New Page 2

TO THE POINT

Actions Taken by the Chairman of ELF-RC

Facts and Fiction

The Nharnet Team on "To The Point"

Dear reader, it is only appropriate to start by thanking you for your readership and continued support as well as continued comments, criticisms and advices. It is obvious ELF-RC has gone thru trying times and stages. The negative impacts of those stages are regrettable. However, no matter how difficult and complex they seem, diversity of opinions always leads to the next stage. Dusts settle, clouds clear, ideas get crystallized, strategies get formulated and the truth comes out. Many things are said in times of confusion. Eventually the truth some how makes its way from the mud no matter how thick of a swamp.

On our last comment after the infamous RC meeting, we told you that the leadership came out in unison. Many of you could be wondering if we misled you. This topic will be our next commentary on "To The Point". For now let's stick to the heading and share some of the actions by the chairman and try to sort out what was fiction and what was fact of the things you heard. It is rather too difficult to point out every little campaign item but may be able to clarify some of the main political actions that matter.

What was said /heard	The Fact
1. Seyoum insulted people, spit on some, and pushed some one in the 5th Alliance meeting.	Seyoum was chairing the political section. He did not insult, push or spit on any one. To the contrary, attendants appreciated and congratulated him on the skill he displayed in leading the meeting.
2. Seyoum stood and nominated himself. But, no one seconded him and that is why he walked out of the meeting.	The delegation of ELF-RC, Ahmad and Seyoum did not participate in any of the nomination and election meetings. It is rather impossible to nominate yourself when you are not in the nomination meeting. He read the statement and the delegation walked out before any nomination process started. We feel those who were told by their leaders to the contrary should challenge their leaders. How do they trust what they would tell them the next time?
3. Seyoum decided to withdraw from Alliance.	First and foremost, it was a walk-out, not a withdrawal as the two have different political meanings. Second, it was a walk out from the meeting not a withdrawal from Alliance. Third, it is only RC that can make a decision of withdrawal from Alliance/ENA. Fourth, the delegation, Ahmad and Seyoum walked out as a result of a decision by the whole leadership (EC) in the vicinity.
4. Seyoum engineered the walkout to elongate his stay in power.	The Executive Committee members present at the vicinity and RC speaker collectively decided on the walkout. Seyoum did not even have any specific suggestion of any action. The following were the suggestions forwarded in the EC meeting a day before the walkout along with the individuals who suggested them: Mengisteab Asmerom: let’s us present our candidate to the election. He further noted that he wants to see the ENA member organizations to elect the Cooperative Party by raising their hands. If that happens to be true he said he will no longer trust the organization and he suggested that we refrain from holding and position or office in the Secretariat. He just defended the walkout because it was a collective decision. That is what leaders of integrity, discipline, and courage do. He was the one who defended the walkout openly. He never revealed his own suggestion and was politically sliced mercilessly by those who are splitting now under the leadership of Ahmad. Ibrahim Mohammad Ali: Let’s participate in the election meeting and argue to make our point accepted. If that did not happen we show our reservation by refraining from casting our vote and continue accept the outcome of the meeting. Yet, he was the one who sent internal memo telling members that the decision was made jointly by the leadership and not something imposed by Seyoum. He did not mention what his own suggestion was in the circular. Ahmad Nasser: Put forward the suggestion to walkout. He convinced the others that it was the right response. It then ended up becoming the collective decision of the leadership. He never defended the walkout openly or other wise. People known to be close to him were at the fore front claiming that the walkout was the work of Seyoum. So, did Seyoum really engineer the walkout? We leave it to the readers to reach their own conclusion.
5. Seyoum is chauvinist and said things about the Islamist groups.	1. Seyoum together with members of his delegation defended the whole opposition in the European Union Parliament meeting when PFDJ representative Andebrhan W/giorgis claimed that the Alliance is a terrorist organization and has ties with Al-Qaeda. 2. He always defended that point when he met with representatives of governments in Europe and USA saying that the root cause of problems in Eritrea is lack of democracy. He always went with a delegation when he met with other government officials and those members of the different delegations at different times can attest to this fact. 3. Never once in any meetings he conducted with ELF-RC members did he say any chauvinist things against them. 4. Seyoum was the only leader who sent a letter to the President of UN assembly defending the Alliance against PFDJ representative allegation that the Alliance is a terrorist organization and has ties to AlQaeda while the leaders of the other organizations were busy conspiring against him. His record and his actions prove contrary to this defamation. His firm stance on the struggle to establish a democratic secular government does not make him any thing but a champion of democracy and a default spokesperson of human right.
