BBC Monitoring Africa - Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
May 8, 2008 Thursday
LENGTH: 2642 words

HEADLINE: Eritrea: Commentary doubts "legitimacy" of oppositions meeting in Ethiopia

BODY:


Text of commentary in English by Habtom Yohannes entitled "Will the Addis-Conference deliver", republished by US-based website specializing in Eritrean affairs Asmarino.Com on 3 May

Coming Monday, 5 May, around 13 Eritrean political organizations, "religious leaders", individuals and invited representatives of Eritrean civic societies will congregate in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, to discuss...[all ellipsis as published]; yes to discuss what? The organizing party is the Eritrean Democratic Alliance (EDA), an on-and-off network of 13 religious and secular political parties that have been fighting the Eritrean regime for the last 17 or less years without any tangible success so far. The agenda of the conference or the title/theme of the meeting is not yet disclosed.

However, deducing earlier statements of EDA-members leads to agenda points as power-sharing, religious or secular law, ethnical and regional autonomy and method of struggle; armed or peaceful struggle.

Except the 13 political organizations, all the other participants will have an observer status. This means they have no right to vote on resolutions with far-reaching consequences for the Eritrean people. It is not yet clear whether the Ethiopian government will participate in the conference that will kick off on Tuesday, 5 May, and will last until 11 May.

Seventeen days later another conference will take place but this time no invited "religious leaders", individuals or representatives of civic societies are allowed. This conference will be serious and is only for 4x13=52 leaders of the 13 political organizations that form EDA. The result of that conference is essential to tell if EDA has any chance of coming back out of the year-old coma. Others contend that EDA was born in coma in 1999 [and] has been in coma ever since, except for the changes of its names and or the venues of its annual meetings. For many bystanders, these annual meetings are the only sign of EDA's existence. In between the meetings, the EDA leaders return to their individual partisan huts, watching one another with deep-seated suspicion and antagonism that makes their collective effort none but a PR-exercise at best.

It is, of course, commendable when Eritreans assemble to debate issues of national significance. One can bless such conferences in nativity or rush to join them out of various interests or scrutinize them for public debate and public interest. I have chosen to do the last one. Out of conviction and for the sake of public debate, I will raise some cardinal points regarding the alliance, the upcoming conference and the role of the civic societies. In doing so, I hope I will be contributing to the discourse on the question whether EDA qualifies to be considered as a possible agent for political change in Eritrea.

EDA lacks legitimacy

This utterly unstable umbrella organization came into existence on 30 March 1999 in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, under the already forgotten name of Alliance of Eritrean National Forces (AENF). Most, if not all of the nine political organizations and one individual who comprised the AENF, were remnants of the Eritrean liberation struggle. One of the main traits of every armed struggle is its "legitimacy by gun". The authority of such an organization finds its legitimacy in the "barrel of gun" and not in the consent of the people. Such organizations are accustomed to first claim power by "gun" and then assemble the befuddled people behind them instead of attaining legitimate power through "legitimacy by conviction". The disease of "legitimacy by gun" has infected all who formed that old AENF and all who joined it later to form the Eritrean National Alliance (ENA) and later the present Eritrean Democratic Alliance (EDA).

By the way, the term "democratic" in the acronym EDA is as worthy as the term "democracy" in People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ), the oppressive regime in Eritrea. Both use it for public consumption and not out of conviction. Organizations that operate in the mentality of "legitimacy by gun" do not necessarily need to have military wings. We know, though, that some political organizations within EDA possess military wings that execute hit-and-run operations inside Eritrea. Political organizations that cling to "legitimacy by gun" are first interested in power and then in the coerced consent of the people than the other way round.

So far, EDA has failed to win the hearts and minds of the Eritrean people. It is true that some member organizations perform better than others do, but in general, all have failed the Eritrean people miserably.

While the Eritrean people have been yearning for viable alternative, the opposition forces have been preoccupied with weakening each other instead of being the alternative the people seek. Actually, the opposition groups must be very thankful to [President] Isayas Afewerki for doing their work by pursuing ruthless and repressive domestic policies as well as his lack of coherent foreign policy, which left him regionally and internally isolated. However, the opposition has, so far, drastically failed to exploit this ideal situation for the benefit of liberty. The cardinal question EDA must ask itself at the opening of the conference is: What has been the added value of our existence for the last 10 years; first as AENF, then ENA, then EDA, then EDA-bloc 1 and EDA-bloc 2, and now EDA? Imagine the world without the divided and ever bickering Eritrean opposition groups; what would you miss?

