Wednesday, 1 October 2014

Ethiopia: The Crime of Extraordinary Rendition

Eth renditionLast week, the regime in Ethiopia announced its abduction of Andaragatchew Tsgie, General Secretary of the Ethiopian opposition group known as Ginbot 7 Movement for Justice, Freedom and Democracy, with smug delight. According to the regime, the “Ethiopian national security service coordinating with its Yemeni counterpart had detained and transferred to Ethiopia [Andaragatchew Tsgie] as he tried to enter Eritrea through Sanaa [Yemen].” Andargatchew is a British national of Ethiopian origin. Yemeni officials denied Adargatchew access to British consular officials, legal representation and contact with family members before subjecting him to extraordinary rendition to the regime in Ethiopia. 
In what appears to be a secretly recorded 63-second video clip released by the regime, Andargatchew is seen stoically reflecting on his abduction. He declares, among other things, that he is “at peace” with himself and has “no anger or ill-will” towards his captors. Is the man shown in the video clip speaking freely or repeating what he is told to say by his captors? Was Andargatchew aware that he was being secretly videotaped for propaganda purposes when he made his “statement”? Does the video clip depict a man speaking words of quiet defiance or pleading for mercy before his abductors? Is the whole drama staged in the video an attempt by the regime to hoodwink Andaragatchew’s supporters, international human rights organizations and the British government? What did they do with Andargachew for over two weeks before officially announcing his capture and extraordinary rendition? I do not know the answer to these questions, but  I was surprised by the stoicism, composure and calmness exhibited by a man trapped in laughing hyenas’ den with glinting teeth bared at him. 
It is not clear to me why the regime released the video clip of Andargatchew’s video “statement” over 2 weeks after his reported arrest and rendition on June 23. I believe the regime aimed to achieve a number of propaganda objectives with the “statement”:
1) Prove to Ginbot 7 and other opposition elements that the regime has intelligence and tactical capabilities to act against its enemies and opponents at least with the broader Horn of Africa region. (By the way, the regime’s arrest and rendition of Andargachew reminded me of theinterview given by an Addis Ababa police chief known as Zemedkun to a Voice of America- Amharic program reporter. After berating the VOA reporter on the air, Zemedkun warned the reporter, “I don’t care if you live in Washington or in Heaven. I don’t give a damn! But I will arrest you and take you. You should know that!!) It seems the regime delivered on Zemedkun’s threat in Yemen when it arrested Andargachew. The regime wants to send the message out that they will get their enemies in transit in Yemen, living in Washington or even if they have gone to Heaven.)
2) Disprove any claim that Andargatchew has been physically or psychologically tortured, mistreated or abused.
3) Prove that Andargatchew is actually being treated well and in a dignified way (Andargatchew appears physically unharmed (at least his face does not appear to show any visible signs of trauma). He  appears in the video clip in his regular causal wear in a room that appears to be a stark police interrogation chamber). They also wanted to show a “relaxed” Andargatchew who does not exhibit the usual disorientation, stress, anxiety and depression of  victims of extraordinary rendition.
4) Preemptively and proactively deflect any criticism or complaints from human rights groups and others that Andargatchew has been or is highly likely to be tortured in detention.
5) Embarrass Ginbot 7 and its leadership by demonstrating that the regime has penetrated and compromised that organization’s internal security by planting a mole (a deep cover agent) to report on sensitive organizational activities.
6) Prove that the Ginbot 7 organization is effectively neutralized and fatally incapacitated with the capture of Andargatchew and any information they could extract from him by torture and other means.
7) Demoralize the whole Ethiopian opposition and psychologically paralyze them from mounting an effective challenge in the  fake election scheduled for 2015.
8) Prove that the regime can flout the rule of international law and get away with it -- without the objection and implicit blessing of the Western donors and loaners-- as it has done dozens of times before. I am sure conspiracy theorists have their own explanations. 
It remains to be seen whether the regime has achieved any or all of these objectives by abducting Andargatchew. However, I am reasonably sure that regime members have popped crates of champagne bottles and done do-si-does right into the night for a well-concocted and -executed abduction. Should the regime now do a final victory lap over Andargatchew’s abduction? I doubt that any one person could be the soul, body and mind of any organization (with only one exception, Meles Zenawi). It seems reasonable to conclude that Andargatchew’s abduction could be a significant setback for Ginbot 7. I doubt it will necessarily spell doom for that organization. Similarly, time will tell whether those who asserted Andargatchew will be tortured for information are correct. Nonetheless,  the social scientific data and analyses show compellingly that torture in ordinary criminal investigations and in extraordinary renditions produces lies not truth.    
For the record, I have never met or spoken to Andaragatchew Tsgie. I have seen his videotaped interviews and read some public statements he has made online. I know that the regime has convicted Andaragatchew of committing  “terrorism” and sentenced him to death in the regime’s kangaroo courts. It is precisely this question of kangaroo justice and the flagrant violation of the rule of international law in Andargatchew’s extraordinary rendition that compels me to write this commentary. 
State terrorism through the use of “anti-terrorism law” and violation of the rule of international law  
The hallmark of any failed state is the absence of the rule of law. The hallmark of the failed criminal state is the flagitious violation of the rule of constitutional and international law. I see little difference in principle between what Boko Haram did in Nigeria to abduct  nearly 300 young women three months ago and what the regime in Ethiopia has done in the abduction of Andargatchew Tsgie. The regime argues that Andargatchew is a “terrorist” and has been sentenced to death in absentia under the so-called anti-terrorism law (Anti-Terrorism Proclamation No. 652/2009 ). As I have demonstrated in dozens of commentaries since 2006, the prosecution of political opponents for “treason” and “terrorism” in Ethiopia is a legal persecution and lynching of political opponents in kangaroo court. As numerous annual U.S. State Department human rights reports have documented,  Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism “law” is merely a convenient mechanism for “politically motivated trials and convictions of opposition figures, activists, journalists, and bloggers, as well as increased restrictions on print media.” A conviction and a sentence of death for those charged with “terrorism” is foreordained and a foregone conclusion. The fact of the matter is that a sentence of death on a person charged with “terrorism” in Ethiopia’s kangaroo courts is like a sentence of capital punishment on an antelope at a convention of hyenas. In a country that lacks judicial independence and where judges are instructed to make legal determinations, no conviction and imposition of the death penalty could stand fair and independent legal scrutiny.  
