Permanent Mission of the State of Eritrea to the African Union and
UN Economic Commission for Africa
Thank you Mr. Chairman!
In the spirit of saving time I will present the summarized version of my intervention. I would like
to request the Chair to distribute and circulate the complete and written version of my
intervention as an official document to all members of the PSC, PRC and AUC.
Again thank you Mr. Chairman.
Excellencies!
My intervention has three components. They are all basic facts which I hope will help you to
make your own conclusion, rational judgment and decision.
The three components of my intervention will deal with Ethiopia’s occupation of sovereign
Eritrean territory, U.S’s negative role on Eritrea and Ethiopia border issue as well as Ethiopia’s
baseless accusation and military threat against Eritrea. My first intervention is simple and
straight request by Eritrea to the AU, the international community including the Government of
Ethiopia. Eritrea’s request is, Ethiopia must respect international law and the Final and
Binding Delimitation and Demarcation arbitration Decisions of the Eritrea Ethiopia
Boundary Commission (EEBC) – and must unconditionally withdraw from sovereign
Eritrean territory including Badme.
Excellencies!
The Algiers Agreement that was signed in 2000 by President Isaias Afwerki of Eritrea and Prime
Minister Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia to solve the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia is
crystal clear. It is meticulously done with no ambiguity or loophole. It was guaranteed by the UN
and the OAU/AU and witnessed by the U.S, E.U, Algeria and Nigeria.
BASIC FACTS:
! The Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) composed of five prominent and
highly respected lawyers (two British, two American and one Nigerian) was established
in 2001 and was fully mandated by the Parties, the guarantors and the witnesses to make
its Final and Binding Delimitation and Demarcation Decisions.
! The Commission is clearly mandated only and only to resolve the border dispute through
arbitration. No third party and neutral body, mediator or alternative mechanism is
allowed.
! The Commission made its Final and Binding Delimitation Decision on 13 April 2002.
! The flashpoint of the dispute, Badme, was awarded to Eritrea.
! The physical demarcation of the border on the basis of the Delimitation Decision was
envisaged to be concluded on November 2003.
! In consultation with the parties, implementation and Demarcation Directives and rules of
procedure were issued on 21 March and 22 August 2003 and adopted by the Parties.
! The Commission’s Field Offices were established in Asmara, Addis Ababa and Adigrat.
! A Chief Surveyor was appointed by the Commission and had taken his post in Asmara.
! Surveying staff were recruited to assist the chief Surveyor.
! Implementation and demarcation activity started in the Eastern Sector in March 2003
without any problem.
However, with clear objective of trying to change the Final and Binding Delimitation Decision
of the Commission, aided and abetted by the western powers, in particular the U.S., Ethiopia
kept on creating all types of excuses and justifications for the Demarcation not to continue.
Even though it was frustrated and disappointed by the behavior of the Ethiopian Government,
shouldering it legal obligation and responsibility of demarcating the border, the Commission
deployed every legal, political and diplomatic measures to make Ethiopia respect the rule of law
and its international obligations. But Ethiopia insisted on “dialogue” as well as the “creation of
an alternative mechanism” and a “third party or a neutral body” to demarcate the border. The
Commission rejected Ethiopia’s request and even went out of its way and responded to a letter
that was sent to it by the former Foreign Minister of Ethiopia, Mr. Seyoum Mesfin. The main
content of the letter by the President of the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC), Sir
Elihu Lauterpacht, dated 27th November 2006, to the former Foreign Minister of Ethiopia is as
follows:-
! “I have received and read with care your letter to me of 13 November 2006. Although it
is unusual for international tribunals to respond to criticisms made by a discontented
party, it is not possible for the Commission to leave your observations without some
response-the more so as you have already given much publicity to your letter and have
requested that it should be published as a Security Council document. I do not reply in
full detail because the Commission’s understanding of the facts is set out in the Statement
which it is issuing today, of which I attach a copy. Nonetheless, with great respect, I have
to tell you that, insofar as your letter purports to set out facts, those that it states are,
regrettably, in significant detail wrong or highly selective.”
! “You place great emphasis on ‘the need for dialogue and support by neutral bodies to
help the two Parties make progress in demarcation and normalization of their relations.’
