From: E-SMART Admin (esmart@eritrean-smart.org)
Date: Mon May 24 2010 - 23:46:20 EDT
E-SMART Campaign Eritrean Sanctions Must be Annulled and Repealed Today!
600 L St., NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20001 | www.Eritrean-Smart.org |
INFO@ Eritrean-Smart.org
Truth is Stubborn: Antithesis of the Sanctions Imposed on Eritrea
The recent US-led UN Security Council decision to impose sanctions on
Eritrea based on groundless charges has once again shown the world body’s
total disregard for the truth, especially in dealing with vulnerable Third
World nations.
The hasty and ill-conceived decision against Eritrea is troubling and
works against the United States’ short- and long-term interests. The US’
ability to influence events in the region and to fight terrorism
effectively will depend upon whether it garners trust in the region by
following an even-handed policy. Scapegoating Eritrea is not the solution.
Eritrea is accused of having “provided political, financial and logistical
support to armed groups engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in
Somalia and regional instability.” Eritrea has consistently denied this
allegation, which has not been substantiated with concrete evidence; the
baseless nature of the charges has also been proven by many independent
observers. The underlying reason for sanctioning Eritrea appears to be
punishment for its refusal to endorse flawed and ineffective policies
pursued by the United States in Somalia.
Eritrea’s position on Somalia has time and again called for an inclusive
Somali-driven-and-owned reconciliation process in place of the externally
crafted and financed approach seen over the last two decades. Today,
support has been thrown behind a non-inclusive transitional federal
government that has failed not only to establish the most basic forms of
governance, but also to fulfill its paramount responsibility of providing
stability, peace and security for its people. A credible and sustainable
solution in Somalia must be inclusive and more importantly born out of the
Somalis themselves. Anything less is bound to fail, as has been the case
since Somalia’s internal conflict first erupted in the late 80s.
US policy on the Somali crisis has been either ad hoc or by proxy.
Beginning with the humanitarian military intervention Operation Restore
Hope in December 1992
[1] during [the first] George Bush’s administration, close to 30,000 US
military personnel were deployed to Somalia. The ill-fated downing of a
Black Hawk helicopter after which 19 American soldiers and 1,000 Somalis
were killed spurred the US’ withdrawal from Somalia under President Bill
Clinton in late 1993. [2]. US support for a group of warlords, the
Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter Terrorism, also proved
to be misguided and drew criticism for being shortsighted, including from
US diplomats in Nairobi. The US’ next major involvement in Somalia has
been through its proxy, Ethiopia, whose disastrous intervention has
further complicated, exacerbated and radicalized the situation. [3]. John
Prendergast, while a Senior Advisor at the International Crisis Group,
challenged policy decisions on Somalia: "They didn't realize their limited
engagement would actually make matters worse … It's ignorance and
impecuniousness that have led us to be in a more difficult and
disadvantageous position than we were." [3].
As a matter of principle and moral obligation to the support the people of
Somalia rendered to Eritrea during the war of independence, Eritrea does
not believe that supporting one group or faction over the other will bring
about a lasting solution to the conflict in Somalia. Furthermore, it
refuses to endorse one-sided, failed policies and engagements that have
proven detrimental to the long-term peace and security of the region.
Eritrea’s objective is to see a united, peaceful and stable Somalia. For
this, it is being punished.
The second allegation against Eritrea involves a purported border conflict
with Djibouti. “Eritrea has not withdrawn its forces to the status quo
ante, as called for by the Security Council … refusal so far to engage in
dialogue with Djibouti, or to accept bilateral contacts, mediation or
facilitation by sub-regional or regional organizations or to respond
positively to the efforts of the Secretary-General.” As with many
accusations leveled against Eritrea, the history behind the situation as
well as the facts is unclear. The position of the borderline is critical
for negotiations on maritime boundaries in the Red Sea. Although part of
the border was not demarcated, there seems to be a general consensus (both
inside and outside the region) that the boundary has been a settled matter
on the basis of the colonially drawn agreements, specifically the
France-Italy Protocols of 1900 and 1901
[4]. This has been the general understanding of Djiboutians and the basis
for their bilateral and fraternal relations with Eritrea. Djibouti and
Eritrea had maintained fairly good bilateral relations until June 2008.
On June 12, 2008, the Associated Press reported from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
that an unidentified Djiboutian official claimed: "Eritrean soldiers made
an incursion into Djibouti territory two or three days ago in the Ras
Doumeira area." Eritrea denied the report and has insisted that it has not
occupied any part of Djibouti’s territory. Its forces remain in sovereign
Eritrean territory. Furthermore, French forces based in Djibouti at the
time of the accusation conducted a reconnaissance mission at the request
of the Djibouti government and was not able to confirm an incursion [5].
Of further concern, a few weeks before the onset of the alleged Djibouti
conflict, the Ethiopian regime set up a new military camp on mount
Musa-Ali, building a network of winding roads up the mount, and deployed
offensive, long-range artillery and heavy equipment directed at Eritrea
[6]. Musa Ali is strategically perched at the border junction of Eritrea,
Ethiopia and Djibouti. It is also on the route to the Eritrean port of
Assab. It is widely known among regional observers that the occupation of
Assab by any means has been the obsession of the Ethiopian regime. Why has
Ethiopia been allowed to move long-range artillery and heavy equipment
onto Musa Ali in pursuit of its dreams of access to the sea in blatant
violation of international laws? It is under this threat that Eritrea is
unfairly being pressured to withdraw from defensive positions within its
own territory.
