Nope to dialogue
is a matter of principle
Editorial: Eritrea Daily.net21-Oct-03
Yes, Eritrea’s nope to dialogue was a matter of principle and not because: It is Payback time? “Prime Minister Meles' numerous scornful statements of the past five years that Ethiopia would have nothing to do with Eritrea as long as the current government is in place”. That can’t be a reason to decline dialogue because the int’l community can counter that by getting PM Meles to apologize publicly or whatever is needed to express regret if Eritrea would only accept the proposed dialogue? Too little too late “..coming as it did five years after the initiation of the conflict.” That is no reason either, because as long as the problem persists the int’l community can counter by saying that it is better late than never, as they say, and penalizing Meles for figuring that out so late, if Eritrea would only accept D? “..one has to concede that Ethiopia is a recent convert to
the Previous D has failed: The int’l community can easily counter this by saying that they can learn and take lessons from the failure of previous several bilaterally attempted D’s and move on to a multilateral D (auspices of UN) if Eritrea would only consent to dialogue? Previously failed bilateral D cannot be a reason to decline dialogue with the participation of and the under auspices of int’l community? Mistrust/distrust, unfavorable odds of success, unclear motive, gimmickry, etc. are all legitimate concerns but not something the int’l Comnty.can’t handle to Eritrea’s satisfaction if Eritrea would only consent to the proposed D? If those were Eritrea’s reasons, God forbid, for declining Ethiopia’s wishful aspiration for dialogue, then Eritrea has no reason because the int’l Comnty can easily counter that and hit Eritrea with naked intransigence and aversion to dialogue based on lame excuses, which Ethiopia rulers are fantasizing to attain. Ladies and Gentlemen: Let it be said loud and clear that Eritrea’s categorical nope to Dialogue on demarcation is a matter of principle and not an act of vengeance, settling old scores, or vindictive gloat. Understanding that Dialogue is basically an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue of mutual interest/concern, esp. a political (In this case the Ertiro-Ethio border demarcation) or religious issue, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement or settlement, Eritrea declined dialogue on Ertiro-Ethio border demarcation
Ethiopia rulers are in denial that the border dispute with Eritrea has been conclusively resolved and their call for dialogue with Eritrea is nothing but a futile attempt to instill denial in the international Comnty.as well, true to the negative consequence of people in denial. Eritrea and Ethiopia have already had dialogue over their border dispute, when there was a border dispute, under the legal and conclusive arbitration of the EEBC and the dispute has been so settled once and for all in a final and binding verdict. What we have now is Ethiopia’s blatant defiance of the verdict, for which Ethiopia must seek dialogue with the enforcers of the verdict (USA, EU, UN, AU), not Eritrea, over how best to handle the consequences of such defiance because the sanctity of the verdict has been guaranteed and hence will be enforced one way or the other. “The purpose of dialogue is a common search for truth” and the truth has been found in the border ruling of the EEBC, making dialogue on border dispute between the two countries redundant and calling for the truth to be realized and implemented in all aspects Viva Eritrea |