From: RUSSOM FESSAHYE (russomf91@msn.com)
Date: Fri Oct 16 2009 - 01:51:09 EDT
Sanction without verification against Eritrea?
Thursday 15 October 2009 05:41. Printer-Friendly version <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?page=imprimable&id_article=32781> Comments... <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article32781#comment_article>
By Ibrahim A Ibrahim
October 14, 2009 - Recently, British ambassador to the UN has accused Eritrea of intervening in inter Somalia issue. His comment brings some critical issues forward relating Eritrea and British historical relations.
ERITREA BRITISH RELATION:
British forces defeated the Italian army in Eritrea in 1941 and placed Eritrea under British military administration until its fate is determined. In the absence of agreement amongst the Allies concerning the status of Eritrea, British administration continued for the remainder of World War II and until 1950.
At the time, the British military administration proposed a poisons idea that leaves Eritrea divided along religious lines (which was not scientifically verified) that the lowlands be united with Sudan and the highlands united with Ethiopia. If it was the far sighted and united citizens of Eritrea, the determination of British was to delete Eritrea once and for all out of the world map.
During their stay in Eritrea, the British administration also has done a great damage to the well being of Eritrea and Eritreans. Poised by the above stated idea, animosity among Muslims and Christians was ignited. Eritreans did not bow to this evil idea that divides them. The plan did not succeed, instead were confronted by wiser and more civilized people fending their historic unity.
What the British military administration accomplished though a full destruction looting and stealing the infrastructure and industries of Eritrea. The industrial machineries were literally dismantled and shipped to Kenya, Pakistan, India and Sudan among other countries. The writer will leave the full detail of the looting stealing and dismantling for a future time.
Currently, the British government does not have any power to sway the Eritrean government due to obvious reasons. As its allies the British government uses stick and carrot system to impose its national interest on some countries. Eritrea definitely is not one of them. The sole means of penalizing Eritrea if it disavows policies that contradict its national interest is to use the UNSC. The British government is doing nothing but that.
Eritrea, since its inception is striving to uplift the standard of living and wellbeing of its citizens. Unfortunately, unwanted war has been imposed to it, and several archaic methods of defamation and lie have been employed against it.
BRITAIN'S ACCUSATION OF ERITREA:
Britain's U.N. Ambassador John Sawers unfounded and unsubstantiated accusation of Eritrea's support to opponents of the so called government of Somalia, is nothing but open aggression against the peace loving hard working people of Eritrea.
The Ambassador based his accusation on the so called "report by U.N. experts monitoring the arms embargo," should be flatly rejected for the reasons the same experts report that was unable to provide a single proof to its prior reports of the same that Eritrea has more than 2000 soldiers helping the then "Islamic Court" who was headed by the current President of Somalia.
The current President of Somalia was also accused of being an Islamist who treated attacking Ethiopia.
History is repeating itself. These same countries who are insisting on harming Eritrea are also the same countries who crowned themselves at the helm of UNSC to decide the fate of the people of Eritrea on uniting them without taking into consideration the will of the citizens. The organization that once closed its eyes and deafen its ears when the Eritreans were suffering under the rulers of Ethiopia, by all means of illegal weapons that include napalm and nerve gases, are keen to accuse the peace loving hard working principled people of helping terrorists.
Accusing Eritrea to bow to the orders of countries like British is illegal by all means. If British indeed is unable to furnish a genuine proof, then accusation without verification is nothing but a diplomatic ploy.
