The Horn of Africa is a geopolitical region that is often taken as a singular unit of analysis used to explain limitations, failures, intra and interstate security issues, and the plethora of societal calamities caused by political and economic instability. For many authors exploring the subject, geographical differences are considered a major determinant that challenged civilization and development, caused state collapses, and poverty. Historical writing has been influenced by such discourses of geographic determinism. Scholars reproduce such discourse and often write about the region through their pessimistic eyes and pens. The Horn is nearly described as the gate of Joseph Conrad’s Dark Continent.

This gloomy representation of the region serves to evoke political intervention from foreign forces in the name of spreading the gospel of democracy, saving humanity, and overall pacification. Through it, the Horn is portrayed as a natural place where the Whiteman’s burden gets fulfilled. The policy reaction, added with incessant reporting and tweeting from major international actors and institutions about events unfolding in Ethiopia (specifically the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam[GERD] the civil war in the north, and the 6th general elections) can only be understood as a continuation of the hitherto distortion and misrepresentation of the region’s image. Bombing the dam, shitholes states, dividing and dismembering Ethiopia, unending scenarios of doomsday interventions to save Ethiopians from Ethiopians are but a few examples of derogatory languages worth mentioning. The spread of fake news, pseudo-intellectual opinion pieces, offensive speeches, smear campaigns, tweets from many western leaders, journalists, and scholars inform us how the world remains the same as it is seemingly changing.

This discursive violence exposes the system and signifies the end of liberal internationalism. The world once again shows the death of a third party, the absence of a genuine egalitarian international community, and a disorder to its order. The coming back of past geopolitical dynamics, the unfolding of a new Cold War— now in the marketplace, the emerging multi-polarity altogether exposes inherent realities of coloniality, racism, hierarchy, caste system, and patriarchy embedded in the global system of international relations. The international responses to Ethiopia’s trio events, the dam, the election, and the war serve to expose the already existing feature of a deeply biased international order.

This gloomy representation of the region serves to evoke political intervention from foreign forces in the name of spreading the gospel of democracy, saving humanity, and overall pacification.

This global trend warrants an urgent response at regional or sub-regional levels. In this article, I question what must be done, at the regional level, to enable the dignified survival of people of the Horn within the chaotic international system of our time? I explore alternative politics as a response to the existing international system and ultimately advocate for the politics of solidarity that can be re-imagined and re-constructed centering on IGAD, a non-aligned movement, and pan-Africanism. I invoke black diplomacy to serve as guiding principles to this end. This prescriptive imagination is what I designate a decolonial turn in the Horn.

The Horn was a hub of civilization in the pre-modern period. It is a land crossed by the great Nile River basin and hosts a range of Great Lakes. It is also located between the Indian Ocean world and the Mediterranean civilization order. The ancient long-distance trade roots cross the region connecting the African continent with Asia via the red sea, Bab-el-Mandeb, and the Indian Ocean. Seen in longue durée, communities in the Horn were connected through these trade routes and managed to sustain their complex social and political fabric for centuries. Competing endeavors of state formation and political imagination were hitherto a historical engine producing war and cooperation among communities, polities, and states.

The colonial encounter that animated the modern state formations in the region late in the 19th century, interrupted the long process of human interaction of the pre-modern period. The modern states of the Horn of Africa then gradually produced as historical entities and as an anti-colonial process. The Horn, like any other region of Africa, is an anti-colonial space often imagined within politics of statehood, albeit the leaders of the region played key roles during the heydays of pan-Africanism. This anti-colonial spirit left a favorable seed that can be deployed towards decolonial world politics.

In the 1980s, the political elites of the region envisioned a new politics at the regional level and created the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD). This organization came into being as a product of the political imaginations of the leaders of the region; everchanging, at times expanding and shifting its objectives. When it was established in the 1980s, this supra-national entity used environmental crises like drought and desertification as its entry. The celebrated nation-state model of social organization could not allow the leaders of the region to deal with transnational issues such as drought and desertification. Therefore, IGADD was envisaged as an entity for a new politics of solidarity in the Horn.

The establishment of IGADD can be considered as a first attempt to define the Horn of Africa as an ecological region, defying the hitherto representation of the Horn of Africa as a land of difference: highland core, and lowland periphery, among others. Its foundation and survival justify the endurance of the dream, the goal, and imagination for solidarity politics at a regional level. Today the organization comprises states in the Greater Horn including Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia, South Sudan, and Uganda.

Despite the narrow ecological objective, IGADD found itself as an avenue to address the peace and security concerns of the region. Such involvement was a product of a functional, gradual, and incremental confidence-building process initially triggered by ecological needs for regional cooperation. IGADD entered into the political sphere through the backdoor using the indirect, functional, and incremental approach. It was impossible for IGADD to ignore the intra and interstate conflicts in the Horn and operate only on ecological issues. Such involvement in the wider political sphere necessitated the revitalization of IGADD into a new organization called IGAD in 1996. The revitalization of IGAD heralded the expansion of the new regional politics in the Horn of Africa.

After its revitalization, IGAD was made to work on the three issues such as political, environmental, and economic cooperation. These objectives, therefore, defined the Horn of Africa as an ecological, economic, and security region. IGAD has created an alternative political space to manage the environment, the economy, and the security of the Horn. It began to serve as a new platform of solidarity for multilateral, transnational, and supranational politics.

In 2002, IGAD came up with a new special agency called the Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism (CEWARN) under the peace and security division. CEWARN, with its early warning

and early response system, has been working to contain cross-border conflict and promote peace connecting local, national, and regional actors. IGAD’s gradual and functional involvement in security issues was necessitated by political circumstances in the region. The organization has achieved relative success and now faces serious challenges within the intra- state political dynamics and from the international disorder. This historical condition necessitates revitalizing IGAD in line with a decolonial turn towards addressing internal crises within the region and improving world politics through collective and autonomous foreign policy.

Now the time has come for IGAD to work its role as an avenue for regional solidarity against internal and global crises, and provide further political alternatives to the states and communities of the Horn of Africa. As political circumstances in the 1980s motivated states to invent IGADD, and as the 1990s context necessitated the revitalization of IGADD into IGAD and the creation of CEWARN, the current state of affairs itself requires regional leaders to work towards authoring a new IGAD. The crisis within the international system, the ongoing political turmoil in Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia, and the intra-regional dynamics affirm that the time has come to relaunch and reboot IGAD. This quest for the revival of IGAD is not solely derived from crises and disasters, rather it is driven by hope and the euphoria as an outcome of popular struggles and youth movement in the Horn of Africa on one hand and the unfolding crisis, the return of geopolitical competition in multipolar global disorder on the other.

Relaunching informs revival and revitalization too. The time is ripe for revival and the relaunching of IGAD towards a vibrant regional political-economic community in the Horn of Africa. These included measures towards strengthening people-to-people relations among others allowing visa-free travel to citizens of the Horn across the region, free flow of business and ideas without restriction, softening of the borders, the harmonization of policies, and facilitating grassroots people to people interaction which has survived for centuries, irrespective of tensions between states in the region. All these warrant IGAD to revive to serve as an umbrella towards regulating all these activities and ensuring the realization of the Horn of Africa political-economic community.

Supranational political projects such as IGAD can be seen as projects towards the long organic interaction between communities of the region. IGAD, as an alternative political site, should be able to return the economic and social interaction as well as combine the national interests of member states with an overarching regional and supranational interest. IGAD as supranational and multilateral space should expand the horizon of politics to solve the problems of the region and perhaps towards new politics of solidarity in the region and beyond.

IGAD, as an alternative political site, should be able to return the economic and social interaction as well as combine the national interests of member states with an overarching regional and supranational interest.

Regionalism, therefore, in the Horn is not just an auxiliary project but also an organic political process towards re-creating the Horn as a conducive home for numerous communities. How can the region realize this organic political imagination? This question will provoke us to think about how regionalism materialized in a region where modern state formation and colonial intervention previously took place. The history of regionalism elsewhere teaches us that the process is a long, gradual, and functional process that warrants the political commitment and involvement of many state and non-state actors, friendly states, and organizations outside of the region. The road IGAD has taken so far appears similar to these complex processes involving multiple actors in functional areas. The evolution of IGAD therefore can be conceived as a gradual and functional journey of the region towards a regional economic, ecological, and security community in the Horn of Africa. Now is a favorable time to further increase and intensify this journey towards strengthening organic solidarity and crafting new strategic integration against the exploitative world disorder.

The guiding principles during the revitalization of IGAD must reflect the history of the people of the Horn, the predicaments they have encountered across time, and the mode of response from within as means of survival during their colonial past, and the subsequent postcolonial global new coloniality. This includes pan-Africanism and black diplomacy because the international system, as it exists, is not only hierarchical but also racial. The foundation of the existing international system is the exploitation and suffering of black people for centuries that is made all the more evident in the response of the international system to events in Ethiopia. This collective experience dictates collective political projects. The revitalization of IGAD guided through the philosophy and principle of pan-Africanism shall transfer the Horn to become a site for new emancipatory politics.

Another principle that must guide the revitalization of IGAD is the non-alignment. People and the states of the Horn must revitalize IGAD itself as a new center for rekindling the Bandung moment in our time. The return of the geopolitics and Cold War era mindset as main features of the new complex multipolar international disorder necessitates the rekindling of the Bandung moment. It is worth recalling that the people and states of the global south used the non-aligned movement as a response to the crisis of the postcolonial and the Cold War period. This movement and the principle of non-alignment have been redefined according to the dynamics of world politics. Now is the time to consider redefining and rekindling this movement from the Horn. The new global disorder, the projection of power to the Horn from different competing powers, the global Cold War with the complex multi-polarity make non-alignment an indispensable principle in re-launching IGAD. IGAD must capture the recent “No more” popular movement from below as a springboard to transform itself into a strong and vibrant regional community of the Horn of Africa. This, undoubtedly, will create the possibility to define the region’s place in world politics and even enable the region to contribute to the progressive transformation of the international order.

In liberal capitalist democracies, the media is generally accepted as having a watchdog role in mediating between the state and all facets of civil society. Hence, they are accorded the status of a fourth estate, i.e., a coequal branch of government that provides the check and balance without which governments cannot be effective in conducting the people’s business.

In what appears to be an article of faith about the centrality of a free press in a democratic society, Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the American Republic and its third President, reiterated this in a letter he wrote to Edward Carrington in 1787. By the time Jefferson was a Minister to France representing the government of a nascent American Republic. Edward Carrington was a fellow Virginian whom Jefferson had appointed to represent the State of Virginia at the Continental Congress. In this letter written from Paris, Jefferson noted the following: “The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers [media] or newspapers [media] without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter…”

As Jefferson was writing on the eve of the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789, his letter was partly precipitated by his critical observation of the nature of European governments. His appraisal was that the European governments of the time had divided the nation into two contending classes where the governments were considered the predator, and their people as prey. Jefferson was in essence warning Carrington that all governments, even the new American government unless checked, would inevitably become a predator; and he thought that the role of a free press in keeping government power in check was so important that he would prefer “newspapers without government” to “government without newspapers.” Such a Jeffersonian ideal of a free press in a democratic society has often become one of the principal organizing principles in explaining the relationship between media and democracy in journalism schools.

Theoretically or in principle, the media’s watchdog role over the functioning of a democratic government is not confined to their national borders but would span beyond their territorial boundaries. However, we oftentimes observe when such ideals are at odds with the experiences of the Western media, especially when they deal with issues beyond their national borders. Then, we would often begin to struggle as to how to account for such apparent ‘mismatch.’ Out of sheer disillusionment, we would direct our anger against the perceived double standard of the Western media.

The perceived ‘mismatch’ between the ideal and the practice, and the resultant frustration or anger emanates partly out of a lack of understanding as to how the liberal media operate on the ground. In a liberal capitalist democracy, elite dissent versus elite consensus often guides the media’s behavior. When elite opinion is divided over a policy issue, the media will cover the conflict among the elites, serving as a platform for robust democratic discussions. However, when elite opinion is unified over a policy issue, the media will reflect and amplify the consensus. This is even more so when it is a foreign policy issue. If officials or elites agree about foreign policy, the media cover that unity, and public opinion tends to agree with that official consensus. If officials or elites are in conflict about foreign policy, the media cover that conflict among foreign policy elites, and public opinion becomes more split over foreign policy options. Thus, the media can communicate and amplify the existing unity or disunity, creating openings for foreign policy shifts or closing ranks around the existing policy.

One would be tempted to ask why this is so. A convenient argument is that the media cannot be outside of the politico-economic environment in which they have their abode. In any society, media exist in a particular socio-economic and political arrangement. Media institutions often interact with socio-economic and political institutions where one shapes and influences the other, i.e., they have a constitutive relationship. Liberal capitalist free-market democracy constitutes the politico-economic system of the liberal West, and the media are its stakeholders. As such, they defend such a system with tooth and nail.

In a seminal scholarly study conducted on American mainstream television’s relationship to foreign policy, the principal author noted, “perhaps the most striking overall pattern in network television‘s coverage of international news is its congruence with the foreign policy priorities of the U.S. government…Television,like other major media, gives heavy coverage to… nations that somehow directly involve American interests.” In the same study, the author quoted the former ABC reporter Bill Blakemore as saying the following: “We most often follow what Washington and, in particular, the President and the State Department say is important…We rarely have an adversarial or even critical relationship with Washington.”

Does this mean that there is a grand conspiracy between the Western media and the governing elites? There answer to this question is a categorical ‘no.’’ If so, how could one make sense of such a convergence? Well, the convergence is the outcome of neither conspiracy nor coercion; rather it is a matter of common or shared interest. As noted earlier, the liberal capitalist free-market democracy constitutes the politico-economic system of the liberal West. The foreign policy priorities set by the government are believed to advance their national interests. Such national interests are also the interests of the media conglomerates, whose end goal is profit maximization. Hence, they see it in their best interest to defend their government’s foreign policy priorities.

What does all this mean to us? If the argument above makes sense, then we ought to put the current behavior of the Western media in the right perspective. We need to understand that there is nothing out of the ordinary in their current behavior surrounding the armed conflict between the central government of Ethiopia and the TPLF. They are acting consistently with their government’s foreign policy priorities in the region. Such foreign policy priorities, among others, include containing the influence of China in the region and seeking leadership that would be responsive to such priorities.

They are acting consistently with their government’s foreign policy priorities in the region. Such foreign policy priorities, among others, include containing the influence of China in the region and seeking leadership that would be responsive to such priorities.

Such an understanding would help us to carefully think about how we should respond effectively. Trying to maintain a confrontational posture and venting anger at the West would not do the trick. Rather, it would drain us of productive energy. We need to try to recalibrate our engagement with the West and spend more time on clearly articulating our national interests, and demonstrate how such national interest priorities could be achieved in a manner that does not threaten their interests. In the interdependent world we live in, national interests should not be seen as mutually exclusive. There should always be mutually beneficial outcomes, which we should strive for. But for this to bear the desired fruit, it is imperative that we engage in strategic communication and astute diplomatic endeavor.

Hermela Aregawi was born in Addis Ababa and moved to the United States shortly after. Raised in an apolitical household, her understanding of Ethiopian politics was limited to reporting by CNN, AP and BBC. She pursued a career in media graduating from Emerson College with a Bachelor of Science in Broadcast Journalism. Hermela worked for a decade as a writer, producer and on-air presenter for various local news agencies, including Aljazeera America. However, prioritizing activism, she suspended her term as a news anchor at CBS Los Angeles in July of 2021.

At the outset of the war in November 2020, while volunteering at an aid distribution center in Tigray, Hermela discovered intentional discrimination against sources of aid by some humanitarian agencies in order to avert accountability and redirect resources to war efforts. Disassociating from these groups, she questioned and reexamined her initial understanding of the conflict.

Currently, Hermela works with independent news organizations to combat propaganda and false narratives concocted by the TPLF and promulgated by mainstream media outlets. Though she is subject to online harassment, and threats, she continues to encourage Ethiopians to be active participants in the telling of their stories. This is exemplified through the #NoMore movement she spearheaded this November; a social media campaign which unites people from across Africa and the diaspora in their fight to end great-power politics and meddling in African nations.

Ethiopian Airlines (ET), having started operations in April of 1946, is the largest and most profitable airline in Africa. Annually, with 116 international 23 national and 44 freighter destinations, it services 5.2 million passengers and 500 tons of freight through its main hub in Addis Ababa.

Although the airline is publicly owned by the Ethiopian government, it is managed autonomously. This private management, unlike most African state-owned airlines, protects against nepotism and politically influenced business decisions. Where government regulations, and protectionism plague African airlines, Ethiopian Airlines greatly benefits from governmental support in the form of tax exemptions and special loans, allowing for the redistribution of revenue for investments and other improvements. Consequently, it has become the most profitable airline in Africa due to its three pronged approach: strategic network building, decentralized management structure, and diversification of income streams.

But similar to the experiences of other Ethiopian institutions, the conflict in the North has exposed ET to defamation campaigns in the digital space through crusades like Boycott Ethiopian Flowers and the amplification of falsehoods about the use of Ethiopian aircrafts to transport weapons in Ethiopia’s Tigray crisis. Both campaigns, propagated by partisan critics like Martin Plaut and Nima Elbagir, did little to damage the airline’s profit margins with 95 million stems sold during the valentine’s season and the Airline earning a revenue of 3.3 billion dollars in 2021.

Suleiman Abdella, born in Dessie, is amongst the Ethiopian Diaspora living in Saudi Arabia. Since January of 2020, he has used his Arabic language skills to translate and share Arab perspectives on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam,which would otherwise be inaccessible to the Ethiopian public. Suleiman is a self-prescribed digital diplomat who uses his Twitter and Facebook accounts to combat unsubstantiated narratives and unpack biased reporting.

Acknowledging the deep mistrust the community has towards traditional media, Suleiman works to rebuild that trust as one of many independent voices providing evidence-based narratives for both internal and external audiences.

Suleiman advocates for increased participation of the Ethiopian community so as to provide a varied and honest depiction of the reality on the ground. His resolve in countering harmful claims, particularly as it relates to GERD, dubs him a pioneer in digital advocacy.

2021 ኢትዮጵያ ብዙ ውጣ ውረዶች ያለፈችበት ጠመዝማዛ ጉዳዮች አስቸጋሪ ክስተቶች የተከሰቱበትና የፖለቲካ መጠማዘዞች የነበሩበት ዓመት ነበር፡፡ ይህም ኢትዮጵያ የሚታመኑ ወዳጆቿን ከደግ ጊዜ ብቻ ወዳጆቿ ለመለየት ረድቷታል፡፡ ይህ ያለፈው ዓመት የቀጠናችንና ዓለም አቀፍ አጋሮቻችንን ፍላጎቶችና ስሜቶች አሳይቶናል፡፡ በህግ የተመረጠው የኢትዮጵያ መንግስት ላይ የጫና ዘመቻ በማድረግ ወደነርሱ ፍላጎቶች ለማዘመም ሲሞከር በማያሻማ ሁኔታ ተመልክተናል፡፡ እንደማንኛውም አገር ኢትዮጵያም የራሷ የውጪ ጉዳይ ፍላጎቶችና ምርጫዎች ያለው ፖሊሲ ስላላት የውጪ ሀይሎች በፈለጉት ጉዳይና ሀሳብ ሊገዛ አይጠበቅበትም፡፡ በአሁኑ ጊዜ በሰሜኑ ከተከሰተው ድህረ ግጭት ጉዳይ ጋር ብቻ ሳይሆን ሉአላዊነቷንና ነጻነቷን በአፍሪቃ ቀንድ ብቻ ሳይሆን ከዚያም ማዶ ለማረጋገጥ ተጠምደን ቆይተናል፡፡

ዋናው መሰረታዊ ጥያቄ ውስጣዊ ልዩነቶቻችንና አለመስማማታችንን እንዴት መፍታት ችለን ወደፊት መራመድና የብልጽግናን መንገድ መጓዝ እንችላለን የሚለው ነው፡፡ ምንም እንኳን ያሉንን ችግሮች በሙሉ ባንድ ጊዜ መፍታት ባንችልም፤ ነገር ግን በመሰረታዊ ጉዳዮች ላይ አገራዊ መግባባት ላይ መድረስ አስፈላጊ ነው፡፡ ከሁሉም መጀመሪያ የራሳቸንን የውስጥ ችግሮች ለመፍታት የበለጠ መጣር አለብን፡፡ ያሉብንን ክፍተቶች ለማጥበብ ተጨማሪሥራዎች አሉብን፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ መጪው ሁሉን አቀፍ ውይይት ችግሮቻችንን በበለጠ ለይተን የመረጥነውን ጎዳና ለመከተል በደንብ ይረዳናል፡፡ ኢትዮጵያ ረጅም ያገረ መንግሥት ታሪክ ቢኖራትም ነገር ግን የራሳችንን የውስጥ ችግሮች ከመፍታት መቻል አንጻር ወደ መቶ ዓመት ወደኋላ ቀርተናል፡፡ በዚህ ውጥንቅጡ በወጣ ብዙ የተለያዩ ፍላጎቶች በሚከሰቱበት ዓለም ላይ ኢትዮጵያ መስቀለኛ መንገድ ላይ ቆማ በመቅረትና በልዩነቶቻችን ውስጥ ሠርገው ገብተው ለጥቃት እንዳንጋለጥ መሆን አለበት፡፡ እያንዳንዱ ኃይል መንግሥትም ሆነ የሚዲያ አካል ወይም ሌላ የራሱ ፍላጎቶች አሉት፡፡ በተመሳሳይ ኢትዮጵያ ከማንም ጋር የቁርባንጋብቻ ስላልፈጸመች ይልቁንም የራሷን ያገርውስጥም ሆነ የውጪ ጉዳይ የፖሊሲ ቅድሚያዎች ላይ ትኩረት ማድረግ አለባት፡፡ ኢትዮጵያ ምን ጊዜም ቢሆንየገለልተኛ አገሮች ንቅናቄ አካል ስትሆን ይህንን አቋሟን ወደፊትም ትቀጥልበታለች፡፡ ይሄ ደግሞ የራሱ የሆነ ድብቅ ወይም አሳሳች ችግር ሊኖረው ይችላልና ኢትዮጵያ ወዳጆቿን በደንብ ለይታ የወደፊት ያጭር ጊዜና የረጂም ጊዜ ግቦቿን አስቀምጣ ፍላጎቶቿን ማሟላት አለባት፡፡ አለበለዚያ በታላላቅ መርከቦች ፍትጊያውስጥ ተውጣ እንዳትቀር ያሰጋታል::

ዓለም አቀፍ ልምዶች አሉ፡፡ ደንቦችም በእርግጠኝነት አሉ፡፡ ነገር ግን እነዚህ ደንቦች የተቀመጡት ሁሉንም እኩል እንዲያገለግሉ ሳይሆን ይልቁንም ደንቦቹን ያወጡትን ለማገልገል ነው፡፡ ኃይልና ችሎታ አቅም ያላቸው አገሮች አልፎ አልፎ ደንቦቹን ለራሳቸው ፍላጎቶች ሲያውሉ ይሄ ችሎታ የሌላቸው ደግሞ ሲገደዱ እናያለን፡፡ እንደኛ አርል ላለ አዳጊ አገር በዓለም አቀፉ መድረክ ላይ በደንብ በተጠና እቅድና አገራዊ ፍላጎቶችን በየጊዜው ማጤንና ከተለዋዋጭ ሁኔታዎች ጋር መስተካለል ያስፈልገዋል፡ ፡ ስለዚህ ነው በሕግ በሚገዛ ዓለም አቀፍ ሥርዓት ውስጥ ነን ከማለት ወደኋላ የምለው፡፡

በመጀመሪያ ብሔራዊ ውይይት የሚለው ቃል ላይ ጥርት ያለ መግባባት ያስፈልጋል፡፡ ተጠባቂው ብሔራዊ ውይይት ሊያሳካ የሚፈልገው በሕዝቦች መካከልና በፖለቲካ ልሂቃን የሚጋሩት ግብ መንደፍ ነው፡፡ ሽብርተኛ ተብለው ከተፈረጁ ሃይሎች ጋር ድርድር ለማካሄድ አይደለም፡፡ ይህ ጉዳይ እንዲያልቅ፤ ወራት ምናልባትም ዓመታት ሊፈጅ ይችላል፡፡ አሁን ባለው ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ ሕወሀት በእንደዚህ ዓይነቱ ውይይት ለመሳተፍ እቅድ የለውም፤ ምክንያቱም የሚያቀርባቸው ሀሳቦች እርስበርሳቸው የሚቃረኑ ናቸው፡፡ ማንም ሕጋዊ መንግሥት ከሽብርተኛ ኀይሎች ቅድመ ሁኔታዎች መቀበል አይጠበቅበትምና፡ ኢትዮጵያም በዚህ ጉዳይ ላይ ልትገደድ አትችልም፡፡ ቅድመ ሁኔታዎችንና ደረጃዎችን በግልጽ ማስቀመጥ የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት ኃላፊነት ሲሆን ነገሮችን ወደነበሩበት የማስተካከልና የመልሶ ማቋቋም ጥረቶችን ማድረግ አለበት፡፡

ሚኒስቴር መሥሪያ ቤቱ አሠራራችንን እና አጠቃላይ ቁመናችንን ለማሻሻል የተለያዩ ለውጦችን እያደረገ ነው። ሚኒስቴሩ ለውጦችን ከማቅረባቸው በፊት በሠራተኞቹ ላይ ረጅም እና ጥልቅ ግምገማ አድርጓል። ባለ ሁለት አቅጣጫ ግምገማችን ጠንካራ እና ደካማ ጎኖቻችንን በተሻለ ሁኔታ ለመለካት ግላዊ እናደረጃውን የጠበቀ ፈተናን ያካትታል። በአንጋፋ ሠራተኞችና በአንፃራዊነት አዲስ በሆኑ ሠራተኞቻችን መካከል በንድፈ ሃሳባዊ ዕውቀት እና ልምድ ላይ ክፍ ያለ ልዩነት አለ ፣ ልዩነቱ በአብዛኛው በሥራ ላይ ከመቆየት ጋር የተያያዘ ምክንያት ነው። ከአቅም ግንባታ አንፃር ሚኒስቴሩ ለሠራተኞቻችን የቴክኒክ ዕውቀትና ክህሎትን መሠረት ያደረገ ሥልጠና በመስጠት እነዚህን ክፍተቶች ለማስተካከል ቅድሚያ ሰጥቶ ይሠራል።

2021 ኢትዮጵያ ብዙ ውጣ ውረዶች ያለፈችበት ጠመዝማዛ ጉዳዮች አስቸጋሪ ክስተቶች የተከሰቱበትና የፖለቲካ መጠማዘዞች የነበሩበት ዓመት ነበር፡፡ ይህም ኢትዮጵያ የሚታመኑ ወዳጆቿን ከደግ ጊዜ ብቻ ወዳጆቿ ለመለየት ረድቷታል፡፡

ቀደም ባሉት ጊዜያት የሥራ ላይ ሥልጠናን ለአቅም ግንባታ እንደ ቀዳሚ መሣሪያ እንጠቀም ነበር :: ይህም የጠቅላላ ዕውቀት ባለቤቶች በብዛት እንዲኖር አድርጓል። በዲፕሎማሲያዊ ሥራችን ላይ ልዩ ትኩረት በሚሰጣቸው አካባቢዎች ፣ ጂኦግራፊያዊ ቦታዎች እና ጭብጥ ጉዳዮች ላይ የበለጠ ትኩረት በማድረግ ይህንን ክፍተት ለማሟላት አስበናል። በተጨማሪም በሚኒስቴር መሥሪያ ቤቱ ውስጥ የነበረውን ጊዜ ያለፈበት አሠራር ማለትም እያንዳንዱ ባለሙያ ሠራተኛ ከሶስት አመት አገልግሎት በኋላ አግባብነት ያላቸው ጥናቶች ስለማካሄዱ ወይም የቋንቋዎች ችሎታ ከግምት ውስጥ ሳይገባ አለም አቀፍ ስምሪትየሚረጋገጥበትን ልምድ ለውጠን ፣ በማሻሻል ላይ እንገኛለን። ይህ አሠራር በተወሰነ ርእሰ ጉዳይ ላይ የተካኑ የባለሙያዎች እጥረት እና የጠቅላላ ዕውቀት ባለቤት ሠራተኞች ብዛት እንዲፈጠር አድርጓል።

አሁን ባለው ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ ሕወሀት በእንደዚህ ዓይነቱ ውይይት ለመሳተፍ እቅድ የለውም፤ ምክንያቱም የሚያቀርባቸው ሀሳቦች እርስበርሳቸው የሚቃረኑ ናቸው፡፡

በተጨማሪም፣ ካስፈላጊው ብዛት በላይ የተሞሉት የውጪ ሚሲዮኖቻችን ያስከተሉት የወጪ ሸክም ይህን አሰራር ለመሻር ሌላው ምክንያት ነው። ለምሳሌ በአንድ አካባቢ ውስጥ ያሉ በኢንዱስትሪ የበለጸጉ አገሮች ኤምባሲዎች አራት ወይም አምስት ዲፕሎማቶች ሲኖራቸው፣ በዚያው ክልል ያለው የኢትዮጵያ አቻ እስከ 15 ዲፕሎማቶች ሊኖሩት ይችላል። ሚኒስቴሩ በውጭ ፖሊሲያችን ዓላማ መሰረት፡ የሚሲዮኑን ወይም የኤምባሲውን መጠን ለመመዘን ፤እንደ ፖለቲካዊ ጉዳዮች ሁኔታ፣ እንደ የዲያስፖራው ፍላጎቶች፣ የኢንቨስትመንት እና ከአገሮቹ አጋርነት ጋር ባሉ ጉዳዮች ላይ የበለጠ ትኩረት ለመስጠት ያለመ ነው። ሚኒስቴራችን ተደራሽነቱን ለማስፋት በባህላዊ ዲፕሎማሲ ብቻ ሳይሆን በዚህ የዲጂታል ዘመን መሳሪያዎችን ለመጠቀም አስቧል። ምንም እንኳን ይህ የታቀደው ማሻሻያ በስርአቱ ላይ ድንጋጤዎች ሊፈጥር ቢችልም፣ የዚህ ማሻሻያ የረዥም ጊዜ ፋይዳዎች እጥፍ ድርብ እንደሚሆኑ አምናለሁ።

ዋናዎቹ 3 ጉዳዮቻችንን; አንደኛ የአገር ውስጥ ጉዳዮቻችንን በተገቢው መንገድ አካሂደን ያገራችንን ገጽታ አድምቀን ብቃታችንን አስረግጠን ማሳየት ነው፡፡ ሁለተኛ፣ ሚኒስቴሩ የኢንቨስትመንትና፣ የቱሪዝም ምንጭ እንዲሆኑ፣ በውጭ ሀገራት የሚደረጉ ዘመቻዎችን በመዋጋት ረገድ እገዛ እንዲያደርጉ ፤ከኢትዮጵያውያንና፣ ከትውልደ ኢትዮጵያውያን እንዲሁም ከኢትዮጵያ ወዳጆች ጋር ያለውን አጋርነት ለማጠናከር አቅዷል። በመጨረሻም፣ የኢኮኖሚ እድገታችንን ለማጎልበት ባገር በቀል የኢኮኖሚ ማሻሻያ አጀንዳ ማካሄድ እየጀመርን ነው። አላማችን ቀስ በቀስ እራሳችንን መቻል ቢሆንም፣ አሁንም የኢንቨስትመንት ፤ የእርዳታ አጋርነት እና ፕሮጀክቶችን መጠየቃችን ይቀጥላል።

የፐብሊክ ዲፕሎማሲ እና የህዝብ ግንኙነት ክፍሎችን እያሰፋን እንገኛለን፤ እንዲሁም በዲጂታል ተግባቦት ዘርፍ ከፍተኛ የሰለጠኑ ወጣት ባለሙያዎችን በማሰባሰብ ላይ እንገኛለን። ከሀገር ውስጥ ቋንቋዎች በተጨማሪ ዲያስፖራውን ወደእኛ ለማቀራረብና ለማዋሃድ የቋንቋ መሰረታችንን ወደ ፈረንሳይኛ፣አረብኛ፣ ስፓኒሽ እና እንግሊዘኛ እያሰፋን ነው። ሌላው፣ ከኢትዮጵያ ሚኒስቴር መሥሪያ ቤቶች፣ ከዲያስፖራ ኤጀንሲዎችና ድርጅቶች ጋር ያለንን ትብብርናእንቅስቃሴ ለማሳደግ ዓላማችን ነው።

በዲያስፖራው የሚታየው የመቀራረብና መተሳሰብ ደረጃ የሀገር ውስጥ አንድነታችን ነጸብራቅ ነው። መጪው ሀገር አቀፍ ውይይት በዲያስፖራው ውስጥም የጠበቀ ትስስር ይፈጥራል የሚል ተስፋ አለኝ። በዚህ ረገድ የኢትዮጵያ ኤምባሲዎችና ሚሲዮኖች የዲያስፖራ አባላትን በቀጥታ ለማነጋገር የተለያዩ የኦንላይንሴሚናሮችን፣ ምክክር እና ውይይቶችን በማዘጋጀት ላይ ናቸው። በዲያስፖራ ውስጥ ለመሳተፍ ያለው ከፍተኛ ፍላጎት አበረታች ነው።

2022 የዲያስፖራውን ተሳትፎ የበለጠ እንደሚያመጣ ተስፋችን እና እቅዳችን ነው። እየተካሄደ ያለው ታላቁ ወደ ሀገር ቤት መለስ ዲያስፖራው በራሱ መሬት ላይ ያለውን ተጨባጭ እውነታ እንዲገመግም ሰፊ እድል እንደሚፈጥር ተስፋ እናደርጋለን። ባገራቸው ጉዳይ ላይ ቀጥተኛ ባለድርሻ አካላትእንደመሆናቸው መጠን ትክክለኛ መረጃን በማሰራጨት ረገድ የዳያስፖራው ሚና ወሳኝ ነው። ከዚሁ ጋር ተያይዞ በጦርነቱ ሳቢያ በሆስፒታሎች፣ በትምህርትቤቶችና በመሳሰሉት የህዝብ መገልገያ ተቋማት ላይ ከደረሰው ውድመት የተነሳ መልሶ ግንባታውን ለማገዝ ከዲያስፖራው በኩል የሚበረታታ ጥረት አለ። የቀጣዩአመት ዋና ሥራችን የሀገር ውስጥ ተሀድሶ ጥረታችንን በበለጠ ማጠናከር ነው። ይህም አጋሮቻችንን እና ወዳጆቻችንን በዲፕሎማሲያዊ እና በልማት ዘርፎችለበለጠ ትብብር በማበረታታት ረገድ ትልቅ ተጽእኖ ይኖረዋል ብለን እንጠብቃለን። በተጨማሪም፣ ግጭቱን ብናልፍም፣ ለተሻለ ተስፋ፣ የወደሙ መሠረተልማትን እንደገና መገንባት እንጀምራለን። የሚቀጥለው አመት የመልሶ ግንባታ እና የመልሶ ማቋቋም ሥራን የምናስተካክልበት አመት ይሆናል፡፡

በመጪው አመት በዩንቨርስቲ ካምፓሶች እና አካባቢ በአህጉራችን፣ በቀጠናችን እና በአለም ላይ በተመለከቱ ዋና ዋና አለም አቀፍ ጉዳዮች ላይ በርካታ ወርክሾፖችን፣ የፓናል ውይይቶችን እና ስልጠናዎችን ለማዘጋጀት እቅድ ይዘናል። በቀጠናችን ውስጥ ካሉ ሌሎች አገሮች ጋር ሲነጻጸር, እኛ በዚህ ረገድ በደንብ ዘግይተናል፡፡ ይህ በከፊል ከፋይናንስ አቅርቦት ቁርጠኝነት ማነስ እና በከፍተኛ የትምህርት ተቋማት እና በሌሎች ባለድርሻ አካላት መካከል የተቀናጀ ጥረት ባለመኖሩ ነው፡፡በዚህ ረገድ ብዙ መሥራት የሚጠበቅብን ሲሆን፤ ሚኒስቴራችን አሁን ያለውን የዜጎች የዲፕሎማሲ መነቃቃት በዩኒቨርሲቲዎቻችን ግቢዎች ለማስቀጠል አቅዷል።

2021 has been a tumultuous year for Ethiopia with a number of twists and turns, shenanigans, and political maneuverings; this has helped Ethiopia clearly distinguish its trusted allies from its fair weather friends. This past year has also revealed the interests and motivations of our regional and global partners. We have indisputably witnessed various pressure campaigns in an attempt to bend the will of the Federal Government, the elected representative of the Ethiopian people, to fit western agenda. Similar to these very nations, Ethiopia has its own foreign policy priorities and should not be expected to be at the beck and call of external powers. We are grappling not only with the challenges and aftermath of the conflict in the North, and all the while asserting our sovereignty and autonomy in the Horn and beyond.

A: The elemental question is how we handle our internal disagreements and resolve our fundamental differences to propel the nation toward a peaceful and prosperous path. Though we may not be able to resolve all our differences all at once, it is important to bring about a national consensus on the most fundamental things. First and foremost, we need to place the highest importance on solving our own issues, as narrowing existing gaps and societal cleavages requires incremental work. The upcoming all-inclusive dialogue will help in sorting out our issues and better equip all Ethiopians to chart a path of their own choosing; this grand project, however, does not include groups who have been designated as terrorist groups by Parliament; that is, unless, it reconsiders its decision. In this multipolar global order, Ethiopia must not remain at a crossroads because our differences make us vulnerable to exploitation by various groups that seek to weaponize our differences. Though Ethiopia has enjoyed a long history of statehood, regrettably- we lag 100-years behind in our collective ability to address significant differences amongst ourselves.

There are international norms, and there are certainly rules, but these rules are not in place to serve everybody, rather- they are in place to serve the rule makers. Those with power and means frequently bend these rules to their favor, those without risk being taken advantage of, and even coerced. For a developing country like ours, the international arena requires careful planning, as well as a frequent aligning and realigning of national interests. For this reason, I hesitate to say that we are indeed in a rules-based international system.

First, there needs to be clarity in our understanding of the term “national dialogue”. The tentative national dialogue is meant to establish a shared goal amongst the people, and the political elite; it does not mean or imply bargaining with designated terrorist elements. This endeavor could take months, or perhaps years depending on the process. Considering the Ethiopian parliament’s designation, the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF – Shene) will not participate in the dialogue because this designation disqualifies them from having a stake. No legitimate government can be made to accept preconditions from terrorist elements and Ethiopia certainly will not accept preconditions if a negotiation is to happen. It is the Ethiopian government’s responsibility to set clear conditions and standards so as to move forward with normalization and rehabilitation efforts.

The Ministry is rolling out various changes to improve its capacity and overall stature. Before proposing changes, the Ministry undertook a lengthy and thorough assessment of its personnel. Our two-pronged assessment entails a personal, as well as a standardized test, to best gauge our strengths and weaknesses. There is a distinct disparity in theoretical knowhow and experience between our senior and junior staff, the difference is largely due to seniority. In terms of capacity building, the Ministry prioritizes bridging these gaps by providing technical and skills-based training to our staff. In the past, we used on-the-job training as a primary tool for capacity building which has resulted in an abundance of generalists. We intend on ameliorating this gap by placing greater emphasis on highly specialized areas, geographic locations, and thematic interests in our diplomatic work.

We are also in the process of amending a rather antiquated practice at the Ministry whereby every professional staff is ensured an international deployment after three years of service, i.e. irrespective of factors like experience, relevant studies, and language. This practice has led to scarcity of subject matter experts and an abundance of generalists. In addition, the financial burden of our overstaffed missions is yet another motivation to repeal this practice. For example, where embassies of industrialized nations in a particular region would have four or five diplomats, the Ethiopian counterpart in the same region might have up to 15 diplomats. The Ministry aims to place heavier emphasis on factors like political relevance, diaspora needs, investment and partnership interests so as to rate the size of the mission or embassy in line with our foreign policy objectives.

Our Ministry is intent on widening its reach not only through traditional diplomacy but also by utilizing tools of this digital age. Though there might be initial shocks to the system, I believe the long term benefits of this reform will be many fold.

The to One is to assert our relevance by handling our domestic issues, and also portraying a positive image. Secondly, the ministry plans to strengthen its partnership with Ethiopians in the diaspora as well as friends of Ethiopia, to facilitate paths for investment and tourism. This will significantly add to efforts to combat foreign and foreign backed campaigns against the Ethiopian people.

Considering the Ethiopian parliament’s designation, the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF – Shene) will not participate in the dialogue because this designation disqualifies them from having a stake.

Lastly, we are only beginning to venture deeper into our homegrown economic reform agenda to enhance our economic development. Though our aim is to gradually become self reliant, we still solicit partnerships and projects both in terms of investment and aid.

We are expanding our public diplomacy and public relations departments as well as staffing them with highly trained young professionals in digital communications. In addition to the local languages, we are expanding our linguistic base to French, Arabic, Spanish, and English, to integrate the diaspora. Furthermore, we aim to increase our collaboration and ventures with Ethiopian Ministries, as well as diaspora agencies and organizations.

It is apparent that the level of cohesion observed in the diaspora is a reflection of our unity at home; it is my hope that the upcoming national dialogue will forge greater ties within the diaspora as well. In this regard, Ethiopian embassies and missions are hosting various online seminars, consultations, and discussions to directly address members of the diaspora. We are encouraged by the overwhelming interest for involvement from the diaspora.

It is both our hope and plan that 2022 will bring an increased involvement of the diaspora. We hope that the great homecoming that is taking place provides ample opportunity for the diaspora to assess the reality on the ground for themselves. As direct stakeholders, the diaspora can play a crucial role in disseminating accurate information.

In parallel, there are commendable efforts from the diaspora to help in the daunting task of reconstruction from damages to hospitals, schools, and other public facilities as a result of the war.

Our major task in the coming year is bolstering our domestic reform efforts. We expect this to have a cascading effect in encouraging our partners and friends for increased collaboration, both in the diplomatic and development spheres. Additionally, though we may be through with the conflict, we will need to begin reconstruction and rebuilding infrastructure. The next year will be the year of mending, reconstruction, and rehabilitation.

In the coming year, we are tentatively planning to host a number of workshops, panel discussions, and trainings in and around university campuses on core international Affairs issues relevant to our continent, our region, and the world. Compared to other nations in the region, we significantly lag in this regard; this is partly due to the financial commitment and lack of a coordinated effort between the ministry institutions of higher learning, and other relevant stakeholders. There is more to be done in this regard, and our ministry plans to maintain the current wave of citizen diplomacy in our university campuses.

በአገሮች መካከል ያለውን ዲፕሎማሲያዊ ግንኙነት ስናሰላስል የዲፕሎማሲያዊ ግንኙነቶችን ኮምፓስ መቆጣጠር የሚቻልባቸው መንገዶች ማኅበራዊና ሕዝባዊ ግንኙነቶች መሆናቸውን ብዙ ጊዜ እናስተውላለን። ምንም እንኳን ዲፕሎማሲ የሀገራት መመዘኛ እና መልካም ስም መለኪያ ቢሆንም በዋናነት ህዝቦች ትክክለኛ ሚዛን እና ተቆጣጣሪ ተደርገው ይወሰዳሉ። ዲፕሎማሲ የተለያዩ ፅንሰ- ሀሳቦች ሲኖሩት አንዳንዶቹ ኦፊሴላዊ ሲሆኑ አንዳንዶቹ ደግሞ ህዝባዊ ናቸው ዛሬ የኢትዮጵያ፣ የግብፅ እና የሱዳን የሶስትዮሽ ግንኙነቶችን ለማንሳት እንሞክራለን።

ሦስቱ አገሮች በየደረጃው እያዩዋቸው ካሉት ለውጦች አንፃር በመካከላቸው ያለውን ዲፕሎማሲያዊ ግንኙነት ወደ ኋላ መለስ ብሎ፣ ገለልተኛ በመሆን ጥልቅ የሆነ ዲፕሎማሲያዊ ማሰላሰል ይጠይቃል። በጂኦግራፊያዊ አቀማመጥ ጎረቤት የሆኑት ሶስቱ ሀገራት የተለያዩ ግንኙነቶች እንዲኖራቸው አድርጓል እነዚህም ግንኙነቶች በዲፕሎማሲ ክትትል እና ጥበቃ ስር ይተዳደራሉ። ይህ በመካከላቸው ያለው ጉርብትና በሶስቱ ሀገራት ላይ በአዎንታዊም ሆነ በአሉታዊ መልኩ ተፅዕኖ ሊያሳድር ችሏል።

እነዚህ ሀገራት ሆን ብለውም ይሁን ባለማወቅ የእር በርስ ግንኙነታቸውን ለማጠናከር እና ለማሻሻል ብለው በሚያደርጓቸው ጥረቶች የሚጠብቁትን ውጤት ላያገኙ ይችላሉ! ቁም ነገሩ እነዚህ ውጤቶች ለምን ሆኑ ሳይሆን የዚህ ሁሉ ጥረት ዋና አላማ ጥሩ ውጤት በመጠበቅ እንደሆነ ማወቅ ነው ብየ አምናለሁ። በሰው ልጆች መካከል ያለው ልዩነት ተፈጥሮአዊ ነገር ነው። አለማችን በውስጧ ባሉ ነገሮች መካከል ልዩነቶች አሉ ስለዚህም የተለያዩ ቅርጾች፣ ቀለሞች፣ ሀሳቦች፣ እምነቶች፣ ወዘተ… ይገኙባታል። ልዩነታኝንን ለአለማችን እንደተሰጠ ስጦታ አድርገን ስናየው እና ሁሉም ከስጦታው የድርሻውን የወሰደ መሆኑን ስንገነዘብ ውበት ይሆናል።

እዚህ ላይ ሊነሳ የሚገባው ጥያቄ፡- በኢትዮጵያ፣ በግብፅና በሱዳን መካከል ያለው ልዩነት ወደ እውነተኛ አለመግባባት ተቀይሯል ወይንስ አሁንም ለሦስቱ አገሮች በሚስማማ መልኩ መቆጣጠር የሚቻል ነው? ዋናው ችግር አለመግባባታችን እንጂ ልዩነታችን እንዳልሆነ ይታወቃል። ምናልባት በእነዚህ አገሮች መካከል ያለውን ታሪካዊ የዲፕሎማሲያዊ ግንኙነቶችን ለመተረክ ግዜ ባይኖረንም ሦስቱን ሕዝቦች በሁሉም መስክ ከሚያቀራርቡ ትስስሮች መካከር የተወሰነ ልንወስድ እንችላለን።

እዚህ ላይ ሊነሳ የሚገባው ጥያቄ፡- በኢትዮጵያ፣ በግብፅና በሱዳን መካከል ያለው ልዩነት ወደ እውነተኛ አለመግባባት ተቀይሯል
ወይንስ አሁንም ለሦስቱ አገሮች በሚስማማ መልኩ መቆጣጠር የሚቻል ነው?

እናም የእነዚህን ሀገራት ማህበራዊ ትስስር ስናሰላስል የጋራ ትስስር አጠቃላይ እይታ እንዲሁም በመካከላቸው ያለው የዲፕሎማሲያዊ ወይም ሌላ ግንኙነቶች ተፅእኖ ምክንያቶችን መለየት እንችላለን። በሶስቱ ህዝቦች መካከል ያለው ማህበራዊ፣ ሕዝባዊ፣ ኢኮኖሚያዊ እና ሌሎች ግንኙነቶች ምን እንደሚመስሉ ለታዛቢዎች የተደበቀ አይደለም፣ ምንም እንኳን በብዙ ጉዳዮች ላይ ውጥረት የበዛበት ዲፕሎማሲያዊ ግንኙነት ቢኖርም ፣ይህም በበርካታ የጋራ ማህደሮች መካከል በተፈጠረው አለመግባባት መሆኑን ደርሰንበታል።

ሆኖም የአንዳንድ ጉዳዮች ክምችት ይህን አለመግባባት በአስደንጋጭ መልኩ እንዲያድግ ቢያደርግም እና የተወሰነ ተፅኖ ቢኖረውም በሶስቱ ሀገራት ህዝቦች መካከል ካለው ጠንካራ ግንኙነት እና ህዝባዊ ትስስር አንፃር ደካማ እንደሆነ ምንም ጥርጥር የለውም።

የሶስቱ ሀገራት ዲፕሎማሲ በብዙ ለውጦች እና ፈተናዎች እንዳለፈ ታሪክ ዘግቦታል። በተለያዩ ጊዜያት ከባድ የሆኑ ችግሮች ቢኖሩም ትስስሩ የሚያደርገውን የህልውና ትግሉ ላይ ያለውን ፅናት ልናይ ችለናል።

አገራችን እየገነባችው ያለው የህዳሴ ግድብ ለረጅም ጊዜ ያለመግባባት ምንጭ ነበር ይህም ፋይል በእኛ ጊዜ የአፍሪካ ትእይንት ርዕስ ለመሆን በቅቷል:: የህዳሴው ግድብ ችግር መሰረቱ እና ውስብስብነቱ ከታሪክ ባይደበቅም ነገርግን በዚህ ፅሁፌ ላይ በልማት፣ በብልጽግና የተሞላ አዲስ ጎህ እንዲወለድ እና የተስፋ ሻማ እንድናበራ በማሰብ እንዲሁም ፍትህ፣ ሰላም እና መልካም ጉርብትና በውዷ አህጉራችን እንዲስፉፉ ካለኝ ፍላጎት አለመግባባታችንን የተረሳ ታሪክ ማድረግን መርጫለሁ። እንደ እኔ እይታ በአፍሪካ ቀንድ እየተከሰቱ ካሉት ፈጣን ክስተቶች የዚያ አካባቢ ህዝቦች ህጋዊ ምኞታቸውንና አላማቸውን የሚያሟላ ብሩህ የወደፊት ተስፋ እንዳላቸው እርግጠኛ ነኝ።

በነዚህ ትልቅ ምኞቶች መጠን ተግዳሮቶቹ እየበዙ መጥተዋል። የታላቁ የሀበሻ ሕዝብ ምን ያህል ብዙ ችግሮችን እንዳሳለፈ ታሪክ ቢዘግብም ነገር ግን ባጠቃላይ የኢትዮጵያውያን እና የአፍሪካውያንን ለውጥ እና እድገት ሊፈጥር ችሏል። አንዳንድ ጎረቤት አገሮች ከኢትዮጵያ ጋር ለረጂም ግዜ አብሮ ለመስራት የሚያስችል የሰለጠነ እና መልካም የሆነ ግንኙነት መፍጠር እየቻሉ ኢፍትሐዊ ታሪክ በመጠቀም ፖሊሲያቸውንና እድገታቸውን ኢትዮጵያን ወደኋላ በማስቀረት ላይ የተመሰረት አድርገዋል።

የታላቁ ህዳሴ ግድብ ፕሮጀክትን አንዳንዶች በተለያየ መንገዶች ለማደናቀፍ እና ለማስቆም ብዙ ጥረቶኝ ቢያደርጉም ነገር ግን ይህን የኢትዮጵያ አገራዊ ህዳሴ ጉዞ ለመቀጠል የተነሳ ቆራጥ መሪ እንዳለን የዘመናችን ታሪክ አስፍኖታል። ይህም መሪ የኖቤል የሰላም ሽልማት ባለቤት የሆኑት ክቡር የኢትዮጵያ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትር ዶ/ር አብይ አህመድ ናቸው። ምናልባት አንዳንዶች ይህ ሽልማት የተሰጠውን ሰላም በማስጠበቅ ስም የኢትዮጵያን መብት አሳልፎ እንዲሰጥ ነው ብለው ያምኑ ነበር።

እንዲሁም የኢትዮጵያን ሉዓላዊነት፣ ክብርና ህጋዊ ህዳሴ ለመናድ ነው ብለው ያስቡ ነበር!

አንዳንዶችም የውጭ አካላትን አጀንዳዎች ለማሳካት በኢትዮጵያ የውስጥ ጉዳይ ጣልቃ ለመግባት እና የህዝቡን ፍላጎት ለመቆጣጠር በሽልማቱ ጫና ለማድረግ ያስቡ ነበር።

ኢትዮጵያን ፊት ለፊት የመጋፈጥ ሞራል እና ድፍረት እንደሌላቸው ስለሚያውቁ ተላላኪዎችን እና ከጠባብ ጥቅሞቻቸው ጀርባ የሚሹ የሀገርንና የመብት ጥቅምን ቅንጣት ታክል ግምት የማይሰጡ አካላትን እየተጠቀሙ ይገኛሉ።

ነገር ግን እንደ ክቡር ዶ/ር አብይ አህመድ ፍልስፍና ለዚህ ክብር ሽልማት ተገቢ ባለቤት ለመሆን እውነተኛ ሰላም ያስፈልጋል። ያንን ሰላም፣ ፍትህና ሁለንተናዊ እድገት ለማስመዝገብ ፅናትንና ቁርጠኝነትን መጠቀም አጥብቆ ይጠይቃል! ስለዚህም የህዳሴውን ግድብ አስመልክቶ የኢትዮጵያ አገራዊ ጉዞ የጀመረው ከአቻቸው የተከበሩ የግብፅ ፕሬዝዳንት አብዱልፈታህ አል-ሲሲ ፈገግ ብለው ባቀረቡት ከባድ የሆነ ቃለ መሃላ የመፈፀም ጥያቄ ምላሽ በመስጠት ነው።

ይህ የሆነበት ምክንያት የግብፅና የሱዳን ወንድሞች ከጠየቁት አስገዳጅ ስምምነት በላይ በፈጣሪ ስም ቃል ኪዳን መግባት የበለጠ ከባድ እና አስገዳጅ ነው ተብሎ ይታመናል።

አሁንም አገራችንና አመራራችን ከወንድሞቻችን ጋር ያለጥፋትና ጉዳት እንዲሁም ያለቸልተኝነትና ያለማጋነን በመልካም ዓላማና ጉርብትና መስራትን አደራ እንላለን።

እናም በዚህ ቃለ መሃላ ይዘት ላይ በኢትዮጵያ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትር ሕሊና ውስጥ ከተመሠረተው መተማመን እንዲሁም ለግብፅ ወንድሞች ካላቸው እምነት እና በጎ አስተሳሰብ ያለምንም ማመንታት እና በሙሉ እርግጠኝነት መሐላ መስጠቱ ምንም አልከበዳቸውም። የግብፅ ፕሬዝደንት እና ታዳሚው የተደሰቱበት ቃለ መሃላ የኢትዮጵያ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትር ንግግራቸውን በሰላምታ እና ለሁሉም ተሰብሳቢዎች መልካም ምኞት የተመኙበት እንዲሁም መልካም ጉርብትና እንደሚቀጥሉ እና በግብፅ ላይ ምንም አይነት ጉዳት ለማድረስ ፍላጎት አለመኖሩን ያካተተ ነበር።

ይህ ብቻ አይደለም ክቡር የግብፅ ፕሬዝዳንት ማንንም ሳይጠይቁ ቃለ መሃላ ለመፈጸም ያላቸውን ተነሳሽነታቸውን በመግለጽ እንዲሁም ለመተባበርና የሁለትዮሽ ግንኙነታቸውን ለማጎልበት ቃል ገብተው ለኢትዮጵያ ፕሬዝዳንት እና ለኢትዮጵያ ህዝብ እናንተም ከግብፆችም መልካምን ነገር ያያሉ በፈጣሪ እምላለሁ፣ በፈጣሪ እምላለሁ፣ መቸም አንጎዳችሁም በማለት ንግግራቸውን ጨረሱ::

የዚያን ጊዜ ህዝቦች ለአስርት አመታት ውስብስብ ሆኖ የቆየውን የተራዘመ ቀውስ በተመለከተ ከዚህ ግንዛቤ በኋላ እፎይ ብለው ተነፈሱ::

የሁለቱ መሪዎች ቃለ መሃላ ምንም አይነት ትንተና ሳንተነትን፣ ቀውሱ በጉዳዩ ላይ የጣለው ነገር ከጊዜ በኋላ ለሁላችንም የሚያረጋግጠው ነገር በሀገራችን ላይ በድብቅም ሆነ በአደባባይ የተነደፉት አጀንዳዎች አንዳንዶች በጊዜያዊነት ከሚያሳዩት መልካም ስነ ምግባር እጅግ ያለፈ እንደሆነ እና ሌላ ጥቁር ድብቅ ዓላማዎችን ለማሳካት እንደሚጠቀሙበት ልናይ ችለናል:: አሁን የጠቀስናቸው አካላት የኢትዮጵያን አንድነት፣ መረጋጋትና ብልፅግና እንደግፋለን እያሉ ነገር ግን በተመሳሳይ መልኩ በውስጥ ጉዳዮቿ ውስጥ ጣልቃ ለመግባት እና የማዳከም እንዲሁም ቀጠናውን ለማራበሽ ኢትዮጵያን መከፋፈል ዓላማ በማድረግ ማዕቀብ የሚጥሉ ናቸው::

በሱዳን ያሉ ወንድሞቻችን ለሶስቱ ህዝቦችና ለመንግስቶቻቸው መልካም ነገር ከማያስቡ ሁለት ፊት ካላቸው የተለያዩ አካላት ላይ ያላቸው አቋም ፅኑ እና ግልፅ አልነበረም:: ኢትዮጵያ በወንድም ሀገር ሱዳን ውስጥ በወቅቱ ሀገሪቱን በወረረ ግጭት ሰላም ፈጣሪ ነበረች። አገራችን አንዳንድ የሱዳን ግለሰቦች በያዙት ተቀያያሪ አቋም ላይ ምንም ትኩረት አልሰጠችም ነበር። የአቋሞቻቸው መጋጨት የሚያሳየው እነዚህ አመለካከቶች በስነምግባር ኬላ ሳያልፍ ሆን ተብሎ ወደ ሱዳን የገባ እንደሆነ ምንም ጥርጥር እንደሌለው ያረጋግጣል።

አሁንም በሶስቱ ህዝቦች መካከል በመልካም ጉርብትና መርሆች ላይ በተመሰረተ በጋራ ትብብር፣ በሶስቱ ሀገራት የውስጥ ጉዳይ ጣልቃ ገብነት ሳይኖር እንዲሁም እነዚያን ህዝቦችን ለሚወክሉ ሚድያዎች ተገቢውን ክትትል በማድረግ በጠንካራ መሰረት ላይ እንደገና በማጤን እና በመገምገም ግንኙነታቸውን ለማሻሻል እድሉ አለ።

ይህንንና ሌሎች በቀጠናው ውስጥ ያሉ ቀውሶችን ለመፍታት የተተወው የድርድር ጠረጴዛ ቁልፍ ይሆናል ብለን እናምናለን። በመጠባበቅ ላይ ያለው የህዳሴ ግድብ ድርድር ፈታኝ እየሆነ

መጥቷል ይህም በብዙ ምክንያቶች የተወከለው ነው። በተለይም፡-

• የሚቲወቁም ሆነ የማይታወቁ አካላት በህዝቦች መካከል በፈጠሩት ግጭት
• የአመለካከቶች እና የአቋሞች ለውጥ
• የሌላውን ተደራዳሪ አካል አቋም ግምት ውስጥ ያላስገቡ ጥያቄዎች መጠየቅ
• በተደራዳሪዎች ላይ የውሸት ቅድመ-ግምቶች እና የተሳሳቱ ትርጓሜዎች እና ትንታኔዎች መስጠት
• ዓላማዎች አስቀድመው ሳይወስኑ ድርድሩ ላይ ግትር መሆን
• ሚዲያዎችን እና ዲፕሎማሲዎችን አሉታዊ እና አሳፋሪ በሆነ መንገድ በመጠቀም ድርድሩን ለማበላሸት እና በድርድሩ ላይ ባሉ ወገኖች ላይ ጫና ለመፍጠር መሞከር ናቸው።

በመጨረሻም ኢትዮጵያ በግብፅ እና በሱዳን ወንድሞቿ ላይ ያላትን በጎ አመለካከት ለአለም እያሳየች እና እያስመሰከረች ያለች ሲሆን፤ ለችግሩ መፍትሄ በመፈለግ ረገድ ድሮም ሆነ አሁን እያደረገችው ያለ እንቅስቃሴ በፍትህ አይን ለሚያይ ግልፅ ነዉ። በዚህ ረገድ በሀገሪቱ ውስጥ ያለው የበላይ አመራሮች ከችግር ጊዜ ጀምሮ እስከ ዛሬ ድረስ የሰጡትን መግለጫዎች መመልከት ይችላሉ። ከዚያም በኋላ ተፉሰስ ሀገራት መግለጫዎች ጋር በማነፃፀር ብዙ ነገር መረዳት ይቻላል። አሁንም አገራችንና አመራራችን ከወንድሞቻችን ጋር ያለጥፋትና ጉዳት እንዲሁም ያለቸልተኝነትና ያለማጋነን በመልካም ዓላማና ጉርብትና መስራትን አደራ እንላለን። ቁም ነገሩ ቀውሶቻችንን መሻገሪያ መንገድ አድርገን ወደፊት መራመድ እንጅ አንድኛችን አንድኛችን ላይ አሸናፊ መሆኑ አይደለም።