At the same time, Ethiopia continues to occupy sovereign Eritrean
territory in defiance of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission
demarcation decision of 2003. Eritrea accepted the decision without
reservation. Ethiopia, despite its treaty obligations, has not. With this
in mind, the Djibouti-Eritrea border issue cannot be looked at in
isolation. The territory in question is located at the trilateral junction
of Eritrea, Ethiopia and Djibouti’s borders. It is unfair to expect
Eritrea to withdraw from what it claims is its own territory, and for the
UNSC to remain silent on the Eritrea-Ethiopia border issue and de facto
allow Ethiopia to continue occupying Eritrean territory.
The Eritrean people and their determination to establish a peaceful,
stable and prosperous nation surrounded by a stable and peaceful region
are products of their experience. Throughout history, Eritrea has been
subjected to gross violations and injustices by different actors. Below
are some of these experiences:
1. The British Chief Administrator of Eritrea, 1942-1944, Brig. General
Stephen Longrigg, wrote in his book [7]: “It seems, then [1944] that the
single Eritrea of today is doomed. Dismemberment, in some form and to some
extent, must be the alternative. If this is so -- and the evident racial
and cultural and historical diversities suggest it -- it must be in favor
of the two greater neighbors of the territory, the Sudan and Ethiopia.”
The British administrator’s statement foreboded coming actions. During the
Four Power Commission Report [8], the US proposed to partition Eritrea and
grant Ethiopia the southern regions of Denkalia, Akele Guzai and Seraye,
but to defer the decision on Asmara and Massawa to the UN General
Assembly. France also suggested ceding Denkalia to Ethiopia. On April 5,
1949, the First Committee of the UN voted to divide Eritrea between the
Sudan and Ethiopia. The General Assembly, however, rejected this proposal.
Soon after, Great Britain proposed assigning the highlands, including
Assab and Massawa, to Ethiopia and the western lowlands to the Sudan. At
no point during these deliberations were the desires and aspirations of
the people of Eritrea considered.
2. On December 2, 1950, Eritrea was federated with Ethiopia for 10 years
[UN Resolution 390 A (V)], despite the objections of the Eritrean people.
The then US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, stated [9]: “From the
point of view of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean people must receive
consideration. Nevertheless, the strategic interests of the United States
in the Red Sea Basin and considerations of security and world peace make
it necessary that the country [Eritrea] has to be linked with our ally,
Ethiopia.”
3. In 1962, the UN remained silent after Ethiopia unilaterally abrogated
the federation and annexed Eritrea by force. Left with no other choice,
the Eritrean people took up arms. The war of independence lasted for 30
years, costing Eritrea dearly -- some 65,000 people died, 10,000 were
disabled, and another 600,000 internally displaced and over 753,000 became
refugees around the world, while the country was left in ruins. [10].
Sustained US and Soviet support of the Ethiopian military made it one of
the largest and most brutal forces in sub-Saharan Africa, committing mass
atrocities against innocent civilian population in Eritrea.
4. Although the UN, US, EU and AU are the architects and guarantors of the
Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC), it has become evident that
the US has blocked meaningful actions by the UN Security Council to force
Ethiopia to respect its treaty obligations. Ethiopia’s rejection of the
EEBC border decision and its continued illegal occupation of Eritrean
territory for over seven years now are in flagrant violation of the final
and binding determination and international law. The UNSC should remain
seized of this matter, but its actions are otherwise.
5. Against this backdrop, the basis for sanctions against Eritrea is not
only shaky but also unfounded. Its purpose and short- and long-term
effects on the peace and stability of the Horn region should be
questioned. Despite many mischaracterizations, the Eritrean leadership has
on many occasions agreed to work jointly with the US on matters of mutual
interest, but as any government would be expected not at the expense of
Eritrea’s peace and security.
The US and Eritrea in fact have many common interests. Within the region,
Eritrea has battled foreign and homegrown terrorism since its birth as a
nation. It has also played a constructive role in peace building and
conflict resolution in Sudan. Now more than ever, the need for
constructive and forward-looking engagement is critical. The Horn of
Africa has suffered for decades from conflicts and poverty. It is also
slowly becoming the next frontline for the war on terror. A peaceful and
stable Horn is not only in the best interest of the US and the
international community, but also the nations of this region. In the Horn
of Africa, everything is linked. The international community, led by the
UNSC, must take a fair, balanced and holistic approach to the region’s
problems if it wants to solve them once and for all. As Americans of
Eritrean heritage, we humbly call upon the UN Security Council and the US
to reevaluate their policies toward the Horn of Africa and to redirect
their efforts to help bring about durable and lasting peace and
development to the region.
References:
1. Somalia UNOSOM I, http://www.un.org/Depts/DPKO/Missions/unosomi.htm
accessed 2/8/2010
2. The United States Army in Somalia, 1992-1994
http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/Somalia/Somalia.htm accessed
2/8/2010
3. The Guardian, 10 June, 2006
4. Report of the United Nations fact-finding mission on the
Djibouti-Eritrea crisis, 28 July-6 August 2008.
5. Letter dated 11 September 2008 from the Secretary-General addressed to
the President of the Security Council, S/2008/602
6.
http://nazret.com/blog/index.php?title=eritrea_soldiers_go_into_djibouti...
Ethiopia built a network in Musa Ali, accessed 2/6/2010
7. Longrigg, Stephen H., Short History of Eritrea, Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1945, p. 172.
8. The four power commission Report Sept. 15, 1948.
9. Heiden, Linda, The Eritrean Struggle for Independence, Monthly Review,
30 (2) (June 1978): 15
10. Eritrea: General Facts, EPLF Foreign Relation, 1989.
Support our Worldwide E-SMART Campaign Eritrean Sanctions Must be Annulled
and Repealed Today!
http://www.Eritrean-Smart.org
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----