
Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki: Three decades, one leader - how independence hopes were dashed
Once hailed as part of a new generation of reformist African leaders, Eritrea's president, who recently marked 32 years in power, has long defied expectations.Isaias Afwerki now spends much of his time at his rural residence on a dusty hillside some 20km (12 miles) from the capital, Asmara.With the cabinet not having met since 2018, all power flows through him, and like a potentate he receives a string of local officials and foreign dignitaries at his retreat.It is also a magnet for ordinary Eritreans hoping in vain that Isaias might help them with their problems.The 79-year-old has never faced an election in his three decades in power and there is little sign of that changing any time soon.But things looked very different in the 1990s.Isaias was 45 when, as a rebel leader, his Eritrean People's Liberation Front (EPLF) defeated Ethiopia in 1991. Those who fought in the war are remembered each year on Martyrs' Day, 20 June. Tall and charismatic, he inspired hope both at home and abroad.In 1993, following formal independence, Isaias appeared on the international stage as head of state for the first time.It was in Cairo, where he attended a continental leaders' summit, that he lambasted the older generation of African leaders "who wanted to stay in power for decades".He vowed that Eritrea would never repeat the same old failed approach and promised a democratic order that would underpin the social and economic development of his people. His stance won him plaudits from Eritreans and diplomats alike.
Riding the euphoria of the early years of independence and enjoying a glowing international reception, Isaias sought closer relations with the West.In 1995, after inviting the Eritrean leader to the Oval Office, US President Bill Clinton expressed appreciation for the country's strong start on the road to democracy.Eritrea had just begun drafting a new constitution expected to establish the rule of law and a democratic system.Isaias was supposed to be a "transitional president" until a constitutional government was elected. The new constitution was ratified by a constituent assembly in May 1997.But just as Eritreans and the world were expecting national elections in 1998, war broke out between Eritrea and neighbouring Ethiopia over a disputed border.Isaias was accused of using the war as a justification to postpone the elections indefinitely.He had promised a multiparty democratic system and his resolve was tested after a peace agreement was reached in 2000.Several of his cabinet ministers, including former close friends and comrades-in-arms, began to call for reform.In an open letter issued in March 2001, a group of senior government officials, who later became known as the G-15, accused the president of abusing his powers and becoming increasingly autocratic. They called for the implementation of the constitution and national elections.
Starting from the mid 1990s, Eritreans had tasted some freedom, with emerging newspapers carrying critical voices — including from within the ruling party, that had been renamed the People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ).The transitional national assembly had decided when elections would take place, an electoral commission was being formed and proposed political party laws were under debate.The country seemed to be on a slow path towards democratisation.However, this fragile opening abruptly closed in September 2001, while the world's attention was focussed on the 9/11 attacks in the US.In a single morning, the authorities shut down all independent newspapers, effectively silencing critical voices. Many editors and journalists were detained and never seen again.Simultaneously, the government arrested 11 of the G-15, including three former foreign ministers, a chief of staff of the armed forces and several members of the national assembly. They have not been seen or heard from since.The hopes of many Eritreans were dashed.But Isaias had already moved away from introducing democratic changes. "I had never had any intention of participating in political parties," he said in April 2001. "I don't have any intention of participating in a political party now, and I won't have any intention of participating in a political party in the future."He also described the democratic process as a "mess", saying that the PFDJ was "not a party. It is a nation". For many, it became clear the president would not allow democratic reforms to take hold. The silencing of critics and the failure to hold elections, earned him and his country pariah status.However, his supporters say he was unfairly targeted by Western nations and praise him as a symbol of national liberation.
