/power-plays-spurred-irans-ambitions-make-waves-red-sea.
59 Author’s interview with Emirati officials, October 2018.
60 “Qattan: We have reversed the effects of disturbances and troubles in Africa,” Asharq al-Awsat, September 14, 2018, https://bit.ly/2NGBpBn.
61 Author’s interview with Emirati officials, October 2018.
62 “Turkey reaping rewards of ‘Opening to Africa’,” Anadolu Agency, February 27, 2018, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/turkey-reaping-rewards-of-opening-to-africa/1075334.
63 Youssef Sheiko, “The United Arab Emirates: Turkey’s New Rival,” Washington Institute for Near East Policy Fikra Forum, February 16, 2018, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/fikraforum/view/the-united-arab-emirates-turkeys-new-rival.


 

The Gulf Scramble for Africa: GCC states’ foreign policy laboratory, By Will Todman (Center for Strategic & International Studies) Part I

 The Issue

  • Arab Gulf states are intervening more assertively in sub-Saharan Africa to capitalize on economic opportunities and protect their security interests.
  • They view Africa as a relatively uncontested arena in which they can experiment with foreign interventions as part of their strategy to prove their rising status on the world stage.
  • The impact of Gulf states’ rivalries in Africa is becoming increasingly damaging, as their zero-sum rivalry has provoked retaliations, which have dangerously destabilized vulnerable parts of Africa, such as during the fallout to the GCC crisis.

When the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia descended into bloody conflict in 1998, few could have predicted where a peace agreement would be signed some 20 years later. On September 16, 2018, the Eritrean and Ethiopian leaders sat at desks facing one another in the middle of a lavish hall in the Peace Palace in Jeddah. A huge portrait of Abdulaziz, Saudi Arabia’s first king, loomed over them. King Salman bin Abdulaziz sat underneath, with Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and the secretary general of the United Nations Antonio Guterres on either side. The optics were clear: It was under Saudi sponsorship that decades of conflict ended. The deal would be known as the “Jeddah Peace Agreement.”1
The Jeddah Peace Agreement is the latest example of Arab Gulf states’ increasingly assertive interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. Although the Arabian Peninsula shares historic religious, economic, and linguistic links with parts of sub-Saharan Africa, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states have rapidly deepened their economic and security ties across the African continent in the last decade, and a growing diplomatic role has followed. Gulf states are seeking to demonstrate their status on the world stage by acting as powerbrokers in African conflicts, and they have also attempted to secure the backing of African states in their own disputes. As they prepare to play a more significant role on the world stage, GCC states have come to view sub-Saharan Africa as a laboratory in which they can test more assertive international interventions.

Africa’s Economic Promise

Although Gulf Arabs have traded with Africans for centuries, the global financial crisis from 2007 to 2008 motivated GCC states to deepen their economic ties with Africa. With economies in the West slowing down, Africa’s fast-growing economies and expanding middle classes became an increasingly attractive prospect for investors across the world. But three other key factors prompted GCC states to turn to Africa. Building economic ties in Africa helped Gulf states capitalize on their geostrategic location, increase their food security, and enhance their reputation as benevolent Muslim actors. Expanding their economic influence in Africa has provided GCC states with their most important source of leverage to advance their security and diplomatic goals.
GCC states have advanced their strategies of economic diversification and reduced reliance on oil by investing in African markets, which became even more critical when oil prices crashed in 2014. The UAE invested an estimated $11 billion in capital in Africa in 2016, overtaking Saudi Arabia to become the largest GCC investor and the second largest in the world after China.2 Gulf companies’ expertise in the energy sector makes them especially attractive to African states seeking to develop their energy industries, and Saudi Arabia recently announced a $10 billion investment in South Africa’s energy sector.3 Meanwhile, Gulf states’ ability to execute large-scale infrastructure projects is also appealing to rapidly-developing African states. Dubai’s DP World announced an initial $50 million investment in an inland logistics facility in Mali in July 2018, complementing larger infrastructure investments in West Africa such as the Dakar port and economic zone. Qatar also signed a $4 billion deal to manage a Red Sea port with Sudan in March 2018.4
Building economic ties in Africa helped Gulf states capitalize on their geostrategic location, increase their food security, and enhance their reputation as benevolent Muslim actors.
The Gulf’s geostrategic location also explains why Africa has been a focus of GCC states’ economic activity. By focusing on infrastructure development and trade, GCC states are able to benefit from Asian trade and investment flows to Africa, which dwarf their own figures. China pledged $60 billion in financing to Africa in 2018 alone and increased its total trade with Africa by 180 percent from 2010 to 2017.5 The UAE has leveraged its superior shipping and port infrastructure to plug into this potential, becoming the largest GCC trader with Africa. The UAE imported roughly $5 billion of goods from Africa each year from 2010 to 2015, before increasing its imports substantially to $23.9 billion in 2016.6 Africa’s growing importance to Emirati trade is apparent from an examination of its imports. As a share of the UAE’s total imports, those from Africa quadrupled in the last six years.7

