E.U. must stop treating Ethiopia regime with kid gloves – MEP wants action

March 4, 2018 (African News) — The European Union (E.U.) must start being tough with the Ethiopian regime especially given the current political climate, a Member of the European Parliament has said.

MEP Ana Gomes has thus requested that the parliament summons the E.U. Commission vice-president and top diplomat to explain the body’s most recent statement on the Ethiopian crisis.

According to her, the statement was weak and failed to send a strong signal to the regime especially relating to the reinstatement of a state of emergency (SoE) – the second measure in the last two years.

And the statement made by the European Union is a shame compared namely by the one that was put out by the Americans condemning the reinstatement of the state of emergency.

“I have asked this moment to ask you to raise with the High Representative Mogherini, the situation in Ethiopia. Brutal repression is going on, the Prime Minister has resigned (and) there has been a state of emergency reimposed.

“And the statement made by the European Union is a shame compared namely by the one that was put out by the Americans condemning the reinstatement of the state of emergency.

“I ask you to bring this up with the (European Union) Commission and the High Representative, so that the European Union, indeed, has a position that respects our values and meets the interest of democracy that has to be inclusive in Ethiopia and the establishment of the rule of law and the respect for human rights,” she said in a session on March 1.

My question at @EP plenary today on shameful @eu_eeas statement endorsing reinstatement of  in  (albeit with limits….). @FedericaMog must review disastrous  standing by repression and descent to chaos in Ethiopia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6zGZSRe2wg&sns=tw via @youtube

Gomes is a Portuguese politician who doubles as a Socialist Member of the European parliament.
She is currently a member of the political committee of the socialist party, is known to be someone who frequently speaks on Ethiopia politics.

She was part of efforts calling on the government to disclose charges against Oromo leader Merera Gudina after his in 2016. She is on record to have slammed the government after his release stating that he did not have to be arrested in the first place.

What did the E.U. statement say in February 19, 2018 statement

The resignation by Prime Minister Hailemariam Dessalegn opens a period of uncertainty in Ethiopia. It will be important for the new government to have the full capacity to pursue the positive reforms initiated by the Prime Minister to address the grievances of the population.

Only a constructive dialogue among all stakeholders – authorities, opposition, media, civil society – will allow for a peaceful and durable resolution of the crisis.

The announced reinstatement of the State of Emergency risks undermining this very objective. It is therefore of the utmost importance that it should be as limited in time as possible and respectful of human rights and fundamental freedoms, notably those enshrined in the Ethiopian Constitution. Violence should also be avoided.

As a committed partner of Ethiopia and of the Ethiopian people, the EU will continue to encourage all actors to work constructively towards a democratic and stable Ethiopia.

What the U.S embassy said in its Feb. 17 2018 statement

We strongly disagree with the Ethiopian government’s decision to impose a state of emergency that includes restrictions on fundamental rights such as assembly and expression.

We recognize and share concerns expressed by the government about incidents of violence and loss of life, but firmly believe that the answer is greater freedom, not less.

The challenges facing Ethiopia, whether to democratic reform, economic growth, or lasting stability, are best addressed through inclusive discourse and political processes, rather than through the imposition of restrictions.

The declaration of a state of emergency undermines recent positive steps toward creating a more inclusive political space, including the release of thousands of prisoners. Restrictions on the ability of the Ethiopian people to express themselves peacefully sends a message that they are not being heard.

We strongly urge the government to rethink this approach and identify other means to protect lives and property while preserving, and indeed expanding, the space for meaningful dialogue and political participation that can pave the way to a lasting democracy


US-Ambassador to Ethiopia Ambassador RaynorItiyoophiyaatti Ambaasaaddarri Amerikaa Maaykil Reneer ministrii dantaa alaa Itiyoopgiyaan waamamanii labsii yeroo muddamsaa biyyattiin labsite irratti ejjennaa qaban irratti ibsa akka kennan gaafataman jechuun gaazexaan biyya keessaa Ripoortar jedhamu gabaasee ture.

Garu Embaasii Amerikaa Finfinnee jiruuf dubbii himaa kan ta’an Nikolaas Barnet walgahiin gaggeeffamee kan sadarkaa dhunfaa ta’u ibsuun waa’ee irratti dudubbatame ibsuu hin feenu jedhan.

Gama kaaniin wanni gaazexaa Ripoortar irratti ba’e Ambaasadirichas ta’e Embaasii Amerikaa kan bakka bu’u miti jedhan.

Labsii yeroo muddamsaa kan ilaaleen ejjennaa qabnuu fi ibsii baafne kan jijjiramu miti jechuun irra deebi’anii mirkaneessan.

Scottish Parliament debate second independence referendum (DAY 2), before voting later today

Scottish Parliament debate second independence referendum (DAY 2), before voting later today


Scottish parliament expected to back 2nd independence referendum


(rt) — Scottish MPs are expected to back First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s bid for a second independence referendum when they vote later on Wednesday.

