Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage Eritrean Foreign Ministry Statement on Ethiopia's Preparations for War.
News leaked by various sources, including Western intelligence sources, report that the Ethiopian Government will launch attacks against Eritrea between mid January and mid February along three directions.
Meanwhile, efforts are underway by U.S officials to ascertain whether the air moratorium still holds.
The Government of Eritrea has always maintained that both parties must renounce force as a means of settling their border dispute. It has repeatedly affirmed that what is needed is a binding agreement on cessation of all hostilities, including a total ban on air strikes. The Ethiopian Government, however, has been adamantly opposed to a cessation of hostilities, even to a ban on air attacks. The result of accepting Ethiopia's condition is a precarious "moratorium" - which it can unilaterally break at a time of its choosing.
Ethiopia's repeatedly declared intent to launch war is by now widely known. While anyone is free to speculate about the outcome of any such war, it is highly unfortunate that Ethiopia has been helped in its belligerent attitude by extraneous circumstances and misguided parties.
The Government of Eritrea has never - and does not - consider war as an option. It realizes full well that war can not resolve the dispute. But if it is attacked, it reserves its legitimate right to self-defense. In that event, it is the Government of Ethiopia which bears full responsibility.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 12 January 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Press Release
Ethiopia's Intentions to Unleash War Cannot Be Disguised
The Government of Eritrea had issued a statement on January 12 warning of Ethiopia's planned attack against Eritrea. This warning is based on various indicators including tangible activities on the ground, reports leaked by Western intelligence sources and accounts of defecting Ethiopian soldiers whose number is increasing each day.
But, in characteristic fashion, the Ethiopian Government is trying to deny these facts, accusing Eritrea of "drawing attention to a fictitious impending offensive." It has moreover resorted to well-known distortions to portray Eritrea as desirous of impeding the OAU peace process underway. In reality, however,
1. It is Ethiopia which has inexplicably declared on 6 January 1999 that the "peace process has come to an end." This happened despite the fact that the OAU High-Level Delegation remains seized of the border dispute in accordance with the decision of the Central Organ. Eritrea has explicitly reaffirmed, through its letter of December 18, its desire to cooperate with the OAU to promote the process underway.
2. The OAU has not "ascertained that Eritrea is the aggressor" as the Ethiopian statement falsely asserts. Paragraph 7 of the OAU proposal, indeed, reads: "In order to determine the origins of the conflict, an investigation be carried out on the incidents of 6 May 1998 and any other incident prior to that date which could have contributed to a misunderstanding between the two Parties regarding their common border, including the incidents of July-August 1997." Eritrea has welcomed this proposal. But Ethiopia has been opposed to any investigation because it knows that it was the aggressor party which launched the unprovoked attack on May 6, 1998, and the party that committed aggression in Bada and Badme in July 1997.
3. It was Ethiopia that escalated the armed clashes in Badme to the entire boundary between the two countries: declaring total war on May 13th; launching an attack on the Zalambessa front on May 31, 1998; and, the first air strike on Asmara on 5 June 1998.
4. Finally, Ethiopia has rejected the call for a cessation of hostilities although this is the primary point in the OAU proposal as well as UN Security Council resolutions.
Indeed, if Ethiopia has no intentions of launching war, then it should have no qualms on agreeing to a cessation of hostilities, including a total ban on air strikes.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 15 January 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_012599.html 100644 127137 345 5210 6653125033 6255
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_012999.html 100644 127137 345 14511 6654355637 6325
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_013199.html 100644 127137 345 7037 6655146015 6270
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_020499.html 100644 127137 345 4223 6656364435 6274
Ethiopia's "Hit and Cry" Tactics
February 4, 1999
"The Ethiopian government is once
again resorting to their over-used tactic of hitting others and then
crying about being attacked. The latest round of artillery exchanges on
the Eritrean-Ethiopian border were started by the Ethiopian army,"
says Yemane Ghebreab, Eritrean Government Spokesperson, currently on a
visit to the United States.
The artillery exchanges are not a new development. They do not signify a change in the military situation as there have been intermittent exchanges over the past several months.
Mr. Yemane Ghebreab said the latest allegations from Ethiopia are intended to cover their preparations for war. "Eritrea, on the other hand, has repeatedly stated and remains committed to not firing the first shot."
"If Ethiopia is really interested in peace, then it should respond immediately to international calls for a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities. Eritrea also calls for independent observers to be placed on the ground to verify who in reality is initiating hostile action," said Mr. Yemane Ghebreab.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Ethiopia's Fabrication of an Air Attack
The Ethiopian government has today accused Eritrea of launching an air attack on AdiGrat at 10:45 a.m. This is a complete fabrication.
But the design is clear. Because Ethiopia is planning to launch a full-scale war against Eritrea, it has been fabricating stories this week of Eritrea's "provocations and attacks." Thus, while it was Ethiopia that opened a new front in Tsorona (central Eritrea-Ethiopia border) by deploying about 55,000 troops--including the "elite" 20th Division, Ethiopia claimed earlier this week that "Eritrea had deployed troops in the Tsorona front to attack industrial sites in northern Tigray and the obelisk in Aksum."
The fabricated story of an air attack against AdiGrat falls into this pattern. Obviously, Ethiopia want to break the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States on June 14, 1998. But, as the party that wants to break the moratorium has to inform the United States Government, Ethiopia has preferred to fabricate a story rather than inform the United States of its real intentions. Eritrea remains on record calling for an immediate secession of all hostilities.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 5 February 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
The Ethiopian government has today launched a large-scale attack against Eritrea on the Mereb-Setit front. The attack started at 6:00 a.m. this morning.
Ethiopia's impending offensive has been in the offing for days now:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 6 February 1999
g_0206992.html 100644 127137 345 2574 6657116745 6367
PRESS STATEMENT
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
Feb 06, 1999
Time 8:30 PM local time
ETHIOPIA ARMY SUFFERED HEAVY LOSSES
The Ethiopian army has suffered heavy losses in the large-scale offensive that it had launched on the Mereb Setit front this morning. So far, two Ethiopian brigades have been totally routed while another two brigades have suffered severe causalities. Over 100 soldiers have been captured.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
6 February, 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Ethiopian launches a second offensive
In spite of the heavy losses that it has suffered in the offensive it launched yesterday on the Mereb-Setit front, ( two brigades put out of action while another two were heavily battered), the Ethiopian army has opened a second round of attacks on the same front at 6:45 a.m. today.
The offensive is accompanied by helicopter gunships.
In accusing Eritrea "for launching the offensive" yesterday, the Ethiopian claimed strangely - the Ertirean objective was to " control and destroy the Ethiopian military at Badme". Strange because Ethiopia had all along been threatening to wage war unless "Eritrea withdraws from occupied Badme".
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
7 February, 1999
g_0207992.html 100655 127137 345 10475 6657422471 6405
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
7 February, 1999
4:35 p.m. local time
War was always Ethiopia's intention
1. From the outset of this conflict, Ethiopia has been constantly and consistently threatening to go to war if it did not have its way.
2. Ethiopian officials recently declared that " the peace process is as good as dead", and announced that the only option remaining for them was to force Eritrea out of "disputed areas" which happen to fall, invariably, inside Eritrea=92s borders.
3. For months, Ethiopia has been making public its war preparations. Frequent declarations of readiness to " route the enemy" and the now fabled proclamation that it would " teach Eritrea a lesson" are only a few examples of Ethiopia=92s willingness to speak sorecklessly about war.
4. The Ethiopian allegation that Eritrean planes bombed Adigrat on Friday, February 5th has been internationally recognized as a complete fabrication and thus belies an inherent intent to attack and abrogate the air moratorium.
5. This fabrication was preceded by Ethiopia's "sealing off" of Tigray to media and journalists last week, cutting of any road or telecommunication access so as to curb the flow of information about their offensive plans against Eritrea.
6. Twenty four hours prior to their February 6th attack, the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs instructed all its missions abroad to be on alert and to await " very important news within the next 24 hours." Ethiopian Forces attacked Eritrean positions at 06:00 hours on Saturday morning, February 6, 1999.
7. The Ethiopian army, as part of their attack plan came out of their trenches and attempted to charge Eritrean positions. Eritrea's defensive stance meant that the Ethiopian forces were killed and fell as they approached. Anyone who wishes to independently verify this assertion is invited to go and see the thousands of Ethiopian corpses lying outside their trenches.
8. Ethiopia is now poised to launch an air attack having declared its abrogation of the air moratorium based on its fallacious claim that Eritrea attacked Adigrat.
9. International silence in the face of Ethiopia's intent to dictate its will, blaming Eritrea for its own crimes as it does, evident from the outset has encouraged it to persist in this reckless path. The international community must assume some responsibility for the very grave situation which Ethiopia's objectives and irresponsible measure have created.
10. Now, with these unfortunate turn of events, one needs to think back. Which government has consistently called for a cessation of hostilities and asked for direct negotiations to avoid such hostilities? Which has refused to accept unless its ultimatum was met? The answer is very obvious.
Proving that War is not an option
11. This border dispute can not be resolved by force. War is not only an impossible means by which to solve this dilemma, but is also, strategically and tactically, a terrible mistake.
12. It must be recognized that unjust external pressure on Eritrea to acquiesce to Ethiopian ultimatums and threats only encourages Ethiopia to try and use force. It also postpones a solution to a very simple border dispute.
13. Ethiopia must affirm its irreversible commitment to a peaceful solution by rescinding its declaration of war, formally accepting an immediate cessation of all hostilities, and engaging in the peace process to reach a mutually accepted agreement for a peaceful solution of the border dispute.
14. It is imperative to remember that this is a border dispute. The ability to resolve this dispute through technical demarcation and with the participation of neutral third parties has been the fact that Ethiopia has worked so hard to avoid. It cannot be forgotten in the light of these recent and tragic developments.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
7 February, 1999
g_020899.html 100655 127137 345 2135 6657554572 6306 Ethiopian Regime Continues Its Full-Scale Offensive and Opens a New Attack on the Alitena-Mereb Front
The Ethiopian regime continues to launch repetitive attacks in spite of the heavy losses that it has suffered. Over 250 Ethiopian soldiers were killed while eighteen were captured in the clashes along the Mereb-Setit front yesterday, Sunday, February 7. The Ethiopian regime had used helicopter gunships in the attack in the hope of reversing the disastrous defeats that it had sustained on Saturday in which two brigades were completely routed and another two brigades severely battered. The Addis Abeba regime has again violated the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States on June 14, 1998, through the use of helicopter gunships and fighter planes.
This morning, the Ethiopian regime has yet again launched a fresh attack on the Mereb-Setit front employing helicopter gunships and fighter aircraft while simultaneously opening a new attack on the Alitena-Mereb front in southern Eritrea.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 8 February 1999 g_0208992.html 100655 127137 345 2560 6657561751 6367
The Ethiopian large-scale offensive launched today along two axis, the Mereb-Setit and the Alitena-Mereb fronts respectively, is faltering with the regime's forces suffering huge losses.
After claiming for the past two days that the current large-scale attacks
were initiated by Eritrea, the TPLF regime has now been forced to admit--by
the weight of incontrovertible evidence--that it is the party which has
unleashed the offensives. Ethiopia has also admitted today that it is using
fighter planes and helicopter gunships in the fighting.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
8 February, 1999
Will the Crimes of the TPLF Regime Go Unpunished?
On Saturday, February 6, 1999, the Ethiopian regime launched a large-scale offensive against Eritrea along the Mereb-Setit front. Despite heavy losses, the attack has continued on the same front for the past two days. The TPLF regime has further opened a new front on the Mereb-Alitena front today.
But what is the objective and rationale of this military adventure? Is this war necessary and justifiable at all?
The crisis that has gripped Eritrea and Ethiopia for nine months now has come about because the TPLF regime violated a fundamental principle that is sacrosanct to the African continent. The unnecessary confrontation has been triggered because the TPLF authorities have redrawn, unilaterally and illegally, the international boundary between the two countries in order to gobble up large tracts of Eritrean territory. Moreover, the TPLF regime:
* resorted to a pattern of using force for almost two years in order to create facts on the ground;
* declared war on Eritrea on May 13, 1998;
* launched the first air strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998;
* refused to agree on a total ban of air strikes;
* continued to use the threat of war as a bargaining chip in the diplomatic endeavors to bring about peace;
* committed gross violation of human rights by deporting to-date more than 52,000 Eritreans and detaining more than 1,500 innocent citizens in concentration camps.
While these are the facts of the case, the international community chose to accommodate and appease Ethiopia. Some argued, implausibly, that the international community has to beef up "the fragile Meles government to prevent possible fragmentation of the country." Other portrayed a non-existent rift between "moderates and hard-liners" in the TPLF regime arguing that tolerance was imperative to strengthen the power balance of the "moderates."
It is this "kid glove" treatment that has encouraged the TPLF regime to go below the board. As a "prodigious child" of the international community, the TPLF regime felt that it could commit any crime and go to any excess with impunity. With this "carte blanche" in hand, the regime was able this week to:
* fabricate an air bombardment of AdiGrat insulting the intelligence of the international community;
* unleash a full-scale war and claim that this was initiated by Eritrea;
* break the moratorium on air strikes to use fighter planes and helicopter gunships in its war effort while not bothering to inform in advance, as it is bound by the agreement, the United States Government which brokered the arrangement.
In the face of all these crimes and excesses, what will the international community do? Will we hear again some unearthly explanation for continued inaction? Or will the international community take the measures that it should have taken long ago and which could have saved the region from the scourge of another war? The Eritrean people are asking these vital questions and earnestly awaiting some fair and true answers.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 8 February 1999
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Asmara
9 February, 1999
Ethiopian Forces in the Tsorona Area Battered
The large scale offensive that the Ethiopian regime launched along two axes yesterday has been foiled with the TPLF forces suffering heavy losses. The attack that the Ethiopian army launched on the Mereb-Setit front wilted early on as the regime's bruised forces did not have the stamina to venture out from their trenches having lost almost four brigades in the three days fighting along this front.
Pitched fighting continued until the late afternoon hours on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front. Here again, TPLF forces could not gain ground in spite of repeated waves of attacks. At the end of the fighting yesterday, the "elite" 20th and 24th divisions of the Ethiopian army were severely battered with more than 1,500 soldiers killed and around 3,000 wounded. Twenty soldiers were also captured.
In the meantime, independent journalists (VOA) have confirmed that Ethiopia had shelled the town of Adi Quala on Sunday evening killing eight civilians and wounding 23 others. Ten houses were demolished. Ethiopian claims that their target was a radar station were a pure fabrication. Similarly, Reuters' correspondent in the Mereb-Setit front has confirmed yesterday evening that "Geza Gerehelase" (a small post in the chain of Eritrean entrenched positions) remains firmly under Eritrean control.
Statement by Ambassador Haile Menkerios
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
I am honored to address the Security Council in this session to consider the current draft resolution on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict. Indeed, my government appreciates the serious concern of the Council on the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea, and the dangerous level it has been escalated to by the Ethiopian government. Eritrea further welcomes the Council's decision to be actively seized of the issue.
Mr. President,
My government has presented in writing its considered reaction to the las resolution (S/1226/1999) concerning the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and I need not repeat them here. Needless to say, the concerns that Eritrea tried to alert the council about in its presentation have unfortunately come to pass. Ethiopia has broken the de facto truce that had existed since June and restarted an all-out offensive against Eritrea.
It is a fact known to members of the Council that Eritrea has constantly and consistently called from the outset of this conflict for the renouncement of the use and threat of use of force; for a firm, irreversible commitment to a peaceful and legal solution of the conflict; for a binding cease-fire or cessation of hostilities so that a conducive atmosphere could be created for the peaceful process to continue and succeed. Such calls were repeated by the international community including the Council. Sadly, these calls were adamantly rejected by Ethiopia. Nonetheless, Eritrea continued to engage with all peace endeavors by concerned parties in good faith, reaffirming that despite Ethiopia's constant threats and declared preparations for war, it shall never shoot unless shot at.
Mr. President,
My country has been shot at and forced to defend itself in the current all out offensive unleashed on it by the Ethiopian regime. Indeed, the fact that Ethiopia intended and was preparing to do just that was never hidden from the international community. Consistent with its Parliament's standing declaration that unless Eritrea unilaterally and unconditionally withdraws from its own territory that Ethiopia claims, Ethiopia will make it do so by force, the Ethiopian government has, going from bad to worse, escalated this conflict from a containable border skirmish to an all out war.
Your Excellencies, the fact that Ethiopia started this offensive and violated the US brokered moratorium on air attacks has been, contrary to its useless but usual attempt to deny them, ascertained by all those who have followed and witnessed its final preparations and the actual launch and conduct of its current offensive. We can only be convinced that this fact can not be unknown to your Excellencies' governments as well, as representatives of the diplomatic communities in either or both countries, those of your governments included, have followed or witnessed the facts for themselves.
Summarizing the overwhelming independent eyewitness reports of the developments on the ground, Global Intelligence Update writes, "Ethiopia launched an offensive against neighboring Eritrea on February 6, ostensibly aimed at retaking the disputed border area of Badme." The Update continues to warn, "The problem for international organizations attempting to broker a peace treaty between the two countries is that the dispute is not that simple. Ethiopia has not expended an estimated $300 million on arms since last June simply to retake a desolate patch of rocks."
Concerning the violation of the moratorium on air strikes, no less than President Clinton, the broker and thus custodian of that moratorium, has clearly indicated that it is Ethiopia that did so: "I am particularly alarmed by the recent use of air power, which escalates the conflict and violates the agreed moratorium. I urge the Ethiopian government to refrain from further use of its aircraft as currently employed along the border ..." A myriad of independent on-site witnesses of the Ethiopian air bombardment of towns and other civilian centers, including shelters set up for deportees from Ethiopia some 30 kilometers away from the war front, have reported the death of innocent civilians and devastation of property such bombings are causing.
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
The danger that Ethiopia's all out war poses for the security of the entire region and wider, far from its immediate negative consequences on the process for a peaceful resolution of the border dispute, can not escape Your Excellencies. While these remain the facts and consequences of the Ethiopian government's persistent recourse to force, it is indeed tragic and regrettable that the Security Council, the very body entrusted with ensuring international security, would gloss over this dangerous reality, and not condemn the Ethiopian regime for its irresponsible resort to force to solve what indeed is a border conflict. Not to do so, to allow the Ethiopian regime to continue to wage war in violation of another country's sovereignty with impunity, would only encourage Ethiopia, as it has done so far, to continue on its war path with very grave consequences. The Security Council will then have to share responsibility for those consequences.
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ethiopia alone bears full responsibility for the start and escalation of this conflict to a full scale war, including the current offensive. Eritrea urges the Security Council to take note of this fact, to resolve accordingly and act appropriately.
I thank you.
Security Council Resolution
The Security Council,
Reaffirming its resolutions 1177 (1998) of 26 June 1998 and 1226 (1999) of 29 January 1999,
Expressing its grave concern regarding the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the resumption of hostilities between the parties,
Recalling the commitment of Ethiopia and Eritrea to a moratorium on the threat of and use of air strikes,
Stressing that the situation between Ethiopia and Eritrea constitutes a threat to peace and security,
1. Condemns the recourse to the use of force by Ethiopia and Eritrea;
2. Demands an immediate halt to the hostilities, in particular the use of air strikes;
3. Demands that Ethiopia and Eritrea resume diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict;
4. Stresses that the Framework Agreement as approved by the Central Organ Summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management, and Resolution on 17 December 1998 (S/1998/1223, annex) remains a viable and sound basis for a peaceful resolution of the conflict;
5. Expresses its full support for the efforts of the OAU, the Secretary-General and his Special Envoy for Africa, and concerned Member States to find a peaceful resolution to the present hostilities;
6. Calls upon Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure the safety of the civilian population and respect for human rights and international humanitarian law;
7. Strongly urges all States to end immediately all sales of arms and munitions to Ethiopia and Eritrea;
8. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.
g_0210992.html 100644 127137 345 17015 6660564124 6366Statement by Ambassador Haile Menkerios
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
I am honored to address the Security Council in this session to consider the current draft resolution on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict. Indeed, my government appreciates the serious concern of the Council on the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea, and the dangerous level it has been escalated to by the Ethiopian government. Eritrea further welcomes the Council's decision to be actively seized of the issue.
Mr. President,
My government has presented in writing its considered reaction to the las resolution (S/1226/1999) concerning the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and I need not repeat them here. Needless to say, the concerns that Eritrea tried to alert the council about in its presentation have unfortunately come to pass. Ethiopia has broken the de facto truce that had existed since June and restarted an all-out offensive against Eritrea.
It is a fact known to members of the Council that Eritrea has constantly and consistently called from the outset of this conflict for the renouncement of the use and threat of use of force; for a firm, irreversible commitment to a peaceful and legal solution of the conflict; for a binding cease-fire or cessation of hostilities so that a conducive atmosphere could be created for the peaceful process to continue and succeed. Such calls were repeated by the international community including the Council. Sadly, these calls were adamantly rejected by Ethiopia. Nonetheless, Eritrea continued to engage with all peace endeavors by concerned parties in good faith, reaffirming that despite Ethiopia's constant threats and declared preparations for war, it shall never shoot unless shot at.
Mr. President,
My country has been shot at and forced to defend itself in the current all out offensive unleashed on it by the Ethiopian regime. Indeed, the fact that Ethiopia intended and was preparing to do just that was never hidden from the international community. Consistent with its Parliament's standing declaration that unless Eritrea unilaterally and unconditionally withdraws from its own territory that Ethiopia claims, Ethiopia will make it do so by force, the Ethiopian government has, going from bad to worse, escalated this conflict from a containable border skirmish to an all out war.
Your Excellencies, the fact that Ethiopia started this offensive and violated the US brokered moratorium on air attacks has been, contrary to its useless but usual attempt to deny them, ascertained by all those who have followed and witnessed its final preparations and the actual launch and conduct of its current offensive. We can only be convinced that this fact can not be unknown to your Excellencies' governments as well, as representatives of the diplomatic communities in either or both countries, those of your governments included, have followed or witnessed the facts for themselves.
Summarizing the overwhelming independent eyewitness reports of the developments on the ground, Global Intelligence Update writes, "Ethiopia launched an offensive against neighboring Eritrea on February 6, ostensibly aimed at retaking the disputed border area of Badme." The Update continues to warn, "The problem for international organizations attempting to broker a peace treaty between the two countries is that the dispute is not that simple. Ethiopia has not expended an estimated $300 million on arms since last June simply to retake a desolate patch of rocks."
Concerning the violation of the moratorium on air strikes, no less than President Clinton, the broker and thus custodian of that moratorium, has clearly indicated that it is Ethiopia that did so: "I am particularly alarmed by the recent use of air power, which escalates the conflict and violates the agreed moratorium. I urge the Ethiopian government to refrain from further use of its aircraft as currently employed along the border ..." A myriad of independent on-site witnesses of the Ethiopian air bombardment of towns and other civilian centers, including shelters set up for deportees from Ethiopia some 30 kilometers away from the war front, have reported the death of innocent civilians and devastation of property such bombings are causing.
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
The danger that Ethiopia's all out war poses for the security of the entire region and wider, far from its immediate negative consequences on the process for a peaceful resolution of the border dispute, can not escape Your Excellencies. While these remain the facts and consequences of the Ethiopian government's persistent recourse to force, it is indeed tragic and regrettable that the Security Council, the very body entrusted with ensuring international security, would gloss over this dangerous reality, and not condemn the Ethiopian regime for its irresponsible resort to force to solve what indeed is a border conflict. Not to do so, to allow the Ethiopian regime to continue to wage war in violation of another country's sovereignty with impunity, would only encourage Ethiopia, as it has done so far, to continue on its war path with very grave consequences. The Security Council will then have to share responsibility for those consequences.
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ethiopia alone bears full responsibility for the start and escalation of this conflict to a full scale war, including the current offensive. Eritrea urges the Security Council to take note of this fact, to resolve accordingly and act appropriately.
I thank you.
Security Council Resolution
The Security Council,
Reaffirming its resolutions 1177 (1998) of 26 June 1998 and 1226 (1999) of 29 January 1999,
Expressing its grave concern regarding the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the resumption of hostilities between the parties,
Recalling the commitment of Ethiopia and Eritrea to a moratorium on the threat of and use of air strikes,
Stressing that the situation between Ethiopia and Eritrea constitutes a threat to peace and security,
1. Condemns the recourse to the use of force by Ethiopia and Eritrea;
2. Demands an immediate halt to the hostilities, in particular the use of air strikes;
3. Demands that Ethiopia and Eritrea resume diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict;
4. Stresses that the Framework Agreement as approved by the Central Organ Summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management, and Resolution on 17 December 1998 (S/1998/1223, annex) remains a viable and sound basis for a peaceful resolution of the conflict;
5. Expresses its full support for the efforts of the OAU, the Secretary-General and his Special Envoy for Africa, and concerned Member States to find a peaceful resolution to the present hostilities;
6. Calls upon Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure the safety of the civilian population and respect for human rights and international humanitarian law;
7. Strongly urges all States to end immediately all sales of arms and munitions to Ethiopia and Eritrea;
8. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.
g_021199.html 100644 127137 345 12324 6660566467 6317Statement
Mercenaries Participate in Ethiopian Aggression on Eritrea
1. It is to be recalled that Prime Minister Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia had, on 3 February 1999, admitted that the Ethiopian Air Force has been strengthened by the recruitment of foreign technicians and trainers. There is now conclusive evidence that among the so-called trainers are included mercenaries who are participating in the Ethiopian war of aggression against Eritrea.
2. A mercenary is, according to Article 1 of the International Convention Against the recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries (UN General Assembly resolution 44/34), a person who is: * specifically recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict,
* motivated essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to a conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions in the armed forces of that party;
* neither a national of a party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a party to the conflict;
* not a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict and
* has not been sent by a state which is not a party to the conflict on
official duty as a member of its armed forces.
3. Additionally, a mercenary is also a person who, in any other situation, is recruited to participate in a concerted act of violence with the view to (a) overthrowing a Government or otherwise undermining the constitutional order of a state and (b) undermining the territorial integrity of a state.
4. It has become increasingly evident that the real objective of the latest Ethiopian aggression has been the "undermining of the territorial integrity of Eritrea and to overthrow the present Eritrean Government." There is also incontrovertible evidence that these mercenaries have actually participated in the aerial bombardments, by helicopter gunships and aircraft, of Eritrean villages and towns, killing several innocent civilians, and in attacking Eritrean military positions. The mercenaries involved have been lured to participate in the Ethiopian aggression by payments of large sums of money.
5. Mercenaries are considered criminals by international law. Thus, by UN General Assembly Resolutions 3103 (XXVIII) of 1973, 2465 (XXIII) of 1968, 2548 (XXIV) of 1969 and 2708 (XXV) of 1970 mercenaries are considered criminals which should be accordingly punished.
6. It is also to be noted that the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States declares that it is the duty of states not to organize or encourage the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries for incursion into the territory of another state.
7. Furthermore, General Assembly Resolution 35/48 (1980) which established an ad-hoc committee on the Drafting of an International Convention Against the recruitment, Use, Finance and Training of Mercenaries recognized that "the activities of mercenaries are contrary to fundamental principles of international law..." Then too, Article 3 (g) of General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 1974 which defines aggression includes the sending of mercenaries by or on behalf of a state against another state as amounting to aggression. Needless to say, several resolutions of the OAU consider the recruitment and use of mercenaries as a grave crime because of the suffering they have caused to many African states.
8. The recruitment of mercenaries is condemned by Articles 2, 3 and f4 of UN General Assembly Resolution 44/34, which provides that any person who recruits, uses, finances or trains mercenaries or who, being a mercenary, participates directly in hostilities in a concerted act of violence, commits an offense for the purposes of this convention as does a person attempting to commit such an offense and an accomplice.
9. Finally, by article 44 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Convention relating to the victims of international armed conflict, a mercenary does not enjoy the rights of a combatant or a prisoner of war.
10. The Government of Ethiopia has violated the clear provisions of several international instruments and, by its actions, committed aggression against Eritrea. It has also committed crimes against regional peace and security. What is more disturbing is that all these heinous crimes are committed by a state which is hosting the OAU and the United Nations Economic Commission of Africa. By its actions, Ethiopia is holding both the UN and the OAU in contempt. It is no longer possible to accept such behavior and all the necessary measures must be taken to relocate both these institutions from a country which is holding Africa in contempt.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 11 February 1999
g_0211992.html 100655 127137 345 3116 6660700636 6346
The Government of the State of Eritrea reiterates its appreciation of the concerns of the Security Council as indeed this was communicated on 2 February 1999, and wishes to make the following observations on Resolution 1227 of 10 February 1999.
Eritrean Foreign Ministry: Ethiopia Take Over Ambassador's Residence
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:58:11 -0000
Press Release
Ethiopia Takes Over Ambassador's Residence
The Government of Ethiopia, after having declared Eritrea's ambassador to the OAU and Ethiopia persona non grata on February 9, 1999, and expelling him within 24 hours, has taken further illegal actions.
On February 12, 1999, the Ethiopian authorities ordered troops who had surrounded the Eritrean ambassador's residence for 24 hours to break into the residence. Eritrea's charge d'affaires has been denied entry into the residence.
Mr. Tesfaldet Woldeab, a guard at the residence, and his child, a son, Zerai Tesfaldet; and two house maids--Mrs. Addisa Kasa and Mrs. Alganesh Ghebremicael--have been taken and their whereabouts are unknown.
Similarly, two guards working at the chancery--Mr. Wasyehum Ayele and Mr. Asmerom Legesse--have been taken by Ethiopian security.
Furthermore, the Government of Ethiopia has cut all telephone lines of the Embassy of Eritrea in Addis Ababa. These actions violate Article 22 of the Vienna Convention which guarantees the inviolability and immunity of premises and property of diplomats and diplomatic missions.
The Government of Eritrea had appealed to the OAU Secretary General to take prompt measures against Ethiopia's actions. Apparently, the Secretary General has failed to dissuade Ethiopia from taking these illegal actions.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 13 February 1999
g_021499.html 100655 127137 345 2643 6661511666 6277
The Ethiopian regime has unleashed an offensive on the Assab front today, Sunday, 14 February, 1999. The attack, which was accompanied by air bombardment of the environs of the frontline by Antonov 130 planes, started at 6:30 a.m. The Assab front is about 71 kms from the port city of Assab.
Today's attack comes in the wake of the staggering defeats that the TPLF army has suffered on the other two fronts earlier this week. The 20th Division was virtually decimated and the 24th Division heavily battered on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front while four brigades were routed on the Mereb-Setit front.
Ethiopia is resorting to air bombardment, in violation of the US-brokered moratorium on air strikes, because it has received a heavy pounding in the ground fighting. The United States government has subsequently urged Ethiopia "not to use further air attacks." The town of Adi Qwala, a constellation of villages in the Zalembesa area, and the village of Deda Lalai were bombed by air in the past few days. Sixteen civilians were killed while twenty others were seriously wounded in these air attacks.
Eritrean air defense units on the Assab front have shot down, at 9:00 a.m. this morning, an Ethiopian MI-24 helicopter gunship that came to strafe the front line. All the crew were killed as the helicopter crashed behind the front line.
