THE POLITICAL REPORT OF THE

5TH GENERAL NATIONAL CONGRESS

Our Congress has convened after a delay of one year, largely due to external factors that hindered our movement. We, therefore, congratulate ourselves and our people on this historic occasion. No doubt, the conditions we see currently unfolding on domestic and international levels vary in many respects from those that had prevailed at the time our 4th National Congress concluded its sessions.  

International reality today is characterized by the domination of a single and undisputed world power, and the ongoing process of globalization that has manifested itself on economic and political spheres. This has created a situation whereby the United Nations has virtually become a body to which the weak can hardly pin their hopes in their quest for justice, whenever their interests happen to contradict with those of the dominant global power. Although globalization does seem to postulate openness in world trading relations, it has, nonetheless disadvantaged the poor and weak states in the Southern Hemisphere to the extent that unjustly benefited the rich and powerful North, thus widening the gap between the two spheres.  

On regional level, the countries on the African Continent, especially those in the Horn region, are known to be among the poorest in the world. The peoples of these nations lack the technical and economic strength to absorb the pressure of globalization. Consequently, their chances for reasonable competitive economic development have been shrinking. Given the imposing weight of the global order and the ruinous and repressive policies of the current regime, Eritrea, as a fledgling state, could lack the space that would allow it make any viable move towards development. Politically, during the past few decades, our region has been engulfed in conflicts and devastating wars. The post Siad Barre crisis in Somalia that had spun out of control, due to the fierce power struggle amongst the various vying political forces had brought the country to a virtual state of non-existence, as central political control was lost. And to make an already bad situation worse, the Ethio-Eritrean conflict had spilled over to their arena and negatively impacted the Somali condition. Graded as one of the cruelest wars Africa has ever witnessed at the closing years of the 20th Century, the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict has been a fertile ground for tension across the entire Horn region.

However, following the agreement among the Somalis in the Arta Conference in Djibouti, which intended to restore normalcy to the Somali state on the one hand, and the Algiers Agreement between Eritrea and Ethiopia, on the other, had apparently given a ray of hope for peace and stability in the region. Nevertheless, we should not lose sight of the possibilities of the region relapsing to yet another round of tension and conflict. The fact that some of the Somali forces opposed to the new government of their country are still pitted against one another and the Isayas regime, which has been a reservoir of troubles and wars in the region, is still in power make apprehension about the future more real than apparent. These two sources of instability keep dangers to peace in the region lingering on the horizon.

On the Eritrean side of the equation, the regime there has no longer the potency and ego-trip of five years ago that aroused its passion to menace and assault one neighbour after another in a feverish bid to assert itself as a regional bully. Successive internal and external failures have substantially curtailed its maneuverability, causing its erstwhile supporters to step back or distance themselves from it altogether. The repercussions of these fiascos have galvanized into an open rift within the ruling establishment triggering bitter internal power struggle.

In contrast, the ELF-RC is no longer in the state of weakness it was in on the eve of the 4th General N. Congress. The influences and alliances the regime enjoyed and utilized in pursuing our organization have passed away. In fact, the regime itself is suffering of increasing isolation in the region. Having emerged from those difficult conditions, thus, our organization today stands on a more stable ground. Better organized and well positioned, the ELF-RC has been able to challenge the regime on several fronts, and play a leading role in the context of our joint struggle with other Eritrean opposition forces. Moreover, the Alliance of Eritrean National Forces has become an organ to which our nation hinges its hopes for setting itself free from the shackles of the dictatorship.

The regime has shown no sign of any change of motto or policy since our 4th General National Congress was held in October 1995. To the contrary, it has escalated the cruelty and ferocity it had demonstrated in its inhuman measures to the extent its relationship with the Eritrean people dropped to its lowest level. Furthermore, the regime has been resorting to base and extremely dangerous methods that have endangered national cohesion cemented during the long national armed resistance. Chauvinistic, arrogant and terrorist tactics of divide-and-rule have manifestly reinforced repressive policies that have characterized the regime's ways. The sensitive nature of religious differences and sentiments was calculatedly stirred and instrumentals to divide the people and serve the power interests of the regime.

