I have been sitting on this article for some time now pondering on how readers would receive its strong views, and I guess the sitting did me good; at least it gave me the wisdom and the self-assurance that comes with time. Strong views have to be reckoned with, any way, if we mean the best for our society. New ideas, new modalities and alternative thoughts must always be encouraged and contemplated upon even if they may be a departure from accepted norms. A person who is for change - especially when a few usurpers to power deny a whole society the right to express its mind and try to decimate every shred of independent thought - a person who is convinced that such a decadent system, as the Eritrean regime is, must go and let the many breath freely again, such a person cannot stop at the middle of the road and say, ‘this is probable how far I should go.’ No! Then that person is not a believer; that person is like a rooster weathervane that bends to the winds or a compass-less boat that moves with the waves. Liberating a society from the evil plots of an evil regime is a matter of conviction, a matter of change, a matter of seeking new alternative ways and implementing changes unabated by the evil spirits that an evil regime can wield; never to be silenced, never to fear. Those who follow the regime and stubbornly abide by its will, either for their selfish interests or simply because of a madness in them that drives them to a willful subjugation like the bull-headed fans of Arsenal, like the Hitlerjugende of Nazi or the Shabaab militia in Somalia will not only bark but they will bite; for that is what they are expected and trained to do. But, the strong must remain stronger and this article is meant for them. They must advance and not be hindered by the barking of the dogs. “Advance, and never halt, for advancing is perfection. Advance and do not fear the thorns in the path, for they draw only corrupt blood,” Kahlil Gibran.

Following the teachings of the Prophet, I still Endeavour in the discovery of new realities and scenarios for the emancipation of our people. Like in my last article to Asmarino.com (‘Time for Sobriety’, February 3, 2006) I try to imagine the choices of the majority of our people were they to be asked to chose between bringing the jailed to court or creating more prisons to host those yet to be jailed; between solving the war situation or conscripting deacons and priests to feed the army (may be women next!); between the distress of the bread-lines or opening the market for a free flow of goods and services. In short, would they chose war and follow the same dark track of the last nine years or would they give peace a chance, at least for a change. The answer is clear to me.

The choice of peace over war is, of course, self evident for Eritrea. Our national struggle and the fact that we attained our independence against all odds has given certain people the wrong impression that we are the best fighters in our region. But this is only a myth which begun in the E.P.L.F. to boost the moral of the fighters and latter purposely exploited by the junta, rather by the usurper Isaias, to pursue its/his perverse attitude of invading neighboring countries and assuming a strengthened status for western nations to acknowledge. The nation invaded Yemen a country 4.3 times its size and a population 4.5 times greater. The next victim was Ethiopia who, not aware of the malice broiling within the PFDJ, sided with Eritrea in the Eritro-Yemen case. Again, Ethiopia is 9.3 times bigger in size and has a population 15.5 times greater. Eritrea also tested its might against Sudan in a skirmish along the border – a country 20.6 times its size with a population 8 times greater (figures, estimates from CIA World Facts, 2008). Even poor Djibouti was not an exception until the presence of a French garrison there quelled Isaias’ madness. As matter of fact, the relapse has taken Isaias all over again and his troops had intruded into Djibouti territory – may be to disrupt the Djibouti-Addis railway line or may be to provide a back-bone to OLF forces. Both ways, this attempt will also end in a disaster as has the last.

The above figures are produced to show the smallness of Eritrea and the absurdness of its foreign policy. For the last four or five decades, countries who understood and followed their comparative advantages have successfully emerged from backward feudal societies to affluent and world recognized economic powers. The theory of comparative advantage is not unknown to African countries either: South Africa for its policy of national reconciliation and its wisdom of maintaining economic stability; Mauritius for using its human resources to increase its export economy; Botswana for using revenues from an expanding mining industry to boost social welfare and economic expansion are only a few examples. What all these countries shared in common though was only political and social stability, prudent economic management and a peaceful relationship with their neighbors. By the same token, Eritrea could have used its smallness in size and population to boost its economy and broker peace in the region. At least, the presence of an immense Eritrean investment in Ethiopia could have been taken as a positive beginning instead of arrogantly causing its destruction. Yet, such a decision requires not only social stability but a stable mind as well. It requires the supremacy of law, and therefore the liberation of the individual, rather than a mind corrupted by absolute power.