Gulf states also identified investing in Africa as a way to achieve food security. Saudi Arabia’s attempts to produce its own food stumbled a decade ago, and it has since embarked on a new food security strategy. Gulf states considered agricultural investments in Central Asia and Latin America but determined that Africa’s rich and underdeveloped agricultural lands held the greatest promise.8 Africa’s geographic proximity to the Gulf was an advantage; it contains 60 percent of the world’s total uncultivated arable lands; and its water shortages were deemed surmountable with appropriate investments.9 Saudi Arabia is the top investor in agriculture in Africa, conducting largescale investments such as its purchase of 500,000 hectares of land in Tanzania in 2009.10 For Qatar, the most dependent of Gulf states on food imports, the 2017 intra-GCC dispute added new urgency to its quest for food security as it relied heavily on food imports from its Gulf neighbors. The Qatari government announced plans in 2018 to invest half a billion dollars in Sudan’s agricultural and food sectors.11 However, Gulf states’ agricultural investments in Africa are not without controversy, as some of the states they leased land from struggle to produce enough food to feed their own populations. When Qatar entered into talks with Kenya in 2009 to lease 40,000 hectares of land in the Tana Delta, it was met with fierce local opposition.12
GCC states have also strengthened aid ties with various African states, largely motivated by their shared religious heritage. As well as GCC states’ generous donations to humanitarian appeals in the Horn of Africa, numerous Gulf charities have operated throughout Africa since the 1980s.13 The Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) and the Kuwaiti African Muslims Agency (AMA) were among the first state-sponsored Islamic charities to work in Africa. As well as their humanitarian objectives, Gulf Islamic organizations also play a missionary role, and many of their activities are influenced by Islam.14 Gulf charities targeted sub-Saharan Africa’s many Sufi orders to “re-educate” them according to their salafi form of Islam, and they also attempted to convert non-Muslims.15 Alarmed by the spread of Wahhabi Islam in Africa, Libya’s former dictator Muammar Gaddafi created the World Islamic Call Society to compete with Gulf charities in Africa and preach a Sufi-influenced version of Islam.16
The global war on terror in the early twenty-first century forced many Islamic charities to curtail their activities abroad after being accused of supporting terrorism, and it was not until the global financial crisis in 2008 that new openings in Africa emerged.17 When economies slowed in the West, some African leaders approached GCC states for economic assistance because of their wealth and religious ties. President Wade of Senegal actively strengthened ties with GCC states when he was in power from 2000 to 2012, emphasizing Senegal’s shared religious heritage with Gulf states by playing a prominent role in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.18 Expanding charitable activities in Africa serves to bolster GCC states’ reputations among Muslims in Africa and elsewhere as they are able to present themselves as beneficent actors that pursue philanthropic goals as well as their own economic interests in Africa.
The Qatari international NGO Qatar Charity distributes food to internally displaced people (IDPs) in Mogadishu, Somalia, on May 22, 2018. MOHAMED ABDIWAHAB/AFP/Getty Images

Migrant labor networks are another important element of the economic relationship between GCC states and sub-Saharan Africa. Many migrant workers from the Horn of Africa provide GCC states with cheap, unskilled labor. Although GCC states do not release detailed data on the migrant communities they host, Sudanese, Ethiopians, and Eritreans are thought to be the largest communities. The United Nations estimated that 540,000 Sudanese lived in GCC states in 2015, roughly a third of the entire Sudanese diaspora.19 Half a million Ethiopians and 100,000 Eritreans are believed to work in Saudi Arabia, while over 100,000 Ethiopians work in the UAE.20 Africans are not the largest migrant communities in GCC states, but their remittance flows are a critical source of income for countries in the Horn of Africa, meaning they represent an important source of GCC states’ economic influence in Africa.

Expanding Security Interests

As their economic interests in Africa have grown, Gulf states have also expanded their security presence. As well as supporting anti-piracy efforts in waters off Somalia, Gulf states have enhanced their military projection capabilities by building their first overseas bases in the Horn of Africa. They have also increased their military cooperation with African states and play a more prominent role in international counterterrorism operations across Africa. The expansion of Gulf states’ security influence in Africa has been possible thanks to their ability to wield their growing economic power.
Gulf states’ security interventions in Africa have been principally motivated by threats emanating from the Horn of Africa. In the 1970s, Saudi Arabia joined Egypt, Morocco, Iran, and France to establish an informal intelligence alliance known as the “Safari Club” to counter the spread of communism in Africa.21 Saudi Arabia perceived communism as a potential military and ideological threat, being especially alarmed by Soviet and Cuban military intervention in Ethiopia and the spread of Marxist liberation movements more broadly. More recently, the UAE controversially provided an initial grant of $50 million to support mercenaries in Puntland, Somalia, to defend its trade routes and fight piracy in waters off the Horn of Africa in 2010.22
The war in Yemen heightened Saudi Arabia’s and the UAE’s security interests in East Africa, shown by the fact that they built their first overseas military bases in the Horn of Africa to enhance their power projection capabilities. The two countries initially planned to use Djibouti as a base for their operations in Yemen, but a diplomatic spat in 2015 resulted in Djibouti evicting GCC troops from the base.23 The UAE then turned to the Eritrean deep-water port of Assab and built up its military infrastructure considerably in return for developing the port for Eritrea’s use. Assab now serves as the UAE’s main logistics hub for Yemen operations, hosting helicopters, jets, drones, and naval vessels. The UAE started to build a second base in Berbera, Somaliland, in 2017, adjacent to the port which DP World is developing as part of a $442 million deal.24 Saudi Arabia finalized a deal to build its first overseas military base in Djibouti in 2017, similarly aiming to protect its strategic interests in the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa.25
Gulf states have also worked to build military partnerships and intelligence sharing relationships with African countries, often offering economic incentives in return. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have recruited African forces to support their operations in Yemen as part of this approach. Saudi Arabia deposited $1 billion in Sudan’s central bank shortly after it contributed more than a thousand troops to the fight in Yemen in 2015.26 In 2018, a week after Sudanese Defense Minister Ali Ahmed Salim reviewed Sudan’s participation in the Yemen conflict, Saudi Arabia and Sudan signed a number of defense and economic cooperation agreements, resulting in Saudi Arabia promising more investment.27
Gulf states have increased their commitments to peacekeeping and counterterrorism operations in the Horn of Africa in recent years. Qatar deployed peacekeepers to the border between Eritrea and Djibouti for almost a decade, starting in 2008, but Gulf states have shown the most consistent interest fighting extremism in Somalia. As part of an African Union military mission to defeat an Islamist insurgency, the UAE trained and equipped hundreds of Somali troops from 2014 to 2018.28 When Saudi Arabia launched the Islamic Military Counterterrorism Coalition (IMCTC) in 2016, it announced it would provide Somalia with capacity-building support and training as one of its first steps.29 The IMCTC has enhanced military cooperation and intelligence sharing between GCC and sub-Saharan African states significantly, as all GCC states participate in the coalition and over half of its 41 member countries are sub-Saharan African states.30
But GCC states have also contributed to counterterrorism efforts in areas of significantly less strategic importance than the Horn of Africa. In 2017, Saudi Arabia and the UAE pledged $118 million and $35.4 million respectively to a counterterrorism force in West Africa’s Sahel region. Playing a more prominent role in counterterrorism in West Africa appears largely motivated by Gulf states’ desire to enhance their international reputation as serious partners in the fight against extremism, a policy repeatedly advocated by President Trump.31 As such, GCC states’ security interventions in Africa have been motivated by a desire to protect economic interests, enhance their power projection capabilities, and also to improve their international reputation.
Playing a more prominent role in counterterrorism in West Africa appears largely motivated by Gulf states’ desire to enhance their international reputation as serious partners in the fight against extremism.

