When A Dictator Speaks In Favor of Democracy

I remember when we were small kids an Italian journalist asked the ex-emperor of Ethiopia, Haile Sellassie I, which democracy was the best in his view. He said without hesitation: “Ours” (‘yegna’). The intention of the journalist was if he could compare the two democratic systems existed at that time, that of the West and East.

Even though I have never expected any positive attitude for the Eritrean people from Mr. Issayas, I read his speech on martyrs’ day in text. Just my intention was based on “What will he say this time?” For my surprise his main topic was about “weyanie” in general and on the Ethiopian election in particular. He blamed the EPRDF government of not having a fair and transparent election.

Dear reader, we have written and said a lot about the PFDJ regime. I don’t believe that there are neither Eritrean citizens nor foreign politicians who do not know the nature of this regime. Eritrea is not only suffering under one single dictatorial party, but it is an autocratic system which rules the country without the rule of law. The regime does not have constitution nor does it allow any freedom of speech, press, assembly and religion. So many people are arrested, missed and tortured daily without any legal process.

How can a dictator speak in favour of democracy? How can Mr. Issayas talk or criticize about election, wherever and whatever it is? Having a system in which he has never allowed an election to take place during his 14 years of iron rule? How can he talk about an international rule of law, whereas he does not have the sense of rule of law in the country? Even he does not allow his long suffering prisoners to appear in a court of law? How can a killer condemn a killing?

Again my intention is not to support the Ethiopian ruling party, but the fact is, the EPRDF party is much better than the PFDJ regime. During the 14 years in power, the Ethiopian ruling party tried to manage three national elections. Leaving aside whether they were democratic elections or not to history of that country, at least the Ethiopian people are exercising their democratic rights. The self appointed regime in Asmara has not even tried to carry a single election. As our writer Gezae Kidane said in his last article: ‘adgi zeyblus beqli ynik (one who does not have a donkey undermines the one who has a mule).

How can Mr. Issayas criticize the Ethiopian election? Yes, the killing of 26 young Ethiopians during the violence in the merkato area was unfortunate and discouraging event. But Mr. Issayas must condemn himself before he condemns Prime Minister Meles. The young Eritreans who were rounded up and massacred at Addi Abeyto is not in the mind of Mr. Issayas. Above all the killing of the war disabled heroes at Mai Habar is not to compare anywhere. Tell me, how can Mr. Issayas condemn any killing anywhere? How can the Eritrean history forget those intellectuals (menkae group) who were murdered under the leadership of Mr. Issayas?

Ah! Mr. Issayas talked too much about the “spoilers”. He meant here the (rich) western countries which support Ethiopia financially, “instead putting pressure on it to implement the border demarcation”. Ironically Mr. Issayas did not understand that his regime became so weak to convince those “spoilers” on human rights issues. That he failed to improve the daily lives of the people. That he failed to introduce any democratic change in the country. Yes, it is true, on the eyes of the G8, Ethiopia is not only one of those 18 countries which are exempted from paying foreign debts, but it is also one of the selected countries which improved democratization. I can’t advocate Ethiopia’s democracy here, but I am certainly sure it is hundred percent better than the system in our country.

As I said in my previous article, we can learn many things from the ongoing Ethiopian democratic process. Both the negative and positive sides. Especially, we can learn from the opposition parties. In spite of all their political differences the various parties are united as one.

By now we have realized very well that that the PFDJ regime as the EPRDF did in Ethiopia, can not and will not introduce any democratic change in Eritrea. The only way to do this is to dismantle the PFDJ repressive system and transform political power to the people. Then we need a strong and united opposition.

Fortunately, we can say that the Eritrean opposition forces are united. The Eritrean Democratic Alliance is our symbol of unity. We do not have other alternative than to support and strengthen this unity to move forward. The regime is doing and will do everything possible to weaken this alliance. But we must be vigilant and see this struggle beyond the interest of every and each individual organization. At the same time we must openly criticize that EDA is still weak. The leaders of EDA must do more than public (opposition members) meetings. EDA has these members already and there is nothing to tell them new. They know everything about the regime. EDA leaders must achieve what they haven’t yet achieved. Member organizations of EDA have to be dedicated. Telling the people reservations and opposition by some member organizations on the signed charter does not have any advantage than putting the people in dilemma. It is obvious that the agreed charter is not a holy book. It must be improved with time. Economic power is political power. EDA must have enough means (budget) to penetrate into the world media. It must have strong delegation group to fight the PFDJ regime politically and diplomatically. Attacking (not constructive criticism) EDA from the opposition camp is categorically supporting the PDFJ regime. One has to be either part of the solution or part of he problem. There is no third part in a struggle.

Adhanom Fitiwi

Comments: fitiwi@planet.nl

home