Awate's main mission is to promote reconciliatory efforts that are designed to narrow the gap between various segments of our societies.  It strives to combat the Islamic vs. Christian, Lowlander vs. Highlander and other cultures that are divided by vices that drill seeds of sub-national frictions. Building the culture of tolerance, rational deliberations, and respect for one another's views are at the center of a structure that embraces reconciliation.  It is within this mindset that we look into one of the major differences between the EPLF and ELF political cultures.

Reconciliation does not mean to become one and the same.  It does not strive to eliminate differences but it employs a mature and systematic handling of differences.  We realize that resolving differences through reconciliatory negotiations is not a logical and linear process. However, this handling of differences or reconciliation model can serve as a framework for understanding past experiences which help us to stay on track by learning how and where things went wrong.

At this stage of our history, where the president has assumed absolute power and he is using that power to pulverize opponents, critics and terrorize citizens, we need to see beyond issues that separate groups at a practical and conceptual level and concentrate on what we really want.  At this very moment we all face the ruthless onslaught of the president and his men, and all citizens whose democratic and moral values are being mocked should come together and stand up for their rights.

The government is actively engaged in putting in a lasting wedge between the reformers and other reformed members of the opposition parties by vilifying their stand against the dictatorial regime of President Isaias Afwerki.  It behooves the opposition to give it the easy weapons and the wedge issues and we call on all of them to re-examine some of their weaker points.  (We cannot make any calls on the G-1 because they only listen to foreigners with money or threats.)

The ELF-RC

The ELF-RC�s choice of Gondar as a meeting venue was a colossal mistake that the Awate Team criticized in previous issue of The Pencil. But this �Gondar taint� is being used by the G-1 to escape accountability from all the destruction caused by its leader�s ruinous policies: the government raises the "enemy-link" with the current democratic movement.  The Awate Team has a clear stand on any group who collaborates with the enemy. Simply put, anyone with any link with the enemy cannot be part of the democratic movement because its mere presence undermines the larger goals of the larger group.  But we need to be clear: by �enemy�, we mean enemies of the State of Eritrea, not the caricature of the State that is being made in the image of Isaias.   

The Awate Team is also of the belief that the Gondar Fiasco should not be an obstacle in forming a broad based movement that is comprised of various political thoughts, allegiances, backgrounds and identities. According to the dictates of reconciliation, accepting each other's strengths and weaknesses is an important factor in building a bridge between the existing divides. Acceptance of shared concerns does not mean one agrees with the other group's stands or one is obligated to share the other group's stated interests.   As it is, the issues that unite us far too many and too important to be derailed by the self-serving accusations of the G-1; but we do not condone destroying the nation to rid it of one man.

The PFDJ Reformers

If the excitement these reformers have generated is to be sustained, they need to speak with one and coherent voice.  They need to remember that many of the issues they are raising, although novel to them, are ones that have been raised by thousands of Eritreans, in some cases for decades.  While we understand their need to establish an identity for themselves, they need not do so by attacking the Alliance constantly.  They need to fashion their messages to the rank-and-file Eritreans, including the followers of the Alliance, instead of addressing the leadership.   They need to be aware that points they score by attacking the Alliance pale in significance when compared to the goodwill they would generate by addressing shared values and goals of Eritreans.  

There is an immense need to establish a healthy context for reconciling differences by planning and selecting the right time and the right atmosphere -- one that exploits shared interest, focuses on the bigger picture and fosters mutual respect. In other words, priorities need to be set up before the journey towards a common goal begins. In fact, the priorities should tap into mutual motivation. We should all appeal to each other's self-interest in order to motivate ourselves in coordinating a concerted challenge to the status quo. Getting to an agreement through accommodating the other party's concerns is a wise strategy but all concerned should ask themselves a basic question that can be used as a reminder or a guideline -- Do I want a democratic and inclusive government that does away with a one-man rule?

Top Secret: Eritrea�s Issues

An oft-repeated criticism against all opposition forces (Alliance, PFDJ Reformers, Third Wave, Independents) is that they have no issues.  It is alleged that to the extent they have any it is all about power.  They have no vision for Eritrea: all they do is run their mouth whereas the G-1 (the unreformed, deformed and un-reformable PFDJ) is busy running projects, implementing programs, paving roads, constructing schools and hospitals and assembling busses.  Hence, goes the argument, it is incumbent on all patriotic citizens to support the G-1 (unconditionally) and ignore the opposition.

All Eritrean political forces have expounded on their positions via interviews, published documents and open letters.  If a document is not read, it is only because it is treated as classified, Top Secret information by some or too lengthy by others.  If you belong to the latter group, here is a brief summary presented as a matrix: 

One may agree or disagree with the positions each party advocates but to pretend they don�t have any issues or clear-cut positions on the issues simply because you don�t agree with them is to continue to engage in the politics of marginalizing and denial and to assume that the literacy rate in Eritrea stands at 0%.  

The other method used to deny people is to pretend that nothing, nothing at all, is new.  When the G-13 surfaced on the political landscape, ridiculous stretches were made to compare them with �E.Na.Sa.E� of the 1970s�the first grouping of Eritrean scholars and professionals in North America.  Although these two groups had practically nothing in common, the message that was being sent was: �nothing new, here.  PS: you want to be on the winning side, don�t you?  Remember what happened to that last group of intellectuals?�  When the Reformers (G-15) emerged�a first-ever public challenge of the G-1 by senior members of the government--the same oh-nothing-new theories were floated without referring to a particular incident, the G-1 said, �we have seen many like them in our long struggle.�  Again, the message was: �we won; they lost.  Now you don�t want to be on the losing side, do you?�   So now, to the extent that the G-1 admits that there are other people, with different visions, it tries to present these views as if they are old or vanquished ideas when in fact they are the ingredients of putting together a New Majority.

Bad Lessons; Flawed Conclusions

There is something worse than not learning �lessons� from history: it is labeling �lessons� to episodes that are no lessons at all.    One of the many sad outcomes of the Eritrea-Ethiopia war is that it has cultivated and empowered neo-isolationists who want a perpetual state of tension and war between the two nations.   

Predicting war, accidents, earthquakes, and tornadoes and calling for �vigilance� is a perfect prophecy.  If the predicted disaster strikes, you get to say, �I told you so�; if there is no disaster, you get to say, �wait, just wait, one is coming your way.�   When the UNMEE reports something particularly dreadful�about how either or both parties are not complying with the terms of the peace agreement�or the human rights organizations or regional organizations or the Superpowers say something particularly nasty about the G-1, you can just see them gleefully rubbing their hands, like a scientist whose hypothesis was proven.

These messiahs of disaster exist everywhere and would be amusing�if only they were not in powers of authority like government and academia.  One of our favourite writers is serializing a �lesson� whose sole message is �don�t trust Abyssinians!�  To his �credit�, he is a paleo-isolationist: he has always been suspicious about Abyssinians regardless whether Isaias calls Meles �comrade� or �Chifra Woyane.�  The lessons our isolationist is quoting are anachronistic: neither the protagonists nor the antagonists were Eritreans or Ethiopians.  He recites interesting anecdotes about feudal warlords and presents it as evidence of national enmity just because the plots of land they argued about are now recognized as parts of highland Eritrea and Ethiopia.  These characters pre-date the national consciousness of Eritrea and Ethiopia: the �Eritreans� (heroes and villains of the story) did not see themselves as Eritreans and, to the extent the Ethiopians saw themselves as Ethiopians (always villains, of course), the Ethiopia they were talking about bore little resemblance to the Ethiopia of our century.  In fact, their feuds had nothing to do with nationalism, identity, maps or demarcation: they had to do with what occupies the mind of a warlord: money, power and how to optimise both.   

On the other side of the fence, we have neo-Alulites whose sole message is �don�t trust the Eritreans.�  The messages they perpetuate is: �The Eritreans are not trustworthy; they are Banda; they are Italian-wanna-be�s; they are ingrates; they are parasites of Mother Tigrai (or Mother Ethiopia.)�  Again, the peddlers of this filth are not illiterate Ethiopians; they are some of the well-educated Ethiopians.

These two groups read each other�s �lessons� to buttress their prejudices and biases.  If a particular Alulite says, �we should have kept Assab�, then instead of dismissing him for the moronic statement, they gleefully say, �aha!� and weave fantastically paranoid ideas about why this means we should mobilize, raise funds, and �double our efforts�, and �stay vigilant� and�and�and.  They are not interested in building bridges; they want to blow up the bridges and build impenetrable walls.

What�s more, the neo-isolationists have made it quite fashionable to be a bigot.  Those who look up to them have not an iota of shame in uttering words like �Agame�, �beAl beles�, �Banda�, �Komal�, etc.  In the Eritrea and Ethiopia of 2001, the more vulgar and more hateful one is, the more genuine his claim to being a true patriot.   The more militant, the less accommodating and welcoming of peace, the less suspect the credentials.  All this while using pen names and without having to pay anything for the �principle.�

We wish the two neo-isolationists, who live in the safety of the United States, would concentrate their studies on what happened when Eritreans and Ethiopians last worked together: they rid Africa of some of its worst sons and they brought hope to their people.   If they can�t do that�because they are too busy minimizing the role of the other-- then perhaps they could buy plot of land in the deserts of Nevada and, cowboy style, indulge themselves of a shoot-out and live out their fantasies and predictions of how utterly irredeemable and evil the other is.  This way, they can leave alone the poor people of Eritrea and Ethiopia, particularly those who live around the common border, to sort out their differences in a manner they have done for generations.

The tragedy for both Eritrea and Ethiopia is both agents have good friends in high places, very high places, of their respective governments.  It is ruinous when those in academia who should be pursuing enlightenment and knowledge engage and spearhead this animosity; it is downright dangerous�and a self-fulfilling prophecy�when those who give orders to armed young Eritreans and Ethiopians believe this stuff and, by their acts, perpetuate it. 

Ramadan Charity: An Inspired Week

A writer at Asmarino.com took  �The Pencil� to task over the last issue.   He did this with class, humor and merit and we thank him for it.   We cannot rebut his points without repeating ourselves, so we invite our readers to draw their own conclusions.  We were perplexed, though, when he challenged us to declare that we are secular�leading us to consider that he didn�t read the entire editorial because we do make that declaration in the same issue he was criticizing (too much lead, perhaps?)  Incidentally, it is called �The Pencil� and not �The Pen�: the pen may be mightier than the sword but only the pencil comes with an eraser head.   

Naturally, we think the best writers write at Awate.com.   Inspired poetry, classic prose is so common place that the quantity sometimes dwarfs the quality.  A perfect example of an Awate.com article is one written by Seyoum Tesfai (�There Is No Funeral For Liberty�).  But the Article of the week didn�t appear at Awate.com.  It showed up, of all places, at our alma mater, Dehai (we are just as shocked as you are.) Crowded among the ad hominim, ad nauseum and ad barfum  was an article by Yosief G.�a very promising, original and brilliant thinker.  Yosief was writing in response to Mussie M. (who is not too shabby himself.)  We invite you to enjoy the debate. We can�t have it in a National Assembly because in three-dimensional Eritrea, debate = defeatism; thus, we might as well enjoy it in cyber space.