Federation in Eritrea, why and how?

Introduction:

· Eritrean, in its current form, was created and named "Eritrea" by Italy 1889. The three regions of this entity were actually fragments or extensions of other bigger national groups across the borders with Eritrea. Some of them have tribal, linguistic, cultural and national affiliation in the neighboring countries; for instance, the Tigrinya national group has its national and cultural depth in Ethiopia. This cultural affiliation might have been the reason behind the demands of the FPP (Free Progressive Party) lead by Ras Abraha Tesema, for independent Eritrea that includes the Ethiopian Tigray province. Also it might have been the cause for the emergence of a political trend within the Islamic League Party calling for partition of Eritrea. But at the end, this is the Eritrea we have got, as being inherited from the Italians with its political borders, as the case is in most other African countries that includes within their borders heterogeneous groups with different languages, cultures and ethnic groups. However, we in the Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement are convinced that the time the Italians held the three Eritrean entities together was enough to start the nation building process and to create the sense of belongingness to Eritrea and the "will to live together" but it was not enough for the three regions to integrate, develop common national interests and sentiments, or forge a common political ground and legal and political mechanism that clearly defines "how they should live together". The nation building process in Eritrea is in the making, it is in its infant stage. Engineering the process by forcibly imposing terms of one part over others to enhance national unity and homogeneity is unsustainable and impossible in the world of today. The middle ages mechanism of "Conquer, Cancel and Assimilate" is no more possible under the flourishing capitalism and its moral codes, liberties and institutions. Such imposition could lead to the destruction of the already achieved cohesiveness and lead to a failing nation. In the other hand courageously devising modern legal and political mechanisms to recognize and accommodate diversities is the only possible road to ascend the ladder of nation building processes that leads to stronger national unity and the construction of one people and one nation.

Historical facts about the three Eritrean regions

By reflecting on the history of the Eritrean peoples, we may determine the following facts:

· Each of the Eritrean three regions has its own distinguishable identity, different from the other two regions, shaped by natural climate, geographical surrounding, entire cultural legacy, ethnic and tribal overlapping, and religious beliefs. These communities were able to create a state of uniformity among its members irrespective of their religious beliefs or their tribal affiliation.
· For this reason, the Eritrean lowlands inhabitants, for instance, have embodied through their long history, a state of peaceful coexistence in their geographical framework. Thus, all Tigre speakers of the Beni-Amir, Mensa'a (Christians and Muslims), the Hebab, and Maria have lived together in the same geographical sphere with Baria (Nara), Blin and Kunama with their diverse religious beliefs and for thousands of years. They constituted together an allied force against all external invasions that have targeted their pens and their farms. This doesn't mean their lives were, in some separate periods of time, free of minor disputes and discordant over trade routes or pastures. However, such minor disputes were quickly overcome and solved through finding satisfactory solutions that restores the social harmony to its normality resulting in creating common culture at the end of the day. Peaceful fashion of solving their internal problems helped them to unify their political and cultural feelings, entrusting their social concord, tribal intermarriage, customs and their means of survival.

· Also, if we take a look at the Afar region, we will notice that the composition of its population is a homogenous, one that is governed by one culture, religion and language. For a long period of its history, that area has been under the rule of local sultanates. The Afar nationality has proven throughout history that it has deeply rooted experience of tolerance and strong willingness to coexist with other communities that has similar cultures and religion such as Tigre speaking inhabitants of the area from Zula to Dahlak.

· The Eritrean highlands represent a geographical framework that is inhibited, among others, by a majority of Tigrinya Orthodox whose members form a single nationality and culture, with Tigreya as their major language. They have a unified distinct culture and set of mind enshrined in many magnificent traditional local laws and a sedentary way of life. However, the Tigrinyas, as their southern brethren across the border, have always lived in a trepidation anxiety of others that might have been inherited from Abyssinian legacy of apprehension from neighboring cultures and peoples. It has to be recalled from history books that the Abyssinians since their immigration from South Arabia and settlement in Axum and environs, had always felt superior to, but threatened by, their neighbors. The power struggle and siege, by the Muslim Sultanates in the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, Abyssinia have had suffered could have exacerbated the intolerance towards others. The strong Abyssinian culture and civilization has always fêted among its ruling classes and power circles (may be as self-preservation mechanism) chauvinistic elements and groups who never tolerated and recognized other cultures and communities as partners. In Eritrea, the few chauvinistic groups (represented by Unionist leaders in the forties and the PFDJ sect leaders now) have always failed to comprehend an Eritrea built on genuine partnership, tolerance and compromise among its diversified cultures and peoples. Despite the agonies the country and all the people have been through due to the yearning of some for unity with Ethiopia, these few chauvinistic groups are still captive of this trepidation from their partners and co-citizens. They suffer unjustified fear from an imaginary enemy. For that reason, they always endeavor to seize all strings of political and economic power and hegemony. To get to their goals, they wouldn't hesitate to ally with an alien concord as it was with Haile Selassie or with a dictator as Afwerki. Though the hard working and peace loving Tigrenya speaking Eritrean population has always been the first victim to suffer from such policies, Tigrenya chauvinism as a phenomenon is one of the problems, if not the only, Eritrea has always suffered.

