Paradigm Shift
The latest PFDJ propaganda assault backpedals to the ideological wasteland of over 3 decades ago. But again, PFDJ may be excused for dusting old and forgotten books fetched from its forgotten libraries and feeding us old tunes. The authors of these forgotten books have since then moved on to adopt the ideological positions of their former antagonists.
The latest PFDJ stale propaganda is as follows,
1. Africa’s current crisis is due to colonial legacy,
2. Western interest remains in exploiting Africa and keeping it in bondage,
3. Food Aid and NGOs is the root cause of Africa’s problem, etc…
The irony of singing these tunes is that we introduced Eritrea to OAU in 1991 by belittling the rest of Africa. In the end, PFDJ is singing the rest of Africa’s tune louder than the PFDJ condemned AU states.
In my last two articles, this writer discussed how even China has abandoned the ideological wasteland of the 20th Century while PFDJ is backpedaling into that long forgotten era. Good for China and hope that those who worship Mao’s China learn from today’s China instead. In the end, China has embarked on the same path as South Korea, Malaysia and other South East Asian countries.
China’s economic growth is financed and managed by Western multinational companies, the 21st century imperialists. PFDJ has dusted off old books and tells us that slavery is needed to build its couple of infrastructures while China is seeking local and foreign investors to participate in its $125 Billion USD project to upgrade water supply in various parts of China. If there is anyone ‘covetous’ of achieving the economic growth experienced by South East Asia, we would be more covetous of South Korea, Singapore, or other earlier economic success stories in that neighborhood [the five tigers]. We had dreamed that Eritrea become the ‘Singapore’ of Africa, but where are we now? Singing old tunes of forgotten ideological wastelands? It ain’t the dream that is the problem; rather it is the dream wreckers that are the problem.
The so called ‘piteous’ opponents of Chinese style of economic growth are actually found among social and environmental conscious movements, and trade unions – and not the Western capitalists who are raking record profits from China’s new policies. Check Walmart’s obscene profits! Those called piteous are the very same people who are fighting for the rights of child [labor], for worker safety, against sudden and significant climate changes and against degradation of the environment. If these groups are considered piteous, one can only lament where the world is heading.
As some internet writers pointed out, it is interesting that the Chinese had banners written only in “English, French, and Chinese” during the Summit. Aren’t these the languages of our Western colonizers? Are our cultures defined by the colonial era? Shouldn’t there have been banners in Swahili, Eritrean languages, Arabic and others?
Paradigm Shift
Unlike the socialist/communist era when every youth was absorbed by the social justice espoused in the socialist/communist ideology, the struggle for democracy doesn’t have such clearly defined ‘course of action’ [class struggle and against imperialism] nor ‘end results’ [triumph of the proletariat class]. Democracy is an evolving process that doesn’t have the same political appeal as radical ideologies.
Moreover, the communist model provides a seemingly convenient solution for the challenges of governing multi-ethnical and multi-religious – it eliminates all forms of divisions. Governing a multi-ethnic and multi-religious requires delicate balance exercised by prudent political leaders. Under democratic systems, it is natural for campaigning politicians to attempt to exploit natural divisions within a society in order to gain votes. Similarly, dictatorial systems aren’t immune from exploiting these divisions when their illegitimate powers are threatened. PFDJ is just one example.
One can debate forever why PIA has pursued certain political course for Eritrea. Unfortunately, none of us are mind-readers. However, one may speculate that PIA is engaged in his social re-engineering in order to eventually create his homogenous society – a society held together by selfish individual interests rather than by collective cultural and traditional values. For PIA, a multi-ethnic and multi-religious Eritrea can only be held together by the strength of an iron man and a morally corrupt nation – hence his efforts to establish a military government and a corrupt civil service that pursues its own individual [selfish] self interest than striving for [as perceived by PFDJ] a democratic system which would only get embattled in traditional ideological and cultural hang-ups. Although we should never rule out anyone’s concerns, we must condemn any effort to address one’s concerns through violation of people’s basic rights. The means doesn’t justify the end.
The history of man is the failure of various ideologies. Communist ideology was the culmination of the observations of human history throughout centuries – yet it failed. Throughout history, those leaders who believed they held ultimate wisdom in bringing about the best socio-economic and political solutions ultimately only achieved to bring about even worse miseries to their people – starvation, infighting and external conflicts.
