We are still in the season of action.  All the movements will coalesce, natural alliances will form, and natural leaders will emerge.  A little patience, Eritreans.  We appreciate the agitation for action, but let the moment emerge, as it surely will.   Meanwhile, there are things we can do on our own: Until such time, we recommend disobedience. 

Disobedience.  Boycott.  Boycott all goods and service offered by the PFDJ.  Don�t buy their videos, their books and don�t participate in any fundraising�which are funds for jails, funds for war.   Don�t get into a taxi owned by the PFDJ.  Don�t buy anything from them.  Don�t pay the �2%� extortion tax.  Starve them until they understand that the citizens that they took for granted are the sea their rotten fish is feeding from.  Starve the MONSTER.

Why?  For moral, ethical and legal reasons.  

Instead of acting as a diplomatic legion representing Eritreans in foreign lands, the PFDJ embassies have become an arm of exploitation and terrorizing Eritreans.  They don�t represent the State of Eritrea; they represent the �G-1� and its economic arm�The Red Sea Corporation (RSC), a company that pays no taxes and whose financial records are not audited.   

The RSC has unethically converted sovereign Eritrean diplomatic missions into a network of branches, each as a separate profit center, for its selfish operations.  Embassies are involved in currency-exchange and transfer, purchasing goods for export to Eritrea and selling real estate and properties in Eritrea as well as selling bonds on behalf of the Eritrean Government.  All this without the knowledge of the host countries.  As any rookie in economics and law will tell you, it is illegal and unethical.  Respectful governments do not get involved in that kind of activity; gangsters and Wedinis do not know any other method of operation.  The PFDJ discourages the formation of civil societies by individuals while the embassies sponsor fund raising activities everywhere.  Nothing has been accounted for and no audited report has ever been issued by the PFDJ.   Is this the kind of lawless government that Eritrea deserves? It is just shameful.

In the PFDJ�s Eritrea, public employment opportunities are limited to PFDJ card-holding members.  Land allocation is limited to PFDJ members.  So are investment opportunities, diplomatic appointments and promotions in the army.  In an irresponsible gesture, scholarships are also limited to PFDJ members.  The rest of Eritreans are expected to watch this and say, �They take what they own�.  

Just say no to the PFDJ.  Don�t let them confuse you about how this will hurt Eritrea and its image.  Uganda has a good image now; it had a bad image under Idi Amin.  It is the head of the state that affect the nation�s image; and a nation�s image can be changed: it is not permanent�neither is the head of state.

The Stockholm Syndrome

While Eritreans are in jail�without charge�and innocence and guilt has not been established (and is not likely to BE in the kangaroo session of the Special Court), we are seeing Eritreans supporting the Eritrean Government unconditionally in various petitions organized by PFDJ �community leaders� and, for good measure, criticizing the non-government websites.

In North Korea, they say that the radio receivers are made with one single dial: the government station.   With the closure of the free press, that is what has happened in Eritrea.  There are some Eritreans who are not just content with having closed the private press in Eritrea; they wish that the private press beyond the control of the government (the Internet) would just disappear as well and we would all listen to dimSi Hafash and nothing else.  What is disappointing is that people who ought to know better because they live in countries with freedom of choice, expression, and due process are, via their petitions, telling the Eritrean Government that they will continue to support it, regardless of what it does with the Reformers or anyone else in jail for that matter.  It can have them rot in jail for years; it can summarily execute them but as far as the signatories are concerned, it is all good.  We give unwavering support to Eritrea, its government and its president, they say.

The favorite phrase used by �G-1� writers to make their arguments is �make no mistake.� This is their way of saying, �we know what we are saying makes no sense and is illogical, but this is no time to exercise your mind and to doubt what we say: just take our word for it.�   Call it �a�emurawi ktet�: intellectual mobilization.  Don�t ask questions; just obey orders!   One thing about the pro-�G-1� petitions is that they always present criticism against Isaias as criticism against Eritrea and endangering the unity of Eritrea.  �Isaias�, �PFDJ�, �Eritrea�, �Eritreans� are all used interchangeably.   This means that even the supporters of Isaias believe in the formula we explain below that  Isaias = PFDJ; PFDJ = Eritrea.  Therefore, Isaias =  Eritrea.  Why else would they get so worked up about people criticizing the man and his policies and his party?  Why else would they accuse someone who is critical of the �transitional� president as being critical of the State of Eritrea?   If he is as beloved as they claim, and the �noise� of a handful of �defeatists� is insignificant, why do they go to all this trouble to show support?  A bit strained, we think.    In fact, we think this is proof positive that the Isaias Era is over.  As for Eritrean unity, it is not so fragile that it will come unraveled if people criticize the many foolhardy decisions of Isaias?    Eritrean unity is strained�thanks to the exclusive, intolerant, irresponsible acts of the PFDJ which has managed to do what no other organization had managed to do: to divide Eritreans along religious lines.  It is strained but it is there because people know that, sooner or later, the Isaias Era will be over.   

We still believe that this equation is a minority view, albeit a LOUD minority view, because most people�including Eritreans�are decent people and will not knowingly condone injustice and unfairness.  And, in due time, we believe that this will manifest itself.  Meanwhile, we have no explanation for some of the heartless petitions we have seen other than that people have been misled or that the Stockholm Syndrome* is more commonplace than we thought.  We recommend that they free their mind.  

* For those of you who are not familiar with this phrase, it came about as a result of an incident in Stockholm in 1973 when four victims of hostage-taker, resisted efforts to rescue them and, after they were freed raised funds for the defense of their victimizer (one of them got engaged to one of the captors.)  This incomprehensible sympathy and understanding for the victimizer is known by psychologists as the  �Stockholm Syndrome.�

The Dishonest Call For �Debate�

The first sentence of the Reformers Open Letter told us that the paper was �� a call for correction, a call for peaceful and democratic dialogue, a call for strengthening and consolidation, a call for unity, a call for the rule of law and for justice, through peaceful and legal ways and means.�  Five months after the G-15, the Reformers, were silenced in dawn raids by AK-47 brandishing security officers (except for one whose just-in-time disassociation from the group and rejection of the �debate� spared him jail and saved him his job as an administrator of a region in Southern Eritrea), we are hearing calls for debate from the G-1.   The obvious questions are: Why is the call for �democratic dialogue� being joined now?  Who is the invitation for debate sent out to?  What does �debate� mean?  Is throwing chairs and disrupting meetings a form of �debate�?  Why was not a peep heard in the months of June, July, August and September from all these new members of the debate society?  Is it because, as they claim, they are like the famous slow reptile, patiently processing the information, exercising �quietism� before they reached a conclusion? Or is it because, as we think,  they are loyal members of paternalistic party, awaiting clear instructions and directives from the party hierarchy because they express their opinion?

To go back to the belated call for debate, it is always helpful to define terms because the same word��debate� in this case--has different meaning to different people.  To help us understand if what they really have in mind is �debate�, let�s ask some questions:

Who is going to participate in this �debate�?  Not the �G-15�: they are defeatists.  Not the �G-13�; they are �detached.� Not the members of the �Alliance�: they are traitors.  Not the ex-ambassadors: they are defectors.  Not the elderly mediators: they are agents of �G-15.�  Not the Asmara university students, they are �spoiled brats.�   Not the �unaligned� and �independents�: they are too wishy-washy.   Participants of Debate: Limited to G-1 wing of PFDJ to talk to themselves.

What is going to be debated?  Well, here there are also issues that are not subject to debate.  This is because they�the �language issue�, the role of women in the military, economic policies, centralism vs decentralism--- have �long been settled� by the PFDJ during the armed struggle or they are taboos and too �divisive� and not subject to debate.  Or, they are not really issues: they are �sub-issues.� Subject of Debate: Restricted.

