Ethiopia's famines - breaking the vicious cycle.

By: D. Kebede

So much is written about famine, seeing it in terms of "decline in food availability", "entitlement", "civil war" and so forth. It is therefore a complex issue, one I will not dare to claim to have a grasp and, if anything, I am acutely conscious of the pitfalls of generalization and oversimplification.

Since the news of the current famine started gathering momentum, I have been thinking to air my views about the whole situation. Then came two articles by Ghelawdewos Araia, which were posted on deki-alula.com. Both of them I found useful and thought provoking, but the most recent one, 'REHAB ENATFA' motivated me to write this. However, I would say at the outset that I have remained baffled by the author's mention of a number of studies and expertise in the Ethiopian famines, without making even a passing reference to Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam's work, particularly his book, Rural Vulnerability to Famine in Ethiopia. Although the topic of 'famine' involves complex and, at times, emotive issues, this home grown book by a renowned academic who had spent considerable part of his academic life researching in the field, gives an insight into the subject, its root causes, hence enriching the way forward in defeating this perpetual national scourge. His work could not be more fitting for the situation about which Ghelawdewos Araia seeks to initiate a debate, as I understand it. I therefore fail to understand why people go to great lengths looking for academics elsewhere, routinely ignoring to start from home and then build on it. I am aware that it's the author's prerogative to select his/her references, but I do not think this would still make my comment less valid.

As Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam put it "famine is not a mere deficiency of food, but an absolute lack of food", he goes on to say that "The confusion between draught and famine obscures our understanding of the problem of famine and delays its possible solution". In understanding the factors which could precipitate famine, he argues that "Vulnerability to famine is a product of a system: a subsistence production system which has three components: the peasant world, the natural forces and the socio-economic and political forces". Such is the profound nature of famine it can only be described in Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam's words as "a socio-economic crisis with profound consequences for the economic and social fabric of a society".

One of the ironies of the Ethiopian famine, perhaps other tragic situations of such magnitude, is whilst people perish away in their thousands, some beneficiaries have, wittingly or unwittingly, exploited the situation to amass power and personal fortunes. This includes of course the incumbent ethnic Government, which started its guerilla campaign as Tigrayan Peoples' Liberation Front (TPLF), under the defunct Marxist military regime. It used the 1984-5 famine to give itself a humanitarian cloak. It is no secret that it had been supported by many Western Governments whose main concern had been winning the poker game of the Cold War, seeing a Marxist Government overthrown. It is also in the public domain that massive aid had been pumped into the TPLF and other fronts' coffers to bolster their firepower. This had contributed significantly to the current EPRDF ethnic government usurping power in 1991, when it might look ironic that the seeds of yet another famine were sown. EPRDF is now desperately hanging on to power by playing the same political game with the current famine whilst people are dying like flies. In fact Prime Minster Meles Zenawi has now been invited by President Bush and it looks that he will get a pat on the back for being a "friend" in the fight against "international terrorism", no matter to the continued suffering of millions of Ethiopians. This could buy the Prime Minster sometime to cover the ground (if he had any) has lost. The aid machinery will keep rolling in response to the familiar television pictures, with emaciated faces, which would soon keep bombarding the screens. Shipments of biscuits, flour, tents and wheat would continue landing at various ports. The question of 'why another famine?', 'why such a violation of a person's 'right to life''? are not necessarily in the interests of a sizeable proportion of aid agencies. In fact it would not be surprising to see EPRDF being complemented for its co-operation for giving these agencies a free ride, with the vicious cycle allowed to go on.

It is known that the list beneficiaries of famine include personalities and aid agencies. Some (remember, it is some) of the aid agencies that were born in the 1984 and the previous famines have now become huge institutions, powerful enough to influence government policies, directly or indirectly. It is entirely logical that their survival is related to perpetuating famine as biscuits and flour are to the starving. These agencies thrive more on controlling famine. While many generous ordinary people keep donating, it has also led to individuals building personal fortunes; some have won accolades from their respective governments, perhaps it is not their fault. Many have established their academic reputation, acquiring an enhanced status in the academia; many have written books, made films. Yet only few have dared to utter the words of the silent majority, the very victims of famine that successive governments, including the incumbent EPRDF, have denied its peoples the most basic human right, the 'right to life'.

