Am Bekhitay’s spirit i.e. the spirit of a gallant Eritrean nationalist is answering the call. It is the unchallenged spirit that owns the determination to be free, to liberate himself and others. It is the pride of the historical revolutionary achievements which has never been tired of the heroic people's struggle. Unfortunately all those glittering priceless successes have been stolen by the brutal mongrel street boys in Asmara, to satisfy their horrific power hunger and greed; exploiting the gracious heart and mindful thoughts of the owners of the nation, the Eritrean people.

There is an Amharic proverb which says: "wisha yeqededew jeeb yighebabetal" i.e. roughly translated "holes in your shelter which have been torn down by your dogs will allow the hyena to penetrate".    Eritrea is facing an existential threat.  A threat that can only be faced by the unchallenged spirit that owns the determination to be free, to liberate himself and others; to call up on the pride of the historical revolutionary achievements and our heroic people's struggle. Unfortunately, all those glittering priceless successes have been stolen by the brutal mongrel street boys in Asmara, to satisfy their horrific power hunger and greed; exploiting the gracious heart and mindful thoughts of the owners of the nation, the Eritrean people.  Now, the worst may come, I have a feeling, as there is no smoke without fire, this feeling is also not without evidence. There may be already "friendly" venomous political fingers which penetrate into our sovereign fortified shelter-our nation, through holes which are ripped off by the heinous betrayers in power.

So now Am Bekhitay as usual but now in spirit is murmuring in Sotto-voce, "yom ydegegkum minghebee' fejr tizemeto." The following questions demand an answer:

DO OUR NEIGHBORS THINK THE WAY WE DO? DO WE HAVE SIMILAR VISIONS FOR OUR BILATERAL AND REGIONAL COOPERATION FOR THE PROGRESS, SECURITY, AND DEVELOPEMENT OF OUR PEOPLES?

The Precedent In Somalia

If these questions are not addressed seriously and be given honest and proper answers by the concerned parties, neither the socio-political crises of every nation nor the enormous problems of the area will be solved.   Contrary to the dreams of our people, the ready-made Somali-formula "anarchic-hell" will be the epidemic of the region. 

It's quite clear, why these questions should be addressed now: the Somali conflict is deepening and widening, the Ethiopian government maneuvered itself into the extremely complicated situation that has put Ethiopia already to a potentially disadvantageous position because its intervention in Somalia is considered by some other Islamic nations as "hostile hegemony by a Christian neighbor". It's not a matter of pessimism if I say that as long as the Ethiopian involvement gets thicker and longer the ugly days may come and the burden of the conflict will fall on the Ethiopian shoulders like the American tragic dilemma in Iraq.
 

Another potentially explosive circumstance is also to be expected from the north. The Eritrean political situation is entering into its critical phase. If not saved in time and true democratic change is set up, the consequences will be disastrous. The unavoidable extreme turbulence will follow and would not confine itself within the Eritrean borders.

Although the countries of the region seem to have conflicting interests, they should have a common concern in preventing the dangerous consequences of the gathering storm. That is why I decided to talk. Now is the time to accept facts, to tell the truth and try to find solutions, rather than to be silent, tolerate the intolerable and wait for the worse to come and cry over the spilled milk.

The chronic conflict in Somalia is well known to every concerned person and no new explanation from my side is needed. 

The situation in Eritrea also doesn't need much explanation: the People are down-trodden and the dictator is rotten. Thus, the primary goal of the Eritrean struggle i.e. its people and the opposition in general and the Eritrean Democratic Alliance (EDA) in particular is to over throw the torturous, abominable regime of Isaias Afworki and replace it by a democratic system by transferring the power peacefully, respecting the people's choice through ballot box.

Ethiopia's Motives

In Ethiopia there are Ruling Parties; the Alliance of Opposition Parties and the armed rebellion. Although not without serious problems in Ethiopia there are social, political, and economic transformations in process.  

