Who is Aster Yohannes?
In 2000 Aster Yohannes arrived in Phoenix, AZ with dreams of finally completing her college education quickly so she could return home to her husband and four young children. Aster was the grateful recipient of a United Nations funded scholarship for college bound individuals in her homeland Eritrea, a small country in the Horn of Africa. In September of 2001, as she was nearing completion of a degree in marketing, Aster's husband was arrested in Eritrea for demanding democratic reform. When the Government of Eritrea refused to allow Aster to bring her children to the US, Aster felt she had no other choice but to return to Eritrea. On December 11, 2003, as her children waited in the Asmara airport to greet their mother, whom they had not seen in almost four years, Eritrean security took Aster away as she stepped off the plane. She has not been seen since.
Other innocent women facing cruel injustice under the regime include Aster Fissehatsion, Saadia Ahmed, Miriam Hagos, and Senait Debessai.
What are their crimes? Which court of law found them guilty? Which sections of Eritrean laws did they violate?
What do you call those who bring women and children into a fight among men? In February 1990 when the heroic Eritrean Liberation Army (ELA) stormed the City of Massawa with lightening speed, the coward Dergue army held the civilian population in Massawa as hostages in order to stop ‘tegadlties’ from advancing into their position. ELA first attempted negotiation and then used stealth maneuvers to minimize human collateral damage. Whenever the coward Dergue army lost, it took out its frustrations on the innocent people of Asmara, Keren, She’eb, and many other areas of Eritrea. There is no more heroism and integrity than sparing innocent civilian from getting caught in a fight among quarreling men. Cowards are those who only feel secure by imprisoning and mentally torturing innocent mothers and children. We, Eritreans, are known for our compassion and forgiveness. Cruel Eritreans who advocate for infringing on other peoples’ rights and for violation over civil laws can’t be Eritreans.
PIA’s Interview
I will avoid regurgitating the well-articulated VoL, Ms. Elsa Chyrum’s excellent open letter, EDA, and many other criticisms of PIA’s interview.
But just for greater emphasis, it is worthwhile to note that the purpose of this interview isn’t clear. After all, any public engagement has certain purpose, including to inform, to clarify, to elaborate, to refute, to give hope, to encourage, to justify, etc… specific issues, policies, and agendas. The public address has intended audience. PIA’s interview achieves none of the above.
Who was the target audience?
1. General Eritrean public in Eritrea (including Warsai-Yekealo)? One can rest assured that over 95% of this segment of the population doesn’t have access or didn’t bother to switch their radios and television. People are tired of hearing their leader telling them that they must continue to line up for their breads every morning because it isn’t his fault.
2. Higdefawiyans aren’t the target audience either because this fan club doesn’t need any convincing that their leader is doing marvelous job. This fan club have tendency to clap for their leader even before he begins uttering his words. They are trapped in infatuation rather than exercising their common sense.
3. The general population in Diaspora is too busy to listen to a leader who has little immediate consequence to their everyday life.
4. The opposition camp is a tough bunch to convince. The opposition camp in Diaspora will only find more ammunition to write about at a time when topics of discussion is coming a bit too scarce, and will continue to regurgitate his interview until the next hot topic.
5. Interested foreign parties will not change their minds after this interview. In fact, they will only learn PIA’s deteriorating state of mind.
The purpose of this interview is simply to allow PIA to vent his frustration. PIA is now stuck between a rock and hard place. The rock is the desire of Eritrean people for reform and the rule-of-law. The hard place is PIA’s bungled handling of the border issue.
The interviewer [a.k.a. Eritrea’s male Barbara Walters-wanna be] sheepishly asked PIA how he finds time to visit all these development projects with his busy schedule.
· Obviously, the interviewer must be unaware of such modern machines as helicopters. The trip from Asmara to Barka is no more than half-an-hour, then one-hour photo opportunity in Barka and after giving couple of lectures on agriculture, it is then another half-an-hour back to Asmara. Total time: two hours every couple of months. The interviewer is probably still thinking in terms how many days it takes to reach Barka on foot. Give the interviewer a helicopter ride one-day.
