Network of Eritreans for Constitutional Governance (NECG)

The Border Issue: Eritrea Tyrant’s Worst Nightmare

29 July 2008
Berhane M Tekeste

In the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia, just how one botches up a favorable legal decision and turns it into one’s own worst nightmare is a question only the perverted cerebrum of Eritrea tyrant Afewerki can answer. I mean favorable in the narrowest sense that what presumably started it all- sovereignty over a border town called Badme that even Afewerki’s nemesis south of the border acknowledged as casus belli- was conclusively adjudicated to Eritrea.

It has been over 6 years since the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) pronounced on 13 April 2002 its final and binding delimitation decision that resolved the border dispute judicially and conclusively. Yet, the EEBC decision exists only on paper to date! And that has become tyrant Afawerki’s nagging hallucinatory nocturnal worst nightmare and daytime fata morgana.

This is not because of the lack of technical means that would enable the realization of the decision on the ground by making it physically visible and tangible as clearly stipulated by the border agreement but only and only because Eritrea tyrant Afewerki wants to have it only his tyrannical way.

To that end, Afawerki started looking for some celestial body, a third party like the UN Security Council, or even the peace keeping mission (UNMEE) to implement the decision for him contrary to the essence and nature both of the border agreement and the court the tyrant himself helped set up and also sought to adjudicate the border dispute exactly the way he wanted it in the first place.

After multiple torturous attempts to secure bilateral consent to effect its final and binding legal decision on the ground had failed, the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) threw in the towel, so to speak, and decided in November 2006 to leave the shared border demarcated on paper (virtual demarcation) and made it up to the two contending parties to figure out/negotiate a way to realize it consistent with the delimitation decision by implanting pillars within one year (until November 2007).

At the time, both Eritrea and Ethiopia rejected the Boundary Commission’s virtual demarcation decision for not being consistent with the Algiers Agreement. As a matter of fact, one month prior to the Boundary Commission deadline, in October 2007, Eritrea tyrant sent, via his surrogate at the UN, a letter to UN Security Council in which he re-stated his rejection of the EEBC’s virtual demarcation decision in black & white based on sound legal grounds (inconsistency with the Algiers Peace Agreement).

“Let me take this opportunity, Your Excellency, to reiterate Eritrea’s position on the so called “virtual demarcation” as proposed by the Boundary Commission should any or both of the parties fail to meet the conditions it laid out on or before the end of November 2007. In this regard, it is important to point out Article 4.2 of the Algiers Peace Agreement of 12 December 2000 that states:

“The parties agree that a neutral Boundary Commission composed of five members shall be established with a mandate to delimit and demarcate the colonial treaty border based on pertinent colonial treaties (1900, 1902,and 1908) and applicable international law. The Commission shall not have the power to make decisions 'ex aequo et bono.'”

Consistent with the above provision, Eritrea’s legal point of view is that the border should be demarcated by placing the pillars on the ground.” Argued tyrant Afawerki emphatically at the time to justify his objection to virtual demarcation!

Note that in this letter, Eritrea tyrant Afawerki speaks of so called “virtual demarcation” only to turn around 3 months later and to hail this same so called “virtual demarcation” to the skies as the best thing that could ever clearly identify Eritrea’s territorial sovereignty and even the best ever demarcated border in the entire continent of Africa! With that, tyrant Afewerki also declared, unilaterally, the chapter on border issue closed. Wait a minute; don’t the two countries share the border? There is nothing that would grant either side the right to dictate the state of affairs of a shared border? Well, in his tyrannical mind, tyrant Afawerki thinks he could?

All along, tyrant Afawerki rejected any tampering in any shape or form with the terms of the Algiers Peace Agreement under any circumstance for it would constitute an alternative mechanism hence breach of the Agreement unless of course any such tampering goes his tyrannical way.

Virtual demarcation by tyrant Afawerki’s own admission as stated in his letter to the UNSC above is inconsistent with the Algiers Agreement therefore constitutes alternative mechanism for “the border should be demarcated by placing pillars”. Yet, after rejecting virtual demarcation for being inconsistent with Algiers to the last month, tyrant Afawerki made an about face and decided to accept an alternative mechanism to demarcate the border (virtual demarcation) because it works for him and wants to impose it on others regardless of the fact that it is inconsistent with Algiers. The problem is that the state of affairs of the shared border neither hinges solely on tyrant Afawerki’s acceptance or rejection of the virtual demarcation depending on his tyrannical moods and whims nor can it be dictated by one side, it necessitates and mandates the consent of the other party for it is an equal contender in this matter.

Get this right. The issue is not whether virtual demarcation is a legally accepted method to demarcate a shared border but whether it is consistent with the Algiers Peace Agreement because we go strictly by that not by whatever legally acceptable method tyrants like Afawerki can think of or fantasize about in the entire hemisphere.

Tyrant Afawerki’s flip-flop on the virtual demarcation issue is not difficult to explain. By accepting the virtual demarcation, tyrant Afawerki falsely hoped to establish sovereignty over territory (Badme) that the EEBC awarded to Eritrea and then to invoke UN Charter to claim it by shifting the issue from being border related to violation of sovereignty. Fortunately, the UN is not as dumb as tyrant Afawerki would like to think. Like it or not, Afawerki’s sovereignty claim over Badme, though right, stems from a Boundary Court’s decision that has not been effected in reality yet and the international community is still struggling with. As such, tyrant Afawerki can roll and turn it all he wants, Badme remains part of the border complex; it is far from being a case for the UN Charter to resolve.

The border war between Eritrea and Ethiopia was brought to a halt and the border dispute was legally resolved based on the provisions of the Algiers Peace Agreement, and the legally conclusive border decision can be implemented as decided and physically realized based only on the provisions of this same agreement, the sole authoritative legal document in this matter.

Actually, what got me hitting my pc keyboards again today was the flurry of letters released by tyrant Afawerki a couple of days ago regarding Afawarki’s yet another self-inflicted worst nightmare: The issue of UN Peacekeepers in Eritrea aka UNMEE, EEBC, and the UN. Why the flurry of letters at this time? Because UNMEE's mandate expires this Thursday, 31 July 2008. I am afraid this might be the last exchange of letters of this sort and I didn’t want you to miss it.

EEBC Letter on Winding up its operations

Tyrant Afawerki’s Response to EEBC

Tyrant Afawerki’s Response Regarding UNMEE

Back Home