EEBC's Decsion Should Be Implemented. The “year of Africa” proclaimed by grateful
western political leaders and music celebrities showered considerable policy and
media attention on the continent but in too many cases allowed serious problems
away from the spotlight to fester. Nowhere is this truer than the Horn of
Africa, where there were many signs that the dangerous territorial dispute
between Eritrea and Ethiopia might bring these two shattered countries to a
repeat of their 1998-2000 war.
Unless the dynamic of escalation can be
halted in 2006, the likely result is a war that will devastate the lives of
millions. If it occurs, the “international community” should do more than blame
the usual suspects – namely megalomaniacal African leaders, in this case
Ethiopia’s Meles Zenawi and Eritrea’s Isaias Afewerki. Rather, the primary
responsibility will lie closer to home, chiefly with the self-interest of
western governments, a catastrophic failure of international law, and the
impotence of the United Nations.
The acrimonious relationship between
Eritrea and Ethiopia is both ancient and new. Resentful ethnic stereotypes run
deep, but more recent political events have added a toxic element of
embitterment. Whipped into this unstable mix is the fact that the Horn of Africa
is a region at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa where the ambitions of
the world’s greatest powers have collided with local populations, religions and
political formations for centuries.
This is as true today as it has ever
been. Eritrea and Ethiopia currently face each other across a border, which also
serves as a temporary security zone manned by 3,337 military personnel of the
United Nations Peacekeeping Mission to Ethiopia and Eritrea (Unmee). The
sanctity of this border is the cornerstone of lasting peace. Ambiguous
demarcation was arguably the key cause of the previous war that raged from May
1998 to December 2000.
War between Eritrea and Ethiopia does not conform
to the lethal African stereotype of conjoined machete and AK47. High-tech
weaponry employed on an old-fashioned battlefield takes barbarity to a different
level. In just eighteen months, up to 100, 000 people were killed and hundreds
of thousands displaced. The ensuing misery permeates life’s every detail in the
region.
Eritrea and Ethiopia signed a peace agreement on 12 December
2000, the terms of which stipulated that a specially appointed United Nations
boundary commission would oversee the border demarcation. The commission’s
judgment would be final and binding. Both countries signed on the dotted line.
Lasting peace, it seemed, was plausible.
In April 2002, the Permanent
Court of Arbitration in The Hague announced the decision. Both sides immediately
declared it a success and a vindication of their actions in the war. However,
critically, the name of the tiny settlement of Badme, a village near the border,
was noticeably absent from the official report.
Badme was administered
by Ethiopia before the war and Eritrea’s brash attempts to liberate the village
by force led to the first shots of the war being fired. Due to the village’s
adopted significance, the UN’s experts had decided not to mention its name in
their official report, but it was quickly apparent that Badme had been awarded
to Eritrea. This fact alone, in the eyes of Eritrea, was the ultimate
vindication. The UN had upheld Eritrea’s consistent claim that Badme was
Eritrean and it was time now for Ethiopia to withdraw. It still has
not.
An impossible problem
Herein lies the nucleus of this
impossible problem. For three years, the UN and the international community have
failed to impose The Hague’s ruling on Ethiopia, while the Eritrean government
has stuck doggedly to this point of principle: the inviolability of
international law should be sacrosanct.
In spite of this, Ethiopia has
courted international governments and organisations with sublime aplomb. Meles
Zenawi, the Ethiopian prime minister, is a member of Tony Blair’s all-male
Commission for Africa and is a darling of Bob Geldof. He even appeared at the G8
summit in Gleneagles in July 2005, bending the ears of the world’s political
heavyweights. It is small wonder Eritrea is incensed and
disillusioned.
Zenawi is the latest in a long line of supremely gifted
Ethiopian diplomats stretching back beyond Haile Selassie, who, in June 1936,
famously pleaded in vain to the League of Nations against Italy’s invasion. The
same diplomatic proficiency saw Eritrea’s federation with Ethiopia sanctioned by
the UN in 1952, a decision that led to much of the hostility that has
characterised the Horn since. Exactly half a century later, the UN’s impotence
has undermined Eritrea’s legitimate right for self-determination, which it won
in 1991 after a thirty-year “struggle” with Ethiopia.
