The background 

The most significant difference between totalitarianism and democracy , is  the existence of the civil society � the intermediary institutions like , political parties , trade unions, student unions , religions and pressure groups which fill the gap between the ruled and the ruler. Under authoritarianism the civil society is suppressed. In democracy it thrives. If life is to improve in a society , the civil society organisations must be encouraged to grow and prosper.

 A key agent of participation is what  social scientists call civil society. civil society refers to the conglomeration of organisations and associations which spring up in any society, independent of government and reflective of the interests of citizens. They come into existence in autonomous form among people. It is extremely difficult to consolidate a new democracy without a healthy civil society. Civil society operates both as a channel for participation and provide useful checks and balances on government action, ensuring accountability and transparency, especially in cases where political parties/ political organisation are weak and fail to provide an effective opposition. ( compare Eritrean situation now )

The relationship between democratic government and civil society will be mutually energising. Not only can civil society engender democratization, but in return democratic structures of government facilitate and encourage lively participation by civil society.

Political solutions are always more likely to succeed when they are owned by the people , rather than imposed upon them. An exclusive negotiation process could derail easily if there is a perceived disunity between the elite and the civil society.

Political parties / political organizations, as in the case of Eritrea, are important features of democratization. Political parties are the means through which citizens aggregate their political preference, participate in the government politics and voice their concerns. In a sense, they serve as the intermediary between the government and civil society. Political parties are the means through which citizens aggregate their political preferences, participate in the government politics and voice their concerns.

Demands for change in the political landscape of Eritrea focus on the two major problems: removal or enforcing the intransigent brutal regime in Asmara and establish a democratic rule in Eritrea. The relationship between political and social movements ( civil society movements ) is very important for the tenacity of the democratic movement. A democratic system that undermines the rights of the people can create wedges between political parties and lead to a single party system in the future. ( Mahamood Mamdain, 1991 )

In a single party regimes ( most African countries ) social movements were liquidated. The ruling party establishes its own single trade unions ( Eritrean National Unions as Womens, Youth, Students, Workers ) The media is state controlled. The soil which nurtures the single party regime is always practised during the transition period in African countries. The opposition groups , either political or social movements should prepare a political soil that can accommodate both movements. 

Eritreans have lost the heritage of their ancestors � liberty , unity and legalism during the 30 years� liberation period and during the 11 years� of independence. The ideal of free self expression whether in politics, economics and social and cultural were hindered. Different tribes in Eritrea have existed together by these traditional values that promoted peace, neighbourly love, mercy and charity. These values , unlike those imposed by PFDJ ( Popular Front for Democracy and Justice ) were adopted by all Eritreans regardless of their racial blood and religion and culture. To day, these values have been replaced by the jungle and uncivilised rule of one man.  No rights of man, no rule of law and no liberty.                                 

The concept of civil society

The idea of civil society movement was born during the Roman Empire and was reborn during the nation �building in western countries. Civil society movements have also emerged during the revolution of Russia , when Russians defied the supreme power of the Tsar, when the constitutional order and political civil liberties of the citizens were highly violated. Recently, civil society resistant movements were spurred by the revolutionary events in eastern Europe, Latin American countries and South Africa. In Eastern Europe , like Yugoslavia, Rumania , and Poland etc, civil society organisations and solidarity groups created opportunities and institutions outside the state to discuss national issues and develop visions and material bases for organizing strikes, boycotts, and street demonstrations for protecting the rights of those in detention. In the Marxist �Leninist, the state is the guarantor of legal order and the administrator of the general interest. The state has evolved as the main motor of social organization and modernization. There was no freedom of  individuals and groups ( civil rights � see ,UDHR )

Civil society is a  non �governmental institution which is strong enough to counterbalance the state power, while not preventing the state from fulfilling its role of  keeping peace and stability in the country , Civil society can emerge from the conditions prevailing in the country.

Societies are concerned with the maintenance of order and survival in the face of enemies, on one hand, and with the maintenance or enhancement of production on the other. They organise themselves when order and peaceful livelihood is in menace. They are not interested for power or wealth , but peace and salvation. Civil society is not necessarily and primarily about power per se  but about empowerment �to know how to use your rights ( political, civic, economic and social )

Civil society can be , in one sense, be identified with democratisation and political liberalisation, but it is a far more comprehensive and deep concept than democracy. It embraces an entire range of assumptions , values and institutions such as political, social and civil rights, the rule of law, plurality of associations, representative institutions and public sphere which are indispensable preconditions for democracy.

The value of this conception should be grasped whenever the power of the state has been dictated by repressive government of  a totalitarian regime. It embodies emancipatory aspirations which focus on the respect of human rights against oppression.

 Current situation in Eritrea

The virtues of moderation and toleration are assailed ( attacked ) by extremism and fanaticism in Eritrea, divided by , � We and Them. � The Eritreans are divided and are unable to impose their will on the government. In the aftermath of the Ethio � Eritrean border war, the criminal power politics of the tyrant ruler has escalated its detention and extra �judicial criminal activities against all critics. What is the clear picture of the situation in Eritrea  since the war with Ethiopia ?  Eritrea is in a deep crisis. The economic crisis and the social unrest has reached its climax. Young generation are fleeing the land. The people at home are suffering of man �made famine and other diseases. Eritrea is at the edge of life and death. All will flee the land to save their lives. The self- appointed president  will never listen the suffering of his people but continue with his cruel and criminal rule. He installed martial law to repress and curb any protest against his rule. Permanent human rights violation continue. He will never abandon his  Polpot ideology and monopoly on power.

