Tell Me You Are not Co-opted
EPRDF true cooption (an attack on a network of opposition political influence) is focused on a small number of people; even less number of people than my writing a few weeks ago suggests. After I wrote that article, a few “coopted” people wrote to me that EPRDF’s promises of promotion and good jobs were not kept. I asked a lot of them to tell me their positions (work place), social stature, connections, political participation etc and it seemed to me that they were coopted, but never in the truest sense of the term.
Anyone who is close enough to me would by now have known what my newest political obsession is. It is the increasingly successful elite cooption by EPRDF.
Following the arrest of Kinijit leaders, human rights activities and journalists in November 2005, the newspaper I used to edit was shut down and I had no work; nor was I interested in finding one. Anger at the government’s reversal of what seemed to be a very promising democratic change had driven me into an underground politics that I had talked about little since the release of the political prisoners in the summer of 2007. In 2006 and 2007, I used to meet and talk to plenty of Ethiopians (mostly of my age group) who had the same commitments as mine. Some of them were involved in the most noble of fights against a very formidable opponent. Until the Kinijit leaders were released from prison and, quite disgustingly, got involved in an infighting that made EPRDF appear to be an oasis of stability and calm rule, a small group of dedicated Ethiopians did what many people would think were unimaginable in a security state like Ethiopia. The infighting in Kinijit, particularly its ethnic dimension, left many of us wondering whether organized politics at that time was where we wanted to spend our productive lives in. We chose different directions of life; some completely retreated from active political engagements.
In between my travels to the West, I used to meet some of them. Football was our new shared experience, but we sometimes bantered about the good, old dangerous days. It was in these conversations that I started noticing changes first in the instinctive anti-authoritarianism of a few of my friends. Then there was a general, but reluctant, acceptance of EPRDF rule. With some of them, the bond was created “with blood” and I had no reason to suspect them of being co-opted by the party they distasted enormously even though as a keen-eyed journalist I knew that EPRDF had started elite cooption in earnest. I took their acceptance of an authoritarian rule as a sign of resignation. It was explainable. The opposition was useless; civil society organizations were rapidly shrinking; newspapers like Addis Neger were the indulgence of a few urban elite. They had tried and failed. Not many people have an appetite for ceaseless political fights against a strong authoritarian state.
The closure of Addis Neger in December 2010 seriously challenged my explanation. A lot of people sent me e-mails to tell me how much angry they were at what happened; some needed clarifications about the process of its closure; some said they were so disappointed that we buckled under pressure. But there were some who said that our closure was good riddance. Among them were my former comrades. It was shocking at first, but my academic temperament didn’t allow me to mourn that fact for days. It seemed a goose-chase at that time, but I ventured into understanding what was going on. With me thousands of miles away and not able to communicate with them face to face. My ex-comrades were confident enough to engage me honestly. Electronic communication had disinhibited them. They thought we at Addis Neger were too much into the pre-September 2007 politics. They said that had changed. One quoted the famous statement by John Maynard Keynes: “When the facts change, I change my mind, what do you do sir?” Their arguments were a mixture of “but Ethiopia is registering growth”, “there is no alternative”, and “we can change EPRDF from within”. I tried to show them the flaws of their logic but in a half-hearted manner. What I wanted to know more was what really happened to them; How they changed. I might convince a friend or two with passionate conversations, but that wouldn’t give me an insight into a political dynamic.
I joined a password protected e-mail group of some EPRDF supporters, posing as a diaspora supporter with the help of a friend (but was kicked out in June). I also got key e-mail exchanges and information about cooption and party recruitment processes. After I wrote on Addis Neger Online about EPRDF’s cooption and Awramba Times translated it, more information started pouring in. I learned that there was a pattern in EPRDF’s cooption. A caveat here: this is by no means conclusive.
Political influence is not randomly distributed. It follows power law distributions. There are people who have a lot of influence due to a variety of reasons – connections, partnerships, social position, wealth, political office etc – and many have little or no influence at all. A mathematical graph of distribution of influence would probably look like this 80-20 rule graph.
But political influence also has small-world aspects. Local elites have powerful influences on the people in their localities. They also have influences that can be had from operational advantages. These are local hubs. When opposition political parties are in poor shape, what remain are different hubs of political influence -national and local – connected to each other and smaller nods attached to the bigger nodes. If there is any major country-wide repression, these networks usually resist them. In the study of both political and non-political networks, it is discovered that networks that follow power law distributions are the most resilient against random attacks. But a systematic attack on a few nods may lead them to a collapse.
EPRDF’s true cooption (an attack on a network of opposition political influence) is focused on a small number of people; even less number of people than my writing a few weeks ago suggests. After I wrote that article, a few “co-opted” people wrote to me that EPRDF’s promises of promotion and good jobs were not kept. I asked a lot of them to tell me their positions (work place), social stature, connections, political participation etc and it seemed to me that they were coopted, but never in the truest sense of the term.
We can divide EPRDF’s cooption into four.
-Strong cooption – this is directed at the biggest hubs nationally. Some of the friends I mentioned above and some active former members of Kinijit and OLF are the main targets. This is where the party spends a lot of its capital. The targets of strong cooption get big and medium level promotions, investment opportunities (mostly in partnership with other EPRDFites), access to big officials and other considerable benefits.
-Medium cooption – This is directed at the big hubs locally. Outspoken and active local elite (particularly teachers in small towns) are the main targets. They get a benefit of various degrees of promotion, salary increase and attention from local officials.
-Weak cooption – Although political influence networks have an old-nod preferential attachment problem (first entry advantage), there is an intrinsic growth factor. Some new nodes become bigger and bigger. These are the targets of weak cooption. Active university students can be taken as an example. A target of weak cooption gets handouts and some benefits from time to time; enough to make him/her wait for a larger pie to come. For the party, it gives control of the expansion of new nodes, deciding when and how to move the subject into other cooption territories. It will also give it a control on the gradual increase factor.
-No cooption cooption – Some of the people who were asked to be members by the EPRDF never received any benefit (some incurred costs of membership – monthly fee, newspaper fee etc). These are mainly people who were thought to have bigger political influence than they had and coopted but were dropped from the benefits list.
This hierarchy of cooption gives EPRDF the opportunity to do the cooption in an economically efficient way.
Two variables that have made the economically efficient process of cooption moderately successful are; (1) the shrinking number of NGOs, which are normally places where elites look to for decent gainful employment. With the private sector controlled by Al Amoudi and EFFORT, elites are left without a choice, (2) the disarray of opposition groups.
I am still in the process of in-depth observation of the phenomenon. It is disheartening, but also very important to understand. As I said in my previous article on cooption, opposition parties should not dismiss the phenomenon, but study it and counter-strategize.
to teshome.
don’t be mistaken like Eritreans who used to think defeating Derge as defeating Ethiopian and Ethiopian nationalism. civil war is tricky,TPLF was cheered when it controlled gonder,gojjam, wollo, the very first region where TPLF believed and still believe inhabited by its enemy, had the derg been as racist as tigrigna speakers,it could have used the ethnic card.
to lubak.
there are few honest persons who joined tplf led government.they know EPRDF is not changed, they know it’s dictator and dominated by Tigriyan but there are lots of circumstances(deliberately created by woyane) which force them to join. we shouldn’t demonize them. it doesn’t mean we will keep quite when they abuse their power. It’s not good to demonize sebhat nega and a fresh graduate who become eprdf member equally.
to those who become members of eprdf, you will never been treated equally as Tigriyan. we have seen what happened to solidiers after Ethio-Eritrean war.I had a high school friend, he is half Tigraye. we were very close and he told me he will use his connection to get a job in one of the reputed company in ethiopia, company x, but he didn’t get the job because there were others who were more tigraye than him.
teshome
what you are talking about your courageousness is simply pathetic, to say the least. In any event, you can call yourself whatever you want, but it doesn’t sit well with others. I would have called you courageous if you have denounced the shamlesee victory of TPLF by 99.6% of the voters, when every sould in Ethiopia knows that it shamelessly rob the vote. I would have called you courageous if you have denounced the trumped up charges on former kinijit leaders and sentencing them to life imprisonment with its politically controlled judicial system. I would have called you courageous if you have denounced when TPLF make a mockery of the judicial system. I would have called you courageous if you have condemned when TPLF snetence innocent citizen such as Birtukan to life imprisonment.
Sorry man you are way far to be called courageous, the closest name I can give to you is just what we call in amharic “aderbay”.
Dear Anbesaw
Thank you for sharing your experience on cooption and repression in Ethiopia.
As the case of your friend clearly demonstrated TPLF party card is no guarantee of success but I understand that lack of it is a guarantee that you will not have a career of any kind at least in TPLF dynasty and so some people viewed membership in the TPLF to be the key to a good life. However, history teaches us that despite their ability to co-opt successful generations of young and ambitious people; dictatorial regimes do not survive forever.