Of course, ‘the normalization of relations’ is a desirable objective but that is a matter that
falls outside the scope of the Commission’s mandate, which is solely to delimit and
demarcate the border. The scope for ‘dialogue’ is limited to what is necessary between
the Commission and the Parties to further the actual process of demarcation on the
ground. There is no room within the framework of the Algiers Agreement for the
introduction of ‘neutral bodies’ into the demarcation process.”
! Your letter seeks to blame the Commission for Ethiopia’s failure to meet its obligations
under the Algiers Agreement. Such blame is entirely misplaced. The truth of the matter
appears to be that Ethiopia is dissatisfied with the substance of the Commission’s
Delimitation Decisions and has been seeking, ever since April 2002, to find ways of
changing it. This is not an approach which the Commission was empowered to adopt and
is not one to which the Commission can lend itself.”
The letter of the President of the Commission had not impacted the Government of Ethiopia. The
intransigent attitude of the Ethiopian Government continued unabated. After trying in vain for
five years to convince the Ethiopian Government to uphold its commitments to the Algiers
Agreement and to respect international law and to allow it to perform its mandated job of putting
the pillars and markers on the ground, the Commission was obliged to adopt another approach to
effect the demarcation of the boundary. Stating that “it evidently, cannot remain in existence
indefinitely,” and invoking internationally accepted and practiced procedures of demarcating
Land and Sea borders such as, the Beagle Channel Case, the Iraq-Kuwait Border Demarcation
Commission’s (IKBDC) Decision of 1993, the Argentine-Chile frontier case (1966) and the
manner in which the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea deals with the limits of
maritime claims by states, the Commission which is composed of highly qualified and
experienced lawyers on the subject matter adopted similar approach to effect the demarcation of
the Eritrea-Ethiopia border.
Excellencies!
Using modern techniques of image processing and terrain modeling in conjunction with the use
of high resolution aerial photographs by identifying boundary points both grid and geographical
coordinates, the Commission virtually demarcated the Eritrean-Ethiopia border in 2007. It
wrote a letter to the two parties and the Secretary General of the UN stating that “The
Commission hereby determines that the boundary will automatically stand as demarcated
by the boundary pillars points listed in the Annex hereto and that the mandate of the
Commission can then be regarded as fulfilled.”
! Signed copies of 45 maps on a scale of 1:25,000 containing the demarcation of the
boundary by coordinates was sent to the parties on 30 November 2007.
! A copy was also deposited with the United Nations
! Another copy for public reference is retained in the Office of the U.N Cartographer.
Excellencies!
No matter what the Parties to the Agreement feel and say, as it is clearly articulated in the
Algiers Agreement Article 4 Paragraph 15 and Article 5 Paragraph 7, in exercising its right and
mandate, the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) has unanimously delivered its
Final and Binding Delimitation and Demarcation Decisions in April has 2002 and November
2007, respectively. The Ethiopia Government has been saying that “I have accepted the
Delimitation Decision but I cannot accept the Virtual Demarcation Decision of 2007.” It has
even gone to an extent of declaring the virtual Demarcation Decision of the Commission as a
“legal fiction”. First of all the Commissioners are better qualified than the Ethiopian officials on
international legal practices and accepted methodologies and procedures of border demarcation.
Second, on the basis of the Algiers Agreement, the Delimitation and Demarcation Decisions of
the EEBC cannot be rejected, amended, appealed or reversed by the Parties under any pretext. It
is Final and Binding, Final and Binding means final.
Therefore, Your Excellencies, there is no contested or disputed border between Eritrea and
Ethiopia. What we have is Ethiopia’s occupation of sovereign Eritrean territory including
Badme. Thus, Eritrea calls on the A.U as a Guarantor of the Algiers Agreement to urge the
Ethiopian Government to unconditionally withdraw from sovereign Eritrean territory,
including Badme.
Excellencies!
I am hundred percent sure that since it is crystal clear that Ethiopia is illegally occupying
sovereign Eritrean territory including Badme, you will ask “why is it then the Government of
Ethiopia in defiance of international law and its signed commitment refusing to vacate sovereign
Eritrean territory?” The question is legitimate and correct. That leads me to my second
intervention. Eritrea believes that it is U.S’s misguided policy and the military, financial and
diplomatic support it gives that is encouraging Ethiopia to occupy sovereign Eritrean
territory with impunity. Mr. John Bolton, U.S. Ambassador to the UN during President Bush’s
time, and Mr. Ennifar, former Acting Special Representative of the UNSG to Eritrea and
Ethiopia as well as wikileaks have confirmed this fact to all of us. Therefore, I hope your
question is answered and the puzzle is solved. The main engineer and architect of this misguided
policy of the U.S. is Ms. Jendayi Frazer, U.S. Assistant Secretary for African Affairs during the
Bush Administration.
