Visit the new AsenaTv Website

https://asenatv.com

Voice of Assenna: London Debate on Change needed in Eritrea – Part 2 ( Apologies for the occassional poor sound quality), Thursday, Dec 12,2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G25BM6wGDCY&feature=youtu.be

aseye.asena@gmail.com

Review overview
27 COMMENTS
  • Liban December 12, 2014

    The way the guy at 24.14 interrupted and the one who was snickering is rude behavior that should not be tolerated. We need to respect each other and stop acting as if we are better that others.

  • AHMED SALEH December 12, 2014

    From all the ideas or arguments between the participants of this debate , I agree at the
    point view for our willingness to tolerate different opinions of each other and to form a
    united front prior to the question of political change . In addition on the notion of political
    parties leaders ambitions and statues on future Eritrea must be clear because our people won’t
    make same mistake to give unreserved support like they did with Issayas .
    Indeed radical change can ease the weak and powerless feelings of our people if we want
    to revolutionize our people and words must have practical movement to influence , even
    confrontations if that is what it takes . We witnessed the recent history of uprisings .
    I can say most of the ideas are similarly internalized as personal experience like images
    from our life span to become part of our dream . The forces what stir deep with us , taking
    root to our minds as thoughts has the power to change what we do finally at the end .
    This frame of mind will help to our young to be more open to real knowledge against doubts .

  • ERITRAWIT December 12, 2014

    Nay behakey des zble tmhrtawey eu. Gen geeze yelene hantey maltey ms-twesek N Iasais awet eya. nezen ztefelaleya wedbat ab hade m- msa kelel aykonen. Kemtey Amaule zbelo tewesakey hages enber Ab weshetey zelo mnkskas bzbelese ab weshetey zelew slezfelto buko nay Isaias B kemey bzlale megedey khyele msrah tray eu maltey Isaias khaser zkele.

  • rahel December 12, 2014

    IT IS REALLY SAD TO hear PEOPLE ARGUEING ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR ERITREA as tough this brutal dictator will be gone tommorow, by sitting in air conditioned room in LONDON, 24 YEARS OF THIS TYRANY RULE and yet rather than concentrating all energy to ghange the brutal dictator, people are hiding in european cities and shout and discuss change ,we are not even close to over throw this dictator and look what those people are arguing .ON THIS WORLD WE LIVE IN NO ONE HAS GOT RID OF BRUTAL DICTATOR OUT SIDE THE COUNTRY THEY INTEND TO FREE ONLY BY TALKING coprende?IF YOU WANT CHANGE MOBILIZE THR PEOPLE INSIDE THE COUNTRY and let them decide what king of government they want,THE only thing you can do for those living abroud is support and finantialy help ,AND NOT WHAT WE ARE WETNESSING IN london.

  • Gezae December 12, 2014

    The features of radical political change are abrupt reversal of political system, accompanied by social, cultural, and economic unrest, swift change of political elites and state laws. This hard for to day Eritrea and it is not 21st way of political struggle. In the globalization era the best was of struggle for democratization is not the old fashion of revolution. It is the new revolution. The word radical itself means- having extreme political or social views that are not shared by most people. This is undemocratic
    The second, progressive or reformative path of political change is opposite to the revolutionary transformation. It is a gradual process of modification in government, laws, social elites, mainstream culture and economy. Reform by itself means to put an end to (an evil) by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action. That is what the EU is now starting to work with the PFDJ/PIA government. It is more democratic than radical, but not enough for the Eritrean people. The Eritrean people need to choose themselves.
    Therefore I would say the best choice change is constitutional democratic change. Because the Constitution ensures our people fundamental democratic rights to choose what ever democratic system they like.

  • Gezae December 12, 2014

    The features of radical political change are abrupt reversal of political system, accompanied by social, cultural, and economic unrest, swift change of political elites and state laws. This is very hard for to day Eritrea and it is not 21st way of political struggle. In the globalization era the best way of struggle for democratization is not the old fashion of revolution. It is the new revolution. The word radical itself means- having extreme political or social views that are not shared by most people. This is undemocratic
    The second, progressive or reformative path of political change is opposite to the revolutionary transformation. It is a gradual process of modification in government, laws, social elites, mainstream culture and economy. Reform by itself means to put an end to (an evil) by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action. That is what the EU is now starting to work with the PFDJ/PIA government. It is more democratic than radical, but not enough for the Eritrean people. The Eritrean people need to choose themselves.
    Therefore I would say the best choice of change is constitutional democratic change. Because the Constitution ensures our people fundamental democratic rights to choose what ever democratic system they like.

