National Dialogue with partners for a common strategy
By Fesseha Nair “No outsider should impose risk preferences on those who must live with the consequences.” Joe Stiglitz In all forms democratization dialogue is absolutely crucial. Partnership is impossible without a genuine dialogue but it is difficult
By Fesseha Nair
“No outsider should impose risk preferences on those who must live with the consequences.”
Joe Stiglitz
In all forms democratization dialogue is absolutely crucial. Partnership is impossible without a genuine dialogue but it is difficult to establish a genuine partnership if one party wants to impose or dominate on others on decision making. The Eritrean opposition for democratic change still suffers by the attitude of fear, mistrust and dominance.
The last ten years, I have observed it is the attitude of negation, mistrust and fear of each other disabled us not establish a genuine partnership. A genuine partnership can be built on common concerns, visions, goals and values as well as respect, honesty, transparency and mutual accountability. We must disengage from the attitude and behaviour of dominance and accompany each other to safe our people from the disaster.
Dialogue takes time and a sustainable willingness to listen, to learn and review your own thinking. The Eritrean Forces for democratic change must first develop the culture of dialogue before they convene national conference. In this article, I will try to discuss on the concept of dialogue, modalities and the risks. But ahead of this I would like to clarify the concept of dialogue and its kinds.
Concept- What is National dialogue
The concept of dialogue has taken on different meanings in the Eritrean context. Eritreans mix dialogue with conferences. Dialogue stands for the methodology of interaction between the stakeholders. It is the instrument for formulating the parameters, which together should make up the joint understanding and partnership between the parties on policy, programme or project. Dialogue cannot occur between one who imposes his/her own ideas upon others who do not want this imposition( Suzuki). “Dialogue is not to inform views abut exchange views which need mutuality and sharing( Ringström).” The purpose of national dialogue is not necessarily to reach a common view but try to understand the different participants’ perspectives.
The kinds of the Eritrean National Dialogues
1. The Eritrean national dialogues were not based on the values of the Eritrean people but on personalities. There are no academic studies about the Eritrean diversity and its conflicts except political propaganda teachings of the cadre-schools.
2. Dialogue should be owned by the stakeholders. It should focus and involve all stakeholders. However, what I saw and experienced was that dialogue was used an instrument to unite the Eritrean political stakeholders without preparation among them. ( Example the Addis conferences and the ongoing national congress) we have seen such conferences without preparation and negotiations among the stakeholders results in new conflicts.
3. The Eritrean dialogue is not to bring together people with different views but people of the same views.
4. The Eritrean national dialogues are not nationally owned and poorly organized
Here I will concentrate on the ownership and organization.
The coming congress for democratic change is poorly organized and is not owned by the stakeholders. Looking from the concept of dialogue, a congress requires all parties to be prepared. There is also asymmetric relationships between the participants. The Eritrean National Commission for democratic change misinterpret , the term, “ Indpendence” by cutting relationship with the political organizations who are the members of the conference. Due to this there was an asymmetric relationship after the national conference held in 2010. The EDA who organized the first national conference was excluded. The Commission declared itself as the representative of the Eritrean people.
Some member organizations of the EDA and non – EDA exploited this asymmetric relation and are making alliances to defeat each other or impose their will on others.
The purpose of the congress is to bring all stakeholders together. A congress without common understanding and equal preparation is doomed to fail. A congress with power games where the stronger party will impose its will on the weaker cannot build a genuine partnership. This imbalance may drive into a defensive position, and rather than stimulating for congress.
Ownership- without ownership, there is no sustainability and thus no long-term effects. The ongoing discussions among Eritrean political and civic organizations for democratic change how much their organization of dialogues and conferences are owned by them is not clear. A congress without this perspective is not a congress. Many are recommending that how much do we own this congress? It is not only that we conducted a congress but who cares- that the congress should lead us to practical and sustainable results. A congress conducted by intervention of supporting countries is not sustainable.( See Darfur, Somalian………. And many others)
A congress or conference must first have legitimacy by its owners. It is the owners who decide together the congress agenda and outcomes. Is the commission appointed during at the conference in 2010 have the proposals for the coming congress its agenda and its prospects on the outcomes? Are the representatives or participants informed or got these proposals? I have never heard from the participants that they have these information. I therefore see a congress conducted without preparation and information cannot succeed. It is better to delay it until you prepare and own it.
Modality and its risks
In science, modality has many definitions but here it is only concerned with the conditions surrounding our situation and our organization and structure, our formal agreements and negotiations. The need for national conferences in the Eritrean political diaspora started by the Eritrean Opposition Political Organizations from 2002 and has developed since then. In 2008, the EDA was assigned to convene the conference. Ahead of the conference workshops, seminars were conducted by the EDA branches in the diaspora. A clash was created inside the EDA on its modality. One of the EDA member organization EPDP-1 criticised the modality and did not participated in the conference of 2010. The Conference was conducted were 330 persons from various political and civic organizations participated. The main agenda of the conference were:
1. National Unity
2. National Charter
3. Organizational Statute
4. Post-dictatorship-devolution of power from individual to the people- or set of rules of the transition
Have the opposition common understanding on what is national unity and what modality do need we to achieve national unity? National Unity is not something empty it is the unification of common interests and powers of decision making. Did all the forces for democratic change agree on the methods of the national unity or simply preaching it without practicing?
