By Mehari Taddele Maru (@DrMehari)
Addis Abeba – Africa has lost one of its most brilliant minds and compassionate souls. Andreas Esheté, philosopher, public intellectual and mentor to many, passed away on August 29, 2024; and was laid to rest on Sunday, September 8, 2024, in Addis Abeba. His death deprives us of a towering African intellectual and an extraordinarily humane person.
The news of Andreas’s passing engulfed me in a wave of shock and sorrow. I was not alone. In the following days tributes were paid to him from across the globe, their extent clearly demonstrating how many lives have been touched through Andreas’s life and accomplishments. Andreas was not only the philosopher and prominent advocate for better human condition in Africa and beyond. To me, he was the mentor who played a crucial role in my life; hence, this personal reflection on the life and influence of a man who was supererogatory, consistently going above what was required and beyond the limits of academia and public service to leave a lasting legacy with those fortunate enough to know him.
I first saw Andreas as a public intellectual on TV before he transitioned into being my professor, later a friend, then my boss, and ultimately a brother figure. My first personal encounter with him took place in early 1996 when he was Chair in the preparations for the Adwa Centenary commemoration. I was then a student at Addis Abeba University. Not least because of his deep understanding of the grave human rights violations against my family, he became the driving force behind my decision to enroll in his Law School courses. Once there, I planned to ask him – and nobody else – to become my thesis supervisor. In his classes and under his guidance for my thesis, I learned a great deal from him. For me, three things stood out that made him special: his profound intellect and public intellectualism, his compassion, and his friendship.
The philosopher of fraternity: the often-neglected ideal
Andreas’s life and work exemplified multiple types of intelligence (to borrow Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory) and his componential-analytical gifts endowed him with perspectives rarely seen in others. Globally, he will perhaps be best known for his rich analyses in “Fraternity,” in the Review of Metaphysics 35 published in 1981. In her book On Beauty and Being Just published by Princeton University Press in 1999, Elaine Scarry, a Harvard University Aesthetics Professor and one of today’s leading intellectuals, depicted Andreas as a ‘turn-of-the-millennium philosopher … who [argues] that of the revolutionary triad — liberty, equality, fraternity — it is fraternity … that underwrites liberty and equality … hence also fraternity that underwrites liberal theories of justice’.
Scarry places him alongside other foundational philosophers, underscoring his original perspective on ethical justice and fairness. By arguing that fraternity and solidarity are cornerstones of freedom and equality in the revolutionary trinity – and consequently in liberal concepts of justice – he becomes a significant figure in debates around moral ethnics and justice.
Scarry’s recognition of Andreas’s work points to the parallel between creating for beauty and creating for justice, as the latter (procedure for justice as fairness) articulated by Andreas himself and by his favorite political philosopher, and the much-quoted John Rawls.
Scarry further elucidates how Andreas’s work, along with that of John Rawls, on procedure of creating of justice applies beyond political theory to illuminate the creation of beauty itself: “Another feature shared by the kind of creation we undertake on behalf of beauty and the kind of creation we undertake on behalf of justice has been suggested by political philosopher Andreas Eshete. In both realms, the object that one aspires to create may be completely known, partially known, or completely unknown to the creator. It is precisely on this basis that John Rawls differentiates three forms of justice: in “perfect justice” we know the out-come we aspire to achieve as well as the procedure by which that outcome can be brought about (food should be shared equally, and we can ensure this outcome by arranging that the person who slices the cake is also the last to select his own slice); in “imperfect justice” we know the outcome we aspire to achieve, and we know the procedure that gives us the best chance of approximating this outcome (persons guilty of a crime should be convicted and innocent persons should go free; a jury trial gives us the best hope of achieving this outcome, though it by no means guarantees it); in “pure procedural justice,” finally, we have no picture of the best outcome, and we must trust wholly in the fairness of the procedures to ensure that the outcome itself is fair (here equality of opportunity is Rawls’s illustration).”
