Dear Red Sea, youstated many injustices of the international community [read U.S.] against Eritrea. Although it is true that the U.S. is the worst violator of countries' sovereignty, there is no way to challenge it head on. yours and Conformist's argument about Iran's and its president is diversionary. The bottom line is , as Conformist stated, the Eritrean government has less interest in the use of diplomacy in international relations. I have similar view with Conformist about this issue. Isaias is too arrogant and rigid. That is not beneficial to Eritrea. It is fact.

Of course I have an additional criticism of the eritrean government in the economic arena. The eritrean people are well known for their intelliegence and hard work, by now Eritrea should be doing tens of billions of dollars of business annually in the export business.

There should be small factories all over Eritrea producing furniture, musical instruments, household goods, fruits, small machinery for export.

Today if you go to Walmart or Home Depot you won't find a single product made in Eritrea. That's a major failure, because eritrea has the advantage in man power to compete in the export market.

I think comformist and oromay are mistaken in one fundamental thing. Yes, politics is compromise and diplomacy but there´re VALUES and BELIEFS which should never be put into compromising situations. For example, what we eritreans never compromise about is our freedom of policymaking and above all our territorial integrity. What makes Eritrea look rigid and uncompromising is when, especially, these two issues are put into doubt or are not considered serious in the eyes of others. For us, they´re extremely serious. The secret is this: the US has alresdy decided to govern Africa by proxy countries (regimes). These are: Nigeria in the west, Ethiopia and Kenya in the east and South Africa in the south. In this kind of situation the soverignty of each country, neighbouring these three, becomes meaningless. In the west and south of Africa, the americans didn´t encounter so much resistance because those countries are already colonized by remote. In the east, where people are more conscious and fiery, the task is a little bit harder. Sudan and especially Eritrea say NO to this foreign policy of the US. The media takes over and trumpets the lie of Eritrea being rigid and uncompromising without detailing what Eritrea is asked to compromise about. I hope comformist and Oromay do not mean Eritrea shuld give up saying No and just jump into the basket like every other country in Africa. Eritreans say NO,OVER OUR DEAD BODY!

Dear Z,

Eritrea must differentiate between domestic policy and foreign policy. She has the right to prevent foreign powers from telling her what kind of political or educational policy to formulate. But foreign policy is different, Eritrea must not even give the impression her foreign policy could pose a threat to the west, because they are powerful, they are ruthless, and violent.

Look at the slaughter of Syrians today, it's not because Assad is a "dictator", it's because he is a danger to Israel's security.

Conformist

While I respect your views of the need for the eritrean gov to change its stance, I completly disagree.
I will give you one example why. His name is ghadaffi. This guy completly was against the american, and guess what happened in the end, he got soft. In 2004, he decided to do the very thing you are recommending the eritrean gov to do. He opened his arms and his country to all these western governments . They got hinsiden and started building relationships with all these groups inside libya, and so when ghaddafi got anti- western again, it was to late, because the west built their military,and intelligence. Basis inside. Ghadafi would still be ruling libya today, if he had continued his original policy. . U need to understand. In politics there is no loyalty, which means every government, needs to think objectively and long term. Everything you read about in politcs is based on interests.

History shows that Only the governments that are independent and think about their national ineters survive in the end. Because there are no strings attached. the eritrean government has no choice. It has to be tough.while there are external threats. Let's not forget, the american government never wanted eritrea to be independent in the first place. So what makes you think the west is after geniune friendshio with the eritrea. Government, when only 20 years ago, they tried to destroy the same people . Every country has its own opportunites, but every country also has its own threats. The case of eritrea really is unique, because its pretty much hated simply the eritrean government is the truth. So when you represent the truth, they make you think that you are anti- west, but in actial fact it is all phycological, they play a pychological war to make you think that.

Conformist

While I respect your views of the need for the eritrean gov to change its stance, I completly disagree.
I will give you one example why. His name is ghadaffi. This guy completly was against the american, and guess what happened in the end, he got soft. In 2004, he decided to do the very thing you are recommending the eritrean gov to do. He opened his arms and his country to all these western governments . They got hinsiden and started building relationships with all these groups inside libya, and so when ghaddafi got anti- western again, it was to late, because the west built their military,and intelligence. Basis inside. Ghadafi would still be ruling libya today, if he had continued his original policy. . U need to understand. In politics there is no loyalty, which means every government, needs to think objectively and long term. Everything you read about in politcs is based on interests.