Even where a leader was able to bring about prosperity and peace during his reign, his immediate successors squandered it away. Somehow, the eventual downfall of quickly changing societies, usually sooner than later, is as true as the law of gravity. Throughout history, no society has managed to permanently stay in socio-economic and political pinnacle. Advanced societies such as Egypt and Aztecs somehow lost their knowledge and power centuries ago. Genghis Khan dominated the better part of Asia then his children destroyed it through their infightings. The history of Athenians and Romans teach us much about human history. Learning about the Spanish and Portuguese domination of the world some six centuries ago, no one would believe that by the end of 19th century they would end up being third rate powers is a lesson that man’s history is dynamic – what-goes-up-must-come-down. The history of man is the rise and decline of people and nations. Some have lasted centuries, while many others lasted only decades.
In fact, the interesting fact about dictators throughout history is that when they failed in their endeavors, they proceeded to build big monuments that had neither significance nor benefits to the general population, but immortalized the dictators. The pyramids were built by hundreds of thousands of slaves so that it can be used as burial grounds. The pyramids didn’t have any ‘known’ benefits for the general population. The relics of Romans and Athenians ostensibly glorified their gods but indirectly immortalized the leaders that built them. The twin-towers in Kuala Lumpur immortalize Dr. Mahtir.
Western civilization as we are witnessing today is in reality barely one century old. In fact, most of the social changes and, esp., economic growth experienced in the West began in earnest after the end of the Second World War – it is barely fifty years old. Already dynamic natural laws of restoration to the equilibrium are imposing their own will on man. Unfettered wealth destroyed Athenians and Romans. In today’s world, our insatiable thirst for limited resources, adverse impact on the natural environment, gap between rich and poor, ideological conflicts, the pitfalls and vanities of riches, and many other issues will ensure that today’s realities will be replaced by new and different realities tomorrow.
Eritrean political activists should never shy away from discussing uncomfortable but real issues. We should be able to articulate our vision of Eritrea and be able to promote it among our fellow politically active Eritreans. PFDJ’s fate is tied to its own act, or rather follies, and thus the opposition camp shouldn’t be too concerned that its open discussions on various issues may prolong the regime’s life. However, we should remain cognizant that burning issues can only be settled through extensive debates in democratic Eritrea. Our current open debates should be viewed as an effort to build momentum in resolving some of these critical issues, rather than to become an open schism that divides the opposition camp.
Eritreans and especially social and political activists should remain aware that there are no one-size-fit-all solutions to attaining and sustaining viable societies and nations. For clarification, solutions are not the same as universally shared principles of the rule-of-law and peaceful means of resolving disputes. Instead, this discussion pertains as which types of socio-economic and political path a nation, esp. a multi-ethnic and multi-religious one, should pursue to achieve its desired and sustainable socio-economic and political goals.
Without a clear vision, our uphill struggle for democracy will falter in its infancy. In 21st century, almost every nation outside Sub-Saharan Africa is finally on a path towards socio-economic prosperity and political stability while Sub-Saharan Africa is backpedaling into oblivion. If we examine Sudan for instance, its land area is bigger than France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, UK and Italy combined. With a population of roughly 1/8 the size and natural resources probably some 5 times bigger than these European states combined, there are no reasons why Sudan continues to face socio-economic challenges. If we examine the other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, our conclusion would be the same. Imagine the riches being squandered away in DR Congo, Kenya, Angola, Nigeria, Sierra Leon, etc… Eritrea is no exception. After independence, we thought we would chart a different course than the rest of Africa, and instead we have fallen into the same or worse pitfalls.
