Save The Ogaden – SaveOgaden.Org

A joint undercover investigation by BBC Newsnight and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that the Ethiopian government is using billions of dollars of development aid as a tool for political oppression.

Posing as tourists the team of journalists travelled to the southern region of Ethiopia.

We are just waiting on the crop, if we have one meal a day we will survive until the harvest, beyond that there is no hope for us Villager in southern Ethiopia

There they found villages where whole communities are starving, having allegedly been denied basic food, seed and fertiliser for failing to support Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

The investigation has also gathered evidence of mass detentions, the widespread use of torture and extra-judicial killings by Ethiopian government forces.

Yet Western donors including Britain – which is the third largest donor to Ethiopia – stand accused of turning a blind eye by continuing to provide aid money despite being warned about the abuses.

The aid in question is long-term development aid, not the emergency aid provided in response to the current drought in Ethiopia and its neighbours in the Horn of Africa.

Government response

Ambassador Abdirashid Dulane, the Deputy Head of Ethiopia’s UK Mission, has rejected the allegations saying that the Newsnight/Bureau report “lacked objectivity, even-handedness”.

“The sole source of the story was opponents of Ethiopia who have been rejected by the electorate, and time and again it has been shown that their allegations are unfounded”.

Our reporters visited one village in southern Ethiopia with a population of about 1,700 adults.

Despite being surrounded by other communities which are well fed and prosperous, this village, which cannot be named for fear of reprisals, is starving. We were told that in the two weeks prior to our team’s arrival five adults and 10 children had died.

Lying on the floor, too exhausted to stand, and flanked by her three-year-old son whose stomach is bloated by malnutrition, one woman described how her family had not eaten for four days.

“We are living day to day on the grace of God,” she said.

Another three-year-old boy lay in his grandmother’s lap, listless and barely moving as he stared into space.

“We are just waiting on the crop, if we have one meal a day we will survive until the harvest, beyond that there is no hope for us,” the grandmother said.

‘Abandoned’

In another village 30 km (19 miles) away it was a similar story.

Almost all of the aid goes through the government channels… in terms of relief food supply and some of the safety net provisions, they simply don’t get to the needy of an equitably basis Professor Beyene Petros, opposition politician

There our team met Yenee, a widow who along with her seven children is surviving by begging, eating leaves and scavenging scraps from the bins in the nearest town.

“The situation is desperate,” she said. “We have been abandoned… It is a matter of chance if we live or die.”

The two villages sit just 15km (9 miles) either side of a major town, surrounded by other communities where the populations are well fed and healthy. They are in desperate need, but no-one is helping.

According to local opposition members they are being punished for failing to vote for the ruling party, the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which Mr Meles leads.

Further north a group of farmers alienated by Mr Meles’ government met the BBC/Bureau team at a secret location on the edge of a remote village.

One farmer described how he had been ostracised for failing to support EPRDF: “Because of our political views we face great intimidation. We are denied the right to fertiliser and seeds because of political ideology,” he said.

‘Buying support’

The Ethiopian federal and regional governments control the distribution of aid in Ethiopia.

Professor Beyene Petros, the current vice-chairman of the Ethiopian Federal Democratic Forum, an alliance of eight opposition parties known as Medrek, told our reporters that aid is not distributed according to need, but according to support for the EPRDF:

“Almost all of the aid goes through the government channels… in terms of relief food supply and some of the safety net provisions, they simply don’t get to the needy of an equitably basis.

“There is a great deal of political differentiation. People who support the ruling party, the EPRDF, and our members are treated differently. The motivation is buying support, that is how they recruit support, holding the population hostage,” he said.

Mr Beyene said that the international community, including the British government, is well aware of the problem and that he has personally presented them with evidence:

“The position of the donor communities is dismissive… they always want to dismiss it as an isolated incident when we present them with some proof. And we challenge them to go down and check it out for themselves, but they don’t do it.”

Accountability

The UK International Development Minister Stephen O’Brien issued a statement in response to the allegations raised by the investigation, saying:

“We take all allegations of human rights abuses extremely seriously and raise them immediately with the relevant authorities including the Ethiopian Government, with whom we have a candid relationship. Where there is evidence, we take firm and decisive action.

They raped me in a room, one of them was standing on my mouth, and one tied my hand, they were taking turns, I fainted during this Ethiopian woman from the Ogaden

“The British aid programme helps the people of Ethiopia, 30 million of whom live in extreme poverty. We demand full accountability and maximum impact on the ground for support from the British taxpayer.”

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Newsnight also gathered evidence of a crackdown and human rights abuses in Ethiopia’s Somali region, the area bordering Somalia and Kenya, also know as the Ogaden region.

Ethnic Somali rebels from the outlawed Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) and Ethiopian government forces have been fighting for control of Ogaden since the 1970s.

The media and most aid agencies are banned from the region.

Ethiopia, one of the poorest countries of the world, is currently suffering from horrific drought.

Many of those fleeing the ensuing humanitarian crisis have headed to Dadaab refugee camp in northern Kenya.

It is the largest refugee camp in the world, and the vast majority of the 400,000 people there are from Somalia, but among them are an increasing number of Ethiopians from the Ogaden.

‘Revenge killings’

Abdifatah Arab Olad, an Ogaden community leader, told our reporters that up to 100 refugees are arriving every month with tales of killings and the burning of villages by government troops.

“Whenever fighting has taken place between the rebels and the army, for each army member that is killed, the military go to the nearest town and they start killing people,” he said. “For each army member killed it equals to 10 civilians losses.”

In the corner of a makeshift shack in the camp, an old woman who had arrived from Ogaden three weeks earlier described being arrested along with 100 others in her village.

She said they were taken to a jail where they were locked up in a shipping container, and picked out on a nightly basis to be tortured:

“They beat me then started to rape me; I screamed and fought with them… I tried to bite them… they tied me this way,” she said, gesturing to her legs.

“They raped me in a room, one of them was standing on my mouth, and one tied my hand, they were taking turns, I fainted during this… I can’t say how many, but they were many in the army,” she said.

‘Assaulted when pregnant’

Other women in the camp also said they had been arrested and accused of being members of the OLNF.

They included one who said that she was eight months pregnant when she was detained and raped by eight soldiers:

“They were beating me while I was being raped, I was bleeding,” she said, describing how one soldier stamped on her stomach and beat her with the stock of his rifle:

“I fell unconscious when I saw my baby… a man jumping on your stomach, you can imagine what happened to the child, very big kicks blows with the back of a gun. As a consequence of that the child died.”

We cannot substantiate these individual allegations. But other credible sources have reported similar stories of the widespread use of rape by Ethiopian security forces against women in the Ogaden.

Speaking on Newsnight, Ethiopia’s Ambassador Abdirashid Dulane said that the claims of rape and torture were a “rehash” of old allegations that the Ethiopian government had answered time and again.

“The Ethiopian government is governed by the rule of law, and human rights and democratic rights are enshrined in the Ethiopian constitution,” he said.

