http://ascenteq.com/project/epdp

EPDP Editorial

First, we would like to express our appreciation for the comments and critiques given by EASE. But, the writer has missed the context and the essence of the EPDP Editorial Article. Here is why:

The Context:

• EPDP believes that Eritrea, as a nation-state, is the result of a common and long history of the social, economic, and political struggle by the people (the different ethno-linguistic groups, including Afar) who inhabited and constituted the present day Eritrea. In essence, Eritrean is a shared identity that was more enhanced and solidified during the 30-year war of liberation for which Eritrean people from all walks of life: all ethnic and nationalities/social groups, young and old, men and women came together and died in search of their freedom, liberty, and national sovereignty. Thus, Eritrea is a pluralistic society that belongs to all Eritreans (individuals, ethno-linguistic groups, etc.) equally. Furthermore, EPDP believes that the proper management of Eritrea’s diversity in post PFDJ Eritrea is a critical determinant factor for the continuity and sustainability of Eritrea as a nation-state and for a durable peaceful coexistence among its diverse ethno-linguistic groups.
• EPDP recognizes that the struggle against foreign occupiers was not waged in the name of one nationality or social group, nor was it waged by one nationality or group. It was a cumulative force of Eritreans whose loyalty to their own social group was never at variance with their country, Eritrea. 
• EPDP understands and knows the fact that, instead of establishing democratic governance structures and resources allocation system that allows all population groups full participation, the regime from the outset adopted extractive and exclusionary laws that allow it to capture absolutely all the benefits of our independence. As a consequence, many population groups in our country were and are marginalized politically, socially and economically. Here, the Eritrean Afars are no exception.
• For EPDP, Regionalism in the Eritrean context is not the same as ethno-linguistic affiliations. Regionalism or “Awrajawinet” (Serewetay, Akeleguzetay, Hamasienetay, Barketay, Senhitetay, etc.) is the result of regional self-awareness or regional self-identification ascriptions and the bases for these kinds of cleavages in Eritrea are the Italian colonial legal administrative regions that had been developed solely to serve Italian interests. The Editorial Article used the term “regional mobilization” in this context.
• EPDP believes that the major culprit for generating regionalism and identity politics in the Eritrean political landscape is primarily the undemocratic nature of the Eritrean regime, which suffocates the political space. Hence, indisputably, the solution for Eritrea’s ills squarely lies in dismantling the kleptocratic regime and replacing it with a democratic system of governance in which real power lies in the hands of the people of Eritrean and in which justice and rule of law with all its features become the solid foundation of Eritrean life. It is very legitimate to argue about how best this noble aim can be achieved.

The Essence:

As stated in the Editorial Article, EPDP wishes to reiterate that the single solution to the Eritrean quagmire is to dismantle the dictatorial regime and to replace its absolutist and extractive political and economic institutions by a pluralistic and inclusive political and economic system through establishing a united front of the democratic forces of Eritrea in the opposition, including the Afars, both inside the country and in the Diaspora. In this, the Political Program of EPDP stipulates a decentralized system of governance where political and economic power is devolved to the lower levels of administrative units (province, district, and village) with self-governing authorities (for a detailed information, see the Political Program of EPDP). The key vision here is to establish a system of governance that guarantees a constitutionally protected decentralized self administration in which Eritrean regions and/or nationalities will have greater power to administer their localities by maintaining and protecting Eritrea’s full sovereignty and territorial integrity. For the convenience of our readers, Article 2.7 and Article 4.2 of the Political Program are reproduced below as follows:

2.7 Decentralized Administration

Well aware of the plurality of cultures and traditions in the Eritrean setting, EPDP believes that decentralizing and spreading power down to the provinces, districts, sub-districts and villages will prevent the concentration of state power and wealth in the hands of a few, a phenomenon which can jeopardize national unity. In order to apply decentralized administration, the following must be fulfilled: a) proper socio-economic and historical/geographical study on the condition of the settlements; b) the willingness of the people to create the new administrative divisions; c) and approval of the plan by constitutionally established organs of the state. Until then, EPDP shall support the continuation of the administrative divisions/provinces that existed before the independence of the country.

 4.2 EPDP Policy for Equitable Economic Development of Eritrean Provinces

1. Give special attention to underdeveloped provinces,
2. Struggle for every province to develop its own economic administration, that the province administers by itself, which is in line with the general economic policy of the country:
3. Struggle for the establishment of an all inclusive relationship and support system in all levels of government (province, district, and village) based on national constitution. 

Unlike what the writer’s comments and the critiques try to allude, EPDP neither represents Ethnic Tigrigna nor is the flip side of PFDJ regime. This is fundamentally a gross misrepresentation and mischaracterization of EPDP. Again, EPDP is well aware of the motivation, and the negative interpretations, descriptions, and tendencies that float now and then against it by some quarters in the opposition. Two, EPDP neither condones nor ascribes to PFDJ’s policies and actions and hence should not be blamed for the actions of the current regime. The writer is directing his/her political grievances against a Political Party that struggles on his/her side, ‘barking at the wrong tree’ as they say. Three, the political orientation and the composition of EPDP reflect the diversity of Eritrea more than any political group in the Eritrean opposition, and that EPDP through its official positions made it clear that its primary objective is to make Eritrea a country where ethno-linguistic diversity is properly managed (for example, minority rights are recognized, respected, protected and even promoted) and that the unity and mutual trust between Eritrea’s social groups is nurtured, and that the growth of equitable and fair economic development as well as social and political equality is part of the system we establish in post PFDJ Eritrea.  

Another, EPDP has never ever said it is planning to implement the 1997 Constitution as is if it were to come to power. This is another misrepresentation of EPDP’s official stand on the 1997 constitution. The fact is EPDP understands the controversies surrounding the 1997 constitution, and it is within this understanding that it adopted the following resolution in its first Merger Conference:

The Merger Conference, having considered and discussed the relevance of the Unimplemented constitution of Eritrea, resolved that the question on what to do with the 1997 constitution finds ground only after the fall of PFDJ. The option of discarding the document or accepting it in any form shall be left to the people to decide: either through a popular referendum or through its elected representatives.

From EPDP stand point, the constitution of 1997 is not a bone of contention, and dwelling on it not only gives the dictatorial regime a space to exploit and benefit out of it, but also it misplaces the priority of our struggle against the PFDJ regime.

The author of the critique is advised to rectify his/her facts and redirect the critique to the regime, which is the “mother of all evils” in Eritrea. Population displacements and the exodus of Eritreans, including Afars, are well chronicled and they are squarely the result of the brutal tyranny of PFDJ, and we must join hands to eliminate PFDJ from the face of Eritrea, rather than engaging on issues that polarizes us as an opposition. 

Yes, we agree with the writer that Dankalia is one of the cradles of modern Eritrea and there is no Eritrean nation-state without Dankalia, or without any of the other components of Eritrea for that matter. A democratic and prosperous Dankalia is impossible without a democratic and prosperous Eritrea. EPDP firmly believes that modern Eritrea is a pluralistic and diverse society and that the integrity of Eritrea as a nation-state must be preserved by anchoring it on the pillars of peaceful coexistence of its diverse social cleavages. We know the current regime continues to mismanage and abuse indiscriminately this diversity to perpetuate its misrule, and reversing all these problems will be an uphill battle in the aftermath of its fall. Therefore, to throw some light, in the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Issaias regime, the most challenging issues will be numerous, but the key ones are these: One, the establishment of effective and good governance that allows access to fair and equitable socio-economic development, wealth distribution, and equal political representation as a necessary condition for ensuring a durable peaceful coexistence among Eritrea’s diverse groups. Two, organization of government institutions and structures that can effectively manage and accommodate the diversity of Eritrea’s social groups in a manner, for example, that defines the relationship between the national government and its local government bodies. Last, EPDP knows that it is not alone in the Eritrean political landscape and cannot achieve this noble objective by itself. Instead, EPDP strongly believes that it must strive to work with other Eritrean compatriots, including the Eritrean Afar State in Exile to dismantle the dictatorial regime in Eritrea and replace it with a constitutional and inclusive governance structure. Hence, we would like to take this opportunity to call upon the Eritrean Afar State in Exile to join hands with us in this endeavor.

Harnnet Editorial Board 

After nearly quarter of a century of independence, Eritrea under the repressive regime of Dictator Isayas Afeworki remains at the bottom of all world indexes – even in sports in which it is the 202^nd out of 202. But few would care about the sports index: the worst is when you lack in the economic sector, also in technological connectivity.

Least Connected in the World

The June 2014 report of the UN International Telecommunications Union (ITU) confirmed that Eritrea is “the least technologically connected country in the world”. Its telecommunication is under the monopoly of the state-owned EriTel with no other competitor in the country. At 1% of potential users of fixed-line and mobile line, Eritrea ranks the lowest in the world.

The Business Monitor International (BMI) lamented on 24 December 2014 that “by preventing international investors from entering the Eritrean telecoms market, there will be no significant boost to growth”. BMI continued to observe that “international investment would bring long-term benefits to the market, extending networks to rural areas and lowering prices that would enable more Eritreans to participate in the telecoms market.”

Human Development Index (HDI)

This is one of the most important indices that measure health/life expectancy, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. In the 2014 HDI, Eritrea again ranked at the bottom: 182^nd out of 187 countries put to the measure. Djibout ranked a bit better by being the 170^th in the list, Ethiopia the 1773^rd and the Sudan 166.

Human Development Index map for Africa

Eritrea’s Economic “Freedom” Score

Eritrea’s economic freedom score was put at 38.5, making its economy one of the least free in the 2014 index of the Heritage Foundation. Eritrea was also ranked 45th out of the 46 countries in the Sub-Saharan Africa region in 2014 although the revenues from the mining sector (which are consumed for the regime’s security concerns) are expected to improve the index to be issued in 2015.

The Heritage Foundation’s report of 2014 further states as follows:

“Corruption is a major problem. The president and his small circle of senior advisers and military commanders exercise almost complete political control. The politicized judiciary, understaffed and unprofessional, has never ruled against the government. Protection of property rights is poor. The government has a history of expropriating houses, businesses, and other private property without notice, explanation, or compensation. ...... State domination of the economy acts as a deterrent to foreign investment. The financial system, consisting mainly of a small banking sector, remains severely underdeveloped and subject to heavy state control. Private-sector participation in the system remains constrained”.

Also in spite of the lies churned out by the regime, public debt has reportedly reached 125 percent of GDP, making Eritrea one of the most indebted countries in the world.

The report continues to confirm the following:

“Eritrea’s economic freedom was first assessed in the 2009 Index and has remained stagnant near the bottom of the Index rankings. Score improvements in government spending and business have been completely offset by deteriorations in six of the 10 economic freedoms including investment freedom, labor freedom, and fiscal freedom. Scores for financial freedom and property rights have not changed. The country continues to be stuck in the “repressed” category.

“Strong GDP growth has been led by increased foreign investment in the mining industry, but substantial mineral revenues benefit only a narrow segment of the population. Chronic deficits due to large military spending plague public finance, worsening already fragile monetary stability. A repressive central government continues to marginalize the domestic private sector, perpetuating an uncertain investment climate.

“Inconsistent enforcement of regulations and other institutional shortcomings often impede business activity and undermine economic development. Launching a business takes more than 80 days and is costly. The labor market remains underdeveloped, and much of the labor force is employed in the informal sector. Monetary stability has been weak. Subsidies and price controls are core features of the country’s command economy.”