|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Horn of Africa: Border Peace Delay
AFRICA ACTION
Africa Policy E-Journal
October 11, 2003 (031011)
Horn of Africa: Border Peace Delay
(Reposted from sources cited below)
With implementation of the border agreement between Ethiopia and
Eritrea "stuck," the International Crisis Group (ICG) has called
for the U.S., the African Union, and the European Union to step up
active engagement to avoid a breakdown and possible return to war.
This posting contains the executive summary of a recent report from
the ICG, several brief updates from the UN's Integrated Regional
Information Networks, and excerpts from an allafrica.com interview
with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.
+++++++++++++++++end summary/introduction+++++++++++++++++++++++
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks
http://www.irinnews.org
ERITREA-ETHIOPIA: UN still awaiting demarcation date
[This material is from IRIN, a UN humanitarian information unit,
but may not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or
its agencies. ]
ADDIS ABABA, 10 Oct 2003 (IRIN) - The UN peacekeeping force in
Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) said on Friday it was still awaiting
the date for demarcation of the two countries' contested border.
"We are ready to start as soon as we are told that demarcation is
ready to go ahead. But the decision is not ours," UNMEE spokeswoman
Gail Bindley Taylor Sainte told IRIN.
"The only people with the key to when demarcation starts is the
EEBC and the two parties," she added.
The independent Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) is
responsible for demarcation of the 1,000 km-long border. It must
agree with both Ethiopia and Eritrea when positioning of the two
metre high border pillars will begin. Demarcation is scheduled to
start this month.
But diplomatic sources close to the peace process told IRIN it was
unlikely the process - which has already been delayed twice - will
start as planned.
Ethiopia has insisted that while it is happy to let demarcation
take place in the eastern sector of the border region, it does not
accept the ruling in other areas.
But Eritrea is opposed to partial demarcation and says the ruling
- announced in April 2002 - should be implemented in full.
UNMEE will play a key role in demarcation by monitoring the
security situation on the ground and ensuring pillar sites are free
from landmines.
Eritrea has refused to engage in dialogue with Ethiopia until after
demarcation is completed. The only direct talks that take place are
at the Military Coordination Commission (MCC) meetings between
senior-ranking military officials of the two countries under UN
auspices.
The next MCC meeting is due to take place on 5 November.
Western diplomatic sources in Addis Ababa say it is likely that an
MCC meeting would be needed before demarcation to help "iron out"
any problems.
Ethiopia and Eritrea: War or Peace
International Crisis Group
September 24, 2003
Full report available on http://www.crisisweb.org
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The next few weeks will go far to determining whether Ethiopia and
Eritrea resume a path toward war - which took some 100,000 lives
between 1998 and 2000 - or solidify their peace agreement. Ethiopia
must decide whether to allow demarcation of the border to begin in
October 2003 even though the international Boundary Commission set
up under the Algiers agreement that ended the fighting has ruled
that the town of Badme - the original flashpoint of the war - is on
the Eritrean side. The outcome will have profound implications for
both countries and the entire Horn of Africa, as well as for
international law and the sanctity of binding peace agreements and
arbitration processes. The international community, particularly
the U.S., the African Union (AU), and the European Union (EU), all
of which played major roles in brokering the Algiers agreement,
need to engage urgently to help Ethiopia move the demarcation
forward and to assist both parties to devise a package of measures
that can reduce the humanitarian costs of border adjustments and
otherwise make implementation of the demarcation more politically
palatable.
The two warring states agreed at Algiers to establish the Boundary
Commission and accept its judgement as final and binding. The
Commission made its ruling in April 2002. After a series of
technical and political delays caused largely by Ethiopia's
objections, in particular to the disposition of Badme, it announced
in July 2003 that physical demarcation on the ground should begin
in October. On 12 September, the UN Security Council extended the
mandate of the United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
(UNMEE), which monitors the border, and called on both parties to
fulfil their commitments under the Algiers agreement by creating
"the necessary conditions for demarcation to proceed, including the
appointment of field liaison officers", providing security for the
demarcation process, and pursuing political dialogue.