Excellencies! Let us look at the facts.
Mr. Bolton, in his book ‘Surrender is not an Option’, dealing with Eritrea and Ethiopia border
issue he wrote:
o “…I certainly had no favorite, but it seemed that Eritrea had a point. Ethiopia had
agreed on a mechanism to resolve the border dispute in 2000 and now was
welching on its deal in flat violation of its commitments…”
o “...I said we should solve the problem and not let it fester forever, France, Japan
and several other Council members agreed with me”
o “…For reasons I never understood, however, Frazer reversed course, and asked in
early February to reopen the 2002 EEBC decision, which she had concluded was
wrong, and award a major piece of disputed territory to Ethiopia. I was at a loss
how to explain that to the Security Council…”
Excellencies!
Like Mr. Bolton, Mr. Ennifar was also clear on the negative role of the U.S. Government on
Eritrea-Ethiopia border issue. After meeting J. Frazer in Addis Ababa, in a report he sent to the
former Head of the UN DPKO, Mr. Guhenno, he wrote:
! “I met on 24 June 2006 with Jendayi Frazer, U.S Assistant Secretary of State for
African Affairs in Addis Ababa. She regretted that the EEBC is not flexible. She
told me that she has developed parallel tracks to deal with the matter. In her view,
demarcation as Eritrea wants it is not feasible. She also said that the status quo
would benefit Ethiopia and demarcation would not take place without
dialogue…”
! “She also said the current priority for the US in the region is to find an acceptable
solution to the Somali question. Therefore, the demarcation process has receded
to the background…”
! “…What is clear it that Washington shares Ethiopia’s view that demarcation
could not proceed without dialogue.”
Excellencies!
! Wikileaks also confirmed what Mr. Bolton and Mr. Ennifar said about U.S.’s misguided
policy in the Horn of Africa, especially on the role of Ms. Jendayi Frazer.
! U.S. Embassy Addis Ababa cable of 6 February 2008 reads:-
o “…On January 31, Assistant Secretary Frazer met with Ethiopian Prime
Minister Meles Zenawi in a broad ranging 100 minute discussion on
Kenya, Sudan, Somalia, Somaliland, and the Eritrean border. In the
meeting Meles and Frazer agreed that the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary
Commission's (EEBC) virtual demarcation decision should not be
supported by the UN…”
! Furthermore U.S. Embassy Berlin cable of 11 august 2009 reads:-
o “We agreed that Ethiopia is an ‘indispensable partner’ to stability in the
region, the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea is ‘frozen’ for the
foreseeable future…”
Excellencies!
From what we have read and learned from Mr. Bolton, Mr. Ennifar and Wikileaks, what we see
in the Horn of Africa today is history repeating itself, U.S’s misguided policy against Eritrea. In
the 1950s when the question “What shall we do with former Italian colonies?” i.e., Eritrea,
Somalia and Libya was raised and debated in the UN, Libya and Somalia were granted their
independence. But under the pretext of “Ethiopia is our strategic ally in the fight against the
Soviet led spread of Communism in Africa,” Eritrea’s right to decolonization was stifled by
the misguided policy of the U.S. It is sufficient to look into the archives of the UN and to read
what Mr. John Foster Dulles, the then U.S. Secretary of State, said during the debate in 1952.
This is what he said:
“From the point of view of justice, the Eritrean people deserve their
independence. Nevertheless, the strategic interests of the United States in the
Red Sea Basin and world peace make it necessary that the country be linked
with our ally Ethiopia.”
As the result of this misguided U.S. policy in the Horn of Africa, Ethiopia and Eritrea fought a
bloody and bitter war for more than thirty years. It was a loss for both the people of Eritrea and
Ethiopia and the people of Africa. History is being repeated. Today again under the pretext of
“Ethiopia is our strategic ally in the fight against terrorism in the Horn of Africa” it is the
U.S. that is blocking appropriate action by the international community against Ethiopia and it is
the one that is also financially, militarily, diplomatically and politically supporting and
encouraging Ethiopia to occupy sovereign Eritrean territory.
Excellencies!