I am not talking here about some reasonably effective individual member organizations with political programmes and visions; but about the alliance which has been a disappointment for the Eritrean people and a blessing for the oppressive regime in Asmara. If your existence strengthens the weak and shaky dictatorship, then you better ship out for the sake of the Eritrean people.

EDA will not be viable for sustainable and peaceful change in Eritrea as long as:

1. It harbours opposition "parties" whose existence is based on religion, ethnicity and regionalism;

2. It harbours "leaders" who lack integrity and the capacity to be the alternative the people seek;

3. It harbours "leaders" and groups who compromise the Eritrean territorial integrity by sending perfidious signals, including the "secession" of Kunama and Dankalia [southwestern and southeastern Eritrea respectively];

4. It harbours parties whose sole aim is to weaken Eritrea by exploiting the current crisis in the country;

5. It harbours personalities whose sole aim is power at all costs. These people are power-hungry and only interested in their own well-being than the welfare of Eritrea and its people;

6. It harbours parties and personalities who are instruments of foreign powers;

7. It remains alienated from the Eritrean people.

It is not only the Eritrean people that have lost confidence in EDA, EDA-members themselves do not believe in their own organization and their own charter. Different EDA-leaders and cadres have expressed their distrust in different occasions. They are in it not out of conviction but out of tactical reasons. Please visit the official website of EDA to see how weak and anti-Eritrean the organization is. Some member organizations have a better website, with responsible contents than Erit-alliance [Erit-alliance.com]. When you read their weekly bulletin at Erit-alliance.com, do not think you are visiting a pro-Ethiopian Ethiopian website. This is the website of an organization which pretends to bring a lasting, democratic and peaceful change in Eritrea. Book-reviews on heroism of Ethiopian soldiers and military attacks on Eritrean soldiers are produced as something which will attract the Eritrean masses behind EDA. The only advice I can give to the serious parties within EDA is to abandon this albatross on the neck of the Eritrean people and pursue a sane struggle in unity for peaceful change in Eritrea. Those who adore armed struggle must convince us first that all peaceful means to set up rule of law in Eritrea have been tried and failed. No to regionalism, no to ethnicity and no to religious extremism!

Why is the avenue Addis Ababa?

The fact that EDA has been organizing one after the other (so far) unsuccessful conferences in Ethiopia undermines the already weak legitimacy of the organization. The time is not opportune. This is not about having ties with the Ethiopian government and the Ethiopian people. Since Eritrea cannot exist as a stable and prosperous nation without Ethiopia and vice-versa, it is the duty of every Eritrean organization, whether political or civil, to have a healthy and good relationship with Ethiopia and other neighbouring countries. We are culturally, historically, ethnically, religiously, geographically and economically so tied with, especially, Djibouti, Sudan and Ethiopia that we must do everything to repair what the Isayas regime has been destroying with all dire consequences for the peoples of the region.

However, I repeat my question: Is it beneficial for the Eritrean democratic struggle to hold conferences in Ethiopia at this critical period? By now, it is common knowledge that the Ethiopian regime does not only pursue an aggressive regional policy, but is also in breach of international law by continuing to occupy an internationally-recognized Eritrean sovereign territory. Moreover, the Ethiopian regime's stand in relation to EDA and the Eritrean opposition politics in general is somewhat ambiguous, to say the least. When you confront EDA members with this question, they do not answer with yes. They start to defend themselves by saying: "Since mid-2006, the Sudanese government has been refusing the EDA and its member organizations to organize conferences in the Sudan."

In that period, Isayas outsmarted the opposition and Ethiopia by improving relations with Khartoum.

The refusal of the Ethiopian government to abide by international law and agreements it signed has been helping the Isayas regime to keep the Eritrean people hostage in their own country. The Ethiopian regime is hampering any democratization process in Eritrea by its continuous rejection of the border decision.

While the Eritrean people and the friends of Eritrea (not of Isayas) are calling for the immediate and unconditional demarcation of the border, Eritrean opposition forces negate this issue. What kind of signals are these opposition groups sending to the Ethiopian government and the international community? The Ethiopian government is supporting the EDA financially and materially out of self-interest. Why did not EDA make its conference and further collaboration with the Ethiopian government conditional on the following three points?

1. Public excuse [as published, presumably apology] from the prime minister for the inhuman deportation of around 70,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin from Ethiopia;

2. A legal protection for the remaining Eritreans in Ethiopia and the human treatment of Eritrean refugees in Shimelba [a camp for Eritrean refugees in northern Ethiopia] and other Ethiopian cities;

3. The unconditional acceptance and immediate demarcation of the April 2002 border decision of the EEBC [Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission];

This stand would have helped the opposition forces to rally the Eritrean people, including those who support the Isayas regime for different reasons, behind them. This is a missed opportunity. Instead of making their cooperation with the Ethiopian government conditional, some of the opposition groups are even offering the Ethiopian government "a negotiated settlement of the border issue". The border issue is an international issue settled legally and a case between states and not self-appointed opposition groups. The EDA has no legitimacy, at all, to negotiate the border, except support the international decision. Selective justice is no justice!

In 2003 when EDA was called ENA, I wrote two articles regarding the relationship of the opposition with Ethiopia and the position of the opposition regarding the border issue: "Opposition prolonging oppression" and "Rushing for power before death arrives"

The role of Eritrean civic societies

The fact that EDA has invited individuals, representatives of civic societies and religious leaders is estimable. I understand that there were heated debates within EDA, between some who were for inviting civic societies and the majority who were against the invitation. The proponents of the invitation used one argument: "let the civic societies come and be witnesses of what we agree, since some of us have misconstrued past agreements". This shows two things: there is still a deep mistrust between the member organisations of EDA. Second, the role of the civic societies during the first conference is pure observer; witness; no more and no less. The invitation is just for public exercise. Because deep inside most of the EDA-members perceive the Eritrean civic societies as an impediment at best, and as rivals at worst. Still one can accept the invitation as a good public exercise.

The EDA-invitation to the civic societies came around the beginning of April, which allowed them little space to plan the trip let alone to come up with a well-thought plan. Some and not all of the civic societies responded positively and their representatives are either under way to or already in Addis [Ababa]. Some of these civic societies have been doing marvellous work, but it is also an undeniable fact that they themselves suffer from internal bickering, quarrels, divisions and hidden or explicit personal ambitions. These ambitions and hidden agenda's have often derailed the civic societies from the purposes for which they were set up: to develop an independent civic movement for a peaceful change and sustainable rule of law in Eritrea; indeed a united group of Eritreans with a solid vision beyond change. But alas, instead of enticing the Eritrean people through strengthening their organisations and developing effective action plans, they seem to succumb to this or that invitation. I really do not understand what these civic societies expect to gain from joining an EDA-conference full of intrigues.

By going to Addis, these civic societies are blessing the EDA-conference in Ethiopia, a country that still occupies a sovereign Eritrean territory against international law. It is true; this argument has been used by the Eritrean regime; however, what your enemy says is not always false. This is a missed opportunity for Eritrean civic societies. They could have used this opportunity to unite their voice and write a very critical letter to EDA, thereby voicing the Eritrean peoples' concern instead of rushing to the Addis Conference without any leverage to influence the meeting or the future of EDA. The civic societies could have made their participation conditional on the unity of EDA, its method of struggle and its independence from foreign powers. However, power not only corrupts but it entices first; and its makes you forget your purpose. My compatriots let us "Shape up or Ship out!" before it is too late; actually it is more than too late! This call, I think of all Eritreans, is not only addressed to the EDA but also to the civic societies. Eritrea seems 'blessed'. Take time and think well upon this subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time.

Delay is ruining us. Time is everything. Please act in view of this. Make haste slowly."

Lincoln giving seemingly contradictory advice to different followers in different situations (March 1861-July1862) From "Be a Master of Paradox". Lincoln on Leadership pp.76 Emphasis mine.

"Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace. "Eisenhower Dwight D.

Source: Asmarino.Com website in English 3 May 08