ERITREAN POLITICS:
NEED FOR ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE OPPOSITION CAMP
Yohannes Ligiam (Dr)
London 29/10/04

The incumbent PFDJ system in Eritrea has repeatedly demonstrated that it is neither accountable to the will of people nor to the national aspirations that sustained the thirty years struggle for independence. The system has flouted basic international human right issues and in the name of national security PFDJ has escalated its isolationist position.

In defiance of national or international accountability, The Eritrean Government has thrown out the last international journalist, filled the prisons with people without any charge, disappeared the largest number of journalists in the Africa, perpetuated religious persecution (the only case in this century) and in addition to the tense situation in the border with Ethiopia it has been stepping up its provocation in the Sudanese border.

Not that accountability or transparency is to be expected from PFDJ and its determined leader; it had never been part of EPLF’s policy and has been far less the nature of PFDJ.

It is ironic is that the level of national disintegration and human suffering has not become an incentive to establish and priorities an agenda of action relevant to the viability and sustainability of a national entity to Eritreans in general and the opposition groups in particular. A unitary and focussed stance that challenges a system that has dashed the hopes and aspirations of a nation.

The opposition groups tell us that PFDJ is accountable neither to God nor to the peoples suffering and has been defiant to the international rules. However, it is relevant and timely to ask if the multiple opposition groups feel any accountability towards the people for their eternal fragmentation and non-constructive attitude. Opposition groups’ politics has been characterised of endless description of the harsh reality and suffering that prevailed under PFDJ but very little on how they intend to resolve the problem and much less on alternative strategies they intend to adopt in order to relieve the country of its misery in the post PFDJ era.

Recently, we have been rearing about 4+1 and other 3 in 1 coalitions among the Eritrean opposition groups followed by endless arguments some in support of it and others to undermine the nature of these regroupings. Though coalitions and understandings are welcome, it is all of the same game within the Eritrean context i.e. reshuffling the cards and is remotely adequate to what is required and expected from establishing an effective and credible national opposition. These groupings are prone to external infiltrations and in any case they are not an answer to the Eritrean problem which desperately requires an inclusive single opposition. The only strategy that people inside Eritrea want to hear is the establishment of a single unified opposition. I can’t imagine that people inside Eritrea still have any energy left to follow-up and hope on the ever divergent opposition politics abroad. After all these are people who know and who have suffered the consequences of national political fragmentation since 1952, as direct result of lack of unity and national consensus they have been victims of one aggression or the other.

Any process that is not accountable to the clients it serves or to a superior legal entity, is bound to continue to live with its conviction and leads a blind approach to the impact of its actions on others and sometimes on itself.

The lack of accountability is a serious weakness in a political process and in any other walk of life for that matter. Eritrean opposition groups are “relatively accountable” only to their own groupings. Regional and religious interests and past ELF/EPLF allegiances make the basis to fuel and perpetuate the irreconcilable political divergences. Unfortunately, in such circumstances it is difficult to see mistakes of own actions let alone to have the drive or the commitment to review them. Defensiveness, political paralysis and lack of vision become the norm and stagnation of ideas followed by bickering and further division.

There is no entity or process that scrutinises the initiatives of opposition groups and how their respective initiatives impact on the overall national aspirations and objectives. Internal or external criticisms are often met with isolation, expulsion or denigration of individuals and often the process ends up in the creation new noisy groups. The reason why these self inflicted divergences perpetuate could be due to lack of political experience or due to a premature competition to grasp power. This is better left to the judgment of the reader. In any case, they are neither the wisdom nor the strategy that lead to the desired outcome and in any case they nurture the strength of the system that is meant to be replaced.

The fragmented politics that characterises Eritrean opposition groups, which some people like to view as a “democratic process” (twenty opposition groups VS one dictator) appears to me more as a distraction than an effective search of a solution for the main problem. Replacing a rogue state and a dictator requires clarity of objectives, inclusive strategies and the courage of implementation. Mixing up political strategy with lamentations and emotional incontinence of multiple groups is neither democracy nor of any benefit to those who are suffering most. Opposition Political process must have clear and prioritised objectives; the objectives must be responsive to the wishes of all the nationalities, both in terms of toppling a dictator and in preparing a consistent platform to rehabilitate the country.

No one expects that the opposition resolves all the complex social, political and economic problems of the nation. The oppositions’ mandate is only to replace the dictatorship and provide people with a national political platform to deal with present and future problems in their own pace. If the basis of the oppositions’ fragmentation is search for miracle for all the ills of the nation, not only this is an impossible task it also demonstrates lack of trust on the Eritrean people to determine their fate, given the opportunity. The opposition need to define and to be clear of their role and the role of the people in tomorrow’s Eritrea. Establishing an objective without identifying roles and boundaries, is often source of infinite wrangling and a journey that never ends. As far as this author is concerned, the role of the opposition is to replace the dictator and prepare mechanisms that enable people to exercise their responsibility of finding solutions to Eritrean political, economic and social challenges. I struggle, I know, I speak and I decide what is best for the people attitude, arrogance apart, it has a streak of PFDJ’s politics.

The relevant opposition groups must ask themselves why people prefer to establish new groupings rather than joining the existing objectives and policies. Why many veterans of the liberation struggle have become bystanders and avoid the politics of divergence. The responses can be summarised in two problems i.e. lack of clarity of objectives and plausible strategies, the non-correspondence of these to peoples’ aspirations and the non-inclusiveness. In summary, lack of trust of capability and of intentions of the various groups.

I have said it before and I repeat it again a non effective opposition nurtures dictatorship; and Eritrean opposition groups can not be exemptible of this responsibility.

Why do I think the opposition is failing Eritrea, its people and its future?

