Zeryihun Kassa
In my last article, I tried to show why and what the opposition need to be proactive with. This is because I believe placing ones responsibilities on external bodies never helps any individual or institution. Winners are always those who take charge of their actions and the course they hold on to.
The opposition has a duty for deep sole searching to come to rely on their own inner strengths than the enabling environment and the political sphere they are calling for. The presence of democracy never be proved when opposition parties win and the absence whenever the ruling party continues to win election after election.
So long us elections are open and fair who wins doesn't mater at all. It feels like our opposition measure the prevalence of democracy with the number of seats they are able to win in elections.
In an article last weekend on Adis Admas I read an article by Chairman of EDP who call upon EPRDF to make a level field for the opposition to thrive in elections and other political issues. I don't believe one political party needs to make its opponent believe in a particular issue.
In the global political arena, every party works to make things difficult for its opponent not to win in any election. This happens even with in matured political systems. May be developed democracies often employ legitimate ways to cripple their opponent.
What is important for a political party is to devise mechanisms that take it to the top most leadership position by maneuvering every option under the rule of law. Expecting one's opponent, especially when the other believes the opposition have nothing good to offer for this nation and has no character that enable them to deliver the promise they make, is naive take on the matter.
Yet the opposition has a place to look for solutions for their deeply rooted institutional and capacity problems. Above all they have wrong paradigm with which they build their organizational structure. It is time to clearly see their fault and lead themselves with the right map that takes them to destinations where responsible parties reside and compete one another.
First the private victory they need to deal with themselves in shaping their programs, mindset and tools with which they play in the political arena. That help them become strongly legal and ethical. Once they become parties which see issues from inside out, they begin to take responsibilities for their failure. That ends their search for escape goat whenever something fails. Besides it makes them responsible with in their sphere of influence.
Once they finish being proactive than reacting to the ruling party , once they become clear with where they intend to take this nation and keep showing the public its destiny and continuously develop their leadership and management capabilities to run their program, they begin to influence the public with their own strength.
That makes them dependable. It is because they don't have these character they hold on to criticizing the ruling EPRDF hoping they would expose the failures to make their bid for election.
Exposing the failures of ones opponent is marginal technique for able opponents. What comes first is being able opponent which the opposition are not so far. I hope they grow to becoming one. That automatically gives confidence both for the public and the ruling party that the opposition would not be stumbling blocks for progress.
It makes the public and the ruling party believe that opponents are legal, competent parties that see the way out of the problem from different perspectives. Otherwise they are dependable to take legal and constructive approaches in ways that build on what has already been accomplished.
Such confidence can only happen when the opposition strike balance and maturity to design blue prints of their programs and progressively become responsible and able parties which got armed with the fundamental, dependable leadership qualities. No body gives them this. They create it with their own organized and continuous effort.
Once they build and reflect these character and competence of dependable leadership, they are to go on showcasing their programs, strengths and unique features that makes them competent in the political system that embrace diverse views. That I think expects them to believe in win-win mentality.
They have to recognize that democracy is abundance where even the defeated party has a role to play and a reward to enjoy. They have to believe democracy doesn't enable society to determine consequences of elections but the process it happens with. This is in deed very essential for the opposition to acknowledge in their search for vote.
Second they need to listen to real problems of the public and stick to those things that matter most than populist issues which may take a distance as the temper of the public goes high. once parties identify the real problems, it is convincing that they are half way into the solutions.
Next is considering options after options not seeking to fit with ones ideology but to fit solutions for the problems the nation faces. Parties may sort out problems properly and set solutions effectively but communicating it is another issue.
They have to immerse in emphatic listening in ways that genuinely show for the pubic that they are really there to come up with solutions that curb the challenges identified. Listening is by the way the greatest way of showing ones respect.
No need of reflecting the I-know-it-all-syndrome that makes the public in turn reject parties for their lack of empathy. Therefore engaging the public in continuous discussions is essential to exactly communicate one's ways of going for solutions.
Third is the ability to forge co-operation among different unions and organizations which may have roles in a democracy despite differences of any kind. While the difference remain, parties can work with any one in those things that unite them with any one out there.
Synergy is one of the true characters of great institutions and individual leaders. That would sum up any parties quest for lasting service and contribution.
While all parties have such responsibilities to pick and go for, they enjoy fixing criticisms on their opponents as if criticism gives them the foundation for becoming better candidate in elections. Time for radical paradigm shift to go to the basics and build them from inside-out than trying to do it from outside-in which is a known route for failed organizations and individuals alike.
