Risks to stability in Sudan and Ethiopia

The Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington released two studies in June 2011 that deal with assessing risk in Sudan and Ethiopia.

The one on Sudan (PDF) is authored by Richard Downie and Brian Kennedy.The key stress points are:

• Sudan’s long term stability depends on whether the country’s North and South can reach and fully implement equitable agreements on the terms of their separation in July 2011.
• North Sudan faces a highly volatile period during the next decade. The ruling National Congress Party will face growing calls for political change, an economic slump, and the possibility of armed challenges from within. There is the added risk of contagion from the uprisings seen elsewhere in North Africa. The regime will most likely use violence to confront these challenges. The prospect of civil war cannot be ruled out.
• South Sudan faces the enormous challenge of the need to establish a functioning state with few resources in the face of serious security challenges. Its stability will depend on establishing its legitimacy as a state, which will mean being able to provide services to its citizens and keeping them safe. The next decade is likely to see slow progress checked by frequent reversals.

The one on Ethiopia (PDF) is authored by Terence Lyons. The key stress points are:

• In the short to medium terms, Ethiopia is likely to remain stable but brittle. The authoritarian ruling party, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), has consolidated power across all levels of government and society, efficiently suppressing political opposition.
• The choice of a long-term successor to Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is likely to expose tensions within the ruling EPRDF and its ethnically defined sub-parties, and exacerbate friction between some of Ethiopia’s most volatile regions.
• Ethiopia faces multiple security threats, which taken alone can be contained by the military but if combined would threaten to overwhelm the state, triggering serious instability and violence. Constant vigilance is required by Ethiopia to prevent its enemies in Eritrea and Somalia from linking up with internal armed groups such as the Oromo Liberation Front and the Ogaden National Liberation Front.

Correction to "Ethiopian Armed Groups"

I have attached a corrected version of my remarks titled "Ethiopian Armed Groups" found in the right-hand sidebar that were presented in Garmisch on November 13 - 14. Leenco Lata pointed out that he is not supporting any faction of the Oromo Liberation Front, but rather is engaged with others to resolve differences between the Dawud and Kamal factions. I apologize for the inaccurate statement in the original paper.

Panel at Howard University on U.S. policy in the Horn of Africa

I participated in a panel hosted by the Oromo Studies Association at Howard University in Washington on April 4 and gave a subsequent interview to the Oromo language service of the Voice of America. The theme of the conference was "U.S. Policy in the Horn of Africa: Opportunities and Prospects for Change under the Obama Administration." Other members of the panel were Terrence Lyons, associate professor at George Mason University, and Ezekiel Gebissa, associate professor at Kettering University. I emphasized during the panel and in the VOA interview that it is important to treat the Horn of Africa as a region as conflicts in any one country inevitably have important implications for one or more neighboring countries. It is also essential that the United States work cooperatively with traditional allies and some of the new non-African countries that have growing influence in the region. I urged the mostly Ethiopian-American audience of Oromo heritage not to accept the commonly-held view that the United States wields enormous control over the Ethiopian government through its assistance program, which consists mostly of funding to combat HIV/AIDS and humanitarian assistance. U.S. influence is important but not uniquely critical to the Ethiopian government. Although the 2005 national elections in Ethiopia ended badly and the 2008 local elections were a missed opportunity to restart a competitive electoral process, I noted that the Eritrean-based Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) also missed an opportunity when it boycotted the 2005 elections. It is difficult to be optimistic about competitive national elections in 2010, but if discussions between the Ethiopian government and the OLF suggest the possibility of good elections on a relatively-level playing field, the OLF should engage politically. Its long-standing armed struggle against the government has not been successful and shows no sign that it will be successful. As for the Obama Administration and the concerns of the Oromo in Ethiopia, I doubted that the new administration will focus on any particular ethnic group in Ethiopia. Although the Oromo constitute by far the largest group in the country, there are some 85 ethnic groups in Ethiopia. It is not realistic to expect the American government to single out the grievances of any particular group. On the other hand, I believe the Obama administration will give greater attention generally to the process of democratization and human rights issues in Ethiopia. This should work to the advantage of the Oromo. UPDATE (4/8): The Yeroo Jimma Times has published this post on its website, as has Ethiopian Review and EthioBlog.