BITING:
Eritrea currently requires external financial sponsors in order to survive, From 1991 to 1997, Eritrea's single largest financial sponsor was the government of Ethiopia. In 1998, Eritrea responded to the inevitable end of its financial subsidies by attacking Ethiopia.

Another of Eritrea's major financial sponsors is the United States. As the above quote from October 1998 shows, U.S. development assistance to Eritrea is the highest per capita in Sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, the US was instrumental in helping Eritrea implement its policy to "monetize" food aid despite the objections of the food aid donors from Europe.

"Late in 1996, with Eritrean grain supplies running short, the U.S. agreed to permit the sale of donated grain as proposed by the Eritreans, rather than take the blame for renewed hunger, though European donors continued to oppose the program." (IPS; September 1997)

Eventually, the US helped persuade the Europeans to go along with Eritrea's stubborn insistence on selling food aid and controlling the money raised from this activity as it saw fit.

"In the last two months, USAID was particularly successful in facilitating multi-donor efforts leading to a major reform of food policy in Eritrea. (USAID, 1997)

Other activities of the US in Eritrea include: US Peace Corps; US "non-lethal" military aid; US demining operations; US clearing of Massawa harbor etc. etc.

BARKING:
The Eritrean dictator has been making accusations against the US before. In September he lashed out and accused the US of encouraging Ethiopia to bomb the Eritrean Air Force base in Asmara. At the time, most people dismissed this as an immature and irrational outburst:

"Some American authorities were for a quick fix and bombing Asmara into submission was not overruled. In brief, the idea was to force the medicine down the throat." (Interview with President Isaias Afwerki; Eritrean National TV Thursday, September 17, 1998)

It simply doesn't make sense. If anything, US policy is biased toward Eritrea. The major US business investment is in Eritrea (Anadarko Petroleum). The US is always ready to respond to the needs of its oil companies. They have huge influence in Washington thanks to their financial contributions to the campaigns of prominent American politicians. Last year, Anadarko ranked among the largest contributors to political campaigns in Texas.

BITING AGAIN:
Now rather than respond to the deadly serious issue of whether Eritrea fully accepts the OAU peace plan, the Eritrean government decided to attack the US in a public diplomatic forum:

"Eritrea has been expressing its reservations and protests on the continued interference of the US Government in the matter. We continue to follow with dismay the pressures that the US is bringing to bear to curtail the peace process underway." (Eritrean Government; Jan 29, 1999)

NUZZLING THE HAND OF GADHAFI:
Eritrea's latest financial sponsor is Gadhafi. In return, Eritrea is supporting the Libyan position on the Lockerbie issue (terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 109 which crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland. All 259 people on board the plane were killed. Eleven residents of Lockerbie were also killed. An investigation by the US and Britian found that Libyan agents were responsible for this terrorist attack. Libya is refusing to extradite the suspects for trial in a neutral location (Holland.))

Although Eritrea seems to be getting something from its sleazy liasions with Libya, the story is far from over. Gadhafi is a very erratic individual. It remains to be seen who will end up biting whom when this sick little relationship eventually breaks up.

CONCLUSION:
Inappropriate barking and biting is a symptom of "small man syndrome." Eritrea has been diagnosed as suffering from the national version of this malady (see Financial Times, June 1998). Eritrea's recent behaviour confirms this diagnosis.

- Dagmawi

Attachment 1: USAID activities in Eritrea:

USAID/Eritrea, in close collaboration with the Government of the State of Eritrea, developed an Investment Partnership Plan which was approved in 1997 by USAID Washington. This partnership comprises USAID's assistance in support of three investment objectives:

• IO1- Primary Health Care: Increased utilization of sustainable, integrated primary health care services;
  
  
• IO2- Enterprise Development Program: Increased income of enterprises, primarily rural, with emphasis on exports; and
  
  
• IO3- Human Capacity Development, focused on government institutions.

The Investment Plan also supports the Greater Horn of Africa Initiative (GHAI) which focuses on food security and crisis prevention.

Since 1993, USAID has obligated resources on the order of approximately $23,000,000 to the health sector, specifically, Primary Health Care; $12,229,000 in Enterprise; $9,850,000 in Human Capacity Development / Governance sectors; and $26,000,000 in P.L. 480 Title II and Title III food programs.

Attachment 2: US Acquiesecence to monetization of food aid:

"Food aid has been a contentious issue. In 1996 the government ended all free distribution of food. Henceforth, it announced-over U.S. and European opposition-that it would sell donated grain on the domestic market at subsidized rates (rather than giving it away)

"Washington and other food donors balked at losing control over the distribution of grain shipments within Eritrea. They also insisted that subsidies should be eliminated and that donated grain must be resold at world market prices. When the Asmara government refused, the U.S. withheld grain aid, forcing the cash-strapped Eritrean government to purchase food on the open market and to postpone its jobs program. Late in 1996, with Eritrean grain supplies running short, the U.S. agreed to permit the sale of donated grain as proposed by the Eritreans, rather than take the blame for renewed hunger, though European donors continued to oppose the program."