Earlier today, the Ethiopian regime bombed sparsely populated civilian areas in the environs of the Assab front with an Antonov 130 bomber plane. The TPLF regime had employed fighter aircraft and helicopter gunships on the Mereb-Setit and Alitena-Mereb fronts in the fighting last Sunday and Monday, thereby unilaterally violating the moratorium on air strikes.
The Assab front line is 71 kms east of the port city of Assab.
The TPLF regime has released thirty eight Eritrean exchange students from its prison camps. This is too little too late. The students languished in these brutal camps for eight months enduring beatings, poor conditions and lack of medical or humanitarian attention. One of the students, Gebrekidan Zecharias, died in detention. One thousand five hundred Eritrean civilians are still imprisoned in Ethiopian concentration camps and their death toll continues to rise.
These students should have never been touched; neither should the 1,500 young Eritreans who remain in detention in Blattien and other isolated prison camps around Ethiopia. The Eritreans who remain in detention are accused of being a security risk because some of them have completed their national service in Eritrea at some time.
The actions of the TPLF regime in this regard are beyond the pale. This was not reprisal or retribution. Indeed, the Eritrean government allowed Ethiopian students in the same exchange program to sit for their final exams before flying them back to Addis Ababa. This meant nothing to the TPLF regime. They have had a free hand with which to execute systematic repression of anyone with Eritrean connections and no retroactive pretence can exonerate them from the fact that they have destroyed thousands of lives and families for political gain. What will Ethiopia say to the family of Gebrekidan Zecharias? Indeed, what will they say to the families of thousands of Eritrean civilians who remain in remote prison camps in Ethiopia?
How can this have happened? How can a government that openly violates human rights and flagrantly unleashes its vengeance on innocent civilians continue to be pampered? How can the international community have turned their eyes from the unthinkable acts that were happening to people in their offices, in their neighborhoods, in their care and even in their homes?
The TPLF government has worked harder to shatter the relations of Eritreans and Ethiopians than any other government in our common history ever has. They have displayed a savage lack of scruples. Those who have said nothing and who have thought it suitable to deal with the TPLF while they committed these acts must hold themselves responsible as well.
The TPLF is using the confusion its current military offensive has created to "creep out the back door" on heinous crimes it has committed. Their guise is completely transparent. A solitary and insincere apology here, a long overdue concession there and now they hope that overnight they can clean a record tarnished by a public policy of persecution of innocent Eritreans. The international community must not tolerate this gimmick and should demand the release of the 1,500 innocent Eritrean civilians who remain in the TPLF's concentration camps.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 14 February 1999
g_021699.html 100655 127137 345 14114 6662275022 6307
Ethiopia's Rejection of an Arms Embargo
In its official statement yesterday (February 15, 1999), Ethiopia accused the UN Security Council for "double standards" and for "rewarding Eritrea's dangerous gamble." The reason that has apparently aroused the regime's irrational fury is operative paragraph 7 of Security Council Resolution 1227 of February 10, 1999, which "strongly urges all states to end immediately all sales of arms and munitions to Ethiopia and Eritrea."
As it may be recalled, the Government of Eritrea has argued strongly that an isolated arms embargo on Ethiopia and Eritrea -- desirable as this might be in the context of the current conflict -- will only lead to dangerous imbalance if it is not applied simultaneously to States in the area whose agenda of regional destabilization is well known.
But Ethiopia's protest does not emanate from such cogent considerations. And, leaving aside the abusive language with which the Ethiopian regime has couched its case, why is Addis Abeba so lethargic to balanced arms control?
The Ethiopian regime opposes an arms embargo because it has an insatiable desire to occupy Eritrean territory by force. To achieve this, it believes that it must purchase weapons which will give it "superiority." It has spent around 400 million dollars in a weapons shopping spree in the past eight months. But it wants more, even as it is soliciting food aid to the tune of 100 million dollars from the World Food Programme.
While this is the transparent motive of its hollow protest, Ethiopia has tried to invoke international law to argue that the embargo should be targeted at Eritrea alone. Indeed, it has the audacity to claim that the United Nations is repeating history by "condemning aggressor and victim alike" as did the League of Nations when "Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935."
If there is one nation that deserves redress for a historical injustice meted to it at the hand of the United Nations, it is Eritrea. The United Nations imposed a "federation" between Eritrea and Ethiopia in 1952 against the expressed wishes of the Eritrean people. Ethiopia unilaterally abrogated this international instrument to annex Eritrea in 1962. And, Eritrea had to struggle for 30 years to regain its national independence; paying precious sacrifices in the process, while it was ignored by the world body.
But this is history and Eritrea has forgotten and forgiven the historical injustice that it had suffered. The energies of the Eritrean Government are accordingly focused on resolving the current crisis with Ethiopia.
What are the origins of this crisis?
Ferocious confrontations -- much bigger in scale and intensity than the clashes that occurred in May/June last year -- have taken place last week on the Mereb-Setit and Alitena-Mereb fronts. Ethiopia has further unleashed attacks on the Burie front on February 14 and 15th, an act that is raising serious question of its motive as Addis Abeba does not have territorial claims on this part of Eritrea. In any case, the international community is well aware of the "bombing of AdiGrat" that Ethiopia fabricated -- rather ineptly -- to allow it to break the moratorium on air strikes and to justify the large scale offensives that it has and is launching since February 6, 1999. Hence it has become obvious to the international community, although belatedly, that Ethiopia's first and only option is war. The aggressor country is Ethiopia, which is not only bent on regaining "contested territory" by force but that seems to entertain other sinister designs on its neighbor.
But even in regard to the earlier incidents, the aggressor was Ethiopia as the following facts illustrate:
These are wanton acts of aggression as defined by the relevant articles of the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States as well as the resolution of the 79th Session of the UN General Assembly. This is also the reason why Ethiopia has been resisting adamantly a comprehensive investigation of all the events that led to the current crisis.
Ethiopia falsely claims that "all third parties without exception that have at one time or another been seized with the crisis have realized that aggression was committed by Eritrea against Ethiopia." If the "Facilitators" had asked Eritrea to withdraw from "Badme," it was because they felt that a "face-saving" formula was vital for the Ethiopian regime which had ineptly cornered itself "into a box." Otherwise, they were categorical in stating in the document that they were not being judgmental on the origin of the crisis. If the OAU has repeated that plea in some varied form, the reason has again been the same. They asked Eritrea to show "goodwill" because Ethiopia had strenuously claimed that it had been "humiliated."
Eritrea has not accepted these arguments because in reality, it is Eritrea which has been humiliated by Ethiopia through repetitive acts of aggression as well as the perpetration of gross violation of human rights on its citizens that were resident in Ethiopia.
In conclusion, Ethiopia can certainly oppose the call for an arms embargo on both countries. But it must be true to itself to tell us the real reasons rather than coming out with silly arguments.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 February 1999
In its application to the Court, filed at The Hague, Netherlands, Eritrea describes an escalating campaign of harassment against its diplomatic officials and embassy personnel in Ethiopia. Since the beginning of June 1998, Ethiopian security agents stationed outside the embassy have severely limited access to the premises. Eritreans attempting to enter the building have been detained and taken away by Ethiopian forces. Delivery persons have been stopped and interrogated.
According to the Eritrean application, the current crisis began when the Ethiopian government cut off telephone service to the embassy on the morning of Tuesday, February 9. At 2:00 p.m. that day, Eritrean Ambassador Girma Asmerom was informed by the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs that he was persona non grata in the country. Ambassador Girma, who is also the Eritrean representative to the Organization of African Unity as well as the UN Economic Commission for Africa (both headquartered in Addis Ababa), was given 24 hours to leave the country. When the Ambassador attempted to board a flight to Jeddah the next day, he was seized by four Ethiopian agents. According to the Ambassador's affidavit submitted to the Court:
"These four security agents included the Chief of Security for Addis Ababa, Mr. Makonnen ("Wedi Cobal"). All were armed. They personally knew me and knew I was the Eritrean Ambassador, but they said they were going to search my person, my garment bag and my briefcase. I protested that I had diplomatic immunity and cited the Vienna Convention. They simply laughed at this and said, 'Your immunity has expired.'"
The security agents confiscated papers and correspondence the ambassador was carrying as well as his luggage.
The next morning, February 11, Ethiopian officials confronted the Eritrean Charge d'Affaires, Mr. Saleh Omer, and demanded he hand over possession of the embassy residence. The Charge objected, arguing that the embassy residence was an official embassy premise. Immediately the embassy residence was surrounded by a large number of Ethiopian armed forces, who eventually broke into and occupied the embassy residence. Five embassy employees and one of their children were detained.
Despite numerous inquiries by Mr. Saleh, Ethiopian officials have refused to disclose their whereabouts. Because of communication difficulties between Asmara and Addis Ababa, the Eritrean government has been unable to determine the current location of the Charge himself. The embassy residence remains occupied by Ethiopian armed forces.
The Vienna Convention mentioned by Ambassador Girma is a multilateral treaty guaranteeing the inviolability of diplomatic personnel, premises and documents. One hundred seventy eight states have ratified the Convention, including Eritrea, Ethiopia and the United States. The Eritrean claim asserts that thirteen separate articles of the Convention have been violated by the take-over of the embassy residence and other acts. The Convention provides in Article 45 that states must "respect and protect the premises" of a diplomatic mission "even in the case of armed conflict."
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is the same treaty relied upon by the United States in its 1980 case in the World Court against Iran. The United States brought the case after Iranian militants occupied the US embassy and took 52 Americans hostage, including members of the diplomatic staff. The Court, in ruling for the United States, strongly affirmed the fundamental importance of rules of diplomatic immunity.
"Such events cannot fail to undermine the edifice of law carefully constructed by mankind over a period of centuries, the maintenance of which is vital for the security and well-being of the complex international community of the present day, to which it is more essential than ever that the rules developed to ensure the ordered progress of relations between its members should be constantly and scrupulously respected."
The Eritrean application also claims violations of the Charter of the Organization of African Unity, the Convention between Ethiopia and the Organization of African Unity granting immunity to OAU ambassadors, and the international law of human rights. In addition, Eritrea has filed an application seeking "provisional measures," immediate orders designed to address emergency situations. Eritrea seeks a number of remedies from the Court, including restoration of the occupied embassy premises, the release of detained embassy staff and an order ensuring the inviolability of the embassy premises in the future.
The World Court's jurisdiction to hear Eritrea's claim is based on the agreement of both parties. In its application, Eritrea declared its willingness to have the case go forward before the Court and invited Ethiopia to do the same. Ethiopia has not yet responded to this invitation.
Ethiopia's Repeated Violation of the Moratorium on Air Strikes
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Monday, February 22, 1999
Ethiopia's Repeated Violation of the Moratorium on Air Strikes
The first round of adventurist offensives perpetrated by the Ethiopian authorities has ended in a debacle in spite of the unrealistic expectations that were apparently placed on it by several quarters. Failure may breed more desperation. In this context, it is conceivable that the TPLF authorities could indulge in yet another round of futile adventures. For its part, the Government of Eritrea is closely monitoring these developments with utmost patience.
The level of desperation of the TPLF authorities is indeed manifested by, among other things, their recourse to continuous air bombing of civilian targets in violation of the moratorium on air strikes. The illegal break-in and occupation of the Eritrean Embassy residence in Addis Abeba by the regime's security organs is another illustration of this desperation.
But, while these illegal and inhumane acts of the Ethiopian regime are well known, the international community has not to date taken any measures to deplore or deter them.
In spite of these realities, the Eritrean Armed Forces have opted to pursue a strategy of passive defense, firmly convinced that this is the correct approach by all standards and aware that such a posture will ultimately enhance the prospects of a peaceful solution.
The escalation of the air bombardment by the TPLF authorities will not bring about any change on the ground. Nevertheless, the failure of the international community to condemn its acts has been a factor that has encouraged its excesses. In the event, the Eritrean Armed Forces wishes to inform all concerned that it has no option but to take appropriate measures of deterrence against these adventures. Responsibility for all the consequences rests squarely with the TPLF authorities.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 22 February 1999
Two Ethiopian tanks have been destroyed on the Mereb-Setit front as Ethiopian mechanized units began a ground assault at around 7:00 a.m. this morning.
Ethiopia began heavy shelling at 4:30 a.m. as a prelude to the ground attack. Antonov bombers were also briefly employed in an effort to soften Eritrean positions.
At around 7:00 a.m., Ethiopian mechanized units began waves of ground assaults but were repulsed with heavy losses. Two Ethiopian T-55 tanks were destroyed in the process.
Ethiopia subsequently summoned air support (around 8:30 a.m.) but the MiG-23 fighter planes turned back after resistance from Eritrean forces.
In the meantime, in a statement issued yesterday, the US Government has expressed "deep regret on the use of air power by Ethiopia in the current conflict" and "urged it to resume the moratorium immediately." The moratorium on air strikes was brokered by President Clinton on June 14, 1998. Ethiopia violated the moratorium on February 7 and has used its aircraft against civilian targets bombing the villages of Deda Lalai, Adi Qwala, Mai Aini, a cluster of villages in the Zalambesa area, and sparsely populated areas in the Assab region. Twenty two civilians were killed while many others were wounded in those attacks. The US State Department statement of yesterday requests Eritrea "to continue to uphold its commitment to the terms of the moratorium."
The Ethiopian regime has launched a large scale offensive on the Mereb-Setit front today. The ground attack started at 4:30 a.m. this morning.
Today's attack was preceded by intensive though ineffective, all-day long air-bombardment on the Mereb-Setit front and Tsorona flanks by Ethiopian Mig fighter planes.
The Mereb-Setit front had been relatively quiet from ground fighting for the past two weeks since Ethiopia's large scale attacks on February 6th and 7th respectively. The regime had then suffered huge losses in which four brigades were routed.
In the meantime, the US State Department has expressed, in a statement that it issued yesterday, February 22, 1999, "deep regret on the use of air power by Ethiopia in the current conflict" and "urged the government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to resume the moratorium immediately". Ethiopia, however, continue to ignore these repeated calls. Two Ethiopian Antonovs dropped bombs near Eritrean trenches on the Mereb-Setit front at 5:30 a.m. this morning.
So far, a total of nine Ethiopian tanks have been destroyed while two were captured on the Mereb-Setit front. Ethiopia has also opened a feeble attack on the Tsorona front around 10:00 a.m. today.
The Ethiopian regime opened the large scale attack on the Mereb-Setit front at 4:30 a.m. this morning.
Eritrean Foreign Ministry: MI-24 helicopter Gunship Shot Down ..
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:52:39 -0000
Press Release
MI-24 helicopter Gunship Shot Down; 31 Ethiopian Tanks Destroyed;Three
Others Captured
Intense fighting involving mechanized and infantry units of both sidescontinued the whole day today on the Mereb-Setit front. Ethiopia also usedfighter planes.
Incomplete reports establish that 31 Ethiopian tanks were destroyed whilethree tanks have been captured. An Ethiopian MI-24 helicopter gunship wasshot down by Eritrea's air defense units and crashed behind Eritrean defenselines.
The latest found of intense fighting on the Mereb-Setit front was launchedby Ethiopia yesterday. Fighting is still continuing.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 24 February 1999
g_022799.html 100644 127137 345 3772 6666061602 6300
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_022899.html 100644 127137 345 4173 6666302233 6273
Yesterday, February 27, the UN Security Council President, issued the following statement. We are distributing it for the public's information. Statement by the President of the Security Council The Security Council reaffirms its resolutions 1177 (1998) of 26 June 1998, 1226 (1999) of 29 January 1999 and 1227 (1999) of 10 February 1999 which called on Ethiopia and Eritrea to refrain from armed conflict and to accept and implement the Framework Agreement as approved by the Central Organ Summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution on 17 December 1998 (S/1998/1223, annex).
The Security Council demands an immediate halt to all hostilities and calls on the parties to refrain from the further use of force. The Security Council welcomes the acceptance by Eritrea at the Head of State level of the OAU Framework Agreement and recalls the prior acceptance of the Agreement by Ethiopia. The OAU Framework Agreement remains a viable and sound basis for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. The Security Council reaffirms the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ethiopia and Eritrea.
The Security Council expresses its willingness to consider all appropriate support to implement a peace agreement between the two parties. The Security Council expresses its continuing support for the efforts of the OAU, the Secretary-General and his Special Envoy, Ambassador Sahnoun, and concerned Member States, to find a peaceful resolution to the border dispute.
The Security Council remains actively seized of the matter.
27 February 1999, 4:50 p.m.
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_030299.html 100644 127137 345 12624 6667026610 6307
Eritrean Foreign Ministry: Ethiopia Is Intent on Waging War
Statement
Ethiopia Is Intent on Waging War: Peace Was Never On Its Agenda
Ethiopia's diplomatic offensive in the past months was anchored in one theme: that it will not contemplate peace unless and until the OAU Framework is accepted by Eritrea.
Eritrea's acceptance of the OAU framework has now exposed Ethiopia's bluff. Indeed, Ethiopia can no longer conceal its territorial ambitions and other larger objectives behind the facade of a framework "which it has accepted in good faith but that remains rejected by Eritrea."
The UN Security Council, the OAU High-Level Delegation, and the European Union, among others, have all issued statements this week urging both sides to cease hostilities immediately and unconditionally. But Ethiopia refuses to heed these calls.
Ethiopia has yesterday lashed out at the United Nations, arrogantly stating that it will not accept UN Security Council Resolution 1227. It particularly took offense at Article 2 of the resolution that "demands an immediate halt to the hostilities, in particular the use of air strikes" and at Article 7 which "strongly urges all states to end immediately all sales of arms and munitions to Ethiopia and Eritrea." Ethiopia's underlying motive in rejecting these articles is too transparent to merit elaboration.
Ethiopia's larger design on Eritrea is coming to the surface in various forms. The regime has now begun to sing a new tune, calling for the "overthrow of the Eritrean government" which it dubs as a "threat to the region." This was the gist of the official statement that the regime issued yesterday.
Ethiopia's territorial ambitions on Eritrea have been an open secret for a long time now. In June last year, Ethiopia's Deputy Foreign Minister openly boasted that the Addis Abeba regime will capture the Eritrean port of Assab "within a week." Ethiopia has amassed thousands of heavily armed troops on the Burie front, 70 kms. from Assab, and hundreds of kilometers away from the "disputed Badme area." The Ethiopian regime recently bombed, without success, the airport of Assab and attempted to destroy the water reservoir supplying the port city.
Confirming its larger designs on Eritrea, the Ethiopian regime informed its troops on the eve of the large-scale offensive that it launched on February 6, that the objective was to take Eritrea's capital, Asmara; overthrow the present government; and install a "transitional government" whose "Charter" has already been drawn up in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Abeba.
Signs of Ethiopia's hidden agenda against Eritrea have been evident for quite a long time now:
* In July 1997, Ethiopia occupied by force, with the use of over 1,000 troops, the Adi Murug area in eastern Eritrea and escalated its incursions on the Badme area, which it had started much earlier;
* In October 1997, Ethiopia published a new map of the northern region of Tigray which incorporated large areas of Eritrea;
* In May 1998, Ethiopia provoked a series of clashes in the Badme area when its troops first attacked a small Eritrean unit, killing most of its members;
* Finally, on May 13, 1998, Ethiopia's "Parliament" declared war on Eritrea. This declaration was executed through ground attacks that Ethiopia launched in late May and early June last year on all three fronts as well as the first air bombing of Asmara on June 5. And, since February 6 this year, and at a time when there was visible progress in the peace efforts, Ethiopia began to unleash the on-going large-scale offensives.
Ethiopia has violated fundamental principles of international law and accepted conventions and norms of civilized behavior in conducting its war of aggression. Indeed, it has:
* repeatedly resorted to the use of force, including the unleashing of the current large-scale offensive;
* violated international human rights conventions in its campaign of "ethnic cleansing" of Eritreans;
* bombing civilians and economic targets;
* violated the US-brokered moratorium on air strikes without serving advance notice to the party concerned;
* employed mercenaries in its Air Force;
* broken into the premises of the Eritrean Embassy residence in Addis Abeba.
All these facts illustrate one thing. Ethiopia may have succeeded to smokescreen its real intentions in the past. Many may have thought that this was a simple border dispute that has gone beyond proportions. But now, it is becoming clearer that Ethiopia's agenda encompasses expansionist territorial ambition on its sovereign neighbor and subversion of its government. This can only be a recipe for regional instability and insecurity.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 2 March 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters
Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
Tel: 202 588 7587 Fax: 202 319 1304
E-mail: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea, H.E. Haile Woldensae, today held discussions with an OAU delegation representing the High-Level Delegation mediating the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict.
The Eritrean Foreign Minister informed the delegation that Eritrea:
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_030899.html 100655 127137 345 15170 6670771354 6324
The Ethiopian regime continues to pursue its war of aggression against Eritrea, adamantly rejecting calls by the OAU, the UN Security Council, the European Union and several countries including the US, Russia, France, China, Japan, and Italy, among others, for an immediate cessation of hostilities.
As it may be recalled, the OAU High-Level Delegation had urged on March 1st "for an immediate end to the fighting given the acceptance by both parties" of the Framework Agreement. Similarly, the UN Security Council issued two statements in the past week alone calling for an immediate cease-fire and expressing its regret, especially in its communications of March 4, "that Ethiopia still continues its military actions."
But Ethiopia persists stubbornly in its war of aggression giving a deaf ear to all these calls. Pitched fighting continued throughout last week as Ethiopia launched, almost daily, attacks on the Mereb-Setit front in an attempt to seize Eritrean sovereign territory.
These acts of aggression have been accompanied by belligerent statements coming out from Addis Abeba:
This is a complete lie and a deliberate distortion of the OAU Framework. Indeed, there is no ambiguity in the OAU Framework concerning global demilitarization. The OAU clarification on redeployment and demilitarization given to the Government of Eritrea further reads: "the redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town and its environs (defined as the areas surrounding the town). This should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."
It must also be borne in mind that Ethiopia has always been refusing to submit the totality of its territorial claims in spite of the illegal map that it published officially in October 1997 carving out large chunks of Eritrean territory. The Government of Eritrea has time and again requested the OAU to demand that Ethiopia submit, in explicit geographic terms, the totality of its claims as this was imperative for defining the scope of the border conflict. But Ethiopia has invariably rejected these demands. And, in the clarifications that Eritrea sought from the OAU regarding this particular issue, the OAU's response reads: "Ethiopia had indicated that it will submit its claims when the issues of delimitation, demarcation and, if need be, arbitration are addressed."
Why is Ethiopia raising new issues now when it has refused to discuss its claims in the past eight months? Does Ethiopia want to revise the Framework Agreement which was endorsed by the Summit of the Central Organ?
Ethiopia has violated operative paragraph 1 of the Framework Agreement on the cessation of hostilities and the relevant Security Council resolutions when it launched the war against Eritrea on February 6, 1999. Despite its pronouncements to the contrary in the early days, Ethiopia does not deny now that this was a well-planned offensive complete with a code-name (Operation Sunset).
In the event, is Ethiopia now demanding a "reward" for an act of aggression that it has committed in contravention of the OAU and UN Security Council resolutions? Is this the reason why it is requesting, albeit in a round-about way, a new version of the OAU Framework?
Ethiopia goes further to accuse Eritrea of the violation of human rights and other norms of international law in an effort to justify continued war. Here again, the track record illustrates the reverse:
Ethiopia is pursuing the war not because it has legitimate border claims. Ethiopia's agenda is territorial aggrandizement which it hopes to achieve by installing a puppet government in Eritrea. But this ambition is not tenable in terms of international law. It is also impossible to achieve in practice. It was this ambition that plunged the region into turmoil for thirty years in the past. The sad history should not be repeated now and the onus for preventing a similar disaster lies with the international community.
These ludicrous prevarications can only be attributed to the diplomacy of a government whose duplicity has run out of steam. It is now common knowledge that Eritrea had warned the world community of Ethiopia's impending aggression between 15 January and 15 February 1999. It is also common knowledge that it was Ethiopia that invaded Eritrea, broke the air moratorium and refuses all calls for a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities by the international community. It has been -- and continues to be -- condemned for all these acts by the UN, the US Government and other parties. In the event, it is hypocritical and mind-boggling newspeak to claim that "Eritrea is concerned with its defensive measures because it is intent on continuing the war."
"In order to create conditions conducive to a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the conflict through the delimitation and demarcation of the border, the armed forces presently in Badme Town and its environs, should be redeployed to the positions they held before 6 May 1998 as a mark of goodwill and consideration for our continental Organization, it being understood that this redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the area concerned, which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation of the border and, if need be, through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration."Environs was defined as "the area surrounding Badme Town." The OAU clarification on redeployment and demilitarization given to the Government of Eritrea further reads: "the redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town and its environs (defined as the areas surrounding the town). This should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the re-deployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_031099.html 100655 127137 345 4335 6671750265 6275
The Ethiopian Government is, under the pretext that it has grave doubts about the Government of Eritrea's acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, feverishly preparing for a new aggression against Eritrea. This is contrary to the provisions of the Framework Agreement and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions endorsing the Framework Agreement and is meant to achieve other political and military objectives. It is therefore manifestly clear now that the Ethiopian Government is violating the provisions of the Framework Agreement and creating obstacles to the peaceful resolution of the conflict.
The Eritrean Government therefore likes to clarify, without leaving any room for doubt, its position on the basic contents of the Framework Agreement, if only because Ethiopia is, by its prevarications and allegations, sowing confusion on the matter.
The fact that the Eritrean Government has created a Follow-Up Committee to determine the modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement is a mark of the sincerity of its commitments. The Follow-Up Committee awaits the call of the OAU High-Level Delegation to begin its work as provided for in article 9 (a) and (b) of the Framework Agreement.
Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, has informed the ambassadors accredited to his country on Monday, 8 March, that his government will launch another offensive against Eritrea "before the weekend." Ethiopia's declared decision to continue its war of aggression against Eritrea and to resort to large-scale military action:
Ethiopia thus bears full responsibility for the war and its consequences. In light of Ethiopia's violations of international law and of UN Security Council Resolutions and its open contempt for them, and the danger that its avowed escalation poses to regional peace and stability, the Government of Eritrea calls on the UNSC to act without delay before it is too late. In this regard, the Government of Eritrea calls on the UNSC to:
H.E. Mr. Qin Huasun
President of the Security Council
United Nations
Excellency,
I have the honour to transmit the attached document, entitled "Issues Raised by the Eritrean Side Requesting Clarification," that contains the written clarifications of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) High-Level Delegation at the Heads of State Level to the questions submitted by the State of Eritrea on the OAU "Proposals for a Framework Agreement for a Peaceful Settlement of the Dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia."
Eritrea submitted its questions for clarification to the OAU High-Level Delegation on 12 December 1998 prior to the meeting of the OAU Central Organ, and received these written clarifications on 26 January 1999. Eritrea was studying these clarifications to give its considered response to the OAU High-Level Delegation when the process was cut short by Ethiopia's launch of its all out offensive on 6 February 1999.
I wish to draw the attention of the Council to the clarity of the answers from the OAU regarding:
I understand, Your Excellency, that the Ethiopian government had, through its Permanent Representative to the United Nations, requested that this same document ("Issues Raised by the Eritrean Side Requesting Clarification") be circulated as a document of the Security Council about three weeks ago during the Presidency of Canada.
As the Ethiopian government raised no questions about the clarifications then, such a measure would indicate that the Ethiopian government was in agreement with the clarifications provided in this document. In fact, that is the only way Ethiopia could be consistent with its alleged "full acceptance" of the OAU Framework. Ethiopia's attempts to misinterpret and revise the Framework now could only indicate its design to continue to use force against Eritrean sovereignty.
I should be grateful if you would kindly circulate this letter and its annex as a document of the Security Council.
Haile Menkerios
Ambassador
Permanent Representative
Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the United Nations
The Ethiopian regime has launched a large-scale offensive on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front today. The attack started at 8:00 a.m. this morning.
As a prelude to today's large-scale offensive, the TPLF regime had carried out aerial bombing and heavy artillery shelling in the environs of these areas (Hazemo Plains) yesterday afternoon from 2:30 - 4:30 p.m.
Today's offensive has been in the offing for days now. Ethiopia's Prime Minister had informed the ambassadors accredited to his country on Monday, March 8, that his government will launch another offensive against Eritrea "before the weekend."
The Ethiopian regime has launched the attack today in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March urging Ethiopia to stop its continued military action. The Ethiopian regime has openly reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, putting forth new preconditions now so as to torpedo the peace process.
g_0314992.html 100655 127137 345 2266 6673033745 6363
Press Release
One MiG-23 Jet Fighter Shot Down;
Nineteen Tanks Destroyed and Two Captured
The large-scale offensive that the Ethiopian regime launched this morning on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front has been repulsed with the enemy suffering heavy human losses.
The infantry and mechanized attacks were accompanied by heavy shelling and air bombardment with mercenary pilots.
One MiG-23 jet fighter was shot down. Nineteen tanks were destroyed while two were captured.
Ethiopia launched its war of aggression today in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March urging Ethiopia to stop its continued military action. The Ethiopian regime has openly reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, putting forth new preconditions now so as to torpedo the peace process.
The large-scale offensive that the TPLF regime launched on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front on Sunday March 14th has been totally foiled around 9:00 a.m. today.
Ethiopia launched repetitive attacks the whole day yesterday which continued throughout the night and until the morning hours today.
It has not yet been possible to give an estimation of the huge human losses that the TPLF regime has sustained in the three days of fighting which can better be described as a slaughter. In what has become a standard pattern now, the TPLF regime employed human waves for successive assaults with little apparent concern for the massive losses that its army continued to sustain.
Furthermore, the callous regime forcibly brought about 5,000 villagers to the battle areas yesterday and compelled them to carry ammunition on pack animals and their own backs thereby rendering them victims of the fighting.
While thousands of its troops fell like leaves in the battlefront, the TPLF regime's hypocrisy and blatant lies reached its height as it first denied the existence of fighting and later tried to downplay its intensity.
Ethiopia unleashed the war of aggression in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March to "stop its continued military action." Ethiopia has in practice rejected the OAU Framework by putting forth new preconditions. These acts demonstrate that Ethiopia was never interested in peace and that its agenda transcends the border dispute.
g_031799.html 100655 127137 345 6025 6673726412 6301
The large-scale offensive that the TPLF regime unleashed on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front was foiled yesterday about 9:00 a.m. with the Ethiopian army suffering its heaviest losses ever in a battle of three days. BBC and other journalists who visited the battle scene yesterday described the human carnage as "horrific."
Four Ethiopian divisions were involved (one division is 11,000 to 12,000 strong) in the successive assaults with human waves that the TPLF regime launched without respite for three days. The regime further threw into battle about 5,000 villagers who were forced to carry ammunition on their backs and on pack animals. They were mingled with the attacking army to ensure a continuous supply of ammunition.
"We were threatened with imprisonment of twenty years if we did not comply," said one of the poor farmers who was captured. "Those who were scared of the battle and tried to flee were machine-gunned by our own troops from behind," he added.
Ethiopia had lost about 9,000 killed in the battles that raged from February 23rd to 26th on the Mereb-Setit front. But their losses on the Tsorona front in the past three days were several fold higher. Furthermore, a total of 57 enemy tanks were destroyed while six others were captured. One MiG-23 fighter plane was shot down.