From 1994 onwards, and subsequent to the severing of diplomatic ties with the Sudan, following surprise accusation it leveled against the latter of “support for destructive activities by the Eritrean Islamic Jihad Movement”, the regime had been shamelessly attempting to drive a wedge between the two major religious communities of our country. It has been striving to realize these malicious objectives through deliberate ploy of portraying the Eritrean opposition forces as proponents of Shari's system of rule that would relegate non-Muslims in Eritrea to second-class citizenship. By this means, the regime hoped to instill fear and suspicion among the followers of the Christian faith, easing thereby its way of turning them into a social base for its power under the cloak of championing their best interest. As though this was not enough, the regime added the element of regionalism as yet another expedient for splitting the ranks of the people in order to satiate the dictator’s hunger for domination. This latter maneuver has indisputably been proven by the document the regime’s embassy in Washington issued in 2000. Such an infamous act stood as a stark testimony to the diabolic extremes the regime is capable of going in order to stir up baseless suspicions among inhabitants of various zones.

The social composition of our organization and the national line it represents have proven their compatibility with our people’s national interest to a much more higher degree than mere representation of the social set up of the Eritrean society. Such a status has accorded our organization the competence and qualification to challenge the mendacious acts of the regime. As a matter of fact, by exposing its lies and true identity, our organization has proven that the regime represents none but its own self. The mask of exhibitionist pretension used to pose itself as the champion of one religion against the other has been torn asunder to show its real agenda: staying indefinitely on the saddle of power.

Apart from the respect our organization has gained by virtue of the initiative it took and the role it played in the formation of the Alliance of Eritrean National Forces, the principles enshrined in its Charter have proved to be the appropriate and decisive response to the false allegations the regime has been keen in spreading. The unequivocal acknowledgement of basic liberties; independence of religious faiths; acceptance of religious, cultural and social pluralism and approval of legitimate rights and obligations as basis for citizenship in Eritrea had shattered the false contentions of the regime.

In February of 1997, the regime had its constitution ratified without any question or dissent in the ranks of the so-called National Council, 50% of whose seats are filled by members of the PFDJ Central Committee. However, despite the fact that it was meticulously tailored to serve the very interest of the regime, there has as yet never been any show of intent to enforce the document as law. It has remained locked, and shall stay there; collecting dust until perhaps some voices from within may some day claim it.

Indisputably, the defeat of the regime in the Ethio-Eritrean war and the terrible devastation it left behind was an eye-opener to many members of the ruling party to see facts hitherto hidden from them, or the reality they had chosen not to see. Humiliation felt by the entire population notwithstanding, the regime capitulated to pre-conditions the winning side had imposed. It was forced to accept a 25,000 km. sq. buffer zone, wholly located inside Eritrean borders to be used as what came to be known as the Temporary Security Zone under the control of international peacekeeping forces. The armed forces of the other side had deployed right on the border of the two countries without conceding an inch of their national land.

Clearly, the June 2000 defeat was a shock that sent the regime reeling in total loss of orientation. Many of its stalwart supporters, who until then applauded and ululated for the regime and its falsehood, began to lose confidence. Significantly also, the shock seems to have mellowed the attitudes of some Eritrean intellectuals who had abdicated their special social merits to distinguish between right and wrong, and chose to serve the regime as mute apologists of its horrendous mistakes, despite repeated calls to consult their conscience and side with their injured people.

After the debacle had shown them what had really taken place, those intellectuals began to direct bitter criticism against the boss of the regime and his way of running the affairs of the country and complained about monopolization of political power in his hands. They went public to underscore the need for democratic system, political pluralism and national reconciliation.

Nevertheless, to think about them, and others that are turning their back on the regime, depart from the same set of objectives could still be misleading. Moreover, the emergence of a reformist wing opposing one-man rule from within the END was another important event the post Eritrea-Ethiopia war has produced. But its role in weakening the regime and its contribution on the national stage remains uncertain until it comes forward with unambiguous position on crucial matters that concern the people and the country. It is only then that the true political color of the group could clearly be visible and the speculation of whether or not its objectives are limited to infighting for power is dispelled.

On our part, in order to interact with the current events with wisdom and competence, and deal with them in ways beneficial to our cause, we observe that there is need for careful and thorough study about the scope of the June 2000 defeat. The top-to-bottom changes it triggered inside the regime would have to be appraised vis-à-vis the continuing struggle of the Eritrean people.

