Ethiopia's Development Disaster: An Overview of Some Root Causes

December 20, 2007

Side Goodo

1. Introduction

At present, many economists agree that economic development implies not merely growth plus change but growth plus progressive changes in the socio-economic structure of the country. It implies changes in technology, the system of production organisation and pattern of income distribution. It implies reduction in poverty, inequality and unemployment. According to the proponents of the “basic needs” approach, there are five basic goals of development (Kuhnen, 1987). These are: (a) economic growth to secure food and other requirements for the population; (b) social justice to reduce inequality; (c) employment as means of earning an income but, as well, because of its ethical and social value; (d) participation as political involvement and social sharing; and (e) independence as freedom from external domination.

While individual societies may have different opinions on the priorities of these goals, in the absence of a general theory of development; one can use the criterion of fulfilment of these goals as a yardstick in development. Development is then understood as a simultaneous progress towards these five goals (Kuhnen, 1987).

While many African countries achieved the fifth basic goal of development half a century ago, after decolonisation of most countries in early 1960s, many countries still today failed to achieve most of the five basic goals of development. These countries are classified as the least developed countries (LDCs) in the world. Among the 49 least developed countries of the world as of 2007, 33 are in Sub Saharan Africa. These are: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo Democratic Republic, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda and Zambia.

The LDCs are characterized by low income, GNI per capita of less than US$750, low level of human resources development, and economic vulnerability. A country must achieve GNI per capita of over US$ 900 to leave the LDC camp. About five of these LDCs in Sub Saharan Africa are characterised by a very low level of economic progress measured by a very low level of Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of less than US$ 200. These are: Ethiopia, Somalia, Seira Leon, Burundi, and Guinea Bissau.

Only two countries in Africa have shown remarkable economic performances during the past 20 years and were able to graduate from the LDC category. These were Botswana which moved up the ladder in 1994 and Cape Verde Island which graduated from LDCs just in 2007.

The poverty and backwardness of Africa stands in stark contrast to the prosperity of the developed world. The continued marginalization of Africa from the globalization process and the social exclusion of the vast majority of its peoples constitute a serious threat to global stability (NEPAD, 2001). The continued influx of Africans seeking better living conditions in Europe has already caused a great alarm among the EU member states but no concrete actions have been taken by this block of wealthy nations to bring sustainable development in the African continent.
The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) adopted in 2000 are not likely to be achieved in many of the African countries because of such dismal economic performances in most of these countries. The 2015 targets for most indicators are already accepted as unachievable. Thus many of African countries are trapped in a vicious circle of underdevelopment, poverty, hunger and famine. The world has the resources and the technology to eradicate poverty in Africa and globally, but it does not have the will. Ethiopia is a typical example of a sustained development failure.

2. Over a Century of Underdevelopment in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has failed to achieve a meaningful economic progress since the country took its current shape in 1880s and 1890s. As we have stated earlier, Ethiopia’s dismal economic performance with GNI per capita of about US$152 in 2005 puts the country at the bottom of the least developed countries of the world. As a result, poverty in Ethiopia is rampant. According to BBC World Service report (Feb 2007), 81% of Ethiopia’s population is living below the poverty line of US $2 a day. Given Ethiopia’s current population of about 78 million, this means that over 63 million Ethiopians today live below poverty line.

Ethiopia has one of the highest unemployment rates worldwide. Over 50% of the urban men between age 15 and 30 are unemployed. With rapid increase in population in rural areas, the size of the cultivable land holdings have shrunk to less than 0.3 hectares in over populated regions such as Sidama in the South creating a massive reservoir of redundant rural labour force.

Ethiopia has a high level of chronic food insecurity and is vulnerable to acute food insecurity, primarily caused by drought, environmental degradation and low access to and availability of food. The population is characterised by one of the world’s highest incidences of malnutrition and one of the lowest primary-education enrolment ratios in the world. Ethiopia is ranked 170 out of 177 countries in the UNDP Human Development Index for 2006 (WFP, 2006).

Over the last 40 years, Ethiopia has not sustained long periods of high economic growth rates. Short lived spurts of growth are typically associated with positive shocks such as rainfall. Despite the considerable growth levels of the 1990s, per capita income today is at a level that had been reached previously in the early 1970s. GDP per capita has increased by a low 0.2 percent per year over the period of four decades, i.e.1961-2003 (World Bank, 2006).

At the beginning of the 21st century, we witness an increase in global poverty and hunger along side unprecedented affluence among nations and individuals implying an ever increasing disparity between nations and with in various regions of a country. The fact that the Microsoft tycoon Bill Gate’s net worth is 5 times as big as Ethiopia’s 2005 annual Gross National Income (GNI) of $11.1 billion US dollars at current prices (World Bank, 2005) is a vivid depiction of not only how the country has failed in terms of economic achievement during the past century but also the alarming disparity between individuals and countries in the developed world and individuals and countries in the LDCs.

The political landscape of the country has been characterised by totalitarian systems; be it the feudal monarchy, the military dictatorship or the current one party dominated political system. Thus the peoples of the country never had any opportunity to participate in the political decision making processes. All available evidences indicate therefore that the country has failed to make any progress towards the five basic goals of development during the past 120 years. Ethiopia is a development disaster. Then what are the root causes for the country’s abysmal development performance?

3. Some Root Causes of Ethiopia’s Development Failure

3.1 A unique form of African colonialism and the creation of artificial state

The rest of the African countries blame colonialism for their underdevelopment. This is because, on top of the direct exploitation of human and material resources, western colonialism contributed to the underdevelopment in Africa by creating artificial states that lack legitimacy and political stability.

Ethiopia has been praised as the only African country that resisted western colonialism. Ethiopia was never colonised by the west except the brief occupation by Italy during the Second World War. However, Ethiopia, as it took shape in 1880s and 1890s, was itself the result of a unique colonial expansion by Abyssinians against the hitherto independent Kushitic, Omotic and Nilotic African nations of the south, east and the west. The rivalry between the two biggest colonial powers, Britain and France, during the scramble for Africa, created a unique opportunity for an Abyssinian king Minelik to conquer and subdue the hitherto independent states in the southern, western and eastern parts of the present day Ethiopia.

The disadvantage of African colonialism in Africa was that while the western colonialism brought advanced technology and education as a means of exploiting the resources of the colonies, the Abyssinian colonialism was characterised by archaic feudal system more inimical to economic growth and development than the indigenous political systems of the occupied nations. On top of this, the rapacious feudal system instituted by the Abyssinian expansion deprived the masses of these nations their basic means of livelihood, the land. Land was divided among the ex-soldiers of king Minelik who now became the new land lords. The peoples of these formerly independent states now became serfs. Consequently, two thirds of what these people produced was robbed by the land lords and the church. The serfdom killed any incentive to expand production and increase productivity. Such archaic feudal system lasted for nearly a century, from 1880s to 1974 when popular revolution overthrew the monarchy. The feudal serfdom resulted in over nine decades of down ward spirals in economic growth and development in the country.

On the other hand, the creation of artificial state out of an African colonial expansion coupled with brutal treatment by the land lords bred resentment and animosity among the ruling class and the oppressed peoples. The ensuing resistance struggle in various parts of the country consumed a great deal of resources that could have been put into alternative productive uses.

3.2 Bad governance and bad policies

Ethiopia has no one to blame for its unprecedented development disaster except for successive archaic feudal and totalitarian political leaderships. As we argued earlier, archaic monarchical rule and rapacious feudalism that lasted for almost a century, kept the country under perpetual darkness while the rest of the world was moving forward with lightening speed. Neither the 1974 revolution nor the 1991 TPLF take over of the political power in the country brought any fundamental changes on political organizations and economic management in the country. The socialist regime wasted 17 years of opportunity for economic revival of the country. Misguided policies of collectivisation and villagization pursued by the socialist government killed any private initiatives for investment and economic growth. Like its predecessors, the current regime managed to cling to political power for over 16 years with out any significant improvement in economic lives of the majority of the peoples in the country. In fact poverty, hunger and famine are now embodied into the very structure of the Ethiopian economy.

A decade and a half is not a short time to harness the resources of the country towards the path of sustainable growth and development. On the contrary, the current leadership is preoccupied with maintaining its political power at the cost of economic nightmare. Recent stories of high economic growth in the country can not be trusted because no tangible improvements have been observed in the living standards of the majority of the population. According to The Economist Magazine (Nov.1, 2007), “An area like Sidama, in the south, looks green, tropical and improbably fertile, but existence there can be precarious. One foreign charity, Action Contre la Faim, recently found that the average cash income for households in one area was six cents a day. Shocked researchers concluded that the depth of poverty there was ‘far beyond what had previously been thought’.

Visiting the nearby villages confirms these cold statistics. In Garbicho Lela, high up in the hills, a nurse estimates that 13% of children are severely malnourished. The one shop in the village betrays the low level of economic activity; on the weekly market day, when over 500 people will walk for hours from the surrounding hill-villages to sell a few things, the shop will do only about 200 birrs ($23) of business. On an average day, it sells two Pepsis. After three years of good rains, aid workers reckon that the risk of severe food shortages has, for the moment, receded. But so marginal are the reserves of food and money here that one bad season could still spell disaster”. Such is a shocking reality about the economic performance of the country.

Time and resources are wasted on repressions of democratic freedom and human rights. Dictatorial and predatory regimes, lack of democratic freedom and human rights, lack of recognition of the rights of various ethnic groups in the country, absence of the rule of law, absence of property rights and institutions that support free enterprise under the current and previous Ethiopian regimes are some of the key causes of continued underdevelopment and abject poverty of the majority of the peoples living in this country.

3.3 Social and cultural factors

The social and cultural practices of the various peoples in Ethiopia; be it Abyssinian, Kushitic, Omotic or Nilotic, are not conducive to economic growth and development. Some social and cultural practices of the peoples in Ethiopia discourage entrepreneurship and thriftiness as unworthy attributes in society. In Abyssinian culture in particular, a trader or business person was despised while unproductive priests and warriors were praised. The forerunners of the indigenous technology such as blacksmiths, tanners, potters and weavers were despised and marginalised by almost all groups of the peoples living in Ethiopia there by killing their derive for creativity and further innovation. The industrial revolution in Britain would not have been possible with out the full recognition and support accorded by the people to the forerunners of the indigenous technology.

The enslavement of the occupied peoples by the Abyssinian expansionists exterminated the already marginalised forerunners of the indigenous technology in many parts of the south, west and east. However, the most destructive and negative cultural practices of Abyssinia is the endorsement of dependency. The typical example of this is the practice of beggary. While enterprising and thriftiness were discouraged as unworthy, begging and dependency were encouraged as acceptable social norms.