Although Africa’s dictators have milked the colonial legacy as an excuse for their poor governance while enriching themselves, one can’t deny the lingering effects of colonial legacy. However, overcoming and resolving the challenges of colonial legacy should have been these leaders’ priorities. Instead, these African leaders are too busy lining their own pockets and imposing their ideological experiments on their people. Imagine such leaders as Presidents Mobutu and Abacha accumulating over $3 Billion USD each and stashing away their money in Western banks while their countries remain trapped in socio-economic backwaters and the general population suffering in poverty worse than under European colonialism. Many say that these are only puppets of the West, and indeed they were. But what should occupy us are discussions that can formulate workable solutions. Finding excuses are easy, but to overcome these problems we must occupy ourselves in finding workable solutions – not defunct ideologies imposed by one-man political showmanship but through collective efforts. Although PIA, PMMZ, and Col. Mengistu didn’t or don’t conspicuously engage in opulent and jet-setting lifestyles as many other African rich and self-serving leaders, indirectly they control[ed] every penny that flow[s/ed] into their countries. In a twisted way, as PIA is concerned that ethno-religious-regional based societies are recipes for social disharmony and thus must be coercively transformed into self-serving individuals, probably the danger is more from ideological based leaders who would have better served their countries if they were devoid of ideological hang-ups and instead pursued their own opulent lifestyles.
Solutions are never found by diagnosing problems in convenient way. The legacy of Western colonization is in creating African nations by meshing together zillion ethnic and religious together without any consideration other than their own colonial political and economic interests. When African nations gained their independence, individuals and groups that never managed anything bigger than their local wedding ceremonies were thrust into leading nations comprised of multi-ethnic and multi-religious societies. Moreover, with the changing socio-economic world, these African leaders, without even first attaining the most rudimentary but workable governance, had to simultaneously engage in managing transition of their complex societies at the same time.
We believed and continue to believe that the Eritrean society managed to resolve much of these multi-ethnic and multi-cultural issues throughout our history and during the armed struggle for independence. It is unfortunate that PFDJ continues to believe that multi-cultural societies and economically infant societies must be tortured and whipped into socio-economic prosperity.
Rigid top-down political administrative systems endanger the viability of a nation. The challenge is to create a flexible system of government that incorporates the rich cultures and traditions of our multicultural/multi-religious society. Both rigid and flexible political systems have their own flaws and challenges. But rigid systems introduce wider swings in governance leading to bitter internal conflicts that endanger the viability of a nation.
Instead of pursuing PFDJ’s rigid political administrative style based on imposing historically failed social experimentation, flexible system of government is needed that appreciates and builds on our strong traditional and cultural values. Most of the opposition parties agree in principle the need to devolve power to administrative regions to better manage the challenges of governing multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.
On Nov. 18, 2006, Nharnet.com published an article on ‘decentralized’ system of government that raised timely and relevant issues. A ‘decentralized’ system of government is the only system that can achieve multiple objectives,
1. Local issues should be resolved through local administrative systems that reflect the cultural and traditional values of that locality,
2. Separating local issues [relating to ethnic and religious needs] and national issues [such as foreign policy, defense, and restricting the central government to maintaining socio-economic and political standards and consistencies (e.g. conflict of interest in civil service, ethics in government, certain rules on local elections, etc…) across the administrative zones] can disengage national politics from having to gel together or to homogenize varying local traditions, cultures and values at national level. Importantly, politics at national level would be able to separate state and religion.
3. Decentralized systems are the only effective means to thwarting the tendency towards establishing dictatorships under heavily centralized systems,
[For emphasis] In fact the most effective antidote against dictatorship is to devolve political powers to administrative regions and to various interest groups, such as trade unions, students and youth, business groups, and others. Establishing an effective anti-dictatorial system of government should be one of our priority tasks in the immediate periods after the establishment of post-PFDJ government.
Decentralized system of government (i.e. multi-level government system) isn’t a radical idea. In fact, supposedly, there is multi-level government, i.e. from central to zonal assemblies, under PFDJ. In reality, under PFDJ, the zonal governments don’t have any legally defined powers, duties and responsibilities. In addition, they aren’t legally empowered. They may have been originally established to create genuine multi-level government, but in today’s PFDJ, these assemblies remain in the news for stale propaganda purposes. The true PFDJ intention always has been to build a military style or Chinese Communist Party type system that is heavily controlled by a central power – with wide power vested in one man. The first step is to corrupt everyone and coerce or buy the loyalties of “troublesome ethnical/religious/regional political actors”.
The other factor we should mind is that, decentralizing in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state may require greater administrative flexibility than a relatively more homogeneous society. Thus, creating decentralized systems and then to expect each state/province/administrative zone to be exact socio-political and legal replica of each other may defeat the purpose of decentralizing the system.
