Isaias’s latest interview has disappointed many Eritreans, and he has come under sharp criticism by several Eritrean media personalities on the internet, as well as a direct rebuttal by his former colleague, Ambassador Andeberhan Woldegiorgis, in an article on Eri-Platform. Some have made a spectacle of the interview, claiming that the President demonstrates his knowledge and prowess in all his appearances, while others have rebuked it as endless halewlew. The tough pill we need to swallow is that the latter is correct. If anything, the interview shows that the much-needed reforms Eritreans have been anticipating will not come for as long as Isaias remains President of Eritrea.
One could argue that the sanctions imposed on Eritrea, coupled with the active efforts of Western imperialism, have contributed to the government’s “martial law” posture—especially since 2001–2002—as well as the economic hardships the country has faced. While the border war gave Eritrea every right to defend itself and safeguard its national security by any means necessary, it should not have served as an excuse, after the war ended, to delay the implementation of the constitution, to neglect revitalizing the economy as promised in the 1994 PFDJ National Charter—which would have enabled Eritreans to invest in their own country—or, worst of all, to indefinitely detain and disappear political prisoners without arraignment or due process.
I would argue that President Isaias exploited the aftermath of the border war to consolidate his power even further by disappearing the top PFDJ leaders (G-15) who were urging him to convene a parliamentary meeting and implement the constitution. I use the word disappearing because I find it difficult to use the word incarcerate when their whereabouts remain unknown. Isaias would go on to disappear other prominent Eritrean government officials who possessed immense knowledge that could have been passed down to the next generation—or forced them into exile—such as the late martyr and tegadalay Berhane Abrehe, Ambassador Andeberhan who now resides in Brussels, Belgium, and Ghebreselassie Yoseph who is in the United States, among many others. Many of Isaias’s former comrades, either in interviews or in their memoirs (i.e., Berhane Abrehe, Andeberhan W/Giorgis), have elaborated on how difficult he was to work with. Ever since the G-15 were arrested, it has all been downhill. I personally believe Eritreans were a quarter-century too late to realize the slippery slope we are on.
There was a tweet made by the media attaché of the Eritrean Embassy in the UK, Yared Tesfay, in which he quoted a remark Isaias made in his interview. It caught my attention, and I had some strong things to say about it:
“President Isaias emphasized the need for strong institutions in Africa, urging nations to take ownership of their development for sustainable growth and empowerment.” — Yared Tesfay
I replied with the following quote tweet to Yared’s post:
“To preach about strong institutions when you have weakened the ministries, dissolved the parliament, and eroded the banking and financial sector of Eritrea is top-tier hypocrisy and gaslighting. Hopefully, Eritrea will have a better leader when this guy bites the dust.”
A few hours after I made the quote tweet, the post went nuclear in the Eritrean political space on X, with many pro-government Eritreans putting me on blast in the comments section and emphasizing how Isaias has been protecting Eritrea from neocolonialism and imperialism. On the advice of a friend—whose name I will not mention out of privacy and respect—I deleted the quote tweet to avoid causing any further backlash. I have reason to believe the post was misunderstood. However, I mostly still stand by what I wrote.
The quote tweet should not be misinterpreted as an open call for the death of Isaias Afwerki. Such a claim would suggest I advocated for his assassination—something I have never done, nor do I support, as I believe it would further destabilize Eritrea. My point was to highlight the reality that Isaias is unlikely to voluntarily step down from the presidency or even attempt to reform the government and economy while still in office. Given the current trajectory and his lack of political will to change the status quo, it appears he will remain in power until he is either incapacitated due to health reasons or passes away from natural causes.
In that event, I hope a reform-minded Eritrean leader will emerge from within the PFDJ ranks—much like China’s transition after Mao Zedong. Despite the hardships under Mao, China entered a new era of reform in both economy and governance under Deng Xiaoping, Mao’s successor. Eritrea deserves a similar shift toward progress and responsible governance.
It is also worth noting that Isaias Afwerki is now 79 years old. As Ambassador Andeberhan Woldegiorgis aptly observed, he is well into his twilight years and long past his political prime. Sooner or later, nature will take its course. When that time arrives, Eritrea will face two critical questions: First, will there be a peaceful and orderly transition of power? And second, will his successor uphold the same policies that have delayed the nation’s progress—or will they break from the past, implement long-overdue reforms, and steer Eritrea toward sustainable development and accountable governance?
The Interview
The interview itself was split into two parts: one focused on regional issues, the other nominally on domestic concerns. I cannot stress the word nominally enough—because starting off an interview that is supposed to focus on domestic issues with commentary on events in other nations is baffling. Isaias immediately segues into Part II (domestic) with commentary on Sudan’s civil war, Omar Al-Bashir, and Osama bin Laden—hardly relevant to Eritrea’s internal matters and better described as halewlew (i.e., meaningless banter). If the purpose was to address domestic matters, the conversation should have remained focused on Eritrean issues inside Eritrea’s borders.
Many of the topics Isaias touched on—such as food and water security, energy security, transportation infrastructure, and investment—are issues we’ve heard time and time again. Granted, these are valid concerns for a developing country, but they fall more appropriately under the portfolios of the respective ministers rather than the President himself. For example, matters of food and water security would be better addressed in an interview with Minister Tesfai Ghebreselassie, while the state of Eritrea’s transportation system should be discussed with Minister Tesfaselassie Berhane.
There was a time—particularly in the late 1990s and early 2000s—when Eritrean ministers gave interviews and discussed their work openly, rather than the President doing it for them. Don’t take my word for it—watch interviews by Berhane Abrehe, Haile Woldensae, or Saleh Meki (credit to Aida Kidane for preserving these interviews on her YouTube channel).
However, due to the President’s persistent micromanagement of ministerial affairs—as detailed by the late Berhane Abrehe in his book—it is nearly impossible to imagine these officials appearing independently on state television to give transparent updates on their ministries’ progress. In other words, it has become a one-man show.
What the President should have discussed is how to revitalize Eritrea in all aspects—politically, economically, and socially. He spoke of the diaspora’s potential to invest in the homeland, but said nothing about revitalizing the banking and financial sector or reforming the economy to make such investment possible. This comes across as all talk and no action. Much of what Isaias discusses—especially given Eritrea’s current state—is trivial for a head of state to be addressing. These are matters that should be delegated to relevant ministers, not handled by the President.
To truly revitalize Eritrea on the political, economic, and social fronts, the discussion of reform is inevitable. Eritrea cannot continue on this trajectory with a government that has a severely weak judiciary, a non-existent parliament, and a crippled financial system. For Eritrea to grow politically, reform must come—but it will not come from Isaias. It will, hopefully, come from someone who ascends to power once Isaias departs this earthly world.
I noticed many people online were upset that Isaias failed to address the growing concern—even among pro-government Eritreans—about the need for sweeping political and economic reform. Many genuinely expected something new or bold from his interview. But those who have followed his interviews over the past two decades didn’t miss anything. The cycle continues because Isaias not only lacks the political will to implement the reforms Eritrea desperately needs—he has shown no interest in doing so.
Until then, listening to Isaias’s interviews is two hours wasted—time that could be spent doing something meaningful or intellectually stimulating, rather than mind-numbing. I would even argue that watching reactions to his interview is equally mind-numbing.
We will meet again when something dramatic happens.
Til then…
Awet N Hafash
Victory to the Martyrs!
