·
It is now
becoming clear that UNMEE’s formal existence is about to come to an end. Of
course,de facto,UNMEE is at present as good as dead already. What the
Security Council is debating is how to terminate UNMEE formally. There is a
draft resolution which is on the table at the Security Council. Apart from
the provision on the termination of UNMEE, which does not appear to be too
controversial, the other key provisions relate to a possible mechanism for
ensuring a UN presence in the area. Ethiopia has made it clear that any
possible UN presence after the demise of UNMEE can not be based on the same
principles. This was communicated by the Ethiopian Prime Minister to the
Security Council in a letter he sent to the President of the Council on 17
June, 2008. In the same letter, Prime Minister Meles did emphasize the fact
that Ethiopia would keep an open mind in terms of cooperating with the UN
and the Security Council with respect to a UN presence in Ethiopia in line
with principles related to the maintenance of regional peace and security.
On the other hand, in a letter addressed to the President of the Security
Council, the Eritrean President made it quite clear to the Council that it
can not count on the cooperation of Eritrea with respect to future UN
engagement or UN presence in the area following the formal termination of
UNMEE.There seems to be one serious problem with the on-going debate at the
Security Council. In its preambular part, the draft talks about delimitation
and demarcation determinations in a rather confusing manner and in a way
that would make it difficult to make progress. Ethiopia has repeatedly
pointed out that appeasing Eritrea would not ensure progress.
·
This week
the UN Security Council asked the Secretary-General to send a fact-finding
mission to the border between Eritrea and Djibouti, to investigate Eritrean
incursions into Djibouti territory. A Council statement on Tuesday
reiterated its earlier call to both countries, especially Eritrea, to
withdraw forces to the status quo ante. It also voiced regret that Eritrea
had not seen fit to answer calls made in a June 12 statement in which the
Security Council called on both parties, and Eritrea in particular, to
commit themselves to a ceasefire, exercise maximum restraint and cooperate
with diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the crisis. In
Tuesday's statement, the Council said Djibouti and Eritrea must facilitate
the work of the Secretary-General's fact-finding mission, and asked
Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon to report back within two weeks. In a
statement to the Council, Djibouti's Prime Minister, Deleita Mohamed Deleita,
said Djibouti fully supported the idea of a fact-finding mission. He noted
that Eritrea while failing to explain its presence inside Djibouti and
refusing to resume any dialogue, had continued to reinforce its troops. The
Prime Minister noted that the area concerned is a key point for shipping and
is of strategic military importance. Djibouti had originally expressed its
concern to the Security Council at the beginning of May after a number of
regional initiatives had failed to achieve any Eritrean response. Both the
Arab League and the African Union had urged restraint and their respective
Peace and Security Councils had sent missions. Neither had been received by
Eritrea. It is to be recalled that the recent IGAD Summit held in Addis
Ababa had condemned Eritrea for its belligerent attitude towards Djibouti
In a typical Eritrean denial of known facts, Eritrea's Permanent
Representative to the UN,
Araya
Desta, denied
any invasion of Djibouti territory, claiming Eritrea had no territorial
ambitions in the region. He claimed there had been numerous contacts,
including at the highest level, and the leaders had agreed to address the
situation calmly but then Djibouti had launched “totally unwarranted,
anti-Eritrea hostile campaigns”. He told the Council that the criticism of
Eritrea was all unfounded. Far from Eritrea attacking Djibouti, the reverse
was the case. For the first time, Eritrea did admit there had been fighting,
but this, the ambassador claimed, had been because Djibouti troops had
attacked Eritrean units at the border. This, he said, had been at the behest
of the US and Ethiopia, and was an attempt to provoke Eritrea. Council
members did not seem to have been impressed with Eritrea's
misrepresentations. They demonstrated broad sympathy with Djibouti and
expressed strong concern on the need to avoid any escalation of fighting.
Most seemed frustrated, and alienated, by Eritrea's actions and its refusal
to moderate its behaviour. The Senior Political Advisor to the AU noted that
Eritrea still refused to allow entry to the AU assessment and consultation
team although Djibouti had done so. A representative of the Arab League said
the Arab League had also been unable to get any response from Eritrean
officials. The US recalled its support for the June 12 statement and
categorized Eritrea as remaining in a hostile military posture towards
Djibouti. It suggested the Council should consider measures if Eritrea
continued its present course, noting that Eritrea had been a destabilizing
factor in Somalia, and had put many obstacles in the way of UNMEE. It was
not, however, too late for it to restore its position as a good neighbour.
The UK which reiterated the need for acceptance of the June 12 statement
that had condemned Eritrea's incursion, also paid tribute to the AU and the
Arab League and others for efforts to resolve the issue and urged Eritrea to
engage with these activities. France noted the border dispute had now become
an international affair and it was essential that Eritrea respected the June
12 statement. Djibouti, it pointed out, had already withdrawn its troops as
requested. Eritrea had not. In fact, Security Council members, including
Libya, unanimously called on Eritrea to respect the statement of June 12 and
respond promptly to it.