Sunday, 25 November 2018

The Proposed Horn of Africa Economic Integration: A Guide for the Perplexed

By Abdul Ahmed III 

Proposed Horn of Africa Economic Integration for benefit of Saudi
For the last several weeks, people of the Horn of Africa, have been engaged in debates about new bold idea of a regional integration initiative in the Horn Africa



"Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition  for benevolence, confidence, justice." Baruch Spinoza


For the last several weeks, people of the Horn of Africa, have been engaged in debates about new bold ideas of reform presented by the new populist, energetic leader of Ethiopia Abiy Ahmed. The new premier has embarked on (1) a wide-ranging transformative economic and political reform in Ethiopia and (2) a regional integration initiative in the Horn of Africa region.  The former part attracted both praise and criticism.  (See  Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Shows Knack for Balancing Reform and Continuity,   Can Ethiopia's Reforms Succeed?,  and  Ethiopia: climbing Mount Uncertainty).   It is the later part of the proposal – the idea of a regional economic integration - that has not yet fully been scrutinized.  The following paragraphs discuss Abiy Ahmed’s vision for the region, the pace with which the premier thrusts his vision and the reality in the region.

To the prime minister’s credit, the region needs new fresh ideas. Indeed, some form of economic coordination can facilitate economic growth and political stability in the region. It is quite plausible that some form of economic coordination, may pave the way for a gradual slow rapprochement over the next 40 years or so. On the other hand, attempting a quick implementation of a full-fledged political integration will only produce grave risks to the stability of the region by exasperating the existing ethnic tensions, especially if such attempts proceed with the current hurried pace.  This is certain because there are serious political and practical problems with the idea of political integration in the Horn of Africa. A region mired by conflict, social unrest and distrust amongst the inhabitants.

There are also contentious technical issues that require unambiguous determination prior the formulation of any regional integration.  Questions remain today, about how equitable are the stakeholders engaged in the process? What kind of economic or trading bloc?  And how to create an impartial common space for economic and political action for the parties concerned?
An equitable participation in formulating these policies and designing the future of the region is crucial for successful regional economic cooperation.  It is worth noting that economic literature on Africa’s economic integration informs us that countries in the region failed to realize economic integration partially because of political issues, rivalry, state-society relations, questions of sovereignty, exclusionary policies, and parochial interests.  It is therefore unclear if and how Abiy Ahmed’s enthusiasm alone can single-handedly overcome these long-standing serious challenges.

Yes!  The region needs some form of economic grouping, to compete globally, and, yes, there are many possible arrangements to aspire solidarity, cooperation in the region, but the last thing the region needs is a hasty process and uncertain future brought about by ill-conceived vision and mandates signed by inequitable entities.
It is also surprising that Abiy Ahmed’s initiative excludes Kenya from the proposed economic integration in the region. Kenya is politically the most stable and economically most advanced in the region, excluding Kenya makes no rational sense (economically and politically).  Moreover, it is not clear why should the region introduce a new initiative outside – the Intergovernmental Authority for Development - IGAD’s Pillar 2 strategic objectives, especially one that excludes Kenya the region’s economic powerhouse.
The exclusion of IGAD countries from the current initiative and the furious pace of this may plunge the region into a disastrous region-wide conflict in which ethnic groups engage perpetual competition for dominance and/or survival. This is not implausible in a region that is characterized by ethnic narratives and trust-deficit. There are already claims that the current initiative is an Oromo driven plan to dominate the region and annex of the former Somalia (including Puntland, and Somaliland), Djibouti, and Eritrea to form a Greater Ethiopia.  A dangerous narrative!  For sure, yet, the underlying apprehension is reasonable given the transitive nature of power and Byzantine politics in the region!
Finally, economic integration is a long ardent process that culminates in collectively accepted and complete harmonization of economic policies.  It is not an instrument for a shock therapy nor is it a one-shot cure-all solution for all the region’s economic problems.

(Source: Tigrai Onine)


የሕገ መንግሥት ጉባኤ ወቅታዊነት

ከተስፋየ መኮንን
(የ”ይድረስ ለባለ ታሪኩ” ደራሲ)

ኢሕአዴግ ከሕዝባዊ ወያኔ ሓርነት ትግራይ መራሽነት ወደ ኦሕዴድ መራሽነት የተሸጋገረበት ጊዜ ላይ እንገኛለን። የወንበር ሽግግር ተደርጓል። ይህ ግልጽ ነው። ግን ይህ መፍትሔ ነው ወይ? በመሠረቱ እነ ዶ/ር ዐቢይ የኦሕዴድ መራሹን ኢሕአዴግ በማሻሻልና ወያኔያዊ የሆኑ ገፀባሕርይዎችን በማጥፋት ለውጥ አምጥተናል ሲሉ እየታዘብን ነው፡፡ የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ምርጫ ግን ወያኔያዊ የነበረውን ገፀባሕርይ በኦሕዴዳዊ ለመቀየር አይደለም። የኢትዮጵያ ሕዝብ ፍላጎት መሠረታዊ ለውጥ ነው።

ወያኔ ሄዷል፤ አልቆለታል። በአገራችን ግን መሠረታዊ ለውጥ አልመጣም። በአገራችን መሠረታዊ ለውጥ የሚመጣው አዲስ ሕገ መንግሥት ተቀርፆ፣ በዚያ ላይ ተመሥርተን ወደምርጫ ስንሄድ ብቻ ነው። እንደዚያ ካልሆነ ለውጥ የለም። የኢትዮጵያ ብሔርተኝነት ላይ ተቀብሯል ከተባለ በኋላ በመፈክር መልክ ስለተስተጋባ ለውጥ መጥቷል ማለት አይደለም። መፈክሩ ያሳየን ሕዝቡ ኢትዮጵያዊ ብሔራዊነት ስሜት እንዳለው ብቻ ነው። የዐቢይ መፈክር ይህን አረጋግጦልናል። ይህን ደግሞ ዐቢይ አሕመድ አውቆ ነው ያደረገው። መለስ ዜናዊ አክ እንትፍ ብሎ የቀበረውን ኢትዮጵያዊነት በኢትዮ-ኤርትራ ጦርነት ጊዜ መልሶ እንደጠራው ነው። በአገራችን በተጨባጭ የሚታየው ግን ኦሕዴድ/ኢሕአዴግ ወያኔነቱን አጥቦና ተሻሽሎ ወደፊት እየሄደ መሆኑ ነው። ያለ ጥርጥር፣ አሁን ያለብን እዳ በሥራ ላይ ያለው ኢሕአዴግ ያዋቀረው ሥርዓት እንዳለ ተጠብቆ ወያኔያዊ መልኩ ታጥቦና ኦሕዴዳዊ መልኩ ቅባት ተቀብቶ ወደፊት ይሂድ የሚለው አደገኛ አቋም ነው።

