�The Eritrean opposition has many challenges.  One of them, second only to convincing the Eritrean people, is to convince the Bush administration that they are a good alternative to Isaias Afwerki.  That they are the voices of liberty, democracy, freedom (including religious), justice, free enterprise, moderation and stability.   How do they do that?  - To be continued��

So intoned Alnahda authoritatively, in a time and space far, far away (March 3, 2005), back when its author was sure nobody would actually be paying attention to the �to be continued� part.  Thanks for the reminders.  I will get back to it, I promise, but there has been so much �piling on� on the opposition�diagnosis of  what is wrong with them and what they must do�I will pause for now.   Meanwhile, why don�t we catch up on our neighbors down south because there has been so much going on there.  Hey, we are Eritreans: we have strong opinions about France�s rejection of the EU constitution, the African Union, Darfur, South Africa, the scandal in Canada�s politics (Canadian citizens' message: "We are not boring!  Let�s prove it to you!") Let�s face it, we cannot talk about an oxymoron: Eritrean elections.  So let�s talk about Ethiopia�s elections.  

A Sandinista Moment

There is a certain parallel between the Ethiopian elections and the Nicaraguan elections of the 1980, 1990s and present.   A rebel movement becomes a government and reluctantly, grudgingly, and under pressure from the West opens up the election process.  By the time the former rebels agree to have free and fair elections, they had been used to unchallenged authority for so long, that they have perfected the art of manipulation�bribes and threats�for so very long, that they don�t even consider the possibility of defeat.  Then�.

Let�s look at the comparison.  In 1979, the Sandinistas (official name FSLN, but named �Sandinista� after an assassinated Nicaraguan) overthrow dictator Samoza.  In 1991, the Weyane (official name TPLF, but named after the �Weyane� of the 1940s) overthrow dictator Mengistu.  In 1984, the Sandinistas have an election, boycotted by the opposition, and claim to have garnered 70% of the popular vote.  In 2000, the Weyane (we will fight while we vote, we will vote while we fight, or something like that), have an election, boycotted by the opposition, and claim to have garnered, what, 95% of the popular vote.  In 1990, the Sandinistas, trying to show once and for all that the Contras are nothing but US tools and imperial agents that will be overwhelmingly rejected by the masses, agree to have open elections.  The masses reject the Sandinistas and elect the Contras.   In 2004, the Weyane, trying to show once and for all that the opposition coalition is a hate-filled, Diaspora-based group that has no support in Ethiopia, agree to have free and fair elections.   And�

Democracy Humbles The Pretenders

For all his talk that if his party lost, he would surrender power, you can bet that Meles agreed to a free, fair election only because he was 100% sure he would trounce the opposition, just like the Sandinistas did in the 1980s.  It is a truism in democracy that those who always pretend to speak on behalf of the people don't always find their professed love requited by the masses.  But until proven false in a free and fair election, they are so sure that they are loved and the opposition is despised.  When the PFDJ cancelled the 2001 election, they gave their reasons (the usual all-purposed one) and then dismissed, with utter contempt, the possibility that the real reason was that they feared a loss.  "Us?" they asked, "Who could possibility defeat us?  The people love us and they hate the opposition!!  We are the people and the people is us!"  But look at Addis: "mayor of the decade" or not, the mayor of Addis Ababa has now been told by the people that matter most, his constituency, Addis residents: �we are not impressed.�

Mixed Emotions

The definition of a mixed emotion, they say, is to see your enemy drive over a cliff� in your brand new Mercedes Benz.  Meles Zenawi has this good-cop-bad-cop personality that, to his admirers, gives him a complex personality and to his detractors, a confused one (or slippery.)  Tony Blair and Bill Clinton had that same affliction of wanting to be all things to all people. When Meles is good, he is very good and when he is bad, he is just awful.  It is a bipolar thing.  All of the following are attributable to Meles�they are not direct quotes, but pretty close:

Good: Asab is indisputably Eritrean territory

Bad: Asab without Ethiopia will be nothing but a watering hole for camels.

Good: We have nothing against Eritreans, our dispute is with Shaebia.

Bad: We will fight while we negotiate; we will negotiate while we fight.  Because, with Eritreans, you always have to carry a stick.

Good: Our objective is to regain our territories.  Beyond that, we have no interest in occupying Eritrea.  We know, more than most, Eritreans resistance to occupaction.

Bad: If a war is initiated, we will not stop until we bring about regime change in Asmara.

