Liberty And
Security
The issue of
finding a harmonious balance between the right of people to live
freely (liberty) and live at all (national security) is one that
challenges even mature democracies like the United States of
America. The debate in Eritrea over the last four years--if one
describes the pitched shouting matches and name calling as
"debate"—has been between those who genuinely feel that
insistence on constitutionalism and rule of law right now
endangers national security and those who feel that
constitutionalism strengthens national security. In the process,
those of us who call for more freedom have been accused of being
treasonous or supporters of traitors and those who have been
calling for delays have been accused of being totalitarian or
supporters of totalitarians.
The difference
has been on presentation of facts.
Those of us
who believe that the PFDJ is a totalitarian party and that its
head is a tyrant have persisted in showing one evidence after
another. Almost every state in Africa is mired in one conflict
or another but Eritrea is the only nation in the continent that
has no independent press; it has no independent legislative
body, no independent judiciary, no rule of law, no due process.
In fact, we have shown that it is not even a party or a front,
but merely a vehicle for one man—Isaias Afwerki—who has no
limits to his power. In addition to its tyranny, we have also
shown plenty of evidence that it is incompetent, reducing the
State of Eritrea into a beggar state.
On the other
hand, those who accuse the opposition of treason have, todate,
not provided single evidence beyond repeating their allegations.
Not one single individual, out of the thousands, if not the tens
of thousands they have accused, has been proved to have
committed crimes against the State in anything that remotely
resembles a free and fair court. Not the elderly citizens. Not
the "fifth columnists." Not the reporters. Not the G-15. None.
To us, this is confirmation that the secrecy that the PFDJ
operates under has nothing to do with protecting the national
interest but its own power.
National Security vs Isaias Security
In the case of
Eritrea, some--and by "some" we mean those who are fanatical
supporters of Isaias--confuse disloyalty to the man with
disloyalty to the nation. This is not surprising: if one is
content to roll the entire fate of a nation into one man, then
one can easily fall into the trap of equating criticism of
Isaias or even assertively working against Isaias as working
against the State of Eritrea. To us, patriotism means standing
up for the nation from everyone INCLUDING AND SPECIFICALLY from
Isaias Afwerki. In the eyes of these misguided citizens, even
individuals who dedicated two thirds of their lives, bled for
Eritrea and sacrificed everything for the nation were not spared
from the accusation of treason simply because they disagreed
with one man. Thus, while disappointing, the reckless
accusation of treason against everyone who runs afoul of one man
is hardly surprising, nor unique to Eritrea.
Legitimate National Security Concerns
Of course,
just because the PFDJ uses the "national security" card to
justify every abominable crime it commits against Eritreans does
not mean that there is no such thing as a national security
concern. Freedom is not an absolute concept. There is a
reason why every nation, including the most democratic, the most
peace-loving countries have intelligence services and spying
agencies. There is a reason why citizens, even the free-est
citizens in the world, allow their governments the right to
protect safeguard some information as privileged because they
understand that by giving up some individual freedom they ensure
a higher collective security. Some may be surprised but we are
not "free speech absolutists": there are many documents we have
received and not published because we believe they compromise
our national security or unity.
But free
nations understand the tendency of governments, all governments,
is to over-reach and classify everything as secret because by
doing so, they can dodge accountability. In free
nations—democracies—the struggle to maintain a harmonious
balance between liberty and security, is maintained through a
constantly-improving checks and balance system.
The Martyr’s
Database
Despite the
disappointing and overabundant accusations that Eritreans wage
against one another, we begin with the premise that all
Eritreans are patriots. We may differ, often in pitched tones,
on the methods we use to improve the livelihood of our nation
but we all want the same thing: a nation at peace with itself,
at peace with its neighbors, a nation ruled justly and
democratically, and a nation whose citizens living standard is
constantly improving. Some of us think that the biggest hurdle
to this goal is the PFDJ, some think it is the Ethiopian
government, some think it is both. To what extent should we go
to remove the hurdle? Here, too, we differ.
It is in this
environment that we have been studying the Martyr’s Database we
have received. The information contained is quite comprehensive.
The question is: what will we publish? What will be our
parameters? What is the purpose? What do we hope to achieve?
The test we
will apply must pass three standards: national security, decency
and accountability. We are patriots; we love our country
passionately. We also believe that our country has been very
badly served by the PFDJ. Thus, for example:
-
We will not disclose
where or by what cause a martyr died. Such
information compromises Eritrea’s national security because
it can disclose to any enemy Eritrea’s vulnerabilities of
where to attack and what equipment to use. Moreover, it does
not pass the decency test: a mother who takes pride in her
son’s martyrdom does not need to know that the real cause of
his/her death was suicide.
-
We will not disclose the
unit the martyr was serving in because this, too,
can disclose Eritrea’s vulnerabilities: some units are more
ably led than other, some sectors of the Eritrean Defense
Forces are more resourceful than others and there is no need
for anyone except those in a positions of authority--preferrably
elected--to know this.
-
We will not disclose the
precise dates of martyrdom (particularly for
1998) because Eritrea has an outstanding case on the matter
of who initiated the Eritrea-Ethiopia war and disclosure may
compromise its case.
The above are
some examples; there are others that have to pass the same test
of national security and decency. Why are we even listing these
examples?
Because we want to remind those who have the
database and those who have access to it, to think of these (and
similar) examples and to handle the material responsibly.
The question
is: what are we publishing and why are we even publishing this
data? Towards what end?
Accounting/Closure
The PFDJ gave
a total of 19,000 and then proceeded to assemble the loved ones
of the martyred, in clusters of "zoba," of those who died from
that specific zoba. There is no accounting to the entire
Eritrean people of the full names of those who died. We have
received no closure on the issue, particularly those Eritreans
who question the number announced by the PFDJ. We intend to
address that question.
Accountability
We have
interviewed several individuals who have spoken of rampant and
cruel disciplinary measures that have been taken against
Eritrea's Defense Forces for even minor infractions. In its
index, the database mentions "Code 500," defined as those
martyrs who died because "sgumti tewesiduwom" (steps were
taken against them.) There are also many for whom no reason was
given. Again, in the interest of sensitivity and decency, we
will not identify the names. But we will provide
statistical summaries because someone has to account for
the execution of these brave souls. It is the height of
hypocricy to take the lives of people and then stonewall and
plead national security when people demand accountability. At
the appropriate time, scholars and human rights activists, may
find the data useful in demanding accountability from the
government. Meanwhile, we might share this information with
concerned entities if we deemed it appropriate.
Promote Peace
Of all sectors
of a society, veterans are probably the most peace-loving
because they have witnessed first-hand the devastation of wars.
We believe that those who are trigger-happy and those who see
war as just another extension of diplomacy will have second
thoughts when they see the magnitude of war. When they see the
ages of those killed in war. In this regard, we invite Ethiopian
reporters, particularly those from the independent media, to
challenge their government to disclose the entire list of the
names of Ethiopian soldiers that were lost in this "senseless
war."
We believe all
human beings want to live free and secure. Governments have an
obligation to be vigilant in safeguarding their nation’s
security. Maintaining a well-equipped standing army does this.
But the same vigilance that citizens show in ensuring that their
government is capable of defending them from external enemies
must be matched by citizens’ vigilance to disclose the full cost
of its policies —in loss of life, loss of liberty-- and whether
the policies the government pursued in defense of the nation
were defensible or unavoidable. And since our nation lacks the
basic systems of accountability,
this
is the least we owe those who died for what they believed was
defense of the motherland.
We believe
that the martyr's database does not belong to the government. It
doesn't even belong exclusively to those families who lost loved
ones in the war. It belongs to the Eritrean people on whose
behalf they were ordered to die and it should, and it will, be
shared. But we recognize the legitimate concerns of some
well-meaning people and we will try to address them by making
these pledges:
(1) The
martyred and their loved ones deserve sensitivity and decency,
which we will do our utmost to honor. We will neither
sensationalize nor trivialize the dead. We will not be
gratuitous. We will provide the data in a tone and language that
is measured and sober.
(2) The State,
which is a permanent, deserves to not have its national security
compromised, regardless of who is running it now, who is
temporary and will eventually be gone. This is a recognition
that will be honored and we will err on the side of caution. But
we have no intention of being accomplices with those who have
chosen to go along with dictatorship and decided to fool
themselves by declaring that their meekness is being done for
the sake of the country.
(3) The
citizens deserve accountability from their government and
closure on this highly emotional issue. That, too, we have a
duty to fulfill, and we will do our share. Now, and in the
future.
awateteam@awate.com
