The current official projections suggest a worst case scenario up to 39 million people being affected by COVID-19 in Ethiopia. The Multi Sectoral Preparedness and Response Plan projects that 102,000 people could be infected in the next three months. According to the Ethiopian Public Health Institute by the end of April 235,000 people could be affected with the numbers reaching 1.94 million by the end of May. Even with social distancing measures over 15 million could be infected before the pandemic runs its course.

The numbers are very alarming. Insofar as this galvanizes action at individual, societal and governmental levels, it can be a good thing, so long as it does not lead to panic. However, I am hopeful that the trajectory of the pandemic may end up being different in Ethiopia (and possibly in other parts of Africa too) for reasons to do with the environment, poverty, globalization, culture, the timing of the pandemic and learning from the rest of the world, as well as the state system and leadership.

1. Climate, weather and flu waves.
Flus tend to spread more easily in temperate climates during cold weather and the COVID-19 pandemic occurred in winter in Asia, Europe and America, and may be subsiding with the coming of spring (see Bruce Lipton https://www.facebook.com/BruceHLiptonPhD/videos/577988852925866/). However, there are sometimes second waves as was the case during the 1918 epidemic in Ethiopia. A first wave starting in April spread during the rainy season and the second from October come to an end in November. COVID-19 spread to Ethiopia while the weather was warm. There is now what appears to be the start of the Belg small rains which may have an adverse impact, although it might also encourage people not to congregate, go out unnecessarily and abide by government recommendations and directives. We should, however, be wary of the possibility of a second wave as well.

2. Poverty as a blessing in disguise.
The spread of the pandemic in the rest of the world was exacerbated by hospital contexts where patients and doctors were exposed to high loads of the virus, before it was understood how easily and fast is can be transmitted. Ethiopia has few hospitals (0.3 for 1000 people according to World Bank Figures) and those who have been identified with COVID have been sent to special centres. However, should the worst case scenarios come true, the health services would rapidly be overwhelmed as many experts point out, hence the importance of heeding these warning and doing everything possible to avoid this happening.

3. Less locked into the global economy.
Ethiopia (and the rest of Africa) are less enmeshed in the global economy. International passengers come through Bole airport, and screening was put in place early on. Ethiopian airlines reduced flights to many countries including China in mid February and suspended flights to 30 countries relatively late on March 21. There is limited train travel – the railway to Djibouti runs every four days (It is worth remembering that the 1918 epidemic came through the Djibouti railway and worryingly there are currently 241 cases in Djibouti for a population of under a million, compared to 197 in Kenya, 34 in Eritrea, and 25 in Somalia). There is limited cross border road traffic and no evidence of spread by land, with the borders closed since March 23, when there were 11 confirmed cases.

4. Addressing the exogenous threat.
A strong focus on airport screening and follow up of foreigners and Ethiopians coming from abroad may be paying off and might mean that the pandemic will be have been sufficiently addressed to prevent the take-off of community transmission and its inexorable logic of exponential progression. In Ethiopia the categories that have been most at risk were initially those in contact with foreigners, including investors and government officials and then those with travel history. These are often among the better off and/or better aware sections of the populations, most of whom have been taking precautions, reducing contacts and even self-isolating, and it soon became clear that the risks were mainly associated with returned travelers and contact with them. The risks from those returning from Dubai (representing more than half the cases – See COVID Ethiopia Dashboard) and the forced evictions from Saudi Arabia are clear ongoing threats that the government is well aware of and seeking to address.

5. Fortuitous timing after peak season travel.
The timing of the arrival of the pandemic in Africa in general and in Ethiopia in particular was much later than in Asia, Europe and America. In Ethiopia the main tourist high season (December – January) had fortuitously passed before the pandemic was first identified on 13th March. Moreover, tourism was much lower this year than usual due to security fears. The holiday season when diaspora Ethiopians return had also passed, and less came and travelled within the country due to security concerns.

6. Learning from the rest of the world.
By the time the pandemic hit the African continent and started to spread, awareness of the means of transmission was much greater, and there had been time for debates about what measures can reduce risks and what behaviour make it worse, leading to government and societal action, including airport screening, isolating suspected cases, mandatory quarantine for travelers from abroad, following up their contacts, limiting meetings, closing schools and universities, banning large gatherings, etc.

7. Government action: the culture of campaigns.
The Ethiopian state is well known for its organizational capacity that has increased over the regimes, and its ability to organize zemecha campaigns, mobilizing people and resources rapidly and efficiently. While there may be criticisms and debates about whether measures should have been taken earlier (such as reducing Ethiopian airlines flights), there have been vigorous government actions, and media campaigns, including the messages before every telephone call, culminating in the State of Emergency. Finally, there has been impressive leadership notably from Dr Lia Tadesse, the Minister of Health (see her briefing and response to questions on facebook yesterday 12 April).

I should end by saying that these speculations are not based on any expertise or hard evidence and I may be proved wrong and foolhardy. But I also suspect that those that worst cases scenarios are also not based on accurate data on the progression of the pandemic as we only know the numbers tested, how many were positive, and how many died, but cannot have data on how many have been infected.

Ethiopia deserves a break and some good fortune as a country that has been ravaged repeatedly by famine, war, internal conflict (now hosting the largest global number of IDPs), and having faced many epidemics, and epizootics most recently the ongoing locust invasion.

We can only hope that the prayers of millions of Ethiopians will be heard and that this plague will pass by without inflicting the devastations seen in so much of our planet.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post Why we can hope that Ethiopia will be spared the worst of the pandemic appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The case for banning handshakes

The COVID-19 pandemic is causing people to rethink the wisdom of shaking hands and seek other options that perform similar functions without entailing getting quite so close. One man in Ethiopia has been making the case for banning handshakes for the past ten years.

Berhane Achame is a teacher and writer who lives in Mekele, capital of the Tigray region. He is known in the city for a historical novel that he authored in Tigrigna language “Wedi Waero” that focuses on the history of Ethio-Eritrean relations. He is also known for something else: He has not shaken anyone’s hands for the past ten years. He says a vast number of infections are passed from person to person via the hands, in an interview with BBC Tigrigna. This is what he said.

“It all started ten years ago when I came across a study that shows the average office keyboard has 4,000 colony-forming units of bacteria per square inch. That was disconcerting because as a university teacher, I used to spend a lot of time on a public computer. The thought of carrying those bacterias and transmitting them to others and vice versa with handshakes repulsed me. I automatically avoided shaking hands and refused to do it when people offered to do, sometimes verbally and sometimes in more subtle ways. There were some in my circle of friends who were supportive but they did not follow suit because they feared the social impact of taking a stand.

I am not saying we should not greet others. What I am saying is we should avoid handshakes. Even from a cultural point of view, it has not been our tradition until it was introduced by the Italians. Even after its introduction, not many people used it. When we were kids, our parents used to greet each other with a respectful head nod, lowering the netela (a large shawl) or removing the hat. They did not shake hands. Since it is not even our tradition, it is better to replace it (western handshake) with the traditional greeting. Second thing, handshaking has more harm than good.

I refuse to do it in any circumstances, even with my wife. When I arrive home from work and when I leave for work, I give my wife a kiss but no handshakes. She and other members of my family know that. They respect my choice. They tell others saying that ‘Berhane does not shake hands’.  When people greet me, I give them a friendly wave. Even if they try to hold my hands, I would not let them. Some of them ask, « What happened to him ? » but later they come to terms with it. Because it has been ten years now.

Coronavirus will pass but other diseases would persist. Our hand is a carrier of viruses, germs, and bacteria. If we keep our hands clean, the rest of our bodies would remain clean too. There are other options than shaking hands. So we could simply say ‘Hi’ from afar or just bow our head. Or if you carry a hat and if the person you are about to greet happens to be your senior, you could show him respect by tipping your hat.”

The post An Ethiopian man explains why he has not shaken anyone’s hands for the past ten years appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

• Critics say the use of GMO puts farmers at the mercy of corporate power & risks contaminating organic crops

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foreign Agricultural Service in Addis Ababa laud’s Ethiopia’s approval of commercial cultivation of the controversial genetically modified organisms (GMOs), according to a new report it published.

In a report USDA published on February 5, 2020, prepared by Abu Tefera, agricultural specialist of the USDA and approved by Rachel Bickford, foreign service personnel, the Ethiopian government’s “approval of commercial cultivation of genetically engineered cotton and confined field trail on GE maize can be taken as an effort of the government to improve agricultural productivity using modern agricultural tools,” it said. The report went on to say that the country’s adoption of Bt-cotton not only has important economic importance but also expected to have positive influence on the acceptance of this technology in the region. “Especially considering that a decade ago the country was at the forefront of the anti-GMO movement in Africa,” it said.

The country’s adoption of Bt-cotton not only has important economic importance but also expected to have a positive influence on the acceptance of this technology in the region.

Ethiopia for long years had resisted the use of genetically modified seeds, that are often adulterated by pesticides, touted as a means to boost agriculture security by lobbyists. However, this has been relaxed in recent years, the country moving to approve the commercial cultivation of genetically modified insect-resistant BT cotton and field research on GM maize.

The USDA’s report expresses its delight in the interest shown by the government, “from the Prime Minister’s office on down,” in what it describes as “in commercializing agricultural biotechnology as a tool to achieve food security in the country, it said.

To show the government’s growing commitment to GMOs , the report cited the move to authorize a five-year permit to conduct confined field trails on drought tolerant and pest resistant WEMA-TELA Maize, developed under the philanthropic Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project in partnership with the African Agricultural Technology Foundation. “The WEMA-TELA Maize trails have been successfully conducted in 2019 by the Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research. The second trail will start up in November during the dry season using a controlled drip irrigation system,” the report reads. Another GM crop approved for a confined field trail is, disease-resistant Enset (Ensete ventricosum), according to the report. Enset, commonly called “false banana” is a native crop and belongs to the earliest plants domesticated in Ethiopia.

The US government has been promoting the interests of the biotechnology industry for several years. When Corteva Agriscience, the agriculture division of the American brand DowDuPont, one of the world’s largest GMO seed companies, opened its office in Addis Ababa in mid-April, 2019, the American Ambassador in Adis Ababa described it as a part of “the U.S Government’s ongoing investments in Ethiopia’s agricultural capacity,”

The condescending attitude towards smallholder farmers

Though certain experts and scientists have long been optimistic about the possible application of GM crops to overcome agricultural and food crises in Africa, there have been serious concerns about the application and the whole topdown approach. Teshome Hunduma, who is currently doing research on seed system development at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, says that agricultural and food crises that occur in the country are not only the result of lack of use of agricultural technologies, but it is rather the product of “the top-down, dogmatic attitude, uncritical faith in techno-scientific solutions, and the condescending attitude towards smallholder farmers that is rampant throughout the formal agricultural institutions”.

