UK further prohibits the Eritrean Embassy from providing any service other than issuing visas

In a further escalation of relations between the UK and Eritrea over the detention of four British citizens since December 2010 without any consular access, the British government has today restricted the Eritrean embassy from providing any other services to the large Eritrean community in the country other than strictly issuing visas. Unlike the previous targeted measures it has taken, the latest directive is sweeping in what it is meant to cover.

The four detainees were working for a security company that provides protection for ships in a region known for its piracy, all the way from Red Sea to the Indian Ocean. They were detained after they docked at an Eritrean port to refuel. Ever since then, the Eritrean government has been unwilling to either give consular access or to provide further information on the whereabouts and wellbeing of the detainees. Up to this day, it has yet to articulate the reason for their detention.

It is to be known that about ten days ago the British Foreign Office has given two directives to the embassy in retaliation. First, Eritrean diplomats and visiting officials are to be restricted to London area only; travelling outside the London premises would require written permission. And, second, the collection of the two percent tax over its nationals has been rendered illegal; the embassy has been told to immediately stop this illegal action. The latest move is different in kind from these two directives in that it is general in its scope, and prohibits the embassy from various activities it involves itself except strictly the issuance of visa.

To understand the sweeping nature of this further directive, one has to put in perspective the scope of extracurricular activities Eritrean embassies are involved in Western capitals. First and foremost, these embassies are used as collection centers for extracting money from Eritrean nationals (most of them citizens in the host countries) through various illegal and clandestine means. Besides collecting various illegal “taxes”, festival revenues, “donations”, and other “services”, they are also involved in money transactions. To exploit the huge amount of remittance money that flows from the large Diaspora community, the regime has set up various clandestine centers (known as “Hawalas”) to monopolize the business. Many community centers have also been working virtually as branches of these embassies.

Second, these embassies are used to monitor the diaspora community for intimidation purposes. If an Eritrean is involved in opposition activities or doesn’t comply with many of the regime’s directives (paying “taxes”, attending festivals, participating in rallies, etc), various steps are taken: from visa denial to reprisals of his family back home. One of the cruelest methods the regime uses to intimidate the newly arrived refugees is that if they don’t comply with its policy, their families back home are penalized either with a hefty 50,000 Nakfa or imprisonment. The embassies “employ” many sympathizers in identifying the identities of these new arrivals.

Thus, the latest British step against the authoritarian Isaias regime will have a sweeping effect in that it will hit the regime both financially and politically. It has also set a precedent for what other nations might soon do. Australia is already following Britain because one of the detainees has a dual citizenship. It is to be seen if Sweden follows soon, given that it has been frustrated in its  dealings with a similar case, where the Swedish journalist Dawit Issac has been in prison for  ten years. It has tried every peaceful means to set him free, but so far without success.