A Week in the Horn

      08/08/2008 

• A turning point for the Algiers Agreements

• Eritrean Prisoners of Conscience

• Somalia’s Joint Security and High Level Committees to meet next week

• Ethiopia, Human Rights and reporting for International Human Rights Instruments

• Regional Cooperation and the future for IGAD

• The United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 1827 (2008) on 30 July 2008, terminating UNMEE’s mandate effective as of 31 July. The resolution once again reiterated and reaffirmed the fact that the primary responsibility for achieving a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the border dispute and normalizing relations rested with Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Security Council also regretted “that Eritrea’s obstructions towards the United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) reached a level so as to undermine the basis of the Mission’s mandate and compelled UNMEE to temporarily relocate from Eritrea,.” The Security Council’s resolution was crystal clear that Eritrea was responsible for the untimely termination of UNMEE’s mandate through the numerous restrictions it imposed on UNMEE, enforcing an undignified departure on the United Nations peacekeepers. In a letter he wrote to the President of the Security Council on July 31, the President of Eritrea rejected Resolution 1827(2008), referring to what he called the Council’s “abdication of legal responsibility”, and claiming Resolution 1827 has no legal substance. The President of Eritrea reproached the Council for failing to enforce the Boundary Commission’s decision, claiming “might is not, and cannot, be right”, a change from his views as expressed in an interview with the Washington Post in 1998 when he specified that “might is right”.  

It is ironic that Eritrea rejects the resolution that terminates UNMEE so shortly after it forced UNMEE out of Eritrea in a humiliating manner. Eritrea’s obstruction of UNMEE started with the impediment that Eritrea placed on the Mission’s ability to provide necessary assistance to the Boundary Commission’s staff in the Eastern Sector in 2003 as part of its objection to pillar emplacement despite its empty rhetoric for demarcation. Mr. Lloyd Axworthy, former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Canada and the Special Envoy of the United Nations Secretary General, visited Ethiopia and was received by Ethiopia’s leaders; Eritrea refused to see the Special Envoy. Ethiopia decided to allow United Nations aircraft to fly directly between Asmara and Addis Ababa; Eritrea refused to do so. The Secretary General submitted numerous reports to the Security Council demonstrating that Eritrea’s continued restrictions on UNMEE's movements resulted in the Mission’s inability to discharge its mandate in accordance with the Agreement on Cessation of Hostilities. The Security Council adopted resolution 1640(2005) condemning Eritrea’s restrictions on UNMEE helicopter flights and the additional restrictions on UNMEE’s freedom of movement. On 6 December 2005, Eritrea sent a letter to UNMEE expelling members of UNMEE who were nationals of the United States of America, Canada and European states including the Russian Federation, from the country within ten days; this was condemned by a Security Council Presidential statement. In December 2005, the Security Council was led to relocate military and civilian staff of UNMEE from Eritrea to Ethiopia “solely in the interests of the safety and security of UNMEE staff”. A statement by the President of the Security Council noted: “The lack of cooperation with UNMEE by the Eritrean authorities has produced conditions on the ground which prevents UNMEE implementing its mandate satisfactorily”; UNMEE’s mandate included the provision of necessary assistance to the Commission’s staff on the ground.  

Given all this, the latest statement circulated by the Eritrean delegation at the time of the July 30th meeting of the Security Council (intended for delivery but cancelled at the last minute) can only be called blatantly hypocritical. It refers to the Eritrean Government’s “appreciation to the men and women in blue helmets...for their accomplishments in the past eight years...thanks also go to the troops contributing countries and to the countries who made the necessary technical, financial as well as material support for the deployment of UNMEE...”.  

It is clear that Eritrea has done everything in its power to prevent progress in the peace process, making demarcation impossible through insurmountable barriers. Ethiopia’s commitment to peaceful resolution of the conflict and its concrete and workable peace proposals have repeatedly been rejected by Eritrea. Ethiopia has been left with no option but to wait for Eritrea to realize that the only option available to the two countries is peaceful resolution of the conflict either through direct discussion and dialogue, or through the facilitation of a third party. 

