Here goes the marriage!

The Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP) said Thursday that it was surprised to hear that the party is a member of a new front called "Alliance for Freedom and Democracy." In a statement it issued CUDP said that though the formation of an opposition front in foreign countries was not a new phenomenon, it was not involved in the formation of the new front, and so far not a member of the so-called front.

CUDP added that as a legally registered party operating in the country, it has no interest to create a front with elements that want to engage in armed struggle.

The party underlined that it would strive to realize its objectives only through peaceful means based on the constitutions and other laws of the land.

According to the party, no one can speak about the destructive outcome of armed struggle more than Ethiopians, and the feeling of enmity and killing each other should stop.

The party strongly said that CUDP does not accept any call that is contrary to the legal and peaceful method of struggle, and urged individuals operating in foreign countries in the name of CUDP to refrain from irresponsible activities.


This is what I call it, “match made in heaven”. OLF & CUD? Come on!

Statement announcing the formation of the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy A historic meeting convened, by the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP), the Ethiopian People's Patriotic Front (EPPF), the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF), the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF), the Sidama Liberation Front (SLF) and the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces (UEDF), at Utrecht in Netherlands, from 19 to 22 of May 2006 has successfully completed by forming the Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (AFD) and elected its officers. The UEDF supports the formation of the alliance and its objectives and has requested a month to consult its member organizations. The formation of the Alliance is an outcome of a series of bilateral and multilateral discussions conducted in the past several months. The Founding Agreement has been unanimously accepted and ratified by all members of the Alliance. The formation of this Alliance reflects the aspirations and best wishes of all people in Ethiopia whose life has been blighted by political repression, marginalization and exclusion.

The ultimate aim of the Alliance is to establish a just, representative and a genuine democratic process through the convening of an all-inclusive conference where the country’s problems will be discussed and resolved.

We are confident that the formation of this Alliance will be a vehicle to eliminate mistrust and suspicion between political groups and communities so that all will work together in the spirit of mutual understanding and to the benefit and well-being of all. We believe the collective effort behind the Alliance will put an end to the existing destructive mentality of winner takes all and the habitual indifference towards the excluded. The Alliance aspires to purposefully cultivate the values of compromise, tolerance, inclusion, reconciliation and mutual understanding. That is the only way to end the underlying causes of repression, bloodshed, insecurity, political instability and exclusion in Ethiopia and the region, which are inflicting severe hardships and suffering on all people, and seriously hampers the prospects for development and the attainment of equality, justice and prosperity.

Time and time again the people in Ethiopia have risen up and paid unimaginable sacrifice to satisfy their yearning for freedom, justice, liberty and democracy. The struggle and the sacrifice that is being paid in relation to the May 15 2005 election is a recent addition to the series of quashed aspirations.

Our people have demonstrated their readiness and ability that a just and democratic political order is feasible in Ethiopia. What stands between the aspiration for freedom and democracy and its realization is the unwillingness of the incumbent EPRDF regime to submit to the expressed will of the people and its flagrant violations of human rights and civil liberties and failure to even respect and abide by its very own constitution.

The Alliance will therefore struggle to pressure the ruling party to stop frustrating the realization of the yearning for freedom and democracy. The Alliance would use its generous spirit of inclusiveness in convening the conference that would facilitate a way towards the establishment of a democratic and representative order.

We call upon all the people in Ethiopia, both at home and abroad, to rise up in unison to support the cause of the Alliance and struggle to make the convening of the conference, which paves the way for a democratic transition, a reality. The struggle should continue to challenge the current spate of repression in the country, halt the futile and destructive military campaigns, security crackdowns and end the farcical political trial of elected members of parliament and others and to free all political prisoners, including those detained in the small towns and villages.

We also call upon the international community to realize that dialogue and good-faith negotiation offers the only way to achieve a lasting solution and back the alliance's call for this all-inclusive conference to break the current impasse. We hope the international community will realize that peace and stability, sustainable development and good governance can be a reality in Ethiopia only when the disfranchisement of the many by the few is stopped and by bringing all the stakeholders together to chart a genuinely democratic course.

Ethiopian's problems are immense and grossly complicated. Convening an all-inclusive conference to address them is well over due. We do not underestimate the obstacles and challenges facing us. However, with patience and perseverance we are certain that we will succeed.

The Alliance would hold a Press Conference to lay out its vision and work programs in detail.

Freedom and Democracy for all!


Wayane will continue to kill as long as it mean remaining on power

This long adapted tactic manipulated by Wayane it seems working so far. The recent bombing in Finfine is a prim example of Wayane's ill-conceived tactic to silence the oppositions. The issue also looks divisive among people of Ethiopia. Half of the Average people in Ethiopia think this crime is trurly committed by oppositions. The other half knew that this is not a work of oppositions. The situation gives Wayane a breathing room and more power to harass peaceful people regardless of their political view. Give Wayane excuse to send people to jail for no reason. Here I am not saying opposition like CUD are totally clean. This group also will not back from taking advantage of the situation.
Oromos are also blamed to be part of this crime but I highly doubt if that the case. In any case this is crime that been committed against humanity and each of us has a responsibility to expose it

Speak out Oromo!


