BY NATNAEL MEWAEL
Historians generally agree that the actions pursued by Adolph Hitler once he took power were not surprising considering his book ‘Mein Kampf‘ enumerated every single one of them. What made them surprising to his contemporaries was such ideas were merely considered as a ploy to gain power, nothing more. This view was held not only among his later adversaries but even in those who were adamant supporters.
The world leaders of his time accommodated every demand of his until it was impossible to do so. What culminated in Munich to appease this monster of a man, is apparently because of world leaders’ hesitation to believe his explicit words. Among other garbled ideas raised by Hitler, one is regarding his so called ‘historical’ territorial ambitions. This led to unimaginable catastrophe that haunts humanity to this day.
This should have been confined to history books, but unfortunately at the moment the Ethiopian government is repeating such statements almost in verbatim. If history repeats itself first as a tragedy, then as farce, as Marx said, it is the obligation of the Eritrean, Ethiopian and World Communities to make sure this is the latter. This in particular is the focus of this article.
As early as 1923 Hitler outlined what he called living space ‘lebensraum‘ to the German nation. In his words this included lands to the east of Germany including Ukrainian fields and Romanian oil fields among others. This he followed point by point starting with Austria, Czechoslovakia and later Poland which started the second world war. It is of course established that the concept of living space was not Hitler’s original idea, at the same time it cannot be denied that it was he who carried this grotesque plan to its destructive end. According to this concept Germany with its increasing population was held to be doomed without all this extra territory. Add to this the claimed historical, ethnographical and survival needs of the country, the quest for territory is justified by distortions of history and pure lies.
What this has to do with the Ethiopian government’s recent sea access discourse is obvious. According to this not so original pseudo philosophical idea, the prime minister for incomprehensible reasons did start his talk with explanation of ‘water memory’ a debunked scientific theory, for Ethiopia sea access is a ‘question of survival.’ Moreover, there are the so called historical demographical (increasing population) and ethnographical justifications for Ethiopia’s claim.
The historical justifications of the nazis and the current Ethiopian administration are of course a mix of distortions, lies and half truths. But this blatant disregard of the truth is actively pursued by both regimes. In what could have made the nazis squirm with envy, this reached its ridiculous culmination in Ethiopia in an AI rendering of Emperor Menelik exhorting his ‘Ethiopian children’ to gain sea access. In this way the Ethiopian prime minister is presenting himself as a continuation of the emperor just like Adolph Hitler named his empire the third Reich to show continuity with Frederick the great.
Should it also be noted that the emperor never once in his reign did he own a port and that his primary imports were weapons to kill and pillage fellow Ethiopians? Poor are the Ethiopians indeed who are made to suffer and possibly believe such demonstrations of, for lack of a better word, pure idiocy.
Similarly, the so-called ethnographic justification is full of hay. What ethnographic claims Ethiopia, a multiethnic country, can raise against any of its multiethnic neighbours is baffling to any outside observer. The Ethiopian administration, however, does not seem to be concerned with mundane things like logic or truth. Rather its efforts are aimed to confuse and brainwash the Ethiopian people.
The prize for the most foolish allegation by the nazis and the Ethiopian administration is reserved to the alleged survival issue. Survival of a country depends on the wisdom to foster peace and collaboration with other countries. However, the quest for wise decisions was not the aim of the nazis and it certainly isn’t of the Ethiopian administration. The name of the game is deluding the masses. In such an endeavour to control the public perception, fear is often the most capable weapon. The fascists realized this and used it to the maximum limit using the survival card. The Nazis were trying to persuade the populace that unless Germany gained extra land, oil resources and coal mines, it will perish.
To the average German this might have made sense, after all anyone could see how oil and coal can be handy. Fortunately, history reveals how this line of reasoning is hocus-pocus at best. Any cursory view of the world at the present of course shows that Germany not only survived but prospered beyond anything that Hitler could ever have imagined. A Germany that provided for its citizens the right to travel and live anywhere in Europe, or the world for that matter, that is striving to eliminate the use of coal and oil as energy sources, could only have been a utopian nonsense to the nazi leader.
