Confession: I was expecting the people who attended the EGS symposium would be part of this dedicated forum but no one other than the usual forum members participated so far. Well, we will move on hoping they are reading us!

Rezen: “Opening of the meeting: I can’t help noticing that the meeting “started with about 50 and grew up to probably 80 people in the progression”! You mean people did not respect the start time of?

Response: Yes sir! The group announced to start at 8 AM and I was there on time but it did not start its program till about 10 AM. And some people showed up late after it started and one or two after the symposium was over. We have a problem respecting time as you know and I saw it in the symposium as well. To me, there is no excuse for this and no way out through “Blackman’s or Eritrean time” excuse because time is common universally. Civilized people respect it and others don’t: we are not that civilized to respect time and punctuality. It, appeared, however that the program was over on schedule.

Rezen: ““Exploring Possible Scenarios for Eritrean Transition to Democracy”
It is very interesting and bold undertaking. As a rule that is what it should be i.e. preparedness, well in advance, on the required action. The four subdivisions that you listed as the “group dispatch” of the symposium are truly ambitious undertaking. It is worth repeating them here:

a) Developing a strategy- a road map and a comparative analysis for pre-transition period
b) Framing the political and judicial structure of the transition period;
c) The Role of Eritrean Societies and all stakeholders throughout the stages of the transition periods,
d) The Mechanics of the government and good neighborliness post transition period,”

I have a question? Assuming [] that all the above are accomplished, by the restricted few, in a professional and detailed manner — hopefully in a foreseeable future — would there be an occasion where ALL “Eritreans” in the Diaspora would be requested for evaluation and FINAL approval? Or, is it a question of take it or leave it? Note that I only picked the ‘Diaspora’ for the simple reason that the wretched-poor-noble-people of Eritrea inside Eritrea have no say on their Life, anyway.

Response: I cannot answer this question precisely since I am not a member of the EGS nor do I know how this group was structured and other related details about from my first contact ever. I think they can answer it better but I don’t believe (a and b) were accomplished from the symposium, the foundation for them may be. The theories presented by the panelists should first be compressed/expanded and the potential application of the resultant output in our society clearly defined. An integrated final theoretical material should then come out of the effort to serve as the group’s fundamental foundation to build practical democratic elements on. By elements, I mean said “strategy- a road map and a comparative analysis for pre-transition period [and said] framing the political and judicial structure of the transition period”. The assignment should of course investigate societies that transited from dictatorship to democracy through a transitional structure (government). EGS can in the long run come out with a full-fledged comprehensive TRANTIONAL PROGRAM (its version) fit for Eritrea in relation to other universally relevant social experiences (Somalia, Liberia, etc.) but only if it focuses on it. EGS has to produce something tangible out of the symposium first before it presents it for final approval from the people or imposes it on the same.

Rezen: If the originators of the symposium indeed have in mind of ALL “Eritrean” factions, would they transmit their report to all concerned? In other words, where does all this end?

Response: Excellent question to entertain! Clearly we cannot endlessly research and philosophize on how to transit the society to democracy needless to say that this symposium was the only one I know initiating the topics for discussion. Vividly, its practical aspect may wait because of issues beyond this topic but not the theoretical in my opinion, which is within the reach of the scholars that attended the event I don’t see any valid excuse for not producing a final product from the EGS symposium, for it would be waste of resources otherwise, to leave it there with no follow up effort aimed at something conclusive. The Eritrean reality is not something you lecture on and walkout without an assignment!

I would certainly transmit the final product if not the preliminary to all opposition groups to evaluate, comment on and even amend (in their own ways) if I were EGS management. The effort has to end up producing something tangible on the topics EGS picked for the symposium and the minimum would be a written TRANSITIONAL FORMULA (EGS’ version) that can be examined by the Eritrean people for approval. I have personally addressed this issue in the symposium with Professor Araya Debessai assertively underlining the notion to the panelists and the audience.

I also heard the Assenna interview (Amanuel’s) with the group and I think EGS is expecting a follow-up from the panelists in the near future. I thought I also heard that they will transparently communicate it with the people through the available media (Assenna, their Website, etc.). It may take them a little time to patch up and we will see what happens. END

Eritreans’ Uniqueness or Exceptionalism: As you all know we Eritreans lived thinking we were better than other societies until our performance after independence proved us terribly wrong. Our fallaciously high opinion of ourselves should have motivated the professor panelist to pick this topic for presentation and it makes sense. He said our inflated individual or social self-perception was similar to other forms of empty exceptionalism in other societies. In my interpretation, he humorously reminded the crowd to take it easy in this regard for it was nothing other than misconception of reality, self deception so to say. I agree: I believe we are backward compared to many African societies in education, in economy, beurocracy, communication, perception of democracy, basic infrastructure (water and electricity), intellectual confidence, etc. In fact the first panelist Professor affirmatively told us that Eritrea currently stands the second poorest country in Africa despite its potential wealth.

Denial of this can only produce the empty Eritrean Arrogance that put us at the rock bottom of the continent in everything. Our obstinacy and denial starts from the regime down to the lowest stratum of the society. “Habo, sikifta, Entaigedeseni, Sukbel taigedeseka, Ayraekun/aysemaekun, hasadnet, etc.” are cultural diseases that testify our backwardness in many aspects of life. Clearly, one needs knowing the self and one’s potential and capacity to succeed, which we Eritreans have a problem with.

