Two Sides of the Same Neo-Nazi Coin

Some are uneasy about the way he has chosen to focus on the low‐land/highland divide and the land issue which is a critical part of that divide. I think many other particularly Mohammed Berhan Hagos have raised these same issues in a very constructive manner. Ali Salim is right to raise these issues and do so in a particularly provocative manner. We cannot afford to shelve these issues. We must discuss them openly and more importantly find a reasonable and lasting solution to these problems. The problem as I see it is therefore not that Ali raises the issues and does so in a particularly provocative manner but that his solution to the problem is identical to that of the PFDJ.

Scare the highlanders first

Ali rightly or wrongly believes that his central agenda, that of land expropriation in the lowlands by highlanders, can only be resolved when the highlanders decide to stop it. He believes the best if not the only way of stopping it is to scare the highlanders shitless first. To that effect, he tells them about the genocide in Rwanda, how the genocide began with the assassination of the president, how the Tutsis with their supposed Ethiopian connection were killed and thrown in to rivers so that their corpse could be transported to Ethiopia. He indicates the similarities with a possible future genocide in Eritrea. The river to take the corpses to Ethiopia being much closer than that of Rwanda.

There are a number of problems with this politics of fear. Fear of the future in itself does not lead to corrective action. It could lead to paralysis or desperate actions that complicate the problem rather than solve it. Ali does not come up with a clear and sustainable solution to the problem. As I will explain later the likely outcome of his politics of fear is thus likely to be paralysis and/or desperation.

The second problem with Ali’s approach is that it has been tried before by none other than the PFDJ itself. Issayas’s chauvinist propaganda about the threat of Islam to Eritrea, his fear mongering about the Somali and Rwanda scenarios is a very well known tactic to maintain support in the highlands, scare off the lowlands and paralyze all thinking about change and transformation in Eritrea. He has been quite successful in his politics of fear and does not need reinforcement from Ali. What Ali is providing is the exact same coin but the flip side to that Issayas shows us every day. It thus ends up reinforcing Issayas hold on power rather than undermining it.

The third problem with Ali’s politics of fear is that it is unlikely to scare the hard core highland chauvinists. If push comes to shove and there is a genocide in Eritrea, the Tutsis of Eritrea will most definitely not be the Tigrignas. If there is any risk of that they will use their dominance of power to see to it that the lowlanders will be the Tutsis and the destination of the corpses will be Sudan rather than Ethiopia. And so Ali is likely to get the wrong response from that group. They are not going to say oh my God they are going to kill us. They are going to say bring it on, we know who will end up dead. On all counts therefore Ali’s politics of fear is a failure except in so far as it is the flip side of the coin of PFDJ’s politics of fear and may to some extent reinforce it.

The democracy “Crap”

A number of commentators have said that the land problem in Eritrea can only be resolved when all Eritreans have a say in determining their future and when they come up with a negotiated solution acceptable to all the parties and not a day earlier. Eritreans can have a meaningful say in their future if they can freely express their views, if they are free to associate with like minded people and so on and so forth. In other words democracy is essential to come up with a sane solution to our problems and that requires the removal of the PFDJ regime. Democracy is also essential to sustain such a solution of the land issue as well as other issues. Because in an anti‐democratic environment the people will be in no position to protect their rights and whatever popular agreements which might have been reached in the past, no paper agreement, no paper constitution can provide the guarantee. Only democratic dispensation of power buttressed and protected by democratic institutions could do that.

Ali’s solution to the problem says nothing about removing the current regime. Indeed he thinks it is an essential part of the solution. He thinks it is an essential part of the solution not only because he believes that it has defended Eritrea against the invasion of Woyanes in the past and is doing so as we speak, but also because he thinks it is the legitimate representative of the highlands and must sit at the negotiating table to resolve the land issue.

Ali’s stated opinion is therefore that removing the current regime is not necessary to resolve the problem. Indeed he could not contemplate such a solution because he does not want to hear about what he calls the crap of democracy in Eritrea. He thinks that if the Americans could not bring it about in Iraq and Afghanistan there is no possibility for Eritreans to bring it about in Eritrea. Therefore, he seeks a solution to the land issue outside the process of democratization in Eritrea. There is no harm in thinking differently so long as such different thinking improves on current thinking. The problem with Ali’s thinking is that he does not have any alternative that makes any sense at all.

The only specific proposal Ali has to resolve the problems we face is “I think it is imperative that we sign contracts and agreements and build barriers so that no one will violate other peoples’ God given rights and get away.” Mind you none of this is to suggest that the “democracy crap” is the solution because that “crap” has been specifically and repeatedly ruled out as a solution by Ali. Given the fact that Ali, like Issayas, believes that democracy in Eritrea is an impossible wishful thinking what will the content of these contracts, agreements and barriers be. Will they be democratic in the sense of recognizing and protecting people’s god given rights or will they be contracts of the type that the Mafia are famous for. Given that according to the institutions of democratic governance and division of power are impossible in Eritrea, who will protect the agreements from violation? Ali in one of his articles seems to suggest that there will be an armed truce of some sort with every Eritrean group armed and ready to punce on any one who trespasses. That is typical of Mafia type agreements, which are violated as soon as they are signed.

