The Old Guard Comes Out of Neo-liberal Closet

I am somewhat flattered and surprised that a senior member of the TPLF’s leadership has taken the time to respond to my op-ed piece headlined, “The Old Guard Shadows TPLF’s Leadership Meeting in Meqelle” [Volume 18, Number 917, November 26, 2017]. Part of this,  Getachew Redda has over the last few weeks launched a public relations campaign on behalf of his allies, especially given the number of articles, as mentioned by Getachew, the meeting spawned. Indeed, this newspaper has been responsible for delivering a number of “leaks,”  in no less than four consecutive columns of its “Fineline” on the meeting with claims of an insider’s knowledge.

My deep flattery is made more profound by the rather endearing accusation of “know it all,” as the exchange matches my hope that it continues and serves to inform and enliven public debate over matters we can all agree are of grave national concern.

In his own words, Getachew’s op-ed in this newspaper headlined, “TPLF’s Marathon Meeting: An Insider’s Account” [Volume 18, Number 919, December 10, 2017] was not a “line-by-line rebuttal of the laundry list of distortions and misrepresentations.” He argued it was “a modest attempt to highlight the most central of the agenda items.”

It would, however, be safe to assume that the distortions addressed in Getachew’s op-ed were the ones he feels are most important to dispel; the accusations that have hit a nerve. He identifies the most “central of the agenda items” as being the “culprit responsible for prolonging the meeting.” As confirmation of his unfounded accusations of distortion and misrepresentation, he offered the news that the TPLF meeting had been going on for “a little over a week when the rumour about the Honorable House Speaker’s intended resignation began to surface.”

The claim in my piece was that the Speaker’s resignation prompted a “prolonging” of the meeting “into the marathon” he concurred it was, instead of claiming that Abadula Gemeda’s resignation had provided the impetuous for holding a regular and scheduled meeting. His desire to sever the links between the new OPDO leadership and the TPLF’s “old guard” and dismiss my take on the inter-party dynamics based on a misrepresentation of my argument, was rather unsuccessful.

An editorial published in this newspaper headlined, “Diriba Kuma’s Administration Needs to Step Up to Step Down” [Volume 18, Number 917, November 26, 2017] best corroborates my piece. The criticism of the Mayor, perhaps the last progressive voice within the OPDO’s top leadership, included praise for Arkebe Oqubay (PhD), the “old guard’s ” chosen economic authority. In this editorial, the newspaper claimed, “Every mayor of a city worth its name would die to write policies and design programmes that define them and leave their good legacies . . . Arkebe’s tenure for three years beginning 2003 was the finest for the political and diplomatic capital of Africa. Most of the signature policies from public housing to expansion of infrastructure, from promotions of small and medium enterprises to restructuring the administrative structures of the city, were carried out then. Indeed, the successive administration has only followed up these policies with various intensity and clarity.”

Arkebe’s still passionate envy of Meles Zenawi, now buried for half a decade, is expressed in his desire to take ownership of the policies crafted by Meles while dismissing both the man and the theoretical underpinnings of those policies. The implementation of Arkebe’s old-fashioned ideas, his attempt to be Blair in the era of Corbyn, is made possible by right-wing nationalism that has engulfed the OPDO and the accusation that Meles was an imperialist.

Indeed, one could claim that the “old guard’s ” initial victory over the forces of Revolutionary Democracy and Developmentalism was scored in their hit against the former OPDO leadership. Since the change of guard, Oromia has descended into chaos that has sucked in neighbouring regions such as Somali Regional State and Harer. The lives lost and property destroyed are of little concern to the “old guard” who sees the rise of uncertainty and chaos as an opportunity to undermine the Ethiopian Defense Forces, further risking national stability and security.

It is a response Getachew gave to Mimi Sebhatu of ZAMI, in a recent radio interview, that offers insight into the “old guard’s ” mindset. Asked why the idea of TPLF’s hegemony had gained such currency despite the federal structure’s guard against the possibility of any one group creating such hegemony, his hesitant yet familiar response was that TPLF’s hegemony might have been visible in the “execution of federalism.” It is unclear why a man that has publicly asked for the ANDM to be held accountable for the tragic events of Gonder would fan the flames of an accusation that has led to the death and displacement of hundreds of his countrymen.

A secondary focus of Getachew’s piece was to rebut the claims I have made of Azeb Mesfin’s political position and popularity amongst the rank and file. He began by belittling my views that Azeb’s widespread popularity amongst the rank and file, and veteran fighters presented a challenge to an “old guard” hell-bent on completing Ethiopia’s sharp and, so far, highly disruptive turn toward neo-liberalism. With or without popularity within her base, Azeb would have to be some kind of woman to make a roomful of men consider, even nominally, the possibility of electing a female as the chairperson of the TPLF. Indeed, her popularity amongst veteran female fighters, particularly those who are now members of the military, has been augmented by her suspension despite the attempted offering of a female politician in her place.

The more substantial issue is that of her political position as a defender of Revolutionary Democracy and Developmentalism. Getachew claims “with almost mathematical certainty none of us inside the process did see the need for or the prospect of a miraculous deliverance from neo-liberalism courtesy of one well-intentioned individual; not at least from our side of the seat anyway. As far as the central committee as a body went there appeared little doubt, if any, as to who was the repository of orthodoxy, however ill-defined.”

Mathematical precision over matters that are ill-defined is difficult to come by. It is certainly not an intellectual feat I am capable of making. To arrive at mathematical precision, I need to begin by defining the orthodoxy that is Developmentalism and Revolutionary Democracy.

Developmentalism asserts that all policy instruments, including market-oriented, should be used upon empirical examination of their suitability to the country’s stage of development rather than ideological dogmatism. While this flexibility can create room for confusion, Developmentalism has clear conceptions of the market as a social institution open to and requiring political engineering. It identifies the institutions that underpin the market and the types of state intervention necessary to develop those intuitions, a matter I touched upon in my discussion of social capital.

The developmental argument is that even more important to economic growth and development, then traditional indicators like technological capability are the institutional context in which accumulation occurs. The effectiveness of institutions, including imported institutions such as universal suffrage, the parliament and the rule of law, will depend on the nature of the informal institutions in which the formal institutions operate. These informal institutions are the basis for social capital, that is, the norms, values and ideologies that allow for the reduction of uncertainty, reduce transaction costs and create an environment in which complex economic interactions can occur.

An illustration of the importance of informal institutions is provided by the fact that, despite our relatively progressive gender equality laws, such is the nature of the social capital as it exists in contemporary Ethiopia, the judge interpreting those laws would likely take on a conservative, if not reactionary, reading of them. The battle over abortion rights in Ethiopia, where a push by the party to legalise abortion was hijacked by religious groups organising protests across the country-side, previously the heartland of EPRDF’s legitimacy and power, does perhaps provide a relevant example.

All attempts by the EPRDF to modernise the bureaucracy and legislature are hampered by the lack of social capital, and will only be made successful through the accumulation of social capital.

Developmentalism is also evident in the relationship between technology, rent and economic growth. Developmental economics asserts that innovation, that is technological change, can only occur under conditions of Schumpeterian competition, that is, under circumstances in which a firm has access to monopoly rents. Developmental economics requires a broader conceptualisation of development as being a process that encompasses but is not limited to economic growth and structural transformation and identifies weak state formation as the primary institutional impediment to the full development of markets.

The revolutionaries in Revolutionary Democracy provide the interpretation of social justice that informs these interventions; Developmentalism offers the economic argument for the pragmatism of said interventions beyond ethical considerations associated with notions of social justice. Meles will perhaps be most remembered by the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) economists for his assertion that equality increases the rate of growth because it aids the accumulation of social capital. Indeed, his role in “reforming” the IMF, alongside the economist Joseph Stiglitz (PhD), is so well documented, it has found its way into Arkebe’s much-acclaimed book.

I would argue it is an insult to the intelligence of the members of the upcoming congress and the Ethiopian public at large to claim that the “old guard” is not attempting to complete the neo-liberal reforms it has managed to push through the Prime Minister’s Office. From this perspective, Getachew is correct in claiming that the differences he outlined both in his piece and in his radio interview are more “ imagined than real”.

His attempt to cover-up the “real” differences are overwhelmingly exposed by Christine Lagarde, managing director of the IMF, in an interview given to this newspaper. She claimed, “The challenge now is to manage a transition from public sector-led growth to a situation where the private sector takes the lead, something rightly emphasised in the government’s second Growth & Transformation Plan (GTP II). Transitioning to private sector-led growth, as envisaged in the GTP II, is important for several reasons.”

Getachew writes that “despite the writer’s innuendos and hyperbolic claims, none of the discussion did in any way feature any debate on the merits or otherwise of Revolutionary Democratic or Developmentalist ideals of the ruling party. Nor was there any mention of the need for making an exception to party orthodoxy.”

I find his claim as surprising and worrisome as it is accurate.

I believe the “old guard’s” attempt at presenting itself as both “repositories” of and saviours from orthodoxy will be frustrated by the public’s intellect. This newspaper’s column “Fineline”, which has served as a loyal articulator of the “old guard’s” positions, indicates that their plan to overcome the public’s intellect is an “uphill battle to claim the soul of the EPRDF, dawn seems the era of a resurgence of populism and radical nationalism, sentimentally powerful tools none of the leaders in each party of the coalition would mind unleashing, claims gossip.”

The “old guard” should keep in mind that as powerful a sentiment of our individual identities as “nations and nationalities” is the sentiment of an independent sovereign Ethiopia. Lagarde and the institutions, as well as the interests she represents, should not be fooled by the fawning of the politicians such as Abraham Tekeste and Arkebe. A single man does not dictate the trajectory of Ethiopian history; the country will not surrender its sovereignty simply because someone of enduring legacy is dead and buried.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.