The Comparative and Absolute Disadvantages of Eritrean Refugees

In his recent interview, an Eritrean journalist in exile, Zecarias Gerrima, sparked an important debate by comparing successful Eritrean entrepreneurs in parts of Africa with the Eritreans struggling to advance in Western economies.

Many praised his commitment to helping Eritrean refugees wherever they are. Others reacted defensively, worried that economic comparisons might blur the political reasons that forced Eritreans to leave in the first place. I believe his work on Eritrean refugees arise from a genuine belief that Eritreans deserve dignity and opportunity in every corner of the world.

By raising this comparison, Zacharias, however, has challenged us to move beyond surface reactions and confront a deeper structural question. The deeper issue he’s trying to raise is neither celebration nor denial.

The real question is this: what structural disadvantages do Eritrean refugees carry with them because of the system they left behind? He is not simply telling us the tale of two groups of Eritrean refugees: one in under developed African countries and another group in developed western countries. It is a story of inherited comparative and absolute disadvantages.

Comparative Disadvantage in Global Markets

Comparative advantage depends on alignment between skills and structure.

Eritrean refugees leave under pressure, not preparation. They depart equipped with resilience, courage, and endurance only. Too many of them leave without:

• International language fluency

• Competitive digital skills

• Recognized certifications

• Startup capital

• Networks tied to global industries

In flexible informal economies of Africa, resilience can still convert into business success. But in highly regulated, credential driven Western systems, lack of portable skills creates delay, dependency, and downward mobility.

Many of them enter low wage sectors not because of lack of intelligence or ambition, but because of structural unpreparedness.

This is comparative disadvantage. The structure of departure determines the structure of arrival.

Lifetime Absolute Disadvantage

Absolute advantage asks where long term wealth potential is highest. When migrants arrive with interrupted education, limited technical training, and psychological strain from prolonged uncertainty, they start behind. Even in high ceiling economies, catching up requires years.

Thus absolute disadvantage is not that Eritreans lack potential. It is that they begin global competition late and underprepared.

Many neighboring countries have positioned their youth to export services from home. Egypt, for example, built call centers serving the Gulf. India built global technology outsourcing. The Philippines built administrative back office industries. These countries invested in:

• Telecommunications infrastructure

• Language competitiveness

• Technical training aligned to global demand

• Integration into international payment systems

• Space for private enterprise

But Eritrea did not. The result is stark. While others countries export services, Eritrea exports people. That is the absolute structural disadvantage that’s deterring Eritreans where ever they maybe.

The Impact of Forced Exit

Migration that is strategic looks different from migration that is compelled.

When young people leave because national service is indefinite, because private sector opportunity is constrained, because civic space is narrow, they leave without leverage. They leave to survive, not to negotiate.

Forced exit creates:

• Delayed skill formation

• Interrupted career paths

• Psychological strain

• Loss of early asset accumulation

These disadvantages compound across decades. The governance model that narrows domestic space creates global vulnerability.

The Impact of Digital Disconnection

In a connected world, geography is less decisive than connectivity.

Eritrean youth could have participated in remote work serving neighboring wealthy economies. Customer support, translation, billing services, data processing, and technology maintenance require training and infrastructure, not relocation.

But preparation requires policy:

• Reliable broadband.

• Open digital payments.

• Language training aligned with global markets.

• Freedom to transact internationally.

When these are absent, migration becomes the substitute for integration. Physical departure replaces digital participation. This is not accidental. It is structural.

The Impact of Remittances

Remittances are often celebrated as success. Families survive because of them. Foreign currency flows into the country. But remittances also mask disadvantage:

• Capital accumulates abroad instead of building domestic enterprise

• Youth invest in supporting families rather than scaling businesses

• Structural reform is delayed because migration functions as safety valve

Other Civic & Social disadvantages

There is another absolute disadvantage that is harder to quantify.

The first generation of Eritrean refugees conceptualized Eritrea. They financed the struggle. They defended coexistence from exile.

Today’s dispersed generation grows up within polarized political climates abroad. Some absorb ideological extremes from host countries. Others romanticize the homeland while disconnected from its lived realities.

An exported youth that remains unsettled is the cause for the deepening fragmentation. Eritrea depends on coexistence and hence cannot afford prolonged dispersal.

Structural Youth Export

The heart of the matter is governance. A country that limits private sector growth, politicizes language policy, constrains digital integration, and extends national service indefinitely produces predictable outcomes. It exports its youth. This is not fate. It is policy. Therefore the comparative disadvantage abroad reflects structural disadvantage at home. The absolute disadvantage across generations reflects institutional neglect.

Therefore a necessary Reframing is Needed here. Zacharias Gerima deserves credit for raising the economic comparison. His concern for Eritrean refugees is sincere and consistent. But I believe the debate must go deeper.

The question is not whether Eritreans can succeed abroad. The question is “Why should Eritreans, regardless where they live, begin global competition in such a disadvantageous position?”

The tragedy is not just migration itself. It is joining a global competition under such structural disadvantage. Until this structural governance changes, Eritreans will continue to participate in global markets unprepared, forcing our most energetic generation to overcome obstacles that should never have existed.