Eritrea/Ethiopia:
Setting records straight, AngolaPress on US
|
|
Commentary
|
By TED
|
|
31 Dec 2004, EDnews - Ethiopia refuses to accept United
State’s negative reaction to its recent sham plan for Eritrea because it was
not conveyed Ethiopia’s way, not that it will accept it then but simply to
embarrass the US. It has therefore launched a campaign lying about US
reaction to its plan under the title “Concern over US silence on peace
initiative”.
|
|
AngolaPress has now popped up as a major ally to that
effect. On 28 Dec 2004, Angop re-posted an article entitled “Ethiopia
expresses concern over US silence on peace initiative”, which is a carbon
copy of the initial post[ Ethiopia said concerned by US silence
on peace plan with Eritrea] disseminating lies about the reaction of not only the US
but also of a set of other nations/organization regarding what Ethiopia put
forward on 25 Nov 2004 including its own assessment.
|
|
While Angop is fully entitled to its news story, it is
a shame for such an esteemed organization to stoop so low to the level of
disseminating blatant distortions of publicly known facts for reasons that
escape one’s comprehension.
|
|
First of all what Ethiopia recently put forward is not
at all even remotely a “peace initiative” but a plan manifestly designed to
destroy the Algiers peace agreement in the name of peace (see below for
details).
|
|
There is no border or any dispute for that matter
between Eritrea and Ethiopia because that has already been settled legally,
conclusively, and irreversibly in accordance with the Algiers peace agreement
that both countries signed and agreed to abide by and the decision exists in
the form of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s ruling of 13 April
2002. Eritrea has long accepted the ruling as such and unequivocally and the
international community treats the decision equally so.
|
|
Ethiopia’s refusal to accept the border decision in
blatant contravention of Algiers does not render the dispute unresolved or
mean that the dispute persists but makes Ethiopia defiant for no one else is
contesting the border decision.
|
|
The int’l community has established and persists that
the Algiers peace agreement is the only mechanism for peace and stability
between Eritrea and Ethiopia in particular and the Horn region in general.
Ethiopia agreed and signed on to that peace accord. Hence, peace between
Eritrea, Ethiopia, and in the Horn has been so defined and established. And
where peace has been so established, there can’t be another peace initiative
(because on one else is contesting it) but sabotage of the so-attained peace
in the name of peace. That is exactly what Ethiopia put forward in the name
of peace on 25 Nov 2004 does: It violates the cardinal tenets of the Algiers
peace accord on two counts. Therefore, there can’t be any talk of “peace
initiative” when referring to what Ethiopia offered on X-mas Day 04 but a
2-point plan to destroy the Algiers peace accord in the name of peace
shrouded in 3 items from the Algiers agreement.
|
|
“in the diplomatic world silence is shorthand for
consent” said one observer. That may be true, but Unless AngolaPress, other
observers, and Ethiopia are waiting to see US troops stationed in Eritrea,
the US is neither silent nor consenting to Ethiopia’s sham plan. To the
contrary, the US has ducked Ethiopia’s plan by expressing its unwavering
commitment to the Algiers peace Agreement and has spoken publicly on three
occasions, and on one face-to- face meeting of Ethiopia’s foreign minister
and Richard Armitage to that effect and dispatched a high US official to let
Eritrea know that the US sticks to Algiers.
|
|
May be the US did not speak as loud as Ethiopia wanted
but it was audible and comprehensible enough for Ethiopia to get worried and
concerned. For more please check out the following links:
|
http://www.eritreadaily.net/news/article200412202.htm and
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2004/28294.htm
|
|
“It was to be recalled that the African
Union, the European Union, the United Nations Security Council and other
countries and partners welcomed the peace proposal after Ethiopian Prime
Minister Meles Zenawi presented the peace proposal on November 25.” Writes AngolaPress.
|
Well, it is not certain if one can equate AU to OAU
(forerunner of AU). But if that is the case, then the OAU is co-signatory of
the Algiers Agreement and thereby treaty-obliged to ensure strict adherence
to the Algiers agreement. Last time we checked, the AU has not reneged on
that, could that be wrong?
|
|
As to the EU, UNSC, and others, here is what William
Maclean reported to Reuters on 23 Dec 2004:
|
“Major powers are unanimous in saying reopening
negotiations would go against promises both countries made to be bound by the
ruling. The European Union last week echoed Eritrea's call for Ethiopia to
respect the border ruling in full.” For more please refer to the following
links:
|
|
Declaration
by the Presidency on behalf of the European
Union on the
peace process between Ethiopia and Eritrea
|
and http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8276.doc.htm
|
|
“The newly introduced peace proposal demanded
Eritrea to sit for dialogue for the keenly awaited border demarcation process
at the border areas of the two countries.” Goes on AngolaPress.
With all due respect, this is a fraudulent statement. The “proposal” demands
Eritrea to accept Ethiopia’s 85% acceptance of the demarcation decision and
to enter into dialogue in order to re-open the case and re-argue the border
decision over the remaining 15 %. That is an audacious and shameless proposal
to destroy the Algiers peace agreement because it violates the sanctity of
the border decision head-on. By agreement between both countries, once the
verdict is pronounced the case is closed, border decision is final, binding,
cannot be negotiated or dialogued, and must be accepted unequivocally (as
is). Also by mutual agreement, demarcation is an exclusive authority of the
Boundary Commission and cannot be delegated.
|
|
“Observers said the US silence on the
peace proposal helped Eritrea to continue rejecting the peace offer and
dialogue”. So, concludes AngolaPress.
|
|
What a shame? As
stated above, the US is not silent. The US has damped Ethiopia’s destructive
plan by reiterating its firm commitment to the Algiers peace accord.
Moreover, the US stance neither favors Eritrea nor Ethiopia. All the US is
calling for is strict adherence to the Algiers peace agreement agreed to and
singed by both parties to abide by, what is wrong with that? There is no
peace offer that Eritrea rejected, that is a lie. What Ethiopia put out on 25 Nov is manifestly an unblushing
plan to destroy a peace agreement in the name of peace by all standards and
not at all remotely a “peace offer” and it is a shame that AngolaPress keeps
referring to it as such. Eritrea like the rest of the world is sticking to a
binding international peace agreement. If that helps Eritrea to dampen
Ethiopia’s sham plan, so be it; because that is how it ought to be. In fact,
the UNSC appreciated this Eritrea’s stance in its press release of 21 Dec
2004, wherein it is stated “Members of the Security Council welcome Eritrea’s
continued acceptance of the Boundary Commission’s decision”. Now, since when
is sticking to the Algiers peace agreement considered as “rejecting the peace
offer”, then? The Delimitation and Demarcation decision of the Boundary
commission is final, binding, and cannot be dialogued. Apart form that, there
is no public record of other dialogue that Eritrea rejected.
|