|
|
Ethiopia’s “No war over Badme” dupery |
|
By M. Filli A. |
|
April 17 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ethiopia’s “Accept and deceive” swindles continue
unabated to the extent of bemocking the resolve and commitment of the
international community, insulting their intelligence and blatantly flouting
international agreement as exhibited by the recent defiant statement of
Ethiopia’s foreign minister regarding the most recent ruling of the
independent Border Commission. |
|
|
|
Speaking at a press briefing in Addis Abeba on Apr
12, 2003, Seyoum Mesfin expressed “Ethiopia's strong commitment to resolving
the problem peacefully and lawfully”, and also confirmed “Ethiopia shall not
in any way resort to the use of force to ensure the rectification of the
Commission's Mistakes”. The crux of Seyoum’s message here is the statement
“Ethiopia shall not in any way resort to the use of force to ensure the
rectification of the Commission's Mistakes”, which is a calculated hoax
intended to dupe the international community into believing that Ethiopia had
“accepted the border ruling, but grudgingly” when in reality Ethiopia has
rejected the ruling and is pursuing a non-existent legal venue (first portion
of Seyoum’s statement) to challenge it, contrary to the Algiers Agreement
that did not provide for any appeal
mechanism. Hence, the recent media attention to Seyoum’s statement is
misleading because the media is punctuating only what it wants to hear and
what could shield Ethiopia’s rulers from the wrath of the inernational
community: “No war over Badme”, which Seyoum’s advisors know and have
skillfully included in his statement, while Ethiopia’s rejection of the
boundary ruling that was expressed clearly in the first portion of Seyoum’s
statement is suppressed for obvious reasons. In fact Seyoum was kind enough to justify
Ethiopia’s rejection by “underlining Ethiopia’s right to reject any unjust
decisions by the Commission”. Well I have bad news for Seyoum: Ethiopia has
no right to reject or even appeal the decision of the Border commission.
Ethiopia has voluntarily waived all its rights to challenge The
Haig/commission decision when it signed the Algiers agreement: It was
binding, meaning Ethiopia will accept it, no appeal, meaning the decision is
not appealable, and that the Commission has the sole and exclusive authority
to adjudicate this matter, meaning all Seyoum’s blabber about pursuing a
legal venue to challenge the ruling is a meaningless and cheap ploy intended
to camouflage its rejection of the ruling. The only right Ethiopia has is to
renege on the Algiers agreement, prevent the demarcation forcefully, and face
the wrath of the international community. Who is kidding whom? Seyoum’s
advisors are that smart not to let him cry “Badme or death” when he can
express same without uttering those politically suicidal words. Ethiopia’s
rejection of the ruling became more vivid, courtesy of Seyoum, in an exchange
he had with a local journalist as follows: |
|
|
|
Responding to a journalist’s question as what would
be Ethiopia’s next step if legal and peaceful means fail and the border
commission stands by its ruling, here is what Seyoum said in a televised
press briefing on April 14, 2003 in Amharic: “ህጋዊ
በሆነ መደረክ
ክርክራችንን እስከ
መጨረሻ
እንቐጥልበት ኣለን
እያልን ነዉ።
መፍትሄ መኖር
ኣለበት። ካልሆነ፤
ኮሚሽኑ በመሰለዉ
ዳምጠዉ ያንን
ድምበር ማካለል የምችልበት
ሁኔታ ኣይኖርም።” Moreover, apart from launching a litany of allegations
and accusations against the border commission, Seyoum has already re-opened
the case and presented Ethiopia’s failed arguments for public re-trial in an
effort to prepare the Ethiopian people for the eventuality of likely forceful
implementation of the border ruling by the international community. In his latest press briefing, Seyoum also
attempted to score a point by ridiculing the commission’s suggestion calling
for the consent of both parties as the only way to accommodate Ethiopia’s
political crybabies by saying that “ if both parties were agreeable there
wouldn’t have been a need for a third party arbitration”. For heaven’s sake,
how stupid and dumb could the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve be? The
commission is not calling the parties for agreement on the substance of the
matter but for consent of both parties on procedural matters such as
Ethiopia’s request for multiple postponement of the announcement date of the
verdict, composition of the commission, legal basis and applicable international
law to adjudicate the matter, the ‘’ex aequo et bono” and the “final and
binding” clauses are all procedural matters. And yes, both parties have been
agreeable on procedural matters, otherwise the Algiers agreement wouldn’t
have been signed in the first place. Hence, Seyoum must be grateful to the
commission for making this suggestion even if it is and remains hypothetical!
Seyoum |
|
Having said that, Ethiopia is now clearly
challenging the resolve, commitment, obligation, and responsibility of the
international community to implement the ruling as provided for by the
Algiers agreement including the use of force. And as our President recently
and correctly said, as far as Eritrea is concerned, the case is closed. From
now on Ethiopia’s contradiction is with the international community as
represented by the USA, UN, EU, AU, and Algeria. |
|
|
|
The Algiers peace agreement is not a mere
bilateral agreement. It is an agreement between Eritrea and Ethiopia on the
one hand, and the international community as represented by the USA, UN, EU,
AU, and Algeria, on the other hand. It is now time for the international
community to realize the duping and fraudulent nature of the catch phrases
that come from Ethiopia’s rulers and to face up to their responsibilities in
no uncertain terms. How much insult can the intelligence of humanity endure
before it reacts? |
|
|
|
Yes, Eritrea will prevail. |
|
|