Teshome recalls the imperial monopolistic use of agricultural technologies and exploitation of peasants pre-1975, focus on inefficient and ineffective state farms and marginalization of peasants between 1975-1991, and continued state ownership of land and top-down agricultural development policies from 1991 until now. He said: “This experience from the past and recent political changes in the Ethiopian agricultural system shows the exclusion of the poor from the use of agricultural technologies and an increasing gap between rich and poor, not equitability.” The use of GMO seeds yokes farmers to corporate power, requiring ongoing purchases from multinational companies that have control over the technology through intellectual property rights, experts say. While the companies enjoy exclusive rights to commercialize their technologies, they have less accountability for GMO contamination of farmers’ indigenous crops, according to the argument. Almost 400 cases of contamination occurred between 1997 and 2013 in 63 countries, according to the International Journal of Food Contamination.

Image:  Atekelt Tera, Ethiopia’s largest vegetable market. Photo Ethiopia Observer

The post USDA pleased with Ethiopian Gov’t for its willingness to approve GMOs appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in Ethiopia has passed 100 after 10 more positive tests in the county.

The latest data from Health Minister Lia Tadesse has shown the number of positive tests across the county has reached 105. A total of 659 tests were conducted in the last 24 hours, nine of them testing positive for COVID-19, eventually bringing the total number of cases to 105.

All of the latest nine individuals, except one Equatorial Guinean national, are Ethiopians – six males and three females, according to the data. Three of the newly infected persons, two of them 19 years old and one 20, are recent deportees from Djibouti, a country that has logged more than 700 cases and two deaths, who are currently sheltered at Dire Dawa University, which has been designated as a quarantine facility. A 20-year-old woman who returned from Libanos tested positive in Jimma, it was revealed. She was not under quarantine as she arrived before the start of the mandatory 14-day quarantine, the Minister of Health wrote.

On Friday, the country has registered four new cases and seven others the previous day, including a 14-year-old girl who has not traveled recently. It is unknown how she contracted the virus, according to the Health Minister. There is currently one person in a critical condition, she added.

Lia Tadesse wrote on Twitter that overall 6890 coronavirus tests have been carried out in the country. Most of those tested are people who returned from overseas. Testing has been extremely limited in the country due to a lack of supply. It’s expanded in recent days though, Lia Tadesse acknowledged Thursday. The number of laboratories performing testing increased to a total of eight nationally, she said. Door-to-door visits to identify people who may require testing has also started in Addis Ababa and other towns, according to the Minister.

Since the country confirmed its first case of coronavirus on March 13, three coronavirus patients have died and 16 have recovered from the virus, Lia said.

The post Ethiopian coronavirus cases pass 100 as 9 more people test positive for COVID-19 appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Here are images by an Ethiopian photojournalist Mulugeta Ayene that won a prize in the world’s most prestigious photojournalism awards. Mulugeta’s series of images of grieving families at the site of the crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET302, near Addis Ababa on March 14, 2019, has won first prize in the category for ‘spot news stories’ of the World Press Photo of the Year Award.

The award was announced on April 17. ‘This is an incredible achievement not only for me as an individual but also as an African photographer. I hope that this award will inspire other young African photographers to take photojournalism seriously and to be part of a new generation of African journalists who share their own stories and views from the continent,’ the photographer wrote on his Facebook page.

Mulugeta is a photographer for the Associated Press (AP) and works on regular assignments for prominent international organizations such as UNICEF the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to mention a few.

Mulugeta’s photos have won him awards such as first prize in the ‘Excellence in Journalism’ competition organized by the Foreign Correspondents Association of Ethiopia (FCAE) in 2011 and 2012, and the first prize in the India-Africa Photo Contest in 2012, according to the description on the World Press Photo website.

Main Image: An Ethiopian relative of a crash victim throws dirt in her own face as she mourns at the scene where the Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 crashed

The post Prize-winning images appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

King of Kings: The Triumph and Tragedy of Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia by Asfa-Wossen Asserate,  translated from the German by Peter Lewis, London,  Haus Publishing, 2015

In his exhaustive, deeply affecting biography of the life of his great-uncle Emperor Haile Selassie, Prince Asfa-Wossen Asserate talks about his relationship with the emperor by invoking a particular incident. Asserate, 72, who spent his childhood and adolescence in Addis Ababa, was a student in Germany when harrowing images of the famine came from the provinces of Wollo in the autumn of 1973. “In Frankfurt, where I was studying at the time, I myself had organized a benefit concert for the ‘flying doctors’ who were working in Ethiopia and raised a decent sum,” he writes.

The occasion coincided with the final visit of Emperor Haile Selassie to Germany, on 12 September 1973, exactly a year to the day before he was deposed by army officers and driven from his palace into detention. “A large crowd had gathered on the Castle Square in Stuttgart, where the emperor was due to meet Hans Filbinger, the state president of Baden-Wurttemberg; most of them were there to cheer Haile Selassie and wave Ethiopian flags, but a handful of protesting students from the nearby University of Hohenheim had also mingled with the crowd. They were holding up placards with slogans proclaiming ‘Haile Selassie-Go Home and Feed your starving People !’ and ‘Death to Imperialism !’ and handing out leaflets to passers-by. The emperor and his entourage had been put up at the Monrepos Lake Palace in Ludwigsburg, just north of Stuttgart, and I was summoned to his suit there for an audience with Haile Selassie.

 ….the emperor asked me: ‘By the way, who told you the Ethiopians were starving?’ I knew he didn’t approve of my fundraising initiative, but I was determined to fight my corner. ‘Your Majesty,’ I replied cautiously, ‘I don’t believe that I am doing anything wrong. The flying doctors perform an important role, they’ve already proved that in Kenya. I’m sure their aid will be good for our country as well.’ Haile Selassie said nothing for a moment, then continued: ‘Anyone can start something…but the real art lies in carrying it through to the end.’ …. Then he looked up at me and said: ‘We will talk again in Addis Ababa.’ My audience was at the end…. Just a few months later, the Ethiopian Empire, which had existed for millennia, was consigned to history,” the author writes.

Despite this moment of tension and ambivalence, Asfa-Wossen, who came from a long imperial line, presents a well-researched, objective, and understanding picture of the emperor, the royal family, and issues surrounding the period. The book is full of inside stories and personal perspectives on the emperor. The author relied on his childhood memories and his knowledge of the milieu of the Imperial rule to paint a picture of Haile Selassie and he also sought the people who knew, consulted, or simply crossed paths with the emperor for a better understanding. In the prologue, he tells us that for decades, he had entertained the idea of writing a book about his great kinsman Haile Selassie, “but I did not simply want to produce a family memoir and a hagiography.” He laments about a paucity of wide-ranging, serious historical biographies charting the life of Haile Selassie. “There are various reasons for this: in Ethiopia, over the past forty years, there has been little inclination to revisit the topic of the Ethiopian Empire and its last ruler. Indeed, the regime that immediately succeeded it was hell-bent on erasing every last trace that period,” he observes.

This is not the first book on Haile Selassie. There are good political profiles such as Zewde Reta’s, Tafari Makonen Rezmu Yeseiltan Zemen ( 2005) and Yekedamwi Haile Selassie Mengist (2012), Angelo Del Boca’s, The Negus: The Life and Death of The Last King of Kings (2012), Ahadu Sabure’s Yekedamawi Haile Selassie Fitsamena Yederg Anesas, Harold Marcus’s Haile Selassie I: The Formative Years (1987), Christopher Clapham’s Haile Selassie’s Government (1969), Denis Gérard’s Ras Tafari Haïle Sélassié (2006), and Theodore M. Vestal’s The Lion of Judah in the New World (2011), but this one stands out as the author “exploited a unique advantage: the history of his own family was, for three generations, interwoven with the history of the emperor,” as Thomas Pakenham wrote in the foreword of this book.

Stories and anecdotes related to the author’s father, Prince Asserate Kassa, the son of the venerable Ras Kassa Hailu, a leading politician of the empire, and his relationship with the emperor are ample. There are arguments corrective to the idea that Asserate Kassa was a conservative or even reactionary aristocrat. Rather, his commitment and recommendations for sweeping reforms, following the 1960 failed coup, showed him as a great reformer and open-minded, at times putting him at odds with the emperor. Asserate, who rose to the rank of Presidente of the Senate in 1961, was sent to Eritrea on a new assignment as governer in 1964. His assignment was cut short in Eritrea when the Imperial government declared the controversial marital law seven years later and replaced Asserate by a high-ranking military officer, a move that he opposed fiercely. Asserate came to be appointed as president of the Crown-Council, an important position around the throne that he held until he was arrested and summarily executed, along with many other aristocrats and Imperial officials, in November 1974 when the revolution broke out. (Asfa-Wossen’s brothers and sisters, Rebecca, Teruworq, and Mulugeta, Wendossen, and Kassa Asrate were arrested by the Derg.)

Early Career

Haile Selassie’s early life is illuminated in much greater detail than before. The author begins his story in the final years of Emperor Menelik II when he appointed Ras Makonnen as a governor. Makonnen’s son Tafari, the future emperor, spent his boyhood in Harar and started education there. While In 1909 Menelik designated his only grandson, Lij Iyasu, as his heir to the throne of the Empire, Tafari was appointed to his father’s governorship of Harar a year later. But Iyasu, a handsome, dissolute and athletic young man, was only sixteen years old when the emperor died in 1913, and he showed himself an unstable successor, contrary to the posed and moderate Menelik. Menelik’s daughter, the childless Zewditu, was crowned empress and Tafari was elevated to the rank of ras, and regent and heir to the throne under Zewditu. “In the meantime, the pact between Tafari Makonnen and Lij Iyasu was destined to be strengthened through familial ties. In 1911, Tafari married Princess Menen Asfaw, a granddaughter of King Mikael of Wollo and a niece of Lij Iyasu. Iyasu had personally engineered this liaison. To enable Menen to marry Tafari Makonnen, he arranged for her divorce from her then-husband, Ras Leul Seged. Yet despite the fact that this was an arranged marriage, the 22-year-old Menen was by common assent one of the most beautiful women at the Addis Abba court, and the couple was evidently devoted to one another,” writes Asfa-Wossen.