The ballot for a section 30 order, the mechanism authorizing a vote, follows a two-day debate on whether Sturgeon should seek permission to hold another referendum on independence from the United Kingdom between autumn 2018 and spring 2019.

While Conservative, Labour, and Liberal Democrat MSPs have promised to block such a ballot, the pro-independence Scottish Greens, who have six MSPs, are expected to give Sturgeon the support she needs for her motion pass.

Last week, Prime Minister Theresa May said “now is not the time” for another vote, implying she will reject the SNP’s preferred timeframe.

Sturgeon opened Thursday’s debate by saying it would be “wrong, unfair and utterly unsustainable” for the UK government to block her request, while telling the Scottish parliament that there was an “unquestionable democratic mandate for an independence referendum.”

“The voice of this parliament has been ignored at every step of the way and, far from any indication of new powers, we now face the prospect of the UK government using Brexit to reserve itself for powers in areas that are currently devolved to this parliament,” she said.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson accused the SNP of trying to “bulldozer” the vote through, saying there was no support in Scotland for a second referendum.

Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said that “leaving the UK is the only thing that matters” for Sturgeon.

“It isn’t improving education in Scotland; It isn’t lifting children out of poverty. It’s independence. That will always come first and always has,” she said.

In last June’s Brexit referendum, about 62 percent of Scottish voters backed the UK remaining in the EU.

The SNP manifesto said they would hold another ballot on independence if there was a “material change in circumstances” after the first referendum in 2014. They now say Scotland is being removed from the EU against its wishes.

However, Scottish voters’ support for staying in the UK is the highest it’s been in two and a half years, a poll has revealed.

According to a YouGov survey published by The Times last week, first minister Nicola Sturgeon would have to close a 14-point gap to win an independence referendum.

The poll found that, after “don’t knows” and those who won’t vote were excluded, 57 percent of voters want to remain part of the UK and 43 percent want independence.

YouGov recorded a 14-point lead for Scotland staying in the UK in August of 2014, a month before the first independence referendum was held.

Museveni weighs-in on US-Russia row, warms up to Donald Trump

Museveni weighs-in on US-Russia row, warms up to Trump

President Museveni is received by his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Moscow in 2012

By Frederic Musisi

KAMPALA (Daily Monitor) — President Museveni has sucked himself into the ongoing verbal rattling between liberals and conservatives over new US President Donald Trump’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, by penning a missive proposing a middle ground in the divisive international politics.

In the statement likely an attempt to endear himself to President Trump, whose policy outlook towards Africa has remained an enigma even after assuming office last month, President Museveni argues that against the backdrop of the widespread gap between the West versus East this is where Mr Trump comes in.

“He [Trump] says: ‘Why do we not examine the possibility of working with Russia against common threats, such as terrorism? The liberals then shout that Mr Trump must be having a secret agenda with Mr Putin,” President Museveni’s missive reads in part. “This is why we could think of looking into the possibility of talking about the Trump Therapy for strategic myopia and recklessness in the West.”


“Why can’t these countries of the West have a just and balanced attitude to the countries of the East that are growing in capability and getting millions of Peoples out of poverty?” he asks.

Related:Putin invites Museveni to Kremlin

Almost one month into office, President Trump has been rebuked by the mostly liberal media in the US for his perceived [earlier] connections to Moscow, and this has been interpreted as likely to affect his administration’s bond with Moscow.

Read: I look forward to working with Trump, says Museveni

At all press conferences he has addressed, Mr Trump has accused the media of being biased towards his infant administration and publishing materials of his alleged involvement with Moscow being premised on fake intelligence fanned by certain individuals in Washington. President Trump’s first pick for national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned this week on Tuesday out of pressure after several exposés in the media that he lied about his earlier engagements with the Russian ambassador to the US.
President Museveni in the missive, extensively delved into West versus East divide, illustrating how Africa comes into the picture…

See missive below:

I have been either closely following or actively involved in World and African political events for the last 56 years.  In those 56 years, I have noticed many happenings, behaviours, etc.  One of the groups that I have observed with interest are the Western “Liberals”, “Leftists”, etc.  In particular, I have noticed the confusion, ingratitude and, therefore, danger of these groups.  Liberals are supposed to be people who are not conservative and hardliners in economic, political and social issues.  Leftists are supposed to be progressive as far as the same issues are concerned.  In order to keep this piece brief, I will not go into the history and details of Western Liberalism and Leftism.  That should be for another day.

Suffice it to say that the freedom fighters from Africa, who have been fighting colonialism, neo-colonialism, slave trade and marginalization for the last 500 years, would have counted the Westerns Liberals and Leftists among our automatic allies because these should be people that should be fighting for freedom and justice for all peoples, including the formerly Colonized Peoples.

Instead, we notice confusion, ingratitude and, therefore, danger from these liberals and leftists.  Let us start with the confusion.  During the US campaign, I noticed President Trump using the words: “convergence rather than divergence”, while handling international affairs.  That is exactly what the Western Liberals and Leftists should have been looking for.  Instead, we would spend endless hours arguing with the Western Liberals on matters on which we cannot have convergence bearing in mind that our societies were still pre-capitalist and traditional while theirs have been industrial for centuries now.  These are issues to do with family, forms of democracy, homo-sexuals, central planning versus economic liberalization, etc., etc.  One had to control irritation to politely get through these meetings.  Yet matters of convergence were there and uncontested: fighting extremism and terrorism (narrow-mindedness and indiscriminate use of violence); modern education in natural sciences and social sciences; the emancipation of women; trade; democracy; etc.  This is what, in brief, I regard as the confusion of the Western Liberals and Leftists.  I do not want to say much on this because I want to get to the next two points and space is limited.  Nevertheless, by the Western Liberals trying to impose all their views and values on everybody in the World, they generate not convergence but divergence and even conflict.

Owing to the confusion of these actors, it leads them to two other mistakes: ingratitude and, therefore, a danger to peace in the World.  As colonized Peoples, the Africans were greatly assisted by two earth-shaking events in the last century: the October Communist Revolution of 1917 in the Soviet Union (Russia) and the Victory of the Communists in China in 1949.  You should remember that by 1900, the whole of Africa had been colonized except for Ethiopia which Musolini would soon add on the list (in 1935).  Colonized by whom?  By the Western Countries (Britain, France, Portugal, Germany and Spain).  The Communists, on the other hand, in both Russia and China, were totally opposed to Western Imperialism and were for de-colonization.  They opposed Imperialism by word and action (support for the Liberation Movements)

The greed and flawed logic of the Western Imperialists soon led to two World Wars (the 1st and the second ─ 1914–18 and 1939 – 45).  How? In 1453, the Ottoman Turks captured Constantinople (Istanbul) and, therefore, blocked the overland trade route opened by Marco-Polo in the years 1272 – 1275. The trade was mainly in silk and spices – very much in demand in Europe at that time.  Now, the Ottoman Turks cut off this route.
The Europeans had, therefore, to look for sea routes either around the massive African Continent or through the unknown Western Oceans ─ the Atlantic and the Pacific.  Frantic efforts by Western rulers to go by sea around Africa and over the Western Oceans, were soon rewarded.  In 1492, Christopher Columbus landed in Cuba, discovering for the Europeans a new continent occupied by the American Indians.  This new continent was North and South America.  In 1498, Vasco Da Gama went around the Cape of Good Hope and spent the Christmas day at Natal.  These two events should have been very beneficial to humanity if it was not for two weaknesses: the greed of the Europeans and the bankruptcy of the African Chiefs as well as the under-development of the indigenous Peoples of the Americans.  The bankrupt African Chiefs would not organize us to resist slave trade and colonialism.  In fact, many of them actually assisted both.  Especially for Africa, both slave trade and colonialism would not have been possible, if it was not for the collaboration and bankruptcy of the African Chiefs.  Owing to the social under-development of the Indigenous Americans (the American Indians), they were exterminated by “the Christians” from Europe, using war and disease.  It is an amazing miracle of God when I go to the UN and see the very American – Indian face of Evo Morales, the President of Bolivia.  So, some American – Indians survived in sufficient numbers to generate a President from among themselves!!  How great God is even in the face of evil!!  I have never had a chance to talk to him.  What language do these Indians speak?   Do they still speak their indigenous languages?  Therefore, in the four centuries between Columbus landing in Cuba and 1900, three most terrible things had happened to the non-European children of God: the indigenous People of the Americas had been exterminated and their land had been taken over by “the Christian” Europeans; millions of Africans had been up-rooted, taken into slavery in the Americas or perished in the process; and the whole of Africa (except for Ethiopia) and much of Asia had been colonized by European Countries (Britain, France, Spain, Holland, Portugal, etc.).  The Europeans had polluted the efforts of the explorers that were looking for the sea routes to the East.  Unlike Marco Polo who opened a trade route to the East for the flow of silk and spices, the Europeans now unleashed conquest, slave trade and even extermination on the People of the three continents: Africa, Asia and the Americas.

Nevertheless, the Colonized Peoples, initially betrayed by their bankrupt chiefs, were beginning to organize themselves.  The ANC of South Africa was, indeed, founded in 1912.  I attended their Centenary celebrations in Bloemfontein in 2012.  In the USA, by around 1905, people like Du Bois, later on joined by George Padmore, started agitating for Pan-Africanist ideas.  It is this re-invigorated resistance by the African and other colonized peoples that formed the first pillar of our ability to regain our freedom.  Indeed, Mahtma Ghandi was also in South Africa as a young lawyer when this awakening was taking place.