As the Ethiopian army continued to sustain its biggest losses ever, the TPLF regime continued to deny or downplay the fighting. But, when it had actually subsided yesterday morning and as foreign journalists spent the whole day yesterday on the battle scene, the regime's spokeswoman and TPLF radio told their domestic audience that "fighting continued throughout the day." The TPLF regime has designated the whole of Tigray "off limits" to local and international press barring any independent account of the war since the start of its offensives on February 6 last month.
As a sign of its desperation and in an apparent retaliation for the staggering defeat that it has sustained on the Tsorona front, the TPLF regime yesterday bombed the small town of Kinafina in south-central Eritrea.
Eight people were severely wounded in the senseless air raid. The TPLF regime has bombed the civilian centers of Deda Lalai, Shambuqo, Adi Qwala, and a cluster of villages in the Zalambesa area in the previous weeks killing 27 civilians and wounding 30 others.
Ethiopia unleashed the war of aggression in defiance of UN Security Council calls urging it "to stop its continued military action." Ethiopia has moreover rejected the OAU Framework that it had earlier "accepted" by putting forth new preconditions. These acts illustrate that the TPLF regime was never interested in peace and that its agenda transcends the border dispute.
Consider the following litany of lies:
But are people really buying these lies? Or is it because there are other forces at play? As one seasoned diplomat observed: "It is naive to think that the diplomatic community is not in the know. But nobody wants to see a larger Ethiopia under a very fragile government stagger under the weight of this crisis. That explains, to me, the deliberate nods and winks."
This may well be the case. But the TPLF's lies are costing thousands of lives and it is time that the international community face up to its responsibilities.
g_031999.html 100655 127137 345 5336 6675433550 6307
The TPLF army has sustained considerable losses in the fighting on the Mereb-Setit front in the past two days. Ethiopia opened new attacks on this front on Wednesday in the aftermath of, and to cushion its devastating defeat at, the Tsorona front last Tuesday.
In two days of fighting between March 17th and 18th on the Mereb-Setit front:
The TPLF army suffered a devastating defeat on the Tsorona front in the battles that it unleashed on Sunday, March 14, and that raged for three days until Tuesday mid-morning:
Yet, while thousands of its troops fell like leaves on the Tsorona battlefront, the callous TPLF regime denied at first that any fighting was taking place at all. This was later qualified as "routine shelling and skirmishes." When the battle ended on Tuesday, the TPLF regime continued to lie to its people. The TPLF regime continues to maintain this appalling lie, branding it as "a drama staged by Eritrea," even as its huge debacle has been witnessed now by journalists from the BBC, Swiss Radio and TV, Der Spiegel, Xinhua News Agency, Al Hayat, and Al Sharq Al Awsat among others and footage of the ghastly battle scene is being broadcast worldwide by major TV networks.
The TPLF regime started the current battles on March 14th in defiance of UN Security Council calls urging it "to stop its continued military action." The Ethiopian regime has further reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework, rejecting any cease-fire unless its new preconditions are met.
Ethiopian Antonov bombers, MiG aircraft and helicopter gunships bombed the civilian districts of Molki and the environs of Shambiqo in the past two days in retaliation for the heavy defeat that the regime has sustained on the Tsorona front. Twenty eight civilians were killed and 42 others wounded in air raids carried out by the Ethiopian air force in Deda Lalai, Hazemo, Adi Qwala, Shambiqo and Kinafna in the past few weeks.
Fighting on the Mereb-Setit front continued during the weekend. An Ethiopian MiG-23 jet fighter aircraft was shot down yesterday while two tanks were destroyed on Saturday.
In addition, an MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down with slight damage and captured by Eritrean Defense Forces last Friday.
The Ethiopian regime launched the attacks on the Mereb-Setit front last Wednesday in an apparent attempt to overextend Eritrean Defense Forces which routed a huge Ethiopian attack on the Tsorona front employing four divisions. Ethiopian suffered a devastating defeat on the Tsorona front last Tuesday in which:
And, since last Saturday, the TPLF regime has begun to declare that fighting was taking place "in the vicinity of the Mereb River near Shambiko." Why is Ethiopia engaged in a battle near Shambiko? Shambiko is not "contested territory" and it is deep inside Eritrea. Is this an attempt to occupy territory that Ethiopia has incorporated in its illegal map of 1997, in violation of Eritrea's internationally recognized territory, which the TPLF regime has not officially rescinded to date?
g_0322992.html 100655 127137 345 10006 6675444043 6370
Eritrea has appealed (through a letter to all member states yesterday) to the 69th OAU Session of the Council of Ministers convening in Addis Abeba today to take necessary measures as there may be to ensure that the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia is discussed at a neutral venue acceptable to both member States.
The 69th Regular Session of the Ministerial Council is scheduled to discuss administrative and budgetary issues of the organization. However, Eritrea believes that the Council could well be seized of the raging conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia in view of its urgency and gravity. Be this as it may, Eritrean cannot possibly attend the session to argue its case in the capital of a country that has:
The implementation of the OAU Framework remains blocked by Ethiopia's new preconditions which are completely outside the Framework Agreement that was clearly articulated by the High-Level Delegation and fully endorsed by the Central Organ in its Summit in Ouagadougou on December 17, 1998. Ethiopia is indeed insisting that it will not accept any cease-fire or delineation and demarcation of the border unless its new preconditions are met.
As it is underlined in the clarifications provided to Eritrea by the High-Level Delegation through its letter of January 26, 1999:
It must further be recalled that when Ethiopia was requested to submit to the OAU the totality of its claims, its response was that "it will submit its claims when the issues of delimitation, demarcation or, if need be, arbitration are addressed."
Ethiopia's preconditions are therefore new, in clear contradiction to the letter and spirit of the OAU Framework, and simply put forth in order to torpedo the peace process. Ethiopia's early pronouncement of "acceptance of the OAU framework" indeed appears to have been motivated by public relations and diplomatic games.
In the face of Ethiopia's prevarication and distortion of the Framework Agreement, Eritrea has requested the High-Level Delegation, through a letter of President Isaias Afwerki to the Chairman on 19 March 1999, to "set the record straight in an unambiguous and public manner." Eritrea maintains that the Framework Agreement is not "an elastic framework susceptible to altering interpretations on the basis of perceived or real changes in the battlefield."
Mr. Chairman, Excellencies,
It is indeed an honor for me to be given the opportunity to brief the Council on the border conflict between my country and Ethiopia which has unnecessarily and irrationally escalated to full scale war leading to thousands of casualties and the suffering of so many. I say unnecessary because, as we, and I am sure Your Excellencies, have always believed, the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia could be solved through peaceful and legal means; and irrational because the use of force, as has been and is being attempted by the Ethiopian regime, can never lead to a solution.
Let me say at the outset that Eritrea highly appreciates the deep concern of the Security Council and the rest of the international community about the conflict as well as the efforts that have been and are being made by different parties for its peaceful resolution.
Excellencies,
Allow me to present a synopsis of the genesis of the conflict, where we are now and what we believe needs to be done to curb Ethiopia's designs to continue its war of aggression and to move to the final settlement of the border on the basis of the OAU Framework.
It is known to the Council that Ethiopia has so loudly and persistently announced its "full acceptance" of this Framework which Eritrea did also, after considering the necessary clarifications from the OAU High-Level Delegation and making compromises to pave the way for its implementation, full-heartedly accept.
Eritrea has been consistent in its argument that the borders between Eritrea and Ethiopia were clearly delineated by duly signed treaties during the colonial period and remained unaltered until Ethiopia forcibly annexed Eritrea in 1962. Even after the illegal annexation, the borders of the annexed "province" of Eritrea remained the same during both the Haile Selassie and Mengistu regimes.
Excellencies,
It is the pattern of expansionist and aggressive behaviour of the Ethiopian regime that is the root cause of the existing conflict, and it is the proper understanding of the measures Ethiopia has taken that expose this behaviour, we strongly believe, that can lead to a correct, just and legal approach to end the conflict and settle the dispute peacefully.
International law clearly states that every state has an obligation to respect the territorial integrity and sovereign independence of every other state. The United Nations Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, states that: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."
The actions that Ethiopia undertook prior to May 1998 to attempt to alter or undermine Eritrea's borders were illegal aggression, and illegal aggression cannot be the basis for acquisition of territory. Ethiopia's pattern of behaviour over recent years indeed shows a spiral of increasing disregard for Eritrea's inherited boundary. It presents a classic case of aggression under accepted definitions of international law.
In August 1997, Ethiopian troops illegally entered Adi Murug in the Bada area of Eritrea. That this was an illegal incursion was undeniable, and Ethiopia did not attempt to justify the incursion by denying Eritrean sovereignty over the area. Instead, Ethiopia explained that it had been pursuing rebel forces that fled Ethiopia and took refuge in Eritrea. Nonetheless, while present in Eritrea, the Ethiopian military dismantled Eritrea's governmental presence and administration in order to set up an administration of its own.
Under the United Nations General Assembly's Definition of Aggression (1974), this incursion clearly constituted illegal aggression. Article 3 states:
"Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:
(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof."
The Definition of Aggression not only identifies the Ethiopian behavior of 1997 as aggression, it also clearly provides that such aggressive activities cannot constitute the basis for any "territorial acquisition or special advantage" in the territory occupied. According to Article 3, "No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression shall be recognized as lawful."
As with all of Ethiopia's other illegal military activities on Eritrean soil, Ethiopia cannot have obtained any vested rights in military incursions that were intrinsically illegal.
Starting in mid-1997, Ethiopia also directly initiated efforts to alter the international border on the ground in the Badme region. As is well known, Ethiopian officials operating in the area around Badme commenced a program of placement of piles of rocks in an effort to establish a new international border. In certain cases, Ethiopia was not satisfied with the scope of its initial incursion into Eritrean territory and came back a second or third time to move the rock markers to try to encroach even further into Eritrean territory.
Such efforts clearly violate international law, which requires respect for the existing international boundaries of a state. The United Nations General Assembly's Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations states that "Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national integrity and political independence of the State or country," and that "the territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable."
In 1997, Ethiopia issued a map that purported to claim large portions of Eritrean territory. Entitled "Political Map of Tigray," it was prepared by the Planning and Economic Development Bureau, Physical Planning Department. The title of the newspaper article containing this map was "New Map of our Administrative Zone Prepared." According to the text of the article, "the map defines the new boundaries of Tigray with other countries and with Administrative Zones in Ethiopia." It was said to be the result of three years of research and to have been approved by the Central Mapping Authority in Addis Abeba. Comparison with standard administrative maps of Ethiopia shows that the changes effected by this new map were quite substantial.
Ethiopia obviously knew that the map was a "new" one which altered the traditional borders, but it made no effort to justify or explain this unilateral incorporation of Eritrean territory. It did not state what facts or legal arguments turned up in the "three years of research" that might have led it to think that it had the power to unilaterally define "the new boundaries of Tigray with other countries" or to draw the line in the location that it did. To this day, it is simply unclear what Ethiopia thinks that it has a right to. Although asked many times, it refuses to say.
While Ethiopia refuses to state the extent or the basis of its territorial claims, it can hardly be doubted that this map was intended to be an early step in a campaign to acquire portions of Eritrean territory. Such efforts to acquire territory on the other side of an existing international boundary are, as stated above in 2, illegal under international law.
Ethiopia's efforts to redraw the international boundary in Badme culminated in its attack of 6 May 1998. On that date, about sixty Ethiopian army troops completely encircled a group of ten Eritrean officers who were present in the Badme region and opened fire. Four were killed and three wounded. This initial attack further led to spiraling clashes in the subsequent days, with both sides bringing in reinforcements and a final showdown on 12 May 1998 in which Ethiopian troops were driven out of Badme.
Eritrea's reaction to this completely unjustified attack presents a classic case of self-defense under international law. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter states clearly that every state has an "inherent" right of self-defense against armed attack. "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and Security."
Ethiopia subsequently declared war on Eritrea on 13 May 1998. And, on 4 June, the Ethiopian Prime Minister ordered the Ethiopian Military to implement this declaration of war. The following morning, Ethiopian forces attacked Eritrea throughout the common border, and at 2:10 p.m. the same day the Ethiopia air force bombed the capital city of Eritrea.
Eritrea's constant and consistent calls for cessation of hostilities, the demilitarization of the entire border, the deployment of neutral monitoring forces and the speedy demarcation of the border continued to be ignored by Ethiopia.
In early February 1999, Ethiopia launched an all out offensive against Eritrea. The supposed justification was an air raid that (according to Ethiopia) had taken place in AdiGrat on 5 February. Several independent sources confirmed Eritrea's official statement that no such air raid had ever taken place. However, Ethiopia continues to cite this supposed "air raid" as the rationalization for its all out war. In mounting this attack since 6 February, Ethiopia has violated the US brokered moratorium on air strikes and has bombed civilians fleeing northward into Eritrea from areas near the border. Eritrea has not violated the moratorium, even in the face of Ethiopia's illegal bombing of its territory.
In the months leading up to the February attack, Ethiopia had engaged in full scale build up of troops and armaments at several places along the border. Ethiopia also issued continuous threats to Eritrea that it would "teach Eritrea a lesson," that it would replace or overthrow the current government of Eritrea, and so forth. Among its other violations of international law are its deportation of over fifty four thousand persons of Eritrean family origin, the internment without trial of unknown number of persons in Ethiopian prison camps, and the 9 February forced entry into, ransacking and continued occupation of the Eritrean Embassy residence in Addis Abeba.
Excellencies,
It is evident from the series of measures briefed above that the Ethiopian regime had violated Eritrean sovereignty and territorial integrity through illegal acts of aggression prior to 6 May 1998, not to mention its subsequent acts of aggression. From the start of discussions with the OAU, these developments, along with evidence of where the border lies and that we remained inside our territory, were brought before the OAU High-Level Delegation. We consistently argued, and rightly so, that illegal aggression cannot be the basis for acquisition of territory, and for this reason, any proposal that takes May 1998 as the relevant "status quo ante" rewards Ethiopia's illegal efforts to undermine the existing international border in place between Eritrea and the Tigray state of Ethiopia, and is a violation of international law. If measures taken on the ground needed to be reversed, they were the illegal, aggressive measures taken by the Ethiopian government to forcibly alter the established border between the two countries and not the legitimate measures taken by Eritrea to defend its sovereignty.
When the OAU finally came up with its proposed Framework Agreement for a peaceful solution at the Summit of the High-Level Delegation in Ouagadougou in November last year, Eritrea expressed its positive stance considering the Framework as a basis for discussions that would lead to an agreement acceptable to both parties. In this spirit, Eritrea invited the OAU Secretary General for consultations to Asmara on 12 December, 1998, and submitted a list of queries on which it sought clarifications prior to its full acceptance of the Framework Agreement. Eritrea hoped that the clarifications would be given prior to the Summit of the Central Organ which was then scheduled for 17-18 December. Unfortunately, and for reasons that are better explained by the OAU High-Level Delegation, this did not happen as expected. While noting the respective positions of both countries, the Central Organ endorsed the Framework Agreement and called on both sides to cooperate with the High-Level Delegation.
The written clarifications were provided to Eritrea on 26 January 1999. But before Eritrea could digest the clarifications to give its considered response, Ethiopia launched yet another offensive against Eritrea on 6 February 1999. This was in clear contravention of the OAU's repeated calls for both sides to observe maximum restraint and continue to uphold the de facto cessation of hostilities which was, indeed, a primary element in the Framework Agreement in order to pave the way for a final solution on the basis of the demarcation of the boundary.
Excellencies,
Eritrea accepted the proposed Framework as a compromise, as a measure of "goodwill," as requested by the OAU delegation, to stop further bloodshed and expedite the demarcation of the border. Eritrea did so because it was led to believe that the proposals and written clarifications that were provided by the OAU High-Level Delegation, which were known to Ethiopia, were "fully accepted" by Ethiopia as well. That, Your Excellencies, is what the OAU and the Security Council led us to believe Ethiopia had done and urged us to do likewise in the interest of peace. And that is what we did.
How could these very bodies now fail to condemn the Ethiopian regime when it reverses its position and presents a new and totally unacceptable condition not only to ensure its illegal occupation of Eritrean territory, but also to provide itself a smoke screen to continue its war for wider agendas against Eritrean sovereignty? How far is Ethiopia to be appeased to move the goal post of its aggressive demands further and further as we are required to make unjustified compromises to accommodate its dictates?
For us, Ethiopia's designs and tactics are clear. The Ethiopian regime has made no secret of it. It intends to maintain its illegal control and take more of Eritrean territory by force, defeat the Eritrean army completely and replace the Eritrean government by a puppet regime which will respond to its dictates. Your Excellencies, the Ethiopian regime has already formed such a "government in exile" from terrorist groups such as the Islamic Jihad in collaboration with the National Islamic Front government of the Sudan.
Excellencies,
I would like to conclude my remarks by reconfirming that Eritrea has always called for and is now ready for a cease-fire. It has likewise expressed its readiness for the immediate implementation of the OAU proposal which the Council has supported. Any attempt to revise that proposal which both have avowedly accepted would lead to a total nullification of that proposal, thus postponing the demarcation of the border which alone can definitively settle the conflict. To reiterate our firm position, Eritrea has accepted the proposal to withdraw from its own territory in Badme and its immediate environs only as a "goodwill measure" not because of any other justification. If the Ethiopian regime insists on new conditions to persist on its war path against Eritrean sovereignty, Eritrea has the responsibility, capacity and resolve to defend itself.
I thank you.
The Addis Abeba regime has done it again. A statement entitled "Setting the Record Straight" which it issued yesterday, March 22, 1999, is replete, in typical fashion, with distortions and pure fabrications.
Consider the following Ethiopian allegations:
If Ethiopia can maintain that the inhuman deportation of over 54,000 ethnic Eritreans out of a total Eritrean community of 130,000 is selective and not indiscriminate, then obviously Ethiopia is not operating on the same wavelength with internationally accepted human rights conventions and norms. Moreover, deportations have not stopped (about 1,000 poor farmers long resident in Tigray were deported last week) although the tempo may have slowed down due to the resumption of hostilities. In any case, the UN Human Rights Commission, the OAU Ambassadorial Committee, Amnesty International and a host of other humanitarian organizations have found Ethiopia guilty of gross human rights violations and there is no point in pushing this issue further.
Ethiopia's propaganda campaign in the past ten months has been anchored on two pillars:
This unscrupulous strategy may have worked initially. But, as a seasoned diplomat based in Addis Abeba observed recently, "the official lies, which are becoming increasingly transparent with time, are an embarrassment to the diplomatic community and, in the long run, damaging to Ethiopia itself."
In the event, it is high time that the Ethiopian government heed these sentiments and get down to the real business of finding a peaceful solution to the conflict rather than embarrassing itself and its international audience through transparent lies.
g_032499.html 100655 127137 345 14623 6676161734 6325
In a letter circulated to member states attending the 69th Session of the Council of Ministers, the Ethiopian Government alleges that the Eritrean Mission to Ethiopia and the Eritrean ambassador accredited to Ethiopia and the OAU:
The Government of Eritrea is not surprised by these preposterous lies. The Ethiopian Government indeed seems prepared to go to extreme lengths to achieve its objectives as illustrated by these two recent cases:
In as far as the current groundless accusations are concerned, the Government of Eritrea has no wish to dignify Ethiopia's lies with an extensive response. But, by way of illustration, we cite the following:
In view of these realities, it is mind-boggling how a single person and his deputy, harassed and watched as they were 24 hours a day by Ethiopia's security, could engage in clandestine or other illegal activities. More importantly, the Government of Eritrea does not engage in such illegal activities as a matter of policy.
The Ethiopian regime has also deliberately misconstrued President Isaias Afwerki's interview. The president had told The Times of London in July last year that if Ethiopia continued to bomb the city of Asmara as it did on June 5, 1998, Eritrea has the deterrent capability to strike back at the heart of Ethiopia. This was in reference to Ethiopia's air attacks which escalated a simple border conflict presuming that it has absolute air superiority.
In the same statement, Ethiopia harps a lot and accusing Eritrea of "extreme spite and arrogance towards our Continental Organizations."
Eritrea may have expressed some dissatisfaction, from time to time, on the shortcomings of the OAU peace process. But this candid view emanates from its higher expectations. It remains otherwise fully and sincerely engaged in the OAU peace process. Moreover, Eritrea is an active participant in all the deliberations of the OAU meetings and it remains one of the twelve countries that pays their contribution regularly.
On the other hand, one can plausibly argue that Ethiopia's much touted "respect to the OAU" is suspect and outwardly. In the first place, Ethiopia unleashed the offensive on February 6 last month in defiance of the OAU's repeated appeals to both sides to observe maximum restraint and to agree to a cessation of hostilities, and while the OAU peace process was in motion. Secondly, Ethiopia should have thought twice before violating the Headquarters Agreement with such heavy handedness. If Ethiopia has indeed evidence of the mission's illegal activities, then these should have been submitted to the OAU Secretary General before taking any action. This is standard practice by host countries which serve as venues for international bodies (the US Government relative to the UN in New York for instance) and there is no reason why the OAU should be treated with less respect by Ethiopia. Thirdly, the outrageous lies about the Eritrean mission which the Ethiopian Government circulated at the 69th Session of the Ministerial Council are another illustration of its condescending attitude as they are a clear insult to the intelligence of member states.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 25 March 1999
Press Release
Is the ICRC Placing Its Own Neutrality and Impartiality At Risk?
In its statement of March 22 (which we received yesterday), the ICRC "strongly deplores the public use - by Eritrea - of its information for propaganda purposes." In the first place, the Government of Eritrea has not used any information that was provided to it by the ICRC "for propaganda purposes." If it has mentioned the ICRC in its press statement of 18 March 1999 on the untimely death of one of its nationals in the Blaten concentration camp, it was only because it received the notification of his death from the ICRC.
The ICRC further states that it "regularly visits prisoners of war and civilian internees in the Blaten camp and is therefore in a position to state that the allegations as to the death causes are unfounded." Apparently, this statement was meant to contradict our own assessment of the "poor living conditions, mental and physical torture and lack of medical attention" to which our citizens are subjected, and, in some cases, we believe are "the main causes of death."
What are the realities?
As far as we have been informed and in spite of our express requests:
* The ICRC does not carry out an independent investigation of the causes
of death.
* In the majority of cases, the Ethiopian regime notifies the ICRC one month
or even longer after the event. In those cases, we have not received from
the ICRC any report of an independent post-mortem investigation.
* The death certificates provided by a hospital which may be operating under
government duress cannot be taken at face value without an independent investigation.
Regarding the specific case of G. Negus Awalom (the subject in question and the eighth internee to die in the prison camp), the Ethiopian death certificate states:
* "Diagnosis: dead on arrival
* Recommendation of doctor: Case 7 AF1 810 severe malaria 40 Meningitis
from Blaten. On external examination of the corpus, there is no pertinent
finding to attribute for the cause of death."
The statement above clearly indicates that:
* the victim had not received any hospitalized treatment as he was reported
dead on arrival; and,
* the cause of death was only based on external examination of the corpse
indicating no extensive post-mortem examination.
More importantly, if an innocent person is incarcerated in a malaria-infested dungeon, contracts malaria and meningitis there, is emaciated and dies of diseases due to deprivation of proper medication, is this not death caused by an unacceptable health environment? As is well known, meningitis is caused by a bacterial and viral infection that is predisposed by crowding and unhygienic living conditions.
The accounts of the 86 university students who were on an exchange programme to Ethiopia and imprisoned in Blaten camp for periods ranging from four to nine months further reveal that all the prisoners were subjected to physical and mental torture. They were daily subjected to political indoctrination by TPLF cadres to denounce their government as "undemocratic and dictatorial," accept that "Eritrea is an aggressor," and join a puppet political organization created by the TPLF as a condition for their release. Resistance to this political indoctrination invariably resulted in physical torture.
In light of these facts, the ICRC's attempt to take issue with our own assessment is not well founded and can only put at risk its stated neutrality and impartiality as an intermediary. Ethiopia has indeed misconstrued the ICRC's statement and used it for its propaganda purposes to misinform its people through its mass media. In its radio broadcast yesterday, it even when to the extent of denying the occurrence of death at Blaten camp.
We also recall with disappointment that in the early days of deportation of innocent Eritreans from Ethiopia, the Ethiopian regime had claimed that the deportation were carried out not only with the prior and full knowledge of the ICRC but also with its accompaniment. The ICRC, when asked about the situation, confirmed to the Eritrean Government that this was not the case. However, the ICRC declined to disclose this vital information publicly due to its stated "statutory limitations." In the event, the Eritrean Government would like to request the ICRC for clarification in respect to its press statement of March 18 whether this constitutes an amendment or a violation to its "statutory limitations"?
The Government of Eritrea appreciates the role of the ICRC in the present circumstances and expects it to strictly adhere to its principles of neutrality and impartiality. And, as it is very well established, more than 90% of the 1,500 prisoners detained at Blaten concentration camp are not prisoners of war. They are civilian internees illegally detained because Ethiopian claims that they are "potential soldiers." This is unacceptable by any standard. The main issue that must be addressed by the ICRC is not therefore some marginal improvement of their treatment while in custody but rather their immediate and unconditional release.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 25 March 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters
Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
Tel: 202 588 7587 Fax: 202 319 1304
E-mail: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
The Ethiopian regime has yesterday accused Eritrea of launching three successive attacks on Badme and unleashing "unusually heavy shelling on the Zalambesa front."
The motive of this accusation is not clear. How can Ethiopia claim that Eritrea has launched a major attack on Monday when:
Obviously, there is no coherence in these contradictory statements which cannot all be true at the same time.
But, of course, anything is possible for a regime that has sanctioned lying as an instrument of foreign policy.
Indeed, the Ethiopian regime was on record for dismissing the occurrence of any major fighting on the Tsorona front from March 14th-16th, dubbing the horrific scene of its major defeat (in which over 10,000 Ethiopian troops were killed and 57 tanks destroyed and was witnessed by independent journalists) as a "PR drama staged by Eritrea." Ethiopia maintained this stance even as footage of its major defeat was broadcast worldwide.
Now, in its "military report" of Sunday, the Ethiopian regime repackages Eritrea's accounts of the battle to claim that it "had killed or wounded over 9,000 Eritrean soldiers and destroyed 36 enemy tanks," in the Tsorona battle, the occurrence of which it had originally denied.
As far as Ethiopia's accusations of yesterday are concerned:
Ethiopia's unfounded accusations of yesterday, amid contradictory claims, can only be interpreted as a thinly veiled intention on its part to launch fresh offensives.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has yesterday appealed to several humanitarian organizations to put pressure on Ethiopia to account for the whereabouts of 1,000 missing Eritreans and to ensure their immediate release if they are in detention.
The list of the missing persons -- most of whom are young -- was compiled over a three month period from parents and other family members. The missing Eritreans had been permanently residing in Ethiopia. But, as they were picked up by Ethiopia's security officials from their homes and work places in Addis Abeba and several other Ethiopia towns, their subsequent whereabouts remain unknown. They have not been deported with the 55,000 of their compatriots who have been expelled so far. Neither have they been interned in the Blaten concentration camp. Family members fear that many of them might have been killed or they may be languishing in secret concentration camps somewhere in Ethiopia.
The information compiled so far contains full individual details of the victims including the dates of disappearance.
Over 1,500 other Eritrean youth remain in jail in the Blaten concentration camp for no crime other than their ethnicity.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 31 March 1999
g_0331992.html 100655 127137 345 3145 6700434260 6343
Press Release
One thousand five hundred one Eritreans deported inhumanely from Ethiopia arrived in Eritrea on March 27 and 28. One thousand four hundred twenty three of the deported Eritreans, expelled through Gash-Barka Zone, arrived in Molqui subzone, and 78, deported through Southern Zone, arrived at Mai Mine.
The deportees, consisting mainly of children and the elderly, were not accompanied by the ICRC. They had been detained for up to three months prior to their deportation.
According to the deportees who left family members behind, they suffered from hunger and sickness and their properties were confiscated.
To date, the Ethiopian regime has expelled 55,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia.
In other news, the Ethiopian regime on March 28, 1999, at 11:30 a.m., deployed its fighter planes and bombarded the purely civilian area of Kofenko and Adi Keshi in Gash-Barka Zone. One man was killed and five people were wounded.
These villages are very far away from the front lines. This is a continuation of the previous air strikes and heavy artillery bombardments which had been carried out against civilian targets.
To date, 41 innocent Eritreans have been killed and 44 wounded in air strikes.
In its press statement of yesterday, April 5, 1999, Ethiopia accused the Eritrean government of "once again issuing a fabricated news release, alleging that the Ethiopian Speaker of the House recently called on the Islamic Republic of Iran to mediate a resolution of the Ethio-Eritrea conflict." This is patently false.
In the first place, the Government of Eritrea did not issue any official statement on the meeting between the Ethiopian Speaker of Parliament and the Iranian Ambassador to Ethiopia. An Eritrean Foreign Ministry official however gave his considered views when asked by the Eritrean News Agency to comment on the request by Ethiopia for Iranian mediation as reported by the Iranian News Agency on March 29.
Secondly, if the Iranian News Agency had misquoted, which it did not, the Ethiopian official, this is evidently a matter between him and the agency. The appropriate disclaimer, if any, should come from the Iranian News Agency.
Ethiopia further maintains that "such tactics of fabrication will be ... counterproductive," inhibiting "acts of good faith." Unfortunately, the fabrication of facts and events has been long employed by the Addis Abeba regime and remains an instrument of official policy in its diplomatic campaigns. If a few recent reminders are needed:
NOTE: The full text of the report of the Iranian News Agency (IRNA)
appeared on the website
www.irna.com/headlines/ehead.html
on Monday March 29. In addition, BBC monitoring on line picked up the text
from the Iranian News Agency on the same day.
Ethiopian fighter planes today bombed the town of Adi Kaieh, the environs of Mendefera and the village of Forto (western Eritrea). The successive bombings occurred from 12:30 to 1:00 p.m.
Eight children were wounded--some of them critically--in the bombings that hit a school in Adi Kaieh where a nearby church was also partially demolished. There were no casualties in the other two air raids.
The high altitude bombings were indiscriminate.
The TPLF regime has carried out the air raids on these civilian targets only two days after the UN Security Council renewed its calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement which remains blocked by the TPLF.
The town of Adi Quala, the environs of Zalambesa, Deda Lalai, Hazemo, Shabiqo, Kinafna and Molki were targets of previous bombings by Ethiopian Antonov and MiG aircraft and helicopter gunships since February 6 this year when the TPLF regime violated the moratorium on air strikes. Twenty seven civilians were killed and 42 others wounded in those bombings.
The extent of Ethiopian air raids yesterday is now fully known. While the bombings in Forto and Mendefera resulted in no casualties, eleven civilians were seriously wounded and a church destroyed in Adi Kaieh. The bombings injured the following group of ten school children walking home for lunch in Adi Kaieh as well as an elderly man standing nearby:
TPLF claims that its forces had hit "carefully selected and strategic military targets" are simply false. As corroborated by international media who went to the scene of the bombings, a church and the group of school children were the so-called "carefully selected and strategic military targets."
Yesterday's unprovoked bombings come in a week when the TPLF regime is coming under heavy international pressure to implement a cease-fire and the OAU Framework Agreement. The air raids also reflect the desperation of a regime that suffered huge losses in Badme last February and a devastating defeat in Tsorona subsequently in mid-March.