The other very sad side of the EPLF regime’s story has been the fact that our country, which its children had anticipated to embrace them from dispersal and exile imposed by colonial wars, has been plunged into a much worse inferno. For the second time in its history, its youth are being forced to abandon it in thousands by deserting the ranks of the army or the training camps. They are flocking to seek shelter in neighboring Sudan or other spots around the wider world. Their rejection of the war policies proves the regime has utterly failed to persuade them about the credibility and righteousness of its choices.

The flight of the youth from their homeland at a time of its dire need has posed a new challenge to the opposition forces, in general, and our organization, in particular. Obviously, these young Eritreans are ill-equipped and have very little knowledge about the history of their people’s struggle. All they know is what the EPLF had inculcated in them or what they gathered from reading books it had published for the sole purpose of distorting and tarnishing the leading role and national record of the ELF. Under the circumstances, the need to offer them support at the initial stage of their exile entails a crucial responsibility. They should simultaneously be armed with all the facts they lack by way of a clear and concise programme, that can help them reshape their orientation in favor of their peoples national struggle and in ways that could help them contribute positively to the ongoing struggle to oust the dictatorship and ending the suffering of the nation.

On the economic sphere, the EPLF government has during the past ten years hardly accomplished any useful work to improve the condition of ordinary citizens. All its efforts have been preponderantly channeled to enabling the ruling party grow into the biggest business cartel by controlling all lucrative sectors of the economy in the country. Pressures and obstacles had been studiously applied to protect enterprises belonging to the ruling party by way of blocking competition from domestic and foreign investments. As the logical outcome of the system, thus, moral bankruptcy, corruption and sleaze inside the institutions and the organs of the establishment have become so rampant that they could no longer be hidden. To assuage the widespread public anger, the regime came up with yet another pretension and launched in 1996 a special court to deal with corruption!!.

The EPLF government had extravagantly squandered the scarce material resources and productive manpower in its unjust wars of aggression. Soon after the flare up of the Ethio- Eritrean war, the value of regime’s currency, the Naïf, plummeted 50% against the $ US. The army of the unemployed increased in folds, famine ravaged large zones of Eritrea and the poor standard of living of common people kept on falling.

The implementation of the 1994 land law of the regime did not only cause economic damages; it also produced dangerous social and political tensions. When the ruling party grabbed fertile land from its rightful owners for itself and its supporters with capital in the Gash region without any worry for compensation or redress, there emerged, as counter-reaction, a resistance movement based on purely regional and ethnic lines. Though demanding back the usurped land is legitimate, it has also entailed social ramifications. Tension between natives who were robbed of their possessions and citizens arriving from other regions to receive land from the government has been fermenting. Moreover, the sale of land belonging to villages surrounding the urban centers to rich Eritreans living abroad and capable of paying the government in dollars which it covetously awaits has been another source of friction. The deep resentment this has caused among the villagers aside, loss of land here has been transformed to overt resistance against the regime’s land confiscation policy.

Our position on the economic policies of the regime has always been unequivocal and for good reasons. The already paralyzed pace of development of the war ravaged economy in our country had further dropped, and the living condition of our people plummeted. Our organization had challenged the land law right from the beginning, and unambiguously declared that no authority has the prerogative of usurping land from its legal owners and transfer its ownership to persons having no legal right to it.

Regarding Eritreans who have been paying their money to the dollar-addicted regime, this organization has unmistakably made it clear through an official statement that the Executive

Committee issued in accordance with the directive of the Revolutionary Council. The

irresponsible measures and acts of land grabbing by the regime were condemned in the strongest possible terms, apart from serving the clearest warning to individuals who chose to purchase land from an authority that does not own it. The people have widely applauded and commended the position our organization has adopted on the land issue; and our declaration had received strong support among the general public.  

