webmaster
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2011
All rights reserved
From: Afrah Negash (fwd@dehai.org)
Date: Fri Jul 08 2011 - 12:38:12 EDT
Who is the real "spoiler" of the Horn Of Africa?
Afrah Negash
The previous article explained Ethiopia's obsession with the role (unilaterally undertaken) of speaker for the Horn of Africa, and use it to redefine relations among countries of the region by rendering Eritrea as the enemy of all. In so doing, Ethiopia is not really concerned with securing regional peace and stability but is fixed on diverting world attention from her refusal to comply with the international arbitration ruling about borders with Eritrea.
Nevertheless, it is useful to know the "arguments" as advanced by Addis Ababa and to understand the facts. Such examination is important not only for the sake of accuracy, but also to identify the real Ôspoiler' in the Horn of Africa. A recurring argument of the alleged "spoiler role" of Eritrea claims that since independence the country has been at war with one or another of her neighbors. Accordingly, Eritrea is given the image of a menacing warmonger nation. In reality, the only war that Eritrea fought after independence had been against Ethiopia, otherwise whatever hostilities erupted were never more than border skirmishes (which is a fact of life in international relations as recently experienced between Ethiopia and Kenya or between Thailand and Cambodia).
Eritrea's hostile engagement with Sudan came as a result of Khartoum's attempt to expand her "self-styled civilizing project" by exporting her brand of political Islam to her neighbors. Consequently, not just Eritrea but all countries of the region, including Ethiopia and Uganda, formed together an alliance of "frontline states" to contain the overspill of Sudanese radical Islamism. Following the attempted assassination of Egyptian President Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopian troops moved deep inside Sudan to, in the words of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, Ôcreate a buffer zone' against terrorist attacks coming from Khartoum. Sudan's relations with all of its neighbors remained hostile until the 2005 signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which ended its civil war.
In the aftermath of the CPA, Eritrea was able to not only normalize relations with the government in Khartoum, but also form strategic alliances with Sudanese political forces in both the north and south. This relationship enabled Eritrea engage in active mediation between various Sudanese political antagonists. More specifically, Eritrea successfully facilitated the Eastern Sudan Peace Agreement signed in Asmara in 2006. In contradistinction, although Ethiopia too Ônormalized' relations with Sudan it continues to occupy massive tracts of fertile agricultural Sudanese territories. During May 2010, the Governor of Gadarif State of eastern Sudan publicly complained in an interview with Sudanese daily "Al-Sahafa" newspaper, that more than one million acres of agricultural schemes remain "under Ethiopian occupation". Subsequently and in a rare incident of international affairs, Prime Minister Meles Zinawi informed the Ethiopian Parliament that large chunks of that territory had been leased to foreign investors.
In Somalia, the supposed Eritrean destabilizing role remains without any evidence other than pure hearsay. Even when Ethiopia and its allies were turning every stone to accuse Eritrea of supporting anti-government rebels, the UN Secretary General Special Envoy to Somalia Mr. Ahmedou Ould Abdella, explained that "...despite much talk there was no proof of the charges against Eritrea." Perhaps for that same reason references to Eritrean provision of arms to Somali rebels, which was present in earlier drafts of UN deliberations to impose sanctions were eventually dropped. In contrast, Ethiopia's intent and role in destabilizing Somalia is well established. In late 2006, the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) successfully controlled and stabilized many parts of Somalia including the capital Mogadishu as witnessed by numerous international visitors. Yet, in spite of UN Security Council Resolutions (particularly Resolution 1725 (2006) prohibiting neighboring states from involvement in Somali affairs, Ethiopian troops invaded the country.
Actually, no one believed that the UIC regime posed any credible danger to Ethiopian national security. However, UIC represented an immediate threat to Addis Ababa propaganda that the re-constitution of Somalia is an impossible task and therefore it is best to divide it into cantons. The Ethiopian invasion not only complicated the Somali crisis and produced a long trail of well-documented atrocities of every kind from scorched earth policy to loss of lives, extensive displacement and human suffering. There is no denying that Ethiopia's phobia of a greater Somalia nationalist movement is responsible for obliterating the Somalis most recent opportunity to reclaim and rebuild their country after nearly two decades of a collapsed state. Even after withdrawing its troops from Somalia, Ethiopia continued meddling in its affairs to prevent the reunification of the country.
As for the Eritrean Ð Yemeni dispute over Hanish islands, both countries had agreed to refer their case to international arbitration. At that time, Ethiopia supported Eritrea by providing documents as well as military re-deployment of troops in case of war with Yemen. Astonishingly however, the same government in Addis Ababa now considers the very same Eritrean cause as illegitimate! Once the international arbitrators reached their decision, Eritrea abided by the ruling and implemented its articles fully despite its reservations on certain parts. Since then, Yemen and Eritrea have normalized relations and moved beyond the incident by actually signing no less than eight bilateral agreements on various forms of cooperation including forming a joint fisheries company. Eritrea's experiences with Yemen is markedly different from that with Ethiopia which after nine years from the international arbitration verdict refuses to implement the demarcation ordered by the court and withdraw from the Eritrean territories.
In view of the above particulars, Ethiopia makes a travesty of international /regional relations by insisting on portraying Eritrea as "a regional spoiler" Facts prove the opposite. It is also precisely because of this reason Ethiopia has spearheading a campaign to prevent Eritrea's views from being heard in international arena. It fears that such chance will show who the real spoiler is in the Horn of Africa.
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----