  • Delai Fithi December 13, 2014

    Compatriots,

    The burning question facing our country is how to get rid of the dictatorship.
    What will happen post dictatorship is not in our control. Change has its own logic.
    It really is a futile exercise to talk about radical change or planning at this point.
    The only thing I am anticipating is that things can’t be worse than what they are right now. And that is a step forward. As for what Eritrea will look like post Esayas, no one can predict. I don’t think even God knows!

    • rahwa December 13, 2014

      We need to discuss and investigate the scenarios that could follow the removal of the system. we cannot say let’s get rid of eseyas and then the future is not in our control. change has its own logic. there is a lot we can do to positively impact change if we really want to. it is good to be alert and conscious about important issues. it is vital that we know what kind of change we are seeking, what we can do without and what we need to do in order to spare our people and our country from getting into another crippling messy state after eseyas and his croonies are gone. we are not looking for another eseyas. so giving another eseyas a chance is suicidal.

      • Delai Fithi December 13, 2014

        Rahwa,

        You are very thoughtful. In principle, I support everything you say. My rationale for focusing on getting rid of the dictatorship is for practical reasons. In my individual life, I have been more successful when I have one or two goals and pursue those goals doggedly. I say the immediate focus should be on that. Our best hope for that is through a military coup followed by a benevolent military rule. And yes, military rule. Not all military rules are bad.
        Some benevolent dictators have left positive legacy for their people. Some examples are Bourguiba of Tunisia and Kemal Atatürk.

        I believe any other scenario will be a recipe for disaster and will result in losing our sovereignty. We are located in a tough neighborhood. We are not ready for democracy. A benevolent dictatorship can help build the institutions necessary for eventual mature democracy. Eritrea is too small for the all the power hungry elites scrambling for the spoils of power.

        • rahwa December 13, 2014

          Delai Fithi,
          see! you have come up with one scenario yourself. there may even be more if we open our hearts and our minds and we start talking in order to communicate not just to be heard or to show how educated or smart we are. we need to have serious platforms where we can discuss serious issues. now if your scenario is as good as you say, if you think it could work for us, don’t you think we need to debate it seriously? don’t you think we need to raise public awareness about that also in order to make sure our people takes full responsibility in case something went wrong?

          • Delai Fithi December 13, 2014

            Rahwa,

            I must admit you are a tough cookie but I suspect you operate from the vantage point of western liberalism or even worse the ivory tower of academia. The late Eritrean professor Tekie Fessehatzion used to say, let us not throw the baby with the bathwater.

            I am in the medical field Rahwa. In the emergency room, there is no democracy. It is strictly hierarchy. Saving a patient doesn’t allow for the niceties of democracy. Eritrea is like a patient in the emergency room.
            You know where the tumor is. Just remove it. Recuperation and rehabilitation can be done in the luxury of democracy. But first thing is first. Hutsus situation calls for Hutsus measures. There is no time for Kemish Adey Hankulini. No disrespect meant. I guess I am a dictator at heart but I don’t believe in killing people to achieve my goals. I realize that is a contradiction in terms.

  • Mike December 13, 2014

    This is how I felt on this program – disgusted! Eritrea is bleeding however.

    The first person who was supposed to ask kept yapping. That is the problem with Eritrea. He is a complete wastes. No one would stop him! The program was moving to a new phase question and answer not to rephrase again. Again, his name I think is Berhane. What an idiot. I m thinking this person called Berhane has empty pride and was compelled to say something and destroyed the mood. Berhane – when you are on stage one day – you do that now listen and ask if you could. Again, this person called Berhane kidnapped the whole program! Berhane – repeated, South Africa, Iraq… Berhane – I never met you and I do not want to meet you ever but shut that yapping mouth and simply ask if you had a question.

    Worst yet, the person who was acting as a mediator – first stated that the program was moving to question and answer then went on with Berhane’s idiotic plan. What is wrong with you people! Do that in coffee house – when you have a program – follow the program. Do not bring your friendship when working on solving a problem!!!

    Then goes Assenna team – instead of re-aligning the program to its program phase when at it.

    Then the program moved to suggestion, discussion, massaging…then was suggested to take Emmanuel’s out and discuss the other two! What a lost/sad cause!

    Then some started throwing word of English and adding numbers and subtracting numbers and I can clearly hear the mediator breathing heavily. The discussion moved on to another planet and back to Earth….. This one was painful. Painful to a max. degree. He went on to calling few African Countries and back to Eritrea and kept swimming and swimming – he rested finally.

    Then another man came late, Goitom” and the game started again. At this point I figured this program was a coffee house talk! This man Goitom – was amazingly valueless!

    Then Habtegergs came in – he seems to be lost after sitting and listening all of them apparently. He again, kept going over the same thing. Basically swimming in the same mess. At this point, I started to think Eritreans need to start from scratch. Like political 101, or Respect 101, or Behavioral 101,….something 101.

    Then came Asefaw – if this Asefaw is the Dr. Asefaw….Eritrea run away from this man. After I saw him on another program I said – no hope. This man is not honest and not man enough. Asefw kept saying – the system in Eritrea is abusive, brutal …..I agree but I say Dr. Asefaw – did you just walk up today? What is bad is this program I heard today. Then Dr. Asefaw rejected the panels approach and amended it for them. Again, I got tired of this ma too and just gave up. Whoever called this program is a very poor organizer.

    Finally – I had to go up scroll up and see where in the world this was happening – then I noticed it is in London – I guess that is what the Londoner’s do- completely mess up a program. But I must say to the program provider – very poor and very unorganized. I give for this a grade of F. People, if you can not lead – do not do anything. Just stay put for you are giving the evil government in Eritrea another life line. To my beloved Eritreans in this site….Do not fire at me – listen for yourself and then decide.

    God pleas bring someone who could lead Eritrea!

    • rahwa December 13, 2014

      Mike,
      don’t be frustrated. i know where you are coming from. i think the moderators could have been more forceful in directing and redirecting the discussion. we Eritreans we enjoy talking even when we are not saying anything. that is a curse. so on top of what i could learn about the issue i learned what not to allow during a debate. interesting discussion, as a whole though.

      • AHMED SALEH December 13, 2014

        Mike
        Understandings , respect and group work requires tolerance on each other . No need
        to take personal on somebody’s different point of view like the example of 2 plus 2
        equals 5 and 6 which is wrong answer but can easily corrected if there is a will to
        learn from listening .
        Progress comes when people take great ideas and turn the impossibilities into possibility.
        The goal should always based on possibility thinking ; it might look impossible today but
        that doesn’t mean impossible tomorrow . We let faults control our lives and we also surrender
        leadership to the faults instead first recognize them and then rise above them .
        WUHUJ KEYMEXE MENHGEDI WUHUJ XIREGH says in Tigrigna . Doing nothing rather complain about our
        problem as an excuse only brings disappointments .

  • Truly Truly i say to you December 13, 2014

    Mike the debate is not like you contempted was bad, in deed it was very interesting, very teachable, everybody should to encourage and appreciate it. I think you are born negative to see only people´s fault and defect. Where is the encouragement? Last time Tegadalay Yemane he did his best to expose Isyas´s un reveal crime, but you find any means to discredit him. These panellists also they did their best but no one lefts you, you run after everybody. What is your motive at all? May PFDJs sent you to discourage everybody or what? We know PFDJ as using sadistic method by defaming and despising how they lead people to be crazy, to do suicide, or by belittling and humiliating how to put a person out of politic . They did it to General Ukbe Abreha, Sherifo etc. They did it to Naizgi kiflu, they attempted to humiliate and make crazy Dejen Andi Hishel, to discredit Ambasador Andebirhan but they couldn´t because they clever. And now you strongly run after Dr. Asefaw, may next to Amanuel,Soliman and Abdu, What is your motive at all?
    If participants have no competence in this debate like you asserted Mike; it is not a big deal,they are like anybody of us normal citizens on learning process not elected experts. But Suliman´s and Abdu´s point is very teachable which everybody should to put in its mind and consideration, however the Amanuel´s card is very logical argument and best solution, there is nothing to repair the regime.
    The question is how?
    In my view not only the three panellists forget the decisive role of the western powers impact, but all our oppositions they never put in to their consideration about that. But believe or not, like or not unless our struggle supports by these powers like Arab spring , regime change will be nightmare, impossible. But if the US gives green card in deed it is so easily as much as you thinking. May be in our own might what we can do is, if there is courage in broad day light to execute the main sinner leaders, this could also will lead us to change the regime. If you like this is the honest easiest card, first step solution, then you will see how all things dramatically will be changed by it self.

  • Berhe December 13, 2014

    At first I must frankly state that I live in Eritrea but happened to listen to the debate here in Europe, where I am on a temporary visit. My commentys could be sumnmed up as follows:
    1. The three panelists were all reasonable and of a good standard, however, the audience, or rather the moderator, failed to give the a specified time for three of them and come up with a conclusion after ironing their ideas. In my o[pinion, it weas a questiion of semantics and nothing else/
    2. As whether it tackled the urgency of the problem and whether the presenters, panelists or the audience really have connected thier ideas to the aspirations of the Eritrean people at home, I can dare say that it is totally in the negative, other than saying it is an excellent academic exercise.
    3. You may ask me what my recommendation is, and I would sum it as follows: a) If you cannot be part of the solution, you are part of the proble. b) If you cannot win them join them, and you cannot do that by remote control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

POST A COMMENT