Elections in non-democratic nations are included when they exhibit a significant element of genuine competition or, in the case of upcoming elections, when they represent an important test of progress toward democracy, but we have witnessed rigging, violence and killing as result of the electorate process in Horn of Africa. Kenyan and Ethiopian leaders have rigged the voice of the public. They preferred blood, bullet than ballot. In this brief article we will examine the election that had been held in Ethiopia in the summer 2005 and the recent election of Kenya.

The rigging of election is not the only familiar face that we have experiencing in Africa; the same could be said about the Western countries. For instance, the US, beacon of democracy in the true sense of Greek city style, was the talk of the town when Bush was reelected as result of manipulation of votes.

The election of 2000, which hung on a disputed vote in Florida, a politicized Supreme Court, and an electoral college victory that contradicted the popular vote, exposed the flaws for all to see.

Meanwhile, this week voters in the snowy farmland of Iowa started the great national pageant that will be culminating in the election of a new US president. Peaceful and even joyous this feast of politics may be, but also distorted by dollars, dynasties and discriminatory electoral registers.

Barak Obama, a black, freshman senator from a northern state, will be the time of the test in this era of globalization when change is the core values and norm of democracy. To see an African- American come this close to the White House less than 50 years after the end of segregation (which had been imposed brutally by southern, white Democrats) is an accomplishment for which all Americans can be proud. Democrats in particular must quietly feel glad that the days of the Birmingham Barons and Bull Connor are behind the party. On the other hand: John F. Kennedy was the last northern Democrat to win a presidential race.

If the democratic process is often imperfect, however, few venture to challenge the actual principle of democracy is in order. The clinching argument tends to be Churchill’s well-used quip about democracy being the worst possible form of government were it not for all the rest. And the presumption, when things go wrong, is that the practice, not the principle, is to blame. Ethiopia’s TPLF has snatched the power as the cold war was over; they do not know the ABC of democracy let alone to relinquish the power through ballot. They believe only gun will be the ultimate force to decide who will be leading the country. This minority ethnic group, who do not pass 3. 5 millions, is killing left and right other ethnics such as Somali s, Afar, Oromo, Amhara by the help of US machine.

Scandinavian standards, then good sense and harmony would reign. So in Kenya, you might argue, as many have done in recent days, that everything went admirably until the count. In Ethiopia, all would have been well had opposition party, Kinijit, been afforded better protection as they unseated Meles’s gang in Addis Ababa. However, 193 innocent Ethiopian paid their lives. To add insult to injury, their relatives were told to pay the number of bullets that killed them so that they would bury their loved ones. Meles and his gang do not allow any other party to compete in the regions of Ethiopia. They have setup a cloning parties in any region (or kilil in their languages) and chased other parties that dare to field its candidates.

Churchill, though, has another much-quoted and rather different quip that also deserves an outing. The best argument against democracy, he said, is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. And perhaps it is time to ask whether it is not electoral practice, but democracy — “people power” — that is the problem. For example, if one asks an ordinary Ethiopian to decide his future through the ballot in the upcoming election in 2010, he/she will definitely respond, “One might get a free and fair election in heaven not on earth while Woyane is ruling.”

Many Western countries media might argue, in many parts of the world elections divide voters, not along political lines — which may foster productive debate — but along ethnic, religious or clan lines. That is far from reality; the average person in Ethiopia or in Kenya, struggle to meet the basic needs of its family and opt for hard work, free and fair election and justice. They vote the ones that deliver his/her basic necessities unlike the inherited marker of clan, tribe and ethnic affiliations. These were the outcome of Kenya and Kenya elections.

The imposition of a recognizable political process on Iraq, via elections, was supposed to bring democratic government and peace. But the US and British administration had to downgrade its objective from “democracy” to “representational government”, and finally to “security”. However, conscientiously Iraqi voters turned out for successive elections, these only institutionalized old divisions in the new order.

The same scenario is unfolding in Somalia whereby a surrogate and terminal government has concocted in Kenya by the Ethiopian security and imposed on the people of Somalia; this political trend is the new world order that we inherited as the result of demise of cold war. To add insult to injury, Ethiopian happy triggered soldiers have invaded Somalia and occupied; they have killed 10 thousands and forced to flee from their home 1.5 millions. Genocide of high degree is going in Somalia by the thugs soldiers of TPLF; they have raped Somali women; they have killed children and elder and they have rounded up Somali men and sent to Ethiopian notorious jails in the name of fighting terrorism. Humanity is crying for justice.

The same happens in much of post-colonial Africa. The parties in Kenya are divided pretty much along tribal elitist lines, which are why resentment of the outcome is so bitter, and potentially so destructive. In the last three weeks, thousands of innocent and

poor Kenyan is marching in exodus to search for peace, food and shelter. One can witness a long line of human being as Burundi and Rwanda that were forced from their home due to their tribe affiliations. History is repeating again and again. Western Media have echoing that Kikuyu has been killing and massacring Luo and vice versa. This is a false interpretation of reality at the ground.  Kenyan people have voted out a dynasty party that ruled for four decades and broken the cycle of elite tribe privileged ever since Kenya got its independence from England. As one Kenyan elder nicely put, “If Odinga’s party wins a majority in Kenyan’s parliament, is this a manifestation of democracy, or is it dynasty dressed up in democratic clothes?

 The poor and innocent Ethiopians, Somalis and Kenyans were told that clans, birth and names matter; the circles of power become closed. This is a typical Euro centrist outlook of African politics. A seat in parliament, even national leadership, is inherited. And while a ruling caste may produce responsible leaders born and trained to rule, it may equally spawn an effete priviligentsia that sucks the country dry, perpetuating a cycle of penury and popular revolt. It so happens, though, that some of today’s most successful countries — in the narrow economic terms used by today’s number-crunchers to define national success — are neither democracies or dynasties.

What we supporters of democracy have to recognize, however, is that there are governments that would not qualify under any definition as democratic, that are nonetheless doing well by the vast majority of their citizens. And they are doing so by virtue of an essentially technocratic, apolitical approach to nation-management and front trained soldiers such as Meles Zenawi, who does not have a clue to rule in public consensus.If there is, we would not be contemplating the end of history, but we would be watching the end of politics as we know it.

The leadership problem in Ethiopia and Kenya boil down to the failures, sins and blunders of the generation of leaders and the incompetence and insecurity of their successors.

The post-independence leadership effected personality cults and failed to strengthen institutions of State and democracy. Some went out of their way to rape the institutions of State. The result was that their successors, often lightweights who command little respect, resorted to enhanced patronage, corruption, oppression and all manner of political shenanigans to entrench their positions.

How does all this compare with the situation in Rwanda? In general, the character of violence is similar. Indicators show the violence is directed at particular ethnic groups. It is intended to destroy them and their economic well-being.

If the standard for determining ‘‘genocide’’ is the legal one established by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, then the happenings especially in Rift Valley, and Ogaden region are no exception. Direct killing is the

primary mode of violence. The violence is happening spontaneously across the country, rather than in one region.

The humanitarian crisis is a major threat and challenge. Ethnicity was salient before the mass violence. Ideologies of ethnic nationalism and exclusive political rule remain the obstacles to resolving the current violence and political upheaval.

President Kibaki and others, including the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, have alluded to the possibility of co-opting members of the opposition into the government. However, the experience of other African countries has demonstrated that national unity governments are transient. They do not resolve the institutional and attitudinal contradictions in the electoral process that create the problems. Until these are resolved, the problems will remain.

In the circumstance, the onus lies with the international community, especially the African Union, to initiate immediate measures to find a diplomatic solution to the problem. A diplomatic solution offers a means to resolve the crisis at hand. However, a permanent solution can only be found through a thorough review of the electoral process. Electoral tribunals should be able to adjudicate complaints with utmost dispatch in order to avoid a situation where the law is used to thwart the aspirations of candidates. The electoral commission should also be empowered to operate as a legitimate, fair and impartial umpire. The people of Kenya deserve respite from political violence. Politicians should operate to advance the interest of their people and not exploit the system to advance their parochial and pecuniary interests.