Yet this arrangement could not prevent the impending confrontation between the two cousins. Most accounts hitherto have claimed that Iyasu’s dissolute lifestyle, volatility and violent temper had distracted him from the heavy imperial charge and put him at odds with the aristocracy. But Asfa-Wossen disagrees and instead says Iyasu’s ousting was due to “his grand vision that lay at the heart of his political agenda: namely reconciliation between the Chrisitan and Muslim sectors of Ethiopia’s population. » Ethiopian Muslims, Lij Eyasu, announced had been abandoned and persecuted, and he then continued to make a call for Muslims and Christians alike to “be united through a nationalist sentiment.”  The author then provided an explanation of how that fact had been used by Iyasu’s opponents, including Tafari, to launch an attack against him, alleging that he had converted to Islam and was intending to transform Ethiopia into a Muslim state.

The account contains another interesting claim which says that the Allies led by Britain and France who viewed the new direction Ethiopian politics were taking under Iyasu with great suspicion used every means, as he puts it, at their disposal to fan the flames of the rumour that Lij Iyasu had converted to Islam, even going so far as to circulate faked photographs showing the Ethiopian ruler clad just in a loincloth in the manner of a Muslim nomad. “These images, which were passed around from hand to hand in rural regions, achieved their desired effect.”

On 27 September 1916, a group of Ethiopian princes gathered in Addis Ababa under the chairmanship of the defence minister Habte Giorgis and decided to depose the prince. Iyasu, who was in Harar, fought back, he assembled his forces in Harar and marched towards Addis Ababa. But his troops were defeated and he fled into hiding. It was on this background that Tafari Makonnen came to power as regent of Ethiopia, in 1916, and on 3 April 1930, he was elevated to the throne with the title of Emperor Haile Selassie I.

Asfa-Wossen provides an extensive treatment of Haile Selassie’s early career, and of his determination to modernize his feudal empire. The steps the emperor took to promulgate Ethiopia’s first written constitution, to hire a team of Belgian officers to train the imperial bodyguard, to import foreign advisers to supervise educational, legal, and financial reforms. But all his plans were to be cut short by the Mussolini’s invasion in 1935, forcing him to flee into exile. As Asfaw-Wossen wrote in the prologue, “Just six years after ascending the throne the King of Kings appeared in Geneva in front of the General Assembly of the League of Nations……the exiled monarch made a moving appeal to the world’s conscience. The words he spoke that day have gone down in history: ‘Catastrophe is inevitable if the great states stand by and watch the rape of a small country.”

Rodolfo Graziani, who served as viceroy from June 1936 to November 1937, had earned himself a reputation for brutality. After an attempt to assassinate him in Addis Ababa, he ordered the subsequent massacre in the capital which continued for nearly three days, and thousands of Ethiopians were slaughtered. In January 1941, after six years of brutal occupation, the Italian armies were defeated and Haile Selassie resumed his reign.

The Restored Empire

The emperor went back to modernizing the state and strengthening his power. He established a centralized system of the provincial administration, with governors appointed by himself. He promoted in his cabinet people of humble origin who showed him absolute loyalty. The best example was Tsehafe-Tezaz Wolde Giorgis Wolde Yohannes who was named Minister of the Pen in 1941, who “remained in this post for fifteen years, growing increasingly powerful in the process. But as his influence grew, so did the deep mistrust of his internal opponents,” writes Asfaw-Wossen.

In 1950, Haile Selassie established the first college-level institution, the University College of Addis Ababa, later Haile Sellassie I University with the Jesuit administrators. With the help and assistance of the United States, the emperor created a national airline for Ethiopia in 1945. After a long and difficult diplomatic battle, the Ethiopia-Eritrea federation was implemented in 1950.

On the basis of careful sifting of evidence, Asfa-Wossen shows how the emperor enjoyed important achievement, in advocating African unity and independence and put himself at the forefront of the pan-African struggle for independence and unity, his alliance with the Allies against the Axis powers during World War II, his role in the Organization of Non-Aligned States. In one of the chapters, entitled “shaking hands with history, 1963 to 1973», the author highlighted how in the 1960s Africa was divided into two blocks, known as the Casablanca and Monrovia groups, Emperor Haile Selassie managed to reconcile the two blocks, which he achieved through the creation of the Organization of African Unity in Addis Ababa. «And the skills in having reconciled the most conflicting opinions was one of the greatest foreign policy triumphs of Haile Selassie. It earned him the soubriquet ‘the Father of Africa,’” Asfa-Wossen writes. “With the foundation of the OAU, Ethiopia was accorded a key position within African politics. And on several occasions over the ensuing years the position of authority that the emperor enjoyed among the assembled nations of Africa would play a decisive role in resolving conflicts.”

Another of the emperor’s achievements was putting his country on the non-aligned Movement, an international organization dedicated to representing the political, economic, and cultural interests of the developing world. In particular, Haile Selassie was impressed by “the policies of the Yugoslavian leader, who had successfully extricated himself from the clutches of the Soviet Union and put himself at the forefront of the non-aligned movement. The two heads of the state became close allies from the first state visit by Marshal Tito to Ethiopia in December 1955. Thereafter they met regularly, and right to the end Haile Selassie referred to Tito as ‘my friend’. The Marshal advised the Ethiopian emperor against keeping all his eggs in one basket – a piece of advice that the latter was all too ready to heed ….”  A core conviction of Haile Selassie was not to rely solely “upon one protecting power, for good or ill, to maneuver adeptly between various parties and wherever possible to play one off against the other.” Again these have been said before, but never so eloquently and in such powerful detail.

In a measured approach and astute contextualising, Asfa-Wossen explains that the Emperor’s legacy was complex, blessed with moments of insight and wisdom but also with that of bad judgment and poor performance. While acknowledging the earlier side of the emperor’s intent on modernizing his country, building schools and hospitals, adopting modern technologies, including aircraft, improved communications, he shows how towards in the 1950s Haile Selassie came to be regarded as the embodiment of an archaic political institution. The first break in the era of benevolent imperial power came in December 1960, when a dissident wing of the army led by the commander of the elite Imperial Bodyguard, Mengistu Neway, conspired to overthrow Haile Selassie while the emperor was in state visit Brazil.

‘The Stolypinists’

The attempted coup failed but Asfa-Wossen writes that in, ”So it was that, after the abortive coup in Ethiopia, a growing number of people in the emperor’s inner circle reached the conclusion that something fundamental had to change if the country’s monarchy was to be saved.” They included many of those had commanded the loyalist forces and defended the Crown against the insurrectionists in the dark days of December 1960, including Ras Asserate Kassa, Lieutenant General Abiye Abebe, who was also interior minister and the governor-general of Eritrea, and the defence minister Lieutenant General Merid Mengesha, colonel Tamrat Yigezu, the minister for social affairs and later governer-general of Harar, and the minister of information Dejazmatch Germatchew Tekle-Hawariat. In one of the author’s most interesting insights, we learn how their discussions resulted in a ‘Memorandum to His Majesty’….. under the headline ‘Our loyalty compels us to recommend some timely reforms to your Majesty.’ In this memo, they warned that the ‘trust and support of the people might continue to ebb away,’ and of ‘the danger of revolution increasing.’ To prevent this from happening, the signatories called for a root-and-branch reform, especially in the realms of bureaucracy, the parliamentary system, the economy and social welfare, and the organizational structure of the army. In conclusion, they listed seven concrete demands, including a revision of the constitution, a widening of parliamentary rights of scrutiny, and duty of accountability to parliament on the part of the prime minister. »

The authors of the memorandum were later termed ‘The Stolypinists’ –by the British ambassador, Sir John Russel who served in Addis Ababa from 1962 to 1966 – an allusion to the Russian statesman Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin, who introduced an an agrarian reform program at the begining of the 20th century that he hoped would shore up the imperial Russia.

“Haile Selassie showed the memorandum to his prime minister, and Tsehafe-Tezaz Aklilu Habte-Wold must have encouraged His Majesty in his conviction that he should reject the suggestions. Even though the premier may well have been of the same mind as the signatories of the memo on many matters, he saw it primarily as an attempt by aristocratic forces to relieve him of his office by the back door and seize control of the post of the prime minister themselves.”  That’s certainly debatable. The fact that the emperor rejected the suggestions could not be contested but the claim about prime minister Aklilu’s position with the use of “may well have been” could be problematic. For one thing, the emperor on matters of important issues would have consulted other loyal people such as Ras Mesfin Sileshi, Mekonen Habetwold, or his eldest daughter, Princess Tenagnework but of course Aklilu also. The fact of the matter was Aklilu was pushing for the reform as much as the others. As Abera Jembere wrote in Encyclopaedia Aethiopica: Volume 1, Aklilu in 1961 submitted to the emperor radical proposals, which included constitutional, judicial, and land reforms and the enactments of liberal laws on local administration, the civil service, pensions, employer, and employee relations, etc. Of course, it was not March 1966 that some of these were implemented, and the Prime Minister received the power to select other ministers. Aklilu’s cabinet were commoners yet intellectuals and technocrats such as Ketema Yifru, Mammo Tadesse, Minasse Haile, Tesfaye Gebreezgi, in contrast to the tradition-bound aristocrats.

The author says after the 1960 coup, the aura of imperial omnipotence was shattered and for the remaining fourteen years the regime was living on borrowed time. ”But in the interim,” Asfa-Wossen observes, ”things had reached a stage where the emperor was no longer judged by what he had achieved but by what he failed to do. For Ethiopia was still one of the most economically backward countries in the world. The per-capita gross national product stood at just US$83 in 1973, one of the lowest in the whole of Africa. Average life expectancy was thirty, and 60 percent of all newborn children died before they reached their first birthday. In almost all statistical measures of international development, the Ethiopian Empire found itself in the last five places.”

The emperor’s downfall in 1974, though promoted in part by famine and worsening unemployment, was due more to a failing system. “Shouldn’t the Ethiopian dignitaries have seen this disaster looming? Were they living in an ivory tower?” the author asks rhetorically. And then he went on to narrate an incident that occurred in the palace at Massawa in Eritrea in the late 1960s, as told to him by the Ethiopian author Mammo Wudineh. “The chief of the Ethiopian police, Brigadier General Tadesse Birru, was paying his respects to the then Governor-General of Eritrea, Ras Asserate; Mammo was accompanying Tadesse at the time as a journalist. Ras Asserate and General Tadesse fell to discussing the country’s future, in the gloomiest of terms. In 1960, both men had played a key role in putting down the palace revolt staged by the Neway brothers. Now the general posed the question: ‘When the earth finally receives our bodies, will we be worthy of it?’ The Ras’s response was unequivocal: ‘Why should we be? No, the earth should not receive our mortal remains! We are divided amongst ourselves and all we can think of is destroying others’ work. This country is descending straight into a chaos that can never be made good.’ And he added: ‘Yesterday’s events [i.e. the 1960 putsch] will come back to haunt us tomorrow!'”