Press Release
Eleven Civilians Wounded in Bombing of Adi Kaieh
The extent of Ethiopian air raids yesterday is now fully known. While the bombings in Forto and Mendefera resulted in no casualties, eleven civilians were seriously wounded and a church destroyed in Adi Kaieh. The bombings injured the following group of ten school children walking home for lunch in Adi Kaieh as well as an elderly man standing nearby:
Yesterday's unprovoked bombings come in a week when the TPLF regime is coming under heavy international pressure to implement a cease-fire and the OAU Framework Agreement. The air raids also reflect the desperation of a regime that suffered huge losses in Badme last February and a devastating defeat in Tsorona subsequently in mid-March.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 April 1999
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
In a report titled "Eritrean Economic Growth Dealt Heavy Blow by War" (April 12, 1999) attributed to Alex Last, Reuters has misquoted Eritrean officials on facts about the Eritrean economy, made inferences that are not supported by the naked facts, and sensationalized a topic that otherwise deserves serious consideration. In so doing, Reuters not only abused and misused economic statistics but also did a great disservice to its readers. In this report which is replete with innuendoes and inept interpretation of statistics, Reuters resorts to cheap journalism by using sensational phrases such as "strangled economic growth," "suffered a severe blow," and "a buying spree of foreign weaponry and aircraft." This is nothing but sensational journalism that characterizes throw-away tabloids of the worst kind. The following are the relevant facts:
Reuters describes an economy that recorded a 4 percent growth rate (1998) as "strangled" and dealt with a "heavy blow". This is simply a sham.
g_042399.html 100655 127137 345 15466 6710213766 6323
As the UN special envoy, Ambassador Sahnun, prepares to return to the region in pursuit of a peaceful resolution to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the regime in Addis Ababa is issuing a flurry of statements on the need not to "reward aggression". The TPLF regime attempts to portray itself as a "victim of Eritrean aggression" through the distortion of facts and omission of crucial events. It argues that the border conflict has its origins in early May of 1998 when "Eritrea suddenly attacked Ethiopia" in the Badme region; (even then the date is sometimes May 6 and at other times May 12).
The moral high ground that the TPLF regime is attempting to straddle can not be taken seriously when one considers the true origins of the conflict and pattern of Ethiopian aggression.
Ethiopia has displayed a pattern of disregard for international law and accepted norms of State behaviour. The aggrieved picture it seeks to portray and the banner of righteousness it is waving at the world becomes satirical in the light of its aggressive acts which caused the conflict. The TPLF cannot speak about international principles unless it is willing to confess its blatant violation of them and come clean on the actions it undertook to force a war of aggression on Eritrea.
g_0423992.html 100655 127137 345 17211 6710214477 6373
The Eritrean Economy is well and growing. However, recently, there have been a few articles in the Western electronic mass media that presented mistaken views and conclusions about the performance and growth prospects of the Eritrean economy, The facts presented below should put the Eritrean economy's performance and future prospects in proper perspective.
Those who followed Eritrea's long struggle for independence know that at liberation in 1991, Eritrea inherited a war-raged economy in ruins, with a devastated infrastructure, weak and corrupt institutions, defunct factor and product markets, and undeveloped and technologically backward productive sectors. As such, Eritrea's economic development efforts had to start from scratch with meager domestic resources and little or no external assistance.
Over the past eight years since liberation, thanks to its sound economic policy and management, and the motivation, discipline and drive of its people, Eritrea made significant progress toward achieving its long-term economic growth potential. Its infrastructure (including power, transport, communications, water, etc.) has been rehabilitated and significantly expanded; its factor and product markets have been revived; its social and economic institutions have been revitalized, streamlined and strengthened; and its productive sectors have been expanded and improved. Additionally, Eritrea has been able to establish a clean system of governance of free of corruption and bureaucratic red-tape that are essential to ensure private sector confidence and economic growth.
As a result, all sectors of the Eritrean economy posted remarkably high growth rates and its overall performance was much better than expected. Real GDP during 1992-1998 grew by over 6 percent while inflation was contained at below 7 percent. In spite of the increasing public expenditures that have been made to meet the emergency needs and critical investment required to resuscitate the productive and infrastructure base of the economy, overall government fiscal deficit (including grants) as a percentage of GDP at the end of 1997 was approximately 5.1. Gross foreign reserves increased from less than one month of imports in 1992 to about seven months of imports in mid 1998. Moreover, the growth during this period was accompanied by a faster job creation in all sectors than the growth in the labor force, thus resulting in the importation of large numbers of workers from Ethiopia and some Asian countries.
In May 1998, Eritrea was poised to attain a fast and broad-based growth with macroeconomic stability and socioeconomic justice. In spite of the challenges posed by the border conflict with Ethiopia, Eritrea has been able to maintain growth and stability:
In combination, all these economic performance indicators show the Eritrean economy's resilience in the face of adversity. Eritrea's growth comes from the shared vision, sound policies and management, ownership of policies and self-reliance, and motivation, drive and dedication of its people. The challenges of the border conflict with Ethiopia have only sharpened the focus and increased the commitment of the Eritrean People to maintain the development momentum and to defend the sovereignty of their country.
g_042699.html 100655 127137 345 3331 6711125604 6264
President Isaias Afwerki met this afternoon with Ambassador Mohamed Sahnoun,
Special Envoy of the UN Secretary General. Ambassador Sahnoun delivered a
message from the Secretary General of the UN, Mr. Kofi Annan, to President
Isaias.
Earlier in the day, Ambassador Sahnoun met with Foreign Minister Haile
Woldensae who leads the Eritrean delegation that is mandated to deal with
the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
In the course of both discussions, Eritrea reaffirmed its strict adherence
to the OAU Framework Agreement that was endorsed by the Summit of the
Central Organ and expressed its commitment and readiness for its full
implementation. In this context, the Eritrean Government further reiterated
its readiness for redeployment as clearly stipulated by, and in the letter
and spirit of, the Framework Agreement.
Eritrea also informed Ambassador Sahnoun--indeed, as it had done so when the OAU delegation visited Asmara last month--that it has already designated a committee and that the Eritrean Government stands ready to play its role within the Follow-Up Committee to be established under the auspices of the OAU High Level Delegation, with the active participation and assistance of the United Nations.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 26 April 1999
In reality, the contents of the Framework Agreement--the substantive and sequential tenets of which are listed below--do not support Ethiopia's preconditions:
The TPLF regime further claims that Eritrea "has accepted the cease-fire alone without agreeing to the full package." This is patently false. Eritrea has formally announced its acceptance of and adherence to the Framework Agreement in its entirety on several occasions before and has reiterated its readiness to implement the Framework Agreement in full to the UN Special Envoy Mohamed Sahnoun during his visit to Asmara this week.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 April 1999
g_0428992.html 100655 127137 345 4213 6711613723 6354
At 11:00 a.m. this morning, two Ethiopian Antonov planes escorted by fighter planes violated Eritrean air space to bomb nomadic grazing areas along the Binbina-Kuluk road in western Eritrea. There were no casualties although a few heads of cattle were slaughtered in the bombing.
The air raid today was deliberately timed to coincide with the visit of UN Special Envoy Ambassador Mohamed Sahnoun to the region. He left for Addis Abeba yesterday after holding talks with President Isaias Afwerki and the Foreign Minister here on Monday.
During the talks in Asmara, the Government of Eritrea reiterated to Ambassador Sahnoun its continued adherence to the OAU Framework Agreement and its readiness to implement all its provisions. Ambassador Sahnoun expressed his satisfaction telling the international press on departure that "the talks went well and, at this stage, I am hopeful."
The aim of Ethiopia's air raid today is therefore transparent. The TPLF regime is anxious that the efforts underway by the UN envoy and the persistent calls from the international community for the implementation of the OAU Framework will create an environment for lasting peace. Indeed, the OAU Chairman, President Compaore, is scheduled to visit the region in the next few days to accelerate the implementation of the agreement. Furthermore, the US State Department has urged both sides, in a press statement on Monday, to agree to "a cease-fire as a first priority" in accordance with the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement that has been consistently endorsed by the UN Security Council.
In light of these developments, it is clear that Ethiopia's recourse to an air strike today has no rationale other than provoking retaliation in an effort to trigger a new round of hostilities so as to torpedo the peace process.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 April 1999
g_043099.html 100655 127137 345 6533 6712340131 6261
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
Friday April 30, 1999
The TPLF's claims, however, are not borne out by the facts in Eritrea. Indeed, the timing of these accusations is geared to detract attention from the peace process and intensified international calls for the immediate implementation of the Framework Agreement.
As far as the accusations are concerned: *
The ICRC has, in the past year, investigated and dismissed identical claims made by the Ethiopian government regarding their nationals in Eritrea. The ICRC continues to enjoy full, unlimited access to investigate 'new' accusations of unlawful detention. *
This is in stark contrast to the plight of Eritreans in Ethiopia who have been subject to the very policies Ethiopia wants the world to believe exist in Eritrea. But, while in Eritrea Ethiopian nationals continue to live and work protected by the June 26, 1998, parliamentary act which honors their rights, in Ethiopia Eritrean civilians have and continue to endure arbitrary arrest and detention in brutal camps where many have lost their lives. While Ethiopian nationals in Eritrea have been given the option to return to Ethiopia voluntarily in a program supervised by the ICRC, Eritreans in Ethiopia have been deported by force and en masse--to the tune of 56,000--after having property and all means of livelihood confiscated. *
Ethiopia can not, in earnest, claim that their nationals are prevented from entering the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara. Access to that embassy has never been restricted or denied. Neither has anyone attempting to visit the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara been "intimidated and harassed." This, again, is in stark contrast to the actions the TPLF has taken against Eritrea's diplomatic mission in Addis Abeba. TPLF soldiers stood guard outside the premise and placed a twenty four hour surveillance on the ambassador who himself was eventually deported. The TPLF has since broken into the embassy residence in direct contravention of the Vienna Convention.
The TPLF regime seeks to give credence to its accusations by producing bogus 'lists' to undermine the legitimate appeals the Eritrean government has undertaken on behalf of missing Eritreans in Ethiopia. The regime in Addis Abeba also seeks to convince the world that Eritreans have become vindictive following "humiliating defeats." Is it not Ethiopia, as verified by international media, which has sustained massive loss of life on both the Badme and Tsorona fronts?
Ethiopians in Eritrea, as everyone knows, have and will continue to enjoy their rights including the right to stay and work, or indeed the right to leave. The TPLF regime cannot continue to suggest that the policies they execute against Eritreans are being replicated in Eritrea.
It is with great sadness that the General Consulate of the state of Eritrea to UK learned about the tabling of an Early Day Motion (EDM) No 576 under the heading Children In Eritrea, by the Rt. Hon. John Austin, MP. The motion refers to the African Conference on the Use of Children as soldiers held in Maputo, Mozambique, and expresses concern that the Government of Eritrea is forcibly conscripting children into the armed forces.
The General Consulate of the State of Eritrea to the UK wishes to strongly repudiate the false remarks made in the EDM No 576 as no allegation was made against the Eritrean Government at the Maputo Conference. This reference was deliberately done to give credence to the unfounded accusation put forward in the EDM.
The sources of these allegations can only be the TPLF leaders in Ethiopia. They would have done this in order to obscure their own gross abuses of the rights of children. As corroborated by independent witnesses, Ethiopia has been engaged in mass recruitment of students as young as 13 years old for combat duties. The stories of Dawit Adam and Tewelde Alem, two Ethiopian POWs who were interviewed by Lucy Hannon (ref. the Independent, 11/02/99), speak for themselves. Seventeen-year-old Dawit was playing football in Gondar High School, northern Ethiopia, when three government soldiers rounded up 60 boys and took them to a military training camp. Tewelde, who is from Tigray, was also forcibly recruited from his farm and taken to Kobo training camp in Tigray.
Another sad story is that of 13 year old Demoz Admasu from Southern Gondar whose grade six student certificate and a letter from his mother were recovered from the pockets of his dead body. In the letter his mother wrote, that he should stealthily turn back to his village if he got an outlet. Suffice to say that it is the TPLF regime in Ethiopia that has been forcibly conscripting under age children in its armies and using them as cannon fodder. From the POWs own words, that officers in the back line shot many of the child soldiers as they attempted to retreat.
Rt. Hon. John Austin selectively welcomed the adoption and ratification of the convention of the Rights of the Child by Ethiopia, ignoring the fact that Eritrea too has adopted and ratified the UN Convention on the Right of the Child. Unlike Ethiopia, however, Eritrea does honour the rights of its children.
The National Service program in Eritrea as enshrined in the Eritrean Constitution, and fully abiding by the provisions of the international human rights instruments, in particular the CRC, is geared primarily towards the mobilisation of human resources towards national development. It is a legal and national obligation of every Eritrean citizen to participate in this programme. Observers believe that the national service programme has greatly contributed to the rapid progress Eritrea achieved since it won its independence in 1991.
Mr Austin's EDM further calls on the Government of Eritrea to cease
hostilities towards Ethiopia and withdraw its troops from all occupied
Ethiopian territory in accordance with the Framework Agreement for peace
drawn up by the OAU. The General Consulate wishes to express its dismay by
Mr
Austin's apparent lack of knowledge as regards the genesis of the conflict,
and pattern of Ethiopian aggression, the OAU proposal and the current
Ethiopian and Eritrean positions to it. At this juncture it is appropriate
to
put on record that:
In contrast to Ethiopia's aggression and war posturing:
It is well known that Ethiopian propaganda campaign in the past eleven
months
has been anchored on two pillars: i) recourse to the distortion and
fabrication of facts and events so long as these appeared to serve its
purpose; and ii) attempts to render them credible through sheer repetition.
EDM No 576 hosts these mechanisms efficiently.
Although the Early Day Motion No 576, by virtue of its contents was not
considered for debate as is the procedure in the House of Commons, the TPLF
regime has already started propagating its lies. It has gone to the extent
of
presenting the contents of the motion as though they are the views of the
House of Commons and the British Government.
As International pressure on the TPLF regime to stop these horrendous
violations mounts the EDM No 576 attempts to portray Ethiopia as a victim
of
Eritrean aggression is ludicrous and counter productive. The General
Consulate of the State of Eritrea hopes that the distinguished British MPs
did not mean to give Ethiopia the licence to conduct further aggression on
Eritrea. The challenge for them is establishing the truth and, if they were
to do that, there is no doubt they would want to amend the motion that they
tabled.
Agreement
As part of the good offices being made by the state of Qatar to reach a
solution for the existing differences between the State of Eritrea and the
Republic of Sudan, and in keeping with the traditional ties and historical
relations between the two neighboring peoples; and
In response to the mediation by the State of Qatar aiming to establish
security and stability in both countries and in the Horn of Africa, and in
accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the two
countries in Doha on November 10th, 1998.
A summit meeting was held in Doha on Sunday, May 2nd, 1999, between H.E.
Issaias Afeworki, President of the State of Eritrea, H.E. Omar Hassan
Al-Basheer, President of the Republic of the Sudan, and H.H. Sheikh Hamad
bin Khalifa Al-Thani, Emir of the State of Qatar,
Whereas they agreed to the following:
On May 6 last year, about sixty Ethiopian troops in the Badme area encircled
a small Eritrean unit and opened fire killing some officers and wounding
others. This unprovoked act of aggression triggered a series of spiraling
clashes until May 12, with each side reinforcing its positions.
The TPLF regime later distorted the origin of the clashes in Badme to claim
that Eritrean "forces invaded Badme and Shiraro (?) one sunny morning"! Even
the date for "this surprise attack" was doctored to suit its arguments;
sometimes becoming May 6 and at other times May 12. Badme itself was
portrayed differently to the outside world and even to its domestic
audience. Whereas Badme is a small town of not more than 300 Eritrean
families, it was depicted by the TPLF lie machine as "a constituency of
90,000 residents." Whereas its location is indisputably inside Eritrea, the
TPLF dislocated it deceptively to claim "Badme is situated in the inverted V
(Yirga Triangle) and together with Sheraro, both on the Ethiopian side, have
always been under Ethiopia as indicated in the Addis Abeba Agreement of
1902."
There was an underlying motive for this manipulation of facts and events.
Badme was not in fact the origin of the border conflict. It was indeed the
culmination of a series of violations of Eritrean sovereignty by the TPLF
regime.
The first serious violations occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopian troops
crossed the border to dismantled the Eritrean administration in Bada.
Parallel with these acts, villagers in the Badme area were uprooted by local
Tigrean administrators who began to carry out unilateral marking of the
border. The following letter, translated from the handwritten message of
President Isaias Afwerki to Prime Minister Meles on 16 August 1997,
underlines the origin of the conflict.
"Greetings,
I have been compelled to write to you today because of the
preoccupying situation prevailing in the areas around Bada.
It cannot be said that the border between our two countries is
demarcated clearly although it is known traditionally. And we had not given
the issue much attention in view of our present and future ties. Moreover, I
do not believe that this will be a cause of much concern and controversy
even in the future.
Be this as it may, there have been intermittent disputes in the
border areas arising from different and minor causes. Local officials have
been striving to defuse and solve these problems amicably. However, the
forcible occupation of Adi Murug by your army in the past few days is truly
saddening.
There was no justification for resorting to force as it would not
have been at all difficult to settle the matter amicably even if it was
deemed important and warranting immediate attention. It would also be
possible to quietly and without haste demarcate the boundaries in case that
this is felt to be necessary.
I therefore urge you to personally take the necessary prudent action
so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary
conflict."
Eritrea further suggested the formation of a Joint Border Commission at very
high levels. In spite of this mechanism, the TPLF regime persisted in its
acts of aggression to:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
An OAU delegation led by the Foreign Minister of Burkina Faso, the special
The special envoy delivered a message from President Compaore to President
The Government of Eritrea reiterated to the delegation its adherence
to the
1. A formal and binding agreement to be signed between the Government
of
2. Formal agreements concerning the "mechanisms" and "technicalities"
of
3. A formal agreement on a cease-fire be signed and declared so
as to
The Government of Eritrea further informed the OAU delegation that when
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ethiopian MiG-23 jets bombed the port city of Massawa today. The bombing
took place at 6:20 a.m. this morning.
One person was killed and three others seriously wounded in the air raid. A
commercial warehouse in the vicinity of the port was hit. Ethiopian MiG
fighter planes also bombed the areas around Zalambesa yesterday but failed
to hit any target.
These provocative bombings come in the wake of intensified peace efforts by
the OAU and other concerned parties. The TPLF regime continues to obstruct
the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement by stipulating new
preconditions.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The Ethiopian Government has, on 14 May 1999, made the absurd accusation
that close to 2,000 Ethiopian nationals are being held as prisoners in
Hawashait, Eritrea. This fabrication is a repetition of a similar accusation
made by the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara on 12 May 1999 in a note sent to the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and circulated to all Diplomatic Missions,
Consulates and International Organizations in Asmara.
These accusations are nothing but another futile propaganda attempt by the
Addis Ababa regime to camouflage the heinous crimes it has been perpetrating
against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin since its aggression on
Eritrea over a year ago. By now, however, the international community is
fully aware of Ethiopia's big lie technique and its various schemes to
hoodwink world public opinion.
The fact of the matter is that there are no Ethiopian prisoners in Hawashait
or in any other place in Eritrea.
This latest attempt by the Addis Ababa regime to bring the Eritrean
Government down to its level of criminality will as usual expose its lies in
a convincing way because the Eritrean Government, which follows an open door
policy, has invited both the ICRC and members of an international media
group which is currently touring Eritrea to visit Hawashait and any other
place in Eritrea and verify for themselves that there are no Ethiopian
prisoners in Hawashait.
The Ethiopian regime must remember that no amount of lies will be able to
cleanse it of the crimes it has committed against Eritreans and Ethiopians
of Eritrean origin and it will be held accountable for the crimes it
commits.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemns this criminal and barbaric act by
the Addis Ababa regime and demands the unconditional and immediate departure
of these Eritreans to any place they may wish to go.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
As it may be recalled, the eleven-point OAU Framework Agreement was endorsed
by the international community, including the UN Security Council, as "a
viable and sound basis for the political settlement" of the border conflict
between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
From the outset, Eritrea had no doubts on the positive merits of the
Framework Agreement and thus remained actively engaged in the process. In
this spirit, it asked for clarifications on 12 December 1998, prior to
declaring its definitive response, because it did not want to leave loose
ends in an agreement that it felt must be meticulously implemented once it
is accepted by both parties.
Ethiopia, on the other hand, announced its earlier "acceptance" of the
Framework Agreement. On January 27, 1999, Ethiopia's Prime Minister told
African ambassadors: "... the OAU Conflict Resolution Mechanism, having
listened to both sides made a very clear decision. First, it fully endorsed
the proposal of the High Level Delegation and second, perhaps more, perhaps
just as important as the first one, it called for the implementation of the
proposal, not for further negotiation of the proposal. It called for the
implementation of the proposal ... they were firmly rejecting any
prevarication."
Now, Ethiopia is prevaricating. Indeed, with hindsight, it is very clear
that Ethiopia's early "acceptance" was a simple public relations and
diplomatic game. The pretexts on "interpretation" that the TPLF regime is
raising today, or the arguments of a "package" with no natural sequencing,
are otherwise hollow.
On the question of interpretation, the Framework Agreement and the written
clarifications issued by the High Level Delegation on January 26, 1999, do
not leave room for any ambiguity. Badme and its environs is certainly Badme
and its surrounding areas. Eritrea was required to withdraw from Badme and
environs unilaterally, not because this territory belongs to Ethiopia but,
as operative paragraph 3 of the Agreement stipulated: "as a mark of goodwill
and consideration for our continental organization. It being understood that
this redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the area concerned
which will be determined at the end of delimitation and demarcation of the
border and, if need be, through an appropriate mechanism or arbitration."
The Framework Agreement further stipulates (operative para. 5 a and its
clarifications): "... this should be immediately followed by the
demilitarization of the entire border through the redeployment of the forces
of both parties along the entire border to positions to be determined
subsequently as part of the implementation process of the Framework
Agreement."
The Framework Agreement is certainly a package, its basic tenets being:
Ethiopia's preconditions that are hampering immediate cease-fire, or
shifting "interpretations" that have no basis in the Framework Agreement,
are therefore flimsy pretexts meant to derail the peace process and promote
its agenda of war. The international community should not tolerate
Ethiopia's unjustified prevarication.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
An Ethiopian attack launched on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit
front was totally foiled with the TPLF regime suffering considerable casualties.
Three hundred eighty Ethiopian soldiers were killed, 975 wounded while
eleven others were captured.
An MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down and its pilot killed as the
TPLF regime attempted a last ditch effort yesterday morning to bolster
its ground attack through air support. The attacks involved one Ethiopian
division and
The TPLF regime had been boasting through its mass media that it would
turn "the independence celebrations into mourning." The attack on the Mereb-Setit
front this weekend seemed to have no purpose other than to disturb the
nationwide celebrations for the eighth anniversary of independence.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The TPLF regime launched another futile attack on the central flank of the
Mereb-Setit front on May 25. The attack, which started in the latter
afternoon hours continued until the morning hours the next day when TPLF
forces were totally dispersed.
Cumulative TPLF losses in the fighting which started on May 21 amount to:
The TPLF's repeated attacks occur at a time when there are increasing calls
from the international community for an immediate cessation of hostilities.
The Security Council has called for the full and immediate implementation of
Resolution 1227 in its session last week.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
In its letter of 14 May, 1999, addressed to the President of the Security Council, Ethiopia accused Eritrea for "embarking on a large-scale military activity of destabilization in Somalia". Ethiopia further states that Eritrea is guilty of "violating Security Council Resolution 733 (1992)" through its "shipment of arms to one of the warring factions".
The audacity of the Ethiopian regime in leveling these hypocritical accusations against Eritrea is not surprising. Indeed, it has now become common practice for the leadership in Addis Ababa to flagrantly violate fundamental principles of international law - whether it is acts of brazen aggression, human rights violations or blatant incursions against neighboring countries - to then accuse its victims for the very transgressions that it is guilty of in a pre-emptive, if transparent, manner.
What are the true facts as far as Somalia is concerned?
Somalia has long become a victim of repeated Ethiopian incursions as well as the manipulative acts of training and arming different warring factions at different times. Indeed, violating the territorial sovereignty of Somalia under the pretext of containing "the threat from terrorist groups", the Addis Ababa regime continues to carry out periodic military aggression against Somalia. The real purpose is however, "to project power" so as to dictate events in Somalia.
Ethiopia has been doggedly pursuing these patters on intermittent incursions into Somalis and continuous supply of arms to different factions at different times in order to achieve the following overriding policy aim. The TPLF regime does not want any central authority to emerge in Somalia. Its pronounced policy is the creation of clan-based mini-States so as manipulate a weak and divided Somalia.
This obsession has compromised its neutrality and the mandate that Ethiopia was entrusted to by IGAD to promote national reconciliation and peace in Somalia. The Sodere Conference, which excluded some of the key players in Somalia, was a disappointment to IGAD. Ethiopia's failure to redress this mistake in the subsequent period, giving rise to a proliferation of initiatives that were not co-ordinated, finally impelled some IGAD member States to recommend, in the Summit in Djibouti in March 1998, that the initiative be carried out under the auspices of the Chairman and the Secretariat of IGAD.
Ethiopia's pretext that its actions in Somalia are dictated by its security needs of containing "terrorist incursions" and its accusation that "Eritrea is working hand-in-glove with terrorist groups" is preposterous and a pure fabrication. Indeed, Eritrea has been and continues to be, at the fore-front in the regional efforts to combat terrorism emanating from fundamentalist and extremist groups. Eritrea has not, in fact, compromised its principled position to dally with and accommodate terrorist groups or their sponsors for tactical and short-terms gains as has sadly been the case with Ethiopia.
At any rate, Eritrea believes that regional terrorism can only be contained and combated through concerted action by the countries in the region. In this spirit, it has not spared any effort to promote regional co-operation towards that end.
In conclusion, Eritrea's track record establishes without doubt that it has no vested interest to destabilize Somalia. On the contrary, Eritrea has been consistently working to promote national reconciliation of the Somalis without partiality or preference to selected factions on the basis of narrow self-interest.
Similarly, Eritrea has no desire or sinister design to use Somalia as a battle ground for "a proxy war" with Ethiopia. Eritrea firmly believes that the Somali problem is one of the fundamental security problems in the region. Its solution rests primarily on the Somali people themselves although it will undoubtedly be enhanced and accelerated by the concerted and constructive efforts of all the countries of the region. Thus, even if Ethiopia has a long border with Somalia, this cannot be used as a pretext to give it a "free-hand" to aggravate the conflict in Somalia which will have obvious consequences for the stability of the Horn of Africa region.
In the circumstances. the right course of action for Ethiopia is to refrain from its continuous acts of destabilization of Somalia in pursuit of its narrow interests that are contrary to the interests and aspirations of the region as well as in contravention of international law and the relevant resolutions of the Security Council.
Haile Haile Weldensae
The TPLF war-propaganda has gone beyond limits. In a statement issued from
Addis Ababa yesterday, we are told the following: "...Unlike in Eritrea,
there is no military conscription in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Defense Force
is made up of volunteers who come from all parts of the country and
represent Ethiopia's diverse nationalities...they all spoke of the comradery
and friendship that exist among them...military officers and leaders fight
side by side with their soldiers...the soldiers are happy to be fighting to
protect these interests."
Does this rosy picture conform to actual reality? What are the real stories
from the Battlefield? Excerpts follow:
These are the grim facts. To glorify war by denying reality is a grave
folly for which the TPLF regime is squarely accountable. Indeed, it is high
time that the leaders in Addis Ababa reconcile themselves with reality,
recognize the horrors of war and the futility of military solution and give
the quest for peace the seriousness and sincerity that it deserves.
g_060899.html 100644 127137 345 12671 6727265010 6316
Forced to react, the Eritrean Air Force bombed the military airport
in Mekele destroying several fighter aircraft. In the retaliatory
strikes,
The year since Ethiopia bombed Asmara has illustrated the scale
of Ethiopia's intentions and the means by which the TPLF regime is prepared
e expulsion of close to 60,000 Eritrean
For the past two months, Ethiopia has been launching an intensive
campaign aimed at persuading the international community that Eritrea is
violating
To use its own hyperbole, it is in fact Ethiopia which has been resorting
to a pattern of "attacking first and crying first" as these sequence of
events illustrate.
Indeed, in violation of international law and the Charters and Resolutions
of the UN and the OAU, Ethiopia:
It was therefore Ethiopia which first abused the trust and good will of
its neighbour to occupy sovereign territory. Ethiopia was also the first
to cry "foul" and declare war on its unsuspecting neighbour.
Moreover, Ethiopia is guilty of the following excesses:
Ethiopia is, furthermore, guilty of repeated acts of regional
destabilization and aggression as demonstrated by its current invasion of
Somalia, and intermittent incursions into Kenya and Somalia in the past
years.
To start with, our policy has been and still is that the current
crisis be resolved not through the logic of force but through legal
and peaceful means.
It has been our belief right from the beginning that the recognition
of and adherence to the colonial borders would lead to a lasting
solution of the crisis. If we are talking about borders and wish to
solve the border problems, then we should, both of us, be ready to
accept the border demarcations officially recognized by International
law and the charters of the United Nations and the Organization of
African Unity, or the principles that govern border demarcations. This
should be followed by the creation of a demilitarized zone in order to
defuse the tension along the border.
If we are to talk about the implementation of these basic principles,
it should be borne in mind that the borderlines should be delineated
and landmarks put on. On our part, we propose the UN cartographic
unit, which has a vast experience in this field or anyone with
up-to-date and professional skill to participate in the task. On our
part, we want this process to take as short a time as possible. As to
the demilitarization of the entire border, it should be done in the
presence of international observers and within a limited period of
time.
All along this process, all details and particulars should be
exhausted and agreed upon one by one. The question of temporary
administration in the disputed area can only be technical. And during
the interim period, the people living in the area may be moved
elsewhere to be resettled once the demarcation of the border is
completed.
And anticipating further misunderstanding that may crop up through the
exploitation of loopholes in the agreements, the details of the
implementation process should be exhausted. By so doing, we can save
time and the final agreement can have full guarantee and assurance.
However, what we have witnessed recently was a readiness from the
Ethiopian government to accept the proposals as if they have been
presented to them by the facilitators and then creating pretexts and
excuses for declaring war against us. Such a sudden action could come
only as a climax to a growing unhealthy internal motives.
On the ambivalent moves of the Ethiopian government:
The notion entertained by the Ethiopian government that accepting the
proposals stipulated the acceptance of its precondition is without
base. They are simply trying to justify their wrong decisions taken in
haste. But, in such a situation the justification may sometimes prove
worse than the blunder.
First, they said that unless we pulled out of their ëoccupied
territoryí they would use force. This was officialized as if it
were a big legal decision by their parliament. Finding themselves in
an impasse after making a hasty and faulty decision, they had somehow
to find a befitting excuse. Thatís why the facilitation process
is lagging behind.
More excuses are created in order to justify their war of aggression.
They are simply moving from one blunder to the next and are swirling
in a spiral of endless blunders. The recent bombing raid in Asmara is
a logical process of this endless circle of blunders.
