This article is prepared in form of response to the sponsors of H Res.128 against the Ethiopian government.

1. 1
Supporting the Promotion and Protection of Human
Rights in Ethiopia
By Aberra Paulos Sumamo
I am writing this paper as a response to H.Res.128: Supporting respect for human
rights and encouraging inclusive governance in Ethiopia. The sponsors of H.Res.128 have
acknowledged the fact that Ethiopia is not only an ally of the United States, but also a strong
partner in the war on terrorism. In the same token, Ethiopia continues to play a great role in
international peacekeeping missions. Without doubt, the United States takes a leading role in
enhancing democratic values, not only in Sub-Saharan Africa, but also throughout the globe.
The current Ethiopian government is a strong advocate of building democratic, representative,
and inclusive governance, and has been relentlessly working with its partners, including the
United States.
Those who know or are familiar with the Ethiopian cultures, traditions, socio-ethnic
compositions, and political dynamics (past and present) can recognize that, before the 1991
political revolution, there was nothing resembling democracy or/and a democratic government.
The transition from a military regime to the current representative governance in Ethiopia is the
fruit of a remarkable sacrifice of the Ethiopian people. Advocates of peace-loving and inclusive
governance had their precious blood spilled in order for us to be where we are today. The
sponsors of H.Res.128 fail to appreciate the positive socio-political and economic transformation
that the current government has made.

2. 2
Today, Ethiopian government-established institutions respond to the needs and demands
of the Ethiopian people, and they have been very much inclusive from day one, since the current
government took power from the military junta. Ethiopians of all ethnic origins, beliefs, cultures,
traditions, and languages are able to say and communicate their preferences. Ethiopians from all
the corners of the country are represented in the Parliament. Educational opportunities are
inclusive of all socio-ethnic communities. The government is building infrastructure, including
roads, electricity, and communication systems to provide services, not only in the cities, but also
in the rural areas. The bottom line is that the current Ethiopian government created political
institutions that can deliver what the people of Ethiopia want: equal representation, self-
governance, and equal opportunities for all Ethiopians.
H.Res.128 lacks objectivity, leading to great bias. The sponsors of H.Res.128 need to
appreciate the role of Ethiopia in promoting peace and security in the region. The focus of the
Ethiopian government is fighting poverty, with the goal of enhancing the transformation of
socio-political, economic, and educational institutions. These developmental goals are aimed at
increasing the living standard of its citizens. Ethiopia has demonstrated practical and measurable
progresses and has furthered initiatives that are accepted by the world community. Today, the
Ethiopian government is taking the necessary steps for creating opportunities for youth
employment, with the aim of decreasing socio-economic and political instability, while fostering
self-sufficiency.
With full confidence, I can argue that the current Ethiopian government ended the old
political hierarchy that boosted to power and benefited those who had the upper hand, reserving
economic advantages for the few elites and oppressing the majority. There is no doubt in my
mind that the 1991 political revolution provided opportunities for the nation’s various socio-

3. 3
ethnic communities to participate in national political institutions with a new-found degree of
self-determination. As such, there are no alternative political groups that can currently compete
with the EPRDF government. Those individuals and groups claiming to have an alternative
political agenda don’t have political views accessible to the majority or a viable economic
agenda. In short, the EPRDF government has shown its legitimacy by reducing poverty through
economic development projects, enhancing peace, security, and national political stability.
Often, people mistakenly think that Ethiopia has strong oppositional political parties.
However, Ethiopia’s primary challenge comes from militant political opposition groups
operating from the outside, who incite violence in the country and dream of grabbing political
power through violent means. Individuals with this attitude and behavior are disconnected from
the day-to-day life of the populace. Belligerent political forces, such as Ginbot 7 and OLF are
engaged in demonizing the current political leadership, no matter what good is done. These
political fugitives lack vision and the political and economic framework to propose a viable,
alternative political agenda. These political groups are interested in dismantling the
Constitutional System, as they put out a call to power and go disseminate false information
across the globe. Literally speaking, Ethiopia does not have productive political opposition
groups that can challenge the current government.
In Ethiopia, remnants of past regimes still engender political chaos to take every
opportunity to grab power at the expense of weak, voiceless, and defenseless groups of people.
Right now, the only political body that can guarantee political, social, economic, and
environmental security is the EPRDF government. Political fugitives like Ginbot 7 and OLF are
messengers of anti-Ethiopian political forces and are not fit to be called political organizations.
They lack every positive element conducive to political, social, economic, and institutional