When are the �issues� going to be debated?  When it is the right time�an opportune time that only PFDJ knows.  The issue of �timing� is completely arbitrary, at the whim of the G-1.   Some things (like elections, due process, implementation of the constitution) are suspended in a never-never land pending resolution of demarcation, IDP resettlement, refugees� resettlement, Woyane threat, GDP growth, and anything that makes the Top Five.  Unless.  Unless the G-1 says, �now is the time� or �yesterday was the time� and then the hurdles all magically disappear and all calendars are cleared.    It was not OK for Eritreans to discuss democracy a few months back; now it is OK, tomorrow, it may not be.   Timing of Debate: Arbitrary

Where are these issues going to be debated?  Certainly not in a German hotel.  Certainly, certainly not in a hotel room in Washington.  Absolutely, positively not in a London school.   Certainly not in �chaotic� private Eritrean press.  Certainly not in Dot Coms�those hateful, divisive media.    Certainly not at university cafeterias or lecture halls.  They are going to be discussed in Embatkala and in PFDJ-run �seminars� and �workshops� and at Hadas Ertra and TV-ERE.  Never mind that these sessions exclude large segments of Eritrean society and the �debate� formats are like call-and-response African chants.  Place of Debate: At A PFDJ Echo Chamber.   

How are these issues going to be debated?  No �dynamic� debates, no �open-ended� debates: they are going to have to be �guided� by the PFDJ.  The party leadership offers the �discussion paper� to the senior cadres who then pass it on to the junior cadres who then pass it on to the membership.  There will no minutes taken, no votes recorded, but in the end, we will be told that the meetings were �lively, candid and productive.�  Methodology of Debate:  Call & Response Style.

Why are these issues going to be debated?   To arrive at the truth? To reach consensus? To choose from alternatives?  To persuade?  To have an exchange of opinions?  Or�are they designed to set up alibis?  To justify and rubber-stamp conclusions?  Reason for Debates: To Rubber-stamp decisions already made.  

Through this lengthy process of filtering or exclusion, what we are left with is a group of like-minded Eritreans, invited to a �seminar� organized by a �community center� composed of like-minded Eritreans, attending a session given by a like-minded G-1, about a chosen subject, at a chosen time and place, listening to a presentation of Truth As Told By The Supreme Authority and sealing it with hypnotic sounds of Awet nHafash.    This is how debates�actually, a monologue packaged as a dialogue�get, votes reminiscent of Soviet era Kremlin votes:  699 supporters and 1 dissenter.   And please don�t hold your breath waiting for a real debate between Ambassador  Girma Asmerom and Executive Committee Member Mesfun Hagos: IT WON�T HAPPEN.   It is just more hot air.   Is it any wonder then that many see this �debate� as a farce and choose to say, �thanks, but no thanks�? to a monologue that continues to be presented as dialogue.  

While on the subject, we congratulate our brothers and sisters in London and Atlanta for their successful meetings (Sunday, 11/11/01).  One (in London) had to be held in a church under heavy police presence, a testament to the PFDJ Qaeda�s terror.

Recklessness & Its Consequences

The EU Ambassadors returned after �consultations� with their governments because the EU, a government agency likes to deal with another government agency: the Government of Eritrea.  It is precisely for this reason that the UNHCR deals with the Government of Eritrea on the matter of Eritrean refugees stranded in the Sudan.  Not because the EU and the UNHCR are impressed with or are exonerating the G-1, but because they have no alternative other than to do that.   Who else are they going to deal with?

Dear G-1: Can we have a cease-fire on the dishonesty, please?  Can you take a sabbatical from the distortions and lies?  Can you, for once, take responsibility for your actions?  Will you, for once, admit to an error in judgment, to a mistake, to recklessness?  

There is only one reason that the EU called its ambassadors to Eritrea for �consultations�: it is because its representative to Eritrea, Mr. Antonio Bandini,  was expelled.  And who did that?  Who knew, or should have known, that the expulsion of the EU representative to Eritrea would generate a tit-for-tat reaction?  Only one party here: it is not the Reformers, it is not the Alliance, it is not the Woyane, it is not the Eritrean journalists, the elderly citizens in jail or the Asmara University Students.  The G-1 and only the G-1 was responsible for this colossal mistake.

Who was responsible for the EU threatening to suspend aid to Eritrea?  Who is responsible for the EU�s conclusions that Eritrea is not living up to its side of the bargain for getting aid: taking concrete measures towards democracy and respect for human rights?  Only one party was responsible: it was the G-1 and only the G-1.    

