Eritrea/Ethiopia: Irony of all ironies, Meles invoking UN ch.7?
By Milion Semere
17 October 2005
The irony of all ironies is that the person who
is invoking UNSC’s term- chapter seven in the last few days is no one but the
Ethiopian Prime minister Meles, who has been defying international laws and
norms by rejecting the Ethiopian-Eritrean border commission (EEBC). Time and
again, Eritrea has been pleading with major powers to heed to its call and have
the border demarcated based on the directives of the EEBC. More than three
years have been elapsed with out any tangible measures. On the contrary, all
diplomatic efforts of UNSG and the guarantors have been to turn the table and
apply political and diplomatic pressure on the party that has fully accepted
the Alger’s peace agreement and EEBC verdict without any ifs and buts.
To escape from this fundamental request, the
UNSG and the guarantors have been devising various schemes to evade the corner
stone of the verdict: the final and binding nature of the verdict by coming up
new proposals like assigning special envoy, hammering Eritrea for not allowing
direct flights, hampering UNMEE movement and so many insignificant issues to
overshadow the principal matter which should be the levying of tangible
pressure on the part that is refusing to abide by the very points of agreement
it signed to adhere.
Now it seems the diplomatic and political thread
that is linking UNSG and the guarantors on one side and the Eritrean government
on the other is nearing to breaking point mainly due to the high dose of
indifference exhibited by UNSG and the guarantors to Eritrea’s repeated plea
for the parties to abide by international laws and norms and to apply
meaningful pressure on the belligerent party to allow the border commission to
demarcate the border based acceptable international practices.
In his recent interviews the Ethiopian prime
minister, who has been caught in an Intractable internal political situation
couldn't help himself from indirectly asking the sympathetic western powers to
apply UNSC’s chapter seven on Eritrea for imposing the helicopter flight ban on
UNMEE. Here is how the diplomatic savvy but inherently insincere prime mister
of Ethiopia put it:
“We have a ceasefire agreement signed sometime
in the early summer of 2000 and the final agreement which was signed at the end
of 2000. Now the ceasefire agreement, among other things includes provisions
for the Security Council to act on the basis of Chapter Seven of its charter in
the event that the ceasefire agreement has been violated by one or the other
side. Therefore, I think it is worth pointing out that the activities of UNMEE,
which are based on the ceasefire agreement, are backed by the powers of the
Security Council to invoke Chapter Seven provisions to see to it that the
ceasefire agreement remains intact. “
Given the past experience, it wouldn’t be far
fetched to assume the prime minister’s plea might find some sympathetic ears
from the same powers that have been turning deaf ears to Eritrea’s request
which was nothing more than asking the US-led guarantors and UNSC to live up to
their international obligations and prevent Ethiopia and Eritrea from relapsing
to battle field horrors.
The prime mister’s diplomatic savvy-ness would
lead him no where if there was a fair judge on the situation.Such rhetoric, from the leader of a
government that has been rejecting the final and binding verdict of EEBC could
be only interpreted as shooting his own foot. First and foremost, rejecting the
corner stone of the Algers agreement, which is abiding by EEBC verdict is the
first major blow to the peace agreement. And, such rejection couldn’t be window
dressed by beautiful words like “accepting in principle “and “open ended
dialogs” mantras. If this prime minister is committed for lasting peace between
the two nations, what he has to do is accept the verdict then both nations
could proceeded to normalizing relations and nursing the wounds inflicted on
their people by the unfortunate war.
The whole notion of Meles’ five point plan and
“accepting in principle” is shrouded by insincerity and cover ups. If the prime
mister is so worried about the fact that allowing the border to be demarcated
by the rendered verdict could run the risk of splitting villages and
cemeteries, he shouldn’t worry about the occurrences of those matters as the
EEBC verdict fully accommodates such concerns based on normal international
practices in demarcating any border. EEBC clearly stated that the need for dialogue
to deal with “theanomalies and impracticalities “. In fact, on 4 February 2005,
the border commission has invited both parties to
come to London start dialogue based accepted international practices. Eritrea
in line with its total acceptance of the EEBC verdict accepted the invitation;
however, Ethiopia refused to attend any meetings chaired by the border
commission that includes its own candidates. That venue would have been an
opportunity to address the so called “anomalies and impracticalities” and the
border commission would have applied its power and mandate in interpreting
which ones anomalies and impraticlaities. Because neither parties should be
given the right to interpret those geographical terms as the term
impracticality and anomalies could be stretched as claiming the ownership right
of places as vast as Badme and its environs. So no party could use the so
called impractically and anomalies loopholes to acquire what is lost in the
court of law.