· In addition, the interviewer has never seen such computer softwares as Adobe Photoshop. It is strange to see the same cutout pictures of our leader and the same entourage posing in exactly same angle pasted on different project settings.
· The interviewer could have easily wondered aloud if his leader spent more time on this two-hour every couple-of-month project tours, or breaking people jaws and cutting faces with fists and bottles. How does he find time for such escapades?
· The interviewer doesn’t appear to be aware that these days whenever PIA needs to travel outside Asmara, it is only as far as Gash-Barka or the Southern Red Sea Zone.
Guarantors and the Demarcation Process
Every sensible Eritrean wants this border demarcated as soon as possible. The question on every Eritrean’s mind is, if the world isn’t prepared to enforce the Algiers’s agreement, where do we go from here? Can Eritrea continue to hemorrhage politically, legally, socially, and economically without collapsing into comma while waiting for the border demarcation. In this case, we are allowing external powers, including Ethiopia and the major powers, to dictate our fate.
But there is a critical question that must be answered – does PFDJ want this border to be demarcated at all? PFDJ has been using the border situation as its political card, attempting to complicate it at first until PFDJites felt secure in their power, and then to proceed with the demarcation process at the most opportune time for their own political gain. PFDJ has been in this phase [‘demarcation’] of their political game for few months now. But PFDJ’s high-stakes politics has put them on collision course with the very same power that is needed to enforce the Algiers Agreement. A series of seemingly blunders are no longer called blunders, rather they become a systematic approach. PIA labeled the woyane as an American ‘baby’. Yet, PIA has sought to antagonize the American government into confrontation at least since the war with Ethiopia broke out. Let us count the ‘purposeful blunders’,
1. PIA rejected not only the American-Rwandan proposal, but even worse belittled the former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Ms. Susan Rice as young and inexperienced for her job.
2. PIA antagonized the US special Envoy, Mr. Anthony Lake, who was a former National Security Adviser, sent to resolve the border conflict with Ethiopia.
3. PIA imprisoned two Eritrean employees of the American Embassy in Asmara without any due cause. PIA was asked to either bring these two employees to court of justice or to release them. PIA has refused to do either one. To make matter worse, at a time when Eritrea needs American support to finalize the border demarcation, PIA arrested two more Eritreans working at the American embassy.
4. PIA kicked out the former American Charge-d’Affair, Mr. Donald Yamamoto, at the American Embassy in Asmara over flimsy reasons. The State Department received Mr. Yamamoto’s credentials, being kicked out by the PFDJ regime, by promoting him to the position of Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. PIA must now deal with the very same man he kicked out only short memories ago. It doesn’t take much to guess the discussion atmosphere between the two.
5. PIA has repeatedly thrown his unreserved accusations at the State Department and CIA over various paranoid allegations.
6. As if he doesn’t have enough issues with the American government, PIA has chosen to dabble into dangerous game of politics with ‘religion’ at a time when American politics has swung to the ‘right’. At a time when the American Congress has enacted laws mandating the American government to take action against violators of ‘religious freedoms’, PIA found it fit to drive further wedge with one major power that can possibly put pressure to resolve the border issue.
7. Few months ago, sixty eight Congressmen signed petitioning that Ms. Aster Yohannes be released. PIA has simply refused to budge. Eritrean National Assembly is a rubber stamping institution that last met long-time ago. On the other hand, Congress is the seat of power in the US. Not heeding to Congressmen’s plea, and significant number of them at that, is sure way of losing much of one’s political capital.
8. USAID was kicked out only few weeks after it donated enough food to feed Eritreans for four months.
PIA has also antagonized other nations and international organizations,
1. The Italian government which was a key ally during the conflict with Ethiopia. It provided much of the necessary maps for demarcation with both Yemen and Ethiopia. PIA reciprocated by kicking out the Italian Ambassador to Eritrea, Mr. Bandini. Recently, PFDJ regime engaged in war of words over the pictures shown in an Italian newspaper of a young Eritrean murdered by PFDJ security forces on one of the main streets of Asmara in broad daylight.
2. The political suicide is extended with the incarceration of Mr. Dawit Issac. The latest fiasco will only wedge the political row between the PFDJ regime and the Swedish government, which will only extend to the EU members.
3. PIA refused to meet Mr. Kofi Anan, General Secretary of the UN, during his visit to Eritrea.
4. Every other international organization, Amnesty International, CPJ, ILO, and European Parliamentarians have asked for human rights and freedoms to be respected in Eritrea.
Let us take the case of Mr. Dawit Issac. PIA could have resolved this issue with the government of Sweden and even by extension possible ever-increasing tension with EU by just releasing him and allowing Mr. Dawit to return to Sweden. Mr. Dawit will not create any more political damage than the hundreds of other former top Eritrean government officials who have defected to the West. PIA has everything to lose, and nothing to gain by keeping Mr. Dawit in jail, and yet PIA has chosen the losing battle. That is purposefully designed political suicide.
Some argue that the West still maintains its colonial mentality towards Africa, and that when they give a dollar that they expect ten dollars back. But this is simplistic argument used by African dictators. Western colonial history in Africa aside, Western countries must continue to aggressively pressure African dictators to abide by human rights codes, respect for individual rights and freedoms, and the development of democratic institutions. Foreign aid or economic assistance should be tied to these benchmarks. Western countries have both moral and legal obligations to do so. Some will say that this is interference in the internal affairs of the country. I can assure my readers that ordinary citizens of Africa suffer indignity in the hands of their own egotistical and unaccountable leaders. We should only resist Western assistance [except humanitarian or emergency/relief assistance] to regimes that have shown no inclination towards ‘political reform’. But again, the days of geopolitics requiring propping up the ‘Mobutu’ regimes are gone after the end of the Cold War.
PIA has chosen to pursue belligerent position against all these rich and/or powerful countries. To turn around and claim that the whole world is conspiring against Eritrea is simply hogwash. With diplomatic tact, Eritrea could have been way ahead of the game. This is where we need people like Min. Haile Woldetensae.
The burning question remains, why does PIA choose to pursue a politically suicidal path? Even brutal regimes must pursue flexible foreign policies to avoid from creating unnecessary enemies. The fact is that PIA has reached the inescapable conclusion that there is no realistic scenario that will keep him in power more than a very short time. PIA made the irreversible mistake of imprisoning his own strong but prudent colleagues because PIA was concerned that he would be made to account over errors of judgment in handling the Woyane issue before the conflict broke out, the mishandling of the conflict itself from first day, and the mismanagement and embezzlement of Red Sea Corporation finances. His imprisoned colleagues only wanted to bring about ‘reform’ and the ‘institutionalization’ of Eritrea, but PIA felt that their actions will eventually lead to exposing his ‘sins’ or ‘crimes’. He couldn’t take chances! The rest has been downhill since PIA’s attempt to escape from accountability. The tragedy of PIA’s mistake is that his imprisoned colleagues weren’t pursuing witch hunt against him, but a genuine desire to bring about change. They would have overlooked PIA’s ‘sins’ in order to avoid destructive politics. But unfortunately, paranoia is more powerful than reason and prudence.
Having used the border conflict to clamp down on the opposition, PIA feels that it is the right time now to demarcate the border. If the border is demarcated now, PIA can claim that he had to resort to inhumane acts in order to end the border issue once-and-for all. “All is well that ends well”. PIA hopes that he would discredit the ‘reformers’ by claiming complete victory over the border conflict. PIA’s very need to claim public victory over the border issue is now the snagging problem, because Woyane can’t allow PIA to claim highly publicized victory without exacerbating its own tenuous position in Ethiopia.
Time to kill
“Woyane has bought ticket for five years” PIA said during the interview.
