Watch this video on Eritrean migration to understand the relentless disinformation campaign orchestrated by the Eritrean government. Read our essay about Eritrean national identity, disinformation and the need for truth.

By the strathink editorial team.

noun dis·in·for·ma·tion \(ˌ)dis-ˌin-fər-ˈmā-shən\

: false information that is given to people in order to make them believe something or to hide the truth: false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth

A Public Relations Machine

Beginning in the 1970s, Eritreans worldwide were a public relations machine. Across global civil society, Eritreans were making friends and telling everyone the dramatic and engaging story of their struggle for independence. For over 25 years, Eritreans connected with their neighbors, government representatives, religious cohorts and work colleagues to build an impressive constituency of supporters outside Eritrea. The storyline was clear, simple and consistent—a small nation fighting for its freedom from an oppressive state that illegally annexed its territory and was bombing the people into submission. It was a true story and touched the hearts of many people.

Twenty-five years later, however, the situation has changed but the narrative has remained the same. Although Eritrea has been independent since 1995, the thread of Eritrea’s national mythology is unchanged despite enormous changes throughout the country.

From Cradle to Grave Socialization: Building the Eritrean Identity

It is important to note that Eritrea’s disinformation campaign is not just targeted externally. Indeed, the strength and authenticity of the Eritrean national mythology begins in the Eritrean home. Whether in Asmara or New York, Eritrean children are taught what it means to be “Eritrean.” This socialization process of creating national identity is not unique to Eritreans—it is fundamental to nation building that the state promotes a unifying national identity in order for its citizens to facilitate a bond to the state and civil society.

The modern Eritrean national identity began with Italy’s colonial occupation. According to Eritrean President Isayas Afewerki, “In a small area as diverse as this with nine languages, [and] two major religions, Eritrean nationalism developed largely as a result of foreign intervention.” [1] The Eritrean national identity during colonialization was relatively weak, however, and only began to take off with the 30 years war for independence. Ruth Iyob further argues that it was during the last ten years of the liberation struggle that Eritrean nationalism, as we know today, surged under the proprietorship of the Eritrean Peoples’ Liberation Front (EPLF), now the Peoples’ Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ).

Peggy Hoyle, an international lawyer who worked in Asmara for several years, identifies several key components of the Eritrean national identity. They are: ethical behavior; a belief in critical public speech; perseverance or steadfastness; an emphasis on the community over the individual; and a commitment to self-reliance. [2]

“Eritreans celebrate their nation as being exceptionally ethical and contend that dignity and fairness are what differentiates them from other societies, especially Ethiopia.” [3] Indeed, the modern Eritrean identity exists as a counterpart to Ethiopia. Eritrean national identity serves as an antithesis of all the negative qualities that are perceptually associated with Ethiopians. Moreover, there is no distinction between the Ethiopian state and the Ethiopian people—a distinction that Ethiopians make when talking about their northern neighbors.

This is an important characteristic of the Eritrean national mythology because it allows for the continuity of the narrative even though the situation on the ground has changed. During the war for independence, the successive governments of Haile Selassie and Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam indiscriminately bombed combatants and civilians alike. It was a brutal occupation that spared not women, children or the elderly. Yet, under the current Ethiopian government, the war immediately stopped and plans were put in place for a national referendum that would make the de facto independence of Eritrea de jure and internationally recognized. This key historical fact is often lost in the present narrative.

Additionally, while Ethiopians are careful to distinguish between the Eritrean government and the Eritrean people, Eritreans tend to make no distinction. Both the Ethiopian state and people are demonized and made the source of everything that goes wrong in Eritrea. Again, Eritrea’s ethical conduct, dignity and fairness exist as a counterpart to Ethiopia’s perceived corruption of self and state, lack of dignity and injustice.

The public forum and public discourse is a very important component of the national mythology. Eritrea’s relatively small population lends itself very well to a notional concept of full democracy. Public meetings were used throughout the struggle to explain, to teach and to indoctrinate people with the norms and values espoused by the liberation front. As a result, decisions made by the leadership could be presented as already vetted by the people. This characteristic allows leaders to make unilateral decisions presented prima facie as the collective decision of the people. This gives remarkable flexibility to the leadership for asserting an informal democratic process in the absence of formal democratic institutions and processes.

Perseverance or steadfastness is another quality that makes up the Eritrean national identity. This quality has its roots in the 30 years struggle for national independence. Despite the tremendous odds of fighting one of Africa’s biggest and most well armed military , the EPLF waged a long and arduous campaign against the Haile Selassie government and then the Derg. Patience. Perseverance. Steadfastness. These were the characteristics of the liberation fighters that eventually defeated the mighty Ethiopian military.