On the efforts made by facilitators:
According to the statement issued by the government of Eritrea, the
facilitation process cannot be said to have been exhausted. There is a
lot to be developed in the general principles concerning details of
implementation. Anyway, the facilitation process, in itself, is not a
simple contribution. Not only US and Rwanda but the General-Secretary
of OAU, the General-Secretary of UN, President Hassan Guled Aptidon,
Chairman of IGAAD, the Organization of Sahel- Sahara, but various
other organizations have one and all counseled for the a legal and
peaceful alternative as a solution to the crisis. On our part, we will
continue supplying information to these organizations and efforts will
not cease until a solution is found.
On the worsening of the situation:
Ethiopia has taken unilateral actions of ordering the closure of
Eritrean Embassy in Addis and consulates in Tirgray and Affar
administrative regions. While they keep on preaching peace in words on
the contrary they seem to stand firm on their previous policy of using
force to solve the problem. Looking at their actions of violations and
belligerence, one can deduce that their intention is to continue the
war and whatever they say is a cover-up.
On the situation on the grounds:
They have already proclaimed their intention. Their stratagem is
resorting to false accusations and counter-accusations. They seem to
have fully developed the habit of attacking first and accusing the
victim of having attacked first. However, we have clear proofs of who
struck first and when and where. All their actions testify to the fact
that they still want to solve the problem through the logic of force.
We have all the relevant documents which may be revealed in due time.
None of their attacks have been accidental. They are logical
developments of their aggressive policies. All the various border
attacks including that of Alitena and Zelambessa, have been started by
them.
At this juncture, I would like to make it clear that all these attacks
have not taken place in empty places. We have those who were in the
battle fields to stand as witnesses. We have very clear and detailed
information as to who ordered the war, who outlined the strategies,
when and where it was discussed, etc.
Preparations for war had been going on for quite a long time by
supplying false and erroneous information to the people to the effect
that the Eritrean fighting force has been weakened following
demobilization and rehabilitation and that the real army composed of
national service trainees is insignificant and unwilling to fight.
This is cheap propaganda.
On my part, I consider such misleading propaganda as pure crime. In
brief, those who are at present resorting to force as a final solution
to the crisis have only sullied spirits. Their desire to want to do
everything by force is now becoming clear to every thinking person.
Hand in hand with this goes their habit of posing themselves as
victims all the time. For example, this afternoon ( June 5 ) at 2:10
pm they conducted an air raid in Asmara. At 2:30 our planes took off
and probably at 3:00 they retaliated by bombing defined military
targets in Mekele. This being so, they came up with their fabricated
story that they had struck only after they had been bombed. How do you
explain such a flagrant twisting of events? Donít they know
that their own people may be looking down on them?
Nevertheless, whatever they might say and dream cannot in any way
change what is happening on the ground. Their actions are the result
of continuous despair and frustration which only help to worsen the
situation.
On the other hand, it is very unwise to misjudge oneís own
people. The people of Ethiopia and especially the people of Tigray
know full well what is exactly happening. It is futile to try and
cheat them. Nothing can remain permanently hidden from them. They are
getting more and more conscious regarding the situation in general.
This rising of consciousness is affecting their army as well. And
finally, the measures which are being taken by Ethiopia to solve the
problem thorough the use of force is also becoming more evident among
the international community.
There is a feeling that the logic of force may continue for some time.
On our side, we desire to see an end to the current situation whatever
stage the military clashes may reach. We believe that eventually peace
may come only through legal means. The problem is that we cannot tell
exactly when the other side is going to accept this logic. However,
with the facilitators making tremendous efforts and the deep concern
shown by the international community, a lasting solution may be found
for the present crisis.
On ulterior motives for the present crisis:
It seems to me very inappropriate for anyone to speculate and analyze
and look out for possible motives just because a new situation happens
to be created in front of one. The notion that the war is proclaimed
with the intention of overthrowing the present government in Eritrea
is simply the effect of daydreaming. The present crisis is simply the
result of wrong decisions and the inability of correcting the same
decisions in time. I find it difficult to see any ulterior motive
whatsoever.
On the situation on the ground:
It has never been part of our military tradition to speak of war
exploits and heroism. It is again unwise and inappropriate to
underestimate oneís enemy and to look down on it as spineless
and insignificant. One can talk to his heartís desire about
politics because that is an open field, but when it comes to war, one
has to be more serious.
Whatever the case, the Ethiopian side know very well what is happening
regarding their successive attacks on the battle fronts. They may say
whatever they want to say, but in our case we deem it inappropriate to
talk about victories and heroism at present. Such information can only
help to heat up the situation.
On peace:
One thing should be clear and that is peace can come only through
efforts being made by Eritrea, Ethiopia and other concerned countries.
There is nothing to despair about.
The other side is clamoring for war, but what exactly is going on on
the ground? We know that the people of Tigray more than any one wants
good relations with Eritrea. It seems that those who are urging for
war are those who intend to gain from it. We are however of the mind
that the people of Tigray will never shun peace and let themselves be
led to war by people of narrow and selfish sentiments. This in itself
is a positive force capable of bringing about peace.
On word to the people:
As I have said repeatedly, the people of Eritrea know what is required
of them and what they should do in time of war and in self-defense.
What is of paramount importance however is taking things with calm and
judging events without bringing undue sentiments to the fore. We
should always be looking ahead and we should be assured that we are
not alone, we have all the peace-loving people of the world behind us.
g_061199.html 100644 127137 345 5066 6730545046 6274
The TPLF regime has, again, unleashed new offensives against Eritrea.
After a lull in fighting of almost two weeks, fighting resumed on
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release
About 7,000 Ethiopian soldiers put out of action
Pitched fighting continued on the central flank of the Mereb-
Setit front for the second day yesterday. Ethiopian losses on Thursday,
June 10, amounted to over 2,300 soldiers killed,
4,200 wounded, and over 80 soldiers taken prisoner.
Press Statement
Heavy fighting continued for the fourth successive day yesterday on
the
Two MiG-23 fighter planes were shot down yesterday morning around 9:00
a.m.
Ethiopia's human losses were the heaviest yesterday although the exact
Ethiopian cumulative losses for Thursday, Friday and Saturday amounted
to
The Burie and Alitena-Mereb fronts were relatively quiet apart from
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Statement on the Agreement for a Total Ban on Air Strikes
The Government of Eritrea has accepted the proposal put forward by the United States Government yesterday, June 14, 1998, on a total ban of air strikes by both sides. The agreement provides for Eritrea and Ethiopia to "halt immediately the further use of air strikes and the threat of air strikes in their present conflict." The moratorium "will continue indefinitely or until such time as either party concludes that any prospect for a peace process has come to an end and provides a formal, advance notice to the United States Government that it will no longer respect this moratorium."
The Government of Eritrea has consistently been calling for the
The Government of Eritrea wishes to avail itself of this occasion to
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
g_061598_2.html 100644 127137 345 5263 6541314724 6514
Today, June 15, 1998, Eritrea's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios sent the following message regarding the maltreatment of Eritreans in Ethiopia to the United Nations Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mr. Sergio Vieiro de Mello.
15 June 1998
Dear Mr. de Mello,
Allow me to raise a matter of utmost urgency and gravity concerning the fate of Eritrean civilians being rounded up by the Ethiopian authorities throughout the country and being exposed to all kinds of abuses including threats to their lives.
Sincerely,
Haile Menkerios,
g_061599.html 100655 127137 345 2322 6731477536 6303
Press Release, 8:00 a.m. LT
Over 6,000 Ethiopian Troops Put Out of Action in Two Days of Heavy Fighting
Fighting continued unabated for the fifth consecutive day yesterday on the
central flank of the Mereb-Setit front.
Two thousand sixty Ethiopian soldiers were killed and 4,050 wounded in the
battles of Sunday and yesterday, bringing the total number of Ethiopian
troops put out of action in five days of intense fighting to over 18,000.
Ethiopia has also lost two MiG-23 jet fighters, one MI-35 helicopter gunship
and five tanks destroyed in the previous days of fighting.
The Ethiopian regime has employed five divisions to date which were thrown
into battle in turns. Ethiopian attempts to gain new ground have all been
repulsed.
Fighting also resumed this morning.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Release, 7:30 a.m. LT
Two Ethiopian MiG-23 fighter planes were shot down around 2:00 p.m.
The two aircraft were hit at high altitude as they encroached on Eritrean
Meanwhile, ground fighting on the Mereb-Setit front, which continued
with
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Statement on the Violation by Ethiopia of the Moratorium on Air Strikes
The Government of Eritrea had accepted on Sunday, June 14, 1998, the
The Government of Ethiopia has however violated this agreement both
The efforts to de-escalate the conflict have thus been frustrated as the Government of Ethiopia continues to escalate the tension.
The Government of Eritrea has communicated these violations to the US
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Background to the Current Border Dispute Between Eritrea and Ethiopia
1. The crisis between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in the violation by the Government of Ethiopia of Eritrea's colonial boundaries, and to willfully claim, as well as physically occupy, large swathes of Eritrean territory in the southwestern, southern and southeastern parts of the country. This violation is made manifest in the official map issued in
2. Ethiopia went further than laying claims on paper to create a de
3. Unfortunately, Eritrean efforts to solve the problem amicably and
4. Ethiopia's unilateral re-drawing of the colonial boundary and
5. Ethiopia's blatant act of aggression is clearly in violation of the OAU Charter and Resolution AHG/RES 16(1) of the First Assembly of the Heads of State and Government held in Cairo in 1964. Unless rectified without equivocation, Ethiopia's refusal to abide by the OAU Charter and decisions, and its continued occupation of undisputed Eritrean territory will open a Pandora's box and create a cycle of instability in the region. The acceptance of Ethiopia's logic will not only affect all African States but will indeed backfire against Ethiopia itself, since its sovereignty over much of its territory, including on the Ogaden, is based on the same principles of international law.
6. A simple border dispute has assumed this level of conflict because of Ethiopia's continued escalation of its hostile and provocative acts. Among these are:
7. In spite of all these, Eritrea has been restrained and committed to a peaceful solution of the dispute. In this vein, it has already presented constructive proposals (attached). The proposals center on: i) the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries on the basis of borders established by colonial treaties; ii) the demilitarization of the entire border area pending demarcation; and,
In addition, considering the state of war that exists between the two
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Attachment:
1. PRINCIPLES
The Government of Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia agree that they will resolve the present crisis and any other dispute between them through peaceful and legal means. Both sides reject solutions that are imposed by force.
Both sides agree to respect the clearly defined colonial boundaries
The demarcation of the borders shall be effected speedily and within an agreed time frame.
Both sides agree to be bound by this agreement.
2. IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES
2.1 The UN Cartographic Unit, or any other body with the appropriate
2.2 The time frame for the demarcation of the boundary shall be six
2.3 The demarcated boundary shall be accepted and adhered to by both
2.4 If there are segments in the boundary whose delineation is under
g_061998_2.html 100644 127137 345 26610 6543466704 6547
Statement on the Violation by Ethiopia of the Moratorium on Air Strikes
The Government of Eritrea had accepted on Sunday, June 14, 1998, the
The Government of Ethiopia has however violated this agreement both
The efforts to de-escalate the conflict have thus been frustrated as the Government of Ethiopia continues to escalate the tension.
The Government of Eritrea has communicated these violations to the US
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Background to the Current Border Dispute Between Eritrea and Ethiopia
1. The crisis between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in the violation by the Government of Ethiopia of Eritrea's colonial boundaries, and to willfully claim, as well as physically occupy, large swathes of Eritrean territory in the southwestern, southern and southeastern parts of the country. This violation is made manifest in the official map issued in
2. Ethiopia went further than laying claims on paper to create a de
3. Unfortunately, Eritrean efforts to solve the problem amicably and
4. Ethiopia's unilateral re-drawing of the colonial boundary and
5. Ethiopia's blatant act of aggression is clearly in violation of the OAU Charter and Resolution AHG/RES 16(1) of the First Assembly of the Heads of State and Government held in Cairo in 1964. Unless rectified without equivocation, Ethiopia's refusal to abide by the OAU Charter and decisions, and its continued occupation of undisputed Eritrean territory will open a Pandora's box and create a cycle of instability in the region. The acceptance of Ethiopia's logic will not only affect all African States but will indeed backfire against Ethiopia itself, since its sovereignty over much of its territory, including on the Ogaden, is based on the same principles of international law.
6. A simple border dispute has assumed this level of conflict because of Ethiopia's continued escalation of its hostile and provocative acts. Among these are:
7. In spite of all these, Eritrea has been restrained and committed to a peaceful solution of the dispute. In this vein, it has already presented constructive proposals (attached). The proposals center on: i) the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries on the basis of borders established by colonial treaties; ii) the demilitarization of the entire border area pending demarcation; and,
In addition, considering the state of war that exists between the two
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Attachment: Proposal for a Solution Submitted by the Government of Eritrea 1. PRINCIPLES The Government of Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia agree that they will resolve the present crisis and any other dispute between them through peaceful and legal means. Both sides reject solutions that are imposed by force. Both sides agree to respect the clearly defined colonial boundaries between them. In this respect, both sides further agree that the actual demarcation of the borders will be carried out by a mutually acceptable technical team. In the event that there is some controversy on delineation, both sides agree to resolve the matter through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration. The demarcation of the borders shall be effected speedily and within an agreed time frame. Both sides agree to be bound by this agreement. 2. IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES 2.1 The UN Cartographic Unit, or any other body with the appropriate expertise, shall be charged with the task of demarcating the boundary in accordance with existing colonial border treaties. 2.2 The time frame for the demarcation of the boundary shall be six months. This time frame may be shortened or prolonged subject to justifiable technical reasons. This requisite time frame shall be designated as AN INTERIM PERIOD. 2.3 The demarcated boundary shall be accepted and adhered to by both sides. 2.4 If there are segments in the boundary whose delineation is under controversy, the matter shall be resolved through an appropriate mechanism of ARBITRATION. 2.5 The technical details relevant to the practical implementation of the DEMARCATION process shall be annexed to the agreement. 3. DEMILITARIZATION as a measure for defusing the crisis and expediting the demarcation of the borders so as to ensure a lasting solution shall be accepted and adhered to by both sides. 3.1 DEMILITARIZATION shall begin by the Mereb-Setit segment; proceed next to the Bada area and be implemented throughout the entire boundary in accordance with this phased pattern. 3.2 DEMILITARIZATION shall be implemented through the involvement and monitoring of observers. The team of observers shall be composed of the forces and commanders from the facilitators as well as representatives of both sides. 3.3 DEMILITARIZATION shall be completed within the time frame of one month. 3.4 The issue of civil administration in populated demilitarized areas shall be addressed through appropriate ad hoc arrangements that will be put in place for the interim period. 3.5 When the INTERIM period comes to an end following the completion of the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries, the LEGITIMATE AUTHORITIES shall regain full jurisdiction over their respective SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES. 3.6 The details regarding DEMILITARIZATION and its implementation modalities shall be included in the main agreement as an annex. 4.0 A full INVESTIGATION of the incident of May 6, 1998, shall be conducted in tandem with the demilitarization process. 5.0 This COMPREHENSIVE agreement, signed by both parties, shall be deposited in the UN and OAU as a legal agreement so as to ensure its binding nature.
g_062099.html 100655 127137 345 3370 6733432465 6275
Press Release, 8:00 a.m. LT
There were reports in the international press yesterday referring to the
contents of a letter from the OAU Chairman to the Eritrean President.
The Eritrean Government had indeed dispatched a prompt response on the same
day, May 11, 1999, to the letter of President Campaore through the same
envoys composed of the Foreign Minister of Burkina Faso and members of the
OAU Secretariat.
The main contents of the response of Eritrea were:
The letter further noted that Eritrea has not occupied Ethiopian territory.
The Government of Eritrea wishes to underline at this juncture--indeed as it
has stressed on several occasions before--any tampering with the OAU
Framework Agreement will bear no fruit other than throttling the Agreement
itself and bring the OAU initiative to a dead end.
In the event, the Government of Eritrea strongly urges the OAU to work for
the implementation of the Framework Agreement and not to open the door for
another round of fruitless wrangling.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs
In a letter dated 14 June 1999 to the President of the Security Council
(S/1999/679), Ethiopia's Foreign Minister accuses Eritrea of "obstructing
peace and the implementation of the OAU Framework." The Ethiopian Foreign
Minister further claims that the OAU High Level Delegation has pronounced a
"new clarification" on "Badme and environs" that is consonant with
Ethiopia's "interpretation."
As you will recall, Eritrea had submitted to the Security Council, in its
letter of 12 March 1999 (S/1999/274), the written clarification that the OAU
High Level Delegation provided it with on January 26, 1999. The
clarification was unequivocal on several points. Thus, "Environs refers to
the area surrounding Badme Town." In regard to redeployment, the
clarification reads, "The redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town
and its environs. This should be immediately followed by the
demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the
forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be
determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the
Framework Agreement." Indeed, it was on the basis of the clarifications
provided to it in writing that Eritrea accepted in good faith the OAU
Framework Agreement.
The eleven-point Framework Agreement is unambiguous and its most essential
contents may be condensed into the following five, sequential, measures:
In the event, the Framework Agreement remains blocked and peace is being
kept hostage only because Ethiopia has reneged on its earlier commitment by
putting forth new preconditions.
Ethiopia's Foreign Minister has once again only restated Ethiopia's
preconditions when he stated in his letter, "... The bottom line for
Ethiopia is that Eritrea should and must withdraw from all occupied
Ethiopian territories and that the Ethiopian administration--forcefully
uprooted--should be restored. That is what the OAU Framework requires of
Eritrea ... Any interpretation of the OAU Framework Agreement that suggests
that Eritrea would withdraw from territories it occupied in May but retain
those it occupied in June cannot be taken seriously."
Ethiopia's Foreign Minister is clearly reading from a new script. The OAU
Framework Agreement was endorsed by the Central Organ in December 1998 and
has therefore covered the clashes of May and June of that year. Moreover,
the Framework Agreement is not only unambiguous in terms of redeployment of
troops but operative paragraph 7 provides for the determination of the
origin of the crisis "through an investigation that will be carried out on
the incidents of 6 May 1998 and on any other incident prior to that date ...
including the incidents of July-August 1997."
Ethiopia's underlying motive in pursuing this approach is transparent.
Ethiopia wants to be exonerated from the acts of aggression that it has
perpetrated in the preceding years and to legitimize the Eritrean
territories that it has occupied in the process.
Indeed, Ethiopia has persistently violated Eritrean sovereignty,
international law and covenants to which it is a signatory by:
Ethiopia's selective approach is not only untenable in terms of
international law. It also defies common sense. With regard to international
law, the status quo in Africa is anchored in the respect of the boundaries
inherited from colonial rule. This is the sacrosanct OAU principle governing
the behaviour of neighbouring countries. In the conflict between Eritrea and
Ethiopia, the restoration of the status quo ante refers to redressing of any
and all territorial violations that Ethiopia has perpetrated by violating
this fundamental OAU principle. Ethiopia's arguments are thus nothing but an
effort to gloss over its violations prior to 6 May 1998. In fact, it is
tantamount to the logic of a serial killer who, when caught in the act of
murdering his fifth victim, argues that he must not be held responsible for
the four previous crimes since he was not caught red-handed.
In a classic case of the perversion of truth, Ethiopia's Foreign Minister
accuses the international community of "appeasing Eritrea" and urges the
Security Council "to give Eritrea a clear signal that we are governed by
international law and that aggression cannot pay. The time to do so may be
long overdue, but it is better later than never."
If anything, the Security Council has been tolerant of Ethiopia. The Foreign
Minister has finally admitted, in his present letter, that Ethiopia has
unleashed the large scale offensives since 6 February this year, which have
claimed, and continue to claim, tens of thousands of lives. (Ethiopia had
earlier denied this and even fabricated the fictitious bombing of Adi Grat
by Eritrea on 5 February.) Ethiopia has perpetrated this act of
aggression--and presently occupies new areas in Eritrea--in contravention of
UN Security Council resolutions calling on both sides to observe a cessation
of hostilities. Ethiopia has further violated the moratorium on air strikes
brokered by the United States Government in June last year to target
civilian areas in Eritrea.
Additionally, Ethiopia has deported about 60,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of
Eritrean origin in the most inhuman manner and confiscated their life-long
earnings. The international community has taken forcible measures to punish
such abhorrent acts of ethnic cleansing elsewhere. On the other hand,
Ethiopia's leaders have not even been reprimanded--let alone faced stern
measures--for the identical crimes that they have committed and still
continue to commit.
Then too, the international community remained silent when Ethiopia expelled
Eritrea's Ambassador to the OAU and ransacked his residence in violation of
the Vienna Conventions and the OAU Headquarters Agreement. This Ethiopian
act has been tolerated even as Eritrea requires unhindered access to the OAU
while the latter is still seized of the conflict.
It is therefore Ethiopia which has been allowed to get away with acts of
aggression and a catalogue full of other grave human rights violations.
The issues of the occupation of territory and aggression are not and cannot
be determined solely by the declarations of one or the other party to a
dispute but by the determination of the fact by impartial third parties on
the basis of objective, relevant documents. Eritrea has been committed to
any such fair determination while it rejects any attempt, direct or
indirect, to make it renounce its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Finally, Eritrea is unequivocally committed to the implementation of the
Framework Agreement as clarified by the OAU on 26 January, 1999. Any other
attempt to interpret the Framework Agreement differently will violate the
integrity of the document and will endanger peace and security in the
region. In this respect, it is incumbent on the Security Council, which is
ultimately responsible for the maintenance of peace and security, to ensure
that its calls for a cease-fire, cessation of hostilities and the peaceful
settlement of the dispute are observed by the implementation of an
unadulterated OAU Framework Agreement.
Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The TPLF government in Ethiopia continues to disseminate false and pretentious information at a time when efforts for peace are underway and the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community as a whole are getting a more clearer insight of the causes of the conflict.
In the past few days, the Government has stated that it has "huge resources" which it will employ to "teach the Eritreans a lesson" in a prolonged war. We find this arrogance surprising.
As it is widely known, the military adventures that Ethiopia had launched in the first phase had failed miserably. Its subsequent efforts to prod the Ethiopian people into war through misinformation has not been successful either. Nonetheless, it continues to purchase weapons and conscript young people forcibly.
There cannot be any doubt that the TPLF government will be weakened if it pursues this dangerous path. The people and Government of Eritrea will persist in their search for peace without let-up. But it must also be known that they have the capability to frustrate and deter any bluffs and attempts.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
g_062499.html 100655 127137 345 4241 6734444172 6276
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The UN Security Council issued a statement yesterday, 23 June 1999,
demanding, interalia, that "both parties immediately and unconditionally
agree to a cease-fire." The Security Council statement further calls upon
both parties "to cooperate fully and constructively with the high level
delegation of the OAU to implement the framework agreement."
While the Government of Eritrea welcomes these recommendations, it cannot
but emphasize the following points:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
This is why the TPLF continues to falsely claim that the "OAU Framework
Agreement calls for
In the first place, it is Ethiopia which continues to occupy sovereign
Eritrean territory. As a
Secondly, there is no ambiguity in the 11 - point OAU Framework whose main
contents
As the clarification again underline, Ethiopia has all along refused to
submit the totality of its
Finally, the TPLF regime is now alluding to private letter of the OAU Chairman
to give
The Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the United Nations sent the
following urgent appeal regarding the incarceration of Eritreans in
detention camps in Ethiopia to the United Nations Under Secretary
General for Human Affairs, Mr. Sergio Vivero de Mello, today, June 26,
1998.
General Consulate of the State of Eritrea to UK.
London. 30/04/1999
g_050399.html 100655 127137 345 4662 6713346165 6301
Eritrea-Sudan Agreement
Doha, Qatar, 2 May 1999
Signed in Doha, on 16/1/1420 H
Corresponding to 2/5/1999 G
President of the State of Eritrea
Issaias Afeworki
President of the Republic
of the Sudan
Omar Hassan Al-Basheer
Emir of the State of Qatar
Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani
g_050499.html 100655 127137 345 7510 6713577475 6307
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 4, 1999
Asmara, 4 May 1999
g_051299.html 100644 127137 345 5243 6716312262 6265
Press Release
g_051399.html 100644 127137 345 10772 6716613652 6320
envoy of President Blaise Compaore, visited Asmara yesterday, Tuesday,
May
11, 1999, and held talks with President Isaias Afwerki. The delegation
also
met with Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae leading the Eritrean committee
on
the border conflict.
Isaias.
Framework Agreement as endorsed by the Summit of the OAU Central Organ
and
its readiness to implement its provisions fully. In this context, and
with a
view of expediting the implementation of the process, the Government
of
Eritrea called for the following practical measures:
Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia confirming the acceptance of
the OAU
Framework Agreement by both parties;
implementation of the Framework Agreement be signed by both parties
and that
these be declared;
create a conducive climate for the implementation of the Framework
Agreement.
these three points are agreed and signed, Eritrea will exhibit, in
the
process of implementation of the Framework Agreement, necessary flexibility
and co-operation without compromising its claims over its sovereign
territory. The Government of Eritrea urged the OAU delegation to ensure
that
Ethiopia's illegal expulsion of Eritrea's ambassador to the OAU is
rectified
and the Ambassador enabled to return to the OAU Headquarters to resume
vital
communication with the OAU Secretariat.
Asmara, 12 May 1999
The TPLF regime has been distorting key facts and events to portray
Eritrea as the "aggressor" country and to demand "Eritrean withdrawal from
occupied territories" as a precondition to the implementation of
the OAU FrameworkAgreement. Its transparent tactics appear to hinge on
repetition ad nauseam of falsehoods in the hope of confusing public opinion.But
what are the facts? Who is the aggressor? Are there areas contested by
Ethiopia or "sovereign Ethiopian territories" occupied by Eritrea?The current
border crisis is rooted in the following, sequential violation of international
law and the OAU's cardinal principle on the sanctity of colonial
boundaries perpetrated repeatedly by the TPLF regime:
In regard to human rights violations, the TPLF regime:
The TPLF's pre-emptive discourse on "respect for international law and
not rewarding aggression" is indeed hollow and resorted to in order to
cover up its acts of aggression and violation of international law. As
a matter of fact, it was Eritrea which consistently pressed, from
the outset, for an independent investigation on the origins of the
crisis and the identification of the aggressor party. This has now been
included as operative paragraph 7 in the OAU Framework Agreement. Furthermore,
Ethiopia has been roundly condemned by the international community
for its violation of human rights. As these acts continue to be committed
by Ethiopia, Eritrea has requested the placement of observers from the
UN Human Rights Commission.
Asmara, 13 May 1999
g_051699.html 100655 127137 345 1716 6720001367 6270
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 17, 1999
Asmara, 16 May 1999
g_051799.html 100655 127137 345 14750 6720001337 6310
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 17, 1999
Asmara, 17 May 1999
g_051899.html 100655 127137 345 3655 6721032402 6271
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 18, 1999
Asmara, 18 May 1999
g_051999.html 100655 127137 345 2132 6720555677 6306
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 19, 1999
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea has received
conclusive evidence that the Addis Ababa regime has deprived about 10,000
Eritreans of their right to leave Ethiopia even though it has confiscated
their property, frozen any bank accounts they may have had and otherwise
deprived them of their right to a livelihood. This gross violation of the
human rights of these Eritreans is yet one more example in a series of human
rights crimes that have hitherto been committed by the Ethiopian regime
against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin.
Asmara, 19 May 1999
g_052099.html 100655 127137 345 10101 6721025776 6302
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 20, 1999
The Framework Agreement has a natural sequence, the first steps being:
Asmara, 20 May 1999
g_052599.html 100644 127137 345 3256 6722523713 6275
Press Release
More Than 1,300 Ethiopian Soldiers Put Out of Action; MI-35 Helicopter
Gunship Shot Down
had continued, with varying intensity, for four days.
Asmara, 25 May 1999
g_052799.html 100655 127137 345 2453 6723265264 6304
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 27, 1999
One MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down while large quantities of medium
and light weapons have been captured. In the meantime, the number of
deserters is growing. In the past five days alone, 22 Ethiopian soldiers
with different ranks have surrendered to the Eritrean Defense Forces.
Asmara, 27 May 1999
g_052899.html 100655 127137 345 15737 6723643505 6334
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 28, 1999
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 May 1999
g_0528992.html 100655 127137 345 6635 6723646261 6375
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
May 28, 1999
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
Friday, May 28, 1999
Press Statement
Ethiopia's inexorable drive towards full-scale war
Exactly one year ago at approximately 2:20 p.m., Ethiopian Mig
fighter jets bombed Asmara, Eritrea's capital, in what was the first use
of
aircraft and a major escalation of what, until then, had been
a localize border conflict.
The bombing of Asmara occurred on the morrow of a public announcement
by Ethiopia's Prime Minister who told his domestic audience through the
local
TV and radio that "the Ethiopian armed forces have been given
orders today to take all necessary measures to repulse Eritrea's Aggression".
The
Ethiopian Prime Minister gave the orders for escalating the war
in spite of Addis Abeba's parallel announcement the same day that it "had
accepted
the US-Rwanda recommendations".
stray bombs caused damage to a school resulting in unfortunate
casualties. The Government of Eritrea promptly apologized for the unintentional
loss
of human life.
Ethiopia again used its air force to bomb Asmara the following
day stopping only after two of its planes were shot down by Eritrean
air-defense.
The United States brokered a moratorium on air strikes on June
14, although Ethiopia rejected Eritrean proposals for a total ban on air
strikes as a first step towards a comprehensive cessation of
hostilities.
The introduction of air strikes by Ethiopia a full year ago takes
on a disturbing significance now. In retrospect, the Ethiopian air
strikes on
June fifth must be seen as a significant reflection of the regime's
decision to pursue war, not peace with Eritrea.
In February this year, after several months of intensive efforts by
the OAU and other concerned parties, Ethiopia jumped the gun once again
in a
clear move to thwart peace. This time, however, the offensives
unleashed by Ethiopia had all the characteristics of a total war.
This occurred
despite the OAU peace process that was in motion and a contravention
of international calls (OAU, UN Security Council) for "both sides to observe
maximum restraint".
Ethiopia's bogus pretext for launching its attack in February
were fictitious claims of an "Eritrean air strikes on Adi-Grat".
Again, the
timing of the attack reveals a considered decision to impede
peace with continued fighting.
This second phase of the TPLF's offensive became the venue for
an Ethiopian air campaign that selected civilian targets deep in
Eritrea and
far from disputed territories. The decision to again resort
to air attacks in this period was in contravention of the moratorium on
air
strikes. Ethiopia's random air raids in the past three
months included:
Around 80 Eritrean civilians were either killed or maimed as a result of
these strikes. Whole villages (Shambuko), residential quarters, a
church,
May 16th, warehouse in Massawa
food storage and warehouses were destroyed.
to continually escalate the conflict to deter peace. In
one year, Ethiopia has carried out th
civilians. In one year, Ethiopia has used its mercenary-led
Air force to attack innocent civilians throughout Eritrea. In one
year, Ethiopia has
consistently rejected a cease-fire. In one year, Ethiopia
has repeatedly, and actively, thwarted efforts for peace. And
yet, the border crisis was
easily solvable from the outset and remains solvable if the TPLF
regime was serious about peace.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 5 June 1999
g_060899_2.html 100644 127137 345 6156 6727267606 6535
Press Statement
No amount of fiction can clear the TPLF's record
The TPLF regime has again, produced a string of accusations against
Eritrea regarding Ethiopians living here. In an 'umpteenth' statement
of
its kind, the regime in Addis Ababa claims that Ethiopians are
being "abducted of the streets...severely beaten...thrown in the streets
and
left for dead." The idea is very clear. The government
in Addis Ababa is hoping that a smear campaign on Eritrea will deter attention
from a year
of unprecedented human rights violation by the government in
Addis Ababa. But will it ever be possible for Ethiopia to hide the truth
about what has
happened to Eritreans in Ethiopia? To date the regime in
Addis Ababa has:
These are all facts. The United Nations, the US Congress, Amnesty
International and other concerned groups and governments have all
expressed dismay at what has been happening to Eritreans in Ethiopia.