Enter, the Ethiopian prime minister who is playing this weapon as a fiddle. His argument runs as such, ‘Ethiopia is in geographical prison, so necessarily this prison must be pried open ‘peacefully if possible.’ To the average Ethiopian looking at a map of his country, this might make sense. The point is however that we expect leaders to make better judgements. For example, the fact that this argument could be made by any of its neighbours ought not to be lost to anyone. What would the Ethiopian response be to such claims from South Sudan or Uganda?
To paraphrase one author, if you break every law to hunt the devil, you will have no place to hide when he comes for you. In a sense every country is in geographical prison, if we can use the phrase at all. Every country has a boundary so that not only that others cannot infringe it, but so that it may not overstep unto others. It would be remiss to point out, one can argue, that even our physical bodies in a way imprison our souls. Is suicide the answer? I think not. The test of any leader is decided on what he made from what he was given. A leader that whines day in day out how he would have built something great if only he had Saudi Arabian oil fields or Niger’s uranium mines is simply put just a clown or a maniac threatening everyone. I personally would have considered the Ethiopian prime minister as the former if I did not see the danger he is posing in another way.
“The action [i.e. war] to be taken should be after a period of diplomatic discussions which gradually lead to a crisis and to war”, such was the alternative that Hitler envisioned regarding his war mongering in Czechoslovakia. This was the time when the world first saw propaganda warfare put in action. According to one directive propaganda warfare “must intimidate the Czechs by means of threats and wear down their power of resistance.”
If one replaces the word Czechoslovakia with Eritrea, the Ethiopian regime’s strategy becomes clear for all to see. The Eritrean response can only be one thing “surely, you’re joking, Mr. prime minister.” Far superior forces have threatened and put to action much worse tactics against Eritrea, such ridiculous threats cannot induce panic in Eritrea they merely strengthen the people’s resolve. As far as history can show, the primary threat that can arise from Ethiopia to Eritrea is not military invasion but Ethiopia’s own implosion and subsequent disintegration along ethnic and religious lines. This is clear to anyone with minimum knowledge of the Horn of Africa.
Again, this is not the danger I sense. Hitler eventually did not have to go war with Czechoslovakia because the world leaders, to his surprise, handed him that country, and much more, on a silver platter in Munich. The reason? they wanted to avert another war in Europe. If they sacrificed Czechoslovakia for peace, they concluded, it was worth it. This is the Ethiopian regime’s primary aim, and this is the chief threat towards Eritrea.
Mind you, its not that another Munich can ever happen where Eritrea is concerned. Every government in the world knows Eritrea does not allow others to make choices on her behalf. The primary threat lies in the fact that if the international community at this time does not declare territory grabbing by Ethiopia for any reason intolerable, the frail Ethiopian regime might take this silence as a subtle approval to conduct war on Eritrea.
One can only worry about the effect of an armed conflict with Eritrea will have on Ethiopia’s future and possible disintegration. The international community’s silence currently is liable to open the very real Pandora’s box in the Horn of Africa. The Ethiopian prime minister is courting for this perceived subtle approval wherever he goes. Recently, when one European leader declared he was willing to work with Ethiopia regarding sea access, whatever that means, it was treated by Ethiopian media trolls as a call to arms and a justification for war. I can personally testify to this fact.
Sovereignty as the incontrovertible bed rock of international relations cannot be subject to negotiations. Eritrea’s sovereignty is not any different. Suing for peace while threatening war does not make one peaceful, rather it makes him an idiot or a nazi. The recent talks of the Ethiopian prime minister, uniquely, qualify for both descriptions. Negotiations and discussions can only be conducted based on sovereignty of both parties; they are not means to infringe sovereignty of a country. This should have been a well-known fact in these modern times, alas the Ethiopian prime minister does not seem to get it.
The international community’s chief job at this juncture should be to establish to the Ethiopian regime, the inviolability of territorial integrity of countries of the Horn of Africa. Let’s not explain away the obvious war mongering. After all, if one average Eritrean can see this, why can’t the international community?
* The writer resides in Eritrea and works at the prosecution office in Barentu.