This international
impasse has forced Eritrea into a corner where, despite having justice on its
side, it has no international support. This is a dark and lonely position for
any country to be in. Unfortunately, the conduct of the Eritrean government has
been far from deft. It closed the free press on 18 September 2001, and has since
jailed many journalists, politicians and religious figures without trial, citing
national security as an overriding precedence. According to the international
journalism watchdog, Reporters Without Borders, Eritrea is a media “black hole”
ranking second worse in the world to North Korea. Eritrea’s once celebrated
democratic process is defunct and a distant memory, and its Amnesty
International report reads like an advertisement for Abaddon.
The Horn and the
world
With such a poor record, it is understandable that international
governments refuse to fund Eritrea’s development, yet in 2005 Britain’s
department for international development had an aid budget for Ethiopia of more
than £60 million. Ethiopia’s achievements in the year it was awarded this
bounteous largesse consisted of a continued refusal to honour international law,
national elections widely acknowledged to be flawed, the killing of student
demonstrators, the arrest of political opposition, and a well-known weapons
shopping-spree.
In addition to the obvious devastation a war between
Eritrea and Ethiopia would reap on these two nations, its wider consequences
would be felt worldwide. The fragile peace in neighbouring Sudan might be
threatened, it might cause the disintegration of Ethiopia, and it would make
America’s task of supervising its “war on terror” from its bases in the region
very much harder.
America bears many scars from meddling in the Horn of
Africa. The Ethiopian communists who deposed Haile Selassie in 1974 ejected it
unceremoniously from its huge military base, Kagnew Station, in the Eritrean
capital, Asmara, and its interventions in Somalia in the 1990s ended in
disaster. Up to now, America has hedged its bets with Ethiopia, whom it sees as
a major ally in its phoney war, but in the last few days, it has assembled a
team to try and break the deadlock. In another country whose administration
deals only in the extremes of right and wrong, America should understand the icy
reception it will get if it tries to convince Eritrea of anything other than
upholding international law over the border decision. History books are
unambiguous about what happens to those who pursue a policy of self-interest in
the Horn. If Eritrea and Ethiopia start fighting, America should take a note
from history and be cautious of pursuing a policy of
self-interest.
Ethiopia’s problems are as complex and deep-rooted as
Eritrea’s, but despite the claims against the Eritrean government’s conduct,
Eritrea’s consistent stand over the ruling of international law is legitimate
and unbowed and, in its eyes, precedes all other reforms. Until the world’s
leaders are willing to uphold justice over the border ruling, no one is in a
position to indict others over extraneous misdeeds. Everyone is guilty. An
Ethiopian withdrawal from Badme would force Eritrea to deliver its former
promises of democracy, a free press, religious freedom, civil liberty, and
demilitarisation. Until then, national security remains a supreme excuse for
repression.
Eritrea’s frustration is now so great that on 7 December 2005
it expelled American, European, Russian and Canadian UN staff from the
peacekeeping mission based in Eritrea. In October 2005, it banned the UN from
flying their helicopters in Eritrean airspace. The UN mission is now little more
than an impotent force costing the global taxpayer half a million dollars a
day.
As if to drive the final nail into the coffin, an International
Commission in The Hague ruled on 21 December that Eritrea had no right to invade
Badme in 1998. Ethiopia is drafting a reparations bill that will run into
hundreds of millions of dollars. Now, it seems, international law is on both
sides. Stalemate.
As both countries continue to spend millions of dollars
on weapons from east-central Europe, there is every possibility that this “year
of Africa” will witness a conflict that will stain the hands of the Asmara and
Addis Ababa governments, the international community, and the United Nations.
The world should pay attention before dangerous brinkmanship turns once again to
terrible tragedy.
Edward Denison is a writer and
consultant based in the United Kingdom and China. With his wife Guang Yu Ren,
his work focuses on the role of design in effecting positive social and
environmental change. Together, they spent four years working to promote
Eritrea’s architectural heritage internationally