Can the regime in Addis Ababa seriously hope to veil its own record
by simply leveling fictitious accusations at Eritrea? The Government
of Eritrea has invited the ICRC and other monitoring groups to verify
the claims being made by Ethiopia regarding civilians in Eritrea.
The international community must check Ethiopia's claim and determine
for themselves where the truth lies. This duplicity can not be allowed
to go uncondemned.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, June 8, 1999
g_060999.html 100644 127137 345 6273 6727537207 6312
Press Statement
TPLF issues contradictory claims
the rights of Ethiopians in Eritrea. Aside from accusations
of torture, mass imprisonment and public persecution being leveled at the
Eritrean
government by the regime in Addis Ababa, the TPLF has now made
the suggestion that Eritrea is preventing Ethiopians from returning to
their
country. A June 8th Statement from the Office of the Ethiopian
spokesperson states:
accept them. Not only is this a blatant lie, but is also incredibly
inhumane to tell individuals that they are unwanted and unwelcome in their
own country when their government is eagerly expecting their
arrival. In conjunction with the ICRC, the government has made preparations
to accept
its returning citizens through the border post at Humera."
unable to inform Ethiopia of the pending deportation."
Now consider the content of the following letter sent to the
Eritrean government on March 25th 1999:
civilians to their home country across the border at Mereb.
In this regard, the Ethiopian Government has today informed the ICRC that
they
consider the whole border as a war zone and therefore security
cannot be guaranteed. Since the requisite security guarantees cannot
be obtained,
the ICRC considers the proposed operation to be hazardous."
On the one hand, Ethiopia privately informs the ICRC that they
will not accept Ethiopians wishing to return home then turns around and
proclaims
to the world that the Eritrea government is preventing them from
returning. Where will the deceit end? When will the international
community come out and condemn what has turned into a dangerous
farce by the regime in Addis Ababa.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 9 June 1999
g_061099.html 100655 127137 345 6227 6727776165 6313
Ethiopia's approach for curtailing intelligent discourse on the conflict
between Eritrea and Ethiopia has rested on disinformation and
name-calling. In this respect, Ethiopia's favourite buzzword constitutes
of accusing Eritrea for "attacking first and talking later" .
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
10 June 1999
g_061198.html 100644 127137 345 26467 6540054073 6315
Our hope is that the facilitation process continues:
President Isaias Afwerki
TPLF unleashes new offensive
Wednesday when Ethiopian Forces opened an offensive on the Burie
front, 70 kilometers west of Assab. The TPLF offensive in Burie was,
however, of low intensity. 50 Ethiopian soldiers were killed and
around 100 wounded in what was, apparently, a diversionary attack.
Yesterday the TPLF unleashed a larger offensive along the central
flank of the Mereb-Setit front line. Two full Ethiopian divisions
were employed to attack Eritrean positions along the front. Yesterday's
attack was repulsed but continued fighting was confirmed this morning.
What is very clear is that the TPLF has decided not to abandon its all
out war against Eritrea. The facts speak for themselves:
Now, as the TPLF leads us into a third phase of fighting, the signs
are very clear. The TPLF does not appear to be interested in peace.
The regime in Addis Ababa is satisfied that it has successfully thwarted
any chance for peace through the introduction of its 11th hour preconditions
and seeks to continue a war of aggression against Eritrea. But war
cannot and will not be the answer. The TPLF must abandon use of force
to resolve the crisis and must sincerely join in the search for peace.
Asmara, Eritrea
11 June 1999
g_061299.html 100644 127137 345 3113 6730543463 6265
One MI-35 Helicopter gunship shot down
Three tanks were destroyed and one MI-35 Helicopter gunship shot
down in yesterday's fighting. Full reports on human losses for yesterday
were not yet available. Fighting also resumed this morning.
The Ethiopian regime had launched a diversionary attack on the Burie
front last Wednesday as a prelude to its large-scale attack on the Mereb-Setit
front on Thursday, 10 June 1999.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
12 June 1999
g_061299_2.html 100644 127137 345 10264 6730607577 6542
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 12, 1999
President Isaias Meets with returend Peace Corps Volunteers
President Isias Afwerki today met a team of returned Peace Corps
volunteers who are on a peace mission to Eritrea and Ethiopia.
President isaias thanked the members of the team for undertaking
the peace mission at this crucial moment and expressed the hope that this
informal initiative from people with sentimental attachment to both countries
will have significant contribution to the peace endeavours underway.
In regad to Eritrea's readiness for peace, President Isaias underlined
to the team that:
attacked;
7 has provisions for investigating all the events and violations
that led
to the current crisis;
of the OAU High-Level Delegation to Eritrea on January 26, 1999;
level.
The Peace Corps team members expressed their faith in the potential
of both countries and the Horn of Africa region as a whole. In this
regard, they stressed that peace was a pre-requisite for development and
increased investment. The members of the team stressed that they
will do their
utmost to give an impetus to the peace process.
The team is composed of Judge William Cabny, Mr. Mike McCaskey,
Mr. John Garamendi, Mr. Charles Dambach and Mr. Melvin Foote. The
team will leave Asmara tomorrow for Addis Ababa.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
11 June 1999
g_061499.html 100644 127137 345 3236 6731202004 6255
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 14, 1999
Press Release
TPLF Army Suffers Huge Losses;
Two MiG-23 Fighter Planes Shot Down
central flank of the Mereb-Setit front. By yesterday, the TPLF regime
had
thrown five divisions--in turns--to the battlefront. All of them were
badly
mauled.
One MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down on Friday, June 11, 1999.
Five
tanks were also destroyed on Friday and Saturday.
figures were not yet available at press time.
over 12,210 soldiers killed and wounded. Over 80 Ethiopian soldiers
were
taken prisoner on Thursday alone.
diversionary shelling and small scale Ethiopian attacks that were quickly
crushed. But fighting on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front
resumed
early this morning.
Asmara, 14 June 1999
g_061598.html 100644 127137 345 4345 6541225476 6300
Eritrean Statement on Air Strike Ban Agreement
By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
cessation of hostilities and the demilitarization of the entire boundary to allow for a peaceful resolution of the dispute with Ethiopia. The border conflict was exacerbated by Addis Abeba's recourse to air-raids when the Ethiopian Air Force launched the first air-strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998. Eritrea's subsequent deterrent actions against military targets were simply in retaliation and legitimate self-defense. As the Government of Eritrea does not see any sense in the on-going confrontation in general and the air-war in particular, it welcomes this agreement with Ethiopia on a partial cessation of hostilities as a positive and first step towards ending the war and resolving the conflict through peace and legality.
express its gratitude to the Governments of the United States and Italy for their endeavors in this regard.
Asmara, June 15, 1998Eritrean UN Mission Message to UN Under Secretary General for Human Affairs
By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
Besides detaining hundreds, the Ethiopian government is rounding up thousands of Eritrean civilians from different parts of the country. After herding them in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopians are ferrying them by road to be dumped at the border between the two countries.
Leaving aside all the other abuses of the human rights of these civilians, the most urgent is the fact that those herded are being transported by road through more than 1,000 kms of hostile territory, right through the zone of conflict. With emotions so heightened by persistent propaganda and the consequences of the fighting around the border, they will not only be subjected to harassment, but there is also a great danger to their lives.
We urge the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs to do its utmost urgently to save these defenseless civilians from the ordeals they are being subjected to, from expectable threats to their lives. We request that they be transported to Eritrea by air ensuring their safety. for those that have already started the journey by road, we request that they be accompanied by an appropriate independent humanitarian body.
It is also important to mention that those being detained and expelled have been snatched from their homes and places of work leaving their families and property behind. We request that the safety and well being of those left behind if attended to by the responsible UN humanitarian agency.
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 15, 1999
Asmara, 15 June 1999
g_061799.html 100644 127137 345 2717 6732217706 6303
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 17, 1999
Two Ethiopian MiG-23 Fighter Aircraft Shot Down
yesterday, June 16, 1999, on the Mereb-Setit front. This brings to
five the
number of Ethiopian fighter aircraft (four MiG-23 planes and one helicopter
gunship) shot down since the resumption of fighting last week.
airspace and fell behind Ethiopian front lines. Both pilots are presumed
to
be dead.
less intensity in the past two days, has resumed this morning. Although
figures for the last two days were not yet available, Ethiopian cumulative
losses were over 18,000 killed and wounded in the intense battles that
took
place from 10-14 June, 1999.
Asmara, 17 June 1999
g_061998.html 100644 127137 345 21525 6542517444 6323
Eritrean Statement on Ethiopian Violation of Air Strike Ban, Background & Proposal for Solution
By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
proposal put forward by President Clinton on the total ban of the use and threat of use of air strikes by both sides. The Government of Eritrea had accepted this proposal, which it saw as "a positive first step towards ending the war," because it did not start the air-war in the first place and all the actions that it had taken were in legitimate self-defense and as a means of deterrence.
through its official belligerent pronouncements and its communications to commercial airlines and shipping lines. Through these threats to use air strikes in violation of its expressed commitment to the US Government, the Government of Ethiopia is effectively maintaining the illegal blockade that it had imposed on international flights and shipping.
Government. The Government of Eritrea will await a positive response. If all efforts to persuade the Government of Ethiopia to honour its commitments on the total ban of air strikes fail and the blockade continues, however, the Government of Eritrea will have no option but to take appropriate deterrent measures.
19 June 1998, Asmara
1997 as well as the map of Ethiopia embossed in the new currency notes of the country that came into circulation in November 1997.
facto situation on the ground. The first forcible act of creating facts on the ground occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopia, under the pretext of fighting the Afar opposition, brought two battalions to Bada (Adi Murug) in southwestern Eritrea to occupy the village and dismantle the Eritrean administration there. This unexpected development was a cause of much concern to the Government of Eritrea. Eritrea's Head of State subsequently sent a letter to the Ethiopian Prime Minister on August 16,
1997, reminding him that "the forcible occupation of Adi Murug" was
"truly saddening." He further urged him to "personally take the necessary prudent action so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary conflict." A week later, on August 25, 1997, the Eritrean Head of State again wrote to the Prime Minister stressing that measures similar to those in Bada were taken in the Badme (southwestern Eritrea) area and suggesting that a Joint Commission be set up to help check further deterioration and create a mechanism to resolve the problem.
bilaterally failed as the Government of Ethiopia continued to bring under its occupation the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its map. Our worst fears were to be realized when on May 6, 1998, on the eve of the second meeting of the Joint Border Commission, the Ethiopian army launched an unexpected attack on Eritrean armed patrols in the Badme area claiming that they had transgressed on areas that Ethiopia had newly brought under its control. This incident led to a series of clashes which, coupled with the hostile measures that were taken by the Government of Ethiopia, resulted in the present state of war between the two countries.
flagrant acts of creating facts on the ground are the essential causes of the current crisis. In light of these facts, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression are obviously false and meant to deceive the international community. Indeed, Ethiopia to this day occupied Eritrean territories in the Setit area in the southwestern part of the country.
* the declaration of war by Ethiopia's Parliament on May 13, 1998;
* the launching of an air-strike by Ethiopia on June 5, 1998, on Asmara;
* the imposition of an air blockade and maritime access blockade to Eritrean ports through the threat of incessant and indiscriminate air bombing;
* the mass expulsion and indiscriminate arrests of thousands of Eritreans from Ethiopia.
iii) the establishment of appropriate ad hoc arrangements for civil administration in populated demilitarized areas in the interim period.
countries, the Government of Eritrea has been calling--and continues to call--for:
i) an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities; and, ii) the start of direct talks between the two parties in the presence of mediators.
Asmara, June 19, 1998
Proposal for a Solution Submitted by the Government of Eritrea
between them. In this respect, both sides further agree that the actual demarcation of the borders will be carried out by a mutually acceptable technical team. In the event that there is some controversy on delineation, both sides agree to resolve the matter through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration.
expertise, shall be charged with the task of demarcating the boundary in accordance with existing colonial border treaties.
months. This time frame may be shortened or prolonged subject to justifiable technical reasons. This requisite time frame shall be designated as AN INTERIM PERIOD.
sides.
controversy, the matter shall be resolved through an appropriate mechanism of ARBITRATION.Eritrean Statement on Ethiopian Violation of Air Strike Ban, Background & Proposal for Solution
By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
proposal put forward by President Clinton on the total ban of the use and threat of use of air strikes by both sides. The Government of Eritrea had accepted this proposal, which it saw as "a positive first step towards ending the war," because it did not start the air-war in the first place and all the actions that it had taken were in legitimate self-defense and as a means of deterrence.
through its official belligerent pronouncements and its communications to commercial airlines and shipping lines. Through these threats to use air strikes in violation of its expressed commitment to the US Government, the Government of Ethiopia is effectively maintaining the illegal blockade that it had imposed on international flights and shipping.
Government. The Government of Eritrea will await a positive response. If all efforts to persuade the Government of Ethiopia to honour its commitments on the total ban of air strikes fail and the blockade continues, however, the Government of Eritrea will have no option but to take appropriate deterrent measures.
19 June 1998, Asmara
1997 as well as the map of Ethiopia embossed in the new currency notes of the country that came into circulation in November 1997.
facto situation on the ground. The first forcible act of creating facts on the ground occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopia, under the pretext of fighting the Afar opposition, brought two battalions to Bada (Adi Murug) in southwestern Eritrea to occupy the village and dismantle the Eritrean administration there. This unexpected development was a cause of much concern to the Government of Eritrea. Eritrea's Head of State subsequently sent a letter to the Ethiopian Prime Minister on August 16,
1997, reminding him that "the forcible occupation of Adi Murug" was
"truly saddening." He further urged him to "personally take the necessary prudent action so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary conflict." A week later, on August 25, 1997, the Eritrean Head of State again wrote to the Prime Minister stressing that measures similar to those in Bada were taken in the Badme (southwestern Eritrea) area and suggesting that a Joint Commission be set up to help check further deterioration and create a mechanism to resolve the problem.
bilaterally failed as the Government of Ethiopia continued to bring under its occupation the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its map. Our worst fears were to be realized when on May 6, 1998, on the eve of the second meeting of the Joint Border Commission, the Ethiopian army launched an unexpected attack on Eritrean armed patrols in the Badme area claiming that they had transgressed on areas that Ethiopia had newly brought under its control. This incident led to a series of clashes which, coupled with the hostile measures that were taken by the Government of Ethiopia, resulted in the present state of war between the two countries.
flagrant acts of creating facts on the ground are the essential causes of the current crisis. In light of these facts, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression are obviously false and meant to deceive the international community. Indeed, Ethiopia to this day occupied Eritrean territories in the Setit area in the southwestern part of the country.
* the declaration of war by Ethiopia's Parliament on May 13, 1998;
* the launching of an air-strike by Ethiopia on June 5, 1998, on Asmara;
* the imposition of an air blockade and maritime access blockade to Eritrean ports through the threat of incessant and indiscriminate air bombing;
* the mass expulsion and indiscriminate arrests of thousands of Eritreans from Ethiopia.
iii) the establishment of appropriate ad hoc arrangements for civil administration in populated demilitarized areas in the interim period.
countries, the Government of Eritrea has been calling--and continues to call--for:
i) an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities; and, ii) the start of direct talks between the two parties in the presence of mediators.
Asmara, June 19, 1998
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 20, 1999
Asmara, 20 June 1999
g_062299.html 100655 127137 345 22520 6734147753 6321
Addressed to the President of the Security Council
(Dated 17 June 1999)
Asmara, Eritrea
June 22, 1999
Eritrea officially announced its formal acceptance of the Framework
Agreement by its letters of 27 February to the Current Chairman of the OAU
and the United Nations Secretary General. Eritrea has again reiterated its
full commitment to the Agreement, and readiness to implement all its
provisions, by its public pronouncement as well as letters of President
Isaias to President Blaise Compaore when the envoy of President Compaore and
the envoy of the Secretary General visited Asmara towards the end of April.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 22, 1999
g_062498.html 100644 127137 345 3404 6544256017 6271
Eritrea - Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
Asmara, June 24, 1998
Asmara, Eritrea
June 24, 1999
Asmara, 24 June 1999
g_062599.html 100655 127137 345 15417 6740403133 6313
In the past year or so, TPLF propaganda has been hinged on one ploy: repeat
any falsehood
ad nauseam in the hope that sheer repetition will confuse public opinion.
the withdrawal of Eritrean troops from all the Ethiopian territories that
they have occupied
since May 6, 1998, and for the full restoration of the Ethiopian civil
administration of those
areas."
matter of fact, it is Ethiopia which unilaterally re-drew the established
boundary between the
two countries to incorporate large tracts of sovereign Eritrean territory
into its illegal map of 19
October 1997. Indeed, it is now clear in retrospect that Ethiopia’s acts
of aggression in the
Bada and Badme areas in July 1997, and the Bure area in January 1998, were
motivated by
the desire to create facts on the ground so as to put under its control,
albeit in a piecemeal
manner, the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its illicit
map. This was why Eritrea
emphatically insisted for an investigation of all the incident prior to
May 6, 1998; inserted now
as operative paragraph 7 the Framework Agreement.
include the following five, sequential, measures:
The OAU Framework, and the 41-page report of the Secretariat, does not
contain a single
paragraph to support Ethiopia’s new preconditions. The written clarification
that the OAU
High Level Delegation provided Eritrea on January 26 this year are clear.
"Badme and
environs" refers to Badme and the surrounding areas as the logic and meaning
of the word
imply. It does not, by any stretch of imagination, mean Badme and any coveted
area in the
1,300km long common boundary as Ethiopia now claims unabashedly.
claims, arguing that these will be submitted "when the issues of delimitation
and, if need be,
arbitration are addressed". The OAU has not, thus, been in a position to
determine the scope
of the conflict and the extent of the "contested areas", if there are any,
let alone give a verdict
on "occupied areas".
legitimacy to its unacceptable preconditions. These letters-which have
contradictory
content-cannot obviously override the official clarifications that the
OAU High Level
Delegation provided Eritrea on 26 January 1999.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 05 July 1999
g_062698.html 100644 127137 345 5206 6545027326 6275
With my highest respect,
Sincerely,
Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the UN
g_062699.html 100655 127137 345 2307 6735701731 6277Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release
Asmara, Eritrea
June 26, 1999
Ethiopian fighter aircraft today bombed the environs of Assab airport at 9:55 a.m. The high altitude air raid did not hit any target. Thus, there were no human casualties or damage of any kind.
The senseless bombing seemed to be prompted by the TPLF's apparent desire to give the impression of a military edge just prior to the forthcoming OAU Summit in Algiers.
The TPLF was heavily battered in the offensive it launched from June 10-16 this month in which it suffered more than 18,000 soldiers killed or wounded while four MiG-23 fighter aircraft and a MI-35 helicopter gunship were destroyed.
In spite of these heavy losses and in a bid to reverse the trend, the TPLF opened a new attack yesterday on the right flank of the Mereb-Setit front which was quickly foiled.
Today's cowardly and fruitless air bombing can be seen as a psychological attempt to make up for TPLF's increasing ground defeats.
Statement of the 11th Session of the National Assembly of Eritrea
The National Assembly of Eritrea has held its eleventh session in Asmara today, June 26, 1998. The Assembly addressed two important issues in its session today, namely, the conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and the programmes of economic and social development. In this respect, it passed the following resolutions and recommendations after reviewing in greater detail:
- the developments of the past six weeks;
- the policies that the government of Eritrea has been pursuing in this regard; and,
- the endeavours set in motion to bring about peace.
A. The Cause of the Conflict Between Eritrea and Ethiopia
1. The National Assembly asserted that the root cause of the conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia is the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty, as well as the naked aggression, perpetrated on Eritrea by the Ethiopian government that is currently controlled by the Tigray People's Liberation Front. The Assembly further noted that the Ethiopian government has issued an official map that incorporates large swathes of Eritrean territory, and embossed this map on its currency. Moreover, the Ethiopian government has been systematically employing its army to physically occupy the lands that it had incorporated on its map. It has thus put large areas under its control by destroying Eritrean homes and crops, dislodging the indigenous population and dismantling Eritrean administrations. It has even changed the names of Eritrean villages. The Assembly also noted that the TPLF authorities have carried out ruthless repression and committed many crimes against the population in the areas that they had forcibly occupied.
2. The National Assembly affirmed that it is the logic of force pursued by the Ethiopian government which has transformed a minor problem of border dispute, that should have been easily amenable to a legal and peaceful solution, into a war pitting two neighbouring countries which had enjoyed very close ties. The Assembly noted that when the Ethiopian government dismantled Eritrean administrations in several areas by force in July last year, the Eritrean government had expressly requested, through the letters of President Isaias to Prime Minister Melles on August 16th and 25th respectively, for the rescinding of these illegal measures. But these requests were not heeded. And as a continuation of its acts of aggression, the Ethiopian government caused the simmering tension to flare up when its army contingents unleashed an unprovoked attack against Eritrean army officers and soldiers on May 6 this year. Moreover, instead of handling the issue with the requisite calmness, it convened a session of the Parliament on an issue that was never discussed before and hastily adopted a resolution that called for the declaration of war. The sea, air and telecommunications links with Eritrea were severed. On June 5, presuming that it had absolute superiority in the air, it escalated the war by launching an air attack on Asmara with the aim of sowing terror. The Assembly also noted that the Ethiopian government is conducting a campaign of mass arrests, expulsion, repression and senseless killing of law-abiding Eritreans living in Ethiopia merely on the basis of their national origin.
3. The National Assembly noted that the Ethiopian government is not
prepared to correct past mistakes but continues to brace for war. Its main focus has become the inflammation of hatred and animosity between both peoples. It is beating the war drums incessantly and forcibly conscripting young people, though with limited success. Although its ambitions and threats are boundless, the clashes that have occurred so far have demonstrated that it does not have the capability to achieve its goals. It has thus chosen to prepare for a prolonged and destructive war.
B. Eritrea's Stance on Peace
1. The National Assembly asserted that sole responsibility for the
conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and for the destruction that has ensued, rests on the Ethiopian government which has violated Eritrea's sovereignty, invaded its territory and that is pushing for a violent solution by rejecting a peaceful path. The Assembly demanded that the Ethiopian army withdraw from Eritrean territory that it is still occupying. It also affirmed that Eritrea does not harbour claims, and nor has it occupied any part, of Ethiopian territory.
2. The National Assembly affirmed that this conflict between Eritrea
and Ethiopian cannot be solved through force; but only through peace and legality. The Assembly further noted that the Ethiopian government does not have the power to implement its expansionist objectives although it persists in its sabre rattling and repetitive bluffs to deceive the Ethiopian people and the international community.
C. Endeavours for a Peaceful Solution
1. The National Assembly asserts that the peace efforts undertaken in the past and those underway in the present have made positive contributions laying the basis for a peaceful solution. The main stumbling bloc has been the unacceptable and rigid precondition that the Ethiopian government has placed insisting that "it will not negotiate unless the government of Eritrea withdraws" from its own territory. This is designed to cover its act of aggression and to blame responsibility on the Eritrean government. The National Assembly has asserted that the government and people of Eritrea will not accept this precondition under any circumstances whatsoever. The National Assembly thus urges all facilitators and interested parties to frustrate the attempts of the Ethiopian government to achieve its expansionist objectives through intimidation and deceit when it has failed to do so through force.
2. The National Assembly examined the efforts made and proposals
forwarded by the government of Eritrea for a peaceful and legal resolution of the conflict. In addition to endorsing these proposals, the Assembly has underlined the centrality of the following points:
a) The boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia must be fully demarcated
both in order to bring about a comprehensive resolution to the current conflict and so as to guarantee that future generations will live within secure and recognized boundaries.
b) Although Eritrea's inherited boundaries are unambiguous,
controversies that may arise are to be resolved through arbitration.
c) In order to prevent any military confrontation and reduce tension
until the demarcation of the borders is fully carried out, the entire boundary is to be demilitarized.
In addition, and taking into account the state of war that exists
between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the blood that is being spilled, and the resources wasted,
d) As the government of Eritrea did not opt for or start the war in the first place, it calls for its immediate and unconditional cessation. The air war should be stopped not only through a temporary moratorium but permanently. Similarly, fighting on the ground and other hostilities should be stopped.
e) Direct talks should begin between the governments of Eritrea and
Ethiopia.
3. The National Assembly believes that this peace proposal is
constructive, fair and enjoys wide support. It has therefore charged the government of Eritrea to work vigorously to promote it.
D. Enhancement of National Security
1. The National Assembly asserts that the government and people of
Eritrea will not recoil from their commitment to a peaceful and legal solution. However, the National Assembly has endorsed the decision to take all the necessary measures to guarantee the defence of the country as long as the invasion and threat of aggression by the government of Ethiopia persist. It commended the heroic performance of the country's armed forces to defend national sovereignty and the safety of the population. It praised the prompt readiness that the demobilized soldiers and members of the national military service have displayed to combat the invasion. It equally commended the substantial contributions that Eritreans inside the country and abroad are making with an intensity and promptness that was never exhibited even during the most dynamic phase of our liberation struggle, by creating the "Fund for National Defence." The National Assembly called for its sustainability until the threat is thwarted altogether.
2. The National Assembly confirmed that the economic activities and
growth achieved in the past seven years through the policy of self-reliance and wide popular participation can cushion the adverse effects that the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia may entail in some sectors of our economy. In this vein, it urged a prudent prioritization of our programmes and effective utilization of our human and material resources so as to maintain the steady annual growth that our economy has been registering.
3. The National Assembly has discussed in depth the crimes perpetrated by the Ethiopian government on Eritreans living in Ethiopia in violation of basic human rights and international law. It noted that the government of Ethiopia is kidnapping Eritrean youth in various Ethiopian towns; arresting thousands; expelling many thousands more; separating families and confiscating their properties. The National Assembly strongly condemns these practices which dwarf the crimes committed by the previous regime at its darkest hour. It has charged the government of Eritrea to take all necessary measures to protect their rights and assist the rehabilitation of those who have been expelled. In addition, the National Assembly has reminded governments and international organizations to shoulder their responsibility so as to ensure that:
- the kidnapping of Eritrean youth in Ethiopia is stopped;
- the thousands of young people who are jailed without any crime under the false pretext that "they pose a security threat" are released; and that others are spared from this witch-hunt;
- the families of those who have been expelled are made to join them;
- the property of Eritreans is protected by law;
- the expelled Eritreans and their families are given the necessary assistance.
The National Assembly has asserted that in contrast to the inhuman
policy of the Ethiopian government, the Eritrean government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree.
4. In conclusion, the National Assembly noted that the relationship
that was cultivated with the EPLF and the government of Eritrea over 22 years has been severely damaged by invasion, terrorism and gross crimes perpetrated by the TPLF against the Eritrean people. The ties with the people of Tigray, and more broadly the Ethiopian people, will not be affected by this development. The National Assembly thus calls on the Ethiopian people to contribute their part for a constructive peace and a solid relationship between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
National Assembly of Eritrea
Asmara, June 26, 1998
g_062799.html 100655 127137 345 3132 6735701363 6276
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release (9:30 a.m LT)
Asmara, Eritrea
June 27, 1999
The TPLF launched an attack on the right (west) flank of the Mereb-Setit front on Friday which was quickly repulsed. Yesterday, the TPLF opened small scale attacks on the central and right flanks of the same front.
Aggregate Ethiopian losses in the two day fighting were 850 Ethiopian soldiers killed, 3,100 wounded and thirteen taken prisoner.
The TPLF attacks appear to be motivated by a bid to reverse the serious defeats that its army has suffered on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front in recent battles (May 22-26 and June 10-16 respectively). Especially in the last round of fighting, the Ethiopian army suffered huge losses with over 18,000 soldiers killed, and four MiG-23 fighter aircraft and an MI-35 helicopter gunship destroyed. The TPLF regime was compelled to deny these defeats and publish imaginary figures of presumed Eritrean casualties days later.
The TPLF army has bombed the outskirts of Assab yesterday and this morning in an apparent attempt to divert attention from the heavy defeats that its infantry are suffering on the ground. There were no human casualties or damage to property in either of the bombings which seemed to target the civilian airport of Assab.
Fighting had resumed on the right flank of the Mereb-Setit front at press
time.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 27 June 1999 g_063098.html 100644 127137 345 32315 6546164100 6302
Ethiopia couldn't define its borders: President Isaias
Last week President Isaias Afwerki answered questions from foreign journalists regarding the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Excerpts:
On results of OAU mission:
It is very unrealistic to expect dramatic changes overnight. The discussions we had with OAU delegation was very fruitful because it was a test case for them. If the OAU has to be useful in solving the problem, it has to grasp the causes of the crisis. The discussions were on demarcating the border including the background to the conflict taking into consideration colonial treaties. We proposed a cessation of hostilities, by way of defusing the tension, and direct talks of any form because evading direct talks and raising secondary and marginal issues to confuse the real issues at stake would not be useful in finding peaceful solution to the crisis. It was not appropriate for the delegation to talk to us concerning the details of the discussion they had with the Ethiopian side and definitely they are playing the role of a broker and we would like to see their mediation to continue. However, there was no any useful information which was provided from the Ethiopian side. The question of withdrawal from Badme was raised. Again I had to ask a very important question and the delegation could have done that earlier. Where on earth is exactly Badme? Is it on the moon, the sky or in the heavens? No one seems to know. That should have been clearly defined from the Ethiopian side. But it was not done. Let us give the OAU a chance. However, this is also a responsibility of the OAU. The charter and the resolution that was adopted in 1964 regarding colonial boundaries is a sacrosanct principle as far as the OAU is concerned. That's why I say that this is a test case for the OAU. That principle should be upheld. On the other hand, heads of states alone cannot be fully occupied to solve this problem. There has to be a mechanism. I have suggested to the delegation that it would be practical for them to use the OAU as an umbrella and consolidate whatever initiatives there are that may be contributed by various organs and come up with a mechanism that would initiate a process. That would be a practical way of moving ahead.
On differences of principles:
First, to this day Ethiopians have not officially produced any map. In order to find a solution to the problem the cause to the dispute should be made clear. The government of Eritrea is talking about treaties and colonial boundaries. The Ethiopian government is also saying that it would recognize and respect colonial boundaries. The maps from the two countries should come and if there is an overlapping area in the claims of the two countries we will have a clear definition of the dispute. This has not been made possible because Ethiopia has not to-date come up with the definition of borders. Secondly, there has been talks about Badme. This place has to be put on the map and we have to find out where this place lies exactly. Is it on the Eritrean or on the Ethiopian border? Then we have to come up with hard facts on the ground. Talking about incidents does not make any sense at all. We have presented the OAU delegation with fresh information and documents about the dispute including hand-written letters corresponded between Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and myself in 1997 concerning the present crisis and that will clearly define the problem at hand and will make it clear as to who is claiming what on the ground so that the dispute will be clearly presented for proposing a solution to the problem. This will be followed by employing a technical team. UN cartographic unit or any expertise can demarcate the border on the ground which is very simple. If there is a controversy on the colonial boundaries and treaties, it will have to be dealt with by legal experts. This is not a political issue. We believe that these boundaries are the most well-defined in Africa. Let us give our Ethiopian brothers the benefit of doubt to come up with a claim on the boundaries, but the final verdict has to come as a result of due process.
On expelling Eritreans:
This was raised by the OAU delegation. They told us that they reminded the Ethiopian government to stop harassing Eritreans living in Ethiopia and hopefully the position of the OAU will add strength and will contribute to the consolidation of the opinions of the international community regarding the misbehavior of the Ethiopian government. The international community has been very responsive and positive regarding this. I can assure you that this misbehavior on the part of Ethiopia could be somehow checked because of intervention of the international community. Many Eritreans have been missing in rural Ethiopia where communication is impossible. We have information about detainees and we have already contacted international agencies to find ways and means of protecting our citizens and safeguarding their rights in Ethiopia.
On cessation of air-strikes:
I have already made it clear to the public that we have abided by the agreement, if you can call it an agreement, and we have accepted the proposal of President Clinton that this could be a way for de-escalating the conflict. It could be a new phase in finding an environment conducive to a peaceful solution to the problem. We made it clear to the US government and other interested parties that we have no intention of using air-strikes as a way of imposing a solution. We would like to see this as a starter to fully de-escalate the tension on the ground and probably demilitarize the conflict areas. Unfortunately, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister made it clear that they will not abide by this agreement and today I got report from the civil aviation and other Airline companies that the Ethiopian authorities have issued instructions to all commercial flight that they need to report to Addis Abeba before entering Eritrean air space 10 minutes ahead. Meaning that the blockade is effective. This is a violation of the commitment made to the international community and in particular to the US government. We will be committed to self-restraint and we would like to hear a positive response from the US. If that does not materialize, we would take any appropriate action to defend our national security. I cannot speculate now what the US response will be.
On diversion from the real issue:
What the Ethiopians are doing is a deliberate diversion from the real issue and a deliberate attempt to confuse the whole case. I have made it clear to the OAU delegation, and through a letter to Prime Minister Meles after the incident, I proposed the demilitarization of the area in dispute. He accepted the proposal although he evaded the issue under the pretext that it was inside our territory. I did mention to him that the issue concerning Bada and Badme has to be sorted out by the joint commission. Ethiopians should not make a big issue of Badme because if they think Badme is within Ethiopian territory, they have only to prove it. When the Ethiopian parliament made decisions on this matter, no member of parliament asked where Badme is situated. A decision was made on false information. The continuation of campaign for withdrawal from Badme will have to be clearly defined. Where exactly is Badme? Is it part of Ethiopia? This can be proved by facts. If they were administering the area, for how long and why did they administer it? Why is administration being brought as an issue? It is really a weak argument. Administering an area does not bias colonial boundaries. And colonial boundaries should be left to legal experts.
On expansionist policies:
Talking about Ethiopia's internal political issues is not my business, but I will tell you one thing. We tried to solve the problem in an amicable manner. However, there is a trend of expansionist policy on the Ethiopian side. The idea of creating a Greater Tigray has always been there. I can take you back to the mid-70s when the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front ( TPLF ) had a clearly defined geographical area of what was Tigray at the time. According to a map of 1976, it included not only areas inhabited by Tigrinya speakers but other nationalities as well. We knew this right from the beginning. If you look at Tigray now and compare it with the Tigray of the period of Haile Selassie and Mengistu, you will find that it has completely changed. This is a problem of aggrandizement manifested by only one of the regions of Ethiopia. We know who has the political clout in Ethiopia. This trend for aggrandizement is supported by clear proofs. We tried to contain this for a long time, but it was in vain. Finally, we fell victim of this dream of expansion.
On economic motives:
I have always been reactive to this problem. It is a problem of culture. The question of economic problem behind this crisis does not make any sense at all because there are no sound economic bases in both countries. We are so underdeveloped, both of us, that we cannot talk of expansion because of economic reasons. It just doesn't make sense. We are only beginning to build our economy and to rehabilitate a completely demolished infrastructure. It is unimaginable to talk about economic interest involved in this. We don't have substantial resources which may incite conflict. It is only speculation that results from being unable to find a logical motive to the problem. There is no reason why we should go to war when there are possibilities of solving the problem peacefully. No one can find a good explanation for using force to impose a solution to a problem. Hence, people are inventing reasons to the crisis. It is a speculation influenced by foreign culture where every conflict should involve money and where every problem does involve resources. That is not the case in this part of the world.
On Ethiopians residing in Eritrea:
This is a very open society. We have a clear policy. Our security officials called on some Ethiopians residing here for interrogation and then released them. It is purely security precaution. It is not the policy of this government to detain or expel any Ethiopian from this country. There are an estimated 100,000 Ethiopians in Eritrea and we would like them to live comfortably with all the privileges, and we would like to protect them as citizens who would one day play a role in the future relations between the two countries. The Ethiopian authorities would like us to follow their example of expulsion. We will not. And if there are Ethiopians detained here or expelled from this country, it has to be reported officially. Let the international community examine if there is any violation. What is being said from the Ethiopian side is pure fabrication aimed at justifying their actions. It is true that some Ethiopians, especially Tigreans, have left when the conflict erupted. But it was on their own free choice. No one has forced them to leave this country.
On war and belligerence:
War is bullshit. Anyone talking about war these days is bluffing. We may have skirmishes here and there, but that will not bring a solution. Anything we do on our part is for self-defense and deterrence. Trying to blow up the issue out of all proportion is bluffing. Even the recent threat of not abiding by the commitment entered to stop air-raids is a bluff. It might do damage on international commercial flight and shipping for some time, but it wont go beyond that. The Ethiopian government is talking about legitimate action. We will wait and see. We have always been on the defensive. All talk about a great war in the tradition of the mother of all wars will not take place. It is simply bluffing.
On Ethiopia's political shift:
It is amazing these days to see political developments turning 180 degrees. The last seven years and before, we worked together with the TPLF and EPRDF to see to it that the political process of transition in Ethiopia went smoothly. We have always been told that there were subversive and chauvinistic elements in Ethiopia, remnants of the Haile Selassie and Mengistu regimes who wanted to destabilize the country with dreams of expansion. We Eritreans have contributed a lot to the stability of Ethiopia. At present, warmongering is going on and the Ethiopian authorities went as far as welcoming from all parts of the world old enemies whom they considered threat to the unity and stability of Ethiopia at one time, and they are recruiting them to join their camp. This may prove very dangerous in the future. This will surely affect the political reality of Ethiopia. That's why we are saying let us solve the present crisis legally and amicably.
Compiled by Amanuel Sahle for Eritrea Profile
g_070399.html 100644 127137 345 6076 6740411107 6267
It is to be recalled that, in flagrant violation of the letter and spirit of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and the various agreements between the Organization of African Unity and Ethiopia as host country, Ethiopia has carried out the following:
Now, after perpetrating all these crimes, the Ethiopian government has alleged in a press statement dated July 1, 1999, that the Eritrean government has seized Ethiopian Embassy property by "confiscating documents sent in a pouch by the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the Embassy."
The TPLF's intentions are again thinly veiled. One week away from the OAU Summit in Algiers at which Eritrea's legitimate grievances regarding Ethiopia's violations will be discussed, the TPLF is throwing in another decoy. The government of Eritrea has never in any way hampered the Ethiopian Embassy or infringed on any of its inherent rights, whereas in Ethiopia, Eritreans have been denied any consular rights or protection.
Addis Ababa is issuing these claims to further "muddy the waters." No one should be misled. Ethiopia's violations must receive the unfettered and direct attention they merit.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 3 July 1999
This is why the TPLF continues to falsely claim that the "OAU Framework
Agreement calls for
the withdrawal of Eritrean troops from all the Ethiopian territories that
they have occupied
since May 6, 1998, and for the full restoration of the Ethiopian civil
administration of those
areas."
In the first place, it is Ethiopia which continues to occupy sovereign
Eritrean territory. As a
matter of fact, it is Ethiopia which unilaterally re-drew the established
boundary between the
two countries to incorporate large tracts of sovereign Eritrean territory
into its illegal map of 19
October 1997. Indeed, it is now clear in retrospect that Ethiopia’s acts
of aggression in the
Bada and Badme areas in July 1997, and the Bure area in January 1998, were
motivated by
the desire to create facts on the ground so as to put under its control,
albeit in a piecemeal
manner, the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its illicit
map. This was why Eritrea
emphatically insisted for an investigation of all the incident prior to
May 6, 1998; inserted now
as operative paragraph 7 the Framework Agreement.
Secondly, there is no ambiguity in the 11 - point OAU Framework whose main
contents
include the following five, sequential, measures:
As the clarification again underline, Ethiopia has all along refused to
submit the totality of its
claims, arguing that these will be submitted "when the issues of delimitation
and, if need be,
arbitration are addressed". The OAU has not, thus, been in a position to
determine the scope
of the conflict and the extent of the "contested areas", if there are any,
let alone give a verdict
on "occupied areas".
Finally, the TPLF regime is now alluding to private letter of the OAU Chairman
to give
legitimacy to its unacceptable preconditions. These letters-which have
contradictory
content-cannot obviously override the official clarifications that the
OAU High Level
Delegation provided Eritrea on 26 January 1999.
Ethiopia's Gross Violations of the Human Rights
of Eritreans Living in Ethiopia
1. In mid-May 1998, Ethiopia unleashed a war of aggression against Eritrea. Almost immediately thereafter, the Ethiopian Government started to systematically violate the human rights of peaceful Eritrean civilians living in Ethiopia in contravention of the basic provisions of all international agreements, conventions and declarations on human rights and in total disregard of the basic precepts of civilized international behavior. These acts are continuing.
2. It has thus become incumbent on the Government of Eritrea to draw the attention of the international community to the plight of most Eritreans living in Ethiopia and the danger posed by these unwarranted and inhuman acts by the Ethiopian Government to stability and security in our region. The Eritrean Government wishes in particular to bring to the attention of the world the following flagrant human rights violations that are being routinely committed by the Ethiopian government.
A. Expulsion
3. All states are required to respect and to ensure to all individuals including aliens living in their territories and subject to their jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments. Most of these instruments prohibit the collective expulsion of aliens.
4. Yes, the Government of Ethiopia has embarked upon a policy of mass expulsion of Eritreans in total disregard of its international obligations. To date, it has collectively expelled bout six thousand Eritreans and there seems no indication that it will discontinue its policy in the near future.
5. These deportees did not have any chance to contact members of their families or friends since they were suddenly and unexpectedly apprehended from mosques, schools, offices and the streets without any warrant and hauled to detention centers with only the clothes they were wearing. They were then crammed in ill-fitted buses without toilets where they spent more than three days and nights, without water and much-needed medical attention.
6. Most of the deportees are elderly. Seventy percent (70%) are fifty (50) years or older. Several are septuagenarians and octogenarians. Sixty percent (60%) had lived in Ethiopia from twenty-five (25) to (60) years. Some were born in Ethiopia. Some were of mixed (Ethiopian-Eritrean) parentage. fifteen percent (15%) are women. Fifty percent (50%) were professionals who had served Ethiopia and its people in both the public and private sectors. A few were single parents who had been forced to leave behind babies and other minors without making any arrangements for their care. None of these people could, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered as a threat to the security of the Ethiopian state.
B. Arbitrary Arrests and Imprisonment
7. It is a basic principle of international law and practice that no one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or imprisonment. Once a person is deprived of his liberty, the law requires that he/she shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person and that be/she shall not be subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment or torture.
8. Yet, the Ethiopian Government is indiscriminately arresting Eritreans, including school children, all over Ethiopia, without any declaration of a state of emergency or notification of its actions to either the OAU or the UN as it is required to do by international conventions it has signed. These Eritreans are languishing in wretched and unhealthy detention centers in all part of Ethiopia, including Addis Ababa, Fiche, Humera and Mekele. In the Fiche camp only, there are at least 1,000 Eritrean youth, including about eighty (80) students enrolled at Addis Ababa University on an educational exchange program.
9. Most of the detention centers are concentration camps. In Humera, fifty (50) to sixty (60) detainees are crammed in dark containers (which are about twenty (20) cubic meters) or in equally small and unlighted cells. They are denied food and water and basic sanitation needs, including any visit to toilets. They have been denied any communication either with relatives or legal representatives who may not know their whereabouts. Some have been tortured or subjected to inhuman treatment which violated their physical, mental and moral integrity.
C. Internal Refugees (Displaced Persons)
10. The violence and destruction inflicted upon the Eritrean people by the Ethiopian Government has not been limited to those residing in Ethiopia only. Ethiopian aggression has also displaced tens of thousands of Eritreans from their villages and other domiciles, thereby causing extensive social disruption and economic damage. They need urgent food and medical assistance. Their need for shelter, food and medicine has already strained government resources.
11. There is no denial that any state can, under certain circumstances, impose restrictions in the political activities of aliens so long as the measures it takes do not violate international law or practice. It is also acceptable that any country which is at war or in imminent danger threatening its independence or security may declare a state of emergency and may thus take measures derogating from its obligations under international conventions it has adhered to as long as they are limited to actions necessitated by the exigencies of the situation. Even then, it is under legal obligation to follow universally accepted and strictly applied procedures and to make sure that its actions are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law. Surely, Ethiopia's actions are not covered by these provisions since no derogation is permitted from, inter alia, respect for the right to life, security of person and recognition as a person before the law.
12. It is also recognized that any person whose rights or freedoms are protected by international conventions and agreements shall have an effective remedy as well as an enforceable right to compensation, notwithstanding that the violations have been committed by persons in an official capacity.
13. Finally, the Government of Eritrea is convinced that it is the duty of all states to contribute to the respect, promotion and protection of these essential rights of human beings by raising their voice, and by acting with commitment, when they are systematically subverted by any members of the community of nations. Accordingly, it requests members of the international community to, inter alia: * denounce Ethiopia's gross violation of the basic human rights of the Eritrean people under its jurisdiction and to emphatically call for the immediate cessation of its hostile and unlawful acts; * demand the unconditional release of all detainees; * arrange for the early reunion of divided Eritrean families and to evacuate them by the safest means of transport possible, including airlifts; * ensure the protection of Eritrean property and means of livelihood in Ethiopia and/or to secure commensurate compensation for expropriated property and means of livelihood; and * provide adequate assistance to Eritrean detainees, deportees and displaced persons.
14. It is to be noted that the Eritrean Government had, since the beginning of the dispute, scrupulously respected the human rights of Ethiopian citizens living in Eritrea. It will continue to do so. It has not and will not put civilian Ethiopians living in Eritrea in detention camps. It has not deported them. It has not taken action that will violate their physical, mental and moral integrity. It shall allow them to live in Eritrea as peaceably as they had done so in the past. The Eritrean Government makes this undertaking to the world.
In this connection, the National Assembly of Eritrea, meeting in its eleventh session on 26 June, 1998, declared that "the Eritrean Government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed upon under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full right of redress."
To this end, the Government of Eritrea invites all interested governments and organizations to visit Eritrea and to independently verify for themselves the situation in which Ethiopians living in Eritrea find themselves.
15. The Government of Eritrea also seizes this opportunity to reaffirm to the international community its firm commitment to the peaceful and legal resolution of the conflict and to the restoration of the amicable and harmonious relations that existed between the people of the two countries prior to the outbreak of hostilities.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, July 3, 1998
g_070699.html 100644 127137 345 4763 6740410560 6275
Press Release
TPLF Regime Resumes Mass Deportation of Eritreans
One thousand four hundred ten Eritrean civilians deported from Addis
Ababa arrived at the port city of Assab early yesterday morning. The Eritreans
and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin were expelled through the Burie front
line, 70 kilometers west of Assab. The deportees included expectant mothers,
children and several handicapped and gravely ill people. A large number
of the
deportees had lived their entire life in Ethiopia and carried Ethiopian
passports. They said they had been arrested and detained for periods ranging
from three days to ten months prior to their deportation.
Reliable sources in Addis Ababa are reporting that the TPLF regime is
commencing another round of arbitrary arrest and deportation of Eritreans.
This group of Eritreans is thought to be only the first batch of some 15,000
Eritreans who remain destitute in Addis Ababa and who will be deported
in
the coming days.
Many of the expelled Eritreans had been separated from family members who had been deported earlier and said they had become virtually destitute having been denied employment and, in many cases, thrown out of their homes. They said the situation remains desperate for many Eritreans who have lost all means of income but have been prevented from leaving Ethiopia.
Local journalists in Assab reported that seven of the deportees are currently in Assab Hospital recovering from heat exhaustion, dehydration and other conditions associated with the difficult journey.
Yesterday's arrivals bring the two day total to 3,000. Thirty one Eritreans were also expelled from Tigray between June 23 and July 3 after having their property confiscated. To date, the TPLF regime has deported 60,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia based on their ethnicity.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 6 July 1999
Press Release
Eritrea Rejects Any Tampering with the OAU Framework Agreement
Ethiopia has yesterday published the private letters that the OAU Chairman sent to the Eritrean President on May 11 and May 20 respectively. How Ethiopia obtained copies of these private letters remains a mystery. The fact is that Ethiopia appears to have an inside track to the workings and documents of the High Level Delegation. Indeed, this is not the first time; Ethiopia also received the full report of the OAU Ambassadorial committee last year while Eritrea remained in the dark.
In regard to the letters, what is obvious is their contradictory content although they were written within a space of nine days. The first letter speaks about Eritrean redeployment from "Ethiopian territories occupied after May 6." The second letter retracts the grave error qualifying it as "our clear and renewed understanding is that this redeployment will not prejudge in any manner the claims held by either party regarding these areas." So are we talking about "occupied territories or contested territories?" What is the location of these areas relative to the established boundary between the two countries? The truth is that all these areas fall within Eritrea's recognized boundary although they appear to be incorporated in Ethiopia's new and illicit map of 1997.
Moreover, the letter are in complete contradiction with the official clarifications that the High Level Delegation provided to Eritrea on January 26, 1999, requesting, inter alia, "the redeployment of the troops of both parties from the entire boundary" with the exception of Badme from which Eritrea was expected to make a unilateral withdrawal as "a mark of good will" to the OAU.
They are also in complete contradiction with the Terms of Reference
of the OAU Ambassadorial Committee of last June which was confined to the
"collection from the two Parties and any other appropriate International
Organization and Agency, information which would make it possible to determine
the authority which was administering Badme before 12 May, 1998." Eritrea
then sought, in vain, to extend the mandate of the Committee to include
all areas under dispute. But the OAU High Level Delegation declined
the request insisting that its mandate was confined "to ascertaining
the situation in Badme." How come these letters now appear to grapple with
issues that the High Level Delegation has consistently refused to investigate?
It must be borne in mind that the OAU Secretariat remains inaccessible to Eritrea as Eritrea's Ambassador to the organization was expelled illegally by Ethiopia in violation of the Vienna Convention and the Headquarters Agreement. Yet, these letters and "new recommendations" on the conflict continue to be drafted in Addis Ababa by people with little or no access to the second party.
These appalling acts sadden Eritrea. In the event, Eritrea wishes to underline once more that it will not accept any tampering with the Framework Agreement under any guise.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 7 July 1998
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_071499.html 100655 127137 345 12534 6743240121 6306
Press Release
Today, 14 July 1999, the Eritrean government announced its acceptance of the OAU's "Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement ..." proposed at the 35th OAU Summit in Algeria.
The full text of the Modalities, as well as President Isaias Afwerki's remarks, follow.
Embassy of Eritrea
Washington DC,
14 July 1999
Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement on the Settlement of the Dispute Between Ethiopia and Eritrea
The two Parties reaffirm their commitment to the principle of the non-use of force to settle disputes.
The two Parties reaffirm their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and commit themselves to implement it in good faith.
There shall be a return to positions held prior to 6 May 1998.
On the basis of these principles, the two Parties agree on the following modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement:
President Isaias Afwerki's Remarks Regarding the OAU Modalities, 14 July 1999
Mr. Chairman, Your Excellencies,
It is Eritrea's understanding of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities presented to us that:
On the basis of this understanding and in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea but, may I add, also to the people of Ethiopia and our continent as a whole, and as mark of goodwill to the OAU, Eritrea has decided to accept the "Modalities for the Implementation of the Framework Agreement" presented to us by the High Level Delegation. In accepting the Framework and Modalities, Eritrea hopes to make its small contribution to the realization of the lofty objective proposed by the newly elected President of Africa's giant, Nigeria, General Obasanjo, and I believe endorsed by this Summit -- to make the year 2000 "The Year of Peace and Security" in Africa.
Your Excellencies,
Eritrea knows the bitterness of war and also the taste of the fruits of peace. It has absolutely no interest, and sees no advantage, in war. Our Ethiopian neighbours may pride themselves on the size of their country and population. But the experience of Algeria, which inspired us when we were launching our own liberation struggle, as indeed the whole lesson of the decolonization of our continent including Eritrea's own liberation, point eloquently to the pitfalls of that thinking. More importantly, here in Africa, leave alone the poorer among us, the richest in our midst can ill afford war.
So let us endeavor to put this sad chapter behind us and work for peace. This will be no easy task. There will be problems and pitfalls along the way. But with determination and the support of Africa and the world at large, there is no reason we cannot succeed. Let me assure Your Excellencies that Eritrea will work indefatigably for peace.
Thank you.
Eritrea has yesterday formally accepted the "Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement" that was proposed by the High Level Delegation to both parties and endorsed by the 35th Summit of Heads of State and Government held in Algiers from 12-14 July 1999.
At the closing session of the Summit, Eritrea's President Isaias Afwerki announced Eritrea's official acceptance of the Modalities for Implementation. President Isaias underlined that this was done "in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea but also, if I may add, to the people of Ethiopia, and our continent as a whole, and as a mark of goodwill to the OAU." Eritrea further deposited its formal acceptance of the peace formula through a letter to the Current Chairman of the OAU.
The Modalities of Implementation calls for the two parties to reaffirm:
their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and commit themselves to implement it in good faith.
In accepting the Modalities for Implementation, Eritrea observed that:
Ethiopia did not make its position clear to the Summit while indulging, in characteristic fashion, in strident and invective language against Eritrea.
Ethiopia Has Yet to Say Yes to OAU
Peace Plan
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 July 1999
The Ethiopian regime continues to refuse to publicly state whether it has accepted or rejected the Modalities of Implementation endorsed by the OAU Summit in Algiers on Wednesday, 14 July 1999.
At the Summit, Ethiopia's Prime Minister evaded stating Ethiopia's position on the Modalities. Instead he astounded his audience by indulging in his usual dose of invective against Eritrea. The Prime Minister continued to give mixed signals on arrival in Addis Abeba, telling journalists that his government "will seek clarifications" and arguing that certain aspects of the proposal "will have to be examined by relevant government institutions." The long statement issued by Ethiopia's Foreign Ministry yesterday simply rehashes the Prime Minister's evasion.
Ethiopia thus has yet to accept the OAU Modalities, without mincing its words, and make this clear to its own public, the OAU and the international community at large.
In contrast, Eritrea has confirmed its acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation to the Summit and deposited its formal letter of acceptance through a letter of President Isaias Afwerki to the Current Chairman of the OAU.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 July 1999
g_072299.html 100655 127137 345 5644 6745656074 6315
Ethiopia's Council of Ministers issued a statement yesterday which, unfortunately, is conspicuous for its inflammatory rhetoric and war mongering rather than the sobered language of peace. True, the statement contains a feeble "acceptance" of the Modalities of Implementation (MOI) endorsed by the 35th Summit of the OAU in Algiers on July 14, 1999. But this is blighted by a distorted presentation of the peace formula and the TPLF's siren call for war. The Council's "appeal" for Ethiopia's "Defense Forces" to pursue further its war of aggression was in fact accentuated by a more strident call for continued war issued by the EPRDF--Ethiopia's ruling party--yesterday evening.
Whereas the MOI provide for both sides to redeploy, as an interim measure, from positions moved into after fighting, the Council of Ministers tried to disinform public opinion by insinuating that the peace formula hinges on Eritrean unilateral withdrawal from "sovereign Ethiopian territory." To this end, it glosses over Article 4 of the MOI which reads, "The redeployment of troops shall commence after the cessation of hostilities. This redeployment shall not, in any way, prejudice the final status of the territories concerned, it being understood that this status will be determined at the end of the border delimitation and demarcation."
The Council of Ministers also appears to read from its own script as far as interim administration of these areas is concerned. In this regard, Article 5 read, "The modalities for the re-establishment of the civilian administration and population in the concerned territories shall be worked out after the cessation of hostilities."
More importantly, the TPLF regime seems to have missed the kernel of the MOI and the Framework Agreement itself. Both documents, as a package, are designed to ensure and expedite the demarcation of the boundary so as to settle the border problem legally. This will have reversed Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's established colonial boundary through the issuance of an illicit map in October 1997 and acts of piecemeal occupation of Eritrean territories thereby triggering the current conflict.
This is indeed the reason why the TPLF regime has been obstructing the implementation of the OAU Framework in the past months and was reluctant to accept the MOI at the OAU Summit in Algiers. If it claims to have "accepted" the MOI now, it is only because it is finding it difficult to ward off intense international as well as growing domestic pressure. The TPLF's agenda of war remains, otherwise, transparent.
Since the outbreak of the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea in May 1998, the Ethiopian government has been committing gross human rights violations against ethnic Eritreans in Ethiopia. In mass expulsions to date, over 11,000 Eritreans have suddenly been taken from their homes, schools, offices and farms, hauled to detention centres and then crammed into buses to be dumped on the Eritrean-Ethiopian border from where they had to walk several kilometres to reach Eritrea. In these indiscriminate arrests and expulsions, many have been forcibly separated from family members, with some mothers forced to leave behind infants and underage children. Even school children are being detained in concentration camps and underage children have been deported from Ethiopia without the knowledge of their parents. Among the 2,037 latest deportees, 510 are underage children. Over 1,000 Eritreans, including 85 university students have been detained in one concentration camp, Fiche, 150 kilometres northwest of Addis Abeba.
Women and children, left behind in Ethiopia when their menfolk were illegally deported, have been denied rightful access to their family's businesses, bank accounts and other sources of income. Children whose parents have been expelled have been left behind without any arrangements for their care. This forced exodus of Eritreans from Ethiopia continues with an estimated number of fifty people reaching Eritrea every day. On the other hand, Eritreans are denied voluntary departures and access to safe and normal transport.
Meanwhile, thousands of families inside Eritrea have also been displaced from their villages due to the war of aggression unleashed by the Ethiopian government in the border areas. These families, most of whom are farmers, have been forced to move out of their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs and will not be able to farm this rainy season. A UN fact-finding team has confirmed that the number of displaced is 170,000 people.
The National Union of Eritrean Women (NUEW) is deeply outraged by the gross violations of human rights being committed by the Ethiopian government against innocent Eritreans, especially women and children who are the most vulnerable victims in any conflict situation. Eritreans who, after thirty years of war liberated their country from Ethiopian military occupation, treasure their hard won peace and freedom. Since independence, Eritrea has worked hard to build friendly relations with Ethiopia based on mutual cooperation and mutual benefit. A border dispute between previously friendly nations should not be allowed to escalate into a generalized war or degenerate into an ethnic cleansing campaign. NUEW believes that the border conflict can be resolved, as proposed by the Eritrean government from the onset of the dispute, through peaceful negotiations, demarcation of the border region, and if necessary through international arbitration.
NUEW welcomes the statement of concern made by the UN High Commissioner from Human Rights in which it confirms that the expulsion of Eritreans from Ethiopia is a "serious violation of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Ethiopia is a party ... and calls upon the Government of Ethiopia to respect the rights of non-discrimination and freedom of movement and to meet its obligations under the international covenants and other human rights treaties it has ratified."
NUEW calls upon the international community, humanitarian and women's organizations to take urgent measures to avert further violations of human rights of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia, prevent the escalation of hostilities and support the peaceful resolution of the conflict by:
1. Condemning the Ethiopian government's gross violation of human rights of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia.
2. Calling for the immediate cessation of all mass detention and expulsion of Eritreans; demanding the immediate release of all Eritreans who have been unlawfully detained in prisons and concentration camps; and calling for the protection of the lives and properties of Eritrean deportees and those still residing in Ethiopia.
3. Assisting in the reunification of separated Eritrean families, including arrangement of early and safe transport.
4. Providing emergency support to Eritrean deportees and displaced people.
5. Calling for the immediate cessation of hostilities and for the peaceful resolution of the border conflict.
National Union of Eritrean Women
21 July 1998, Asmara, Eritrea
For further information on how you can assist, please contact:
National Union of Eritrean Women, PO Box 239, Asmara, Eritrea Tel: ++291-1-115271, Fax: ++292-1-119122
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_072398_2.html 100644 127137 345 21532 6555741201 6530
University of Asmara Appeals on Behalf of Detained Exchange Students
The president of the University of Asmara, Dr. WoldeAb Yisak, has appealed to UNESCO, the International Association of Universities, and the Association of African Universities to obtain the release of University of Asmara students who were on a student exchange program at the University of Addis Abeba and who now find themselves in custody at Fiche military camp outside Addis Abeba.
Dr. WoldeAb Yisak is also making a more general call for assistance to all concerned individuals. He says, "I would like to appeal to all of you to use your good offices in whatever possible way, such as through your governments, through your national or European universities associations, to put pressure on the Ethiopian authorities to release these innocent students unconditionally. Such acts, in my opinion, must be condemned because, if they pass unchallenged, they will probably place the whole student exchange programme at a much greater risk than has been witnessed before."
In his July 7, 1998, letter to UNESCO, the IAU and the AAU, the president of the University of Asmara provided the following background information:
"In 1994/95 the Governments of Eritrea and Ethiopia signed a bilateral agreement on cultural and educational affairs ... On the basis of this agreement during the past three academic years (1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98) each party had been entitled to send thirty students per year to each other's undergraduate academic programmes. To date we have 85 Eritrean students who have been studying at the University of Addis Ababa while the Ethiopians had only 46 students who had been studying at the University of Asmara.
In spite of the current political tensions between the two countries, the University of Asmara has persisted in meeting its international academic obligations by ensuring the safety and comfort of the Ethiopian students. It has allowed the students to complete their courses and exams for the current academic year. It further has provided the students with their summer stipends and travel allowances so that their departure home can be facilitated. However, when their scheduled departure was delayed by about three weeks by the Ethiopian authorities..., the University allowed all the students the use of its dormitory facilities free of charge during the waiting period ... the normal expected services and facilities had been extended to our foreign students even during periods of political tension. I am now pleased to indicate that the 46 Ethiopian students had safely flown to Ethiopia on Friday, July 3, 1998.
On the other hand, we have been unable to obtain official information about the 85 University of Asmara students from the University nor from the government authorities in Ethiopia. We have received information from our Embassy in Addis Ababa which was independently confirmed by members of the International Committee of the Red Cross that all of our students, with the exception of three female students, are under custody in a military camp at Fiche ... These students have been denied the right to sit for their final examinations and worse still have been stripped of their basic human rights since they are locked in prison for no crime other than being Eritrean nations. It is a tragic state of affairs when political tensions overflow to victimize peaceful students who are guests of the academic institution
.. Such acts, which are morally, ethically and legally wrong, should not be tolerated ..."