·
The third
round of the Somali peace process is expected to resume next week in Jeddah,
and then move to Mecca, for the signing of agreements reached at the end of
negotiations. It will be recalled that the Transitional Federal Government (TFG)
of Somalia and the opposition Alliance for the Re-liberation of Somalia (ARS)
signed an agreement on 9 June in which both parties committed themselves to
resolve the Somali crisis through peaceful means. Furthermore, the two
parties agreed to establish committees to implement the agreement
effectively. The details of these have yet to be worked out. Meanwhile,
despite numerous calls by different groups in Somalia and the Diaspora, the
ARS splinter group, led by Sheikh Hassan Dahir 'Aweys', still based in
Asmara continues to reject the peace process. Apparently quoting Eritrea,
Sheikh Aweys has called on an 'innocent' Saudi Arabia not to be lured into a
process which, amounts to a wishful thinking, and is a waste of time. Sheikh
Aweys argues that those trying to make peace in Somalia have the ulterior
motive of trying to amass money and power.
Al-Shabaab terrorists have also continued to try and disrupt support for the
peace process. Yesterday, Al-Shabaab attacked an Ugandan contingent from
AMISOM forces at KM-4. The Ugandan peacekeepers replied forcefully
dislodging their attackers. Al-Shabaab also attacked Daynile police station,
killing nine police officers and burning the police station as well as the
residence of a member of the TFG parliament. These incidents occurred after
Al-Shabaab became aware of the appearance of a peace movement to back
implementation of the Djibouti peace accord which was getting the support of
local residents. In fact, a strong movement is appearing on the ground in
Mogadishu and more widely, in which numerous stakeholders, the TFG, clan
leaders and civil society groups, including even Islamic Courts Union
sympathizers, have begun to work for the implementation of the Djibouti
agreement. The movement poses a clear threat to Al-Shabaab operations and
support. It is a clear indication that with the success of the peace accord
concluded in Djibouti, people are finally prepared to challenge Al-Shabaab
terrorists on the ground. This is also happening on the eve of preparations
for the third round negotiations of the peace process, and the movement
needs all the support it can get. The international community, all other
stakeholders and those who have serious concern for the success of this
effort at peace-making in Somalia need to be vigilant and ready to tackle
the challenges these terrorist groups pose.
This week, Somaliland's President Dahir Rayale Kahin paid a visit to
Djibouti to express the solidarity of the people of Somaliland, and of his
government, with the people and government of Djibouti faced by the recent
Eritrean aggression. During his visit the two sides held extensive bilateral
discussions on regional and other issues of common concern. They agreed to
resume the bilateral relationship that was strained some years earlier.
According to the understanding reached, both will open offices in each
other's capital cities as soon as possible.
·
Two weeks ago, Human Rights Watch (HRW) produced a report on human
rights in the Somali Regional State of Ethiopia. As we previously noted this
report made no effort to address the reality of the situation on the ground.
It made no attempt to consult with the Federal Government or, more
pertinently, the Somali Regional State Government. Its allegations were
made exclusively on the basis of information collected from exiled
supporters of an organization which even HRW has finally admitted has been
responsible for numerous human rights abuses in the Somali Regional State.
Despite this reluctant admission, HRW gives little hope that any more
balanced or accurate reports can be expected in the future. The credibility
of its approach to evidence is emphasized by the way it welcomed satellite
photographs as a demonstration of support for its claims that the Ethiopian
army had been burning villages in the Ogaden. No satellite image can, of
course, do anything of the sort. They can demonstrate that a village may
have been removed, possibly burnt, but there is no way it can support any
claim of responsibility. HWR’s bias against Ethiopia becalms all the more
apparent when one takes in to account the fact that there is plenty of
evidence that the ONLF has burnt numerous villages belonging to government
supporters in recent years. The facile acceptance of all such allegations
with little or no effort to investigate the affiliations of its sources, or
their accuracy, is typical of HRW's view of its own role and importance.
What is of greater concern is that others accept HRW's own evaluation of its
reports, repeating HRW claims without any check on their political aims and
intentions. The ONLF has carried out numerous terrorist actions,
exemplified, but not limited to murderous slaughter of over seventy Chinese
and Ethiopian workers, including women and children, most shot in bed or
lining up for breakfast. It has thrown bombs into public gatherings,
consistently planted land mines which have blown up civilian vehicles,
including buses, assassinated police and government officials and killed
clan elders and others critical of its terrorist activities. Little of this
makes it into HRW's reports which have consistently concentrated on what
ONLF supporters and sympathizers tell it. Of course, it might be possible
that for HRW, groups such as the ONLF might not be dangerous terrorist
organizations no matter how deeply they might in fact carry out terrorism
against countries such as Ethiopia because, as David Shinn said in a recent
article, these are simply domestic terrorist acts which can not rise to the
level of international terrorism to which much greater importance is
attached by key actors within the international community. Obviously, HRW
can not be counted on as an objective judge of the danger that groups such
as the ONLF represent in the Horn of Africa. By the same token, one can
assume that HRW has the right kind of mindset to give credence to ONLF’s
fabrications.