The former Asmara university professor Dr. Sara Uqbai says this to this effect,“Strong and blind nationalism can breed fragmentation because we all need to do research [for] what brings us together and see if we can compromise. It seems that one of the things the opposition has inherited from EPLF/PFDJ’s is ‘no compromising’ arrogant mind set. We should stop being control freaks?” The characteristic profiles the Doctor briefed are to my take derivatives of underdevelopment. What we learned in the last 23 years of experience about ourselves contradicts our self perception to the point of surprise: we found out that we cannot even organize ourselves on common grounds and we dwell on minute negativities instead of moving forward via forgiveness. We personalize opinion differences because we don’t have democratic culture at all.

The panelist professor to my understanding predicts transition to be a very difficult process ahead and the situation may implode collapsing the government as a consequence. There was, however, no suggestion about what we can do in our part to prepare for the unpredictable possible scenario. I found the situation like tracing a disease without suggesting a remedy although it is too premature to conclude. Let us first see what comes out of the symposium and what the next plan may be before we arrive at conclusion in this regard.

A very interesting question from a physically fit and sexy looking scholar:To my understanding democracy is the best solution for ethnicity driven issues in a given society. You cannot converge people to a common ethnic group but you can deal with the consequence of ethnic difference through fair justice system and constitutional democracy. Should there exist convincing evidence from a minority group for special attention, Affirmative Action can resolve the drift like the US does it in relation to blacks and women as the President of the Eritrean refugee assistance program said in the discussion. This, however, is impossible without democracy which should be the priority of all Eritreans at this point in the challenging road ahead. Knowledge says that the US is composed of all types of people from the world with different cultures and complexions.

Americans are different in material and psychic composition but every citizen is equally protected by the constitution irrespective of race, ethnicity or place of origin. Democracy holds them together like gravity pulls matter to the ground. It allows them to peacefully coexist through fair justice system like a nucleus keeps atomic electrons in their respective orbits.

In such a setup, every ethnic group in the country is protected by default derivative through an individual’s constitutional rights. Every Eritrean-American is for example individually protected by the constitution and so are our ethnic groups by apparent rationale as a result. If democracy secures individual rights of the people, it should indirectly secure the rights of ethnic groups as well because an ethnic group is a collection of individuals related to each other by common cultural and/or traditional values. Therefore I don’t see any conflict of interest here since the process by which a diverse society peacefully coexists within starts at the individual right level of the relationship

On Diaspora’s effect in the resistance for change: One of the organizers said that “Italy, Israel, the US, UN, Sweden can help because they are directly affected by this problem (flock of refugees)” but only if we approach the issue properly. These governments cannot help us no matter how ready we think we were unless we show something in writing. They want to know what type of change we want and how we plan to do it based on other experiences and universally understood roadmaps for getting there. The change that is assumed to come in Eritrea must conform to their understanding of a decent society for them to help and the only way to do this is for Eritrean social scientists designing a written transitional formula that has the potential to work according to their expectation. I strongly feel that the symposium was an opportunity for our scholars to prove their intellectual substance universally and they can do it. Nothing should stay in the way here except organizational problem and lack of strategic substance in my opinion. I actually assume that they have started working on it already, just assumption, for I don’t see any reason for not. I don’t have information in this regard.

The regime has indeed divided the people but did we exasperate the division through quietism? I believe we, the educated class of the society did not fight back for a long time. The ordinary mass has been trying to do something without our effective involvement. We could not guide the confused youth scattered everywhere and expanding in number not because of incapacity but because of personal reasons. We failed to academically challenge the opposition forces and this is the output: uselessly sitting around without political vision. To me, there is no excuse here and we have to share responsibility of failing the society parallel with the regime. I do believe the regime spends millions to divide us but it could only succeed if we allow it through quietism. I don’t accept the theory that makes the government responsible for our division in the absence of aggressive effort from the Eritrean intellectuals worldwide against. Let us please modestly take this responsibility and do something to improve the situation rather than making the regime responsible for our failure.

The answer from a panelist was “SECURITY and HUMANITARIAN” tasks and I agree. Someone should deliver security and humanitarian needs in the process of democratizing the country and that in my understanding is a TRANSITIONAL GOVERNMENT that should take power immediately after the fall of the regime. As we stand today, the military inside the country or the ambitiously shallow and selfish opposition forces will replace the government in the absence of a transitional government but I cannot tell you whether they will effectively secure the society and the country for humanitarian assistance to flow in without a problem. Once again, the intellectual class of the society will be responsible for anything going wrong in post Afwerki Eritrea should it decide to continue napping on the question of TRANSITIONAL GOVERNMENT after Afwerki because we can do it in a short time utilizing the collective intellectual power in the symposium alone. This collective intelligence can and should immediately initiate this process of designing the transitional formula because it is the priority of the society and the ultimate role and obligation of the scholars that attended the symposium, needless to strongly stress that EGS management should take the responsibility of organizing this momentum towards a successful end. To be continued!