The Eritreansâ unshakeable certainty was exasperating, a positive handicap during a crisis that might require for its solution the murky skills of diplomacy, an ability to conceive of shades of grey. As ever, the community stood grimly united. âEritrea is not made of people who cry,â said an old businessman who had just waved goodbye to a son going off to fight. âWe did not want this, but once it comes we will do whatever our country requires.â The Eritrean capacity for speaking with one voice was beginning to sound a little creepy to my ears, as depressing as the belligerent warmongering blasting from television screens in Addis Ababa. In its chiming uniformity, it had a touch of The Stepford Wives .
Two years later, after at least 80,000 soldiers from both sides of the border had died, the doubters were proved correct. With Ethiopian forces occupying Eritreaâs most fertile lands to the west and a third of Eritreaâs population living under UNHCR plastic sheeting, a peace deal was signed and a UN force moved in to separate the two sides. The war had been a disaster for Eritrea. But True Believers, already seriously questioning their assumptions, were about to be dealt a final, killer blow. In September 2001, President Isaias arrested colleagues who had dared challenge his handling of the warâincluding the ex-Fighters who had been closest to him during the Struggleâand shut down Eritreaâs independent media, a step even the likes of Mugabe, Mobutu and Moi had never dared, or bothered, to take. So much for Africaâs Renaissance. Many of the ministers whose independent musings had so impressed me were now in jail, denied access to lawyers. Plans to introduce a multipartyconstitution and stage elections were put on indefinite hold, bolshie students sent for military training in the desert where no one could hear their views. Aloof and surrounded by sycophants, Isaias clearly had no intention of stepping down. As it gradually became clear that this was no temporary policy change, Eritrean ambassadors stationed abroad began applying for political asylum, members of the Eritrean diaspora postponed long-planned returns. As for the economy, who was going to invest now that the countryâs skilled workers were all in uniform, the president had fallen out with Western governments, and relations with Ethiopia, Eritreaâs main market, were decidedly dodgy? No one cuffed the beggars on Liberation Avenue any more, because the beggars were not chirpy urchins but the old, left destitute by their childrenâs departure for the front.
Far from learning from the continentâs mistakes, Eritrea had turned into the stalest, most predictable of African clichés. What was striking was how far the waves of despair and outrage at this presidential crackdown travelled. For the journalists, diplomats, academics and aid workers who followed Africa, this felt like a personal betrayal, because it had destroyed the last of their hopes for the continent. Had this happened in Zambia or Ivory Coast, we would have shaken our heads and shrugged. Because it had taken place in Eritrea, special, perverse, inspiring Eritrea, we raged. âHow could they, oh, how could they?â I remember an Israeli cameraman friend moaning over lunch in Londonâs Soho. This from a man who could not have spent more than a fortnight in Eritrea in his life.
Somewhere along the line, it wasnât yet clear where, the True Believers must have missed the point. They had failed to register important clues, drawn naive conclusions, misinterpreted key events. The qualities we had all so admired obviously came with a sinister reverse side. Had we mistaken arrogant pigheadedness for moral certainty, dangerous bloody-mindednessfor focused determination? I had become intrigued by the Eritrean character, I realized, without digging very far into the circumstances in which it had been forged. âThey carry their