·
On Tuesday, Ato
Seyoum Mesfin,
the Minister of Foreign Affairs
presented the ministry's ten month performance report to the House of
Peoples’ Representatives. This is a regular requirement for the Minister and
indeed for all ministries and government administrative bodies. On this
occasion, the report comes at a time when the ministry is deeply involved in
the implementation of the civil service program and is engaged in
introducing the findings of the "Business Process Re-engineering" (BPR)
study. This will bring about significant change in the ministry and the
Minister made it clear he attached prime attention to the project. The
ministry had therefore assigned “change agents” to provide the necessary
manpower to support the process. The ministry is currently working on a
draft proclamation, the Foreign Service Proclamation, which would provide
firm foundation for the institutional transformation of the Ministry, among
other things, by clearly defining the rights and responsibilities of the
staff of the Ministry.
In his report, the Minister highlighted the work that had been done in Addis
Ababa and by the forty-two Ethiopian missions abroad, to encourage support
abroad for the government strategies of poverty reduction and sustainable
development. He said the Ministry had, by its concerted efforts, played a
major role in creating the necessary conditions for this. In presenting the
report, the Minister also underlined the successes achieved in economic
diplomacy over the past ten months, successes that were applauded by the
House of Peoples’ Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee in particular
and members of parliament more generally.
In political diplomacy, the ministry had inevitably been forced to
concentrate on the activities of Eritrea. Other major regional issues which
had been the preoccupation of the Ministry have been the peace in Somalia
and other conflict situations in the region. A lot of attention has also
been given by the Ministry over the ten months to developing all round
cooperation with the countries of the region, states on the African
Continent, the Middle East, Asia, Europe and North America. During the
reporting period, the Ministry had responded to the illegal activities of
the Eritrean regime in relation to the Algiers Agreement, and the Temporary
Security Zone. It had given wide publicity to Eritrea's continual violations
of the TSZ and of the whole Algiers Peace Process. It had made clear that
the so-called 'virtual demarcation' was no more than a legal nonsense with
nothing to do with the Algiers Agreement or the reality of boundary
demarcation. The Algiers Agreement, he pointed out, dealt with delimitation
and demarcation on the ground not 'virtua'l demarcation. Responding to
comments and questions from members of parliament, the Minister said both
regional and international organizations had criticized Eritrea on numerous
occasions, and he argued that the international community, and particularly
the UN, was now duty bound to impose sanctions on the Eritrean regime for
its irresponsible behavior towards UNMEE and international peacekeeping. On
Somalia, the Minister said there had been encouraging results in the efforts
to consolidate Somalia's institutions. He pointed out that it was now clear
there was a very real window of opportunity for the Somalia peace process to
make real progress. The international community, he underlined, should not
miss the opportunity; it was high time to act accordingly. As far as the
Ethio-Sudan border was concerned, the Minister pointed out that while the
government had embarked on survey activity along the border, it had not yet
started any demarcation process. There had been a propaganda campaign
against the government launched by elements in the Diaspora claiming that
the government had ceded land to Sudan. As the Ministry had made it clear,
these allegations were absolutely unfounded. The Minister also noted the
vital role Ethiopia is playing in peacekeeping mission activity in Africa.
In terms of its contributions to UN peace keeping, Ethiopia stands 7th in
the world. It had, the Minister said, demonstrated its sincere commitment
and devotion to peace and stability in the region not only in principle but
also in practice.
As for Public Diplomacy, this remained a priority area for the ministry. The
ministry had exerted its utmost efforts to build up the image of the
country, publicizing the policies and positions of the government on various
critical issues. He admitted there had been a problem because of the way the
world's most prominent human rights organization and a number of
international media outlets had deliberately publicized fabricated stories
to tarnish the image of Ethiopia. They had in fact launched what could only
be described as a smear campaign against Ethiopia. The Minister emphasized
that the Ministry had been explaining and defending government policies and
where relevant and necessary challenging errors and misrepresentations. The
Minister noted that the Ministry had carried out a lot of activity in
"constituency building" in the Diaspora, and had registered tangible results
in encouraging Ethiopians, and people of Ethiopian origin living abroad, to
provide positive support for the ongoing development efforts in the country.
The Foreign, Defense and Security Affairs Standing Committee of the House of
Peoples' Representatives welcomed the report, describing it as clear and to
the point. The Committee felt the report demonstrated a satisfactory focus
of attention and success in most areas of ministerial activity. In his
concluding remarks, the Minister expressed his own commitment, and the
commitment of the ministry, to increase still further the progress achieved
in economic as well as political and public diplomacy.