Recently some thirty-five Christians were released from
prison in Eritrea. Is this a sign of future toleration or a case of symbolic
amnesty, a diplomatic bone thrown to Ethiopia's allies in the West? The event
is probably best understood by the recent peace declaration between Addis Ababa
and Asmara, ending the border conflict which has been ongoing since Eritrean
independence in the 1990's. Will these moves signal a change for the persecuted
Christians in Eritrea? Let's hope so, but there's good reason to doubt.
The Horn of Africa's contemporary history was complicated by
the Cold War and over the past fifty years the region has been subject to
twists and turns and changing alliances. The United States supported Eritrean
independence in the early 1990's. This was devastating to Ethiopia as Eritrean
independence meant the loss of their access to the sea and rendered Ethiopia a
land-locked country.
The US had supported Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie during WWII
and the opening decades of the Cold War and even supported him as he rejected
British and UN calls to allow for Eritrean semi-autonomy and led his nation
(somewhat disingenuously) into the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). From the early
1960's when the War for Eritrean Independence broke out until the coup that
ousted Selassie in 1974, the US supported Addis Ababa.
But then came 1974 and the ousting, death (and possible
murder) of Selassie in 1975. The nation was now under control of The Derg and
Ethiopia shifted into the pro-Soviet sphere. By the late 1970's all the
alliances had flipped. The USSR and Cuba supported the Mengistu led pro-communist
junta and the United States shifted its support to Somalia in the east (who
would with US support invade Ethiopia in 1977) and the Eritreans fighting for
independence in the north.
After a long and vicious war the Eritreans gained
independence in 1991. The Cold War was over but the United States still opposed
the Mengistu government in Ethiopia. By then The Derg had been officially
replaced by a People's Republic but burdened by civil war, famine and the
collapse of Soviet support, the regime soon fell and was replaced by the
current Democratic Front in 1991. Mengistu would subsequently flee to Zimbabwe
where he remains today. He was tried in
absentia for the many deaths that took place under his regime and even
today the government of Ethiopia wants him extradited. Long protected by
Zimbabwe, Mugabe's fall from power in Harare means that Mengistu (now in his
80's) has cause to be concerned as many still want him to answer for his
crimes. The numbers are difficult and may indeed range into the hundreds of
thousands. Mengistu's 'Red Terror' was a ploy akin to that of the Soviet purges.
Supposedly threatened by counter-revolutionaries, Mengistu in the 1970's and
80's used Stalinist terror to eliminate all rivals and any resistance. It was a
bloodbath.
In the early 1990's Ethiopia shifted once more, and during
the same post-Cold War period the US reshuffled its geopolitical strategies and
alliances. Addis Ababa would again become a friend to the West and Eritrea
would become the pariah. Eritrea grew frustrated with their southern neighbour
in 1998 and disputes over the still unresolved border led to open war from
1998-2000 in which more than 100,000 people died. The US continued its support
for Ethiopia and in the wake of 9/11 the Bush administration became quite cozy
with Addis Ababa and Ethiopia became a key ally in the US strategy surrounding
the Horn of Africa and Somalia. Ethiopia hosts drone bases, listening posts and
for a time hosted at least one Black Site used as a secret prison and torture
centre. Washington provides training for police, military and counter-terrorism
operations and yet interestingly the United States has been reticent to provide
large-scale military support for Addis Ababa. Some believe this is due to
Ethiopia's poor human rights record and the potential instability of the
country. Ethiopia is haunted by ghosts and there are still many skeletons in
the closet. Practically speaking most of Ethiopia's armaments are from the
1980's and the time of The Derg and the Soviet alliance. As a consequence
they've turned to former Soviet bloc nations for weapons including a rather
controversial (but US approved) deal to purchase parts from North Korea in 2007.
If the relationship with Washington continues to flourish you
can be sure the Pentagon will begin negotiating a roll-over of Ethiopian
military equipment. US contractors are already waiting in the wings to cut
deals and Washington will embrace this as it gives them an opportunity to
train, establish relationships with the Ethiopian military and exercise some
control over Ethiopia's foreign policy. Addis Ababa knows this and like many
other nations they will probably try (as much as they can) to purchase weapons
from different countries in order to retain some autonomy. All that said, it's
a time of great optimism in Ethiopia.
But history doesn't just go away. Ethiopia may seem to be
headed toward a happy ending but the Eritreans have not forgotten the past and
under Isaias Afwerki who has ruled the country since independence, there is
great bitterness and suspicion.
Due to the Cold War, from the late 1970's until 1991 the US supported
the Eritreans, a regime that has now become one of the top persecutors of
Christianity in the world. Even while Evangelicals push for the US State Department
to get more involved globally in stopping Christian persecution these concerns (if
genuine at all) always take a back seat to larger US interests. In reality the
US will pursue these 'humanitarian' issues as part of a larger diplomatic
toolkit, not out of ideological conviction. It can be clearly demonstrated that
actual concern for 'human rights' is not something Washington's cares about. It
has a long history of supporting dictatorships, fascist and even totalitarian
regimes.
As far as the Eritreans are concerned, they were used,
abandoned and betrayed by the American-led West. The almost endless wars have
created monsters and Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia and the Sudan region have
suffered from not only the warfare but the social consequences of war. They
suffer from civil unrest and as a consequence they live under often brutal
regimes that fear the enemies within almost as much as those across the border.
The great powers of the Cold War period bear a great deal of responsibility for
fomenting and fueling these wars and the authoritarian regimes that appeared as
a result. And though the Soviets were eliminated from the picture by 1991, the
United States has continued to manipulate and in some cases terrorise the
region.