The dependency syndrome has far reaching consequences on entrepreneurship, innovation, investment and economic progress. Members of the society have little incentive for creativity and little desire for uplifting their current status to a higher position. Every individual strives just for survival which may be characterised as a low level economic equilibrium. There is no incentive for change and hence no economic progress.

3.4 Low savings and investment

Collective wisdom suggests that frugality and thrift nurture rapid economic and social development. People in most advance countries of the world such as Japan are considered to be uniquely thrifty and high savers while the people in the least developed countries lack such attributes. As we stated earlier, the cultural practices of most Ethiopian peoples discourages thriftiness and saving. While the Japanese saving rate has never fallen below double digits for many years and has reached an alarming 40% for some years after WWII, Ethiopia’s aggregate saving rate was a mere 4% at the beginning of 1990s.

In most advanced countries low household savings are compensated with increased government savings. However, in Ethiopia the government saving is very low not only because of limited economic activities and limited tax base but because of steep rises in military expenditure to finance more than three decades of civil war. The recent war with Eritrea between 1998 and 2000 was estimated to have cost the poorest country in Africa over a million dollar a day. Most of the government expenditure therefore is financed either by borrowing domestically or abroad and grants from abroad.

Low savings implies low investment and low investment implies low economic growth. Economic growth is an important component of economic development. Low household savings implies low private investment while low government savings implies low level of investment in social and economic infrastructure without which economic development is unthinkable.

3.5 Limited resources

Ethiopia is not endowed with abundant natural resources. Therefore, the traditional belief that the country is “the most fertile land on earth” has only come out of unwitting ignorance. However, by African standards, Ethiopia is a potentially wealthy country, with fertile soil and good rainfall over large parts of the south and the west. Coffee is the most important crop to the country’s economy and produced in the southern part of the country. By the late nineteenth century, coffee had become one of Ethiopia's most important cash crops. In addition to this the country possesses several valuable minerals, including gold and platinum.

However, both the availability of these resources and their exploitation is limited. As a result, the country has never become a great trading nation unlike many developing countries. Coffee has remained the single most important source of foreign exchange earnings covering up to 2/3 of the total export revenues.

There is ample evidence that the availability of vast natural resources positively contributes to faster economic growth and development. While some advanced countries such as Japan were not particularly endowed with abundant natural resources, a recent fast economic growth in Botswana in Sub Saharan Africa is directly linked to its abundant diamond reserves. On the contrary, countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo endowed with vast mineral and other natural resources still failed to achieve tangible economic progress and remained one of the least developed countries of the sub Saharan Africa.

Ethiopia is endowed with sizable water resources such as perennial long distance rivers and lakes throughout the country. However, due to lack of technological progress and continued reliance on archaic and primitive method of farming, the majority of the population in the country continue to suffer from hunger and famine alongside such plenty of water resources.

3.6 Population pressure

Before the 1990s economists were unable to find a clear link between population growth and overall economic growth. However, a new research since mid 1990s, indicated that falling fertility opens a “demographic window” of economic opportunities. The falling fertility means that the number of dependent children relative to the working age population becomes fewer thereby allowing the country to release more resources to make additional investments which can spur economic growth and help reduce poverty.

High fertility impedes development in a variety of ways. The macroeconomic impact of high fertility was highlighted by the World Health Organisation (WHO) when it stated “At the societal level, rapid rural population growth in particular puts enormous stress on the physical environment and on food productivity as land-labour ratios in agriculture decline. Desperately poor peasants are then likely to crowd cities, leading to very high rates of urbanization, with additional adverse consequence in congestion and in declining urban capital per person.” (WHO, 2001).

Unlike the other regions of the world, in much of sub-Saharan Africa the demographic transition and the attainment of the “demographic window” is a long way off. The population is still very young and the proportion in working ages relatively low.

Ethiopia’s population dynamics clearly indicates that the demographic transition is a long way to go. The fertility rate is still high. According to the Central Statistical Agency (2006), the 2005 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey found that there has been a decline in fertility from 6.4 births per woman in 1990 to 5.4 births per woman in 2005 indicating only a marginal one child drop in 15 years. There still is significant differential in fertility rates across regions and across wealth levels with rural women and women with lowest wealth quintile having twice as many children as those in urban areas and highest wealth quintile.

As a result the country is still characterised by a rapid population growth. As of 2007 the country’s population growth rate is over 2.27%. Given the estimated current total population of 78 million this implies that the country’s population will continue to grow by nearly 2 million every year. At this rate the current population needs only about 30 years to double.

4. Ethiopia’s Development Prospect

Does the 21st century hold any hope for the country’s economic revival, recovery and development? While the various peoples living in that country hope for the better, the future is still bleak. The country’s prospect for the future economic recovery and development hinges primary on the current political processes.

The various peoples of the country are pressing on their demands for greater freedom, democracy, full recognition of ethnic rights and meaningful political autonomy. As long as the current regime continues to suppress the demands of the majority of the peoples in the country using force, the dream of economic recovery and sustainable development will only remain a dream.

In the absence of a viable political alternative in the country, the current regime is required to make fundamental changes in its political structures and make fundamental concessions with the various ethnic political organisations which it considers as unlawful. In particular, the regime has to stop playing ethnic cards while its policies are primarily centralized and unitary. This undermines the credibility of its policies. Economic development is unthinkable with noncredible government and noncredible policies.

The current regime can show that it is a better alternative to diehard unitary political stances of some opposition political parties by making fundamental changes in its policies. Among others, this would include the full accommodation of all genuine political opposition, full recognition of ethnic rights and full political autonomy for the majority of the poulation, full recognition to property rights and respect for the rule of law. Failing this, the current regime sinks the country into oblivion.

Sidama Coffee or “Sidamo” Coffee? The Implications of the Misnomer

December 7, 2007
Side Goodo

Coffee is the second most widely traded commodity in the world next to petroleum where more than 80 countries cultivate coffee, which is exported as the raw, roasted or soluble product to more than 165 countries worldwide. It is the most important agricultural commodity in the world, and is worth up to $14 billion annually.

Coffee is believed to have been discovered a thousand years ago by a Kaffa goatherd, in the Kaffa region of Ethiopia. At present, coffee is one of the most important cash crops in the Sidama region and other parts of the country. In the year 2005, Sidama and Gedeo regions alone produced over 63,562 tons of coffee (Central Statistical Agency, 2005). This is about 1/3 of the total coffee output for the country during the year.

The Sidama people live in the Southern part of Ethiopia with notable geographical features such as lake Awassa in the North and lake Abaya in the South. The population of the Sidama land is about 5 million at present. The capital city of Sidama, Awassa, is 275 kms south of Addis Ababa. Sidama is the fifth largest nation in Ethiopia after Oromo, Amhara, Ogaden and Tigray.

Sidama is well known for its production of garden coffee. Speciality coffee is grown in many villages. Sidama has ideal soil type and climatic conditions-including altitude, rainfall and temperature for the production of Arabica coffee. Coffee is predominantly produced in villages organized in 39 primary coffee cooperatives in Shabadino, Dalle, Alata Wondo, Darra and Bansa districts and many other sub districts. However, almost every household in rural Sidama outside of the extremely hot lowlands of Awassa, Shabadino and Dalle and the very cold highlands of Hula and Harbagona produces coffee. Thus over half of the total population in Sidama directly or indirectly depend on coffee for livelihoods.

Over 60% coffee produced in Sidama region is washed coffee and ready for export while half of the country’s coffee output of about 200,000 tones is consumed domestically. There are over 89 coffee washing stations in Sidama alone. Thus, about 40% of washed coffee destined to the export market comes directly from the Sidama region.

However, the Sidama coffee is sold in retail outlets of most multinational food chains throughout the world with a wrong brand name of “Sidamo” coffee. The food chain multinationals such as Starbucks are the major retailers of this brand. The name “Sidamo” coffee is a misnomer. It derives from a misnomer attached to the Sidama people and other peoples of the South.

The misnomer originated in 1891 when the army of king Minelik deliberately changed Sidama to “Sidamo” as part of the policy of humiliating the newly occupied territories in the Southern part of the country. “Sidamo’’ is a derogatory terminology which implies the nation’s inferiority under occupation compared to the preoccupation position. The term was deliberately coined to deny the Sidama nation its true ethnic identity and pride.

This was reflected in further measures taken by the archaic feudal monarchy which ruled the country following Minelik’s expansion in the late 19th century. The misnomer “Sidamo”, which was initially used to refer to the Sidama people, was later used to refer to a broader geographic area in the South of the country that included Sidama, Gedeo, Guji and Borena Oromos, Burji, Wolayita and other smaller Kushitic and non Kushitic groups extending from Awassa town in Sidama to Moyale town in the Ethio-Kenyan boarder. This area was named collectively as the “Sidamo” province. This was meant both to erase the ethnic identity of the Sidama people, from which the misnomer “Sidamo” originated, and those of other ethnic groups which were assigned a name that never belonged to them. At the same time, specific ethnic groups under this province such as Wolayita were given other derogatory names. Wolayita was referred to as “Wolamo”- a humiliating derogatory term deliberately meant to undermine the people in question. Prior to this, the Oromo people had been given another derogatory term called “Galla”- a name that had nothing to do with the people in question.

While the use of “Wolamo” and “Galla” significantly declined after the 1974 socialist revolution in the country and is almost abandoned at present, the term “Sidamo” continued to be used in Ethiopia until 1993. The term ceased to officially exist only in 1993 when the current EPRDF regime dissolved the then “Sidamo” administrative region that included a smaller geographical area compared to the former “Sidamo” province, and created another pseudo federal region of 45 ethnic groups called SNNPR.

Although the term “Sidamo” does not officially exist in Ethiopia at present, its legacies had far reaching consequences on the Sidama people. The Sidama coffee continues to be traded with a wrong label “Sidamo” coffee until today. The “Sidamo” misnomer was deliberately assigned to the Sidama coffee when the coffee classification and grading systems were developed in Ethiopia in 1952 and 1955. The National Coffee Board of Ethiopia, established in 1957, endorsed the “Sidamo” misnomer as the “true” name of the Sidama coffee. Thus, for more than half a century, the Sidama coffee has been traded globally under a wrong label, “Sidamo” coffee. In a country where human and democratic rights have never been respected, the continued abuse of the identity of a people and its resources could not be of any concern. This is a typical example of deliberate socio-economic and socio-cultural marginalisation.

The irony is that while “Sidamo” province referred to a wider geographical area that included several other ethnic groups, the “Sidamo” coffee exclusively referred to the coffee from the Sidama region. For instance, it does not include coffee from Gedeo area which is specifically denoted as Yirgacheffe coffee. Accordingly, the three speciality coffees from Ethiopia are labelled as “Sidamo”, Yirgacheffe and Harar. The latter is located in the eastern part of the country.