As the years went by, the chances of reform slipped, paralysis had settled on the palace and the capital. The author relates what his father had gone through towards the end, as The Lion of Judah was no longer able to tackle the fundamental reforms that the country required. In 1972, when the Emperor celebrated his 80th birthday and 42 years of his reign, Asserate went to the palace to offer his congratulations-then suddenly fell at the emperor’s feet. Lying there, he begged for one favour. ‘Please say this to your subjects: « My beloved people of Ethiopia. I have served you for almost sixty years. Now the time has come for me to abdicate… Here is my son, into whose care I commend you.”

The emperor was visibly moved and said nothing for a while. Then he told Asserate to get up, and replied: ‘Tell me, did King David abdicate…We shall reign as long as the Almighty allows Us to. And when the time has come for Us to depart,  He will know what is best for Ethiopia.’ »

Asfa-Wossen’s biography is not just a portrait of Hailselassie, but the story of the 20th century-its upheavals, promises, and terrors. This makes for a very good read and provides much substance for debate.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post King of Kings: The Triumph and Tragedy of Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Genetically modified (GM) traits can be valuable and the discussion around them should be based on facts and in a case-by-case approach, according to an Ethiopian geneticist doing his postdoctoral research at Aarhus University in Denmark.

A recent report by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foreign Agricultural Service welcoming the Government of Ethiopia’s (GOE) approval of commercial cultivation of genetically modified (GM) cotton and confined field trail on GM maize has ignited a public debate over deployment of GM seeds. With generic discussions focusing on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) collectively rather than individual GM traits, opinions are as divided as one might expect. In addition, fundamental misconceptions appear to prevail inter-twined with some facts.
The author of this article is fundamentally in favor of agricultural biotechnology in which GM is a component. As an additional tool at the disposal of plant and animal breeders, there are things breeders can do with GM, which cannot, or can only be done with great difficulty, by other means. Transfer of specific identified genetic variants (or even whole genes) between species or distant varieties/breeds is one example. The genome of organisms can be altered to contain such genetic variants so that the genetically modified organism (GMO) can express the desired trait, which could, for instance, be drought-tolerance. In principle, this could allow increased yield and lower production costs, which translates to increased farm income. However, as in any tool, moving a GM trait into a certain production system should be evaluated for its relevance and potential impacts across a wide range of perspectives applicable to the specific production environment. While acknowledging the fact that whether or not to deploy GM traits must, in the end, be decision citizens as a whole need to discuss, it is argued here that a case-by-case conversation on individual GM varieties and traits rather than a wholesale conclusion on GMOs is in the public’s best interest. Furthermore, such discussions require presenting the public with scientific facts rather than promoting myths and misconceptions.

Thousands of years of genome alterations

A typical misconception is the assumption that altering the genomes of plants and animals begun with the emergence of GM in recent decades. In fact, people have been altering the genomes of plants and animals for thousands of years starting from domestication through to traditional selection and modern-day breeding. In what can be regarded as evolution fast-forwarded, artificial selection has led to the development of a wide variety of crops and breeds of animals. This is achieved by causing a gradual increase in the frequencies of naturally occurring favorable genetic variants in the population.
In recent decades, however, advances in genetic engineering have allowed direct genetic modification (GM) of organisms allowing precise control over the genetic changes introduced into an organism like the aforementioned example of transfer of specifically identified variants. Agricultural applications of GM have relatively advanced in crop production in comparison to animal farming. Most dominant modifications so far include crops modified to express the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxin- a natural insecticide, and crops modified to herbicide tolerance (HT). These modifications or gene introgressions can be made on different varieties of various crops. As of 2018, 191.7 million hectares of GM crops were planted by up to 17 million farmers in 26 countries.

Ethiopia is not a pioneer in Africa!
An additional misconception that should be untangled from the ongoing conversation is one that alludes to the GOE’s approval of a GM crop as a “breakaway” position from an “African consensus” on the ban against GM. Some going as far as speculating the decision might cost the country’s “Pan-African environmental leadership”. Whether or not Ethiopia has such a “leadership” in the first place is debatable in itself, but nothing can be further from the truth than assuming the decision as a “break-away” from African consensus on GM ban. Neither is Ethiopia an African pioneer to approve GM crops nor is there a continent-wide consensus over the ban. GM crops have been commercially cultivated in Africa since as early as 1998. Commercial cultivation in South Africa begun in 1998 reaching 2.1 million hectares of land covered with biotech maize, including Bt maize, by 2014. Burkina Faso and Egypt followed in 2008. Sudan initiated commercial GM cotton in 2012 and by the end of 2018 had 0.2 million hectares of land covered with biotech crops, a significant part of which was Bt cotton. Other African countries were conducting trials on GM crops with approvals for commercial cultivation widely expected soon. Kenya, for instance, had already approved field trials for Bt maize back in 2016. In 2019, the Kenyan government further granted approval for Bt cotton cultivation, in a move welcomed by its agricultural research community. There appears to be a tendency to equate The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, adopted on 29th January 2000, as a consensus on a collective ban against GMOs. The Protocol is an international agreement which aims to ensure the safe handling, transport, and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology on the precautionary principle (PP). Opponents often invoke the PP to justify a ban on GM, but proponents see these as selective applications of the PP.

GM can be a valuable tool but is no cure-all
Proponents of GM argue that adoption can lead to increased yields, decreased insecticide applications, reduced drudgery, and the use of environmentally friendly herbicides. Several studies have reported and quantified such benefits. Based on a meta-analysis of publications from several countries on the farm-level costs and benefits of GM cotton and maize, Finger et al (2011) conclude that adoption of the GM crops led on average to higher economic performance. Another meta-study published in 2014 estimates a 22% increase in global yield from GM crops while reducing pesticide (active ingredient) usage by 37% and environmental impact (insecticide and herbicide use) by 18%. For countries with foreign currency bottlenecks like Ethiopia, reduced usage of inputs such as pesticide, insecticide, and herbicide translate to substantial foreign currency savings. Opponents of GM who argue that GM crops tend to benefit the better off and do not accommodate the resource-poor farmers often challenge such reports. However, studies at smallholder levels too appear to indicate beneficial effects for some GM varieties. For instance, a study in South Africa showed that laborsaving benefits of Bt- and HT- maize varieties made them particularly preferable among smallholder women. A 2013 review by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) indicates that nearly all available peer-reviewed publications on Bt cotton in South Africa (mainly focusing on smallholder farmers) report yield increase with the use of Bt cotton compared to conventional varieties. Similar success stories are reported for Bt cotton in Burkina Faso. Carefully and selectively deployed, GM traits have the potential to improve productivity and enhance food security. GM also offers an adaptive capacity against an increasingly unpredictable future.
However, there are limitations to how much we can do with GM traits. There were instances where some varieties with GM traits added no value compared to the conventional varieties under specific constraints. For instance, South Africa once rejected a GM maize variety developed by the US giant Monsanto after studies showed statistically insignificant superiority compared to the conventional maize in water-limited conditions despite Monsanto’s claim of improved drought-tolerance. This could be variety-specific shortcomings and might not be taken as an inherent limitation of GM.
However, inherent challenges exist too. So far, only a handful of traits are moved around through GM and these are mostly related to tolerance to biotic and abiotic challenges. For some of the most important yield traits, it will be very difficult to identify suitable candidate variants to move around owing to the underlying oligo- or poly-genic control. Thus, GM will have to integrate with conventional breeding, which will continue to provide the bulk of the genetic gain.

Careful evaluation of possible impacts
Many concerns have been raised against GM crops but the facts must be untangled from the misconceptions. One important concern among the public has been over the safety of consuming GM-sourced foods. So far, studies by national and international organizations reveal no demonstrated toxic or nutritionally harmful effects of foods derived from any of the widely available GM crops. The official position of the World Health Organization states: “GM foods currently available on the international market have passed safety assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved.”

Additionally, there are legitimate concerns related to control of patented GM crops by corporations, which dis-advantages smallholders who tend to save and re-use seeds. “Technology fee”, through patents tend to increase GM seed prices over conventional varieties. However, it should be noted that the same problem applies to some conventional hybrid seeds that are patented by private companies. In the author’s opinion, this is precisely why national agricultural research institutions, as well as their international partners, must leave the back seat and take center stage in the GM R&D to effectively prevent this technology from being a private sector monopoly. Public research institutions can, through research, be able to develop GM seeds using genes in the public domain. Additionally, public-private partnership models can be adopted to ensure resource-poor farmers’ access to transgenic traits in developing countries. Public-private crop breeding initiatives in South Africa and similar pilot projects in Kenya can be good models to scale-out. The adoption of GM crops might also negatively affect export to countries where such products might not be marketed. Thus deployment should be carefully aligned with each country’s agricultural export priorities.

The most pressing concern raised against commercial cultivation of GM crops is the possibility of transgenic contaminations to non-GM varieties, thus threatening biodiversity. Transgenic contamination from the Bt maize in Mexico has been a popular case.
In the author’s view, this calls for immense caution but does not warrant a complete ban. Technical measures can be put in place to minimize risks. For instance, various spatial and time segregation measures of coexistence can be adopted as seen in some European countries. With spatial measures, some countries establish buffer zones between GM and non-GM farms with specifics varying to individual species and between the countries. Time segregation entails to the time difference between cultivating GM and non-GM varieties of the same crop on the same or neighboring lands. For example, some European countries insist that after cultivating GM maize, farmers must wait between one and 10 years before growing non-GM maize on the same field. Others require off-season planting of GM crops to avoid cross-pollination. However, keeping crops free from transgenic contamination requires constant effort throughout the entire value chain, not just at the farm level. Countries have been putting regulations to this effect including labeling of GM products. However, none of these measures can be adequately implemented in the absence of effective and functional regulatory institutions.

Conclusion
GM can be a valuable tool for productivity improvement. Merits and impacts should be evaluated for individual GM varieties on a case-by-case basis rather than a blanket ban. National agricultural research systems should be engaged in GM R&D to prevent this tool from being a private sector monopoly. Effective and functional regulatory institutions are indispensable.

Main Image: A compound salad at Chimaki Bet in the Legahar area of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Observer.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post The case for GMOs appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The statement by the pro-GMO expert in an article published in the Ethiopia Observer: “[GMOs] in principle, […] could allow increased yield and lower production costs, which translates to increased farm income,” lacks moral correctness and it is built more on theory than reality.

The author has every right to promote Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) but his article is one-sided, selective in its use of studies, and full of factual errors. The author who has a manifestly unbridled enthusiasm for GMOs makes some overconfident claims, starting from his opening line which says, “genetically modified (GM) traits can be valuable and the discussion around them should be based on facts and in a case-by-case approach.” However, he did not provide enough case-by-case examples of these traits that could be relevant to solve the problems of smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. After all, any technological intervention must be based on the needs and realities of those smallholder farmers who are the main producers of food and raw material for industrial production in Ethiopia. For instance, we have yet to see GM traits that could be effective to mitigate the devastating wheat rust, withstand extreme drought and frost, and provide a higher yield than existing crop varieties. There are numerous writings that wax lyrical about the virtues of GMOs, many of them written by paid advocates. But independent assessments on the nature and performance of GM crops in comparison with conventionally improved varieties are rare. Even if we must advocate for GMOs, it must be in consideration of the country’s interest than that of the multinationals, whose sole motive is nothing more than profit. We must also communicate facts that are relevant for smallholder farming in Ethiopia instead of stories from commercial farming in the U.S. or other industrialized countries. If the GM traits must be there, it must be with the aim to solve farmers’ problems.

Indeed, GMOs should not be confused with the use of biotechnology as a science. There are biotechnology tools such as “marker-assisted selection” that are cheaper and can be helpful in countries like Ethiopia to develop new varieties in a short period of time for use. These kinds of technologies are less risky and easy to integrate with conventional breeding in pro-poor public research institutions.

In the first paragraph, the author wrote, “the genome of organisms can be altered to contain [a] genetic variants so that the GMO can express a desired trait, which could, for instance, be drought-tolerance.” He adds, “in principle, this could allow increased yield and lower production costs, which translates to increased farm income.” The truth of the matter is, we have not yet seen super varieties or GM cultivars that have led to a huge surge in yields and tolerate moisture stress. High yield already exists in conventionally breed improved varieties. Most GMOs are created by inserting genes (e.g. from bacteria) into these high yielding varieties to produce toxins that kill insects or to become herbicide tolerant. Thus, two types of GM crops dominate today’s market.

Insect-resistant GM crops – these types of GM crops are developed by introducing a gene from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a soil bacterium. Such GM plants or Bt-plants were created to produce toxins that kill insect pests. The advantage is that we avoid spraying synthetic chemicals to control insect-pest by growing Bt-crops. This is useful for the environment and the economy of the producer. But things get murkier when the insect evolves through time and develop resistance to Bt toxin produced by the plants. Insect resistance by GM crops breaks as much as those varieties developed through conventional breeding. Studies have already shown this problem. This would force farmers to go back to using chemicals to control the pest, making the cost of production higher as farmers would be obliged to buy expensive GM seeds as well as associated insecticidal chemicals. It also means farmers would be required to spray more chemicals, which is bad for the environment. Another problem with GM crops is that they do not have certain features compared to their counterpart conventional varieties while they maintain insect resistance. For instance, the Bt-cotton failed in Burkina Faso because the fiber quality of cotton was below standard, and farmers were forced to sell at a low price. Generally, GM crops have not demonstrated superior performance compared to conventional varieties in this regard but one thing that we could speak with certitude is they increase production costs. This is because all GMOs are patented, which makes the seeds and associated agrochemical inputs more expensive. Thus, the patent on such GM crops is an incentive for the multinationals to accumulate wealth at the expense of poor farmers.

Herbicide-tolerant GM crops – these types of GM crops are modified to tolerate huge doses of chemical herbicide e.g. Roundup Ready GM soybeans. Roundup kills non-modified normal soya plants and weeds. In other words, normal soya plants and all other unwanted plants in the field (weeds) die except those GM soya plants when we spray them with Roundup. Indeed, this makes weed control easier or manageable when we have a huge soya field which otherwise is difficult to control weeds by manual weeding. This can be beneficial for large scale farmers in developed countries where labor is expensive. The problem with this type of GM crop is the emergence of “superweeds” as observed in recent years. These are tolerant weeds that are no longer killed by Roundup and growers must spray more of it to control weed infestation. This means it exacerbates the environmental hazard. It increases water, soil, and air pollution, which can have a devastating effect on human and ecosystem health. Still, the winners are companies who earn from the sale of a patented chemical (roundup) and GM soya seeds.

Companies are now “grabbing” plant genetic resources by incorporating genes from traditional plant varieties and wild relatives into GM crops through patenting.

The author correctly points out that altering the genomes of plants and animals did not begin with the emergence of genetic engineering (GE) and genetic modification in recent decades. “In fact, people have been altering the genomes of plants and animals for thousands of years starting from domestication through to traditional selection and modern-day breeding,” he wrote. This is why many observers find patenting plants and animals outrageous because the diversity of crops that we have today is the result of thousands of years of selection and management by farmers. Companies are now “grabbing” plant genetic resources by incorporating genes from traditional plant varieties and crop wild relatives into GM crops through patenting  It must be underlined that companies  are not inventing genes, but they are simply isolating them from farmers’ varieties or genetic resources in the public domain.  They would go on introducing these genes to a new one to claim a patent, which gives them complete monopoly of the genes. The example of introducing a gene that confers resistance to Xanthomonas from sweet pepper to banana shows this technological practice. The same thing is being tried on Enset. This becomes unfair when the technology is monopolized by a handful of multinational companies through patents.

In my view, it is insincere to promote GMOs in a country that has weak or insufficient biosafety regulatory frameworks such as biotechnology and/or biosafety policy, laws, regulations and guidelines, administrative systems, decision-making systems and mechanisms for public engagement.

In addition to hiding these socio-economic harms from use of GMOs, the author intentionally avoids distinguishing genetic engineering from conventional breeding including the selection of better plant varieties by farmers. Genetic engineering (that involves the transfer of genes from unrelated organism to another such as between bacteria and plants to create transgenic organisms), and Genetic modification (that involves modifying the DNA of an organism by removing, replacing some genes or inserting genes from other plants of the same species) is different from farmers’ selection practices (conscious or unconscious). The later resulted in an enormous diversity of crops and animals we have today. This is a common communication practice by pro-GMO experts to ignore the socio-economic and ecological risks of GMOs. In my view, it is insincere to promote GMOs in a country that has weak or insufficient biosafety regulatory frameworks such as biotechnology and/or biosafety policy, laws, regulations and guidelines, administrative systems, decision-making systems and mechanisms for public engagement. While the author’s doubt about Ethiopia’s eco-leadership is forgivable, the fact he stressed regarding earlier cultivation of GMOs in other African countries is undeniable.

I leave it to the author to learn about Ethiopia’s Pan-African environmental initiative by reading Dr. Melaku Wored’s work and that of Dr. Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher. Earlier cultivation of GMOs in other African countries is true, as the author points out.  But he avoids mentioning that the use of GMOs has been restricted to few crops and countries on the continent. The U.S. and its agri-conglomerates pushed for commercial cultivation of GM crops in South Africa in the late 1990s following the country’s transition to democracy from apartheid. It is no accident, that they are trying to push for the same market opportunity in Ethiopia today. They see a similar moment in the country’s history – a transition from authoritarian rule to “democracy”. In the last 20 years, big commercial farmers in South Africa have been growing GMOs. Egypt and Sudan have allowed GM crop cultivation, especially Bt-Cotton. Burkina Faso tried to do the same, but it largely failed. Overall, GMOs have not expanded to many African countries as hoped by the U.S and its companies in the 1990s and later years. Ethiopia, Rwanda, and Uganda seem to be the new target countries now. Uganda has allowed trials for the genetically modified banana in the last few years. Rwanda is considering opening up to genetically modified potato. GMOs have also made their way to the African Union in the form of policy through the development of the African Seed and Biotechnology Programme in 2008. But the program focuses on overall seed system development and states that GMOs can be one alternative, but it should be managed safely. I would also like to remind the author that this program was developed based on the African Model law that Ethiopia drafted in 2000, before its relaxation due to pressure from western donors and new philanthropists such as Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It is understandable for the author to say that “GM can be a valuable tool but is no cure-all” when he argues using a study done by people from Agri-food group and a study that uses data from the internet (a literature review of studies mostly done/financed by Monsanto and other companies) instead of filed level environmental and socio-economic impacts of GMOs to make conclusions. What we have been lacking is an independent study of GMOs that has no affiliation to pro- and ant-GMO movements. So, all these praises don’t support the author’s claims.  

The author also tells that for countries with foreign currency bottlenecks like Ethiopia, reduced use of inputs such as pesticide, insecticide, and herbicide could translate to substantial foreign currency savings. Unfortunately, this is premised on flawed reasoning. Ethiopia could earn more foreign currency from exporting its organic products. Buying a technology that others benefit from will not solve its currency problem. Rather Ethiopia’s export will be questioned after the adoption of GMOs especially in Europe where GMOs are not welcomed both by consumers and their strict regulatory framework.

Another argument by the author is the labor-saving benefits of insect-resistant – and herbicide-tolerant maize varieties. This is beside the point. It is strange to argue in this manner in a country where millions of young people are not in employment. The country might have many other problems but not labor. The author also said, “GM also offers an adaptive capacity against an increasingly unpredictable future.” What is proof of this? Of course, there is not. The author has simply overstretched himself. In my view, there is no risk that vulnerable smallholder farmers can bear, and Pro-GMO experts need to be honest and build public trust in Ethiopia

Image: Cotton farmers near Arba Minch, southern Ethiopia, photo Ecotextile.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post We need more honesty in GMO discussions appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Maryam Dengelat is one of the 200 rupestrian churches of Tigray, which according to tradition was dug in the sixth century. The church, situated near Adigrat across the Agame Massif, was inaccessible for about 400 years since a section of the mountain collapsed, taking with it the entrance of the church.

On 24 March 2019, for the first time in more than 400 years, priests were able to celebrate a mass in the church, after having climbed 30 meters. Thanks to two Italian mountaineers, the five priests managed to ascend and penetrate into the inside of the church to lead the ceremony. An electrician who would install the light and loudspeaker also went up.

A gathering of 300 priests, including Melake Genet Abba Kidane Mariam, personal assistant to His Holiness Abune Mathias, officials, and the faithful attended the ceremony at the feet of the cliffs.

