Browsing through WALTA today, I came across an article that was written some ten days ago. Why so late?, I asked myself. Today's article from the East African Forum provided the answer. Let's give the benefit of the doubt for the electronic media, Walta, for its attempt to be fair. It posted the critiqued article.

I invite the reader to first read both articles at Walta. The writer that posted in the East African Forum failed to address the issue. Dagmawi presented three points as to why he thinks the TPLF-EPLF alliance may resurface in the future. The hitherto existing lopsided agreements that favoured Eritrea, the atrocities committed by EPLF against Tigreans in their exodus to Sudan and the ‘forgiveness' of TPLF, the historical relationship of the last thirty years were the basis for Dagmawi's conclusions.

The question here is not whether his conclusions are legitimate or not. That is open for criticism and scrutiny of facts. A serious person would concentrate on the reasons behind the conclusion. Instead the article that is written to repudiate Dagmawi's points chose to be thetorical. It is plausible that forces that strive on negative energy could use Dagmawi's article to support their hateful propaganda on certain ethnic groups of Ethiopia. Dagmawi may need to be clear and formulate his articles in such a way that these negative forces would not have the chance to exploit his writings. However, to accuse the paper as one that undermines Ethiopia's rich ethnic diversity is , I believe out of line.

I have failed to see any response to the questions raised. The paper talks about Alula, Yohannes, Menilik and the struggle of the people of Tigrai, their contributions to Ethiopian unity and territorial integrity. There is neither a dispute on this point nor was it raised in the critiqued article.

Nobody challenged the points raised above. These are well established historical facts. So why are they here? Is it a case of an ‘Aramba-na Qobo' kind of mistake or a calculated move to sensationalise the issue, to stop people from asking hard and difficult/sensitive questions? Frankly, I find the article to be not constructive.

It is issues that we are concerned with. Not defending this or that group. It is understandable that those who take their group interests above everything else indulge themselves in that topic. But that needs to be clear to readers. Really, if it is the case that the EPLF-TPLF interests come to coincide, there is no reason that they should not join forces. That is a theoretical possibility. Of course, under current conditions, its feasibility is questionable. However, TPLF has a track record of not putting Ethiopia's interest as its top priority. It gave away Eritrea to Isayas. It urged foreign powers and international organizations to legally authorize/accept Eritrea's independence. It gave away Assab. It did not consult the Ethiopian people in these very important and far-reaching decisions. Following Isayas' lead, it ( EPRDF) characterized the almost two hundred thousand Ethiopians that have been deported from Eritrea as Derg functionaries. The past mistakes of this government are too far-reaching to be ignored. Please do not impose your wills upon us. Allow us to say the things that we perceive to be wrong or right. The agony of us all will be relieved if you realize that it is only through unity that the wishes of the majority will be met.

The author wrote: ".. I strongly believe this conflict cannot be regarded as ‘over' until all the important issues raised by the Ethiopian government are unconditionally fulfilled". May I ask what the important questions raised by the government are?

Is providing a legal , demarcated border for Eritrea an important question? Is it? Is erecting a permanent border for Eritrea , with the blood and bones of tens of thousand of Ethiopians to our interest? Should the assertion by Meles that Assab is Eritrean be fulfilled? Is inviting UN peacekeepers ( foreign troopes) an all important issue for Ethiopia? Is safeguarding Eritrea from its southern border so that it will have the resources to destabilise its neighbour to the east ( Sudan) to the interest of Ethiopia?. In my opinion, there is no important question raised to the benefit of Ethiopia.

The current government still has the opportunity to make things right. The PM must be advised to listen to the wishes and aspirations of all Ethiopians. His ‘know it all' mentality has proved to be wrong. He has repeatedly exhibited serious difficulty in articulating Ethiopia's interest in its dealing with Eritrea. If he truly believes that he is elected to fulfill the wishes of the electorate, he has to precisely do that.

I think these are what the article by Dagmawi want us to think hard and consider. The critique, instead, failed to raise the ‘all important questions' and by doing so has not helped us to understand our problems clearly. In fact the person who is writing in defence of the TPLF seems to be angry at the Diaspora as a whole. This is consistent with TPLF's policy of not wanting to do any thing with the Diaspora. Intolerance towards any criticism or suggestions that come out of the Diaspora are vividly expressed towards the end of the article. TPLF is advised to increase its tolerance level towards Ethiopians. It is capable of expressing such characteristic. Eritrea/Eritreans/ is a witness.

As to Dagmawi's role, if we are talking about the same person that maintains the Ethiopian-Eritrean website, his work is a witness to his commitment to his country. The site, where one finds vital resources, informative articles and glaring tributes to the courageous sons and daughters of Ethiopia, the Ethiopian defence Forces, is hardly a work of a person in an way associated with ‘fringe groups'. The challenge now is how to convince one the conclusions that have been reached by the author based on precedence are invalid under the current condition.

To coin a precedence based analysis as irrational does not obviously get the ear of a serious audience. Nonetheless, it does detract the serious person from focusing on more important issues.

Samuel Fasika