|
Foreign Minister Seyoum’s speech at the UN General
Assembly
Foreign Minister Seyoum addressed the UN General Assembly on
Wednesday this week. In a wide-ranging speech, he began by reviewing
the main aspects of Ethiopia’s political and economic
transformation, and in particular the process of democratization,
now in its second decade. It had been a bumpy process and one
“fraught with difficulties” but perseverance in encouraging the
institutions of democracy, good governance and the rule of law to
build a stable political system based on devolution of power to the
people, had paid off. Minister Seyoum reiterated the government’s
belief that democracy was not an option but a means of survival. The
process was irreversible and had put out “deep roots” both in the
state and in society. It was, of course, also the means to improve
the life of the people. Ethiopia had built a national consensus
within a framework of democracy and development, registering an
annual average of double-digit economic growth for the last seven
years.
This has provided the basis for the formulation of the next five
year Growth and Transformation Plan (2010-2015), an ambitious plan
designed to create and strengthen a stable democratic developmental
state and remove any bottlenecks to the full achievement of the
Millennium Development Goals. The plan, in fact, will help to make
“poverty history” in Ethiopia and bring an end to the era of food
insecurity and dependency on food aid. Ethiopia had made substantial
progress towards the MDGs, taking charge of its destiny, devising
its own strategy and maximizing its own resources as well as making
the nest use of available international assistance. Minster Seyoum
noted that progress towards the MGDs in Sub-Saharan Africa had been
encouraging. Nevertheless Africa still lagged behind other regions
of the world. The High-Level Plenary Meeting last week had been most
timely and the action agenda designed to achieve the MDGs required
responsibility and accountability of all stakeholders. “We in Africa
know what we can do; we want to know what the rest of the world will
do to help us achieve our goals.”
Minister Seyoum emphasized the critical challenge of climate change.
Copenhagen, he said, had reached agreement on the political
commitment necessary, but the upcoming Cancun meeting must come up
with a legally binding commitment coupled with the political will to
provide resources for adaptation and mitigation for the most
vulnerable states. He noted that access to energy was key to
fighting poverty, and stressed Ethiopia’s commitment to the
development of renewable energy. It was committed to zero carbon
emissions by 2025, and since 2008 had been planting over 1 billion
trees annually. By the end of the Growth Plan Ethiopia will have
developed 10,000 MWs of hydroelectric power together with parallel
development of geothermal, bio-fuel, wind and solar power potential.
We aim to provide 75% rural electrification by 2015.
Turning to the issues of international peace and security, Minister
Seyoum noted that Ethiopia has always been an active participant in
peacekeeping operations since the early 1950s. It was among the
major troop-contributing countries for UN peacekeeping mission. He
emphasized the dangers of terrorism and stressed the importance of
unreserved international cooperation to combat it. He said the
threat of extremism continued in Somalia, pointing out that the IGAD
Heads of State and Government had identified the conflict in Somalia
as between the people of Somalia and international terrorists.
IGAD’s Council of Ministers in New York, supported by the
Secretary-General’s Mini-Summit on Somalia last week, had called on
the TFG leadership to strengthen their cohesion. The IGAD Council
had reaffirmed the Djibouti Process as the sole basis for peace and
reconciliation in Somalia, urged the UN to engage within the region
and with IGAD, and expressed regret over the continuing role of
Eritrea, in continued violation of UN Security Council resolutions,
as a “spoiler” and the main provider of arms to terrorist groups in
Somalia. IGAD had called upon the UN to mobilize the necessary
resources for AMISOM to sustain an enlarged deployment of forces
pending its transformation into a UN peacekeeping force.
With regard to the situation in Sudan, Minister Seyoum said success
in Sudan would be a significant success for Africa; failure would
entail a serious catastrophe. This was why the activities of the
AU’s High-Level Implementation Panel should be strengthened and
parallel initiatives avoided. The referendum on Abyei, popular
consultation in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan, border demarcation
and post-referendum issues were all organically linked to the CPA.