• On June 11 this year, 64 UN member states sponsored the UN Declaration on Prisoners of Conscience, calling for a global commitment to work for the freedom of prisoners of conscience, and to make their release a key international priority. The Declaration called on all UN Member States to reaffirm their commitment, embodied in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, adopted in December 1948, that all may have the rights of freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of assembly and association, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freely express their opinions, and assemble freely without fear of reprisal. On July 24, a Panel Discussion was held at the UN in New York to underline the issue of Prisoners of Conscience. The panel was addressed by Ms. Senait Yohannes, whose sister and brother-in-law have remained imprisoned in Eritrea for five and seven years respectively. Senait's brother-in-law, former foreign minister, Petros Solomon, was arrested and imprisoned without charge or trial in September 2001, as one of the G15 group of senior government officials and ministers who had addressed a letter of concern about government policies to President Issayas. The letter called for the implementation of the Constitution which was ratified in 1997 but never implemented. Senait's sister, Aster Yohannes, traveled to Asmara to care for their four children after studying in Phoenix, Arizona. Aster was arrested on arrival at Asmara airport on December 23, 2003. As Ms. Senait Yohannes told the panel, she has not been seen or heard from since. She has not been charged and the government has given no reason for her continued detention in solitary confinement. “To date she has not been allowed any visits from her children or family members”; her only “crime” is apparently “being the wife of former foreign minister and (present) prisoner of conscience, Petros Solomon”. Surprisingly, there has been hardly any serious attempt to pursue her case by international human rights organizations.  Ms Senait Yohannes told the panel that the regime had criminalized dissent in Eritrea; it had closed down all private media and imprisoned journalists. “One of those journalists who have been languishing in prison since September 2001”, she said, “is a high school schoolmate of mine. He was top of his school...fought for Eritrean independence and he is a very gifted writer and journalist. No one knows his whereabouts for the last seven years.” Ms. Senait Yohannes said there was no one advocating for the rights of prisoners of conscience in Eritrea. She appealed to the United Nations to apply pressure on Eritrea to free all prisoners of conscience. She suggested a number of steps to be taken, including diplomatic pressure to abide by international rules, to make aid funds conditional on the state of human rights in Eritrea, to adopt a travel ban on senior officials, support Eritrean organizations fighting on behalf of prisoners of  conscience and efforts to take legal actions against the Eritrean regime, to assist Eritrean refugees who risked their lives to flee across Eritrean borders to neighboring countries and provide education, job training and resettlement programs for those in the refugee camps in Sudan and Ethiopia. Ms. Senait also urged the UN to demand that the Eritrean regime allowed the ICRC to visit prisoners on conscience in Eritrea, some of whom had been in jail for more than a decade. Without any visiting rights, or any sort of communication, she said, families do not know whether they are alive or dead, and remain in a never-ending state of anxiety. 

• The political crisis in Mogadishu sparked off last week by the dismissal of Mohamed Dhere, the Mayor of Mogadishu, by Prime Minister Nur Hassan ‘Adde’ and the refusal of President Abdullahi Yusuf to accept the move, continues. Eleven ministers from the Prime Minister’s 15 strong cabinet resigned and the Prime Minster made six new appointments though these have yet to be ratified by the President. Prime Minister Nur Hassan ‘Adde’ has made it clear he will not resign. This afternoon, the AU Peace and Security Council expressed its deep concern at the difficulties facing the TFG and the resignation of the cabinet ministers. It urged Somali leaders to show “a unity of purpose and take all steps required to enhance the cohesion of the Transitional Federal Institutions to consolidate the progress made following the Djibouti Agreement”. The Council also called on the UN Security Council to authorize the early deployment of a peacekeeping operation to take over from AMISOM, and, in the meantime, the establishment of an international stabilization force, as called for in the Djibouti Agreement. The UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Somalia, Amedou Ould-Abdullah has also expressed his concern over the current problems facing the administration, calling on all Somalis to work together for peace and reconciliation. He said the authorities should remain focused on peace, calling on the President, the Speaker of Parliament, the Prime Minister and all MPs to move forward. Mr. Ould-Abdallah said it was particularly unfortunate that this situation arose at a time when the parties signing the Djibouti Agreement had just submitted the names of participants for the Joint Security Committee, tasked to follow up on the implementation of security arrangements agreed at Djibouti, and the High Level Committee which deals with political cooperation, justice and reconciliation. The two committees will be holding their first meetings shortly in Djibouti. This was, Mr. Ould-Abdallah said, an important step by the TFG and the ARS, demonstrating their commitment to the Djibouti Agreement. The ARS leader, Sheikh Sharif, has been in Cairo this week with a large delegation. His visit is part of a longer itinerary visiting a number of Arab and European countries and the US to try and drum up support for the Djibouti Agreement. The ARS has called on the international community to play an important role in the peace process. Meanwhile, on Sunday in Mogadishu, a bomb killed 20 women, and injured 47, five of whom later died. Most were part of a street cleaning group clearing rubbish on Maka Al Mukerama Road for a food for work program. Nobody has claimed responsibility for this atrocity but there is a widespread belief that the bomb had been placed by Al-Shabaab terrorists as part of its campaign to disrupt the political reconciliation process and international humanitarian relief aid to Somalia.  

