Recently after long and arduous day's work I downloaded WALTA- Weyane's notoriously inept and disinformative propaganda machine; I usually surf this web site to enjoy myself and to see how low the leadership in Ethiopia and its functionaries have reached. When I saw an article by Paul Henze (Wither Eritrea) I decided to read it even though I did not expect too much from this individual. After reading the entire article, I began asking myself whether it is true that Mr. Henze was a visiting scholar at Rand Corporation- a research institution known for its scholarly, albeit conservative, research output in the social sciences. I began to ask myself whether the author of the article possesses some traits of a serious and sober scholar; what he wrote has little to do with factually based newspaper articles or scientific based research piece. It appears that the article is meant to jumpstart Walta's propaganda activities which, like the Weyane army in the North, seems to have run out of steam.

At the time when the guns are silent, when the cessation of hostility between the two warring neighbors is in order, and peace seems to be within reach, I expected Mr. Henze, an American and supposedly a friend of the "Horn", to come out with well researched, scientific and more conciliatory article. I was naively hoping that Mr. Henze's article would serve the purpose of healing the wounds by minimizing hatred and animosity between the two governments and people thereby opening a gateway towards normalcy. What I read was simply the opposite.

Over a period of time people in the academia have developed certain criteria for assessing the objectivity and scientific merit of an article. At the initial stage of the review process the aim is to check whether the publication is a scientific piece or whether it is meant for propaganda or other purposes. Setting aside some flippant arguments, I counted the number of repetitive words, names and phrases. In his article, Mr. Henze repeats the word "defeated" (with regards to the Ethio-Eritrean war) ten times, he mentions the name of the President of Eritrea, in negative terms, 12 times, and uses some derogatory word such as "dictator" 15 times. As a result one can easily classify the article as a propaganda piece not worth publishing but ought to be relegated where it belongs-the trash basket.

I have met Mr. Henze several times; I attended lectures seminars and workshops where he participated and was introduced as an economist, a historian, a political scientist depending on when and where his presentations were made and on the mix of his audience. When I relate the content of his lectures I am not surprised at the tone and content of the article. Let me explain the number of times and instances that I met Mr. Henze.

1. In 1984 I attended an international conference on Ethiopian studies at Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia where Mr. Henze identified himself as a macro economist. It should be noted that this period was when the famous (infamous) 1984-85 Ethiopian famine was unfolding with hundreds of thousands of people were dying or exposed to death; this was also the period when the DERG leadership was at its peak. Mr. Henze's macroeconomic findings were that the Ethiopian economy is doing fine and is in good hands! I remember that his findings were strongly challenged by some scholars at the meeting, notably Professor Mesfin Woldemariam.
2. In 1992, one year after the Weyane leadership took power, Mr. Henze delivered a lecture, again at the Addis Abeba University to a large crowd, of instructors students and others. Among other points, he defended Eritrea's right for independence, Ethiopian nationalities right for self determination including the right to secede; on the latter point he was vigorously challenged by many Ethiopians to the extent that the audience were on the verge of being hostile.
3. On September 23, 1996 when I was homeword bound from Washington D.C to Eritrea, I met Mr. Henze at Dulles airport were both of us took the same flight to Frankfurt. After we introduced each other he asked me where I was heading; I responded that I am returning to my country for good and that I was offered a teaching position at Asmara University. Mr. Henze congratulated me for what he said was a wise move on my part, he then stated that Eritrea's leadership in general and The President in particular are dedicated and exemplary for Africa.
4. Finally I read the latest article (wither Eritrea?), an article with little or no " value added", emotionally charged and deliberately designed to mislead the reader.

Taking the above four U turns of Mr. Henze one can only conclude that the author's stand is 'regime specific' and highly irregular. If the author's main objective is to maximize pecuniary returns by giving his services to the highest bidder, then such a behavior may be "regular" but similar to the East European pilots serving for the Weyane airforce.

It may be in order to comment upon some of the generalizations that Mr. Henze made in this latest article. The first remark that Mr. Henze wishes to impress upon his readers is the declaration that Eritrea was defeated by Ethiopia and goes on to repeat the word ten times. If the Eritrean army is defeated why is that that the Weyane's expeditionary forces did not reach its final destination-Asmara? How come that it did not "break the Eritrean army backbone" as these were the declared aims of the Weyane? The fact that these were the objectives of the beleaguered Weyane army can be verified by reading the statements of Weyane politebureau members, notably Ato Abbay Tsehaye and many Ethiopian POWs. As things stand Eritrean army is relatively intact. Because of the differences in the battlefield tactics of the two armies, as verified by observers and military experts, one can easily conclude that the Ethiopian army's dead, wounded and disabled were in tens of thousands, while the Eritrean losses may be declared as relatively light. The Ethiopian army continued to send waves after waves of non Tigrean Ethiopians to sweep minefields and act as cannon fodder's while at the same time establishing a special platoon whose sole purpose is to pick and bury the dead (sometimes those who were buried may not have been dead-they may have been wounded but unconscious-and thus buried alive?). On the other hand, Eritrean army held and modified its position and simply mowed those who came foreword; under this scenario the outcome of causality is easy to predict. It bemuses one when Mr. Henze declares Ethiopian centuries old battlefield tactics as " brilliantly conceived". One wonders whether Mr. Henze is working for or against the present regime's interests. If this what the author considers as Ethiopian "victory" and Eritrean "defeat" then he should come out with a new "a-la- Henze" definition of victory and defeat.

I was in Asmara during the third Weyane invasion and have followed a blow-by-blow account of battlefield reports; the fact remains that tens of thousands of Ethiopians have died, that many of the unattended bodies of Ethiopiasns are still rotting, and that farmlands on the Eritrean side of Mereb and Setit rivers have turned into human graveyards. In the end the Ethiopian army had run out of steam, Weyane's estimated one billion dollar investment in this wild undertaking has gone down the drain; Weyanes's forex reserves and coffers are empty; the prime minister is visiting western capitals; he is knocking the doors of IMF-World Bank offices in search for new loans, grants and appeals for a massive debt reduction.

Secondly Mr. Henze's article goes on to attack the Eritrean leadership using some of the most crude language available and lamenting about the future scenario between the Eritrean leadership and the broad masses; he proceeds to ridicule the Ethiopian opposition group within and outside Ethiopia especially the OLF. As expected he goes on to emulate the Weyane leadership in general and the prime minister in particular as being visionary and exemplary; this is simply an affront and insult to the various opposition groups. I wish there was an objective-cum-instant referendum on the popularity of the Eritrean leader vis-a-vis the Eritrean population , on the popularity of Ato Meles vis-a-vis the Ethiopian population, and on the popularity of the OLF vis-a-vis OPDO (Weyane's Oromo party or Weyane's department of Oromo!). Chances the Eritrean leader's popularity may be in the ratio of 24 to 1 (a 95 percent approval rate). For Ato Meles the maximum it can be is the opposite (five percent)- most of the latter coming from the prime minister's birth place-Adwa and its surrounding Axum and to a lesser extent Shire. Chances are that the popularity of the OLF is by far higher than any other Oromo party and more so than the OPDO. Any objective assessor who knows the areas and who has lived there will be able to testify that the above estimates are not far from the truth. Mr. Henze continues to acclaim the Weyane leadership for introducing the most lively free press; the truth is simply the opposite; the international free press association has singled out Ato Meles as the most notorious anti press leader in the world; many journalists are behind the bars and as I write this article the Ethiopian free press association is on strike due to the skyrocketing publication costs imposed upon them by printing presses- establishments owned and operated by the Weyane leadership.

Mr. Heinz's analysis stretches beyond the Ethio-Eritrean affairs and singles out the Arab world in general and Egypt in particular for supporting Eritrea during the conflict. To the best of my knowledge, Egypt was and continues to have a neutral stand and that its diplomats seem to be doing their level best to reconcile the two countries with the aim of solving this conflict. Mr. Henze's utterances, interferences and giving a regional scope to an otherwise bilateral conflict would naturally lead one to inquire on whether the author has alterior motives. Instead of encouraging the two countries to resolve their differences, Mr. Henze is trying to exploit a highly sensitive issue -the hydro politics of the Nile. The author's 'uncalled for' intervention ought to be condemned by Ethiopians who wish to preserve their country's future wellbeing. By creating animosity between Ethiopia and Egypt and by raising an issue that ought to be considered by sober minds and under serious circumstances, Mr. Henze seems to be following a dangerous line in a futile attempt to write a propaganda piece whose contribution to the regional peace process in nothing but adverse.

Taking the above points into consideration, one may be able to conclude that Mr. Henze's article lacks objectivity and is of no use; its aim may be to have one or a combination of the following;

1. To jumpstart Walta's propaganda machine which as of late has run out articles whose contents are nothing but rumors, innuendoes, character assassinations, insults, mis and disinformation
2. Mr. Henze's irregular stands, lack of consistency and his flip flops leads one to conclude that monetary gains may be the main objective function of the author.
3. Raising sensitive issues such the hydro-politics of the Nile, trying to create animosity between Ethiopia and the Arab world thereby creating a gap and generating more instability in the region.

No matter what the political stand of those of us in the region, we should be ware of a "sugar coated" but inherently poisonous articles. We owe it to ourselves to siphon out and read behind the lines- articles and commentaries by groups and individuals from inside or outside-especially the latter . -------------------------------------------------------------------------