6. Seyoum changed the EDU-RC leadership in Germany illegally.	This needs an explanation beyond the scope of this commentary and we will seek help from Germany to clarify the point. How ever we have ascertained the following points: The union was under ELF-RC organizational structure not an independent civic association. The fact that all the members of the committee are members of the European Committee of the newly structured split organization by Ahmad proves that point beyond any doubt. An effort to resolve the issue was made by the Head of Organizational Affairs, The chairman himself, and a committee composed of an EC member and two RC members. They refused to abide by any decisions of the organization's leadership, and withheld funds. They did not want to hear any clarifications from the leadership. Either the leadership had to do what they wanted it to do or there was no chance of resolution. They presented themselves as representatives of all the ranks and files of ELF-RC all over the world. The fact is that they are the ones who did not want to resolve the issue. The leadership (Seyoum and Mengisteab) took temporary action and the whole leadership EC+ Secretariat) ratified it. The bottom line is that it was being fueled by Ahmad and group and there was no room for resolution.
7. Seyoum is showing undemocratic symptoms in his leadership style.	The problem is no one knows the actions that are the cause for this claim. The walkout was decided collectively. The resolution about the Germany situation was passed collectively. All ELF-RC branches around the world told us that he works through a delegation when ever he meets with government officials or other Eritrean organizations when he was Head of Foreign Affairs. We found out that the claim to be baseless. His trademarks are those that are found in true democrats. Being honest and a person of conviction and passion do not make you any less a democrat. A leader without a clear stand who sways to which ever direction the wind is blowing an opportunist and does not lead an organization any where at the end of the day.
8. Seyoum is anti -ENA and anti- unity	Taken every one's action into consideration, ELF-EC as an organization, and Seyoum as an individual has had the most significant role in promoting the opposition in the western hemisphere by his relentless and tireless efforts. It was his ability to participate in world and regional organizations that played significant role in bringing measurable recognition to the Alliance. His frequent meetings with Eritreans brought many of the evils of PFDJ to the surface. He served as a voice of the human right abuses in Eritrea by his tireless communication with world human right organizations and issuing effective statements about the human right transgressions by PFDJ. He campaigned on behalf of refugees in Malta, Italy and any where else. He advocated for making the Alliance effective by restructuring it. He advocated for a single Opposition National Army in his call for political pluralism with a single constitutional army. Standing against conspiracy and having a centrist views does not make one anti-ENA or anti-unity nor does it take away any thing from Seyoum as a champion of democracy and unity. Democratic and honest unities last and can alleviate sufferings of people. Conspiracies and temporary one another's back scratching among leaders however doom people's aspirations.
9. Ahmad and his group have decided to split because they could not work under Seyoum specially in his stand against his rejoining the ENA.	We refer our readers to Ghere Tewolde's article in Tigrinia. (link here). We can't say it any better. RC, the legislative body of ELF-RC, set out guidelines for the Executive Committee. A dialogue committee was assigned to work with the ENA. The dialogue committee did not even start work. The RC documents and EC clarification have been posted on nharnet.com for every one to see. It is RC that has the final say on this issue and the EC has to abide by that. Seyoum and the rest of the EC members (five of them) followed the RC decision. Ahmad and Dr. Beyene decided not to adhere to the guidelines and therefore issued a call for members to abandon their organization, ELF-RC, and join the ENA. The meeting of EC had just ended when they issued their call. When did they start working that they try to convince us that Seyoum hindered their work? What are the projects that they could not accomplish because of Seyoum's interference, decision, indecision or other behaviors? ELF-RC members are too experienced to accept wild claims without asking hard questions.
10. Seyoum is assigning his own supporters in all key positions replacing those who do not align with him.	The process that he adopted was the Executive Committee members nominate their own appointees for the offices they head and the EC jointly approves the appointment. In fact, some of the names they floated around in their rumors as having been replaced are individuals that were nominated by Ahmad to other positions in the Foreign offices he was supposed to head and approved by the EC. Once he nominates them and they are approved for another position, their old positions get filled in the same process. Meanwhile, their deputies fill in the gap until a permanent placement is made. They have not provided any concrete example where the chairman did any thing outside this normal process.
11. “Seyoum is anti-Islam and anti-Arabic language.”	This counters his record as reflected by the people and by fighters in areas where he spent most of his time in the struggle. In fact, he is known to champion harmony, mutual respect and acknowledgement and respect for the pluralist nature of our nation. He vigorously confronted EPLF’s anti-Islamic propaganda more than any other that he was labeled by the EPLF as a man who has integrated to Islam and Arab culture. When we checked around where this defaming point comes from, it is a mystery that revealed itself when he became a chairman. He is not a known religious or church person either. As far as the Arabic goes a fellow comrade who knew him in Akeleguzay routinely known as 'qusri aserte' shared with us a message Seyoum sent to a group of fighters who questioned the legitimacy of Arabic as an official language: “ This has to do not only with the will of the people and the requirements of unity and harmony, but it also has much to do with reality. Even if Eritrea had no Moslem citizens, we would still need Arabic, more than we would English. Our environment makes it a necessity and also offers an asset; and it is a blessing that we have Islam here for the richness of the culture and literature therein and Moslem Eritreans as added bridge with peoples in the region. Do not forget as well that we are all of Afro-Asian origin.” - translated from Tigrinia. Can some one who has this background turn into something else in few months just because he was elected a chairman?