ኦሕዴድ/ኢሕአዴግ የተቀባባ ለውጥ አድርጎ ወደ 2012 ዓ.ም. ምርጫ እንሂድ እያለ ነው፡፡ ጨርሶ መሆን የለበትም። በሕገ መንግሥቱ ላይ ሳንስመስማማ፣ ስንደራደር፣ ኮንትራት ሳንገባ ወደ ምርጫ መሄድ የለብንም። ኢትዮጵያ በጣም ብዙ ሐሳብና አመለካከት ያላቸው ዜጎችንና ቡድኖችን ያቀፈች አገር ናት። ተሰባስበው መምከር አለባቸው። ስለአገራቸው ኮንትራት መግባት አለባቸው። ይህ ሳይሆን በምን ተዓምር ነው በቀደመው መንገድ የምንጓቸው? አዲስ ኮንትራት መገባት አለበት። አዲስ ጉባኤ መጠራት አለበት። ጉባኤ ካልተጠራና ሕገ መንግሥቱ አሁን ባለበት ሁኔታ ቀጥሎ ምርጫ ይካሄድ ከተባለ ኦሕዴድ/ኢሕአዴግ ያሸንፋል፤ የአገሪቱ መሠረታዊ ችግሮች ግን ፈጽሞ አይፈቱም። እዚህ አጣብቂኝ ውስጥ ነው ያለነው። ሕዝባችን ይህንን ሁኔታ ግልጽ አድርጎ መረዳት አለበት።

ችግር ቀፍቃፊው የቋንቋ ፌደራሊዝም ይቀየር

አሁን ከምንገኝበት አረንቋ ውስጥ የከተተን የትንሽነት ኀይሎች በፈጠሩት ትርክት መሠረት ላይ የቆመው ቋንቋ ተኮር ፌደራላዊ ሥርዓት ነው፡፡ ይህ በአገራችን የታሪክ ጉዞ ያልተደገፈ፣ የታሪክም የኢኮኖሚም የባሕልም መሠረት የሌለው ፌደራሊዝም በተግባር ሊቀጥል እንደማይችል ያለፉት 27 ዓመታት በሚገባ አሳይተውናል። አሁንም መዘዙን እያየነው ነው። በሥራ ላይ ያለው ፌደራላዊ ተብየ ሥርዓት ዲሞክራሲያዊ እንዳልነበርና እንዳልሆነ አሳምረን እናውቃለን፡፡ ዲሞክራሲያዊ አለመሆኑ ብቻ ሳይሆን በቋንቋና በነገድ ላይ የተመሠረተ ፌደራላዊ አወቃቀር በግልጽ እንደሚታየው ጠንቀኛ ነው፤ ገፈቱንም እየቀመስነው ነው፡፡ በዚህ ከቀጠልን መዳረሻችን የእርስ በርስ ጦርነት መሆኑ ብዙም አያከራክርም፡፡

በዚህ የቋንቋ ፌደራላዊ ሥርዓት ምክንያት የአገሪቱ ኢኮኖሚ ችግር ላይ ወድቋል። ካፒታሊዝም በተፈጥሮው ሰፊ ገበያ ይፈልጋል። ከትልቅ ገበያ ውጭ ካፒታሊዝም የለም። ሰፊ ገበያና አንደረ የተጠቃለለ ብሔራዊ ስሜት ይፈልጋል። ሁልጊዜ አገራዊ ስሜት የሚቀሰቀሰው ከአገራዊ ስሜት ጋር ነው። ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ገና ካፒታሊዝም አልዳበረም። አሁን ያለው አናሳና በግሎባላይዜሽን የመጣ ነው። እሱን እየተቀባበለ ነው የሚሸጠው። እስከመቼ ይዘልቃል? የተሟላ ኢንዱስትራላይዜሽን መምጣት አለበት። አሁን ያለውን አሳፋሪ ሁኔታ በምናይበት ጊዜ፣ የአማራ ከበርቴ ተብሎ ለብቻ፣ የኦሮሚያ ከበርቴ ተብሎ ለብቻ፣ የትግሬ ከብርቴ ወዘተ. እያለ ለብቻው ታጥሮና ተጠርንፎ የተቀመጠበት ነው፡፡ እነዚህ ከበርቴዎች እርስ በእርስ እየተነጋገሩ አንድነታቸውን ሲያጠናክሩ የአገሪቱን ኢኮኖሚ በአንድ ላይ ያንቀሳቅሳሉ።

ሆኖም የምንከተለው ሥርዓት እንደመደብ አንድ ላይ እንዳይቆሙ፣ እርስ በእርስ እንዲናቆሩ እያደረገና ካፒታላቸው ተበትኖ የነገድ ብሔርተኝነት እየነገሠ ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ካፒታሊስ ለመሆን አይቻልም። ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ወጥ የሆነ የካፒታሊስት ሥርዓት ካልተመሠረተ እንዴት ነው ይህን ሥራ አጥ ወጣት አንቀሳቅሶ ገበያ ውስጥ ማስገባት የሚቻለው? አማራና ኦሮሞ እየተባለ እንዴት ወደገበያ ይገባል? እንዴት ጠንካራ ብሔራዊ ኀይል ይሆናል?