Source: BBC News (Link)

NAIROBI, Kenya — The United States and other Western governments are ignoring clear evidence of war crimes by Ethiopia, a key U.S. ally that launched a military crackdown on rebels last year, a human rights group said Thursday.

Separately, a U.S.-based science group said satellite images confirm reports that villages have been destroyed in the country’s Ogaden region.

New York-based Human Rights Watch said America’s relationship with Ethiopia means an alliance with a country repeatedly accused of violating human and political rights. In recent years, Ethiopia has become a U.S. partner in the fight against al-Qaida, which has been trying to sink roots in the Horn of Africa.

“The United States is being willfully blind,” said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director for Human Rights Watch. “Because Ethiopia is viewed as a key ally in the counterterrorism efforts, they are perhaps prepared to look the other way at abuses committed by Ethiopian soldiers.”

In a 130-page report, Human Rights Watch said Ethiopian troops have beaten and strangled civilians, staged public executions and burned villages during a year-old campaign against rebels in the Ogaden, an arid stretch of land on the border with Somalia. The group said the allegations were based on more than 100 eyewitness accounts.

The country in the Horn of Africa is an ally in President Bush’s fight against terrorism.

U.S. says it’s not ignoring war crimes reports
A State Department spokesman on Thursday dismissed claims that the U.S. is minimizing or even ignoring war crimes by the Ethiopians. Gonzalo Gallegos said officials “strongly reject” Human Rights Watch’s allegations.

The report said that since early 2007, when Ogaden rebels attacked a Chinese oil site, “the Ethiopian military’s killings, torture and rape of civilians have driven thousands of people from the region, while trade restriction and limited relief aid are exacerbating the humanitarian situation.”

Gallegos said the U.S. has received reports from international nongovernmental organizations and other aid groups of serious abuses and harsh intimidation tactics by Ethiopian government soldiers and fighters of the Ogaden National Liberation Front.

For the past year, he said, U.S. and nongovernmental personnel have investigated, but it has been impossible to identify who carried out the atrocities.

The U.S. ambassador “has persistently raised concerns over human rights abuses with the highest level of the Ethiopian government, as have senior U.S. government visitors” to the country, Gallegos said.

At the same time, Gallegos said, the U.S. military aid program has continued, with $700 million given last year.

“U.S. government military assistance to Ethiopia is designed to transform the military into an apolitical professional defense force that can secure its borders and protects human rights,” he said.

Ethiopia denies allegations
Bereket Simon, special adviser to Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, denied all allegations in the report.

“It’s the same old fabrication,” he said.

But satellite images confirm reports that the Ethiopian military has burned towns and villages in Ogaden, the American Association for the Advancement of Science reported on Thursday.

Eight sites in the rocky, arid region, which borders Somalia, have clear signs of burning and other destruction, the AAAS Science and Human Rights Program said.

AAAS

In this image of the town of Wardheer, Ethiopia, from Dec. 30, 2007, yellow dots indicate structures removed since a previous image from February 2006. Red dots indicate new structures added in that same period.

The commercially available images corroborate the report by Human Rights Watch, which also relies on eyewitness accounts of attacks on tens of thousands of ethnic-Somali Muslims living in the area, the AAAS said.

“The Ethiopian authorities frequently dismiss human rights reports, saying that the witnesses we interviewed are liars and rebel supporters,” Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch, said in a statement.

“But it will be much more difficult for them to dismiss the evidence presented in the satellite images, as images like that don’t lie,” he said.

Ethiopia, a key regional ally of the United States, launched its latest offensive after the Ogaden National Liberation Front attacked a Chinese-run oil field in the region in April 2007, killing more than 70 people.

Lars Bromley, project director for the Science and Human Rights Program at AAAS, said his team analyzed several before and after satellite images of villages identified by Human Right Watch as possible locations of human rights violations.

They found eight, mostly in villages and small towns in the Wardheer, Dhagabur and Qorrahey Zones, that appeared to have been burned or destroyed recently.

Reports difficult to corroborate
For example, in the town of Labigah, 40 structures identified in a September 2005 image were gone in images taken in February 2008. In the Human

Rights Watch report an eyewitness said the Ethiopian army “went into every village and set it on fire.”

Such reports are nearly impossible to corroborate because the region “may well be the most isolated place on earth, save perhaps the densest parts of the Congolese or Amazon rain forests,” Bromley said.

An open letter to the nations of the world Iran, Belarus, Algeria, Jordan, Bahrain, Ethiopia, etc., all autocratic, theocratic, dictatorial states of the earth.
If I left you out of the list, well, you are included.

Excellency:

If the neutral left is really neutral, why does it keep coming down hard on the West’s official enemies while ignoring the West’s henchmen?

By Stephen Gowans

Many left activists and progressives claim to be equally opposed to oppression, whether practiced by the friends of imperialist powers or their enemies, but are virtually silent on the well documented oppressions of such US client states as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Ethiopia, while exhibiting an uncritical zeal in denouncing the enemies of Anglo-American imperialism, often for crimes that have been exaggerated or invented to be used as pretexts for Western intervention and fulfillment of imperialist goals.

There is no better illustration of this tendency to profess principled neutrality while regularly exhibiting a pro-imperialist bias, than the current obsession with the alleged genocide in Darfur and the claims of unjustified political oppression in Zimbabwe, while a virtually unremarked series of crimes and oppressions is carried out by the US and British client government of Meles Zenawi in Ethiopia.

In an anti-guerilla war conducted in the country’s Ogaden region, “Ethiopian troops are burning villages, raping women and killing civilians as part of a systematic campaign to drive them from their homes.” Refugees say dozens of villages have been destroyed and have “accused the Ethiopian government of forcibly starving its own people by preventing food convoys reaching villages and destroying crops and livestock.”*

“A former Ethiopian soldier who defected from the army said how he had been ordered to burn villages and kill all their inhabitants. He said the Ethiopian air force would bomb a village before a unit of ground troops followed, firing indiscriminately at civilians. ‘Men, women, children – we killed them all,’ he said.”

The little-known conflict in Ogaden parallels the more widely known war in Darfur. The conflict began when rebels killed scores of Ethiopian guards and Chinese employees at a Chinese-run oil field. The government replied with a harsh crackdown.

“Human rights investigators are gathering evidence of widespread use of rape, with women reporting gang-rapes by up to a dozen soldiers. In some villages, men have been abducted at night, their bodies dumped in the village the next morning.

“While in Darfur, aid agencies have been able to establish camps and provide humanitarian support, they have been blocked from setting up operations in the Ogaden. The International Committee of the Red Cross has been thrown out and Medicins Sans Frontieres has also been prevented from working. Journalists trying to enter have also been banned – those that have tried have been promptly arrested.”

But while neutral leftists have worked themselves into a state of high moral dudgeon over Sudan’s counter-insurgency in Darfur, which “has been described by the US as ‘genocide’ and by the UN as ‘crimes against humanity’”, they have been virtually silent on Ethiopia, a recipient of US and British military and humanitarian aid.

“America’s top official on African affairs, assistant secretary of state, Jendayi Frazer, visited one town in the Ogaden last month.

“On her return to Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, she criticized the rebels and said the reports of military abuses were merely allegations. ‘We urge any and every government to respect human rights and to try to avoid civilian casualties but that’s difficult in dealing with an insurgency,’ she said.”

The West’s official enemies are never allowed the same latitude in dealing with their own (often US and British financed and instigated) insurgencies – a double standard backed by neutral leftists through their voluble condemnations of the anti-insurgency efforts of official enemies and comparative silence on those of Western client states.

“The US provides some $283m (£140m) in military and humanitarian aid to Ethiopia and has trained its military – one of the largest and strongest in Africa.”

Compare Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe with Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. For trying to invest Zimbabwean independence with real content (land reform and indigenization of the economy), Mugabe has been calumniated by British and US officials and the Western media as a strongman who will do anything to stay in power, from stealing elections to repressing the opposition. The elections Mugabe was said to have stolen were endorsed by the South African Development Community, an organization of neighboring states, and the opposition operates freely, despite being openly backed and financed by Western powers in pursuit of a regime-change, anti-independence agenda.

For doing the West’s bidding in the Horn of Africa, Ethiopia’s Meles is showered with US and British aid and was handpicked by Tony Blair to sit on Britain’s Commission for Africa, to lead the “African renaissance.” Neutral leftists say little about “the British Government’s – and the West’s – favorite African leader”, channeling their energies instead into calling on the US to intervene militarily in Darfur and in competing to see who can exercise the greatest stridency in denouncing the Mugabe government (contributing to the program of ushering Mugabe and his pro-independence policies out and the MDC and its pro-Western dependence policies in.) Somehow, the end result of all this is to put the West more firmly in control of Africa.

And yet the political repressions of which Mugabe is accused are practiced ardently by Meles. Indeed, even if every charge leveled against Mugabe were true (and most are not), he would still be an angel against Meles.

Following Ethiopia’s May 2005 general election, which the opposition claimed was rigged, “security forces opened fire on protesters, killing 193 people.” Thousands of opposition supporters and leaders were rounded up and thrown in jail.

“More than 100 opposition leaders were put on trial for treason while the police crackdown intensified. Text messages, which had been used to organize the demonstrations in 2005, were banned.”

The state asked that the death penalty be imposed on 38 opposition leaders, including the founder of the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, a former UN war crimes prosecutor and the mayor-elect of Addis Ababa. The court rejected the prosecution’s recommendation, but sentenced the opposition leaders to life imprisonment. They were later freed, but only after the US intervened.

“Britain still gives Ethiopia £130m in humanitarian aid each year – more than any other African country,” while carrying out an unremitting campaign of demonization against Robert Mugabe and blocking Zimbabwe’s access to international credit.

How it is it that Meles, who has carried out much graver crimes than any Mugabe has been accused of, is showered with honors and humanitarian aid, while Mugabe is treated as Africa’s version of Hitler and his country is subjected to a campaign of economic warfare?

The answer lies in the reality that Meles acts as Washington’s attack dog in the Horn of Africa, invading Somalia to put down a pro-independence government, while Mugabe pursues an independent foreign policy and implements reforms to give Zimbabwean independence meaningful content.

How is that many left activists and progressives, though professing neutrality, channel much of their energy into campaigns deploring the official enemies of Anglo-American imperialism, while remaining virtually silent on oppressions carried out by US and British client states?

The answer has much to the do with the media and how left activists and progressives react to it. The news media are structured to report on what state officials say and do. To garner support for their policies, state officials make public statements on issues they want to draw public attention to, while steering clear of events they prefer remain unnoticed. Because Western state officials make frequent references to Zimbabwe, and few, if any, to Ethiopia, dozens of media news stories appear on Zimbabwe for every one that appears on Ethiopia. In this way, state officials, working through the media, are able to establish a public agenda, not only for the media but for the neutral left to follow – one which places Mugabe scores of rungs ahead of Meles, and Darfur much higher than Ogaden. Left activists and progressives talk about Mugabe and Darfur because the media do and the media do because Western state officials do. But neutral leftists hardly ever talk about Meles and Ogaden because the media hardly do, and the media hardly do because Western state officials almost never do (and don’t want to.) The result is that while professing neutrality, many left activists and progressives have been unwittingly recruited into agendas set in Washington and London.

These are the conditions that, in part, lead the neutral left to channel considerable energy into denouncing the official enemies of Western governments, while spending little time talking about or campaigning against oppressive regimes that receive Western aid and support. Neutral leftists are quick to denounce the military government of Myanmar (an official enemy) for its crackdown on a religious group, while saying virtually nothing about the military government of Pakistan (a client state) for an equally bloody crackdown on a religious group. Neutral leftists are acutely sensitive to the humanitarian crisis in Darfur (officially condemned), while saying virtually nothing about the much larger humanitarian crisis in Iraq (officially ignored) or the humanitarian crisis in Ogaden (also officially ignored.) Neutral leftists say virtually nothing about Meles Zenawi, a strongman accused of rigging elections who threatens political opponents with the death penalty, has invaded another country, and carries out crimes against humanity within his own borders (and is supported by the West) while spitting out contempt for Robert Mugabe, who has done none of these things (but isn’t supported by the West).

In all it does, despite professions of neutrality, the neutral left is pro-imperialist, not neutral. The moment its members devote half as much energy to railing against the governments of Egypt, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey as they do against Zimbabwe, the Taliban, north Korea, Belarus and Iran, will be the moment their claims to support neither imperialism nor its official enemies unconditionally become something more substantial than deceptive rhetoric.

* All quotes from Steve Bloomfield, “Ethiopia’s ‘own Darfur’ as villagers flee government-backed violence,” The Independent, October 17, 2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article3067244.ece

 Twenty-five years ago, the world was sickened when pictures of starving children flashed across their television screens each night. Extreme famine, drought, and war hit Ethiopia like a ton of bricks and the victims were the nation’s most vulnerable. Ethiopia was riddled by a deadly combination of war and apathy. And while many will never forget the images from 1984, this scene has continued to replay itself over the years.

Today, drought and violence threaten this region yet again. The Horn of Africa, including the countries of Kenya, Ethiopia and Somalia, has received very little rainfall this past year. In Ethiopia, over eighty percent of the population lives off the land. Any change in climate has a devastating effect on the food supply, and leaves the herders and farmers instantly vulnerable to famine. Kenya and Somalia face the same challenges as well, which makes regional stability a fantastical proposition. Shortages in food supply can lead to violence between communities as men and women fight for the well-being of their families. Experts have warned for years that unless the international community undertakes a serious long term strategy to keep food supplies sustainable, cycles of violence will continue in the Horn of Africa.

But even with this knowledge, the U.S. relationship toward the Horn of Africa has barely changed in twenty years. In 1984, our policy was more geared toward containing communism than saving lives. The U.S. government assisted the most conservative elites within the Horn of Africa, many times ignoring the will or the needs of the people. As civil war waged in Ethiopia, we showed more concern for who was fighting communism than who was fighting hunger.

Fast forward to 2009. In as much as the Obama Administration says the “war on terrorism” and its policies are over, that message has not extended to our defense posture in Africa. AFRICOM, the new U.S. military command structure, is actively concerned with bolstering the military power in this region. Certainly, there is some cause for concern. Extremism is bred in places were people are most vulnerable to hunger, disease and oppression, and the bombings in Somalia last year may have killed a few with ties to terrorism, but the cost of those military operations could have built infrastructure rather than destroyed it. Money for bombers could have sewn crops rather than destroyed them. More disturbingly, we have too often turned a blind eye to how dollars marked for aid are spent, provided the governments in these countries show cooperation with our military interests. Over the years, we have provided millions of dollars in military aid to Ethiopia and Kenya, yet have been slow to criticize those governments when they have allied themselves, at least in word if not in deed, with our military. We see the same in Ethiopia over the issue of the Ogaden region, where thousands have died each year from hunger and neglect.

We can do better and more. As a country, the United States professes compassion and democratic values but so often the effects of our international policies retard the ability for democracy to flourish. It is not an accident that, in many countries, famine is allowed to persist so that those populations cannot pose opposition to ruling parties or leaders. We must consider the ramifications of providing millions of dollars of military aid without any consideration to the basic needs of the recipient country’s citizens.

This recent famine gives the Obama Administration an opportunity to redefine our mission in Africa to one that takes into account the long term effects of our short term military solutions. It allows the Obama Administration to show compassion to starving people and take responsibility for our role in the region. Utilizing a blueprint based on aid, assistance and self-determination instead of militarism can redefine the U.S. role in the Horn of Africa, can save lives and actually encourage real democracy.

Nicole C. Lee is the Executive Director of TransAfrica Forum.

Introduction

During the Weekend of November 18-21, 2010, members of the Institute for Horn of Africa Studies and Affairs (IHASA) took part the 53rd African Studies Association (ASA) with the overarching theme of “African Diaspora and Diasporas in Africa.” that was held at the lush and swanky Westin hotel, San Francisco.  Large Sudanese, Ethiopia, and Kenyan contingents, and a small number of Somali participants were observed.

As customary to ASA participants, a session by the pre-eminent scholar Ali Mazrui comes as a must- to-attend, and more so this year when, Mazrui was reading his treatise about the influence of India and China in contemporary Sub Sahara Africa.  Beyond the cultural influence that both countries have on Africa, the possibility of Chinese vs. Indian rivalry on the Horn, especially in light of the insatiable appetite of these emerging powers for the Horn of Africa region’s resources, is, if not worrisome, captivating.  The Qalub oil (the Ogaden basin) and natural gas in the Somali Regional State in particular comes to mind. What does this say about America?  If China gets access to the Qalub oil fields, does it represent the erosion of the over 100-years-old US influence in the region? Or is it a sign of the fall of US emperial might, as predicted by Paul Kennedy in his book “The Rise and Fall of Great Powers”?

As a research-based advocacy institute, whose headquarter is based in San Diego , IHASA reflects the views of the bourgeoning Somali speaking and other Diaspora communities from the Horn of Africa region.  As such, the conference and its 53rd annual theme on “African Diaspora” had much relevance to the goals and objective of IHASA.  Our follow participants included Faisal Roble, a Senior Researcher who is also the editor-in-chief of the California-based Wardheernews.com, and Fowsia Abdulkadir, also a Senior Researcher at IHASA.

Ethnic conflict in the Horn and US Engagement

Fowsia Abdulkadir presented a paper to a panel called: Social Divisions in African Polities. Her paper, The Dark-Side of Ethnic Federalism: the Case of the Somali Region in Ethiopia tackled the issue of ethnic federalism and its dispensation.  According to Ms. Abdulkadir, proponents of Ethnic federalism argue ethnic federalism is one way to transform Ethiopia while uniting its diverse peoples, and safeguarding its territorial integrity. In other words, the move towards an ethnic-based federalism was to ensure that Ethiopia won’t be consumed with ethnic revolt. Ethiopia has been at cross roads ever since it launched its ethnic federalism. There are inherent challenges in transforming any society and bringing about meaningful economic, political and social change, and Ethiopia is no exception. However, in the context of Ethiopia, there are additional complexities of protracted ethnic-based conflicts which plagued this country. These protracted ethnic-based conflicts are the result of some coercive processes that successive Ethiopia regimes employed in ruling the citizens of this country.

Ms. Abdulkadir argued that Ethiopia provides numerous examples and historical trajectory of rulers and governments who established very strong centralized governments, to the extent that it produced many large ethnically based resistance movements. The current regime has its origins in an ethnic-based resistance movements (The Tigrian People’s Liberation Front), which has rebelled against Amhara hegemony.

Faisal Roble participated in the highly watched Roundtable: Reflections and Ruminations on the Horn: Round Three, with the following participants.  The panel was chaired by the Somali historian Said Samatar of Rutgers University, Newark Campus, with a robust participation by Ed Keller, University of California, Los Angeles, Faisal Roble, Wardheernews,  Mohammed H. Ali, Georgia State University, Assefa Mehretu, Michigan State University, and Alemseged Abbay, Frostburg State University.

The discourse of the panelists focused on the historical and political manifestations of the nationality question in Ethiopia and its impacts on regional stability. Professor Edmond Keller, a re-known scholar in the affairs of the Horn, and a keen observer of ethnic politics in Ethiopia, presented a critical and historical evaluation of elections in the last few years in the Somali region under Ethiopian.  According to Keller, these elections by far constitute staged elections whose results are manufactured wins for the Somali Peoples Democratic Party (SPDP).  Keller argued that for a country to claim “democracy,” or “transition to democracy,” there are more to it than staging elections whose results are predictable.  He contrasted the last election the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) participated (freer and fairer), in which the front commanded a substantial victory by a margin of over 68% of the total votes of that year, against the last two elections which the Ethiopian Peoples Liberation Front (EPRDF) “manipulated outcomes.”  Present day insurgency of the ONLF for the secession of that region and for the preservation of the vastly un-exploited resources is partly in reaction to the absence of free and fair elections.  In his conclusion, he called upon the State Department for more engagement of both sides to the conflict.

Assefa Mehretu, an economic geographer, mainly attacked the Tigrian Peoples Liberation Front (TFPL) domination of the country’s politics and its resources.  He vehemently assaulted the concept of “Killil” or regional governments, an administrative concept, that as Mehretu argued had “ended up dividing the once united Ethiopian family” into tribal regions, while as the same time doing away with the naturally aggregated regions, or “Kifle Hagar.” There were 14 “Kifle Hagar” during the late Emperor Haile Selassie into which the country’s administrative units were organized.  He likened present day “Killil” with “regions of containment,” like those of the German camps where Jews were contained.