Today these characteristics take on a new meaning in the post-liberation period. Eritrea’s maintains a siege mentality that pits “them against us.” Who is “they”? It is just about everybody—from the international community at large, the United States and the CIA, the United Nations, and human rights organizations to Eritrea’s geographical neighbors. The most visible “them” is Ethiopia. Ethiopia, its leaders and its people are, according to the Eritrean national mythology, at the root of every problem in Eritrea—particularly the boundary issue. As reflected in the national dialogue, every problem today can be traced to Ethiopia’s so-called intransigence over demarcating the border.

The primacy of the collective over the individual is a significant characteristic of Eritrea’s national identity. The “we” supersedes the “I” at every level of discourse. This was extremely important during the struggle for independence and remains a fundamental principle of contemporary Eritrean life. During the struggle for independence, the collective good was valued over the needs of the individual. Sacrifice was demanded of the individual in order to serve the broader needs of the collectivity of Eritreans.

Today this emphasis on the collective good over the individual allows the state to avoid responsibility for individual well being. If an individual is imprisoned, it is for the good of the collective. If the government murders an individual, it is to protect the good of the collective. Anyone who deviates from the script written by the government is subject to elimination for the good of the collective.

Critical to the Eritrean narrative of identity, is the commitment to self-reliance. Self-reliance is a double-edged sword. According to Hoyle, “Eritreans concur that another characteristic that sets them apart as a people is their devotion to the concept of self-reliance. After being subjected to decades of colonization by different states, the lesson drawn by Eritreans was that the only people that they could rely on were themselves.” [4] Again, this characteristic was juxtaposed against Ethiopia’s need for guns and food from the superpowers. The commitment to self-reliance has been unchanged since the beginning of the liberation struggle.

Last in the characteristics of modern Eritrean identity is the attachment to the land represented by the Eritrean map. The map, as noted by Hoyle, is a powerful symbol to Eritreans, evoking a tangible, identifiable product of the 30 years of struggle. It explains the attachment to the rocky, barely inhabitable tiny village of Badme that appears to be the root of all Eritrean problems since beginning of the 21^st millennium

“Politicizing Eritrean Migration:” A Case Study in Disinformation

The recent news on Europe’s migration crisis and response was not left unnoticed by the Eritrean government. How does Eritrea explain the 5,000 people fleeing the country every month to seek asylum in Ethiopia—Eritrea’s number one enemy—or Europe, risking their lives in leaky boats to face an unknown future? One approach is to make a video for dissemination over the Internet. (see the video at the beginning of the story.)

“Politicizing Eritrean Migration,” is a 20-minute video ostensibly produced by a group called “African Strategies.” Who is “African Strategies”? It doesn’t exist. The first rule of disinformation is to present an illusion of credibility by having the information come from a third party. “African Strategies” sounds like a third party think tank—hence, inserting layers of objectivity, credibility and factualness. The narrator of the video has a British accent, again seeking to create the illusion that the source of the information being presented is outside Eritrea.

According to the video’s narrator, Eritrea is being singled on the migration issue. It’s “we versus them.” Indeed, the Eritrean migrants are portrayed as victims of human trafficking. The narration is sympathetic towards the migrants, juxtaposing the dangerous voyage in leaky boats with young Eritreans engaging in modern economic activities.

Why are Eritreans risking their lives to leave the country in alarming numbers? According to the video’s narrator, “Emerging evidence suggests that there may be a loose network of state and non-state entities working together to smuggle and exploit Eritrean youth for monetary gain and political influence to influence Eritrean domestic politics.”

And then there is Ethiopia. The video quickly jumps from Eritrea’s history of migration, to the scorched earth policies of two Ethiopian governments, and then mentions the deportation of Eritrean nationals from Ethiopia following the beginning of hostilities in 1998. There is no mention of Eritrea’s deportation of Ethiopians from Eritrea that preceded the deportation of Eritreans.

The “why politicize Eritrean migration” is explained by U.S. support for Ethiopia, especially following the 1998-2000 war. Championing this view is a young Eritrean man, Simon Tesfamariam, who heads a research organization named The Red Sea Institute. Simon Tesfamariam is young, extremely articulate and is a native speaker of English with an American accent. Simon represents Eritrean youth and is a model spokesperson for the government. He begins by discussing the Algiers Agreement and the Boundary Commission, emphasizing Ethiopian intransigence in respecting the decision of the U.N. body. The voiceover, again in a British accent, calls Ethiopia’s decision, “nothing short of shocking.”

The relationship between demarcating the border with Ethiopia and Eritrean migration is triangulated like this: without demarcation, Eritreans are required to perform national service to protect Eritrea from Ethiopian aggression. Eritrean youth leave Eritrea to avoid national service; hence, migration.

The video presents a number of nefarious explanations for Eritrean migration, most notably the result of the United States/C.I.A. wanting regime change in Eritrea. Why does the U.S. want regime change in Eritrea? It is because of their support for Ethiopia. The video shows a number of U.S. officials, including former charge d’affairs Vicki Huddleston, being exposed by leaked cables articulating the U.S. support for Ethiopia and Eritrean opposition. The leaked cables, according to the video’s narrator, “are nothing short of shocking.”

One way is to provide “pull factors,” such as educational opportunities in the United States. These “pull factors,” are intended to embarrass and isolate the government of Eritrea, eventually resulting in the ouster of President Isayas and a government more pliable to the demands of the United States.

Leading this effort is former Eritrean champion, journalist Dan Connell. Dan Connell is shown lecturing a group of Eritreans on how to orchestrate regime change in Eritrea. Dan Connell spent many years promoting the government of Eritrea until the war with Ethiopia. When President Isayas Afewerki suppressed the debate surrounding the pace and direction of the war by shutting down the independent press and arresting government officials, Dan Connell famously withdrew his support and was unceremoniously told to leave the country. He then published a book called, “Enough! A critique of Eritrea’s post-liberation politics.”

Dan Connell is joined by Eritrean opposition activists Daniel Mekonnen and Father Mussie Zerai, a Roman Catholic priest who works with Eritrean asylum seekers and refugees in Switzerland. Father Mussie is especially egregious to the regime given his renown throughout Europe—he has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. All three, according to the video, are working to effect regime change in Eritrea by politicizing migration—hence the title of the video.

Mr. Connell, speaking to an audience of Eritreans, appears to be encouraging his audience to connect migration to the odious national service requirement for Eritreans. However, the video shows a version of national service that that is idyllic—modern classrooms, science laboratories and smiling young people in graduation caps and gowns.

National service, presented by the video, is an extension of high school where students continue learning and participating in national service projects. The visuals in the video include modern hospitals, bull dozers on construction sites, trucks, water projects and women workers. The intention is to present Eritrean youth engaging in nation-building as an extension of their education.

Professor Asmarom Legesse plays a starring role in this video. Professor Asmaron, an anthropologist, was an academic who produced a groundbreaking book on the gada system of Ethiopia’s ethnic Oromo. Professor Legesse, in the video, bears special malice towards the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, particularly Sheila Keetharuth. Ms. Keetharuth is targeted for the recent report produced by the Commission that accused the Eritrean government of “gross human rights violations” and “crimes against humanity.” According to Professor Legesse, she had never even visited Eritrea. Why? The government of Eritrea denied entry to the Commission members.

Personalization and demonization are two widely used disinformation tactics used in this video. Dan Connell. Father Mussie. Daniel Mekonnen. Meles Zenawi. President Obama. All are trying to overthrow the Eritrean government and install a puppet regime.

So what does this all mean?

Every country develops a national mythology and symbolic images to inspire loyalty to the country and serve the national interests of the state. However, in the case of Eritrea, the mythology and symbols used today are choking Eritreans in a relentless cycle of disinformation that deceives not only the outside world but Eritreans themselves.

Eritrean national identity needs to progress beyond negating an Ethiopian identity. The Eritrean identity, as shown in this video and in other forums, remains stuck in the exposition of victimhood. Ethiopia, the United States, the United Nations, human right organizations and NGOs consistently are portrayed as victimizing and isolating Eritrea because…it is not clear why. Certainly, promoting the “them against us” paradigm serves to unite Eritreans in the face of a perceived hostile world. At one time, this served a useful purpose of building the Eritrean national identity. Today, however, especially in the face of imminent change in Eritrea, this characteristic of national identity only serves to prevent the country from moving forward in a meaningful way.

The ethical nature of the Eritrean vis-à-vis the corrupt Ethiopian has run its course. This may have been necessary during the dark days of Haile Selassie and Mengistu Haile Mariam but the need now is to make peace with its neighbors to the south. Eritrea cannot rise without the support of Ethiopia. The public forum of notional democracy is an anachronism today and genuine democratic institutions with public participation is the global norm. The notional democracy practiced today is merely a cover for authoritarianism. Perseverance and steadfastness are positive characteristics but not to mask deficiencies in an undemocratic political culture. The primacy of the collective is also a positive attribute but not when it justifies abusing the individual’s human rights with impunity. Self-reliance does not mean standing outside the community of nations. Attachment to the symbolism of the Eritrean map cannot justify all that is wrong with Eritrea.

Eritrea’s disingenuous attempts at disinformation assume a level of naiveté among the international community. The international community clearly can see the difference between information and disinformation. What is most disturbing, however, is whether or not Eritreans can discern between truth and lies propagated by the Eritrean government and its supporters.

As the situation changes in the coming months, and most certainly the situation in Eritrea will soon change, Eritreans must confront the falsehoods that have shaped the Eritrean identity and find strength in telling the truth. The truth will set you free.

[1] See Robert Papstein, Eritrea: Revolution At Dusk 3-9 (1991).

[2] Peggy A. Hoyle, “The Eritrean National Identity”

[3] Peggy A. Hoyle, “The Eritrean National Identity”

[4] op.cit.