• On Wednesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) held a National Consolidation Workshop on Ethiopia’s draft report to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). It was organized with the technical assistance of the Regional Office for East Africa of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).  The workshop, one of eleven recommendations of the  “National Conference on Ethiopia’s Reporting Obligations under International Human Rights Instruments” held last October, was one of the activities of a joint MFA and EHRC project to encourage the production of  the Government's overdue reports to Human Rights Treaty Bodies. The project is also intended to put in place a permanent national mechanism to enable the Government to submit its reports regularly, and build up the capacity of relevant government and national human rights institutions as well as civil society organizations dealing with human rights. Three technical-training workshops for relevant stakeholders, covering the functioning of Treaty Bodies and on guidelines for producing these reports, have already been held. The project allows for legal experts based in the MFA to collect information and draft the overdue treaty specific reports; for specific persons within government institutions to provide relevant information for the various reports; for a drafting committee to work closely with the legal experts and assist in the production and editing of the reports; and for a national ad hoc committee from the relevant ministries to oversee the treaty reporting process and issue a time-line for submitting overdue reports within the next two years.

This will add to the significant measures already undertaken by the Government of Ethiopia to promote and protect human rights. These included harmonizing the legal system with Ethiopia's Federal Constitution and its international obligations. Since the establishment of the new political system in 1991, the Government has steadily been taking various administrative, judicial and other measures to ensure the implementation of these obligations. Despite efforts to comply with its obligations under the various treaties, Ethiopia has yet to produce the required reports to CERD and other relevant bodies. This latest measure, the National Consolidation Workshop attended by relevant stakeholders, reviewed the Common Core Document and the report for CERD. The workshop enabled civil society participants to provide input for the draft report, and participants stressed the need to involve civil society in the process of preparation at earlier stages. Those present included representatives of government agencies, the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, the Office of the Ombudsman, and civil society organizations concerned in particular with human rights. The report to CERD will be submitted after incorporating the changes suggested by the workshop.  

• In June this year, the Heads of State and Government of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) met in IGAD's 12^th ordinary summit in Addis Ababa. IGAD is made up of Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda, with Eritrea having suspended its membership. The meeting, at which Ethiopia assumed the chair of IGAD in succession to Kenya, reviewed the political and security situation of the region and accepted the call by the IGAD Council of Ministers for revitalization of the organization. The Summit’s final communiqué directed the IGAD Secretariat to undertake an inventory of what IGAD had achieved so far in terms of harmonization and regional integration, and develop regional integration policies to increase IGAD's relevance as a building block for the AU. It decided to call for an Extraordinary Council of Ministers meeting and if necessary an Extraordinary Summit before the end of the year, to encourage revitalization. Noting the implications of Eritrea's suspension of membership for the region, and for IGAD, it nominated Kenya and Sudan to work to convince Eritrea to reconsider its decision.  Eritrea's presence is required for IGAD's longer term development in peace and security, in economic development, in regional commitment to the African Union, and for IGAD's overall effectiveness. It is an integral part of IGAD and the region. It is seriously meaningful for regional security and must not be allowed to hold the region hostage.

In his speech to the summit, Prime Minister Meles underlined the importance of IGAD as  the “regional mechanism for cooperation and integration,” and its value for advancing the collective interests of a region which the AU Summit in July 2006 recognized as one of the Regional Economic Communities for African integration and as a building block for the African Union. In fact, embarrassingly, IGAD is currently the least effective of the RECs. One problem is that some members do not appear sufficiently committed. One country is seriously in arrears on its membership payments, and another substantially so, suggesting a lack of interest in the organization. Others have had, and still have, chequered bilateral relations which have affected IGAD’s capacity for action. Yet, as we must all be well aware, commitment is essential if IGAD is to fulfill its aims and ideals, and produce a communality of the Horn of Africa, of the whole sub-region.  

There is indeed no alternative to cooperation. Cooperation, together with commitment to pursue common objectives, is the only way to begin to resolve the problems of the sub-region; IGAD is the only available multilateral organization for the people of the Horn of Africa. IGAD is our regional organization, an organization particularly well-placed to understand and deal with our own specific regional problems. One cannot be oblivious to the divisions and conflicts that affect this region, and the implications that they have for investment and for addressing the root causes of humanitarian problems. The pursuit of interests at the national level may not be totally avoidable but there is no reason why this reality should be an impediment to the realization of common objectives which are based on the communalities that we all share. There is no necessity for the national interests of individual countries which face common challenges to be in conflict with their collective interests as developing nations. This is the conviction that Ethiopia is driven by and this is its vision it has for IGAD.    

Regional problems do not confine themselves to any single state. They spill over and affect us all. We do not, in fact, have any opti but to share, to cooperate over solutions. Reaching accommodation is equally a necessity if we are to be taken seriously by the International Community, to be treated with the seriousness that we deserve and should merit. If we are not, it will be, partly at least, our own fault. There is every reason why we might feel the International Community should take IGAD seriously, but this also means IGAD must prove that it is worthy to be taken seriously, that it can produce the framework within which it can solve its own problems, that it has the capacity to cooperate and resolve its differences through negotiations, that its members are prepared to act in accordance with international norms.  

While the groundwork may have been already laid for future developments, what continues to hold the region back is the failure to demonstrate whole-hearted commitment to common objectives, to implement the necessary cooperation, to demonstrate the relevant maturity and ability to rise above our differences. We have the ability to turn no-win into win-win situations. When we fail to do so, simply because we fail to accept the value of collaborative efforts, it is hardly surprising that the International Community is unprepared to treat our region, our regional organization, with the seriousness it deserves and needs.  

As Foreign Minister Seyoum noted in June it is imperative that IGAD is strengthened “to embark on the new chapter of integration, to allow it to play its full role [on behalf] of the interests of our peoples, and for Africa”. This year, IGAD is facing a particular and widespread humanitarian crisis as well as continued undermining of stability. There are other major long-term challenges including peace and security, malnutrition, disease, climate change. They all demand urgent action. They need harmonized and coordinated IGAD policies, programs and activities. Minister Seyoum pointed out: “We need real and sustained commitment by member states, all member states, to the greater effectiveness of the organization, and to its revitalization.” No one can deny that this is both achievable and desirable, eminently beneficial and worthwhile. No one can seriously deny that cooperation and dialogue, collaboration and discourse must provide the way forward. A good deal of attention is usually paid to a country’s need to speak with a collective voice, to identify and speak to its national interests. It is self-evident that certain common interests overshadow political differences. It is equally certain that the region needs a collective voice which transcends the differences between member states and allows the common regional interests of the Horn of Africa to be promoted.  

The possibilities provided by an active and revitalized IGAD are virtually limitless. There is an all-too-obvious value in having economies of organization, structure, scale and, quite simply cooperation, in the face of the current enormous problems, particularly the present humanitarian crisis now affecting the whole region. There are numerous examples where collaboration and coordination, joint concerted action, would obviously benefit all. The desirability and advantages of cooperation and dialogue do not really have to be spelt out. IGAD countries may have different policies and politics but none of these need impact on levels of economic activity, encouragement of peace and security for the region, the relevance or value of discussion, or of cooperation. The IGAD region makes up a unit with defined borders. Rationally, we must work to encourage unified thinking about regional development and security. There is no dispute that our region needs development and the promotion of peace. IGAD was established with a view to creating real and lasting regional cooperation. We have the very real option of implementing this vision. It will be in the interests of all IGAD states, without any exception, to realize this vision. This is a time to encourage re-commitment to IGAD, to underline the necessity for all states to demonstrate their dedication to IGAD and the concept of genuine cooperation and collaboration in pursuit of common objectives which promote the interests of all the countries and peoples of the region. This is a vision to which Ethiopia is committed and is determined to pursue without fail.