The Ethiopian model of dividing the country into purely ethnical regions, forming a federal state, then pushing socio-political power down [real or illusionary] to the regions overnight may not be the best path to pursue. PFDJ’s redrawing administrative regions, aside from the issue of legitimacy to do so and the impact on certain local people, has some of its merits. In other words, decentralized administrative system need not be along purely ethnic or religious divide. Rather, we have to debate and define the advantages and disadvantages of redrawing Eritrea’s administrative zones in various combinations and then to devolve power to these administrative regions. There is no reason why an administrative zone can’t be further subdivided to sub-zones, albeit with further limited but sufficient political powers to accommodate the specific needs of minorities within that administrative sub-zone.
First, establishing decentralized systems doesn’t mean that each zone will have its own fiefdom. Second, decentralized systems shouldn’t be decreed and installed overnight. Otherwise, we would create a disjoined system that will eventually cause dangerous internal conflicts that may consume the nation worse than what we are currently experiencing under PFDJ. Instead, we should establish a consensus on workable decentralized system and then implement it in gradual stages along clearly predefined milestones. Naturally, some corrections along the journey will be necessitated based on realities.
Decentralized system of government can address specific issues such as Sharia Laws, Adi Strategy, preservation of culture/tradition and other legal and social systems that reflect traditional, cultural and religious values of specific localities. We should debate flexible system of government without prejudice and without blindly ruling out the ability and viability of different cultures co-existing together. If we refuse to debate how different cultures can co-exist together through flexible political administrative system, then we are tacitly approving the homogenization of cultures through dire methods. Multi-cultural, and to lesser extent multi-religious, societies may become homogenized over time, but the process should only be through the natural process rather than through the imposition of such homogenization process through coercion.
Clear Vision
The opposition camp and esp. future leaders must articulate clear vision for the future of Eritrea. Some of our discussions may give the wrong impression to a casual political observer. But those who are convinced of their views should not shy away from sharing their views – and then must engage in debates to persuade others.
When Mr. Hiruy or Mr. Adhanom or Nharet.com or EMDHR shares their views and opinions with us, they are enriching our knowledge and allowing healthy debates to take place. No one individual or group is endowed with ultimate wisdom. In reality, solutions are found somewhere among the various discussions and debates. The intention isn’t to create hodgepodge solutions or patchworks of incongruous ideas and political platforms for the sake political niceties or compromise but to weave them together into coherent platform that reflect and address genuine multiple concerns.
In order to avoid creating disjointed decentralized system of government and to resolve some inconsistencies that will be discovered when practicing decentralized system of government, we have to ensure that the following enabling factors or mechanisms are in place beforehand,
- We have to define what the shared principles and values are that hold a country together [e.g. women’s rights – we should ask ourselves, can different regions have different rights? If so, does this introduce legal inconsistencies that may have wider implications and ramifications – say on individual rights and freedoms? How can we maintain consistent across the board values and yet allow different cultures and traditions to survive?
- Disputes, due to misunderstanding or intentional, are part of life. Dispute resolution mechanisms [among different levels of governments] are probably the most critical component in ensuring the viability of decentralized system of government.
First, in order to avoid disputes, we must anticipate what possible problems may arise and a clear understanding must be reached beforehand on how to resolve them legally. We can learn much from other societies which are experiencing similar challenges,
Second, the rules of dispute resolution mechanism must be formulated before disputes arise. Otherwise, aggrieved parties feel that dispute resolution mechanisms are hastily formulated to work against them.
Third, the rules of dispute resolution mechanism must be formulated before disputes arise because concerned parties are aware of what mechanisms await them if they are to raise disputed issues. This may help parties to arrange their affairs to avoid disputes, or may help parties to resolve disputes without ill-will.
Fourth, the most important component of dispute resolution mechanism is the conciliators, mediators or adjudicators. It is important that the conciliators be known beforehand or that the mechanism for choosing them is agreed upon beforehand. Otherwise, the dispute mechanism won’t achieve its objectives. Especially in a country where the judicial system has been battered by lawless regime [and a Constitutional Court doesn’t exist], an alternative mechanism must exist to resolve issues pertaining to which level of government is endowed with specific powers.
