|
Contributor Tseggai Yohannes has so far posted in the websites two installments under the above mentioned title criticizing the contents of my recent article in the websites that narrated some past misfortunes of the ELF-RC and what I thought could be in stock for it after the unhappy ending of the 5th regular session of the Alliance of Eritrean National Forces in Addis Ababa. The gist of his writing attempted to insinuate an imagined adverse effect my article could have caused to the process of reconciliation among Eritrean political forces. (I could not respond on time because I waited to read the promised continuations on the same subject, which have been delayed up to now.) I thank compatriot Tseggai for his appreciation of my past writings in the websites, almost all of which were on reconciliation, and I wish to confirm to him that the article he sarcastically criticized was also about reconciliation. For the information of Tseggai, I should underline that reconciliation is nothing but exposing past mistakes and misdeeds in order to learn from the past, and to never repeat those misdeeds, but to build a new future without the mistakes of the past. As all reports on reconciliation commissions had shown, reconciliation starts with opening ‘Pandora’s Boxes’’ and saying all what has gone wrong in the past in order to commence a clean future. Therefore, Tseggai and everyone who is seriously looking for reconciliation in Eritrea must prepare to open the recorded and unrecorded files on alleged mistakes, betrayals, wounds and crimes of our recent past (say 30-50 years) in order to reconcile and start a new chapter without those mistakes. That is all what reconciliation is about. Covering up the past is not called reconciliation. To my understanding, Tseggai did not make a point in his entire writing and my response to his main point could have ended here. Nevertheless, I have the time to add a couple of paragraphs in response to some ‘questions’ he raised, apparently not in a genuine search for knowledge and enlightenment, but as cynical insinuations – e.g. his asking me if the ELF-RC was a front or a ‘continuation of the [Marxist-Leninist] Labour Party’ of the old ELF. In general, the writer of ‘Pandora’s Box’ tried to slight the ELF-RC and downgrade its contribution in the Eritrean struggle during the past 20 years. Tseggai first gleefully expresses delight in his own interpretation of my article, which he said had presented the ELF-RC as a vulnerable group of “submissive missionaries”. Later in his writing, though, he reverses the intended insult of “submissiveness” to ELF-RCs alleged “stubbornness”. It is important to state here that this was not only an unfair comment by Tseggai but also one that reduced to naught his effort in writing the piece. Contrary to his claim, my article touched on familiar facts, which are usually encountered by fighting forces worth that name. Therefore, his play with pejorative jargon was devoid of any meaning save rendering the writer himself to a critical judgment of the good reader. One may not fully agree with the No’s of ELF-RC in the past, but each No, as stated in the article, was a defiance to a specific situation: rejection to a military coup in 1982; opposition to the formation of the foreign instigated “Wuhda Sulasiya”; rejection and action against ethno-sectarian and fundamentalist politics; a rebuff to the Isayas/EPLF dictatorship after liberation; calling for democratic participation starting with the referendum of 1993, and finally voicing its reproof to an admitted submission to an alleged pressure in electing one’s leadership. To me, any Eritrean who would not commend the ELF-RC for taking those positions listed above is really not a genuine patriot, and not a good judge. By looking at them through the prism of the past, today’s members of the ELF-RC will most likely continue saying Yes to unity of our people and pose an adamant No to divisive measures; Yes to democracy, equality and justice and a defiant No to dictatorship and violations of human rights; Yes to dialogue and No to intimidation and arrogance. That is not blind stubbornness, but standing as a dependable shield against all the challenges confronting our common good and common future as a nation. And that is far from what brother Tseggai sees as “stubbornness” and at other paragraphs “submissiveness” for not having devised a survival mechanism by compromising nonnegotiable principles and national interests. And I have no clue as to why Tseggai had to take readers’ time by attempting to compare the above listed No’s of the ELF-RC to those of lunatic Isayas and his PFDJ. And only to stress: Tseggai may have his own reasons to oppose the ELF-RC and may even have points to criticize it for other shortcomings, which no doubt can be plenty, but his points in his response to my article do not make any sense under all points he so far raised. Nor do I think his attempts to make mockery about the ELF-RC and the presentation of my article won him any commendation from the neutral or unbiased reader. He also said he found my article to be ‘slim and unfair’. After expressing displeasure with the finger-points I made at other organizations, Tsegggai noted that I failed to write about Saghem and EDM members who were victims of what he termed “baseless allegation cooked by the Sudanese and [the] Abdalla group”. I admit that it was a slim article mainly because it was an article, and not a book, about the liberation struggle as a whole. But the article was in no way unfair in presenting a set of examples and hard facts relevant to the theme. The critic asked for a profile of the ELF-RC, its mission and vision, all of which are articulately stated in publications of the organization and posted in its official website, Nharnet.com. As to ELF-RC’s solution for what he calls the question of ‘diversities’ in Eritrea, the very organization we are talking about is already a microcosm of the Eritrean diversity – and that is already the ideal solution in the making. Our people are destined to live under one roof which provides adequate space to this diversity; this is definitely manageable through democratic processes, including popular referenda, able to accommodate diverse interests and viewpoints. The issues writer Tseggai raised in relation to the Alliance and the sad events that followed the meeting in Addis Ababa have been fully covered by different writers and under different headings; therefore, repeating them here will not serve any purpose. I don’t even want to lecture a person of the educational level of Tseggai about the ordinariness of walkouts from meetings and the blunder the new leadership of the Alliance committed by interpreting ‘walkout’ as ‘withdrawal’ from the organization itself. He is fully aware of the fact that ELF-RC’s position in supporting the National Charter but all the same criticizing an election that went wrong was not contradictory political position. One cannot understand people who raise ‘questions’ that are as simple as one plus one. As to the qualification of Herui at this time to the post of Secretary General of the Alliance, I would wish to hear the supportive arguments of Tseggai. Like Tseggai, this writer is also aware that States have no permanent friends but permanent interests, and that at this fast globalizing world politics, one necessarily influences others as well as being influenced by others. But there are limits to receiving influences and ‘pressures’. When you claim that others have pressurized you to accept a recommended leadership, then do not be embarrassed if others shout ‘oramai’ sovereignty. Best regards. Menhot |