Trickle-Up Leadership

Trickle-Up Leadership

"If people are too intimidated or too reluctant to help their leaders lead, their leaders will fail," says Michael Useem, management professor at the Wharton School and the author of a new book about how you can take control -- even when you're not in com

by Bill Breen
photographs by Kate Swan
from FC issue 52, page 70

In a tough business climate -- and even in boom times, for that matter -- it's only natural to want to trust the people in the executive suite. After all, they know what they're doing, right? Not so fast, says Michael Useem in Leading Up: How to Lead Your Boss So You Both Win, due out this month from Crown Business. Sometimes, even the people upstairs need help. "If people are afraid to help their leaders lead, their leaders will fail," says Useem, a professor of management at the Wharton School and the director of its Center for Leadership and Change Management. In an interview with Fast Company, Useem talked about how to take control even when you're not in command.

It's up to each of us to lead our leaders.

As technology evolves and organizations decentralize, people on the front lines have far more independence and responsibility. They are closer to the market and closer to how their product is used. They can see what their leaders are missing. When leaders falter, it's up to the rest of us to step up and help them lead. But leading up is not some noble calling: When you help those above you avoid a bad deal or seize an opportunity, you improve your whole organization's performance.

You've got to speak up to lead up.

In the Marines, the ultimate command-and-control institution, if their superior issues a flawed order, officers are expected to point out the flaws before that order goes into effect. That's the example set by Peter Pace, commander in chief at the U.S. Southern Command in Miami. A four-star general like Pace is an intimidating, big-deal guy. But Pace never ends a meeting without asking his subordinates to tell him what they each think. By challenging them to challenge him, Pace reinforces a culture where everyone is inspired to lead up.

Before you lead up, you've got to team up.

Leading up is riskier in down times. You get close to that CSM point -- the Career Shortening Move -- when you challenge a boss at a time when people are being laid off. David Pottruck, the number-two executive for Charles Schwab Corp., learned this the hard way. When he was president of Schwab's operating company, Pottruck frequently clashed with his boss, Larry Stupski, at top-management meetings. Whatever Stupski proposed, Pottruck tended to oppose. The result was that most of the other executives sided with Stupski, the senior of the two.
Pottruck made two big mistakes: He failed to recruit other people to his cause, and he disagreed disagreeably. He was arguing up instead of leading up, and he was almost forced out of the company. But then he met with Stupski and proposed a solution: He would never publicly argue with him again. He might disagree, but he would do so only in private. In the months that followed, Pottruck learned a critical lesson: By questioning his boss behind closed doors only, he got his ideas into the room and kept the power struggle out of it.

Try to be all things to everybody, and you'll be nothing to anybody.

Many of us report to more than one project leader, and that represents a difficult challenge: How do you meet the demands of multiple managers who often disagree with one another? General Pace reported to no fewer than six immediate superiors. His solution was to follow a policy of full disclosure. He informed each of his bosses of what he was recommending to the others -- especially when he knew that one of those higher-ups would disagree with the recommendation. A case in point: when Wesley Clark, the European commander in chief, wanted U.S. Marine troops in the Balkans. Pace thought it was a bad idea. He was quick to tell Clark: "If you want them, they're yours. But when the Pentagon asks what I think, I'll oppose your plan for the following reasons."
That's a tough message to deliver. But Pace knew that by preemptively disclosing his disagreement with Clark, he was boosting his own credibility. His superiors could be confident that Pace would speak truth to power. Leaders don't have confidence in yes-men.
Which company has done the most to embrace the concept of upward leadership? The answer, says management professor Michael Useem, is General Electric. "GE has an extremely hard-hitting culture," says Useem. "But everyone is expected to challenge their leaders, even if it means challenging Jack Welch himself." To encourage its people to lead up, GE launched a program for mentoring up.
For many years, GE had required veteran leaders to mentor the next generation of top talent. But two years ago, when Welch realized that the Web would change everything, he asked 600 of his worldwide executives to reach down into the ranks and pick younger, Webified people to teach them the ways of the Net.
In his new book, Leading Up, Useem quotes Welch: "E-business knowledge is generally inversely proportional to both age and height in the organization." Mentoring up, Welch says, was intended to "change that equilibrium." Welch himself led the charge by picking Pam Wickham, who ran GE's main Web site, to be his Net coach.
The one-on-one sessions did more than give executives a crash course on the Web. They demonstrated that leadership is a two-way street: "Mid-level managers reported that they had become more comfortable in feeding ideas upstairs and pressing their bosses to change," writes Useem. "Top-level managers reported they had become more comfortable in eliciting insights from below." Bottom line: Reverse mentoring gets people to challenge their leaders -- and it helps leaders do a better job of leading.

Contact Michael Useem by email ( )