On Messay Kebede’s Grand Coalition
If dictators always express surprise when mass uprisings against their rule take place, it is because they are really surprised. This is all to say that Meles will know that his power is in existential danger when it is too late to save it through any sort of arrangement. So it is fair to say that spilling lots of ink on advising Meles Zenawi to create this or that arrangement we like is a waste of a good deal of time and a good number of brain cells.
Professor Messay Kebede has a piece published in a lot of Ethiopian news websites about development and democracy. As I said elsewhere, his approach is fresh and challenging. But I can’t stress enough the degree of my disagreement with him.
On Power sharing
1. People like to hear about grand coalitions and power sharing arrangements because there is a widespread assumption that they are able to facilitate compromise, consensus, accommodation etc among fractious elites in divided societies that gradually lead to democracy. But political science research indicates the opposite. Power sharing arrangements that come before the establishment of fairly strong agreement-enforcing political institutions(independent judiciary, at least quasi-independent army, a strong police force etc) and the development of a good degree of trust are doomed to unravel quickly. In fact, some research findings point to a conclusion that long-term power sharing governments of the sort Messay endorsed frustrate the emergence of democracy by strengthening the culture of behind-the-scene bargaining, which is done to the exclusion of newly emerging elites. Power sharing transitional state is a bad, bad idea if democracy is our eventual goal.
2. But how do we transition to democracy in societies like ours without a power sharing transitional government, some sensible people will ask. Messay’s transitional state is different from a caretaker transitional government, established for a limited period of time. The function of the latter(which usually includes major competing groups) is to develop the procedural and substantive rules of a democratic game as well as establish independent political institutions that will oversee the execution of such procedures. It leaves the field to an elected government after elections take place. Messay’s grand coalition of elites is an authoritarian system, which rules the country until such time as it deems the country to be fit for democratic competition.
3. There is a very pertinent question here: majoritarian democracies are bad for divided societies because they tend to exclude election losers from the act of governing. Wouldn’t that take us back to the stalemate? Well, yes. And the transitional government should not create a system of majoritarain democracy. The alternative is partnership democracy. It is different from authoritarian grand coalitions, but defeated political parties have a lot of say in the passing of laws and policies as well as administration of political institutions.
4. In this system, power sharing arrangements, including elite consociations, mostly take place in political parties as the facts of societal division and complex institutional design force them to be big tents if they want to win elections. The currency of trust among competing elites goes high as they do the day to day bargains and the compromises within political parties.
On Meles Zenawi’s role
I don’t think there is any reason to think that Meles Zenawi will want to create a power sharing arrangement with the opposition if what Messay says about his rule is true. Why would he give power to an opposition that may then plot his downfall from within the system? Messay’s two positions, that Meles’ primary motive is to stay in power, and that it is not inevitable that he wouldn’t concede to the demands of power sharing, are difficult to reconcile in most scenarios. Meles can only get into power sharing arrangements if he thinks that his power can only be saved by power sharing arrangements. This is not a deterministic way of looking at the issue; it is a hard-nosed rationalism. The more interesting question is: when does he think power sharing is the only way to remain in power? Going back to political science literature, absolute dictators have a problem of identifying the right time for the following reasons:
(I) They don’t have a way of knowing the distribution of the intensity of the opposition to their rule as people keep their real opinions to their private spaces(Private vs. Public profile).
(II) The system produces systematic errors as it incentivizes the reporting of false information about people’s views and opinions.
(III)Dictator’s assume that people’s threshold for participating in mass uprisings etc is high because they take enforced silence as a sign of capitulation. But the truth is that there is no way of knowing that unless a fairly wide political space is available for people to express their views.
If dictators always express surprise when mass uprisings against their rule take place, it is because they are really surprised. This is all to say that Meles will know that his power is in existential danger when it is too late to save it through any sort of arrangement. So it is fair to say that spilling lots of ink on advising Meles Zenawi to create this or that arrangement we like is a waste of a good deal of time and a good number of brain cells.
