There is no dispute in the Horn Challenging
Axworthy ___________________________________________________________________________ Editorial24-Feb-04 The latest conflict in the Horn of Africa that
horrified humanity was the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia that
led to a two-year war (1998-2000), which was a scene of dreadful carnage.
That war ended when the international community and the UN intervened and the
Algiers peace agreement was signed in December of 2000. Under the terms of
the agreement, Eritrea and Ethiopia agreed and accepted in writing to
establish an independent Boundary Commission (EEBC) as the only and sole
authority to adjudicate their border dispute. Both countries agreed and
accepted too that the ruling of the EEBC is
final, binding without appeal or recourse and committed to only accept and
abide by it wherever the chips may fall. Moreover, both countries also agreed
and accepted to remedy noncompliance by invoking UN Chapter VII to its
fullest extent. In April of 2002, the Boundary Commission rendered the ruling
that settled the dispute legally and conclusively. Under the terms of the
peace agreement, both countries have no other option but to accept and abide
by the Commission’s ruling. Accordingly, Eritrea accepted and is abiding by
the ruling. On the other hand, Ethiopia neither accepts nor abides by the
Commission’s ruling in outright violation of the peace agreement. Not only
that, Ethiopia unilaterally dismantled the Boundary Commission, publicly
dismissed its ruling as null and void to the extent of forcibly halting its
implementation and sending the Commission into oblivion, and freezing the
peace process despite and in spite of Int’l community and UN’s unwavering
support and endorsement of the EEBC and its decision to date. The decision of the Boundary Commission has rendered the
Eritro-Ethio dispute settled, legally and conclusively. Ethiopia’s
non-acceptance of the Commission’s decision does not by any standard
constitute dispute but brazen defiance by all standards because no one else
is contesting the decision but Ethiopia.
Today there is no dispute but brazen defiance of a legal settlement of
a dispute that was. Having said that, Mr. Axworthy volunteered the following
revealing if not most revealing statement about his futile attempt to abuse
his mission to renegotiate the boundary decision contrary to his declared
mission to implement the boundary decision: “To me, there are two paties to this dipute,” said Axworthy.
With that, Mr. Axworthy has volitionally revealed the futility of his
mission. Here, Mr. Axworthy is certainly alluding to the decision of the
Boundary Commission, which he, Mr. Axworthy, is now brazenly declaring as
being disputed by two parties. Without going any further, Eritrea is not
disputing and has not disputed the boundary decision but to the contrary:
Eritrea has accepted the decision without qualification. Now may we challenge
the omniscient Lloyd Axworthy to name any one else that is disputing the
decision of the Commission besides Ethiopia? None, Mr. Axworthy. With that,
you are not only short of one party to declare a dispute but your attempt to
insinuate controversy over the Boundary Commission’s decision has also failed
because the entire world including Eritrea support and stand by the EEBC and
its decision. Consequently, there is neither controversy over boundary
decision or dispute of any kind but Ethiopia’s outright defiance, which is
preventing peace form reigning in the Horn. It is, therefore, your mission
and incumbent upon you to focus on overcoming Ethiopia’s adamant defiance and
to bring about the implementation of the Boundary Commission’s decision as
required of you by virtue of the terms of your appointment [(SC/7997) 30 Jan
04].
In today’s news report, Mr. Axworthy adds “ To me there are two
parties to this dispute, and the two parties must take the responsibility of
resolving it”. Mr. Axworthy, the
undeclared but apparent premise of your mission (Dispute Resolution) is
simply wrong because there is no dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia that
has not been settled by the boundary decision. Eritrea accepted the boundary
decision not because it got what it wanted but because it is the most
responsible thing to do and in reverence to the peace accord. Can you say the same about Ethiopia, Mr.
Axworthy? Certainly not? Further, Mr. Axworthy added: “ If any one of the parties has decided not to participate in
it, it slows down the efforts of the international community to be helpful.
The only missing voice so far that I haven’t heard from directly are the
Eritreans”. Mr. Axworthy, please allow one more challenge to your
omniscience: Name or cite any thing that Eritrea is disputing or contesting
vis-à-vis the decision of the Boundary Commission or even the Commission
itself? Again, none. Mr. Axworthy,
Eritrea is not a participant of any dispute because there is there is no
dispute that has not been settled by the decision of the Commission. And that
is why Eritrea’s voice is missing. Believe me, Sir, if there were any dispute
you would have heard from Eritrea without you calling for it: Loud and clear.
You don’t hear from Eritrea because Eritrea has no problem with implementing
the Algiers Agreement and the decision of Boundary commission as is. Mr. Axworthy is also quoted as insisting
that his mission is “honest” one. Mr. Axworthy, no need to evangelize honesty
but honesty starts with accepting realities: Accepting not trying to poke
holes into the finality and binding nature of the ruling of the EEBC,
Accepting that the Eritro-Ethio border dispute has been settled conclusively
by EEBC’s ruling, accepting not usurping EEBC sole authority over the
implementation of the boundary ruling. Mr. Axworthy, your honest towards
those realities leaves a lot much to be desired. When was the last time you
mentioned the EEBC or EEBC’s decision, Mr. Axworthy? Mr. Axworthy, your talk
about “peacemeal demarcation“ contravenes UNSC call for demarcation to
proceed in all sectors as directed by the EEBC? And more. Mr. Axworthy, let us not talk about honesty,
honesty is a rare commodity in politics and your mission is no exception to
that: It is disingenuous and manipulative at best and fraud at worst. Talk
about disputes that don’t exist: vis-à-vis Eritrea: none, vis-à-vis EEBC:
none, It is all defiance, because the EEBC has the last word, Mr. Axworhty. |