Advertisements
jump to navigation

Peoples Most under Threat: The Oromo, Anuak, Afars & Somali (Ogaden) and other Indigenous People are Facing Genocide in Ethiopia, the Latest Annual Report Released on 18th May 2015 by Rights Group Reveals May 21, 2015

Posted by OromianEconomist in Amnesty International's Report: Because I Am Oromo.
Tags: , , , , , ,
add a comment

???????????Oromo Are People Under ThreatBecause I am Oromo   Peoples under Threat is Minority Rights Group’s annual authoritative rankings table which highlights those countries around the world where the risk of mass killing is greatest. Peoples under Threat is created by compiling data on the known antecedents to genocide or mass political killing. While the individual indicators describe the current situation – what is happening – the index as a whole seeks to predict what may happen. As an early warning tool, Peoples under Threat has been widely used by UN officials and other human rights and conflict prevention practitioners. Almost all the significant episodes of civilian killing that occurred over the last year took place in countries which were near the top of, or major risers in, 2015’s Peoples under Threattable. The Peoples under Threat ranking highlights countries most at risk of genocide and mass killing. The ranking is created by compiling data on the known antecedents to genocide or mass political killing. Click on a country to view its Peoples under Threat information. The large orange number indicates the country’s position in the ranking. http://peoplesunderthreat.org/   Indigenous people at risk , Anuak, Afars, Oromo, Somalis, smaller minorities Oromo rally in London   Communities at risk in Ethiopia: Anuak, Afars, Oromo, Somalis, smaller minorities

Summary

The report shows that Ethiopia ranked ninth in 2014’s Peoples under Threat index – the same position as in 2013’s index. It is one of  the  countries that ranked  the risk for genocidal mass killing is the highest. The culprit is the government controlled by the TPLF regime.

2015 Data Peoples under Threat value
Self-determination conflicts 5
Major armed conflict 1
Prior genocide / politicide 1
Flight of refugees and IDPs 0.0013
Legacy of vengeance – group grievance 8.9
Rise of factionalized elites 8.7
Voice and Accountability -1.293
Political Stability -1.394
Rule of Law -0.622
OECD country risk classification 7
TOTAL 16.38
The overall measure for each country is based on a basket of 10 indicators. The number in each row is drawn from the source for that particular indicator. The sources of data and calculations used are detailed on the Notes to Table page. 

Background

Ethiopia ranked ninth in 2014’s Peoples under Threat index – the same position as in 2013’s index.

How is Peoples under Threat calculated?   Since the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, our ability to identify those situations most likely to lead to genocide or mass killing has improved. A number of comparative studies of the factors preceding historic episodes of political mass killing had been undertaken since the 1970s, but it was not until the 1990s that researchers pioneered quantitative longtitudinal analysis of a wide range of such factors, enabling the testing of different causal hypotheses. This research enabled the identification of those preconditions that were most likely to lead to genocide and political mass murder (politicide). Minority Rights Group International has drawn on these research fi ndings to construct the Peoples under Th reat table, although responsibility for the fi nal table is exclusively our own. Peoples under Th reat is specifi cally designed to identify the risk of genocide, mass killing or other systematic violent repression, unlike most other early warning tools, which focus on violent confl ict as such. Its primary application is civilian protection. Indicators of confl ict are included in the table’s construction, however, as most, although not all, episodes of mass ethnic or religious killing occur during armed confl icts. War provides the state of emergency, domestic mobilization and justifi cation, international cover, and in some cases the military and logistic capacity, that enable massacres to be carried out. Some massacres, however, occur in peacetime, or may accompany armed confl ict from its inception, presenting a problem to risk models that focus exclusively on current confl icts. In addition, severe and even violent repression of minorities may occur for years before the onset of armed confl ict provides the catalyst for larger scale killing. Th e statistical indicators used all relate to the state. Th e state is the basic unit of enquiry, rather than particular ethnic or religious groups at risk, as governments or militias connected to the government are responsible for most cases of genocidal violence. Formally, the state will reserve to itself the monopoly over the legitimate means of violence, so that where non-state actors are responsible for widespread or continued killing, it usually occurs with either the complicity of the state or in a ‘failed state’ situation where the rule of law has disintegrated. Certain characteristics at the level of the state will greatly increase the likelihood of atrocity, including habituation to illegal violence among the armed forces or police, prevailing impunity for human rights violations, official tolerance or encouragement of hate speech against particular groups, and in extreme cases, prior experience of mass killing. Egregious episodes of mass killing targeted principally at one group have also seen other groups deliberately decimated or destroyed. However, some groups may experience higher levels of discrimination and be at greater risk than others in any given state. Minority Rights Group International has identifi ed those groups in each state which we believe to be under most threat. (Th is does not mean that other groups or indeed the general population may not also be at some risk.) It should be noted that although these groups are most often minorities, in some cases ethnic or religious majorities will also be at risk and in relevant cases are therefore also listed in the table. In some cases, all the groups in the country are at risk of ethnic or sectarian killing. Th e overall measure is based on a basket of ten indicators. Th ese include indicators of democracy or good governance from the World Bank; confl ict data from the Heidelberg Institute for International Confl ict Research and the Center for Systemic Peace; data on the fl ight of refugees, internally-displaced persons and other populations of concern from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees; indicators of group division or elite factionalization from the Fund for Peace and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; the US State Failure Task Force data on prior genocides and politicides; and the country credit risk classifi cation published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (as a proxy for trade openness). For citations and further information, see the notes to the table. For a fuller discussion of the methodology, see State of the World’s Minorities 2006. Based on current indicators from authoritative sources, Peoples under Threat seeks to identify those groups or peoples most under threat in 2015. http://www.minorityrights.org/13054/attachments/MRG_SWM15_PUTBrief_COMB_8.pdf

Advertisements