Editorial
Last week, the long journey that lasted for more than six years came to an end. Ever since the Eritrean Democratic Alliance (EDA) succeeded its predecessor, the Eritrean National Alliance (ENA) in 2005, the notion of holding an all inclusive national conference has been on its agenda.
Since its formation in 2005, a number of attempts were made to organise such a conference. For example, the idea of organising an inclusive national conference was discussed in great depth at the Annual Festival in Kassel, Germany few years ago. A significant part of the festival time was dedicated to explore the means by which an all inclusive national dialogue conference could be organised. The festival went to the extent of electing a committee with the mandate to conduct a proper study on the subject and put forward ideas that could facilitate the process of organising a conference that would provide a forum for national dialogue and cross-fertilisation of ideas and visions.
Although the committee did in fact publish the outcome of its study, for some unknown reasons, both the committee and its report were ignored without any explanation. Notwithstanding this, the proponents of the would-be conference never stopped harping on its importance in promoting national dialogue and strengthening the ineffective and divided opposition. However, no concrete steps were ever taken to make this happen. The EDA seemed to be more pre-occupied with the never-ending rivalry among its own members (who lacked any sense of unity of purpose and vision) rather than with what ought to be the priorities of a competent opposition at a time when the country was facing gigantic internal and external challenges.
This being the case, it was only about a year ago that the EDA suddenly announced its plans to hold a conference within a year. To this end, it also announced the formation of a preparatory committee comprising some of its members and civil society groups. However, although the EDA was excessively pre-occupied with the notion of a national conference since its birth in 2005, it has not been able to underpin this endeavour by a clearly defined vision. Not only was it unable to identify the goals and objectives of the so-called conference, but it was also unable to rally its member organisations behind the idea of a national conference.
Besides, neither the ill-conceived preparatory committee nor the hastily organised workshop improved the situation. On the contrary, the EDA was plunged into a much deeper internal crisis resulting in one of its members, and a significant one as such, boycotting the conference altogether. Paradoxically, a national dialogue conference whose aim should have been to bring about a much needed unity and harmony within the opposition camp has, inadvertently exacerbated the pre-existing divisions.
Notwithstanding the newly aggravated and to a large extent dangerous trends of divisions within itself, the EDA leadership ignored all calls urging it to postpone the timing of the conference until such a time when at least its own members came to a common understanding regarding the aims and objectives of the conference. The EDA leadership disregarding the potential dangers, went ahead with its plans to hold the conference in July 2010.
The Ethiopian government which is said to have footed all the bills and provided the logistics for the conference had reportedly tried to bring the parties together, but in vain. After they failed to rescue the situation, the Ethiopians are said to have suggested the convening of another conference in the future. This suggestion was embraced by the conference and that was what the Ethiopians had wanted from the outset anyway.
The final communiqué issued at the end of the conference communicated a number of resolutions, the most important of which is the formation of yet another preparatory committee for the future conference. For many, this was another proof that the ownership of the entire process has been and still remains highly questionable.
Other important resolutions include the entrusting of the committee with the responsibility to draft a transitional constitution to be presented at the planned future conference. The latter is expected to form a transitional assembly or parliament in exile. The last two resolutions also raise questions very much related to the issue of ownership. Contrary to any rational expectation, the EDA’s excessive pre-occupation with holding consecutive conferences is underpinned by the assumption that there is already a power vacuum in Asmara and hence its prioritisation of transitional arrangements that would facilitate its ascendance to power.
The reality on the ground being far away from this wishful assessment, the central questions that arise are: what is going on within the Eritrean opposition camp or what are the Ethiopians up to? These are the central questions which every change-seeking Eritrean democrat should be raising.
It is important to critically reflect on these questions bearing the following factors in mind:
- the latest United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution 1907;
- the sudden surge of ethnic-based organisations;
- the so-called conference of nationalities held in Mekele in northern Ethiopia a few days before the EDA conference; and;
- the recent fanfare regarding the so-called transitional constitution and transitional assembly.
Are these indicators of a somalisation project for Eritrea in the making or is this just yet another proof of an ever confused opposition? Time will tell, but that time may not be that far away.
In conclusion, it is good that the conference was held. At least those who expected miracles would now know that there is no such a thing and those who had raised questions may find some answers and now be able to readjust.
The EDA, by missing the priorities of the nation and its people and by failing to address its structural deficiency, it has once again proved right those who have always doubted that it has a vision for Eritrea. The gap between the expectations of the people of Eritrea who are crying for the restoration of the rule of law and the priorities of EDA cannot be wider. A genuine and patriotic opposition is one that knows the priorities of the people it is supposed to serve. The people of Eritrea deserve a better opposition and certainly a better government. Unfortunately, neither of what we have is what we deserve. It is therefore high time that this dilemma comes to an end.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|