Ali’s view on democracy is thus identical to that of Issayas, it just happens to be the other side of the same coin. Ali seems to have arrived at this conclusion by confusing a number of issues. The freedom to worship and equality of religions is a democratic right that everyone should respect and fight for. Imposing and peddling obscurantism in the name of freedom of religion is a thoroughly undemocratic project. Ali seems to confuse the two and seems to have flipped from one to the other. Equality of all ethnic groups in Eritrea including their right to their ancestral home is a democratic right that everyone should respect and fight for. Imposition of self‐appointed spokesmen of these groups with the view to a “negotiated solution” among such spokesmen in an environment where democracy is denied is a thoroughly undemocratic practice worthy of the war lords of Somalia and the ELF of the Zebene Kiflitat! Ali seems to confuse the two and has slipped from one to the other.

Birds of the same feather

Ali not only considers the PFDJ as part of the solution to the problems of Eritrea so long as it recognizes that it is an ethnic Tigrigna organization but he also prefers it to other Tigrigna based organizations. He states that “many of the Tigrignas who support the government (excluding the Neo‐Nazis) by paying their 2% tax, by reading the garbage in Hadas Ertra and trying to follow up developments, by attending festivals and appreciating what is left of our rational independence, or by hanging out in the trenches guarding the nation against foreign invasion are responsible citizens…”. There you have it. The supporters of the PFDJ are responsible citizens precisely because they are keeping the regime afloat by paying the 2% tax attending festivals and more importantly by hanging out in the trenches. Those who refuse to do so are not responsible citizens, indeed they are traitors as the opposition clearly are. You see they did condemn the PFDJ for initiating the war with Ethiopia and that according to Ali and the PFDJ is wrong because the PFDJ was simply defending Eritrea against Weyane’s invasion. The opposition are moved by pay checks and travel allowances of the Woyane (presumably the Tadamun are free from that) and cannot thus be worthy citizens. And so the lowlanders should negotiate with their fellow worthy citizens of the PFDJ and not the opposition.  There are a number of problems with Ali’s preferred alliance for the lowlanders.  First of all Issayas is in no mood to negotiate with any one to share his absolute power. That much he has made absolutely clear over a number of decades. Ali is thus trying to lead the lowlanders into a dead end. However passionate he appears to be about their plight, his solution is to keep the PFDJ afloat including by hanging out in the trenches and plead and negotiate with it in the vain hope of deliverance from it. As you can see there is no fire behind the massive smoke screen Ali has put in place.

Ali’s preferred solution is also factually wrong and leads to the maintenance of the status quo. We know now as a result of the independent judgment of the claims commission and Issayas’s acceptance of its verdict that Issayas unlawfully invaded Ethiopia. We also know that the youth who are hanging around the trenches are not there to protect Eritrea from invasion. They are simply incapable of doing that given that fact that they are fleeing in their hundreds every week to the supposed invader. More importantly behind such factual errors lies the desire to maintain the status quo and hence all the problems that according to Mohammed Berhan pose an existential threat to Eritrea.

The 2% tax needs to be maintained because according to Ali that is a sign of responsible citizenship. We need to keep the youth in the trenches because they are protecting the country from foreign invasion and that too is a sign of responsible citizenship. We need to forget about democracy because that is a crap. What we need is to scare Issayas shitless with talk of genocide and thus force him to share power with the lowlanders. Once we do that our land problems will be resolved. In other words the status quo is maintained it is hoped with some modifications. By maintaining the status quo, we keep all the problems created by the status quo alive and kicking. Eritrea dies a slow death!

One is tempted to conclude that Ali is just another agent‐provocateur of the PFDJ masquerading as an angry lowlander. On all issues that matter he simply parrots and reinforces the PFDJ’s arguments. But I think that may be a little too simplistic an understanding. What we seem to have here is someone who is day dreaming about the Zebene Kiflitat. Just like the war lords of the time he is prepared to let Issayas be the representative war lord of the Tigrignas so long as he in return recognizes the Ali’s of this world as representatives of the other ethnic groups. Ali wants to assure Issayas that there will not be the democracy crap in Eritrea – just sharing of power among self appointed representatives of the ethnic group with Issayas as a key element of that sharing of power. Ali wants to assure Issayas that the status quo will be maintained and modified with some adjustment in power sharing and possibly land allocation. If Issayas does not agree to that Ali has a trump card up his sleeve.

He intends to out bluff the master of bluffing with the threat of genocide and bodies floating upstream on the Tekeze. There is just one problem with that. Issayas’s most likely response is going to be bring it on and Ali is left with a puff of smoke and tons of obscurantist ideas. He happens to be the other side of Issayas’s coin. He happens to be as much part of the problem as Issayas. That is why he has to be mercilessly exposed for what he is. An imposter trying to use the legitimate grievances of the lowlanders to buff his way to the palace in Asmara and share power with the devil himself. The people of the lowlanders deserve our solidarity not Ali.