4. 4
productivity, and they lack a theoretical framework sufficient enough for them to be categorized
as a political organization.
H.Res.128 reads, “…in Oromia in 2015, the Ethiopian government charged more than
150 students, opposition leaders, and activists at the Federal High Court…” As an Ethiopian-
American, I strongly believe that there are no true opposition leaders that have been charged with
such an absurdity. Those who call themselves opposition political leaders are labeling
themselves with misleading and confusing titles. If sponsors of H.Res.128 wish to call them
opposition leaders, that is their prerogative, but I would rather call them political fugitives
engaged in treason or/and criminal acts that destabilize the peace and security of the country.
H.Res.128 reaches the level of accusing the Ethiopian government of abusing the 2009 Anti-
Terrorism Proclamation (ATP). There is no record supporting the Ethiopian government
charging its citizens with terrorism, unless those individuals are or were engaged in criminal acts
or conspiracies directed at terrorizing innocent people and destroying public and government
infrastructure to achieve their narrow political or/and religious agenda, which is contrary to
Ethiopia’s #1 priority-- fighting poverty and bringing sustainable development to its people. I
am not surprised if the Ethiopian government identifies Ginbot 7 as a terrorist and political
fugitive organization. What would surprise me is if, by any chance, American lawmakers would
identify Ginbot 7 as a political organization. If so, there is a huge conflict in national interest
between the sponsors of H.Res.128 and the Ethiopian government.
It is well acknowledged that the militant opposition groups are engaged in war, operating
from the military base in Eritrea. The Ethiopian government assumes the duty and responsibility
to protect the national interests of its citizens. It should be crystal clear that the Ethiopian

5. 5
government stands firm to protect itself against any domestic and external political forces. This
is what any sovereign nation must and should do.
H.Res.128 reads, “State-sponsored violence against those exercising their rights to peace
assembly, in Oromia and…” This is just one of the included statements that lack credibility and
informed political assessment. Sponsors of H.Res.128 seem to have neglected taking a
measured and informed analysis before labeling the Ethiopian government with such absurd
political language.
What the H.Res.128 sponsors call “peaceful assembly,” hasn’t actually been peaceful,
but, rather, characterized by anti-development and anti-social assembly. Sponsors of H.Res.128
seem to lack substantial information about the public property destroyed and innocent lives lost
at the hands of the so-called “peaceful demonstrators.” The sponsors cannot tell the Ethiopian
government to release criminals from prison. However, if the Ethiopian government is holding
any of its citizens in prison without valid charges or for simply expressing political views, then
the story is a different one, and it would be correct to makes demands and advocate for their
release.
False Testimony
The sponsors of H.Res.128 have shown bias in terms of taking sides with and inviting
individuals with no political connection to the current Ethiopian political reality and individuals
without political persecution, such as the marathon runner. False testimony has led to headlines
such as, “Democracy under threat in Ethiopia.” Indeed, false testimony does not reflect
democratic principles and what the concept of democracy stands for. The democratic system in

