PREEMPTION IS A FALSE RIGHT.

INTRODUCTION.

Mr. Zenawi used preemption as his right to invade Somalia in December 2006. Details and a sequence of events concerning the invasion are given elsewhere (http://aboutethiopia.com/a8-Senseless-Dec-06.htm). Since coming to power in 1991 Zenawi has behaved in ways that cannot be expected from a rational individual with a discernible plan for the future other than destroying Ethiopia . The Ethiopian Civil Rights leader Professor Mesfin Woldemariam in his book, “Yekiulkulet Khedet”, examined issues when the social contract is broken and likened the condition as a trip to the abyss. He argued that "khedet" (denial of a social contract) is not only a mistake; and though “khedet” is linked to ignorance and stupidity, it is not only the sum of the two; “khedet” is going outside of the light of one's heart and being governed by external power or interest; it is lowering the value of the human spirit and changing it to an inanimate object (Mesfin Woldemariam, 1996 Eth. Calendar, p.15). The harm brought by Zenawi to Ethiopia and Ethiopians is incalculable. The question is: How come Ethiopians cannot tame, contain, or otherwise remove the wild Zenawi Kingdom that has divided the country into coastal ( Eritrea ) and landlocked (FDRE) regions, thereby bestowing “geography of poverty” to both regions? The “geography of poverty” that he helped engineer and enforces allows him to make Ethiopia a destitute, impoverished, famished and diseased country. His doctrine of Revolutionary Democracy (RD.pdf)provides goals, objectives, strategies and tactics by which he will use his TPLF/EPRDF party to enrich himself, his extended family, relatives and others of his choosing. Ethiopians seem to have forgotten how their forebears protected their country. They gave their limbs and lives and handed the current generation a blessed country free and blameless. In everything that relates to Ethiopia , Ethiopians have no one but themselves to blame for they should assert their rights. Yet, Zenawi has become a formidable tyrant for the current crop of Ethiopians to handle partly because he gets favors from what appears to me to be wrong-headed foreign-policy objectives of the West, and principally from the recent administrations of the United States and Great Britain . The situation for Ethiopia worsened when the current president of the USA embarked on his preemptive attacks. True to America 's promise people's representatives both from the Republican and Democratic parties have passed a bill in committee in support of the rights of the people of Ethiopia and are working to get it, HR5680, to the full congress.

This article briefly outlines the behavior of organism with the view of showing the state of nature and natural laws that govern their lives. It also provides brief notes of the contributions of pertinent philosophers and political thinkers, (Abba Estafanos the Gunda Dundie, Zera Yacob, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Authors of American Constitution and Woodrow Wilson) who help us understand human rights (“mbet"). The conclusion argues that preemption is not a right and that Zenawi does not pay any attention to principles that work for the rights of the Ethiopian as a person or Ethiopia as a country.

ON THE STATE OF NATURE.

Birds fly freely. They eat grass seeds and/or animals. They mate as they wish, perhaps in pursuit of happiness, but certainly to reproduce and maintain their species. They gather twigs and grass to make nests. They lay their eggs in their nests. They guard their nests against external danger. They feed their hatchlings until they mature, fly away and fend for themselves. This is a state of nature. Birds have natural rights to do what they do. Likewise humans have natural rights.

Note that birds do not make trees or grass. God creates them; accordingly they are His properties. Birds use twigs and grass to make their nests. The nests result as a product of the labor of birds, so that the nests are the properties of birds. This is a state of nature, and birds have natural rights to own their property. Likewise, humans have natural rights to own properties that derive from their labor, particularly labor necessary for subsistence, i.e., eat, drink, have a habitation, clothes, etc.

Organisms, including humans, live grouped in bunches. Birds of the same feather flock together. Plants of one type bloom in a region while other plant types do not. In the oceans minute plant-like organisms bloom in discrete bunches. Other organisms that graze on the plant-like organisms occur as bunches. Smaller fish feed on the grazers or the plants and swim in schools. Fishes swim in schools in the ocean and birds of the same feather flock together in the sky, and they do so by maintaining formations. Within each formation individuals move to the left, the right, up, or down in tandem with others as they migrate from one place to another, giving an appearance that the formation is one giant organism. Each organism has the right to behave independently, yet it behaves dependently and occupies a different role when it is in a formation. The individual benefits by participating in the formation when in flight or swimming. Among other considerations the individual is assured to have a mate when they settle after their flight in formation. This is a state of nature and the individual benefits by moving together in a group. Likewise, humans benefit by cooperating with others when migrating in groups.

