Eritrea: The Merits of Federalism Abstract: The current Eritrean system of government fails to address the multicultural nature of the Eritrean people. The policies of the government favor the interests of the Tigrinya-speaking Christian segment of the population. Eritrea was created from three culturally distinct communities, each one tracing its roots to one of the neighboring countries of Sudan, Djibouti and Ethiopia. A federal government composed of three states formed along the historical boundaries of these different communities, namely, the Western Lowland-Sahil region, the Afar region, and the Southern Highland region, can provide a truly transparent and democratic government that can address the cultural diversities of the nation. Federalism is an old political system that dates back at least to the eighteenth century. It is a political system in which the authority to govern a single sovereign nation is constitutionally divided between a central federal government and regional autonomous governments of states, provinces or cantons. The federal government controls functions of national scope such as national defense, foreign policy and interstate commerce, while the states generally control functions of domestic importance such as education, healthcare, local governance and elections. In this form of government, the authority of the federal government and the states is mandated by a constitution. The constitution, in effect, takes the form of a treaty between the federal government and the member states. As a result, a proposed amendment to the constitution requires unanimous consent of all the states before it becomes law. In essence, every state in a federal union has veto power over constitutional amendments. Federalism was created in response to a desire to maintain or revive small communities with different interests, and the need to establish a larger nation with a military power capable of defending itself against a stronger adversary (Riker, 1964). This also provided an economic advantage through the creation of a common trading market. As federalism developed over time, it became more and more appealing to multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual nations that needed to resolve conflicts based on cultural, ethnic and religious diversities. This latter feature may be of interest to the Eritrean people as they search for a representative government that can guarantee their basic rights and freedoms for which they have sacrificed dearly. Since the Italian creation of Eritrea in 1890, the Eritrean people have been unable to define themselves in a single national identity that represents the entire nation because of their diverse cultural background. The current unitary political system that was installed after Eritrea gained its independence has failed to serve the interests of all Eritreans. This system, as evidenced by the results of government’s policies, is conveniently tailored to serve the cultural, economic and political interests of the Tigrinya-speaking community of the Southern Highland region. It is failing fundamentally because Eritreans “are not in any accepted sense a single people but a conglomerate of different communities which are themselves in most cases akin by culture and blood to their neighbors in Ethiopia, the Sudan, and French Somaliland (now independent Djibouti)” (Trevaskis, 1960, p. 11). It was reported that an Eritrean political leader, Ali Muhammad Saed Birhatu, proposed administratively dividing Eritrea into three geographical regions to accommodate its cultural diversity (EFDM, 2002). This proposal was later adopted as a political platform by the Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement (EFDM, 2002). It is herein proposed that a federal government consisting of the three historical regions, namely, the Western Lowland and Northern Sahel region, the Eastern Afar coastal region, and the Southern Highland region that contains a national district for the seat of the federal government, can provide a truly flexible, transparent and representative government that responds to the cultural and political needs of the people. The three culturally and demographically distinct regions can be unified to form a federal representative government. These regions have different demographical characteristics. In the Western Lowland and the Northern Sahil Highland Sahel region, majority of the inhabitants are Tigray tribes, along with the Bilain, Kunama, Baria (Nara), Hidareb, Eilit, Bitama and Rashaida tribes (EFDM, 2002). Most of the people in this area are Muslims with close cultural ties to the people of Eastern Sudan. Arabic was the main language of education, media and government during the British and Ethiopian occupations of the region. In the Southern Highland region, on the other hand, the majority of the people are Tigrinya-speaking Christians, along with the Tigrinya-speaking Jeberti Muslims and the Saho Muslim tribes. During the British occupation and the subsequent Ethiopian occupation, Tigrinya was the main language for education, media and government in this region. Finally, in the Southern Coastal region or the Dankalia Region, the inhabitants are the Afar people who are culturally related to the people of Djibouti and the Afar people in the adjacent Ethiopian region. The people of this region are mainly Muslims and favor the use of Arabic language in education, media and government. A federal government that is representative of the three historical regions can operate using Arabic and Tigrinya as the official languages, while allowing the regions to decide their choice of languages for education, media and government. This arrangement will help in the preservation of each region’s distinct cultural identity. Federalism is designed to provide a relative advantage for ethnic groups to express their cultural identity while preventing forceful cultural assimilation. It accommodates the needs of member states to articulate their own ethnic or cultural identity, while gradually contributing to the image of a national identity. Many countries such as Belgium and the new federal republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina use federalism to balance the cultural, linguistic and religious needs of various ethnic groups in their nations. The current Eritrean national identity is not a balanced national identity because it is excessively dominated by the cultural and linguistic identity of the Tigrinya-speaking ethnic group. This image of the national identity has emerged as a result of the targeted educational and land tenure policies of the government, which amplified the culture of the Tigrinya-speaking ethnic group, and suppressed and marginalized the cultures of all other ethnic groups. The current government policy of implementing mother-tongue education in primary public schools has resulted in the dominance of the Tigrinya language because the other ethnic groups are divided between supporters and opponents of the mother-tongue policy. Most of the Muslim communities, including the Tigre, Nara, Afar, Saho, Bilen, Hidareb, and Jeberti, have opposed mother-tongue education in favor of using Arabic language as medium of instruction in elementary schools (Woldemikael, 2003, p. 6), while the Kunama and some Tigre-speaking Christians have supported the mother-tongue policy. Nevertheless, the government has achieved modest success in dividing the non-Tigrinya speakers into small communities with at least eight instructional languages that resulted in the dominance of Tigrinya language in the public school system. Federalism can assist in resolving the brewing language conflict by delegating the responsibility of education to the states where the citizens of each of the three proposed states can democratically decide on the choice of language and educational policies. The resolution of this issue, in turn, will pave the way for further cooperation and partnership between all states. In the preferred model of federalism for Eritrea, all states share power equally at the federal level through a bicameral national legislature. There are many variations of federalism to ensure equal partnership between the states. The more suitable model of federalism for Eritrea is the presidential system of government, with a bicameral national legislature composed of two levels of representation. This is a very versatile and stable model of federalism. In this system, all states have equal number of senators, without regard to census, who are directly elected by the people of each state to form an upper chamber of the national legislature, and a proportional representation based on census or density of population for a lower chamber of the legislature. In this model, the president originates from outside the national legislature; he or she is directly elected by the people of the country. Furthermore, the federal government would be divided into three equal branches consisting of an executive branch led by the president, a legislative branch composed of members of parliament, and an independent judiciary branch. The presidential system, by virtue of its public mandate and limited term, provides stability and decisiveness of action as compared to a parliamentary system where a prime minister is elected by the legislature and can be dismissed at any time by the legislature. In the presidential system, the president is directly accountable to the people, whereas, in a parliamentary system, the prime minister is accountable to the legislature or the elected members of his/her party in the legislature. The presidential system is used in the United States and many Latin American countries including Mexico. In Eritrea, the three historical regions can negotiate a presidential system of government with bicameral national legislature to create a democratic government capable of preventing hegemony of the majority. The actions of such government will be guided by the federal law. A federal constitution protects the fundamental rights of individuals from interference or coercion by others and guarantees their freedoms to the extent necessary to allow the same freedom to others. It obligates the government to intervene on behalf of the individual when such rights are violated. In fact, it stipulates that all people in the society have the duty to defend such fundamental rights of an individual upon infringement. These rights include the right to life, liberty, property, and due process (Fifth Amendment, U.S. Constitution). The free exercise of freedoms includes freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association. The constitution also prohibits the seizure of private property, unreasonable searches without court order, and the right to receive compensation if private property is taken for public use, such as land taken for a public park. Most Eritrean minority groups have been negatively affected by the policies of the government. For instance, the traditional way of living of the Kunama, the smallest ethnic group, has been disrupted due to the government’s resettlement program in the Gash-Barka area of the Western Lowland region. Federalism would inspire minority groups such as the Kunama to preserve their cultural and linguistic identities, as their rights and freedoms will be guaranteed by the constitution. Federalism encourages communities that share a common culture to form unified autonomous political entities to strengthen their economic and political advantage. Federalism also discourages the temptation to create weak mini-states with limited resources that leads to marginalization and separation of regions of a nation. The creation of economically non-viable small entities within the larger population of a state encourages isolationism and disintegration of nations; it is also administratively burdensome. Federalism is a mechanism designed to encourage unity of culturally compatible groups who inhabit contiguous territories to merge into a much larger, administratively manageable, and economically viable state. It is a method of uniting peoples who have a common destiny, by choice or accident, to peacefully coexist under laws that observe their commonalities and differences. Some Eritrean minority ethnic groups have been advocating the plight of their ethnic groups in the hands of the majority ethnic groups in their region; these minorities wish to have their own autonomous area. Federal law accommodates the particular concerns of these minority communities at the local level. Minority communities