EPRDF's ideology of "revolutionary democracy", with personalized and centralized power has since its advent intended to silence its critics by whatever means, using its secretive state apparatus and poisonous propaganda machine. Many have fled, died, with others languishing in official and unofficial detention centers. This obviously has seriously stifled the country's capacity for a collective response to such a tragedy of epic proportions. It well documented that EPRDF's so-called land distribution, which openly favored its cadres, like the previous military regime's land distribution, has created serious divisions among farmers forcing emigration en masse. Its untested and inappropriate fertilizer policy has lumbered poor farmers with huge debts owing to fertilizer being sold to them at exorbitant prices.

We might have reached yet another crucial junction to look for a lasting solution to this dehumanizing phenomenon so that no more lives will be lost and that national self-respect and confidence could be revived. It is therefore right for Ghelawdewos Araia to call for a concerted action at a national level, arguing, "we must set aside our ideological and political differences and embrace a common national agenda". It would of course have been more helpful for him to have shared his views clearly as to what this agenda should entail and be made practical. This is when we have to be wise, as an eminent intellectual and human rights activist advises, " Actions without ideational content lose their potency as soon as the situation which called for them ceases to be valid. A series of pragmatic moves unconnected by a continuity of vision cannot be expected to sustain a long-term movement". As Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam has put it "famine is fundamentally a result of socio-economic disorganization and political irresponsibility". Clare Short, the Secretary of State for the Overseas Department, UK, has also stated, "you don't get famine without gross misgovernment". This misgovernment in the Ethiopian context is unfortunately measured in millions of lost lives. The Secretary of State's statement goes in tandem with what Prime Minster Tony Blair said in his over quoted Brighten Speech in October 2001. He said "the state of Africa is a scar on the conscience of the world" and he talked about "true democracy, no more excuses for dictatorship, abuse of human rights; no tolerance of bad governance". This should inform the basis for an overarching principle upon which Ghelawdewos Araia's "common national agenda" could be erected for a durable and a lasting solution.

So what precisely should the rallying agenda be? Surly a while ago now, the European Parliament called for a "national dialogue", involving the incumbent, individuals, civil societies, opposition parties. At the very least the EPRDF government, under Prime Minster Meles Zenwi's personal leadership, should accept its failure, as until recently it has even been talking about exporting grain. In its belated recognition of the unfolding tragedy it has not taken initiative to come out of its ethnic/linguistic shelf and call, for instance a state of emergency. Obviously it does not have the magnanimity to resign. As a matter of urgency a National Emergency Committee (NEC) should be set up, backed by appropriate emergency laws and resources both to conduct the relief operation and to decide the nature of relief assistance. The NEC should involve prominent individuals, civic organizations, opposition groups/movements and EPRDF itself. In addition to assuming full responsibility for the relief operation, the NEC should also have at least following brief to look into:

EPRDF should commit itself to implementing recommendations of the NEC and international observers should keep monitoring the smooth running of affairs. This is an essential requirement. Clare Short could assist in this process, for example, as the wider context has already been outlined by the European Parliament's resolution and she has made a very valid statement.

The way we respond to today's crisis by setting up NEC should be linked to a more lasting and durable solution which would open the opportunity for a government, which embraces the notion that "in a nation, the people are the most important, the State is the next and the rulers the least important" (in Mencius). The inherent problem in our state of affairs tragedies has been with this priority always turned up side down, and more recently politics being ethnicised, with its astronomical consequences, such the one facing us.

As Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam has pointed out early, "Nothing else manifests man's inhumanity to man than famine. Nothing else expresses the hypocrisy of cultural and religious values. Nothing else shatters the myth of social and political unity". The "donor community", particularly those aid agencies with greater clout and with human rights concerns, are again under the glare of history as to whether they would act in a way which would ultimately perpetuate the processes of famine, hence not upsetting Prime Mister Melese Zenawi, or take courageous measures to deal with this "man's inhumanity to man" once for all by supporting the establishment of NEC. However, it's essentially an Ethiopian problem to be ultimately solved by Ethiopians, others could only assist. Surely Clare Short's noises and Prime Minster Blair's words raise hopes in otherwise depressing situation.

D.Kebede
1/12/02



[Opinions in this article are solely that of the writer.]


TO GO BACK