A message to our Christian brothers

 By Omar Jabir 

The idea of this message was in my mind a couple of years ago – but then all of a sudden I faced health crisis that prevented me from writing.

Why am I addressing Eritrean Christians?

Because they are in power and have got the “upper hand” in running the country’s life.

Why now? Because people inside and outside the country are talking about a “change” that will come – how and when – nobody knows!!

Eritrean Muslims are not optimistic – they recall the past experience and question will the change be genuine? Maybe they are remembering the Eritrean proverb (Tigre) which says: “Those who had been bitten by a snake, escape from a rope”!!

Christian highlanders are more “prepared” to take over when the present regime collapses, why?

Economic power: Tens of ex-EPLF members, gained millions and escaped to neighbouring countries such as: Kenya, Uganda, Zaire etc…they are waiting for the right moment to come back and dominate the Eritrean market/economy, they will be the spearhead for regional and international investors.

Politically: Thousands of state employees, army members and diplomatic missions are ready to fill any gap that might be created; in addition to the many  organizations of civil society in the USA and Europe.

Culturally: The present state is based on the highlanders’ culture and it will not be easy for any other culture to compete.

What I am trying to say is that we have to find a common ground for both sectors. I am not accusing all Eritrean Christians of being chauvinistic or sectarian; in fact my experience as an ex-ELF member convinced me that there are hundreds of leaders and cadres who rejected sectarianism, regional and religious polarisation.

The question is about EPLF and whether it represents the other concept or still there are certain trends inside it that give priority to the national issues?

I will mention a particular incident that took place after independence, in 1995.

During a meeting in Massawa – in a meeting for all Eritrean Ambassadors, “Adhanom Gebremariam” (ex-Ambassador to Sweden) in his report stated the following:

“The majority of Eritrean Muslims in Sweden are upset and feel that they are marginalized and deprived of their national rights – Arabic language and Friday holiday…”

The education minister “Osman Saleh” replied and said that the policy is of the organization – he cannot change it!!

Later when the split occurred “G13” – it was clear that what thought to be “invincible and united” organization was a superficial image and has no roots.

The first and most comprehensive document that speaks about the (EPLF) internal opposition was that of Tesfai Sherif, which I will consider/use as a reference and try to come out with what is common and point out at the differences.

I am urging all Eritrean Muslims and Christians to come together, have a correct understanding of each other and pave the way for the new/next generations to have a better life.

This message is equally directed to Eritrean Muslims who should come closer to understand the concerns of the other side.

REFORMING DICTATORSHIP

Document by: Tesfai Sherif

• Too loud and informative to be ignored.

• Too “organizational” that it missed the national dimension.

All readers of the document understand now that the document is the outcome of intensive consultations that had been going on within the “opposition” wing inside EPLF.

During the last seven years, opposition outside EPLF (groups and individuals) criticized the ruling party, but the EPLF members (leaders, senior cadres and ordinary members) turned a deaf ear, not only that but accused any opposition of being a “foreign conspiracy”.

Now, the same “cry” came from within the same party and along the same lines that the opposition had been addressing, it is a promising sign and reflects awakening of the conscience. Some might say it came late, but late is better  than never.

Appreciating their move to correct and reform, I would like to give my input, and this time I hope they will listen and understand that all Eritreans are equally concerned about their future.

I)  EPLF:

The main finding of the document is about the “nature” and “structure” of the state: (absence of institutionalized system of work in Eritrea).

This is a manifestation of “Dictatorship”.

The question is how and why things ended up that way?

Dictatorship is a phenomenon that takes time to be established; gradually it takes the shape and form that expose the ugly side of human nature.

There are certain factors that contribute to the formation and establishment of dictatorship. They are objective and subjective factors.

A) Objective factors:

After independence, the policy of the state had been driven by intoxicated, arrogant organization, supported by “fanatic, subjective and emotional” supporters.

It had been described as the “invincible” organization that can defeat “anyone” and can make the country prosperous!

A few years ago, I wrote saying (….EPLF is not a super organization, it is a very ordinary Eritrean movement with all the heritage of colonialism, sectarian and religious contradictions, its success can mainly be attributed to the weakness and failures of the other (ELF)…). However, it enjoyed “stability at the level of leadership, but that same advantage turned to be the fertile soil for dictatorship to flourish”.

Now,  Tesfai Sherif’s  document confirmed not only that, but also revealed that EPLF lacked the basic principles and pillars of an organization; i.e. well defined and flexible structure, policy making bodies, team work  and accountability.

But this phenomenon did not start after independence; it had been there during the revolution era. The “Mankaa” movement had been suppressed and liquidated in a fashion that sent a strong message to all those who might think in the future of protesting or asking for reforms.  Mohamed Ali Omoro, a veteran of the revolution, had been humiliated and sacked from the leadership in the first organizational conference.

Ramadan M. Nur, the “chairperson” of EPLF for ten years, was the last to know what and how decisions had been made.

I remember an incident in “Khartoum Grand Hotel” where a group of ELF cadres were sitting in the lobby with an American journalist waiting to meet the chairperson of EPLF. One of the group said to the journalist: you are wasting your time; you will get nothing from the man. But the journalist refused to listen, saying: “no, my sources told me that he is a very influential and decision maker”, then took a small paper from his pocket and read: Isias Afwerki...

We were surprised and told him that was the deputy chairperson. At that moment Ramadan arrived and introduced himself as the chairperson of EPLF. But the American journalist was uncompromising, he said to Ramadan: “I want the real chairperson”.

Ramadan left the place, cursing the day he accepted to play that role, now retired as “Abboi Ramadan”.

Do you want me to remind you of the story of the three oxes: black, red and white?

The short sighted and selfish black and red ones, made a deal with the wolves to get rid of the white. Then the black betrayed the red, and when the turn came to the black, it said:  “I died the day the white ox died”.

B)  Subjective factors:

The man (the president you elected) is an authority – obsessed leader, power freak and a person who dreams of being an international figure.

To be fair, those characteristics are common among leaders of the third world.

There is an Egyptian proverb that says: “they asked the Pharaoh: “who crowned you a king”? He answered: “people didn’t object”.

The nature of human beings is to persuade others to satisfy their needs and meet their demands. If things go well, they ask for more and the ego grows bigger and bigger.

Then comes the role of the “entourage” they give excuses, explanations and legitimacy.

The person – leader becomes totally self-asserted and deals with any advice or criticism in an aggressive way that is the time when it becomes too late to “reform” him.

The end result cannot be used to justify the means, however good a result might seem. Such results reached through the wrong process, reflect the lack of intelligent and ethical tactics. The sad thing is that in the case of EPLF, even the results have not been good.

II)  National unity:

The document did not address this issue, or to be more accurate, its approach was that of EPLF. It is true that the document pointed out important factors affecting national unity (language, equality, political rights….) but the message they tried to send (the writers) was this: “As long as the EPLF  is strong, united and successful – national unity is protected and everything is OK.

Once the internal unity of EPLF is cracked, national unity is jeopardized, that was one of the weaknesses of the document.

Eritreans in general read and understand things in a different way.

Priority is given to national unity, if that is achieved, then EPLF and other organizations will survive and flourish within that healthy environment.

That task – national unity – had never been addressed correctly by the EPLF and still need to be fulfilled.

 III)  The opposition:

The document totally ignored the existence of opposition of any kind.

That is the theme of the “Big office”, the document criticized and described as being out of touch and one man show. I will not talk about the ELF factions, they are known as to why and how they ended up in that situation.

The other opposition group – Jihad – needs to be talked about.

Why are there, and what are they fighting for?

To start with, I am not a member of any opposition groups; in fact I have my own concerns about their programs, tactics and alliances. I am an independent person trying to understand and follow up the developments in my country.

It seems that the writer of the document is fond of the famous Arab writer “M. H. Haikel” – I appreciate and respect that – so I will quote from the same writer the following: “When people get frustrated, lose hope in any change that brings justice and equality – they turn to the last resort – the instinct of the primary human nature, i.e. Religion”.

That was what happened and – Jihad - came as a reaction and response to the unjust and unfair policies of the EPLF.

It had been an alarming signal and should have been addressed and dealt with in a different way; instead, the short sighted leadership of EPLF responded in an arrogant manner and was engaged in military confrontations that deepened the mistrust and widened the gap between the ruled and the ruling.

The question is: “What do the Muslims want?”

Do they have a different agenda? I don’t claim that I represent the Muslim sector, but through my communications with groups, individual activists, my readings and discussions, and last but not least, feeling the pulse of ordinary men and women – all that helped me in understanding and concluding the following:

“ Eritrean Muslims believe in the co-existence and partnership of the two sectors of the nation”.

But still they have their own concerns.

First.

They ask and “fight” for (general rights), rights that they share with other Eritreans.

• A Democratic Constitution.

• Basic Human Rights.

• Sharing political power: presidency, cabinet of ministers, army and security, equal opportunity of employment (according to the document 90% of government employees are Christians).

• Sharing wealth – land issue, assets (the document revealed that only two Muslims found a chance to buy private assets – out of 29 applicants).

Second:

Specific rights for Muslims.

1)      Cultural Rights.

·        Arabic to be recognized as an official language and to be used in all departments and activities of the government.

·        Recognition and respect for their culture, history, traditions and social relations and extensions along borders.

2)    Religious Rights.

·        To establish and run their religious institutions with the privileges enjoyed by churches, including communication with regional and international religious bodies and welfare organizations.

·        Recognising their religious events and feasts – including Friday as a holiday – and putting that in the official calendar of the state.

Third.

The document ended up with a shocking finding: “It is a one man show!”

Some people were arguing in the past, saying: Yes, he is a dictator, but a “benevolent dictator”!

Benevolence and dictatorship cannot co-exist, they are two opposite phenomenae that contradict and negate each other.

Plato, the old Greek philosopher, stated the following criteria for a leader:

(Those driven by their desire to rule are the least qualified, the ambition for power belongs to the aggressive part of the person rather than the rational. If that part – ambition – becomes dominant, he will not be able to rule neither himself nor others rightly).

In the case of EPLF, the founder, the instructor and decision maker had always been one man, the question is: how are you going to “reform” this situation?

The majority of Eritreans are not interested and not concerned about the geometrical shape of the regime – whether it should be square, triangular or rectangular.

What people are saying is that the very existence of the present leadership – its attitudes, concepts, vision and approaches are totally unacceptable.

Conclusion.

The way out proposed by the document lacks the national dimension, i.e. the involvement of other forces in the process to change and reform. Moreover, the writer(s) admit that they are minority inside the Central Committee of the EPLF, so, how are they going to bring the change?

Here is my input:

• Formation of a national united front from all national and democratic forces – inside and outside the country, to adopt a national charter that guides the front during a transitional period. The opposition inside the EPLF, should take the initiative and approach all national forces and come out of the limited organizational boundaries.

• A government of national unity – from the above forces – will  run the country to pave the way for the democratic phase mentioned in the document of Tesfai Sherif.

If we Eritreans – do not have a common understanding, recognition for each others’ ambitions and rights, we will remain in the same vicious circle.

National unity is the start and solid ground on which every reform can work. National unity needs a deep rooted belief to live with others – living with them and not ruling them!

If that is not the case, then the worst is to come – remember Somalia, Lebanon etc…

God save and protect our country

Omar Jabir - writer and Researcher

Melbourne - Australia

February 2008