Unity or Irrelevance: The Eritrean Opposition’s Moment of Truth
Eritrea is no longer governed; it is controlled. The state has collapsed into one man. Eritrea is Isaias Afwerki.
After more than thirty years in power, the ruling system has not only failed—it has stopped changing. Its thinking is stuck in the Cold War. Its actions are shaped by a past that no longer exists. Institutions are empty, society is militarized, and the future is frozen. That reality is clear.
What is not clear is what the Eritrean opposition will choose to do next.
For decades, “unity” has been treated like a moral wish—something everyone praises but no one builds. As Dawit Mesfin has correctly said, unity has become a slogan, not a plan. Agreement has replaced commitment. Emotion has replaced structure.
That period must end.
Unity is not a nice idea. It is not a cultural habit or a symbolic gesture. Unity is infrastructure. Without it, no group can create real pressure or influence events. Fragmented actors do not add up—they cancel each other out. This is not theory. It is a political fact.
The opposition does not lack awareness. It lacks discipline.
Much of the problem comes from group‑based politics. Organizations have turned into defensive shells, more focused on protecting identity than producing results. Loyalty has replaced judgment. “Consultation” has become a permanent excuse for delay.
This is why unity, as Ismail AA has argued, must begin with individuals, not blocs. Individuals can compromise without fear, act without hiding behind group labels, and take responsibility for decisions. Organizations matter—but only when the individuals inside them are empowered to decide.
At the same time, we must drop our illusions. Factions will not disappear. They are now a permanent part of diaspora politics. Pretending otherwise has wasted years. The goal is not to eliminate factions but to discipline them.
That requires a hybrid model: political organizations, civil society groups, and independent individuals working inside one clear framework. This idea is not new. It has been tried before. Its failure was not because the idea was wrong—it was because the process was weak.
Past unity efforts collapsed for predictable reasons: unclear authority, endless consultation, fear of leadership, and avoidance of accountability. These are design problems, not proof that unity is impossible.
Some skeptics say unity always fails. They are mistaken. Failure only shows that seriousness was missing.
Others say the differences are too deep. This confuses disagreement with dysfunction. Successful coalitions do not erase differences—they organize them. Eritrea does not need everyone to think the same. It needs everyone to agree on priorities.
A third objection says the diaspora lacks legitimacy. That is partly true—but mostly irrelevant. The diaspora cannot replace the people inside Eritrea, but it can organize pressure, shape the narrative, and engage the world. Disorganization guarantees irrelevance.
The hardest truth is this: avoiding leadership has become one of the opposition’s most damaging habits.
When many people claim to lead, no one leads. When no one is accountable, nothing moves. Leadership is not domination; it is responsibility under limits. Refusing to lead while claiming moral authority is not humility—it is sabotage.
A unified opposition needs a clearly elected spokesperson and an executive body that is time‑limited, recallable, and accountable. Anything less is performance.
Cynicism is now widespread—and understandable. Years of empty unity talk have taught people not to believe. As Dawit Mesfin has noted, unity has become a ritual phrase with no operational meaning.
Cynicism will not be defeated by better speeches. It will be defeated only by visible action: shared decisions, joint statements, unified messaging, and real consequences for those who obstruct progress.
History gives us a lesson Eritreans admire but rarely apply. The unification of the PLF did not happen under perfect conditions. It happened because one faction chose solidarity over safety and strategy over neutrality. Unity was not declared. It was demonstrated. And importantly, the PLF/EPLF held an organizational congress—not a “national” one.
That is the standard today’s opposition must meet.
Unity does not mean sameness. It means agreement on a small number of essential goals: ending dictatorship, preventing national collapse, and building accountable governance. Nothing more is required. Nothing less is acceptable.
From now on, unity must be measured by actions, not intentions:
- A time‑bound unification conference
- Delegates with real decision‑making authority
- Election of a unified leadership
- A public framework with signatures
- A standing coordination body
Anything else is rehearsal.
Eritrea cannot afford more delay. Division is no longer just weakness; it is participation in stagnation. No outside savior is coming. No miracle will appear. Responsibility cannot be outsourced.
Unity is not someone else’s job. Leadership is not someone else’s burden.
The future of Eritrea will not be written by those who wait. It will be written by those who act.
The choice is no longer theoretical. Unity—or irrelevance.
To Contact the Author: weriz@yahoo.com
Awate Forum