After carefully reading the very enlightening, fresh and out of the box work from Messay, I have to say I agree with him nearly 100%. When we came back to your challenge of his idea without giving your own suggestion on how to bring about the desired goals of democracy, freedom, justice and rule of law. I have to say that what were available in Messay’s article were practical solutions to the massive issues we face in Ethiopia today. If I am not mistaken, I think what has prompted Messay to write is the present political impasse in Ethiopia. The fact is, I don’t think anyone can argue if one says that neither Meles nor his group can succeed in marginalizing the opposition through what is deemed as double digit economic growth, transformation and development, nor the opposition can overthrow him through peaceful means be it through electoral victory (no chance!) or popular revolt (no chance, the political environment in Ethiopia is such that Libya and Syria will be more likely than Tunisia and Egypt). Obviously for geopolitical, economic and morality reasons Armed struggle is out of the question. So what is left? In your view, how can we come out of these dead-ends? That is what I think Messay was grappling with, although there needs to be more detail on how to incentives and prompt all sides to look at the bigger picture and bring about these political arrangements with the ultimate goal of establishing democratic governance. But, I am not sure if you are suggesting that, currently, Ethiopia is not in a political stalemate, are you? Can you explain to me how a new democracy can be born in Ethiopia? How does that fit with strong developmental states that managed to become democracies like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan etc…?
1. Fight, fight meles. That is the only road out
2. cooperate with Eritrea. That is a no brain strategy. Woyanie used it; I do n’t see why it is wrong when opposition uses it. Many Ethiopian intellectuals are ignorant on this matter.
3. The hardship Ethiopians are going through is lack determination to fight woyanies in a way they came in. Peaceful struggle is a wrong means of struggle in the Ethiopian context.
Essentially,koroboo`s statement that the good professors recommendations are “out of the box”is about the only description that is sensible. Infact,it borders on delusion.I wonder if the ex-eprp professor is beginning to feel that time has passed him by to attain power and best create a road map of seemingly respectable compromise called `Grand-coalition`.The prof. must have surplus ink and paper,but most importantly the time to pen such drivel.Seems he aint got the true pic. on the ground,as the Meles kakicracy is at its zenith-the prof and his grandcoalition should stay as an after dinner joke.
good job! Abye I do not want to sing a song ” Endegna bera Meles ye ante se ra ” for Aze Meles Zenawi
As with any long essay, Messay Kebede’s makes several points, some of which we may agree with and others we disagree with. Some of these are well argued while others are just mentioned in passing.
The most relevant point, I think, in Messay’s essay is that Meles is establishing a developmental state because he sees this as the best way to remain in power. In other words, he has come to understand that promoting economic growth is the best way for him to stay in power.
I think this is his most relevant point for two reasons. First, it is true. The evidence is clear. While GDP growth is not 11% or whatever the government makes up, it is certainly somewhere around six or seven percent, which is quite high. Also, it is clear that the government is spending a large portion of its budget on public goods. There was a time when it would not have done this, but rather opted to remain parasitic and pocket the money.
The second reason is that many in the democracy movement do not understand or refuse to understand this new reality. They cling to the notion that since Meles really does not care for Ethiopia, he does not work to improve its economy. But that argument is wrong. It is true, Meles does not really care for Ethiopia. But that irrelevant to the question. Meles cares for power. It is because he cares for power that he realized that in order to remain in power, he cannot run a parasitic government that simply steals the people’s money and does not provide public goods.
He saw from 2005 that this will quickly result in an uprising. Much better for him to promote economic growth and fill people’s bellies. This is what Meles learned from 2005.
Now, the question is, can the EPRDF keep this up while remaining a minority-based party? The answer is no. And this, as many other have said before, is the biggest issue facing the EPRDF. In order to keep providing public goods and have a successful developmental state, the party will have to become less Tigray-centric. The TPLF will have to cede more and more power, both to the EPRDF and to Meles. But is this possible in an ethnically polarized environment in which power has until now been based on zero-sum ethnic polarization? No.
This is the EPRDF’s big dilemma. It’s because problem – ethnic division – is what it had thought was its biggest weapon. And this is where the opposition, once it gets its act together, can really hurt the EPRDF.
No doubt Abiye has the knowledge and resourcefulness to see the article of professor Mesay in the proper depth. I am really satisfied with Abiye’s arguments and agree 100%.
On the other hand, I am also grateful for the educative presentation of Professor Mesay about developmental state, the ‘ambitions’ of Meles Zenawi and the reality of the Ethiopian politics. I particularly appreciate the elaborate description of the characteristics of a developmental state and the contrast with situation in Ethiopia. However, I have some question, though I am not a political scientist. The categorization of Japan and the listed East Asian countries as authoritarian is a bit confusing for me. At least I know from the News media that these countries undertake relatively fair and democratic elections and there is a change of political power and government through the ballot box. Therefore my question is whether the contrast between developmental state vs neoliberalism and developmental state vs authoritarianism is the same thing. Perhaps a country having both an authoritarian and developmental state is China. But in both cases Meles’ Ethiopia is no match to these countries in all respects, as professor Mesay showed with convincing argument.
I also doubt whether professor Mesay’s depiction of the current Ethiopian political situation as a political stalemate caused by a confrontation between the authoritarian ruling elite of Meles and modernizing elites in the opposition camp. It appears to assume that the TPLF led government is entrenched in the traditional system of power legitimacy. TPLF itself came to power only 20 years ago and it still is in the process of consolidation. The most distasteful part of professor Mesay’s article is its ending. The writer openly showed a pathetic attitude of pandering to the egotistic passion and interests of Meles. If that is a cost to be paid to bring democracy, peace and stability to the country, I have no objection. But the power-sharing arrangement sounds also to be naïve and desperate. I may not be well versed in political science as professor Mesay is, but I wonder how much we can assume the interests of Meles and cronies is only dictated by power and wealth. How can we disassociate and overlook the deep-entrenched bigotry, tribalism, and distrust that Meles and his TPLF cronies harbor from their ideologies and political goal? Can we assume that this underlying mindset will easily wither away by political reasoning and pragmatism?
The other question is where are the real political issues and the stakeholders of Ethiopian politics, the people? Is everything the game of political elites? Aren’t there real concerns and problems that needs to be addressed? Aren’t the political groups upholding some legitimate political demands that gives them their ‘legitimacy’ in the eyes of their respective supporters? How would they make compromises from the people (mass supporters) perspective and how are they going to accommodate this demand in their ‘backdoor’ deal?
There are two sides of the recommendation made by professor Mesay. In the second-from-last paragraph, professor Mesay’s recommendation is no less than a call for democracy as we know it in the Western world. On the other hand, in the last paragraph, it calls for the ‘evolutionary democracy’ catchphrase of TPLF. The difference is professor Mesay recommends a gradual building of democracy, but sooner where as the TPLF’ites espouses gradual democracy with no definite time, can be 40 years.
In the end I should site Abiye’s wonderful paragraph, “If dictators always express surprise when mass uprisings against their rule take place, it is because they are really surprised. This is all to say that Meles will know that his power is in existential danger when it is too late to save it through any sort of arrangement. So it is fair to say that spilling lots of ink on advising Meles Zenawi to create this or that arrangement we like is a waste of a good deal of time and a good number of brain cells.”"
Based on the comments here I would like to point out very simple facts that seem to be avoided in the comments section here and in today’s Ethiopian opposition political landscape
1) Given that elections, popular revolts or armed struggle are not going to either work or be controllable by anyone. Especially since the majority in Ethiopia doesn’t have any appetite for further bloodshed given that the relative peace experienced for the last couple of years has shown people the values of tranquility and the pointlessness of mindless conflicts, wars and carnage. How do you go about attaining our goals for democracy, freedom, justice rule of law etc…?
2) With enough blame to go around, would a purely blame game strategy used by the opposition a correct course to take? Why are the opposition parties failing to forward alternative arguments on issues of public interest ranging from the cost of living to doing business and social security? Is playing a blame game alone what we need right now or solutions? Why would the opposition fail to articulate their stands and go to bed merely opposing and comfortably? Why shouldn’t we hold them to account for both our and their benefits? If they are like these now how would they be like when they take power? Continue their lazy ways?