But, this corrupt and vicious behavior of the person did not happen in a fortnight. In fact, we are guilty for allowing it happen. First, lured by the oratorical ability of the person we subjected ourselves to his will, and latter we ululated to his praise before it was too late to notice that it was all a trap, a gangrene that saps the life out of us. Now, the moment has come for us to undo what we did otherwise the quagmire will continue to suffocate us. But how do we do that?

The political option

The toppling of the dictator and his system will, of course, depend on the strength of the opposition, and that all opposition groups have now come under one umbrella is a way forward. The recent meeting of EDA in Addis Abeba, aside to rallying the main political groups around one agenda, has for the first time established a national platform for all good-hearted Eritreans to work together and hasten the liberation of their people. All freedom loving people must therefore support this great achievement and sustain it at any cost irrespective of the small differences and mistakes we may observe. We have to rally behind this unity and refrain from discussing its weaknesses in the open. We should become members of one or the other politcal group, play a constructive role in the progress and clarity of the movement, condemn all sideliners and exploiters and be aware of the wolf in sheep’s clothing. This way, our unity will solidify and move forward. The opposition will become stronger, more determined and prepared to end the madness haunting Eritrea.

The EDA has decided to resolve to armed struggle if the regime does not agree to negotiate towards a peaceful transition of power and the implementation of democratic changes. Without any doubt, the regime will stubbornly sabotage any calls for democratic changes, continue to defame the opposition as Woyane collaborators and blame, as usual, the U.S. and the U.N. for Ethiopia’s failures. It will Endeavour to intensify its instruments of terror and repression and use the border issue to justify its miserable policies while its agents abroad will continue to misinform the public and harass progressive individuals. This will leave the opposition with the only other alternative, that is to eliminate the system by force and install democracy. For, one way or the other, this inhuman and evil system must go, the wretched suffering of the Eritrean people must end and Eritrea must once again play a constructive and peaceful role in its region. But, sadly enough, there are some elements within the Diaspora who hold the view that such an option would bring the opposition into a direct conflict with the army, which they maintain is being forced to serve the regime.  Although it is true that there are members of the army and the police force who not only discharge the regime’s crimes but also perform it with a personal character, the general argument that the army does not support the regime cannot be rejected. The rank and file of the army do not have any vested interest in the system and would have been better off had they been deployed and allowed to run their own lives. Naturally, one would expect them to sympathies at heart, though may be not in action, with the cause of the people. Yet, the gross generalization that the EDA would kill innocent soldiers if it raised arms serves the persistence of the regime rather than its downfall – an argument inconsistent with its parallels in history. 

During the struggle for independence, the EPLF described the Ethiopian army as a cannon fodder forced into the battlefield by a group of military cadre firing on its back (by the way, the same campaign of hate persisted during the border war with Ethiopia). This did not however prevent the EPLF from attacking the same army. The other related argument regards inviting the cooperation of the Ethiopian army in defeating the common enemy. Here again, it may be remembered that the EPLF’s defense against the Derg’s Red Star Campaign was only strengthened thanks to the willingness of TPLF (Woyane) forces to fight along EPLF combatants, where many lost their lives and got wounded. Now, how can we absolve the EPLF and condemn the EDA for the same action? Wouldn’t that be a double standard?