Minister Seyoum said there was clearly a need to change the mode of
operation in discussions on CPA implementation. Business as usual
isn’t going to work. In the final analysis both parties must carry
out their obligations without putting forward preconditions. The
referenda should certainly be held strictly in conformity with the
terms of the CPA. Irrespective of the outcome, the parties should
also recognize there are several commonalities between north and
south, and it was of paramount importance that negotiations on
post-referendum matters should be conducted with a seriousness of
purpose.
In terms of security in the Horn of Africa and the Southern Red Sea,
Minister Seyoum emphasized that members of IGAD had warned the
international community and the UN time and again that Eritrea was
the principal destabilizing force. The Security Council had
recognized this when it imposed sanctions in December last year. It
was, however, regrettable that it had not yet taken the necessary
steps to compel Eritrea to respond to the requirements of Resolution
1907. Eritrea was still training, arming and nurturing extremist
elements such as Al-Shabaab and Hizbul Islam. This had been standard
behavior, in the sub-region and more widely. Consistent with this
have been the acts of aggression committed against nearly all its
neighbors since its independence only 17 years ago. “The time,
therefore, is long overdue for the Security Council to take resolute
action and see to it that its decisions are complied with”. Minster
Seyoum said this was a necessity if the integrity of the decisions
of the UN were to be maintained.
Minister Seyoum emphasized the importance of the United Nations as
the principal global player on the international scene. He
underscored the importance of the ongoing reform of the UN to ensure
its continued vitality. Of particular importance was cooperation
between the UN and the African Union, and ongoing cooperation
between the Security Council and the AU’s Peace and Security
Council: “We should continue with this cooperation”. Ethiopia, he
added, would do whatever was necessary to support this.
******************
top |
The UN’s mini-summit on Sudan
UN Secretary-General, Ban ki-Moon convened a high-level meeting on
Sudan on Friday last week, September 24th. It followed
the meeting of the IGAD Council of Ministers on the sidelines of the
General Assembly in New York, in which IGAD, while welcoming the
establishment of the South Sudan Referendum Commission and the
appointment of its Secretary General, had called on the two parties
to work together fully to implement the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement (CPA). IGAD also encouraged the parties to expedite the
establishment of the Abyei Referendum Commission and the full
demarcation of the Abyei area administration and the North-South
border. It emphasized the need to redouble efforts to realize post
referendum arrangements.
It also expressed its appreciation of
the African Union’s High Level Implementation Panel, headed by
former South African President, Tabo Mbeki, for assisting the
parties to implement the CPA. It assured the panel of its support.
The objective of the mini-Summit was to mobilize international
support for full and urgent implementation of the final elements of
the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. And in addressing the meeting,
Prime Minister Meles, as chairman of IGAD, stressed the urgency: the
issue was now one of peace or war. There was no other conflict
comparable to it. “If we succeed in Sudan, it will be a major
success; and if we fail it will be catastrophic.” That’s why the AU
had provided its best efforts with the panel led by former President
Mbeki. Prime Minister Meles stressed that issues, including
post-referendum arrangements, the Abyie issue and border
demarcation, were all linked and must be addressed. Business as
usual would not work. The process of negotiation over CPA
implementation must be changed. A more effective method was needed.
The two parties had to play the decisive role. The ultimate
incentive was peace and the parties must live up to their
responsibilities without preconditions. IGAD provided the framework
for the CPA, but there could not have been a CPA without the support
of the international community. It was necessary to revamp the
negotiation process and reinforce support to the peace process in
the limited time remaining.
