In Defense of the Issues By Zeineb Ali

On September 17th, 2001, I published the following article under the pen name Zeineb Ali. Its release came just one day before the horrific events of September 18th, in which eleven members of the G-15 were rounded up and detained by the state's security apparatus. This crackdown initiated a series of purges within the ranks of the ruling party (PFDJ), the consequences of which continue to shape our nation's trajectory. The article is particularly striking for its accurate prediction of the impending catastrophe.

Semere

In Defense of the Issues

By Zeineb Ali

17 September 2001

Dear reader,

I wrote this article on the eve of a horrific and shocking chapter for the Eritrean people: the events of Black September 18th. I am posting it unchanged because its message remains deeply relevant to our current situation.

Zeineb

Ideas, political outlooks, and trends are everywhere in the open within the Eritrean political arena today. Never in our history has there been such a vibrant flow and exchange of divergent views. I admit we are lucky to witness our society regaining its sanity.

I wrote this article on the eve of a horrific and shocking chapter for the Eritrean people: the events of Black September 18th. I am posting it unchanged because its message remains deeply relevant to our current situation.

I am adding my voice to this crucial debate about our country's future. I have titled this piece “In Defense of the Issues” because, too often, discussions become fixated on personalities at the expense of substantive debate. For me, what matters most is what you stand for, not who you are.

What are the Key Issues?

The core issues facing Eritrea concern both the management of its current state affairs and the shaping of its future. They involve defining the nation's role and place within the region and the broader international community across all spheres—economic, political, and social.

Fundamentally, these issues will determine whether Eritrea evolves into a strong, sovereign, and progressive state, and whether it will establish itself as a peaceful democracy with a thriving economy. The international community is watching closely.

To be more specific, the following issues require immediate attention:

·       Resolving the ongoing conflict.

·       Implementing the constitution and transferring power to a legitimate government.

·       Establishing the rule of law and an independent judiciary.

·       Delineating powers between the legislative and executive branches.

·       Defining Eritrea’s regional role and its relationships with neighbors and the international community.

·       Clarifying the relationship between the ruling party (PFDJ) and the government.

·       Addressing the lack of institutionalization.

·       Managing the economy effectively.

·       Developing mechanisms for conflict resolution, particularly for internal disputes.

·       Choosing between pluralism and political hegemony.

·       Pursuing national reconciliation versus maintaining the status quo.

·       Addressing the case of the university students.

·       Re-evaluating national security policy.

This list is long, but these points serve as crucial starting points due to their timeliness and relevance to Eritrea's current political reality. Now, let me turn to the key personalities involved.

The political groupings

Of course, any political struggle is ultimately driven by people—those who champion ideas and work to promote them. This dynamic is a natural feature of political contestation everywhere. It reflects an undeniable reality: society is engaged in a profound process of soul-searching, a phenomenon that deserves close attention. We can thus identify two main groupings:

On one hand, there are those who advocate for the supremacy of law, an independent judiciary, the immediate implementation of the constitution, and political pluralism. This group argues that the economy has been mismanaged, primarily due to the massive and misguided intervention of the PFDJ, and that excessive interference from the Front in government affairs has deliberately weakened legislative and executive bodies to pave the way for one-man rule. They promote regional harmony, peaceful coexistence, and democratic dialogue as means for conflict resolution, and they emphasize the importance of aligning with international values and interests. This group also maintains that national security has not been adequately addressed.

This faction is unwavering in its commitment to peaceful conflict resolution. It calls for transparent dialogue, the free exchange of ideas, and active public participation in addressing national issues. It stands for legitimacy and transparency in governance.

In the wake of the Open Letter, this group has also voiced opposition to the government’s handling of the university students’ case.

On the other hand, a second group is led by the Chairman of the Front, who also serves as the President of the State, the Chairman of the National Assembly, and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. In contrast to the first group, this faction denies the existence of one-man rule and instead justifies the PFDJ’s hegemony based on its political monopoly during the pre-independence struggle. (It is important to note that legitimized political hegemony has no place in a pluralistic society, nor can a monopoly on power be justified by unsubstantiated self-esteem.) This group insists that the issues raised by the opposition are untimely. Citing the ‘Woyane Threat’, it argues that democratization is currently irrelevant and ill-advised. Instead, it prioritizes the eradication of “corruption” over democratic reform—hence the establishment of “Special Courts.” This group considers extra-legal bodies acceptable as long as they serve its narrow interests. Accordingly, it has focused intensely on condemning and vilifying the opposition, a strategy that could likely lead to political purges. It shows no interest in consulting with those who hold differing opinions but invests significant resources in smear campaigns. Its greatest fear is dissent. Conflict resolution through peaceful and democratic dialogue is not in its vocabulary. The ‘Purge’ of 1923, similar to Stalin's, and China’s Cultural Revolution, is feared to be repeated in our country.

This group defends the PFDJ’s economic monopoly as a means of ensuring “social justice”. In practice, however, this approach has resulted in social pauperization and the misuse of the country’s limited resources.

In reality, this faction has led the nation into political adventures it can ill afford. Its foreign policy is guided by a motto of ‘hegemony’, which has resulted in isolation and failure.