Frankly, we have differences with the Ethiopian government and the Ethiopian people, but I do not think that such differences should blur our reasoning nor do I believe that they are of a degree as to barr our cooperation in as much as we have a common enemy to fight and the willingness to live in peace. It is true that, during the border war the Ethiopian army viciously attacked Eritrean villages and went into a rampage of vengeance mutilating innocent Eritreans and destroying their property. We are hurt, and we are sour about it. But, should we not admit that the current confrontation and deadlock is causing our people more harm and marginalizing our country more than ever? Cooperation is better than confrontation and, by all measure, it is the only wisest option for Eritrea. At a time when rabbis, sheikhs and priests are sitting together to discuss inter-faith issues ( of all places in Qatar) there could be no reason at all to prevent the EDA from availing itself of the cooperation of the Ethiopian government. At least, the Asmara regime is doing it with ‘Kinijit’- an Ethiopian political party oppsed to Eritrea’s independence.

Of course, there are costs to consider. One is that the Ethiopian government could persist to secure an access to the sea, which could be discussed and arranged in accordance with the International Convention of Land-locked Countries and on conditions favorable to both sides. Such an understanding could once more be a source of revenue and much needed employment to the local people. The other question is the settlement of the border. Here, it is very important to stress that this particular problem could not and should not be treated outside of the decision of the Boundary Commission, which both governments are legally bound to respect and which, if dealt otherwise, can create a dangerous precedence to regional peace. Yet, the need to negotiate the implementation of the decision in order to preserve the interests and foster the harmony of those living on both sides of the border would only contribute to a lasting and sustainable peace besides not contradicting the letters of the Algiers Agreement. Other than these main issues, both governments could raise various concerns including the deportation of Eritreans from Ethiopia and the compensation for their property expropriated by the Ethiopian government and, likewise, that of Ethiopians evicted from Eritrea. In any case, there is nothing to fear about negotiation. It is only a polite way of meeting your opponent on issues you can take or leave. Further, conducting rapprochement and showing readiness to discuss and negotiate problems, which may obstruct an easy and peaceful implementation of the decision, is the only way to defuse the tension and build trust, mutual respect and set a guarantee for preventing future aggressions. This, as I understand it, is the message of EDA’s recent declaration. It is not a submission to Ethiopia’s demands, nor is it an alteration of the commission’s decision. People should remembered that we are already in a mess that the dictator and his clique created, and the best way to get out of this mess is to adopt a tactful diplomacy of cooperation and understanding not only with Ethiopia but more so with the U.N., the U.S., A.U. and the other members of the Guarantors of Peace. The regime’s policy of aggression and proxy war has only worsened the situation at hand. It has created more enemies, marginalized the stake holders and gave Ethiopia more excuses to reject an agreement it signed. The Asmara regime is now simply impotent and the issue is out of its influence. It cannot take any initiative to solve the problem except to continue to frustrate the hopes of the Eritrean people and those displaced from the war zone in particular.

The peoples option

As a principle, I reject the idea that expects the people living in the country to fight the system, a suggestion that has been forwarded by some followers of non-violent opposition. Our people are already undergoing a situation nobody is willing to experience, and that is more than a share of the agony. Besides, there are no instances in history where non-violence has succeeded in toppling a dictatorial police-state where neither a constitution nor the rule of law exist. My message here however, and of course the whole essence of this article, is that those of us living abroad have the moral and conscientious duty to sympathize with our people and struggle for their cause. In order to advance the people’s cause, however, we first need to liberate ourselves. Liberating ourselves means, in this case, opposing everything that the regime stands for – from the bread-lines and the country’s economic downfall, to human rights abuses, to its handling of the border issue and many others. For many, it is probably easier to condemn the regime’s economic and human right policies than its stance on the border. Many, including prominent political leaders, are simply stuck in this impasse. They find it difficult to condemn the regime’s ability to hold the border issue a hostage not because they accept the regime’s arguments, but because they cannot develop an opposing agenda of their own. Yet, it is this very issue, which the regime is using to manipulate Eritreans abroad and to attack its opponents.

The regime is calling for the full implementation of the Decision by the Boundary Commission and the demarcation of the border and subsequently the withdrawal of Ethiopian forces. This is in accordance with the Algiers Treaty and hence legally correct. It is also the wish of all Eritreans. But, as I have mentioned earlier, the regime have adopted a stubborn position rejecting international opinion on the implementation of the decision and continues to demand that the U.S. and the U.N. take punitive action against Ethiopia while, at the same time, upsetting diplomatic ethics by attacking the personality of their leaders. This policy of aggression does not show a willingness to solve the border problem and return to normality. It is rather a fear response of what may follow next: implementation of the constitution, bringing the jailed to justice and taking accountability for its acts against humanity, demobilization of the army and compensating its members, liberalizing the market and confining/ending the operation of its various party owned business enterprises, embarking on a foreign policy of peace and harmony in the region and dropping its ties with terrorist agents ….the list of repentances is endless as the sins of it atrocities are innumerable. All these popular demands will, to the dislike of the regime, follow the demarcation of the border. Hence, the most intriguing way of preventing such a political avalanche is to obstruct the demarcation process. One may ask, provided one is not fearful of the regime and its cronies, if it makes any sence at all to kill army deserters, let prisoners of conscience die in jails and keep the people on bread-lines just because the border has not been demarcated? The answer is that there is something beyond.   

Moreover, this arrogant behavior has made the regime the black sheep of our region, and has neutralized those who could persuade Ethiopia to abide and bring about a solution: The U.S. and A.U. have been verbally mutilated to a point of silence, the U.N. has literally been kicked out of the county, and the E.U. is told to stay out. Self alienated Eritrea is now falling deeper and deeper into the abyss of state terrorism and Arab patronage.

This, aside to humiliating the Eritrean people, is causing the country immense humanitarian and economic problems. Just to mention one example, according to IDMC of the Norwegian Council of Churches about 40,000 people are still unable to go back to their  villages situated in the mine ridden areas of the Temporary Security Zone (TMZ). This is a figures received from the UNDP in Asmara, which gets its estimates from the government (remember! there are no independent sources to conform it), and for all practical reasons (the regime lies always) one should expect that at least a third of the 250,000 formerly displaced, which is about 80,000 people, could still be confined to relief camps. These people have, since the beginning of the war, been living in make shift tents and on U.N. handouts and they have children whose domains are tents. The area comprising the TSZ has a width of 25 Km. all along the border, which means an area almost the size of Belgium. Almost all of this area is located in Eritrea the greater part being in Gash & Setit region, which is a very fertile part of the country. This is, therefore, one reason contributing to the massive food shortages recorded in Eritrea since it instigated the war aside to the fact that the PFDJ is harvesting fruits and vegetables for export. Moreover, PFDJ’s continuous forced conscription of all physically capable people (until the age of 45) into the army has enormously depleted farming manpower thereby rendering village communities incapable of producing their own food. A similar effect has been registered in the manufacturing and service sectors of the economy where PFDJ is amassing money not only by monopolizing all production and service areas, including agricultural, but also by using conscripted manpower to construct houses for sale and run U.N./E.U. financed construction projects.

What is more significant here is that the border conflict is not yet solved and may continue to be for an indefinite time. War may be taken as an option, but war will only worsen the problem. All Legal means are closed since the Boundary Commission dissolved itself in November 2007 which, ironically, Isaias welcomed as a mission accomplished. The only remaining hope was to persuade and encourage the U.N. and U.S. to take more positive steps towards solving the issue, but that  possibility does not exist any more due to PFDJ’s ill advised measures. Yet, for reasons well known, the regime is comfortable with the ‘no war – no peace’ situation. The PFDJ is using this instrument effectively both to mobilize Eritrean support abroad (a lucrative source of its much needed foreign currency) and strength its hold in the country. Then, what is the way forward? Should we let the ‘no war no peace’ situation and the never-to-end conscription of the young continue (today priest and deacons, tomorrow house wives and nuns – there is simply no telling of the agony and fear our people are undergoing) ?  Should we abandon the 80,000 people to their fate, or should we defend their right to go back to their places of origin?