Hope political parties and individuals with aspirations in political parties gain one or two good points here. You may drop a line or two if you have comments on this article or on my blog. Thank you for reading me.//
In my last article, I tried to show why and what the opposition need to be proactive with. This is because I believe placing ones responsibilities on external bodies never helps any individual or institution. Winners are always those who take charge of their actions and the course they hold on to.
The opposition has a duty for deep sole searching to come to rely on their own inner strengths than the enabling environment and the political sphere they are calling for. The presence of democracy never be proved when opposition parties win and the absence whenever the ruling party continues to win election after election.
So long us elections are open and fair who wins doesn't mater at all. It feels like our opposition measure the prevalence of democracy with the number of seats they are able to win in elections.
In an article last weekend on Adis Admas I read an article by Chairman of EDP who call upon EPRDF to make a level field for the opposition to thrive in elections and other political issues. I don't believe one political party needs to make its opponent believe in a particular issue.
In the global political arena, every party works to make things difficult for its opponent not to win in any election. This happens even with in matured political systems. May be developed democracies often employ legitimate ways to cripple their opponent.
What is important for a political party is to devise mechanisms that take it to the top most leadership position by maneuvering every option under the rule of law. Expecting one's opponent, especially when the other believes the opposition have nothing good to offer for this nation and has no character that enable them to deliver the promise they make, is naive take on the matter.
Yet the opposition has a place to look for solutions for their deeply rooted institutional and capacity problems. Above all they have wrong paradigm with which they build their organizational structure. It is time to clearly see their fault and lead themselves with the right map that takes them to destinations where responsible parties reside and compete one another.
First the private victory they need to deal with themselves in shaping their programs, mindset and tools with which they play in the political arena. That help them become strongly legal and ethical. Once they become parties which see issues from inside out, they begin to take responsibilities for their failure. That ends their search for escape goat whenever something fails. Besides it makes them responsible with in their sphere of influence.
Once they finish being proactive than reacting to the ruling party , once they become clear with where they intend to take this nation and keep showing the public its destiny and continuously develop their leadership and management capabilities to run their program, they begin to influence the public with their own strength.
That makes them dependable. It is because they don't have these character they hold on to criticizing the ruling EPRDF hoping they would expose the failures to make their bid for election.
Exposing the failures of ones opponent is marginal technique for able opponents. What comes first is being able opponent which the opposition are not so far. I hope they grow to becoming one. That automatically gives confidence both for the public and the ruling party that the opposition would not be stumbling blocks for progress.
It makes the public and the ruling party believe that opponents are legal, competent parties that see the way out of the problem from different perspectives. Otherwise they are dependable to take legal and constructive approaches in ways that build on what has already been accomplished.
Such confidence can only happen when the opposition strike balance and maturity to design blue prints of their programs and progressively become responsible and able parties which got armed with the fundamental, dependable leadership qualities. No body gives them this. They create it with their own organized and continuous effort.
Once they build and reflect these character and competence of dependable leadership, they are to go on showcasing their programs, strengths and unique features that makes them competent in the political system that embrace diverse views. That I think expects them to believe in win-win mentality.
They have to recognize that democracy is abundance where even the defeated party has a role to play and a reward to enjoy. They have to believe democracy doesn't enable society to determine consequences of elections but the process it happens with. This is in deed very essential for the opposition to acknowledge in their search for vote.
Second they need to listen to real problems of the public and stick to those things that matter most than populist issues which may take a distance as the temper of the public goes high. once parties identify the real problems, it is convincing that they are half way into the solutions.
Next is considering options after options not seeking to fit with ones ideology but to fit solutions for the problems the nation faces. Parties may sort out problems properly and set solutions effectively but communicating it is another issue.
They have to immerse in emphatic listening in ways that genuinely show for the pubic that they are really there to come up with solutions that curb the challenges identified. Listening is by the way the greatest way of showing ones respect.
No need of reflecting the I-know-it-all-syndrome that makes the public in turn reject parties for their lack of empathy. Therefore engaging the public in continuous discussions is essential to exactly communicate one's ways of going for solutions.
Third is the ability to forge co-operation among different unions and organizations which may have roles in a democracy despite differences of any kind. While the difference remain, parties can work with any one in those things that unite them with any one out there.
Synergy is one of the true characters of great institutions and individual leaders. That would sum up any parties quest for lasting service and contribution.
While all parties have such responsibilities to pick and go for, they enjoy fixing criticisms on their opponents as if criticism gives them the foundation for becoming better candidate in elections. Time for radical paradigm shift to go to the basics and build them from inside-out than trying to do it from outside-in which is a known route for failed organizations and individuals alike.
Hope political parties and individuals with aspirations in political parties gain one or two good points here. You may drop a line or two if you have comments on this article or on my blog. Thank you for reading me.//