It is a misnomer to call the regime’s “anti-terrorism” proclamation a “law”. Proclamation 652 is “law” of the bush, the jungle. As I have demonstrated in my commentary, “Ethiopia: Dictatorship is State Terrorism”, Proclamation 652 is an arbitrary and capricious diktat conceived and crafted by the late Meles Zenawi and approved by his rubberstamp parliament. That proclamation has been  thoroughly condemned and criticized by all of the major international human rights organization. For instance, Human Rights Watch criticized that “law” for providing “an extremely broad and ambiguous definition of terrorism that could be used to criminalize non-violent political dissent and various other activities that should not be deemed as terrorism.” Even the U.S. State Department expressed its disapproval of the “extremely harsh and politicized use of Ethiopia’s anti-terrorism law” in persecuting political opponents. To add insult to injury, in every single suspected case of “terrorism”, Meles Zenawi and his spokesmen have made outrageous and prejudicial public comments and levelled angry and unsubstantiated accusations against “terrorism” suspects while trials are underway, violating the suspects’ constitutional right to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. It is also a fact that all suspects accused of “terrorism” by the regime have been denied right to counsel and other constitutional rights during interrogations and subjected to physical and psychological torture. The regime has also exerted political pressure on the courts to make findings of guilt in “treason” and “terrorism” cases. 
Preaching the rule of international law to outlaws 
I have always said that preaching rule of law to the regime in Ethiopia is like preaching Scripture to a gathering of deaf, mute and blind Heathen or pouring water over a slab of granite. It goes in one ear, passes through a vacuum, and out the other. As a constitutional lawyer who takes great pride in defending the rule of law, I must keep on preaching, teaching and defending the rule of law with full knowledge that regime in Ethiopia does not give a rat’s behind about the rule of law, due process, international law, its own Constitution, and least of all, anything I have to say. Regardless, I must speak out because I have a moral duty to do so. Those who practice silence when the rule of law is trampled are passive accomplices in the triumph of the rule of thuggery over the rule of law. 
What the regime did in abducting Andargatchew with the active cooperation of the Yemeni government is an act of thuggery called “extraordinary rendition”. It is a fancy phrase coined by the Central Intelligence Agency to justify the secret extrajudicial arrest, detention and extradition of an individual suspected of “terrorism” to the custody of another state. It is essentially a form of outsourcing interrogation by torture to countries where torture is commonly practiced. Logistically, individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism are captured and detained by foreign authorities on foreign soil and transferred to another state for interrogation under conditions of torture and physical and psychological abuse.  
The regime in Ethiopia is not new to the criminal practice of extraordinary rendition. In fact, it is one of the top practitioners of that criminal activity. Beginning in 2007, a total more than 100 terror suspects have been arrested in Somalia and Kenya and transferred to Ethiopia to face interrogation by regime and US intelligence and law enforcement officials. None of the rendered prisoners was given access to or allowed to retain counsel during interrogation. Many were interrogated under circumstances of physical and psychological torture. In specific cases, among others, the regime in Ethiopia has hosted the interrogation of Yasser Tinawi, who was subsequently flown to  Egypt and rendered to Syria. Mohammed Ali Isse and Omar bin Hassan were also rendered to Ethiopia.  Isse was tortured with electric shocks by his Ethiopian interrogators. 
Extraordinary rendition violates every rule in the human rights book. The rendition process invariably involves forceful abduction or kidnapping. The victim is detained incommunicado and without due process of law for an extended period of time. They are often interrogated for extended periods and subjected to physical and mental torture. The victim of rendition is not afforded an opportunity to contact consular officials before being whisked away to the rendition destination. Rendition victims are prevented from having access to family members, friends and health care providers. They are often held in solitary confinement in secret prisons and prevented from challenging their detention in a court of law.
Convention Against Torture 
The right to be free from government-sponsored torture is a fundamental and universal right recognized under the highest principles and conventions of international law. States are also under the absolute and unconditional obligation to subscribe to and practice the principle of non-refoulement (not returning a person to a place where that person is likely to face persecution, torture, etc.). This obligation is so “fundamental that it is binding on all states, and no nation may derogate from or agree to contravene them.” It also applies to all states irrespective of whether they are signatories to any particular treaty prohibiting refoulement and regardless of the offenses allegedly committed or the danger posed by the individual concerned. 
The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has been signed (by “accession”) by Ethiopia (March 14, 1994) and Yemen (November 5 1991) (CAT).  Article 3 of the CAT specifically provides that “[n]o State Party shall expel, return (“refouler’), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.” Article 1 defines torture as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession… [and] … when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.” 
Torture and ill-treatment are tools of trade for the regime in Ethiopia. Confinement in the stinking prisons and  jails in Ethiopia  is itself torture and a monumental crime against humanity. One need only read the regime’s secretly commissioned report of the prison system by retired British Colonel Michael Dewars to get a glimpse of the horrific and shocking conditions of penal servitude in Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch has documented incidents of torture and ill-treatment by Ethiopian security forces in a range of settings.  “Torture and ill-treatment have been used by Ethiopia’s police, military, and other members of the security forces to punish a spectrum of perceived dissenters, including university students, members of the political opposition, and alleged supporters of insurgent groups, as well as alleged terrorist suspect. The frequency, ubiquity, and patterns of abuse by agents of the central and state governments demonstrate systematic mistreatment involving commanding officers, not random activity by rogue soldiers and police officers. In several cases documented by Human Rights Watch, military commanders participated personally in torture.” Torture techniques and methods vary. “Repeated and severe beatings with sticks, electric cables, rifle butts, iron bars, or other hard instruments is the most frequent method of abuse. Occasionally, police and soldiers resort to other methods, such as immersing victims' heads in water; beating and kicking victims while they hang bound upside down; tying bottles of water to testicles; and forcing detainees to run or crawl barefoot over sharp gravel for several hours at a time. Some victims have suffered serious permanent injury; a few have been tortured to death… Although Ethiopia has criminal code provisions and other laws available to enforce its international and domestic obligations, they are seldom enforced. Very few incidents of torture have been investigated promptly and impartially, much less prosecuted.” 
