Opposition Politics: Beyond Pitfalls and Ahead

These are dark times to write about the prospect of multi party democracy in Ethiopia compared to the way things were five years ago. The state of the opposition parties in the country is tragic with only one Medrek candidate set to join the national Parliament – the Parliament which looks more like the congress of the EPRDF.

Of course, all of the blame on the current situation cannot be laid on the door of the incumbent. We have witnessed a relentless fall out and division of the opposition camp in recent years. Most of the times, these divisions are either about strategies or personalities.

Following the announcement of 2005 election results, for instance, a debate was raging whether the opposition should or should not be joining the parliament that cut asunder the opposition. While some (UEDF, Ato Lidetu’s faction of EDP, and a number of CUD members like Ato Temsegen Zewdie) decided to join the Parliament, the majority of the CUD leadership ended up in jail.

Upon release from prison, hopes were high that the core of the CUD leadership would have more resolve, espirit de corps and vision to galvanize the opposition. Unfortunately, we witnessed a split of the CUD leadership when the rift between Ato Hailu Shawl and the rest of the CUD leadership became apparent.

Even worse, the departure of Dr Birhanu Nega from CUD and the formation of Ginbot 7 were accompanied with the formation of UDJ under the leadership Birtukan Mideksa. Here again, there were obvious differences on strategy. However, we cannot help but admit that much of the infighting and squabble within the opposition camp has got to do with personal egos and ambitions.

Much of what comes in leadership also depends on the followership. In my opinion, most people who sympathize, if not support, the Ethiopian opposition has adversely impacted the way the leadership attempted to operate, often out of positive intentions. One of the usual pitfalls is the urge to see immediate results and hence hurrying opposition parties to do this or that as soon as possible. I call it the temptation of time.

Another pitfall is the temptation of the ‘demos’- a wide ranging array of sympathizers who are summoned in all kinds of ‘teklala gubaes’- that offer disconcerted, emotional and vague ‘advice’ on what the leaders should or should not be doing. Such meetings end up becoming psychoanalytic exercises where people pour out their anger, frustrations and utter desire for change, go home and sleep.

Another everyday pitfall of opposition politics is the urge to form coalitions and form a united front of resistance against the incumbent. In principle, there is nothing wrong with this. However, most of such coalitions are formed in haste, with little or no thinking over ideological (political or programmatic) matters, or even financial, managerial and organizational issues. Sorting the coalitions out itself becomes politics, instead of using them to wage the struggle against the EPRDF.

Even more, there is a lack of basic discipline in protecting organizational and leadership matters. Both the print and electronic media, particularly of the Ethiopian Diaspora, seems to have an unbridled access on the process of decision making in almost all of the opposition parties. Leaks, accusations, counter-accusations and wide open defamations by renegades are an everyday scene.

While some of this is a logical product of infiltration, most of it has got do with malcontented figures that break rank with their party and go out in public to disclose and incriminate their ex-comrades. Tesfaye Gebre Ab’s ‘literary’ sophistication partly comes with such scoops he was able to disclose to the general public. True, such stories may satiate the minds of the curious public but erode the public’s trust and confidence about the capacity and resolve of opposition parties to launch struggle against the incumbent.

What could be done to reverse this trend and put back the opposition on the right track? I have a few recommendations. First, enough time should be taken to arrive at an ideological outlook which could be able to counter that of the EPRDF. This is very crucial in light of the fact that EPRDF has comfortably placed itself as the middleman between ethno-nationalism and Ethiopian nationalism. In this regard, MEDREK’s attempts to forge an ideological and programmatic alternative should be commended.

Secondly, it is time to buckle down and think about organizational and strategic issues. Here the task should be finding effective strategies of constituency building both within and outside the country in a situation where a dominant party state suffocates the opposition. The cases of Malaysia, Singapore, Japan and Mexico could be worth looking at here.

Thirdly, opposition parties should be able to adopt the ethics of ‘democratic centralism’, though not the principle of democratic centralism. Ways have to be found to prevent endless factionalism, whose consequences end up becoming very irresponsible and image tarnishing. The parties should also stop leaking like a sieve.

Last but not the least, galvanizing and converting the Diaspora (or at least a section of it) into an organized, robust and articulate constituency is a task that lies ahead of the opposition. Apart from supporting the initiatives back home, the Diaspora could serve as an effective public sphere to trash out ideological and strategic issues facing opposition parties. It could also play a key role in liaising, lobbying and influencing key policy makers in Euro-America, who have key economic, diplomatic and moral leverage over the EPRDF.

All said ours is a long walk for freedom but every inch of it is worth treading.