We must learn from history. This misguided policy of the U.S. must be stopped, and another
disastrous war between Eritrea and Ethiopia must be avoided. It is simple to stop it and to avoid
it. First, no nation big or small under the pretext of strategic ally or strategic interest of the big
powers should be allowed to violate AU’s Constitutive Act, the UN Charter and international
arbitration to occupy a sovereign territory of another country. Second, for the sake of the people
of Eritrea and Ethiopia and the people of the Horn, the Ethiopian Government must be told
unequivocally by the AU, UN including by its “strategic ally” the US to unconditionally vacate
sovereign Eritrean territory including Badme.
Excellencies!
My third and last intervention deals with Ethiopia’s fabricated and baseless accusation and
military threat against Eritrea. In the past few weeks, the Prime Minister and other Ethiopian
Government officials have been issuing baseless accusations against Eritrea. They have also
made a series of belligerent and threatening statements through Government Media Outlets,
proclaiming their intentions to carry out “military action to oust the regime in Eritrea.”
! Eritrea is not surprised by the current disinformation campaign and the patently baseless
and unjustifiable accusation of Ethiopia.
! The accusation is purely fabricated to divert and deflect the attention of the international
community from giving undivided attention to Ethiopia’s illegal occupation of sovereign
Eritrean territory including the town of Badme in violation of the UN Charter and the
Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) Final and Binding 2002 Delimitation
Decision and 2007 Demarcation Decision.
! Eritrea does not have a plan or an agenda of destabilizing Ethiopia or the region.
! Eritrea has never thought, imagined or said that it will make Addis Ababa, Baghdad.
! Unless they are doing it for diplomatic and political expediency, the entire leadership of
the Ethiopian Government who were our comrades-in-arms knows that it is not in our
psyche, our culture, our philosophy, our upbringing, our value and our history to attack
civilian targets, and victimize as well as terrorize innocent people.
! For us, let alone the Ethiopian people whom we consider our brothers and sisters, as the
saying goes “Blood is Thicker Than Water”, we don’t want any human race black, white,
red, yellow etc to be victim of terrorist elements and activity. We are principled African
people who value human life forever and ever no matter what.
! The leadership and the people of Ethiopia also know that let alone today as sovereign
state and government where we are obliged and expected to respect international law and
treaties, even during our struggle for justice and independence when our towns, and
villages were bombarded day and night (with U.S. and Soviet supplied fighter planes)
and when our people were massacred indiscriminately by the forces of the Emperor and
the Military Junta that overthrew him, we never attacked civilian targets nor practiced
terrorism. We did not do it yesterday! We will not do it today! And we will not do it in
the future!
As to Ethiopia’s military threat against Eritrea, its capability and capacity aside, it is clearly a
violation of Article 4 (f) of the Constitutive Act of the Union and Article 2(4) of the United
Nations Charter. It is pure aggression and declaration of war against a member state of the
African Union and the UN which should be condemned by all peace loving Governments and
Peoples of the world.
Once again Eritrea calls on the AU and UN to urge Ethiopia to:-
a) refrain from making military threats against Eritrea, a sovereign nation and
a member state of the African Union,
b) unconditionally withdraw from sovereign Eritrean territory including
Badme on the basis of the Final and Binding Delimitation and Demarcation
Decisions of the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC).
Excellencies!
On behalf of the Eritrean Government, I wish to underline that we will not be plunged –through
provocations, enticements and other mendacious accusations- into a crisis to become a scapegoat
to the misguided Horn of Africa policies of the U.S. Government that is railroaded through
Ethiopia. It has failed in the past; it will also fail today and in the future. The people of Eritrea
and Ethiopia and the region deserve to live in peace and harmony. Unlike what some myopic
experts say or wish it to be, the peoples of Ethiopia and Eritrea are not cursed but blessed to be
neighbors.
Excellencies!
I want to assure you that once Ethiopia vacates sovereign Eritrean territory including Badme, the
Government of Eritrea is ready and willing to normalize its relation with Ethiopia and to engage
the Government of Ethiopia in constructive dialogue on issues that are relevant and beneficial to
the people of Eritrea and Ethiopia as well as the stability of our region.
Excellencies!
Agreements must be respected and justice must be supported.
Thank you!
1 comment:
we just need to battle it out AGAIN and get this mercineries and puppets of the west out of our territories and BUILD the greatest african wall aND MOVE-ON.
Post a Comment