ERITREAN (ANTI- TYRANNY) GLOBAL

 SOLIDARITY AND THE THEORY OF MAGNETISM.

          BY EAIM

                       OVERVIEW

             Democracy is simply defined as “GOVERNMENT BY THE MAJORITY OF CITIZENS”. Laws and decisions are made by democratic governance and citizen participation, not by a monarch or dictator. Thus, legitimacy and power is given to individuals and agencies through the people they govern, not because of family heritage or military strength. A government is an organization that has the power to make and enforce laws for a certain territory. “Govern” means the power to administer, whether an area of land, a set group of people, or an association.

                   There are two thoughts of what government is meant to scholars. A) By some minds, “government is conceived as strictly a practical art, giving rise to no questions but those of means and an end. Man has the choice ether to make them or not, and how or on what pattern they will be made”. B)  Other scholars say “governments cannot be constructed by premeditated design. They are not made, but grow. Our business with them, as with the other facts of the universe, is to acquaint ourselves with their natural properties, and adopt ourselves to them”.

                     Whatever the school of thought say the Eritrean opposition has put a political charter, which in our opinion is logical and realistic to the Eritrean political reality. Now it is time to inform, teach, and persuade the Eritrean public wherever they reside and mobilize them to work hand in hand with the EDA so as to make democracy a reality in Eritrea. When we say that, it does not mean we Eritreans don’t suffer from leadership quality systemic weaknesses, but with the understanding that it is a problem we have to rectify. 

    ERITREAN {ANTI-TYRANNY} GLOBAL SOLIDARITY AND DEMOCRACY

     Eritrean anti-tyranny global solidarity held its founding conference in Alexandria Virginia on Saturday, December 15, 2007.  When we look at the faces  on the picture of the founding fathers who attended the conference are most of them  except the EX-EDP {Eritrean Democratic Party} and some others are the ones who had similar conference  in 2002 or 2003 around Washington DC  under the name EIDM {Eritrean Independent Democratic Movement}, the Awate- Team was one of them. EIDM declared at that time that the movement is replacement according to EIDM for the dying ENA now EDA which itself vanished after two years. Is EIDM resurrected as EATGS?

   According to sources who where in the conference hall one of the agenda the founding fathers discussed at length and ended up with a compromise was NEGOTIATION with the dictatorial regime PFDG and the compromise they settled with, was to give the regime a list of demand and follow it up in accordance with the response the regime gives. Is the EATGS trying to confuse the Eritrean public with semantics? On one hand they tell us that they are Anti-Tyranny and on the other hand they say they want to negotiate or have a dialogue with the dictator. When some one who tells the public that he or she stands anti-tyranny and at the same time negotiates with dictatorship we see no grain of democratic principles. In the SOLIDARITY Press Release # 3/2007 states the meeting adapted POLICY and BY-LAWS. In the lower lines of the same press release states that drafting POLICY and BY-LAWS is mandated to the board of directors. Does it mean the EATBS is founded with no POLICY or BY-LAWS? What a precedent in the history of forming an organization!

     The scientific theory of magnetism states that “like poles repel and unlike poles attract”. Engineers have invented and are inventing various equipments based on the theory of magnetism. The EATGS founding conference seems to have adapted the magnetic theory and we are waiting to see what they build.

     THE SCOURGE OF EPDJ DICTATORSHIP:

      The EPDJ regime knows no rule of law, is brutalizing his opponents, the regime is using all means under its disposal to eradicate any political opposition, human, religious and individual rights violations are rampant. Our country’s finances, natural resources and production capacities are being plundered to support the dictators’ will. Every able to work is serving the regime’s whim with out pay. Dialogue and negotiations are alien to the Eritrean regime. The regime listens to no one, but himself and has no history of solving internal (domestic) or external conflicts or crisis peacefully, but only violently. Dictatorship is the well known example of poor leadership and man’s greatest scourge and the most significant cause of death. Here is some of what is happening in Eritrea right now.

·       Enslave Eritrans in the name of national service and defense of the mother- land.

·       Massacres people.

·       Herd Eritreans in prisons of unknown locations.

·       Open accounts and invests in places like China while Eritrea is deprived of hard currency.

·       Practice corruption and bribery in governance.

·       Divide and rule.

·       Cause human suffering of mal-nutrition, hunger, illness, and ignorance.

·        Cause economic destruction by governing the country with no economic plan.

·         Cause severe bodily and mental pains on the people who govern.

·        Creates flood of refugees.

·        Reins on one-party dictatorship the negation of our armed struggle and the Oath of independence.

. FROM DICTATORSHIP TO DEMOCRACY STRATEGIC PLANNING

  Political struggle against dictatorship may be waged in a variety of ways. Specific grievances with the Eritrean dictatorship often triggered new brutalities, the arrest or killing of highly regarded people, a new repressive policy or order, food shortages, disrespect towards religious beliefs, etc. Do the Eritrean opposition organizations have adequate plan to get rid of dictatorship? Very careful thought based on realistic assessment of situation and the capabilities of the populace is required in order to select effective ways to achieve freedom under such circumstances. The more important the goal, or the graver the consequences of failure, the more important strategic planning becomes. In order to have strategic plan, we must be able to answer the following fundamental questions:

What are the main obstacles to achieving freedom in Eritrea?

What factors will facilitate freedom in our circumstances?

What are the main strengths of the EPDJ dictatorial regime?

 What are the various weaknesses of the dictatorial regime?

To what degree are the sources of power for the dictatorship vulnerable?

 What are the strengths of the opposition and how democratic are they?

What are the weaknesses of the opposition forces and the general population and how can they be corrected?

   Are there organizations or parties who are not involved in the struggle and how can we make them join the struggle?

 How hard is it to formulate a minimum program which embraces all?

Is it possible to achieve the goal with only the organizations who embrace the minimum program?

          CHIOCE OF MEANS OF STRUGGLE

 The leadership of the opposition needs to choose the means of struggle to be employed in the conflict. The merits and limitations of several alternative techniques of struggle will need to be evaluated, such as dialogue and negotiation, political defiance, civil disobedience, armed resistance movement, guerrilla warfare and all means of struggle. We have to consider whether the choices are within the capacity of the opposition, utilize strengths to the dominated population, and target the weaknesses of the dictatorship, strike at strongest points of the opposition.

 DIALOGUE AND NEGOTIATION

Negotiations or dialogue are very useful tools in resolving certain types of issues in conflicts and should not be neglected or rejected when they are appropriate. In some situations where no fundamental issues are at stake, and therefore compromise is acceptable. Negotiation can be an important means to settle a conflict. A labor strike for higher wages is a good example of the appropriate role of negotiations in a conflict; boarder dispute is also another good example which could be settled through negotiation. When the issues at stake are fundamental, affecting human freedom, religious principles, or hole future development of the society, negotiations do not provide a way of reaching a mutually satisfactory solution. On some basic issues there should be no compromise. Only a shift in power relations in favor of democracy can adequately safeguard the basic issues at stake. Such a shift will occur through struggle, not negotiation. This is not to say that negotiations ought never to be used. The point here is that negotiations are not realistic way to remove a brutal dictatorship in the absence of a powerful democratic opposition.

 DANGERS OF NEGOTIATED SURRENDER

 When faced with the severe problems of confronting dictatorship some organizations may lapse back into passive submission. Others, seeing no prospect of achieving democracy, may conclude they must come to terms with the apparently permanent dictatorship, by hoping that through conciliation, compromise and negotiations they might be able to salvage some positive elements and to end the brutalities. On the surface, lacking realistic options, there is appeal in that line of thinking. Serious struggle against dictatorship is not pleasant prospect, but we have to so as to empower the people once and for all. To dream negotiated resolution to the Eritrean political situation is a mere capitulation. The dictatorship never recognized that there is an opposition, continues to resolve conflicts through violence, all the scourge of life is happening upon our people even when they are silent. Where is the leverage to suggest dialogue and negotiation as conflict resolution in Eritrea? Even if the offer comes from this dictatorial regime after all these atrocities, it is rather disingenuous to trap the opposition movement.

  We strongly believe that Eritreans love “THY” country and “THY” people, want to safeguard Eritrean sovereignty and entity. We might differ on how to serve and lead the people. People say unity is strength, but we say only principled unity is strength. We have to scrutinize unity in context but not always in euphoria.

  N. B. The best asset of a country is the people specially the youth. Eritrean youth are perishing on the Sahara desert, Mediterranean sea, Red sea, in refugee camps in different continents and countries after escaping from the country every Eritrean loves and prefers to live in provided that we get rid of the brutal dictatorial system of government.         Lamenting on our youth’s plight is not enough; we say the problem needs immediate attention. We are not saying nothing is being done, we are saying what we are dong on this serious problem is meager and uncoordinated. We understand that the lasting solution is erecting democratic in Eritrean, but our youths’ problem is time sensitive.

     We call upon the EDA to form a committee on their Jan.,15 2008 meeting mainly for this problem. We are confident the Diaspora opposition will fund it what ever it takes.        

WE STRUGGLE WE SUCCEED        COMMENTS > ama766@comcast .net

GLORY TO OUR MARTYRS