This brilliance, manifested in his publications and lectures, has been affirmed by one of his teachers and an authority on Hegel and Aristotle, Prof Kenley Dove, who sprang to Andreas’ defense when pundits in Ethiopia questioned his academic standing on his appointment as President of AAU.
His creative intelligence was also evident in his innovative philosophical contributions, not only on fraternity but also on Ethiopian modernity and in his writings on recent Ethiopian constitutional issues.
In these as in his other works, one could discern an interweaving of fraternity as a central value and as an imperative in diverse societies such as Ethiopia (and most other African countries). He asserted that ‘The public ideals realized in the modern age are ideals for all human beings. In that sense, fraternity is a central idea of modernity. It is undeniable that modernity provides the possibility of shared values, aims and bonds amongst all human beings and peoples … hence the modern form of solidarity I call fraternity. Indeed, it is striking that it is only in the modern age that we are all contemporaries. Modernity is the era where humanity shares a common destiny.’
The public intellectual: critical reflections
In his 2011 lecture ‘How Ethiopia Became Modern’, Andreas turned to the illusions harbored by his generation’s commitment to lofty principles of socialism. He argued for the importance of taking seriously ‘two brute facts of society: coercion and scarcity’. His reflections demonstrated a rare ability to critically examine his own generation’s assumptions and failures. Andreas accepted, perhaps painfully, the failure of his generation to bring its ideals into practice in the real world: “Even though it may not have prompted change in the institutions and practices of the practical world [sic], Ethiopian modernism furnished a powerful expression of the ethos of modernity.”
His practical-adaptive intelligence dealt with the mental activity involved in attaining fit to context. He tried to work with whatever is available and adapt to local realities.
At the triple convergence of academia, policy, and practice, Andreas exemplified the role of a “public intellectual” and jurisprudential scholar through his proactive engagement and public articulation of differing stances (for example his proposal for judicial review and abolishment of death penalty) during the drafting of the Ethiopian federal constitution—a bold instrument that sought to depart from Ethiopia’s past political and economic structures, addressing the pivotal issues of his generation, including the “nationalities question,” the “land issue,” and the question of equality in religions and gender. In the same vein, his incisive article, “Does a Lawyer’s Character Matter?“, offers insight into his thinking on lawyers’ moral and ethical dilemmas while performing their profession in society and their responsibilities as advocates.
This trait made Andreas a daring public intellectual with bold proposals that tried to bridge the gap between philosophical theories and policy and practice. In his effort to apply a kind of reflective equilibrium – to use another Rawls concept he often cited – he did not simply stagnate in the face of the status quo and in the name of pragmatism; nor was he an idealist with illusions – a characteristic he attached to the failure of his generation to materialize the lofty ideal of transforming Ethiopia’s agrarian society to a socialist one. He pointed up with cold clarity but dazzling presentation his generation’s ‘illusions’. He articulated the follies of socialism without constitutional accountability and constraints on power, while remaining to the end a stern critic of capitalism and neoliberalism. I like to believe his thoughts were most often those of a liberal social democrat and in his disposition akin to the oft-quoted Rawls as one of the twentieth century’s preeminent liberal philosophers.
Andreas cared about the global human condition in general and more patriotically for those in Ethiopia. He loved his country and cherished the hope for a new Ethiopia that is just and that provides material well-being. He believed that fraternity is vital in this effort and in healing a nation mired in extreme poverty, especially given Ethiopia’s painful history of oppression, continual war, endemic violence, and governmental malfeasance. In ‘Reflections on Expanding Ethiopia’s Democratic Space’ (December 31, 2018), co-authored with our common very close friend, the Ethiopian prominent academic and diplomat Samuel Assefa, he observed of the 2018 political change in Ethiopia: ‘Of late, in the wake of protracted public protests … there are signs … of a turn to a more open and freer political space … It is important to ascertain [whether these steps] are also expressive of a standing aspiration to create an enduring democratic space of wider scope. Does the release of dissidents and the decriminalization of opposition parties demonstrate a full commitment to the rule of law, essential to the creation of a free and open democratic space?’