A full list of the detained students, with their field and year, follows:
Abdulhamid Musanur Abrar, Statistics, 3rd
Abraham Fesehaye Gebresadik, History, 4th
Adimaseghed Mesfun Belay, Geology, 4th
Amanuel Okube Haile, Library Science, 3rd
Andom Kubrom Tesfaghabir, Geology, 4th
Asmerom Teclezghi T/Berhan, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Awet Tewelde Woldemichael, History, 4th
Bahlbi Andemariam Abraha, Medical Technology, 2nd
Bereket Adha Habteselassie, Medicine, 4th
Bereket Chimar Amaha, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Bereket Kiflay Adhanom, Educational Psychology, 3rd
Binega Adhanom Markos, Medical Technology, 2nd
Biniam Berhe Tewolde, Political Science, 3rd
Biniam Fessehaye T/Tsion, Pharmacy, 2nd
Biniam Kefela O/Michael, Engineering, 4th
Biniam Ogbamichael Gebreab, Engineering, 4th
Brook Tesfay Debas, History, 3rd
Btesfa Yikeallo Habteselassie, Pharmacy, 2nd
Butsuamlak Hadish Tekeste, Computer Science, 2nd
Danile Ghebremichael Tecle, Medicine, 4th
Deglel Habti Aibu, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Efreim Ghebreleul Hailu, Educational Administration, 3rd
Essayas Sahlezghi Kifle, Computer Science, 3rd
Estifanos Haile Ghebremichael, Geology, 4th
Feseha Yohannes Habtesion, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Filmon Tsighe Tesfaselassie, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Fitsum Mebrahtu Kahsai, Electrical Engineering, 2nd
Frezghi Dawit Kidane, History, 3rd
Ghebrekidan Zecarias Teklemariam, Statistics, 3rd
Ghebriele Ghebrebrhan Zerizghi, Education, 4th
Ghirmay Kiros Gebretinsae, Geography, 3rd
Habtom Tecle Tesfu, Library Science, 3rd
Habtom Tesfaghebriel, Medicine, 2nd
Hagos Ghebremicael Tecle, Education, 4th
Hebret Haileab Bokru, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Henok Russom Fessahaye, Geology, 4th
Hisham Zein El Abdir Yasin, Medicine, 4th
Kaleab Sebhat Menker, Health Science (Jimma), 2nd
Kibrom Gebrehiwot Weldegabriel, Computer Science, 2nd
Medhanie Asrat Medhin, Statistics, 3rd
Mehari Sium Frezghi, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Merdia Mohammed Abdereshid, Medicine, 4th
Merhatinsae G/Mariam G/Yesus, Medicine, 4th
Michael Berhane Tesfatsion, Education, 4th
Michael Berhe Sahle, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Michael Tewoldemedhin Gebreselasie, Geography, 3rd
Muluberhan Fitwi Zeresenay, Geography, 3rd
Mulugheta Tsehaye Mirach, Political Science, 3rd
Mussie Beraki Demoz, Medicine, 2nd
Mussie Ghirmai Habte, Medical Technology, 2nd
Neamen Yohannes Teclebrhan, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Negash Habte Debas, Library Science, 3rd
Paulos Zekarias Ghebreselassie, Education, 4th
Saba Tesfayohannes Kidane, Political Science, 3rd
Samson Tesfu Tekle, Engineering, 4th
Seare Haile Rezenom, Engineering, 4th
Simon Tesfamichael Tombosa, Pharmacy, 2nd
Simret Tecle Ghebremichael, Pharmacy, 3rd
Tedros Yosief Andemichael, Engineering, 4th
Tekesteberhan Mehreteab Kidane, Agricultural Engineering, 2nd
Teklehaimanot Tewelde Beraki, Architecture, 2nd
Teklit Keleta Oankay, Agricultural Engineering, 2nd
Temesgen Kibrom Weldeab, Political Science, 3rd
Temesgen Shibabaw Belew, Library Science, 2nd
Tesfaldet Kiflemariam Yohannes, Mechanical Engineering, 2nd
Tesfalem Kesete Ghebreab, Computer Science, 3rd
Tesfalem Tekleab Araia, History, 3rd
Tesfamariam Amare Mehari, Pharmacy, 3rd
Tesfay Teame Gebretsadik, Library Science, 3rd
Tesfazghi Gernet Tecle, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Thomas Fitwi Adagish, Electrical Engineering, 2nd
Tsegay Bein Habtemariam, Chemical Engineering, 2nd
Weldesilase Hidray Ghebreyesus, Statistics, 3rd
Woldekidan Zekarias Teclamariam, Computer Science, 2nd
Yohannes Tecleab Habtemichael, Mechanical Engineering, 2nd
Yonas Tekie Idris, History, 3rd
Yonas Tesfazghi Weldeslasie, Computer Science, 3rd
Yonas Yemane Weldemichael, Educational Administration, 3rd
Yonatan Tecle Berhe, Library Science, 2nd
Yosief Solomon Marcos, Chemical Engineering, 2nd
Yosief Weldeghiorghis Kesete, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Yosief Woldu Araya, Medicine, 2nd
Zerabruk Tesamariam Kidane, Health Science (Jimma), 2nd
For further information, contact:
University of Asmara, PO Box 1220, Asmara, Eritrea Tel: ++291-1-161926, Fax: ++291-1-162236
July 23, 1998
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_072498_1.html 100644 127137 345 10755 6556215717 6546
Statement on Ethiopia's Gross Violations of Basic Human Rights
In an affront to the international community which has been interceding with the Ethiopian government to stop the massive and illegal arrest of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia, the Addis Ababa authorities have started a third wave of arrests in preparation for more deportations. There are ominous reports of fresh and widespread arrests, especially in Addis Ababa in the past three days.
More than 11,000 Eritreans were rounded up and deported in the most inhumane way in two previous rounds from major centres in the country and villages in the border areas. People were dragged from their homes in the middle of the night; families cruelly separated from their underage children; and even suckling babies left behind. Property has been looted after the families were deported and dispersed.
The Ethiopian authorities have also arrested thousands of young Eritreans under the ridiculous claim that their enrollment in the national service, the summer school campaign or previous role in the liberation war renders them "a potential threat to the security of Ethiopia." More than 1,000 Eritrean youth thus remain held as
"prisoners of war" in a detention camp at Fiche. Eighty university students are included among these hostages. Many innocent Eritreans are also held in prisons in other parts of the country and particularly in Makelle and Adi Grat. Two Eritrean Catholic nuns were recently arrested in Adi Grat while five other priests who were running schools in southeastern Ethiopia were deported.
Eritreans who hold nationality of other countries are similarly being arrested and deported although some have been rescued due to the protests of their respective embassies.
Many governments, international agencies, and human rights groups have been interceding with the Ethiopian authorities to stop this gross violation of human rights. But "quiet diplomacy" has not delivered tangible results. The authorities in Addis Ababa continue to trample on basic human rights and pursue with impunity the arbitrary arrest and mass deportation of Eritreans in total contempt of the concerns of the international community. The Ethiopian Prime Minister had even the temerity to publicly state that "Ethiopia has an unlimited right to expel any foreigner if it did not like the colour of his/her eyes."
Addis Ababa is moreover resorting to the most base practice of fabricating lies to accuse the Eritrean government of similar violation of human rights. To this end, it has revived the "Morale Boosting Department" which the Mengistu regime had established with the help of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) to concoct and spread lies to disinform the domestic and international community. Among the outrageous lies that this Department has fabricated this week include wild allegations of "group rapes by Eritrean fighters,"
"burning of seven Ethiopians in Alla," "the wanton shooting of Ethiopians who wanted to return to their country in Adi Quala," "the public beating of Ethiopian civilians in Asmara and the parading of prisoners of war," etc. The banality of these allegations have been verified by a BBC correspondent in Eritrea, the ICRC and members of the diplomatic community in Asmara. But the international press continues to pick up these allegations at face value without necessary verification.
The Government of Eritrea finds the silence in the face of Ethiopia's gross violation of human rights and the inflammatory campaign of disinformation shocking and unacceptable. The international community should no longer confine its reactions to mute diplomatic protests. These excesses must be condemned publicly and unequivocally.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, July 24, 1998
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_072699.html 100644 127137 345 7203 6747465536 6313
Embassy of Eritrea
Washington DC, 26 July 1999
Organization of African Unity
Issued by the OAU Information Division
Press Release No. 64/99
As part of the efforts to ensure the speedy implementation of the OAU
Framework Agreement for the Resolution of the Dispute between Ethiopia
and
Eritrea and the implementation Modalities adopted by the Algiers Summit
and
in consultation with the OAU Secretary General, H.E. Mr. Abdelaziz
Bouteflika, President of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria
and
Current Chairman of the OAU, dispatched to Addis Ababa and to Asmara
a
delegation led by his Special Envoy, Mr. Ahmed Ouyahia.
The OAU Delegation held talks with H.E. Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister
of the
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia on 23 and 24 July 1999 and
with H.E.
Isaias Afwerki, President of the State of Eritrea on 23 and 25 July
1999.
The OAU Delegation welcomed the confirmation by Ethiopia and Eritrea
of
their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities for
its
implementation.
The OAU Delegation also noted the clear disposition of Ethiopia and
Eritrea
to contribute to the speedy implementation of the Framework Agreement
and
the Modalities. In that regard the two Parties indicated that they
were
looking forward to the OAU submitting to them the practical arrangements
specifying the details of the implementation of the Framework Agreement
and
the Modalities.
On its part and with reference to the relevant provisions of the Framework
Agreement and the Modalities, the OAU Delegation called upon Ethiopia
and
Eritrea to contribute to the preservation of the situation of calm
obtaining
on the ground and to refrain from any action and statement which could
complicate matters and jeopardize the establishment of the atmosphere
of
serenity which is required for the implementation of the Framework
Agreement
and the Modalities. The OAU Delegation was encouraged by the reaction
of the
two Parties which expressed their will to act in that direction to
facilitate the on-going efforts of the OAU.
Furthermore, the Delegation pointed out to the two Parties that the
OAU, in
cooperation with the UN and other partners, would submit, as soon as
possible, the necessary technical arrangements for the full implementation
of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities adopted by the OAU and
accepted by the two Parties. In this context, the two Parties agreed
to send
to Algiers their respective delegations in order to finalize the technical
arrangements that would facilitate the commencement of the implementation
of
the Framework Agreement and the Modalities.
Asmara, July 26, 1998
Amnesty International
London
We are receiving letters from your members which express concern on two issues:
i) humane treatment of Ethiopian detainees in Eritrea; and,
ii) deportation through open and fair court proceedings.
We are indignant that these allegations are being leveled at the Government of Eritrea by Amnesty International without independently checking their veracity simply because the Government of Ethiopia is fabricating outrageous accusations to cover up the gross violations of human rights that it is perpetrating in Ethiopia. In as far the true facts are concerned:
I. Political detainees
The Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has falsely accused the Government of Eritrea for detaining "600 Ethiopian civilians who were paraded in the streets of Asmara." That this accusation is without basis has been established by various independent sources including: the Ethiopian Embassy, the diplomatic community and UN agencies in Asmara; and, the Committee of African Ambassadors charged with finding a peaceful solution to the border conflict between the two countries. The Ethiopian government has now revised the allegations to submit a list of 77 people allegedly detained in Eritrea without a cause. The Government of Eritrea has invited the ICRC to look into the matter.
This contrasts starkly with the wide-spread arrests of Eritrean youth in Ethiopia. As you may know, the Government of Ethiopia is detaining more than 1,000 youth in a concentration camp in Fitche around 90 kms northwest of Addis Abeba. These people, most of whom are students, have been detained either because they were enrolled in the National Service at one stage during the past five years; or because they have contributed in the summer campaigns. Some are also demobilized soldiers who have been long integrated into civilian life. Eighty five of these were students at the Addis Abeba University who were barred from taking their exams and dumped in this camp. On the other hand, the 45 Ethiopian students who were in Asmara in accordance with the exchange programme were not only allowed to take their exams but enabled to return to their country safely. There are reports now that the Government of Ethiopia has moved the hostages in Fitche to another obscure camp in eastern Ethiopia. The ICRC, which was initially provided with access to these detainees, does not know their exact whereabouts as the measure was taken without their prior knowledge or consent.
II. Alleged expulsions
The Ethiopian government has accused the Government of Eritrea for expelling about 5,000 Ethiopians. There have also been accusations of willful redundancy of Ethiopians or refusal to give them permission to leave the country. All these accusations are false. Indeed:
1. Several hundred Ethiopians had left the country out of their free will immediately after the escalation of the conflict when Ethiopia launched the first air-strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998. This was a time when all foreigners were being evacuated by their respective embassies. In the circumstances, it was not surprising to find some Ethiopians wanting to leave the country.
2. The Government of Eritrea has time and again publicly reassured the more than 100,000 Ethiopians residing in Eritrea that their rights to live and work in the country would not be jeopardized due to the current conflict. In this regard, the resolution of the Eritrean National Assembly of June 26, 1998, reads: "The National Assembly has asserted that in contrast to the inhuman policy of the Ethiopian government, the Eritrean government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree."
The Government of Eritrea does not have therefore a policy of deporting Ethiopian residents in the country.
3. Ethiopians who want to go back to their country are not being prohibited from doing so in any way. But as the Ethiopian government has attempted to distort the facts and depict their willful repatriation as "forcible deportation" (only recently, 80 teachers in Assab who were assisted by the Administration through facilitation of sea transport were portrayed as having been expelled), the Eritrean government has announced that this process will henceforth be carried out through the ICRC or some independent international body.
4. The Government of Eritrea has requested that the UN Human Rights Commission field representatives to investigate into the allegations leveled by Ethiopia. Four representatives from this body are accordingly on their way to Eritrea. The ICRC have also been charged to look into these accusations. The Ethiopian government has however rejected the fielding of six UN Human Rights representatives in Ethiopia. The ICRC were not also allowed to register and accompany all those who have been expelled to date.
5. The Government of Ethiopia has to date expelled more than 11,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia in the most inhumane manner. Most of these people have been snatched from their homes at night or during early morning hours. Many were simply collected from the streets. Families have been cruelly separated; properties systematically appropriated and looted.
In conclusion, we urge Amnesty International to verify the true facts by consulting other independent observers or through other suitable means before apportioning equal blame to both sides. We also request that this letter be circulated to all members of the organization.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_072899.html 100655 127137 345 10076 6747606754 6340
Ethiopia's Campaign of Slander Continues
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 July 1999
The TPLF regime has intensified its campaign of hate and slander in spite of a verbal commitment to the OAU "to refrain from any action and statement which could complicate matters and jeopardize the establishment of the atmosphere of serenity which is required for the implementation of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities."
Two days after the OAU had issued a statement on the acceptance of both parties of the Modalities of Implementation (MOI) and the Framework Agreement and on the outcome of the shuttle of the OAU envoy, Ethiopia's state-controlled media have yet to inform their domestic audience. Instead, the TPLF propaganda machine is busy heaping insults on Eritrea and fabricating groundless accusations to inflame public opinion.
To this end, the TPLF regime has accused Eritrea in the past two days of obstructing access to their embassy in Asmara and of detaining "1,500 Ethiopians in Awashait prison alone."
But the true facts are:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 July 1999
g_080598.html 100644 127137 345 11520 6562164543 6312
The OAU Ministerial Committee on the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia will submit its recommendations to the Heads of State of the three countries in the next few days. The Committee underlined that these recommendations "will be fair and take into account the legitimate concerns of the parties and the ideals of the OAU."
The Ministerial Committee, which is composed of Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and Djibouti, was convened in Ouagadougou from August 1-2, 1998, to review the findings of the Committee of Ambassadors that had visited Eritrea and Ethiopia earlier this month. Separate sessions with the Foreign Ministers of Eritrea and Ethiopia were also held to exchange views and explore avenues of a peaceful solution.
In its final communiqu^?, the Ministerial Committee welcomed "the disposition reiterated by both Parties to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute" and urged them "to continue their observance of the moratorium on air strikes and the present situation of no hostilities." The Government of Eritrea had expressed its readiness for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and the placement of African observers under the auspices of the United Nations pending a comprehensive peaceful solution to the conflict. But Ethiopia's Foreign Minister told the Ministers that Ethiopia did not accept the cessation of hostilities and the placement of an observer force.
In regard to the substantive aspects of the conflict, the Ministerial Committee acknowledged that the two parties continue to hold "divergent points of view both on the origin and evolution of the dispute and the issues which must be considered to resolve the crisis." But it added that this should not preclude "the spirit of compromise to prevail" which will make it possible to respond to the fundamental concerns of each of the parties while respecting the principles of the OAU.
The Government of Eritrea had all along maintained that the root cause of the dispute lay in Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's colonial boundaries. Focus on secondary issues will therefore be unhelpful and only derail the peace process. Ethiopia's insistence on ascertaining first "which authority was administering Badme prior to the clashes of May 6" was thus an obstructive posture mainly designed to divert the peace process. This glossed over Ethiopia's use of force earlier in July 1997 to occupy Adi Murug as well as to encroach on areas around Badme. Under these circumstances, "administration" in itself was not valid if the process by which that administration had been established was illegal. What is of paramount importance is to establish where Badme, Adi Murug and other areas were situated within the recognized boundaries.
The Ministerial Committee emphasized that it "understands the viewpoint of Eritrea on the origin of the conflict" and underlined its concerns "about the incidents which would have taken place at other places on the common border to July 1997." It noted that Badme town was administered by the Ethiopian authorities prior to the eruption of the recent round of clashes. But it acknowledged that this "does not obviously prejudge the final status of that area which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation process and, if necessary, through arbitration."
In regard to violation of human rights and treatment of nationals by both sides, the Ministerial Committee stated that "it could not establish the reality of a systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." But it expressed its deep concern on "the conditions in which the deportation of Eritreans was carried out by the Government of Ethiopia, the decision to extend those measures to the families of the deported persons and the fate of their properties."
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, August 5, 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_080698.html 100655 127137 345 6010 6562604421 6265
US State Dept. Statement on Ethiopia's Expulsion of Eritreans
U.S. Department of State
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
August 6, 1998
Statement by James B. Foley, Deputy Spokesman
Ethiopia: Expulsions of Eritreans
The United States Government is greatly concerned about the growingimpact on civilian populations of the continuing conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.
The United States views with deep concern the detention and expulsion of ethnic Eritreans in and from Ethiopia. The Government of Ethiopia has a legitimate right to guarantee the safety and security of its people against potential threats. However, there are fundamental humanitarian and human rights concerns raised by the forcible separation of families, the undue hardships of those detained or expelled to Eritrea, and the financial losses caused by sudden expulsions. We urge the Government of Ethiopia to respect international human rights norms and standards and follow appropriate due process in handling its security concerns. We further urge the Government of Ethiopia to allow all those who were wrongfully expelled to return and to establish a compensation commission to investigate and recommend compensation for the claims resulting from undue financial loss and hardship as a result of rapid, forced expulsions.
We call on the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure full access to all detainees and P.O.W.s, to exchange P.O.W.s, to allow all students to repatriate, and to facilitate the return of nationals who wish to repatriate voluntarily. We welcome the decision by both governments to grant the ICRC access and urge full cooperation with the ICRC in accordance with its standard procedures. We call on both parties to receive missions from appropriate United Nations agencies. History has shown that deportations and detentions and the massive displacement of innocent civilians, wherever and whenever they occur, create hardships and bitternessfueling misunderstandings and lasting mistrust.
Ultimately, a durable peace is the best guarantee of the rights of each other's nationals in Eritrea and Ethiopia. The United States urges Ethiopia and Eritrea to redouble their efforts in seeking a peaceful resolution to the current border conflict, and we pledge our continued commitment to support such efforts.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW,
Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_080698_2.html 100666 127137 345 11556 6562604343 6546
The OAU Ministerial Committee on the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia will submit its recommendations to the Heads of State of the three countries in the next few days. The Committee underlined that these recommendations "will be fair and take into account the legitimate concerns of the parties and the ideals of the OAU."
The Ministerial Committee, which is composed of Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and Djibouti, was convened in Ouagadougou from August 1-2, 1998, to review the findings of the Committee of Ambassadors that had visited Eritrea and Ethiopia earlier this month. Separate sessions with the Foreign Ministers of Eritrea and Ethiopia were also held to exchange views and explore avenues of a peaceful solution.
In its final communiqu^?, the Ministerial Committee welcomed "the disposition reiterated by both Parties to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute" and urged them "to continue their observance of the moratorium on air strikes and the present situation of no hostilities." The Government of Eritrea had expressed its readiness for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and the placement of African observers under the auspices of the United Nations pending a comprehensive peaceful solution to the conflict. But Ethiopia's Foreign Minister told the Ministers that Ethiopia did not accept the cessation of hostilities and the placement of an observer force.
In regard to the substantive aspects of the conflict, the Ministerial Committee acknowledged that the two parties continue to hold "divergent points of view both on the origin and evolution of the dispute and the issues which must be considered to resolve the crisis." But it added that this should not preclude "the spirit of compromise to prevail" which will make it possible to respond to the fundamental concerns of each of the parties while respecting the principles of the OAU.
The Government of Eritrea had all along maintained that the root cause of the dispute lay in Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's colonial boundaries. Focus on secondary issues will therefore be unhelpful and only derail the peace process. Ethiopia's insistence on ascertaining first "which authority was administering Badme prior to the clashes of May 6" was thus an obstructive posture mainly designed to divert the peace process. This glossed over Ethiopia's use of force earlier in July 1997 to occupy Adi Murug as well as to encroach on areas around Badme. Under these circumstances, "administration" in itself was not valid if the process by which that administration had been established was illegal. What is of paramount importance is to establish where Badme, Adi Murug and other areas were situated within the recognized boundaries.
The Ministerial Committee emphasized that it "understands the viewpoint of Eritrea on the origin of the conflict" and underlined its concerns "about the incidents which would have taken place at other places on the common border to July 1997." It noted that Badme town was administered by the Ethiopian authorities prior to the eruption of the recent round of clashes. But it acknowledged that this "does not obviously prejudge the final status of that area which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation process and, if necessary, through arbitration."
In regard to violation of human rights and treatment of nationals by both sides, the Ministerial Committee stated that "it could not establish the reality of a systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." But it expressed its deep concern on "the conditions in which the deportation of Eritreans was carried out by the Government of Ethiopia, the decision to extend those measures to the families of the deported persons and the fate of their properties."
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, August 5, 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_080798.html 100644 127137 345 107227 6562657723 6355
STATEMENT BY THE DELEGATION OF THE STATE OF ERITREA TO THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AGAINST ERITREANS IN ETHIOPIA
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_080899.html 100655 127137 345 2513 6753305237 6301
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Asmara 8 August 1999
Eritrea has officially accepted the OAU proposal on Technical Arrangements submitted to both parties at the end of this week. It has also "pledged its full co-operation with the OAU and the United Nations in implementing the three Agreements - the Framework Agreement, the Modalities and Technical Arrangements - as the sole basis for resolving the dispute". President Isaias informed the OAU delegation led by Algeria's special envoy, Ahmed Ouyahya, of Eritrea's acceptance in a meeting here yesterday evening. The Eritrean president and current chairman of the OAU, H.E. Abdelaziz Boutiflika.
The Technical Arrangements were worked out by technical experts from Algeria, the OAU, the United Nations, and the United States of America. The envisaged next steps are a formal signature of all three documents, a cessation of hostilities, redeployment, the instatement of civilian administration and demarcation within a specific time frames.
The OAU delegation left Asmara today for Addis Ababa.
Asmara 8 August 1999 g_081099.html 100655 127137 345 3467 6754045103 6275
At the 35th OAU Summit in Algiers last month, Ethiopia's Prime Minister tried in vain to cast doubt on Eritrea's acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation. And, in what he thought would be enticing bait, he promised that Ethiopia's response will be unequivocal. Thus, he pledged:
"... We will not engage in such a subterfuge. If we accept the package, Your Excellencies, we will tell you so. No ifs, no buts. If we don't accept the package, Your Excellencies, we will tell you so. But we will not insult your intelligence ... We shall not do that. We respect the OAU too much to do that."
As it happened, Ethiopia's belated acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation was a six page letter full of ifs and buts. What is more, Ethiopia has yesterday refused to accept the Technical Arrangements, requesting "clarifications." These Technical Arrangements are merely technical details of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities of Implementation and they have been carefully worked out by experts from the OAU, the United Nations and the United States Government.
Ethiopia's request for "clarifications" is but a transparent ploy for delaying the peace process. And, it betrays the game that the TPLF regime has been playing in the past. Indeed, the TPLF cannot plausibly raise now, at the eleventh hour, substantial issues in regard to the Technical Arrangements if it had really accepted the underlying agreements in good faith. That this was not the case is illustrated today, beyond any shred of doubt, by its refusal to proceed toward their implementation.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea has received the following letter from Amnesty International regarding a letter writing campaign about allegations of Ethiopians unjustly detained in Eritrea.
Dear Minister,
Thank you for the communication from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs dated 26 July 1998. This refers to letters from members of Amnesty International in various countries who had expressed concern about reports of Ethiopians detained in Eritrea without charge or trial or deported from Eritrea.
We welcome the assurance contained in your letter that the Government of Eritrea does not have a policy of deporting Ethiopian residents and that the latter will continue to have the right to live and work in Eritrea. We note the information about the return to Ethiopia of 46 students of the University of Asmara and 80 teachers from Assab.
It is encouraging to learn that the government has invited representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to Eritrea and has asked them to investigate the allegations of detentions. It will considerably reassure the international community if the ICRC is able to provide its range of services to the Government of Eritrea to ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions in connection with the current conflict with Ethiopia, and if it is granted access according to its mandate to prisoners of war and security detainees. Similarly the presence in Eritrea of officials of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights will be a positive step for protection of human rights in the region in the times ahead.
With regard to the situation of Eritreans in Ethiopia, many of whom had Ethiopian nationality, Amnesty International has been deeply concerned at the thousands of arbitrary detentions and deportations and ill-treatment of men, women and children of Eritrean origin. Since these serious human rights violations started in mid-June 1998, our members have been repeatedly protesting to the Ethiopian government about these arrests, particularly where Eritreans appear to be prisoners of conscience detained solely on account of their Eritrean origin and without any evidence that they have committed criminal offences. We have called for their immediate and unconditional release if they are not to be charged with a recognizably criminal offence. We have demanded respect for the basic human rights of detainees and for them to be humanely treated while in detention, including being given immediate access to relatives, lawyers and the ICRC. Furthermore we have appealed for deportations not to be carried out in violation of articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights prohibiting arbitrary exile or deprivation of nationality and affirming the right to freedom of movement. We call for them not to be deported without any clear or fair procedures, including the right to challenge the deportation order through open and fair court proceedings.
We would like to clarify that although these issues of detention and deportation in Eritrea and Ethiopia bear some similarity, the scale of proven abuses has been very different in terms of the numbers of people affected: the detentions in Ethiopia number some thousands and the deportations have apparently surpassed 12,000, whereas the allegations concerning Eritrea refer to a very much smaller number. The Ethiopian authorities have not replied to Amnesty International's appeals or halted the detentions and deportations. It does not appear that the ICRC has been given full access to the detainees.
We appreciate this prompt reply from the Government of Eritrea, which we are communicating to our members. In view of this positive response from the Government of Eritrea we are asking our members to discontinue their letter-writing to Eritrea at the present time. We will continue to investigate and where appropriate will bring allegations of arbitrary detention to the attention of the authorities. We trust that the Eritrean authorities will thoroughly investigate all allegations which are substantially based.
Yours sincerely,
Gill Nevins
Acting Africa Program Director
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_081798.html 100644 127137 345 15171 6566132161 6316
14 August 1998
International Committee of the Red Cross
Asmara
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea presents its compliments to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and has the honour to communicate to the latter regarding the baseless accusation labeled on the Eritrean government by the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara on 10 July 1998 in which it accused saying that "Seventy two Ethiopian citizens living in Eritrea are detained arbitrarily by the Eritrean Government."
The Ministry wishes to inform the ICRC that there is no Ethiopian citizen detained arbitrarily. However, this doesn't mean that there are no Ethiopians who are arrested due to security, criminal and civil offenses and this makes the Embassy's accusation absolutely groundless.
The Ministry confirms that from the list which the Ethiopian Embassy annexed to its circular, of the 72 people it said were "arbitrarily" arrested:
a. 32 were released after the taking of the necessary investigation, that is before the Embassy notified of their detention (see Annex 1); b. 22 of them have never been detained anywhere in the country. We would like to inform you we do not have any kind of information on the first twelve listed in Annex 2. Those listed from number 13 to number 17 (same annex) are still living peacefully in Eritrea, while the last six have left to Ethiopia. c. 12 are still under the custody of the police, and their case is under investigation. (All of them were visited by your office recently.) (See Annex 3.) d. 6 were tried for the crime they had committed and are sentenced to be imprisoned. (See Annex 4.)
All this shows that the allegations made by the Ethiopian Embassy are pure fabrication and the Ministry calls the ICRC to react against the false allegations that the Ethiopian Government is conducting continuously.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the ICRC the assurance of its highest consideration.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Annex 1 - Detainees Already Released
1. Mr. Niftalem Kasa, goldsmith, Asmara
2. Mr. G/egzier Gebru, bakery owner, Asmara
3. Mr. Gebru Tesfai, student, Asmara
4. Mr. Tedros G/egziher, day laborer, Asmara
5. Mr. Arefaine Negere, E.C. chairman, Asmara
6. Mr. Nigussie Gebru, farmer, Asmara
7. Mr. Yemane Gebru, E.C. chairman, Massawa
8. Ms. Tiebe Mezgebo, housewife, Massawa
9. Mr. Shishay W/yohannes, merchant, Massawa
10. Mr. Haile Aregai, carpenter, Ginda
11. Mr. Alemitu Imuru, bar owner, Ginda
12. Mr. Ataklti G/yohannes, merchant, Mendefera
13. Mr. Aimro Yitbarek, bar owner, Asmara
14. Mr. Tedros Haile, merchant, Dekemare
15. Ms. Yordanos Haile, student, Dekemare
16. Mr. Filmon haile, student, Dekemare
17. Ms. Adiyam Kebede, day laborer, Dekemare
18. Mr. Debas G/giorgis, merchant, Massawa
19. Mr. Isaq G/kidane, merchant, Adi Quala
20. Mr. Abadi Abrha, cashier, Ginda
21. Mr. Kidane Abadi, day laborer, Ginda
22. Ms. Sesen Abreha, bar owner, Ginda
23. Mr. Haile Berhe, day laborer, Ginda
24. Mr. Bereket Haile, student, Dekemare
25. Mr. Kahsay Abreha, day laborer, Massawa
26. Ms. Teberih Meche, bar owner, Dekemare
27. Ms. Berhan Hadgu, housewife, Dekemare
28. Mr. Teklemariam Abreha, TDA chairman, Dekemare
29. Mr. Gebremeskel Mahamed, day laborer, Ginda
30. