“Self-reliance” must not be understood
merely as a policy. In Eritrea it has been a way of life since time memorial,
and Eritreans are being identified with it. In Eritrea, unlike the other
African countries, "self-reliance" is meant to be a necessary
constraint that must be met in forming and implementing other policies and sub
policies. Instead of preaching the philosophy of begging, our concern must
rather be directed and focused on its implementation process, and that it must
be in a modern public administration and business management modes.
As it is a due course process as opposed to an event, it is also upon which our
Nation Building Strategic Planning is to be based on. “Self-reliance” as a
policy has been commended and applauded by many Eritrean intellectuals. Eritean
Academics and professionals” after the meeting in Berlin (known as G13 or B13)
in the letter they sent to the president of Eritrea in October 2000, did state
the following.
“… even the commendable policy of
self-reliance, which many applauded, has now been portrayed as an aspect of
arrogance. In our view, the problem is not the policy but its implementation.
We know that there is a lot of room for improvement in the matter of
implementing policies and in the manner of handling representatives of
foreign bodies”.
Where as Mr. Yosief Gebrehiwet, in the
first part of his article NGOs and Shaebia's Self-Reliance Policy - I (Economic
or Behavioral Performance?) has:
(1) Characterized that "the talking about self-reliance, let alone acting
on it, as comically absurd".
(2) Stated that "there is no (or there has not been) such a thing as
Economic Performance in Eritrea, that could be taken either as good or
bad". He further argued that the country is run by "allowance
economy" which is entirely a function of the GOE "behavioral
performance".
(3) Claimed that the improper behavior of GOE has led to a drastic cut in the
“allowance” that flow into Eritrea as remittances, the 2% tax, and Aid and soft
loan.
(4) Narrated that GOE has been campaigning (a) to vilify NGOs, and to glorify
PIA's philosophy of self-reliance (b) introduced legal pretexts to drive out
most NGOs out of the country. And further, he concluded that the needy is left
for more suffering, as other form of Aid are not going to flow into Eritrea at
the current level of "behavioral performance" of the GOE.
(5) Extended his advice (as a prudent advice) that the GOE need to shape up and
behave properly, as it is the "behavioral performance" that
determines the size of the "allowance" that flows into the country’s
economy.
The G13 and Mr. yosief Gebrehiwet may come along very well on some of the
behavioral assumptions they have made about GOE. On the argument of
"self-reliance", however, the G13 may not wish to have a cup of
Coffee with Mr. Yosief Gebrehiwet. As for PIA and PFDJ, Mr. Yosief is just
another member of the "denktat" and is not yet tall enough to have
his advice be considered.
This piece attempts to provide a different perspective from that of Mr. Yosief
Gebrehiwet’s conclusive position. In doing so, it will be shown that Mr. Yosief
Gebehiwet’s analysis of “economic performance” of Eritrea in general and the
“self-reliance” policy in particular is way out of the norm, and is contrary to
the economic theory and empirical facts of Eritrea. Such is to be noted in the
following divisions. These are: (1) The objective reality of Eritrea (2) The
rationale to expel NGOs (3) The conceptual understanding of “self-reliance. (4)
The measure of Economic performance (4) the conceptual understanding of
“performing Economically” (6) "behavioral performance" as the
philosophy of begging.
The objective reality of Eritrea:
In addition to the context of Eritrea described by Mr. Yosief Gbrehiwet, the
following are also part and parcel of the objective reality of the present day
Eritrea. Eritrea is a third world country with great potential to advance
itself to a level of second world in the short run and first world in the long
run. The components that could advance Eritrea as said comprised of its people,
natural resources, its geo political location, and Good governance. The
alignment of these factors in a functional setting would result in making
Eritrea among the few of the world’s nations. Eritrea has resourceful, skilled
people and enough educated professionals in almost every branch of knowledge.
More so they all are patriotic. They all want to do something good for their
country. Eritrea’s wealth above all is its people.
Currently Eritrea is in a no-peace and a no-war situation. The war with the
Government of Ethiopia has impacted negatively on its ability to feed itself,
and to lessen its bargaining power in regional and world dealings. Its
productive force is also tied up in the military, and the cost of living has
skyrocketed. The internal turmoil within the leadership, the people, and the
animosity between the people and the leadership has reached a record high. The
lower and middle management levels have contributed significantly to such
animosities by mistreating the general public, and by conducting abusive
administrative styles. As a result a growing hesitance and resistance towards
the GOE in different forms is evidenced at this trial time. The youth is fleeing
from the country, the number of non-returnee, once out of the country, has been
increasing. Talks against the government have been widespread more than ever.
Organizations like human rights watch, amnesty international, and state
department have been reporting on human rights abuses in Eritrrea. Regardless
the GOE has exhibited time and again a solid political base, and a pragmatic
approach to the existing challenges that the country & its governing body
is facing. As always, against all odds prevalence is inevitable.
The Rationale to Expel NGOs:
Consider a decision that is to be made whether or not an NGO is to be expelled
from Eritrea. If expelling an NGO has a Zero-Sum or positive effect, or keeping
it in the country has a Zero-sum or negative effect, then expelling the NGO is
the right thing to do. To allow an NGO in the country must be and only must be
when it has more than zero-sum effect in the short run. Zero-sum effect is when
the pluses and minuses of NGOs presence in the country are amounted to
neutrality. That is with no positive or negative values.
What do we know in general about NGOs…? And what do we know in particular about
USAID…? It is a commonly known fact that it is only about 20% of an aid via
NGO”S reaches its destination. The remaining 80 % are allocated towards
administrative cost of it. Such reports are available via media and newspaper
outlets (Toronto Star and Globe & Mail). The USAID could not be different
on that. Now, Does the 20 % shares of Eritrea via USAID good enough to induce
the GOE to allow USAID to continue its existence in the country?
We can deduce that the NGO’s have a vested self-interest in perpetuating a
needy atmosphere in countries like Eritrea so that they can earn their living.
In the long run, therefore, if not monitored, their minuses will outweigh their
plusses. Given this fact and the opportunities that are available for them to
advance their vested self-interest, it may necessitate putting a brake at once
when a short run economic benefit is not conducive enough to let them continue
to exist in the country. Another rationale is that another form of Aid
arrangement could be established as an alternative by passing NGOs, such as
direct arrangement from government to government.
The GOE attempted to maximize the gain from NGO’s by introducing a new
legislation requirement and levied taxation for goods arrived via NGO’s.
Consequently GOE has been labeled as “Ebuy Lemanay”-Abkndey yeknyeley si gbri
wessKley". Such characterization though within reason, one should not
ignore the possibility that the GOE was acting based on optimality criteria.
Since the NGO’s have a vested self-interest, the steps taken by the GOE to
legislate conditions and levy tax is a prudent act. Who must be saying
"yeknyley" or thank you for the flow of the Aid fund? The one who
appropriate the 20 % of it or the one who appropriate the 80 % of it?
Such an act of prudence (imposing conditions and levying taxes on NGOs) is the
only of its kind and the newest of all that NGOs has ever to deal with. Such an
act should not be described solely as if it would result in increased suffering
of the needy. As Aid could come in different forms, Aid via NGOs is the least
preferred form of Aid arrangement.
The conceptual understanding of “self-reliance”:
Reader’s Digest-Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary defines self-reliance as
“Reliance upon one’s own capabilities, judgment, or resources”. Therefore, the
objective of “self-reliance” is to be able to use ones own resources by
applying ones own judgment and capabilities. It is a process that progresses
over time infinitely to achieve its objective. The positive change in an
Output-Gap could be a good indicator of how well the "self-reliance"
policy is being actualized. Output-Gap is the difference between potential
output and actual output in a given year. In this section its (self-reliance)
pretexts of the social, economic, and political circumstances or systems that
are to be conducive enough to actualize the policy of “self-reliance” will be examined.
The social circumstances:
The social system that has been in existence within the Eritrean populace does
not demand a redesign that is prone to utilize ones own resources, nor does it
require significant modification to suite (complement) the other systems for an
outcome of maximum gain. That is, the Eritrean people are dexterous and proud
people who by their very nature enjoy their success most when it is done
without help of others. Such pattern of behavior is not peculiar to Eritreans
only. It is present in all types of societies and/or nations. The difference
from one society/nation to another is expressed only (1) by the degree and
intensity of it (2) by the strength of the alignment and coordination of the
said systems (i.e. the social, economic, and politics).
Such degree and intensity is expressed within a cultural and legal framework of
a society/nation. And such expression is obvious within the Eritrean cultural
and legal framework. The Eritrean society values those who made wealth more than
those who inherited wealth. The Eritrean society also judges by the content of
ones character than by the possession of ones wealth. The so-called “meida
experience” in relation to the “self-reliance” concept is just simply an
extension of what was inherited from our parents and fore-parents. The
"btsfrena" communiqué is an Eritrean identity.
The political circumstances:
The accumulated political capital of “Shaebia” now GOE/PFDJ, is now being spent
uncontrollably, and may even continue indefinitely. Such spending is to stop or
slow down only when its political base is about to begin shaking. In the
foreseeable future, such base shaking does not seem to take place, and may not
even take place at all. PFDJ would continue to enjoy in the sole ownership of
the political process, and in making decisions in the affairs of the country.
It is completely being naive to expect political changes without having a base
for it. The prudent advice one may provide should not be to the GOE but rather
to the so-called opposition groups. GOE/PFDJ has still ample room to be
extravagant in spending of their political capital without fear of political
bankruptcy. The experience of the leadership, and the accumulated wealth of the
political capital is too solid and too broad a base to allow such bankruptcy.
The only signal for the GOE/PFDJ to watch its spending is when the “pull and
Push” strategy of the so-called opposition groups is about to begin working.
Since the high proportion share of the invested political Capital still owned
by the GOE, the other political groups (opposition parties/movements/clubs),
without the “pull and push” strategy, are still too powerless to effect changes
in the political arena of the country. Current political reality reveals that
such "pull and push" possibility is so remote, and the on going
efforts towards that possibility will die out gradually. Such political
stability provides assurances to the existing political process, to proceed in
the implementation of the "self-reliance" policy. Therefore, GOE has
the political will and is in a position to execute at ease the alignment,
coordination and fitting of the systems at a pace it feels maintainable to meet
the objective of the "self-reliance" policy.
The Economic circumstances:
Eritrea is blessed with natural resources of Gold, Potash, Zinc, Copper, Salt,
Possibly oil and natural gas, and fish. It is also blessed with agricultural
products of sorghum, lentils, vegetables, corn, cotton, tobacco, coffee, sisal;
livestock, goats; and fish. Industries of food processing, beverages, clothing
and textiles, salt, cement, and commercial ship repair are also running.
In accordance with the world factbook, Eritrea exported an estimate of 64.44
million worth of goods in 2004. Export partners as of today includes Malaysia,
Italy, and France.
Such Economic reality could allow the GOE/PFDJ to design and redesign an
economic system that meets the objective of “self-reliance”.
The war with Ethiopia caused some $600 million in property damage and loss, including
losses of $225 million in livestock and 55,000 homes. The continued no-war
no-peace situation prevented planting of crops in Eritrea’s most productive
region, causing food production to drop by 62 %. Although the erratic rainfall
is also another factor, the war with Ethiopia, and the delayed demobilization
of the productive manpower from the military, severely hurt our country’s
economy. Otherwise, Eritrea could have fed itself without or little aid. Most
importantly, its ports and the wealth of its seashores are something that could
put Eritrea to the top within a short time span. All it requires is the
determination of the governing body to coordinate, align, and fitting the
systems all together to actualize the objective of “self-reliance”.
The optimality of "Self-reliance", Good governance, and NGOs:
The existing social, economic and political systems of Eritrea do allow a
progress to meet the objective of “self-reliance” in a manner that is
complementary to each other. Even when such complementary condition is not
viable, a choice may be made that offsets a negative outcome to a level of
zero-sum at worst or positive-gain at best. That is, a choice is made based on
an optimality criterion. An optimality criterion is the one that has highest possible
gain or lowest-possible- inevitable-loss in using or abstaining-from-using ones
own resources. In other wards, a decision is made with intent to maximize a
possible gain or minimize a possible inevitable-loss. In such setting, the
relevance of “self-reliance” in a short run is negligible and must not be a
center of social issues for the challenges Eritrea is facing currently.
"Self-reliance" does not prohibit a nation from receiving-an-Aid, as
it is conceivably a short-term program. Nor can it be used as an excuse for
expelling NGOs or declining from-receiving-Aid via NGOs. However, one must not
neglect the tendency to extend a short-term program to an indefinite long-term
period by its stakeholders. All it requires to monitor and to actualize the "self-reliance"
concept is Good governance. Good governance aligns and coordinates the said
systems. And the strength of the alignment and coordination of the systems in
turn measures the effectiveness of the good governance. One could question or
form an opinion on whether or not GOE's effectiveness of good governance on
"self reliance" is at its optimum level.
The measure of Economic Performance:
Gross National Product (GNP) or Gross National Expenditure (GNE) measures the
economic performance of a country. Eritrea's GNP represents the value of
all-final goods and services produced in its economy during a given interval of
time. Each individual item produced within the economy is multiplied by its
price tag and added with all other final goods and services. Removing the
effects of inflation, and evaluating total production gives a meaningful
measure of output in real terms. Similarly GNE approach adds up the
expenditures that are made on final goods produced and services bought.
In 2004 estimate the GDP figure for Eritrea is amounted to be more than $550
million. And in the same year GDP real growth rate is estimated to be 2.5 %.
The GDP composition by sector have been reported as agriculture: 12.4 %,
Industry: 25.9 %, and services: 61.7 % of GDP. (Source: World fact-book:
updated August 2005).
The Concept of "Performing Economically":
Mr. Yosief Gebrehiwet uses the term "economic performance" and
"performing economically" interchangeably. I like to drop a line or
two for the readers to show that these two concepts do differ from each other.
The concept "Performing economically" refers to the idea of
"efficiency". That is to mean to be able to use resources in an
efficient manner. Such efficiency is expressed in terms of productivity. It
could be an X of output per Y of input. Where as that of economic performance
is expressed in terms of GDP or GNE for a given period of time, usually a year.
To be continued…
Raphael Arefaine