He offered fresh proposals on building a more just society based on fraternity and solidarity in an Ethiopian reality full of ‘unfavorable conditions for liberal democracy’ (another concept he would borrow from Rawls). Andreas never construed ‘fraternity’ as in contradiction to ‘diversity’ or various identities. In his eyes, it was precisely because of the presence of diversity that fraternity was necessary.
Bridging theory and practice
Andreas was not content with purely theoretical work. He practiced in public what he preached in academia, serving as President of AAU and as Chair of the Ethiopian Adwa Centenary Commemoration Committee, his work consistently aiming to bridge the gap between philosophical ideals and practical realities. As the leading personality in the National Committee for the commemoration of Adwa’s centenary, he made ‘the Victory of Adwa [as] the victory of Africa’ a central theme that aimed to foster fraternity among Ethiopians, Africans and all other freedom-loving people in the way it brought together diverse ethnic groups for a common national cause and became a symbol of African resistance against European colonialism.
The significant public roles he came to play ranged from his duties with the Committee to leading repatriation efforts for the Aksum Obelisk and other heritage artifacts. As President of AAU, he focused on democratizing the university’s governance, and university contribution to the national political life, and to the economy of the local community, and initiated Pan-African programs such as the Tana High-Level Forum on Security in Africa. He also established new centers of excellence, including the Institute for Peace and Security Studies, the Center for Human Rights, and the Center for Federal Studies. He was a proponent of the establishment of the Center for Nile Studies, well before the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam project and the subsequent diplomatic tiff with Egypt over the use of the Nile River.
In dealing with public affairs, he was both fair and firm. He would protect his office, the institutions and his colleagues from unwarranted political and other attacks. He would act according to his convictions and reject outside interference, such as that from government authorities protesting strongly when the university appointed former government officials and opposition leaders to positions at the institution.
When the Ethiopian government indefinitely postponed the scheduled August 29, 2020, legislative elections, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as the reason, Andreas expressed his principled opposition to this move. Drawing from the scholarship of another preeminent thinker he valued, Amartya Sen, specifically Sen’s work on how a free press could act as a safeguard against famine, Andreas offered his trademark bold and fresh perspective to the public. In a live TV appearance, he underscored the vital need for a system of checks and balances and accountable government, particularly in the midst of calamities like the COVID-19 pandemic. He stressed the importance of holding elections according to the constitution, even in difficult circumstances, to maintain the credibility of the government and uphold democratic accountability in dealing with the polycrisis Ethiopia was facing. When the war on Tigray broke out in November 2020, Andreas was deeply devastated and vehemently opposed to the conflict and resulting famine. Drawing on his profound understanding of constitutional law and human rights, Andreas opposed against the war, siege and the suffering inflicted upon civilians, calling for dialogue, reconciliation, and a peaceful resolution to the war.
Taking such principled public position and speaking truth to power was not new or a sudden old age revelation for him; it was a consistent marker of his lifelong commitment to justice and compassion. I learned from close friends that Andreas was among the few rare leaders of his generation who expressed immediate and unqualified opposition to the summary execution of Emperor Haile Selassie’s government officials, known as the “Massacre of the Sixty,” on November 23, 1974, by the Derge- a military junta led by Mengistu Hailemariam. This stance, taken early in his career, demonstrated Andreas’s principled approach to justice and his opposition to extrajudicial killings, regardless of political circumstances. It showcased his courage in standing up for justice, due process, and the rule of law, even when it was politically suicidal in his left-leaning generation. This stance reflected not only Andreas’s unwavering commitment to constitutional democracy and his belief in the importance of maintaining constitutional constraints and processes, especially in times of crisis, but also his novel approach to such pressing political and social issues.
