Rhetorical Recalibration and Strategic Silence: A Discourse-Analytical Reading of the 2026 ERi-TV Interview
This section analyzes President Isaias Afwerki’s 2026 ERi-TV interview through the lens of political discourse analysis, drawing specifically on theories of securitization, framing, and strategic silence. Rather than treating the interview as a neutral policy statement, it is examined as a discursive practice through which political realities are constructed, prioritized, and selectively obscured.
The interview is highly structured and controlled, with no adversarial questioning. This format allows the president to articulate policy positions without challenge, reinforcing a top-down political narrative. Issues are framed primarily through the lens of national sovereignty, resistance to external interference, and historical grievance.
Critical assessment: The absence of critical questioning limits the interview’s value as a forum for public accountability. Rather than facilitating dialogue, it functions as a vehicle for reinforcing official ideology and consolidating state legitimacy.
Attribution of Problems to External Forces
The president’s rhetoric frequently frames regional challenges — including ethnic conflicts or external diplomatic narratives — as driven by foreign influence or distortion. This was a central theme in past interviews and related coverage.
Critical observation: Blaming external actors is a consistent feature of Eritrean state discourse. While external dynamics undeniably impact regional stability, this framing can diminish internal accountability and limit opportunities for transparent self-evaluation and reform.
A recurring theme is the attribution of regional conflict, misinformation, and economic challenges to external powers. International institutions, foreign governments, and global media are frequently portrayed as hostile or manipulative.
Critical observation: Although external influences undeniably shape regional politics, this explanatory framework risks oversimplification. It limits internal policy critique and reduces space for acknowledging domestic governance challenges.
Media and Information Environment
It is important to contextualize this interview within Eritrea’s media landscape, which is tightly controlled by the state. Eritrea has been ranked among the lowest in global press freedom indices, with independent journalism largely absent.
Implication: State television interviews are curated narratives intended to reinforce official policy positions rather than open, critical debates. The interview’s content should therefore be viewed as government messaging, not independent journalism.
The interview must be understood within Eritrea’s highly restricted media environment, where independent journalism has been absent since 2001. ERi-TV operates as a state communication platform rather than an independent broadcaster.
Implications: This context affects both the content and reception of the interview. The lack of alternative narratives or public debate constrains critical civic engagement and reinforces a monolithic political discourse.
Strategic Silence and Discursive Exclusion
One of the most analytically significant aspects of the interview is the complete omission of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF). Given the centrality of the TPLF in Eritrean state discourse over several decades, this absence constitutes a case of strategic silence—a deliberate discursive exclusion that reshapes political meaning by omission rather than articulation (Huckin, 2002; Jaworski, 1993).
From a discourse-analytical perspective, silence is not politically neutral; it functions as a form of power that determines which actors remain visible within the political field (Foucault, 1978). The removal of the TPLF from the narrative suggests a recalibration of threat construction and signals that this actor no longer serves the regime’s immediate discursive or strategic objectives. This supports the view that Eritrean official discourse is instrumental and adaptive, rather than ideologically consistent.
Securitization and Selective Threat Construction
The interview also reflects a reconfiguration of securitization practices. According to securitization theory, political actors frame issues as existential threats to justify extraordinary measures and consolidate authority (Buzan, Wæver, & de Wilde, 1998). Historically, Eritrean state rhetoric securitized the TPLF as an existential enemy. Its omission indicates a shift in the referent object of security and a temporary de-securitization of that actor.
In contrast, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali and the Prosperity Party (PP) are discursively positioned as destabilizing forces through personalized and character-based framing, rather than institutional or policy-centered critique. This personalization of threat aligns with what van Dijk (1998) describes as ideological discourse strategies that rely on delegitimization of political opponents through moral and character judgments rather than empirical argumentation.
Framing, Alignment, and Positive Attribution
Simultaneously, the interview employs positive framing toward Saudi Arabia and Egypt, portraying them as constructive and stabilizing partners. Framing theory emphasizes that political meaning is produced not only by what is said, but by how actors and events are selectively emphasized and evaluated (Entman, 1993). The repeated commendation of these states reflects a framing strategy aimed at signaling geopolitical alignment with Red Sea and Nile Basin powers, thereby situating Eritrea within a broader regional security architecture.
Similarly, President Isaias’s favorable references to the U.S. President Donald Trump and the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) slogan represent a selective ideological alignment rather than a systemic reorientation of Eritrea–U.S. relations. From a discourse-analytical standpoint, this reflects context-dependent positioning, in which global actors are framed positively or negatively based on perceived utility rather than consistent normative commitments (Fairclough, 2013).
Discursive Implications for Regional Politics
Taken together, these discursive strategies—strategic silence, selective securitization, and targeted framing—underscore how the interview functions as a tool of narrative governance rather than transparent policy communication. By omitting former adversaries, endorsing specific external actors, and personalizing conflict with Ethiopia’s leadership, the interview narrows the interpretive space available to domestic and regional audiences.
This pattern aligns with scholarship on authoritarian communication, which emphasizes how controlled media environments enable leaders to recalibrate narratives without institutional accountability or pluralistic contestation (Wodak, 2015).
Over all Conclusion
Viewed through the framework of political discourse analysis, the 2026 ERi-TV interview illustrates a highly managed and adaptive discursive strategy. Strategic silence regarding the TPLF, selective securitization of Ethiopian leadership, and opportunistic positive framing of certain international actors collectively reveal how Eritrean state discourse is mobilized to manage legitimacy, alliances, and perceived threats. While the interview offers insight into the regime’s evolving rhetorical priorities, it also highlights the limitations of state-mediated discourse as a reliable indicator of policy coherence or regional intent.
Conclusion of This Shift
Overall, the interview reveals a recalibrated external narrative: fewer historical scapegoats, selective international praise, and a sharpened focus on Ethiopia’s current leadership as the primary antagonist. This evolution underscores how Eritrean state discourse adapts pragmatically to changing regional and global power dynamics, while still relying on confrontational rhetoric where it serves strategic interests.
In sum, the interview exposes a highly opportunistic and inconsistent political rhetoric, driven not by principles or long-term strategy, but by short-term tactical calculations. The selective silences, exaggerated praise, and personal insults collectively underscore the extent to which Eritrean state communication remains a tool of power preservation rather than transparent governance or constructive regional engagement.
Broader Context to Keep in Mind
Because ERi-TV is state media, the content:
- Lacks independent verification or critical questioning.
- Minimizes discussion of internal challenges such as human rights or social policy.
- Frames external parties as central causes of complex political issues.
- Eritrea’s media environment has been highly restrictive since 2001, with independent outlets banned and journalists detained. This affects how political messages are delivered and received domestically.
- Recent external analysis suggests Eritrea’s narrative shapes public perception around conflict with Ethiopia and stability in the Horn of Africa, often positioning Eritrea defensively regardless of broader diplomatic developments.
The ERi-TV interview succeeds in:
- Clearly articulating the government’s official positions
- Reinforcing themes of sovereignty and resistance
- Signaling Eritrea’s geopolitical posture to domestic and international audiences
However, it is limited by:
- Lack of critical scrutiny
- Absence of measurable policy outcomes
- Marginalization of internal socio-political challenges
References
Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality, Volume 1: An introduction. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Huckin, T. (2002). Textual silence and the discourse of homelessness. Discourse & Society, 13(3), 347–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/095792650201300304
Jaworski, A. (1993). The power of silence: Social and pragmatic perspectives. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London, UK: Sage.
Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. London, UK: Sage.