6. 6
Ethiopia is just 26-years-old, and it is essential that the following considerations be noted in
one’s analysis:
1. There was no democracy in Ethiopia before 1991. Thus, there was no inclusive
government before 1991.
2. There was no representative government before 1991.
3. There had not been a time in the Ethiopian history that individuals and ethnic
communities exercised their freedom to speak in their own local languages.
4. There had not been a time that the rural communities learned the value of diversity in
larger Ethiopian society.
5. There had not been a time in the history of Ethiopia that the educational system had been
expanded to all regions.
6. There had not been a time in the history of Ethiopia in which people were adequately
informed and conscious of national politics and sustainable economic development.
7. There had not been a time in the history of Ethiopia in which infrastructure (i.e. roads,
etc.) reached the most remote areas of the country.
8. There had not been a time in the history of Ethiopia in which regions were governed by
representatives of the people.
US Congressman Chris Smith and his colleagues should have made a more substantial
effort to learn about the political dynamics (past and present) of Ethiopia and the sacrifices made
to reach to where the country is now. It is shocking and embarrassing that they would assess the
Ethiopian human rights case based on ethnocentric and false testimony from individuals without
productive resumes and credibility. Such a political assessment appears to illustrate that the

7. 7
sponsors of H.Res.128 don’t seem have a close working relationship with the Ethiopian
diplomats in Washington.
The testimony by Seenaa Jimjimo includes the reference, “three generations of pain,
agony, and political oppression of Oromo people…” Yet, who oppressed who? How much is
understood about the history of the Oromo migration and how the Oromo people occupied the
land where they currently live? In the first place, who are the Oromos in question? Are we
talking about Arsii, Borena, Bale settlers, Shawans, or Wellega Oromos? Are we invoking
history between the 15th and 21th century, or fiction? What did the sponsors of H.Res.128 take
from the testimony? The testimony seems to have indicated that 40% of the Ethiopian population
is Oromo, who occupy the most productive lands of Ethiopia. That is fascinating, as I really
don’t have words to explain that fantasy. The testimony even went to the extent of proclaiming
and assuring the sponsors of H.Res.128 that, “American interest is her interest, the interest of
many Oromos.” She told the sponsors, “no democracy, and no support”. What support was she
talking about? She appears to be insinuating that the American financial support to Ethiopia is
enabling the tyrannical government of Ethiopia. Yet, what reason is there to believe that this is
credible or true? Spreading fake news or information is akin to spreading a virus that threatens
the moral/ethical values and integrity of Ethiopia.
The testimony from Tirfe, a representative of the Amhara Association of America, is
another example of false testimony that does not reflect the reality of Ethiopia and how the
country is governed. This individual went to the extent of saying closer to five million Amhara
people are missing or disappeared and suggested that the Ethiopian government is systematically
depopulating the Amhara population. This individual does not have a credible basis for these
claims. I am of the assumption that this individual was reading from what was dictated by

8. 8
individuals or groups with anti-Ethiopia sentiment. Unfortunately, the sponsors of H.Res.128
seem to have validated this testimony by its inclusion. I would characterize this as political
marketing-- trying to sell the United States Congress political propaganda and seeking attention
for a self-serving purpose that involves the dissemination of false information. One should
examine how this individual tried to blackmail the Ethiopian government with claims of ethnic
cleansing and genocidal acts against the Amhara population. If such claims were proven, I would
support Ethiopian government officials being charged with criminal act in an international
criminal tribunal. However, no such evidence currently exists.
According to the information provided to H.Res.128 sponsors:
1. From 1992 to 1994, between 15,000 and 20,000 Amara people were killed.
2. From 1991 to 1993, between 13,000 and 20,000 Amharas were killed in West Arisii.
3. In 1990, as many as 300 Amhars were burnt alive in Benishangul, and, in 2013, 5,000
displaced.
4. In 2000, as many as 1,200 Amhars were killed in Wellega, and 14,000 were displaced.
5. In 2015, as many as 22,000 were displaced, and 600 were killed in Bench Maji.
6. In 2015, as many as 500 were displaced in West Shew.
These numbers have not been generated from credible research findings. Individuals
seeking to introduce false testimony should be warned that statistics need to correspond to
independent research findings, in order for them to be deemed credible. The Ethiopian
government should demand that the United States not encourage the dissemination of false
information and the practice of undermining the credibility of the independent nation of Ethiopia.

9. 9
The testimony from Terrence Lyons of the George Mason University School of Conflict
Analysis and Resolution is inaccurate. Mr. Lyons has adopted the misleading title; “Democracy
under Threat in Ethiopia.” His resume includes advising the Carter Center’s 2005 election and
being a guest lecturer in Ethiopian universities. He claims; “Ethiopia is in its most profound
crisis since the current government came to power in 1991.” This is misinforming the public and
distorting the truth. According to this testimony, Ethiopia’s crisis endangers the peace and
stability of the horn of Africa and the interest of the United States. I was shocked to hear such a
baseless assessment from an academic professional. Technically, this individual suggested to the
United States Congress that Ethiopia was well off before the current government took political
power. This represents another message that would serve to undermine Ethiopia’s political
integrity and the historic progresses it has made. This testimony is not only false, but also closer
in character to the type made by Ginbot 7 lobbyists than informed academics.
The Ethiopian government is not jailing innocent citizens. Rather, it is isolating those
who have acted as criminal, threatening the national interest and becoming a hindrance to
sustainable economic development. The root causes of this conflict are not the current
government’s political institutions, but rather the inherited social conflicts for which no
medication has yet been found. Extending a State of Emergency is a legitimate political approach
to clear what is akin to a social virus that is spreading from outside to within. As we all know,
the United States government does not compromise its national interest by tolerating street drug
deals, gang members, hate politics, etc. This is not unlike what the Ethiopian government is
doing to protect its citizens, political institutions, and infrastructure.
Conclusion

10. 10
In conclusion, Ethiopia is passing through one of its most challenging times. It is
simultaneously fighting poverty and combating militant political forces. The transition from an
absolute dictatorial political system to the current representative and inclusive political system
was the result of a sacrifice made by many. I do not have any ill will toward the sponsors of
H.Res.128, but the approach taken here is insufficient and unacceptable. We must ensure that we
are informed with only well-vetted and credible information if we wish to produce targeted
advocacy toward the valuable goal of promoting human rights and dignity.
I support the government’s stance in the promotion and protection of human rights. The
goals of achieving freedom of expression, exploring democratic rights, sustaining national and
local economic developments, and guarantying socio-political and cultural self-determination are
in progress, always closer to being realized. Ethiopia is progressing in the advancement of its
national political agenda, while transforming political institutions in such a way that fits the
needs and demands of its people. The current government believes that the legitimacy of political
power belongs to its people, not the other way around. The current political system and its
institutions are designed to bring peace to a country that was tormented and ruined by its
previous, power-hungry political elites and military juntas. Of course, the 1991 political
revolution broke the chains of the dominant cultural and religious perceptions that served as an
obstacle to Ethiopia’s national integrity and interest. The new political, social, educational, and
economic ideology aimed at changing the direction of the nation’s political destiny, with equal
opportunity. Let us all continue to work together to promote and protect human rights.
Accusations that the Ethiopian government suppresses free expression, limits the work of
civil societies and NGOs, corrupts the mass-media and judicial systems, imprisons independent
journalists, considers public discussions as a dangerous move, and hinders organizations working

11. 11
for human rights and democracy are an expression of political opportunism. To this date, the
Ethiopian government continues to be challenged by individuals and groups who are a threat to
the national interest, political stability, security, and the peace of the nation. It must also content
with individuals and groups who are obstacles in its fight against poverty, who engage in the
destruction of public and government properties and incite violence. Unfortunately, there are no
immediate or conclusive answers to these problems. Yet, if we continue to work together and
make our decisions on the basis of well-vetted and credible information, I believe we can achieve
our mutual goal of promoting the human rights and safety of all of Ethiopia’s citizens.