There is considerable concern expressed by various international human rights groups, Ginbot 7 and others that the regime will torture and abuse Andargatchew in an effort to extract information from him.  This concern cannot be easily discounted. The regime in Ethiopia has a long  history of using torture dating back to their days in the bush. I submit four notorious cases of torture and ill-treatment of detainees by the regime. Birtukan Midekksa, the first woman political party leader in Ethiopian history, was held in solitary confinement for months and subjected to psychological and physical torture after she was jailed by the late Meles Zenawi in 2008. When asked about Birtukan’s condition in solitary confinement in 2010, Meles Zenawi joked, “The health situation of Birtukan, the last I heard, is in perfect condition. She may have gained a few kilos, but other than that, and that may be for lack of exercise, I understand she is in perfect health…” I have documented Meles’ sadistic treatment of Birtukan in numerous commentaries. In 2010, Ethiopia’s foremost defenders of press freedom, the husband and wife team of  Eskinder Nega and Serkalem Fasil wrote in their letter to Columbia University President Lee C. Bollinger describing the inhumane and barbaric treatment they received in the regime’s jails. “… Severely underweight at birth because Serkalem’s physical and psychological privation in one of Africa’s worst prisons, an incubator was deemed life-saving to the new-born child by prison doctors; which was, in an act of incomprehensible vindictiveness, denied by the authorities.”  
In 2013, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) documented the abuse and ill-treatment Reeyot Alemu, a young woman journalists, suffered in the regime’s prison. CPJ wrote, “Prison authorities have threatened Reeyot with solitary confinement for two months as punishment for alleged bad behavior toward them and threatening to publicize human rights violations by prison guards, according to sources close to the journalist who spoke to the International Women's Media Foundation on condition of anonymity. CPJ has independently verified the information. Reeyot has also been denied access to adequate medical treatment after she was diagnosed with a tumor in her breast…” In March 2014,  seven young Semayawi (Blue) Party women members were arrested, beaten and jailed for demanding the release of political prisoners and respect for their basic human rights during a 5k run. I need not mention the tens of thousands of men – opposition party leaders and members, dissidents, civil society leaders, human rights advocates and others -- who have been subjected to torture, ill-treatment and abuse at the hands of the regime in Ethiopia. 
I suspect there are some in the regime who want to see Andaragachew humiliated, embarrassed and disgraced. Revenge, retribution and retaliation is like mother’s milk to them. Careful  examination of the anecdotal evidence of the regime’s record of treatment of their enemies and opposition  suggests  that they are extremely vengeful, vindictive, unforgiving and sadistic. I have come to the conclusion that the regime relishes seeing their victims in pain and enjoy inflicting suffering on them.  The late Meles Zenawi, the “enlightened visionary leader” of the regime, was a man who derived sadistic pleasure from humiliating and degrading his opponents. I was outraged and inflamed by his calculating and sadistic dehumanization and degradation of Birtukan Midekssa. Meles suppressed any trace of human compassion, decency and mercy he may have had by acting sadistically against Birtukan. The point is that I expect Meles’ apostles to follow their visionary leader and sadistically deal with Andargatchew. I do not think the hard-core members of the regime will be satisfied by Andargachew’s capture and detention. It is not enough for them to have “won” the war against Ginbot 7. The only thing that will soothe their tortured souls is to see their nemesis tortured, humiliated, tarred and feathered. Power in the hands of the unenlightened breeds sadism.  
Yemeni liability under the CAT 
A state which knowingly aids or assists another state in the commission of a violation of international law (extraordinary rendition) is liable for accomplice liability. Yemen by knowingly rendering Andargachew to the regime in Ethiopia (which is notorious for using torture, secret detentions and enforced disappearances) is in clear violation of the CAT. The government of Yemen is accountable for accomplice liability for knowingly detaining, providing practical and logistical assistance and delivering Andargatchew to the intelligence service of the regime in Ethiopia with full knowledge that there are  “substantial grounds for believing that Andargachew is in danger of being subjected to torture.” 
Article 3 of the CAT requires an assessment of “all relevant considerations” relevant to any “consistent patterns of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights,” when determining whether an individual held for rendering or extradition is likely to endure torture upon his return. Yemen callously disregarded this essential requirement when it delivered Andargachew to the regime in Ethiopia. Indeed, the Yemeni regime did not even bother to seek  diplomatic assurances from the regime in Ethiopia that Andargatchew will not be tortured once he is turned over. On July 7, Yemeni Deputy Foreign Minister Hamid Al-Awadi told the Yemen Times “that Yemen extradited Andargachew Tsege, secretary-general of the banned Ethiopian opposition movement Ginbot 7, to Addis Ababa in accordance with an agreement on the exchange of wanted individuals signed between the two countries in 1999.” What about Yemen’s obligations under the CAT? Yemen is liable as an accomplice under the CAT for its extraordinary rendition of Andargachew. 
The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 
There are 177 state parties to the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR). Ethiopia, and a dozen other countries including, among others, Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, Palau, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, South Sudan have failed to sign the Convention.Yemen became a party to the Convention by accession on April 10, 1986.
Article 36 of the VCCR provides that when a national of a foreign country is arrested or detained on criminal or immigration charges, the detainee must be advised of certain rights. Specifically, Article 36 requires states to 1) inform without delay the consular post in their jurisdictions concerning the detained person, 2) advise the detained person of his/her right to contact consular officials and 3) facilitate visits of the detained person by consular officials. 