As we stated earlier, officially, the term “Sidamo” does not exist in Ethiopia and does not refer to any people at present. However, the coffee exporters in Ethiopia continue to label the Sidama coffee as “Sidamo” coffee until today. The importers of the Ethiopian coffee and the multinational retailers might not be aware of the history of the “Sidamo” misnomer and hence cannot be directly responsible for the continued abuse of the identity of the Sidama people. However, the exporters in Ethiopia and the Ethiopian government which licences these exporters are fully aware of the history but are reluctant to change the abusive name. Therefore, they must be held accountable for their actions. The continued use of this misnomer is the reflection of lack of any respect for the Sidama people and their ethnic identity in the country.

The immediate eradication of this abusive misnomer, however, requires the active participation of all stakeholders including importers and multinational retailers. Importers and multinational retailers must be concerned about this problem because it violates the basic principles of fair trade. Coffee is the first labelled commodity for the Fair Trade and remains the backbone of the system. Fair Trade is not only about fair price, increased income and poverty alleviation. The concept goes beyond a simple economic transaction. According to the International Federation for Alternative Trade (IFAT), “Fair trade is a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, that seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers – especially in the South …".

There could not be a better definition of fair trade than IFAT’s definition. Lack of respect to the marginalized Sidama coffee producers reflected in the continued use of the misnomer “Sidamo” coffee must therefore be the concern of all global citizenry, viz., the coffee exporters, the Ethiopian government, coffee importers, and the multinational retailers of the wrongly labelled “Sidamo” coffee. All concerned stakeholders can show their support for Fair Trade system and to the Sidama people by actively participating in the process of changing the wrong and abusive label of “Sidamo” coffee to the legitimate, rightful and dignified label called Sidama coffee. The process has already started in Ethiopia. Once completed, this achieves two grand objectives: improved income and poverty reduction through further integration into the Fair Trade system on the one hand and empowerment of the Sidama coffee producers on the other.

Ethnic Identity in Ethiopia. Why is it Important?

Side Goodo
November 29, 2007

“Human inability to alter the course of wretchedness and misery results in a desire for diversion. But the flaw in diverting our attention via diversion lies in the fact that it keeps us from realizing truth: And yet it is the greatest of our miseries. For it is that above all which prevents us thinking about ourselves and leads us imperceptibly to destruction … diversion passes our time and brings us imperceptibly to our death”. (Pascal, 1995. Trns.)

Based on naturalistic framework taken for granted by scientifically validated common sense, human beings are considered to be a particular sort of evolved animals, homo sapiens. Thus, undeniably, as a particular animal species, human beings have common attributes that distinguish them from other animal species.

However, unlike other animals, human beings have passed through intricate processes of identity development which takes us far beyond the philosophy of human being. Human identity is just that animal identity reflecting the collection of material parts suitable for the support of human existence and continuation of the species. Thus no one with in the home sapiens species can be born with out the common, universal attribute that distinguishes this species from other animal species. Otherwise that particular individual should be classified as a non-human being.

Beyond human identity, we find a distinct personal identity defined on the basis of the functions rather than the underlying nature of that being. This refers to a man as a moral agent or a moral or a rational being. This identity is as distinct as it is an essential attribute of humanity. In the absence of such distinct personal identity the essential attributes of man as a rational being do not exist. Then, the attribute of all animal species including home sapiens can be conveniently compared with the attributes of other animal species where donkeys, cats or dogs belong. However, human individuals posses a morally vital sense of personal identity. Both necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of such morally vital sense of identity is consciousness. A person is not just a moral being but also a moral and a conscious being. Issues such as accountability for ones actions emanate from the very existence of morally conscious being. Thus, it is not the universal attribute of human identity but the attributes of personal identity that are the most important objects of societal concern.

Human evolution bestowed human individuals with verities of identities. On top of the universal human identity and personal identity, we also find racial identity, ethnic identity and political identity. Racial and ethnic identity are critical parts of the overall framework of individual and collective identity. Thus they can not be dubbed as accidents of historical contingencies. Ethnic identity development consists of an individual’s movement towards a highly conscious identification with their own cultural values, behaviours, beliefs and traditions. This is a higher stage of human identity development compared to a rudimentary human identity and a more conscious personal identity. This is because a sense of ethnic identity is developed from shared culture, religion, geography, and language of individuals who are connected by strong loyalty and kinship or genealogy none of which are accidents of historical contingencies.

In advanced western societies with a common race and language, ethnic identity is manifested in mostly unconscious ways through their behaviours, values, beliefs and assumptions. For them ethnicity is usually invisible and unconscious because societal norms have been constructed around their racial, ethnic and cultural frameworks, as well as values and priorities which could be referred to as a culture of a country X. However, in underdeveloped countries such as ours, one can not talk of the “Ethiopian culture” because here societal norms have been constructed around specific ethnic and cultural frameworks as well as values and priorities, unless of course we force the various ethnic groups to submit to a societal norm of one politically dominant ethnic group.

Apart from this, in multiethnic societies an individual naturally integrates ethnicity into his/her self-concept or self-image. This leads to the development of ethnic self-identity. This is a full recognition of ones ethnicity and the subsequent self-identity that flows from the values, and norms of that ethnic group regardless of the opinions and the prejudices of the dominant ethnic group against it. Ethnogenesis is a very complex process. It involves an interaction of contextual and developmental factors. As opposed to racial identity which is defined on the basis of hereditary particles or genes and physical characters and that can disappear from time to time due to geographic and cultural isolation, ethnic identity is a continuous process.

In this context, therefore, ethnic identity is the most important element of human development and can not easily be reduced into an accident of historical contingency.

When the geographic boundaries of an ethnic population and a political state coincide, ethnic identity refers to national identity, i.e. a nation-state. Therefore, in this sense, ethnic identity is the basis of political identity. In this case there will be no conflict between ethnic self-identity and political identity. The problem arises when a political state extends beyond the geographic boundaries of an ethnic population as in the case of the present day Ethiopia.

Under these circumstances conflicts between various ethnic groups for the control of resources with in that geographic boundaries is inevitable. In the absence of clear and agreeable socio-political contracts among these various ethnic groups (which is often the case), the dominant group is bound to oppress and exploit the minorities or the less dominate ones. Anthropologist and historians suggest that such conflicts among ethnic groups should be resolved in one of two ways: first, the legitimacy of modern states must be based on notion of political rights of autonomous individual subjects. According to this view the state should not acknowledge the ethnic, national or racial identity, but instead enforce political and legal equality of all individuals. The second and the most dominant view is that the autonomous individual it self is a cultural construct and hence it is not possible to separate it from ethnic identity. According to this view states must recognise ethnic identity and develop a process through which the particular needs of ethnic groups can be accommodated with in the boundary of the state. If the state fails to address this fundamental problem, it is incumbent upon the ethnic groups to fight for their own separate nation state as we observe in Ethiopia at present. This process can be accentuated by irredentism or grievances with in the state boundary.

Thus the issue of ethnic identity in multiethnic countries like Ethiopia is of paramount importance. First ethnic demands and their legitimacy must be fully recognised. Then the state must clearly indicate which approach it follows to resolve conflicts among the various ethnic groups (most often between the dominant ethnic group and the rest) with in the state. It must be clear whether the state follows the notion of political rights of autonomous individual with no recognition to the ethnic identity or it recognises ethnic identity and agrees to develop a process to accommodate the particular needs of the ethnic group with in the boundary of the state, period.

There is no in-between solution to this fundamental human demand. However, the views of some Ethiopian scholars on this fundamental demand of humanity are inherently flawed. Instead of addressing the issue, the scholars choose to follow what Pascal calls the philosophy of diversion. Instead of addressing a rather straightforward question of ethnic identity, they try to divert the issue by reverting to unnecessary comparisons with universal human attributes that separates us from other animal species which are irrelevant here. They fail to understand and appreciate the value of ethnic self-identity in social development. They try to portray as if ethnic identity contradicts political identity. They try to deny the fact that the foundation of modern nation state is ethnic identity. Our preceding argument clearly indicated that there is no inherent contraction between ethnic identity and political identity. This incoherent attempt of diversion is a reflection of the most disturbing and the most fundamental principle of diversion in Ethiopia, i.e. trying to present Ethiopia as the country of “one people and one language”.

That is the reason why I began my rather short article on ethnic identity with a quote from one of the greatest philosophers, Pascal. We have one and only one choice: use scientific knowledge humanity has accumulated over time to address the problem. Stop diversion. Discover the truth. Avoid an inevitable death to the country.

The Former Leader of Sidama Liberation Movement Passes Away

November 25, 2007

The former leader of the Sidama Liberation Movement (SLM), Mr. Woldeamanuel Dubale Hankarso passed away on November 20, 2007 in a London Hospital. He was the leader of the movement since the late 1970s until recently. He lived in exile in Somalia between the late 1970s and 1991 when he came back to Ethiopia to participate in the formation of the transitional government led by EPRDF.

When EPRDF purged out SLM from the transitional government in 1992 Mr. Hankarso sought asylum in Britain and lived there until recently. However, he returned back to Ethiopia a year ago under unclear arrangement with the current government. He went back to Britain because of ill health and passed away there a week ago. His body was sent to Sidama for burial.

The Sidama Chronicle passes its condolences to his family.

Unity Vs Diversity, Delusion Vs Reality? The Ethiopian Scenario

Side Goodo

November 21, 2007

1. Introduction

For the good part of the twentieth century, the country was under two totalitarian political systems. These were the archaic feudal monarchy and the diehard socialist-cum-military dictatorship of the 1970s and 1980s. The current regime is awashed with rhetoric of democracy, press freedom, political pluralism, ethnic rights which are all illusive. The objective is to appease the west and most importantly to ensure continued inflows of aid.

The current regime neither tolerates genuine political opposition nor promotes genuine ethnic freedom. The ethnic based liberation movements such as OLF, and the Sidama Liberation Movement, which were part of the transitional government led by EPRDF were purged out from the government with in one year of its inception. A weak political opposition was tolerated as a showcase to the west. Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s four or five opposition members of parliament were elected into an EPRDF dominated parliament of over 540 members. Prominent among these handful MPs were individuals such as Dr. Beyene Petros and one or two others. Both the 1995 and 2000 elections in the country were neither free nor fair by any standard.

However, the preparation for the May 2005 elections saw a little relaxation of EPRDF restrictions on the opposition movements. This miscalculation by the party that became overconfident after successfully rigging two successive elections later threatened its very existence.

The front runner opposition parties for the 2005 elections were Coalition for Unity and Democracy (known as Kinijit in Amharic), the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces (UEDF) led by Dr. Beyene Petros and Dr. Merara Gudina, the Oromo Federalist Party and the Sidama Liberation Movement, among others. Although the opposition posed a major threat to the ruling party for the first time in the history of the country, it was unable to change the course of the country’s political history. There are two fundamental causes fore this failure. First, there has never been any level playing field in the country’s political system. Second and equally important is the credibility of the political opposition itself. For a political opposition to enjoy unreserved support of the electorate, it must prove to the people that it is credible in terms of believability, authenticity, genuineness and legitimacy. For most Ethiopians, the current ruling party is not a credible political organization because it seriously lacks authenticity, believability and genuineness among others. The main reason for the credibility crisis of the ruling party is its fundamental belief in delusive unity while at the same time playing the ethnic card of diversity. The majority of the Ethiopian peoples cannot believe the main opposition either because; its diehard political stance of unity is delusive.

2. Unity, Diversity and the Credibility of the Ethiopian Political Opposition

As we stated earlier, the Ethiopian political opposition which took shape few months before the 2005 elections does not enjoy much credibility either. In particular, the major opposition party CUD (Kinijit) is viewed by many Ethiopians with a serious suspicion because of the past political history of the country. The basic political premise of CUD, i.e. unity is not a mere political ploy but is a reflection of deep rooted belief to restore the old political order in the country. Many non Amhara Ethiopians view unity as synonymous with the Amhara rule and as such as a serious threat to their aspiration for greater freedom, democracy and greater political autonomy. Can democracy be achieved only under unity? Is unitary government the best form of government for a country as diverse as Ethiopia? What is behind the concept of unity? Any group of people has full right to establish a political organization of its choosing. I am not questioning the right of the Amhara people to establish a political organization with a goal of unity. But what I am questioning is whether the rest of the Ethiopian peoples view this type of political organization as believable, dependable and trustworthy. According to the facts on the ground, they do not.

Ethiopia is an amalgamation of over 80 nations or ethnic groups which can be classified into peoples of 4 major ethnic origins. These are: (a) Kushitic peoples: Sidama, Oromo, Afar, Somalis, Hadiya, Alaba, Xambaro, Kambata, etc. (b) Semitic peoples: Amhara and Tigray, (c) Omotic and/or Bantu peoples: Wolayita, Gamo, Gofa, Dawro, Kulo Konta, etc. and (d) the Nilotic peoples: Anuak, Nuer, Gumuz, etc. The Kushitic group is the majority group in Ethiopia. According to the 2005 Central Statistical Authority’s population figures, the Kushitic group comprises of 51.3% of the 78 million total population of the country while the Semitic group comprises of 30%. The remaining 18.7% is constituted by the Omotic, Nilotic and other smaller groups.

It is undeniable fact that Ethiopia took its current shape only after the imperial expansion of the 1880s and 1890s by king Minelik. If any Ethiopian historian or politician believes that most peoples in the south, east and west were part of the current Ethiopia before 1880s and 1890s, he/she must be either hallucinating or in perpetual denial of the reality. Many peoples such as Sidama were never part of the Semitic “assimilation/domination” in the northern part of the country before this particular expansion. However, the main problem this article tries to address is not when and how the peoples of the south, the west and the east became part of the current Ethiopia. The main concern of this article is whether the current political system in the country provides any hope for the future peaceful and harmonious coexistence of various peoples of this country or it is bound to disintegrate it for ever.

The Oromo people, which form the majority ethnic group in the country, have started an organised struggle for freedom, democracy and total liberation from Ethiopia four decades ago. The Sidama people have been engaged in an organized liberation struggle since the early 1970s. Currently, an intensified campaign is under way in the Ogaden region by ethnic Somalis who seek greater political autonomy and or independence from Ethiopia. Thus, the facts on the ground clearly indicate that Ethiopia is not a nation state and a unitary form of government is not a feasible alternative for the country.

3. Ethiopia is a Multinational State

Ethiopia is not a nation state. Ethiopia is a multinational state with various nations that have successfully preserved their language, culture and distinct socio-economic setting. The failure by the Amhara rulers to build an empire state led to a failure in nation building. Due to lack of education, industrialization, urbanization and broader economic development, the majority of the peoples of the country continued to live primitive life style in rural areas with little or no interaction and integration with the rest of the peoples in the country and the rest of the world. Over 80% of the country’s population belongs to subsistence peasant households in rural areas of the country. Many areas are still today inaccessible by any means. These peoples have maintained their distinct socio-cultural and socio-economic set up for centuries albeit serious disruptions by the feudal system in the south, east and west. These peoples strive to maintain and promote their distinct culture, language and social settings. To achieve these, their basic demands are freedom, democracy and above all greater political autonomy.

The advocates of unity in Ethiopia presume that these ethnic and national diversities do not exist and Ethiopia is a country of “one people, one nation and one language”. There is a blatant misrepresentation of the reality. Denial of diversity and wishing away ethnic differences has not come out of genuine love for the rest of the peoples but out of utter lack of respect and out right contempt. By implication, wishing away ethnic diversities in Ethiopia means that the 70% of the non Amhara and non Tigray population of the country are considered to be immaterial, negligible, marginal and even nonexistent. Let me provide an example. It was after the 1991 political change in the country. One morning, an Amhara friend of mine came to the office very angry and frustrated. I asked what had happened to my good old co-worker. I was shocked to hear his response. He told me that the Tigrians (the ethnic group of the people who took power in 1991) were promoting tribalism in the country by allowing the Oromo language to be broadcast on the Ethiopian television. I asked him whether he believed that the Oromos were Ethiopians. He replied that he did but continued that all of us should speak one language, Amharic and lamented further that allowing the Oromo language to be broadcast on TV was promoting tribalism. He was implying that speaking the language of his Amhara tribe would not imply tribalism. But the moment other languages were spoken that would reflect tribalism, what ever that meant.

I learned one important lesson from my good old Amhara friend. There is a serious attitude problem particularly among the educated Amharas. They believe that the Amharas are superior to others in the country, the feeling that was echoed in some writings of their intellectuals. That is the biggest mistake of today’s Amhara elites and the biggest mistake of their political opposition.

I later told my good old Amhara friend that if Ethiopia is to stay together, the Oromo language must be made the second official and working language in the country, if Oromos agree to settle for it, let alone showcasing it on TV for 30 odd minutes. I regret for not being able to learn the Oromo language in schools in Ethiopia. I told my friend that in Canada, the Quebec region speaks French and the rest of the country speaks English. They have two official languages. Both the French speakers and English speakers respect each other as human beings and live in peace and harmony. They developed their country to one of the 7 most industrialised countries in the world. Here are we busy undermining each other and at the bottom of every single country in the world. At the bottom of GDP per capita, at the bottom of human resources development index, at the bottom of trade and industry development index, and most crucially at the bottom of food self sufficiency.

Against this backdrop we hear a constant preaching for unity. Unity for what? Unity for poverty, unity for hunger, unity for underdevelopment. The premise of unity by the aforementioned political opposition is based on the denial of the facts on the ground; the fact that Ethiopia is a multinational state and not a nation state.

The recent crisis in the main opposition party CUD is a reflection of fundamental problem, i.e. wrong political premise of the organization than a mere power struggle.

4. The Current Crisis in the Opposition

The political goal of CUD is de-ethnicisation of the current Ethiopian politic in the sense of undermining the rights and the powers of national groups such as the Oromos, Sidamas and so on. As we have reiterated earlier, the party advocates for unity that does not recognise the diversity of the country’s populations. Their political agenda is based on myth of one nation, one language, and one country rather than the reality of many nations and many languages in one country. The recent rift between some diehard leadership of CUD and two or three a little moderate non Amhara leadership of the organization clearly indicates that there is a conflict between the goals and the structure of the organization.

If the members of the various political organisations that formed CUD were genuine advocates of freedom and democracy and the rule of law in the country, why did they purge out the renowned Kushitic intellectuals and veteran opposition leaders such as Dr. Beyene Petros and Dr. Merara Gudina from their coalition and form an almost exclusively Semitic-cum-Amhara coalition (Kinijit)? Again I am not questioning the right of the people to form any party. However, the political parties should clearly understand the political boundaries they are setting themselves when they decide to limit the participation of other peoples in their organisations.

Worse still, the top leadership of the party has recently indicated that it would not tolerate any remaining non Amhara voice in its leadership. The current crisis of CUD not only made it a mockery of the ruling EPRDF but also stripped it of any credibility what so ever.

Another serious credibility crisis of CUD is its attempt to forge unholy alliance with certain political organisations that stand in stark contradiction to its principles of unity. This refers to the alliance with OLF, SLF, and other more pro-independence political organisations after the 2005 elections. Are these organisations more compatible with the objectives of unity than United Ethiopian Democratic Forces? Can we believe that this alliance is genuine?

The fundamental solution to the Ethiopian political crisis can not be found by political organisation that play hide and seek games. Call a spade a spade. Stop ostentatious and excessive preoccupation with delusive unity. Work for a realistic and long-lasting political solution if the country is to stay united.
.
5. The Best Solution for the Ethiopian Political Crisis is Strong Federalism

Advocating unitary and centralist political system for a country like Ethiopia where the majority of the population is already seeking greater autonomy and/or total independence from the country, is totally unrealistic. Nor is the current weak and pseudo-federal arrangement of EPRDF a viable solution for the crisis facing the country.

The only sustainable solution for the Ethiopian political crisis is a strong federal system where various ethnic groups enjoy full political autonomy to fully decide on their internal affairs. In this , the role of the central government should be limited to international relations, defense and implementation of certain supranational projects. One may ask how it can be possible to create viable ethnic based federal entities in Ethiopia with over 80 ethnic groups. This is a legitimate question. It is neither feasible nor viable to create over 80 ethnic based federal regions in Ethiopia. The federal arrangement should be based on a combination of various objective criteria such as ethnic background, population size, economic potential, geographical proximity and socioeconomic similarities between the peoples in question.

It is a mockery to organize 45 different nations in the south under one pseudo-federal region called SNNPR. The 45 different ethnic groups belong to four major ethnic origins mentioned earlier. The fifth largest ethnic group in Ethiopia, Sidama, is forcefully held in the ghetto of the SNNPR. Sidama qualifies for its own federal state by any standard, be it population size, economic potential, socio-cultural and socio-economic unity of the people, if the Sidama people agree to settle for it. The SNNPR can be appropriately restructured in to 8-10 federal states. The rest of the country can be reorganized accordingly into similar federal systems which will yield no more than 20 strong federal states in the country in total.

To ensure real and sustainable as opposed to delusive unity in Ethiopia, the only alternative is to grant greater political autonomy to the majority of the population by creating strong federal system of government. Even more advanced countries in Western Europe such as Germany, Switzerland, and Austria as well as the emerging market economies in Latin America such as Brazil and Argentina exercise strong federal system, where sub-national states have more power than the national government. And yet they have not disintegrated.

Thus, a credible political opposition in Ethiopia is not the one that wishes away ethnic and cultural diversities and advocates for unrealistic unity in the country nor is it a political organization that uses ethnic cards to score local and global political goals with out genuine recognition of democratic and ethnic rights of the peoples concerned.

6. The Possible Way Ahead for the Opposition

Political opposition that can pose a serious and credible challenge to the current EPRDRF rule in the country must address the following fundamental issuers:

First, work for genuine and strong federal arrangement in the country. Various Ethiopian peoples have already been demanding a greater political autonomy or independence for decades. If any political organisation is concerned with the rights of the majority of the Ethiopian peoples which it strives to rule or lead, it must be able to address their concerns. If any political party tries to dictate what is better for the majority of the population it is bound to fail.

Second, accept openly and honestly that Ethiopia is a multination state. It is not a nation state. The right of various ethnic groups to promote their language and culture must be accepted unequivocally.

Third, a country wide political party should include key leadership members of major ethnic groups: Oromo, Amhara, Tigray, Ogadenis, Sidama, Hadiya, Wolayita, Afar Gumuz and so on. This is the case in many politically stable and democratic countries of the world. One or two leadership members for a political party dominated by one ethnic group will not make it different from an ethnic liberation organisation. Otherwise, such political parties will end up as a minority ethnic and regional parties which will never pose a serious and credible threat to EPRDF. In the meantime regions such as Oganden may split up from the country paving the way for further disintegration of the country.

Finally, appreciate EPRDF’s strengths. EPRDF is a much clever political party compared to CUD and UEDF. EPRDF at least pays leap services to ethnic rights and ethnic diversities in the country. It does not openly advocate the delusive concept of one nation, one language and one country, although it believes in it. A political organisation that strives to take the majority of the Ethiopian peoples an inch backward from what they have achieved under EPRDF will never be able to enjoy popular support and will never be able to rule the country peacefully. Remember that EPRDF was able to fabricate its own surrogate representatives of the entire ethnic groups in the country. These surrogates honestly believe that the demands of their peoples have fully been answered by EPRDF. Therefore, they are bound to fully back the party in its future elections. This is not a myth. It is a reality. Thus, given the current crisis of credibility by the major political opposition and the utter weaknesses of other opposition parties, EPRDF would easily outmanoeuvre the opposition and will win so many elections to come. I do not believe that HR2003 alone would bring a miracle! As it stands at present, there is no credible political alternative to a noncredible ruling party in Ethiopia.

Open letter to Owners of “Sidamo” Cafe

October 18, 2007

Dear the owners of the "Sidamo" Cafe
Washington, USA

Thank you for your great work in promoting the market for Sidama Speciality Coffee which has also been known by "Sidamo" coffee.

The term "Sidamo" province was used to refer to a region in South Ethiopia which included Sidama, Wolayita, Gedeo, Burji, Guji and Borena Oromos. That region was reduced to "Sidamo" administrative region by the socialist government by removing Wolayita from it in early 1980s. In 1993 EPRDF dissolved the "Sidamo" administrative region and created SNNPR. There were no people who were called Sidamo then or now.

Since 1993 the term "Sidamo" ceased to exist as a legal term as did "Wolamo" and "Galla" long time ago. But knowingly or unknowingly people continued to use this term both in Ethiopia and globally up to now. Thus, the Sidama people at home and in Diaspora have begun a massive campaign to correct the continued use of the derogatory misnomer "Sidamo" and replace it with the rightful name Sidama world wide. Please visit http://sidamachronicle.blogspot.com/ or http://www.sidamaconcern.com/ for your information about the history of the Sidama people and how the misnomer "Sidamo" originated.

The article was written to the Oxfam offices world wide. We thank you in advance for your understanding.

Sidama not "Sidamo" Coffee campaign team.

Open Letter to Oxfam

Oxfam America,
All Oxfam Offices World Wide

October 16, 2007

RE: The Use of the Misnomer “Sidamo”

This is to bring to your attention that the use of the derogatory term “Sidamo” continues both in Ethiopia and abroad after 15 years of the dissolution of the former “Sidamo” administrative region of the socialist government. Up to now the Sidama people have been opposing the use of this degrading and insulting term “Sidamo” on individual basis. However, the time has now come to take a collective action as a nation and inform the international community that there are no people called “Sidamo” at present.

A campaign has started by voluntary and free Sidama intellectuals and Sidama community members to inform the international community that THERE ARE NO PEOPLE CALLED “SIDAMO” AND THE USE OF “SIDAMO” MISNOMER MUST BE STOPPED IMMEDIATELY. We have prepared a brief document pertaining to the history of the Sidama people and the origin of the misnomer “Sidamo” to enable you to make informed decisions about the continued use of this derogatory term. These are presented below:

1. An overview of the history of Sidama people

The Sidama people live in the southern part of the present day Ethiopia, in the Horn of Africa. They belong to the people of Kushitic origin that occupy the vast area of north eastern and eastern Africa extending from the Sudan throughout the Horn of Africa to Tanzania. The most notable peoples of the Kushitic origin to which the Sidama people belong include, the Saho in Eritrea, Oromo, Hadiya, Afar and Somalis in Ethiopia; the Somalis especially the Degodai tribe both in Somalia and Kenya; the Randle and Sakuye in Kenya and many others in Eastern and central Africa. The Sidama along with Agew and Beja were the first settlers in the northern highlands of the present day Ethiopia before the arrival of Abyssineans. That was why the present day Ethiopia was called the land of Kush. The Ethiopian historians such as Taddese Tamirat themselves accept this fact.

At present the majority of the Sidama people live in the Southern part of Ethiopia with notable geographical features like lake Awassa in the North and lake Abaya in the South. The population of the Sidama land is about 5 million at present. However, during the course of great popular migration from North and East to the South of Africa, some Sidamas were left behind and were later scattered into different parts of the country and even beyond. One example of such groups of people related to Sidama includes those who live around river Dawa in South Eastern Ethiopia and North Eastern Kenya. The Dawa river was the turning point in the history of the migration of the Sidama people from North to the South. These people now speak Somali language and identify themselves as Digodai, the clans of which include several clans in Sidama. The most notable of these clans is Fardano whose name is maintained both in Sidama and Somali Digodai tribe with out slightest modification. Other people that have even greater affiliation to the Sidama people and its culture and language and that were only separated from the present day Sidama land most recently include Alaba, Tambaro, Qewena and Marako. These groups of the Sidama people live in the western vicinity of the present day Sidama land. This latter group of Sidama people are called western Sidamas. Some writers of the feudal era were misled by some non-Sidama writers into believing that there were two different groups of peoples called “Sidamo” and Sidama. That is absolutely incorrect. There are no two peoples called Sidama and “Sidamo”. There are only one people called Sidama.

2. The Origin of the Misnomer “Sidamo”

When Baalichcha Worawo, the last king of Sidama, made the Wuchale type treaty with Bashah Aboye, the general of Minelik and the leader of the invading Abyssinian army that first set its foot on the Sidama land in 1891, the latter asked the King of Sidama what the name of this people was called. King Baalichcha Worawo told him that his people were called the Sidama people. However, Beshah never used the name Sidama to refer to this people. This was because it was part of the policy of occupation and subjugation to humiliate the occupied territories by degrading their identity either by selling the peoples as slaves or using other humiliating mechanisms such as calling them with inferior names. Accordingly, Beshah and his soldiers refused to call the people in their real name and started to call them “Sidamo” which implied their inferior status now under occupation. However, because the treaty between Beshah and King Baalichcha failed to work, Beshah’s army was defeated and Beshah retreated back to Shewa. The Sidama land was free once again although it was for a brief period.

When Beshah arrived back in Addis Ababa, he reported to emperor Minelik that he encountered some people called “Sidamo” who repulsed his army. Thus, the term “Sidamo’ was first coined by Beshah Aboye and his soldiers in 1891. That was how the term emerged. There have never been any people called “Sidamo” and there never are at present!! Therefore, the term was a deliberate fabrication by the invading soldiers of King Minelik as part of the campaign to humiliate, undermine and subjugate the newly conquered territories in the South of the country.

Minelik’s army had to change the direction of their attack on Sidama from the north western tip of Sidama near lake Awassa where Beshah was defeated by Baalichcha Worawo to the more remote eastern highland of Hula adjacent to Bale in the present day Oromia region. This time another general of Minelik called Leulseged launched a massive military attack which was superior in armament and ammunition compared to the ordinary armaments the Sidama people then had to reoccupy the Sidama land. He successfully reoccupied the Sidama land and established his first administrative post in Hula which was later called Hagereselam town in the mid 1890s.

Later in 1890s Leulseged forced Baalichcha Warawo to join him in his campaign to conquer the Konso land, south of Sidama. King Baalichcha had no power to refuse to accompany Leulseged because he was now under occupation. King Baalichcha Worawo was taken to the Konso land with the pretext of assisting the conquest and was assassinated there by Leulseged. His mule called Laango on which Baalichcha travelled to Konso came back home travelling an amazing distance of over 200 kms by its own. To date the Sidama people lament about Baalichcha’s assassination by saying that: “Warawo Baalichcha, diinu galafati ma manchi shaalicha. Gaangichosi Laango, Baalichchi gorena bae dagu gaango”, roughly translated as “the enemy brutally murdered the beloved King of Sidama. But his mule escaped and came home alone!!”.

After the Conquest of Sidama, Gedeo, the Guji and Borana Oromos and other smaller Kushitic nations south of Sidama, the entire area of Sidama and south of Sidama including Wolayita and starting from Tikur wuha in Awassa town up to Moyale on the Ethiopian-Kenyan border was named the “Sidamo” province by the successive Amhara rulers until the early 1980s when the military Junta reduced the size of the “Sidamo” province by separating Wolayita and Borana from it. This province was dissolved when the new government formed SNNPR in 1993.

Therefore, the use of the term “Sidamo” ended in 1993 with the dissolution of the “Sidamo” administrative region the same year. At present there are neither regions nor peoples who are called “Sidamo”. But the use of this term has continued in Ethiopia as well as internationally. It is not possible to correct this misnomer on an individual basis by addressing individuals or organizations who use the term globally.

The Wolayita people were able to change the derogatory term “Wolamo” used against them long time ago. The Oromos also managed to ban the use of another derogatory term “Galla” long time ago.

The former “Sidama” province which referred to a collection of Sidama, Wolayita, Gedeo, Burji, Guji and Borena Oromos was dissolved by the derg in early 1980s. None of these people referred to themselves as “Sidamo” any way. “Sidamo” was simply an administrative name used by the rulers and did not actually reflect the true name of any of the peoples in the province. The Sidama people never called themselves “Sidamo”, the Wolatyita people never called themselves “Sidamo”. neither did Gedeo, Burji, Guji or Borena Oromos.

3. The Sidama Coffee Farmers’ Cooperative Union trades “Sidamo” Coffee?

At present this derogatory term “Sidamo” is being used to represent the Sidama people. The evidence for this is the use of Ethiopian “Sidamo” coffee to refer to the Ethiopian Sidama coffee. This is not acceptable. The coffee farmers are Sidama and the coffee is Sidama coffee. The Gedeo coffee is trade marked as Yirgacheffe separately. It is time that the “Sidamo” coffee trade mark be changed to the Ethiopian Sidama coffee. The continued use of “Sidamo” to refer to the Sidama coffee is against the rule of the fair international trade in commodities and clear violation of the right of the Sidama farmers to sell their products in the name they assign to the product. One can not trade the Russian Gold as the USSR Gold today because there is no more USSR today.

How and why does the Sidama Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union trade in “Sidamo” coffee? This is completely against the principle of fair trade.

4. Conclusion and call for immediate halt in the use of “Sidamo” misnomer

There are no people in Ethiopia called “Sidamo”. The misnomer was invented in 1891 by the invading Minelik’s generals and soldiers as part of a psychological war to degrade and dehumanise the newly occupied land of Sidama and other peoples living around the Sidama land. The same dehumanising misnomer was used against the Wolayita people who were called “Wolamo”. Oromos were called with another derogatory name called “Galla” which in fact preceded “Sidamo” and “Wolamo” misnomers.

5. Request to Oxfam America and all Oxfam Offices worldwide

Oxfam is a voice of voiceless. Its worldwide campaign to make trade fair was a great achievement to the Sidama poor.

We, the Sidama people, therefore request Oxfam’s good offices worldwide to assist the Sidama people once again to be able to trade their high quality coffee in the name of Ethiopian Sidama coffee instead of a misnomer Ethiopian “Sidamo” coffee.

THERE ARE NO PEOPLE CALLED “SIDAMO”: STOP THE USE OF “SIDAMO” MISNOMER

Side Goodo
October 4, 2007

1. Introduction

Time and again the Sidama people have rejected the use of the derogatory term “Sidamo”. The term was a deliberate fabrication by the invading Abyssinian soldiers of King Minelik as part of the campaign to humiliate, undermine and subjugate the newly conquered territories in the South of the country.

This article is motivated by the outrageous statements made by Eremias Woldemikael during his email conversations with Kambata Xola of Sidama National Liberation organization (SNLO) regarding the Abyssinian occupation, subjugation and exploitation of the Sidama land. Eremias writes:

“When I was referring to Sidama and Oromo relationship, I was using the term ‘Sidama’ in a historical sense. Historians use the term ‘Sidama’ to refer to peoples that lived South of and including some part of Shewa. The term "Sidamo" is used to one of the ethnic groups of those peoples. As you may know the region was conquered by the Oromo during their expansion in the 16th c. For further information on the distinction between Sidama and Sidamo, see J.S. Trirmingham's Islam in Ethiopia pp. 179-185 and Mordechai Abir's Ethiopia: The Era of the Princes pp.73. By making this distinction, I hope you do not feel like I am trying to lecture you about your culture or ethnicity. I am simply trying to explain the context of my discussion”.

I am shocked to read the above statements in the 21st century. I agree with Eremias, on one point, however. Abyssinians do not know anything and do not want to now anything about non-Abyssinian peoples such as Sidama. They must be taught not only about democracy, respect to human dignity and the rule of law but also the fact that there are other proud nations in Ethiopia who have their own history, who know their history very well and who can articulate these at least as much as the Abyssinians do regarding their peoples. Who is Eremias to tell us who we are and who wrote what rubbish about us? We, the Sidama people very well know where we originated, when and where we first settled in Ethiopia and when and how we came to our present land. Quoting rubbish written on Sidama by foreign transcribers of Abyssinian rulers and telling us that the Oromos conquered us in the 16th century, which they did not, is as outrageous as it is a blatant distortion of our history. Our brief history is presented in the next section in case it may wake Abyssinians like Eremias up in the future. The origin of the misnomer “Sidamo” is elaborated in section 3 of the article. Section 4 presents other evidences of deliberate name changes by Abyssinian rulers in Sidama. Finally, section 5 concludes the article.

2 An overview of the history of Sidama people

The Sidama people live in the southern part of the present day Ethiopia, in the Horn of Africa. They belong to the people of Kushitic origin that occupy the vast area of north eastern and eastern Africa extending from the Sudan throughout the Horn of Africa to Tanzania. The most notable peoples of the Kushitic origin to which the Sidama people belong include, the Saho in Eritrea, Oromo, Hadiya, Afar and Somalis in Ethiopia; the Somalis especially the Degodai tribe both in Somalia and Kenya; the Randle and Sakuye in Kenya and many others in Eastern and central Africa. The Sidama along with Agew and Beja were the first settlers in the northern highlands of the present day Ethiopia before the arrival of Yemeni habeshas (Abyssineans). That was why the present day Ethiopia was called the land of Kush. The Abyssinian historians such as Taddese Tamirat themselves accept this fact.

At present the majority of the Sidama people live in the Southern part of Ethiopia with notable geographical features like lake Awassa in the North and lake Abaya in the South. The population of the Sidama land is about 5 million at present. However, during the course of great popular migration from North and East to the South of Africa, some Sidamas were left behind and were later scattered into different parts of the country and even beyond. One example of such groups of people related to Sidama includes those who live around river Dawa in South Eastern Ethiopia and North Eastern Kenya. The Dawa river was the turning point in the history of the migration of the Sidama people from North to the South. These people now speak Somali language and identify themselves as Digodai, the clans of which include several clans in Sidama. The most notable of these clans is Fardano whose name is maintained both in Sidama and Somali Digodai tribe with out slightest modification. Other people that have even greater affiliation to the Sidama people and its culture and language and that were only separated from the present day Sidama land most recently include Alaba, Tambaro, Qewena and Marako. These groups of the Sidama people live in the western vicinity of the present day Sidama land. This latter group of Sidama people are called western Sidamas. The transcribers of the Abyssinian rulers whom Eremias quotes as his authentic sources on Sidama were misled by the post Minelik Abyssinians writers into believing that there were two different groups of peoples called “Sidamo” and Sidama. That is not only absolutely incorrect but also absolutely outrageous!! I will show why in the next section.

3. The Origin of the Misnomer “Sidamo”

When Baalichcha Worawo, the last king of Sidama, made the Wuchale type treaty with Bashah Aboye, the general of Minelik and the leader of the invading Abyssinian army that first set its foot on the Sidama land in 1891, the latter asked the King of Sidama what the name of this people was called. King Baalichcha Worawo told him that his people were called the Sidama people. However, Beshah never used the name Sidama to refer to this people. This was because it was part of the policy of occupation and subjugation to humiliate the occupied territories by degrading their identity either by selling the peoples as slaves or using other humiliating mechanisms such as calling them with inferior names. Accordingly, Beshah and his soldiers refused to call the people in their real name and started to call them “Sidamo” which implied their inferior status now under occupation. However, because the treaty between Beshah and King Baalichcha failed to work, Beshah’s army was defeated and Beshah retreated back to Shewa. The Sidama land was free once again although it was for a brief period.

When Beshah arrived back in Addis Ababa, he reported to emperor Minelik that he encountered some people called “Sidamo” who repulsed his army. Thus the term “Sidamo’ was first coined by Beshah Aboye and his soldiers in 1891. That was how the term emerged. There have never been any people called “Sidamo” and there never are at present!!

Abyssinians had to change the direction of their attack on Sidama from the north western tip of Sidama near lake Awassa where Beshah was defeated by Baalichcha Worawo to the more remote eastern highland of Hula adjacent to Bale in the present day Oromia region. This time another general of Minelik called Leulseged (probably a Tigre due to his name) launched a massive military attack which was superior in armament and ammunition compared to the ordinary armaments the Sidama people then had to reoccupy the Sidama land. He successfully reoccupied the Sidama land and established his first administrative post in Hula which they later called Hagereselam town in the mid 1890s.

Later in 1890s Leulseged forced Baalichcha Warawo to join him in his campaign to conquer the Konso land, south of Sidama. King Baalichcha had no power to refuse to accompany Leulseged because he was now under occupation. King Baalichcha Worawo was taken to the Konso land wth the pretext of assisting the conquest and was assassinated there by Leulseged. His mule called Laango on which Baalichcha travelled to Konso came back home travelling an amazing distance of over 200 kms by its own. To date the Sidama people lament about Baalichcha’s assassination by saying that: “Warawo Baalichcha, diinu galafati ma manchi shaalicha. Gaangichosi Laango, Baalichchi gorena bae dagu gaango”, roughly translated as “ the enemy brutally murdered the beloved King of Sidama. But his mule escaped and came home alone!!”.

After the Conquest of Sidama, Gedeo, the Guji and Borana Oromos and other smaller Kushitic nations south of Sidama, the entire area of Sidama and south of Sidama including Wolayita and starting from Tikur wuha in Awassa town up to Moyale on the Ethiopian-Kenyan border was named the “Sidamo” province by the successive Amhara rulers until the early 1980s when the military Junta reduced the size of the “Sidamo” province by separating Wolayita and Borana from it. This province was dissolved when TPLF fabricated another pseudoregion called the South Ethiopia Nations and Nationalities and People’s Region in 1993.

The Wolayita people who bordered western Sidama land also resisted the Abyssinian occupation very strongly. After they were defeated, their King Xoona was captured by Minelik’s army and was taken to Addis Ababa and was killed there. Due to their fierce resistances, the Wolayita people were given the name of baria (slaves) and harshly mistreated by the Abyssinians. They were sold as slaves in the country. As a result of their resistance their name was deliberately changed from Wolayita to “Wolamo”. This justifies our previous argument that the name change from Sidama to “Sidamo” and its application as a name of a province that includes, Sidama, Gedeo, Burji, Wolayita, the Guji and Borena Oromos was a deliberate policy of humiliation. This was aimed at degrading the occupied nations and subject them to a psychological torture to tame them for permanent slavery. Until recently, the Wolayita people were called the “Wolamo” which is an out right derogatory and insulting misnomer. While “Wolamo” is less frequently used at present, we the Sidama people are being insulted by Abyssinians like Eremias Woldemikeal being called “Sidamo” in the 21st century. This is an abuse of the right of the Sidama people to be called by their right identity. If people like Eremias will not unconditionally stop from insulting us again by calling us “Sidamo”, we will regard this as a deliberate abuse of our right as a nation and refer the case to the relevant international human rights organizations.

Another outrageous statement by Eremias Woldemikael is the following:“Now, I understand you are concerned only about the Sidamo people who still very specifically use that term for their ethnicity. I have read some about them but I am open to any new information you can contribute to my knowledge of the people and their issues.”

Which people use the term “Sidamo” to refer to their ethnicity? We the Sidama people in Sidama land with the capital city of Awassa never called ourselves “Sidamo” in our entire history. The other Sidama people in Alaba, Qewena, Xambaro or Marakko never call themselves “Sidamo”. The Woalyita, the Gedeo, Burji, the Guji and Borena Oromos to which the name “Sidamo” province referred to never accepted that name and none of them used the term “Sidamo” before or now. So which ethnic group uses the term “Sidamo” at present? Where did Eremias read about this non-existent ethnic group? If Eremias is able to distort the truth at present while the Sidama intellectuals are providing the correct information about Sidama, one can imagine how his uneducated ancestors were able to distort our names and history in 1890s and thereafter. It is amazing how Abyssinians are unwilling to learn from their past mistakes and unwilling to accept the correct account of history other than the ones fabricated by their rulers and written by some foreign opportunistic transcribers who served as chroniclers of the Abyssinians kings.

4. Further Evidences of Deliberate Name Changes in Sidama

The use of the derogatory terms and name changes by invading Abyssinian forces was not limited to the fabrication of the derogatory misnomer “Sidamo” for the Sidama people, “Wolamo” for the Wolayita people and so on.

The settling Abyssinian rulers exercised a policy of deliberate name change on the Sidama people after their attempt to forcefully convert the Sidama people into orthodox Christianity in 1910s and 20s failed. The Sidama people rejected deliberate conversion to orthodox Christianity by lamenting this statement: “Xoomi yihero xoomi. Xoomiro xoomo gowwu doomi. Miniki giddo doogo nooni?” roughly translated as “If they ask you to fast, do it. Let the foolish do it. But is there any road through your house? Why do you even bother about it?”. The ingenious and most democratic Sidama elders used to organise the Sidama resistances through such poems which most of the time were very effective and successful. The Sidama people later accepted Christianity in the 1950s and 60s through protestant missionaries who brought some education and development projects with them.

Deliberate policy of name changes was part of the Abyssinians operation and subjugation. If a child was allowed to join a handful of schools built in Sidama before 1974 he was not allowed to use his Sidama name. In fact, the Abyssinian rulers forced the Sidama youngsters to go to Wolayita for primary school and the Wolayita youngsters to travel to Sidama so that these people will abandon their aim of getting education because of the high transport and living cost involved if they decided to travel to those distant places to get education. Is not this barbaric denial of the right of a child to have access to primary education? And yet Ethiopia used to boast to be part of the League of Nations and United Nations that guarantees the right of a child to have access not only to primary education but to primary education in their mother tongue. For instances, if a child was sent to a school in Sidama he was asked to come with a civilized name, i.e. of course Amhara name. Thus beautiful Sidama names such as Baxisso, Gabisso, Agana were all ridiculed and were replaced with Abebe, Bekele, Ayele so on. In case a child resisted or refused to change his name, then he was either denied school and any other opportunities or his name would be bastardised like “Sidamo”. In this case the Sidama names such as Dangisso were changed to a bastardised name of “Degsew”, Argata to “Argachew” and so on.

However, forced name changes came to an end with the 1974 revolution which abolished barbaric Abyssinian feudalism. But, of course, other forms of subjugations and oppressions continued until today.

5. Conclusion and Call for Immediate Halt in the Use of “Sidamo” Misnomer

There are no people in Ethiopia called “Sidamo”. The misnomer was invented in 1891 by the invading Minelik’s generals and soldiers as part of a psychological war to degrade and dehumanise the newly occupied land of Sidama and other peoples living around the Sidama land. The same dehumanising misnomer was used against the Wolayita people who were called “Wolamo”. Oromos were called with another derogatory name called “Galla” which in fact preceded “Sidamo” and “Wolamo” misnomers.

We ask all the Abyssinians living in Ethiopia and globally to stop using the derogatory term “Sidamo” which was coined by their invading ancestors. The continued use of this term only validates our arguments that Abyssinians are not the people to live with and the Sidama people be better off as an independent nation in east Africa. Do not add insult to injury by reminding us all the time what your ancestors did to us by using this humiliating term “Sidamo” .

The term “Sidamo” must be declared illegal both in Ethiopia and internationally and must be removed from all websites, other electronic and hard copy documents.

We also plead to the international community to stop using the misnomer “Sidamo” from today on and put pressure on the Ethiopian government to declare the term “Sidamo” illegal as it is illegal to use the term “Galla” and “Wolamo” any more. No people and individuals know better the history of the Sidama people than the Sidamas themselves. We are Sidama not “Sidamo” and no one else is “Sidamo” either.

Sidama: Coffee Economics, Politics and Poverty

Side Goodo
September, 2007

1. Poverty, Hunger and Underdevelopment in Africa
Over the last two centuries many countries of the world have developed at a breakneck speed. However, after half a century of decolonization, Africa still remains the darkest continent and the majority of its people still live under abject poverty.

Half of the 800 million people on the African continent live on less than US$1 per day while the mortality rate of children under five years of age is 140 per 1000. Only 58 percent of the population had access to safe water. The rate of illiteracy for people over 15 is 41 percent and there are only 18 mainline telephones per 1000 people compared with 146 for the world and 567 for developed countries (NEPAD, 2001). Thus, in Africa, at present, poverty defined in terms of both lack of ownership of economic resources and lack of access to social and economic services which refer to the broader livelihoods is rampant. Poverty is also about lack of power. The poor is the most vulnerable and the most powerless group of society.

Among the 49 least developed countries of the world as of 2007, 33 are in Africa. These are: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo Democratic Republic, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda and Zambia.

The LDCs or the fourth world countries are characterized by low income, GNI per capita of less than US$750, low level of human resources development, and economic vulnerability. A country must achieve GNI per capital of over US$ 900 to leave the forth world. About five of these African LDCs are characterised by a very low level of economic progress measured by a very low level of Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of less than US$ 200. These are: Ethiopia, Somalia, Seira Leon, Burundi, and Guinea Bissau.

Only two countries in Africa have shown remarkable economic performances during the past 20 years and were able to graduate from the LDC category. These were Botswana which moved up the ladder in 1994 and Cape Verde Island which graduated from LDCs just in 2007.

The poverty and backwardness of Africa stands in stark contrast to the prosperity of the developed world. The continued marginalization of Africa from the globalization process and the social exclusion of the vast majority of its peoples constitute a serious threat to global stability (NEPAD, 2001). The continued influx of Africans seeking better living conditions in Europe has already caused a great alarm among the EU member states but no concrete actions have been taken by this block of wealthy nations to bring sustainable development in the African continent.

The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) adopted in 2000 are not likely to be achieved in many of the African countries because of such dismal economic performances in most of these countries. The 2015 targets for most indicators are already accepted as unachievable. Thus many of African countries are trapped in a vicious circle of underdevelopment, poverty, hunger and famine. The world has the resources and the technology to eradicate poverty in Africa and globally, but it does not have the will.

2. Poverty and Underdevelopment in Ethiopia
Ethiopia’s dismal economic performance with GNI per capita of about US$152 in 2005 puts the country at the bottom of the least developed countries of the world (the fourth world). As a result, poverty in Ethiopia is rampant. According to BBC World Service (Feb 2007), 81% of Ethiopia’s population is living below the poverty line of US $2 a day. Given Ethiopia’s current population of about 78 million, this means that over 63 million Ethiopians live below poverty line.

At the beginning of the 21st century, we witness an increase in global poverty and hunger along side unprecedented affluence among nations and individuals implying an ever increasing disparity between nations and with in various regions of a nation. The fact that the Microsoft tycoon Bill Gate’s net worth is 5 times as big as Ethiopia’s 2005 annual Gross National Income (GNI) of $11.1 billion US dollars at current prices (World Bank, 2005) is a vivid depiction of not only how the country has failed in terms of economic achievement during the past century but also the alarming disparity between individuals and countries in the developed world and individuals and countries in the LDCs.

The rest of the African countries blame colonialism for their underdevelopment. However, Ethiopia has been praised as the only African country that resisted western colonialism. Then why is Ethiopia at the bottom of the fourth world? Ethiopia has no one to blame for its unprecedented development disaster except for successive archaic feudal and totalitarian political leaderships. Archaic monarchical rule and rapacious feudalism that lasted for over half a century kept the country under perpetual darkness while the rest of the world was moving forward with lightening speed. Neither the 1974 revolution nor the 1991 TPLF take over of the political power in the country brought any fundamental changes on political organizations and economic management in the country. The socialist regime wasted 17 years of opportunity for economic revival of the country. Like its predecessors, the current regime managed to cling to political power for over 16 years with out any improvement in economic lives of the majority of the peoples in the country. In fact poverty, hunger and famine are now embodied into the very structure of the Ethiopian economy.

A decade and a half is not a short time to harness the resources of the country towards the path of sustainable growth and development. On the contrary, the current leadership is preoccupied with maintaining its political power at the cost of economic nightmare. Time and resources are wasted on repressions of democratic freedom and human rights. Dictatorial and predatory regimes, lack of democratic freedom and human rights, lack of recognition of the rights of various ethnic groups in the country, inappropriate value systems of the societies’ of the ruling elites, absence of the rule of law, absence of property rights and institutions that support free enterprise under the current and previous Ethiopian regimes are solely responsible for continued underdevelopment and abject poverty of the majority of the citizens of this country.
The Sidama province located in the southern part of the country is endowed with abundant natural resources. However, under the current Ethiopian political organization, the Sidama region has deteriorated from self sustained traditional economic system into an economic disaster where hunger and famine have become the order of the day.

3. Poverty in Sidama Region
The Sidama region with estimated total population of 5 million which makes Sidama the 5th largest ethnic group in Ethiopia after Oromo, Amhara, Ogaden and Tigray, is one of the least developed regions in the country already at the bottom of the fourth world.

Only about 8% of the inhabitants of Sidama have access to electricity. The average rural household has only 0.3 hectare of land (compared to the national average of 1.01 hectare of land) and the equivalent of 0.5 heads of livestock. Most cattle in Sidama particularly in the low lands died due to tsetse fly infestations in the early 1980s. Only 15.4% of the population is in non-farm related jobs, compared to the national average of 25% and a southern average of 32%. Primary school enrollment has improved since recently to reach about 68% of all eligible children while enrollment in secondary school is one of the lowest (18%). These figures are inflated because of highly deflated population figure for Sidama of 3 million. Continued changes in climatic conditions due to global warming increased land areas in Sidama exposed to malaria to about 72% (World Bank, Country Memorandum, 2004).

All indictors reflect the glaring poverty in Sidama region. Sidama is predominantly rural society. 91 % of the total pupation in Sidama lives in rural areas. Thus it is primarily the peasant farmers who languish in poverty in the Sidama region. Fragmented land holdings, less than 0.3 hectares per household, coupled with very high population density of over 430 persons per sq km, implies a huge reservoirs of redundant labour force that needs to be employed out side of the subsistence farming. And yet the proportion of the total population engaged in non-farm related jobs in the Sidama region is only about 15%.

Sidama is endowed with various natural resources. Rivers such as Ganale that form Wabeshebelle river in Somalia originates in Sidama high lands of Harbagona. Lakes Awassa in the north west and Abaya in the south west offer great tourism potentials for the region. On top of all these, Sidama is endowed with the resources that make the Sidama name a global household name- that is, its black gold- coffee. Sidama produces abundant high quality organic (speciality) Sidama (Sidamo is a bastardised name given by the Amhara rulers) coffee that fetches the highest international retail prices for food chain multinationals such as Starbucks.

4. Sidama: Coffee and Poverty
Coffee, believed to have been discovered a 1000 years ago by a Kaffa goatherd, in the Kaffa region of the country, is one of the most important cash crops in the Sidama region. In the year 2005, Sidama and Gedeo alone produced over 63,562 tons of coffee (Central Statistical Agency, 2005). This is 1/3 of the total coffee output for the country during the year.

Sidama is very well known for its production of garden coffee. Speciality Coffee is grown in many villages. Sidama has ideal soil type and climatic conditions-including altitude, rainfall and temperature for the production of Arabica coffee. Coffee is predominantly produced in villages organized in 39 primary coffee cooperatives in Shabadino, Dalle, Aleta Wondo, Darra and Bansa districts. However, almost every household in rural Sidama outside of extremely hot lowlands of Awassa, Shabadino and Dalle and very cold highlands of Hula and Harbagona produces coffee. Over half of the total population in Sidama directly or indirectly depend on coffee for livelihoods.

Over 60% coffee produced in Sidama region is washed coffee and ready for export while half of the country’s coffee output of about 200,000 tones is consumed domestically. There are over 89 coffee washing stations in Sidama alone. Thus, over 40% of washed coffee destined to the export market comes directly from the Sidama region.

Coffee is the single most important export commodity for Ethiopia providing about 65% of the country’s foreign exchange earnings. Ethiopian coffee exports currently account for about $400 million in export income. More than 20 million people in the country (about 25% of the population) derive their livelihoods from the coffee sector. Coffee contributes over 10% of Ethiopia’s GDP.

Coffee is the most important agricultural commodity in the world, and is worth up to $14 billion annually. In fact coffee is the second most widely traded commodity in the world next to petroleum. More than 80 countries, including Ethiopia, cultivate coffee, which is exported as the raw, roasted or soluble product to more than 165 countries worldwide. More than 121 countries export and /or re-export coffee. More than 50 developing countries, 25 of them in Africa, depend on coffee as an export, with 17 countries earning 25 per cent of their foreign exchange from coffee.

Coffee classification and grading systems in Ethiopia were developed and licensed for the first time in 1952 and then modified in 1955. Ethiopian coffee certification began after the establishment of the National Coffee Board of Ethiopia in 1957. Licensed and graded coffee export from Ethiopia has the history of over half a century. However, half a century of progressive coffee export did not at all translate to poverty reduction and increased access to livelihoods in Sidama. Instead, as specialty coffee production, processing and exports increased from Sidama, poverty, hunger and famine also increased. This is a symptom of fundamental economic and political problems in the country.

Why did massive high quality coffee production fail to reduce poverty in the Sidama region and in other coffee producing regions in Ethiopia? There are various factors that explain why coffee failed to contribute to poverty alleviation in these regions and in Sidama in particular. Among others these include (a) inimical macroeconomic policies, (b) systematic exploitation of producers by parastatals (c) unfair allocation of retail returns, and (d) international price volatility. I will deal with each of these in the following sections.

a) Inimical macroeconomic policies
Successive dictatorial regimes in the country followed inimical macroeconomic policies. One of such policies is the exchange rate policy. Ethiopia followed fixed exchange regime during both the feudal and socialist regimes. The national currency, birr, was exchanged for highly overvalued rate of about 2 birr for 1 US dollar for over two decades. Both economic theory and practice shows that currency overvaluation has serious negative effects on the export performance and export earnings. Since coffee is the country’s major export, currency over valuation has the most undesired effects on the coffee export performance and earnings in the country.

Thus, prolonged currency overvaluation in the country during both the feudal and socialist regimes meant that coffee producers were denied of most of their coffee incomes. Since the government was the primary exporter during these periods, it was able to artificially set the farm gate prices at a very low level so that it retains most of the returns generated from the coffee export. Thus the peasant farmers continued to earn negligent income from their coffee produces. This perpetuated rural poverty and under development in major coffee producing regions such as Sidama.

However, the macroeconomics alone does not explain why coffee failed to alleviate poverty in Sidama. Systematic exploitation of coffee farmers through parastatals was another reason why the benefit of coffee could not trickle down to the legitimate producers. I will review this in the next section.

b) Systematic exploitation of coffee producers by the parastatals
In addition to inappropriate macroeconomic policies, there is also another indirect mechanism by which coffee income from the area is stifled to the center. These is carried out systematically through the parastatal called the development bank of Ethiopia. The coffee producing cooperatives are required to deposit their earnings only in the development bank accounts. However, when they deposit their monies there, they are forced to put it in the non-interest bearing current account. This enables the bank to lend and benefit by charging interest to other borrowers the money deposited by these cooperatives. Thus while cooperatives get no interest for the money they deposit in these banks, the banks charge these co-ops exorbitant rates of interest whenever they want to borrow from these banks. Thus there is double exploitation of the coffee revenues of these cooperatives. Their money does not bear interest but they pay high interest for what they borrow from these banks.

Cooperatives are private businesses and there is no reason why they should not earn interest from their assets. This is another mechanism of inappropriate resource misappropriation that perpetuates the misery of the coffee producing farmers in Sidama.

(c) Unfair distribution of retail returns
The Sidama coffee along with Harar and Yirgacheffe is considered to be among the world’s best coffee. However, the producers of this coffee, the Sidama peasant farmers, are among the world’s poorest people. One of the reasons for this is the insignificant retail return these farmers obtain for their coffee produce. The specialty coffee fetch higher prices for food chain multinationals compared to the prices of commodity coffee. That is each of the high quality coffees sells at a premium over commodity coffees in world markets and draws high retail prices.

However, the distribution retail returns from the speciality coffee is monopolised by the importers and distributors. The peasant farmers in Sidama, Gedeo and Harar who produce such speciality coffee in Ethiopia obtain only around 6%-10% of the total retail returns. This barely covers even the production costs.

This is far less than the percentage the high quality coffee producers in other developing countries obtain for their produce. For instance, producers of Jamaican Blue Mountain Coffee capture 45% of their product's retail price which is 35 percentage points higher than what the Sidama producers obtain for their produce. The fact the Jamaican retail return share is acceptable by both the importers and distributors indicates that, other things remaining constant, there is a possibility for the Sidama farmers to increase their coffee income by three folds. However, the realisation of this dream is very difficult if not impossible in Ethiopia.

(d) International price volatility
The recent plunge in the international coffee prices contributed to further deterioration of the incomes of the Sidama coffee producers usually supported by the IMF and World Bank poverty alleviation, structural adjustment and stabilization programmes. The global oversupply of the commodity coffee resulting from increased production by farmers led to a sharp decline in coffee prices beginning in 2001. At the beginning of 2003, the world coffee prices have fallen by 50% and were at their lowest in 30 years where the global supply was about 8% above the global demand.

Accordingly, the world market price for coffee has become less than US$0.50 per pound, of which farmers only receive half. This was five times less than what the farmers used to get before the slum began in 2001. However, still in Western countries, coffee was sold for around US$10 per pound. As a result of this massive slump in coffee price, the Sidama and other coffee farmers in Ethiopia faced a sharp increase in poverty and hunger.

The main reason for such devastating price slump was the global over supply of commodity coffee. However, the effect is compounded in Ethiopia because of the country’s insignificant share in the world coffee market. For instance, while Brazil produces over 2 million tones, Ethiopia’s out put is only about 200,000 tons 1/3 of which comes from Sidama and Gedeo alone. Ethiopia produces only 10% of Brazils coffee output and les than 2% of the world coffee output. Nothing has been done by the successive Ethiopian regimes to increase the country’s share in global coffee market. Vietnam which was insignificant coffee producers before 1980s has now become the world’s second largest producer of coffee following Brazil. The successive Ethiopian rulers continued to plunder revenues collected from wild coffee trees and those produced by poor Sidama, Gedea, Wollaga and Harar peasant framers but did nothing to improve the efficacy and the scale of production except boasting that coffee originated in Ethiopia 1000 years ago. This represents another 1000 years of lost opportunity in Ethiopia.

Thus Ethiopia does not have any role in international coffee price determination. The country is the best example of a coffee price taker firm with perfectly elastic price line and demand curve. The Sidama coffee enriches the importers and distributors to the detriment of the peasant farmers who produce it. The recent battle between Starbucks and the Ethiopian government over the issue of trademarks over specialty coffees, i.e. Sidama, Yirgachefe and Harar was a typical example of how globalisation tends to perpetuate poverty in the periphery and continues to enrich the centre. Finally, Starbucks accepted the country’s right to trade mark the Sidama (Sidamo is the bastardised name given by the Amhara rulers and is a misnomer) other specialty coffees. Accordingly, with the support from DFID in 2005 and 2006, the Light Year Intellectual Property (LYIP) assisted the country to obtain trade marks in over 30 countries.

This together with the involvement of coffee cooperatives in Fair Trade is meant to increase incomes of peasant coffee producers. It is argued that Fair Trade guarantees a minimum of $1.26/pound (a living wage) and access to credit at fair prices to poor farmers organized in cooperatives. Fair Trade is also believed to promote socially and environmentally sustainable techniques and long term relationships between producers, traders and consumers. How many of the Sidama coffee cooperatives are able to benefit from this agreement is not clear at present.
Although the Sidama coffee producers have been organized in cooperatives since early 1980s they have never benefited from the organization. The recent attempt to reorganize the Sidama coffee producers union that will be able to directly export coffee has been a disaster. It was reported that while coffee price has recovered recently and other coffee unions are making recovery, the Sidama coffee cooperative union became bankrupt for some reason. Thus, whether Starbucks accepts the country’s bid to trade mark the Sidama and other specialty coffees or not, the benefits of a massive coffee production from these areas will not likely trickle down to the poor farmers in the near future.

The Ethiopian political economy needs a fundamental change. It is only when such changes take place peacefully and sustainably and as immediately as possible that the current subhuman living conditions of the people in Sidama and the rest of the country will improve.