Commentary:
One Man Rule in Eritrea:
contributing factor to war
Ethiopian Internet Newsletter; April 12 1999
Lately, the Eritrean elites have displayed anger at any Ethiopians who question their dictator. But what Eritreans should realize is that Issayas Afeworki is the focus of discussion because he has turned Asmara into a one-man show.
The Eritrean elites have abdicated any responsibility to principle. Instead they simply parrot what Issayas says. They meekly followed him into Badime and then meekly followed him out, leaving the corpses of at least 3,000 Eritrean conscripts lying in and around the trenches of Guemhalo, Senbel, Hadish Adi, and Dembe Mengul. As for Zalanbessa and Alitiena, these elites will advocate continued Eritrean occupation until their dictator changes his mind. At that point they will also change their mind and advocate withdrawal.
But would Eritrea have invaded Badime, Zalanbessa, and Alitiena if the local Eritrean border inhabitants had been given the power to decide their own fate? Probably the Eritrean villagers would have vetoed the aggressive invasion by the Eritrean army if they were given the chance. There would not have been a war if those with most at stake had been given the freedom to decide their own futures.
But Eritrea is currently laying the foundations for a top down governmental structure that even further centralizes power in the hands of Issayas Afeworki.
"It appears that the new structure of local government in Eritrea reflects the idea that only a few individuals at the top of society should be entrusted with the power and duty to decide what is the optimal strategy of development for Eritrea and its citizens….a power seemingly without checks and balances."
"The establishment of an executive line of command from the president's office all the way down to the village/area level…is also a new arrangement within the field of local government. The administrators at each level are accountable for the conduct of their office to their immediate superior - and not to their constituencies." By Kjetil Tronvoll Norwegian Institute of Human Rights University of Oslo; The Journal of Modern African Studies, 36, 3 (1998), pp. 461-482 Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom
Thus we see that while the winds of democracy sweep across the African continent, Eritrea is moving to reinforce one-man-rule. Far from being a model for Africa, Eritrea's new administrative setup is simply an excuse to suppress democracy and legitimize a dictatorship.
As Bricker and Leatherbee wrote in their article "Consensus and Disssent in the Horn of Africa," (1994):
"It is hard to imagine progress toward genuine democracy in an atmosphere in which Eritreans are not permitted the full rights of expression, association, and assembly."
"The EPLFs impressive ability to mobilize a near 100% turnout on the noncontroversial issue of independence should not be confused either with the will to govern democratically or the ability to amass permanent popular support. The prospects for democracy and human rights remain unclear."
Even within the EPLF there is a long tradition of centralizing power in the hands of Issayas Afeworki.
In 1973, a movement for democratisation developed within the ELF-PLF (pre-cursor to the EPLF). This movement was ruthlessly suppressed and its leaders were executed in June 1974. The quotation below describes this episode and is taken from "National and Class Conflict in the Horn of Africa" (1987) by John Markakis.
"The focal point of such criticism in the ELF-PLF was the undemocratic nature of the leadership and its methods. This reflected the fact that there had been no election of leaders, as well as a resentment of their penchant for centralization and secrecy. Isayas in particular was accused of supervising everyone's work, of censoring all publications, thereby undermining the position of the cadres."
The democratisation movement was called Menka, and is derisively dismissed as "anarchist" by EPLF supporters. However, the platform of this movement seems eminently reasonable. Their main demands were:
Other guerrilla movements in Ethiopia have incorporated these principles long ago. For example, these policies were standard practise within the TPLF. The OLF has incorporated leadership elections and a peaceful transition of power vaguely modeled on the traditional Gada cycle.
However, the EPLF leadership managed to suppress the Menka movement. Five Menka leaders were arrested, tried and sentenced to death in June 1974. Ever since then, the EPLF leadership has demonstrated an extreme intolerance towards any groups that question their policies.
As is typical with dictators, the Eritrean president completely controls both the military and the economy
"Unfortunately, the investment proclamation is not properly implemented. On paper, authorization power is vested with the Investment Center. In practice, large scale projects are approved at the highest levels, usually by the appropriate minister or Office of the President." (US Embassy report; Marcb 1998)
"Likewise, the Eritrean's command is highly centralized. "The key figure in the war remains the president," a diplomat said. Unlike Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, President Issaias Afeworki, 54, holds total control in Eritrea, the diplomat said." ( AFP; 15 Feb 1999)
As they say, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In the case of Issayas Afeworki, the corruption is not of a material nature, but a magalomaniac perception that he alone is qualified to chart the future of Eritrea, and those that disagree with his self-assessment are enemies of Eritrea. As we have seen many times before, a wildly popular dictator can end his life swinging upside down. The David Koresh cult-like following the Eritrean president has attracted from some quarters is unhealthy and a contributing cause for the initiation and perpetuation of the Eritrea - Ethiopia conflict. However, one day we may see these Koresh-type cultists hanging their leader upside down. One enterprising fellow has already depicted this graphically:
|