Now, let us see it from another direction. What could have been the result if Eritrea had complied with U.N. resolutions and adopted a more conciliatory attitude to discuss the implementation of the boundary Commission’s decision on demarcation?  Nothing worse, but surely a lot better. Of course, the implementation of the demarcation process would have lingered as Ethiopia could have come up with more demands and Eritrea not willing to accommodate, with both countries tackling each other on semantics and accusing each other and disrupting the process to a point where the guarantors of peace would come-in and find a solution. One can expect a long, dragging and tiresome process requiring more energy and unlimited commitments as well as a willingness to compromise. But, at least, the situation would have allowed the operation of demining activities whereby the internally displaced people could return to their places of origin and start life again. Demobilizing and rehabilitating of the forces would have been possible as the willingness to negotiate would mean the end of all armed conflicts, and both countries would have not used proxy wars against each other thereby saving their badly needed resources and preventing a disaster from befalling Somalia. The process would in due time, and if handled carefully, allow a slow movement towards normalization of relations, the opening of  telephone lines, allowing the reunification of families and possibly trade contacts.

What does this mean for Eritrea? First of all it would mean that the war situation would be completely defused. This, by itself, would  be a great relief. Aside to the massive resources this could liberate there is nothing better than living in peace. Moreover, the situation in Eritrea would be normal again. The government would be persuaded/forced to establish due process of law and respect human rights, and the number of defects from the army would decrease incredibly. In its relations with Ethiopia the case of the property expropriated from Eritrean expellees, which is estimated in terms of millions of dollars, could be negotiated giving hope to the victims. Further, relations with the U.S. and the U.N. could be normalized giving better access to aid and investments. In any case, it would be a better scenario than the current no-war no-peace situation.

But, would the Eritrean people accept negotiation as an alternative? The PFDJ is continually hammering the Eritrean people with massive propaganda that condemns the U.S. and the U.N. and justifies its stand on the border not only for financial reasons (remittances from abroad and economic benefits from a monopoly of resources and skilled/professional manpower at home), but also to prevent people from thinking and discussing alternative solutions to the dilemma. The PFDJ actively works in all countries where there are concentrations of Eritreans to regiment people’s minds and making sure that alternative solutions do not come up in public discussions. Both PFDJ cadre and its stooges abroad use phrases like ‘defense of the fatherland’ to induce support for the regime’s stand on the border implying an acceptance of all acts by the regime including its defamation of the Church and the humiliation of the Patriarch and the clergy. Any deviation from this PFDJ propaganda is equated to betrayal of the fatherland. Thus, those who call for a democratic change and the implementation of the rule of law as well as those who refuse to contribute money are accused as traitors and Woyane agents, while those who remain silent from expressing their support in public gatherings are seen with suspicion. All this is  an effort to implant in the minds of the people a fear syndrome of a state-less person like that which existed during Eritrea’s struggle for independence. This sense of statelessness is a strong psychological force that compels Eritreans to accept all dogmas and bow to all atrocities, let they not be branded as traitors and saboteurs and be refused a visa to enter their country and visit their relatives. So, the people are forced to accept lies, although they know that the facts speak otherwise.

