Delineation of duty between EPRDF and Affiliated parties

Somali regional state is considered as one of the most peaceful and politically stable in Ethiopia since the new president come to power but the question many ask is what are the chances that this hard earn stability pattern will last?

Most of the people are very worried of the continues EPRDF interference and manipulation of our internal regional issues at a time the leaders are expected to execute issues of relevance and priority to the Somali people like delivering basic services, sensitization of the people in regards to upcoming census exercise, check and balancing of the border commission and following up with the federal government on the details of recent signing of the regional resources without the knowledge and consultation of the locals and the regional government.

Cunningly as it may appear, EPRDF is intentionally diverting our main concerns with premature strategies like holding EPRDF meeting or evaluation of affiliated parties and etc. If EPRDF ought to have such meeting now let them go to the respective regional states instead of holding hostage of whole cabinets and the central committee of seven regions in Addis and disrupt all the regional activities and the service delivering among other things for narrow party interests.

Notwithstanding, The EPRDF has and is undermining the prospects of the undeveloped regions by using manipulative and different tactics to control the internal process of the ruling parties of the undeveloped regions in order to install someone who is lenient and will unquestionably fulfill their narrow agendas. However, the upshot of the concentration of political power in the hands of the few EPRDF elites and the absence of any delineation between them and the affiliate parties confirms the French saying: the more things change, the more they are the same.

The reasons for EPRDF’s failure are tightly wound up in Ethiopia’s history, a past from which the country may not escape in the near future. Unlike the American belief in the “self-evident” truth that government springs from the will of the people, nations like Ethiopia have long held beliefs that power is derived from and located in an independent source. Claiming legitimacy as descendants of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, the Emperors that ruled Ethiopia for more than two thousand years was the source of all law and were subject to no rule but their own. Indeed, the individual was treated in law as a subject, not a citizen.

The militaristic Derg that assumed control in 1974 derived its power initially from a possession of the instrument of oppression (the barrel of the gun), which it then sought to legitimize by the universality of its socialist theories. It deemed non-acceptance of its program illegitimate and branded anyone who disagreed a counterrevolutionary.

The autocratic and totalitarian regimes that ruled Ethiopia from 1991 to date instilled no democratic tradition in the people; rather, dictators rose to power quickly and easily in a political culture that glorified and rewarded few strongmen. With the new Abiy administration has nothing to prove to date other than mare rhetoric with no much-substances. The democratic ideal of the rule of law was never nurtured nor allowed to flourish among the people, who, instead, have been steeped in the strict tradition of absolutism.

Thus, in its transition to a democratic government, Ethiopia has neophyte citizens, and the present struggle for democracy and autonomy for absulate self-rule is proving doubly difficult.