Who is responsible for the reversals of Eritrea�s image?  Who is responsible for transforming the image of Eritrea from a stoic people who, against huge odds, quietly and methodically wage a just war for liberation for decades to that of a boastful, immodest warmongers who are incapable of safeguarding their sovereignty and get over-run in a matter of days and beg for deals they had rejected?  Who is responsible for associating Eritrea with nations who declare war on their citizens�their statesmen and their journalists and their elderly citizens?   Who is responsible for befriending pariah nations like Libya? It is the G-1 and only the G-1.  

Taking all these pig-headed measures shows recklessness; trying to blame someone else for your mistakes demonstrates lack of character and integrity---which makes our argument (expounded on later) that how people conduct themselves in their personal lives is a good clue on how they will do it publicly.  Not only is the G-1 incompetent and reckless but it doesn�t have the moral fiber to admit errors and to take responsibility for its actions.

DaHdHayo: Mr. Endrias Habtegierghis

Eritrea�s General Consul to the Netherlands has resigned his position and will not return to Eritrea.  It is inappropriate for us to say, �congratulations� to a man who invested twenty-six years of his life for the liberation of his people and reaches a point in his life when he believes that his party and his government has no intention of doing that and that it is willing to defame and jail people who share his views and, thus, has to live in exile.    Given that there was a real danger that he, too, could have been imprisoned unless he kept his mouth shut, maybe what is appropriate for us to say is an expression one reserves for those who�ve had a near-miss with fate: � Thank God You Are Safe.�  enQuE bdeHan wetSa�ka.  Liberate a land and then take refuge from some of those who �liberated� it.  

Eritrea�s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is pretending that the resignation did not happen and the government website (shaEbia.org) couldn�t find a space in its marathon-council-of-ministers coverage to report to us of the resignation of another Eritrean diplomat. (now five.)   Chances are they will tell us that a new General Consul to the Netherlands has been named, (who we know already, he is in the Washington DC embassy) without telling us what happened to the old one.  That is what they did when they replaced Haile DeruE and Petros Solomon.

This takes us to their secrecy, which they are still guarding jealously.  After all that Eritrea has paid in the �senseless� war with Ethiopia, one of the things that cannot be allowed to happen is for Eritreans to be kept in the dark about the events that led to the war�particularly the year 1997. They can�t keep that a complete secret: the UN has a fact-finding mission; it the G-1 don�t like the UN�s findings, they will just dismiss it as they dismiss everything else.  But the G-1 committed a Type A and Type B error, which is to say: it did things it shouldn�t have done (1991 � 1997) and it didn�t do things it should have done (1998-2001).  Mr. Endrias Habtegierghis was the General Consul to Mekele, Ethiopia and we invite him to spill the beans and shred the veil of secrecy about how the Woyane repeatedly violated the rights of Eritreans� in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 and how repeated complaints to the G-1 were given a deaf ear by the leader of the �G-1� in the interest of �confederation��and other arrangements that Eritreans were never consulted about.  Speak, Mr. Endrias, speak and tell us who, in reality, was only too willing to negotiate Eritrea�s sovereignty and national security and whose gross negligence and coziness led to ignoring the early warning signs.   

Our Obsession With the Leader of �G-1�

In response to an editorial [the October 25 issue of The Pencil], a reader asked �Give me some timetable when is post Isayas / PFDJ. A year / month will be enough.� He also �laughed� at our suggestion for a general clemency to all politicians.  Some readers accuse us of blaming Isaias for everything.  How can we accuse Isaias for the crisis in Eritrea, talk about a vague post-Isaias era and then propose a clemency for the same man and his clique, Group of One, G-1, which is responsible for the crisis?  We will show the coherence and logic in this: just read on.

Actually, the Post-Isaias Era has begun.  The Era of Isaias as the unrivaled, unaccountable, unquestioned, unchallenged, Do-No-Wrong, mythical, mystical individual is gone. Powerless Eritreans only have the power of opinions (expressed secretly, of course) and their opinion of Isaias had never sunk as low as it has.  Even tyrants, especially tyrants, crave approval�and they seek it at coffee shops, worldwide tours, and press coverage.  That he is no longer held in high esteem must be known to him, notwithstanding the orchestrated �let�s rally around our tyrant� petitions.  If you mean when will the man stop being president, we wish we could give you a timetable for an inclusive and democratic Eritrea and a sun of tolerance rising.  That will happen sometime in the future, and the future always begins with the present.  That sun will appear as fast as our combined efforts will influence it to appear.   We can�t give a timeline; nor can we state how long the struggle will take.  We just know that all justice-loving Eritreans are willing to struggle as long as it takes and that, in the end, we shall prevail.  How do we know this?  History says so.  As for the clemency, we understand our role to be that of bringing issues to the fore for debate by all concerned. Suggesting an idea doesn�t necessarily make you the final arbitrator on the issue.  We think the choices are either clemency or a never-ending cycle of revenge and violence. We prefer clemency.

As for our �obsession� with Isaias, see if you disagree with the following formulation:

(1)    All political power in Eritrea is dominated by PFDJ.  All alternative viewpoints, to the extent that they are verbalized in an organized way, are illegal;

(2)     All political power within the PFDJ is concentrated in one man:  Isaias.  He is the shaker, the mover: he shakes the movers and he moves the shakers.  He has the first, second and last opinion on all decisions (including, by the way, the unilateral design of �our flag� whose absence seems to have riled up the �G-1� Qaeda.)

In short, in the year 2001, Isaias is equal to PFDJ; PFDJ is equal to Eritrea; therefore, Isaias is equal to Eritrea.   If you agree with the premise above (and we believe that friends and foe of Isaias accept this premise: just check the petitions), this means that Isaias (not the party, not any other institution, not the people) is who has the political power in Eritrea.  It follows, then, if you are going to talk about politics in Eritrea, you will and you have to talk about Isaias�unless you are participating in a dangerous game Eritreans have been enjoying for years: self-delusion.   This self-delusion gets us to say �PFDJ�, �Eritrean Government�, �Government of Eritrea�, �Eritrean Ministry of This or That�, �Council of Minister�, �Eritrean National Assembly� as if there is division of power, when we really mean Isaias and his G-1. (Yemane Gebreab gave us a perfect example of that when he forgot the pretense and decided that the election, which is supposed to be domain of a national assembly that never meets, has been cancelled.)   Thus, when we criticize policies and practices, we are talking about the politics and practices of Isaias.  There are many factors why this is so, and how and why all of us, to varying degrees, contributed to this and why it is not all his fault.  The reality is, however, in the year 2001, Isaias makes, for good and bad, (and lately it has been mostly bad) all the decisions.   Please note that our objection is not only that he makes bad decisions but that, even when good decisions are made, because he has monopolized the decision-making process, there is no rhyme or reason to them.)

As if this is not bad enough, some of the practices of Isaias that we have touched on or allowed their publication in this website are his embarrassing indiscretions: his temper-tantrums, his proneness to violence, his drinking, and his womanizing.   How do we know this?  In 1993, in one of Isaias� tour to the United States, Isaias was asked about the scandal at Asmara University when the University administration fired scores of professors for daring to demand intellectual freedom.  He responded: �Well, this question should not be directed to me but since Asmara is such a small place, I heard about the issues you brought up.�  Never mind the charming little lie about the all-powerful University Chancellor having nothing to do with decisions about the University because that is not why we brought up this old story.  We bring the issue up to point out that we wish Isaias remembers Asmara is small town and that all his indiscretions are known not only to the citizens of Asmara but to the diplomatic community and, thus, the world.    The question is: just because we know something, must we report it?  First of all, we don�t report everything we know: we only publish those that we can defend in any court of law.  Second, we report what we report because Eritreans shouldn�t be the only people in the world who don�t know about their government and, thirdly, because we believe how people conduct themselves in their personal life is often a good indication of how they conduct themselves publicly.    

A Chinese Government Reformer once asked an important question: �What has one who is not able to govern himself to do with governing others?�  We believe that this question, asked by Confucius over 2500 years ago, is still relevant and applies to all aspiring politicians who aspire for higher office, particularly those who want to be University Chancellors and Chief Commanding Officers of our Eritrean Defense Forces.   Thus, our �obsession� with Isaias.  We promise that if he leaves public office, we won�t have the slightest bit of interest in his personal life: when was the last time we wrote anything about Ramadan Mohammed Nur? 

The Awate Team