That is exactly the reason why prime minister
refused to attend the proposed London meeting and the response from the border
commission had clearly exposed Prime Minister Meles’ spin to thwart the whole
peace process under the cover of “an open ended dialogue.
This how the border commission expressed its
sadness to UNSG Koffie Anan on Ethiopia’s refusal to dialogue with Eritrea
under the auspices of the border commission to clear any obstacles in regard to
the so called “anomalies and impracticalities:
Ethiopia
is not prepared to allow demarcation to continue in the manner laid down in the
Demarcation Directions and in accordance with the timeline set by the
Commission. It now insists on prior “dialogue” but
has rejected the opportunity for such “dialogue” within the
framework of the demarcation process provided by the Commission’s proposal to
meet with the Parties on 22 February. This is the latest in a series of
obstructive actions taken since the summer of 2002 and belies the frequently
professed acceptance by Ethiopia of the Delimitation Decision.”
The
above remark from the border commission has clearly indicated to the whole
world that Ethiopian prime mister call for dialogue is not to save villages,
cemeteries, two room clinics and seasonal rivers from splitting between the
countries but to render the border verdict null and void under the cover up of
an open end dialogues. There could be no other qualified and legal vehicle to
address anomalies and impracticality than the border commission and rejecting
such venues to bring the border saga to its logical conclusion is nothing but a
futile attempt to hoodwink the international community and the impoverished
people of Eritrea and Ethiopia. You can’t ask for dialogue while you are
refusing to attend one. This is the prime example of the popular saying that
you can’t have your cake and eaten too!! This saying also applies to UNSC as it
has been calling the two parties for dialogue but ignoring the fact that the
EEBC sponsored dialogue was rejected by Ethiopia. May be now, it is high time for UNSC to specifically
mention that any dialogue should be according rules and regulation laid by
Ethiopian government as it seems to brush aside the dialogue proposed by its
own border commission which has the power and mandate to solve any arising
issues between the two parties.
While
those are the facts surrounding the Ethio-Eritrean border problem, the
guarantors of the Alger’s peace agreement and the united nation secretary
general have chosen the path of appeasing the belligerent party and brought the
situation to the present dangerous scenario. So there is nothing could offer
the united nation’s general secretary any sanctuary from the dire incompetence
he has showed in dealing with Ethio-Eritrean border saga. In his latest
interview in regard to the ban of helicopter’s flight in security zone (TMZ), the
secretary general threatened to pull out of the Ethio-Eritrean border and also expressed his organization’s
uneasy relationship with Eritrea. However, for sake honesty, he should also
tell the world the origin of these “uneasy relations” instead of trying to
justify his position by invoking Eritrea’s uneasy experience with other
organizations. It is true, Eritrea is going through uneasy relations with some
organizations but that shouldn’t be the concern of the united nation’s
secretary general. It is bilateral issue and those organizations should deal
with it. The primary concern of the UNSG should be why is his organization
experiencing uneasy relationship with this tiny horn of Africa nation.
The
origin of the uneasy relationship with Eritrea is his biased stand on the
border issue, his repeated attempts to accommodate Ethiopia’s demands by coming
up with new and fresh proposals in direct contradiction of EEBC verdict to
further complicate the issue at hand. By doing so, he has succeeded in bringing
the issue to the present dangerous situation, so the good secretary can’t evade
the world and certainly Eritreans for his wrong actions that nullified the
efforts of UNMEE and the wastage of hundreds of millions dollars down the
drain! This will be a black spot in his legacy as secretary general of the
united nation from black Africa as he failed to carry out his responsibility
and obligation. And, history will judge him for not siding with truth and for
belittling and ridiculing the decisions the organizational arms of UN like the
international court of justice!!
So the
blame for the current impasse should lie squarely on the shoulders of the
United Nations secretary general and the generators of the Algers peace
agreement whose indifference emboldened the embattled prime minister of
Ethiopia to practice the law of the jungle and bring the region to vicious
cycle of instability!!
Ref.:
1. http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/933aba48db7aaaee01388c9f93614934.htm
2. http://dehai.org/demarcation-watch/