Observing the activities of even more organisms may enrich our knowledge of the state of nature, particularly their behavior as groups. Bees give signals to other bees and inform them exactly where and how far to fly in order to collect nectar. Bees make honey that a collection of most competent chemists would be unable to achieve. If they feel threatened a swarm of bees sting the offender. A pack of hyenas can threaten a lion and take away the kill that the lion had made. A pride of lions protect their territory by scenting it as a warning to intrusion by other lions. Intruder lions dare enter that territory at their peril. A strong lion claims the lioness and sires off springs until he his defeated by another stronger lion. Similarly, monkeys are social and territorial and a strong monkey has several in his harem until he is defeated by another. Male monkeys may defend their group from predators by biting on the predator to their death and also that of the predator. Such social and groups of organisms of the same species may shed light on state of nature if man obeyed only natural laws.

ON NATURAL LAW.

To the state of nature described above there are corresponding natural laws. In the case of working individually, the natural law is predicated on total and complete liberty of the individual organism to do as is necessary for its survival and its reproduction. In the case of living in a group, the individual surrenders its liberty to do it alone in exchange for other benefits such as security and to get a mate that the strong male may not claim.  Likewise, humans enjoy natural laws. However, in addition to submitting to the strongest, in the case of humans, they may also have to submit to the wisest and/or the wealthiest. Hence, in group or societal settings there are serious differences between humans and other organisms, which require making social contracts that are briefly outlined below.

ON SOCIAL CONTRACT.

Unlike other organisms, humans have the capacity to raise in their imagination structures before they implement them and build dams, churches, roads, castles, etc. The property that humans create by their labor, which is above and beyond that which they require for subsistence is called productive labor. The labor-process for subsistence living and the property derived from it are qualities performed by a single individual independent of others. In contrast, property that results from productive labor has a different quality because productive labor usually involves more than one individual. Also, the means of production (1- land and raw materials, 2- the body of the laborer, and 3- the tools for mechanical advantage that the laborers make) might involve or belong to more than one individual. Some of the products of a labor-process may be repeatable at costs much less than the cost of labor and of commodity paid for in the initial cycle of production. Such works generate surplus value, which pay huge dividends to the owners of the product. A society might allow individuals to patent as individual property some kinds of ideas that yield surplus value. However, an individual, an agency, or a group that claims a project as its property, commonly pays wages to the productive laborer. The wages that individuals receive for their productive labors are quite different within the same society and among societies. The relations of labor and who claims the properties derived from the labors are the crux of social contracts between individuals and their government. A more perfect human society allows for natural right respecting liberty and the pursuit of happiness for each individual. The members of such a society by their consent agree to have a government that is accountable to them. On their behalf the government would administer laws for maintaining internal peace and works to safeguard the society against external danger. Such a desirable social contract is derived from experiences that are gained from the history of societal contracts.

ON HISTORY OF SOCIAL CONTRACTS.

Energy matters. Energy is stored in plants and animals in the form of glucose that is sought for life and living. Productive labor is a form of another kind of energy that fuels societal growth and the effort of society “to make history” as Karl Marx put it. Trees, fresh water, plants, and fossil fuels are stored in different amounts at separate places, and such fuels are necessary for the economic well being of societies.

Plants and plant-like organisms convert sunlight and store it as chemical energy, glucose, within their body. They burn the glucose and convert the stored chemical energy to mechanical energy that would allow them circulate materials within their bodies and move or sway to sustain their lives. What they have not used-up is stored and eaten by grazers. So, glucose is what organisms are after as they fed on each other in the eternal pursuit of life. We seek organisms not only for food but to use them as a source of different kinds of energy such as horses for transportation, oxen for farming, and others to power our utilities. We burn wood, charcoal, coal, oil, or gas to generate heat and/or electricity. We use water for all kinds of activities including for irrigation farming and also to generate electricity. Ethiopian civilization sprang at the headwaters of the Nile, while Egyptian civilization began at the mouth of the Nile an endured because of irrigation farming. A vibrant society needs energy for its economic well being. Productive labor and the quality of that labor are of paramount importance to the economic progress of a society and the liberty of its people. Education increases the quality of productive labor. Knowledge of such attributes is derived from historical precedents.