The Regime and the Neighboring Nations:

Right after the collapse of the former Soviet Union, the balance of power had shifted in favor of the only remaining world power: the United States. The US administrations soon rushed to assert undisputed domination in various strategic spots of the globe. Likewise, in the strategically significant zones around the Horn of Africa, the US baptized some leaders of the countries there whom it considered as loyal watchdogs and proxies as the "new generation of African leaders". Being one of them, the ruler of Eritrea was more than ready to join in. His dire need to safeguard his regime and satiate his urge for playing Israel’s role in the Horn of Africa matched well with US-Israeli interests. He showed undisguised enthusiasm to prove himself as the right tool for executing their plans in the region. This was, unsurprisingly, the root of the Eritrean dictator’s dangerous embarkation on stirring up conflicts with neighboring countries. Nations in the region, whose peoples deserved gratitude

for their sustained support of our people’s cause, became targets of his adventures, while quarters, who overtly declared hostility to the right of our people to self-determination and openly sided with the enemies of our revolution, became his trusted allies. His need of an umbrella covering his diabolic bid to assert himself as a regional player had cost our people very direly. We recall today that right after our 4th Congress, the regime had a series of surprises ready for us: tension against yet another neighboring country had been sparked. Just one year after severing its relation with the Sudan and turning itself into an outright enemy, the regime stirred up another dispute with Yemen. At issue here was the question of sovereignty over the islands of the Hamish Archipelago. It was barely a month after our Congress, in December 1995, that the Eritrean forces were sent to ignite war at Greater Hamish. Our organization immediately declared its principled position on those developments, and rejecting military option for resolving disputes, it demanded peaceful resolution of differences by appealing to the two governments. They were repeatedly urged to go to the negotiating table, while in the meantime restoring the status quo ante until a final agreement would be reached. Next, and in a way similar to its behavior with Yemen, the regime provoked hostilities with Ethiopia: a closest and long-time ally. In May 1998, and in a surprise move, Eritrean troops entered Bade, a border territory which at the time was administered by the Ethiopians. On these events too, our position did not vary from the one we had on the war against Yemen. While underscoring that from legal perspective Bade should be within Eritrean sovereignty, the 23 May 1998 declaration of the Executive Committee stated the following basic points:

1. That the border dispute should be settled through negotiations and not the military means; denouncing the side resorting to the use force.

2. Withdrawal of forces from disputed areas; and endorsing a mechanism approved

by both sides to administer the disputed areas until conclusive solution has been found.

3. The disputing parties to agree on arbitration by an international court and commit

themselves to abide by its final ruling.

4. Allow citizens of one another’s country to cross the borders at will just as they had

been accustomed to and graze their herds.

5. Refrain from inflammatory rhetoric and belligerent acts. Sadly, all that our organization had warned about did indeed take place. We stated early, and at the right time, with all clarity that unless a speedy resolution is found, the situation would develop and explode to a dangerously ruinous war whose main vulnerable victims would be the peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia. What started as a border dispute flared up into a long-drawn and terrible total war because of the arrogance and intransigence of Eritrea’s dictator who rejected proposals for a peaceful approach to the crisis; the heaviest price was paid by our people. The principled position we maintained on both wars, Yemen and Ethiopia, did not only earn us the expected venom and vicious arrogance from regime alone, but also from the blind supporters of the PFDJ who for long had been hopelessly conditioned to judge matters with chauvinistic outlook. They repeated after the high priests of the regime’s propaganda machine vile accusations, and leveled against us the worst adjectives in the basest available words.

Nonetheless, not much water had flown under the bridge before things changed. Soon after what we had warned had befallen, all those with modicum of wisdom were able to see the scope and veracity of our vision. Indeed, we have lived to witness today those who raised the loudest voices against our declarations are seen writing about, and advocating, the messages and contents of our statements which they very much loathed and rejected.  

International Relations.

Subsequent to the conclusion of the 4th Congress, the center of our activities moved closer to the proximities of our country. The isolation of the regime in the region, and repudiation of its conduct, had helped us to relocate and strengthen our presence in the Sudan, Yemen and Ethiopia. Guided by our political programme, we were able to carry out important organizational tasks in those countries and beyond, in countries of the West. Every opportunity has been taken advantage of to utilize the favorable conditions that availed due to events of the past few years, and positive results have been registered. And, to make our relations even more productive in the future, efforts will have to be made to give the region the attention it deserves. In the context of the countries of the West, endeavors were made to gain membership in the Socialist International. This aimed at promoting the profile of our organization and obtaining a wider platform for our views and contacts, apart from more solidarity assistance. Socialist parties in France, Sweden and Germany have pledged to support our bid, and contacts with other parties have won us considerable understanding. Moreover, our differences with the German Green Party, which has hitherto had close friendship with the Eritrean regime, have been reasonably narrowed after opening a channel of dialogue with it. This will be pursued further for better relations. Needless to say, more efforts do still await us to expand our contacts in similar

directions.

The preparedness shown by the US State Department in June 2000 to meet with the

representative of our organization and listen to our views was a positive sign in its own right. The impression we gathered from the talks there concur with the testimony of the new US ambassador to Eritrea before a Senate Committee. He had testified that promoting democracy in Eritrea was at the top of the list of his assignments. Of course, more work is needed to develop those contacts further. But, as much as our relation with the United States requires due attention from us, it is very important to note that it should be built on the basis of mutual respect, common interest, maintaining in the meantime our independent political decision.

Naturally, the success of our external contacts is a reflection of our internal strength and influence. The absence of open popular resistance on the arena, led by our organization or others, portraying instability inside the homeland that matches the picture of the suffocating realties presented by the opposition has been sending mistaken messages to international public opinion.

The impression there has been that the regime enjoys popular support while the opposition is localized to some few spots outside the country. Despite widespread unpopularity of the regime, there is as yet no head on popular show of opposition in the streets of our towns and villages with the regime. But, it is increasingly appreciated that it is the cruel intensity of repression and terrorization in the country as well as some organizational problems that have been hindering our people from bringing their grievances to the open.

On another front, our organization has been working to open up communication channels with the United Nations agencies, especially with the Human Rights High Commission. These contacts have been useful though more work is needed to open similar channels with other organs of the UN.

In respect to Africa, the Organization of African Unity receives our publications from time to time. However, failure to make better progress in that realm is one of the cases that have to be admitted. Nonetheless, we did have information exchange opportunities with various African leftist and democratic forces, either in power or opposition. Reasonable chances for expanding these contacts in future are available. Admittedly too, no efforts were made in the direction of the Arab League despite its significance as a regional organization.

The signing of the cessation of hostilities agreement by the PFDJ regime, and its compliance with it to a degree, might have partially eased its isolation. It has, indeed, been seen making moves to restore tactical contacts with Yemen and Sudan, which was later followed by Djibouti. Evidently, however, once our people are able to bring their struggle to a more advanced stage, chances are that the regime would neither be in a position of breaking out of isolation nor would it be able to win back the trust it has squandered among the international community.

Nevertheless, the regime shall still strive to hide behind the peace agreement and endeavor to repair its previous relation with Ethiopia, for instance. But, the damage it had caused is too deep to heal so soon and so easily. It cannot, however, be ruled out that the regime may, under cover of pressure from some countries, strike deals targeting the opposition forces. Under pretensions of non-interference in internal affairs and preservation of peace, arrangements might be devised against the opposition forces. In case of such eventualities, policies and tactics which governments might adopt would need to be carefully studied. But generally considered, the wind of change and democracy has become an international concern as well rather than just an Eritrean issue.  

ON THE POLITICAL SPHERE

Right after the conclusion of the 4th Congress, the leadership had vigorously embarked on

explaining the political programme and the principles contained therein. No obstacles worth

mentioning have been encountered save the expected anti-democratic strategies of the END

government. Despite the efforts of the regime, our programme had found wide acceptance among our membership and the people in general. The ruinous internal and external policies of the regime have shown the people, in practice and substance, the naked dictatorial nature of the regime.

Against such a background, our people have appreciated the compatibility of our programme with the realities and problems of our country. As a result, the people understood that only the

definitive end of the regime would make room for the programmers qualified to remove the

hardships from which the nation continues to suffer. Even some members of the PFDJ itself have appreciated that perception and began to identify the regime as a dictatorship. Despite the fact that many of them still have their sight on internal reform, the developing circumstances indicate that the pendulum for the downfall of the regime is swinging faster than ever before. The emergence of a PFDJ faction opposed to the one-man rule is a case in point, and can be listed as a positive indicator.

Following the adventurous wars of the regime against all the neighboring countries, the space of operation available for our movement in the region contiguous to our country that was in the past virtually closed to us had substantially broadened; and these advantages opened for us opportunities to carry out our activities among Eritreans living in the neighboring countries, in addition to offering us the space we needed to reinforce channels of communication with our people in the homeland. Moreover, our presence there was significantly helpful in discharging, within the bounds of our resources, our duty towards Eritrean nationals victimized by the END wars; we could do what we could to monitor developments that affected their lives, and provide them with the necessary assistance and counseling.

