For people who listened or read the speech of President Isaias Afwerki on the 14th anniversary of Eritrea’s independence will realize that there was no new impetus that he offered except more sacrifice traps. Nothing has changed in his approach to tackle pertinent national policy issues. Nor was an adaptation in his cast of mind to absorb new innovative ideas to clear the impasse, which Eritrea encounters itself.

At independence in 1991, Eritrea was full of hope, vitality and vigor, and it was considered a darling and stabilizing nation in the turbulent Horn of Africa region, and a bridge to the Arab world. Then, an Eritrean citizen hoped that one would be able to moderately articulate one’s vision independently and defend that position inside Eritrea in the open without fear of retribution. On May 24, 1991 - Eritreans unanimously jubilated - that day - and next day - would be better than yesterday. Fourteen years later, Eritrea is bled, starving, alienated, with full of prisons and hard labor. Eritreans are overcome with gloom, and asked, "Is this the realm of freedom? Is this where the heroic Eritrean struggle has taken us?" Their hopes and aspirations are dashed - Eritrea is free from foreign colonization, and yet Eritreans are in bondage without basic fundamental liberties.

On January 28, 1993, President Isaias as the leader of a new nation, and part of the new breed of African leaders, attending the OAU meeting in Cairo stated,

Yet, Eritrea remained one of the most marginalized countries in the continental Africa. Looking at historical data, the solutions and manuals the old African leaders produced were more on the collectivist, socialist and undemocratic trends - that were replete in Africa in the 1960s and 1970s. President Isaias seemed firm on his conviction to introduce a multi-party system; allow Eritrea to establish constitutional government; and respect basic human rights. Not only Eritreans, but also the USA and European countries were deluded by these assertions. Later, it was manifested by his own actions that he is just another African leader of the ‘60s and ‘70s with all the dictatorial mold and collectivist baggage. Possibly now, the African leaders who attended the OAU meeting in Cairo in 1993 might be laughing of what became of President Isaias, and pity on what befell on Eritrea. Under President Isaias, Eritrea is recycling solutions and manuals that were already tried by Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and miserably failed. The countries of Eastern Europe who plunged into the democratic path have extremely prospered, in a very short period of time, far more than the forty years of their collectivist rule.

For all the pathos, miseries, poverty and imprisonments that are real and visible inside Eritrea, in his speech on the 14th anniversary of Eritrea’s independence, President Isaias Afwerki doesn’t want to be responsible and accountable. Only naďve people will expect from a man who was not accountable to anyone for the past 40 years to declare the-buck-stops-here. As expected, in his speech on the anniversary day of independence, President Isaias attributed Eritrea’s problems to outside forces and blamed the international community at large.

Contemporary Eritrea has three central issues that hamper its progress:

1. There is no just rule of law in Eritrea; there is the lack of fundament respect of the basic human rights and intrusion to Eritrean human dignity by the Eritrean Government. Many journalists, religious leaders, distinguished parliamentarians, and other citizens are still in jail without due process of the law. The Eritrean Government is not a representative government that is elected under constitutional laws. There are no opposition parties operating inside Eritrea to offer alternative national policy solutions. There is no free press to capture accurate public opinion.

2. The border with Ethiopia is not yet demarcated and thus the conflict is not resolved, though legally delimited and concluded by the verdict of the Hague arbitration committee.

3. The relationship of Eritrea with majority of its neighbors and the international community is not smooth.

Eritrea’s central issues can be classified into Direct Control, Indirect Control and No Control against what Eritrea can do. And yet, the solutions remain hidden from President Isaias Afwerki.

The lack of basic human rights inside Eritrea and the unconstitutional nature of the government of Eritrea are within the domain of ‘Direct Control’ of President Isaias and his government. No country – including the USA, EU or Ethiopia can be responsible for the deteriorating human rights condition and lack of democracy, civil liberties and rule of law inside Eritrea. In his speech on the 14th anniversary of Eritrea’s independence, President Isaias didn’t propose any solution on how to alleviate the despicable human rights condition inside Eritrea. Instead, he was trying to find an alibi for his failures, while the major key for the solution is up to now - within him. The solution for problems under his ‘Direct Control’ should be: To release all political prisoners unconditionally; allow opposition parties to operate inside Eritrea; allow the free press and have a free and fair election. In short, abide by the rule of law. To divert attention, President Isaias continuously focus on the form of the problem than the content and on appearance rather than essence. What does he expect from the international community when he is the direct owner of the problem?

The border conflict with Ethiopia is not resolved yet. Of course, we should be vigilant with motives and prospective actions of the Ethiopian government that may negatively affect the welfare of the Eritrean people. More than anyone else, all patriotic and liberal democratic Eritreans realize that Ethiopia is violating the rule of law. But, Eritrea has no capability to force the Ethiopian Government to implement the verdict of the Boundary Commission, through an approach that may require more bloodshed and more uncertainty. And why should Eritrea bother itself to take a violent route when the rule of law is on its side? Hence, the problem resides with Ethiopia and Eritrea has ‘No Control’ on this problem directly. Yet, the government of Eritrea has an ‘Indirect Control’ to influence other countries to pressure the Government of Ethiopia to implement the Demarcation decision. Unfortunately though, President Isaias’ approach on diplomacy will earn Eritrea more enemies than advocacy friends; and with the pace of his verbose attacks - not many influential countries will campaign on behalf of Eritrea. It becomes, also, difficult for the international community to understand a President that accuses them for not living by the rule of law; for not enforcing international treaties and obligations; and for not respecting the Delimitation Decision - when he himself does not follow the rule of law inside his country, and with his own people. Therefore, the international community does not take him seriously, and he simply lost the moral standing to solicit and get sympathy from the international community advancing Eritrea’s cause.

Though Eritrea’s relationship with Yemen is improving a little bit, President Isaias conspicuously didn’t state any progress of Eritrea’s relationship with its neighbors and the African and Arab nations. In a sense, one may accurately conclude there was no positive item to report. I assume that some of the attendees, in the 14^th anniversary of independence celebrations, may have asked themselves what is Eritrea’s diplomatic problem? And how couldn’t Eritrea secure any commitment from notable African and Arab dignitaries to attend in its important holiday? Eritrea’s influence in the region is tremendously diminished that even President Isaias’ favorite theme, terrorism, was missing from his speech. He only referred it as a complaint on how Ethiopia is benefiting from it. It seems that Ethiopia, Djibouti, Yemen and Sudan have become more ‘appealing’ partners to the Western countries in the fight against international terrorism in the region. More or less, Eritrea is left out to fend itself. Eritrea’s relationship with other countries, however, may not improve until there is a change on the leadership style and its engagement with its friends. In order to register allies to Eritrea’s cause, at a minimum, President Isaias had to respect friends. Imagine how President Obasanjo feels after reading the transcript of President Isaias’ speech.

Irrespective of what President Isaias said about the USA and the UN Security Council, we Eritreans should understand our size: the size of our nation and its small population. The actions of the Government of Eritrea should have been spent on winning friends than garnering enemies. In the final analysis, it is the Eritrean people who suffer by the incompetent actions of its President and his irresponsible rude utterances. Also Eritreans should not make the mistake in thinking that our relative importance in the global world and interrelation with other countries, or even our existence, is an all-important for the rest of human kind. With its export and import size, Eritrea is no more than a small to mid-sized European or US private company. We can maximize our importance in the global space only by playing good diplomatic cards.