In 2002, he unofficially dissolved the transitional assembly that was meant to hold him accountable and in effect did the same with the cabinet in 2018.Some aging ministers with no real authority now lead weak government agencies, and several ministries - including defence - remain without ministers.Many wonder why the independence hero took such a repressive turn.Abdella Adem, a former regional governor and senior ambassador, says Isaias never believed in democracy and has always been obsessed with power. He led the EPLF with an iron fist even before independence, according to Mr Abdella, who now lives in exile in London."He systematically weakened and removed leaders with public legitimacy and struggle credentials who could challenge his authority."To some surprise, in May 2014, Isaias announced plans for a new constitution, later saying that the constitution ratified in 1997 was "dead". But no progress has been made since then.The proposal to write a new constitution may have been triggered by an attempted coup by senior military officers in 2013.They drove tanks into the capital and seized control of national TV and radio stations for several hours.Realising the attempt was failing, they tried to broadcast a call to implement the 1997 constitution and release political prisoners. But security forces pulled the plug mid-broadcast.Many officials - including the mines minister, a governor, diplomats and a general - were detained. The leader of the coup killed himself to avoid arrest.Zeraslasie Shiker, a former diplomat, left his post in Nigeria and sought asylum in the UK. His boss, Ambassador Ali Omeru, a veteran of the independence war, was later detained and remains unaccounted for.Governments that lock people up "like Isaias Afwerki's do not allow genuine political and social institutions or the rule of law", says Mr Zeraslasie, now a PhD candidate at the UK's Leeds University."The indefinite suspension of Eritrea's constitution and the collapsing of government institutions into the office of the president must be understood in this context."Isolated internationally, Isaias withdrew from the global stage. He stopped attending summits such as the UN General Assembly and African Union meetings.
The country's economy has "struggled", according to the World Bank's assessment last year."Economic activity is constrained by underdeveloped infrastructure, limited competition due to state dominance, and strict import controls," the authors said, adding that the financial sector remained "weak".Isaias himself acknowledged problems in an interview with state TV in December last year."A subsistence economy will lead us nowhere. Currently, we are not in a better position than many other African countries in this regard," he said.Isaias also refuses humanitarian aid, citing fears of dependency that would undermine his principle of "self-reliance".For many Eritreans, especially young people trapped in indefinite national service, which the authorities justify because of a series of conflicts and tense relations with its neighbours, daily life is a nightmare. Under a repressive regime, they face a future with little hope or freedom. Disillusioned by the lack of political progress and exhausted by forced conscription and state violence, many risk their lives to escape in search of freedom.Over the past two decades, hundreds of thousands have fled, crossing deserts and seas to find safe haven. Eritreans are currently the third most common nationality to be granted refugee status in the UK.In his independence day speech last month, Isaias gave no hint of any of the changes many Eritreans hope to see. There was no mention of a constitution, national elections or the release of political prisoners. At the same time there was no concrete plan to turn round the country's moribund economy.Despite criticism at home, President Isaias retains support among parts of the population, particularly within the military, ruling party networks and those who view him as a symbol of national independence and resistance against foreign interference.The president also has strong backing among some in the diaspora, who believe Western powers are conspiring to undermine Eritrea's hard-won independence.As frustration grew in Eritrea, Isaias retreated from Asmara in 2014 to his home that overlooks the Adi Hallo dam whose construction he closely supervised.As Isaias nears 80, many fear what could happen next.An apparent attempt to groom his eldest son to succeed him was reportedly blocked at a 2018 cabinet meeting, since when no further meetings have been held.But there is no obvious succession plan or a credible opposition in the country who could replace the current regime, leaving many to find it hard to imagine a future without Isaias."The president's office is what's holding the country from collapse," warns Mr Zeraslasie.During this year's Easter holiday, Isaias was seen kissing a cross during a church mass in Asmara. Some believe he is seeking spiritual redemption, others hope he may release political prisoners.For now, however, Isaias remains firmly in control, while Eritreans continue their long and anxious wait for change.
You may also be interested in:
Why Eritreans are at war with each other around the worldEritrea viewpoint: I fought for independence but I'm still waiting for freedomReporting on Africa's most secretive stateEritrea President Isaias Afwerki 'both charismatic and brutal''I haven't seen my parents for 17 years'
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
43 minutes ago
- Reuters
Under shadow of Trump warning, Africa pioneers non-dollar payments systems
NAIROBI, June 20 (Reuters) - Africa's push for local currency payments systems - once little more than an aspiration - is finally making concrete gains, bringing the promise of less costly trade to a continent long hobbled by resource-sapping dollar transactions. But efforts to move away from the dollar face strong opposition and the threat of retaliation from U.S. President Donald Trump, who is determined to preserve it as the dominant currency for global trade. The move by Africa to create payments systems that do not rely on the greenback mirrors a push by China to develop financial systems independent of Western institutions. Countries like Russia, which face economic sanctions, are also keen for an alternative to the dollar. But while that movement has gained a sense of urgency due to shifting trade patterns and geopolitical realignments following President Trump's return to the White House, African advocates for payment alternatives are making their case based on costs. "Our goal, contrary to what people might think, is not de-dollarisation," said Mike Ogbalu, chief executive of the Pan-African Payments and Settlements System, which allows parties to transact directly in local currencies, bypassing the dollar. "If you look at African economies, you'll find that they struggle with availability for third-party global currencies to settle transactions," he said. Africa's commercial banks typically rely on overseas counterparts, through so-called correspondent banking relationships, to facilitate settlements of international payments. That includes payments between African neighbours. That adds significantly to transaction costs that, along with other factors like poor transport infrastructure, have made trade in Africa 50% more expensive than the global average, according to the UN Trade and Development agency. It is also among the reasons so much of Africa's trade - 84%, according to a report by Mauritius-based MCB Group - is with external partners rather than between African nations. "The existing financial network that is largely dollar-based has essentially become less effective for Africa, and costlier," said Daniel McDowell, a professor at Syracuse University in New York specialising in international finance. According to data compiled by PAPSS, under the existing system of correspondent banks, a $200 million trade between two parties in different African countries is estimated to cost 10% to 30% of the value of the deal. The shift to homegrown payments systems could cut the cost of that transaction to just 1%. Systems like PAPSS allow a business in one country, Zambia for example, to pay for goods from another like Kenya, with both buyer and seller receiving payment in their respective currencies rather than converting them into dollars to complete the transaction. Using currencies like the Nigerian naira, Ghanaian cedi or South Africa's rand for intra-Africa trade payments could save the continent $5 billion a year in hard currency, Ogbalu told Reuters. Launched in January 2022 with just 10 participating commercial banks, PAPSS is today operational in 15 countries including Zambia, Malawi, Kenya and Tunisia, and now has 150 commercial banks in its network. "We have also seen very significant growth in our transactions," Ogbalu said, without providing usage data. The International Finance Corporation, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, has, meanwhile, started issuing loans to African businesses in local currencies. It views the switch as imperative for their growth, relieving them from the currency risks of borrowing in dollars, said Ethiopis Tafara, IFC's vice-president for Africa. "If they are not generating hard currency, a hard-currency loan imposes a burden that makes it difficult for them to succeed," he said. Africa's campaign to boost regional payments systems has found a platform at the Group of 20 major economies, with South Africa leading the charge as holder of the G20's rotating presidency. It held at least one session on boosting regional payments systems when South Africa hosted a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors. And South Africa wants it to follow up the talk with concrete actions. The next meeting of G20 finance officials is scheduled for mid-July. "Some of the most expensive corridors for cross-border payments are actually found on the African continent," Lesetja Kganyago, South Africa's central bank governor, told Reuters during a G20 meeting in Cape Town in February. "For us to function as a continent, it's important that we start trading and settling in our own currencies." Talk of moving away from the dollar - either for trade or as a reserve currency - has drawn aggressive reactions from President Trump, however. After BRICS - a grouping of nations including Russia, China, India and Brazil along with Africans like South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia - weighed reducing dollar dependence and creating a common currency, Trump responded with threats of 100% tariffs. "There is no chance that BRICS will replace the U.S. Dollar in International Trade, or anywhere else, and any Country that tries should say hello to Tariffs, and goodbye to America!," he wrote on Truth Social in January. In the months since, Trump has demonstrated his willingness to use tariffs to pressure and punish allies and foes alike, a strategy that has upended global trade and geopolitics. No matter its intentions in moving to more local currency transactions, Syracuse University's McDowell said Africa will struggle to distance itself from more politically motivated de-dollarisation efforts, like those led by China and Russia. "The perception is likely to be that this is about geopolitics," he said.


BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
SEND: Oxfordshire County Council says funding 'unsustainable'
A £100m black hole in the budget for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) in Oxfordshire has been highlighted in a written contribution to the Education Select Committee, Oxfordshire County Council said the current SEND system is "unsustainable".It called for immediate and comprehensive government previously allocated £1bn to SEND services in its first budget. Oxfordshire County Council has been criticised for its SEND services - with an Ofsted report in 2023 saying there was a "tangible sense of helplessness" among its submission to the committee, it pointed out that despite rapidly rising expenditure, official reports show that outcomes are not improving nationally for children with Sean Gaul, Oxfordshire County Council's cabinet member for children and young people, said there was a "national crisis" impacting families and children in Oxfordshire."The situation is unsustainable," he said."The SEND high needs block deficit is expected to hit £100million in Oxfordshire by March 2026, with many other councils across the country in similar situations. "The whole system is in urgent need of extensive reform."We're calling for clarity on funding and long-term sustainable reforms to ensure we have a system fit for purpose that will meet the needs of every SEND child and young person wherever they live, and whatever their individual needs."The Education Select Committee's "Solving the SEND Crisis" inquiry is looking at how to achieve stability in the SEND system and improve experiences and outcomes for children and young government has been contacted for a comment. You can follow BBC Oxfordshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.


Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
The ultimate disruption: What if Reform promised a referendum on Scottish independence?
PA Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It was billed as a new forum to pose 'the big questions' about Scotland's future, and in fairness Tuesday's Scotland 2050 conference offered a decent line-up, with an intriguing pairing of economy secretary Kate Forbes and Cherie Blair and keynote speeches from First Minister John Swinney and Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar. They are, of course, always 'keynote' speeches, shorthand for a solo spot without interruptions in which little of any note, key or otherwise, is said, and judging by transcripts and subsequent coverage, the presentations at Edinburgh's Assembly Rooms lived down to expectations. 'We were expecting great visions of the future and what we got were stump speeches,' said one attendee who knows about these things. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But it received extensive coverage, so those who bankrolled the free event, presumably the property companies who put up panellists, will have been satisfied with their investment. However, it was who was not there that was most revealing. The faces and names might have been different, but the line-up was drawn from the same sort of bien pensants who have dominated the Scottish Parliament since its inception, and before that the Scottish Constitutional Convention and other 'Civic Scotland' talking shops. 'Scotland 2050 will be Scotland's most inclusive one day conference,' said the blurb, 'We believe that new thinking is required to reimagine what can be achieved to deliver a new enlightenment'. Perhaps, but whether by accident, absence or design, Scotland's most inclusive one day conference did not include anyone from the Scottish Conservatives, and there was no-one from Reform, the party which won 26 per cent of the vote at the Hamilton by-election. I was, however, at an event that evening which was attended by four of the emerging party's leading figures, some of whom I doubt are even household names in their own households, but all the same they are people who are making the political weather; disruptors, bogeymen, crypto-fascists, denigrate them however you like, but poll after poll indicates there will be around 15 Reform MSPs in the Scottish Parliament. While plenty of their more prominent candidates are former Conservatives, as a party Reform is unburdened by a past political record, and while a clean slate, blue-sky thinking or whatever might produce quite bonkers ideas like Nigel Farage's suggestion that a Reform government would re-open South Wales coal mines, it does reveal a party prepared to think the unthinkable in the quest for votes. The other side of the Hamilton coin was the trouncing of the SNP, finishing second in a seat it had held, with vote share down nearly 17 per cent, compared to the Conservative loss of 11 per cent. Speaking separately to two prominent Nationalists this week produced the same analysis; that the SNP is a hollowed-out party in which critical thinking has been crushed, controlled by a failed hierarchy unable to produce workable ideas to take Scotland forward economically and advance the independence cause. Both saw opportunities arising around the time of the next general election, in the next ten years certainly, but with the party as it stands incapable of taking advantage, a spent force in a state of financial and intellectual collapse. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I am not close enough to vouch for its accuracy, and of course the SNP leadership would claim it's fighting fit, but when the number of people who say they currently favour independence is about 20 per cent higher than those who say they will vote SNP, then something is badly wrong. The failures of the UK Labour government so soon after a general election victory based on hope is making no difference to SNP support, but even if independence is less of a priority for most voters than the cost of living, NHS, immigration, schools and crime, Unionists can have no cause for complacency. In the run-up to a general election in 2028-29, what if an ostensibly Unionist, but ultimately opportunist UK party like Reform were to make a manifesto commitment to offer the chance of a referendum with few strings attached? Maybe if independence support polling at 55 per cent for a year. No other Unionist party would match it, and neither could the SNP because it can never be in power in London. There is an obvious risk some Conservative defectors would return to the fold ─ and one, but not all, of the Reform folk on Tuesday night was quick to say it won't happen ─ but Nigel Farage could easily promise Reform would campaign for the Union while agreeing a referendum, as did David Cameron when signing the Edinburgh Agreement in 2012. He could argue that the principle of sovereignty and self-determination is consistent with the position taken by UKIP and the Brexit Party, and there would be no shortage of ordinary English voters who would be quite happy for Scotland to depart and for the Barnett Formula billions to stay south of the border.