History shows that Only the governments that are independent and think about their national ineters survive in the end. Because there are no strings attached. the eritrean government has no choice. It has to be tough.while there are external threats. Let's not forget, the american government never wanted eritrea to be independent in the first place. So what makes you think the west is after geniune friendshio with the eritrea. Government, when only 20 years ago, they tried to destroy the same people . Every country has its own opportunites, but every country also has its own threats. The case of eritrea really is unique, because its pretty much hated simply the eritrean government is the truth. So when you represent the truth, they make you think that you are anti- west, but in actial fact it is all phycological, they play a pychological war to make you think that.

You have argued your point well, it is true, in the long run Eritrea will have to be prepared to fight for its independence none stop. As for Ethiopia it is already lost, it is not possible to free her from the colonial ambitions of the western powers, if one tribe attempts to fight for its freedom they will use another tribe to suppress it. In the long run Eritrea has better chances of surviving as an independent nation than Ethiopia.

Dear Rev,

I am all for the equality all peoples, but that equality should not be a license for reckless actions. The NEPAD program has opened the door wide for Africa to export to America to earn a great deal of wealth, that's how Japan became such a powerful state. Instead of taking advantage of that, instead of bringing in investors to Eritrea, Isiaias is wasting all these heaven sent opportunities by associating with a mad man llike Ahmadinejad. That's not a very smart move in my view. Eritrea could have easily increased its per-capita income to $5,000 by now, if only Shabia leaders had business sense or if they had listened to the advice of Eritrean businessmen.

Eritreans in general have one major flaw, they still are incapable of controlling their fiery passions. Last year Red Sea actually told me Eritreans would prefer to perish as a nation than to sacrifice their national pride. How can that be a sensible outlook. You can't eat national pride, when your children are hungry you can't give them national preide, you need bread. A little humility and diplomacy can accomplish a lot in relieving the suffering of the people, but it is not really smart to always say WE WILL NEVER KNEEL DOWN, every time compromise becomes a necessity.

Also there is nothing wrong with hiring Washington lobbyists, not for foreign aid but to attract invstment and to facilitate export of Eritrean products. Lobbying is a legitimate political activity from which the Eritrean masses can benefit much.

But you have to know, my knowledge of Eritrea is not deep, I am only speaking from the superficial knowledge I have, so I could be wrong, but to me it looks like the Isiaias regime needs to listen to the western powers, it needs to compromise and negotite, that's how the whole world works.

In the bush you can say "my way or the highway" when dealing with the international community you need plenty of diplomacy and tact.

Sorry about the late reply to your comment. I was dealing with a blue-eyed woyane leach stealing my bandwidth on my Wi-Fi network lol.

OK... first of, Japan's economic development is attributed to the Marshall Plan which was extended to non-European countries after WW2 in order to prevent them from falling under the USSR sphere of influence. Japan was under US occupation during the post-war reconstruction period and the aid money it received from the US was not a loan and there was no repayment to be made. To its credit, Japan wisely used the money to lay down solid infrastructure vital for the manufacturing industries, transportation and agriculture, which attracted huge foreign investment.

In contrast, there was no such Marshall Plan for post colonial Africa. The war-ravaged African nations have little or no infrastructure today, and they lack manufacturing know-how and technological skills to convert their raw materials into marketable finished Products for export markets. They can't attract foreign investment under such deplorable condition, but the exploitation of their raw materials.

Take Ghana, for example. It's the largest Cocoa producing country in the world, which accounts for 44% of world cocoa production. But Ghana does not produce a single bar of chocolate, which would have helped the country earn more revenue from exports, but under the IMF's structural adjustment programs Ghana can only export its raw materials to developed countries to be processed in manufacturing and industrial plants. Thousands of people in European countries would lose their jobs if Ghana start exporting chocolates, as opposed to cocoa.

That's what the NEPAD program is all about -- to export raw materials from Africa. The developed countries are only interested in importing raw materials from Africa, because they have to provide employment for their own people. If he could have it his way, Obama would like to see all African countries be like Ghana, where illiterate, barefoot, famished Ghanaian children are producing cocoa for exports to the developed world. The poor children have never seen, let alone tasted a chocolate bar! But the Ghanaian government is hailed as a model for the rest of Africa.

If Eritreans wisely chose not to repeat the mistakes other African countries made, it does not make them less diplomatic, but rather sly as an African fox. They are busy building vital infrastructure that will not only attract foreign investment and sustain long-term GDP growth, but help them get a fair market value of exported products. They're less concerned with image and more concerned with economic emancipation which could only be obtained through rigid discipline.

There are some things on which a responsible head of state shouldn’t compromise, even if failing to do so makes him unpopular with the outside world. Lifting people out of poverty in Africa is neither a popularity contest, nor glamor. It's a life-and-death struggle, because every decision made will affect the lives of millions of people. China lifted more than 600 million people out of poverty over the past 20 years. If Chinese leaders' primary concern was to have a squeaky clean image, there would be 600 million more poor people in China today. Image is nothing; substance is everything.

[color=#004080]Sorry about the late reply to your comment. I was dealing with a blue-eyed woyane leach stealing my bandwidth on my Wi-Fi network lol.

OK... first of, Japan's economic development is attributed to the Marshall Plan which was extended to non-European countries after WW2 in order to prevent them from falling under the USSR sphere of influence. Japan was under US occupation during the post-war reconstruction period and the aid money it received from the US was not a loan and there was no repayment to be made. To its credit, Japan wisely used the money to lay down solid infrastructure vital for the manufacturing industries, transportation and agriculture, which attracted huge foreign investment.

In contrast, there was no such Marshall Plan for post colonial Africa. The war-ravaged African nations have little or no infrastructure today, and they lack manufacturing know-how and technological skills to convert their raw materials into marketable finished Products for export markets. They can't attract foreign investment under such deplorable condition, but the exploitation of their raw materials.

the economic and technological state of the world has dramatically changed since 1945, back then it was an impossible task to find start up money and technology to start even small industry. Today the world is so different, for the following reasons,

1. Technology is widespread and cheap.

2. Trained man power is widely available.

3. money is also available.

i will give you an example, if the Eritrean government was to open the doors for investment, it doesn't need any loan or any kind of start up money. There are Eritreans abroad with the money, knowledge and access to technology. So all the government has to do is invite the Eritrean investors, their part will be to supply the financing, know how and technology. Then government on the otherhand can supply the labor.

The best way for Eritrea to start is to open up labour intensive and low start up capital industries such as the ones indonesia is thriving on today. Furniture making, musical instruments, small machinery, automotive parts and fire arms. All this require little mpney to setup but they are labor intensive, which Eirtrea has plenty of. That way evenall the refugees in Israel can be gradually repatriated to work in the new factories. The factoried can be small like the ones Taiwan has, but built in large numbers the revenue is astonishingly high when you add it all up.

Another way Eritrea can do business is to offer low cost medical care like surgery for Americans and other nations without universal medical insurance. Cuba is doing brisk business by that method.

That's what the NEPAD program is all about -- to export raw materials from Africa. The developed countries are only interested in importing raw materials from Africa, because they have to provide employment for their own people. If he could have it his way, Obama would like to see all African countries be like Ghana, where illiterate, barefoot, famished Ghanaian children are producing cocoa for exports to the developed world. The poor children have never seen, let alone tasted a chocolate bar! But the Ghanaian government is hailed as a model for the rest of Africa.

that's not how it works, if Eritrea is willing to produce products that are in high demand in the west, the export business is open. Not just the west, you have the middle east and Asia too. Africa too can import products and services from Eritrea once they become available.

If Eritreans wisely chose not to repeat the mistakes other African countries made, it does not make them less diplomatic, but rather sly as an African fox. They are busy building vital infrastructure that will not only attract foreign investment and sustain long-term GDP growth, but help them get a fair market value of exported products. They're less concerned with image and more concerned with economic emancipation which could only be obtained through rigid discipline.

Eritrea doesn't need to repeat the mistakes of other African countries, what she needs is to repeat the successes of the Asian tigers, it can be done once the government becomes serious about the appropriate small scale industries.

There are some things on which a responsible head of state shouldn’t compromise, even if failing to do so makes him unpopular with the outside world. Lifting people out of poverty in Africa is neither a popularity contest, nor glamor. It's a life-and-death struggle, because every decision made will affect the lives of millions of people. China lifted more than 600 million people out of poverty over the past 20 years. If Chinese leaders' primary concern was to have a squeaky clean image, there would be 600 million more poor people in China today. Image is nothing; substance is everything.

For one, the Chinese have set very good examples in the art of diplomacy, second China pulled its people out of poverty and backwardness by cultivating the export market extensively. Alot of Asian countries have used the export market to a great advanrtage, no African nation has used taken advantage of that possibility except South Africa. i think Eritrea can do economic miracles for her people if she takes the best aspects of the Asian examples, start with small numerous and labor intesive inductries, as you build up capital you can gradute to the larger industries like steel and car manufacturing, but first start small.

The structural adjustment programs are actually the fault of the African leaders who borrow money, then they steal it later the people have to suffer to pay it back, that doesn't apply to Eritrea since she doesn't borrow money.

That's my suggestion.

You guys are working hard to fool Ethiopians talking nonsense about multiple Eritreans? There is one Eritrea led by Isaias al Arabqit where its citizens are living a life of Arab slavery. That is the Eritrea that many Ethiopians know.
Do guys have your own websites to discuss Eritrean issues?

Comformist, I don´t why U´ve this tendency to insult people sometimes. Is it a conscious decision? Do U think eritrea cannot differentiate between domestic and foreign policy? It´s precisely that I meant when I said "freedom in policymaking". I´m talking about domestic issues. Eritrea believes in non-interference in other countries internal affairs so no need to "restrain" her in that area. What is irritating to us eritreans is the west´s interference in our home. I bet this is not so surprising to U because U know the west interfers everywhere and all the time. I don´t think any policy of eritrea is in any way threatning to the west but Eritrea is used as a scapegoat for the mess they´ve created in our neighbourhood. I thought U were concerned about where Eritrea is headed and that´s OK but pls, don´t insult our intelligence by saying we should differentiate this from that, while U know the mistakes are committed somewhere else. Thanx!

Dear Z,

Eritrea must differentiate between domestic policy and foreign policy. She has the right to prevent foreign powers from telling her what kind of political or educational policy to formulate. But foreign policy is different, Eritrea must not even give the impression her foreign policy could pose a threat to the west, because they are powerful, they are ruthless, and violent.

Look at the slaughter of Syrians today, it's not because Assad is a "dictator", it's because he is a danger to Israel's security.

Comformist, I don´t why U´ve this tendency to insult people sometimes. Is it a conscious decision? Do U think eritrea cannot differentiate between domestic and foreign policy? It´s precisely that I meant when I said "freedom in policymaking". I´m talking about domestic issues. Eritrea believes in non-interference in other countries internal affairs so no need to "restrain" her in that area. What is irritating to us eritreans is the west´s interference in our home. I bet this is not so surprising to U because U know the west interfers everywhere and all the time. I don´t think any policy of eritrea is in any way threatning to the west but Eritrea is used as a scapegoat for the mess they´ve created in our neighbourhood. I thought U were concerned about where Eritrea is headed and that´s OK but pls, don´t insult our intelligence by saying we should differentiate this from that, while U know the mistakes are committed somewhere else. Thanx!

I have no argument against your right to formulate your domestic policy as you see fit, but how do you explain the following accusations against Eritrea,

1. Eritrea is allied with Iran(a nation under the dark cloud of war with the west.)

2. Eritrea has allowed Iran docking rights in the Assab, and has allowed Iranian troops a military base there.

3. Eritrea is involved in the smuggling of iranian weapons to Hams through Sudan and the Sinai.

4. Eritrea is giving military aid to the Shababa.