Text Transcription of Interview with President Isaias Afwerki (Eritrean Radio, 24 August through Sudan Tribune)

August 25, 2007 (ASMARA) — The Eritrean president has set pre-conditions for the improvement of the country's relations with the USA. In an interview as broadcast by Eritrea's state-run radio, Isayas Afewerki said that the USA should suspend "activities aimed at harming our national interests".

Afewerki who accused the USA of interfering in regional affairs, added that the conflicts in Sudan and Somalia had nothing to do with terrorism. He further argued that Eritrea concerns in these countries are based on the need for a stable region.

“There is no reason to confuse terrorism with the issues of Somalia, Sudan etc. We are supposed to be concerned with the Sudanese issue; we cannot look at it in isolation. We are supposed to be concerned about Sudan and Somalia and other issues.”

The following is text of report by state-owned Eritrean radio on 24 August:

FIFTY PER CENT OF US ALLIES "REPRESSIVE AND AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENTS"

>> In its history, America has been shunning its allies and continues to make friends with repressive governments; what does that tell you in relation to Eritrea?

Isayas: Without naming individual leaders, those who have been highly praised. Moreover, looking into the internal affairs of these countries, and their ways of governance, some 45 to 50 per cent of them are repressive and authoritarian governments opposed to their people. If we take the largest democracy in the world, India, there is no democracy, no human rights.

However, according to numerous researchers, there are the so-called lower castes who live under oppression; their number amounts to over 150 million people. In spite of doing everything [to move up the social ladder], these people cannot become free. Some 77 per cent of Indians also live under the poverty line. It is not an issue of democracy or not, but what yardstick to measure democracy. How does America view the situation in India? What about the systems in smaller countries like ours? How does America support such countries? Which systems does America support? At what time does it support them, and at what time does it dump them or weaken their governments?

It is just now that we have started to see clearly how the Cold War activities were carried out. What is going on now is not clear for most of us. How was it done? Why were the Americans supporting individuals who trampled people's rights, and ran systems that suppressed their people during that time and in such and such places? They might try to cover this by saying that this was due to the Cold War and was not their policy to support oppression and suppression. We can give many examples from around and afar on this issue, but it does not matter.

What I want to touch on now are America's concerns about human rights; democracy is all pretension. It is just a name, and what they really do in practice is a different thing. I do not want to delve into this for now.

ERITREA DOES NOT NEED ENEMIES

When it comes to us, we have the interests of our country at heart. We have to stand and defend our national interests. This is not done willingly, just for the sake of it, it is an obligation. It is the obligation of the government, the people of this country, and those living outside the country. It is normal to seek peace in our region. It is our right to defend our interests through all means. Defending our interests is our basic right, and we will hit hard anyone who comes to destroy my country.

What is the main problem in the Eritrean-American relationship? We do not need enemies or adversaries. We do not need these. Why do we need to have enemies? We don't need them. There is nothing that would shame us by opening up a new chapter with our former adversaries and live in peace and harmony. It does not help us by continuously remembering the past or continue with enmity. This does not however mean we must neglect regional issues and become a peaceful country in a violent region. This is the era of globalization, and this affects us directly or indirectly. If there is conflict between Eritrea and America, then we can solve it without America trying to damage our national interests and disturbing regional peace and stability. If it is to the contrary, then we will not welcome this relationship.

If the situation has to really change for the better, then the Americans must change their ways of thinking. They should stop making all manner of threats against us. They have to stop all activities aimed at harming our national interests. Regional peace is being threatened through their interference. The idea that we will control the world might work for a short period of time. They might achieve a minor thing here and there, but the world is not going in their direction.

We have no intention of creating problems, creating adversaries, provoking anyone. Someone with good brains should not think of taking such a path. This is our way of thinking. If there is anyone who will tell us not to defend ourselves, protect our national interests and preserve our national sovereignty, or wants us not to cooperate over regional issues, and who also tells us that it is none of our business to be concerned with regional issues - whether there is peace or conflict in our region -, then this is not acceptable to us. This is not a matter of choice, but an obligation for us to get involved in such issues.

>> Notwithstanding the general strategy, what specific measures are you taking to improve Eritrea-American relations?

Isayas: While we know the route they [Americans] are taking is wrong, to tell them that we are behind them, that we will follow their policy is not only bad enough, but has no tangible meaning. As I mentioned earlier, our efforts and strong will to forge closer ties since the early 1990s have been destroyed and rendered unworkable through their activities. These have been followed by continuous conflicts. We have never stopped from asking the Americans to identify the nature of their conflicts with us.

It would have been good if I could narrate to you in detail the violations they have committed against us; it would have been better, but for the sake of not aggravating the situation, I won't do this. It would have been better for those who do not understand, especially those outside our country who don't have a clear picture about the situation. When I get the opportunity, I will say this to them: Don't create instability in our region. The stability of our region benefits all of us, including the Americans.

ERITREA CONCERNED ABOUT SUDAN, SOMALIA

The Somali people be left alone to solve their own problems in any way they want. There is no reason to confuse terrorism with the issues of Somalia, Sudan etc. We are supposed to be concerned with the Sudanese issue; we cannot look at it in isolation. We are supposed to be concerned about Sudan and Somalia and other issues. All these concerns are based on the need for a stable region around us.

While we are working for better relationships, we will not tolerate any situation that operates against our interests. We are not going to fold our hands and watch, or kneel down and accept what is decided against our national interests. We will not say do whatever you want in our region provided you don't touch us. If our region is on fire, then we cannot have peace in the region. If there is anything to rectify this trend, then we are ready to give a helping hand; that is if they [Americans] will listen to us.

The trend we are seeing does not tally with what we want to achieve. We are not just talking about the relationship between Eritrea and America. Go to other regions and see America's policy of hegemony in the economy, peace, and other sectors. If we look at Americans, 70 per cent of them are saying that the American policy is wrong. We are not the only ones complaining of this wrong policy. People in and around our region have condemned the wrong policy that America is pursuing in the world.

US PEOPLE BENEFIT IF REGIONAL POLICY REVISED

The issue of military deployment might have had some justification at one time, but it should be revised, [since the opposite] will increase regional instability. We do not see any way out. If we say that we are going to improve our relations with Americans, I do not see the way or understand its meaning. If you have an interest in our region, then this should be in line with our regional interest. This is by taking into account the interests of the other stakeholders and not just being concerned with your own interests at the expense of others. We will not accept or agree to this type of agreement; never expect this to happen.

If this mutual agreement is fulfilled, then American people will benefit in the end.

The line that we are currently taking does not lead us to one direction, it could split into four or five different pieces like was between the USA-USSR during the Cold War. We cannot sit and watch as America plays a negative role in the region and the world at large since this will also affect Americans.

---