For this group, even the slightest change in the status quo could snowball and damage its reputation. It will likely resist any change relentlessly until full-blown democratization is achieved—a process that ultimately works against its own interests. Thus, its actions are driven largely by fear and paranoia.

More on personalities? I don’t think it’s a good choice. But ……………

The question of whether we, as concerned Eritreans, should focus on personalities or issues is a critical one. I firmly believe that concentrating on issues is the nobler and more edifying path. What is best for the nation must always take precedence over who is in charge. Personalities are transient—they emerge and disappear. Ideas and systemic challenges, however, are enduring; they persist and demand solutions.

To focus on personalities would inevitably lead to discussing two groups: the former leaders and the current ruling cadre.

The former—individuals like Mahmoud Sheriffo, Petros Solomon, Haile Duru'e, and Ogbe Abraha—were pillars of the EPLF leadership. They played leading roles during the struggle for independence and in the post-independence era. Any credit due to the government for its past successes is largely because of their contributions.

Crucially, these are also the individuals who, from direct experience, came to understand that the nation's trajectory would have devastating consequences if not corrected. They have admitted to failing in their obligations as leaders. They were expected to oppose malpractice, halt illegitimacy, and curb dictatorial tendencies from the outset. While their response was delayed, the principle of "better late than never" applies. They now appear determined to sacrifice to see power returned to its legitimate owners and are demanding a complete overhaul of a system that has paralyzed the economy, stifled initiative, isolated the nation, and usurped the people's power.

In contrast, the latter group represents the current status quo:

The President: Beyond his failures in leading a nascent nation, he is characterized by stubbornness, impulsivity, and vindictiveness. He shows no respect for the colleagues who fought alongside him for three decades, dismissively labeling them a "bunch of cowards" and "hollow cans." He is allergic to differing views and dialogue, preferring to rule with an iron fist.

YG: As the president’s right-hand man, he perpetuates a cult of infallibility around his leader, arguing that mistakes are only ever the result of poor advice from others.

DY: A marginal figure for over a decade, he is an opportunist now seeking to build a career by aligning himself with those in power.

AJ: A frustrated individual, haunted by his past mistakes and recently showing signs of regret, especially after the recent episode that involved the mishandling of the case of two thousand university students. He is now being pushed from the inner circle for making inconvenient remarks.

MGW: A decadent figure who promotes narrow interests. His malicious campaigns are tolerated by the regime so long as he is mobilized against the reformers.

Furthermore, various other lightweights are seizing this moment to try to build their careers. A piece of brotherly advice for them: “As you climb up the ladder, make sure it is leaning against the right wall.”

Back to the Issues

We face issues whose resolution will determine the nation's fate. These are issues of democratization and economic development. We are confronted with the task of defining our role as a people within the region, in Africa, and in the world. We face the challenge of determining whether we can rally all well-meaning Eritreans to the project of nation-building. We must show the world that the sacrifices made to become a sovereign nation were worth it.

We are duty-bound to brainstorm, develop scenarios, formulate strategies, and work tirelessly to create a healthy society free from any complex—whether of superiority or inferiority. Our responsibility is to place the national interest above all else.

The nation demands tolerance for differing views, mutual consultation, and unified action as differences are resolved each day.

The Solution

The solution is to learn from past mistakes. There is no rationale for delaying the implementation of the constitution or the transfer of power to its legitimate owners. There is no need to create extra-legal bodies when legal ones are already in place. The rights of a citizen, enshrined in the constitution, are not meant to be trampled. There is no sense in playing both shepherd and tiger while peace processes show progress. The rights to organize, a free press, and free speech—boldly enshrined in our constitution—are not mere decorations. They are there to be practiced.

It is high time for the PFDJ to withdraw from its business ventures and hand over all its assets to the government. There is no shortcut to economic development except through a path of slow, steady, and sustained growth initiated and driven by the private sector. The government's role is to facilitate, not to impede.

The situation demands peaceful dialogue to resolve conflicts. It demands the pursuit of justice to rectify mistakes. It necessitates the use of persuasion over coercion as a means of building consensus. It also requires the rejection of all forms of intimidation, harassment, deceit, and blackmail.

This moment requires us to master the art of survival in a hostile environment. It requires navigating troubled waters without sacrificing our national interests. It requires mastering dialogue, practicing give-and-take, and understanding each other's interests. It demands the promotion of harmony and cooperation. Above all, it calls upon the nation to have a clear and honest assessment of its worth and capabilities.

At this very moment, two thousand university students are subjected to cruel punishment at the hands of the government. Their sin? Asking for their rights and requesting a say in university matters. This situation demands their immediate and unconditional release. It also demands that those who condemned them to such misery be brought to justice.

A Political Alternative

A political alternative is what we desperately need at this point. We need an alternative built on the principles of democratic practice—one that can unite all patriotic Eritreans around a broad yet cohesive political platform.

We need a platform that accommodates political diversity, promotes the rule of law and individual rights, ensures peace and stability, and secures steady economic growth. We need a platform that nurtures and cultivates independent thinking rather than impeding it. What is demanded is a comprehensive political alternative that calls upon all well-meaning Eritreans to participate in nation-building.

I will return soon with more articles, Insha'Allah (God Willing)!

Don’t go away!

HaftKum,

Zeineb Ali