Since the TPLF overthrew the Dergue regime, it amalgamated a transitional charter, whose provisions for the first time recognized the existence of ethnic groups in Ethiopia and as such divided the country into ethnic-based administrative regions. Contrary to the one-party rule, the charter enacted in 1991 envisioned a multi-party ethnic based federal system of government.  It is this new reorganization of the country (dividing, if you will) that Mehretu considers a step towards the dismantling of the Ethiopian nation.  Some members of the panel, including Roble, adversely reacted to Mehretu’s thesis.

Alam Saged Abbay added to the discourse a new and revolutionary dimension, and ably debated on the concept of whether Ethiopia, given the sheer size of the number of languages, needs and must adopt what he called a “lingua frank” so that the elites of the country can easily communicate with ease.  He likened the validity of his thesis to the successful expansion and positive reception the English language is receiving from many corners of the world.

The twin and weighty presentations of Faisal Roble and Mohammed Hassan, an Oromo Scholar, focused on the intertwined relationship between colonial subjugations of the Somalis and Oromos, two communities who are geographically and socio-culturally intimate with each other through the centuries of Abyssinia domination, and human rights abuses.  Dr. Hassan narrated the historical injustices successive Abyssinian rulers meted and continue to do so against the most numerous Oromo nationality.  His analysis about the plight of the Oromos was historical and sociological in nature.

Roble did not mince at the opportunity to underscore the similarities between present day and past atrocities meted against Somalis and the perpetuation of abuses.  He has argued that, when all things are put together (massive civilian arrests without habeas corpus, the 2007 total blockade the TPLF imposed on the Ogaden region, throat slitting as a means of intimidation, the burning of villages captured by Western satellites, the looting and rapping of women), the present regime of Ethiopia is committing as much human rights abuses as previous regimes.  He weighed these abuses against the “food for security” aid that Ethiopia receives from the United States of America to the tune of $600 million. (The total aid the West dispenses to the Meles regime amounts to over $3 billion dollars annually.)

Moreover, Roble plausibly argued that the region’s conflict would worsen if and when Ethiopia tries to exploit the Qalub oil, especially as Chinese and the Ethiopian governments’ rapprochement worms up.  In that connection, Roble loudly questioned whether recent peace accord between the Ethiopian government and a small faction run by Engineer Macow and United Western Somali Liberation Front with would ameliorate the conflict between the armed ONLF faction and the Meles government.  Both Roble and Keller called for a more serious diplomatic engagement by the American government.  One of the most diplomatically interesting exchanges took place between Roble and a representative from the US Command Center, and together they inquired about the looming danger that can blanket the region if China decides to bank-roll the Ethiopian government to undertake its Qalub project and to what degree that can escalate conflict in the Horn.

Concluding Remarks

Eying the prospective secessionist outcome of Southern Sudan, the Ogaden National Liberation Front with its strong and committed fighters is threatening to fiercely engaging the oversized Ethiopian army.  The combined fuel of resources exploitation and the political aspirations of the Somalis in Ethiopia is a worrisome lethal and potential time bomb that could exacerbate the already fragile conditions of the Horn of Africa region. If left unchecked, once again the entire region can be shadowed by what Robert Ferrell 30 years ago called “war clouds in the Horn,” thus plunging it back into an era of a renewed conflict.  Without robust face-to-face internationally sanctioned talks between the belligerent parties, political crises and human rights abuses are looming large.
Institute for Horn of Africa Studies
San Diego, Ca
Contact info: www.ihasa.org

____________________________
Institute for Horn of Africa Studies and Affairs is a national nonprofit organization whose mission is to document, research, analyze, publish and disseminate information on the political and socio-economic justice issues affecting the people in the Horn of Africa and in the Diaspora community. IHASA promotes peace, justice, equality, development and supports policies and actions that contribute to the advancement of good governance and the elimination of conflicts in the Horn of Africa.

A U.S.-based human rights group has raised an uproar with a report arguing that development assistance to Ethiopia may be doing more harm than good by strengthening a repressive government. The report has sparked condemnation in some quarters, praise in others.

The Human Rights Watch report issued last month accuses Ethiopia’s government of using development aid to suppress political dissent. The 105-page document alleges that much of the $3 billion a year contributed by foreign donors is used to consolidate the power of the ruling Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front.

Ethiopian government spokesmen did not answer repeated phone calls seeking comment on the report. The government, however, launched a scathing counterattack online.  Statements posted on the foreign ministry website accuse Human Rights Watch of “unbridled arrogance” and “warped neo-colonialism.”

One statement calls the allegations a “make believe” story that is part of a “vendetta” against the Ethiopian people. Another accuses the rights group of trying to bully the international aid community into halting cooperation with Addis Ababa.

A consortium of 25 aid donors, known as the Development Assistance Group, issued a statement saying it disagrees with the conclusions in the HRW report. The DAG, as the assistance group is known, said its own independent study earlier this year uncovered no evidence of widespread or systematic aid distortion.

The full DAG study posted on the group’s website, though, paints a different picture. It states that its study was a “desk-top” exercise – not an investigation – and no specific allegations were checked.

The study notes that a fact-finding mission late last year by the U.S. Agency for International Development observed the potential for political bias in the allocation of aid. It recommended further analysis to determine if systematic distortion takes place on the basis of political affiliation.

The United States is Ethiopia’s largest individual aid donor, giving an estimated $1.3 billion per year. USAID Country Director Thomas Staal said the types of distortion alleged in the HRW report would be difficult for a donor study to detect.

“To us, the important thing is to make sure the programs are well managed, closely monitored with strict accountability systems, and you’re building institutions that can make sure programs are meeting the goals, targets and beneficiaries intended,” said Staal. “And you cannot go after individual cases of an allegation here and there.”

Authors of the Human Rights Watch report call the Development Assistance Group’s response to their allegations “disingenuous.” In a telephone interview, HRW Horn of Africa Senior Researcher Leslie Lefkow said the aid community has been timid in confronting Ethiopia’s government with charges of misusing aid money.

“This is one of the ironies of research we did, and the discussions we had with officials before we published this report, is that many of them privately acknowledge the characterization of the regime as repressive. They acknowledge these characteristics privately, but publicly there is no appetite for voicing this analysis.”

Ethiopian opposition leader Bulcha Demeksa is a former World Bank director and a long-time senior official of the United Nations Development agency. He said the ruling party’s access to vast sums of cash during the last election should have been a red flag to donors that aid money was involved.

“I do not understand how they cannot see the huge amount of money that was spent in elections this year,” said Demeksa. “Where does this money come from? Ethiopia, all by itself, cannot sustain that. I believe this money was from the various types of aid coming from donors.”

Demeksa said political payments were so widespread during the election that anyone not receiving money was socially ostracized. “In my own district I know very well … and there is no house this has not touched. People are now afraid if they think somebody has not received money, and is not a thorough EPRDF supporter, nobody goes to his house, he is not invited to weddings, social functions.”