Yemen knowingly and intentionally violated the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by rendering Andargachew to the regime in Ethiopia  without informing the British embassy and consular office in Sanaa. The British Foreign Office said in a statement that it had made “consistent requests for information from the Yemeni authorities, the lack of any notification of his detention in contravention of the Vienna convention and our concerns about the death penalty that Mr. Tsige could face in Ethiopia.” Crocodile tears from the British Foreign Office? A double standard in the protection of naturalized British citizens and those born on British soil? 
War on terrorism or international law? 
The “war on terrorism” should not be a war on international law where anti-terrorism efforts become a convenient justification for thuggery. Nations have the duty to combat terrorism and prevent future terrorist attacks by capturing or containing members of those groups who seek to inflict damage on them. Defeating  international terrorism also requires international coordination between law enforcement, intelligence and foreign policy officials. But such efforts must not and cannot be carried out illegally or in flagrant violation of treaty obligations and customary international law. Following the rule of international law is not aiding or facilitating terrorism. It is upholding the rule of law which separates civilized people from terrorists and thugs. States have a variety of legal mechanisms and tools to apprehend and prosecute suspected terrorists. Extraordinary rendition is not one of them. Extraordinary rendition is a crime under international law. No state has the right to “extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture”. This rule of international law is non-derogable under any circumstances. 
The struggle for the rule of (international) law is the unending struggle of civilization against savagery, brutality, depravity and inhumanity. Savagery against the rule of law is not limited to wild-eyed murderous terrorist. It is equally the stock in trade of those who claim to follow the rule of law by practicing the rule of thuggery. A luta continua! (The struggle continues!) 
As a constitutional lawyer, I wholeheartedly agree with Louis Brandies, one of the most learned U.S. 
Supreme Court Justices, who said, “Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example…. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law into himself; it invites anarchy.” It diminishes the moral standing of the good guys against the bad guys. It erodes moral support for counter-terrorism efforts worldwide. An outlaw government invites terrorism. A criminal government that practices extraordinary rendition breeds terrorism by its own example! 
Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino and is a practicing defense lawyer. 
source-al mariam
posted By Daneil Aleyu Zeleke

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

What is the Value of American Values in Africa?

american values 2“We did a whole lot of things that were right, but we tortured some folks; we did some things that were  contrary to our values. When we engaged in some of these enhanced interrogation techniques, techniques that I believe and I think any fair-minded person would believe were torture, we crossed a line. And that needs to be understood and accepted,” said President Obama at a press conference a couple of days ago.
President Obama offered his comments to blunt Congressional criticism following an inspector general's report which concluded that the CIA improperly scanned the computers of Senate staffers looking into allegations of enhanced interrogation techniques by that agency. He cautioned Americans “not to feel too sanctimonious in retrospect about the tough job that those folks had.” In the same breath, he instructed, “The character of our country has to be measured in part, not by what we do when things are easy, but what we do when things are hard.” 
The “torture” condemned by President Obama was initially launched under the auspices of former Vice President Dick Cheney, the architect of the “War on Terror”  and enhanced interrogation. The Bush Administration denied “enhanced interrogation”, which included such techniques as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, sensory bombardment by noise and light, prolonged isolation and sexual humiliation, among others, is torture. Recently, Cheney said, “If I would have to do it all over again, I would.”
The President’s remarks on torture got me thinking about the torturers attending the “U.S.-Africa Leaders” Summit. On August 5-6, President Obama has invited to the White House the “finest” practitioners of torture, corruption experts and master criminals against humanity from Africa to talk business and American investments (not human rights or American values). Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya, who is on trial with his deputy president William Ruto at the International Criminal Court on various counts of crimes against humanity,  is expected to attend. The roster of invitees reads like a rogues’ gallery of certified human rights violators including Paul Biya of Cameroon,  Blaise Compaore of Burkina Faso, Paul Kagame of Rwanda, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo of  Equatorial Guinea, José Eduardo dos Santos of Angola, Idriss Deby of Chad and Yahya Jammeh of The Gambia. These wicked African criminals against humanity make the CIA’s practice of “enhanced interrogation techniques” look like a walk in the park.
Incredibly, President Obama calls these human rights scofflaws and crooks America’s “partners”.  President Obama exhorted, “The character of our country has to be measured in part, not by what we do when things are easy, but what we do when things are hard.” But how do we “measure the character”  of our President? By his lofty words and catchy phrases or his inactions “when things are hard” ?   If the old saying that “one can judge a man by the quality of friends he keeps” is true, does it necessarily follow that one can also judge a man by the quality of the “partners” he keeps?  When President Obama made “partners” of African criminals against humanity,  did he “cross the line”  between decency and sleaze?  Should it not be “understood and accepted” that American values make no distinction between torturers in America and torturers in Africa?
I believe American business investments in Africa without morality breed only misery and thievery.  An American economic investment policy in Africa that is not anchored in human rights will only accelerate the endemic corruption on the continent and deepen the despair and agony of Africans. President Obama should realize that it is wholly insufficient to invest in African banks, dams, mines, rail lines, hotels and bricks and mortars without a moral foundation. After all, America is not China.  American values are not Chinese values.  President Obama said, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks…” That exceptionalism is built on the American values of liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, republicanism, populism and laissez-faire economics.
Even Adam Smith, the “father” of capitalism understood the utmost importance of a moral foundation and continued education in creating and maintaining a just, fair and harmonious society in a free enterprise system. He called it “mutual sympathy”, something without which a society would degenerate into immorality and amorality. It is  “mutual sympathy” that restrains and bridles the natural predation and avarice of the rich and powerful from ravaging the weak and powerless.  In American business investments in Africa, the moral foundation of “mutual sympathy” is and should always be human rights. I lament the fact that Africa, the cradle of humanity,  is today the graveyard of human rights.  
Does President Obama “truly believe” in “American values”? Which American values has he “betrayed” in “partnering” with African dictators?
