By: Berhane Andeberhan
Surely Mr. Cohen would like to see a quick end to the famine in Ethiopia!
Surely he would love to see the peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia live in
harmony as good neighbors peacefully interacting with each other and even
helping each other and sharing their natural resources. Eritrea, and the
whole world should come to the aid of Ethiopia and rally to forestall
famine and hopefully prevent its recurrence.
Mr. Cohen states that the “Ethiopian famine that is just over the horizon
will require the use of Eritrean ports”. The seemingly condescending tone
of his “recommendations” appears to go beyond a humanitarian concern and
exhibits glaring omissions and glosses over some significant issues. His
suggestions raise many questions that one cannot easily overlook when
considering what he must clearly be aware of; namely, the unfortunately
complicated situation between the two countries.
Granted, this would be one of the ways of getting relief supplies to
Ethiopia.Why is it a requirement that Eritrean ports be used, given that
one can think of other options? Obviously other avenues were used during
the previous Ethiopian famine when the Ethiopian government rejected
Eritrea’s willingness to allow the use of its ports on humanitarian
grounds. Using Eritrean ports might conceivably be the most ideal method,
in which case Eritrea should be consulted. Surely Mr. Cohen must have
other thoughts that he is not sharing!Has he already consulted with the
Eritrean government?
As noted above, Mr. Cohen must be aware of Eritrea’s willingness to allow
its ports to be used during the previous major famine in Ethiopia. He must
recall that the offer was rejected by the Government of Ethiopia. Why
should one expect things to be different now? Has he obtained assurances
that the Ethiopian government will accept the offer this time if it is
given? Is he planning to request or has he already obtained Eritrean
cooperation? And why does he assume that the Eritrean government would not
have misgivings about this matter given the past experience?
It would make sense that Eritrean cooperation would be requested before
such declarations are made.Mr. Cohen’s motivation is no doubt a
humanitarian one. Does his humanitarian concern extend to the displaced
Eritrean peasants whose land and homes are still occupied by Ethiopia more
than a decade after the border dispute was supposedly resolved? The plight
of the internally displaced Eritrean peasants is not outright famine,
thanks to the efforts of the Eritrean government, but it is still a
disaster.
Where is the balance?
Surely Mr. Cohen is aware of the often repeated and loudly disseminated
bluster by the Ethiopian regime against Eritrea. He must know of the
repeated threats to “Invade, Attack, Change the Regime, Capture Assab
etc.” ad nauseam.The Ethiopian government has recently been amassing its
troops in the Eritrean border seemingly to distract its own people by
claiming that the protests in Oromia are directed by Eritrea. It seems
there need to be some steps to dampen the hostility before Mr.Cohen’s
suggestion can warrant serious consideration.
So when suggesting that Eritrean ports be available to Ethiopia, some steps
must be taken to create assurances to guard against Ethiopia’s admitted
hostile goals against Eritrea.That is still problematic because, were
assurances to be made to Eritrea, who would be willing to guarantee those
assurances? Not the same entities that were the guarantors of the Algiers
Binding Resolution and have abdicated their responsibilities?
Most Eritreans dream of the day when they will live in harmony and
cooperation with their Ethiopian neighbors! This will require resolution
of existing differences between the two countries and respect for each
other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. From there should follow
cooperation that will hopefully benefit both countries through mutually
agreed upon principles and practical steps. However,
Mr. Cohen’s suggestions, which seem to indicate that Eritrea forget its
security interests and give access to Eritrean ports without even
mentioning some of the obvious obstacles, strike a discordant chord and
threaten to insult our collective intelligence!
Apparently Eritrea is to blindly enter into some discussions after allowing
its ports to be used without any guarantees of security. Mr. Cohen needs
to be reminded that the suggestion to “engage in discussions” is a refrain
straight out of the Woyane’s hymnal. It is the excuse they continue to use
to avoid implementing the Final and
Binding Algiers Agreement even though they signed it. Surely Mr. Cohen
does not want Eritrea to risk compromising its security in the hope of
subsequently engaging in “discussions” with an adversary that has used the
ruse of asking for “dialogue” to impose on it the current state of “no
peace no war.”
Discussions are indispensable, but the conditions under which they should
be conducted require serious consideration of the existing realities and,
hopefully, the involvement of unbiased mediators.
*The writer is an ERITREAN-AMERICAN who attended UCLA on an academic
scholarship where he earned his BA degree in Zoology and was a member of
the first ever Bruin varsity team and he served as captain of the team in
1971 when the team was an NCAA finalist. He holds an MS in Microbiology
from Loma Linda University and got his Ph. D. in Food Science at Cornell
University. In addition to coaching college soccer he has taught collegiate
Microbiology at Cal State Los Angeles and was a Research Specialist at
Cornell University. *
- application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document attachment: Surely_Mr.docx
Received on Wed Mar 23 2016 - 11:11:17 EDT