ስለዚህ አሁን እየተሠራ ያለው የካፒታሊስት ሥርዓትን የሚቃረን ነው። ካፒታሊዝም እንዲያድግ ሳይሆን ካፒታሊዝም እንዲጫጫ እየተደረገ ነው ያለው። ካፒታሊዝም እንዲከፋፈል እየተደረገ ነው። በእንደዚህ ዓይነት መዋቀር ላይ ምን ዓይነት የፖለቲካ መዋቅር ይዘረጋል? ምን ዓይነት አገርስ ይሆናል? ይህ ወጣት ካልበላ ራሱን ይበላል። የወደፊቱ ዕድላችን የእርስ በእርስ ጦርነት ነው። በዚህ ጎዳና ከሄድን የማይቀር ነው። እነ ሶርያን ማየት ነው፤ ሊቢያን ማየት ነው። የእርስ በእርስ ግጭት እንደ ብሔራዊ ጦር የምትዋጋው ጦርነት አይደለም። እርስ በእርስ ባገኘኸው መሣርያ ነው የምትዋጋው።

በኢትዮጵያ ሁኔታ ይህንን መገንዘብ የማይችል የፖለቲካ ኀይል በጣም ኋላቀር ነው። ኢትዮጵያ እንኳን በእንደዚህ ዓይነት መከፋፈል ውስጥ ገብታ ቀርቶ እኛ እንደምንመኘው ጠንካራ የተባበረ አቅም ያለው ካፒታሊስት መደብ፣ የተባበረ መካከለኛ መደብ ማለትም ዕውቀት ያለው ጋዜጠኛው፣ የሕግ ምሁሩ፣ ሐኪሙ፣ መሐንዲሱ፣ ከሥር እያደገ የሚመጣው ሳይንሳዊ ጥናት የሚያካሂደው የኅብረተሰብ ክፍል፣ የፈጠራ ሥራ ያለው አገር ካልሆነ ምን ዓይነት አገር ሊገነባ ነው? ዶክተሩ ሲመጣ እኔ ኦሮሞ ነኝ ይላል፤ ሳይንቲስቱ ሲመጣ እኔ አማራ ነኝ ይላል፡፡ በዚህ መንገድ እንዴት ዓይነተ አገር ይፈጠራል? ፈጽሞ የውድቀትና የትንሽነት መንገድ ነው፡፡

የሕገ መንግሥት ጉባኤ ይጠራ

የሕገ መንግሥት ጉባኤ ይጠራ ሲባል፣ በኢትዮጵያ ያለ ጥያቄ በሙሉ ጠረጴዛ ላይ ይቅረብ ማለት ነው፡፡ ለኢትዮጵያ የሚያስፈልጋት ፌደራላዊ አወቃቀር ነው የሚሉ ወገኖች ሐሳባቸውን ያቀርባሉ፤ ከፌደራላዊ አወቃቀር ውስጥም በቋንቋ ላይ ይመሥረት የሚሉትም በሌሎች መሥፈርቶች ላይ ይቁም የሚሉትም እንዲሁ ሐሳባቸውን እያቀረቡ በነጻነት ይከራከራሉ፡፡ አሐዳዊ ይሁን የሚሉትም እንዲሁ ምክንያታቸውን ያቀርባሉ። በሁሉም ኀይሎች መካከል ያለው ክርክር መድረክ ላይ ይውጣና በቴሌቪዥንና በሕዝብ ፊት ቀርበን እንወያይ። ሕዝብ ይወስን። ሕዝብ ተወያይቶበት ካወቀ በኋላ ይምረጥ።

በእንዲህ ዓይነት ሒደት አልፎ ብዙሃኑ ሕዝብ በቋንቋ ላይ የተመሠረተውን ፌደራላዊ አወቃቀር የሚመርጥ ከሆነ ባናምንበትም እንቀበላለን። የሕዝብ ምርጫ ነውና። የሚወስነው ሕዝብ ነው። እንዲህ ዓይነቱ የሕገ መንግሥት ክርክር የግድ መምጣት አለበት። አሁን በሥራ ላይ ያለው ሕገ መንግሥት የመጣው ሳንከራከር፣ በነጻነት ሳንመክርና ሳንዘክርበት ነው፡፡ ብዙዎቻችን ይህ ሕገ መንግሥት ሕጋዊ አይደለም፤ መሠረታዊ የሆነ የቅቡልነት ችግር አለበት የምንለው ለዚህ ነው፡፡

የዐብይ አሕመድ መንግሥት የሽግግር ሂደቱ ፍፁም ዲሞክራሲያዊ እንዲሆን ካልሠራ በታሪክ ተጠያቂ ይሆናል፡፡ አገራችንም ተመልሳ ወደ አረንቋ መግባቷ አይቀርም፡፡ አሁን ያለው ሕገ መንግሥት የሕወሓትና የኦነግ ጥንስስ ነው። ይህንን ሌንጮ ለታ ኢሳት ላይ ቀርቦ ያመነው ነው። “ንድፉን እኔ ነኝ ያረቀቅኩት፤ ካረቀቅሁት በኋላ ተሰኔ ላይ ኢሳያስና መለስ ዜናዊ አዩት፤ ተቀበሉትም፤” ብሏል። ይህ በ1983 ዓ.ም. ነው። በቀጥታ በደኖ ላይ የዘር ማጥፋት መፈፀም የጀመረው በዚያው ዓመት ነው። ይህ ማለት አማራ በሌለበት፣ ድርጅቶቹ ዲሞክራሲያዊ ባይሆኑ እንኳን፣ ፀረ ዲሞክራሲ የሆኑ ድርጅቶች ተሰብስበው አማራንም ወክለው ቢሆን እንኳ የአባት ነው። አሁን ያለው ሕገ መንግሥት አማራ የማያውቀው ሕገ መንግሥት ነው። አማራ ላይ የዘር ማጥፋት ለመፈፀም እንደመሣርያ የሚጠቀሙበት ሰነድ ነው።

የኦሮሚያ ክልል ሕገ መንግሥት “ይህ መሬት/ክልል የኦሮሞ ነው” ይላል። በዚህ ሁኔታ አማራ ቢገፋና ቢገደል ተጠያቂ ያለመኖሩ አያስደንቅም። ምክንያቱም በዚያ አካባቢ አማራ መኖር የለበትም፣ መሬቱ አይደለም ማለት ነው። ጉራጌ መኖር የለበትም፡፡ ከኦሮሞ ወጪ ያለው ሌላው ኢትዮጵያዊ ሁሉ መኖር የለበትም፡፡ የሚኖር ከሆነ እንደ ኹለተኛ ደረጃ ወይም በዘመኑ አነጋገር እንደ “መጤ” ይቆጠራል፡፡ ቤንሻንጉል ጉሙዝ ተመሳሳይ ሕገ መንግሥት ነው ያለው። ሐረሪ ተመሳሳይ ሕገ መንግሥት ነው ያለው። ስለዚህ እንዲህ ዓይነት ሕገ መንግሥት ተይዞ በምንም ተዓምር ብትፈቀፍቀው፣ ብታሻሽለው፣ ብትቀባው የሚመጣ ለውጥ የለም።