Lefkow said the ruling party’s influence has grown exponentially in recent years. “Between 2005 and 2010, the party increased its membership to between 4 million and 5 million, that is one in seven adults, which means in most families you have a party member, and in most kebeles (village districts) every household probably has a party member.  So I do not think it is an exaggeration to say the party has essentially infiltrated every layer of Ethiopian society.”

Prime Minister Meles Zenawi rejects characterizations of Ethiopia as a “one party state.” He describes it as a dominant party state.

In parliamentary elections this year, the EPRDF and its allies won 99.6 percent of the seats. In village and regional council elections two years ago, the party won all but three of nearly 3 million seats.

Ethiopia remains one of the world’s poorest countries, though official figures show the economy has grown 10 percent or more in each of the past seven years.

Source: VOA (Voice of America)

The Somali question in Ethiopia has remained a political puzzle for quite some time now. Besieged by manmade disasters and natural calamities, what is today known as the Somali Regional State of Ethiopia (SRS) has had more than its fair share of political turbulence, economic anorexia, death and dearth. In less than half a century, the region has changed hands (British, Somalia, Ethiopia, and Italy) and names (Hararge, Ogaden, Kilil5, Somali Region). Such massive cocktail of problems wrecked havoc upon on the populace of this land but the resilience of the people has never been broken. From Sayid Mohamed to Suldan Olal Dinle to Hussien Gire to Sheik Abdinasir Sheikh Aden and Ali Gudal, the sons and daughters of this land stood up to resist external domination, marginalization and exploitation.

Equally devoted successive Ethiopian regimes, however, left no stone unturned to subjugate the region and its population. Although some development projects have been implemented under the EPRDF, the region remains very backward and is mired in grinding poverty, even by Ethiopian standards. Literacy rate is as low as 10%, majority of children are malnourished (the government banned Save the Children (UK), MSF and other agencies to carry out any nutritional survey since 2007).Recurrent draught compounded by commercial food blockade weighed in to create severe food insecurity in the region since the government launched the scorched earth operations. Livestock, the source of livelihood in the region, has no proper market nor do pastoralists have access to quality vet services. Political participation remains elusive and the Somalis are simply denied representation based on the constitution and census. Somali inhabited regions have been given out to the Oromo Administration for political and electoral reasons.

In sum, it is fair to say the long standing grievances of the people of Somali Regional State (SRS) against successive Ethiopian governments stand today as they stood during the Monarch and Marxist regimes. These accumulated and unaddressed social, economical and political grievances legitimise any struggle and quest for equality, respect, freedom and dignity. Various political movements, bearing different ideologies, emerged to resist domination and subjugation. ONLF is the latest torch-bearer in the line of duty. However, its political objective, representation and future direction continue to generate debate among the intellectuals of the Somali Region. We think ONLF is at crossroads and its existence is being challenged. Should ONLF reform to withstand these challenges?

ONLF’s early days

ONLF celebrated its 26th anniversary about three months ago. Created by WSLF’s youth party, the organization spent its life in exile until 1991 which marked the fall of the Dargue and the rise to power of the TPLF/EPRDF in Ethiopia. ONLF, with the invitation of TPLF/EPRDF, participated in creating Ethiopia’s transitional government. But, after a brief honeymoon with TPLF/EPRDF, the front opted for an armed struggle and deserted its political control over the embryonic Somali State in 1994. No one knows with certainty what led to this dramatic decision, but here are plausible explanations (1) ONLF, being the first Somali political party to dip its finger into the hot political pot with a dozen ethnic-based organizations (all controlled and directed by TPLF) was new to the Ethiopian political scene. (2)Armed struggle is the only form of struggle our people have known to respond to political grievances, (3) The immaturity of the ONLF leaders and their inability to unite and create strong political structure that amasses support from all Somalis during their time in power contributed to the fall out; ONLF resorted to clan politics and majority rule and this become a rallying point for all the non-Ogadeni groups; TPLF took the opportunity to create a mesh of clan-based political entities within the Somali Region. Subsequently, in July 1993, Abdulahi Sadi’s government, accused of mismanagement and corruption, was ousted from power. (4) Perhaps the most decisive factor of all is the narrow and suffocating political space created by TPLF that led to the beginning of another round of armed struggle in the region.

More than 15 years lapsed since ONLF waged the armed struggle. The objective of this article is simply to touch on major weaknesses (key reform areas) of the organization -not about the front’s “‘good” performance (which will not be helpful; suffice to say khayr wax kuma yeelee shar u tooghaay). Nevertheless, in planning this article, some of us wondered if the organization has attained any meaningful goals at all. It all depends on whether you take the cup is half full perspective or the cup is half empty perspective but the fact that the organisation managed to persevere in the face of a very powerful regime for more than a decade is a source of pride that motivates ONLF foot soldiers as well as its leaders. It is also true that, despite the government’s military might, this rebel group has rendered the region instable, a blow to the government’s political and development objectives (of course we are not suggesting that instability is good for the region). What is also seen as a political and military success is the fact that the organization chased away oil exploration companies from the region despite the government’s attempt to protect them. Others celebrate the fact that ONLF has thwarted government’s ‘highlander resettlement policy” along the banks of rivers and the fertile land of the region-mainly in Gode. It is also perceived that the rebel movement has given the Somali question in Ethiopia a publicity-both positive and negative, and recognition among the political elite of Ethiopia; a publicity which could potentially be tapped into in the future. Lastly and most importantly many intellectuals think that this organization, good or bad, is the only political entity that arguably has a defined political structure, objective and managed to mobilize noteworthy support within and outside the country.

It is thorny to assess ONLF’s performance as it is not easy to discuss the institutional reform ONLF needs to undertake. We, however, will touch on some of the salient areas that are visible to an outsider.

ONLF’s core deficiencies and key reform areas:

Name

The letter O in the ONLF rings a bell. Despite of the historical emergence of the name, which was coined by the European colony, many citizens of the Somali Region do not feel accommodated in an organization that claims to represent all citizens regardless of their clan or creed. Furthermore, the organization has not done much to accommodate other Somalis. Many argue it may be too late to address the letter O in the ONLF primarily because the organization has mobilised its support on such platform since its formation. According to their top cadres, to drop the name will mean disturbing the status-quo and introducing an element of irritation in the organization’s power base which does not seem to be ready for such a change at this stage. However, ONLF needs to show its flexibility towards the creation of a social space that encourages a discourse on the name (So far ONLF has not shown that flexibility). Changing the name will not cause an immediate overflow of support to the front by non-traditional constituencies but the framework is of concern not what will happen afterwards.

Lack of trained cadres

Perhaps you, as a reader, have encountered an unapologetic ONLF cadre, usually young and uneducated man of Ogadeni descent or brutally innocent woman affected by the war, lecturing about the ‘cause’ or halganka as they call it. The cause is just and these men and women have noble intentions. But their superficial knowledge about the cause, the region, the enemy, and their lack of deep understanding of the work of a political cadre shows how poorly directed and trained these cadres are. The capacity challenges are understandable but these cadres seem to lack the minimum cadre orientation one would expect of a mature rebel group. The approach of these cadres is ineffective; their attitude towards those who question them about the halgan is full of hatred; they have developed many websites to character assassinate anyone that voices opposition, travel to the region, question their approach or oppose their philosophy. The apparent lack of training and direction alienates many citizens who would otherwise want to contribute to the cause.

Civilian casualties

ONLF is not comparable to the brutal RUF of Serra Leone whose infamous signature was chopping off limps or Koni’s LRA which is known for its senseless rape of Ugandan women and children. Nonetheless, increasing number of civilians have been deliberately or accidently killed by ONLF. They have taken revenge on those who have not supported them or allegedly aided the government. Furthermore, humanitarian workers have also become victims. Very recently MSF was attacked in the Somali region. This is neither acceptable nor beneficial for the struggle. If ONLF wants to borrow something from the Eritrean liberation struggle it should be the strict command systems and adherence to party rules so that ONLF regiments do not to fire on buses or burn NGO vehicles without the approval of the military and political leadership.

Equality and representation

ONLF is fighting against repression. It would make every sense to expect ONLF to not engage in oppression. The organization has miserably failed to broaden its support base beyond traditional constituencies. This is a clear signal of ONLF’s short sighted vision. It is also an indication of the totalitarian nature of the front, an attitude of love- me –or- loath- me either way I represent you. If ONLF cannot capitalise on the grievances and marginalization shared equally by those who live in Ferfer all the way to Aisha, it is hard to see its effectiveness in ruling the region. It may be justifiable, for tactical or spatial reasons not to operate in some parts of the region but that can not be a barrier to recruit or enlist supporters outside the Ogaden clan. Moreover ONLF has not done enough to reach out to Ogaden and no-ogaden intellectuals in the Diaspora. Mostly, top ONLF leaders and cadres seem to enjoy being around supporters who sing the same songs.

Leadership and lifestyle

Though we could not find any published or circulated document regarding the ONLF’s admin chart, we were informed that the organization is led by an executive committee that has a dozen or so members and a bloated central committee. Out of the dozen executive committee members at least nine are living a peaceful life outside the region (mainly in the west) with their families. Yes, the presence of some of these leaders outside the region might be necessary on both political and operational levels. However, the number should be justifiable and all the leaders should get their quota of hardship…they should taste the heat waves of the arid land and should travel on foot with the rank and file members. After all these leaders have subjected the youth of the region to such a hardship and it is only fair to say that these leaders should experience some of the hardship. This is not to say ONLF cadres and leaders do not travel to the region but there seems a lack of commitment on the part of the leadership to disturb the comfortable and risky free lives they are leading in Europe and North America.

Another issue of importance is ONLF’s need to reform its leadership. We are not naïve to say ONLF should restructure itself at this very moment. Yet, this should be a priority as soon as time permits (may be when the current round of government’s military and political campaigns subside), ONLF should immediately look into the leadership reform agenda. One should not belittle the contributions the current leadership has made but it is in the interest of any organization to recruit new bright leaders. It is true that most of the intellectuals of the region have chosen to remain spectators. This is arguably the worst thing that could happen to a nation or a community. It seems many of them are just loyal to their egos and are indifferent to the suffering of their people. But many intellectuals also see that ONLF is neither ready for reform nor willing to open up space for dialogue. To some, ONLF and the regional government seem to be united in fighting the emergence of alternative groups. Those hardliners who think that they own ONLF because they have lived ONLF for almost quarter a century needs also to know that their sacrifice will only bear fruit if they let the organization reform and progress. Unless these leaders are self-interested agents there is no reason for them not to push for a reform even if that will mean stepping aside.

Attitude towards others

ONLF has so far maintained a downbeat attitude towards any individual or group that does not subscribe to its agenda. In fact it is even at odds with individuals and groups who closely work with the front but ask for some amount of space just so that they seem independent of ONLF in the eyes of the international community. Despite the emergence of many advocacy and human right groups that seem to be affiliated with ONLF, we were surprised to find that most of these organizations are at odds with some of the leadership simply because they are not taking orders from the ONLF leadership. ONLF’s war against the UWSLF and other groups is another example of how ONLF deals with groups that stand for the same cause but with different ideology. ONLF needs to reconsider this attitude. Fragmentation is not what we are calling for but ONLF needs to understand that individuals and groups should be applauded as long as they are advancing the same cause. We also think that ONLF needs to work with non-Somali Ethiopian groups whose agenda is to get rid of this regime even if there are differences on some issues (this will send a powerful message to TPLF).

Conclusion

In spite of the numerous deficiencies described above, ONLF fighters on the ground and their leaders have sacrificed their life, time and wealth to stand up for legitimate grievances; they have sustained the pride and bravery of this region’s revered people. The least ONLF has done the region is to safeguard the oil wealth beneath the soil which will turn into curse if explored without a genuine political settlement.

But ONLF needs to transform itself into a viable political organization that can not only lead the region to freedom/autonomy but also can create a society where the rule of law is respected and prosperity is created. This can only be achieved if and when all citizens are given equal opportunity to participate.

It would be to miss an important point if we do not address the issue of peace and ONLF. It is our firm believe that a political settlement would be the way to resolve the conflict in the region. But to sign a paper does not mean to get a peace. Lasting peace can only be achieved through genuine negotiations. One can say Ethiopia has not shown willingness to peaceful settlement in this conflict. Its apparent publicity oriented policy is testimony to that fact. Some may suggest that the ongoing peace agreements between Salahudin’s ONLF faction and UWSLF on one side, and the government on the other side is a step to that direction but we will not judge the book by its cover. We will give a chance to the so called peace agreements. Nevertheless, there are very basic questions that beg for answers: Has the government revisited its unconstructive policy toward the region?, Are innocent civilians still arrested without due process?, has the government shown a willingness to recognise the age old marginalization and injustice?, Are security forces and Tigray advisors still in full control of the administration of the region?, Are Somalis still represented at federal parliament by the same 23 instead of constitutional mandated 38 parliamentarians? Are the Somalis still the consumers of policies designed by TPLF controlled central government and citizens are not given the opportunity to participate in the design of those policies?, Unless the agreements can answer to those questions a change has not came to Somali region and Somalis will remain second class citizens in Ethiopia.

Despite all the challenges, we strongly believe that peace is possible. ONLF should know that the gun is not the ultimate solution but a temporary one. When the government becomes serious about peace agreements, ONLF should be open to it. Of course without a third party mediator it is too much of a risk to trust TPLF. The latest victims of the so called ‘agreements’ with TPLF are the All Ethiopian Unity Party and the Ethiopian Democratic Party (Ethiopia’s loyal opposition who entered an agreement with TPLF prior to the election) and that should be a lesson to everyone in Ethiopia’s political arena.

