We are opposed to Canada’s anachronistic definition of terrorism because it victimizes innocent people and it places on the same footing a genuine popular revolution like Eritrea's, which freed people from terroristic governments, with the practitioners of random terrorism.   

The “you are either with us or the enemy” is meant to shut off debate, to criminalize dissent and to intimidate the wavering into obedience.  When you carry a name like Awate, it is unthinkable to be bought off by anyone, least of all by the Weyane—just as it is unthinkable to be bullied by anyone, least of all the PFDJ.  So the name-calling and false accusation are as futile now as they were when they were directed our way in 2000.  We shall persist, come what may. Some will see the light; others will get burned by the heat.

The United States would never have threatened to list Eritrea as a state sponsor of terror if Isaias Afwerki had limited his hobby to terrorizing Eritreans only. For practitioners of within-the-border-terror, the United States has less severe appellations like "countries of concern" and "outposts of tyranny."   And when Ms. Jendayi Frazer says "We are not looking to go down this route..", she is telling Isaias Afwerki that the threat would vaporize if Isaias would promise, as his friend Muammer Khaddafi did, that he would give up international terrorism in favor of being a plain ol' tyrant.