|
|
Null and void, Ethiopia dares UN to react |
|
|
|
By M. Filli A. |
|
Oct 21 2003 |
|
|
|
The saga of Ethiopia’s
blatant defiance of the rule of law was conceived already days after the
pronouncement of the border ruling in April 2002 when Ethiopia rulers first
pretended to accept the ruling but then baulked and are still baulking to
date. Ethiopia rulers had to go through three stages before declaring this
their reckless and irresponsible act of calling the border ruling of the EEBC
(Eritrea Ethiopia Border Commission) null &void (16 Oct 2003) and now
openly daring the Guarantor Nations (USA, EU, UN, AU) to react in whatever
way they want, so to speak. First and right
after the decision was pronounced, Ethiopia rulers engaged in an “accept
but..” deceitful game where they pretended to accept the border ruling in
order and only to secure the continuous flow of foreign handouts- literally
any thing and every thing Ethiopia needs and upon which Ethiopia’s daily
survival as a nation is completely dependent. But Ethiopia’s “accept but …”
tactic failed when it was exposed as any thing and every thing but acceptance
and a contra-productive ploy to reopen judicially closed matters that
endangers the whole peace process, in reports after reports of the EEBC and
UNSG Kofi Annan. Secondly and then,
there is Ethiopia rulers blabber about their bogus dialogue and their “no
body can force Ethiopia to accept unjust and illegal decision” mantra. Their call for dialogue was exposed by
themselves and shot down as nothing but another futile ploy to reopen a
legally settled matter in attempt to reverse its decision in their favor when
they demanded that they wouldn’t accept any thing less than the reversal of
the EEBC ruling. As far as their mantra is concerned, they are certainly
right, and nobody forced or is forcing Ethiopia to accept unjust and illegal
decision. But what Ethiopia rulers perceive unjust and illegal decision is
the rule of law for the rest of the world and Ethiopia will be brought into
compliance with the rule of law, yes, by use of force if necessary for that
is what both countries agreed to and accepted as remedy for noncompliance of
that magnitude and nature when they signed the Algiers Agreement. Thirdly, 19
Sep 2003 came when Ethiopia formally declared its outright defiance of the
EEBC decision and challenged Guarantor Nations’ resolve to implement the border
decision by force, per the Algiers Agreement, if necessary. This Ethiopia’s
act of defiance was immediately rebuffed by UNSC on 1 Oct 2003 and Ethiopia
rulers were told to abide by the EEBC ruling. Ethiopia rulers immediately
rejected this UNSC call, threw in the towel, coughed it all up, and on 16 Oct
2003 declared the border decision null and void believing that the Cameroon
vs. Nigeria case would constitute precedence for their action. Again, what gutter
insanity? Unless for academic purposes, one doesn’t even need to review the
Cameroon vs. Nigeria matter because the Eritrea vs. Ethiopia matter has no
precedence at least for the simple fact that the ruling of the EEBC is
guaranteed to be enforced/implemented by the mightiest of the world by use of
force if necessary as agreed upon and accepted by both parties under the
Algiers Agreement regardless of the form and nature of noncompliance by any
one party. Under the Algiers agreement, both parties agreed and committed
themselves to only accept the EEBC decision, not to reject,
defy, contemplate another solution, or appeal it. Hence, the fate of the EEBC
decision is only acceptance. That being the irrevocable fact about the fate
of the EEBC ruling, following is the irrational rationale of Ethiopia PM for
calling the EEBC ruling null and void: “In explaining why he( PM Meles) felt Ethiopia could reject the decision, Meles cited Nigeria's rejection of a ruling made by the International Court of Justice. Nigeria had initially agreed to allow the court to settle a border dispute with Cameroon, but when it lost, the West African nation initiated direct talks with Cameroon to reach another solution.” Oct/16/03 Ap But there is more to
the EEBC ruling than the mere presence of mutual prior consent to accept the
verdict and the nature of the verdict (final, binding, without appeal): It’s
final and binding nature is cemented in the most important provision that it
is guaranteed to be enforced/implemented even by use force if necessary.
Ethiopia rulers latest reckless decision to subject the undeserving and peace
loving people of Ethiopia to the severe measures of chapter vii of UN Charter
based on this irrational rationale is a criminal act that merits review by
The Hague. Ethiopia rulers can
call/declare the EEBC ruling null and void, unjust, illegal, or whatever they
want; they all constitute noncompliance and have meaning only to the way the
verdict is implemented but don’t affect the essence of the verdict, which is
guaranteed to be enforced, regardless. Ethiopia rulers’
decision to confront the wrath of the international might is simply a joke.
Ethiopia is no match to even one member of the Guarantor Nations let alone
altogether. But once again, the int’l community has to do what it has to do
in order to fulfill its commitment even if it means opting for the necessary
evil. At this time, the
int’l community must not mull over what to do but how to best accomplish what
it has to do pursuant to the provisions of chapter vii of UN Charter with all
due consideration of all the humanitarian needs of the people of Ethiopia. Eritrea Will prevail |