The facts being what they are as explained above, why all the hype and all the negative campaign against the chairman is a question no doubt our readers ponder. Even though giving a complete analysis is beyond the scope of this commentary, we shall attempt to provide a brief overview as concisely as possible:

As with any global politics, the Eritrean politics has left and right extremism as well as centrist ideologies and views. That is the corner stone of the current campaign against ELF-RC and its leadership. The organizational platform is based on purely secular democratic national principles that do not serve the groups that advocate the right religious extremists with a strategy of establishing purely religious Sharia government. This centrist principle equally challenges the left extremists that advocate the split of our nation under their advocacy of right of nations including secession, an outdated communistic ideology that has been abandoned by almost all its previous sponsors. ELF-RC's policy against foreign interference in our internal national matters is in direct collision with those who advocate to get rid of Isayas even at the expense of intrusion into a national sovereignty.

The ENA is an alliance of all organizations and personalities advocating the above extremist views. There lies the very reason why the proposals of ELF-RC were rejected and more extremist elements were inserted in to the newly adopted charter. To this effect, ELF-RC naturally becomes a common target of all the right and left ideologists. At the center of this phenomenon, a strong orator, a true democrat with centrist views, a man of conviction in what he believes in, as well as a keen defender of Eritrean sovereignty who would not allow external interference in the internal affairs of today's ELF-RC and therefore in tomorrow's Eritrea gets elected at the 2nd regular RC session. It does not take much political analysis to see why all the above extremists see him as a treat to their extremist agendas and thus all the negative campaign that literally amounted to character assassination as well as blackmail using fabricated propaganda.

ELF-RC as a National Democratic Front houses individuals and groups with the extremist views and tendencies mentioned above. As a result, the chairman faces some resistance and outright opposition from within. These groups within started their campaign as soon as he was elected a chairman. They started spreading rumors that the grassroots have not accepted the change of leadership; there is a secret party in ELF-RC; ...etc. Those individuals had a plan not to give the chairman a chance to lead. They were scared that he would be effective and successful. The only choice they had was that to paralyze the organization to prove that he is not capable and therefore remove him from his chairmanship before he has a chance to implement his vision. They did not want to give him a chance to fail as they knew deep in their hearts that he would succeed. In less than two months, they "won a political lottery" as the 5th regular annual Alliance session took place. We are not going to bore you with the events that every one knows of that meeting. This has served as an impenetrable cover to their refusal of transfer of power smoothly based on the democratic process of the RC meetings.

Ahmad had suggested that being a chairman of ELF-RC and working in the leadership of the Alliance is too much for one individual. He had openly suggested that the chairman and the one at the leadership of the Alliance should not be one individual giving his own experience as a chairman of ELF-RC and touring with Tewolde as a delegation of the Alliance. Looking back now, one can easily deduce that it was with the hope that he will be chosen as a leader of the Alliance that he was putting forward this recommendation. However, politics is a dirty business and a lot of times does not go as planned. The other organizations had plans of their own and so conspired against ELF-RC. Neither Ahmad nor Seyoum was about to be considered for nomination. He realized that he was not the chairman of ELF-RC and was not going to be in the leadership of the Alliance.