And yet at this point in time, it could be argued the US also
wants to bring some stability to the Horn of Africa. Officially the US supports
the peace deal between Eritrea and Ethiopia and I don't doubt that some in the
US would hope to not only defuse some of the regional tensions but also there's
the opportunity to bring Eritrea into the Western fold and to shift the
delicate and dangerous array of alliances in the region. A re-alignment of
Eritrea will not only cement the peace with Ethiopia but it will affect the
situations in Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan. The ongoing situation with
Ethiopia has reverberated throughout the region and Eritrea has become involved
in the larger series of conflicts surrounding the Horn.
There's also the potential for peace in the Ogaden region of
Ethiopia. Eritrea has supported the ethnic Somali separatists of the Ogaden and
the new peace deal might help bring that nearly 25 year insurgency to a close.
As mentioned earlier the region saw a brief but somewhat vicious little war in
the late 1970's as the US backed the Somali government in an invasion of
Ethiopia to wrest the region away from the Cuban-Soviet backed Derg.
Peace with Eritrea will also 'free up' Ethiopia to pursue
other regional interests in partnership with United States, such as the ongoing
situation in Somalia. With US blessings and support Ethiopia invaded in 2006
and though they officially withdrew in 2009, Addis Ababa continued to be
involved up until about 2012. Ethiopian involvement is minimal at present and
yet the situation remains volatile.
If Eritrea were to enter into the US camp it would also
pacify the border dispute with Djibouti and elements of the Somali Civil War
with which Asmara has been involved. Eritrea has long supported the Oromo
Liberation Front (OLF) in their struggles against both Ethiopia and elements
within Somalia. Ethiopia which became landlocked with Eritrean independence is
desperate to support Djibouti as the tiny coastal nation and former French
colony functions as Ethiopia's only outlet to the sea. And of course France and
the United States have significant military bases in Djibouti and since 2017,
China has become part of the complicated mosaic by opening their own military
base in the small nation. Djibouti occupies a unique and potentially
problematic position. From the standpoint of the President Guelleh, the massive
international military presence will keep his nation safe from Islamist terror
and even international conflict. No one would dare strike Djibouti, or at least
he hopes so.
Japan also established a naval base in 2011 and already
there's been trouble between the Japanese and Chinese navies and traded
accusations on the part of Washington and Beijing regarding their proximate
bases in the tiny African nation.
While some would hope for a peaceful resolution of the
Eritrean-Djiboutian border dispute, a move by Asmara into the American camp
could change the dynamic. The US considers Djibouti an important ally but
Washington feels betrayed and has openly expressed anger regarding the Chinese
presence and the fact that Beijing has offered to mediate the Eritrea-Djibouti
dispute certainly has upset and frustrated many in Washington. The US could end
up supporting Eritrean claims and put pressure on Djibouti. That may be a
stretch but stranger things have happened. Given the history of the Horn such a
move would be almost par for the course.
The region is to put it simply... complicated and further
complicated by its tortured history. Is it any surprise that authoritarian
regimes, war and terror dominate the region?
While the US plays geopolitics, Christians suffer and regimes
and conditions are created which generate suspicion, rage and retribution.
Striking out at Christians is for many a way to express anger with the West.
From the standpoint of Eritrea, Washington has generated much of the trouble in
the Horn of Africa and they lashed out in 2008 accusing the United States of
generating the border conflict with Djibouti.
Then the US hypocritically intervenes and this undoubtedly angers
countries like Eritrea because they remember, they know the larger history.
They know Washington's professed morality is pretense and they see what's
happening in the region. Additionally they are most certainly aware of American
Evangelical efforts to shape culture as well as their political relationships
in places like Uganda, South Sudan and Rwanda.
In every case American Evangelicals work through local
Christian populations and effectively lobby for politicians like Uganda's
Museveni. From the standpoint of most Africans the efforts of Evangelicals, the
State Department and the Pentagon are all but a unified front. This isn't
always the case but all too often it might as well be. Of course the
Evangelicals are dupes as well. They are but a tool in the hands of those
wielding power. Yes, they exert some influence but they are also manipulated
and used and if Eritrea were to shift over to the American side, what then?
Christians would still be persecuted and despite whatever Evangelical protests
might be lodged, the policy would take precedent. Look at Saudi Arabia. Look at
India under Modi. Christians are suffering but the US government doesn't care
because the geopolitics are far more important. They support militants in Syria
that persecute Christians, forge alliances with nations like Vietnam that
oppress believers. They trade with nations like China that continue to
persecute the Church. Washington doesn't care and the handful of so-called Christian
politicians may 'care' but their concerns for the Church are far down the list
of their priorities... or else they wouldn't be where they are.
It is an old story of shame and disgrace. If Evangelicals
divorced themselves from the politics of Washington they might find a less
hostile reception in some of these countries. And while they lobby for the
persecuted and urge the White House to issue threats (as in the case of Turkey)
they only destroy their own witness to the Kingdom and bring down wrath and
anger on their brethren. It's hard not to suggest that in the end the
Christians within places like Africa are used... used as a political base and
used as a means of access to the larger society leading to what the US system
is really after, control, resources and markets.
That's the irony. The same Middle Class American Evangelicals
who think they're standing for the global Church and fulfilling the Cultural
Mandate are all too often profiting from the suffering of Christians in the
impoverished and war torn parts of the world. They fail to make the connection
between their activism, their financial portfolios, a misplaced patriotism and US foreign policy.
See also: