Statement of the Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the EU's
conflicting statement regarding the Eritrea-Ethiopia peace process
www.shabait.com
staff
Dec 4, 2004, 18:37

The European Union has issued a conflicting statement this week in
regard to the Eritrea-Ethiopia peace process.

The Government of Eritrea wishes to recall that it is four years now
since Eritrea and Ethiopia singed the Comprehensive Algiers Peace
Agreement under the auspices of the United Nations, the Organization of
African Unity and other key witnesses including the United States, the
European Union and leading African countries. The Algiers Peace Agreement
revolves around these three cardinal tenets:

* Resolution of the border dispute by peaceful means with the formal
signature of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement;

* Delimitation and Demarcation of the border through legal instruments;

* Solemn commitment by the parties to accept the Commission's legal
ruling as final and binding without further recourse to a Court of Appeal
or diplomatic mediation.

Article 14 of Algiers Agreement stipulates that the guarantors of the
Agreement shall invoke Chapter VII of the UN Charter to take punitive
measures against the party that violates the provision of the Agreement.
The underlying rationale for this explicit remedial action was the
pattern of repeated violations of earlier agreements. The fact was Ethiopia
had formally accepted the Framework Agreement, the Modalities of
Implementation and Technical Arrangements at various junctures of the peace
process only to reject them when it had made adequate military
preparations and was about to launch its successive wars of aggression.

Ethiopia had and continues to violate the Algiers Peace Agreement this
time round too and in spite of the punitive provisions embedded in the
Algiers Agreement. Addis Abeba accepted the Boundary Commission
decision with much fanfare when it was announced in April 2002 and even urged
the international community to "pressurize" Eritrea to ensure
expeditious implementation. A couple of months later, Ethiopia began to sing a
different song and took several measures to obstruct demarcation and the
field work of the Boundary Commission. Ethiopia took other provocative
measures, including bringing new settlers to Badme and surrounding
villages. And finally, on 19 September 2003, the Ethiopian Prime Minister
rejected the Boundary Commission decision branding it as "irresponsible,
illegal and unjust."

Unfortunately, the international community preferred to look sideways
and to accommodate Ethiopia's violations rather than take credible
action to ensure compliance. As the Ethiopian Foreign Minister reported to
his Parliament in September this year, Addis Abeba "had never had it so
good." In addition to massive humanitarian support, the international
community provided Ethiopia with 970 million USD of assistance in the
past year. A substantial part of the assistance is budgetary support or
other fungible money that Ethiopia can easily divert to pursue its war
objectives. In this respect, the problem is not only Ethiopia but those
powers in the international community who have the necessary leverage
to promote peace but are refraining from doing so.

The announcement made by Ethiopia last week is hollow in practice
despite unwarranted statements made by some countries "welcoming it as a
step forward." "Acceptance in principle" of the Boundary Commission
decision that the Prime Minister continues to brand as "illegal and unjust"
is not only one step backward. It constitutes a serious violation of the
Algiers Agreement which stipulates, without equivocation, that the
decision is "final and binding."

Furthermore, Ethiopia has made it abundantly clear that it will
continue to obstruct demarcation. Payment of its arrears to the Boundary
Commission and appointment of a Liaison Officer will be meaningless if, in
the same breath, Ethiopia maintains that demarcation will not begin
before and unless there is "dialogue" between the parties. The delimitation
and demarcation of the boundary is not and cannot be predicated on
"dialogue" or "normalization" of relations. The two sovereign nations may
cultivate various levels of bilateral cooperation to promote mutual
benefits. Although not desirable, they may also sever diplomatic ties.
Whatever the case, this cannot, clearly, be a pre-requisite or sine qua non
for demarcating the boundary of a sovereign nation. Eritrea finds
linkages between demarcation of the boundary and other tangential issues of
bilateral relationship both unacceptable and contrary to the provisions
of the Algiers Agreement.

Moreover, this is not a time to entertain or float new initiatives or
"proposals." This is a time to demarcate the boundary which should have
happened much earlier in accordance with the Peace Agreement.

The international community, and particularly the Security Council,
cannot employ different standards to violations of international law. We
hardly need to emphasize that Ethiopia continues to occupy sovereign
Eritrean territories illegally and forcibly. If the Security Council has
adopted Resolution 1559 compelling Syria to withdraw its troops from
Lebanon, what are the moral standards for rationalizing its silence in the
case of Ethiopia? This is the more puzzling since Syria's original
presence in Lebanon appears to have resulted from a formal invitation of a
sovereign Lebanese government.

We hardly need to stress the implications of Ethiopia's continued
intransigence and the inexcusable attitude of major international powers.
Eritrea has shown maximum patience and restraint at huge humanitarian and
economic cost. We cannot accept the logic of force and accommodate
Ethiopia's forcible occupation of our territory. We cannot accept the
dislocation of our people and condemn them to live in makeshift camps for
ever. We are long past the time for toothless diplomatic words. If the
international community is really committed to promote regional peace and
security, this is the time for meaningful action to compel Ethiopia to
accept the Boundary Commission decision fully without equivocation or
qualifications and to facilitate expeditious demarcation.

In the event, the Government of Eritrea urges the European Union to
bring pressure to bear on Ethiopia so as to ensure the:

1. full unconditional respect of the Algiers Agreement;

2. full compliance with the Boundary Commission decision of April 13,
2002;

3. withdrawal of Ethiopian forces from sovereign Eritrean territories;

4. expeditious demarcation of the boundary.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmera
3 December 2004