Ethiopia weekly review: Real window of opportunity for Somalia

(Addis Ababa, April  05,  2008 Ceegaag Online) 

According to the AU press release, Ethiopia takes the chairmanship of the AU Peace and Security Council; is that good for the region or.....?!

Meanwhile, Ethiopia takes the chairmanship of the AU Peace and Security Council The first Joint Annual Meeting of the AU Conference of Ministers of Economy and Finance and of the ECA Conference of African ministers of Finance, Planning and Economic Development was held in Addis Ababa from 26 March to April 2, 2008. The conference also marked the Golden Jubilee of the ECA. The Annual Meeting, which had the theme ‘Meeting Africa’s new Challenges in the 21st Century’, was preceded by the discussion of the Committee of Experts (from March 26-29, 2008), whose keynote paper identified four key challenges facing the continent: growth and employment, climate change, emerging social issues and accelerating and sustaining progress in good governance and capacity building.

The Ministerial meeting (held 31st March to 2nd April) was opened by Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. The Prime Minister said the challenges identified under the conference theme were not new: “…none of these are really new [challenges]; what is new in my view, is the internal and external circumstances that have been fundamentally transformed.’ The Prime Minister emphasized the extraordinary development achieved in China and India, and said the present rising commodity prices, should be considered as both a challenge and an opportunity. He noted that their development had been a mixed blessing. It had boosted Africa’s development climate significantly, but it had also contributed to the steep rise in prices and associated risks for the continent. He said there had been a significant change of attitude by Africa’s development partners since last year’s Lisbon Summit of EU and African Heads of States with a greater willingness to tolerate alternative paths of development. The Prime Minister invited participants of the Conference to come-up with imaginative solutions and to avoid the well-beaten path of the past; and he saluted the ECA for its 50 years anniversary.

The Executive Secretary of ECA, UN Under-Secretary-General, Abdoulie Janneh said that the current conference marked the first time a joint meeting had been organized between the African Union and ECA. Welcoming his organization’s Golden Jubilee, Mr. Janneh said that the ECA, since its inception in 1958, had lived up to its mandate to promote the economic and social development of Africa. It had generated numerous lasting ideas to underpin African development through its research, advocacy, technical cooperation and consensus building activities. Mr. Janneh recalled key messages that had emanated from the ECA, including the need for regional unity in tackling common challenges, the imperative of economic diversification, the case for African ownership of Africa’s development agenda and the importance of striking the right balance between development policy and strategy. Mr. Janneh said Africa’s development must be underpinned by growth with equity and social justice, by reduction in poverty, greater opportunities for women, and a brighter future for children. Africa, he said, must build capable states with their priorities driven by ownership and popular participation, and able to mobilize societal resources behind common goals and aspirations.

In a video message to the conference, UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon underlined the ECA’s unique place in Africa as the first intergovernmental Pan-African agency. He said the ECA had generated ideas, helped to establish other development institutions and addressed challenges ranging from the MDGs to climate change, from the empowerment of women to job creation and from governance to HIV/AIDS. He called on both the AU and the ECA to continue working together to make the 21st century the century of Africa.

Among the Conference speakers were: Mr. Benjamin Mkapa, Former President of the United Republic of Tanzania on Empowering the Poor; Professor Adebayo Adedeji on Growth, Employment and Poverty; Nobel Peace Laureate and Director-General of the Energy and Resources Institute of India, Dr. Rajendra K Pachauri introduced the debate on Climate Change; Dr. Peter Piot, Executive Director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS made a presentation on HIVAIDS; and Mrs. Josette Sheeran Executive Director of WFP introduced the debate on the impact of recent rise in oil and food prices on Africa’s economies. The Conference was chaired by Ato Sufian Ahmed, Minister for Finance and Economic Development of Ethiopia.

During the Ministerial meeting, the Economic Report on Africa 2008, the annual flagship publication of the ECA and the AU was also launched. The report titled “Africa and the Monterrey Consensus: Tracking Performance and Progress” notes that African economies overall have continued to sustain the growth momentum of previous years, recording an overall growth rate of 5.8 percent. It said African growth performance in 2007 had been driven mainly by robust global demand and high commodity prices. Other factors which contributed to growth in Africa include continued consolidation of macroeconomic stability and improving macroeconomic management, rising oil production in a number of countries, increased private capital flows, debt relief and increasing non-fuel exports. The report identified Ethiopia as one of the top ten performers in Africa and noted that six top performers had oil or mineral rich economies while the remaining top-performing economies (Ethiopia, Liberia and Malawi) were heavily dominated by agriculture and Gambia by the service sector.

