Waging Nonviolent Struggle under Fear and Repression:General Lessons and the Case of Eritrea

 

A discussion paper presented to the sixth CIVICUS World Assembly

21-25 June 2006, Glasgow, Scotland

Prepared by: the Eritrean Movement for Democracy and Human Rights - EMDHR

Presented by: Daniel R Mekonnen

Partners: the International Centre for Nonvilent Conflict - ICNC and the Centre for Advanced Nonviolent Action and Strategies - CANVAS

 

 

TABLE CONTENTS

 

 

1..... Introduction.

2..... The Eritrean Political Situation: Pre 1998.

3..... The Eritrean Political Situation: Post 1998.

4..... The Entrenchment of Dictatorship in Post-independence Eritrea 

5..... A Continued Culture of Repression and ‘A Country of Whispers’

6..... Citizenry Nonviolent Resistance.

7..... The Role of the Eritrean Diaspora Communities.

8..... EMDHR as A Vehicle to Promote Nonviolent Action.

9..... Conclusion.

 

1.       Introduction

 

Eritrea is one of the newest countries in the world and the youngest in Africa. Like most African countries, the modern state of Eritrea is a product of European colonialism.[1] The present map and shape of the country came into being by the end of the nineteenth century when Eritrea was occupied by the Italians. The Italians ruled the country until 1941. From 1941 until 1952, Eritrea was a British protectorate. In 1952, the United Nations adopted a federal arrangement under which Eritrea was federated with neighbouring country Ethiopia. In 1962, the Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie I unilaterally abrogated the federal arrangement thereby declaring Eritrea the fourteenth province of Ethiopia. This triggered a long war of liberation which culminated in 1991 with a de facto independence when Eritrea was fully liberated under the dominant leadership of the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF). In 1993, Eritrea was officially recognized as an independent state after a national referendum which resulted in an overwhelming vote for national sovereignty.

 

2.       The Eritrean Political Situation: Pre 1998

 

In the first few years after independence, Eritrea enjoyed a relatively peaceful transition. During this time, the EPLF, among other things, established itself as the provisional government of Eritrea; changed its name into the Peoples Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ); framed development policies aimed at overcoming the formidable challenges of nation-building and reconstruction; drafted the constitution of the country and promised to conduct free and fair elections after the ratification of the constitution. The country ratified its constitution in 1997. However, the constitution was not implemented until 1998 when a full-fledged war broke out with neighbouring country Ethiopia; and no free and fair elections have been conducted since independence in Eritrea.

 

3.       The Eritrean Political Situation: Post 1998

 

The border conflict with Ethiopia came to an end in 2000 after the ratification of the Algiers Peace Agreement by Eritrea and Ethiopia. Two years after the Algiers Peace Agreement, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission rendered a final and binding decision on the border dispute. In spite of an earlier agreement to honour the decision of the boundary commission, Ethiopia refused to abide by the final verdict. Consequently, a situation of no-war no-peace persists between the two countries up to date. During and after the war, the Eritrean government used national security and the threat of renewed war as a pretext to suspend all initiatives aimed at facilitating democratic transition.

 

The ramification of the 1998-2000 war was extremely harsh. Among other things, it triggered a serious but covert disagreement among top officials of the PFDJ, the sole and ruling political party in Eritrea. The confrontation went to the public arena after the state president, Isaias Afwerki, obstinately refused to convene the regular meeting of all national deliberative organs; and as a result, a group of senior government officials (known as the reformers)[2] authored an open letter criticizing the president of the state. The cause of the disagreement was mainly President Isaias Afwerki’s “conduct of the war, his hard-line approach to peace negotiations, and his resistance to democratization.”[3]

 

The reformers’ call for an increased democratisation and transparency paved a way for a groundbreaking political debate in post-independent Eritrea. Eritreans of all walks of life begun to discuss issues of paramount importance via the free press, word of mouth and the Internet without fear. For the first time in the post-independence history of Eritrea, university students protested against government policy of summer work programme. Writers and contributors of the free press, editors of privately-owned newspapers, businessmen, professionals and others criticised failures of the government. The year 2001 saw the most vibrant post-independence political debate on the future of Eritrea. It was a turning point in the history of Eritrea. Sadly, all such promising developments did not last long.

 

By September 2001, when the international community was overwhelmed by the September 11 attacks in the USA, the Eritrean government resorted to violence and arbitrarily arrested the initiators of the reform movement and others who supported the call for democratisation. The detainees include 11 top government officials, a number of publishers, editors and writers of the privately-owned newspapers, business people, elders who sought to mediate between the president and his critiques, university students (including the leader of the University of Asmara Students’ Union) and several other individuals. As such, the government unleashed a violent and wide spread attack on dissent. What followed after this has totally tarnished the image of Eritrea, which was once called one of the most promising countries in Africa.

 

4.       The Entrenchment of Dictatorship in Post-independence Eritrea

 

What exists in present day Eritrea is an autocratic rule which has literally controlled major aspects of the county’s life. Political and economic life of Eritrea is fully controlled by the ruling party, the PFDJ. In the political sphere, Eritrea has, since independence, been ruled by one and dominant political party. The country has never seen free and fair elections. Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and association are severely curtailed by the government. Religious freedom is another harshly restricted right in Eritrea. As a result, minority religious groups are persecuted by the government continuously. With no independent courts and autonomous functioning parliament, the country remains under the dominant and unaccounted leadership of the PFDJ. Since 2001, only government-owned media outlets operate in Eritrea. Eritrea is one of the fewest countries in the world without free press, and the largest prison of journalists in Africa.[4] It is also the only African country without unimplemented constitution. In Eritrea, there are no independent civil society organisations and no other form of associations or organisations exist outside the parameters of the ruling party. In short, the political life in Eritrea is fully and wholly dominated by the ruling party.

 

In the economic sphere, the ruling party owns the most profitable economic institutions of the country, these being the major sources of financial resources for the government. Such giant economic institutions include: the Red Sea Trading Corporation, Segen Construction, Gedem Construction, Beilul Financial Services, Himbol Foreign Exchange Services, Intercontinental Hotel and the like. These pseudo-private corporations have been the key players in the economy enjoying wide concessions in taxation and exemption from legal requirements. They have been offered free entry to any industry with potential huge profits. As a result, the private sector is unable to compete in the market and has virtually ceased to exist.

 

A major backing force to the ruling party’s political and economic domination is the Warsay-Ykealo Campaign which was launched in 2002 under the pretext of comprehensive national development plan. This campaign, equated to a campaign of slavery by some opposition figures,[5] purportedly aims to promote national development and economic progress. In practice, however, it is a well orchestrated scheme to keep the Eritrean youth under strict military control. This has enabled the government to effectively suppress possible threats of disobedience and unrest that could have ensued especially after the reform movement of 2001.

 

The national military service law enacted in 1994 obligates every adult member of the population between the ages of 18 and 40 to go through a military national service programme of 18 months; yet, children as young as 15 have been conscripted forcefully.[6] During the 18 months period every incumbent is expected to abide by strict military discipline. Those who fail to honour military discipline and obligations are treated with severe punishment, including torture and extralegal executions which are now widely reported by independent rights groups around the world. In spite of the 18 months limit of the unpaid national military service programme, thousands of Eritreans are still serving as military conscripts for several years under the infamous Warsay-Ykealo Campaign. The overall effect of this has been a total subjugation of the most productive segment of the society, the youth; and hence, a virtually militarised society. This has also enabled the giant economic institutions of the ruling party to benefit from schemes of free labour the source of which are the conscripts of the Warsay-Ykealo Campaign. 

 

5.       A Continued Culture of Repression and ‘A Country of Whispers’

 

In keeping with the Marxist-Leninist background of the EPLF, the forerunner of PFDJ, secrecy and repression of dissent has been Eritrea’s political culture throughout the struggle for independence. During the 30 years liberation struggle, dissent from the official Marxist-Leninist ideology of the EPLF was met with harsh punishment. At times dissidents had been vigorously silenced, as early as in the 1970’s when many members of the clandestine movement, Menkae, were allegedly secretly executed.[7] Likewise, in post-independence Eritrea, dissent and public protest were faced with harsh treatments. The massacre of disabled veteran liberation fighters and the violent suppression of the freedom fighters’ mutiny in the early 1990’s, the disappearance of several Muslim religious leaders and teachers as well as the stripping of the citizenship of members of the Jehovah's Witnesses on account of refusal to honour compulsory national military service can be cited as some of the major incidents of concern.

 

Since September 2001, a widespread and systematic crackdown on public dissent and freedom of expression persists in different forms. This includes the arbitrary arrest of the reformers, elders who sought to mediate between government and critiques, journalists, mid-level officials, merchants, businessmen, church leaders and members of minority Christian denominations. None of the detainees has been taken to court or formally charged with any offence. They have been denied all access to the outside world, including their families, and there are serious concerns for their health and safety.[8]As a result of continued repression and in defiance of indefinite military conscription young people are leaving the country in an unprecedented scale and often with a great risk to their lives.

 

The rule of law in Eritrea is severely undermined and no one dares to challenge the government in the courts. The independence of the judiciary is persistently undermined by interference of the executive branch. A Special Court, whose judges are military commanders, sentences people for corruption without the right to defence or appeal. Torture has routinely been used as a punishment for detainees and members of minority faiths, as well as for offences committed by military conscripts.[9] Continuous round ups of the youth in the cities is customary in such a way that foreign writers described it as a “systematic and selective curfew imposed upon Eritrean youth”. Human rights violations by members of the security forces are committed with total impunity.[10]

 

The government’s policy towards NGO’s and international donor organisations is hostile and unwelcoming.  For instance, under a proclamation enacted in May 2005, NGOs are limited to relief and rehabilitation activities. The government imposed taxes on aid, introduced unrealistic registration requirements and denied NGO’s the opportunity to work independently of the government with local communities. As a result, civil societies, as a voice of debate and analysis, have been frightened into extinction. People are afraid to speak out as there is a great degree of fear and suspicion among the public created by harsh government repression. This is clearly noted by many scholars and writers. Having made in-depth observations about the capital, Asmara, Tom Downey described Eritrea as “a country of whispers”.[11] In general, Eritrea is currently governed by one of the cruelest dictatorships the world has ever seen in the new millennium.

 

6.       Citizenry Nonviolent Resistance

 

Due to the fact that Eritrea’s independence was achieved after prolonged armed struggle, the use of violence is considered by many Eritreans as a viable option for advancing any just cause. Particularly, having a president whose own role model was Mao Zedong, the communist leader who believes that “power grows out of the barrel of the gun,”[12] nonviolent resistance to achieve liberty in Eritrea has to certainly receive little attention among the general public. Nonetheless, segments of the Eritrean society have been practicing, albeit in an unorganised manner, numerous nonviolent activities which have considerably undermined the legitimacy of the government in Eritrea.

 

Since 2001, many high-level officials of the ruling party have defected from their posts and sought protection in different countries of asylum. Some of them joined exiled opposition political parties. Hundreds of Eritrean university students who have been sent by the government for higher education refused to return to the country. Young members of the national military service are deserting from military conscriptions and national development programmes. Several of them are fleeing the country in unprecedented numbers.

 

One, however, can safely say that none of these nonviolent activities are deliberate actions taken to undermine the socio-economic and political relationships between the state and the people. An email communication between a member of the EMDHR and a friend inside the country clearly demonstrates this fact. The writer states that “I am sick and tired of this country … it is hopeless … I am looking for ways on how to move abroad …” Sadly enough, this kind of attitude is common almost in every young Eritrean at present. Evading the country is not taken as one way of political defiance against the existing economic, political and social order but as a way out from ‘a disgusting environment.’ People intend to put the blame on the country and its hostile relationship with its neighbours, an element which can not be substantively defined.

 

The massive propaganda of state media, the monopoly of information and communications infrastructure by the state and lack of access to alternative and independent media outlets has restricted the people from exchanging new ideas and debating about the future of the nation. In such kind of narrow political arena, it is difficult, if not impossible, for unified and disciplined nonviolent people’s movement to flourish and become viable within the country. Still, there is a room to advance nonviolent action in Eritrea.         

 

7.       The Role of the Eritrean Diaspora Communities

 

As a result of the prolonged armed struggle, thousands of Eritreans have been migrating to different parts of the world in the last four decades. A considerable number of Eritreans reside in Ethiopia and Sudan, as these two countries are the immediate neighbours of Eritrea. The Middle East, Europe and North America host thousands of Eritrean refugees, professionals, intellectuals and others who maintain close contacts with their families and/or relatives back in home.

 

Eritrea’s domestic output has been substantially augmented by worker remittances and taxes from the Diaspora community, which is close to 1.5 million in numbers. The government of Eritrea aggressively utilises its monopolised media and diplomatic missions to advertise fictitious development projects and successes purportedly achieved by the ruling party. Large part of the Diaspora community has been confused by government propaganda and numerous ruling party operatives dispatched around the world under diplomatic missions and community centres fully controlled by the Eritrean government. In the absence of independent media coverage coming from Eritrea, the government has successfully implemented its campaign of terror, misinformation, intimidation, fear and suspicion among the Diaspora community. The continuous fragmentation of exiled Eritrean opposition groups was also another factor in exacerbating the situation.

 

In recent years, the trend in the Diaspora community has been changing favourably. With the emergence of several independent civil society organisations and the restructuring of some opposition groups, the Diaspora community has begun to identify the autocratic nature of the Eritrean government. As a result, a considerable portion of the Diaspora community has refrained from supporting the government morally and financially. Yet, much has to be done in order to effectively empower a large number of Eritreans living in different parts of the world.

 

Managing to win the hearts and minds of the Diaspora community would mean to severe one of the major economic sources, in other words, a major source of political power of the Eritrean government. This will also have the impact of severing the moral and psychological support offered to the government and at last breaking the link between the Diaspora community and the government. Once the Diaspora community is effectively mobilised, it will be easier to mobilise the people inside Eritrea. Almost every Eritrean individual or family in the Diaspora maintains ardent contacts with its family members or relatives inside Eritrea. Therefore, empowering the Diaspora community would facilitate the empowerment of the people inside Eritrea.

 

All over the world, Eritrean civil society initiatives are flourishing, most of which advocate for human rights, rule of law and democratisation in Eritrea. Officially established in South Africa, EMDHR is one of the flourishing Eritrean civic society organisations.

 

8.       EMDHR as A Vehicle to Promote Nonviolent Action

 

EMDHR is an autonomous nonviolent civic movement which primarily strives to build a society in which all Eritreans are empowered to exercise their fundamental rights in order to live their lives in peace, dignity and prosperity.[13] The movement was incepted in 2003 by a group of young Eritrean professionals, students and exiles in South Africa. Where civil societies are severely restricted and repression of dissent is widespread, it is practically unrealistic to establish an organization like EMDHR in Eritrea. The official establishment of EMDHR in South Africa came about as a result of such a background.

 

Since its inception, the movement has been serving as a voice of Eritrea’s youth in particular and the public in general. It has been advocating for the rights of Eritreans and conducted numerous civic awareness activities on human rights and democratisation, mainly via the Internet,[14] radio broadcasting,[15] leaflets and newsletter.[16] By mid 2005, the movement launched a project of developing an educational manual on nonviolent action.[17] The publication of the education manual is expected to happen by the end of June 2006 in one of Eritrean local languages, Tigrigna. This would help to make the educational manual accessible to Eritrea’s grassroots community. Depending on the availability of financial resources and experts on other Eritrean languages, the educational manual will be translated into such other languages.

 

The EMDHR educational manual calls for an end to violent conflict and violation of fundamental rights and freedoms in Eritrea in particular and in the Horn of Africa in general. The educational manual is expected to familiarize citizens with the concept of nonviolent action and to help them understand how it operates in a narrow political situation such as the one prevailing in Eritrea. It also highlights the need to develop a strategic plan in order to wage a successful nonviolent struggle. The EMDHR, upon communicating the draft manual among some Eritreans, has been receiving messages of support. One of the messages received was from the capital of Eritrea, Asmara, and states that “… it is human and it will require immense endurance … Only then the Horn of Africa would … realize the futility of violent confrontations ... Keep it up!”   

 

Members of the EMDHR have a strong conviction that in a given society real change occurs from the people. Regime change only does not help people to enjoy liberty and freedom. What is most important is that people need to be empowered so that they would be able to obtain greater control over their lives and to influence events. The EMDHR is convinced that the first step to realize this noble objective is to replace fear and suspicion with truth. The EMDHR educational manual fairly elaborates on the importance of challenging one’s perception by powerfully disclosing the truth about the overall political, economic and social conditions in Eritrea. Yet, having a printed manual is not enough to effect the desired social change in Eritrea. Thus, the EMDHR has a plan to persistently disseminate self-liberating messages among the Eritrean public via possible communication mediums which include the Internet, radio broadcasting, newsletter, etc.

 

9.       Conclusion

 

Contrary to the Eritrean peoples’ expectation and their hard won independence, Eritrea has fallen prey to a despotic rule. The political situation in Eritrea is extremely narrow. It does not allow any kind of political initiative outside the parameters of the ruling party. Current day Eritrea is fully and wholly controlled by the sole political party which has ruled the country since independence in 1991. All efforts aimed at ensuring a peaceful political transition have been harshly suppressed by the ruling party and as such it may appear that the only viable option left in Eritrea is ousting the regime by violence. In spite of such tendencies, EMDHR firmly believes that there is a possibility for a nonviolent struggle to bring the desired effect in Eritrea, if all exiled Eritrean political forces and the Diaspora community commit themselves to take the matter seriously and push their efforts an extra mile. In this regard, it is hoped that the educational manual of EMDHR will receive the necessary support from Eritrean and (international civil) society organisations, opposition groups, the media, think tanks, donor organizations and others in promoting nonviolent action among Eritreans.

 

The EMDHR would like to acknowledge the support that has been granted from the Albert Einstein Institution, the International Centre for Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC), the Centre for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS) and other expert groups and individuals. The movement appeals all supporters of this project to share their experience and knowledge about nonviolent tactics with the EMDHR so that members of the movement would be able to transfer the knowledge to the people of Eritrea. The EMDHR believes that this joint workshop among ICNC, CANVAS and EMDHR is the beginning of a long-term fruitful relationship.

 

The EMDHR expresses its gratitude to CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation for providing the necessary financial assistance which has enabled the EMDHR to send a representative to the sixth CIVICUS World Assembly. The EMDHR is certain that together we will contribute to building a free and democratic society in one part of the world by overcoming the physical and psychological barriers that hinder people from the assertion of their liberty and freedom.

 

 


[1]               GKN Trevaskis Eritrea: A Colony in Transition 1941-1952 (1960, Oxford: Oxford University Press) pp 10-11; see also Tesfatsion Medhanie Eritrea: Dynamics of a National Question (1986, Amsterdam: BR Gruner Publishing Co.) p 6 and Wolde-Yesus Ammar Eritrea: Root Causes of War and Refugees (1992, Baghdad: Sindbad Printing Co.) p 7.

 

[2]               For a detailed account of the reform movement see G-15 ‘An Open Letter to all Members of the PFDJ: A Call for Peaceful and Democratic Dialogue [English version]. Available at http://news.asmarino.com/PFDJ_Membership/Introduction.asp; Awate Foundation ‘The Chronology of the Reform Movement,’ available at http://www.awate.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/17/578/printer; Dan Connell Conversations with Eritrean Political Prisoners (2005, New Jersey: Red Sea Press).

 

[3]               Dan Connell ‘Eritrea’ in Freedom House Countries at the Crossroads: A Survey of Democratic Governance (2005, Lanham MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers Inc.) p 234.

 

[4]               Reporters Without Borders ‘Eritrea: Annual Report 2005,’ available at http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=13567.

 

[5]              See, for instance, Adhanom Gebremariam ‘The Warsay/Ykaalo Campaign: A Campaign of Slavery,’ available at http://news.asmarino.com/articles/2002/09/TesfagiorgisZewde-1.asp. (Translation by Tesfagiorgis Zewde).  

 

[6]               Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers ‘Child Soldiers Global Report 2004: Eritrea,’ available at http://www.child-soldiers.org/document_get.php?id=772. The same report states that “since January 2004 secondary school students have been forced to “complete their final year at a school near the main military training camp in Sawa if they wanted to graduate or to attend university.”

 

[7]               Amnesty International 2005 ‘Eritrea: Religious Persecution,’ available at http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/eritrea/document.do?id=ENGAFR640132005.

 

[8]               Amnesty International 2002 ‘Eritrea: Arbitrary Detention of Government Critics and Journalists,’available at http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/eritrea/document.do?id=49434B6A1759838E80256C1700333E35.

 

[9]               See note 7 supra.

 

[10]             Ibid.

 

[11]             Tom Downey ‘What Went Wrong in Eritrea?’ available at http://www.slate.com/id/2124967/entry/2124969/.

 

[12]             Peter Ackerman & Jack DuVall A Force More Powerful: A Century of Nonviolent Conflict (2000, New York:  Palgrve Macmillan).

 

[13]             See Constitution of the EMDHR, Article 2, as amended.

 

[14]             The EMDHR has a website (www.emdhr.org) through which it communicates its objectives and activities with Eritreans as well as the outside world.

 

[15]             The EMDHR broadcasts its own radio programme five days a week for 15 minutes primarily focusing on the principles and practices of nonviolent action.  The broadcast is an out come of a cooperative agreement reached between the EMDHR and Tesfa Delina Foundation on 18 December 2005.

 

[16]             The EMDHR publishes a monthly magazine known as Meseley (my right). The magazine circulates in South Africa, Europe, North America, Australia and East Africa. It was officially launched on 4 December 2005 in Johannesburg. A report of the official launch is available at http://emdhr.civiblog.org/blog/_archives/2005/12/7/1439039.html.

 

[17]             See a workshop session conducted among Eritreans residing in Pretoria on 14 August 2005 at which the development of the educational manual was officially launched. A report of the event is available at http://emdhr.civiblog.org/blog/_archives/2005/8/16/1141482.html.