can form local governments, such as city governments, where they constitute the majority in their local regions based on the traditional election system in accordance with state and federal laws. Furthermore, the law will protect the right of all citizens to own their land through purchase, exchange, gift or inheritance. Traditionally, land tenure in Eritrea is classified into three forms of ownership: private land or Risti, communal land or Dessa, and communal pastoral land. The Risti and Dessa forms of ownership were mainly practiced in the Southern Highland region, while communal pastoral land was mainly prevalent in the lowland region. In 1909, the Italians categorized most of the lowland region as crown land or Demaniale (Castellani, 2000). Under this classification, Italian farmers were given ownership of most of the land that was communally owned for grazing and farming purposes by the indigenous people of the lowlands. In 1941, the British defeated the Italians and occupied Eritrea. During the British rule, Demaniale land ownership was not enforced and traditional land ownership of the pastoral communities of the Western Lowland area was implicitly tolerated. After independence, in 1994, the Eritrean government passed a land proclamation that gave the exclusive right of land ownership to the government. In an effort to establish farming communities, the government confiscated land owned by the indigenous peoples of the lowland region against the will of the local pastoral communities. Some of these farming settlements were armed by the government (Nharnet, 2004). This created a forced internal migration of the population to purposely affect demographical changes consistent with an undeclared social engineering project designed to empower the peasants of the Southern Highland region. The government intention to resettle landless refugees, former fighters and peasants from the Southern Highland region in the pastoral lowland region has raised the chance of political conflict (Joireman, 1996) between the indigenous people and the migrants. A federal system of government rejects the notion of land confiscation under the pretext of land reform without the consent of the public. Federalism will peacefully resolve all injustices, including illegal land acquisition, through comprehensive legislations arrived at through the democratic process. The Eritrean people will be given the opportunity, through their representatives in parliament, to legislate land laws that will preserve the rights of indigenous peoples and promote the development of the nation. The right of private land ownership is a fundamental constitutional right in a federal system. This is so because a federal constitution gives the ultimate power to the people of the land, not to the state or federal government. For instance, the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution declares that a person shall not be deprived of property, and private property shall not be seized from a person for public use without just compensation, in an implicit recognition of the tendency of a government to take private property from citizens. In addition to the basic constitutional guarantees of land ownership, statutory laws passed by legislatures further provide legal and administrative guidance in land management in accordance with the basic principles of the constitution. Therefore, a federal constitution guarantees the right of property ownership and prevents federal and state governments from interfering with private lands without just cause and compensation. Federalism by principle is a system of government that calls for collective participation in the decision-making process to implement justice and prevent tyranny. The very essence of the doctrine of federalism is based on power sharing to prevent placing absolute power in the hands of a single person. A federal government under a presidential system separates the power of the government into three branches to limit its authority. Furthermore, the constitution relies on what is known as the doctrine of “checks and balances” to extend the power of each branch to the next to enable one branch to monitor and limit the activities of the other branches. As a result of these overlapping jurisdictions between the branches of government, a particular branch of the federal government cannot independently embark on major policy initiatives without the support of the other branches. For instance, in the American system of federalism, the president can veto laws passed by Congress, while Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote. Moreover, the legislature has the capability to remove the President and other Public Officials from Office with two-thirds majority vote on impeachment for major violations of the law. Therefore, with the implementation of a presidential federal system, the Eritrean people can rest assured that government actions will be limited to those outlined in the constitution, have the vote of the required majority of representatives in legislature, and can pass the scrutiny of the judicial system for compatibility with the constitution. Hence, federalism is a transparent democratic system that prevents abuse of authority as a result of concentration of power in a single branch of government. Federalism is also a system that actively participates in the economic development and prosperity of a nation. Federal and state governments jointly provide resources to build the economic infrastructure that will create an economically integrated and prosperous nation. Traditionally, the federal government regulates commerce among the states of a federal union. Since the distribution of goods and service throughout the states requires a network of interstate roads, the federal government funds most of the interstate highways to facilitate economic development and growth. Even though the federal government provides the financial resources to build the interstate road infrastructure, the states regulate the sections of the national road network that pass through their autonomous territory. Similarly, the federal government financially supports the states in building other basic economic infrastructure such as railways, airports, seaports, sanitation systems, water