His 12 �year dictatorship as a leader of the Eritrean State are only characterised by his widespread extra �judicial killings and disappearance of opposition forces . The youth are judged to live in trenches. The mothers are condemned to live in sorrow and the sisters  exposed to prostitution and rape by the military officers of the Higdef. Eritrea is a conflict �ridden state with no  institutions functioning. No constitution , no rule of law, no order, except mass arresting and giffa.

 Emergence of civil society

The emergence of civil society in the Eritrean diaspora is similar with that former civil movements in the 18^th century Europe against the kingdoms and nobles. The absolutist states in the west were limited and constrained by the activities of the self �conscious, rights �bearing individuals in association with others. � There is no other dike to hold back the tyranny , �  without  reorganising the civil society , wrote de Tocqueville. Then , the Eritrean civil society is organised by the concept of the civil society not as mass organisation of hegelian- marxist theory. It is a public sphere, through which organised citizens can limit power and hold powerful actors accountable. The maxim leaders can do no wrong is outmoded and be rubbed out from the minds of the new generation in Eritrea.

Eritreans have never been organised freely either during the liberation period or post-liberation period. The history of the Eritrean struggle for liberation has various structures accompanied by ethnic, religious, regional and individual affiliations, promoting differences, prejudices, privileges and misunderstandings. The process of liberation has never dwelled to solve internal problems by democratic dialogue. This illustrates that the people�s rights were never in the minds of the liberation leaders. The enmity and hatred that have taken root during the armed struggle are still recurring and being used by the shrewd leaders in order to grip power for ever.

The concept of civil society, I am dealing with , in this article, is not a new idea , but a old and proved by other countries in the world. The Eritrean civil society in diaspora is a public sphere connecting the various Eritrean social groups that were divided by  political organisations� leaders. Civil society is a tool that publicly scrutinises powerful agents and institutions. It exposes and criticise the policies of the government and the opposition. It organises public discussions and demand that the political leaders give an account of themselves and their activities.

The Eritrean people has been  and still being hold as captives by divisive and outmoded political leaders of the past , without no hope to innovations. The Eritrean civil society is a platform for openness . It increases the ability to deal with the variety of experiences, makes us more realistic in dealing with the new people, new situations and new problems. The process of civil society accepts changes and not rigidities. It involves acceptance of the truth that one is participant in an ongoing process rather than an autocrat who controls everything. The Eritrean people has been suffering under autocrat political elite leaders. It will struggle against the attitude of secrecy, rigidity and political docility imposed by autocrat leaders.

From words to action

To save the Eritrean people from dictatorial barbarism is to organise all forces for democracy and encircle the brutal regime. Unless this is done now, the anti �democracy forces, in the future can revolt against democracy and destroy Eritrea as a state. How would we solve this problem ? In Eritrea, the president is becoming disgusted not only with his harsh and brutal rule but with his daily criminal activities- treating the Eritrean people as his slaves. Most discussions are on democracy. The discussions have no shed light how can we solve the problem. Until now, the discussions have never led to deliberate and decisive actions that can paralyse the dictatorship in Eritrea.

Civil society and other people�s forums are established by the Eritreans in the Diaspora. Formation of civil society is half way. What is needed now is the broad coalition of these movements to rescue our people and country , Eritrea . Some civil society organizations in Europe have already formed networks regionally. But this is not enough. Worldwide , civil society movements of all Eritreans is the only method that can bring down dictators and transfer the power to the people.

In this article , I propose , A Broad Civil Society Conference- bringing all together and plan key aspects of action to save our people from this illegal system of  ruling. Such conference gives opportunities to the Eritreans who have been polarised and divided, so many years by decadent politics of 50^th, 60^th , 70^th, 80^th and 90^th. We are now on the post 90^th, let us manage our conflicts in a civilised manner. Let us address the demands of our people in a highly visible and inclusive manner.

The objective of this conference is to build a broad  coalition of  the civil society and pressurise the political opposition groups to prevent conflict and come to negotiation table. This coalition plays the role of moderates. It holds back the two extremes and provide a platform for the opposition political groups to discuss, plan, and reach a maximum level of consensus on  Eritrea�s political future.

Such conferences of civil societies have impacts on the current crisis of a country. It can be a useful democratic conflict management tool. It can have significance on forming a new political culture based on negotiation and compromise. It can be a mechanism for conflict resolving.  It  has also significance to promote democracy. It is significant in building trust among the various groups in the country. The progress made in the conference should be followed up and implemented. An international committee co-ordinating and translating into action should be formed and be given the appropriate responsibility to ensure the progress made at the conference.

This conference is only for civil society organisation. It has no connection with the so called national conference already proposed by the Eritrean political opposition alliance. This conference is based on people�s rights to be respected now  and in the future. The political elites, in the state power,  whether Eritreans , or other Africans have always the tendency of oppressing the society, therefore, the Eritrean people from now on , should build their freely associated organisation to watch up their fundamental rights.