The ministerial meeting concluded by adopting a statement and resolutions covering financing for development, climate change, research and development and endorsing an ECA initiative to establish the African Center for Climate Change Policy Studies in Addis Ababa. The ECA signed a Memorandum of Understanding with The Energy and Resource Institute of India (TERI) on Wednesday. Dr. Pachauri, Director of TERI, met with Prime Minister Meles during his visit and discussed world climate change and its consequences. Dr. Pachauri said the Prime Minister reaffirmed Ethiopia’s readiness to help prevent the effects of climate change and had outlined the measures Ethiopia was taking, emphasizing it would intensify its efforts to use alternative energy sources, including the development of Jatropha, a plant to replace fuel.

This week, Prime Minister Meles met Ms. Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the WFP, in Ethiopia to attend the joint AU/ECA meeting of Economy, Finance, Planning and Economic Development ministers. His talks with Ms Sheeran focused on global issues with which WFP is currently grappling, in particular the adverse effects of climate change on food production and supply. She underscored that the alarming effects of the world climate change means that securing an adequate food supply for the world’s population is becoming a formidable global challenge. For the first time in human history, shortages of food and fuel are proving a serious threat to mankind. At the same time, the need to produce more and more for ever-growing subsistence requirements and the huge consumption of bio-fuel can be seen both as a challenge and as an opportunity. The challenge is clear: the opportunity lies in the creation of huge market opportunities particularly for farmers in Africa, including Ethiopia. Equally, however, this ‘window of time’ is fragile, and if there are any more major shocks, the gap in food supply may become impossible to bridge.

The Prime Minister said the impact of global changes was manifesting itself differently in different places. In the developing world the effects are most visible in the life of farmers. While those who are only subsistence farmers face real challenges, surplus-producing farmers benefit from the situation. The losers in Ethiopia, the Prime Minister said, were the urban poor and the pastoralists in the periphery. Even among pastoralists, however, some could still benefit from their cattle, but even then as the cost of cereals continues to rise, they are bound to feel the adverse effects of the change. As the challenge becomes more and more acute, he said, those who produce surpluses must be encouraged to produce even more to satisfy the growing demands for food and fuel. They must square the circle.

Ms Sheeran shared the concerns of the Ethiopian Government over the occurrence of drought and the ensuing risk of food shortages in some areas, particularly parts of the Somali Region and Borena. She reassured the Premier of WFPs readiness to cooperate with the Government in tackling these challenges. The Prime Minister thanked Ms. Sheeran for the offer of support and assistance to mitigate the effects of the current drought. He said the regular short rains were late in coming this year in the affected areas, including some parts of the Somali Region which were naturally vulnerable. He stressed the need to act as fast as possible and underlined the firm commitment of the Government in this regard. It was agreed that the Ethiopian Government and WFP should discuss details to chart out a joint course of action and combine their efforts.

This week, Prime Minister Meles met Dr. Peter Piot, the Executive Director of UNAIDS who also held discussions with President Girma Woldegiorgis and First Lady, Wo. Azeb Mesfin. His talks with the Prime Minister revolved around some of the major challenges of dealing with the omnipresent blight of HIV/AIDS. In Ethiopia, Dr. Piot said there had been considerable and positive changes observable, particularly since the launching of the Millennium AIDS Campaign. He said he had repeatedly visited Ethiopia over the past twelve years and witnessed a number of promising developments and significant achievements. He expressed his appreciation of Ethiopia’s strong political commitment, strategic foresight, well structured nationwide approach, and the persistent efforts of the Government to tackle the complex challenges posed by HIV/AIDS. Dr. Piot emphasized that the Community Conversation scheme, devised and implemented in Ethiopia, is a model for an effective social vaccine. He suggested this approach, first used in Alaba and Guji zones, could in principle be replicated world-wide. The world could learn much of value from Ethiopia’s experience. During his discussions with ministers, the Government reassured Dr. Piot of its firm determination to curb the disease, and said it would continue to exert its utmost effort and resources to this end. He was promised that the present excellent cooperation with the UNAIDS would continue and be enhanced.



