Washington, DC — In 1991, the new government of just-liberated Eritrea requested the help Bereket Selassie in drafting a constitution for the new nation and he became chair of the Consitutional Commission. Selassie served as Attorney General under Emperor Haile Selassie in Ethiopia but he resigned in 1962. By 1975 he was teaching at Howard University in Washington, D.C. and working with the Eritrean Peoples Liberation Front, the start of a long involvement with the party that was eventually to rule Eritrea.
Now, however, Professor Selassie is one of the most vocal critics of Eritrea's government. Last October, he was one of thirteen professionals and academics - now dubbed the G-13 or group of 13 - who drafted what they thought would be a private letter to President Isaias Afewerki criticizing government practices and Eritrea's war with Ethiopia. The letter leaked almost immediately bringing the internal argument and criticism over Eritrea's direction to public attention.
A second critical letter to Isaias, this time drafted by fifteen veterans of the Party and government, intensified the argument. This group, dubbed the G-15, was soon after removed from Party and government posts. Two weeks ago eleven of them were arrested and are thought likely to face charges of violating national security.
AllAfrica.com's Charles Cobb Jr. spoke with Bereket Selassie about the situation in Eritrea.
We mark the argument in Eritrea as starting with what's called the "Berlin Manifesto." How should we characterize this argument? Is it one of reform within party and government, or is it, as Ambassador Girma characterized it in a recent interview, an issue of national security?
Let me begin with a reference to the Berlin letter. By-the-way it has been called the Berlin Manifesto. This phrase was first used by supporters of the government in the Diaspora. But it was not a manifesto, and characterizing it as such actually is malicious, to indicate or imply that it was representative of a political group with some axe to grind or with some other ulterior motive. It was a letter intended to be sent to the President as a private communication.
The question of whether it should actually be a private letter or something that should be revealed to the public was debated by the group. The view that actually prevailed was that we should give [President Isaias] a chance to look at our critique and we will see how he responds to it. If his response is positive then we will take it from there. Our idea was actually to expand the group; it was obviously narrowly based. For this we have been criticized, and I think, justly criticized. With an expanded group we might invite a much larger public forum to debate Eritrean politics. So, we thought it was better to give him a chance to reply to our questions. It [the manifesto] was leaked, we believe, by agents of the government here.
In the United States?
Yes, here in the United States. Some people ask: "why would the President or his supporters want to reveal something which was highly critical of him?" And the answer is, "Why not?" Because, someone must have calculated that sooner or later, the contents of the letter might be released to the public anyway. So, our assumption is that that calculation was made with a view toward discrediting the signatories to the letter. And, of course, as soon as it was leaked, all hell broke loose and there was all kinds of mudslinging on the names and reputations of most of us.
The question now is: Why shouldn't the person to whom the letter was addressed - namely the President of Eritrea - respond to the issues as issues? Well, eleven out of the thirteen people [who signed the letter] went to Asmara because he invited them to come and discuss the issues raised in the letter. What happened in that meeting, what he told the thirteen members of the group, and how the meeting ended (actually it only took an hour and some minutes, and he had them wait several days) - all of this raises some serious questions: Why doesn't he respond to this letter in the spirit in which it was made, respectfully but critically raising several critical issues about Eritrean politics in current times?
Well, the answer to that might be given differently by different people. In our view, it was perhaps not something that the President could digest. No one, to my knowledge, publicly, or in this manner, challenged him. And the language of the letter while respectful is rather vigorous and critical. I think he was offended.
Do you find yourself surprised by this reaction, specifically President Isaias's reaction to the letter and the general reaction that has led to the arrest of people who have widely been considered close to Isaias and the EPLF (Eritrean Peoples Liberation Front)?
I wasn't surprised by the original reaction to the Berlin letter. The extent to which some people went out of their way to sling mud surprised me, but then that's politics.
What [really] surprised me was the fact that the members of the [more recent] reform group, now known as the G-15, would be treated the way they have been treated: arrested, detained for [taking] steps that were similar to the ones that were taken by the Berlin group.
Only in my view, in the case of the G-15, they had actually taken the matter to greater lengths, raising much more fundamental issues and details and challenging [Isaias] to convene a meeting of the transitional parliament, the national assembly, and of the Congress - which was overdue.
The response of the President to their request to convene a meeting was curt, peremptory and in a few words, simply dismissive - that surprised me. Because all they were asking was to engage in a dialogue in the manner in which they engaged in dialogue during the armed struggle, which was characterized by collective responsibility, collective decision-making that now has been abandoned by him, a matter for which we had criticized him in the letter.
We had been observing the development of Eritrean politics, over the years since independence, increasingly becoming one-man-rule, increasingly sidelining anybody who might be considered a threat to him, or who might challenge him on a given number of issues. Increasingly [it was] becoming impossible for people to hold him accountable on a number of issues.
I think there is a sense in which the Berlin letter provoked people to be more assertive. To the extent that the letter might have contributed to important members of the party to be assertive and to challenge him it is perhaps a historic contribution; I don't know.
The PFDJ [Eritrea's ruling party] on its web site, speaking specifically about the arrests, argues that there was a conspiracy afoot and that's why the arrests were made, not because of the criticisms, or the Berlin letter, not because of the later letter from the G-15, but a specific conspiracy to organize cells, to develop relationships with other countries in the region.
That's what they are saying now. It seems to me that they are preparing the ground for charges of treason and other offences. I doubt very much whether any one of these people who are comrades-at-arms with Isaias would be engaged in conspiracy, including conspiracy in consort with outside powers to overthrow him. I very much doubt that. If that had been indeed the case, why wasn't this stated as early as possible?
Why wait until the time when [the G-15] challenged him democratically, legally, asking him repeatedly to convene the meeting in order to review the record of the government and the party's governance over the previous years, and to review the question of the war with Ethiopia: What went wrong? Why did we suffer a devastating defeat? And why did we prolong the war when peace might be possible?
All these questions have been raised by many Eritreans. They are legitimate questions. And questions that not only people who have been close allies with him, but ordinary Eritreans can and should raise, and were raised. If a person can be charged with a serious crime of treason for raising such questions then I don't think that people would be happy to live under such a political or legal situation.
Is it known where this group is being held in Eritrea and when this might come before a court or whatever the legal proceedings are?
I have no way of finding out where they are being held. Some people say they are being held in a military camp in a place called Dongolo. Others say, "no, that's not true." We don't know. We don't know. I don't think that any member of the family of the detained has been able to contact them. We don't know what the medical condition of some of them are. We know that a few of them suffer from some illness. That indeed is one of the human rights questions that is being raised everywhere. All of us - for purely human rights reasons, not for political reasons - are anxious and concerned to find out.
Then of course, there is the question of whether they will be brought to court. We don't know. We don't know. It's a big challenge.
They have a constitutional right first of all to make any statement they wish legally within the framework of the law, with regard to Eritrean affairs, which they did. And they have been arrested for that. All this story about their conspiracy is just a cover-up.
So, it seems to me - and I have written about this - the rule of law has gone to the dogs in Eritrea. There was very good beginning, a very promising beginning. We all hailed Isaias and his colleagues in creating an enabling environment to lead to democracy and we were waiting for that when he and his group - in my view - hijacked the constitution.
They are giving the reason that it was because of the war, but there was a whole twelve months before the war started during which they might have implemented the constitution but they did not.
This is in complete conflict with every image observers of Eritrea have had of Isaias Afewerki, the Party and government. And it seems like a sudden change.
It is very saddening to all of us. Those of us who have associated with the movement in one way or another have felt proud of the achievements of the EPLF, have felt very hopeful that Eritrea was indeed going to show the way in a very progressive, social justice-oriented system of government.
And the constitution-making process which built on this expectation and also built on the experience of the revolutionary struggle, was - we hoped - going to show the way. So first of all when the war broke out suddenly - as suddenly as midsummer thunder - we were all shocked and amazed. And then, of course, developments since the end of the war have showed Isaias at his most autocratic.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
That is the problem. We had minimized the damage that comes out of an autocratic mentality and autocratic method of rule. We had also said, even if he shows tendencies of that, it can be discounted because of his other qualities: his quality of leadership which contributed to the success of the struggle. Now all of this is beginning to haunt all of us. And that is exactly what the group said: "We have let you behave autocratically and we are guilty of that."
We understand Mesfin Hagos is going to return to Eritrea. Is that true? And is he likely to be arrested when he steps off the airplane?
Oh yes. He will definitely be arrested upon his arrival and he knows that. He said so in his statement. The statement that he made was very moving.
I have known Mesfin from the very beginning. From the time I landed in Eritrea in early 1975 he was the first person among the leaders whom I met. I was impressed by his dedication, by his calm, his sobriety - he was very sober. He was a serious and humble fighter - which characterized most of the EPLF people that I saw which pushed me to become a member eventually. And here is a man who was among those who were responsible for the independence of Eritrea now being virtually dispossessed of his citizenship because his passport was withdrawn.
If and when he gets an ordinary passport - because he had a diplomatic passport - I am sure he will hop on the next available flight and go back. He is nothing short of heroic. His statements warning the government that if anything happens to anyone of the detainees - some of them are suffering from illness - or if anybody is killed - "while escaping" - or for any other cause, ... those who are the captors will be answerable. That is a leader for you. His first concern is for his comrades.
What do you predict, as you look down the road? Are we going to see a long drawn-out trial?
I hope not, because that will divide the nation. These are heroic people who have many supporters inside Eritrea and outside. So, I hope that Isaias will relent. I hope that some kind of peaceful solution can be found. I am really hoping that the international community - there are many friends of Eritrea, many personal friends of Isaias - can play a role in getting the situation resolved peacefully, democratically.
