Dear Mr. Evans,

I am writing to you in connection with the International Crisis Group’s latest Policy Briefing: Ethiopia and Eritrea: Stopping the Slide to War (5.11.2007).

This is an extremely disturbing and disappointing document, and indeed a highly dangerous briefing. One has to suppose it is an attempt to influence next week’s Security Council deliberations on the situation between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

It is therefore of profound concern to Ethiopia to note that this briefing contains a considerable number of egregious and extremely serious errors. The most damaging of these is the entirely inaccurate suggestion that Ethiopia has yet to accept the Decisions of the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission. Is not the ICG aware that 18 months ago, at an EEBC meeting on March 10th 2006, the President of the EEBC specifically acknowledged that Ethiopia had accepted the EEBC Delimitation Decision in full, and unconditionally? Indeed, over the last three years, Ethiopia has repeatedly, and publicly, underlined that it is prepared to carry out demarcation at any time according to the EEBC Delimitation Decision and normal international practice. Has not the ICG noticed?

Ethiopia has never said it is considering termination of the Algiers Agreements. It has said, in its September Notification to Eritrea, that it will have to consider any legal and peaceful options if Eritrea continues to refuse to restore the integrity of the demilitarized Temporary Security Zone, to remove all restrictions on UNMEE and to return to full compliance with the Agreements. Eritrea continues to refuse to do so.

Ethiopia, for its part, has called continuously for the full implementation of the Algiers Agreements, including recommitment by both sides to Article 1 of the December 2000 Agreement. This commits both parties to refrain from hostilities. Eritrea continues to reject this.

Ethiopia has never flouted the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement. It is Eritrea which has taken control of the TSZ, sending thousands of troops into the zone, and continuously restricting UNMEE activities. To all intents and purposes it is Eritrea which is now monitoring UNMEE rather than the reverse. Eritrea has repeatedly refused all Security Council demands to restore the integrity of the TSZ. In his most recent report last week (S/2007/645), the UN Secretary-General said: “As underlined in my earlier reports to the Council, the continued presence and deployment of Eritrean Defence Forces and heavy military equipment inside the Temporary Security Zone constitutes a direct violation of the Algiers Agreement of Cessation of Hostilities of 18 June 2000.” The ICG has said nothing about this.

In this context, it is surely willful, even perverse, of the ICG to suggest Ethiopia, rather than Eritrea, should be considered the danger to peace.

Certainly, the situation along the border may indeed not be fully normal. This is because Eritrea, with a long record of aggression, including the invasion of Ethiopia in May 1998, has poured troops into the TSZ and prevented UNMEE from monitoring its activities. As UNMEE can testify, Ethiopia has made no preparations for war. The Secretary-General’s reports and numerous Security Council Resolutions provide ample evidence of Eritrea’s activities.

In these circumstances to give any credence to Eritrean allegations that Ethiopia is preparing to attack seems quite extraordinarily naïve. It would surely make better sense to put pressure on Eritrea to restore the integrity of the Algiers Agreements – immediately and in full.

The aim of a Policy Briefing is presumably to provide accurate and balanced information on which policy makers can make informed decisions. This briefing paper is neither accurate nor balanced. Quite frankly, it appears to be nothing less than an attempt to mislead the deliberations of the Security Council at its meeting on the situation between Ethiopia and Eritrea next week.

I do not know who the author(s) might be, but this briefing appears to have been written by someone who knows nothing of regional political realities, fails to understand either Ethiopia or Eritrea, and is almost entirely ignorant of events over the last five years. The author(s) have obviously not read the Reports of the Secretary-General, particularly his most recent one, or the Resolutions of the Security Council. I can only conclude he (they) have an agenda, and one aimed against Ethiopia.

The end product of this briefing is a number of recommendations which, if implemented, would have exactly the opposite of the expressed aims. Indeed, they appear intended to encourage Eritrean intransigence. Conjectures and invented speculations cannot become certainties. Raising a totally unsubstantiated rumor that Ethiopia is planning a coup in Eritrea, to be supported by the United States, lies in the realm of fantasy. Repetition does not make inaccuracies or absurdities any more plausible.

I have to say that ICG briefings on the Horn of Africa, whether in respect of Ethiopia or Somalia, have not been credible for some time. Regrettably, this policy briefing is no exception.

In view of the extremely serious errors in this briefing, I must ask you to issue an immediate correction in particular with regard to Ethiopia’s full acceptance of the EEBC Delimitation Decision and of its commitment to the demarcation process. I would repeat: Ethiopia remains committed to the full implementation of the Algiers Agreements and the peaceful resolution of all disputes with Eritrea.

Yours sincerely

Tekeda Alemu
State Minister

Mr. Gareth Evans,
President, International Crisis Group
149 Avenue Louise
1050 Brussels
Belgium