Why Federal governance?

For all the above mentioned distinctions and diversities, the federal system is considered the most appropriate option that make Eritrea a stable country where all of its nationalities can coexist by living in one unified Eritrea that aspires to common culture and similar customs. According to the Federal formula, the Eritrean nationalities can rule themselves by themselves and evolve in their own cultural, political, economic and social options. This option is considered the best experiences of mankind to date in achieving political justice, creating a state of national stability, and peaceful coexistence to achieve development, particularly in the multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies like the Eritrean society. Many small and large societies, however, resorted to this option, which has succeeded in securing political stability. Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg and Malaysia are considered examples of the countries that were able to build stable democratic governments in accordance with that experience.

In his book 'The Sudanese Experience in Decentralization', Dr. Mukhtar Alasem wrote: "The Cambridge Conference about "Local Governance" has affirmed that problems of Self-rule in developing countries do not emanate from much powers and authority granted to local councils or provinces, to the extent that threats central governments or the local councils tendency to opt for cessation. The problems rest exclusively in the unwillingness of central governments to give these local councils sufficient power "Salahyat". A fact that antagonizes local citizens and put them all the times in a state of tension with the central government. The local councils indulge in constant demands to preserve their self-rule. Local councils always feel that the capital city of their country over controls their affairs. This reluctance of central governments to relinquish some power to the local governments and the feeling it generates in the regions compels them to contemplate on options of cessation and to form their own government. Such separatist feeling is always results of central state domination of local affairs".

Eritrea is a multiethnic and multicultural nation, taking into consideration other nations' experiences and the disadvantages of centralization; federal system is certainly the best model that achieves security, stability, and equitable economic development in Eritrea. Fair practice and distribution of power and wealth leads to cultural and social prosperity.

Definition of Federation

Federation: means the existence of constitutional foundation for the formation of an entire cluster of required governing institutions in each geographical unit beside the federal government's institutions. Each of these bunches of institutions are entitled to adopt whatever is considered appropriate policies by its constituencies in their own local domain.

This definitely means that federalism can only be instituted by enshrining it into the constitution and not by virtue of regular law. The constitution being the primes document that defines the government system and the way sovereignty is exercised in the country guarantees and defends the federal system. This happens, of course, when the constitution itself is built on democratic conceptions. Federation won't prosper in despotic environment because, in reality, it is democracy among the states of one country without the central government domination over these states or the domination of each of the states over one anther. When federal system is adopted in Eritrea, the country will be one republic with "a National government" but not united countries with united national governments. A National government meaning, the Central Government or the Federal Government that is represented by the President of the Republic (or the Prime Minister), The National Assembly and the Council of Ministers.

The criterions of defining the Regions (States):

In relation to this option in Eritrea, the federal system, some questions arise: what are the criterions used to divide the states and to define their borders? Are these criterions tribal, religious, linguistic, or geographical? Undoubtedly, geographical, historical and economic mode of production factors, besides cultural similarities, customs, traditions, social and cultural affinities on top of tribal intermarriage, linguistic homogeneity and historical experience of coexistence and harmony are all appropriate criterion in defining state borders and landmarks.

Mr. Berhtu's definition for state borders

Our movement has adopted Mr. Berhtu's proposal for defining state borders based on geographical,economic and historical identity, and as follows:

First: The Northwestern mountains and plains(Northren Sahel): its border extends adjacent to the seacoast from the eastern coast Gulf of Zula in the East to the Sudanese border in the West and from the Red Sea in the North to the valley of Setit in the South. This province includes the plains of Gash, Barka, Anseba River valley, the plains and hills of Semhar and the highlands of the northern coast. Its area = (80,000) km squire and it is inhabited by Tigre and Bdaweya speaking peoples, Blin, Kunama, Nara, Eilite, Saho, Betama and the Rashyda tribes and communities.

Second: The Southern Plateau (Kebessa): is composed of the southern highlands of Eritrea. Its area =(21,000) km square and inhabited by the Tigrinya nationality beside the Saho tribes and Jeberti communities.

Third: The Eastern Costal Plains (Dankalia): this State located on the Red Sea coast and extends form The Gulf of Zula in the West to Djibouti in the East and it is inhabited by the Afar and Saho people who speak similar languages and unanimously profess Islam.

