Ethiopia’s prime
minister this week announced his resignation. No doubt it was a
collective decision of the ruling coalition of the Ethiopian Peoples’
Revolutionary Democratic Front.
Addis Ababa had
promised reforms in the wake of widespread protests that started in
Oromia. The government reacted by declaring a State of Emergency and
much later a promise to release all political prisoners.
But
this was slow in coming and the protests persisted culminating in a
national strike that suddenly this week turned into celebrations as the
most prominent of Ethiopia’s political opposition leaders were released.
Meanwhile, farther afield in South Africa, a decision
of the ruling African National Congress also saw, finally, the
resignation of Jacob Zuma as national president in favour of the new
party leader Cyril Ramaphosa.
Unlike those of
Ethiopia’s EPRDF, the ANC’s deliberations played out in full public
view, with almost blow-by-blow accounts of night meetings, negotiations,
demands, threats and eventually compromise by top party leadership.
Outside
the ANC, the Judiciary had already pronounced itself on no small number
of related matters. The political opposition had already seized upon
the same, that the decision to postpone the annual State of the Nation
address rested, at least in part, on memories of the chaotic scenes
inside and outside parliament last year.
The private
sector worried about the ever-decreasing credit ratings. And the public
was clear that while the majority still support the ANC, Zuma had to go.
It
may be odd to compare two countries whose histories, relative states of
openness and economic development are so different. But Ethiopia and
South Africa are both, albeit in different ways, living under
revolutionary movements gone astray. As in Ethiopia, all the restiveness
outside the ruling party played a role in South Africa.
However,
as also in Ethiopia, in the end, it was ultimately the party’s
decision. And, just as in Ethiopia, containment is not the option for
the ANC either. There are a range of real political as well as
bread-and-butter issues on the table that will need to be prioritised
moving forward. For example, inclusion understood in ethnic terms in
Ethiopia and in class terms in South Africa.
The other
not-so-dramatic and more-dramatic leadership changes we’ve seen in
Africa recently — in Angola and Zimbabwe respectively — have also come
from the party, also revolutionary movements gone astray.
We
should also remember the contradictions, trials and travails of
Zimbabwean political opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, who died on
Wednesday.
So while all these changes cannot be termed
“transitions” in the real sense of the word — and the euphoria around
them needs to be tempered accordingly — they still provide little cracks
in which useful things could potentially be done.
The
question then for those of us without parties firmly in control, and not
derived from a revolutionary tradition is, have we gone astray?
Power
may act as though it’s beyond constraint. Ultimately, it’s not.
Everything ends, everything falls. We just need to do our respective
bits to check power wherever we are, and to remind power that nothing
can contain the people’s will forever — or our visions for what lies
beyond.
L. Muthoni Wanyeki is the Africa director of the Open Society Foundations. Muthoni.Wanyeki@opensocietyfoundations.org
No comments :
Post a Comment