The United States, which emerged as the strongest capitalist nation after
the Second World War, began to play a major role in the handling of
international problems. It was the US which played a decisive role in the
disposition of Italian colonies in the Horn. On the other hand, Britain
whose army was the main force in defeating the Italians in the Horn of
Africa and which colonized Eritrea for a decade, played a subservient role.
The decade of British colonization in Eritrea was a period of crises in all
sector of the economy, as the British were more intent on destroying what
was built by the Italians than in developing it. The British also left the
racist Italian colonial administrative system intact. But they introduced
changes in two areas. The first, in the field of education, scrapped the
Italian policy restricting Eritreans to four years of schooling and
provided Eritreans with opportunities for higher levels of education, thus
raising the cultural level of the society. With their second major reform,
the British introduced legislation protecting political rights and
permitting political activity. Political parties and trade unions were soon
established. This coupled with discussions of the question of
self-determination-which came to prominence at that time-gave new breath to
Eritrean political life.
Although this was a positive development, British motives were by no means
altruistic. Aside from the fact that the backward social structure and the
low political level of Eritrean political organizations prevented the
Eritrean people from fully benefiting from their new rights, the
British-who were serving US strategic interests-deliberately whipping up
religious and tribal divisions and clashes and promoted the banditry of non
Eritreans-all in the name of political liberties. It was in this decade of
turmoil, which followed 60 dark years of Italian colonial rule, that the
Eritrean people were faced with the challenge of deciding their own destiny.
And did the Eritrean people decide their fate? Was federation a compromise
solution based on the wishes of the Eritrean people? Despite the
much-touted and written about political clamor of those years, the
splitting of parties along religious lines, meetings of the United Nations
and the arrival in Eritrea of a UN commission, the Eritrean people were not
given the opportunity to exercise their rights to self-determination. The
political commotion had merely been a show.
It was the US that plunged the Eritrean people-who had already suffered for
70 years from colonial rule-into another form of subjugation by denying
their right to self-determination and depriving them of their political and
human rights. Although these facts have been generally known, recently
declassified State Department documents have corroborated that the US
decided right after the Second World War that Eritrea should not become
independent. And not without cause. Intent on ascertaining its global
dominance, gaining control of the strategic Red Sea route and exploiting
oil and other resources in the Middle East, the US sought to gain a
foot-hold in an area that could easily link it with its bases in the Indian
Ocean and the Far East. Soon after the World War, the US began to set up
naval, air and communications facilities in Eritrea. To protect these
interests, the US initially came up with a plan of retaining control of the
coastal areas and the highlands, while ceding the western lowlands, which
it deemed of no strategic importance, to the Sudan which was then a British
colony. Later, when it realized that the Eritrean people were opposed to
the partition of their country and the British were not enthusiastic about
the plan, the US decided to preserve the colonial status of united Eritrea
under the guardianship of its ally, Haile Selassie. Though the matter had
been so decided, the UN federal Resolution was passed-after ten years of
procrastination-to lend it international legitimacy. This decision did not
satisfy the wishes and aspirations of the Eritrean people and became the
cause for their struggle for self-determination.
How did Eritrean nationalism develop from 1941-52, the decade of British
colonial rule? Taking into account the fact that there had been no
organized Eritrean political activity during the Italian colonial period,
that the outcome of the Second World War was totally unexpected by the
Italians, that the Eritrean people’s movement for self-determination had to
start from scratch after Italy’s defeat, that despite growing nationalism,
political activity was marred by manifestations of the old socioeconomic
formation, that Ethiopian bandits with the active collusion of the British
were active in the country, that ten years was too short a span of time,
the Eritrean people did not succeed in establishing a unified organization
to lead their struggle for independence. Nevertheless, Eritrean nationalism
emerged stronger from those ten years.
Written by Yishak Yared
--
Sincerely
*YPFDJ British Columbia Chapter*
YPFDJ Goal and Purpose
- Our goal is to build a strong, conscious and patriotic youth movement.
Our purpose is:
- To raise the awareness and level of organisation of Eritrean youth to
serve our nation
- To reassert the identity, patriotism and unity of Eritrean youth
- To promote the participation of Eritrean Youth in the national
reconstruction of Eritrea as well as guarding the sovereignty of Eritrea
- To enhance the position and influence of Eritrean Youth in their
respective countries of residence.
Received on Wed Oct 10 2012 - 16:02:13 EDT
