Eritrea’s ruling party, the People’s Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ), formerly known as Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF), maintains an orchestrated communication apparatus that spans domestic and international spheres. This system is not merely a channel for broadcasting official statements; it is a carefully engineered mechanism for shaping perception through activism, suppressing dissent, and insulating the regime from scrutiny. Its narratives consistently revolve around victimhood, invincibility, and deflection from substantive issues, with Ethiopia repeatedly cast as the central external adversary, the foil against which Eritrean suffering, endurance, and sovereignty are measured.

Victimhood dominates both domestic and international messaging. Within Eritrea, official discourse presents the country as under continuous threat from external forces. Historical grievances and border conflicts, particularly with Ethiopia, are invoked to justify restrictive governance measures, prolonged national service, and the suppression of civil liberties. Domestic dissent is routinely framed as externally instigated, positioning criticism as an extension of hostile intervention rather than as legitimate concern. Internationally, this narrative is replicated to portray Eritrea as a state unfairly targeted or misunderstood, with Ethiopia central to the explanation for both domestic hardships and external scrutiny. By externalizing blame in this way, the PFDJ frames internal repression and policy failures as necessary responses to persistent threats.

The narrative of invincibility operates in tandem with victimhood, constructing an image of Eritrea as resilient, disciplined, and morally self-reliant. Domestic messaging emphasizes endurance and national pride, often grounded in the historical memory of the secession struggle, while Ethiopia is presented as the measuring stick for Eritrea’s fortitude. Internationally, invincibility projects a sovereign and strategically capable state, seemingly impervious to external pressure. The interplay of victimhood and invincibility allows hardship to be valorized while the source of adversity is externalized, reinforcing both obedience and a sense of exceptionalism.

Deflection forms the third pillar of the PFDJ’s communication strategy. Challenges related to governance, economic performance, or human rights are consistently redirected toward historical, ideological, or geopolitical contexts. International criticism is framed as biased or politically motivated, ensuring that the substance of critique is never addressed directly. Online, this strategy is amplified through a coordinated network of accounts that dominate public discourse, ensuring narratives of victimhood and invincibility remain central while policy failures are obscured.

A crucial dimension of this digital strategy is the role of the diaspora. Almost all pro-PFDJ social media accounts are run outside Eritrea, with the exception of official accounts controlled by the Minister of Information and a small number of state-sanctioned operators. The majority of the network consists of diaspora actors, including descendants of former ELF and EPLF fighters as well as the children and relatives of Eritrea’s ruling elite. These individuals, removed from the daily hardships experienced by ordinary Eritreans under Isaias Afwerki’s authoritarian rule, serve to amplify the PFDJ’s messaging internationally. They act as both content creators and narrative enforcers, extending the party’s discourse into global digital spaces and ensuring alignment with official state narratives. By operating afar from the realities of Eritrean life – poverty, forced labor, militarized national service, and political repression – they are able to present a sanitized, valorized image of Eritrea while discrediting dissenting voices.

The network’s reach is not limited to message amplification; it also functions as an instrument of delegitimization. Opponents of Isaias Afwerki abroad, are systematically discredited, not only for their political ideas but by questioning their very legitimacy as Eritreans. Their critiques are portrayed as externally inspired, morally suspect, or fundamentally disconnected from Eritrean identity. By framing dissent as unpatriotic or even traitorous, the PFDJ and its diaspora operatives attack the personal and collective credibility of the opposition, ensuring that challenges to the regime are perceived as both ideologically and culturally illegitimate. This strategy reinforces social isolation, stigmatizes criticism, and strengthens the regime’s monopoly over Eritrean identity itself.

Within this diaspora network, actors function in tandem with official state channels. Official accounts disseminate government statements and national news, diaspora amplifiers extend these messages internationally, and tactical nodes monitor discourse, respond to criticism, and maintain coherence across platforms. Ethiopia remains central to the narratives, framing both domestic perceptions of threat and international interpretations of Eritrea’s political posture. The coordination between state channels and diaspora actors ensures that messaging is continuous, coherent, and insulated from critique emerging within Eritrea itself.

By intertwining narratives of victimhood and invincibility with systematic deflection, and by leveraging a diaspora suppprt cell that is largely insulated from the consequences of the state’s authoritarian policies, the PFDJ has created a communication ecosystem that neutralizes dissent, manipulates external perceptions, and obscures accountability. Ethiopia’s centrality to these narratives allows the regime to externalize responsibility, valorize endurance, and maintain cohesion in its messaging across borders. Understanding this multi-layered architecture is essential for comprehending how the PFDJ consolidates power, controls discourse, and projects an image of legitimacy while ordinary Eritreans continue to live under the daily weight of authoritarianism.

By Horn Review Editorial