How to lose friends and alienate people: Ethiopia’s civil war

Hello and welcome to The Intelligence from The Economist. I'm your host, Patrick Lane, filling in for Jason Palmer. Every weekday, we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world. For decades, China's one-child policy was policed through forced abortions and heavy fines. Now, the government wants women to have more children. So it's beginning to adopt new tactics. And in India, millions of devotees are enthralled to self-professed saints. We hear about the billion-dollar businesses and questionable motives of these so-called godmen and godwomen. First up though, On Monday, Ethiopia's Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed was sworn in for a new 5-year term after winning what he said was nearly 90% of the vote in controversial elections held earlier this year. He pledged to work with other political parties to overcome the country's political and economic problems. But for many Ethiopians, Abiy's promise rang hollow. Much of the opposition boycotted the vote. About a fifth of constituencies were not able to take part at all. That's because the country is in the midst of a bloody civil war, which started a year ago and shows no is no sign of abating. In the north of the country, the federal government is fighting the Tigray People's Liberation Front. Our East Africa correspondent Tom Gardner recently returned from a trip to the region.

So I went to visit Chenna, which is in Amhara region. That's in the north near Tigray. And the first thing that strikes you when you arrive there is it's an idyllic scene. You see yellow daisies which blossom after long rains in Ethiopia. Were they firing through here? Yes. So these trees are cut from bullets. But as you draw closer, you see bodies lying rotting in the fields. Some have been buried under stones and leaves. But others have been left to lie in the open, limbs ravaged by dogs, torsos blackened and bloated from the rain.

What had happened?

This is the scene of a battle, and a fearsome one, that took place in the early days of September when Tigrayan rebels entered the village. And there was fighting for about 5 days, and possibly very many civilians were killed. How far away were you at that point? You were up on that hill, right? A local tour guide called Solomon Girmay, who usually works at the nearby national park, he was fighting himself or assisting the Ethiopian army, and he witnessed quite a lot of the fighting. He described insurgents who were ordinary farmers, not well-trained soldiers. That might explain to an extent the brutality of some of the fighting that occurred. They are farmers. And even one of them, I heard him, you know, when he was saying that they didn't receive, you know, proper military training and they were told that TPLF is occupying Gondar and other towns and it's time to loot everything and take it back, take everything back to Tigray, you know. That's what I heard from one of the captives. I spoke to many locals. One was Baze Kesade. He's a farmer. And he said he returned home after the fighting had finished and found two of his brothers, one of them his twin brother, dead, shot in the head with their hands tied behind their backs.

That's awful. And the horrifying scenes you saw, this is just what's happened after one battle in the region. What do you think it tells you about the ongoing conflict?

I think it tells us a couple of things. I think firstly and most obviously, it tells us that the war is still raging, its horrors are still multiplying, and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. But it also tells us that the war is metastasizing into a people's war, a war between communities, in particular between the Tigrayans and the Amharas. What we are seeing here is mass recruitment, mass mobilization of entire communities to fight or to at least assist the troop. And that actually blurs the line very dangerously between civilian and combatant. And that's something that was really apparent in this week-long battle in Chenna, where so many civilians seem to have died.

As you were saying, Tom, what you saw was the result of a TPLF incursion into the Amhara region. How did the TPLF justify that sort of action, that sort of activity?

Well, the TPLF leaders justify this by arguing that they have no alternative but to force Abiy to the negotiating table by escalating the conflict. But look, their advance into these neighboring regions has evidently brought great suffering to the civilians in these places.

Does the TPLF have a point though, Tom? I mean, I know you've spoken to the intelligence several times about the conflict there, and there doesn't seem to have been much progress in getting both sides to talk, right?

So in a specific sense, yes, I think Tigray is under siege. Barely any food has been allowed in. People are starving. There need to be talks. Does this justify the TPLF's military decision to invade neighboring regions? That's a contentious point. I think what's really important to understand is the absolute lack of trust between the two sides. So that's what underlies the calculations of each, and neither is willing to risk compromise, laying down their arms, scaling back the war, for fear the other will use window to rearm, regroup, and fight some more. So it's an existential struggle. That's the way it's seen by both sides.

And what about the rest of the world? What's being done diplomatically to try and end the conflict?

Relations between Ethiopia and many Western countries have sunk to their lowest point in decades. Last month, for example, America said it would slap sanctions on officials involved in the war in Tigray if the parties didn't start talk or allowed aid in to reach the hungry. The UN's humanitarian chief warned on September 29th that this could lead to hundreds of thousands dying of hunger. Abiy then responded a couple of days later by expelling 7 senior UN officials, accusing them of meddling, which was really quite a dramatic step.

So where do you think it's heading, Tom? Do you see a route to peace in Ethiopia?

Abiy recently hinted that he might be open to negotiations with the TPLF, but the TPLF is unlikely to accept mediation by the African Union, which is the most likely actor to get involved. They believe it's partial to Abiy. Abiy, in his inauguration speech earlier this week, said nothing at all about talks and instead hinted that there is a new offensive about to be launched. That may force the hand of America, which is deciding whether to suspend Ethiopia's duty-free access to its market. That's hugely important for possibly 100,000 workers in particular, the textile industry. It's hugely important for Ethiopia's economy. One possible glimmer of hope may be the role of African leaders who do seem to be taking a more proactive approach now towards mediation and negotiations, that may be the route forward if we are to see some sort of negotiated way out of this.

Tom, thanks very much for joining us.

Thanks very much, Patrick.

China's government began enforcing its one-child policy in 1980. It was an extreme means of controlling a sprawling population. The Chinese government says it has to support 1.3 billion people who all need land, food, and water. Those who didn't comply might suffer forced abortions, sterilisations, and heavy fines. And here is another harsh reality of the one-child policy. It's an official notice of a fine to a family with 5 children for the equivalent of £8,000. Now, that's far more than anybody around here will earn in a lifetime. Now, though, the one-child policy has been abandoned. China is burdened by an ageing population with too few workers to support health and pension costs. And in attempting to boost China's birth rate, the heavy hand of the Communist Party is still playing its part.

China is desperate for more babies because their birth rate keeps on falling.

Amy Hawkins is a news editor at The Economist.

Last year, China's total fertility rate, which is the number of children that an average woman can be expected to have in her lifetime, fell to 1.3 births per woman, which is much lower than the 2.1 that's needed to maintain a stable population.

1.3 on average, though, it's still more than the one child that the policy allowed for many years.

Yeah, that's true, because in 2016, the one-child limit was changed to a two-child limit. Then this year, the two-child limit was raised to a three-child limit per couple. And the government has also promised to improve childcare facilities and women's employment rights. And some local authorities have even introduced financial incentives for women to encourage more childbearing. But so far, as demonstrated by the falling fertility rate, none of these measures have worked. So now the government seems to have set its sights on curbing abortion.

And how does it plan to reduce abortions?

So in guidelines published at the end of last month, the State Council said it plans to limit the number of abortions carried out for quote-unquote non-medical reasons, but it didn't offer any specifics about how this would be achieved. There are around 9.7 million abortions carried out each year in China, according to official statistics. And so that gives an abortion rate of roughly 28 per 1,000 women compared with 13.5 per 1,000 women in America. So it's more than double America's abortion rate. And one reason that China's abortion rate is so high is that for many years when the government was keen to limit population growth, the procedure was touted as a kind of quick and painless fix for unwanted pregnancies. They even advertised on billboards, on public transport, with glamorous pictures of smiling women looking very happy with their abortions.

So the government wants to walk that back now. How are they going to do it? Are we talking about an outright ban here?

No, so concrete measures to restrict women's access to abortion on a national level have so far been limited, and it's worth noting that China still has one of the most liberal abortion regimes in the world. The termination of are allowed pretty much at any stage of the pregnancy for any reason apart from sex selection. But during the one-child policy, there were a lot of forced abortions and sterilizations. So many Chinese women are suspicious of any attempt to dictate their family planning. And there have been some local restrictions. So for example, in 2018, the authorities in Jiangxi Province introduced rules stipulating that abortions performed after 14 weeks must have the signed approval from 3 medical officials, and other local authorities have introduced similar policies. And that was said to be targeting sex-selective abortions. But there have also been kind of softer-touch approaches to exhort women to bear more children. For example, rather than encouraging women to delay motherhood, which they did in the past, state media now remind them that older mothers are more likely to have babies with birth defects.

That doesn't sound entirely soft. Is that sort of messaging likely to work?

Well, none of these nudges really tackle the main reason for China's declining fertility rate, which is that people want fewer children. And that's from many reasons. As countries get richer, people tend to have smaller families anyway. And in China in particular, mothers often report being discriminated against at work after they've had a child, making the prospect of having another child less desirable. And the cost of bringing up a child can be extortionate. So even for poorer families, for example, families that earn less than 50,000 yuan, which is about $7,800 a year, spend around 70% of their income on their children. And China is a very competitive environment for university places and jobs. And many parents reckon it's better to invest all of their resources into one golden child than to have lots of children.

Given all these pressures working against the government's goals, what's the likely outcome for China's population trend?

It's clear now that China's one-child policy is going to have a very long legacy. It will take many years or even generations to undo the cultural changes that were wrought by that policy, including the view of abortion basically as a form of contraception. And other countries that have tried to erase fertility rates have shown how hard that can be once small families become the norm. And other countries have also shown that restricting access to abortion doesn't lower the number of abortions that happen, it just pushes them underground.

Amy, thanks very much for joining us.

Thanks for having me.

In a birthday message released on YouTube, Mata Amritanandamayi is telling her online followers the 7 steps to a joyful life. As much as possible, keep your body and mind under control. Maintain a regular spiritual practice, and so on. Devotees queue up for hours to receive her healing hugs. She claims to have embraced 40 million people from all over the world. Those who can't come in person can pay for puja, or ceremonial worship, via the internet. Mata Amritanandamayi is one of India's many godwomen. Or godmen, to whom millions of devotees continue to be enthralled.

Godmen or godwomen, they are spiritual entrepreneurs.

Abhishek Kumar writes about India for The Economist.

They are self-ordained spiritual leaders, and they've got there with millions of followers, and they look to them for guidance of all kinds.

And what sort of guidance are these clients looking for?

Well, it could be for the birth of a child, or perhaps a promotion at work, or what are the odds of you going overseas for better prospects. It could be for purchase of a new car, or even to treat a disease which the doctors have given up on. And many of them actually use them as they would therapists and counselors, or psychiatrists or psychologists for that matter. These spiritual guides are very common in Hinduism. You also find them in Sikhism as well, and they actually evoke images of these bearded ascetics, some of them pot smoking as well, and they settle in the mountains to seek salvation. The big name back in the 1960s who had wooed even the Beatles was Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and he had trademarked a style of meditation or a technique called Transcendental Meditation, which folks once upon a time paid a good $2,500 or so for a 4-week course. And gurus like Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, they've been famous for the work that they've done. But more recently, these so-called prophets, they create a lot of money-making opportunities.

And what sort of money-making opportunities are those?

Well, one name that comes to mind, and he's very popular among all age groups in India, is Baba Ramdev. He's a yogi. He also runs Patanjali. It's a $4 billion consumer goods giant, and it competes with the likes of Unilever and Procter Gamble. And I was speaking with one of his followers who buys Patanjali hair oil, and he said that Baba Ramdev has already established trust with us, unlike other brands that need to advertise to win trust. So he already has us hooked. And credit to some of these gurus is that they also do a lot of philanthropic works like building schools or clinics, and they have close ties with politicians as well. The idea is that if you are friends with any of these yogis, you might stand to win more votes. But there are some more insidious motives as well with these gurus.

What do you mean by more insidious motives?

Well, many of them are serving time in different prisons for things like sexual assault, kidnapping, tax evasion. There was one who was arrested for peddling miracle oil to a pregnant woman because her in-laws demanded a boy. And then there was another very famous guru named Sathya Sai Baba. He was accused of money laundering. And more recently, in 2017, there was one by the name of Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in San. He stars in his own films and music videos. He was sentenced to prison for rape. And once that happened, his followers ran amok and some 38 people were killed, 250 were injured in the violence that ensued. And there are a few dissenting voices, but they are silenced often. In 2013, Narendra Dabholkar, a very big name, a rational thinker, He fought against black magic superstition and he was shot dead on a morning walk. His murder trial actually started last week.

So Abhishek, it seems that actually in many ways it's quite a dangerous industry. There's more to it than just harmless superstition or religious practice or good works. Is anything happening to stop its nastier side?

Well, it does not seem that way. There are millions of people who still continue to believe in these holy men or spiritual leaders despite their dodgy track records because they have submitted themselves to that individual so much so that they will not believe anything otherwise. So for as long as people put their faith in miracles over science, India's enlightenment industry will continue to flourish and false prophets will keep finding new ways to exploit them.

Abhishek, thanks very much for joining us.

Thank you, Patrick. Thanks for having me.

That's all for this episode of The Intelligence. If you like us, leave us a rating and a review. And you can subscribe to The Economist at economist.com/intelligence. Intelligence offer. The link is in the show notes. See you back here tomorrow.