Participants at the Summit recognized the CPA parties’ commitment to
the peace process and welcomed the expression of their commitment to
make every effort to ensure peaceful, credible, timely and free
referenda as provided for in the agreement and to overcome the
remaining political and technical challenges as well as hold the
referenda on January 9th next year. Participants
confirmed their commitment to respect the outcome of credible
referenda and to help maintain sustainable peace in the
post-referendum period. They called for the urgent establishment of
the Abyei Referendum Commission and for the acceleration of the work
of the Southern Sudan Referendum Commission. The two parties
recognized that whatever the outcome of the referenda their
relationship would be essential for managing any transition,
post-referenda arrangements and for the maintenance of peace and
prosperity. Participants welcomed the commitment to resolve
post-referenda arrangements, including border management, security,
citizenship, migration issues, debts, assets and natural resources,
as well as the agreement to put in place a framework to resolve all
outstanding issues as agreed at the meeting of parties in
Mekelle, in Ethiopia on June 23rd.
Participants also stressed the importance of inclusive, timely and
credible consultation processes in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan States,
in accordance with the CPA. They welcomed the United Nations
provision of technical and logistical assistance for referenda
preparations, and the work of the African Union High-Level
Implementation Panel, and the support of the Inter-Governmental
Authority for Development (IGAD), the Arab League and the
Organization of the Islamic Conference, as well as other regional
and international partners of Sudan. The meeting agreed adequate
international funding was necessary to alleviate humanitarian
problems in Southern Sudan, and highlighted the urgent need to
assist Southern Sudan develop governance capacities. It welcomed the
meeting held in Brussels on September 17th in which the
Government of Southern Sudan put forward a framework for immediate
functional priorities in the South.
The meeting welcomed efforts to reach an inclusive solution in
Darfur, supporting the work of the Joint Darfur Mediator and the
Government of Qatar, urging all armed movements to join the peace
process without preconditions or further delays. It expressed
support for the principles guiding the Doha negotiations, and called
on all parties to immediately cease hostilities and allow
unrestricted freedom of movement and access to the African
Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) and the
humanitarian community. It welcomed the government’s commitment to
end impunity and protect civilians in Darfur. It reiterated strong
support for UNAMID and its efforts to promote the engagement of all
Darfurian stakeholders. The meeting took note of relevant Security
Council resolutions and the need to support efforts to halt illegal
arms flows into Darfur.
Participants expressed appreciation of the work of IGAD in brokering
the CPA, with the support of other regional and international
partners of the Sudan, including the African Union and the United
Nations. In awareness of growing urgency, they committed themselves
to empower and support the parties to complete implementation of the
CPA, to resolve post-referenda arrangements and work to achieve
sustainable peace. Equally, they noted that while the referendum is
an important benchmark of the CPA it does not mark the end of the
obligations of the two parties to work together for a peaceful
transition. It was firmly underlined that the core objective of the
international community and of all stakeholders in Sudan is peaceful
coexistence for the peoples of Sudan, acceptable to all, together
with accountability, equality, justice and the establishment of
conditions to allow the building of strong, sustainable and peaceful
livelihoods. The urgency of the situation has been underlined by the
decision of the UN Security Council to travel to Sudan next week.
They will be visiting Khartoum, traveling through both North and
South Sudan and visiting Darfur.
*****************
top |
UN Human Rights Council discusses Somalia and Freedom of
Assembly and Association.
The UN Human Rights Council held its 15th ordinary
session from September 15th to October 2nd in
Geneva, Switzerland. It considered various reports and held a
general debate on human rights situations in various areas. During
the interactive dialogue Ethiopia updated the Council on the
positive measures it had recently undertaken, including the
successful elections in May and the launching of the Growth and
Transformation Plan. The delegation also encouraged the High
Commissioner’s Office to continue its work in the provision of
technical assistance in Ethiopia.
During the session, the Council held a debate on Somalia and
considered the report of Dr Shamsul Bari, the Independent Expert on
Human Rights Situation in Somalia. The Ethiopia delegation supported
the decision of the Council to give attention to the human rights
and humanitarian challenges in Somalia and hold a standalone debate
on Somalia. Among those attending were Mr.
Abdirahman Haji Aden Ibbi, the Deputy
Prime Minster of Somalia; Ms Navy Pillay, the UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights; Mr. Augustine Mahiga, the Secretary-General’s
Special Representative; and Ambassador Aboubacar Diarra, the mission
head of AMISOM. Several heads of UN programs testified; and several
delegations condemned the terrorist attacks committed by Al-Shabaab
and Hizbul Islam. Delegations from Ethiopia, Uganda, the UK, Italy,
the African Group and the European Union all agreed on the need for
solidarity and unity of purpose within the TFG. This was reflected
in the resolution adopted by the Council renewing the mandate of the
Independent Expert and urging the Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights to focus on the provision of technical assistance
and support to Somalia.
Ethiopia noted the recent visit by Ms.
Kyung-wha Kang,
Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, to Somalia and the
region, and her call for accountability with particular respect to
the documentation of humanitarian law violations. Ethiopia certainly
supports the call for building up AMISOM’s capacity to protect
civilians within its existing mandate, but regrets that some,
including NGOs, have recently aimed a barrage of unsubstantiated
allegations against AMISOM. It is incumbent upon the Human Rights
Office to ensure transparency and due process in its work and focus
on the provision of technical assistance. The Independent Expert and
the Human Rights Council should be the focal points of
inter-governmental deliberation on human rights in Somalia.
The Council also discussed and adopted a resolution establishing the
mandate of a Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and
Association. The Ethiopian Federal Constitution incorporates
principles and norms for freedom of assembly and association, and
Ethiopia naturally supports continued attention on these rights by
regional human rights organizations and UN bodies like the
International Labor Organization. At the same time, several
delegations were concerned that this new mandate might duplicate
efforts of the ILO’s supervisory mechanisms including the Committee
on the Application of International Standards. The African Group,
Russia, China, Cuba and a number of other delegations called for a
mandate which would first create a broader consensus within the
Council and then move on to consideration of the specific
implementation of measures at the domestic level. As various members
disassociated themselves from some provisions, further reflection in
the implementation of the mandate and an understanding of the
difference in national practices in the implementation of the
relevant norms, seems to be called for.
*****************
top |
The International Contact Group (ICG) on Somalia meets
in Madrid
The ICG convened its 18th session on Monday and Tuesday
this week in Madrid. The meeting was chaired for the first time by
Ambassador Mahiga, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative
for Somalia, who emphasized that crucial decisions were needed. He
called on the international community to convey its concerns to the
TFG as well as recommendations for effective action and for
implementation of the transitional tasks needed for the new
political dispensation after August 2011. He called for the speedy
appointment of a new Prime Minister and for a united and cohesive
cabinet. Ambassador Mahiga appealed to the international community
to redouble its efforts to assist the TFG and AMISOM to address the
political and security challenges facing the TFG. He urged full
implementation of the agreements signed between the TFG and Ahlu
Sunna wal Jama’a, and encouraged the TFG to engage all groups ready
to contribute to peace and renounce violence. Extended political
space and a more secure environment would facilitate the speedy
delivery of humanitarian assistance throughout Somalia. He welcomed
the recent elections in Somaliland, and underlined the continuous
security and economic challenges facing Puntland. The international
community has rallied behind the governments of Iraq and
Afghanistan. It should do the same for Somalia.
President Sheikh Sharif of the TFG expressed the hope that its
outcome would provide tangible assistance for the Somali people. He
called on the international community to confront Al-Qaeda and its
affiliated terrorist groups in a serious manner. He expressed the
readiness of the TFG to make every effort to accomplish the
transitional tasks before next August. Referring to the existence of
differences within the TFG leadership, he praised the ability of the
TFIs to handle the challenges. He called on the international
community to redouble its efforts to strengthen the police, military
and intelligence services to enable the TFG to build peace and
stability.
During the meeting, the representatives of the United States and
Norway urged the TFG leadership to stay cohesive. They called on the
international community to provide the necessary support to the TFG
and AMISOM. Dr. Tekeda Alemu, Ethiopia’s State Minister of Foreign
Affairs, highlighted the justified frustrations of the international
community over the continuous squabbles within the TFG, but also
emphasized that there was no alternative to supporting the TFG. The
Djibouti Process was the only peace process available and the
international community must make more efforts to strengthen it. He
warned against being hoodwinked by statements from those whose
activities were still devoted to undermining the TFG and the peace
and stability of Somalia, and indeed more widely. He stressed the
international community should always act on the basis of empirical
evidence not on the basis of mere assertions.
It was noted that some in the international community have been
trying to unravel the Djibouti Peace Process and question the
legitimacy of the TFG. On the other hand, others including IGAD, the
Arab League, the African Union, the Organization of Islamic
Conference, were united in expressing their support for the TFG,
pledging to continue to strengthen it. They agreed that Al-Shabaab
and Hizbul Islam were not prepared to accept peace or national
reconciliation. Delegates from Sudan and the Arab League noted that
Sheikh Hassan Dahir ‘Aweys’ had been invited to Sudan from Asmara in
April 2008 in an attempt to persuade him to make peace with the TFG.
Despite ten days of effort, they had made no progress; Sheikh
‘Aweys’ remained adamant in his determination for conflict.
Delegates emphasized the need to support areas that have created
relative peace and stability. The ICG applauded the successful
election held in Somaliland and underlined the need to increase
support to enable the people of Somaliland to sustain their relative
peace and stability and their democratic progress. Somaliland was
also the subject of a sideline meeting called by the UK and Norway
on Tuesday. This commended the peaceful transfer of power after the
election, and emphasized the need to provide the necessary support
to ensure continuity of democratization, in terms of direct
budgetary support and capacity building, in security issues and to
encourage the new administration in its reform agenda. There was
agreement on the need to assist in enhancing infrastructure,
including the Berbera corridor, as well as building up social
services, including, for example, Hargeisa’s water supply. Partners
agreed to create a coordination framework for helping the
administration immediately. Somaliland had set an example to all
Somalis, and indeed to Africa in general, in democratization; and it
had also played a major role in regional security. While its new
administration hasn’t abandoned the issue of recognition, it also
attaches great importance to development cooperation and to having
close working relationships with partners. The sense of the meeting
was that as much as possible should be done to assist its progress
short of recognition. The same applies to Puntland.
The ICG meeting itself produced a series of recommendations. The TFG
was called on to produce within two months a roadmap outlining
management of the remaining transition period. The Transitional
Federal Institutions must intensify their efforts to complete the
key transitional tasks, particularly the finalization of the
Constitution-making process, and explore various options for the
post-transition arrangements. While making clear the Djibouti Peace
Process remains the sole basis for the achievement of Peace and
National Reconciliation in Somalia, the ICG called on the TFG to
increase its outreach and reconciliation efforts towards all those
who have expressed their willingness to join the Peace Process and
renounce violence, and take immediate and concrete steps towards
full and effective implementation of the agreement signed with Ahlu
Sunna wal Jama’a. The meeting made concrete suggestions to
strengthen existing partnership and coordination mechanisms within
the security sector, to address the impact of piracy and its causes,
to build sustainable institutions and to increase humanitarian
assistance.
The ICG meeting this week was the latest in a series of meetings
which have underlined the importance of bringing an end to the
status quo in Somalia, of stopping Al-Shabaab’s offensive and
assuring the security of the TFG. There was the extra-ordinary
Council of IGAD Ministers’ meeting, the IGAD Chiefs of Defense
Staffs meeting, and the IGAD Heads of State and Government Summit.