ይህ ሕገ መንግሥት ገሸሽ ተደርጎ እያንዳንዱ ኢትዮጵያዊ ያገባኛል የሚል፣ የተደራጀም ሆነ ያልተደራጀ፣ ተጽዕኖ ፈጣሪ የሆኑ ግለሰቦች የሚመጡበት፣ ሰፊ የሆነ የሰላም፣ የእርቅና የሕገ መንግሥት ጉባኤ ሊጠራ ይገባል፡፡ በዚህ ጉባኤ ላይ ተመክሮ፣ ተዘክሮ ለኢትዮጵያ ይበጃታል የሚባሉትን አንኳር ጉዳዮች አጠቃሎ የያዘው ሰነድ ለሕዝበ ውሳኔ መቅረብ አለበት። ሕዝበ ውሳኔው በአብላጫ ድጋፍ ካገኘ በዚያ ላይ የተመሠረተ አዲስ ምርጫ ይካሄዳል።

የእርስ በርስ ጦርነትን እናስወግድ

ስለምርጫ የምንነጋገርበት የቅንጦት ጊዜ ላይ አይደለንም፡፡ ከሁሉም ነገር በፊት መነጋገር ያለብን ስለ ሕገ መንግሥት ነው፡፡ የዐቢይ አሕመድ መንግሥት ይህን መንገድ አልቀበልም ካለ (እንደዚያ ዓይነት ስሜት እያንፀባረቀ ነው) እና በዚሁ ሕገ መንግሥት ላይ አንዳንድ ማሻሻያዎችን እያደረገ የሚቀጥል ከሆነ፣ ያለ ምንም ጥርጥር ኢትዮጵያ አዲስ ቀውስ ውስጥ ትገባለች። ለምሳሌ የእነሱ ሕገ መንግሥት እንዳለ ምርጫ ተካሄደ እንበል። የተወሰኑ ድርጅቶች ተካፈሉና ኢሕአዴግ አሸነፈ። ሀብቱን ስለያዘ ሊያሸንፍ የሚችልበት ሰፊ ዕድል አለ። ገንዘብ ይዟል፤ የመንግሥት መዋቅርን ይዟል፤ ማወናበዱን ይዟል፤ ሚዲያውን ይዟል። ሊያሸንፍ ይችላል። የተወሰኑ ሰዎችን ይዞ ፓርላማ ገባ እንበል። ያለው መዋቅር እንዳለ ነው። በቋንቋ ላይ የተመሠረተው የክልል አደረጃጀት እንዳለ ነው። በክልሎቹ ውስጥ ያለው ፍላጎትም እንዳለ ነው። ለምሳሌ ደቡብ ላይ ብዙዎቹ የክልል ጥያቄ እያነሱ ነው። መሬት እያሉ ነው። አንዱ አንዱን በኀይል የተያዘብኝን መሬት ልቀቅ እየተባለ ነው በየቦታው፡፡ አይሆንም ሲባል የሚከተለው ጦርነት ነው፡፡

አሁን ያለውን አደገኛ ሁኔታ ካልፈታንና ወደቀልባችን ካልመጣን የእርስ በእርስ ጦርነት መምጣቱ አይቀርም። የእርስ በእርስ ጦርነት እርሾዎቹ እየተሠሩ ነው። እነዚህን ሁኔታዎች ማዳፈን ዋጋ የለውም። እሳት ብታዳፍነው ነገ ጠዋት ይነሳል። መፍትሔ ነው መስጠት ያለብን። እነ ዶ/ር ዐቢይ በማዳፈንና በመቀባባት እየሠሩ ነው። ፖለቲከኛ ማለት ደግሞ መፍትሔ የሚሰጥ ነው። ያን መፍትሔ የማይሰጥ ከሆነ ፖለቲከኛ አይደለም፤ መልቀቅ ነው ያለበት። ምክንያቱም መፍትሔ የማመንጨት ኀይሉ አልቋል ማለት ነው። አንድ ፖለቲከኛ መኖር የሚችለው መፍትሔ የመስጠት ችሎታ እስካለው ድረስ ነው።

EPRDF and Election in Ethiopia

Assefa A. Lemu 

Background: Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) is a political organization established in 1989 by Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) which was established in 1975 and the then Ethiopian Peoples’ Democratic Movement(EPDM), later  known as the Amhara Democratic Movements (ANDM) and now Amhara Democratic Party (ADP) which was established in 1982. Later, the two political organization created by TPLF namely, the Oromo People's Democratic Organization (OPDO) which was created in1990 and now called Oromo Democratic Party (ODP) and  the Southern Peoples Democratic Front (SEPDF) which was created in 1992 and now called Southern Ethiopian Peoples’ Democratic Movement (SEPDEM) made the members of EPRDF. After taking government power in May 1991, EPRDF created affiliated parties (allied parties) like the Somali People’s Democratic Party (SPDP), the Benishengul Gumuz People’s Democratic Party (BGPDP), the Afar National Democratic Party (ANDP), the Gambela People’s Unity Democratic Movement (GPUDM), and the Harari National League (HNL) to govern their respective States on its behalf. These EPRDF affiliated parties are called “Agar Partiwoch” and controlled by EPRDF.
Since 1995, Ethiopia has held parliamentary elections regularly every five year and EPRDF won all the five rounds of election (in 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015) and has been ruling Ethiopia for 27 years.  In the eyes of EPRDF, the elections held in all five rounds are considered free and fair. However, the evaluation of the opposition parties shows the opposite of what EPRDF says.
After 2005 election, EPRDF increased its members significantly. For example, the number of total EPRDF members (the individual members under the four member organizations of EPRDF) increased from 700,000 in 2005 to 6.5 million in 2013 (http://www.eprdf.org.et/web/en/short-history ). The intensified recruitment of members was done with the promise to reward their membership and loyalty with career advancement within government and the EPRDF (https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Arriola-27-1.pdf ).
Compared to the results of all the five round elections, the General Election of 2005 was the election in which the opposition parties won more seats (170 seats) in the parliament. In 2010 election, the opposition parties won only one seat and in the recent 2015 election they won zero.  
Legal Frameworks for Election: The legal bases for holding election in Ethiopia are the Constitution and the electoral laws of Ethiopia, as amended. Article 38 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) says: “Every Ethiopian national, without any discrimination based on color, race, nation, nationality, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion or other status, has the following rights: (a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly and through freely chosen representatives; (b) On the attainment of 18 years of age, to vote in accordance with law;(c) To vote and to be elected at periodic elections to any office at any level of government; elections shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors”. Proclamation No. 438/2005 “Proclamation to make Electoral Law of Ethiopia Conform with the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (Amendment) (file:///C:/Users/asab46/Downloads/Proc%20No.%20438-2005%20Proclamation%20to%20make%20Electoral%20Law%20of%20Eth.pdf ) and Proclamation No. 532/2007 to amend the Ethiopian Electoral Law of Ethiopia (http://www.electionethiopia.org/en/images/stories/directives/Proclamation/532.pdf) provides further legal basis for the election. Proclamations No. 111/1995, proclamation to ensure the conformity of the Electoral Law of Ethiopia with the Constitution of the FDRE and Proclamation No. 187/2000, amended proclamation to ensure the conformity of the Electoral Law of Ethiopia with the Constitution of the FDRE have been repealed by Proclamation No. 532/2007.
Article 9(3) of the Constitution prohibits assuming state power in any manner other than that provided under the Constitution. That means the only lawful way to take government power in Ethiopia is through election. Therefore, election is very important for the political parties and for the private citizens. As a matter of fact, debates are going on at the formal forums and informal forums about the upcoming election in Ethiopia. In this article, I will briefly discuss some of the points under these debates.
1.     Election Board or Election Commission: One of the ongoing debates regarding reforming the National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) is changing its name from “Board” to “Commission”. Some argue that changing the name of the Board from “board” to “commission” increases its power and enhances its performance (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9c24bsvccE).   In reality, this debate is more of a form (packaging) or branding than content.

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, “board” is “a committee of persons organized under authority of law in order to exercise certain authorities, have oversight or control of certain matters, or discharge certain
functions of a magisterial, representative, or fiduciary character” (https://thelawdictionary.org/board/ ). The same dictionary defines “commission” as “a board or committee officially appointed and empowered to perform certain acts or exercise certain jurisdiction of a public nature”. In short, both board and commission represent a group of people appointed to run an organization or perform certain duties. The independence and trustworthiness of an organization hinges upon its operation not on its name. Changing the name from board to commission makes the organization neither independent nor dependable. The emphasis on the name change is like serving the ‘old wine in new bottle’ and doesn’t bring substantive change or value to the election system.
The other point to consider in relation to changing the name of NEBE is the legal requirement. Changing the name of the Board requires amending the Constitution. Article 102(1) of the Constitution of FDRE says “There shall be established a National Election Board independent of any influence, to conduct in an impartial manner free and fair election in Federal and State constituencies”.
The argument which says, board is temporary and commission is permanent (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTH-6PFIdoY&t=2723s ) also doesn’t hold water.  Article 4(2) of Proclamation No.532/2007 says “For the purpose of conducting elections, the Board shall have permanent and temporary branch offices from federal down to polling station level”. An organization exists as far as it has a purpose to exist, not because of its name.   As the Amharic saying goes “melke tifun besim yidegifu”, changing the name of NEBE from board to commission doesn’t add any vale except trying to make it beautiful by wrapping it with a new package.  The objective shouldn’t be about having a bimbo organization but to have well- functioning, independent, and dependable organization.  Therefore, it would be better to focus on how to build its capacity and improve its operation rather than beautifying its name.
2.     Consultation with Opposition Parties: The recent nomination and approval of the Chairwoman for the NEBE shows that Ethiopian politics is heading once again back to square one. It is one of the indications that when it comes to the serious business, what EPRDF leaders are practically doing are the same as previous.  They give big promises when they think there are imminent dangers and then backtrack after solidifying their powers. They rollback their plans to bring promised changes. As Albert Einstein said, doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results is insanity.
 According to Article 6 of Proclamation No. 532/2007, a proclamation to amend the Electoral Law of Ethiopia “The Board shall have nine members appointed in accordance with Article 102 of the Constitution by the House of Peoples’ Representatives upon recommendation by the Prime Minister. The prime Minister shall, before nominating Board members who fulfill the criteria, ensure that there has been sufficient consultation forum for political organizations that have seats in the House of Peoples’ Representatives to ascertain that the nominees are independent and impartial. ….. The members shall: a) be loyal to the Constitution; b) be non-partisans; c) have professional competence; d) be known for their good conduct” (http://www.electionethiopia.org/en/images/stories/directives/Proclamation/532.pdf ).
On November 22, 2018, the Ethiopian House of Peoples’ Representatives approved Ms. Birtukan Misdeksa who was one of the leaders of the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD), who was accused of treason and jailed for 39 months (three years and three months) , and who returned from seven years of exile in the United States on November 7, 2018 on the promise to become head of the election board( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-46301112).
Currently, there is no opposition political organizations that has seat in the House of Peoples’ Representatives and, technically speaking, the Prime Minister has no legal obligation to have “sufficient consultation forum for political organizations” to ascertain the nominee of Chairperson and members of the Election Board are independent and impartial. Since the House is fully controlled by EPRDF and its partner organizations that approve anyone nominated by the Prime Minister without sufficient vetting and checking of legal sufficiency, the Prime Minister can pick anyone he wants without worrying about the chance of approval of the nominee.
Ethiopian Prime Minister and Ethiopian Parliament are doing business as usual. Out of about 80 registered and unregistered political organizations, the leaders of Blue Party and Arbegnoch Ginbot 7 confirmed that they were consulted by the Prime Minister Dr. Abiy on the nomination of Ms. Birtukan Mideksa and they said they gave their endorsements. These two organizations are the offspring of CUD in which Birtukan was a member and one of the leaders. The leader of the third political party (Oromo Federalist Congress), Dr. Merera Gudina didn’t confirm about the consultation and didn’t provide his party’s full endorsement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTdRR9bxdgc ). Therefore, the consultation made to nominate Birtukan Mideksa is 0.025% and cannot be considered substantial.
After her appointment as a Chairwoman of NEBE, Birtukan Mideksa who was asked by ESAT if she is non-partisan or not said “I am very happy to return to use this opportunity to fulfill my objective which has been the reason for my participation in politics”. To put what she said in Amharc word by word “Bezih edil tetekime kemeneshaw lepoletika tesatfo menesha yehonegnin alamayen lemasakat bememelese betam destegna negn” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp4VtHS5NlA ). This is very open to different interpretation regarding her partisanship.
The hair-raising issue is that why Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed who talked a lot about inclusive politics and has a plan to hold a meeting with leaders of opposition parties registered in Ethiopia on November 27, 2018 to discuss electoral reforms (https://fanabc.com/english/2018/11/pm-dr-abiy-to-meet-with-leaders-of-opposition-parties/ ) rushed to get the approval of Ms. Birtukan Mideksa before sufficient consultation is made with the opposition party leaders? When do EPRDF leaders live up to their words? Does such approach of putting cart before the horse and making unilateral decision earn trust for the Election Board and buy-in from opposition parties? When does Ethiopian politics get out of deceiving and conspiracy? Is this EPRDF’s negotiation strategy with the opposition parties on the electoral reform?