Cheers
teshome.
you are right that Tigriyans will have difficulty to own all the grain mills (mefcho bet) all over Ethiopia, but you forgot that they can control the distribution of grain mills as distributors if they wish. Tigriyan control the security,military, judiciary, politics. can you tell me who will stop a Tigriyan who has a general relative to be import exporter of an already established business. go to markato and see the dynamics of commerce, who is doing who, who is getting rich quick in short cuts.
who are member of boards in “big” companies in ethiopia, who is distributing fertilizer, who is transporting food aid, which companies are awarded road construction projects.I remember SURE construction company constructed road in bahir dar and the road was what it was expected to be, it never looked like a new road,it looked like 50 years old road with heavy traffic. it just looked like the start of a new road project, all the people complain but who will listen and who can enforce the law. what bothered me a lot was its lasting effect on the inhabitants’ attitude, they saw in their own eyes criminals becoming rulers and even with regime change, it will affect the next generation.with due respect I experienced discrimination at immigration office when I was there to collect passport and I have seen passangers (speaking tigrigna) infront of me in Bole terminal (arrival) their bags passed without check when mine was checked. don’t get me wrong, I ain’t saying why my bag is checked, that is the rule and it is the duty and responsibility of the security guard to check every bag,I’m disappointed why those are exmpted from the law just by speaking one language.
If you want to call me supporter of Derg for writing what has happened for the last two decades and what is happenening right now in ethiopia, I ain’t ashamed of it and you can call me a derg, if writing the truth can make one a derg, let it be.
an eritrean speaking tigrigna is privileged than an ethiopian speaking amharic or afan oromiffa.
about the federalism you are bragging about, I’m one of the few who believe that a person in gonder, gojjam, wollo and shewa shouldn’t be more concerned of self determination when a tigre, harari,silte are the main proponents of self determination.
Abiye
This issue of co-option that you are writing about has also obsessed me and right now I am not only reading your article but also making some more readings elsewhere too. But I’ve two points – or may be questions:
1. Where do you place this co-option strategy of EPRDF in the Diaspora world? Because I know that they recruit Ethiopian students or those with Ethiopian origins from Colleges and Universities in the US.
2. What counter strategies are you going to come up with? Once we know the problem we should be able to devise some sort of solution for it too. I believe the counter strategy is not only the duty of political parties – it’s all ours too.
I’ll be looking forward to reading your next article. I am obsessed too. Thank you!
The EPRDF is working hard – and in every front You can see that while breaking in the office of the Newspaper in Addis, they are staging a demostration to show the world that they have won the hearts of the people. May be this is the lesson we should take
Dear Teshome,
Honestly, it’s hard to swallow when you say Abiye’s analysis is based on “one or two observation colored by your own bias”. Every one I know close and distant, family and friends who joined EPRDF, joined expecting something or to avoid something else. If you really want to discredit Abiye’s argument, you might need to come up with a better evidence and analysis. If you and few other you colleagues became for other, non-economic reasons, I am really glad. But my experience and intuition tells me otherwise. For me it’s not Abiye who is distorting the reality, it’s you.
Teshome,
You tell us too what you are TPLF,OPDO,ANDM,SPDO or one of the countless fake organization manufactured by TPLF. I bet you can not name a single principle of TPLF you can articulate and defend for there is none. Indeed you may be a beneficiary of this corrupt system being rewarded by TPLF for your support. Unfortunately 80 million Ethiopians are losers in the system that is benefiting you. I do not know how you live with your conscience being a supporter of such corrupt and ruthless system. Even a child knows what is going on in Ethiopia.
To Teshome
‘Nonetheless the majority of us are co opted and gathered around a purpose’, Ofourse every one knows the purpose of your co-option is to sponge off the blood of poor ethiopians, to reinforce bloody one man dictatorial regime, to spread racialism, to corrupt every institition, and compromise our national interest. Sad enough, you blaffed too much for your and your ilk diabolic acts.You should hang up your self in shame.
‘And not too distant future certainly translate to political pluralism’, which means you admit there is no political pluralism at the moment. Funny enough your boss, Meles, endlessly bragging the flourishing democracy and pluralism.
There you go when you run out of arguments you drag the ethnic card out. I am glad you are a mind reader too. Who am I ? I am an Ethiopian. I do not belong to any political organization. What I favor is to let Ethiopians decide their destiny without intimidation. I do not believe in organizations or groups who claim they know what is good for others. TPLF is such a group.
No ethnic group benefited from TPLF rule. No group is controlling its destiny. All these ethnic organization within EPRDF were manufactured by TPLF when they came to power in 1991. The independent national movements of every group were left out simply because they refused to be instruments of repression for the TPLF. This old dog of Amhara bashing do not hunt anymore. Look for a better argument. I think the only convincing argument you have is you are as they say in this forum co-opted. We were not born yesterday and we have seen TPLF rule for nearly 19 years. In more ways than one it is ethnic domination of one group over others.
@teshome
dont try to impress us with your half cooked command of the English language. You would instead do better to give time to read and understand what others have to say. Lubak has given us a fantastic summary of the brain washing process as introduced and excercised in the Far East by Chinese and Korean dictators. This is a well established scinece and you would do well as you said to go and read the works mentioned in Lubak’s commentary. You may be a die hard TPLF supporter but I assure you would not lose anything by reading. On the contrary you might be able to pick a thing or two.