In February 1994, the Eritrean People�s Liberation Front (EPLF) held its congress in Nakfa, Eritrea, changed its name to the People�s Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ) and laid down its charter for mono-party governance.  In February 2004, exiled members of the PFDJ, who had called their organization the EPLF-Democratic Party held their founding congress in Frankfurt, Germany, changed the name of their party to the Eritrean Democratic Party (EDP) and issued their own political tenet.  

There are many things to commend about this party, not the least of which is the transformation from a front to a political party.  Beyond fronts, beyond civil organizations, Eritrea is ready for parties who can organize people and provide them a vehicle for and a choice in change.  Whether front leaders can transition into effective party leaders is a question which will be answered in due time by the actions of the leadership.  Also welcome is the decision to launch a radio program and a leadership, which is experienced and diverse. We also thank the EDP and Mr. Adhanom Gebramariam, for denying satisfaction to those who were expecting a political circus like the one that crippled us for over a year starting in October 2002.

What has come to be known as EDP was brought to public attention in May 2001, when senior members of the government and the ruling party issued a public letter calling for reform and dialogue within their party.  In September 18, 2001, the government made known what it thinks of calls for dialogue and reform when it arrested all Eritreans who initiated or supported the �Open Letter.�    Excluding those who recanted their participation in the authorship of the open letter, the only individuals who have escaped the waves of arrest were those who were out of the country: Haile Menkorios, Mesfin Hagos, and Adhanom Gebremariam. The question that has faced those who chose to be politically active (Adhanom, Mesfin, and the other diplomats and dissidents who joined later) is this: is your party a pressure group whose objective is to ensure that the PFDJ faithfully executes its own political charter or is it a political party that has a different vision from the PFDJ?

The summary of the political programs issued by the EDP is far too terse to provide us sufficient information to make an assessment.  The political program issued does not address issues like national reconciliation, foreign policy, compulsory military service, women in combat, or economic policy.  It does address four hot-button issues: taxation, land ownership, official languages, and provincial administration.   EDP�s position on these issues places it squarely on the side of mainstream opposition (who have been advocating these issues for decades) and contrary to the views espoused by the PFDJ. The programs suggest that the EDP is not about reforming the PFDJ but being an alternative to the PFDJ. 

On the issue of how to democratize Eritrea, EDP has adopted a position which extends the argument beyond its current parameters.  The debate thusfar has been on whether the PFDJ should be peacefully removed or forcefully removed. The debate thus far has been on whether the opposition is ready for an all-opposition national conference or not. EDP seems to have taken the position that the national conference (or roundtable) should be held and that the PFDJ should be invited to this meeting. 

EDP may be making this call out of genuine conviction that the PFDJ will actually consider the invite or for the sake of political expediency and going through the process.  If its call is based on genuine conviction, the natural question to ask is why does the EDP believe that the PFDJ will entertain a call for dialogue and discussion?  What has changed with the PFDJ since January 2001?  In their �Open Letter� of May 2001, the founders of EDP had told us that they had sent a letter to the president calling for a meeting on 2/20/01, 3/20/01 and 3/28/01 and each time the response they received was ostracization campaigns, dismissal and threats.   What has changed with the PFDJ since then to convince the EDP that their call for dialogue will be taken seriously? 

Some will argue that whether the call is genuine or calculated is the concern of no one but the membership of the EDP.  This is true so long as the search for the Holy Grail (dialogue with PFDJ) does not degenerate in a fruitless and protracted negotiations on how, when, where, why, and how the roundtable should be held, thereby sapping the energies of the opposition movement and creating an environment of suspicion and mistrust.   We must avoid the Waiting for Godot drama. There is a history that must be overcome.  What history?

In its short existence, EPLF-DP had shown a lack of symmetry and sensitivity in its unbalanced approach with the government and the rest of the opposition. Whereas it had expressed unqualified eagerness to dialogue with the PFDJ, it had signaled that it would cherry-pick and be conditional in its approach to the other members of the opposition groups.   The new party, EDP, was recently given an opportunity by the Voice of America to reverse this; but it didn't make use of the opportunity. In his interview with VOA, Dr. Assefaw Tekeste once again demonstrated his party�s willingness to enter into dialogue with PFDJ without setting minimal preconditions like the release of political prisoners who are languishing in dungeons for expressing dissenting opinions. 

If we are to avoid a repeat of past incidents when powerful agents like the CIA and the State Department left out many Eritrean organizations representing big chunks of Eritrea from the negotiating table (Carter talks, Herman Cohen talks) at the behest of self-serving Eritrean brokers and organizations, we need to remember that any talks with the regime in Asmara can only be carried out when a strong unified opposition is facing it on the other side of the table. Importantly, the agenda of the talks should be very concise and clear. It should be limited to passing to the PFDJ a short message composed of six plain words: hand over power to the people. That would avoid the bloodshed and violence that many seem to be having nightmares about.

More than many, EDP knows that we are facing a regime that is choking our people and jailing our elders and leaders; a regime that has trampled over the rights of our people; a regime that has sowed seeds of division and hate; a regime that has committed crimes against our youth; faith, traditions and customs; a regime that has condemned half the population into perpetual exile. Such a regime should be uprooted and not sweet-talked into changing its manners-- which by the way, is impossible.

The Withdrawal of Mr. Adhanom Gebremariam

Differences are natural; and the way we handle our differences shows how committed we are to democracy and pluralism. The political tradition in Eritrea has been to gloss over differences, pretend they do not exist and present the public flowery and false declarations of fake unity and then wait for the inevitable implosion.  Within that context, EDP�s honesty in reporting Mr. Adhanom Gebremariam�s dissent is admirable. But the language offered leaves much to be desired; it conceals more than it reveals, and in the absence of information, people offer uninformed speculation.   

We are certain that at some future date Mr. Adhanom Gebremariam will be able to provide first-hand information on why he chose the path he did.  Until such date, we will share with you information that we believe led to his conclusions.

When the G-15 emerged, this website described them as Reformers. This description was based on the �Open Letter� whose opening words were �this letter is call for correction.�  As far as we know, no member or supporter of the �Reformers� objected to this description�except for one person: Adhanom.  He used to tell us, �we are 180 degrees opposed to the regime; how dare you call us reformers?�   The question was a matter of degrees: how bad is the PFDJ and how long has it been that bad?  Since its founding? Since 1987? Since 1991? Since 1994? Since 2000?   What parts of the PFDJ traditions and practices are redeemeable and prideworthy: 10%? 25%? 50%? 75% 95%? The answer to those questions dictates one�s approach to the other Eritrean opposition parties, the neighboring countries and, finally, the PFDJ itself. It is in all these areas that the differences exist between the EDP and those former members of the PFDJ, like Adhanom Gebremariam, who have chosen to go their separate way. 

In any event, we hope the expression of differences between Adhanom and the EDP remains a valuable lesson for future differences in the Eritrean politics. It is all right to have divergent views and ideas. It is all right to have difference of opinion; it is not all right to defame and deal below the belt blows among each other. Again, we salute the EDP and Adhanom for sparing us a political circus. We wish all those elected to the leadership of the EDP all the success and we hope that they will contribute to the struggle positively.

This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it