I Didn't Do It for You: How the World Betrayed a Small African Nation

by Michela Wrong

Scarred by decades of conflict and occupation, the craggy African nation of Eritrea has weathered the world's longest-running guerrilla war. The dogged determination that secured victory against Ethiopia, its giant neighbor, is woven into the national psyche, the product of cynical foreign interventions. Fascist Italy wanted Eritrea as the springboard for a new, racially pure Roman empire; Britain sold off its industry for scrap; the United States needed a base for its state-of-the-art spy station; and the Soviet Union used it as a pawn in a proxy war.

In I Didn't Do It for You, Michela Wrong reveals the breathtaking abuses this tiny nation has suffered and, with a sharp eye for detail and a taste for the incongruous, tells the story of colonialism itself and how international power politics can play havoc with a country's destiny.

Genres: Africa, History, Nonfiction, Eritrea, Politics, Travel, Ethiopia

497 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 17, 2005

About the author

Half-Italian, half-British, Michela Wrong was born in 1961. She grew up in London and took a degree in Philosophy and Social Sciences at Jesus College, Cambridge and a diploma in journalism at Cardiff.

She joined Reuters news agency in the early 1980s and was posted as a foreign correspondent to Italy, France and Ivory Coast. She became a freelance journalist in 1994, when she moved to then-Zaire and found herself covering both the genocide in neighbouring Rwanda and the final days of dictator Mobutu Sese Seko for the BBC and Reuters. She later moved to Kenya, where she spent four years covering east, west and central Africa for the Financial Times newspaper.

In 2000 she published her first book, "In the Footsteps of Mr Kurtz", the story of Mobutu's rise and fall, which won a PEN prize for non-fiction. Her second book, "I didn't do it for you", which focused on the little-written-about Red Sea nation of Eritrea, came out in 2005 and was hailed as a "gripping political thriller" by Monica Ali.

Her third book, published in February 2009, was "It's Our Turn to Eat", which tracks the story of Kenyan corruption whistleblower John Githongo, who sought refuge in her London flat. Boycotted by Nairobi bookshops terrified of being sued, it has become an underground bestseller in Kenya, distributed by local churches, radio stations and non-governmental groups and debated in town hall meetings. Described as reading "like a cross between Le Carre and Solzhenitsyn", it has triggered expressions of interest from US and South African film directors. It was named as one of the Economist's "best books of 2009" and was shortlisted for the Orwell Prize.
Michela Wrong's non-fiction books on contemporary Africa aim to be accessible to both members of the general public and experts in the field. They have become a must-read for diplomats, aid officials, journalists and strategists based on the continent and regularly feature on the "required reading" lists of International Relations and African Studies courses at university. She was awarded the 2010 James Cameron prize for journalism "that combined moral vision and professional integrity

She currently lives in London and is regularly interviewed by the BBC, Al Jazeera and Reuters on her areas of expertise. She has published opinion pieces and book reviews in the Observer, Guardian, Financial Times, New Statesman, Spectator, Standpoint and Foreign Policy magazine, and travel pieces for Traveler Conde Nast. She speaks fluent Italian and French.

In 2014 she was appointed literary director of the Miles Morland Foundation, which funds a range of African literary festivals and a scholarship scheme for African writers. She is a trustee of the Africa Research Institute and an advisor to the Centre for Global Development.

Reviews

[SpaceBear · Rating 2 out of 5]

I can't remember the last time I had such mixed feelings as a book. Its not that Wrong is a bad writer, or that her narrative of Eritrea seems untruthful or dishonest. There's something about the inferences she draws from casual statements, and her over-reliance on rumour and myth that detract greatly from her natural skills as a writer. There's a little too much influence of the journalist reporting whatever she hears, and a too little of the researcher seeking to check their facts. One glaring example is the title of the book; supposedly said by a British officer to a ululating Eritrean woman after removing the Italians from the region during World War Two (in the story, the title phrase is followed by the officer referring to the woman with a particularly offensive term). In spite of the fact that it is almost certainly untrue (why would the officer address someone who didn't speak English this way; and how would people who didn't speak English remember and repeat the story?). It is treated as fact by Wrong, as are a number of other stories which are almost certainly myths or rumours. Additionally, Wrong has a strong desire to infer racism, conspiracy and plot where it doesn't necessarily exist. One glaring example being that after pages of decrying a particularly pedantic UN bureaucrat, Wrong reports one European as reporting that "these people" are holding up the UN mission on Eritrea's future. Wrong infers that he meant greasy, untrustworthy Latinos, in spite of having no reason for asserting that. Its much more likely and believable that the individual meant the kind of pedantic bureaucrats that Wrong herself was decrying. I think that what left me with a bad taste in my mouth after reading this book is the simple fact that I am tired of reading books by Westerners presenting themselves as really 'getting Africa' by complaining about other Westerners who just don't get it. Wrong is very clearly presenting herself this way, and as someone who has spent enough time in Africa to understand that I don't and never will 'get it', I can't help but roll my eyes at people who act as they do. At the same time, she clearly has talent at weaving together an interesting narrative. This is by far the best book I have ever given a two-star rating.

[Liza · Rating 4 out of 5]

Before I read this book I knew absolutely nothing about Eritrea. I still don't know enough, but I am glad this was my introduction. Despite the cover and title it does not toe the typical "Oh, poor Africans; let's throw subsidized food and expensive pharmaceuticals at them and then all will be well" line. It does not paint such a simple story, rather it tells the tale of a nation that has been required to fight everyone: the Italians, the Ethiopians, the U.S., the British, the UN--the list goes on. The main thesis is that everyone has screwed Eritrea, so the Eritreans have done it their own way and nobody should expect an apology any time soon.

The author is a brilliant, somewhat-Hobbesian journalist--plus, she's a woman, which is bonus points in my book.

[Remy · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of my favorite passages:

"Go to the edge of the escarpment, on the outskirts of town, and you will find yourself on the lip of an abyss. You are at eye level with eagles that launch themselves like suicides into the voice, leaping into a blue haze into which mountain peaks, far-off valleys and distant sea all blur. at this altitude, only the most boisterous clouds succeed in rising high enough to drift over the city. Pinned down by gravity, they form instead a sulky cumulus eiderdown that barely shoulders the horizon."

I enjoy reading books written by journalists. The narrative arc tends to not be as strong as clear, but the imagery and descriptive details (as above), well, they knock my socks off.

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 5 out of 5]

[edited August 2026]

The title of this book says it all - this is a brilliantly told tale of how so much bad has been done by so many Western nations to one very small, very poor African country for reasons that, at the time, seemed perfectly justified (to those doing various awful things, needless to say ;the recipients of these awful actions didn't think so, but then they were never consulted).

The country was Eritrea, those inflicting various terribly things on it ranged from Italy, UK, USA, USSR and various African states as well. It is a story replicated all over Africa and elsewhere in the world of the nightmare suffering inflicted on the powerless by the powerful. It is horrible but fascinating and will make you weep with frustration and anger. You can be sure that like all the other books exposing what selfishness underpins the foreign policy actions of those who claim to be doing good, it will not be read by those who need to read it most. And even if it is I doubt it's lessons will be learnt. That requires humility and for some ridiculous reason the countries that have done the most to cause the problems in Africa, Asia, etc., seem to imagine that they can provide solutions - though the one thing they will never do is admit responsibility.

This is a fine, fascinating account of just one small part of the story of western intervention and it's disastrous consequences in Africa.

Read it and weep.

[Χαρά Ζ. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review wiil follow for this amazing book

[Katie · Rating 2 out of 5]

2017 Reading Challenge category: 48. A banned book

I've been reading US banned books lists since I was like seven, so I picked an offbeat one: this book was banned in Eritrea for criticizing the president.

First of all, my rating disclaimer: if I'd had any inkling of how much of this book would be military history, I would never have put it on my to-read list. I hate military history. I'm always hoping for cultural history when I read a book like this.

I wanted to learn about Eritrea, and I suppose I did, but I feel this book needed so much additional development to be effective. Just some examples of many I could give: why were we expected to already know (based on the info presented) who Haile Selassie was but not already know the Eritrean role in WWII? Why did we need an entire chapter of mostly disgusting anecdotes about US military stationed in Kagnew and how did that further the book? In fact, many of the anecdotes relayed left me with little to no idea what I was supposed to be taking from them, or didn't address it until way after it would have been most effective.

Anyway, if you don't mind reading a lot of military history and are less discerning than me about anecdotes, this book will teach you about Eritrea.

[Elizabeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like one of the other reviewers below, I picked up this book to learn more about Eritrea after starting an asylum case with an Eritrean client. Unfortunately, this book isn't *really* about Eritrea; it's about other countries' actions in Eritrea. Only the last two chapters are devoted to post-Independence, while entire chapters are devoted to Sylvia Pankhurst (along with three pictures!), rowdy American behavior at Kagnew Station, Ethiopia, etc. There was some generality but very little detail about the current government, or about the effects of repression on ordinary Eritreans. So, it didn't exactly fit the bill of what I wanted to read.

However, it is extremely well-written and engaging, and I learned a lot about pockets of history that I knew very little about before. And I did come away with it with a much better understanding of Eritrea than I had when I started, so I'm glad I read it. I will keep an eye out for Wrong's book about the Congo.

[Michael Gerald · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read about the Horn of Africa in general, with Ethiopia and Eritrea as the focus. The story of Eritrea is an irony, as the country that was once victimized is now a victimizer, as it persecutes Christians and other opposition to its repressive, Stalinist-like government, making true Dr. Jose Rizal's words: What good is independence if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow?

[Marieke · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a lot more difficult than i had anticipated and at the moment i don't feel like i've retained much information. i think i'm going to need a long processing period. initially i thought this book would rival King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror & Heroism in Colonial Africa for me, but i don't think that actually bore out. During my reading of Hochschild's book, i felt more and more comfortable with the material as the story progressed. I can't say the same for this book. I don't intend that as a criticism, because i don't think i'm in a position, having zero background knowledge of Eritrea, to think critically about the history she details here. I'll definitely be returning to this book in the future to get things sorted out, not just because the challenge of it is irresistible to me, but because there is very little else out there that attempts to explain modern Eritrean history.

[Vanessa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this book after volunteering in the Eritrean refugee community and became facinated and shocked by the gripping telling of the history of this country. The book details the colonial occupation of Eritrea by Italy and subsequent misuse by Britain, US and Russia as well as decades of guerilla warfare with Ethiopia. When independence is finally achieved the leadership is tyrannical. It is very well written with lots of interviews and insights into the Eritrean ethos. The author is a foreign correspondence for Reuters news agency, BBC etc.. and her extensive experience in writing and travelling around Africa is evident.

[Corey · Rating 3 out of 5]

A lot of the events in this book took place during my lifetime… I was even old enough to read newspapers for some of it, yet I had no idea that most of it was happening! The last 8 chapters or so of this book were captivating beginning at the chapter entitled “Death of the Lion” and especially the description of living and fighting conditions in the Nakfa… reminded me of kibbutz! (Actually ironic that the Soviets were supporting Mengistu’s ‘Marxist’ regime against an army that was living the socialist ideal – no class distinctions, communal facilities and possessions, even children were raised communally.)

While I loved the second half of the book, I have quite a bit of criticism for the first half. I don’t know if something switched in my mind or attitude, but the two halves of this book read like two separate books for me. I found the writing in the first half to be cumbersome, and I often went back and read the same sentence two or three times to try to understand it. (Example from p. 102 “Repealing Eritrea’s legislation, much of which seemed pretty unexceptional to British eyes – Brigadier Stephen Longrigg, Eritrea’s military administrator, actually considered strengthening, rather than diluting it – might set an embarrassing precedent.” Multiple sentences like this in a row can become annoying.)

If I could redesign this book for Wrong, I would have started with a chapter about Eritrea vs. Ethiopia before colonialism. (Did the regions interact or were they effectively isolated? What were their relations like? Were they (or their constituent tribes) always divided and distinct or was it more of a continuous spectrum of people?) Then I would have condensed the next 8 chapters or so into 4 or 5 (e.g. Sylvia Pankhurst and American GIs’ bad behavior would get max 5 paragraphs each). The last 8 chapters could remain exactly as is.

Some of the events and people described in the book seemed marginal to the central story. Also, some events that sounded important historically, were glossed over or thrown out in passing – like in the middle of the ‘blow job’ chapter she all of a sudden described a massacre of Eritreans by Ethiopians. It seemed insensitive to write it like that. Also, while their behavior was disturbing, the entire episode of American GIs acting like asses in Asmara seemed much less important to the trajectory of Eritrea's history than the massacre, and the relative length of the descriptions of the events should have been proportional to their importance. Generally, in the first chapters, Wrong jumped liberally around time and often alluded to historical events which had not yet been described. This was confusing.

I was also irritated by Wrong’s judgmental voice coming through the objective facts. I thought she described many of the people that she interviewed in an unflattering or condescending way (particularly those that she obviously didn’t like – i.e. the Americans and Emperor Haile Selassie). Come to think of it, just about every sentence was loaded with Wrong’s opinion. (For example – the first page I turned to randomly – p. 191 “Legally, Cordier was in the wrong, but when you are the boss, that doesn’t really matter. Only two years after Matienzo left Asmara, congratulating himself on a job well done, there was the sound of an organization washing its hands.”) I almost felt like Wrong was a character in her book… and not a likeable one at that – the self-righteous Brit looking down on everyone from her moral high ground. Personally, I would have enjoyed this book a lot more if it had just been bare bones historical fact, told in chronological order, and I had been left more room to form my own opinions.

[Ron · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ms. Wrong tells the story of the tiny African nation of Eritrea over the last century. Like much of Sub-Saharan Africa, Eritrea was colonized by a European country barely out of its own infancy, then used as a battleground in WWII, and eventually learns that its greatest enemy is its own ruling class.

In between though are some episodes unique to Eritrea. While other African nations were declaring independence and struggling through the first generation of self-rule, Eritrea had been annexed to its larger neighbor Ethiopia. The outside world's response to this is rather telling; Ethiopia annexed Eritrea in blatant defiance of international law, but the major powers looked the other way. They didn't want to upset a valuable strategic partner, and quite frankly they were tired of caring about Africa. As Martin Luther King said, "there comes a time when silence is betrayal", and the outside world remained silent for thirty years.

Like most narrative journalism, the author offers moments of personal reflection and opinion, but otherwise lets the events and witnesses speak for themselves. Ms. Wrong interviews and profiles Italian colonials, American GIs, Russian and Ethiopian bureaucrats, and Eritrean rebels to build a well-rounded story of the tiny nation's fight for recognition.

[Talia · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book attempts to answer the ongoing debate about who is at fault for the social, cultural and most importantly economic suffering of Africa. Michela Wrong's latest book illustrates the problems seen in Eritrea to make some kind of sense of whats going on. The book essentially spends the greater part of the book pointing fingers at former Italian and British colonialists, the UN and the cold war superpowers. She also mentions the failures of Haile Salisse and Mengistu did more bad than good. The point of the book was struck by making the basic point that all those who came into contact with Eritrea were only looking out for their own interest, which seems to be a repeating theme throughout the rest of Africa. The only complaint I have with the book is that it would have been better if the author interviewed more ordinary Eritreans and Ethiopians because there was not much of a voice from the civilian point of view. The book is not meant to answer all the questions about Africa's fate, but rather look at it from a different perspective.

[Lucius · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eritrea is a country that tends to be forgotten in global discussions, but there is so much history that comes from this part of the world that it's important that people know something about the country. Before reading this book, I was very ignorant about the people and the politics of the region. Now, I feel like I have a sense of what's happened there and want to find other sources of material to help me learn more. Thank you, Ms. Wrong for writing this book and bringing light to a piece of the world that doesn't receive much attention from places outside of the Horn of Africa.

[Laura · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book before I went to visit Ethiopia as I thought it may give me some idea of the political strife of the region. And it didn't disappoint me. Wrong's analysis is riveting and passionate, the historic reason for Eritrea being an independent country explained in detail in a way as to keep the reader hooked till the very end. Finally a decent historic book on Eritrea with a modern feel to it.

[Roger · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eritrea has had a hard time. This book describes the staggering tenacity of this Horn of Africa nation during its' struggles against just about everyone, emerging triumphant near the end of the century only to have its' charismatic war leader turn tyrant. Wrong does it again.

[Hannah Rasmussen · Rating 4 out of 5]

An in-depth history of Eritrea, told in beautiful writing with a witty sense of humor and vivid description. It took me a while to get through just because I don't read much political / historical nonfiction, but it was worth it.

[Felicity · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye-opening. Fascinating and shocking. Awe-inspiring people! Well-written, gripping. Am extremely curious to go there and see where this incredible history took place...

[Sorin Hadârcă · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even for a person that isn't into the history of Eritrea it is hugely educational to learn how a small nation can fight its way to freedom and screw up because of its own leaders.

[Karna Converse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Six months ago, I couldn't locate the country of Eritrea on a map. Nor was I able to explain the country's significance to the Horn of Africa, to Europe, and to the United States or why so many Eritreans have been leaving the country. Then I met two refugees and decided I needed to understand something about the country they'd left. My search led me to Wrong's book—the subtitle of which says it all:How the World Betrayed a Small African Nation.