The leadership of ELF-RC (Secretariat and EC members) who were present in Addis met to discuss their options of response to the conspiracy against ELF-RC. Ahmad then came up with the suggestion of walking out of the nomination and election meeting. The suggestions put forward by Ibrahim and Mengisteab got sidelined and the walkout was adopted. He knew very well that the practice of the leadership is that a decision is defended once accepted by all the majority and who voted for what suggestion is not disseminated to the rank and files. His close allies started calling members blaming Seyoum for the walkout. He had a big outside help from an organ that does not hesitate to misinform the public based on its members' inclinations and sentiments known as awate.com. Awate.com reported that Seyoum (instead of the delegation as decided by the whole leadership) withdrew (instead of walked out) from the meeting (instead of specifying which meeting and for what purpose). Ahmad kept quiet while Seyoum, Mengisteab, and Ibrahim were receiving political slaps from right and left. He did not even bother to send a one sentence statement to senior cadres acknowledging at least it was a joint decision. His followers continued attacking Seyoum followed by Mengisteab and Ibrahim as if he forced the walkout on Ahmad and the rest of the leadership. Ahmad declined an invitation for an interview from nharnet.com.

Once he thought that the chairman was wounded enough, his followers started screaming for a meeting of RC. The calculation was that Ahmad's followers would be able to influence the others to unseat the politically wounded chairman and bring Ahmad back to the chairmanship. It did not happen. To the contrary, his followers ended up at the receiving end of criticisms for their destructive behavior. When they could not win legally, he led them to a split, a favorite practice of those who only practice democratic centralism only if it favors them. Now, people are asking why did Ahmad authorize the liquidation of Battalion 149 and the rest members of EDM in 1977. Why did he order the imprisonment and liquidation of the force know as "Yemanawyan"? to mean right extremists. Why didn't he call for National Congress in 1981-1982 even when the whole leadership declared that it had failed to prevent disintegration of ELF (Jebha Abay)?

Dear reader, any chairman will have strong and weak aspects as a human being. No one dreams of perfect leader as it would defy human nature. It is impossible for every one to like an individual leader. A leader should be held accountable for his/her actions and decisions based on facts and circumstances under which the action was taken. A leader can be replaced because of accountability issue or simply because he/she has lead long enough and a fresh mind and vision is needed. It is quite easy to do that in ELF-RC. RC has the authority to change a chairman as well as part or the whole leadership in its regular sessions which is held annually. This is the corner stone of its democratic principle of the organization in its struggle to install a democratic institution in Eritrea. The lack of the peaceful democratic transfer of power in EPLF is at the heart of the problems in our country. One can argue the same as the leading cause of problems in Africa and other developing countries as well. Abiding by the will of the majority and truly handing power to the people takes a democratic conviction. Therefore, no matter how much they do not like the chairman or regardless how much of a failure they think of him, they should have abided by the will of the RC majority and let us see his failure and success for ourselves and replace him in due time based on our organizational democratic constitution. In conclusion, it is not what the chairman did that has caused the split of the organization as all actions that matter have been taken either by EC or RC; it is rather what those who wanted to split chose to do that has brought the organization to its current predicament. If it is a matter of failure, we do not have to go further than the record of Ahmad, a chairman for 22 years. How many times did Jebha disintegrate? How many times did it end up in internal fight under his chairmanship? If he is entitled to any position, any one regardless of the level of failure is entitled to lead.

Where does their action leave us as an organization? It is time to clinically treat the bruise. 'Meseretat' (grassroots) have steadfastly decided to keep their organization alive and kicking. Branch after branch in the areas where the destructors were claiming have influence made it clear to that effect. All organs of the organization are functioning normally. This is a matter of principle not a matter of supporting this leader or that leader. Of course, the leaders that adhere to the letter and spirit of the democratic principles are appreciated as a natural outcome of their democratic conviction. The leadership should go by its daily function replacing the vacant EC positions. It is encouraged to bring fresh blood to the leadership like what was done with the head of the organizational affairs. Members should not worry who decides to split and who stays. Those who do not understand our conviction to principles may try to spice it with "so and so is close to x or y, thus ...) are telling their own immaturity, inclinations as well as their bias. ELF-RC members are about democratic principle not about individuals. They are about long term and lasting solution for our country not to who is having what position or title. That is what they learned early on from martyr Said Salih when he was not elected to any leadership position in 1975. He started as a unit ("hayli") commander and did all he could regardless. His respect sky rocketed while the credibility of those who decided to split like Herui hit rock bottom. That is what they learned from Ibrahim Mohammad Ali when he did not make it to RC at the congress held in Gondar. When he saw that meeting participants were concerned, he stood up and told them that the result that did not elect him was the outcome of a democratic process and he would serve at what ever task he was assigned. Now, he is back holding one of the most critical if not the most critical positions in the organization. That is a noble example of a democratic conviction. The issue for ELF-RC grassroots, our supporters and our people is whether a leader's conviction is for a democratic principle or a permanent placement as we see in many other organizations.