Exposing the Blame Shifting in “The Truth About Eskinder Nega and Fano” by Haimy Zewdie

The views, statements and opinion in the article reflects that of the writer’s , NOT borkena.com ‘s 

By Adane Sewhunegn 

In her article, “The Truth About Eskinder Nega and Fano,” Haimy Zewdie offers a staunch defense of Eskinder Nega, asserting that accusations against him are baseless and primarily driven by diaspora groups with vested interests. However, this perspective is a classic case of blame shifting that overlooks legitimate concerns from both Ethiopian and diaspora stakeholders. These concerns highlight the divisive roles of Eskinder and his associates within the diaspora, who have been key actors in creating division and tension within Fano sub-groups. This article invites readers to delve deeper into the complex dynamics at play, challenging the narrative presented by Zewdie and revealing the true impact of Eskinder Nega’s actions on the Amhara struggle.

The author claims that the recent accusations against Eskinder Nega are baseless and primarily stem from diaspora groups with vested interests in the Amhara struggle. However, this assertion is a blatant case of blame shifting. It conveniently ignores the legitimate concerns raised by various stakeholders, principally within Ethiopia as well as concerns within the diaspora. These concerns are not only about Eskinder’s actions and statements but also about the divisive and dangerous roles of his associates within the diaspora. The mainstream media narrative propagated by Eskinder’s associates, the destabilizing roles on social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, electronic journals, and the 24/7 TikTok blasphemy campaigns against other prominent Fano leaders have attempted to create discord and division within unified Fano organizations across the four prominent provinces of the Amhara. These divisive propagandas and mischievous moves have also been repeatedly exposed and advised to halt by Fano leadership and the general Amhara community. Prominent Fano leaders have warned Eskinder’s associates to stop their attempts to twist arms through financial donations or deprivation—funds raised by the grassroots diaspora community for the very cause that Fano stands for. This financial allocation has been misused to coerce Fano into submission to Eskinder’s faction. By dismissing these criticisms as mere propaganda from social media “foot soldiers,” the article attempts to invalidate genuine discourse and concerns about Eskinder and his associates’ roles and impact on the Amhara cause.

The article argues that accusations against Eskinder’s dedication to the Amhara cause are unfounded and presents his long-standing involvement as proof. However, this narrative oversimplifies the issue and shifts the blame away from Eskinder’s controversial decisions and alliances that have, at times, alienated significant portions of the Amhara population. While his historical involvement is notable, it does not absolve him from the legitimate criticisms regarding his recent actions, which some argue have been more divisive than unifying. This portrayal overlooks the complexities of leadership and accountability in a struggle that requires nuanced and inclusive approaches.

The Author’s assertion that Eskinder shares ideological unity with Fano leaders is presented as an undeniable fact. Yet, this overlooks the nuanced and varied perspectives within the Fano movement itself. While public statements may suggest ideological alignment, the reality is that differing strategies and visions for the Amhara cause exist. By denying these differences and presenting a monolithic front, the article shifts blame from the leadership’s inability to address internal divisions and fosters a misleading narrative of unity that does not reflect the on-the-ground complexities.

The article defends Eskinder’s leadership by highlighting his roles in various organizations and the challenges he faced. However, this defense conveniently shifts the blame for organizational failures and internal discord away from Eskinder. Leadership is measured not just by one’s intentions but by one’s ability to effectively unite and mobilize a movement. The struggles faced by Balderas and the disunity within Fano factions point to leadership challenges that cannot be dismissed as merely the result of external pressures or authoritarian regimes. Acknowledging these issues is crucial for genuine progress.

Zewdie’s claim that Eskinder did not divide Fano but rather sought to unify it is another example of blame shifting. In reality, Eskinder and his associates within the diaspora have been the main actors behind the division and growing tension within Fano sub-groups. Internal fragmentation within Fano did not exist at least within each provincial group, but Eskinder’s meddling has introduced controversy and exacerbated tensions. By attempting to centralize command quite mischievously, Eskinder and his associates have created discord rather than unity. The assertion that Eskinder has brought various factions together is an utter lie, far from reality, and overlooks the ongoing divisions and complex dynamics within the movement. Blaming these divisions solely on external propaganda and state interference is a simplistic explanation and blame shifting that fails to address the real challenges. The crystal-clear reality on the ground tells otherwise.

The article argues that the Amhara struggle faces deliberate interference and misinformation campaigns from state agents. While this is a valid concern, using it to dismiss all criticism of Eskinder and his associates as baseless is a form of blame shifting. It is essential to distinguish between legitimate internal critique and external misinformation. Dismissing all criticism as the latter prevents constructive dialogue and the necessary introspection required for strengthening the movement.

The final assertion that attacks on Eskinder’s character are unjustified ignores the legitimate concerns about his actions and leadership style. Character is demonstrated through actions and decisions, and while Eskinder’s historical contributions are significant, they do not exempt him from scrutiny. This defense shifts the blame away from his recent actions and presents an idealized version of his role that does not align with the complexities of the current political and social landscape.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Zewdie’s article attempts to present a narrative that Eskinder Nega is unjustly accused and that all criticisms are the result of cowardly blame shifting or misinformation. However, this perspective utterly overlooks the legitimate concerns and criticisms that exist. It is essential for the Amhara struggle to engage in honest and critical self-examination, addressing both external and internal challenges without resorting to simplistic blame shifting. Only through such an approach can the movement achieve genuine unity and progress.

Footnote:

• The Late Fano Wubante Abate’s speech on attempts to arm twist by the diaspora and the blasphemy campaign against his team. 

• Fano Abebe Fentaw, the then public relations officer of East Amhara Fano and Fano Engineer Beyene Alemaw, Amhara Fano unity in Gondar commander, and Fano Desalegn Tesfashewa from Shewa Command, on the attempts of arm twist through monetary donation and deprivation by Eskindir Nega’s associates. https://youtu.be/ezVi-mNMYEo?si=JTlWJftKMD7tHzQY
• Fano Asres Mare Damtie, Amhara Fano in Gojjam Deputy head and Head of Political affairs addressing the divisive role of Eskindir Nega and his associates. https://x.com/FanoAmhara21301/status/1800221334913650913

Editor’s note : Views in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of borkena.com


__

To Publish an Article On borkena , please send submission to info@borkena.com for consideration.

Join our Telegram Channel : t.me/borkena

Like borkena on Facebook

Add your business to Borkena Business Listing/Business Directory  Jobs

Join the conversation. Follow us on X (formerly Twitter ) @zborkena to get the latest Ethiopian news updates regularly. Ethiopia  To share information or for  submission, send e-mail to info@borkena.com