He has that same delusion that many African leaders have: just because they wear a suit, have a chauffer and are shown deference by the people, they actually think that they are on the same par as the leaders of the developed world. They adopt their language.  Meles does the mimicking of Western leaders quite well; he has gotten the �us and them� power language down pat.  Recall, if you will, that during the Third Offensive, he had his Chief of Staff, pointing to a map with a stick, showing how the Ethiopian forces had crossed this ridge and gone to that road in hot pusuit of Shaebia.  There were war game photos of smart bombs falling on their targets.   Man, it was straight from Gulf War I, with Gebre Tsadkan as Powell, without Powell�s memorable line about Saddam�s forces (�first we are going to cut it off, then we are going to kill it.�)  This was after two years of Meles playing George Bush Sr (�This aggression will not stand!�)      

Remember when Meles went along with Kenya�s Moi to meet with George Bush to discuss terrorism?   This is what Meles said, addressing Bush (and this is a direct quote):

A moment ago you said that we are engaged in the first war of the 21st century. We believe that the war against terrorism is a war against people who have not caught up with the 21st century, who have values and ideals that are contrary to the values of the 21st century. And in that context, it's a fight not between the United States and some groups, it's a fight between those who want to catch up with the 21st century and those who want to remain where they are.

Something you�d expect to hear from a Western think tank but not the ruler of a country whose biggest challenge is not those struggling to avoid the 21^st century but one that existed before they even classified time in centennials: food, famine, pestilence.

So, I admit it, at some level, an admittedly emotional level, I wanted the TPLF to lose.  I didn't know about Mexican politics, either, but I wanted the ruling party, PRI, which had been in power for 70 uniterrupted years, to lose.  It is good for democracy for power to change hands, even if it is to go from bad to worse.  This way, there are no permanent winners or losers, but a system that works.  Power corrupts.   There is nothing like a loss to sober up a party, to go back to the drawing board, to re-assess its goals, to consider, for the first time, that the people must not be taken for granted and, yes, they don�t like you as much as you thought they did.   To be humbled.  

With their apparent win, I hope the TPLF will do what they say they are good at�gem gam or evaluation�and consider that had it not been for the fertilizers and the goodies they subsidize the countryside with, they would have faced a resounding loss. 

But then you look at the Ethopian opposition and it is an even more frightening group.  At the rational level, it is an empirical fact that when it comes to Eritrea, the Weyane is much better than the opposition when it comes to accepting Eritrea as a sovereign nation.  Of course, if you believe all the "hereditary analysis" of Ras so-and-so abused Ras-so-and-so, in the Habesha dispute of bygone era, you don't buy that.   The current Ethiopian opposition is the Flat Earth Society revisited: just denying a basic fact that has been repeatedly, conclusively, irrevocably demonstrated: Eritreans do not want to be a part of Ethiopia.  Not the Kunama, not the Afar, not the �people of the border�: they do not.  Eritrea�s struggle for independence DID have the overwhelming support of every Eritrean, the referendum vote was very real.  That case is so closed, but they want to open it and re-open it.  I read a report that the Eritrean issue was not even a big issue in the Ethiopian campaign, and I hope that is true.   

Now that the Ethiopian opposition has shown that is not just a fringe group but a force to be reckoned with, I hope they show maturity and state the obvious: that Eritrea is an independent and sovereign nation, that Ethiopia is bound by international treaties.  They have enough issues with real resonance in Ethiopia�returning land to farmers, de-ethnicizing the Federal constitution, separation of political parties from business enterprises, equitable nationwide growth, etc�that they can build on and create majorities on.  They should not be talking about issues from a bygone and forlorn era: empire building or lamenting a loss that they could have done nothing to reverse.  They should leave that kind of self-importance of �I was right, I am right, I will always be right� to people like Jimmy Carter.

What Does This Mean?

Even if the TPLF government returns to power with a supermajority (as now seems likely), my sense is that it will, like all political parties, co-opt some of the issues that the Ethiopian opposition capitalized on.  It is sort of like recovering from a heart attack: you will, at least for a while, modify your diet and start jogging.  I expect the TPLF to be even more strident in its rejection of the Algiers Agreement and actually more focused on its domestic affairs and less so on Eritrean opposition.

The other thing is that the Ethiopian opposition, although defeated, has won the capital of Ethiopian intelligentsia�the seat of the scholars, the civil service, the professionals, and the media.  The political class.   Now, we all pretend�for the health of democracy and the sake of justice�that all people are equal under the law, one-man-one-vote, etc.  It is a nice fiction that I quite enjoy.  But we all know that some people are more influential than others�and that is why the Ethiopian opposition win is a big win.  It has won the support of the political class, the group that, at least in a free society, initiates and sets the national agenda.  They are, like most opposition which has been out of power for so long, incapable of appreciating the win and are still in complaining mode.

To the Ethiopian people: uqbalna, neAkum yemaslena, and please accept this analysis which is driven not by envy but pride in a neighbor that has done well.  Well done.  To the opposition: take time out to celebrate your achievement because you�ve done well.  To the TPLF: the best thing that happened to the Sandinistas was their defeat in 1990.  Back to gemgam.  

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