An ambiguity and a solution:

Some people may sense some ambiguities on our proposal for Federal States; they may think it would not provide solutions for the existing feeling of alienation. They may say, on the one hand, there are the Jeberti and the Saho in the highlands and the Kunama, Nara and Blin in the lowlands on the other hand. These communities in their respective states are minorities whose interests and culture may be tramped over by the majorities. However, though there is a genuine common sense in such anxieties, this ambiguity is not unsolvable, particularly when we compare it to other similar experiences in the world at large. Many successful experiences stipulated that diversities within one federal state could be accommodated by fully granting communities the right to define and decide in theirs areas. Rightly guided by these experiences, local communities may establish local self-rule areas and municipalities with greater decision making powers on their land and other matters pertaining to their interests. Minorities or ethno-linguistic groups who feel or perceive dominance of others in each state could pursue and rightly could be granted constitutional guarantees. Communal self-rule enables them to rule their areas of jurisdictions, preserve their political, cultural, social and economic rights. The constitution grants them the right to participate proportionally with their volume in the local government and its legislative, executive and judicial authorities in coalition as described by the European social scientist Bromburg that alternate right of invalidation grants each group the right to oppose other groups' policies, when it sees these policies are hurting its interests and jeopardizing its rights. Federation allows each group to manage its cultural, economical and religious rights without violating other group's rights.

The functions of Regional State governments

As it is the case for the national federal government, each of the states governments shall also have their functions. The legal constitution scholars differentiate three methods and adopt them as curriculum in dividing and distributing authority, which are as follows:

Firstly: The constitution exclusively specifies the functions of the federal government and the functions that are undertaken by the local governments.
Secondly: The constitution exclusively specifies the functions undertaken by the federal government and leaves other functions to the local governments.
Thirdly: The constitution exclusively specifies the functions of the provinces and transfers other than that to the federal government.

Each of these three methods has its cons and pros that we would not cover in this paper. Whatever the case may be we, the federal democratic movement, suggests, a first list of a number of central federal government functions, a second list of state governments functions and a third list of shared functions. If new functions come up during implementation, then the constitution may indicate that the new functions are assumed by the federal government in order to support and enhance national unity trend. Also, we deal with the new function as a matter that requires constitutional amendment determined in accordance to the constitutional procedures that deal with the amendment.

Nevertheless, there are some functions that can be vested to the federal government. They are:
Development and management of foreign polices.
Making international pacts agreements.
Declaring defensive war.
Delineating international and maritime borders.
Appointing diplomatic and consular representatives to foreign countries.
Representing the nation in international, regional and the specialized organizations.
Defense and armed forces
Governance and security of the federal capital
Preserving national security from internal and external threats.
Citizenship, passports, immigration and residence pemits
Owning mainland and maritime natural resources such as mining, drilling for oil and other areas where the federal government reserve the right for exploration, and exploitation
Currency
The Central Bank
Importing ammunitions and firearms and ratifying its use for individuals.

There is, however, a controversial question on the police force: should it be centralized or should the states have their local police forces too? And how the relation between the two will be? This is an issue that merits discussion for useful resolution when the time for it arrives.

How could the states participate in federal affairs decision-making?

Participation of the different states in national affairs could be achieved as follows:

Firstly: adopting the system of two chambers of parliament, which are:

A house of representatives: that reflects electoral densities (as the case of the American Congress)
A states council: where states are represented on equal bases irrespective of its population (like the US senate)

In the United States there is no preference of one council over the other regarding the legislation process, because any proposed law will not become a law until both councils ratify it separately. Thus, a balance between the interests of the federal and state entities is achieved.

Secondly: States participation in the constitution amendment must be ensured. In this regard, a legal interpreter says: The constitution in a federal state is the nation charter, which means it defends and guarantees the independence and freedom of the local states and for that reason, they have to participate actively in the amendment if needed.

Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement
December 15,2002

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ANALYSES

INTRODUCTION
Identity: Is a community collective sense of itself as a group, defined against another communities or groups. Its variables could be based on race, religion, region, culture, language, history etc.

Distribution: Is the means of sharing the economic, social and political resources within a society.
Internal conflict rooted in ideas of human identity and often expressed with frightening intensity is a major threat to stability and peace at the individual, local and national levels. Conflict over any concept around which a community of people focuses its fundamental identity and sense of itself as a group, and over which it chooses or feels compelled to resort to violent means, to protect that identity under threat is labeled as "identity conflict". Where perceived imbalance in distribution coincides with identity differences is a real potential for a real conflict. It is the combination of potent identity based factors with wider precipitins of economic and social injustices that often fuels what is called "deep rooted identity and distribution conflict". Such type of conflicts is often persistent because their origins often lie in deep-seated issues of identity (Such as language, culture, religion, or region etc.…). A conflict that threatens the very sense of who people are or who they should be, is much more difficult to manage. This is a recipe for war. What makes this so pervasive, so durable, so insoluble, is the way in which the issues of the dispute are so emotionally charged. Solutions for such conflicts depend more on accurate diagnose of the root causes. Nevertheless, In such conflicts the symptoms tend to lure away the attention of people from the real causes.
This paper is about conflict analysis in search for sustainable and durable peace in Eritrea. Conflict analysis is not about learning something new, but it is about understanding the same thing in different and deeper way. This paper does not claim to teach something new about Eritrean realities. However, it diagnoses the Eritrean problems realistically and contemplates on new and daring solutions. The propose of the analyses is not to open old wounds or incriminate a segment and prove another innocent but to find out where we went wrong and look for genuine and lasting peace.
Our Movement, The Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement (the owner of this paper) seeks a shift in the Eritrean mentality to focus beyond the immediate to long term, it aspires for reorientation of Eritrean politics from the structure symptoms of problems to their underlying causes that are vital for both the short term process of peace making and installing democracy, and long term future of developed and prosperous Eritrea. What we are calling for is to wholly restructure the country politically and economically so that it becomes a home for all Eritreans. The varied domestic power equations we propose count more than the superficial dissimilarities or similarities of the various Eritrean political groups.
Change has become vital in our country. However for us, it is not as vital as the quality of the anticipated change itself and its sustainability and durability.
Eritrea