3) The realities on the ground in Ethiopia are so much different from what I read and hear from Ethiopians in the Diaspora. Indicating a massive disconnect and unrealistic ambitions. Can you imagine a Chinese democratic activist working with North Korea to democratize china? With the same token, how can anyone in the right mind justify working with the lunatics in Eritrea to bring democracy in Ethiopia? Really? The sad thing is I don’t see anyone who claims to be an intellectual oppose or discuss any reservation about this craziness. Why?
4) What have we learnt from the 60’s and 70’s idealistic but fatalistic student movement? Would you say if they were focused on incremental change rather than squabble to take power we would have seen a different outcome by now? Maybe even a democratic, free and prosperous country?
5) Would the Diaspora do the fighting itself or still hope to use the poor and powerless as cannon holders? Especially the politicians who live comfortably with their families in the west and incite people in Ethiopia using remote controls without batteries? Really?
6) Would you agree that the Ethiopian political scene has been challenged by character poverty since opposition politics has became increasingly specious, individualized, and uncoordinated? Don’t you think the opposition is still divided along sectarian lines, serve special interests etc…? Would you agree that they are still haunted by animosity, and argue about unsubstantiated ideas? Is that how they plan to also serve our people?
7) Given the challenges we face ahead, aren’t you concerned about the luck of mature debate and the intellectual caliber of the people who take the helm of opposition leadership? Case in point Hailu who could/might have been PM in 2005, Thank God! Ehhh!
Above all I really would like you all to understand what Messay was saying, let’s play real politick. Messay has come up with some good ideas, let’s work with it rather than shoot it down without coming up with alternatives. In an idealistic world, I don’t think Messay would have said what he said. However, we live in a very politically twisted and disheveled country, Ethiopia, instead of thinking about what we like as a relatively comfortable people who are mostly enjoying the freedoms achieved in the West. Let’s ask what the poor, powerless and hungry people in Ethiopia would like to see as first priority? Let’s honestly reflect on our and their priorities? That is all I ask. Thank you!
Koroboo
You asked seven questions. Good for you but can you give us your answers to your questions? Just curious
The summary of the long analysis of Mesay is – Melese is the developmental state is a new ploy by Melese to stay in power and he has to deliver on this. But there is a looming conflict between Melese and his cronies that is the cronies interest is enriching themselves, Melese’s is to stay in power. The rent seeking behavior of the cronies is an obstacle to achieve any meaningful economic gain in the nation there by threatening Meles’s hold on power thus Melese would part way and will embrace the opposition.
I think this is naive. I agree with Abiy on this one dictators are blind to this kind of insight. At any rate Melese’s hold on power will not be guaranteed even if he brings the opposition into power. Neither is the opposition free from rent seeking behavior. From all indication Melese is acting as know it all and does not seem to sense the weakness of his argument. It took the disaster of 2005 to get him off of his main cheating means – democratic governance now he is on this new horse of developmental state, it takes another similar experience to get him off of this new horse
Abiy, I’m one of your biggest fan of your analytical and well versed pieces but I’ve to disagree with the above commentary you forwarded against the recent piece of Prof. Messay. For a starter, you didn’t argue with convincing facts and logic why you nullified Professor Messay’s remedy (power sharing) forwarded to the existing problem in Ethiopia which soon or later would be out of control. Secondly, you didn’t come up with other workable alternative/s to change the existing political landscape in Ethiopia.
Nobody denies (including Meles & Co.) that TPLF’s regime hunger for the power even if it failed miserably with its misguided political, economical and social policies which would result uprising (in the worst case scenario Libiyan, Syrian and Yemeni types of civil wars) soon or later. Meles, Gadhafi, Asad & Saleh’s regimes share astounding features: pseudo democracy, corrupt, nepotist & incompetent, officials/civil servants, kangaroo judiciary, ruthless & merciless military/security forces/police etc. On top of that their respective countries are controlled and run by their next of kins, clan members, illiterate cadres, co-opted elites/rent-seeker businesspersons who are enriching themselves at the expense of the poorest of the poor fellow countrymen which resulted inflation, massive corruption, malgovernance, suppression of freedom of expression, unemployment, lack of the rule of law among others. These are some of the triggering factors for the Arab uprising and we shouldn’t rule out they wouldn’t happen to Ethiopia given the recent the skyrocketing of inflation. But what’s most worrying isn’t the uprising (sooner or later) but how it’s gonna be entertained by our fellow citizens and eventually be handled by the military/security apparatus which wouldn’t hesitate to do what their master’s at helm asks them to do (a case in point 2005). Heaven forbids but if that happens we: should either avoid it at any cost or prepare ourselves for the kind of unstoppable bloodshed, displacement, rape, distraction in Libya, Yemen and Syria.