This strategy of the regime is a war-edged one. I mean, if this strategy fails then war will follow. In fact, the strategy itself calls for war. Both countries have amassed forces at the front-line, and Eritrea went too far when it evicted all U.N.M.E.E. forces in the area who were acting as a buffer between the two armies. This extra blunder of evicting U.N.M.E.E. and severing relations with the U.N. has renewed the popular fear that war is eminent, and this is particularly why HEGDEF had been successful in organizing demonstrations in the U.S., Canada and Europe demanding the U.S. Government and the U.N. Security Council to force Ethiopia to accept the Decision of the Boundary Commission. Since forcing Ethiopia to abide by the decision of the Commission is impossible – it is neither stated or implied in international laws, conventions and agreements nor is it a part of the Algiers Agreement – any careless and lonely bullet fired in the border could trigger a major and an endless war. PFJD knows that this could be the consequence of its irresponsible act, but it also knows that by making war a living fear it could manipulate most Eritreans in Diaspora into submission. It knows that this is playing with fire, but the money that could be gained from this ploy is too enticing that it chooses to risk the possibility of war. Now, some lowly individuals and groups like the scum and self-degenerated Sofia Tesfamariam and Alenalki.com – don’t confuse this with Alenalki.net - would have us believe that Eritreans in Diaspora are supporting HEGDEF out of their own free-will which is, by the way, an arrogant insult to the Eritrean people. They are not only saying that Eritreans in Diaspora cannot read between the lines, but they are also saying that Eritreans in Diaspora do not wish their people to enjoy the freedom, the peace and the prosperity prevailing in the countries of their respective residences. Let us not be deceived. Let me also stress this point once for all. Eritreans in Diaspora are better educated, better exposed, know more and can analyze better. The bitter truth is though that Eritreans in diaspora do not wish to be severed from their parents at home, and the only way to keep this line unharmed is to yield to the regime’s evil authority and malicious demands. This is tantamount to subjugation and serfdom, but that is the liability of being a product of an extended family system with ligaments strengthened by the century-old struggle against foreign dominance – Portuguese, Turks, Egyptians, Italians, British and Ethiopians. Given the freedom to think and discuss, however, I think and I believe that all well-meaning Eritreans would want their people to enjoy peace, human dignity and economic freedom.

No one can tell me either - except the blinded and dogmatic HGDEF hooligans - that Eritreans cannot live or do no have the will to live in peace with their neighbors. The Eritrean people have repetitively demonstrated their will to live in harmony with their Ethiopian neighbors, so have the Ethiopian people. The present friction and xenophobia being expressed against each other is only a superficial tint stained by anti-people elements like Isaias and his ‘deki Tigray’ group (the monkeys, the kishas) and Gebru Asrat, and his followers on the other side of the border. Otherwise, we come from the same stock and the things that bind us are stronger than those that divide us. But, while I am considering this important issue , let me recall two incidents that illustrate the consideration these two people have for each other.

When the war broke out, both countries tried to justify their cases by mobilize public support and expelling citizens of the other. So, when the Ethiopian Government expelled thousands of Eritrean, it played the syndrome of ‘the color of their eyes’, with the hope of instigating Ethiopians to act in revenge. Money deposited by Eritreans in Ethiopian banks was confiscated and property was expropriated and put to auction at such a low price as to influence public purchase. But the Ethiopian people, with the exception of a few Woyane followers, did not flinch. They refused to take part in an act of robbery. Somehow, something in their nature told them to stay away from participating in an act that could have inflicted deeper wounds in the relationship of the two brotherly people. On the contrary, they accompanied the expellees to bus stations (an act of farewell often expression to friends and relatives both in Eritrea and Ethiopia) offering them whatever gifts they could manage with, and sheltering their children who were left behind. Some even managed to send them money via London and other places, while there is a story that some Kebele officials hurried to save and return back some to be expelled. A similar event happened in Eritrea when the defeated army of the Dergue was moving out of Asmara westwards towards the Sudan. Then, the mothers of Asmara, and villages west of the city lined-up in the streets handing bread and water to the fleeing army. Imagine!

Although the above two incident happened at times when the two countries were at war against each other, they were not acts of vengeance. Rather, they were acts of faith, perseverance and understanding. They reverberate and last, and they give meaning to those penetrating thoughts which always tend to pull us together, no matter how the tides go. What made Kebele officials and ordinary Ethiopians protect children and property of Eritreans who officially were considered their enemies is not different from what made Eritrean mothers treat with compassion those once seen as colonizers. For some unknown reasons, both people showed mercy and sympathy towards each other at times of need. None was vicious against the other and did not seek blood and swing the machete as sadly was the case in Rwanda and Kenya.

