Title: The Complex Issue of Remittances: Norway‘s Role in Eritrea‘s Diktature
In a recent debate in Aftenposten, Rodas Tadese Sibahtu argued that the Norwegian government should make it easier for immigrant families to send money to their home countries. However, this well-intentioned suggestion raises several problematic issues, as outlined below.
1. Eritrea: A Diktatorial Regime
Eritrea, the small African nation bordering the Red Sea, is one of the world’s worst dictatorship regimes, often compared to North Korea. The iron-fisted ruler, Isaias Afewerki, has governed the country for 23 years and imprisoned thousands of political opponents. One of the regime’s primary sources of income is taxing those who have fled the country, including those who left to escape political persecution.
Even Eritreans living abroad to avoid political persecution are often forced to pay an "exile tax," which is often collected through harsh methods. Unfortunately, there are strong indications that the regime also benefits from the money sent by Eritrean immigrants and expatriates abroad.
Instead of making it easier for Eritreans in Norway to send money home, the Norwegian government should consider halting all exports of Norwegian currency to the dictatorship.
2. Contributing to Child Poverty
It’s no coincidence that child poverty in Norway is highest among immigrant populations, despite the country’s generous welfare system. Sibahtu herself admits that her parents sent money to their family in Eritrea instead of spending it on luxuries like holidays or new sports shoes for her.
This phenomenon is not unique to Eritreans but is also common among immigrants from countries like Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. For instance, Somali immigrants in Norway have a low employment rate, receive substantial public assistance, and have a 75% child poverty rate. However, they still manage to send millions of kroner back to Somalia.
3. Shifting the Burden onto Others
Sibahtu suggests introducing a tax deduction for money sent from Norway to families and relatives in the immigrants’ "home countries." This would, in effect, mean that Norwegian taxpayers would subsidize remittances to other countries, with no control over who receives the money or how it’s used. In the worst-case scenario, this money could end up in the hands of dictatorship regimes or terror organizations like Al-Qaeda and Al-Shabaab.
Moreover, such a system would reward immigrants who keep their children in poverty in Norway by sending money abroad. It would also open the door to large-scale tax evasion, as immigrants could send their entire taxable income abroad and then claim back what they need to live on in Norway through money-transfer companies specializing in transactions with countries lacking proper banking systems.
4. "Home" is Not Norway
Sibahtu’s entire argument is based on the idea that immigrants’ "home" isn’t Norway but their countries of origin. She repeatedly refers to sending money "home" to Eritrea, not Norway, which took her in. Such attitudes may not foster Norwegian goodwill towards accepting more immigrants.
Furthermore, Sibahtu suggests that it’s "neo-colonialist" for the "white West" to aid poor countries. She is a parliamentary candidate for the Venstre party. Perhaps she should consider switching to the Progress Party, where she might find more support for ending such "neo-colonialist" aid.
Worth a look