In the past few weeks, PIA has anted up his game of pressure on the ‘Woyane’ regime by attempting to inflame the tension in Ethiopia over the election issue, while curtailing UNMEE’s activities in the demilitarized zone to put added pressure on the ‘Woyane’ regime.
It failed, and hence the interview to sob in public. Even worse, the UN Security Council passed a resolution last week basically threatening Eritrea with sanction if Eritrea doesn’t lift its flight ban on UNMEE within the next forty days. In my last article, I had mentioned that having imposed flight ban on UNMEE over the demarcation stalemate, PIA can’t lift the ban without some kind of concession over the demarcation process. The latest UN Security Council Resolution is simply a slap on the face for PIA, who must be wondering at this time what he must do to get out of this bind. His verbal antagonism of the American government and other Western powers has only tightened his straightjacket. Now, PIA must lift the ban without any positive political gain for himself. But will he abide by the Security Council resolution?
What must PIA do for the next five years until the next general election in Ethiopia, at which time PIA hopes EPRDF will come out on the losing end? But the first question is, will the next election result in Ethiopia be much different in five years than it is today? The second question is, will there be any change in Ethiopia that will put in motion the stalled demarcation process? In politics, five years is eternity. But the odds are that the current stalemate will continue for at least another 10 years. Will Eritrea continue to live transfixed over the border conflict, while the vast majority of Eritreans flee the country and those who remain in the country live in state of despair? None of these situation are tenable.
In the last five years, which feels like eternity, PIA has had to resort to ever brutal methods to quash any possible resistance to his one-man rule. This brutality has put him on collision course with his own people and the world. PIA is now wondering what more acts of brutality that he must resort to maintain power until there is some form of political tsunami that will save him.
Next Five Years: Any possible military coup?
As the experience of other countries show, well-fed army, especially those at certain level of chain-of-command end up biting the hand that feeds them. Well-fed military men have tendency to take risks for their own personal ambition. Having satisfied their worldly physical needs, their next ambition escalates to fame or infamy. PIA is attempting to neutralize this possible threat against his power by shuffling only the very top brass. Army officers one level below this top brass remain in the same position and thus leaving the threat just underneath the surface. We might just see major reshuffling of the army in the next year or two in order to stave off any possible military coup.
Next Five Years: Political illusions?
There are now unconfirmed reports that PIA is considering entering into ‘Dialogue’ with certain opposition groups. The timing of this ‘illusionary overture’ only confirms the desperate state of the regime. Although the opposition camp must explore what PIA is laying on the table, the opposition camp must not send the wrong signal that it is ‘positively engaged’ to resolve domestic issues with the PIA regime without immediate tangible concessions that clearly indicate that these negotiations are on irreversible path to positive results. Talk is cheap! And PFDJ talk is even cheaper!
For a regime bent on destroying Eritrea, PIA is probably looking for a possible way out in the dying days of its tenure. Knowing fully that the next five years will be very challenging for him until hopefully the ‘Woyane Regime’ falls on its face, ‘appearing to negotiate with the Eritrean opposition camp’ will be used for the following reasons,
- To lobby the Western powers that he has initiated negotiations with the opposition camp to bring about change in Eritrea. PIA will hope to lessen the pressure on him.
- The ‘appearance of negotiation’ may give ordinary Eritreans the ‘illusion’ that progress may be forthcoming and thus lessening the political pressure on PIA.
- PIA’s precondition of negotiating with only certain members of the opposition camp is designed to split the opposition camp, thus further weakening it. Despite EDA’s incompetence, it should present united stand in negotiating with the regime, and avoid the old ‘divide-and-rule’ PFDJ politics.
There are two types of negotiations that can take place, and the direction of the dialogue can be determined at even the exploratory stage of the negotiation process,
1. A gradual reform that will keep the current regime for sometime until formal elections are conducted in Eritrea or other gradual changes based on some other timetable. But our experience is too fresh and too painful to allow a brutal regime that never hesitates to renege on promises when situation is in his favor to stay in power is simply suicidal wish.