The governments of both Ethiopia and Eritrea face harder line
elements that believe too much has already been given away in the
peace process and are unwilling to countenance further flexibility.
Many Ethiopians are determined not to cede any territory to Eritrea
after having allowed its independence. The most potent mobilising
factor for Eritreans is the threat of encroachment by Ethiopia on
their hard-won sovereignty. For Ethiopians who opposed Eritrean
independence, the threatened loss of Badme is emblematic of the
loss of Eritrea, while for many Eritreans the fate of that town of
5,000 cannot be separated from their worry that Ethiopia may one
day try to regain access to the sea. For both sides, losing Badme
would make the sacrifices of the 1998-2000 conflict much harder to
justify.
While neither Ethiopia nor Eritrea wants to return to combat,
incidents of isolated violence have been occurring with increasing
frequency along the border, as have reports of incursions by troops
into the neutral zone. There is no real dialogue between the
parties. Each views the other's government as decaying and its
military as weak and unprepared. Each supports elements of the
other's opposition, and, perhaps most dangerously, underestimates
the will of the other to hold together if there is a new military
confrontation. All these are attitudes eerily similar to those that
prevailed prior to and during the war.
The integrity of the peace agreement is on the brink of being
compromised. Despite its renewal of the UNMEE mandate and its
correct insistence that the agreement be implemented immediately
and without renegotiation, the UN Security Council remains
relatively unengaged and preoccupied with other responsibilities.
Washington, which negotiated the agreement in tandem with the AU,
has largely ignored the issue, despite its interest in regional
stability. The AU has remained largely silent as well.
The international community cannot afford to look away and hope for
the best, however. Vigorous diplomacy is needed now. While the
parties should not be permitted to deviate from implementing a
Boundary Commission decision that both agreed would be "final and
binding", creative solutions can be found to make implementation
more politically acceptable by reducing the security and
humanitarian impacts while demarcation proceeds. These diplomatic
efforts should not be the prerequisite for implementation. But an
early demonstration that the international community is serious
about finding ways to soften the losses perceived by both parties
would be a positive inducement for constructive action. Timing is
important since an Ethiopian decision not to cooperate with the
October schedule could set in motion a rapid deterioration of the
situation, and a small incident - whether unplanned or provoked by
either side - could easily escalate out of control.
RECOMMENDATIONS
To the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea:
1. Implement the peace agreement promptly and fully and in
particular provide the Boundary Commission and UNMEE all necessary
support and security guarantees so that demarcation of the border
can begin in October 2003 pursuant to the Boundary Commission's
April 2002 decision.
2. Seek creative ways to facilitate implementation of the Boundary
Commission's decision by negotiating parallel initiatives with the
help of the U.S., AU and EU aimed at reducing the humanitarian
impacts on the populations of the border region and preventing
conflict which might result from the demarcation process.
To the governments of the United States, the African Union and the
European Union:
3. Undertake an immediate public diplomacy campaign that spells out
for political elites in Ethiopia and Eritrea the importance of full
implementation of the Algiers agreement, the benefits of
compliance, and the costs of collapsing the peace process, and
develop a set of gradually escalating political and financial
measures that could be applied against a party that blocks
implementation of the agreement.
4. Conduct missions to the contested areas of the border in advance
of the scheduled October 2003 start of border demarcation to
explain the approach taken and absorb some of the responsibility
for easing the political, security and humanitarian difficulties
that will ensue when the parties implement the Boundary
Commission's decision.
5. Begin to discuss immediately with each party, and coordinate
with each other to the extent possible on, the parallel initiatives
cited in recommendation 2 above, which could include the following
measures:
(a) dual citizenship for affected populations, maintenance of
existing citizenship in cases where administration changes hands,
and/or codification of the rights of non-citizens living in either
country;
(b) immediate opening of the border and negotiation of port access
for Ethiopia;
(c) administration by UNMEE for a short face-saving period of the
border areas that are to change hands;
(d) mutual agreement, in the context of technical alterations
suggested by the two parties' field liaison officers, on small
adjustments to the demarcation line to satisfy humanitarian,
geographical, security or political needs; and
(e) generous compensation and development aid to affected local
populations, including support for relocation, reconstruction of
infrastructure, and restoration of livelihoods.