In his book, the Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream”, then-Senator Obama wrote:
We hang on to our values, even if they seem at times tarnished and worn; even if, as a nation and in our own lives, we have betrayed them more often that we care to remember. What else is there to guide us? Those values are our inheritance, what makes us who we are as a people. And although we recognize that they are subject to challenge, can be poked and prodded and debunked and turned inside out by intellectuals and cultural critics, they have proven to be both surprisingly durable and surprisingly constant across classes, and races, and faiths, and generations. We can make claims on their behalf, so long as we understand that our values must be tested against fact and experience, so long as we recall that they demand deeds and not just words… If we aren’t willing to pay a price for our values, if we aren’t willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize them, then we should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them at all.
I am not sure what President Obama means when he speaks of “American values” or “our values”. He never quite spells them out. It is hard to know on which values he wants us  “to hang on”. Which values have “we” “inherited” or “betrayed”? Who has really betrayed American values: the “intellectuals and cultural critics” who “poke, prod and debunk” American values or the leaders who are not willing “to pay a price for our values”? What American values are we supposed to “test against fact and experience”? Can we “test against fact and experience” American values in Africa? For which values are we supposed to “pay a price” and make “sacrifices in order to realize them”? What American values do Americans “truly believe in”?
Is torture an American value? 
In a rare instance, President Obama, speaking at the United Auto Workers Conference in February 2012, offered a glimpse of his conception of American values. “Let me tell you, I keep on hearing these same folks talk about values all the time.  You want to talk about values?  Hard work -- that’s a value. (Applause.)  Looking out for one another -- that’s a value.  The idea that we're all in it together, and I'm my brother's keeper and sister's keeper -- that’s a value.”
American values I “truly believe in”
Americans have many great cultural values that I value highly and “truly believe in”.  A strong work ethic,  altruism and giving a hand up to those who are down are definitely signature American values. I think there are many great American values the President glibly omitted in his stump-like speech. Americans place a high value on individual freedom and individualism, which simply means they believe in the uniqueness and paramountcy of the individual person. They value highly individual initiative, individual expression and individual privacy. They value equality and an open society. They value science and technology. They believe in competition (they have a “USA #1 mentality”). They value and practice volunteerism and philanthropy. They believe in pragmatism and are achievement-oriented.  They are frank, open, and direct in their dealings.  I “truly believe” in these values.
However, there are other American values I believe in even more and am “willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize them.” The most important one is the rule of law. It simply means that law should govern a nation, not politicians. To paraphrase President Dwight D. Eisenhower, “The clearest way to show what the rule of law means to Americans in everyday life is to recall what is happening in much of Africa today where there is no rule of law.” I became a constitutional lawyer because I have an unshakable belief in the rule of law.
I am “willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize”, defend and protect the American values of freedom of speech, and of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to counsel and against self-incrimination and so on. I “truly believe in” due process, the principle that before government takes a person’s life, liberty or property, it must comply with fair procedures and be guided by fundamental American values of fairness: The accused is presumed innocent until the government proves the accused’s guilt. The government bears the entire burden of proving the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The government may not interrogate a criminal suspect without informing the suspect of his/her right to remain silent and right to counsel during custodial interrogations, and so on.
I am also “willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize” the American values of representative government, limited government and federalism. I believe in a system of government where “ambition is made to counteract ambition”, there is constitutional separation of powers so that there is not a dangerous  concentration of power in the hands of one individual or branch of government. I believe in a system of government where there are checks and balances with an independent judiciary as the backbone of that system. I believe in a federal form of government that clearly delineates the powers of the national and sub-national governments.  In short, I have a worldview founded on the values of liberty, equality and human rights; and I am “willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize” them. .
Is it possible to form a “partnership” with African dictators if one “truly believes in” American values?
Over the past six years, we have heard a lot of talk about American values and many promises on human rights in Africa from President Obama and his Administration. “We will work diligently with Ethiopia to ensure that strengthened democratic institutions and open political dialogue become a reality for the Ethiopian people… We will work for the release of jailed scholars, activists, and opposition party leaders… We align ourselves with men and women around the world who struggle for the right to speak their minds, to choose their leaders, and to be treated with dignity and respect…. Africa’s future belongs to its young people… We’re going to keep helping empower African youth… Africa doesn’t need strongmen, it needs strong institutions. We support strong and sustainable democratic governments…. America will be more responsible in extending our hand. Aid is not an end in itself… [Dictatorship] is not democracy, [it] is tyranny, and now is the time for it to end… America is watching…” All empty promises and cheap talk.
Edmund Burke, the British statesman and philosopher said, “Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intending to go beyond promise, it costs nothing.” Talk of magnificent American values costs nothing to those who talk the talk and never have to walk the talk. However, talk of magnificent American values exacts an exorbitant price on those who listen to the talk and harbor deep in their hearts the audacity of hope that they will one day see those talking the talk in America walking the talk in Africa.
In the global “war on terrorism”, it may be necessary for the U.S. to partner with state terrorists. As between terrorists and state terrorists, state terrorists may be the lesser of two (d)evils for the Obama Administration. It is true that the politics of “anti-terrorism” has made for strange bedfellows of U.S. and African leaders. Having said that, I am exasperated watching the American people being flimflammed into believing that their tax dollars are supporting American values in Africa. I get completely bummed out watching hard-earned American tax dollars bankrolling ruthless and cunning African dictators who laugh straight to the bank to deposit their American tax dollars. But when I think about those miserable African-leaders-cum-panhandlers “enfolded in the purple of Emperors” making a beeline at the White House rubbing their palms and grinning ear to ear ready to pick up their foreign aid welfare checks in a couple of days, I just plain get pissed off!!!
“If we aren’t willing to pay a price for our values, if we aren’t willing to make some sacrifices in order to realize them, then we should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them at all.” Senator Barack Obama.
“When the United States stands up for human rights, by example at home and by effort abroad, we align ourselves with men and women around the world who struggle for the right to speak their minds, to choose their leaders, and to be treated with dignity and respect. We also strengthen our security and well being, because the abuse of human rights can feed many of the global dangers that we confront -- from armed conflict and humanitarian crises, to corruption and the spread of ideologies that promote hatred and violence.” President Barack Obama.

Monday, 29 September 2014

Breaking news

ESAT Breaking News : Ethiopian Protesters In DC Control Embassy; Embassy Staff Fires At Them
Ethiopian Satellite Television and Radio (ESAT) has just reported that Ethiopian protesters residing in Washington DC, USA, “had entered and controlled the Ethiopian Embassy for a while”on September 29, 2014. The Embassy is located on 3506 International Dr NW, Washington, DC 20008 The protesters removed the flag that the current government had designed in 1994 to hoist the pure green, yellow and red Ethiopian flag with no symbols on it. The News report also stated that shots were fired against the protesters by a staff member of the Ethiopian Embassy. The City’s police are now in the Embassy and the 3506 International Dr NW has reportedly been closed, the report added.
A large number of Ethiopian political exiles live in the Washington area.
http://www.ethsat.com - Ethiopian Satellite Television (ESAT) ESAT is the first independent Ethiopian Satellite Television service and Radio Station who broadcast to Ethiopia and the rest of the world
WWW.YOUTUBE.COM

Ethiopian-American Council Endorses Congressman Mike Honda for Reelection

San Jose, California, September 29 – Citing his past service and his concern for the rights and general welfare of all Americans – with a keen eye on immigrant and ethnic communities – the Ethiopian-American Council of North America (EAC) has decided to endorse the reelection of Michael M. Honda as Representative of the 17th Congressional District in the State of California.
The EAC is a grassroots policy advocacy organization, based in San Jose, California, that operates on the behalf of Ethiopian ethnic and immigrant communities across North America.
In a letter of endorsement to Mr. Honda, EAC cited the time in his youth that he had spent in an internment camp during World War II. EAC expressed hope that with people such as himself in office – those who have experienced prejudice and a consequent loss of rights – that something as egregiously wrong as the Japanese internment will never again happen to any immigrant or ethnic community in the United States of America.
The Ethiopian diaspora and the resultant ethnic and immigrant Ethiopian communities in North America are a result of actions similar to the Japanese internment, and others far more heinous – including the jailing and murder of free-press journalists and political activists – promulgated by the corrupt regime presently ruling Ethiopia.
The EAC partially based their endorsement of Mr. Honda’s reelection on answers to a questionnaire we had sent to his office. After considering his answers, and after some discussion, the EAC decided to lend as much financial and social support as they deem appropriate to ensure that Ethiopian-American voters, and any other citizens they are able to encourage, will go to the polls for Mr. Honda.
Many issues were raised in the questionnaire and Mr. Honda’s answers regarding those issues convinced EAC to endorse him as the one who will most likely help strengthen the Ethiopian community, and the 17th Congressional District in California at large, politically, socially, and economically. The points raised generally include:
  • His advocacy for social justice and giving a voice to those who do not have one.
  • His being a founder of the Congressional Ethiopia and Ethiopian-American Caucus while
continuing to fight for human rights everywhere.
  • His support of H.R.2003 – Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007, a bill that
would have directed the President to provide support for human rights in Ethiopia.
  • His securing of a legislative provision that promoted freedom of expression – specifically one
that objects to government harassment and restrictions on a free press in Ethiopia.
  • His desire to provide a meaningful path to citizenship for law-abiding undocumented
immigrants currently in the United States.
  • His awareness that a family-based system of immigration is key to ensuring that admission is
not based solely on education, wealth, or U.S. economic benefit.
  • His belief that immigrants have strengthened our nation’s social and economic fabric and that
it is unconstitutional and wrong to create a class of secondary citizens who have no right to
vote and no access to health care.
  • His commitment to engaging communities in civic service by providing leadership and
internship opportunities for interested individuals of all ethnicities.
  • His recognition of the need for leaders who have experienced and overcome injustice – who
understand what it means to have basic rights infringed upon solely because of status as a
minority.
EAC and other members of the Ethiopian-American community in the 17th Congressional District perceive they have a forward-thinking friend in Mr. Honda. EAC is interested in preserving Ethiopian heritage in America. EAC wants Ethiopian youngsters and other community members to be politically wise and socially responsible as they involve themselves in the processes of the United States. EAC sees the need for an entrepreneurially friendly environment to put the business acumen of many of its community members to the best and fullest use.
EAC has decided to put its trust in Mr. Honda by endorsing and working for his reelection to the House of Representatives in hopes of realizing these and other important community goals.
The Ethiopian Americans Council of North America (EAC) is a grassroots policy advocacy organization serving Ethiopian ethnic and immigrant communities across North America. 
