Press Statement
<p>
Following the "irregular" IGAD summit in Addis Ababa on 25
November 2011, it is said that the organization subsequently issued a baseless
statement incriminating Eritrea as usual with an outright lie that lacks any
evidence whatsoever. Moreover, the statement lauded Kenya's invasion of Somalia
and called for the Ethiopian government to Ôeinforce' the invasion.
<p>
In view of the fact that such a statement was issued at a time when Eritrea has
reactivated its membership in the regional organization and embarked upon a
constructive engagement with the member states to resume its sacred mission,
i.e. promoting the economic and development integration of the countries of East
Africa on the one hand, and when external interference in Somalia and the
ensuing dire consequences has become obvious on the other, the intended
objective is indeed evident.
<p>
It has become crystal clear that the groundless rumors which were concocted and
circulated alleging that "Eritrea has sent 3 airplanes carrying arms to Baidowa"
was after all another agenda designed to create a prelude to the aforementioned
incrimination. As clearly spelt out in the Eritrean government's message to the
United Nations last week, it once again calls on the Security Council to
investigate the incrimination through an independent body. Where did
the planes depart from? ...Which route did they take? ...where did they land? ...to
whom did they belong? ...What was their type? ...what sort of armaments did they
carry?... at what altitude did they fly? ...through which route? ...how many
countries did they fly over? ...who were the pilots flying them? ...What about their
nationality? ...When did they land? ...who unloaded the aircrafts? ...for how long
did they stay there? ...Where did they subsequently head to? ...How come the radars
monitoring the entire Red Sea and the Horn region failed to detect their flight?
...and what about of the 3rd country about whom charges have been made of 'being
the origin' of the armaments? ...etc. The questions are indeed many.
<p>
Whereas it is Eritrea's legitimate right to challenge these baseless campaigns
of incrimination in an open forum, the Security Council itself is duty bound to
investigate issues submitted to it and thereby take the necessary measures.
After all, in instances when the incriminated party is calling for jurisdiction
in a free and open forum, there should be no reason whatsoever for the accuser
to fear the Ôccused' to defend itself in the open.
<p>
It is to be recalled that during its hectic preparations to invade Somalia in
the end of 2006, Ethiopia, in violation of the Security Council Resolution 1725
of 6 December 2006, that called for "RESPECT FOR THE SOVEREIGNITY, TERRITORIAL
INTEGRITY, POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE AND UNITY OF SOMALIA", unfounded lies alleging
that "Eritrea has sent 2,000 troops into Somalia" were circulated, in pure act
of cover-up ploy for the invasion. However, when such a report was proved to be
an utter lie, nobody questioned the authors of blackmail. What is even worse,
the fate of journalists from the Eritrean Ministry of Information who were
kidnapped from the streets of Nairobi under the false charge of being
"terrorists" is not known to-date.
<p>
Eritrea's firm stance that the "Somalia issue can only be resolved through a
political process in which all Somali political forces take part and not through
military means", has become all the more apparent. The frequent foreign
military interference in the guise of the so-called "mission for maintaining
hope" that started in 1993, did not bear fruit at all besides further
complicating the Somali issue. Amid such practical experience, the rationale
behind Eritrea's stance has once again become evident. Is it then that the
repeated defamation campaign against Eritrea linking it with the Somali issue
designed to cover up the truth? What is the reason for treading along the same
failed approach while it has been crystal clear that the previous military
adventures resulted in unprecedented human cost? What possible reasons could
there be for blessing Ethiopia's repeated invasion? Why are other countries in
favor of following the same approach? Where then is the justification for the
external forces that invaded Somalia in 2006 in order to stamp out the Union of
Islamic Courts then branded Ôerrorist' now trying to launch the 2nd invasion
under the pretext of protecting the same entity, which it used to brand a
terrorist organization? What legal justification could then be put forth for the
group that once fought against Ethiopian occupation of Somalia to assume a
similar position like that of the Abdullahi Yusuf administration that did not
reject the Ethiopian presence in the first place. Moreover, what justifiable
argument could there be to pose as the Ôransitional Government' in Mogadishu
and bless the Ethiopian invasion now?
<p>
When the fabrications that were intertwined in order to create pretexts lacked
credibility and justification with Eritrea's just arguments, fresh tunes are
surfacing like: "In order for us to believe that Eritrea is not Ôupporting'
Shabbab it has to join forces in the military adventurism in Somalia." This
blatant argument is tantamount to: "In order that I believe you are clean, put
yourself in the mess I am in."
<p>
As far as Eritrea's stance is concerned, there should emerge an initiative that
could bring viable solution for the Somali issue. The erroneous handling that
further impedes the achievement of a viable solution should be rectified.
Eritrea is against the baseless incrimination against it in the wake of its
correct stance on the Somalia issue and also calls for rectification of its
wrong handling in the name of IGAD and other regional, as well as international
organizations. Furthermore, it calls for genuine efforts aimed at bringing about
a lasting solution to the crisis on the basis of respect to Somalia's
sovereignty, territorial integrity, political freedom and unity.
<p>
Ministry of Foreign Affairs<br> 29 November 2011<br> Asmara
----[Mailing List for Eritrea Related News ]----
Received on Tue Nov 29 2011 - 19:50:59 EST