Advocating for the preservation of the memory of the countless victims of the former Alem Bekagne prison under Derge and other atrocities, Andreas, who chaired the Board of the African Union Human Rights Memorial from 2012 to 2014, championed the establishment of a museum on the site where imperial ministers were summarily executed. Despite his efforts, the construction of the new African Union Commission Headquarters led to the demolition of this historic site, reflecting the disregard for the need to memorialize victims of gross human rights violations across Africa, which would have been symbolized by the presence of such a museum within its premises.
Compassion and humanity
While President of AAU in 2008, Andreas suffered a stroke that left him needing serious medical attention. The outpouring of support from a cross-section of Ethiopian society was overwhelming and extended well beyond the immediate circle of friends and family members. Calls offering to help in arrangements to evacuate him came from private individuals and businesses, along with messages of care, love and prayer. During his illness, he showed admirable courage and readiness to do as he was told by the doctors and survived the stroke for more than a decade. After he returned home from treatment in South Africa and the US we met again, happily reflecting on his recovery and particularly, the extraordinary response to the news of his illness. I recall vividly after more than a decade, he wept, wondering how he could repay the people of Ethiopia and those individuals who rushed to his aid for their kindness.
The mentor
Andreas had a rare ability to see things that others missed, not dissimilar to Edward de Bono’s concept of solving problems using an indirect and creative approach through reasoning not immediately obvious. He breached most boundaries in the social sciences and encouraged me to do the same. He propounded positivism, empiricism, a certain brand of rationalism, and irreverence for institutionalized departmental boundaries of fields of study such as history, politics, and law – all of which he crossed. He favored a broader, more holistic approach to knowledge. In an age of specialization and career-based education, he inspired me (and many other students) to take a broad approach, to cross disciplinary boundaries, to study what we love and to love what we study, while always open to new thoughts and new ideas.
As his student, I had a wonderfully reflective and intellectually productive time. As a supervisor his most important lessons were his manner of thinking and his writing style. It was ‘how’ than ‘what’ he thought, that most impressed me. Implicit in everything he taught me was that I should see myself as one who could and should think critically, articulate ideas, and write – not simply take notes. He took me out of my intellectual comfort zone by bringing in a different stream of thought and always asking ‘why?’. This was not always pleasant, but it helped compel more hard thought on the clarity of my ideas and proposals. He generously offered his time and knowledge, readily suggesting books and allowing others to borrow from his large personal library.
His experiential intelligence showed in his capacity for innovative intellectual pursuits, including his prose and his understanding of the arts. His writing and speech alike were a joy: economical with words but always striking in presentation and prose. His imaginative observations, informed as they were by his understanding of history, politics, law and philosophy, brought with them insights both innovative and practical. His mastery of philosophy, his style of writing, and his teaching delivery were at the same time gentle and powerful. He had a formidable mind but was devoid of the vanity, pride or snobbery which sometimes can go with this gift, which made him a wonderful friend, accessible to students or strangers. This made it easy for him to cultivate friendship with almost anyone including his students. Andreas was a stellar guide and supervisor for me and others, as well as a forgiving friend even to those who made him their enemy.
The early bird president
I learned more about Andreas who had been my teacher and advisor when he later became my boss as President of AAU. He was an early riser, often in his office before seven in the morning. He would start his day with classical music (Vivaldi, Beethoven, Mozart, and others a taste I developed since then) before reading The New York Review of Books then engaging in conversation about the day’s routine, including meeting with the students he supervised. He was one of those rare intellectuals who could, in his own words, bring together ‘the world of beauty and the world of action’ in the daily round.
Still later, as my immediate boss (with Samuel Assefa, a Vice President immediately supervising the reform office where I served as director), we would lunch together, mostly in Samuel’s or Andreas’s house, continuing our conversations on topics of the university, academic science and politics.