The Ethiopian opposition political parties are functioning openly in the country. Their power and their broadness is not to be underestimated but their unity is very fragile. The stand of most of these oppositions on Eritrean sovereignty is known to be negative. They expressed their chauvinistic attitude by stressing on " Eritrea and the Red Sea are the cradle of Ethiopia's history, culture and religion." They should have known how proud the Eritreans are to be the cradles of Ethiopia's history, culture and religion. But they shouldn't forget the present political maps of the world are not drawn according the old history of any nation. The present political maps of Eritrea and Ethiopia are part and parcel of the modern political boundaries as drawn in all continents of Africa, Asia, and both Americas. Since the Ethiopian opposition does not accept the present status of Eritrean state and do not think for the interest of both nations to live in peace, stability and develop brotherly relations, there can not be serious connection between the two oppositions. As to my point of view there should be future discussions and dialogues on different levels of the parties.
  

Since the main purpose of this writing is to investigate the unknown and understand clearly the vague connection between the Ethiopian government and the EDA, I would like to find the main reason behind the conflict within the EDA. Has the relationship between Ethiopia and Eritrea any future perspective? Was it raised and discussed by both sides (Ethiopians and the Alliance) "as partners in cooperation" to overthrow the dictatorial regime in Eritrea? If the answer is yes, what is the agreement they have reached? If not, what principle is their relation based on? If any principle of cooperation is not addressed and no agreement has been reached, then this brings another question, whether there is any cooperation at all? If not at all then it is going on order and obey i.e. "do that and don't do that" basis which is a prelude to an upgraded master and servant relations. There is no wonder that government leaders of such mentality can only dangerously follow the traditions of the Ethiopian autocratic rulers who used to impose their unilateralism on Eritrea. To mention the few latest ventures:

During Haileselassie's feudal rule the Eritrean-Ethiopian UN-arrangement Federal-Union has been unilaterally abrogated and declared the absolute occupation of Eritrea by Ethiopia; as a result of which the Eritrean revolution has intensified its armed-struggle and the consequence was the downfall of the Emperor.

Not long after that the Stalinist regime of the Dergue has unilaterally declared the scorched-earth policy in Eritrea and invaded it militarily. After long and bitter wars that in turn brought the down fall of the Dergue. How does the present government of Ethiopia see the relationship between the two independent states? 

TPLF and EDA 

The TPLF's stand towards the independence of Eritrea was supportive and principled likewise the support of the Eritrean revolution towards the TPLF was also principled up to their complete success. Those historical stands were the bases for the Eritrean opposition to ask for the support and cooperation from the Ethiopian government against the dictatorial regime in Eritrea who has also become a staunch enemy of the Ethiopian government. It is that long historical position that gave hope in future a long and wide common vision which let the wise leaders from both sides to come together to plan for the establishment a regional order that provides security, social progress, and economic development for our two nations who remained to be interdependent through out history.

Does our interest lie in the closest and durable friendly relations with strong, unified and wealthy Ethiopia; or with hostile, weak, fragile, and poor Ethiopia? For sure our option is not the failed one. But, do our Ethiopian "friends" in power reciprocate our vision and our option? Up to now I still doubt for positive answer, because our "friends'" words are not unfailing by their deeds. On the contrary their lack of sincerity makes the political scenario fictitious.

From my experience focusing only on the practical process of the matter and time factor have tremendous unmasking effect for a sinister political plans of action. That is why the type of relationship between Ethiopian Government and the Eritrean opposition took a decade to be cleared.   

Now I want to bring certain factual accounts which may give us some clues whether our relationship is sincere.

Clues to the TPLF-EDA Relationship 

The relationship between the Ethiopian government and the Eritrean opposition is almost ten years old. In all those years the Alliance has never missed the sweet– lip-service "we support you and we will never intermingle into your internal affairs." Lip-service however can be a very cruel form of betrayal. How can one believe this repeated statement is true, when it is different in deeds? During all this long time except for the very little money support for administration which was given to the individual executive committee office in forms of drops from the Sanaa Forum Office, there was nothing as promised a support which let the Alliance leadership to prepare a program of action which can bring about a significant progress in our struggle.

"No interference in affairs of the alliance." Was this also true? Who imposed the two Ethiopian border nationality groups to be members within the umbrella of alliance and give them higher privilege to broadcast with their two consecutive languages within the radio program of the alliance?

In the 5th congress of the alliance, who can deny and prove to be wrong that the chairmanship of Hirui Tedla didn't come by imposition from the Ethiopian authority?

During the 2nd meeting of the higher leadership of the EDA, the chairman of the Sanaa Forum committee, who is an Ethiopian, came for a special mission to Khartoum to inform the leadership of the Alliance during their meeting that one member of the leadership is a spy of the Eritrean regime, therefore he should not be elected into the executive committee. Being temporarily accepted as "friendly information and advice" the person was dropped from the candidacy. The information has never been proved to be true up to now. As a matter of fact, the same organization is now one of the most favored and admired by the same accuser.   Was it meant to strengthen the unity of alliances, or to weaken it?

The executive committee of the alliance after the second meeting of the higher leadership has organized its program of action and presented it to the office of Sanaa Forum. The answer was:   "we want to discuss the program of action with every office and we will decide how much we can give to everyone." Does this show that the Sanaa Forum Office recognizes the oneness of the EDA and not interfering in the internal affaires of the Alliances executive committee?   Does this strengthen the unity of the EDA and deliver the intended democratic change in Eritrea by the responsible organization.

During the last congress of the EDA, the leaders of the two border nationality groups who are the making of the Ethiopian authorities were openly campaigning that the Ethiopians want Hussein Khelifa to continue in his chairmanship at least for the coming eight months.   Was this not an interference in the internal affairs of the alliance?  What is behind selecting a leader for a given time?   What is going to happen within that given period?

When difficulties arose during the election of the executive committee of the EDA, the turmoil between the two sides was developing a momentum, the foreign minister of Ethiopia invited both sides for a talk.  The expectation was, as an "ardent supporter" of the EDA he personally could have brokered critical talks and venture a solution agreeable to all.   That rescue plan employed could have given confidence to the EDA and its bases and would have been a significant plus point to the Ethiopian government credibility and concern towards the Eritrean people's plight. But from the circumstantial evidence, what has happened was the contrary. In his words: "It is regrettable that, after achieving so much in your congress, you concluded with disagreement in electing your leadership was unexpected. We cannot say anything except that we will remain supporting you as one or as many groups and will not interfere in your affairs." Was this statement really heartfelt or indifference; was it not endorsing the design damaged, and encouraged exactly the wrong tendencies within the alliance?

While the EDA still exists under the Charter of its second congress by virtue of the signatures of all delegations of the member organizations and the Eritrean people is desperately trying to negotiate and mend the misfortune and put back the EDA in one piece, why are the Ethiopian authorities are handling the matter with fuss and rush to deepen the grievances of the two "blocs"?   For example, why is the EDA army piled up into groups according the "bloc" divisions and be thrown into remotely separated camps? Why the authority hastens to separate and divide the office and belongings of the EDA within the two "blocs." Is this not an exigency towards the complete disintegration of EDA?

In conclusion is it EDA's lack of keeping and protecting it's marginal independent decision-making that has tempted certain meddlesome individuals from the Ethiopian authority who pry into its affairs and offer unsolicited advices or even orders? Or is it the policy of the Ethiopian government to jeopardize the Eritrean political affairs in it's totality by keeping the key in their hands and wait until exhaustion and despair leave no alternative for our people but complete copulation and put the state under their direct or indirect control.  

In such situation the concerned Eritrean nationalists and democrats are running out of time to prevent the disaster of the nation. If this fate of our nation becomes inevitable who is to blame? The EDA, the Eritreans in Diaspora, the Eritrean national army or the Ethiopian government? None of these parts can be saved from the denunciation.