Reportage of the EPDP Mission to Ethiopia and the Sudan

Between 29 November and 12 December 2010, a delegation of the Eritrean People’s Democratic Party (EDPD) headed by Party chairman, Mr. Woldeyesus Ammar, conducted important discussions with high-level authorities of the fraternal Ethiopian government as well as with organizations and individuals on questions of vital importance to the Eritrean people’s cause for change and democratization.. The delegation also included Mr. Hamid Drar, the Party vice-chairman, and Mr. Amanuel Habte, executive committee member and Party representative to Ethiopia.

On 30 November, the EPDP delegation was received in audience for over three hours by the Ethiopian Prime Minister, H.E. Mr. Meles Zenawi, in which the delegation candidly tabled for discussion issues of paramount strategic importance in present and future relations between the peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia and their political organizations. Presented verbally and in the form of a memorandum, the questions and issues raised by the delegation included the following:

1.    In spite of some ups and downs of the recent past, the role of the Ethiopian political forces has generally been positive in their approach towards Eritrean [sovereignty] and its opposition organizations. However, since January 2010, the Ethiopian government has indicated that it was adopting a new strategy towards Eritrea, although till now this strategy has not been explained to the concerned Eritrean opposition camp. As a result, many Eritreans that include EPDP total membership started to be deeply concerned about what was to happen to their country and people. On top of that, the matter has further worsened the mistrust among the fraternal peoples.

2.    The delegation stated that the Eritrean opposition and the fraternal Ethiopian government have not so far discussed openly issues like the following: how both Ethiopia and the Eritrean opposition want to remove the dictatorial regime in Eritrea; what system of government is required or is suitable for post-dictatorship Eritrea, and what Ethiopia expects from Eritreans after the downfall of the PFDJ dictatorship.

3.    The EPDP delegation unequivocally noted that this unclear situation has given way to the assumption that the new policy of the Ethiopian government is a preparation to take direct action to topple the dictatorship in Eritrea. Based on the ongoing formation of new ethnic organizations, the policy could be aiming to install a carbon copy of EPRDF (the ethnicity-based ruling Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front) in Eritrea.

4.   The delegation affirmed that the majority of Eritreans opposed to the dictatorial regime continue to mistrust the Eritrean opposition organizations mainly on the basis of the existence of uneven relation between the Ethiopian government and the Eritrean opposition organizations which their apparent lack of leverage to defend their political will and decisions independently.

5.    What EPDP believes to be correct is that, first and foremost, there should be a common understanding, backed by concrete action, on the importance of leaving the fate of [post-PFDJ] Eritrea to be determined primarily by Eritreans, and that the system of political organization and method of struggle to remove the dictatorship must be an independent decision of Eritreans. At this moment in time, it is much preferred to adopt a system of political organization that does not compromise the unity of Eritreans and their country. Likewise, the system [of political regrouping] must be one that can easily mobilize the entire nation against the dictatorial regime.

6.    Regarding realignment of forces, the EPDP delegation has stated that the existing national umbrella has so far failed to rally the nation under its banner, and that it is high time to overhaul it. It was explained that the Party has called early this year on EDA leadership for serious dialogue aimed at addressing the basic shortcomings of the alliance. Sadly, the call was categorically rejected last February. Springing from this situation, the EPDP has started studying options towards forming a working alliance with all concerned if the existing umbrella fails to know its current sad condition and does not wake up to renew itself.

7.    The EPDP delegation also made it clear that, in spite of the big costs incurred for the sake of the opposition, the ill-prepared conference convened in Addis Ababa was a failure, and that not enough effort was exerted by the fraternal Ethiopian government to help ensure its success. The delegation noted that serious efforts could be tried to salvage the situation by introducing important changes at the level of the commission formed at the conference. Otherwise, the proposed “national congress” will still be ill-prepared and much less inclusive. At this point, the delegation revealed to H.E. Prime Minister Meles Zenawi that EPDP has a proposal with the effect of adding to the commission other 24 persons duly elected by the people representing civil society organizations, intellectuals and national figures that were not considered previously. It was further noted that the EPDP shall not be part of the current process for another national convention if the required changes at the level of the commission and the preparations for an inclusive event are not met on time.

8.     The memorandum also mentioned that the still unimplemented “final and binding” decision on the Ethiopian-Eritrean border issue has added to the mistrust of the people and helped the dictatorial PFDJ regime to keep the Eritrean people as hostages of the conflict.

Key points from Prime Minister Meles Zenaw’s Responses:

1.   EPDP’s candidly communicated concerns and viewpoints are an expression of the closeness and fraternity of the two sides and are much to be appreciated.

2.    From early on, we have been fully committed to Eritrea’s full independence. The basis of this principled stand was and is primarily an Ethiopian interest, and we have no plan to annex Eritrea because such an action contradicts our principled conviction.

3.    We in the EPRDF are of the belief in the importance of adopting the self-determination of nationalities. We have not established nationality-based Eritrean organizations, but we support Eritrean opposition organizations that ask for it.

4.   Till the onset of 2010, we were focused on developing our country without Eritrea [and its ports] and we scored great achievements. It was our policy to ignore Eritrea and its regime as long as that regime did not provoke Ethiopia for a reaction. However, today, and taking into consideration the developments in the region, EPRDP has adopted a new strategy for effective action that can accelerate the downfall of the PFDJ regime in Eritrea.

5.   Any means of struggle is legitimate and acceptable. But as EPRDF, we can have our own view as to which means of struggle is more effective in the current Eritrean situation. We can say peaceful and democratic means of struggle cannot give quick results in Eritrea.

6.    Regarding the border issue, we have accepted in principle the final and binding decision. However, we are of the conviction that the border issue shall have a final solution only after normalization of relations and after consultation with the concerned/affected peoples of the region.

7.   We shall continue working with you at EPDP because you are struggling against the PFDJ dictatorship. We are not in a position to tell Eritrean opposition organizations to follow a specific kind of organization or means of struggle. We know that is their rightful option. But we shall continue to help you in the Eritrean opposition to find a common ground for joint action in your struggle. We hear that you EPDP are spiteful of other organizations in the opposition. Our advice is that it is important that you work closely with other sisterly organizations through any way possible.

8.   The Wegahta Radio Station is ours. It is totally unacceptable that this radio meddles in the internal affairs of the Eritrean opposition organizations other than supporting them all impartially. Any mistakes done have to be corrected.

9.   Regarding the national umbrella (EDA) and the national conference, it is useful to make efforts to find ways that can address and reconcile differences of views.

As shown in the above concise summary, the expectation of the EPDP mission was as follows:

• To candidly air out and resolve constructively through dialogue the questions that linger mistrust between us;
• To pinpoint for evaluation the interests of both countries in the removal of the dictatorial regime in Eritrea;
• Through what means can the removal of the regime be effected and how can the shared interests of the peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia be better served?
• What role is or will fraternal Ethiopia play in resolving the widening division within the ranks of the Eritrean opposition camp?

As stated during the cordial discussions with H.E. PM Meles Zenawi and as mentioned in length in the memo submitted to the ruling party in Ethiopia, the EPDP made clear without reservations the major fears and concerns of Eritreans of all walks of life. On his part, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, and later other high-ranking government officials, gave lengthy explanations on the issues raised by the Eritrean delegation with the aim of assuaging the claimed concerns of EPDP members and other Eritreans. The exchange of views and explanations could have served in clarifying certain questions and points of misunderstanding. However, it was not possible to initiate a common plan towards tackling the fears and mistrusts expressed by the delegation and as contained in the memorandum (to be made public when the need arises). On its part, the EPDP shall continue making modest efforts towards reaching a common ground with a joint action plan that can help tackle problems for common good.

EPDP Delegation Talks with other Partners:

Members of the EPDP delegation also held contacts in Ethiopia and the Sudan for exchange of views with other fraternal parties and individuals in the Eritrean opposition camp. The EPDP delegation in Sudan was headed by Mr. Hamid Drar, and included Mr. Ismaeil Nada, head of Social Affairs; Mr. Mohammed Adem Artaa, head of Political Education and Training, and Mr. Ali Dinai, Central Council member in charge of Party’s organizational affairs in the Sudan and Ethiopia. The delegation took the opportunity of meeting with Central Council members and senior Party cadres in Khartoum, Kassala and Gedaref. (Fuller reportage could follow.)