Monday, March 17, 2014

Why Ethiopians Don’t Trust the TPLF (Aklog Birara) 4

Has the ruling party lost its ways?

It seems that way. In political science, they say that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This is the case with the TPLF/EPRDF core. It has no soul. It sees nothing wrong with the current unjust and unfair distribution of wealth and incomes. There is no doubt that when it took power the TPLF dominated ethnic-coalition offered a promising start toward democratization. The world community accepted it as a positive force in doing what is good for the entire society. However, like its predecessor, it failed to seize opportunities to advance genuine democracy. Most people, especially youth, were jubilant when the new government seized power in 1991 for four reasons. First, the repressive regime was removed through collective revolt; second, a new Constitution with democratic content was promulgated; third, ethnic-regions were granted autonomy; and fourth, a new era of growth, justice, peace, inclusion and political pluralism was proclaimed. All these have evaporated.
The selling point of the new ethnic elites in power was this. The Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE) offered a compelling argument that “it stood for human rights, press freedom, political pluralism, the rule of law, equality of all nations etc.” While donors praise Ethiopia’s remarkable growth, albeit from a low base, human rights groups and unattached development experts question the spread of social benefits. “Meles engineered one party rule in effect for the TPLF and his Tigray inner circle, with complicity of other ethnic elites that were coopted into the ruling alliance….Ethiopia’s much praised economic development is not as robust or cost-free ….as the international community believes…The system was entirely dependent on central authority or command and control.” This does not mean that there is no growth. It will be impossible to receive aid without showing some growth. Education opportunities have expanded. But quality is low. In recent survey, Ethiopia ranked 126 of 127 in access and quality of education. The number of colleges and universities has increased. Roads, bridges, hydroelectric dams, etc. have been built. Equally, it will be unthinkable to siphon-off capital unless there is something to siphon or steal.
Sharp criticism of “Ethiopia’s renaissance” is buffeted by others. Following the death of Prime Minister Meles in August 2012, Halvorssen and Gladstein of Forbes critiqued donors and the Ethiopian government’s Anti-Terrorist Law. “Those in the West heaping praise on Zenawi—all living in societies that suffered so much to achieve individual liberty are engaging in dramatic hypocrisy. In a 2009 UK Department of International Development sponsored study of Ethiopia’s growth Stefan Dercon and Ruth Vargas suggested that “The magnitude of this growth and the fact that it has been achieved with little change in input use suggests something is not right with the data on agriculture,” the leading sector in the country. In 2012, the IMF questioned Ethiopia’s growth sustainability. “The sustainability of Ethiopia’s growth model over the medium term is uncertain, given the constraints on private sector development, the absence of savings incentives, lack of financial reform, etc.” Despite these policy and structural limitations, the government argues that export-driven growth is possible without the domestic private sector. Critics argue that mega projects (hydro) to export and generate foreign exchange do not respond to the real need of improving smallholder agricultural productivity, domestic agriculture-based industrialization and employment generation. In other words, state and party-led growth alone cannot create sustainability without competition and participation.
If we accept the thesis that Ethiopia’s development story is not “as robust and cost free” as the government and donors claim, what is the root policy cause? It is lack of freedom and predictability that private property is protected by law and cannot be affected by political decisions. Private sector development in Ethiopia is virtually impossible without a favorable investment regulatory system that levels the playing field. The rule of law and the judicial system must be above the party, sacrosanct and predictable. In 2013, the country ranked “49.4 percent, making its economy the 146th freest or among the least free in the world. It has gone down by 2.6 %; lower in 6 of 10 indices: trade, workers’ rights, financial movement, investment, etc.” It ranks 32nd of 46 African countries. “Regulatory efficiency remains weak, creating an unfavorable climate for entrepreneurial activity…The foundations of economic freedom are quite fragile, and particularly because of pervasive corruption and a deficient judicial system…Corruption further undermines the foundation of economic freedom.” It goes without saying that this suffocating environment limits productivity and efficiency severely. As a result, both the country and consumers suffer.

Human Rights Watch has done more than any human rights organization to show the flaws of Ethiopia’s authoritarian governance in general and the nexus between massive aid inflow on the one hand and discrimination, nepotism, corruption and repression on the other. “Development aid flows through, and supports a virtual one-party state with a deplorable human rights record. Government practices include jailing and silencing critics and media, enacting laws to undermine human rights activity, and hobbling the political system.” Aid is routinely used to punish opponents and reward supporters. Massive amounts of money is siphoned-off for private gain. The effect of this on the population is substantial. “The Ethiopian population pays a heavy price for this approach in development” in economic, social and political terms. The 2005 elections that the opposition won and then lost through political decision is a prime example. Similarly, in 2010, “the EPRDF won 99.6 percent of parliamentary seats,” making a mockery of the electoral process. Competition was not allowed.

http://ecadforum.com

No comments: