I read both articles with the same feeling; it's unfortunate that Dagmawi's
questions are dismissed on the same grounds of pro- or anti-government
agenda. Regardless of political affiliations the issue of Eritrea (and
Ethiopia's access to sea is a part of it) is serious and can't be dismissed.
It was there for generations before us and looks like will be a question for
generations after us to answer. The lack of dialogue has its sad
consequences -- more conflicts, wars and dead. Maybe the time will come when
the government realize that Diaspora IS an independent body of Ethiopians
free to ask and to have their own views.
What difference will it make to label an author who wants to understand? He
is free to think for himself and express himself, knowing that there are
people like him with the same questions in mind. Shouldn't Eritreans ask
themselves the same questions?
Never mind the officials and the "official line" -- this war, the meaning of
it, the results will be examined. And there are the results. You don't waste
100.000 lives to start discussions about borders. That is what diplomacy is
for -- to talk before you shoot. Maybe Meles and Issayas can go back to
pre-1998 situation, the rest of us can't.
What a world we live in when any victory equals defeat! Who lost?
Ethiopians. They lost love ones. What did they get? The maps examination?
What a nonsense!

Anatoly G. Antohin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Berhan Kassa" 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Dagmawi – Sha'ebia's Trojan Horse?


> ----- All Ethiopians Discussion List(AEDL)------------
> All material posted on AEDL is the sole responsibility
> of the author.
> ----- http://pages.prodigy.net/hahuabc --------------
>
> A Precedence Based Analysis is Hardly Irrational: (A response to a
critique)
> by Samuel Fasika, July 26, 2000
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----
>
> Browsing through WALTA today, I came across an article that was written
some
> ten days ago. Why so late?, I asked myself. Today's article from the East
> African Forum provided the answer. Let's give the benefit of the doubt for
> the electronic media, Walta, for its attempt to be fair. It posted the
> critiqued article.
>
> I invite the reader to first read both articles at Walta. The writer that
> posted in the East African Forum failed to address the issue. Dagmawi
> presented three points as to why he thinks the TPLF-EPLF alliance may
> resurface in the future. The hitherto existing lopsided agreements that
> favoured Eritrea, the atrocities committed by EPLF against Tigreans in
their
> exodus to Sudan and the ‘forgiveness' of TPLF, the historical relationship
> of the last thirty years were the basis for Dagmawi's conclusions.
>
> The question here is not whether his conclusions are legitimate or not.
That
> is open for criticism and scrutiny of facts. A serious person would
> concentrate on the reasons behind the conclusion. Instead the article that
> is written to repudiate Dagmawi's points chose to be thetorical. It is
> plausible that forces that strive on negative energy could use Dagmawi's
> article to support their hateful propaganda on certain ethnic groups of
> Ethiopia. Dagmawi may need to be clear and formulate his articles in such
a
> way that these negative forces would not have the chance to exploit his
> writings. However, to accuse the paper as one that undermines Ethiopia's
> rich ethnic diversity is , I believe out of line.
>
> I have failed to see any response to the questions raised. The paper talks
> about Alula, Yohannes, Menilik and the struggle of the people of Tigrai,
> their contributions to Ethiopian unity and territorial integrity. There is
> neither a dispute on this point nor was it raised in the critiqued
article.
>
> Nobody challenged the points raised above. These are well established
> historical facts. So why are they here? Is it a case of an ‘Aramba-na
Qobo'
> kind of mistake or a calculated move to sensationalise the issue, to stop
> people from asking hard and difficult/sensitive questions? Frankly, I find
> the article to be not constructive.
>
> It is issues that we are concerned with. Not defending this or that group.
> It is understandable that those who take their group interests above
> everything else indulge themselves in that topic. But that needs to be
clear
> to readers. Really, if it is the case that the EPLF-TPLF interests come to
> coincide, there is no reason that they should not join forces. That is a
> theoretical possibility. Of course, under current conditions, its
> feasibility is questionable. However, TPLF has a track record of not
putting
> Ethiopia's interest as its top priority. It gave away Eritrea to Isayas.
It
> urged foreign powers and international organizations to legally
> authorize/accept Eritrea's independence. It gave away Assab. It did not
> consult the Ethiopian people in these very important and far-reaching
> decisions. Following Isayas' lead, it ( EPRDF) characterized the almost
two
> hundred thousand Ethiopians that have been deported from Eritrea as Derg
> functionaries. The past mistakes of this government are too far-reaching
to
> be ignored. Please do not impose your wills upon us. Allow us to say the
> things that we perceive to be wrong or right. The agony of us all will be
> relieved if you realize that it is only through unity that the wishes of
the
> majority will be met.
>
> The author wrote: ".. I strongly believe this conflict cannot be regarded
as
> ‘over' until all the important issues raised by the Ethiopian government
are
> unconditionally fulfilled". May I ask what the important questions raised
by
> the government are?
>
> Is providing a legal , demarcated border for Eritrea an important
question?
> Is it? Is erecting a permanent border for Eritrea , with the blood and
bones
> of tens of thousand of Ethiopians to our interest? Should the assertion by
> Meles that Assab is Eritrean be fulfilled? Is inviting UN peacekeepers
>  foreign troopes) an all important issue for Ethiopia? Is safeguarding
> Eritrea from its southern border so that it will have the resources to
> destabilise its neighbour to the east ( Sudan) to the interest of
Ethiopia?.
> In my opinion, there is no important question raised to the benefit of
> Ethiopia.
>
> The current government still has the opportunity to make things right. The
> PM must be advised to listen to the wishes and aspirations of all
> Ethiopians. His ‘know it all' mentality has proved to be wrong. He has
> repeatedly exhibited serious difficulty in articulating Ethiopia's
interest
> in its dealing with Eritrea. If he truly believes that he is elected to
> fulfill the wishes of the electorate, he has to precisely do that.
>
> I think these are what the article by Dagmawi want us to think hard and
> consider. The critique, instead, failed to raise the ‘all important
> questions' and by doing so has not helped us to understand our problems
> clearly. In fact the person who is writing in defence of the TPLF seems to
> be angry at the Diaspora as a whole. This is consistent with TPLF's policy
> of not wanting to do any thing with the Diaspora. Intolerance towards any
> criticism or suggestions that come out of the Diaspora are vividly
expressed
> towards the end of the article. TPLF is advised to increase its tolerance
> level towards Ethiopians. It is capable of expressing such characteristic.
> Eritrea/Eritreans/ is a witness.
>
> As to Dagmawi's role, if we are talking about the same person that
maintains
> the Ethiopian-Eritrean website, his work is a witness to his commitment to
> his country. The site, where one finds vital resources, informative
articles
> and glaring tributes to the courageous sons and daughters of Ethiopia, the
> Ethiopian defence Forces, is hardly a work of a person in an way
associated
> with ‘fringe groups'. The challenge now is how to convince one the
> conclusions that have been reached by the author based on precedence are
> invalid under the current condition.
>
> To coin a precedence based analysis as irrational does not obviously get
the
> ear of a serious audience. Nonetheless, it does detract the serious person
> from focusing on more important issues.
>
> Samuel Fasika
> =======================================================
> http://www.geocities.com/~dagmawi/NewsJuly2000/Samuel_Fasika.html

@2000-2001 sellassie www