UN chief chides Eritrea

27 January 2008

Mulugeta Alemu

Mr. Ban Ki-moon’s latest report on Ethiopia and Eritrea throws scathing criticisms on Eritrea for its numerous failings including its reluctance to accept his diplomatic overtures; its restrictions on UNMEE’s operations; and notably its violations of the Temporary Security Zone (TSZ). The report comes on the heels of Security Council’s negotiation on the future of UNMEE. While it is expected that the council will extend the mandate of the force, there may well be a serious discussion on a host of problems in connection with the Ethio-Eritrean standoff.

Following the termination of the mandate of the border commission in November 2007, Eritrea’s tack has subtly shifted. Now fully aware that the demarcation of the border is extraordinarily difficult to undertake in the absence of the commission, Eritrea is declaring that it accepts the ‘virtual’ demarcation of the boundary.’ It also calls for an unconditional ‘vacation of Ethiopian forces from Eritrean boundaries.’ President Isaias’s letter to the Security Council on 21 December 2007 elaborates this line. Whereas the report makes reference to the president’s letter, it does not endorse the approach taken by Eritrea. In fact, it discusses Eritrea’s position within the context of the country’s breaches of its obligation in implementing previous resolutions by the council.

Whilst the extinction of the boundary commission reinforced the urgency and acceptability of Ethiopia’s call for political dialogue, it also identifies the ludicrousness of Eritrea’s policy of ‘virtual demarcation.’ Eritrea’s stance is blemished from the perspective of international law. There has never been a time when a delimitation decision constituted a final and binding boundary marker without being accompanied by an elaborate demarcation process pursuant to international law. The appeal in Ethiopia’s position on the other hand is that it is informed by reasonable legal expectations and is open to political cum diplomatic process.

The Secretary General’s report presents what is essentially a key setback for Eritrea. It recounts in clearest terms Eritrea’s flagrant breaches of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and the Algiers agreement. It is stated that Eritrea continues to induct members of its defense force to the TSZ. Its soldiers now have fortified within this area. It has also setup several checkpoints and routinely stops UNMEE’s personnel during their patrol operations. Eritrea continues to maintain all previously imposed restrictions on UNMEE. It refuses nationals of EU, the US and Canada to be involved in UNMEE. It maintains 45 permanent restrictions. Currently UNMEE can not undertake nightly patrols. Since 2006, Eritrea restricted UNMEE from having access to fuel, which has forced the later to minimize its operational activities.

The report is a kind of outcome that predictably emerges when Eritrea attempts to play hardball. It simply fails to make friends and draw people and institutions to its cause. By failing to offer a measure of flexibility, Eritrea continues to harvest a pariah status and disapproval. Diplomacy and readiness to negotiate is the only tool that can guarantee an outcome every Eritrean and Ethiopian deserves. As Ban Ki-moon’s report states, ‘Eritrea and Ethiopia bear the primary responsibility for resolving their border dispute and normalizing their relations for the benefit of their peoples. To achieve this, the parties have to summon the necessary political will to overcome their differences peacefully, without use or threat of force.’