The authorities of the regime have been visibly traumatized by our presence and activities in the neighboring countries, especially in Ethiopia. They had, therefore, unleashed intensive and hysterical propaganda campaigns against our organization, and others, in an attempt to tarnish our image before our own people. The PFDJ government had stooped so low as to accuse us of treason by pretending as though fighting a defensive war of aggression launched by the former colonizers of our country! Old suspicions and memories have been viciously drummed to inflame emotions and incite our people to rally in support of its unjustifiable war.

Such malicious propaganda campaign was carried when every one among our people knew for a fact that the present rulers of Ethiopia could not by any stretch of imagination be compared to the former Ethiopian authorities that presided over the occupation of our nation. Indeed, the memories of the audience the PFDJ government was trying to reach were still fresh about the EPLF’s long time alliance with the Ethiopian rulers it was accusing, their recognition of the Eritrean people’s right to self-determination while in opposition and unconditional co-operation to implement that right when they acceded to power.

The regime’s accusation of us of treason could not hold because the nature and credence of our organization was an open book to see. No single being could second-guess that it would ever enter into alliances at the cost of the Eritrean people’s supreme national interest, its declared principles and its tested and fierce defense of its independent political decision.

Nevertheless, it could not be emphatically suggested that the regime’s vicious and expensive campaign could not cause some ephemeral confusion among some circles, in general, and even a few members of our own organization. It would not be unexpected that active presence of organizations in Ethiopia at a time it was at war with Eritrea could give rise to some misgivings among gullible patriots and non-partisan supports of the regime. Indeed, that was the incentive for donning the cloak of defending the nation’s sovereignty by the regime, and spending huge sums of money and resources. But, because its false pretensions and deceptions were equally countered with determination and steadfastness through straightforward messages our people could see our identity beyond any room for ambiguity.

ON INFORMATION

The organization registered significant successes in the area of radio programmers that have been broadcast since 1997. Given the situation in which the country has been turned into a prison of its own people, this medium of communication has been vitally important.

The Tigrigna and Arabic radio programmers that were broadcast three days per week had operated up to December 1999, occasional interruptions notwithstanding. This was crucial to our people as a valuable source of information, moral boost and education. Later, these services were supplemented by another half hour weekly transmission that is still functioning though suffering from some problems related to range.

In this context, too, a new transmission has been launched in May 2000 specifically focusing on East Africa, the Middle East and North America. This covers one hour three times per week broadcasting which was later on revised to two hours per week to Africa and one hour to Europe. In the regions to which the transmission has been directed, especially in Eritrea and the surrounding regions, the role of the radio programme has proved irreplaceable; people await the programme with enthusiasm and patience. In addition, there are also successful and continuing local broadcasting programmers launched by our members in various cities of Western Europe and America.

Not least significant too, members of the leadership and the organization have been taking advantage of opportunities provided by the Internet to explain our views, defend the identity and history of our organization as well as articulate its vision for the future. Besides, the Internet has offered enormous space for exposing the falsehood of the regime. Our publications have also been playing a recognizable role. However, when the quantity, scarcity of cadres, delays, distribution problems and limited number of copies reaching the inside are considered, the success we have had cannot match our expectation. Last but not least, moreover, the annual Eritrea Festival, which has just been held for the 16th consecutive year by the initiative of the Democratic Union of Eritrean Youth branches in Europe, has been playing vital role in disseminating our organization's views and highlighting the realities prevailing in our country.

ON THE ALLIANCE OF ERITREAN NATIONAL FORCES

Our engagement in the task of unifying the opposition forces should be appraised in the light of the important call for dialogue our organization had released in 1992. On the basis of that initiative, there were a series of useful negotiations with various organizations. The contacts centered mainly on proximity talks for confidence building and easing tensions involving some organizations, allaying suspicions, halting mutual accusations and clarifying points of differences and agreements.

Obviously, at that time quick agreement for co-coordinating efforts against the dictatorial regime could not be hammered out. But eventually, consensus on a Charter was reached and the Alliance of the Eritrean Forces embracing all of the opposition organizations was formed. This achievement became a very significant historic event because it responded to the wishes of our members and the Eritrean people at large. Moreover, the Alliance became a good framework for resolving misunderstandings and clearing suspicions, apart from providing a mechanism for joint publicity and diplomatic campaigns against the regime. Our organization's role on all these levels had certainly gained it great respect.