As society evolved from the hunter-gatherer stage to the agrarian, enslavement of humans by organized leaders became the norm. Calling on all forms of objects as gods for one or the other occasion hid the curiosity of humans and a search for their creator. Calling themselves gods helped some powerful leaders. Individuals who pondered the unacceptability of slavery sought of different ways to break away from this bondage. Prophets Moses, BCE 13th to 16th century and Mohammed, AD 570-632, appeared at different times, one to take the Jews out of slavery from Egypt, and the other to establish Islam. Both performed miracles as ways of demonstrating that they are prophets of God. Prophet Moses claimed that he talked to God, and brought the Ark of the Covenant that bore God's script, while Mohammed was inspired by his dream in which he claimed that he talked with Saint Gabriel. Both preached against worshiping of idols and focused the attention of their adherents to worship only in one God, which is quite a liberating effort.

The traditions established after Moses were limited as they were designed to help only the Chosen People, the Jews. Yet, the Babylonians in the BCE 6th century destroyed the temple that was built by Solomon and in which the Ark of the Covenant was placed to safeguard the well being of the Chosen People, until the Persians permitted the rebuilding of the Temple. At a subsequent time, the Romans, some of whose leaders proclaimed themselves as gods, conquered other countries including that of the Chosen People. Jesus Christ appeared in Israel and proclaimed himself God of both Jews and others, and the Christian tradition began. Martyrs (members of “Hizbawi Imbita”) carried Christianity far and wide. More than 300 years after the birth of Christ, when Emperor Constantine used the Cross-in his war efforts and the Ethiopian Emperor Ezana accepted it as the religion of his court, Christ ruled even through governors. It was in the AD 570 that Prophet Muhammad was borne and his teachings started later.

CHURCH REFORMATION AND HIZABAWI IMBITA.

Abba Estifanos (1380? - 145O)

After the spread of Christianity some Christian churches and church leaders enriched themselves at the expense of the laity. Even some monks, who had proclaimed to follow Jesus by giving up the pursuit of owning property, became slave owners. Other priests and monks were enraged by what they saw. One notable monk was Abba Estifanos of Gunda Gundei, who taught his disciples to read and adhere to the New Testament, and worship God and only God. His teachings were strict, and he and his followers would not bow to any other thing (the Cross, the icon of St. Mary, etc.,) or person (the emperor) as they considered bowing to be a form of worshiping. His teaching became popular, which caused other monks to oppose him. They took him to imperial courts by accusing him that he is not teaching the correct Church doctrine. In the court of Emperor Yeshaq (1414-1427- by the way it was Yeshaq's soldiers who gave the name Somalia to the coastal region of Ethiopia of that time) the monk was exonerated. However, in the court of a subsequent emperor, Zera Ya’qob (1433-1468) he and his followers were either stoned, beaten by sticks, and/or put in jail to die. Emperor Zera Ya'qob was a highly church schooled and educated person, who authored many articles and books. There was a serious disagreement on the interpretation of the scriptures between a church-educated emperor and a New Testament evangelist. As a ruler, he probably felt that he is exonerated to demand respect because the scriptures support given unto Caesar his due. However, Abba Estifanos and his supporters saw bowing to a king not as a form of respect but as worship. Those disagreements were fatal to what otherwise would have resulted in the reformation of the Ethiopian Church about a hundred years before the German monk, Martn Luther (1486-1546) had the idea of a reformation when he visited Rome in 1511. At any rate, Abba Estifanos and his followers did not flinch from their beliefs because of torture. They did not oppose the emperors on their other roles but they steadfastly stood by their ideas, and as such they were the founders of Hizbawi Imbita (Civil Disobedience). Indeed they were martyrs of what would have likely become an Ethiopia Protestant Church, though none took hold. The following is an excerpt from a book written about Abba Estifanos (Getatchew Haile, 2004, p.55).

"They rose in anger against me by saying you teach material that is not of our country. What is the teaching of this country? How is this teaching? Beyond Christ and all that is in one Church I know nothing else." Abba Estifanos,

There is no question that Abba Estifanos and his followers (Deqiqa Estifanos) have charted the reality that rights (“mebt”) are to be gained by the efforts of individuals and the groups who wish to have their “rights” respected no matter the cost. They correctly did not seek rights (“mebt”) as a gift to be given to them by anyone including the ruling emperor. They said no to the emperor who tried several ways of causing them to change their ideas. They said no as individuals and as groups. The “Hizbawi Imbita” (Civil Disobedience) that the Deqiqa Estifanos charted is very different from the mass suicide that Jews committed as they jumped to their deaths down the cliffs of Mosada when the conquering Romans laid siege to the mountain and climbed it. The Jews elected to die instead of surrender to the Romans. Deqiqa Estifanos did not question the authority of the emperor on all matters except as it relates to their interpretation of the scriptures. They wanted their rights (“mebt”) to their beliefs respected. Their “Hizbawi Imbita”, however, did not involve a large enough number of the population and hence did not force the emperor to mend the error of his ways. Regardless, they founded “Hizabawi Imbita” in the history of Ethiopia. 