It all began a year ago when Hagos Gebremariam of the University of Adigrat approached Luigi Cantamessa, owner of Korkor Lodge and author of the Ethiopian guide book, to ask him if he could help in organizing logistic and professional support to access the church. Luigi responded in positive and started contacting prospective volunteers to carry out the task.

In March 2019, Giorgio Malluci and his partner, Elizabetta Galli, Italian alpinists,, and active members of Mountain Wilderness, responded to the call of their friend. They were tasked with making the climb and outfitting the imposing rock face that separates the church from the underlying plain at a height equivalent to two 5-story buildings. It took them a three weeks work, a perforator in hand to fix the concrete irons in the rock and the pitons of the iron path which will finally allow access to the small wooden door stuck in the middle of a stone wall. Despite the discomfort, physical exertion, poor quality of the rock, Giorgio ends up reaching the level of the church, under the amazed gaze of the villagers.

On March 24, a local priest Haftey Araya was hoisted along the cliff’s wall. He managed to open the church, becoming the clergyman to re-enter the Maryam Dengelat church after the four-century.

« Abandoning Maryam Dengelat is no longer an option,»  Luigi Cantamessa promised to the religious community during the re-opening ceremony. A lot of work remained before the troglodyte church could be returned to the community. A crowdfunding campaign was launched and a handful of French volunteers landed six months later. Among them, Olivier Grunewald, photographer, and alpinist and Stéphane Trannoy, a specialist in hard-to-access work came to strengthen the security of the church. For three days, they rise from dawn along the cliff and with masks and with shovels, they attacked evacuation of 80 cm thick carpet, with droppings accumulated by generations of birds. The reinforcing priests tirelessly searched amidst the guano, from which they extracted whole pottery, shards of porcelain originating in China, small bibles of illuminated leather, and most importantly, the Tabot of the church. Luigi with Stephen Rickerby and Lisa Shekede, wall painting conservation experts, examined the frescoes, including the presence in the midst of the frescoes of Stephanos, a holy figure to which the orthodox of the region seem so attached.

Maryam Dengelat’s door is closed again but there is an ongoing project to set up a museum in an existing building located at the base. Since the site itself will not be open to the public, the museum would display photographs of the church’s mural paintings and artifacts of the church.

A YouTube video uploaded by Olivier Grunewald shows Elizabetta Galli equipping the iron path to allow access to the church.

The post The reopening and re-consecration of a once inaccessible church appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Following public outcry, the government clarifies its stance on GMOs. Experts say the intention is to distract public attention. 

The Ethiopian government has denied approving the commercial cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) other than two Bt cotton varieties.

An official from the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) told BBC Amharic that the recent report about the country opening its agricultural sector to GM crops was not entirely true. Esayas Lemma, Director of Crop Development Directorate at Ministry of Agriculture, was quoted as saying that even though Ethiopia has approved two GMOs varieties of cotton for use only by investors of large plantation, this does not mean that the country has approved all GMO crops.

“The two cotton varieties that we have brought from India have been successful and have been authorized. But we have not allowed other crops as they did in other countries,” he said.

Ethiopia has long been resisting GMOs, despite intensive lobby from multi-national giants. However, in 2015, it approved the commercial cultivation of genetically modified Bt cotton and field research on GM maize. Following two years of confined field trials, the Bt-Cotton has secured the approval from the Ethiopia Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in June 2018 for “environmental release.” The move has recently been praised by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foreign Agricultural Service, which went on so far as to say that it would have a positive influence on the acceptance of this technology in the region. The report has provoked intense debate for and against GMOs in recent weeks.

But according to Esayas, even for those two authorized varieties, there are still unsolved issues. “Directive has not been issued on how to move forward with confinement and containment operation and making sure that the cotton seeds would be used only by big investors. So it has not happened. The seeds have not yet been imported,” he said.  

One of the issues is the Indian company’s insistence on a corporate monopoly over the cottonseeds, the Director said. “We are still in the negotiation process for the cotton varieties to be developed here than to be supplied every year,” he said. Esayas did not mention the name of the company but previous reports indicate it was Mahyco, Indian subsidiary company of the US-based Monsanto, acquired by Bayer in June 2018.

The official did not say anything about the GE maize and Enset trials, which were mentioned in the USDA report. A five-year permit was issued to conduct confined trials on TELA corn, which was developed under the philanthropic Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA), according to the report. A collaborative project using genetic engineering to develop varieties of enset was also being carried out, the USDA report says.

Some commentators reject the latest statement made by the official of the Ministry of Agriculture. “The issue of GMOs is not their mandate. They are not mandated by Public Health, Food Safety, and Biosafety proclamations. Why is the Ministry out with this statement? I think it is trying to distract public attention from the issue and stop the current outcry. But the people will continue to push for correct information,” Teshome Hunduma, a PhD research fellow at Norwegian University of Life Sciences, told Ethiopia Observer.

Environmental activists say Ethiopia should proceed with caution in adopting GMOs given the adverse impacts that have been noted elsewhere, including the emergence of superweeds, herbicide resistance, and genetic pollution.

Image: A woman collects cotton in a field near Arba Minch town. (Photo by Arefaynie Fantahun.)

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post Ethiopian Gov’t refutes ‘untrue’ report of GMOs appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

In an open letter, former Director-General of the Environmental Protection Authority of Ethiopia and the spokesperson of the Like-Minded Group (Group of 77 & China) at the Montreal and Cartagena biosafety talks, Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher, urges the government to respect the legal status of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

My name is Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher. I turned 80 on 19 February 2020.

I studied in Bangor, North Wales, United Kingdom, for my PhD in plant ecology. It is obvious that there is an overlap between plant ecology and animal ecology.

It is with this background that I served my country as the Director-General of the Environmental Protection Authority of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, based in Addis Ababa, my country’s capital. It was because of this background that I led the Ethiopian delegation, including in the negotiations on biosafety and genetic engineering.

The outcome of the global negotiations on biosafety included the full socio-economic and environmental impact assessment of genetically modified organisms. This assessment looks at possible new and unexpected outcomes of plants and animals that could be harmful to the environment. It includes the transfer of genes modified through genetic engineering to life forms and their possible consequences. This can be avoided if it is done in a contained environment and as and when the effects have been studied and are found to be safe for all forms of life, the genetically modified organism will be allowed for use as food, feed as well as for industrialization. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity is an international agreement which aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) resulting from modern biotechnology. This will prevent adverse effects on biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health. To date, 172 counties around the globe, including Ethiopia, have ratified the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety also requires that the cultivation of genetically modified organisms does not pollute organic agricultural crops and animals, wildlife, and other farming practices that must avoid contamination by the modified gene in the area where they are growing. It also includes the appropriateness of labelling genetically modified organisms to inform those who wish to use non-genetically modified products so that they are assured of their choice. This is a fundamental social right, the right to choose what to grow, what to eat, what to wear, and how to interact with the environment. Once a modified gene gets into the environment and the living organisms therein it cannot be taken out, eliminating the right to choose.

I led the Ethiopian delegation in the negotiations in biosafety. When the negotiations started, the African Group of Negotiators chose me to become their chief negotiator. Following that, the Developing Countries Group of Negotiators asked me to be their lead negotiator. Finally, all the negotiators except those who called themselves the Miami Group also asked me to be their chief negotiator. The Miami Group consisted of the United States of America, Canada, and Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay. The negotiations were finalized in Cartagena, which is a city in Columbia. Thus, the final agreed biosafety protocol is called the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Now, I read and heard in the news that the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia is allowing the cultivation of genetically modified crops in Ethiopia. I have several worries, including the feasibility of 130,000 hectares of research being a contained environment, and how these things have been legally handled with the biosafety protocol as it stands ratified and procedures defined by the Biosafety Framework of Ethiopia defined by the Law, Policy, and Standards of the Directorate General of the Environment, Forest and Climate Change Commission, in February 2019. If these have not been implemented, the involved parties are breaking the law, stipulated in February 2019 and laws gazetted in Proclamation No 655/2009 that was amended in 896/2015. It would also mean that Ethiopia has de-facto withdrawn from the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. To the extent that I know, Ethiopia has thus far kept all its laws and replaced or amended them when necessary, and it has not legally withdrawn from the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. As a retired old man past 80 years of age, I have no direct contact with the Federal Government of Ethiopia. Therefore, I have no way of checking whether Ethiopia is simply ignoring the legal status of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety or not.

If the Federal Government is simply ignoring the legal status of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, then it would be obvious that it is breaking International Law.

If the Federal Government is simply ignoring the legal status of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, then it would be obvious that it is breaking international law. This should not be allowed to happen. Therefore, I want to encourage the younger generation of Ethiopians to protest in all the ways they can. This is because breaking an international law, which includes the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, without legally withdrawing from it, is breaking international law and degrading rule by law in Ethiopia, in the continent of Africa and in the world at large with the exception of the members of the Miami Group, which are only 5 countries as opposed to the rest of the globe.

I would also urge the young generations of Africa and the rest of the world to urge their respective governments to continue respecting international law, including biosafety, globally.

The post An open letter by Dr. Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

• Country reported its fifth death related to COVID-19

The number of confirmed coronavirus cases in Ethiopia climbed to 210, Ethiopian Health Minister Lia Tadesse reported on Saturday.

The daily update by the Health Minister showed that said out of 2,383 lab tests conducted, 16 people have tested positive, bringing the total number of infected people in the country to 210. According to the figures, all 16 new COVID-19 cases are Ethiopian nationals, 7 males and 9 females. 2 of them are recent returnees from abroad and the 13 of them have traceable contacts, it was said. Thirteen of them are from Addis Ababa, one from Woldia town of Amhara region, and two of them from Sodo and Butajira towns of the southern region. The country reported new death today and the victim is a 65-year-old male from Addis Ababa, bringing the death toll to 5.

The Ministry of Health also said that 97 patients who tested positive for COVID-19 have so far recovered from the virus. The first case of COVID-19 was confirmed in Ethiopia on March 13.

Though case numbers in the country have been relatively low, government officials continue to warn the public to proceed with the utmost caution and prudence as the virus might not peak until early June.

There is concern about the arrival of many Ethiopian nationals from neighboring countries such as Djibouti and Somaliland that could hasten the spread of the coronavirus. Officials in Afar and Somali regions are rushing to tighten controls over the border with Djibouti, which has seen more than 1,135 cases so far. Returnees are being kept in hurriedly constructed quarantine centers, some questioning about the effectiveness of facilities.

The post Coronavirus cases in Ethiopia surpass 200 appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) is the foremost violator of the citizens’ rights, despite lip service to safeguard the country’s constitution, a former TPLF official said.

In an interview with the state-owned Addis Zemen, Zadig Abraha, who is currently Minister of Democratic System Building Coordination Center, said that TPLF has a history of violating the constitutional rights of citizens starting from the day it adopted the constitution in 1989.

Reacting to the TPLF’s decision to hold elections in Tigray despite the nationwide postponement of voting, Zadig, who broke party ranks in February 2019 after a string of disagreements, said it is one of the manifestations of the party’s anti-constitutional stance and illegal move.

The Minister, who also serves as an election section head for PP, went on to accuse his former party members of manifesting a kind of, “We don’t want to live in a country which we don’t rule,” attitude. They seem to say “We want a nation apart”, he said.

He added: “A country is not something you discard just because you are not its PM or a plaything you do with as you please. Violating the constitution is a punishable offense.”

The Tigray people have been living together with their Ethiopian brothers and sisters for centuries, paying all the necessary sacrifices and shedding blood for their country, and that was not because their leaders always came from Tigray, according to Zadig. The steps TPLF is taking are neither constitutional or sustainable but they are only meant as show-offs for the loss of its standing, he said. “Unfortunately, they only serve to hasten its demise,” he added.

Ethiopia’s national elections were scheduled to take place on August 29, but have been delayed because of COVID-19. Some opposition parties have demanded the establishment of a transition government. However, Zadig deemed the demand as ill-considered, arguing the constitution mandates the current ruling party to continue exercising power until an election is held.

The post Former ally says TPLF is a foremost violator of the citizens’ rights appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The recent exchanges on Ethiopia’s acceptance of genetically modified (GM) crops and the resulting report of USDA praising the steps our country has taken continue to be informative. My understanding of the debates surrounding GM foods suggests that neat explanations about their usefulness grossly disregard the muddy footprints and messy stories of the technology while the voices of vilification and blanket rejection tend to thrive more on emotional appeal than rigorous science. Let’s start with the basics.
The 21st century is said to be the century of biology and ecology. Thus, for Ethiopia, as one of the globe’s top 50 centers of biodiversity, where better to capitalize on than in understanding and developing its crop and animal varieties and fulfill its long-held potential of being Africa’s breadbasket. Ethiopia is one of the few centers where domestication of crops was practiced at the dawn of agriculture and the country has contributed to the world’s collection of cultivable species – such crops as Teff, coffee, enset, sorghum, millet, etc. It means that our farmers are not new to the genetic modification of organisms since every domestication effort involves selective breeding and recombination of desired characteristics. We also have adopted several foreign plant species (maize, wheat, barley, tomatoes, potatoes, pepper, etc.) some of them only a few centuries ago, without much consideration for their effects on our indigenous species.
Despite these impressive records, our agricultural system stayed firmly rooted in its ancient practices which suffer from abysmal efficiency and very poor productivity. As a result, Ethiopia remains a net importer of crops both for human consumption and for its expanding industries, and there seems to be no natural end to this depressing trend. The consequence is not only a shrinking of profit base for many of the industries but also the misplaced use of the meager hard currency obtained from the export of some raw materials with all the negative impacts on our capacity in importing more useful technologies.

Ironically, Ethiopia has no shortage of cultivable/irrigable land or population able or willing to participate in modern agricultural practices. In fact, Ethiopia’s farming community is estimated to be above 80% of the population– but is unable to feed itself properly let alone supply raw materials for the manufacturing sector. The production by small scale farmers in Ethiopia is demonstrably incapable of keeping pace with the population growth as tens of millions of our people still depend on food handouts every single year and many more live in precarious situations. Therefore, it is pertinent that the country becomes self-sufficient at least for feeding the population with all possible means. And, this is not a very hard task given the scale of its cultivable land and the disproportionately large population whose livelihood is dependent on farming.
The most relevant question is thus how to end this absurdity and persistent tragedy without drastically affecting the livelihood of our farmers and disrupting the biodiversity balance. For a very long period of time, Ethiopia lacked the capacity to introduce mechanized farming and other relevant agricultural technologies. Further, it lagged far behind many (African) countries in developing its policies and relevant practices with regard to the application of plant genetic engineering technology. Arguably the most unhelpful effort on part of the Ethiopian government in the last decade has been the introduction of the Biosafety Proclamation No. 655/2009. It is possible that this proclamation was enacted as a genuine effort to protect the local farmers and the country’s agriculture sector from control by a few foreign biotech industries and create a formidable safeguard against potential fallouts from untended consequences of releasing GM crops. However, it is clear from the outset that the proclamation lacked proper scrutiny by all the relevant stakeholders, not least farmers’ representatives or experts from agricultural research centers in the country. In addition, it failed to recognize the potential of local agro-biotechnology research and innovation and was oblivious to the rapidly changing focus of the debate and policy shifts surrounding this emerging technology from around the world. Thus, our Biosafety Proclamation No. 655/2009 was, by international standards, relatively outdated as soon as it was hastily passed by the parliament (hence the justification for a later amendment as Proclamation No. 896/2015).
It is unclear why modern GM organisms are so divisive and treated as highly toxic materials that should be feared and avoided at all costs. Rigorous analysis done by scientific institutions such as the UK Royal Society and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences has demonstrated that such organisms are at least as safe as their counterparts produced by conventional breeding techniques. For example, the GM cotton that Ethiopia is said to have started cultivating is the widely known Bt variety. In short, Bt is abbreviated from Bacillus thuringiensis, a bacterium species that naturally occurs in soil and produces highly specific insecticidal proteins. This bacterium has been in use, in one form or another, as the most effective, naturally occurring, and environmentally friendly bioinsecticide for more than half-century. Bt spray is currently the dominant bioinsecticide in the world and is authorized for use even by organic farmers worldwide. Therefore, we are talking about a well-characterized gene of a bacterium (which might as well be dwelling in our soils all along). Plants expressing this gene have been tested for more than two decades in several countries and in a wide range of ecological settings for the properties they have been designed for, with no confirmed case of ill effect as food or feed.
I suspect that Ethiopia has been misled or pressured into adopting an overly cautious interpretation of the precautionary principle as was the case in the past in some EU countries. In my opinion, the EU and its policies on GM products (even as progressive as they currently are) cannot be a good lead for Ethiopia. For one, farming practices in the EU are already highly productive even without the need for the introduction of GM. In addition, the sheer proportion of the population involved in the agricultural sector in Ethiopia means that unreasonable restrictions on agricultural biotechnology can have far-reaching consequences. For Ethiopia, the better place to look for inspiration is other developing countries around the world – in Latin America, Asia, and in the continent of Africa itself – for our capacities and needs are likely to be similar.

India, for example, started commercial farming of Bt-cotton in 2002 and at the moment, about 25% of its agricultural land is covered with this variety, the highest proportion in the world. In our continent, South Africa is the pioneer in providing permits for the commercial cultivation of GM crops – for GM cotton and maize – starting in 1997. Egypt has been commercially farming Bt-maize hybrid since 2008, using seeds procured from South Africa (it has since suspended the cultivation due to the lack of proper biosafety laws and other local issues). Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, and, our neighboring countries, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique have all tested and/or adopted the cultivation of GM crops. Furthermore, Nigeria, Kenya, and Uganda are pursuing various genetic modifications to the cassava plant, a staple crop for over half a billion people around the world. It is disingenuous, to say the least, to assert that all of these countries are either threatened or duped into accepting this technology to the detriment of the wellbeing of their population and ecosystems.
Ethiopia, on the other hand, despite having several, experienced agricultural research institutions, is missing out for far too long on the development of its genetic research capacity and utilization of available biotechnologies, especially as compared to many of these African countries. As a commentary on this site made it clear, the Ethiopian team negotiating the Cartagena Protocol, led by Dr. Tewolde-Birhan Gebre-Egziabher, played a key role in formulating a strong African position and had become the continent’s de-facto representative. This had been appreciated and acknowledged by several African countries at that time. Whether this fact can make Ethiopia assume a “Pan-Africanist leadership position in the environmental issues” is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. What is important is the fact that the Cartagena Protocol aims mainly to provide “an adequate level of protection” to worldwide biodiversity by placing a stringent control on “the transboundary movement, transit, handling and use of all living modified organisms that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity”. What it is not is an outright ban on the development, test or use of GM organisms for food or feed. In addition, several of the major African countries have since moved on and have come to realize that application GM crops, transgenic technology, and genetic engineering know-how could have a transformative effect on parts their economies provided that these are supported by a strong monitoring regimen. As a result, and contrary to its supposed pan-African leadership, Ethiopia is currently an outlier in the continent when it comes to the exploration of this powerful technology that can potentially transform the living standards of millions of people. Many of the countries that are said to be hesitant in accepting this agricultural biotechnology lack either the capacity to adapt and manage it or the actual need for a rapid transformation of their agricultural practices (they are either food self-sufficient or have no industrial base to supply to or both). In other words, we may as well have once been the continent’s leading voice against GM organisms but it has become apparent that we are leading the wrong league and it is not where we belong – it is unbecoming to our great nation.
What Ethiopia urgently needs is a dynamic regulatory system and strong scientific capacity for the evaluation, authorization, and monitoring of imported GM crops. It also needs to rebuild and expand its capability for fundamental research with the aim of developing local GM species using state-of-the-art methodology. Public-private biotechnology partnerships should be encouraged to work on genetic identification and improvements even in our own indigenous species of plants and animals. Furthermore, since we are negotiating for accession to the World Trade Organization, it is the most relevant time to substantially revise or repeal the Biosafety Proclamation No. 655/2009 (including its latest incarnation, Proclamation No. 896/2015) and streamline other relevant laws in accordance with international standards.

To this writer, the question is not to be why Ethiopia allowed the commercial cultivation of Bt-cotton and has authorized a confined field trial of Bt-maize. It is whether it had conducted a thorough analysis of the existing problems in the sector and identified the effectiveness of these particular strains of GM crops as cost-effective and sustainable solutions. It is not a case of “re-inventing the wheel” but of identifying our desirable targets and requirements, learning from the front-runners, and applying an appropriate level of precautionary principles. The temporary setbacks in Burkina Faso, Africa’s largest producer of cotton at one point, and some regions in India demonstrate that the process of introducing GM crops is far from being a “turn-key” situation. It requires the collaboration of laboratory scientists, policymakers, market leaders, and farmers (end-users) in identifying the required crop characteristic and quality that is suitable for the specific condition of the locality.
In conclusion, agricultural gene-modification technology has sufficiently demonstrated its worth after more than two decades of commercial application and this is reflected in its widespread global adoption.
Therefore, the excessive hesitance of its acceptance by Ethiopia and campaigners that support this stance is unjustifiable either socially, economically, or more importantly, scientifically.

Main Image: Children at a farm in Hawzen, Tigray region. Ethiopia Observer file.

The post Why Ethiopia needs to embrace gene-modification technology appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

A group of opposition parties, including the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF), proposed the extension of the government’s executive body authority for a year, in light of the constitutional crisis over the cancellation of the election because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

At a joint statement, the seven opposition parties have expressed consent that the executive body continues to exercise its administrative function for a year. However, the government cannot promulgate a new law or repeal existing ones, OLF public relations chief Kejela Merdasa told DW Amharic. Though the constitution does not have provision for such an eventuality as happened in the case of a pandemic, it would certainly be better to violate it through the consent of parties than on an individual party, Kejela said. Constitutional interpretation, which is proposed by the government, is not the legitimate way out of the impasse, he said.

The situation requires the application of the doctrine of necessity, based on the experience of other countries and the parties are calling for the establishment of a monitoring council involving all opposition members that monitor key sectors such as foreign affairs, intelligence bureau, federal army, and national security, according to the public relations chief.

Legislators have recently approved a bill that proposes seeking a constitutional interpretation from the House of Federation on how to resolve the elections conundrum, among other three options, dissolving the parliament, declaring a state of emergency, constitutional amendment.

While admitting it might be hard to come up with something that would satisfy all parties, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed last week said his government is committed to advance a solution that is consistent with the framework of the law and the constitutional system. He warned his government has zero-tolerance for any group that is determined to grab power through the illegitimate way.

Image: The chairman of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) Dawud Ibssa

The post Opposition parties propose extending the government’s authority for a year appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Amidst criticism of the decision to hold an election while the case of coronavirus is increasing in the region and in the country, Tigray’s leader Debretsion Gebremichael said the Tigray region will proceed with the election by taking all necessary precautions.

At a press conference in Mekelle yesterday, Debretsion said that even if the federal government has decided to delay the general election, the region will go ahead by taking all necessary safety precautions against the spread of the coronavirus. “We will execute the election within the legal framework, in the way which involves the political parties, associations and civic societies, and also the election board,” Debretsion said.

When the regional government decided to hold the election in these times, it was not because it was unconcerned about the risks associated with the pandemic but it was out of respect for the people’s votes and Constitution, he said.

“Come September, neither the federal nor regional government will longer have constitutional legitimacy, so not to conduct the election is parlous,” Debretsion told the press conference. “The issue at stake is one of honoring the people’s decision and respecting the constitution, not just extending the election.”

Tigray region recorded four cases of COVID-19, the first in the region on May 7, and four more cases were reported since. The region has declared a state of emergency on March 26, before the federal government.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post Tigray will proceed with election while fighting the pandemic: Debretsion appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

The government of Ethiopia has given significant attention to the road sector considering its massive impact on the socio-economic development of the country as road transport reaches the majority of the people. In this sense, the Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA) is mainly responsible for its administrative role in the construction and maintenance of federal road networks of the country. And in line with responsibility, ERA has been working hard aimed at improving the country’s road network, in a bid to boost transport, trade and thereby to develop the country’s economy, which is much appreciated.

The ‘Chencha-Humbo-Tebella’ road project, located in Southern Nations Nationalities and Peoples’ Regional State (SNNPRS), is an ‘old’ road project that was launched by the Ethiopian government (the then transitional government) back in 1992 G.C/1984 E.C; however, the project has never been implemented. I believe it is either ‘deliberately’ canceled or the authorities overlooked the benefits of it to the people it is supposed to connect. The reason behind the decision not to implement the project is not yet clear. For years, people in this region have been asking the government to start construction of the road, but the request didn’t get an answer. The road is expected to connect people from five different districts/woredas within two administrative zones in SNNPRS, namely:

1. Chencha Woreda-Gamo Zone
2. Dita Woreda-Gamo Zone
3. Kogota Woreda-Gamo Zone
4. Boreda Woreda-Gamo Zone
5. Humbo Wored-Wolyta Zone

The economic benefit of connecting these woredas through the road network is unquestionable. Undoubtedly, the completion of this project will enhance socio-economic development in the area. It will make it easier for farmers of the region to transport their products to bigger markets. In addition, this road project, if completed successfully, will reduce travel time, increase travel speeds, and reduce vehicle operating costs. Also, the construction of this road will facilitate the administrative and social service coverage in the region by connecting the above-mentioned districts. In light of what I have said above, there is absolutely no justification to disregard this a very important road project. And therefore, I call upon the ERA to start the project as soon as possible, and also I urge the government to investigate why such an important project is disregarded, left unimplemented after it was officially launched.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Please cite Ethiopia Observer prominently and link clearly to the original article if you republish. If you have any queries, please contact us at ethiopiaobserver@protonmail.com. Check individual images for licensing details.

The post Call for a stalled road project to be realized appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

• An army pilot who deserted Djibouti has been turned away by Ethiopia while seeking asylum

Djiboutian activists and exiled political figures have condemned Ethiopia’s forced return of an asylum seeker to Djibouti. The man, identified as Lieutenant Fouad Youssouf Ali, was forcibly removed from the Covid-19 quarantine center in Addis Ababa and flown back to Djibouti, according to Radio France Internationale (RFI).

The Lieutenant, who is an army pilot, fled to Ethiopia on March 27 after denouncing the injustices in his country’s army, according to RFI. The Djiboutian government had subsequently issued a warrant for his arrest and extradition and his entire family including his mother, brothers, sisters, children have been arrested, and interrogated, it was reported. On April 8, while preparing to lodge an asylum request, the pilot was arrested by security forces in Addis Ababa. An online campaign demanding his freedom had started, but the Ethiopian government has not reacted. This past Wednesday, the lawyer designated by his family found him and was able to visit him on in Gabode prison, where he is imprisoned after being forcibly returned to Djibouti, RFI reported today.

Ethiopia’s forced return of the Lieutenant to Djibouti has elicited many angry reactions from the Djiboutian diaspora, many of them saying the man is at serious risk of persecution in his homeland. Houssein Ibrahim Houmed, a Paris-based philosophy professor, said he did not believe that the Ethiopian Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, Nobel Peace Prize winner, for whom he had so much admiration and who embodied the hope of an entire continent could deliver the asylum seeker to his executioner. “This situation simply demonstrates that Ethiopia does not respect human rights,” he added. Another Djiboutian national, Abduljibbar Ismail tweeted, bemoaning what rights does political asylum seekers have. “Ethiopia sold to Djibouti a political asylum seeker pilot lieutenant who escaped from his homeland,” he added.

Ethiopia is a landlocked country and dependent on its neighbor, Djibouti for access to process its imports and exports.

Image: Presidential election posters Ismael Omar Guelleh on a street in Djibouti in March 2016, Simon Maina/AFP

The post Ethiopia accused of forcibly repatriating a Djiboutian asylum seeker appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

• The victim is being remembered by his friends as an outgoing person and father a three-year-old girl

A police officer fatally shot a man who reportedly defied coronavirus regulations in Mekele town, capital of Tigray region, BBC Tigrinya reported. The victim was identified as Sheshay Kiros, and he was a self-taught ironsmith.

Two police officers on patrol in Kebele 5, a suburb east of Mekele, are said to have been tipped off about young men who were drinking local beer in a public space. When the police officers reached there and told the young men to disperse, they were met with resistance. That was when the police fatally shot one of them, striking the man in the chest, according to the report. One witness who was on the spot said two police officers, one armed with a rifle and another carrying stick came towards them. “They told us that they would take us to the Mekelle community police bureau, the victim asked what we had done. It was after this exchange that the officer fired the rifle and killed him,” he was quoted as saying by the BBC. The victim is being remembered by his friends as an outgoing person and father a three-year-old girl. “Sheshay wasn’t that kind of guy to start trouble,” a friend, Daniel Kindeya said. “He was a really hardworking man. He was always working.but yesterday since it was Sunday and we were having a drink and a chat.” 

During the incident, two other men were shot and wounded, it was reported. The police officer who fired the shot has been arrested, head of Mekelle city’s crime prevention unit, Andenet Legesse told the BBC. Another person has been killed in the region under similar circumstances at the end of March.

Getachew Gebrekiros Temare, an activist and human rights advocate, wrote on his blog, saying Tigrai’s security forces are not new to commit extrajudicial killings in the region.

The post 1 man dead, 2 others wounded in Mekele for allegedly defying coronavirus regulations appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.

Mongabay, May 19, 2020

Maheder Haileselassie Tadese

SIDAMA, Ethiopia — For Lidya Ashango and 14 million other Ethiopians, the false banana plant widely known as enset is a staple food and, on many occasions, a supplementary source of income. But it’s no longer easy to grow this crop in the southern part of the country, where land is scarce and plant disease is inevitable.

A mother of seven living in this southern town of Sidama, Ashango and her family have been growing, harvesting and processing enset as long as she can remember.

Men plant the crop, but the women do the time-consuming and laborious work of producing food from the crop. By the time a well-tended crop is ready to harvest, three to four years after planting, the woman goes to the farm with a machete and cuts the false stem to scrape and separate it into a starchy pulp and a fiber.

The pulp is covered with enset leaves and left in a pit to ferment for months before being used to make various bread and porridge dishes. Kocho, the fermented product to turn into bread, and bulla, the flour to be cooked into porridge, are among the dishes prepared by the women from the plant. The leaves are used for livestock feed and packaging.

Although enset varieties are known to be found in other countries in Africa such as Uganda, this cultivation and fermentation process is largely known only to Ethiopians with traditional indigenous knowledge. Gurage, Sidama, Gedeo and Hadiya are a few of the ethnic groups that grow and depend on this perennial crop.

Enset’s label as a tree against hunger was adopted in 1984, when the northern part of Ethiopia that’s mainly dependent upon cereals like teff was severely hit by drought and famine. Researchers note that the south, which relies on enset, saw no such tragedy; and also that the tree is relatively resistant to climate change and exists in hundreds of varieties.

Unlike other cereals, it can also be intercropped with coffee or other fruit-bearing trees, still providing a higher yield per unit area.

Find the full story here.

The post Land scarcity and disease threaten a multifaceted indigenous crop in Ethiopia appeared first on Ethiopia Observer.