To the UN Security Council:
6. Consider early expansion of UNMEE's mandate so that it can
administer for a short face-saving period the border areas that are
to change hands, and instruct UNMEE once demarcation of the border
has begun to:
(a) conduct joint patrols along the border with the parties; and
(b) create a rapid response verification capability to troubleshoot
border difficulties and deter those who may want to manufacture a
problem, including to embarrass a national government intent on
fulfilling its obligations.
Nairobi/Brussels, 24 September 2003
UN Tells Ethiopia to Implement Border Ruling
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks
October 3, 2003
Addis Ababa
The UN Security Council has rejected calls by Ethiopia for a new
body to rule on contested areas of the border with neighbouring
Eritrea.
In a one-page response, the UN body expressed "deep regret" at the
move by Ethiopia and urged it to implement the controversial April
2002 border ruling.
"The members of the Security Council therefore wish to convey to
you their deep regret at the intention of the government of
Ethiopia not to accept the entirety of the delimitation and
demarcation decision as decided by the boundary commission," the
letter said.
"They note in particular, that Ethiopia has committed itself under
the Algiers Agreements to accept the boundary decision as final and
binding."
Sir Emry Jones Parry, the current president of the Security
Council, also stated the Council's "serious concern at the
continuous and abnormal absence of political dialogue" between both
countries.
The 15-member Security Council welcomed Ethiopia's "intent" to
remain committed to the Algiers peace agreement that was signed
between both countries in December 2000.
And they also commended Ethiopia for reiterating it will not resort
to force and its commitment to resolving the issue through peaceful
means.
But, the letter, said: "Only the full implementation of the Algiers
Agreement will lead to sustainable peace."
Ethiopia and Eritrea fought a bloody border war from 1998-2000. An
independent boundary commission was then set up to settle the 1,000
km border which was not clearly demarcated when Eritrea gained
independence from Ethiopia in 1993.
But key territories, in particular the town of Badme where the war
flared up, were placed in Eritrea by The Hague-based commission,
sparking outrage in Ethiopia.
Demarcation of the contested 1,000-kilometre border, which has been
delayed twice, is due to start this month. Observers now say the
new date is "extremely unlikely".
The Security Council letter is in response to a letter from
Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi warning that the boundary
commission was in "terminal crisis" and calling for a new body.
Meles also said Badme was "symbolically important", adding that it
was the "casus belli" for the war between the two countries which
claimed some 70,000 lives.
"The decision is thus a recipe for continued instability, and even
recurring wars," the prime minister warned in his letter dated 22
September.
In his reply, Sir Emry noted: "I have been asked by the members of
the Security Council to remind Ethiopia of the obligations of both
parties under the Algiers Agreements...to bring the peace process
to a successful conclusion."
The Council called for the "expeditious" implementation of the
Algiers agreement.
"Therefore we call upon the government of Ethiopia to provide its
full and prompt cooperation to the Boundary Commission and its
field officers," the Security Council stated.
A spokesman for the Ethiopian government declined to comment on the
letter.
Eritrea Warns of "Explosive" Situation
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks
October 3, 2003
Nairobi - Eritrea has warned of an "explosive" situation in the
peace process with Ethiopia and called for action from the
international community.
In his address to the UN General Assembly on Thursday, Eritrean
Foreign Minister Ali Sayyid Abdallah accused Ethiopia of a
"wholesale assault on the fundamental principles of international
law".
He was referring to a letter sent last month by Ethiopian Prime
Minister Meles Zenawi to the Security Council saying an independent
Boundary Commission - set up to rule on the border between the two
countries - was in "terminal crisis". Meles called for a new body
to rule on contested areas of the border.
After their bitter two-year border war, both countries agreed to
abide by the decision of the Commission which was established by
the December 2000 Algiers peace agreement. But Ethiopia is unhappy
over the ruling which puts Badme - flashpoint of the war - in
Eritrea.
"The [peace] process can now be considered explosive, paving the
way, as Ethiopian leaders seem to wish, to renewed conflict, with
its attendant horrific consequences, unless the international
community acts promptly and decisively," Ali Sayyid said.