It is clear that the opposition underestimates the looming dangers of not preparedness for the future. This is a very worrying dilemma. Dictators come and go and usually they live the country in a mess. The threads of fear and terror with which dictators manage a country leave with them but people are left in a vacuum and in fear of the unknown. Somalia after Siad Bare and Zaire after Mobutu are typical examples of major disasters far worse than life under a dictator. Many Eritreans, with the usual limitations tell me “but we are different to Somalis and Zairians”. I beg to differ from such presumptions because these disasters occurred not because of ethnicity but because of the vacuum that has been created and the lack of a structure that could replace the dictator. A responsible and an effective opposition should be able to demonstrate the capacity to fill-in the gap.

Within the same context, I am wondering what is Eritrea’s fate if the present dictator drops dead, gets fed-up and leaves the country in a private jet, today. There are twenty three opposition groups who still have to sit down and work out on how to go about it. For the last ten years, while the country is suffering they have enjoyed refining their divergences instead of converging. The relevant opposition groups despite forty years of political experience have failed to come up with a constructive and inclusive national political platform. Proof of the matter is the ever growing number of new opposition groups to add fuel into the fire.

Suggestion: the opposition groups need to post-pone their differences and should establish a single umbrella – a Parliament and an Executive in Exile. Any other strategy is futile and is certainly contributory to the dictator’s misdemeanour and it only prolongs the suffering of the people inside the country. Time to take a courageous leap of faith and act responsibly.

They fail to imagine the potential political development due to external factors:

In today’s political environment, national fate and politics of a country are determined by external, regional and international factors more than by internal factors. The Eritrean political situation has festered for so long it is upsetting and unsettling the neighbouring countries. There is no doubt that the Ethiopian and the Sudanese Governments are looking for their own solution to the Eritrean problems and it is unlikely that their respective solutions are for the benefit of Eritrea. If they can not control the “spoilt child of the horn” infiltration, fragmentation, political or military annexation of sections of Eritrea could be the only potential solution to their problem.

The opposition groups need to realise that unless they establish a credible opposition force, unless they can reassure the neighbouring countries that the opposition is ready to replace the dictatorship and to promote stability and good neighbourhood, the looming danger is far worse than imaginable i.e. the end of a viable national entity.

Suggestion: all the opposition groups need to review their strategies and understand that the lack of a credible opposition in Eritrea has far worse consequences than a simple change of a dictator. It is also better to bear in mind that International Law doesn’t have solutions for self inflicted problems of a nation i.e. outcomes from a spoilt dictator and inept opposition.

They lack imagination to distinguish national priorities with internal grievances:

There is no doubt that all Eritreans community groups have grievances and expectations from their new nation which they have fought for so long for its liberation. The regional and religious mistrust and interests that had hibernated in the past have been ventilated and re-ignited by PFDJ’s social engineering of “New Eritrea”. However, a new nation and its management has many and complex objectives where a consensus of prioritisation must be sought. Prioritisation should not be seen as neglecting or undermining peoples’ grievances but creating a national consensus on what should be done first, what next, how and by what means. Eritrean opposition groups have a common platform of toppling the dictator and saving the nation. However, when it comes to the strategy each one of them thinks that their strategy is the only solution for the country. This attitude, in addition to creating new pretenders and more confusion to the existing problems it became a contributory factor in prolonging the dictatorship instead of undermining it. As the old wise proverb says “it is futile to argue endlessly how to skin a beast until you capture it”.

Suggestion: The opposition groups have to accept that there is no a single opposition group that can resolve the Eritrean dilemma. The economic, social and political inheritance from PFDJ will require the contribution of all groups without distinction in order to reverse it. The procedure must be to respect and to record the grievances of all the pretenders and establish a political platform to resolve these grievances when the time comes within a national democratic context. The priority now is to secure the national viability under one umbrella before it is too late.

The opposition lacks a relevant, inclusive and a constructive political platform:

Political process is a science of give and take, stand up and duck when the reality dictates it. The opposition have been overwhelmed of own convictions (arguments) and not by the peoples’ sufferings. The groups specialised in describing the suffering and the wrong doing of the dictator only to benefit ones own organisation but they still have to come with a credible strategy on how to relieve the sufferings. The opposition groups should realise their fragmentary political stand is abuse of their privileged position of “being abroad and therefore untouchables” and forget that their inept politics is source of suffering for the people who live inside Eritrea.

People inside Eritrea who are carrying the brunt of dictatorial mismanagement have been wondering for the last ten years – what is wrong with Eritrean opposition groups.

Do they really care of our sufferings?

How long do they expect us to suffer like this – the whole country in prison?

How can we trust the opposition groups to manage the country if they can’t demonstrate their capability as an opposition?

Suggestion: All opposition groups and respective leaders should work towards a single entity in order to establish a credible opposition and to give hope to those who are suffering inside Eritrea. Anything less than this is, becomes insensitive to the sufferings of the people and it should be condemned as inept, irrelevant and cruel to say the least. The task for now is to secure the national viability under one Parliament, a single executive and a single opposition entity that is based on inclusiveness. It is also overdue that the Eritrean grass-roots have a role to scrutinise and rend the opposition politics accountable and responsive to the prolonged and unnecessary suffering of the people within Eritrea. Groups that perpetuate unnecessary divergences and distractions from the main issue must be challenged and if necessary, boycotted.

There is time and place to resolve the internal grievances and this is the role and responsibility of the people, given the opportunity, through a legitimate / representative parliament and constitution and not the mandate of the various opposition groups, as we are led to believe.

For more civilized exchange of ideas you can contact via:Yohannes Ligiam (Dr)

The above article is posted width full permission from Secretary General Herui Tedla. We invite our readers to send any questions, comments you may have regarding to this article to