Andreas’ respectful treatment of everyone meant that a stream of complaints and complainants visited him throughout the day, and his disposition to listen attentively without interruption was remarkable. He held to his position very firmly but would suspend judgment without rushing to express his thoughts and seldom reacted immediately. Even on those rare occasions when I disagreed with him, he would cede first place to listen to me, then explain his differing view much more lucidly and precisely than I could.
The masterful convener
A characteristic that had a profound impact on me was Andreas’ exceptional talent for bringing together people from all walks of life. He personified ideals rarely seen behind the wall of intolerance built by his generation and, of course, ours too. People from all backgrounds would gather at his home in Sar Bait, Addis Abeba, which was a microcosm of fraternity for all his friends, near and distant, young and old, those in authority and in opposition. His home would be filled with many people on March 2nd, as they celebrated his birthday and acknowledged the Victory of Adwa.
In his house, those who admired him and those less fond of him would alike find a place to engage in conversation. Andreas would bring together all strands of politics: leaders of the ruling and opposition parties, artists of varied inclinations and talents, scientists from many fields and Ethiopians from all corners of the country. Andreas created a space for dialogue and understanding, showcasing his remarkable ability to befriend those who often held opposing political views. He transcended the divides of identity politics to advance justice and human dignity for everyone – nationally, regionally, and globally – but above all to protect and defend of the most disadvantaged in society. It’s devastating to think that that convener and that venue is no more.
The ‘Andreas Rule’
In discussions of controversial, divisive issues that could lead to heated, personalized debates, Andreas had a unique approach I came to call the ‘Andreas Rule’. The magic of his approach lay in listening without interruption. He would start by appreciating all opinions and contributions, focus on principles and core ideas, and present the least rejectable arguments. This approach made it challenging, though not impossible, persuasively to disagree with his viewpoints but showcased his capacity to judge individuals on their merits and not by external social indicators such as ethnicity, age or gender. Andreas would begin conversations by inviting all opinions and contributions. He was the least judgmental of men, who could and would work with everyone open to dialogue.
Personal reflections
Despite the seriousness of his work, Andreas had a witty, often sarcastic sense of humor. Even in distressful times, he could make us laugh. When I made the decision to leave the university for a post at the African Union Commission, he playfully remarked, ‘So, you’re aiming to be called Excellency now’, alluding to that organizations rigid protocol of addressing officials in meetings even when seeming unnecessary (or inappropriate). Titles, even the informal ‘Prof’, was not something he favored, and he saw the addition of a titular prefix as representing a lack of empathy and closeness. Early on in our acquaintance, he told me that unless displeased with him, I should simply call him ‘Andreas’. Following a medical procedure on his eyes, he jokingly told me ‘I thought many of you were good-looking, but now that my vision is clearer, I’m not so sure.’ After examining a recommendation penned by a common friend for an application he remarked, ‘To sum it up, this recommendation is essentially saying “I wish I were him”’.
The loss of Andreas Esheté leaves a void in the intellectual and public life of Ethiopia and beyond. He was a compassionate man who possessed deep empathy for others’ distress, along with an urgent desire to alleviate it. But above all, he lived for justice and human dignity. His immortality lies in the countless lives he touched, the minds he shaped, and the ideals he championed. His spirit will continue to inspire and guide us as we strive to build the more just and fraternal world he envisioned. As I conclude this tribute, two quotes come to mind. Maya Angelou said, ‘Your legacy is every life you have touched’. For Aristotle, ‘being is spoken of in many ways, but … not [as] homonyms’.
Of the four people that have been the great influences on my life, my work and my thinking, one has been a truly great, truly inspirational teacher. Like the many, in Ethiopia and the wider world, who knew him or were touched by his life, I mourn for Andreas Esheté. AS
Editor’s Note: Dr. Mehari Taddele Maru is an academic focused on peace and security, law and governance, and humanitarian and migration issues. He tweets @DrMehari