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

a. Philosopher Zera Yacob (1599-1692).

Ethiopia was in turmoil after a jihad against the Christian Kingdom of 15th century. Kings came to power by violent means and the kings had Orthodox then Catholic and back again Orthodox faiths when Philosopher Zera Yacob of Aksum area went to monasteries, completed his education and lastly settled in self-exile at Infraz, northeast of Lake Tana. He wrote his book of 1667 at the urging of one of his students, while he was in self-exile at Infraz. If Abba Estifanos was a fire brand New Testament evangelist, Philosopher Zera Yacob was a rational critic of organized religion, and he perceived that natural religion is “revealed” to reason. He pursed an Ethiopian type of discourse called “Hateta” based on which he satisfied himself about the existence of God. Zera Yacob argued that God is good and does not curse His own creation, so that he would not have incinerated any of His creations had they met Him with Prophet Moses. He continued his rational criticism of religion as shown below.

“In his kind wisdom the creator has ordered for blood to flow from a woman's womb every month. However, Moses and Christians have made this wisdom of God a cursed act. Additionally, Moses curses the man who mates with such a woman. This Law of Moses has brought hardships to her marriage and her life in general. It violates the law of reproduction. It hinders fostering children and destroys love. Thus this Law of Moses cannot be from the creator of women (Daniel Worku Kassa, 1995 Eth. Calendar, p.20).

He exposed the falsity (or violation of natural laws) of religious tenets on fasting, celibacy, and criticize slavery as well as any form of violence. He believed in the equality of man and woman. He proclaimed that a man and woman are one in marriage and have equal property rights.

Regarding the pursuit of happiness Zera Yacob wrote: “God the master of morality created man to choose to be good or bad. Man can choose to be bad or a liar until he receives his punishment. However, since man is of the flesh he pursues happiness. Good or bad man pursues all avenues to please him (his flesh) (Daniel Worku Kassa, 1995 Eth. Calendar, p.15).

As a rational criticism that organized religion may not be the way to reveal God, Zera Yacob wrote:

"As my faith appears true to me, so does another find his own faith true; but truth is one." (Sumner, 1985, p.236).

Since emperors and some other dictators base their power on divine rights as asserted by organized religions, when Zera Yacob debunked the role of organized religion for revealing God he provided the foundation for individual rights and the pursuit of happiness, and was the first in Ethiopian history to argue for the rights of women.

b. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679).

Everybody wants to do whatever he or she wants, but they do not because they do not want to get hurt. So they enter into agreement that promises their survival. The people of that society listen to or are made to listen to a leader to whom they have given the authority to enforce laws and to ensure internal peace and a common defense.

The above is basically the political philosophy expounded by Thomas Hobbes in his 1651 book, the Leviathan. A contemporary of Zera Yacob, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes graduated from Oxford and worked in France during the 1664 Civil war in Britain. He worried about individual and social rights and published books in Latin and in English. In early 1651, he published a translation of his Latin book De Cive, which included criticisms of religious doctrines, under the title Philosophical Rudiments Concerning Government and Society. And in the middle of 1651 he published his famous book Leviathan, or the Matter, Form and Power of a Commonwealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil. The cover of the Leviathan book depicted a crowned giant holding a sword and Croizer in its two hands, and exposing tiny humans below its waist of which it is composed.

For Hobbes the society is an object of study. He was a theorist of natural state and social contract. He depicted an individual as a “self-centered-corporation,” and the state as a Leviathan or a monstrous humanoid as depicted in the engraving of the cover of his book. He perceived that individuals who compose the Leviathan lead a life that is bound by the pressure of human needs, but have the capacity to destroy the Leviathan by human passion. He saw individuals with the right or the license to do anything they desired. Yet, in a world of scarce things, a constant rights-based human struggle would result in a "war of all against all. As he further put it: "In such a natural world, the life of man would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” However, he reasoned, man is afraid of violent death, and self-defense against violent death is the highest human necessity out of which other rights are borne. These rights guide man against war and for peace, and are the foundation of a social contract between the individual and the government. Thus, Hobbes saw the need for a balance between individual rights and the social contract between individuals and a government that has absolute authority. (Wikipidia.org)

c. John Locke (1632-1704)

Locke received the bachelor’s degree in 1656, the master’s degree in 1658, and the bachelor of medicine in 1674 from Oxford . While at Oxford he worked with such scientists as Robert Boyle. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society, and rubbed shoulders with Sir Isaac Newton. Locke was a practicing medical doctor, and a person of letters. Locke, among other achievements, provided amendments to Hobbes views particularly regarding the license of individuals to do every thing, and individuals bestowing power to an authority figure. He was also a theorist on the state of nature, natural laws, and social contract (Wikipedia.org). Though in practice he might have lived differently his writing is powerfully liberal. He published some of his works, namely two treatise of government, anonymously for they dealt with political issues. He had influenced subsequent thinkers and the founders of the American constitution. His anonymously published second treatise on government that is currently available on the web is used in what follows (http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/lock.htm).

In his second treatise of government, John Locke (1690) explains the State of nature, in which man as a creation of God is free to do everything he pleases though he does not have the license to harm others. Then he explains the law of nature, in which he observes that man as a property of his creator does not have the right to destroy himself much less others. Humans are created by the labor of the Creator and as such are his property, and only he can dispose of his property, Locke argues. He continues, “by right of self-preservation, as every man has a power to punish the crime, to prevent its being committed again,..: and thus it is, that every man, in the state of nature, has a power to kill a murderer, both to deter others from doing the like injury, .. and also to secure men from the attempts of a criminal.” This logically resulted in his conclusion, “every man hath a right to punish the offender, and be executioner of the law of nature. Ultimately he argued that men have the right to revolt against an oppressor regime. In regard to invading humans in other countries, Locke enquired, “by what right any prince or state can put to death, or punish an alien, for any crime he commits in their country.” There fore, he logically exposed that there is no foundation for preemptive attack of one nation by another.

d. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778): on Social Contract.

Rousseau was music writer and political philosopher born in Geneva . Among his several works, Rousseau wrote in 1762 a book in French, which in English translates to Social Contract, Principles of Political Right. He argued that individuals in a society ought to make a social contract among each other, and not with a government or a leader. A society would have two organizations, the first one being the society as a sovereign and second being a government that would discharge administrative responsibilities. Rousseau influenced the French revolution, and western political structure (wikipedia.org).

e. The American Constitution (ratified in September 17, 1787)

The authors of the American Constitution were strongly influenced by John Locke. The American constitution is a document that enshrines the inalienable rights of individuals to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It embodies a promise for a more perfect union that its citizens may work toward. Yet the constitution vests the power of defense and foreign policy issues on the president and depending on the outlook of the president and the political situation that he perceives lots of stuff may happen before the people catch up with what is going on.

f. President Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) and the right to self-determination.

As a way of tearing down the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the First World War, Woodrow Wilson brought his Fourteen Points, including the rights of nation to self-determination. This self-determination principle is enshrined in the documents of the United Nations, which Wilson worked very hard to establish. The United Nations Charter does not and cannot condone preemption as a principle by which sister nations can coexist, for preemption will be internally inconsistent with the other well-founded principles of the Charter.

CONCLUSION.

There is no foundation in the state of nature, the law of nature, and the social contracts among individuals and/or between individuals and their governments, or the contracts entered among sister nations that could or would permit preemption as the right of any nation. The case of invading another country for the preemption of perceived offenses was and remains unthinkable to clear thinkers. John Locke has shown that no basis exists for a nation to punish individual of another nation in their country. The UN Charter, which enshrined President Wilson's self-determination principle, clearly opposes preemptive attacks of one country by another. Preemption is not a natural right or a right entered into by the concerned governments. It is a false right, claimed by a bully who terrorizes less strong members of the community of nations.