The alternatives (non-violent, armed struggle) to oust Meles seem not workable at the moment due to the current geopolitical situations and the end of cold war era. Power sharing (without denying their flaws)is being practiced in Kenya & Zimbabwe by diametrically opposite forces who even went further to killing each other. We’re at a cross-road;time is against us and we should clean up our homes before the fire engulfs us.
MakeLOVEnotWARS
Short Reply to Messay’ paper – specifically on the power of dictators!
Mesay’s assertion that elections or popular revolts are not going to either work or to be controllable by anyone is, I think, a wrong assertion.
It is completely wrong to assume that TPLF/EPRDF or any other dictatorship for that matter is undefeatable. Dictators are dependent on the people they rule for their existence. It is this dependence that creates their Achilles-heel. Thus dictators are defeatable if they are struck at their Achilles-heel. (I have discussed these weaknesses of dictators in one of my articles under የሰላም ትግል ሰራዊት posted on Ethiomedia).
Yes, it may take years to build a nation-wide millions-man strong army of peaceful struggle to wage a successful nation-wide peaceful uprising. Yes, it may require a lot of work to bring all or major opposition parties together, exposing the regime as well as building a nation-wide election-result-defending millions-man strong army to force TPLF/EPRDF accept its defeats following elections. Of course, if there is defeat!
I do not see any reason why Ethiopian pro-democracy force can not defeat its dictatorship given all the required homework is sufficiently met before waging the peaceful struggle. Just like the pro-democracy forces of any other countries, Ethiopian pro-democracy forces are also good enough to stand up and defeat their own dictators when the time is ripe. That is, if there is a clearly defined goal, a well-thought grand strategy and campaign strategies are calculated, error-free tactics are planned as well as appropriate mass political defiance and mass non-cooperation weapons of peaceful struggle are selected. Yes, Ethiopia may have its peculiarities including ethnic issues within the army and between regions the regime would love to exploit! Thus the peaceful struggle or uprising may not be as easy as was in Egypt. However, the solution is not to declare defeat and surrender even before trying a single day political defiance sit-in at Ethiopian “change square” or a single nation-wide non-cooperation strike. Therefore the solution is simply to be prepared better not quit!
Regarding the idea of grand-coalition proposed by Messay, if he meant power sharing, I do not think that dictators are in the business of sharing or rendering power at will. In addition, that issue was raised by the opposition during 2005 post-election period and did not get acceptance by Meles. I remember his answer was short to the demand: “Coalition with the opposition is unthinkable.” I think he has also characterized coalition with opposition as undesirable debating club (I stand to be corrected if I am mistaken). So I think Meles is beyond a point of return on that issue. Of courses, if TPLF/EPRDF was forced to accept its election defeat by a nation-wide organized millions-man strong peaceful struggle army and if also it believed that accepting defeat was the only best option left for TPLF/EPRDF to continue staying on power it would have accepted the proposal. Alternately if Messay meant the formation of an authoritarian grand coalition that simply focuses on developmental stuff abandoning democracy, I doubt its feasibility.
In closing, I always believe that the power of the Ethiopian people is much more stronger than the power of TPLF/EPRDF.
I agree with Abye!
Girma Moges
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Messay article provide an insightful understanding of post 1991 Ethiopian politics. But no to grand collation. First, Melese already categorized opposition parties as terrorist, fanatic, or remnants of Dergu. In such case it is difficult to arrive at power-sharing agreements, even more difficult to implement, and even if implemented, it will only be the test of time. Second, power-sharing does not mean that democratic principles and procedures will be respected (look Zimbabwe now). After all Melese loves his power because he want to makes sure that his ethnic and other cronies get wealthier in order to stay for long period in the state power, even in the inevitable democratic Ethiopia.
Who can pay the price for freedom……..Ooh Mandela, Mohammed Bouazizi