Some may say that shared principles can only be the belief in democracy, individual freedoms, separation of state and religion and resolving differences in peaceful ways are suffice to commence decentralizing system of government. In reality, when implementing and managing decentralized system of government, literally thousands of social, political, legal and economic issues will arise. Although we can’t discuss and resolve every possible scenario in which we must apply our shared principles to specific issues to resolve them, still we must strive to openly discuss various major scenarios in order we can better prepare ourselves for the types of challenges we will face under viable decentralized system of government. Especially in a country where the understanding of the wider debates of socio-political philosophy is low, extensive and open discussions are needed to make the general public aware of the issues. In the meantime, the political activists and experts must themselves must engage in wider discussions and debates and then draw up detailed plans to gradually [in phases] implement decentralized system. A nation can’t wait while political activists are pulling each other in opposite directions.
Clear vision can only be articulated and formulated through transparent debates and discussions – and ultimately through compromises among our political activists and leadership, who then must own that vision and campaign for it with all their unreserved energies. Absent leadership can’t rally the public behind visions. And where aspiring leaders can’t articulate clear vision to the public, the public becomes apprehensive and lethargic and thus prolonging the national tragedy – and even creating an obstacle in establishing a democratic system.
The opposition parties shouldn’t be overly concerned about the divisive politics some ‘zeragitos’ strive to kindle on behalf of their suspect benefactors. Others have genuine concerns and we should always encourage them to share their views without any fear of political labeling. The opposition camp has a mission to achieve, obligations to meet, and expectations to fulfill on behalf and for the people of Eritrea. We can only achieve that if we have a clear vision, which we can only formulate once we undergo a paradigm shift in our conquest to find workable solutions. No stone should be left unturned in this endeavor. No solution should be ruled out without the requisite debate. All of us have convictions within us. The quest is first to challenge our own convictions – it is ‘bidho antsar atehasasbana’.
Productive Use of Time
Without appearing to abridge the rights of any Eritrean to propound his/her ideas to the public, yet regurgitating the same debates over hypothetical situations don’t serve our cause. Many of us fail to understand why some opposition members insist on regurgitating the issue of ‘dialogue’ and ‘armed struggle’ as if these are the only two issues that must occupy us. Much has been said and written on these two specific issues. If there are those who choose to engage in ‘dialogue’, this issue can be revisited when such activity takes place. Until then, this issue is simply hypothetical. Similarly, if there are those who insist in engaging in ‘armed struggle’, let them engage in such activity, and only then should we revisit this subject. Until then, this issue is simply hypothetical. There is no reason to engage in ‘hashewye’ over these two topics when there are many other issues of more urgency. If any opposition political organization must differentiate itself from other political organizations, it can choose many other political issues that can differentiate it.
The next government of Eritrea must hit the ground running. During the current struggle, we shouldn’t be walking around like dead zombies regurgitating two issues only. Instead, the opposition parties should be active in formulating plan of action needed to effect political change in Eritrea and how to ensure smooth transition towards building democratic Eritrea considering the significant damage caused on our nation by PFDJ.
We should be able to envision and to anticipate the kind of issues that we shall face immediately after the next government is formed. It will be a tragedy if this regime is to fall and the next government is paralyzed by its inability to articulate a vision for Eritrea. The very same day the regime falls, the first thing that will be taken away from us is the luxury of time. If we don’t have some of our roadmap drawn beforehand, it will be like jumping from the frying pan and into the fire. That is why political activists have the political obligation not only to engage in negative propaganda against the current regime, but at the same time and equally, they have moral obligation to ensure that they articulate a vision for future Eritrea.
But there must be caution! We should never forget that this vision is being articulated by Diaspora political movements. The purpose of this vision isn’t to impose it on Eritreans. In reality, what socio- political course Eritrea will chart can only be ultimately resolved in democratic Eritrea. Instead, the shared vision articulated by Diaspora political organizations will have at least three purposes: first, it provides a coherent and comprehensive platform for Diaspora political organizations; second, it will give confidence to the general public that Diaspora political organizations can resolve complex issues; and third, the shared vision can be used as the guiding light for the next government [whoever forms it]. In other words, Diaspora political activists can assist the next government to hit the ground running by doing some of the legwork today.
