THE EEBC DECISION TEN YEARS LATER AND ETHIOPIA'S ILLEGAL OCCUPATION:
THE ELEPHANT BLOCKING PEACE
By Ghidewon Abay Asmerom
Today is the 10th anniversary of the EEBC Delimitation Decision.
According to the Algiers Agreement of December 12, 2000, EEBC
delimitation and demarcation Decisions are final and binding. In an
impartial world, in a world free of destructive elephants, a decision
that is "final" would give no excuse for running away from
implementation under the cover of "dialogue", and a decision that is
"binding" would imply nothing but an obligation to adhere to the
letter and spirit of the signed agreement. But thanks to the big
elephant and the weakness of the international community, neither of
these two words can now be taken to mean what they were intended to
mean. A treaty that was beforehand agreed to be "final" is now not
being taken to mean "case closed" but "open to manipulation". Welcome
to the contradictions and hypocrisy of the elephant's world. The
minority regime in Ethiopia is nothing but a parasite atop of this
elephant's trunk.
Those who openly promised to be guarantors of the Algiers Agreement
were: the UN, the EU, the AU and the US. In this particular case,
except for the US, the others have been rendered ineffective. For 14
years, their task has been reduced to toeing the US line. Where the
US wanted them to go, they were willing to go and without asking;
what the US told them to do,they were willing to do without ever
thinking to challenge its position. However, whenever it was handy,
they have been used as a convenient cover for mighty US' will.
Eritrea-US relations are now at their lowest point in history. For
nothing else, but because the US is the super power which is
unwilling to be constrained by international agreement to which it
was an an author, guarantor and witness. From the very beginning in
this Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict, the US is the reason Ethiopia was
acting and behaving the way it did. Instead of shouldering its
obligation as an author and guarantor of the Algiers Agreement and
urging Ethiopia to abide by its treaty obligation, the US has been
advising the Ethiopian government to break international law and
Washington will provide the necessary veto cover at the UN.
Every act the Ethiopian government had done, every crime the
Ethiopian government had committed on Eritrean civilians, and every
phrase the puppet in Addis had uttered, had been with the tacit
approval of Washington. This is an open secret. If we look from 1998
to 2012, for 14 years every actor that surfaced to help, every
organization that attempted to speak about the issue has been
carefully controlled by the US. It was the US that wanted an
alternative mechanism to the EEBC delimitation decision and the
puppet in Addis was used as an accessory to breach international law.
It was the US that wanted to introduce Lloyd Axworthy's "axiomatic
fantasy" and Kofi Annan did has he was told. It was also the US that
wanted to replace the EEBC's demarcation plan with "Fulford map and
plan." Even Jendayi Frazer had to turned herself into a border
surveyor so that she can "reopen the 2002 EEBC decision, which she
had concluded was wrong, and award a major piece of disputed
territory to Ethiopia."
Current US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, the very person
responsible for the escalation of the border war in May of 1998, is
also acting true to her expected historical character. Now that Obama
had elevated her office to a cabinet level, in par with that of
Secretary of State Clinton, she (according to a cable from her
office) had "urged Ethiopia to forge a new border demarcation plan,
without preconditions on prior dialogue with Eritrea, stating that
some Security Council members may wish to reference the dispute in a
new sanctions resolution. Tessema initially protested this idea,
stating that progress will be impossible without Eritrean buy-in, but
warmed up to the plan after Ambassador Rice proposed that a third
party could offer some legitimacy to the demarcation project." Under
the Algiers Agreement the EEBC is the sole authority with a mandate
to demarcate the border; yet Rice is urging, over the Ethiopians'
protest, the breaching of international law. She is telling Ethiopia
to come up with "a new border demarcation plan" and "a third
party" (read US) "could offer some legitimacy."
As for the UN, the EU and the AU, instead of challenging the US and
asking it to moderate its biased stand on Eritrea, and to positively
use its super power influence, they like to parrot the phrase
"normalization of relations" between Ethiopia and Eritrea. The
problem is not Ethiopia but US officials who are abusing the US
power. Be that as it may, how can one expect Eritrea to normalize
relations with Ethiopia: a country, at the behest of the US, is
taking a "final and binding" decision to mean neither "final" nor
"binding"? It is absurd for anyone to call for "normalization of
relations" before Ethiopia unconditionally implements the final and
binding decision. No self-respecting government would enter into any
"good-faith" dialogue with a group that has neither goodness nor
faith. Just imagine for a moment for the tables to be
turned around, and Eritrea was the one that had refused to implement
the decision. Would anyone think Washington would have urged dialogue
and waited a second before running to impose sanctions?
So the elephant that is blocking the path to peace in the Horn Africa
in general and between Eritrea and Ethiopia in particular is the one
in Washington. Its trunk is trying to suck all the air out of the
final and binding Decision so that healing and normalization would
not take place between the two neighbors. So, unless this elephant is
persuaded to have a change of heart, nothing will change; and
unfortunately genuine border delimitation and demarcation decisions,
like the one from April 13, 2002, cannot be expected to usher peace
and harmony.
Ghidewon Abay Asmerom
----[Mailing List for Eritrea Related News ]----
Received on Fri Apr 13 2012 - 18:45:04 EDT