It is at this stage that the 2nd pillar of our freedom took shape: the sparking of the inter-imperialist war of 1914-1918.  What were these imperialists fighting for?  They were fighting over us ─ we the Colonized Peoples ─ the property of the imperialists.  The Germanic tribes inhabiting the forests of Northern Europe, had defied the Roman Empire and contributed to its decline and collapse in 450 AD.  By 1870, these tribes were still governed under 39 Kingdoms, Principalities etc.  On account of the growing Junker pressure in one of the Kingdoms, Prussia, a war took place between Prussia and France in 1870.  France was defeated by Bismarck and the German Kingdoms were united.  A United Germany now cried foul on account of being “cheated” by the other European countries in the enterprise of having “Colonial possessions” – i.e. us.  Germany demanded a “fairer” redivision of the World Colonies.  That is how Bismark organized the Congress of Berlin in 1884 – 85 to solve this “problem” ─ the problem of being “cheated” as far as we the “possessions” were concerned.  That is how Germany now joined the League of the Imperialists by being awarded: Tanganyika, Rwanda, Burundi, Cameroon, Namibia, Togo, etc.  It seems, however, that Germany was not happy with the redivision.  That is how, eventually, the 1st World War broke out in 1914.  The results of the 1st World War did not please Germany and Germany, now under Hitler, started the 2nd World War.  The good thing was that the Imperialist Countries had been so weakened by their criminal wars, that the anti-colonial movement grew in strength.  The Imperialists tried to re-establish control, but they were defeated in Indonesia, Indo-China, Kenya etc.  This, therefore, was the second pillar that enabled our emancipation.

The third pillar was the emergence of Communists in the Soviet Union in 1917 and in China in 1949.  These groups were anti-capitalist but also anti-colonialist.  To the advantage of the Colonized Peoples, a big anti-imperialist camp had emerged by 1950.  They opposed imperialism morally and also gave material support to the liberation Movements.  Genuine freedom fighters in Africa can, therefore, never forget this history changing solidarity.  When “Christian” countries from the West were enslaving us, these atheist communists supported our freedom and they never interfere in our affairs even today.  These communists, especially the Soviet Union, did not only support our freedom, they also defended, at a great cost to themselves, the freedom of the imperialist countries themselves.  Although the imperialist countries had intervened in the Soviet Union so as to defeat the new communist power, which efforts had failed between 1918 and 1920, by 1938, the pragmatic Stalin was calling on the West to form an Alliance with him to oppose German aggression.  The Western leaders, on account of their narrow interests and myopia, refused.  Soon Hitler attacked Poland and overrun it; he had gobbled up Czechoslovakia in March 1939.  He overran the whole of Western Europe except for Britain and Sweden.  Spain, Portugal and Italy were Hitler’s allies.  Fortunately for the West and for us all, Hitler made the mistake of attacking the Soviet Union on the 22nd of June, 1941.  It is the Soviet Union that defeated Hitler after alot of sacrifices with over 60 millionpeople dead etc.  Hitler, had to deploy 195 Army divisions against the Soviet Union compared to only 75 divisions in the West against the Western allies ─ the USA, Britain, France’s De-Gaulle, Canada, Australia, New-Zealand, South Africa, not forgetting the hundreds of thousands of African soldiers fighting for the Colonial Masters.  The Western countries only opened the second front with the landings in Sicily in July 1943.   This was after the defeat of the Germans by the Russians at Moscow (1941 – December), Stalingrad (1942-43) and Kursk (July, 1943).

It is this Soviet Union, that did not only support the freedom of us, the Colonized Peoples of the World, but saved the whole of humanity by defeating Hitler, that is ever the target of the ungrateful, confused and, therefore, dangerous groups in the West.  These groups were against the Soviet Union after the October Revolution in 1917, throughout the inter-war period (1918 – 1939), during the Cold War and even after the Cold War.  It is unfair, it is wrong and it is dangerous for World Peace.  True, the Soviets made their own mistakes.  Why did they occupy Western Europe after the defeat of Hitler?  Would the mighty Red Army not have earned more admiration from the Peoples of the World if they had withdrawn from Eastern Europe in 1946 and left those People’s to shape their own destinies?  They would not have, then, involved themselves in Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968 and there would have been no Berlin Wall.  Why did Brezhnev invade Afghanistan in 1979?  I was part of the massive anti-Soviet demonstration in Dar-es-salaam in 1968 following their invasion of Czechoslovakia.  However, to me, who is not biased, those mistakes neither compare with the mistakes of the West, past and present, nor do they deem the great historic contributions of both the USSR and China to the cause of humanity in general and the African Peoples in particular.

The Soviet Union broke up to the wild acclamation of the groups in the West.  They welcomed the break up but did not bother about the how.  You, therefore, had residual and consequent issues to the break-up.  If the old internal borders of the USSR were now to become the new international borders of Sovereign Countries that were successors to the old Russian Czarist Empire and the USSR, was it not necessary to discuss that phenomenon frankly and fairly?  How about the mixed populations ─ Russian and Non-Russian?  How were they to live thereafter?  No, all that was none of the business of the Western governing circles.  What was crucial was that the “enemy” was down.  Moreover, all the positive contributions Russia made to global peace or can make now are of no consequence to these Western circles.  Russia must submit to the dictates of the West.  This is where the danger of these groups comesin.  Russia is a very powerful country even after the break-up of the USSR.  It is (17,021,900 km²) seventeen million square kilometers in land area ─ that is like almost combining the USA and China.  The Communists developed Russian technology and it can develop more.  To think that you can trample on Russia like they have been trampling on other unfortunate Peoples, is to be very reckless and dangerous to World peace.  Yet there are so many issues on which all of us (Africa, the West, Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc.) agree: universal education; improved health; industrialization; freedom of Peoples; the emancipation of women; anti-terrorism; etc.  Why not take advantage of these convergences?  We who were colonized and brutalized by the Western Countries forgot and forgave those mistakes.  Why can’t these countries of the West have a just and balanced attitude to the countries of the East that are growing in capability and getting millions of Peoples out of poverty?

This is where Mr. Trump comes in.  He says: “Why do we not examine the possibility of working with Russia against common threats, such as terrorism?”  The liberals then shout that Mr. Trump must be having a secret agenda with Mr. Putin etc.  This is why we could think of looking into the possibility of talking about the Trump Therapy for strategic myopia and recklessness in the West.

Gen. (rtd.) Yoweri Kaguta Museveni
Friday, February 17, 2017

Churchill Starved 3 Million Indians to Death in the Man-Made Famine of 1943

The great hero of the Anglo-American world did his best to keep up with Stalin and Hitler


Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II is a book by a science journalist Madhusree Mukerjee. It tells of British policy in India in the Second World War and how it relates to the Bengal Famine of 1943.

(Check Point India) — Mukerjee reminds the reader that before the British conquest India was a rich land. Certainly the conquerors drawn to Bengal in the 18th century were of the opinion they were adding a magnificently wealthy possession to their empire. Under colonial rule, however, Bengal soon became a synonym for poverty and a frequent setting of famine.

During the Second World War the colony was made to contribute heavily to the British war effort. India’s industries, manpower, and foodstuffs were made to serve requirements of the war the empire had involved itself in.


This was merely the latest escalation in a long lasting exploitation of the colony. The British deemed their unwanted presence in India a service and therefore extracted “payment” for it in the form of the Home Charge. As the British obstructed the expansion of manufacturing in India lest it provide competition for their domestic industry, the export of agricultural produce presented the only way of realizing this transfer.

Finally, since the empire set the transfer so high so much grain was extracted for export that the colony — which continued to produce more food than its need through the 19th century — was artificially kept in a condition of chronic malnutrition.

Unsurprisingly, there was strong resistance to colonial rule that could only be overcome by large scale repression. As part of the August 1942 crackdown against the Quit India Movement alone, more than 90,000 people were locked up and up to 10,000 were killed.

Short on manpower the British at times resorted to attacking crowds with aircraft. In particularly rebellious districts authorities burned down homes and destroyed rice supplies. British India was not unlike an occupied land.

The book exposes the manifold causes of the Bengal Famine. To begin with mortality rate in Bengal under British rule was atrocious even in a normal year with some of that attributable to malnutrition.

The immediate reasons why conditions deteriorated beyond this “normal” state of semi-famine was the catastrophic Midnapore Cyclone and the Japanese capture of Burma.

The Cyclone storm and subsequent floods disrupted life and ruined crops. The loss of Burma severed links with an important source of rice imports to India. These two factors which were outside British control, were probably enough for a disaster on their own, but subsequent British policies made the crisis far worse than it needed to be.

Anticipating the possibility the Japanese could advance further, the British carried out a scorched earth policy in coastal Bengal, seizing rice stocks, motor vehicles, bicycles and boats. Seizure of boats was particularly disruptive as they normally represented the primary means of transporting rice crops to the markets.

The loss of Burmese rice imports to India was not made up by imports from elsewhere, nor was India’s obligation to supply British Indian troops abroad lessened. Instead, India was made to cover the loss of Burmese rice imports to Ceylon, Arabia and South Africa even though these territories were already better provisioned with food than India.


Albeit in the years before WWII India had become a net importer of food, importing at least one million tons of cereal per year — a figure that was not actually sufficient to cover its needs, but represented what it could afford to import after paying the Home Charge — the British now undertook to export food from India.

Anticipating food shortages that were certain to follow colonial administration moved to protect the strata of society most useful to the British Empire — administrators, soldiers and industrial workers. It set out to buy up huge quantities of grain and store it for their use. It would pay for these stocks in the same way it acquired supplies for the war effort — by printing money.

The government acquired some grain by requisitioning, but for the most part it simply bought it. Some purchases it made on its own, others it contracted out to private traders. Big merchant companies were given advances of vast sums of money and instructed to purchase grain at any price for the government.

The price of already precious grain  skyrocketed and the Bengal peasant was priced out of the market. Between the purchases of the Bengal administration, the Government of India, the army and the industries which were recipients of government largesse, grain was sucked out from rural areas. Departments of government and industries crucial for the war effort secured huge stocks of grain — part of which would end up rotting as millions starved.

What made the looting of the countryside to this extent possible was that the transfer of purchasing power away from the peasant and to the government and those the government made business with that money printing entailed.


In the course of the war the money supply increased by between six and seven times, so that the British worried they were “within sight of collective refusal to accept further paper currency”. This confounded the problem of food scarcity since some cultivators understandably held onto their grain rather than release it to the market, as it was seen a better store of value than the rapidly depreciating currency.

The reason government purchases were so devastating for Bengal peasants was that most families owned tracts of land too small to sustain their families on their own.

Even in a normal year such families were not in position to store enough of their harvest to sustain them until the next one. They were not sellers of crops, they sold their labor to the big landowners and bought food.

Except now buying food meant competing with a government that could print money at will.

Prevalence of effectively landless peasants in Bengal in itself was the result of British policies in India which had created the landlord class from what had been tax collectors before the conquest.

Albeit crop failure and the loss of Burmese imports was enough to create a serious food deficit for India, there was actually no food problem for the British Empire taken as a whole. In fact London claimed that Bengal could not be fed — not for a lack of food, but for a lack of ships — supposedly shipping was so scarce that grain, which was available, could not be taken to India without disrupting the British war effort.

Prioritizing its war over the bare lives of three million of its subjects would have been bad enough, but Mukarjee shows that shipping was nowhere as scarce as London claimed, albeit it was certainly being mismanaged. For example there was shipping and food enough to build up a stockpile in the Eastern Mediterranean for the purpose of Allied invasion of the Balkans that would never come about. Also there were always ships aplenty to build up an enormous and ever growing stockpile of food in the British Isles that the London government was actually building up for post-war use.

In reality the biggest obstacle to secure food for famine-stricken India was not a lack of means, but the lack of will to allocate the resources necessary. Such readjustments would have clashed with the interest and the intent of the British Empire under Winston Churchill to exploit its colony for its purposes to the greatest extent possible.

To their credit, not every Brit was of a mind with the London government personified in Winston Churchill.

Many officials, including high ranking ones like the Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery and the Viceroy of India, Field Marshal Wavell repeatedly called for a decisive effort to relieve the famine. Governments of Australia, New Zeeland and Canada offered grain for India if United Kingdom, which had taken control of their shipping, would transport it there.

British soldiers on the scene defied orders not to help famine refugees often handing over food from their own rations.

In addition to showing how the British Empire helped cause the Bengal Famine of 1943 and then denied it famine relief Churchill’s Secret War also provides the context for these two stories.

Mukarjee recounts a fair bit of the dynamic between colonial metropolis and the colony centering on exploitation and resistance, explains the consequences of British wartime policies for the political future of the colony — partition and independence — and paints a picture of famine and repression as seen from the ground by offering vivid first hand accounts by people who were affected.

It is a book rich in content, but probably the one thing to take from it is the way in which the famine was made worse and its victims selected by government abuse of paper currency.

British reaction to food shortages in Bengal was to protect the cities and industries at the expense of the peasants. Like the Soviet Union which had faced a food crisis of its own a decade earlier the British Empire figured it was up to it to decide who would live and who would die.


Only where the Soviet method of robbing the countryside of grain in 1932-33 was requisition, the British method of choice in India was money creation. It was a more elegant method, but no less deadly, and more difficult to effectively resist.

If the famine in 1932-33 in the Soviet Union was a requisition famine, the Bengal Famine of 1943 was a printing press famine.

HRLHA: Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention

hrw-200x200-2Human Rights League of Horn of Africa


Written Statement:

Submitted to United Nations Human Rights Council,

34th Session

27 February – 24 March, 2017

Item 4: Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention

(Country- Ethiopia)

Geneva, 12 February, 2017




How Many Should die Before the Internatioanl Community intervenes to save lives?

                    HRLHA  Calls for  Intervention by the international community

to end Human Tragedy in Ethiopia

1. The Ethiopian government has targeted the Oromo people in general and the youth in particular, since the 2005 beginning of the mass, but the peaceful uprising of the Oromo people led by Orom students demanding their freedom and the halt of systematic violations of their fundamental rights. The response from the government to the legitimate and peaceful demands of the people] was massive arrests, torture, disappearances and summary executions of the civilian population. However, the heavy hand of the government forces didn’t stop the demands of the Oromo people and the protest has continued for over ten years. From November 2015, the mass movement- in which Oromos from all walks of life have participated- has continued on a daily basis until the government declared a State of Emergency on October 8, 2016.<

The government also targeted prominent political leaders of Oromo parties that are registered and functioning peacefully in Ethiopia. Deputy Chairman of the Oromo Federalist Congress – OFC, Mr. Bekele Gerba- has been in jail for some years now, with his case still pending in the court of justice under the pretext that the prosecutor is unable to gather witnesses to testify against the accused. The number of Oromo political prisoners has reached an unbearable level and so disproportionate that, using the words of one senior government official who spend few years in prison, “Afaan Oromo (the language of the Oromos) has now become the official language of Ethiopian prisons”.

2. Ethiopian prisons, as far as the rights of the political prisoners to a reasonable space/room for sleeping, access to daylights, to proper sanitation, to family visits and meeting with their respective lawyers is concerned, are that they are among the worst correctional facilities in the world. The level of torture, as reported by the families who were granted rare visits, is unbearable. The government continues to deny access to international organizations, the UN Human Rights Special Rapporteurs and the ICRC, whose report could have shed more light on the situations in the prisons.

3. The Ethiopian government boldly demonstrated its dedication to continue violating the fundamental human rights of its citizens, when it arrested Dr. Merera Guddina, chairman of the Oromo Federalist Congress – OFC, on November 30, 2016 upon his return to Ethiopia after briefing the European Union officials on the situation in Ethiopia. The arrest, according to the government, was justified because of an alleged meeting of Dr. Merera with the other opposition leader, Prof. Berhanu Nega, chairman of the outlawed political party, Ginbot – 7 (a.k.a G7). Dr. Merera Guddina and Professor Berhanu Nega, the G7 Leaders, had been invited by the EU parliament to Brussels to attend an EU organized Conference on the Ethiopian current political crisis. According to reliable sources, Dr. Merera Gudina was taken to the infamous Maikelawi interrogation center, with the other two of his friends, Taye Negera and Kumala, both of whom were in his house during the arrest.

4. The peacful protests that have rocked Ethiopia over one year (November 2015- October 2016) led by “Qeerroo Bilissummaa” literally, youth for freedom against subjugation, dramatically changed the peaceful protests into violence after the tyrannical government mercilessly massacred over 700 Oromos, from the ground and the air, at the Irrecha Festival, Oromo Thanksgiving Day on October 2, 2016. This dramatically changed the peaceful protests into violent ones all over the country.

To download full document click here PDF

Ethiopian runner who protested in Rio reunites with family


Olympic silver medalist Feyisa Lilesa, rear, of Ethiopia, hugs his wife Iftu Mulia, his daughter Soko, right, 5, and son Sora, left, 3, while picking up his family at Miami International Airport on Tuesday.

Olympic silver medalist Feyisa Lilesa, rear, of Ethiopia, hugs his wife Iftu Mulia, his daughter Soko, right, 5, and son Sora, left, 3, while picking up his family at Miami International Airport on Tuesday.


The Ethiopian marathoner hid behind a column at the Miami airport as he carried a bouquet of red roses.

Feyisa Lilesa’s daughter spotted him first and ran in for a hug. Then, his young son and lastly his wife.

On Valentine’s Day, the Olympic silver medalist who became an international figure when he crossed his wrists in protest at the finish line in Rio de Janeiro finally reunited with his family. He was a little late (traffic), but what’s a few extra minutes when he’s already waited six long months to see them.

As he made his way out of the airport, his daughter rode on the luggage and his son perched on his shoulders, carrying the flowers he brought as a gift.

Ethiopia’s Lilesa afraid to return home after Olympic display

“The biggest gift is us seeing each other again — and me seeing them again,” Lilesa said through a translator in a phone interview Tuesday. “It’s all been very tough.”

The 27-year-old eventually settled in Flagstaff, Arizona, after making an anti-government gesture during the Olympic marathon that drew global attention to the deadly protests in his home region of Oromia. He never returned home after Brazil out of fear of what might happen to him. He’s constantly been worrying about the family he left behind in Ethiopia. His nearly 6-year-old daughter, Soko, and 3 ½-year-old son, Sora, always asked when they will see him again.

Finally, he was able to answer.

Lilesa remains in the U.S. on a special skills visa. His family arrived on visas as well, secured through his attorney.

UC Davis researcher killed by protesters in Ethiopia

The plan now is this: A few days of beach time and then it’s off to Flagstaff where the family will settle into everyday life in their rental house.

One weight off his mind.

Still, he can’t forget what his country is going through, with the Oromia region experiencing anti-government protests over recent months. Violent anti-government protests spread to other parts of Ethiopia and led to a state of emergency that was declared in October.

Since his gesture, many have described Lilesa as a national hero.

Planned Parenthood fans, pro-life protesters rally across U.S.

“My mind is pretty much occupied by what is happening back home,” Lilesa said. “Whether I’m running or I’m sleeping or I’m laying back, my family and what is happening in Ethiopia — and what is happening to my people — that’s constantly on my mind.”

Olympic silver medalist Feyisa Lilesa, of Ethiopia, carries his son Sora, 3, and pulls along his daughter Soko, 5, after picking up his family at Miami International Airport on Tuesday.

Olympic silver medalist Feyisa Lilesa, of Ethiopia, carries his son Sora, 3, and pulls along his daughter Soko, 5, after picking up his family at Miami International Airport on Tuesday.


Most days since his arrival in America have been spent training. It was his best cure for loneliness.

“I come from a very big family, and I’ve never lived alone,” Lilesa said. “I’ve always been surrounded by people I know. This has been the complete opposite. Here, I’m removed from all of that.”

Still, he would protest all over again.

Dozens gather to mark two-year anniversary of weekly BLM protests

“I think me taking the risk and putting family in that position and putting them potentially in harm’s way, it was a good lesson for a lot of people that you need to sacrifice in order for you to win some concessions and change your situation,” Lilesa said. “In that sense, it inspires people to fight for their rights and resist the government in Ethiopia. It also led to greater awareness about the situation in Ethiopia.

“Now, you see more coverage of the human rights violations. I speak with people wherever I go. Even outside the media limelight, people are interested in knowing. They heard the story because of my protest.”

Someday, he would like to go back to Ethiopia.

“But as long as this current government is in power, I don’t have hope of going back to Ethiopia,” he explained. “I do know change is inevitable.”

Paris Jackson supports DAPL protesters at Grammys

He also wants to compete at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Whether that’s wearing the colors of Ethiopia, he doesn’t know.

“I’m not too hopeful the system will be changed in the next three years and I will be in a position to run for Ethiopia. We will have to wait and see,” said Lilesa, who plans to run in the London Marathon in two months.

For now, Lilesa’s priority is getting his family settled.

“I knew that we would meet somehow, but I didn’t expect it would happen under these circumstances over here,” Lilesa said. “When I think about my family, it takes me back to why I did this and why I’m here. I missed my family, but this was a big bother to me — the plight of my people.

Duretti Fufa, MD – Disusses about orthopaedic surgeon

Fufa-bio.jpgDuretti Fufa, MD – Disusses about orthopaedic surgeon

(HSS) — Dr. Duretti Fufa is an orthopaedic surgeon specializing in hand surgery with additional expertise in reconstruction and microsurgery. She earned her undergraduate and medical degrees from Harvard University before completing her orthopaedic surgery residency at Hospital for Special Surgery. Dr. Fufa completed fellowship training in hand and upper extremity surgery at Washington University in St. Louis. Her subspecialty training continued with a plastic surgery fellowship in trauma and microsurgery at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taipei, Taiwan.

With unique training in both orthopaedic and plastic surgery, Dr. Fufa’s interests range from fractures and common hand and wrist problems to complex wound coverage, limb salvage and post-trauma functional enhancement. Aside from these clinical and research interests, Dr. Fufa is interested in global medicine and has traveled to Germany, China, India, and Ethiopia on medical exchanges. She also volunteers with the organization Health Volunteers Overseas.

Traamp Putiniin Deggeruun Nu Yaaddesse: Gareelee Mirga Namaa fi Seera Tumtoota US

Pirezdaant Traamp yeroo pirezdaantii Raashiyaa Vilaadmir Puutiin bilbilaan haasofsiisu, Amajjii 28, 2017

Pirezdaant Traamp yeroo pirezdaantii Raashiyaa Vilaadmir Puutiin bilbilaan haasofsiisu, Amajjii 28, 2017

Gareeleen mirga namaa, seera tumotoonni US hedduu, gadamoojjiwwan generaalota waraanaa fi ambaasaadderoonni Ameerikaa duraanii prezidaanti Donald Trump prezidaantii Raashiyaa Vladimir Putiniif falmuun kan isaan yaaddesse ta’uu beeksisan.

Trump kaleessa gaaffii fi deebii dhaaba oduu Fox jedhamu waliin geggeessaniin kabajaa Putiniif qaban irra deebi’uun dubbataniiru. Gaaffii qopheessaa sagantaa Sanaa kan ta’e Bill O’Reilly dhiyeesseef prezidaantiin Raashiyaa nama ajjeesuu jedhuuf Trump ennaa deebisan namoota nama ajjeesan nutuu hedduu qabna maal yaadda? Biyyi keenya qulqulluu dha jechuufii jedhan.

Kremlin dhaabi oduu Fox yaada nama mufachiisuu fi fudhatama hin qabne dhiyeesseef dhiifama akka gaafatu barbaada. Qopheessaan sagantaa Sanaa O’Reilly himannaa sana fudhatama dhabsiisuu dhaan Raashiyaan kana naannoo bara 2023 naan haa gaafattu jechuun deebise.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: