By Aron Hagos Tesfai
How do diasporas engage in the politics of their countries?
Following their migration to democratic nations, refugees and immigrants organize themselves into social movement organizations with the objective of exerting political and developmental influence in their countries of origin. The sociopolitical influence of refugees and diasporas in their countries of origin includes the transfer of knowledge, skills, and remittances [2]. Furthermore, governments employ various strategies to involve their overseas populations (diasporas) in the political affairs of their countries of origin. For example, most democratic countries of origin enable their diaspora to participate in transnational politics by granting them voting rights as citizens [3] [4].
However, migration away from authoritarianism provides diasporas with political opportunities to engage in advocacy, allowing them to organize opposition to regimes in their home countries. Those who escaped persecution and violations expose the long arms of the authoritarian regimes in the diaspora and the human rights violations at home through the democratic institutions and rights granted to them in their adopted countries [5]. Concurrently, authoritarian regimes frequently operate in other countries to apprehend threats, deter dissidents and human rights defenders, and exert a degree of authority over diaspora communities [6]. This occurs even within democratic nations.
In this context, authoritarian regimes use the freedom in democracies for repressive purposes, while human rights defenders utilize them for human rights defense. To stifle dissent in the diaspora, autocratic governments employ a variety of transnational repression techniques, such as assassinations, renditions, illegal deportations, abductions, cyber surveillance and threats, Interpol abuse, and victimize dissidents’ relatives at home. Moreover, autocratic regimes fund civil societies and form organizations with the aim of advancing domestic policies and exerting control over the diaspora.
Anti-regime political and human rights activism in the diaspora has thus not been devoid of fear and repercussions, despite the fact that its practitioners enjoy considerably greater safety and rights than those operating within an undemocratic system. Human rights defenders, journalists, civil society activists, and political adversaries are frequently the targets of transnational repression. Moreover, transnational repression depoliticizes the social lives of co-nationals, cultivates distrust and fear, and renders anti-regime activism a risky activity [7]. As a result, transnational repression significantly impedes anti-regime mobilization and diaspora movements. Additionally, such conduct poses a direct danger to democracy, state sovereignty, and fundamental liberties [8]. Academics and organisations working in the area contend that democracies perpetuate transnational repression through inaction or unintentional actions. Certain systemic gaps within the democratic system may impede the efforts of human rights activists. This piece discusses the case of the Eritrean Blue Revolution movement, a pro-democracy and anti-transnational repression movement, to shed light on the techniques of transnational repression employed by the Eritrean regime and the challenges of the movement in its fight against transnational repression.
How do authoritarian countries engage their diaspora? The case of the Eritrean regime
Eritrea gained its independence in 1993. Eritrea is classified as a military dictatorship. The People’s Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ), the only political party, has never conducted an election and the country maintains neither a constitution nor a parliament. Consequently, the regime represses any form of opposition or discord. The ruling regime govern by eliciting fear, submission, loyalty, and mistrust in the population. According to UN reports, the government of Eritrea has committed crimes against humanity since 1991. Thus, Eritreans actively opposed the regime, using migration as a strategy to escape, mobilize resistance, and advocate for regime change when the political sphere became heavily constricted. With approximately one-third of its population leaving the country, Eritrea is among the most diasporic nations in the world, per capita. An estimated 250,000 Eritrean refugees were residing in Europe by the end of 2020; approximately 72% of these individuals were hosted in Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and Italy.
The Eritrean diaspora absorbs a significant portion of the Eritrean regime’s repressive apparatus from home. One could argue that the regime, in the absence of a formal, comprehensive diaspora policy, has established an informal engagement framework with three objectives: (1) generating remittances; (2) deterring dissidents and human rights activists; and (3) using the diaspora as political agents to improve its image. In pursuit of these objectives, the regime employs community-level associations, among others, as a mechanism of coercion and control. Even policymakers and academics who closely study transnational repression tend to overlook these practices.
The community-level associations have historical backgrounds in Eritrea diaspora. The Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF later changed to PFDJ) has instituted mass organizations in diaspora communities since the 1980s with the objectives of organizing and exerting control over these communities, as well as mobilizing them to contribute to the armed struggle through fundraising. Following independence, the regime’s embassies converted the mass organizations to community-based association (known as Mahbere-kom ማሕበረኮም in Tigrigna) – a political and cultural associations. These pseudo-cultural associations’ political objective is to advance the narrative of Eritrean nationalism and history as propagated by the regime. Furthermore, the organizations engage in collaborations with Eritrean embassies and regime loyalists with the intention of intimidating and pressuring individuals to remit the 2% diaspora tax or provide financial support for the regime’s activities. For example, regime supporters were visiting refugee shelters in Germany to persuade refugees to pay the diaspora tax [9]. Tax payments result in a “clearance” for Eritreans, which is required to acquire birth certificates and passports, the right to purchase or inherit property in the country, and other services offered by Eritrean embassies and consulates.
Then the regime established the Young PFDJ (YPFDJ) as an overseas youth branch to indoctrinate young Eritreans and generate funds through charitable contributions and Festivals. The Eritrean government capitalizing on sentiments of obligation for the heavy price of independence, extracts financial resources from the diaspora. As a result, numerous individuals demonstrate their support for the regime, not by actively participating in the country’s politics or economy, but rather in exchange for their super-nationalist affiliation, visits to Eritrea, and maybe remittance houses. As a continuation of these pseudo-cultural associations, the regime has recently established militant organizations like Eri-Life and the Fourth Front in an effort to intimidate the pro-democracy movements mainly to challenge the Blue Revolution movement.
The nation’s precarious economy is heavily reliant on diaspora remittances and other forms of funding. The infamous ‘Festivals’ are typical events serving as a vehicle to amass substantial funds; in addition, churches and music concerts also contribute to this cause. In coordination with the events, on a regular basis, the pseudo-cultural Festivals invite higher government officials to disseminate propaganda and political seminars. All of their propaganda consists of defaming and intimidating human rights defenders, dissenters, journalists, and recent refugees who expose and oppose the regime. The regime tarnishes the diaspora opposition and activists by portraying them as traitors, non-nationals, and agents of foreign powers. The regime consistently divides opposition groups through infiltration and ostracizes opposition activists through a slander campaign. In addition, social media outlets loyal to the regime openly threaten to harm activists and refugees’ family members at home.
These have profoundly detrimental social and psychological repercussions, especially for the most recent refugees. In search of safety, Eritrean refugees escape the indefinite military conscription and travelled the perilous journey across the Sahara Desert and the Mediterranean Sea to reach Europe. Recent migrants have encountered distressing circumstances as they seek refuge. Nevertheless, the communities connected to the Eritrean regime have been towing and pressuring them to fall in line. Despite their traumatic experiences, they are coerced to be silent about the regime and pay diaspora tax—for the sole purpose of perpetuating repression at home and abroad. This is unacceptable to most of the refugees, but some confirm. Those who rejected this have been met with severe consequences, including estrangement from the community, intimidation, deprivation of their Eritrean identity, and animosity and mistrust from the very community that was supposed to assist and integrate them. Despite its lack of overt physical aggression, this subtle form of repression has profound social and psychological ramifications that need due attention from policymakers and scholars.
The other objective of the regime’s engagement with its loyalists in diaspora, worth mentioning, is to furbish its reputation among the international community and the host nations via its supporters. The regime’s advocacy in the diaspora seeks to absolve and defend itself from the heinous crimes and flagrant violations of human rights that it has committed throughout Eritrea and the region. The regime consistently forces diaspora communities to participate in protests, endorsing its policies and denouncing institutions that expose its atrocities. For example, the diaspora supporters engaged in a campaign to disavow the reports and discredit the indisputable account that the Eritrean Defense Forces (EDF) committed war crimes and potentially Crimes Against Humanity during the Tigray War (2020-2022) despite the fact that a number of independent institutions, including United Nations and Amnesty International, corroborated the information [10] [11].
The Blue Revolution: a resistance to transnational repression
Despite existing challenges, the diaspora has been a significant site for human rights activism and democratization for Eritrean opposition movements for the last twenty years. Their resistance to transnational repression has primarily been based on advocacy, which includes informing and engaging authorities and the international community. For an extended period of time, diaspora opposition activists have been informing local authorities and the international community, both formally and informally, of the regime’s extraterritorial coercive endeavors and the fear it sows among its opponents. However, the outcomes are incredibly inconsequential. Only a few countries, e.g., Canada, recognized the clandestine tax collection activities of the Eritrean embassy and outlawed them. Nevertheless, in democratic contexts, the regime continues to collect funds and coerce communities using militant groups. Such actions directly violate the rule of law in democratic countries and serve as a warning to democratic countries to prevent the rise of authoritarian regimes, as Freedom House has repeatedly called for.
Transnationally connected youth, refugees, and second-generation Eritreans launched the Blue Revolution in recent years, striving to exert pressure on the international community and host nations to intervene and halt the Eritrean regime’s transnational repression. The Blue Revolution has been organizing coordinated waves of demonstrations in major Western cities since mid-2022, in opposition to the repressive policies of the Eritrean authoritarian regime both domestically and in the diaspora. Most demonstrations have reached their pinnacle in violent confrontations with police and regime loyalists. Protesters specifically targeted Festivals, which loyalists and the Eritrean embassy organized to amass funds, facilitate political propaganda by higher-ranking officials, and intimidate human rights defenders and the opposition. Blue Revolution activists assert that the regime used the funds to finance war, demobilize the opposition, and sustain its repressive system in Eritrea and abroad. During the Tigray War, for instance, the regime’s events were transformed into fundraising opportunities under the guise of ‘Meal for the EDF ድራር ሓይልታት ምክልካል’ (in Tigrigna).
The Blue Revolution is advocating for cutting off the regime’s lucrative revenue stream and exposing the illicit operations of its institutions and supporters, who continue to exploit the democratic systems of the host nations. Despite the lack of precise data regarding remittances and the inflow of funds from the diaspora to Eritrea, certain authors hypothesize that the actual remittance flow may account for approximately one-third of the nation’s gross domestic product [12]. Eritrea ranks among the world’s impoverished nations. Diasporic remittances sustain the nation’s population and economic vitality. Therefore, the regime has been using the diaspora fund to finance its repressive system, its military activities in the region, and its security apparatus.
How can democracies deter anti-transnational repression movements?
The Blue Revolution is in outrage over the Eritrean regime’s transnational repression and the local and international communities’ inaction. The regrettable acts of violence that transpire during demonstrations serve as an expression of the pervasive transnational repression and the unheard expressions of discontent. Nevertheless, a number of Blue Revolution activists remain imprisoned as a result of the violent incidents that transpired during the demonstrations; for instance, Germany, Sweden, and the Netherlands continue to hold certain demonstrators in custody. These activists are prospective citizens of their host countries. The democratic values of the countries they have adopted motivate their activism.
However, the unfair treatment of some activists who still remain detained has generated some confusion among activists: do democracies support a regime notorious for its transnational repression [13]? For example, the German police are using artificial intelligence (AI)-powered suspect identification on a large scale to criminalize demonstration participants, exacerbating the situation [14]. The matter has prompted human rights defenders and the international community to express a number of concerns. The technology’s accuracy rate in identifying black features is significantly low; it often fails to accurately identify individuals up to 96% of the time [15]. German policy states that this technology facilitated the identification of 679 suspects and the initiation of 457 investigations. The manner in which the German authorities managed the incident fails to instill optimism regarding the impartiality of the proceedings. Second, this procedure fails to comprehend why the Blue Revolution members are protesting around the globe.
Why should democratic nations protect activists against transnational repression?
Despite the concerted efforts of democratic nations to uphold freedom and justice, a variety of factors contribute to the persistence of transnational repression within their borders. Maintaining diplomatic relations with numerous nations, including those with dubious human rights records; economic ties; security cooperation; and legal frameworks that prioritize due process and individual rights are a few of the factors cited by Freedom House. These variables may affect the actions of democratic nations with regard to transnational repression. According to case studies by Freedom House, democratic nations currently facilitate transnational repression by extraditing or deporting individuals to their countries of origin, where they face persecution. However, numerous governments have recognized the issue and implemented measures to punish those responsible for transnational repression; for instance, the UK, Germany, Sweden, and South Africa have expelled diplomats on charges of refugee espionage and dissident assassination [16].