This article is written by:
Karamarda Group
Executive Committee

The karamarda Group is a group of Somali Regional citizens who are interested in Democracy and Good Governance in the Somali Region of Ethiopia and could be reached at karamardagroup@gmail.com

Source: WardheerNews (link)

Please take a look at the article below, author Katharine Houreld (AP) wrote.  The author refers to Ethiopian refugees, but we all know she means ethnic Somalis who have fled the Ogaden in hopes for better lives and times to the Northern Frontiere District (NFD) of Kenya. At one time in history, both the Ogaden region and the NFD region belonged to Somali people, but after colonialism, it was annexed to Ethiopia and Kenya by colonial Britain.

Here is the article**

DADAAB, Kenya – Ethiopian refugees (Somalis from the Ogaden region in Ethiopia) in Kenya say they are being tricked into joining a government security force in a violent region of Ethiopia, and that their families face retaliation if they refuse.

AUTHOR: Katharine Houreld (AP)

FILE— In this Wednesday June 18, 2008 file photo, showing part of the Dadaab refugee camp, Kenya, where refugees from several African countries gather in the hope of receiving U.N. aid. Some It is reported Thursday Oct. 7, 2010, that some Ethiopian refugees in Kenya say they are being tricked into joining a new government security police force in a violent area of Ethiopia, and that their families face retaliation if they refuse. (AP Photo/Sayyid Azim, File

Ethiopia’s government says it is unaware of anyone coercing refugees to return or join the new police force it set up in the volatile eastern Ogaden region, which borders chaotic Somalia and is home to a long-simmering rebellion led by Ethiopians of Somali origin.

Putting a local face on Ethiopia’s security forces — which Human Rights Watch accused of rape, torture and executions in a 2008 report — is essential to clinching a peace deal with a faction of the rebels. A rebel spokesman said the deal could be reached this month.

The refugees, though, say abuses are still happening, and that many of them are being tricked or coerced into joining the new police force.

“Whenever (the recruiters) meet a young man, they say if you don’t go with us, your family (in Ethiopia) will be beaten,” said 27-year-old Nur, a refugee who says he fled to neighbouring Kenya nearly two years ago after Ethiopian troops killed his brother and uncle.

Nur said about 10 of his friends have joined the new force. The recruits are lured by the promise of money and an escape from this dusty refugee camp in eastern Kenya, and are frightened by threats to their families.

Nur and 16 other Ethiopian refugees interviewed by The Associated Press late last month asked that their full names not be used to protect them from reprisals. All but one said they had either been recruited, approached by recruiters, or had seen family members join.

The refugees said that recruiters promise money and either a job or the opportunity to go and see how peaceful the region is before returning with their families.

Such offers can be enticing. Even a little cash is a fortune in the Dadaab camps because the Kenyan government prohibits refugees from leaving or seeking work.

The recruits travel in groups of up to 25 by vehicle to the border and then to the Ethiopian town of Suf. There they are given uniforms, guns and training, said the deserters, who said they got some of their information from men who had stayed.

Ethiopia is a military powerhouse in East Africa and a U.S. ally in the fight against al-Qaida-linked insurgents in neighbouring Somalia. Last year it received $865 million in U.S. aid, plus an unpublished amount for counter-terrorism assistance.

It also has a history of forcing its citizens to join pro-government forces, said Leslie Lefkow, a researcher at Human Rights Watch. She said she has heard dozens of stories of forced recruitment. Family members could be beaten, detained or forced to pay money if they couldn’t furnish a recruit, she said.

That’s what Abdisalam, 38, said happened after he rescued his younger brother and two friends from the recruiters.

“They threatened to kill me,” Abdisalam said quietly, as he sat hidden from the baking sun and prying eyes in the mud-walled sitting room of a local youth leader.

Less than a week after he persuaded his brother to return to the overcrowded Dadaab camp, their sister in Ethiopia was jailed. Family members were told it was in retaliation for her brother’s “anti-government” activities.

“They said I am a rebel and working against the government,” he said. “I told them I’m only saving my brother. Now my sister is in jail. The war that we fled has followed us and we are not safe anywhere.”

Ethiopia government spokesman Shimeles Kemal confirmed that the government was talking to one rebel faction and regional authorities had founded a new police force in the Ogaden aimed at “mopping up” the rest of the rebels. But he said he was unaware of any recruitment by government agents in refugee camps.

“That’s not possible,” he said. “It’s not in line with the principles of the regional government … I have no knowledge of such incidents.”

The rebel Ogaden National Liberation Front, founded in 1984, accuses the ethnically Tigray-dominated government of starving Ethiopia’s ethnically Somali region of resources and killing its residents. The conflict is also complicated by clan loyalties.

“They are going to claim they have an agreement with the ONLF (rebels) soon,” said Abdirahman Mahdi, a London-based rebel spokesman. “Their strategy before was to recruit militias and fight us. This is a new strategy because there is a lot of pressure from the international community for a settlement but people are still very angry.”

Mahdi said his faction of the ONLF would not negotiate unless another country was willing to act as a credible guarantor.

In Dadaab, many refugees say they no longer believe peace is possible. Among them was a woman who arrived to speak to AP veiled from head to foot. She was too fearful even to give her first name.

Through a translator, the woman said that five months ago Ethiopian forces came to her home in the Ogaden. They killed the men, she said, and gang-raped the women before throwing them into a fire. After the translator stepped outside, she disrobed in the fading light, pressing a journalist’s hand against the bands of puckered burn tissue across her torso.

“I can’t forget what happened,” she said later. “How can I trust the government speaking of peace?”

Source: CanadaEast.com (Source)

(Voice of America) Peter Clottey [14 September 2010]

Somaliland army reportedly drove out Ethiopia ONLF rebels

Somaliland’s deputy minister for foreign affairs and international cooperation said its national army has driven from Somaliland territory Ethiopia’s Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) rebels who, he said, were trained in neighboring Eritrea.

Mohammed Yonis Awale said his administration has alerted Addis Ababa about the ONLF rebels wanting to use Somaliland to launch attacks on Ethiopia.

“They came to our coast by two boats and they took their weapons and their men from the coast by some two or three trucks to transport them to Ethiopia. While they were trying that we were informed and we chased them…into the mountains. We captured two of them and we slightly injured one of them. We took from them light weapons and some documents that indicated they belonged to ONLF,” he said.

Deputy Minister Yonis Awale said the rebels wanted to “penetrate Ethiopia’s territory.”

But, the ONLF rebel group denied that over 200 of their troops were forced out of Somaliland.

The ONLF rebels have been battling Prime Minister Meles Zenawi’s government for independence from what they call the original Ethiopia.

Somaliland official Yonis Awale said the ONLF rebels were carrying 64 rocket launchers and that some of them had Eritrean currency and documents that proved they were trained in Eritrea.

“All these indicated that they have been trained in Eritrea and their intention was to go into Ethiopia and start their fight with the Ethiopian government. (But), we intercepted them (on) the edge of the borderline between Ethiopia and Somaliland and so we shared the information with the Ethiopian government and the Ethiopia government closed the border,” Yonis Awale said.

…. (Read More at VOA)