Martin Plaut

Read on blog or Reader

How President Isaias's 'fourth front' is using the courts against pro-democracy activists

By Michael Rubin

Source: National Security Journal

Secretary Antony J. Blinken holds a joint press availability with Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, Philippine Foreign Secretary Enrique Manalo, and Philippine Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro in Manila, Philippines, July 30, 2024. (Official State Department photo by Freddie Everett)

After North Korea, Eritrea is the world’s most repressive and totalitarian country. Independence leader Isaias Afwerki rules with an iron fist. He rejects elections, and treats the country as his personal fiefdom. Unlimited conscription and national service transformed Eritrean citizens into unpaid slaves and made the country Isaias’ plantation. In response, many Eritreans flee. The routes are perilous; many die of thirst in the desert or drown crossing the Red Sea or Mediterranean. Tribesmen, criminals, and slavers prey upon them. Isaias is fine with the flight as Eritrea relies not only upon remittances from those who make it to Europe and the United States but also extorts a two percent “tax” based on ethnicity rather than citizenship. If an Eritrean renounces their citizenship, Isaias does not care. If they do not pay two percent of their income back to his treasury, their relatives will suffer back in Eritrea.

Other members of the diaspora, I would argue, advocate for the government for either privilege or, as possible, intelligence officers who spy on the Eritrean community. This is a strategy ripped from the North Korean playbook. Some experts argue that various ‘front groups’ regularly promote Pyongyang positions in Washington, seeking to confuse policy or, on occasion, win a propaganda coup when they can convince a representative to parrot their talking points without looking behind the curtain.

Indeed, Isaias considers pro-government diaspora to be a fourth front” to supplement the country’s Western, Central, and Eastern fronts. Eritrean embassies often coordinate with diaspora front groups to lionize Isaias and celebrate festivals important to his rule. Eritrean front groups usually seek to intimidate those who favor freedom and democracy. In recent years, clashes and violence have become commonplace as pro-regime Eritreans attack those who do not share their views.

The pro-freedom diaspora has now responded. Over the past two years, diaspora groups across Europe and the United States hava rallied behind the so-called Blue Revolution.” Many of this pro-freedom, anti-Isaias Eritreans counter-protest at pro-regime festivals. This infuriates Isaias and pro-regime organizers as it takes the shine off their events and undermines the image of Eritrean solidarity they promote.

The pro-Isaias community in the United States now appears to be experimenting with a new strategy: Using U.S. courts to target anti-regime protestors. Earlier this year, the Eritrean Association in Greater Seattle sued several Eritrean democracy activists at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Tacoma. While the case remains mired in its early procedural issues such as service, it sets a dangerous precedent.  Many cases have no merit—and reading the complaint, this appears to be one of them. The Eritrean Association says they serve more than 7,000 local Eritreans and openly acknowledge they organize events such as Eritrean Independence Day and Martyr’s Day celebrations. These parallel government holidays that lionize Isaias. The complaint then suggests that for their advocacy, they have become the target of hate crimes. This, of course, elides “hate crimes” with political dissent as those whom they accuse share the same ethnicities.

The root of the Eritrean Association complaint is that protestors disrupted their event by protesting and caused participants to cancel hotel reservations. They allege violence, but the complaint appears exaggerated. What the complaint alleges to be severe violence and destruction of property, the local police spokeswoman acknowledged tents tipped over. She described them as scuffles “that have quickly ended.”

It is understandable that the U.S. government prefers to remain aloof. After all, the judiciary is an independent branch of government, and the executive branch has no business interfering. At the same time, though, this can play into Isaias’ hijacking of the courts. He can channel unlimited funds to his front groups and lawyers to try to use court procedures and hearings to intimidate and bankrupt the Eritrean opposition.

The courts should be interested in not allowing themselves to be used by a dictator or groups that, by their actions, appear to act as his proxies. The State Department should also file a brief with the court explaining Eritrea’s methodology and strategies to target and neutralize opposition. Lawfare is simply its latest tactic.

Make no mistake: Freedom is on trial in Tacoma. Not only is Isaias watching its outcome, but dictators from Beijing to Moscow to Addis Ababa to Caracas will also seek to use U.S. courts to do their dirty work.

About the Author: Dr. Michael Rubin

Michael Rubin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and director of policy analysis at the Middle East Forum. A former Pentagon official, Dr. Rubin has lived in post-revolution Iran, Yemen, and pre-and postwar Iraq. He also spent time with the Taliban before 9/11. For over a decade, he taught classes at sea about the Horn of Africa and Middle East conflicts, culture, and terrorism to deployed US Navy and Marine units. Dr. Rubin is the author, coauthor, and coeditor of several books exploring diplomacy, Iranian history, Arab culture, Kurdish studies, and Shi’ite politics. The views expressed are his own.