Eritreans, have more than once, demonstrated their will to live together on that particular geographical entity known as Eritrea. This "Will to live together" has been reinforced by the armed struggle for independence waged by ELF and fortified when all the social, regional and religious segments of our people have sided with the revolution and sovereignty choice. The heroic sacrifices of the people and the blood of the martyrs for national sovereignty and independence have baptized this "Will". Therefore, the Eritrean people is indebted to no particular social group or organization but to its own resilient resistance and sacrifices against foreign occupation.

1) The vicious Circle
On the other hand, for the last fifty years, Eritrea has always suffered internal conflicts. These conflicts have, somehow, followed the same fracture line of schism. In the early forties Eritreans disagreed which pass their country should go; whether to become a part of Ethiopia, join with Tigrai to form a bigger Tigrai (Tigrai-Tigrenya), accept partition or invest on national sovereignty despite the painful differences between the different Eritrean social and geographical regions.
At the beginning of the armed struggle some doubted the intentions and motives of the revolution, labeled it as Arab or Islamic and sometimes fought it under different pretexts because the revolution had symbolized the social and cultural choices of the Muslims in general and the western lowlands in particular. The schism between those who supported the revolution and those who doubted its motives was almost along the same traditional fracture. When Moslems, mainly from the western lowlands, dominated the ELF most Kebesan Christians did not feel comfortable in it. The national liberation movement has, therefore, segmented on almost the same lines that divided the people in the forties and has developed the same lines of rhetoric used in the forties as pretexts for the division. When ELF has Kebesan Christian majority in late seventies many lowlanders felt uncomfortable and some deserted to PLF (Sabbe's) under different pretexts. When EPLF has full control on power it failed to accept or convince most lowlanders and Afars. The condition of the current Opposition Forces, that ought to trust each other and work as hand and glove, are as polarized into roughly the same blocks, as is the rest of our society. They do not trust each other and almost disagree on every thing except one thing - The rhetoric about unity and territorial integrity of their common country. The same conflict has persisted for the last fifty years, taking different forms and magnitudes. It is a malady of a vicious circle.

2) What is the nature of this "vicious circle?"
a) Could it be religion?
No, it cannot be so and has never been so, for it was historically demonstrated that in Eritrea Islam and Christianity have peacefully coexisted and indigenous inhabitants of the two regions (except The Afars) are composed of both religions. The western lowland was and is the best example where individuals or groups of the same community (or tribe) and even cousins professing different faiths coexisted in harmony for hundreds of years. In Eritrea, religion could have been used in different occasions and times to stir sentiments and mobilize people for some political purposes and to attain certain political goals but never was and never is the nucleus of the conflict.

b) Is it the creation of political organizations?
It is unchallenged fact that EPLF leaders had used sectarian political rhetoric in the seventies to mobilize people against ELF, and the PFDJ is exploiting the traditional fractures, playing a segment against another, to stay in power. Nevertheless, the crack and the real conflict resulting from it, is not their creation. The form and content of the political organizations (ELF/EPLF culture) of the armed struggle era were rather the product and the symptoms of the conflict than been the real cause for it. The conflict actually had predated the birth of these organizations. The same conflict had persisted, taking different forms and magnitudes. Generally speaking, Eritreans, due to illusory threat to national unity, have been escaping from the realities, that Eritreans are different in their socioeconomic and political structures.

3) What is the nature of the real conflict?
To be able to answer such a question there are some fundamental issues that must be addressed and historical facts and phenomenon must be read carefully. The real causes of the fracture dividing the Eritrean people should be identified. The real causes of the affliction and not the symptoms should be diagnosed. We must have a clear picture of the present and past to be able to heal the present, define our future goals, and decide on the means of achieving them.
3.1-The nature of the conflict:
The nature of the conflict can be described as "Deep rooted, Persistent, Complex Identity and Distributional conflict". Such type of conflicts are the most difficult to resolve in a unitary state, ruled from a center, as the case is in Eritrea.
3.2- IDENTITY
3.2.1- Reflections from History
Prior to the Italian occupation in 1890 the present Eritrean territories, as it stands today, never consisted of one entity. The three regions that Italy molded together as a colony had always been part of other nations from the political, historical or cultural aspects. They were different in their socioeconomic and political structures; they were never subdued under one political power and never shared one political or social organization or common markets. They in fact have had entirely different and conflicting economic modes of productions and of course different climates and topography.

These three regions were:
a) The Northern Sahel: (Barka, Gash-Settit, Sahel, Senhet and Semher). This territory had constituted one inseparable geographical, climatic, political, cultural and economic unit with what is today known as Eastren Sudan. The dominant economic mode of Production has been Pastoral Nomadic, where constant movement of people within this region has resulted in cultural and ethnic intermarriages and the emergence of common identity where different ethnic and religious groups coexist and identify with each other. Islam has also became the dominant faith. Within this greater identity one distinguishes from another by his tribe or community: Kunama, Beni Amer, Maria etc…. (Note: nobody in this region has ever identified him/herself as "Tigre" or "Hdareb". The term Tigre has some other meaning pertaining to class and language, it does not indicate a race or a community of people. "Tigre nationality" is an EPLF invented term to fit what they liked to call nationalities. Likewise, there is no race by the name Hdareb, except a small clan within the Betjuk. The language that Shabia refer to as Hdareb is known as Bdaweya). Among the MansaA, Blin and Kunama of this region are Catholics and Protestants. This being the case, all the inhabitants of the region have always identified themselves as one people.
The Ottomans occupied the region from 1557 to 1865. The Ottomans used to control the area from their stronghold posts of Massawa and Sawakin both in the Red Sea, and Keren and Kassala in the interiors. When the Ottoman Empire started to crumble the Egyptians emerged as the dominant force and replaced the Ottomans. Egyptian rule of this region continued from 1865 to 1890. The Arabo-Islamic influence that had been going on since Dahlak and the cost had become part of the Islamic Caliphate had continued with great momentum under both the Ottomans and the Egyptians. Due to some subjective reasons and the strong British pressure on Egypt, the Italians encouraged by Great Britain replaced Egyptians in North Sahil. Italians were not able to go beyond the present boundaries.
This region had strong geographical, commercial, cultural and religious relations with the Arabic and Islamic world in general and the Sudan and Egypt in particular. Due to all this, the local cultures of the different Ethno-linguistic groups were intermarried and amalgamated with the Arabo-Islamic culture on the one hand and among themselves on the other hand. As a result, a new united distinctive local culture and identity came into being in the North Eastern Sahil. Islamic values and the Arabic language became cornerstones that occupy a wider space in the cultural and social consciousness of this identity and in the historical memory of the inhabitants.
b) The Plateau (Most akeleGuzai, hamasien and Seraye)
This region is different from the other two regions in many aspects. From the geographical and climatic aspect, it is a natural extension of the Abyssinian central plateau. From the Ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious characteristics it constituted, together with Tigray the central core of historical Abyssinia. The inhabitants, in their great majority, share Tigrinya language, Abyssinian culture and Coptic Christian faith with the Abyssinians of Tigray. The Economic mode of production, like other parts of Abysinnia Proper, is peasantry that depends on rain fed agricultural practices.
The people of the Plateau, unlike the egalitarian, decentralized, pastoral nomadic societies of the other two regions, had inherited strong and highly centralized social and political organization from Historical Abyssinia. They also inherited the warrior sprit, goal orientation and determination qualities. The sense of discipline, organization and obedience of leaders is a cultural feature in the society. Not least, they also inherited the art of survival, social cohesion and appetite to dominate that emanates from the fear of being dominated.
Depending on the strength or weakness of the center, the Plateau had always been subjected to direct or indirect rule by Abyssinia. It sometimes enjoyed independence on other times forced to dependence. In certain times opted for unity and co-operation, on other times rejected and resisted. In short the region was dangling, due to some subjective and objective realities at the time, between dependence and independence from Abyssinia. However, the Plateau was always subject to the historical, cultural, political, ideological and religious influence from Abyssinia and later from Ethiopia, especially from the strong Coptic Orthodox Church and its leaders.
Despite the repeated attempts of the Ottomans and later the Egyptians to conquer the Plateau and adjacent regions in Ethiopia, they failed to do so. Their endeavor was crushed against the resistance of the people. Immediately prior to the Italian conquest the Plateau was an integral part of the kingdom of Emperor Yohannes of Ethiopia - 1879-1889. It has to be noticed that some Ethipian national heroes who resisted Italian occupation of Ethiopia in 1935, like Zarai Dress and Abraham Dbouch, were from the Eritrean plateau, which manifests the Abyssinian cultural influence. Beside the Christian Abyssinians there are Moslem minorities, the Jaberta and Shaho that inhabits the region. Throughout the Plateau, the Jaberta live in separate villages or share the same ones with their Christian brethren and they speak the same language. The Jabarta do not constitute one Ethnic origin. For the Jaberta, Islam is not only a religion but an identity as well.
c) The Southern Sahel, Afar Coast (or Dankalia):
Naturally, this region includes areas of Eastern Akele Guzai exclusively inhibited by the Saho linguistic group. Afar and Saho Ethno-linguistic groups inhabit this region. The region is endowed with ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious homogeneity. In natural geography and climate, the region is a natural extension to the greater Afar land in the Sultanate of Awsa and Djibouti. From the Ethnic, linguistic, cultural and historical understanding it was an integral part of the Afar nation or nationality. The Afar and Saho as Moslems (few Saho Christians in Eritrea) were influenced by the values of Islam, Arabic language and culture. They interacted, intermarried and traded with their Arab neighbors across the sea for hundreds of years. However, the influence from Arabia was of less magnitude than that of North Eastern Sahel. The harsh desert inhospitable country and the Afar and Saho worrier tribes seldom trusted foreigners or compromised other people. They were always at their guard from Abyssinia and other conquests and domination. The Afar land had never known any rule by colonial powers before the Italians who occupied its coastal areas. They were always independent in their different Sultanates. The Southern Sahel never experienced any direct or indirect foreign rule before the Italian occupation.
D) Italian colonialism: The Italians in 1890 desperate for colonial territories that elevate them to the level of other European colonial countries, occupied and incorporated the above mentioned three fragments of three nations in the making into their colony Eritrea. Northern Sahel was fragmented from the Beja nation (Bagos, Bejaland), the Plateau from the Abyssinian nation and Southern Sahil from the Afar nation. The fragments of three different nations that were welded together by the Italians had no prior common historical, cultural or any experience of integrated socio-economic practices together.

3.2.2 Definitions of the concept "Nationality"
The concept of nationalities and their rights has been misused, especially by EPLF, to serve some partisan interests. Many of the Ethno-linguistic groups, communities and tribes that do not qualify for the definition were designed as nationalities and their parochial sentiments were deliberately inflated and used to serve some divisive goals. Ethnic groups, who lived together and shared common social and political values and a strong sense of been one and the same, were told they were different because of the language of their origins. The concept in the form PFDJ adopts is no more but a sectarian project that aims to break down the sense of unity, solidarity and perception of common identity by the different ethno linguistic groups who lived together for time immemorial. Its final goal is to drive a psychological and linguistic wedge between them, to divide and isolate them as small and antagonized groups that makes it easy to culturally and politically cancel them and assimilate them into the stronger center. However, the concept of nationalities adopted by ELF in 1971 was no more than mimicking the Marxist rhetoric of Eastern Europe that hardly applicable to Eritrea.
A nation or a nationality could be defined as a number of people, who may or may not have one origin, living in a specific territory, with common or similar economic mode of production, culture, language, history, social and political organization. Different ethnic groups within the same nation could have different languages and dialects but all perceive and concede to a common indigenous or acquired language of communication, education, documentation and political and legal expression. Common language together with commonly experienced history and culture are cornerstones that cements a nation together and creates a community of opinion that leads to a union of purpose that in its turn determines the identity and behavior of the nation.
According to the above definition we can dare to say that in Eritrea, if need be, there are only three nationalities. Each of the three Eritrean component parts that formed modern Eritrea is separately a community of opinion that has commonly experienced history and has unity of purpose. With each of these entities there are various ethno-linguistic groups, tribes and communities that differ from each other in language, religion or some cultural aspects. However, all share common values and have common aspirations and a unity of purpose.

4) Identity Conflict
The Italians, irreversibly, brought together the above-mentioned three regions in one territorial entity. Doing this, the Italians, consciously or unconsciously, had built the first vital corner stone on Eritrea's nation building processes - territorial unity. They have also tried to incorporate the different economies of their colony into the capitalist market. The Italian rule was short but enough to create the sense of affiliation to one nation - Eritrea.
However, it is by now apparent that the time the Italians had stayed in Eritrea and their application of the factors of nation building processes were not enough to facilitate the "ones" Eritreans wish to have had attained. Sooner when the Italian rule, that had bounded them together, left Eritreans had disagreed on the very same principles of their existence and coexistence as a nation. They could not agree on common national principles. Still the different three Eritrean segments assign Eritrea their original identity and want to mold the whole nation in that identity's shape and form. The persistent conflict between Eritreans since the Italians left emanates from the inability to forge a system of coexistence compromised and agreed upon by all the three pre-Italian historical entities. In short, the persistent and complex identity conflict in Eritrea emanates from the fact that the Italians left Eritrea before the entire nation building factors and their effects were completed. The differences are as many as the similarities and the identity and cultural conflicts are as wide as the will to narrow them. Slogans such as "one people, one heart" might have been necessary for the national liberation struggle but they are no more, they failed to be realized on the ground. Such slogans have become receipts for cancellation and marginalization in the post independence era peacetime. A unitary state ruling from a center became a manifestation of hegemony of one part over the other parts, a region over the other regions. Identity preservation and equitable partnership in sharing wealth and power became naïve wishes in a unitary centralized state. One region's utopia became a nightmare for another. Eritreans so far have failed to come up with a sustainable formula of how they live together. This is the nature of the conflict that should be resolved and that is the way it should be perceived.

5) How this vicious circle can be broken?
The malady of the vicious circle in Eritrea can be resolved by adopting a system that recognizes diversity within a broader context of unity. The concept of "unity in diversity" should be put into practice to accommodate our different historical, cultural and regional interests. It should be redefined in a broader base that accommodates justice and democracy.
The PFDJ has tried to bring about unity by socially engineering the country through molding it to the identity and culture of the Plateau (Kbessa). This policy has failed because the whole country cannot be modeled to the image of one of its regions. Eritrea can neither be a mirror image of historical Abyssinia nor of the Eritrean Kbessa. Eritrea would lose its legitimacy as a nation. Eritrea became a nation of compromise when the Islamic League had rejected Partition and the unionists had went down to accept less than a total unity with "Mother Ethiopia". Eritrea became a nation of compromise when the liberal Party dropped its claims to greater "Tigrai Tigrnge" and the Afars had opted not to raise the issue of joining the other Afars. Independent Eritrea, with its known territory, is a nation of compromise between the three entities. Molding it to look like one of its regions is a betrayal of the very basic conditions for the existence of Eritrea as a socially and politically viable nation. In the modern world of today policies of "conquer, divide, cancel, integrate and assimilate" of the Middle Ages is no more allowed or possible to achieve. The failure of the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia is a good lesson for those who contemplate such views today. We, in the Federal Democratic Movement believe that the only way that makes Eritrea united, sustainable and peaceful for its inhabitants is A functional Federal Democratic System of Governance. Eritrea can be in peace with itself only when its historical component parts can forge justice and equal partnership among themselves by adopting a System of Federal Democracy. A functional Federal system of governance facilitates identity preservation and equitable partnership; it facilitates justice and makes democracy possible in a diverse and plural society.
6) Why Federal System?
The Eritrean people have suffered considerably from internal conflicts since the early forties. Federation with, or annexation to, Ethiopia that plunged the nation and the people into thirty years of war and agony, would have not been possible had it not been for the conflict between Eritreans themselves. The war for independence wouldn't have had dragged on for thirty years had it not been for the mutual mistrust between the different political organizations and their different social bases.
Strong centralism advocated by PFDJ and some of its sympathetic intellectuals would never lead to solutions for Eritrea's internal conflicts. In young countries, such us Eritrea, with highly diversified historical backgrounds, cultural orientations and political aspirations, a highly centralized unitary state would lead to one social segment's, one party's, and ultimately to one man's dictatorship, as the case is in Eritrea. Advocating a "Strong Unitary State" in Eritrea does not come from vacuum, but for the use of oppressive state apparatus. All dictatorial regimes and police states in the world depends on, and serves the interests of a certain social class, region or any other social group that uses the state machine to oppress other competitive groups and opponents in society. Those who believe that the incumbent dictatorship in Eritrea arises from one man's whims, are either naïve or purposely not stating the truth. A regime ceases to exist when it retracts serving the social group whose interests it represents. However, in the long term, an exclusive hegemony of one strong segment over power and wealth, is destined to result in apprehension, dread, mistrust, mutual fear and the use of violence, between the oppressed and the oppressor on the one hand. On the other hand, it results in internal power competition within the ruling circle followed by purging, incarcerations, assassinations, retaliations, corruption, and nepotism. It is a situation in, which the emerges of the most chauvinistic, strongest and bloodiest dictator surrounded by many opportunists and incompatible weak "Yes Men" become immanent; as, unfortunately, is the case in our country. It is a recipe for a failed state.
That is why we insist that democracies that not forerun by justice only protect the oppressor and never restores lost rights of the oppressed. Justice should precede democracy and pave the way for its sound application, unless people capitulate to the position that their rights, cultures and properties become subject for negotiations and public discussions that are ruled by democratic majority and minority rules.
Eritreans, have not yet come about a conducive political system under which they can live together on equal terms. There is a need for adopting modern conceptions of organizing political, economic and social activities that promote mutual understanding and satisfaction. Eritreans have not yet achieved a sustainable formula of how to live together. It appears that Eritreans so far have shied away to face the real malady and opted to concentrate on its symptoms. Identifying and diagnosing the problem is a pre-requisite for finding functional and sustainable solutions. So far Eritreans have failed to establish a contract of coexistence that satisfies all its component regions and accommodate its diversities. Federal Democratic System is a system of conflict management, which would enable us to live under stronger national unity and territorial integrity while harmoniously maintaining our diversity.

7) The concepts of "Decentralization" and "Federal democracy"
Recently, the concept of decentralization has become a common property of most Eritrean-opposition organizations. However, many of them still shun its details. The idea of justice through the means of geographical decentralization of power and sharing of national wealth has not been presented in clarity. It lacks an organized body that endorses and defends it, and makes it its main goal and purpose. Federal Democracy is not the same as "Administrative Decentralization"; it is also very different from what is known as the principle of "self-determination including and up to secession". The concept of Federal Democracy is about "unity in diversity" and never entertains separation or dividing the country into antagonized entities.
Administrative Decentralization refers to any arrangement by which the responsibilities of the central government for the direct provision and administration of services are voluntarily and benevolently reduced by allocating some of it to subordinate authorities enjoying some measure of discretion. However, the term, "Federation" is a type of polity operating a constitution, which works on two levels of government: as a nation and as a collection of related but self-standing units. The objective of federation is a form of government for the people by the people. That is to say, it is inherently democratic. It seeks on the one hand to maintain the unity of the nation, and on the other hand to preserve the integrity of the units, to preserve their mutually distinctive identity, culture, tradition, properties and their share in power and wealth. It is a system that enables all the component entities of the country to proudly link their exclusive past to their common present and look forward to realize a common future. It is a voluntary, peaceful and sustainable valid social contract that is built on solid mutual benefits, interests and common welfare. The objective of building and maintaining unity in Eritrea need a voluntary will and the realization of interests of all the communities and regions, with no feeling of loss or damaged pride. It is a false unity that is claimed to be achieved by a mentality of the "victor and vanquished". Unity can only be based on equality and justice and no dominance of one ethnic, religion or language group on the others. In federation, no level of government is dominant over the other. The rights of all units are guaranteed by the constitution.
Some Eritreans argue for "decentralized unitary democracy". Nevertheless, there is fundamental difference between decentralized unitary democracy and federal democracy. In federal democracy the rights of the people living in the regions (states) are guaranteed by the constitution, while in decentralized unitary democracy, lower level governments are merely statutory; they could be swept away by the central government at any time. In a federation the central government has no constitutional relation; any influence by the central government on the states is regarded as an illegitimate encroachment on the units' rights. But additional contributions or funds for development of the units are welcome.
The term centralism refers to a polity operating a constitution, which works on one level government as one unit. It is inherently undemocratic and leads directly to dictatorship. The objective of building and maintaining of a nation is exclusive and is realized by dominance, violence and the means canceling and assimilating. This system of centralism is not accepted by the modern world, because it is a failed system. Nowadays, some undeveloped countries, like that of Eritrea, practice it.

8) How heterogeneity within one region be accommodated
Acknowledging, respecting and accommodating heterogeneity within the same region (state) deserves considerable time and efforts to work out its details in a country like ours. Nonetheless, the concept of federal democracy embodies rights of self-government for communities within the same region. The system provides legal granites to different communities in various levels. For instance, the Northern Sahel is home for many Ethno-linguistic groups and diverse religions. Federal democracy guarantees different communities their own self-governments, municipalities and communal systems that preserves their rights and protects them from the hegemony of others over them.
In this regard, it has to be noticed that the effect of the different colonial regimes in Eritrea was more or less limited to the urban areas. Its modernization effect on the social organization of the ethno-linguistic groups and rural communities was minimal. However, the viable role of the "tribe" or "Add/Addi" as a political, economic and administrative organ has diminished drastically through time, especially during the three decades of the armed struggle. It has, however, retained to some extent some of its social role, especially in traditional communities that are not yet affected by immigrations. The traditionally subsistent farming or livestock economy has also undergone gradual changes. Social relations between the traditional communities (and sometimes between conservative urban residents) are still based on the tribal systems. Some legal traditions and social values have managed to persist. Many people choose to resolve some individual, intertribal or intratribal disputes by negotiations at the village or the tribal level.
(Note: Eritrea is endowed with rich legal traditional heritage. Some of these legal traditions are documented, others are verbally transmitted from generation to generation. To mention a few of them:- Fteh Mehare, Fteh Klee Maria, Hege ShwEte Anseba, Hege Loqutou, Fteh Bet Terqe Bagos, Hege Seharte Lamza and Wqerte Damba, Hege Adkeme Mleqa, Saho tradition, Afar Eida, Kunama tradition, Hege Dembezan, Hege Dqe Teshm, Beni Amer traditions, Hege Adqena Teqlba, Shel tribes tradition, Hege Kernishm, and many more others)
Aware of this wealth of our legal traditions and customs, the founding conference of The Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement has adopted an outline for a separate paper on communal system, municipalities and self-rule. A paper that has to be developed later by carefully collecting and researching on our legal traditional heritage. The purpose is to develop a detailed account that gives the different communities full control on their land, education, health care and other services. A system that also provides legal guarantees for the communities, such as veto power, in the regional parliaments and governments. Such Grantees will certainly assure the ethno-linguistic communities and give them tranquility, and voluntary affiliation to the greater whole. It will make these communities to positively interact with self-confidence in the regional and national levels.

The Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement
Stockholm, Sweden
December 13-15, 2002.

width full permission from Secretary General Herui Tedla. We invite our readers to send any questions, comments you may have regarding to this article to