Opposition: Symbolic Psyche v Practice and Adequacy

It has been more than a while now since I left my home country and started residing in my present consign. Sometimes I look behind to see what I left, as I always believe I belong to such place and environment. At other instances I would like also to witness what I benefited from my present status as a second citizen in others realm. I could not pronounce and formulate the exact expression, however, as I see the contemplation of many contemporaries being changed in the gush of circumstances.

In the past recent years, a lot of people were trying to get involved in the political atmosphere of Eritrean politics. It might be considered as a superior motive on one hand but on the other hand there is an unsolved question which crosses our psyche. An issue which could be framed as: Is it because everyone assumes the responsibility to contribute in such arena or is it for the reason to hit upon some attention only? As a result of such initiation, conversely, people could immerse themselves in to a vicious circle as an individual or in a group for various reasons: to overcome their horrendous dissatisfaction and annoyance, to save their interest from any damage, having confidence in supremacy of law and order, or to curb those in authority from being off limits etc, etc, etc. All these, however, could pilot too many an unusual behavioural change which could in turn be disastrous, more violent and revengeful act if not put into service wisely. This can hold true as emotions are becoming a common ground and part of the Eritrean diasporas leaving aside the merits of knowledge, expertise and experience.

It is such a superb exertion when people try to commend or criticize what they perceive and listen to. Indeed it is so civil to give your observations and share your ideas optimistically. Undeniably it is good to pin your ears back to your conscience. It is also polite to not put in the picture the bogus to create impressions. These are some of the trouble-free errands in which people could make the most of in life.

In considering these, it is very crucial to remember what the rationale behind the opposition is. Nowadays, what numerous people appear to recall is that the oppositions are in favor of full democracy. In fact, leaving aside the debatable definitions and points, the issues of democracy need to be raised as a more fundamental demand not only at the present but potentially any time when considered necessary. That is, as one of the gadgets to eradicate not only dictatorship but to craft a well organized institutional chain of command, responsible persona, healthy political atmosphere, etc. It is the belief of intellectuals as well as the people at large that the establishment of democratic institutions is the only way to root out government absolutism without violence and effectively.

However, anyone who wants to avail himself from the present situation should not just tune out in the name of opposition. It is surprising several individuals believe that you have only to denounce the current ruling government in order to be named as a resistant group. Just take your pen and write whatever crosses your mind, without giving a second thought to all the evils that could crop up as a result of one’s instigation. This is a fantasy of self-interest without any philanthropic principle to facilitate the mainstream concern. May be one can get himself in to a difficulty where the point of opposing inadvertently mounting to another level of hatred.

What are some of the plain and primary leading points in opposing any other disposition in power at individual or group level?
• To make sure that you have principles compatible to almost the internal situation and in consideration of the international arena.
• To point out the ideas and rules you are in difference with and the reasons why.
• To dedicate enough time and personality in achieving the goals aimed at.
• To be tolerant and optimist not only in practicing your ideas but also in sharing others thought as well.
• To ingenuously partake in shaping the ruling leadership whenever it is indispensable.

Why most of the opposition groups at hand, who abruptly come up with different names in time, seem to sound they are only the most concerned about the situation the country is facing now? Here, take me not that I do not understand or am in opposition to those who feel sorrow and are working for the good of change in resisting and opposing the present government. It is unquestionable that there are many citizens and groups who really are alarmed and work for such purpose to overcome the calamity the country and its people are facing. This being the patent certainty, almost all of the individuals involved in these different groups have been given more than enough chances in the past; either to shape the government constitution or in opposing its rule of governance and in rectifying other major and minor slip-ups. Most of them have been going hand in hand for years like almost nothing was happening, either inside the realm of the government or upon the rest of the populace (the outsider). And some of them, differing for many years during the armed struggle, had made a reunion after the country’s independence. Here, my point is only to tip at the foundational spot of ‘trust’.

Well now, should not we (the populace) and those who are entering in to the struggle for change ask initially what happened to the friendship and trust among each of them? Is it because one man was found very distrustful which made all the wrongs and evils to become real? If yes, what was the role these people could have played in such instances? Isn’t it possible to put forward your observation upon the real findings on time, or put together remarks, convince, and make your position clear and finally resign where there is no room to accommodate all other possibilities?

One should ask whether the oppositions are capable of overcoming their internal divisions and ousting a burly and so-called charismatic president at one time and still to some emotionally driven people. My point here is about the time lost to come to a unified agenda and solution. Should they formulate a specific governing platform of their own? Will opposition supporters, many of them distrust their leaders as much as they have an aversion to each other; show up to in sufficient numbers? And, perhaps most important, who will rule the country, and how, if the present government is forced out (talking about the collective and participatory rule)? These are some issues which need to be addressed by the oppositions sequentially to win the heart of the majority and grow to be trustful among the masses.

The lack of a thoughtful, trustful and charismatic leader who appeals to the masses is the oppositions’ greatest vulnerability. The most important enemy for the oppositions is not only the present government, save for abstention of the people. But one should ask why? It’s for the undemanding reason that they still need to build upon the populace the buoyancy on how to put his faith on their principles before engaging in a further blunder. Though these oppositions have some committed members, they need an excellent base in order to mobilize the large, so-called neither/nor segment of the population, who are skeptical of both sides.

It seems that the opposition coalition is more held together almost exclusively by its members’ dislike of the present President of the country and his advantage taking collaborators. A kind of following the belief “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,’ or at least “the rival of my rival is my temporary ally,” and they make alignments and split-ups time and again irrespective of whether their chosen allies are dictatorships or democracies. These groups have regularly promised to unveil their own policy platform, and regularly failed to do so. The presiding government has taken advantage of this political vacuum to supply the answer itself. The oppositions’ leadership is declared as a group of terrorist coup plotters, who obey “foreign masters” and baptized upon. Their program is accordingly said to end social programs and hand the county over to hyenas (azabè). Yet, they could not crack this barricade to benefit and succeed the majority’s heart and confidence even when the people and the country are at a desperate time and end.

Regretfully to say so but it’s sad, though not always, to see people organizing themselves for evaluation rather than giving priority to their veracity in life. It is in the name of people that loads of things are happening presently everywhere, whether it is inside the country or in other places of the world, where many Eritreans are scattered for breathing. Taking such situation, however, into ones advantage in order to satisfy your willpower is not acceptable or justified at any circumstance. This is factual in a sense, as the off-putting impact could be massive and dangerous to repair the damage done and afterwards there is almost no way to alter it to good where it reached the peak phase.

Descriptive things in due time and in an acceptable approach are also crucial to the endurance of any civilization. All this can be cuddled by the word “eloquence.” Let’s not forget, it is the dishonesty and recurrence of fabricated information which led the many regimes in Africa and other least developed nations to turmoil. Thus, distinguishing the comments given in the light of advancement to generate a feasible environment in the long run of the kick against despotism could create a viable atmosphere to a shared opinion and tolerance.

Is it that much hard to choose a leader or is it because we are told that it is difficult? Is it because we fear for a change that we want to make a bond only to what we are familiar with earlier (Kab zeytfelto melak, tifelto sheytan) or is it because there is a real possibility that power-gap can be created, akin to the information we listen to? So when is the time to get one? Or are we waiting for a messiah to be born?

I want to be hopeful – and there are some hopeful signs in many respects. I discern that governments change when they have to. The government, nonetheless, may probably weather this storm and continue to hammer back the oppositions. The haughtiness may buy off other critics for some years to come. But without wrenching change, Eritrea will not achieve the promise of genuine modernization that its liberals and reformers hope for. The young Eritreans who lamented viable atmosphere, an opening for the bright future, and role models need legroom and genuine coordination. Perhaps history will recognize us as the people and country that could have been. History is a material source.

The above specifics stated does not mean only to disapprove of what is factual and imperative at the present. It is not as well to stand and/or try to see at the progress of many constructive ideas as a piece of twaddle. I myself believe on the intact liberty of Eritrea and its political attitude and beyond the lot freewill of the people at large. The reader, yet, is left upon his verdict to evaluate whether or not the reasons were really as plain as this.