“Let’s be like the market”. Sure but what if the market is monopolized?

An open letter to Dr. Eleni Gebere-Medhin from Jawar Siraj Mohammed, Stanford University

Dear Dr. Eleni,

I just finished reading an article you recently wrote titled “Let’s be like the Market” in which you made a passionate call to your critics not to engage in destructive ethnic bigotry but rather focus on rebuilding a country in need of grassroot economic development. You have stressed the importance of being like the market – a market that does not care about who is selling and who is buying, but what is sold and for how much, hence we should not judge people based on their identity, but by their characters and deeds. In an ideal world, I agree with you. But what if the market is imperfect, distorted, manipulated and has been for the most part monopolized by a single company or group? Can you still advocate embracing such an imperfect market?

To me, the problem in Ethiopia is not only the fragmentation of ethnic diversity per se, it’s rather the manner in which those several ethnic groups have been unjustly brought under one state and are ruled. When people with different cultures and views live side by side, in the absence of effective interaction, it’s natural for them to make assumptions about the other. When such neighboring groups compete over resources, or when there is conflict of interest, those assumptions develop into prejudices and bigotry. Therefore, assumption, prejudices and bigotry are present in any diverse society, and they often die out as interaction and interdependence among communities increase. But if and when one group dominates its neighbors and imposes its cultural, political and economic will, those preexisting assumptions and prejudices become fertile ground for dehumanization, discrimination and exploitation. In other words, what we call racism today is a situation in which the powerful suppresses the powerless based on those preexisting social differences.

Everyone knows that Ethiopia was built by one group subjugating the rest, and ignoring that history will not help everyone to get along. Therefore, from the very beginning, the market was imperfect. This imperfection continued to worsen as the subjugating group further monopolized the market, by strengthening its own cultural, linguistic and economic domination. I hope your wonderful grandmother has told you about Minelik’s soldier in Hararghe when they used to own at least 10 families including their land, property and lives. All members of that family worked on their land and gave the product to their owner. That monopoly lasted almost a century, and put the then-powerful group ahead of the subjugated, and much of the problems and disparities we are facing today are the product of such imperfect beginnings. Can you imagine what a market monopolized by a single company for such a long time would look like? The Ethiopian market today remains as imperfect as before if not worse. The only difference is that it is monopolized by a new company.

Learning from Not So Distant Past: Would ECX Perfect the Market or Would it Strengthen the Monopoly?

When I first heard about ECX, I was excited on its potential to transform the grain market, but I was also worried about problems you would face from two sides. One, from the larger public that has been excessively exploited by the regime over the last two decades that it has lost trust in any institution run by the government. Two, from the very regime that is known for taking advantage of genuine individuals like yourself to advance its narrow economic and political agenda.

I hope my fear will not be realized and you succeed in fulfilling your dream of making ECX a great market place. But growing up under this government, I am too familiar with its scams and injustices that I cannot help, but remain suspicious. I share the fear that ECX will become just another facet through which the regime will systematically impose its market monopoly and force independent businesses out of the market as it has done since it came to power.

Here is a recent historical reflection: There was a farmers’ cooperative in Hararghe known as East Oromia, which was engaged in trading jimaa (khat). The regime, eying the luxurious jimaa business, falsely labeled the cooperative as an OLF property, and decided to “nationalize” it. However, it was not really nationalized in a real sense, but the finance and operation of the cooperation was simply transferred to Dinsho, a company owned by the ruling party. Former board members and officers of the cooperative have been killed or are languishing in jail. Today Dinsho has been bankrupted and the jimaa business is believed to be owned by none other than the Prime Minister’s wife and is estimated to earn hundreds of millions of dollars per year. To make sure that the business would not be scrutinized and disturbed, the prime minster directly intervened and “federalized” the entire Awaday district so that the company would not have to pay tax to the Oromian regional government. This is as free as the current market is in Ethiopia.

I believe that the ruling oligarchy robbed those business people for one simple reason; the coffee business was the only major sector that was not monopolized by companies owned by the ruling clique or EFFORT. This has been done to several other major businesses in the past. For instance, there was a businessman in Finfinne who was one of the most respected business people since the emperor’s era. He was believed to be one of the first people to import fertilizer. His business was so important for the country that even the communist junta did not nationalize it. When the current regime came and began expanding its business monopoly, they wanted to take the fertilizer market as well, due to its profitability and more importantly to make farmers directly dependent on the ruling party. But there was one problem, the old businessman and his company had been so established that he had strong loyal suppliers and consumers. First, the regime tried to push the man out of business through competition. A tax exempt company got established to bid and import fertilizer. But the old man kept winning. You won’t believe what they did next. They told him that he can import the fertilizer, but had to share the profit with them. The man, being a conservative businessman of the old days, rejected their demand. At last they simply moved on him, seized his entire property and forced him into exile. At the age when he should be sharing his experience and wisdom with aspiring young business minds, he lives in a foreign land, while those who robbed him have been relaxing and enriching themselves on the very land where his “umbilical cord was buried.” Then who should we be surprised when owners of EFFORT publicly claim that it is the biggest company in Ethiopia if not all of Africa, after all the oligarchy was built by properties gained through such daylight robbery.

For a positive, transnational and courageous people like you to succeed in using your wealth of knowledge, experience and wisdom to help the people of Ethiopia without distraction, the current polarization and exclusiveness needs to be replaced by an environment that is based on mutual business trust which is the anchor of any enterprise and free market. This can only be done by democratizing the state and establishing an all inclusive government. Successive authoritarianism has allowed small but well organized vocal and vicious groups to monopolize politics both in the ruling groups and their opponents. Seasoned and rational individuals have abandoned the field of political dialogue due to the kind of smear tactics that was thrown at you. The silent majority has either abandoned the country or has chosen a “non-political” way of helping the country like you are doing now. But for genuine people to make practical, stable and sustainable difference in the country, it is essential for the political system itself to be stable and progressive. Any authoritarian regime is doomed to fail no matter how long it lasts. The longer it remains in power, the more likely that it would face a violent demise With the fall of such a regime, the succeeding group often destroys whatever positive institutions that were left by the previous one and starts from ground zero. We have seen this during the past two successions. The current rulers do not seem to have learned any valuable lesson from their predecessors. So I fear that, the few great institution such as ECX that have been built through such hard work might become the victim of a new cycle of showdown.

- Full Story (OromoIndex.com)

RELATED: Let’s be like the market – Eleni Gebre-Medhin