Nevertheless, certain democratic countries might fail to comprehend the magnitude of the issue or give priority solely to high-profile repressions that entail physical aggression. Like in the Eritrean diaspora, the regimes penetrate diaspora communities and integrate repressive groups into them, complicating efforts to intervene without violating individual liberties. Engagement and collaboration between law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and diaspora human rights activists are imperative in such circumstances. For example, the Blue Revolution activists are working to legally ban regime loyalists who have been instrumental in perpetuating repression, which requires the cooperation of local authorities. By acknowledging having experienced human rights violations in Eritrea, a large number of these individuals obtained refugee status and citizenship in Western nations. However, they continue to be loyal to the regime and serve as tools of repression, raising the possibility of their deployment as refugee spies or security agents. Furthermore, Blue Revolution activists are advocating to shutting down establishments such as community centers and churches, bringing to light illegal practices of regime loyalists, hate campaigns on social media and militant groups, and fund-raising events that support oppressive systems and its interests.
The subtle and community-association-led repression is less physically violent, but this does not diminish its repressive and oppressive nature. It is imperative for democratic nations to unite with the voice in opposition to this longstanding and pervasive transnational repression. By ignoring the cries of the voice of dissent and the actions of criminals, they create an environment that is conducive to the growth of an authoritarian culture, wherein societies operate under coercion and allegiance and gradually become collaborators in human rights abuses and war crimes without consequence. So as to prevent unintentionally facilitating transnational repression, democratic nations must maintain a state of constant vigilance and collaboration with human rights defenders. Lastly, the protection of activists should be a top priority.
Aron Hagos Tesfai is a post-doctoral researcher at the School of Applied Human Science, University KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. He works on Migration and diaspora politics and is a human rights activist. Contact him here: aribanov@gmail.com , Twitter (X) – AronT @aribanob
[1] New Report: Transnational Repression Is a Growing Threat to Global Democracy | Freedom House
[2] Belloni, M. (2021). Remittance houses and transnational citizenship: Mapping Eritrea’s diaspora-state relationships. Africa Spectrum, 56(1), 59–80.
[3] Ragazzi, F. (2014). A comparative analysis of diaspora policies. Political Geography, 41, 74–89.
[4] Koinova, M., & Tsourapas, G. (2018). How do countries of origin engage migrants and diasporas? Multiple actors and comparative perspectives. International Political Science Review, 39(3), 311-321. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512118755843
[5] Perspectives on “Everyday” Transnational Repression in an Age of Globalization | Freedom House
[6] Marcus Michaelsen & Kris Ruijgrok (2024) Autocracy’s long reach: explaining host country influences on transnational repression, Democratization, 31:2, 290–314, DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2023.2267448
[7] Moss, D. M. (2016). Transnational Repression, Diaspora Mobilization, and the Case of the Arab Spring. Social Problems, 63(4), 480–498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26370875
[8] Yana Gorokhovskaia and Isabel Linzer, Defending Democracy in Exile: Policy Responses to Transnational Repression (Washington, DC: Freedom House, June 2022), https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/Complete_TransnationalRepressionReport2022.
[9] The Long Arm of the Regime: Eritrea and Its Diaspora | East Africa | bpb.de
[10] UN experts detail extensive war crimes amid Tigray conflict | AP News
[11] Ethiopia: Eritrean soldiers committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity after signing of agreement to end hostilities—a new report. – Amnesty International
[12] CF_Eritrea-v.2.pdf (diasporafordevelopment.eu)
[13] “We Will Find You”: A Global Look at How Governments Repress Nationals Abroad | HRW
[14] Violence at Eritrea festival in Giessen: How AI helps the police (faz.net)
[15] Facial Recognition Fails 96% of the Time, Detroit Police Chief Says (businessinsider.com)
[16] Transnational Repression: Understanding and Responding to Global Authoritarian Reach (freedomhouse.org)
Blue revolution Brigade N'Hamedu Eritrea Eritrean Diaspora Opposition Transnational Repression