Even though we consider the Tigreans and the Amharas as our enemies, and they us likewise, still neither side could act viciously and abandon a member of the other side when in distress. Is this our common heritage? Would we behaved likewise had the other been a Kenyan, a European? I don’t know. What I know is that many people find it difficult to understand why we fight each other when we think and behave so much alike, and look so much the same. The people of Eritrea and Ethiopia have both used this tool to reach out towards each other, and at no time in their 30 years old turbulent history have either side evicted citizens of the other. In fact, both lived in the same communities, intermarrying and sharing job and economic opportunities without any discrimination or barrier, and in peace and respect towards each other. This is an example of few parallel in history. I think, it is a special endowment we both, Eritreans and Ethiopians, should preserve and be grateful for. But, can we not use it today to defuse the tension around the border ? Of coarse we can, if we could only forget the past.

War or no war, the people of Eritrea and Ethiopia will live together and the sooner they learn to respect each the better the guarantee for peace. Of course, the wounds we have inflicted on each other will not heal easily and the mutual trust we had enjoyed will require time and patient commitment to recover. But, at least we can prevent further conflicts and lessen the tension around the border. Borders can be demarcated and wars can be settled through international agreements and decisions, but then it will always be the people who will be affected by their outcome. A peaceful demarcation of the Eritrea-Ethiopia border will have a positive meaning to all Eritreans in general and in particular to those living along the border who for generations have intermarried and peacefully coexisted with those living across the border, to all those forcefully conscripted into the army and their families, to students and all the young who hope for a peaceful and secured future, to traders, workers and all families whose basic needs have been barred and are living in fear of vicious punishment, to Eritreans living abroad who, day in and day out, are being compelled to give their hard earned money …. in fact, the settlement will be a good news to everybody other than the junta in Asmara whose power and unquestioned authority will not be served by the outcome. So, do we timidly continue to obey the PFDJ or do we demand changes that promote the cause of our people? Do we continue to feed its coffers and ululate at its meetings or do we question its attitude and hold it responsible for the war and the injustices at home? Do we echo the propaganda of hatred or do we extend a palm leaf  to our Ethiopian brothers? The choice is ours. Systems go, but people persist. The suffering of our people will also end as their struggle against colonial rule has shown. But, the hard truth is that the history of every individual will be recorded for generations to read. 

Concluding Remarks.

I have written the above article with due consideration of the psychological monopoly the regime is trying to establish over the thinking of Eritreans in Diaspora and, of course, their money. The system is trying to turn our people into stereotype obedient, but their anger is increasing day by day. More people are demonstrating, more people are demanding the installation of the constitution and a return to the rule of law. On the other hand, PFDJ agents are becoming more frustrated and are meekly avoiding confrontation. This is a good sign and has to be encouraged and forwarded. A light of conscience and justice has rekindled now, and we should give it more fuel to glow and brighten the way.

Hence, a call to all concerned groups and individuals is appropriate that now is the time for closing the gaps between the different political organizations of the opposition and for standing together, a time for putting our full thrust behind the EDA, and a time for opening the eyes and ears of our people in Diaspora. It is also the time for finding new solutions to our major problems one of which is the issue of demarcation which, due to the malicious mind of the dictator, has gone out of hand putting the danger of loosing Badme a sour possibility. Similarly, we should take a bold initiative to discuss the border issue with our Ethiopian brothers and find a lasting and a settling solution to the problem. Matters, all pertinent matters, should not be taken for granted. They must be discussed and their validity must be tested. We simply cannot leave this important matter in the hands of the dictator, for the damage is already too much to bear.