National Charter is a document of agreements. Do we abide by the agreements we adopted? Have we clear vision what do we want after the fall of the totalitarian dictatorship in Eritrea? Most of the Eritrean political organizations either in the EDA or outside have no vision or what they see the future Eritrea will be governed? Have the opposition common strategy to defeat the totalitarian regime in Eritrea?
The Eritrean National Commission for Democratic Change has drafted four papers for discussion but these papers were not discussed academically and pedagogically but amateurishly.
Even there is disagreement on these papers inside the commission. How can a commission given the assignment for preparing the congress call congress a this time without being itself unprepared is ridiculous.
The drafts are:
1. National charter
2. Road map from dictatorship to democracy
3. Organizational structure
4. Post –dictatorship devolution of power or transitional charter or as they call it – interim-constitution
We have seen the risks of the past national conference held in Addis 2010 and it is we who bear the consequences of these risk preferences. I see the country who assists such conference must first listen to the owners and prefer the best choice that can come benefitting the Eritrean people. Call it a congress or national conference it must first be owned by the stakeholders but not imposed by the financiers.
The National Congress for democratic change must be elongated for one year and a national dialogue with the others like EPDP-1 and other civil society organizations must be conducted. I see no changes by the coming congress unless it gets its legitimacy by the Eritrean people. The first condition for convening national conference or congress must have legitimacy from the people.
Paradiso October 9, 2011
2. This is why Americans or Europeans are working hard to influence regional and international politics every where. This is what the Chinese and the Russians are trying to do in their respective regions. This is the nature of power politics. Meles or Issaias also need to do this. The only questions are that, can they afford it? How far can they go?
If Meles or Issaias do not entertain to influence regional politics in Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Somalia … in the region, then they do not deserve to be leaders of their respective countries. Some of the participants of last month’s Addis conference, such as Habtom Yohanes are playing nave or utter stupidity by claiming that Ethiopians have no interest in Eritrea. This is not true, Ethiopians need to have a stake, otherwise they would not have paid for his air tickets and hotels. Meles is in the business of politics, not in the business of charity.
tesfa October 9, 2011
Sure Ethiopia has a vested interest in the future of Eritrea. As you rightly said it, it is a nature of power and politics. How do we define this interest of ethiopia? is it the way the Hgdefits and meskerem net and some individuals tell us or an interest that benefits the people of eritrea and ethiopia alike? my take of habtom yohannes and the likes on this particular matter is they mean to say ethiopia does not have an interest that harms the people of eritrea. i do not want to believe they are that naive to say that ethiopians do not have any interest at all.
guest October 10, 2011
I do agree that everybody has an interest, even after Meles and Issias long gone, there will be still strong interest one another unless this energy or force transformed into mutual interest that would benefit both citizens instead of nations.The reason is very simple both nations and people are really interconnected and their destiny will be the same.Many naive people try to construe both nations distinctly but they always try to compare and contrast each nation.Issias has the same interest in Ethiopia Meles has also to for Eritrea to protect their own interest, but I di believe we can come back together to benefit both nations through dialogue .it is also hard to see the advancement of one nation without the other.
Dawit October 9, 2011
We have a political ball. The players are none other than former tegadelties who now and then form political parties that are good for nothing, but tools to score political points against one another. Who are the spectators of the game, one may ask? The spectators are none-tegadelti-Eritreans who outnumber the martyred and the living tegadelties whose views of the world has been myopic and out of sync with the views of majority non-tegalay-Eritreans in particular and the world in general. Unless they are removed from the political game , or Eritrea’s political scene, Eritrea won’t have a functioning democracy.
Paradiso October 9, 2011
3. In the 1980s, Meles sent his heroic peasant Weyane army to Nakfa and Massawa to aid the EPLF, not for charitable work but, as it should be, for his own self interest and to save his own Weyane from annihilation. And Issias sent his own efficient mechanized army and well trained commando from Shire all the way to the Menelik Palace in Addis Abeba. All these events, as they should be.
There is no free lunch in politics. Habtom Yohanes’ free air ticket and hotel was not “free”. Unless, Habtom Yohanes wants to lie. The Habtom I know in the Intenet is not a liar but he may be nave. As it should be, Meles was only buying political influence in his present and future political engagements with Eritrea. This is the nature of politics, again, Meles is not in the charity business.
The only way one can limit or curtail Weyane’s influence in Eritrea’s politics is for the opposition to be self sufficient, self reliant and very united. You need to read the history of EPLF and TPLF to understand this; they were self reliant and independent from any outsider’s influence. The Eritrean Kidan/commission is Weyane’s slave; it has no choice. However, given the weak nature in the history of kidan/commission, they will always remain slaves of others. They have no choice. That is the nature of the business they are in.
Dawit October 9, 2011
So, I only see a slight difference between the two. In fact, conference seems to be more fitting for political parties with differing views to settle their differences.
Haqi tezareb October 9, 2011
1. I just saw that demo.archive.assenna.com has removed the “thumbs up or down” sentiment scale at the top of each article. Most of assenna’s articles had been getting high marks on the scale but the articles related to Kidan-Commission issues were all getting negative ratings.
In my view, it is unfair they took away our only means of rating articles. No one can hide the fact that almost all independent young Eritreans are fed up with the Kidan-Commission amalgams, and assenna cannot hide this fact.
Assenna and asmarino have a lot of credibility capital but this may be eroded if they continue to interfere with the idea of freedom of press and transparency, as well as getting direct orders from the kidan-commission.
Haqi tezareb October 9, 2011
… from part 1
2. This does not mean that assenna had always been right. There were many interviews conducted with the likes of former Jebha human rights abusers who went unchallenged. Or a worthy three hours of broadcast time evaporated on a pipe dream in a completely failed incoherent discussion called “constitutional commission” interview. On the other side, many hours were spent tarnishing the names of Mesfin Hagos and Weldeyesus Amar without any opportunity given to them to defend themselves.
If this continues, Amanuel Eyasu may be relegated to have been in the dust bins of internet media. Assenna is ignoring the fact that the kidan-commission is a complete failure. In its backyard, in London, where there are thousands of Eritreans, the commission meeting was able to assemble this week less 30 gray-haired ex Jebhas. Many of them “fossilized political rocks”.
Dawit October 9, 2011
testtruly, Truly i say to you October 9, 2011
Every reasonable serious person knows, how the socalled oppositions are agreed to disagree. So Like Albert Einstein once said it, I don´believe weather it is possible with the same mind people created problems to be able solve, with the people of gathering same kind of thinking and mentality. So because of this logic weather we like or not, all these useless unmatured oppositions group needs someone who highly matureder than them public leader figure, who enable them to organize,to unite, to direct and hold them to find the right path, inorder to fight their common enemy together. In my inference, i don´t see anyone, who qualifies for the position,either from the oppositions side or from the Ethioian regime side, like once Berhan Hagos by his proposal to Mesfin Hagos as public leader figure astonishing us all, and like Ethiopian regime romanticiser, but the Eritrean gedli despiser Yoseief Gebrhiwot also proposals either. Part 2 will follow next
truly, Truly i say to you October 9, 2011
part 2
In my belief, like in many Arab nations public uprising the Eritrean oppositions unless they be upported and without intervention of powerful nations, such as US or UK i don´t believe regime change in Eritrea will be possible. So that, it is not absolute disgrace in such difficult and very complicated Eritrean situation to seek head of public figures from other sides ,who they enable the scattered oppositions mind to bring together,personalties( makers figure like Jimmy carter or Bill Clinton unless to gain or involve in our side,). And not at last but primerlly like Fisseha Nair pointed, not only EDA,or EPDP but others groups also they should make one their mind and start to fight together for one common idea, namely to rid the dictator. The other most important point is, all religious and regional motivated parties should also stop there bullshit and unhealthy, specially untimely questions, but start to establish only three or, if more four democratic parties like pro socialist,capitalistic or liberal, economy favorited and orientated parties.
abdi October 10, 2011
eritrean oppositions through out thier history have been oppositing each other in personal benefits which they put before eritrea and eritreans..here we go again they are still fighting on who to lead the country as you said no one is good enough for leadship.and all eritreans know these oppositions are ethnic and religious motivated ppl which is the last thing eritreans need,and they added insult on injury by being gathered by woyane and in woyanes land.we eritreans suffered enough and the best and only option is ISAYAS, because he is the leader who can keep eritrean as one family without clasification into highlanders,lowlanders,muslims or christians.plus he is trustworthy national and the only corrupt free leader in Africa if not in the whole world.
guest October 10, 2011
Abdi,
Is Issias Afeworki your dad or uncle?
guest October 10, 2011
I know IA have been sleeping in different beds.
abdi October 10, 2011
Im not lucky enough to be his son or nephew,but still he’s my Kubur brother and my most repected leader GOD BLESS HIM.
I don’t have to answer such question but just did cos zeytehazelu gasha Asha moghay zemedu Sle zkhonka.
To Radio wegahta, Mekele October 9, 2011
To Radio Wegahta, Mekele Ethiopia:
1. If you have press freedom, please read this in your Radio program.
1.A lot of your news programs are very good. There is a lot of truth in it. But you still have lots of credibility or trust problems.
Eritreans are not happy when you give undeserving praises to the Commission or kidan. Eritreans do not have respect to them. They are sick to hear about them, no respect to them at all. Old Jebha has no respect at all in Eritrea or outside of Eritrea.
You spent a lot of time into your letters program one day tarnishing the good name of Dr. Bereket in a letter written by one of your close associates — memhir goytom Gebru. It was simply despicable zelefa and garbage.
Your news about “… a jeberti organization did this and that …” or “Eritrean Moslem Congress” … did this and that …” is complete garbage.