Ms. Bruton Triumphs over the Rest of the Panellists

The invitation of Ms. Bruton, a critique of flawed US policy on Eritrea, as one of the panellists is a clear indication of the US government desire to engage Eritrea. Ms. Bruton was very careful in her witness and her responses to the questions by Mr. Smith and Ms. Karen Bass. On her part, Ms. Bass was repeatedly asking all panellists about the Eritrean regime’s ideology. In my view, probably, she was trying to test the water and the potential risks to engage the Eritrean authorities.  I think she was also curious to know about Eritrea and its resilience against all odds including by her government. Ms. Bruton was hard-hearted to both the State Department and the US intelligences for their ignorance about Eritrea and its people. She was not vague in her brief presentation to tell the Subcommittee that the American intelligence and American policy makers are completely blind about Eritrea. She was right considering the State Department officials’ utterly nonsense presentations and narratives.      

As far as I am concerned, the first two US panellists, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (Assistant Secretary for African Affairs) and her colleague, seem to have no clue at all Eritrea. Of course, as a State Department’s official Ms. Thomas-Greenfield had no choice but to defend the old positions of her bureau and the notorious Susan Rice’s viewpoints. Ms. Thomas-Greenfield, however, did not hide her government’s desires to engage Eritrea. She was caught up as saying “…this is not the kind of relationship we desire… surprisingly there has been some progresses… Eritrea is beginning to engage the international communities …opening up its doors for a handful journalists … we have not and do not seek to cut-off our bilateral relations with Eritrea …”.

All her message in between is just to justify the old positions of the State Department on Eritrea.

The two Eritrean panellists did not get the trick and they were tricked to speak on human rights violation to give the hearing a human right violation falvour. On the other hand, it seems to me Ms. Bruton was already aware of the Subcommittee’s interests and intentions before the event. In fact, she began her testimony by thanking the Subcommittee for allowing her “…to contribute to the Subcommittees’ timely review of U.S. policy towards Eritrea.” From this introduction by Ms. Bruton and the content of the questions and answers session of the hearings the event was meant not to discuss the human rights conditions in Eritrea but an opportunity for the US to change its course and review its isolationist policy towards Eritrea.