|
Paradigm
Shift
The latest PFDJ
propaganda assault backpedals to the ideological wasteland of over 3
decades ago. But again, PFDJ may be excused for dusting old and
forgotten books fetched from its forgotten libraries and feeding us old
tunes. The authors of these forgotten books have since then moved on to
adopt the ideological positions of their former antagonists.
The latest PFDJ
stale propaganda is as follows,
1.
Africa’s
current crisis is due to colonial legacy,
2.
Western
interest remains in exploiting
Africa and keeping
it in bondage,
3.
Food Aid
and NGOs is the root cause of
Africa’s problem,
etc…
The irony of
singing these tunes is that we introduced Eritrea to OAU in 1991 by
belittling the rest of Africa. In the end, PFDJ is singing the rest of
Africa’s tune louder than the PFDJ condemned AU states.
In my last two
articles, this writer discussed how even China has abandoned the
ideological wasteland of the 20th Century while PFDJ is
backpedaling into that long forgotten era. Good for China and hope that
those who worship Mao’s
China
learn from today’s China instead. In the end, China has embarked on the
same path as South Korea, Malaysia and other South East Asian countries.
China’s
economic growth is financed and managed by Western multinational
companies, the 21st century imperialists. PFDJ has dusted
off old books and tells us that slavery is needed to build its couple of
infrastructures while China is seeking local and foreign investors
to participate in its $125 Billion USD project to upgrade water supply
in various parts of China. If there is anyone ‘covetous’ of achieving
the economic growth experienced by South East Asia, we would be more
covetous of South Korea, Singapore, or other earlier economic success
stories in that neighborhood [the five tigers]. We had dreamed that
Eritrea become the ‘Singapore’ of Africa, but where are we now? Singing
old tunes of forgotten ideological wastelands? It ain’t the dream that
is the problem; rather it is the dream wreckers that are the problem.
The so called
‘piteous’ opponents of Chinese style of economic growth are actually
found among social and environmental conscious movements, and trade
unions – and not the Western capitalists who are raking record
profits from China’s new policies. Check Walmart’s obscene profits!
Those called piteous are the very same people who are fighting for the
rights of child [labor], for worker safety, against sudden and
significant climate changes and against degradation of the environment.
If these groups are considered piteous, one can only lament where the
world is heading.
As some internet
writers pointed out, it is interesting that the Chinese had banners
written only in “English, French, and Chinese” during the Summit.
Aren’t these the languages of our Western colonizers? Are our cultures
defined by the colonial era? Shouldn’t there have been banners in
Swahili, Eritrean languages, Arabic and others?
Paradigm Shift
Unlike the
socialist/communist era when every youth was absorbed by the social
justice espoused in the socialist/communist ideology, the struggle for
democracy doesn’t have such clearly defined ‘course of action’ [class
struggle and against imperialism] nor ‘end results’ [triumph of the
proletariat class]. Democracy is an evolving process that doesn’t have
the same political appeal as radical ideologies.
Moreover, the
communist model provides a seemingly convenient solution for the
challenges of governing multi-ethnical and multi-religious – it
eliminates all forms of divisions. Governing a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious requires delicate balance exercised by prudent political
leaders. Under democratic systems, it is natural for campaigning
politicians to attempt to exploit natural divisions within a society in
order to gain votes. Similarly, dictatorial systems aren’t immune from
exploiting these divisions when their illegitimate powers are
threatened. PFDJ is just one example.
One can debate
forever why PIA has pursued certain political course for Eritrea.
Unfortunately, none of us are mind-readers. However, one may
speculate that PIA is engaged in his social re-engineering in order to
eventually create his homogenous society – a society held together by
selfish individual interests rather than by collective cultural and
traditional values. For PIA, a multi-ethnic and multi-religious
Eritrea can only be held together by the strength of an iron man and a
morally corrupt nation – hence his efforts to establish a military
government and a corrupt civil service that pursues its own individual
[selfish] self interest than striving for [as perceived by PFDJ] a
democratic system which would only get embattled in traditional
ideological and cultural hang-ups. Although we should never rule out
anyone’s concerns, we must condemn any effort to address one’s concerns
through violation of people’s basic rights. The means doesn’t justify
the end.
The history of man
is the failure of various ideologies. Communist ideology was the
culmination of the observations of human history throughout centuries –
yet it failed. Throughout history, those leaders who believed they held
ultimate wisdom in bringing about the best socio-economic and political
solutions ultimately only achieved to bring about even worse miseries to
their people – starvation, infighting and external conflicts.
Even where a
leader was able to bring about prosperity and peace during his reign,
his immediate successors squandered it away. Somehow, the eventual
downfall of quickly changing societies, usually sooner than later, is as
true as the law of gravity. Throughout history, no society has managed
to permanently stay in socio-economic and political pinnacle. Advanced
societies such as Egypt and Aztecs somehow lost their knowledge and
power centuries ago. Genghis Khan dominated the better part of Asia
then his children destroyed it through their infightings. The history
of Athenians and Romans teach us much about human history. Learning
about the Spanish and Portuguese domination of the world some six
centuries ago, no one would believe that by the end of 19th
century they would end up being third rate powers is a lesson that man’s
history is dynamic – what-goes-up-must-come-down. The history of man is
the rise and decline of people and nations. Some have lasted
centuries, while many others lasted only decades.
In fact, the
interesting fact about dictators throughout history is that when they
failed in their endeavors, they proceeded to build big monuments that
had neither significance nor benefits to the general population, but
immortalized the dictators. The pyramids were built by hundreds of
thousands of slaves so that it can be used as burial grounds. The
pyramids didn’t have any ‘known’ benefits for the general population.
The relics of Romans and Athenians ostensibly glorified their gods but
indirectly immortalized the leaders that built them. The twin-towers in
Kuala
Lumpur
immortalize Dr. Mahtir.
Western
civilization as we are witnessing today is in reality barely one century
old. In fact, most of the social changes and, esp., economic growth
experienced in the West began in earnest after the end of the Second
World War – it is barely fifty years old. Already dynamic natural laws
of restoration to the equilibrium are imposing their own will on man.
Unfettered wealth destroyed Athenians and Romans. In today’s world, our
insatiable thirst for limited resources, adverse impact on the natural
environment, gap between rich and poor, ideological conflicts, the
pitfalls and vanities of riches, and many other issues will ensure that
today’s realities will be replaced by new and different realities
tomorrow.
Eritrean political
activists should never shy away from discussing uncomfortable but real
issues. We should be able to articulate our vision of
Eritrea
and be able to promote it among our fellow politically active
Eritreans. PFDJ’s fate is tied to its own act, or rather follies, and
thus the opposition camp shouldn’t be too concerned that its open
discussions on various issues may prolong the regime’s life. However,
we should remain cognizant that burning issues can only be settled
through extensive debates in democratic Eritrea. Our current open
debates should be viewed as an effort to build momentum in resolving
some of these critical issues, rather than to become an open schism that
divides the opposition camp.
Eritreans and
especially social and political activists should remain aware that there
are no one-size-fit-all solutions to attaining and sustaining viable
societies and nations. For clarification, solutions are not the same as
universally shared principles of the rule-of-law and peaceful means of
resolving disputes. Instead, this discussion pertains as which types of
socio-economic and political path a nation, esp. a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious one, should pursue to achieve its desired and
sustainable socio-economic and political goals.
Without a clear
vision, our uphill struggle for democracy will falter in its infancy.
In 21st century, almost every nation outside Sub-Saharan
Africa is finally on a path towards socio-economic prosperity and
political stability while Sub-Saharan Africa is backpedaling into
oblivion. If we examine Sudan for instance, its land area is bigger
than France,
Germany, Spain, Portugal, UK and Italy combined. With a population of
roughly 1/8 the size and natural resources probably some 5 times bigger
than these European states combined, there are no reasons why Sudan
continues to face socio-economic challenges. If we examine the other
countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, our conclusion would be the same.
Imagine the riches being squandered away in DR Congo,
Kenya,
Angola, Nigeria, Sierra Leon, etc… Eritrea is no exception. After
independence, we thought we would chart a different course than the rest
of Africa,
and instead we have fallen into the same or worse pitfalls.
Although Africa’s
dictators have milked the colonial legacy as an excuse for their poor
governance while enriching themselves, one can’t deny the lingering
effects of colonial legacy. However, overcoming and resolving the
challenges of colonial legacy should have been these leaders’
priorities. Instead, these African leaders are too busy lining their
own pockets and imposing their ideological experiments on their people.
Imagine such leaders as Presidents Mobutu and Abacha accumulating over
$3 Billion USD each and stashing away their money in Western banks while
their countries remain trapped in socio-economic backwaters and the
general population suffering in poverty worse than under European
colonialism. Many say that these are only puppets of the West, and
indeed they were. But what should occupy us are discussions that can
formulate workable solutions. Finding excuses are easy, but to overcome
these problems we must occupy ourselves in finding workable solutions –
not defunct ideologies imposed by one-man political showmanship but
through collective efforts. Although PIA, PMMZ, and Col. Mengistu
didn’t or don’t conspicuously engage in opulent and jet-setting
lifestyles as many other African rich and self-serving leaders,
indirectly they control[ed] every penny that flow[s/ed] into their
countries. In a twisted way, as PIA is concerned that
ethno-religious-regional based societies are recipes for social
disharmony and thus must be coercively transformed into self-serving
individuals, probably the danger is more from ideological based
leaders who would have better served their countries if they were devoid
of ideological hang-ups and instead pursued their own opulent
lifestyles.
Solutions are
never found by diagnosing problems in convenient way. The legacy of
Western colonization is in creating African nations by meshing together
zillion ethnic and religious together without any consideration other
than their own colonial political and economic interests. When African
nations gained their independence, individuals and groups that never
managed anything bigger than their local wedding ceremonies were thrust
into leading nations comprised of multi-ethnic and multi-religious
societies. Moreover, with the changing socio-economic world, these
African leaders, without even first attaining the most rudimentary but
workable governance, had to simultaneously engage in managing transition
of their complex societies at the same time.
We believed and
continue to believe that the Eritrean society managed to resolve much of
these multi-ethnic and multi-cultural issues throughout our history and
during the armed struggle for independence. It is unfortunate that PFDJ
continues to believe that multi-cultural societies and economically
infant societies must be tortured and whipped into socio-economic
prosperity.
Rigid top-down
political administrative systems endanger the viability of a nation.
The challenge is to create a flexible system of government that
incorporates the rich cultures and traditions of our
multicultural/multi-religious society. Both rigid and flexible
political systems have their own flaws and challenges. But rigid
systems introduce wider swings in governance leading to bitter internal
conflicts that endanger the viability of a nation.
Instead of
pursuing PFDJ’s rigid political administrative style based on imposing
historically failed social experimentation, flexible system of
government is needed that appreciates and builds on our strong
traditional and cultural values. Most of the opposition parties agree
in principle the need to devolve power to administrative regions to
better manage the challenges of governing multi-ethnic and
multi-religious society.
On Nov. 18, 2006,
Nharnet.com published an article on ‘decentralized’ system of
government that raised timely and relevant issues. A ‘decentralized’
system of government is the only system that can achieve multiple
objectives,
1.
Local
issues should be resolved through local administrative systems that
reflect the cultural and traditional values of that locality,
2.
Separating local issues [relating to ethnic and religious needs] and
national issues [such as foreign policy, defense, and restricting the
central government to maintaining socio-economic and political standards
and consistencies (e.g. conflict of interest in civil service, ethics in
government, certain rules on local elections, etc…) across the
administrative zones] can disengage national politics from having
to gel together or to homogenize varying local traditions, cultures and
values at national level. Importantly, politics at national level would
be able to separate state and religion.
3.
Decentralized systems are the only effective means to thwarting the
tendency towards establishing dictatorships under heavily centralized
systems,
[For emphasis] In
fact the most effective antidote against dictatorship is to devolve
political powers to administrative regions and to various interest
groups, such as trade unions, students and youth, business groups, and
others.
Establishing an effective anti-dictatorial system of government should
be one of our priority tasks in the immediate periods after the
establishment of post-PFDJ government.
Decentralized
system of government (i.e. multi-level government system) isn’t a
radical idea. In fact, supposedly, there is multi-level government,
i.e. from central to zonal assemblies, under PFDJ. In reality, under
PFDJ, the zonal governments don’t have any legally defined powers,
duties and responsibilities. In addition, they aren’t legally
empowered. They may have been originally established to create genuine
multi-level government, but in today’s PFDJ, these assemblies remain in
the news for stale propaganda purposes. The true PFDJ intention always
has been to build a military style or Chinese Communist Party type
system that is heavily controlled by a central power – with wide power
vested in one man. The first step is to corrupt everyone and coerce or
buy the loyalties of “troublesome ethnical/religious/regional political
actors”.
The other factor
we should mind is that, decentralizing in a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious state may require greater administrative flexibility
than a relatively more homogeneous society. Thus, creating
decentralized systems and then to expect each
state/province/administrative zone to be exact socio-political and legal
replica of each other may defeat the purpose of decentralizing the
system.
The Ethiopian
model of dividing the country into purely ethnical regions, forming a
federal state, then pushing socio-political power down [real or
illusionary] to the regions overnight may not be the best path to
pursue. PFDJ’s redrawing administrative regions, aside from the issue
of legitimacy to do so and the impact on certain local people, has some
of its merits. In other words, decentralized administrative system need
not be along purely ethnic or religious divide. Rather, we have to
debate and define the advantages and disadvantages of redrawing
Eritrea’s administrative zones in various combinations and then to
devolve power to these administrative regions. There is no reason why
an administrative zone can’t be further subdivided to sub-zones,
albeit with further limited but sufficient political powers to
accommodate the specific needs of minorities within that administrative
sub-zone.
First,
establishing decentralized systems doesn’t mean that each zone will have
its own fiefdom. Second, decentralized systems shouldn’t be decreed and
installed overnight. Otherwise, we would create a disjoined system that
will eventually cause dangerous internal conflicts that may consume the
nation worse than what we are currently experiencing under PFDJ.
Instead, we should establish a consensus on workable decentralized
system and then implement it in gradual stages along clearly predefined
milestones. Naturally, some corrections along the journey will be
necessitated based on realities.
Decentralized
system of government can address specific issues such as Sharia Laws,
Adi Strategy, preservation of culture/tradition and other legal and
social systems that reflect traditional, cultural and religious values
of specific localities. We should debate flexible system of government
without prejudice and without blindly ruling out the ability and
viability of different cultures co-existing together. If we refuse to
debate how different cultures can co-exist together through flexible
political administrative system, then we are tacitly approving the
homogenization of cultures through dire methods. Multi-cultural, and to
lesser extent multi-religious, societies may become homogenized over
time, but the process should only be through the natural process rather
than through the imposition of such homogenization process through
coercion.
Clear Vision
The opposition
camp and esp. future leaders must articulate clear vision for the future
of Eritrea.
Some of our discussions may give the wrong impression to a casual
political observer. But those who are convinced of their views should
not shy away from sharing their views – and then must engage in debates
to persuade others.
When Mr. Hiruy or
Mr. Adhanom or Nharet.com or EMDHR shares their views and opinions with
us, they are enriching our knowledge and allowing healthy debates to
take place. No one individual or group is endowed with ultimate wisdom.
In reality, solutions are found somewhere among the various discussions
and debates. The intention isn’t to create hodgepodge solutions or
patchworks of incongruous ideas and political platforms for the sake
political niceties or compromise but to weave them together into
coherent platform that reflect and address genuine multiple concerns.
In order to avoid
creating disjointed decentralized system of government and to resolve
some inconsistencies that will be discovered when practicing
decentralized system of government, we have to ensure that the following
enabling factors or mechanisms are in place beforehand,
-
We have to
define what the shared principles and values are that hold a country
together [e.g. women’s rights – we should ask ourselves, can
different regions have different rights? If so, does this introduce
legal inconsistencies that may have wider implications and
ramifications – say on individual rights and freedoms? How can we
maintain consistent across the board values and yet allow different
cultures and traditions to survive?
-
Disputes, due
to misunderstanding or intentional, are part of life. Dispute
resolution mechanisms [among different levels of governments] are
probably the most critical component in ensuring the viability of
decentralized system of government.
First,
in order to avoid disputes, we must anticipate what possible problems
may arise and a clear understanding must be reached beforehand on how to
resolve them legally. We can learn much from other societies which are
experiencing similar challenges,
Second,
the rules of dispute resolution mechanism must be formulated before
disputes arise. Otherwise, aggrieved parties feel that dispute
resolution mechanisms are hastily formulated to work against them.
Third,
the rules of dispute resolution mechanism must be formulated before
disputes arise because concerned parties are aware of what mechanisms
await them if they are to raise disputed issues. This may help parties
to arrange their affairs to avoid disputes, or may help parties to
resolve disputes without ill-will.
Fourth,
the most important component of dispute resolution mechanism is the
conciliators, mediators or adjudicators. It is important that the
conciliators be known beforehand or that the mechanism for choosing them
is agreed upon beforehand. Otherwise, the dispute mechanism won’t
achieve its objectives. Especially in a country where the judicial
system has been battered by lawless regime [and a
Constitutional
Court
doesn’t exist], an alternative mechanism must exist to resolve issues
pertaining to which level of government is endowed with specific powers.
Some may say that
shared principles can only be the belief in democracy, individual
freedoms, separation of state and religion and resolving differences in
peaceful ways are suffice to commence decentralizing system of
government. In reality, when implementing and managing decentralized
system of government, literally thousands of social, political, legal
and economic issues will arise. Although we can’t discuss and resolve
every possible scenario in which we must apply our shared principles to
specific issues to resolve them, still we must strive to openly discuss
various major scenarios in order we can better prepare ourselves for the
types of challenges we will face under viable decentralized system of
government. Especially in a country where the understanding of the
wider debates of socio-political philosophy is low, extensive and
open discussions are needed to make the general public aware of the
issues. In the meantime, the political activists and experts must
themselves must engage in wider discussions and debates and then draw up
detailed plans to gradually [in phases] implement decentralized system.
A nation can’t wait while political activists are pulling each other in
opposite directions.
Clear vision can
only be articulated and formulated through transparent debates and
discussions – and ultimately through compromises among our political
activists and leadership, who then must own that vision and
campaign for it with all their unreserved energies. Absent
leadership can’t rally the public behind visions. And where aspiring
leaders can’t articulate clear vision to the public, the public becomes
apprehensive and lethargic and thus prolonging the national tragedy –
and even creating an obstacle in establishing a democratic system.
The opposition
parties shouldn’t be overly concerned about the divisive politics some
‘zeragitos’ strive to kindle on behalf of their suspect benefactors.
Others have genuine concerns and we should always encourage them to
share their views without any fear of political labeling. The
opposition camp has a mission to achieve, obligations to meet, and
expectations to fulfill on behalf and for the people of Eritrea. We can
only achieve that if we have a clear vision, which we can only formulate
once we undergo a paradigm shift in our conquest to find workable
solutions. No stone should be left unturned in this endeavor. No
solution should be ruled out without the requisite debate. All of us
have convictions within us. The quest is first to challenge our own
convictions – it is ‘bidho antsar atehasasbana’.
Productive Use of
Time
Without appearing
to abridge the rights of any Eritrean to propound his/her ideas to the
public, yet regurgitating the same debates over hypothetical situations
don’t serve our cause. Many of us fail to understand why some
opposition members insist on regurgitating the issue of ‘dialogue’ and
‘armed struggle’ as if these are the only two issues that must occupy
us. Much has been said and written on these two specific issues. If
there are those who choose to engage in ‘dialogue’, this issue can be
revisited when such activity takes place. Until then, this issue is
simply hypothetical. Similarly, if there are those who insist in
engaging in ‘armed struggle’, let them engage in such activity, and only
then should we revisit this subject. Until then, this issue is simply
hypothetical. There is no reason to engage in ‘hashewye’ over these two
topics when there are many other issues of more urgency. If any
opposition political organization must differentiate itself from other
political organizations, it can choose many other political issues that
can differentiate it.
The next
government of
Eritrea
must hit the ground running. During the current struggle, we shouldn’t
be walking around like dead zombies regurgitating two issues only.
Instead, the opposition parties should be active in formulating plan of
action needed to effect political change in Eritrea and how to ensure
smooth transition towards building democratic Eritrea considering the
significant damage caused on our nation by PFDJ.
We should be able
to envision and to anticipate the kind of issues that we shall face
immediately after the next government is formed. It will be a
tragedy if this regime is to fall and the next government is paralyzed
by its inability to articulate a vision for Eritrea. The very same
day the regime falls, the first thing that will be taken away from us is
the luxury of time. If we don’t have some of our roadmap drawn
beforehand, it will be like jumping from the frying pan and into
the fire. That is why political activists have the political obligation
not only to engage in negative propaganda against the current regime,
but at the same time and equally, they have moral obligation to ensure
that they articulate a vision for future
Eritrea.
But there must be
caution! We should never forget that this vision is being articulated
by Diaspora political movements. The purpose of this vision isn’t to
impose it on Eritreans. In reality, what socio- political course
Eritrea
will chart can only be ultimately resolved in democratic Eritrea.
Instead, the shared vision articulated by Diaspora political
organizations will have at least three purposes: first, it provides a
coherent and comprehensive platform for Diaspora political
organizations; second, it will give confidence to the general public
that Diaspora political organizations can resolve complex issues; and
third, the shared vision can be used as the guiding light for the next
government [whoever forms it]. In other words, Diaspora political
activists can assist the next government to hit the ground running by
doing some of the legwork today.
Aside from today’s
issue of how to bring about political change and ensuring security in
periods immediately a political change has taken place, there are
certain burning issues that need to be addressed,
1.
Demobilization, rehabilitation and reintegration of Warsai-Yekealo,
2.
Pension
for veteran tegadelties and civil servants,
3.
Reviving
collapsed economy,
4.
Engaging
in political healing process
While addressing
these immediate challenges, possibly the single biggest political issue
that will occupy the next government will be what political
administrative system [defining the powers, duties and responsibilities
of each level of a multi-level government] is most appropriate for the
future democratic Eritrea.
Without achieving certain degree of political certainty, other efforts
can only be made more difficult. I have brushed this topic above and
will be revisited soon.
To reiterate, it
is suffice to say that only flexible political administrative system can
address dynamic issues. We have to trash out typical Eritrean mentality
which may apply to building a house but doesn’t necessarily apply to
politics – i.e. build a house with thick steel bars and heavy cement so
that it will remain standing for centuries. In politics, we can’t
devise one single socio-economic and political policy that will serve
all of our today’s and future needs. Instead, we have to devise a
flexible political system and to develop the enabling factors that allow
today’s and tomorrow’s generations and governments to address
ever-changing socio-economic and political issues by shifting
political courses as needed without handcuffing them with today’s rigid
political systems. To reiterate, we aren’t vested with ultimate
wisdom and thus our current efforts should concentrate on addressing our
current issues – and not to formulate policies that will last for
generations like our houses. If we can do anything for the future
generation it is to lay the basic principles – equally important is to
practice what we preach - and to formulate flexible political system
that enables the future generation to adapt and to grow with changing
realities.
Finally, we should
resist the tendency to say … all this theoretical stuff is nice and
dandy and may work for other societies and nations … but our society
is different, and then we proceed to bungle up our every effort.
In reality, when we say our society is different, we are trying to
reinvent the wheel … and the result will be assured in this task of
trial and error – more errors than progress and more errors leading to
continued discord. It will be more productive to say we have a lot more
in common with other people, societies and nations than what
differentiates us from them, and then to learn from our own and other
people’s historical and current experiences. Despite our conviction
that each of us possesses ultimate wisdoms, views, and opinions on
various issues, ultimately, none of these are any good if they can’t
contribute towards realizing our objectives.
On Other Thoughts
What would
politics be without some luscious speculation?
Other than the stated reasons for interfering in Somali politics, what
could the various foreign actors gain [as secondary or third motive]
from the Somali venture?
·
Ethiopia
– earns some $ 100 Million in ‘qat/chat’ of which Somalia is one of the
major export destinations. Its real concern might be that UIC would cut
off such large ‘qat’ export both on religious grounds and as political
retribution.
·
Eritrea
– can replace Ethiopia in exporting its new cash crop [‘qat’] through
clandestine operation with tacit agreement from UIC as a form of
payback. With ‘unofficially official’ smuggled ‘qat’, PFDJ may stand to
gain immensely from skyrocketing ‘illegal qat’ prices in
Somalia.
After all, what would PFDJ businesses be without illicit trade?
·
Egypt –
although it is itself engaged in clamping down Islamic movement in its
country, it is interesting that it is propping up one in Somalia.
Possible reason: weakening Ethiopia is Egypt’s eternal effort in order
to ensure that it alone benefits from the Nile River – its lifeline.
·
Libya –
after failing to gain attention from the Arab League, the Libyan leader
wants to leave his legacy by transplanting the AU HQ from
Addis Ababa
to his home town – Sirte. Anything to discredit Ethiopia might be his
remaining life’s ambition just to get the AU HQ.
·
Yemen –
‘qat’ that doesn’t find itself into
Somalia
may awash its country. Falling ‘qat’ prices may drive its people into
further addiction, thus keep ‘qat’ flowing into Somalia under the
transitional government.
·
Kenya –
interesting that this next door neighbor and with significant Somali
population is largely trying to avoid from getting embroiled in the
internal affairs of Somalia while other nations are extending their
hands thousands kilometers away. Uhmmmm! This can raise much
discussion on the internal politics of each country!
PFDJ Mass Media
Many have
correctly criticized the hypocritical PFDJ mass media. For many of us,
what is telling about PFDJ mass media isn’t its message but what is
happening to the staffs of its mass media organizations – EriTV, Dimitsi
Hafash and Haddas Eritrea. What we know is that their staffs are either
skipping out of the country or being thrown into PFDJ dungeons. My
question to my readers is simple, if you were a passenger on a ship that
you suspect is having problems, would you follow the captain’s message
that tells you that everything is alright, or would you follow the ship
crews that are jumping onto lifeboats?
Berhan Hagos
November 29,
2006
|