purification systems and electrical generation in a continuous effort to promote economic growth and development. The Eritrean people will clearly benefit from a government that assumes responsibility for key economic development and commerce among the member states of the union. On the other hand, they will also appreciate that their states will have clear jurisdiction on more regional matters such as those services related to health care and education. Federalism generally delegates the responsibility of managing public education to state and local governments. The states set their individual educational policies, write curriculums and develop tests to provide a suitable public education for their citizens. The choice of language to be used as “official language” in a particular state is usually negotiated and settled peacefully. Many models in practice today have successfully been adopted by multilingual federal societies to settle linguistic disputes. For instance, the models of Belgium, Switzerland and South Africa offer valuable lessons for other multilingual societies (Deprez & du Plessis, 2000). Belgium uses a territory-based linguistic approach (Deprez & du Plessis, 2000). It subdivided the country into four linguistic communities: Dutch (Flemish), French (Walloon), German, and multilingual (Brussels-Capital region). This arrangement may be suitable for the Eritrean case. The prospective Eritrean federal government may adopt the “single official language” per territory approach reminiscent of the successful Belgian experience. In this approach, the Western Lowland–Sahil region and the Afar region can adopt Arabic as their official language, while the Southern Highland region can adopt Tigrinya as their official language. A central federal district where an Eritrean federal government resides can operate bilingually with Arabic and Tigrinya as official languages. It is worth noting that the official languages of Eritrea during the United Nations-imposed autonomy with Ethiopia were Arabic and Tigrinya. The current mother-tongue educational policy, where the language of instruction in kindergarten and elementary is the ethnic language and that for middle school and above is English, has raised serious questions about the motivation of this policy. Many Eritrean Muslims regard the promotion of previously unwritten languages (such as Tigre written in Ge’ez script) as a way of advancing the Tigrinya language over the Arabic language (Naty, 2002, p. 2). This dissatisfaction with the current linguistic policies in education can be resolved by letting the states decide which official language to adopt in consideration of the cultural preferences of the local population. Clearly, federalism is useful to societies struggling with multicultural conflicts. Federalism appeals to people searching for a political system that can resolve identity-based internal conflicts. Unlike decentralized unitary systems such as that of the United Kingdom, where the central government delegates some of its functions to regional governments and maintains the right to recede these delegated authority at will, federalism constitutionally prevents the central government from imposing its will on the regional governments of the states. Federalism accommodates linguistic and cultural differences while facilitating economic growth, security and democracy. Eritreans should not be hostages of the past. The Eritrean experience with Ethiopia did not reflect a federal system (Ghai, 2000, p. 182). The United Nations-imposed federation of Eritrea with Ethiopia in 1952, and the subsequent annexation of Eritrea by the Ethiopian emperor in 1962, associated the word “federalism” with colonialism in the Eritrean mind. Federalism is a democratic system that rejects colonialism and promotes liberty and justice for all. The current government’s effort to create the necessary conditions to assimilate the entire nation towards the Tigrinya culture is unsustainable, because it has been rejected by the majority of the Eritrean Muslim population. Federalism enables all ethnic and linguistic groups to participate in the formation of an inclusive system of government that promotes tolerance and peaceful coexistence. The Eritrean people can negotiate a suitable model of federalism that is unique for the Eritrean experience to create a stable, prosperous and peaceful nation composed of its three historical communities. Works Cited Castellani, L. G. (2000, June). Recent Developments in Land Tenure Law in Eritrea, Horn Of Africa. Retrieved August 17, 2007, from http://www.terrafirma.co.mz/downloads/Eritrean%20Land%20Law.pdf Davidson, R. H. (2007, 1 1). Federalism. Retrieved 7 16, 2007, from MSN Encarta: http://encarta.msn.com/text_761572095_0/Federalism.html Deprez, K. and du Plessis, T. (2000). Multilingualism and Government: Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Former Yugoslavia, South Africa. South Africa: J L Van Schaik. EFDM (2002). Federalism in Eritrea: Why and How? Founding Congress (p. 12). Stockholm. Ghai, Y. (2000). Autonomy and Ethnicity: negotiating competing claims in multi-ethnic states. Singapore: Green Giant Press Pte Ltd. Joireman, S. F. (1996). Eritrea: The minefield of land reform. African Affairs, 95, pp. 269-285. Naty, A. (2002). Potential conflicts in the former Gash-setit region, western Eritrea. Khartoum, Sudan: OSSREA Conference. Nharnet (2004, 3). Nharnet. Retrieved 08 21, 2007, from Land: major issue of our immediate future: http://nharnet.com/Archives/Arch_2004/March_04/land_031104.htm Riker, W. H. (1964). Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company. Trevaskis, G. K. N. (1960). Eritrea: A Colony in Transition 1941-52. London: Oxford University Press. Woldemikael, T. M. (2003). Language, Education, and Public Policy in Eritrea. African Studies Review, 46-1, pp. 117-136.
The views expressed in articles published on Arkokabay.com are those of the authors alone. They do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Arakokabay.com or its Editorial Board	ما ينشر من مقالات في موقع عركوكباي.كوم  يعبر عن رأي صاحبه ولا يعبر بالضرورة عن رأي الموقع والقائمين عليه.
Send mail to Arkokabay with questions, comments, opinions and/or articles
2007-05-19 18:17:Copyright © 2005 Last modified