The Ethiopian American Council
posted By Daneil Aleyu Zeleke

የሰማያዊ ፓርቲ ወጣቶችና የነገረ ኢትዮጵያ አዘጋጆች መስቀልን ከህሊና እስረኞች ጋር አሳለፉ

የሰማያዊ ፓርቲ ወጣቶችና የነገረ ኢትዮጵያ የዝግጅት ክፍል ባልደረባ መስከረም 18/2007 ዓ.ም (መስቀልን) ቃሊቲ ከሚገኙ ታሳሪዎች ጋር አሳልፈዋል፡፡ በወቅቱም አቶ በቀለ ገርባን፣ አቶ ኦልባና ሌሊሳን፣ አዛውንቱን ሲሳይ ብርሌን፣ አቶ ጉታ ዋቆንና ጋዜጠኛ ውብሸት ታዬን አግኝተዋል፡፡ ነገረ ኢትዮጵያ ከታሰሪዎቹ መካከል የተወሰኑትን መልዕክት እንደሚከተለው አቅርባለች፡፡
‹‹ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች ተጠናክረው የብሄር ፓርቲዎችን ማጥፋት አለባቸው›› አቶ በቀለ ገርባ
ከዝዋይ ወደ ቃሊቲ ከመጣሁ 11 ወራት ሆኖኛል፡፡ በህዳር ወር 2006 ዓ.ም ነው ወደ ቃሊቲ የመጣሁት፡፡ በአሞክሮዬ መሰረት ጥር 11 ቀን 2006 ዓ.ም መፈታት ቢገባኝም አሁንም ድረስ እስር ቤት ውስጥ እገኛለሁ፡፡ በወቅቱ በአሞክሮዬ መሰረት መፈታት እንዳለብኝ ለእስር ቤቱ ኃላፊዎች ደብዳቤ ጽፌ ነበር፡፡ ሊፉቱ ሲፈልጉ አስጠርተው ያነጋግሩሃል፡፡ ካልፈለጉ ደግሞ ዝም ይሉሃል፡፡ እኔ ደብዳቤ ብጽፍም አልተጠራሁም፡፡ ምክንያታቸውን ባላውቅም ሊፈቱኝ አልፈለጉም ማለት ነው፡፡ ግን በአሞክሮዬ ባለመፈታቴ አልተጎዳሁም፡፡ በርካታ ነገሮችን ተምሬበታለሁ፡፡ እንዲያውም የሚጎዱት እነሱው ራሳቸው ናቸው፡፡ በርካታ ታሳሪዎች አሳሪዎቹ ለቃላቸውም ሆነ በህጉ ተገዥ እንዳልሆኑ በእኔ ጉዳይ ተምረዋል፡፡ አሁን በመጋቢት ወር ዋናውን ፍርድ ጨርሼ እፈታለሁ ብዬ እጠብቃለሁ፡፡
እኔ የማምነው በባለሙያነቴ ነው፡፡ ፖለቲከኛ ነኝ ብዬ አላምንም፡፡ እንደዛም ሆኖ ግን እንደ ግለሰብ ፍትህን እሻለሁ፡፡ ስልጣን ላይ ማንም ይምጣ ማን ፍትህን የሚሰጥ ከሆነ ችግር የለብኝም፡፡ በሙያተኝነቴ ነው መቀጠል የምፈልገው፡፡ ነገር ግን ክፍቶች አሉ፡፡ ወደ ፖለቲካው የገባሁትም ክፍተቶችን በማየቴ ነው፡፡
ህብረ ብሄራዊ የሚባሉ ፓርቲዎች ለአብዛኛው ህዝብ ተደራሽ አይደሉም፡፡ የህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች ድክመት ደግሞ የብሄር ፓርቲዎች እንዲፈጠሩ ምክንያት ሆኗል፡፡ በእነሱ መዳከም ነው የብሄር ፓርቲዎች በየ ቦታው ለመመስረት እድል የሚያገኙት፡፡ ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች የአንድን ማህበረሰብ ችግር ለመፍታት አቅም የላቸውም ብሎ ያሰበ አካል/ሰው እወክለዋለሁ በሚለው ማህበረሰብ ስም ፓርቲ ያቋቁማል፡፡ እኔም በዚህ ክፍተት ነው ወደ ፖለቲካው የገባሁት፡፡ ይህ ችግር ባይኖር ማህበረሰብን ከፋፍሎ ‹‹ይህኛው ፓርቲ የዚህ፣ ያንኛው ደግሞ የዚህኛው ማህበረሰብ ፓርቲ ነው›› ተብሎ እንዲከፋፈል ፍላጎት የለኝም፡፡
ህብረ ብሄራዊ ፓርቲዎች ቢጠናከሩ በአንድነት መታገልን የመሰለ ነገር የለም፡፡ ከአንዱ ዓለም አራጌ ጋር በታሰርንበት ወቅት ‹‹እናንተ ከተጠናከራችሁ እኛ እንጠፋለን፡፡ እናንተ ተጠናክራችሁ በብሄር የተደራጀነውን ማጥፋት አለባችሁ፡፡ ተጠናከሩና እኛን አጥፉን፡፡ ያኔ ሁላችንም በአንድነት እንታገላለን፡፡ ችግሮችም ይፈታሉ›› እለው ነበር፡፡ የህብረ ብሄራዊ ፓርቲዎች አለመጠናከር እንጅ ለዚህኛው አሊያም ለዛኛው ህዝብ ብዬ መስራት አልፈልግም፡፡ በአንድነት መስራትን የመሰለ ነገር የለም፡፡
ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች በአንድ በኩል በመረጃ እጥረት፣ በሌላ በኩል በስህተት፣ አሊያም አይቶ በማለፍ የአንድን ማህበረሰብ ችግር ችላ ይሉታል፡፡ ይህ ነው ተነጣጥሎ ለመታገል፣ ለብሄር ፓርቲዎች መበራከት ምክንያት የሆነው፡፡ ህዝብ መብቱ እስከተከበረለት ድረስ ማን መጣ ማን ትኩረት አይሰጥም፡፡ ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች መዳከም ግን የብሄር ፓርቲዎች ተደማጭነት እንዲያገኙ ምክንያት ሆኗል፡፡ አሜሪካን ለምሳሌ ብንወስድ ህዝቡ መብቱ እስከተከበረለት ድረስ ጥቁር መራ ነጭ ችግር የለበትም፡፡ የእኛ አገርም ጉዳይ ተመሳሳይ መሆን ይችላል፡፡ በዚህ ላይ እኛ ወንድማማቾች ነኝ፡፡
እኔ ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎችን እወቅሳለሁ፡፡ እነሱ ከተጠናከሩ በየቦታው በተናጠል የሚደረገው ትግል ወደ አንድ ጠንካራ ትግል ይመጣል፡፡ እነሱ ከተጠናከሩ በተናጠል የሚደረገው ጭቆና ይቀንሳል፡፡ ክፍተት ባይኖርና ህብረ ብሄር ፓርቲዎች ለሁሉም ህዝብ መድረስ ቢችሉ እኔ በሙያዬ በቀጠልኩ ነበር፡፡ እንዲህ የምንታሰረውም እኩ ከድክመታችን የተነሳ ነው፡፡ ጠንካራ ህብረ ብሄራዊ ፓርቲ ቢኖረን እኮ እኛም አንተሰርም ነበር፡፡ ይህ ካልሆነ ግን የአገራችንን ችግር መፍታት አንችልም፡፡ በተናጠል ለጭቆና እንዳረጋለን፡፡ በተናጠል እንታሰራለን፡፡ በሂደት ጭቆናውን እየለመድነው እንሄዳለን፡፡ በዚህ ሁኔታ ለውጥ ማምጣት አንችልም፡፡
‹‹ኢትዮጵያ ጭንቅ ላይ እንዳለች እርጉዝ ሴት ነች›› አቶ ሲሳይ ብርሌ
የተፈረደብኝ 13 አመት ነው፡፡ ከታሰርኩ አራት አመት ሆኖኗል፡፡ እድሜየ 65 ደርሷል፡፡ እስር ቤት ውስጥ ችግር አለ፡፡ የእስር ቤቱን ኃላፊዎች የምናገኛቸው ህክምና ስንፈልግ ነው፡፡ ነገር ግን የህክምናው ጉዳይ ባይወራ ይሻላል፡፡ በጣም አስቸጋሪ ነው፡፡ በእርግጥ ውጭ ያለው ህዝብም በሰፊው እስር ቤት ውስጥ እንዳለ ነው የሚቆጠረው፡፡ ልዩነቱ የተሻለ ነፋስ ስለምታገኙ፣ ስለምትዘዋወሩና የፈለጋችሁትን ሰውም ስለምታገኙ ነው፡፡
እኛ እያረጀን ነው፡፡ ከእድሜያችን አንጻር በትግሉ ሂደት ብዙም የምንጨምረው ነገር ላይኖር ይችላል፡፡ እናንተ ወጣቶች ናችሁ፡፡ ለትግሉ መሰረት የምትጥሉበት ጊዜ አሁን ነው፡፡ ወጣትነት ለትግል ወሳኝ ጊዜ ነው፡፡ አባት ያላወረሰውን ልጅ ሊያስቀጥል አይችልም፡፡ እናንተ አሁን ለራሳችሁ ብቻ ሳይሆን ለልጆቻችሁም ጭምር ነው የምትታገሉት፡፡ እናንተ በርትታችሁ ካልታገላችሁ ልጆቻችሁ ምንም የሚወርሱት ነገር አይኖርም፡፡ አባት ያላወረሰውን ደግሞ ልጅ ምንም ነገር ሊያስቀጥል አይችልም፡፡ በመሆኑም እናንተ ከአሁኑ ለእውነት በመቆም ልጆቻችሁ የሚያስቀጥሉት ነገር መስራት አለባችሁ፡፡
ጭቆና እስካለ ድረስ እኔም ሆንኩ እናንተ ባንታገልም ጭቆናውን ለማስወገድ የሚነሳ ሰው አይጠፋም፡፡ እናንተን እድለኛ የሚያደርጋችሁ ጭቆናውን ለመግታት ፈልጋችሁ፣ በራሳችሁ ተነሳሸነት በመጀመራችሁ ነው፡፡
ጭንቅ ላይ ያለች እርጉዝ ሴት ካላማጠች አትገላገልም፡፡ ለእኔ ኢትዮጵያ ጭንቅ ላይ እንዳለች እርጉዝ ሴት ነች፡፡ ኢትዮጵያ አሁን ከሚደርስባት ስቃይ ለመገላገል ማማጥ አለባት፡፡ ያኔ ትገላገለዋለች፡፡ ለዚህ ደግሞ ትግል ያስፈልጋል፡፡ ወጣቶች መታገል አለባችሁ፡፡ ትግሉ ጥንካሬን ይጠይቃል፡፡ መጠንከር አለባችሁ፡፡
‹‹ተቃዋሚዎች በምርጫው ካላመኑበት ሁላችንም አንገባም ማለት አለባቸው›› አቶ ኦልባና ሌሊሳ
የፖለቲካ ፓርቲዎች ስለ ምርጫው ቀድመው መስራት አለባቸው፡፡ ምርጫ ስለመግባት አለመግባት ከመወሰናቸው በፊት ጠንክረው መስራት ይገባቸዋል፡፡ ውሳኔውን ከመወሰናቸው በፊት ውሳኔውን ተከትሎ ሊመጣ የሚችለውን ነገር ማሰብ አለባቸው፡፡ ይህ ጉዳይ ጥናት ያስፈልገዋል፡፡ ለውሳኔያቸው ደግሞ ተገዥዎች መሆን አለባቸው፡፡ አንዴ ከተወሰነ በኋላ ጠንካራ አቋም መያዝ አለበት፡፡ በህዝቡ አመኔታ ለማግኘት በውሳኔያቸው መጽናት አለባቸው፡፡ መወላወል አይገባም፡፡ ጊዜው እስኪደርስ ጠንክረው መስራት አለባቸው፡፡ በአንድ ወቅት 33 የሚባል ስብስብ ነበር፡፡ አሁንም ተባብሮ መስራት ያስፈልጋል፡፡ ለምርጫው በጋራ መስራት ያስፈልጋል፡፡
ተቃዋሚዎች በምርጫው መሳተፍ ለህዝብ የማይጠቅም መሆኑን ካመኑ እና መግባት የማያስፈልጋቸው ከሆነ በአንድነት ኃይልን አሰባስቦ ከምርጫው መውጣት ይቻላል፡፡ በምርጫው ካላመኑበት ሁላችንም አንገባም ነው ማለት ያለባቸው፡፡ በተናጠል ከምርጫው ራስን ማግለል ጥቅም አይኖረውም፡፡ በእርግጥ ይህ መወሰን ያለበት ጊዜው ሲደርስ ነው፡፡ እስከዛ ግን ጠንክረው መስራት አለባቸው፡፡
መጥታችሁ ስለጠየቃችሁን በጣም እናመሰግናለን፡፡ ውጭ ያለውን የቤት ስራችሁንም ጠንክራችሁ መስራት አለባችሁ፡፡
ነገረ ኢትዮጵያ በቀጣይ ጊዜያትም እስር ቤት ውስጥ የሚገኙትን ሌሎች ኢትዮጵያውያን መልዕክት ለማቅረብ ትጥራለች፡፡
Source: Negere Ethiopia
posted By Daneil Aleyu Zeleke