With this, I will conclude my article but, before doing so, let me forward a few suggestions:

a)     To the EDA. 

v It is hoped that the EDA will soon start holding country level meetings and mobilization sessions to explain the outcome of its recent conference and its future programs to Eritreans in the Diaspora by working closely with all the political groups of the opposition and Eritrean civic organizations. The reality is that the political groups that have now formed the EDA have been competing against each other to the extent of harming the national cause, and healing this wound will need a frank, non-partisan dialogue between the parties and their respective members. A satisfactory level of popular consensus should be achieved before conducting a national conference as stipulated in EDA’s declaration of May 11, 2008. It is only with the blessing and full support of the grass-root members of all political organizations and the general public at large that EDA could attain its declared objectives and evolve into a sustainable national front.   

v The recent EDA declaration stresses the need for governments and international organizations to address the issue of Eritrean refugees. This is a concern in the right direction and gives the EDA a moral latitude expected of its leadership. However, more will be required to continue to hammer the issue at international conferences, meeting with governments and international civic and human rights organizations. Moreover, the refugees are in a dire need of help, and the EDA must be ready to work closely with and gain the active support of humanitarian, human rights and legal organizations. It is, therefore, important that the EDA establishes a body whose main work will the above. There should be a significant stress so as to strengthen and not replace Eritrean civic organizations. Further, care is needed to promote the excellent and devoted work that has so far been contributed by organizations such as that led by Elsa Chyrum.

v The Asmara regime is exploiting our resources by inviting companies to mine gold and entering into contracts, which are not in the best interest of our country and the people of the region. The people of the areas where explorations are taking place have not been consulted nor is their share guaranteed in terms of employment and the development of skills, their education and health care needs, and the general impact that the mining of a first class gold could have on the development of their region. Efforts are needed to state these grievances and air them internationally but, most of all, the companies currently involved should be  warned that a government representing a free Eritrea will not be bound by such lopsided agreements that profit the PFDJ. An official warning to Nevsun and the other companies from South Africa, Canada and China, which now are rushing to grab the opportunity, is more than expected.

v A similar notice should be issued to Eritreans abroad who are buying houses directly from the PFDJ or its agencies. It is important that the EDA makes it clear that the land being sold on the excuse of hosing projects has been illegally robed from surrounding villages who have neither been asked on their willingness to give their land nor compensated. One may argue that even governments in democratic countries reserve the right of putting similar lands for public use. Yes they do. But, don’t they consult the locals, and get their willingness and compensate them? Isn’t it also true that such authority is only used at a time when it is needed to install badly need amenities such as roads and rails, schools and hospitals and that only after receiving a parliamentary decision? In any case, never have such governments used local land for building of hoses for sale. Let us be serious! This land belongs to the respective villages and their claim over it is legally tenable - any time. A warning to this effect is, therefore, important and timely. It will help the wise not to set a precedence for a future confrontation with the people of the concerned communities.

b)     To Eritrean civic organizations.

One cannot but admire the patient and effective endeavour that these organizations have been, and are still, making to minimize the hardship of Eritrean refugees and to publicize human rights atrocities by the regime. Further, they have acted as ligaments of grass-root members of Eritrean political groups when such groups were less bound and less focused on national issues. These performances were achieved in spite of the immense hardship they face and the meager resources they command. They have therefore, by the right of their commitment and action, achieved an important status of popular leadership, and this authority must be used to guide our people in confronting the various political problems they face including a free discussion on different approaches to the border issue.

c) To all readers.

This article carries important issues, by all accounts. The issues should be discussed upon, points improved and added to, or they could be opposed and condemned what ever your stand may be. You could be a fearless opponent of the regime and an unbending agent of democracy, a middle of the road person yet to find your bearings in life, or you could be a boot-licker ready to support the regime’s justifications whatever their merits. You are all invited to discuss my article with one condition, that is that you give your true name and address. To hide behind pen names – and many Eritrean embassy staff that I know do - is to deceive the people about your true identity. Who is who is important to the on going struggle of our people as much as the ideas that influence their thinking.