2. The other purpose of negotiation is to allow PIA to escape ‘criminal prosecution’ if he hands over power voluntarily. This should be the only purpose of this negotiation. The opposition camp should not give any immunity to any other PFDJ officials and army officers other than PIA, who will not hesitate to cut a deal leaving the others out in the cold. One caveat should be that if PIA has liquidated any of the prisoners-of-conscious under his direct command then even this ‘amnesty’ negotiation should be scuttled.
After all, Eritreans want the implementation of the Eritrean Constitution, the restoration of their Rights and Freedoms and the rule-of-law, which are incompatible with the continuance of PIA in power. If PIA is truly interested in addressing people’s concerns, he only need to unilaterally act by releasing political prisoners, implementing the Constitution, and proceeding to democratic elections and building independent institutions in Eritrea. This doesn’t need ‘negotiation’ with the opposition camp to achieve. It can be done today.
If PIA is really interested in negotiations, the men he should be negotiating are imprisoned incommunicado in a building next to his office. Instead of making personal row calls every morning to ensure that every one of these imprisoned ‘reformers’ is accounted for, he could enter into negotiations with them. But PIA isn’t interested to negotiate with them because once they take over power, he is concerned that they will prove to be worthy leaders, and thus forever destroying his [PIA’s] reputation. PIA’s rehashing publicly rejected extrajudicial execution of the reformers is designed to deprive Eritreans some of its brightest and brave leaders. As an Amharic book is titled, ‘Atfito Metfat’. Instead, by bringing squabbling opposition camp, he hopes to salvage his name.
Hopefully, there will not be another five years of this brutal regime. Although we don’t have crystal ball, all indications are that this regime is gasping for its last breath. The latest interview and events of the last few weeks unequivocally indicate the fall of this regime can only be very soon. If one is a betting man one can say that PIA will defy the latest UNSC Resolution and thus setting up yet another tragic confrontation with the UNSC. The Eritrean people will further pay for this. But PIA doesn’t have any other choice but to go-for-broke.
On Other Thoughts
1. Mr. Abdella Adem held an interview with Awate.com recently. Particularly two issues may raise some consternation.
a. The question was, “But Lam Akol, the Sudanese vice president, said that the opposition would be disarmed and sent to refugee camps, or something along these lines. What is your comment on that?”
Mr. Abdella replied, “But if Mr. Lam Akol made such statements, all I can say is that no one has the right to disarm the Eritrean opposition and put its members in refugee camps or decide where a national opposition organization goes. This is an Eritrean opposition matter and can only be decided by Eritreans themselves.”
What a bungled up answer! Are these our politicians? We accuse PFDJ of bungled up foreign politics and we have yet another one here in the opposition. Officially, Eritreans are guests in Sudan. As such all Eritreans must abide by the laws of that country. Imagine if the SPLA or OLF leaders made such statements saying that they will not put down their arms in Eritrea because it is their rights.
Mr. Abdella could have replied to this question in so many tactful ways. Instead, he exposed his lack of proper political judgment. I continue to focus on political judgment because we must be able to understand how our prospective opposition leaders may function under various situations if they are brought into power.
b. On the question conflict/dispute resolution mechanism, resolving disputes behind closed doors in unsystematic ways doesn’t allow organizations to learn from their mistakes. Institutionalization is the process of incorporating new experiences into formal learning process. Closed door patching of differences is tantamount to sweeping mistakes under the rug. In general, the general population, or members, shouldn’t excuse a government, an organization, or a political party to escape from accountability just because it is still new. New and old organizations and governments will make mistakes. But there is no excuse to perpetuate old mistakes just because an organization or a government is still new. This is poor excuse. It is unacceptable!
2. Based on Mr. Antonio Tesfai’s article dated November 30, 2005, one can only conclude that Dr. Beyene is also showing political misjudgment in trying to rehash the split between ELF-RC and ELF-NC during Dr. Beyene’s interview on TV Adal. Dr. Beyene could have handled the question tactfully, or even avoiding it totally. Dr. Beyene could have answered saying that the split was unfortunate but that we must allow old wounds to heal and to concentrate on our primary goals and tasks on hand, which is the removal of a brutal regime. It escapes many of us why people choose to scratch old wounds. In fact, Dr. Beyene could have built bridges saying that despite their differences that the opposition groups are working towards building democratic Eritrea. What did Dr. Beyene gain by choosing to scratch old wound? Nothing, other than further entrenching ill-will.
3. EDA’s communiqué dated November 27, 2005 tells us that certain members of the EDA which have military wings met in Shire Ethiopia between 17 – 19 November 2005 to set up a committee to coordinate activities among them. This raises a number of questions,
a. It is no coincidence that certain members of EDA chose to hold their meetings in Shire, where many of the Eritrean youth fleeing Eritrea are settled until their refuge claims are processed. The natural question is, does the Ethiopian government pressure refugee seekers to join EDA military wing and thus violating the rights of refugees. The Ethiopian government may threaten Eritrean youth to join the EDA-army or to return them to Eritrea to sure torture. Could EDA-military wing, and by extension the EDA politicians, be held liable for pressuring Eritrean youth claiming refuge in Ethiopia to join it against their will? Time will tell!
b. Some have expressed concern that such small EDA fighting unit very close to the Eritrean border may trigger the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Although one can’t rule out any possibility, the Ethiopian government will maintain very close watch over this opposition unit because it doesn’t want events to unfold on its volatile border situation in which it is not prepared. It is safe to assume, if this unit launches provocative actions it is tantamount to Ethiopia launching conflict on Eritrea. If UNMEE is made to return to the demilitarized zone, the opposition fighting unit will find it difficult to cross the TMZ. Most likely, the opposition fighting unit are more like the ‘Revolutionary Guards’ whose job will be to give fighting chance to gain power in post-PFDJ Eritrea. In other words, the EDA army will have no role to bring down the PFDJ regime, but it is hoped that it may be used to grab power, with the assistance of the southern neighbor, in the musical chair for power in post-PFDJ Eritrea. In the treacherous world of politics, the marriage between EDA and Woyane is for convenience only. It will not pass the first test.
c. Members of ‘Jebha’ have been complaining bitterly that it was ‘Woyane’ that helped ‘Shaebia’ to win the conflict between the two. Now, we have the same complainers slipping into bed with the same ‘Woyane’ that they have been accusing of siding with Shaebia. Was their complaint over ‘principle’ of not allowing external forces interfering in the internal affairs of Eritrea, or was it a love triangle where ‘Jebha’ was left out? Or, is this ‘Kab Kifue Zigeberuna, Kifue Zemharuna?’ Or, is this ‘the end justifies the means’?
4. Lastly, we heard the reports of the ‘The role of intellectuals at a time of external threat’ meeting. Bravo to Dr. Kidane Mengisteab! It is suffice to say that those ‘intellectuals’ who currently ignore the violations of human rights and freedoms in Eritrea during the PFDJ regime, will be the ones superficially raising the plank of Rights and Freedoms the highest during the next regime. They will hope that their invigorated call for freedom under the new democratic regime will erase their silence on the same issues under the PFDJ regime. They are the ones that ignore the Thomas Mountain type serious accusations and threaten those opposition websites that offer an apology on their own initiative for inadvertent mistakes. The rule-of-law has been practiced by Eritreans for centuries. It doesn’t require ‘intellectualism’ to achieve the rule-of-law in Eritrea. It is in everybody’s blood. Unfortunately, few are bent on ignoring and even destroying our deeply ingrained belief and tradition. We look forward to a meeting called ‘The role of intellectuals at a time of human rights abuse, the utter absence of rule-of-law, and implementation of our Constitution’.
The only sensible thing PIA has done in the past few months is to leave the Minister of Ministry of Foreign Bungle-ups vacant.
Berhan Hagos
December 3, 2005