What is astonishing is how poor Ethiopia was used to invade Somalia, when Somalia is at its hour of weakness. Mr. Zenawi argued in favor of self-determination to support his rebel friend of old, Mr. Isaias Afeworki, as the reason for giving away coastal and maritime territories and properties of Ethiopia to Mr. Afeworki. Zenawi used all the power of the Ethiopian leader to work against the interests of Ethiopia in support of self-determination because he thought that he would personally benefit by that arrangement, and not because he had a belief in the value of self-determination. Likewise, Mr. Zenawi has used "the right of nations and nationalities to self-determination" as an instrument to let him divide the landlocked part of Ethiopia not because he understands or misreads the meaning of self-determination, but because a divided country will allow him to pillage Ethiopia and enrich himself an his extended family (http://nazret.com/blog/index.php?m=20061210).  Clearly self -determination as a principle means nothing to Mr. Zenawi for he would not respect the right of self-determination of the Somali to form a Somalia. He invaded Somalia to vest a few Somalis in power and to oust others that most Somalis had preferred, because doing so will enable him to take a portion of the funds that western governments likely paid to get Ethiopians invade Somalia. His invasion was not limited to killing citizens of Somalia for he has bragged that he has killed citizens of other nations. What happened to Ethiopians who were refugees in Somalia? How many of them were killed? How many have been placed in prisons?

It must be emphasized that Zenawi sent soldiers into Somalia who arrived in Baidoa on July 20 before Sheik Aweys declared a Jihad against Ethiopia on July 21. Zenawi was the intruded that caused Aweys and other patriotic Somalis to raise their ire against Ethiopia.  On the other hand, Aweys is not justified to declare a Jihad against Ethiopia for reasons that I repeat here. Firstly, his declaration is against the teachings of Prophet Mohammed. Secondly, there are more than twice as many Moslem Ethiopians than there are Moslem Somalis (http://aboutethiopia.com/a8-Senseless-Dec-06.htm).

Zenawi went to Algiers to agree with Mr. Isaias Afeworki on how to place an international boundary within Ethiopia de Novo. The two cousins led a senseless war in which over 70, 000 Ethiopians were killed. Zenawi goes through the motion of holding elections in Ethiopia . After loosing the May 15, 2005 elections to the Kinijit Party, he placed the leaders of the Kinijit Party in jail where they are languishing as I write, and personally took over the command of the security apparatus of Ethiopia in which over 193 unarmed and peaceful Ethiopians were killed by a disproportionate use of force as attested by an inquiry commission that his rubber stamp parliament appointed. As the outcry against his murderous rule built momentum, Zenawi invaded Somalia with an estimated 16, 000 Ethiopian troops. He has shown “shock and owe” to himself and perhaps to admiring officials of Western governments who might give him a bonus for a job well done. However, what Zenawi has done, above all else, is soil the blameless name and history of Ethiopia, by dragging it down the gutter of invading a neighboring country. Somalia was invaded by Ethiopia for no discernible offense committed by Somalia against Ethiopia . Nonetheless God loves the inhabitants of both Ethiopia and Somalia , and new opportunities for forging a union or working as independent nations have opened up for the people of the region. Regardless, since the end does not justify the means, all sane Ethiopians, Christians and Moslems, young and old, women and men, should condemn the contemptible invasion of Somalia by Zenawi, the irrational tyrant of Ethiopia. Responsible people should do everything necessary to expose the fact that Zenawi’s senseless invasion of Somali is not done with the best interests of Ethiopia, and does not represent the wishes of the people of Ethiopia, as neither does his rubber stamp parliament.

After Zenawi ascended to power in Ethiopia he made Ethiopia voiceless as he used the power of the “leadership of Ethiopia” to campaign and implement policies against the interests of Ethiopia and to place an international boundary within Ethiopia. The West was eager to comply with the wishes of Zenawi and implement international agreements that countered the interests of Ethiopia. Now Somali is made voiceless as the recent leadership of Somalia that people preferred was replaced by cohorts, which Zenawi was used to place in office. The current “leadership of Somalia”, which is imposed on Somalia through Zenawi, does not speak against the murder of Somalis by foreign troops, preferring instead that more should be killed.  Freedom loving people of both Ethiopia and Somalia have to work harder to regain the liberties of their people, who are made even harder because the West is behind leaders who work against the interests of the people that they purport to represent. It is as though time has reverted to the days of colonialism, where the coastal region of the Horn of Africa is forcibly fragmented into geographies of poverty and only the leadership sanctioned by colonial powers and partially paid for by the largess of the Western colonial powers are allowed to subsist.

This is my Christmas Gift to all Ethiopians and Somalis.

[NB. This is work in progress. It was first drafted and distributed to some friends Christmas Day of the Eastern Orthodox Christians.]

HG 1/7/2007