Furthermore, Prime Minister Dr. Abiy (https://youtu.be/SuS7AV01DS0?t=162 ) and Attorney General Berhanu Tsegaye who said “Her return is initiated by Ethiopian government as her skills and experiences are needed” tried to portrait Birtukan as a person who has unique capability and integrity. This is undermining the contribution of those Ethiopians who despised running away from the struggle and contributed much more to bring political change in Ethiopia and who have comparatively higher legal and political knowledge. Some argue that Birtukan’s decision to release Siye Abreha on bail in 2001 shows her superior integrity. Interpreting the law correctly and making justice is the duty of every judge. If we do an inventory of similar decisions, we may find thousands of judges in Ethiopia. Simply, it seems that the current Ethiopian leadership is more attracted by the so called “diaspora” and we may see more and more returnees taking high positions in Ethiopian government. When will the government values the contribution of citizens fairly and for how long we sing the old song of “Ethiopia agere mogn nesh telala, yemotelish kerto yegedelesh bela”?
3.     The Promise to Make Ethiopian Election 2020 Free and Fair:  One of the duties of NEBE is to “facilitate and ascertain that elections held periodically and at every level are conducted in a free and fair manner”. Free and Fair election is an election where those citizens qualify to vote have the freedom and right to be registered and make their own decision regarding who they vote for and where all registered political parties have an equal right to campaign for voters support and contest for political power.
For all previous five rounds of election, EPRDF leaders promised to make the election fair and fair, but those promises were not kept. The late Prime Minister Meles Zenaw had promised to make Ethiopian Election 2005 flawless. Unfortunately, it was one of the bloodiest elections Ethiopia held in its history.  The current Ethiopian Prime Minister Dr. Abiy has promised to make the 2020 General Election free and fair. Some are skeptical about the practicality of this promise because they some several broken promises before. Others are hoping the Prime Minister is determined his promise. We will wait and see if the promise holds this tikme or not.
4.     Delaying the General Election: As stated under Article 45 of the Constitution, Ethiopia has a parliamentarian form of government. Members of the lower House of the Parliament (House of Peoples’ Representatives) are elected for five years. This is clearly stated under Article 54 of the Constitution which says “Members of the House of Peoples’ Representatives shall be elected by the People for a term of five years on the basis of universal suffrage and by direct, free and fair elections held by secret ballot”. As it stands now, the next General Election in which the House of Peoples’ Representatives and Regional State councils will be elected should be held in May 2020. Per Article 58 (3) of the Ethiopian Constitution “the House of Peoples’ Representatives shall be elected for a term of five years. Elections for a new House shall be concluded one month prior to the expiring of the House’s term”. Therefore, the mandate of the current Parliament will end in September 2020.
One of the ongoing debates relating to the 2020 General Election is whether to delay/postpone the election or hold it as required by the Constitution and the electoral laws of Ethiopia. Those who argue for the delay of the election say the remaining one and half year is not enough 1) for the opposition parties to reach out to the people, 2) to reform NEBE and electoral laws, 3) to change the ethnic and identity based political opinion in Ethiopia, 4) to resettle the internally displaced peoples, and 5) to make the country peaceful where the fair and free election shall be held. They argue that the measurement for the legitimacy of a government is the support it has from the people, not its fulfillment of Constitutional or other legal requirements. They say, Ethiopian Constitution has been violated before and delaying the election in violation of what has been stipulated in the Constitution may not be abnormal for Ethiopians. They consider the current Constitution as a source of all problems and violating it until it will be changed may be the solution to some of these problems (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4anlQVxz6GA ).
On the other hand, those who support the holding of the General Election as scheduled and required by law argue 1) holding regular election is one of the benchmarks of democracy and the election should be held at a regular time, 2) the perfect time never comes and all parties must work towards meeting the 2020 target for General Election, 3) violation of the Constitution and other laws leads to problems not to solutions, 4) the current government has no legitimacy to govern the country beyond September 2020.
If the Ethiopian Government decides to delay the General Election, the country will join the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) where the General Election which was originally scheduled for November 27, 2016 was first postponed to December 2017 and then to December 23, 2018 and where the second and final term of President Joseph Kabila was expired on December 20, 2016, but he ruled the country for two years without constitutional mandate.
5.     Electoral System: Electoral system is “the formula by which votes are aggregated in a democracy to determine the winners and losers of seats in an assembly or office holding” (https://www.idea.int/gsod/files/IDEA-GSOD-2017-RESOURCE-GUIDE-ELECTIONS.pdf ). It is a set of rules on how elections are conducted and how their results are determined. Electoral system may vary from country to country, but there are three main electoral systems : 1) Majority System where the winner takes all; 2) Proportional Representation System where parties are represented proportionally in the legislature, and 3) Mixed Electoral System that combines characteristics of Majority System with element of Proportional Representation System.
As stated under Article 25 of Proclamation No.532/2007, the Electoral System of Ethiopia is a Majority System where “a candidate who received more votes than other candidates within a constituency shall be declared the winner”. The debates are going on to change the electoral law of Ethiopia from Majority vote to Proportional or Mixed system. The main point is that there is no perfect electoral system and there are always tradeoffs.
To conclude, the 2020 General Election and future elections determine what kind of government Ethiopia should have and where she will head. The current pull and push politics and the attempt to undo everything that has been done in the country for the last 27 years may not help the country to progress forward. Building upon the positive gains, gently and wisely straightening the wrongs, having tolerance and respect to the groups and individuals who have different culture and political opinion from what we have are necessary. In this twenty first century, it is not that difficult to know or speculate what the other group is planning to do and the effect of that move on the others. Therefore, the decisiveness of only one group in a multi-ethnic group country like Ethiopia should end and inclusive politics must start. The electoral system and operation must support such inclusiveness rather than imposition of the will of one group over the others.

(Source: AigaForum)