This week, the African Union Committee for Post-conflict Reconstruction of the Sudan visited Khartoum. Led by South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Mrs. Dlamini Zuma, the eight nation committee, composed of South Africa, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Egypt, Algeria, Kenya, Senegal, Gabon, and the Peace and Security Commission of the AU, spent three days in Sudan, March 31 – April 2. Ethiopia’s delegation was led by Foreign Minister Seyoum Mesfin; other countries were represented by their ambassadors in Khartoum and Addis Ababa. The committee was established following the signing of Sudan‘s Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in January 2005. The African Union summit in 2005 decided to form the committee, at foreign ministerial level, to mobilize African resources to assist in the reconstruction efforts in the Sudan, and especially in Southern Sudan. One major aim was to provide encouragement to donors to lend their assistance to support the efforts of the people of the Sudan to ensure that the CPA produced meaningful results.

During its stay in the Sudan, the committee visited Khartoum and Juba. In Khartoum, it was briefed on the implementation of the CPA Protocol agreements, on the achievements to date, and on the hurdles remaining, and on the proposed ways forward. They were also briefed on the levels of international assistance and the problems encountered, by the representatives of the National Unity Government in Khartoum, by the World Bank, and by the Assessment and Evaluation Commission of the CPA. The committee was also briefed by the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) and representatives of the U.N. on the reconstruction efforts in Southern Sudan. The Committee made it clear it appreciated the achievements recorded so far, but it expressed its belief that there is a need to do more, particularly because of the current tensions in Abyei, the subject of a specific protocol of the CPA. South African Foreign Minister Dlamini Zuma urged both the Government of National Unity and the Government of South Sudan “to really attend to the matter of Abyei”. The committee also called for African countries and for the International Community to increase support for capacity building for the GOSS to enable it to make a real difference to the lives of the people and allow them to see the value of their stake in sustainable peace. The finding of the committee will be reported back to the forthcoming African Union Summit.

On Tuesday, Ethiopia assumed the rotating chair of the African Union’s Peace and Security Council for April. The Council has now welcomed its new members, elected during the recent 10th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the AU. The new members are Tunisia, Benin, Chad, Mali, Swaziland, Zambia, and Burundi. This month, on 16 April, the Council is scheduled to hold a Joint Meeting with the UN Security Council in New York. During this joint meeting, which will be co-chaired by Ethiopia, as the Chair of the AU Peace and Security Council, and by South Africa as the current Chair of the UN Security Council, the two Councils are expected to deliberate on conflict situations in Africa, and on ways and means to create a more coordinated approach between the UN Security Council and the AU for peace and security issues in Africa. In particular, the two Councils will be considering a report from the UN Secretary-General on cooperation between the UN and regional mechanisms, and the AU, for maintenance of international peace and security. Seven African leaders, including Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, have been invited to this joint meeting. Ethiopia expects the meeting to yield real and meaningful results with regard to the conflict situations on the continent. During April, the AU Peace and Security Council will also consider the situation in the Comoros, the progress of the peace process in Somalia, and the report of the Peace and Security Commission’s field visit to the common borders of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cameroon, the Sudan and the Central African Republic, as well as electoral disputes in Africa and the establishment of a Continental Early Warning System. During its chairmanship, Ethiopia will do all it can to advance the cause of peace in Africa, and ensure the success of the Council’s work.

Last weekend, Foreign Minister Seyoum paid a visit to Mogadishu and held extensive discussions with President Abdullahi Yusuf on the progress achieved since his last visit to meet the President and the Prime Minister in Baidoa a month ago. The main issues discussed were institutional building, restructuring of the security sector, the progress in the reconciliation process, and the challenges these faced. The talks emphasized the need for a speedy implementation of a reorganization of the security sector.

