In his book ‘To Asmara’, Thomas Keneally, makes observations of the West’s hostile stand toward Eritrea’s struggle for independence. In, yet again, another era of unbridled hostility directed at Eritrea from the Imperial Center, Washington, it forces one to wonder if Keneally was stating simply hard facts or providing prophetic warnings in view of Eritrea’s many successes at the time? With this question in mind it helps to look at some of the remarks and the recurring theme; that the West will never forgive the Eritreans for their “folly” of being “brave” and “cleaver”. A theme which finds an outlet in the exasperations of Keneally’s “Ugly American” character, Henry:  

The theme is, the West, and the world for that matter, will not allow the Eritrean struggle to succeed: not only political, military powers and human folly but also nature as well is colluding against the Eritreans. Given their limited resources and the hostile environment they inhabit, the Eritrean case is a hopeless one is a recurring theme that finds an expression in the many outbursts of the American, Henry, which at times is quite crude, however, honest:

The notion that “the world will [not] allow” Eritrea to succeed is of course not always enunciated in anger, even for Henry. Seeing the Eritreans at work Herny admiringly marvel at the industriousness of the Eritreans points out: 

The outlook that Eritrea’s case was hopeless because of its limited resources and the hostile environment it inhabits, as well as, because of the superiority of its enemies was resoundingly defeated in 1991. However, given current development in Eritrea, especially Eritrea’s aspiration to reject dependence on foreign aid and NGO, and thus choosing to survive solely through its own ingenuity and toil has generated an all too familiar hostility from the usual quarters of power and the NGOs beholden to them. Maybe the Eritrean plan “upsets the world picture” a bit too much? Perhaps it is true that no one wants to see “Colored folk who can look after themselves?” It may as well not be a coincidence that we are told that this plan “is not viable” over and again. All things considered it is understandable that such aspirations of self-reliance, that disturb the view of the “world hooked into the idea of ‘the helpless Africans!’”, to generate hostility. And to be viewed as “sin of pride” or, more properly, “the sin of being sharp when no one wants [you] to be.” In such world view, the fact that Eritrea is succeeding in this endeavor, through meticulous organization and toil, is a double sin “that won’t easily be forgiven.”

Paradoxically, this observations that “the world will not allow” the picture of the “the helpless Africans” to be disturbed, or that no Eritrean or any African can be allowed to succeed the way Eritrea aspires to is not always a result of emotional outbursts of an overbearing American, the more somber characters, the narrator and the ‘British Lady’ character, also make much the same observation: 

Keneally’s characters were of course wrong in one account and absolutely correct in another. Eritrea’s success was not predicated on others “want” - for Eritrea to “succeed” or not. It was solely dependent on Eritreans determination to succeed – same goes today. Even though life and the struggle was made more complicated for Eritreans’ “sin of being sharp when no one wants them to be”, it nevertheless “succeeded”, NOT to be “an embarrassment to Africa”, but to be the pride of a good example of what Africans can accomplish when they stand for their interest in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. Whether “the world hooked into the idea of “the helpless Africans”, appreciates the Eritrean experience or not, Eritrea is here to stay. It has succeeded in wining its independence despite all the hostility directed at it from the quarters of power. Still, one will have to appreciate Keneally’s prophetic observations that Eritrea’s success “won’t easily be forgiven” or his more dramatic pronouncement: “The world hates ‘em for it!” In that sense his observation resonates with current events, as exemplified by former US President Carter diatribe against Eritrea or by the more recent hostilities coming from US State Department.

It is evident that in the psyche of some Eritrea needs permission from the West to succeed or forgiveness to move on. There may be some truth in that the psyche of the colonized and oppressed to want to remake itself in the image of its masters, or to need acceptance from its masters or former masters. A phenomenon that is sometimes associated with what is commonly described as “colonial mentality”. However, what the Eritrean experience exemplifies is the kicking off of such mentality and the development of confidence in ones own resource and ingenuity. In short the Eritrean is what Nkrumah at the dawn of decolonization described as the “New African”. The New Eritrean, who is the result and has deep roots in his independence struggle, is strong, confident, conscientious and patriotic. This New Eritrean does not live for or look for acceptance from the “rulers of the universe”. Nor does the New Eritrean hate the colonizer and/or the oppressor, nor want to be like them. All the Eritrean wants to be is Eritrean in all its substantive forms. This New Eritrean requires not any forgiveness, permission or acceptance from anyone. 

---