This defined the crisis clearly and accurately as a conflict between
the people of Somalia and international terrorism. The African Union
Summit in Kampala endorsed this. So did the UN’s mini-summit in New
York. Now the ICG meeting has taken place in Madrid. All of these
have highlighted the Djibouti Peace Process as the sole basis for
peace and reconciliation in Somalia and stressed the necessity for
the TFG to really push for this. There can be no accommodation with
Al-Shabaab and extremism, nor can there be any compromise with those
who continue to support Al-Shabaab. This is why it was a mistake to
invite Eritrea to the Istanbul conference on Somalia. This is why
all IGAD countries rejected the idea of allowing Eritrea to
participate in the mini-summit in New York. Eritrea has refused to
respond to UN resolutions, and even in the last few weeks has sent
armed fighters into Ethiopia’s Somali Regional State, and flown arms
supplies down to Al-Shabaab in Kismayo. Eritrea has, in fact, shown
no capacity, no interest and no will to be involved in peace-making.
As IGAD members made clear Eritrea has been so deeply involved in
acting as a “spoiler” or a regional trouble-maker that it would have
been a mockery for it to be represented at such a conference.
*****************
top |
Preventing “a failed state”: the responsibility of
Eritrea’s leadership
Last week we
welcomed the fact that the International Crisis Group had at least
begun to take a close look at the increasingly worrying situation in
Eritrea which, the report suggested, was lurching towards the status
of a failed state. We would obviously, like all of Eritrea’s
neighbors, prefer this not to happen. The possible ramifications of
such a disaster would be frightening for Eritreans and for the rest
of the Horn of Africa, even if it would bring an end to the
perennial efforts of the Eritrean government to destabilize the
region and its neighbors.
However, the ICG’s
suggestion that the way to avoid Eritrea’s collapse into the status
of a failed state is to put pressure on Ethiopia, to resolve the
border problem between Eritrea and Eritrea, is something that
certainly needs urgent correction. This is paralleled by the ICG’s
implicit acceptance of Asmara’s view that the international
community is inherently hostile to Eritrea. These are comments that
demonstrate a failure to understand either the roots of Eritrea’s
foreign and domestic policies, or of the aims and attitudes of
President Isaias.
There are two major
points here. One is that Eritrea’s problem with Ethiopia is of its
own making; secondly, from Eritrea’s perspective it is clear that
there is no longer a border issue if indeed there ever was. Eritrea
has made it quite clear it is not prepared to normalize relations
with the present government in Ethiopia.
The ICG warns that
Eritrea might become a failed state unless pressure is put on
Ethiopia to resolve the border problem. Let us not forget that the
problem is actually of Eritrea’s making in the first place. It was
Eritrea that invaded Ethiopia in May 1998 in defiance of the UN
Charter as the Claims Commission made clear; it was Eritrea that
refused to respond to Ethiopia’s acceptance of the Boundary
Commission’s Decisions in November 2004; it was Eritrea which
systematically dismantled the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and
elements of the Algiers Agreement; it was Eritrea that forced out
the UN Mission (UNMEE) whose job was to monitor the Temporary
Security Zone between the two armies, and provide for the security
for demarcation. In fact, according to the Peace Agreement, UNMEE’s
presence is a pre-requisite for demarcation. Equally, demarcation
depends upon a cessation of hostilities, and Eritrea’s deliberate
abrogation of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement means that
hostilities have continued as indeed Eritrea has demonstrated with
its continued efforts to destabilize Ethiopia.
None of this has anything to do with Ethiopia. It could all be
resolved by Eritrea’s President Isaias overnight – if he wished to
do so; if he was prepared to swallow the blow to his pride caused by
Eritrea’s defeat in June 2000. He is not, even though arrogance and
pride are scarcely a sound basis for either internal or external
policy. To be prepared to think again, to admit errors, still
appears to be a psychological barrier for President Isaias.
The excuse so often
made for Eritrea, and so often quoted by Eritrean officials –
frustration at Ethiopia’s failure to demarcate - simply cannot hold
water, and constant repetition adds nothing to its value. In the
first place, as we have repeatedly noted, Ethiopia has long accepted
the Boundary Commission’s Decisions. It is Eritrea which has
prevented demarcation of the border according to international
norms, and which has repeatedly refused any dialogue to normalize
relations. Equally to the point, Eritrea’s destabilization
activities and aggression in the region started long before 2002,
the year the Boundary Commission announced its decisions. Conflicts
with Sudan, Djibouti, Yemen and Ethiopia were all started by Eritrea
in the 1990s. This policy has continued even after the defeat of
Eritrea’s aggression against Ethiopia as Eritrea again demonstrated
in 2008 when its troops invaded Djibouti.
Similarly, Eritrea’s
more recent claim that Ethiopia was occupying Eritrean territory is,
as Ethiopia noted in its right of reply to Eritrea’s statement at
the UN General Assembly, a figment of imagination. Virtual
demarcation, of course, has no legal standing and as the Boundary
Commission itself noted, until the boundary is actually demarcated
the boundary accepted by Ethiopia in June 2000 remains the only
valid one. As Ethiopia has consistently said the most important task
remaining is demarcation on the ground to ensure sustainable peace.
Ethiopia is ready to sit and discuss all issues with Eritrea;
Eritrea persistently refuses to hold any dialogue or any discussions
to normalize relations.
There really is no excuse for Eritrea’s behavior since independence,
its consistent use of aggression as a central element in foreign
policy, and more recently its efforts to use terrorism. Certainly,
however, more attention should be paid to Eritrea, and we would not
disagree with the point that the Eritrean government is “suspicious
of its own population, neighbors and the wider world.” Having said
that, however, it is very clear the root of the problem lies with
the government and leadership of Eritrea which holds these
suspicions, suspicions for which there is no independent or
impartial evidence. In fact, as Ethiopia has been made only too
aware, the problem between Eritrea and Ethiopia now has nothing to
do with the border. Eritrea has made the issue one of attempting to
overthrow the government of Ethiopia, of regional power and
hegemony, and the pride of its president. Ethiopia has consistently
tried to move towards normalization of relations during the last six
years. Eritrea has, as consistently, deliberately and definitely,
refused to countenance the idea. As a result there has been no peace
and reconciliation, no resumption of trade, no discussion of border
demarcation issues, and no cooperation on security. In a word there
has been no cessation of hostilities, and without that there can be
no boundary demarcation. Ethiopia is well aware that it would gain
nothing by any Eritrean slide into anarchy and disorder, but it is
the Eritrean government which controls this, not Ethiopia or any of
its alleged policies, nor even the UN, the US or the CIA as the
Eritrean leader so frequently claims.
While the ICG report
does put considerable emphasis on Eritrea’s domestic problems, its
conclusions almost appear to be part of the government’s
campaign to deflect the international community’s attention away
from Eritrea’s destabilizing activities, offering an excuse for the
regime to get away with the UN Security Council sanctions. “It is
inadequate and unhelpful to portray Eritrea as the regional
spoiler.” It is no coincidence that Eritrean diplomats are currently
busy trying to link their role in Somalia and throughout the region,
and what they call ‘Ethiopia’s illegal occupation’ of Eritrean
‘sovereign’ territory. They are making an attempt to recast the
regime in Asmara as having a potentially constructive role to play
in bringing about a peaceful resolution of conflict in the region,
and more particularly in Somalia. With its comments on border issues
and its acceptance of Eritrea’s view of the world, the ICG appears
to support this, even if it differs over the government’s internal
views. As we have previously noted this hasn’t prevented the regime
sending boatloads of troublemakers to Ethiopia and arms to Somalia
just as it was apparently rolling out a red carpet for those who
naively believe it is possible to change Eritrean government
policies. The ICG’s dismissal of Eritrea’s destabilization
activities suggests the report is actually designed to sell the
insidious agenda of getting the Eritrean government off the hook of
UN Sanctions.
*****************
top |
|