As we mentioned in A Week in the Horn last week the UN Security Council has been expected to take firm action against Eritrea’s humiliating treatment of the UN peacekeeping force. It appears the deliberations in the Council and the submission of the Report of the Secretary General on Ethiopia and Eritrea is taking an unconscionably long time. The excuse of the safety of UN personnel still in Eritrea is hardly convincing in light of the fact that numbers have fallen sharply and are set to decrease to around sixty in May. Even allowing for the safety of UNMEE personnel, there is every reason for the Council to show some seriousness of purpose and awareness of the need for urgency to take an unequivocal stand against Eritrea following the Council’s condemnation of Eritrea’s behavior. Again, this week the Council has failed to act. This may be because the Council is weighing the gravity of the situation and the need to decide exactly what action would be commensurate with such unprecedented behavior by a member of the United Nations. Belgium, a non-permanent member of the Council, is currently in charge of the Security Council file on the issue. It has the duty to prepare the first drafts of any actions to be taken by the Council. This is a heavy responsibility and it will no doubt continue to discharge it with all necessary care and prudence. When the Council does finally start consideration of action, its deliberations will presumably also consider all Eritrean actions since the time it began to impose restrictions on UNMEE. This included the expulsion from UNMEE of nationals of selected states, undermining the universality of the UN. There were numerous restrictions on the movement of UNMEE personnel. It should also be recalled that Eritrea’s prohibition on UNMEE helicopter flights even covered personnel requiring emergency medical attention, putting UNMEE lives in danger. Eritrea has been allowed to consistently violate the Temporary Security Zone with impunity. These, and countless other violations of the Algiers Agreements, will surely be taken into account when the Council evaluates Eritrea’s behavior. The Council will have the opportunity to share its preoccupation over regional arrangements and with regional bodies, including the Peace and Security Council of the African Union, when it discusses the role of these arrangements for the maintenance of peace and security. The report prepared by the Secretary General for this discussion, and the recommendations made for strengthening coordination and consultations with regional bodies, is a telling example of the high importance that the UN attaches to the work undertaken by the African Union. It contrasts sharply with Eritrea’s extraordinary arrogance, and its snubs towards both the UN and the AU.



Refugees International, a Washington based advocacy group came out this week with a report on Somalia, entitled: Somalia: Proceed with Caution, (31.3.2008). Refugees International prides itself on its effective and influential advocacy. It claims to have had major successes in persuading the international community to take action in Iraq, Congo, Darfur, northern Uganda, Burma, South Sudan, Lebanon and in dealing with statelessness issues in various areas. Its mission statement says it generates humanitarian assistance and protection for displaced people and that it works to end conditions that create displacement, taking a rights approach to advocacy. Its advocates assess humanitarian problems, identify the most urgent needs and move quickly to develop immediate assistance. Its main impact is through “leverage”, generating increases in resources and policy changes by governments and UN agencies.

In the light of all these apparent successes, it is extremely disappointing that this latest Refugees International Bulletin on Somalia does itself need to be treated with extreme caution. Much of its information is quite simply inaccurate and seriously misleading. No one can dispute there are humanitarian problems in Somalia (though there is equally no doubt that some of the figures quoted by NGOs and UN organizations have been seriously exaggerated). Equally, however, there is little possibility of effective assistance unless the parameters of the Problems are accurately defined, the facts correctly reported and the major participants identified.

This is the first time that Refugees International appears to have taken any interest in Somalia (despite the long genesis of the crisis – the Somali state after all collapsed in the late 1980s), and it shows. Its only previous interest in eastern Africa was in September 2003 when it visited Kenya and Uganda. Refugees International’s report manages to ignore almost all the most important and significant political developments and events of the last two years. Most obviously, it never even mentions the word ‘clan’ once, even though clans are absolutely central to all political activity in Somalia, and indeed to almost all other activity as well. It also fails to notice any of the developments that have been going on since the arrival of the TFG in Mogadishu in January 2007 and the fall of the Islamic Courts Union. Incidentally, to talk of the Ethiopian Defense Forces as “occupying” parts of central Somalia is nonsense, and makes quite clear from which sources Refugees International obtained its information.

Support for the TFG is far more diverse than the report suggests – the authors admit to only being in and around Mogadishu, and it has far more legitimacy that they suggest. It has faced significant opposition among some sections of society but it has the support of most southern Somali clans. It controls, if loosely, almost all of the regions of Somalia, including the semi-autonomous region of Puntland, with the exception of parts of Benadir (which includes Mogadishu), Lower Shebelle and Lower Juba. It is simply not true that “Somalis view the TFG as an externally imposed and illegitimate body”.

All this is ignored by Refugees International, which also, and equally damagingly, barely fails to mention al-Shabaab despite the fact that this is a terrorist organization which has been responsible for significant numbers of anti-government attacks and numerous assassinations of moderate Hawiye politicians (at least 200-300 since 2005) and multiple and indiscriminate mortaring of civilian houses and properties in Mogadishu over the last two years. This is all well-known, and indeed none of it is in dispute even if Refugees International seems unaware of it. Refugees International’s only reference to al-Shabaab is to suggest that its recent designation by the United States as a terrorist organization merely fuels anti-American sentiment. In fact, it is easy to find hundreds of people, indeed the majority of Mogadishu inhabitants, and of those who have been displaced from Mogadishu, who are terrified of al-Shabaab and regard it as largely responsible for their flight from the city.

It is commonsense to talk to more than one side in any attempt to analyze a situation as complicated as Somalia, and investigate the views of all parties. It is a glaring weakness of Refugees International, as of Human Right Watch, that it has failed to make any attempt to do so, being content merely to talk to those opposed to the TFG, and accept everything told them without checking the source or the reliability of the information provided. Human Rights Watch (HRW) has only recently managed to realize that human rights violations may be committed by what it calls “insurgent forces” or even “the extremist al-Shabaab militia”. In its latest presentation, to the UN meeting on Somalia in Kenya last month, HRW noted: “Insurgent forces have repeatedly and indiscriminately attacked civilians with mortars, small arms and remote explosive devices; killed and mutilated captured combatants on several occasions; killed TFG officials and threatened civilians, including journalists and aid workers; and jeopardized civilians through their deployment in densely populated areas.” Despite this, HRW continues to accept without qualification or any attempt to investigate, all claims of abuse by Ethiopian troops ignoring any possibility that such claims might be made for political purposes, and the fact that Ethiopian troops have consistently demonstrated their discipline. It continues to use loaded terminology: Ethiopian troops carry out “summary executions” of individuals in their custody; the “insurgent forces” merely “kill” their prisoners. HRW admits that “currently, there is little regular, accurate, and credible human rights reporting that reaches the public or key policymakers, including at the highest UN levels.” It is a pity that it doesn’t take its own words to heart.

No one would disagree with the value of having an expanded human rights presence in Somalia. It could provide accurate information on the activities of all parties and, indeed, provide much-needed technical expertise for the TFG and assist in capacity building. As HRW says it could build up the judicial process, train security forces and support all aspects of human rights. Given its very obvious bias, however, the TFG is unlikely to believe that HRW is likely to be helpful. Nor is HRW’s suggestion of an independent international commission of enquiry plausible, unless it is able to demonstrate the genuinely impartial approach that has been so lacking in all recent HRW reports. HRW, like Refugees International, has almost exclusively concentrated its allegations against the TFG or Ethiopian forces, without bothering to investigate the thousands of abuses committed by “insurgent forces”. It is this failure to even attempt to offer any balance which renders the reports of HRW, and now of Refugees International, difficult to accept or use. The obvious failure to understand Somali politics or to demonstrate any knowledge of Somali realities over the last two years, or longer, renders much of what they say irrelevant and useless.

Refugees International in its policy recommendations manages to totally ignore the presence, efforts and achievements of AMISOM as well as the activities of al-Shabaab. It underlines its own agenda by calling for a US Congressional investigation into the US “military support” provided to Ethiopia, despite the total lack of evidence of any such support except in the minds of one or two anti-Ethiopian congressmen and their allies in the Ethiopian Diaspora. There has been none. Refugees International grossly over-estimates the problems of Mogadishu (very different from the rest of Somalia as even the briefest visit should have been able to demonstrate) and as largely underestimates the progress made towards national reconciliation through the successful National Reconciliation Congress in August last year. Indeed, Refugees International ignores the Congress completely.

Refugees International keeps talking about the realities on the ground without the least understanding of Somalia’s political problems or of the progress made in discussions between the TFG and clan elders in Mogadishu. Referring to talks with the Asmara opposition, it suggests bold new measures to break the political deadlock, without appearing to realize that talks with elements of the Eritrean-based Alliance have actually been going on for months.

At a time when there is general agreement that a real window of opportunity for Somalia has been opened and when there are indications of significant progress in reconciliation and in security, many of Refugees International’s comments appear gratuitously inapposite. They are indeed so inaccurate as to be described as actively dangerous. It can only be hoped that Refugees International’s claims of influence are seriously exaggerated. This report in its present form will do significantly more harm than good, to Somalis, to NGOs and to all other parties it is attempting to influence. In fact, the errors and lacunae of this report are such that it can only be a serious impediment to providing the necessary information to help produce any solutions to the crisis of Somalia. It is so flawed that it should be scrapped immediately.

Source: Geeska Africa

www.ceegaag.com

webmaster@ceegaag.com