Wrong, a former foreign correspondent for Reuters, ties together a series of world events dating back to the late 1800s that contributed to who and what the country is. She recounts fascist Italy's desire to create a racially-pure colony, Britain's "liberation" during WWII, the United States' interest in securing a military base for its spy operations in the 1950s, and Ethiopia's 30-year effort to expand its borders into Eritrea territory in clear, concise language that exposes corruption, greed, and mistreatment but does not criticize or opine. I Didn't Do It for You ends with the of 2002 decision by the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission to award the hotly-battled-for city of Badme to Eritrea. More than a dozen years of conflict and corruption have continued between Eritrea and Ethiopa since, but Wrong's narrative provides a balanced foundation to help readers—especially readers who are working with refugees or interested in the worldwide refugee crisis-- understand Eritrea's complicated history.

Wrong continues to write about contemporary Africa and, in 2010, was awarded the James Cameron prize for journalism “that combined moral vision and professional integrity.”

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another excellent book from Michela Wrong.

[Nathaniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

"I Didn't Do It For You" is one of the best works of historical nonfiction that I have ever read; it stands head and shoulders above other works on African history--with the sole exception of "King Leopold's Ghost" by Adam Hochschild--especially for its rootedness in the perspective of superbly selected individuals and its complete avoidance of sentimentality. Wrong almost entirely eschew foregrounding her own judgments and interpretations in favor of allowing well researched documents and memorable interviews to enrich her telling of Eritrea's story.

Each chapter is distinct and self-sufficient, compelling and whole without seeming as though the book is a collection of essays. Also, Wrong's book reveals so much about global politics and the half-baked strategies of the cold war that it could hold the attention of someone without a marked interest in Africa. I was shocked at how little of this recent history was familiar to me and have come away from this reading with a lasting interest in Eritrea's fate. I will read at least two more books by this woman.

[Jake · Rating 2 out of 5]

Two stars for getting to learn a lot about Eritrea, but otherwise pretty "meh". This was a disorganized, entirely anecdotal / miscellaneous collection of stories about Eritrean history. Over-written and over-generalized, for example:

Humility seems unlikely, but Eritreans no longer assume they know the answers to Africa's problems. As their present becomes murkier, they are losing the black-and-white certainties of the past. (389)

Such writing, with its eye-roll-inducing cliches and generalities, should not be allowed in serious non-fiction. This book was unfortunately full of it, and inferior to Michela Wrong's other books about Africa (or at least to my favorable memory of them, which I am now questioning).

[Wendy · Rating 4 out of 5]

The fact that this simply is a readable history of Eritrea makes the book great, because there really are not very many books on the subject (at least if you're going the Amazon-search route). Michela Wrong is a great journalist, and this introductory book finds a pretty solid thesis: Eritrea has been repeatedly screwed by a happy and obnoxious host of different countries over the last century+. Another reviewer compared Eritrea to District 13 in the Hunger Games, and I can't top that analogy; the author does a great job of setting down the history that makes modern-day Eritrea a little more understandable, if no less upsetting for much of the population (as ever, insert relevant refugee stories here).

[Alice · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was an interesting book about a part of the world that doesn't get much coverage. But, despite the author's regular observations that the outside world ignores them and only thinks of the European & Ethiopian interest there, she herself suffers from the same disease. Her history starts with the Italians, covers a lot of Ethiopian politics, addresses Americans living on a military base there - overall about 2/3 of the book isn't about Eritrea itself, but about either Europeans/Americans or Ethiopians. Poor Eritrea, despite it's isolation, I guess it's impossible to disentangle itself from outside forces when it comes to its history.

[Andrew Daniels · Rating 1 out of 5]

not a history
dubious, hard to rely on, lots of gossip included in here, emphasizes drama and readability over reliable history
makes you think of Herodotus

She does a poor job of distinguishing history from what-she-felt-about-history. She also uses a blame-the-West-for-everything lens as a bias to slant her viewpoint wherever she can. Her book doesn't offer a balanced viewpoint, offer more distortion than perspective.

[Molly · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engrossing account of Eritrea's history. Excellent read.

[Tinea · Rating 4 out of 5]

[to review]

[Ekilala · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even though I knew these events, it was really nice to get the detailed version of them. :)

[Elijah Oyekunle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched book about Eritrea, an African country I didn't even know existed till I read this book.