Speaking a day earlier, his Ethiopian counterpart Seyoum Mesfin
said the situation had reached a point "when the United Nations
would have to take greater interest to ensure that the hopes of the
Algiers agreement are fulfilled and the promises held up by that
agreement are met".
"The Algiers agreements were designed to lead to durable peace
between Ethiopia and Eritrea," he said. "It was not meant to punish
the victim of aggression. That is why Ethiopia has felt it
necessary to call on the Security Council to help us achieve the
hopes contained in the Algiers agreement."
He added that Ethiopia was committed to peace and international
law. "This is also how we intend to tackle the present
complications in the implementation of the Algiers agreement," he
told the General Assembly.
Meles Defends Demand for New Ruling on Border With Eritrea
http://allAfrica.com [excerpts only]
September 30, 2003
By Ofeibea Quist-Arcton
Tokyo
The Ethiopian prime minister Meles Zenawi and Eritrean President
Isaias Afewerki are two of many African leaders who attended the
opening ceremony in Japan of the third Tokyo International
Conference on African Development (TICAD III) on Monday.
Although, alphabetically, the Eritrean and Ethiopian leaders should
have been sitting side by side at the Tokyo conference, they were
diplomatically separated by representatives from Egypt and
Equatorial Guinea. ...
AllAfrica's Ofeibea Quist-Arcton, who is in Tokyo covering the
Japan-Africa development conference, sought out the Ethiopian prime
minister to find out more about Addis Ababa's position on the
disputed border and relations with Eritrea.
Q: Prime Minister Meles, Ethiopia pledged to abide by the
International Boundary Commission's ruling on the Badme border with
Eritrea. You changed your mind once it was awarded to Eritrea and
questioned the decision. Now you're are asking for a review and a
new commission. Why?
A: Our commitment is to resolve the problem peacefully. We still
have that commitment. We are not going to initiate any conflict. We
will resolve this peacefully and diplomatically and legally. That
is the first point.
Secondly, the Boundary Commission was supposed to make decisions on
the basis of the terms of reference we gave them. It was a two-way
contract. We were to accept its rulings, they were to accept the
terms of reference they were given. In our view, the contract has
been breached by the Boundary Commission.
Q: In what way?
A: Their decision is not based on the terms of reference that we
gave them.
Q: But, with all due respect, it sounds like sour grapes because
the Commission awarded Badme to Eritrea rather than to Ethiopia.
And people are saying that you have not honoured your pledge to
accept the ruling of the Commission.
A: No, as I said, we honour our pledge to resolve this problem
peacefully and on the basis of the terms of reference of the
Algiers agreement. The breach of the contract I think is that of
the Boundary Commission, it is not ours.
Q: Please tell me specifically where you feel the Commission
breached the contract.
A: Let me give you a specific example. They were supposed to
delimit the boundary and demarcate it on the basis of two
principles, the colonial treaties and applicable international law.
Now if the colonial treaty is very clear, they were to follow the
colonial treaty. If the colonial treaty was ambiguous, they would
follow applicable international law.
Now in the case of Badme, the Boundary Commission said the colonial
treaty is absolutely clear. And they indicated where the colonial
treaty boundary is. But they decided to forego that decision and
apply applicable international law. We said fine. And in applying
the applicable international law, they selected a principle called
the established practice of the parties. We said no problem. And in
applying the principle of practice of the parties they, among other
things, divided a single village into two and a single homestead
into two. ...
Q: Are you prepared to go back to war if the Commission sticks to
its original ruling?
A: No, no. As I said earlier on, we insist that this problem should
be resolved peacefully and diplomatically. No wars! ...
+++++++++++++++++++++Document Profile+++++++++++++++++++++
Date distributed (ymd): 031011
Region: East Africa
Issue Areas: +political/rights+ +security/peace+
The Africa Policy E-Journal is a free information service
provided by Africa Action, including both original
commentary and reposted documents. Africa Action provides this
information and analysis in order to promote U.S. and
international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
political and social justice and the full spectrum of
human rights.
|
