New
Breed of Journalism Perpetrating
BY BERHANU
KASSAYIE
No ‘journalist’ could
have played the role of dictator’s mouthpiece as well as David Hirst did in
the report to the Guardian (18 May 1999) and no biased journalism can ever be as
naked and as desperate. What is unclear is why does a reputable daily such as
the Guardian publish such a report in its International News section, unless
principles of evidenced verifiability and impartiality are irrelevant to media
reports from the African continent. It is widely known that:
·
the Ethio-Eritrean war broke out due to the Eritrean dictators armed violation
of Ethiopian sovereignty and occupation of its territories;
·
even after the Eritrean regime’s invasion, the Ethiopian government was
tolerant and for nine months it gave peaceful resolution a chance without
exercising its legitimate right to drive out the occupying Eritrean army by
military means;
·
the international community’s efforts, including the OAU, the UN and several
USA sponsored missions to mediate and bring about a peaceful resolution to the
conflict was, from day one, unsuccessful due to the blatant refusal of the
Eritrean regime;
·
Isaias, the Eritrean dictator was forced to formally accept the OAU peace
framework after a humiliating defeat in Bademe;
·
Ethiopia has consistently offered a cease-fire once the Eritrean occupying army
withdraws from all its territories (Zalambessa, Egela, Bure);
·
the blessing of the current Ethiopian government’s was one of the main factors
for Eritrea’s secession as an independent state and the Ethiopian government
has repeatedly confirmed that it has no territorial claims in Eritrea;
·
the main problem behind the conflict is Eritrea’s economic non-viability to
realise its dictator Isaias’ dream of building an African Israel, and
·
the repeated attempts of occupation (Yemen, Djibouti, Sudan and now Ethiopia)
are recent history of the Eritrean expansionist policy since independence in the
1993.
No doubt David Hirst and the
editors of the Guardian are aware of these facts, or if they are not, no one can
doubt their access to various international documents and independent
information sources if they are interested in impartial and constructive
journalism.
Notwithstanding all these,
what is disturbing is their covert attempt to ignite ethnic strife within
Ethiopia. What more proof can one look for them to see their covert objective in
the mouthpiece of an expansionist dictatorial regime. Is David Hirst following
earlier compatriots’ footsteps, whose reports on Ethiopia were instrumental to
Italian aggressors at the League of Nation in substantiating their claim on
colonising Ethiopia? Reading his report, it appears that he condones the
Eritrean dictator’s attempt to fuel ethnic upheaval in Ethiopia: he finishes
his report saying, " sooner or later Eritrea is likely once more to act as
a catalyst of great upheavals within its giant neighbour".
Disgraceful as it is Hirst
writes about the Tigrayan expansionist plan as the main reason for the
Ethio-Eritrean conflict, about Tigrayan domination on the rest of Ethiopian
nationalities, about how the Tigrayan soldiers were shooting what he calls
‘minesweeper’ peasant recruits from other Ethiopian nationalities, etc. No
surprise to Ethiopians in this, they are used to tolerantly but decisively
squashing such blunders. The million plus Addis Ababa dwellers who went out on
their accord to celebrate the victory in Badme is a recent example of what
Ethiopianism is to Ethiopians. As to Hirst an Ethiopian proverb says ‘It is
not worth trying to awake one who slept intentionally’. The federal system of
governance in Ethiopia is new and needs time to consolidate. Nevertheless, the
foundation for democracy is laid and Hirst can refer to recent reports by
reputable UK journalists.
On the other hand, does
Hirst know that Eritrea is ruled by a one-party dictatorship and that, dominated
by Tigrigna-speaking Christian highlanders at the cost of over eighty ehnicities
that makeup over 60 percent of its population? Does he know that opposition
parties or papers are banned in Eritrea? Are you aware of your MPs select
committee’s recent condemnation of Eritrea’s use of children for war
efforts? If you do not, then one wonders whether your covert objective as a
mouthpiece of Isaias’ expansionist dictatorship has completely shattered your
cognitive faculties.
Finally, let me challenge
you, David Hirst, on some of your detailed accounts: if you have reported after
six weeks since the Tsorona battle, and that from the Eritrean side, how did you
now the composition of the Ethiopian army and the ethnic composition in its
deployment? If like you said they were decomposing, how did you find out which
decomposing army is from this or other ethnicity, for that matter whether it is
of an Eritrean or Ethiopian army? Where did you get the casualty figures? Did
you count like your colleague Alexander Last? If it is not a twisted
‘journalistic’ disguise, who are these ‘diplomats’ who told you about
these figures, about Tigrayan domination, about Ethiopian use of mercenary
pilots, etc. If you do not have sufficient evidence to prove these claims of
yours, then you are merely working as a propaganda machine for the Eritrean
dictators and your report was merely repeating their futile propaganda like a
parrot. Neither Isaias's dreams nor your unfounded forecast will materialise.
Ethiopia will remain a mosaic of diverse ethnicity and cultures once again
repeating its established tradition of protecting its sovereignty and building a
democratic federal system.