Aside from today’s issue of how to bring about political change and ensuring security in periods immediately a political change has taken place, there are certain burning issues that need to be addressed,
1. Demobilization, rehabilitation and reintegration of Warsai-Yekealo,
2. Pension for veteran tegadelties and civil servants,
3. Reviving collapsed economy,
4. Engaging in political healing process
While addressing these immediate challenges, possibly the single biggest political issue that will occupy the next government will be what political administrative system [defining the powers, duties and responsibilities of each level of a multi-level government] is most appropriate for the future democratic Eritrea. Without achieving certain degree of political certainty, other efforts can only be made more difficult. I have brushed this topic above and will be revisited soon.
To reiterate, it is suffice to say that only flexible political administrative system can address dynamic issues. We have to trash out typical Eritrean mentality which may apply to building a house but doesn’t necessarily apply to politics – i.e. build a house with thick steel bars and heavy cement so that it will remain standing for centuries. In politics, we can’t devise one single socio-economic and political policy that will serve all of our today’s and future needs. Instead, we have to devise a flexible political system and to develop the enabling factors that allow today’s and tomorrow’s generations and governments to address ever-changing socio-economic and political issues by shifting political courses as needed without handcuffing them with today’s rigid political systems. To reiterate, we aren’t vested with ultimate wisdom and thus our current efforts should concentrate on addressing our current issues – and not to formulate policies that will last for generations like our houses. If we can do anything for the future generation it is to lay the basic principles – equally important is to practice what we preach – and to formulate flexible political system that enables the future generation to adapt and to grow with changing realities.
Finally, we should resist the tendency to say … all this theoretical stuff is nice and dandy and may work for other societies and nations … but our society is different, and then we proceed to bungle up our every effort. In reality, when we say our society is different, we are trying to reinvent the wheel … and the result will be assured in this task of trial and error – more errors than progress and more errors leading to continued discord. It will be more productive to say we have a lot more in common with other people, societies and nations than what differentiates us from them, and then to learn from our own and other people’s historical and current experiences. Despite our conviction that each of us possesses ultimate wisdoms, views, and opinions on various issues, ultimately, none of these are any good if they can’t contribute towards realizing our objectives.
On Other Thoughts
What would politics be without some luscious speculation? Other than the stated reasons for interfering in Somali politics, what could the various foreign actors gain [as secondary or third motive] from the Somali venture?
- Ethiopia – earns some $ 100 Million in ‘qat/chat’ of which Somalia is one of the major export destinations. Its real concern might be that UIC would cut off such large ‘qat’ export both on religious grounds and as political retribution.
- Eritrea – can replace Ethiopia in exporting its new cash crop [‘qat’] through clandestine operation with tacit agreement from UIC as a form of payback. With ‘unofficially official’ smuggled ‘qat’, PFDJ may stand to gain immensely from skyrocketing ‘illegal qat’ prices in Somalia. After all, what would PFDJ businesses be without illicit trade?
- Egypt – although it is itself engaged in clamping down Islamic movement in its country, it is interesting that it is propping up one in Somalia. Possible reason: weakening Ethiopia is Egypt’s eternal effort in order to ensure that it alone benefits from the Nile River – its lifeline.
- Libya – after failing to gain attention from the Arab League, the Libyan leader wants to leave his legacy by transplanting the AU HQ from Addis Ababa to his home town – Sirte. Anything to discredit Ethiopia might be his remaining life’s ambition just to get the AU HQ.
- Yemen – ‘qat’ that doesn’t find itself into Somalia may awash its country. Falling ‘qat’ prices may drive its people into further addiction, thus keep ‘qat’ flowing into Somalia under the transitional government.
- Kenya – interesting that this next door neighbor and with significant Somali population is largely trying to avoid from getting embroiled in the internal affairs of Somalia while other nations are extending their hands thousands kilometers away. Uhmmmm! This can raise much discussion on the internal politics of each country!
PFDJ Mass Media
Many have correctly criticized the hypocritical PFDJ mass media. For many of us, what is telling about PFDJ mass media isn’t its message but what is happening to the staffs of its mass media organizations – EriTV, Dimitsi Hafash and Haddas Eritrea. What we know is that their staffs are either skipping out of the country or being thrown into PFDJ dungeons. My question to my readers is simple, if you were a passenger on a ship that you suspect is having problems, would you follow the captain’s message that tells you that everything is alright, or would you follow the ship crews that are jumping onto lifeboats?
Berhan Hagos
November 29, 2006
Short URL: https://english.farajat.net/?p=2458
Posted by 
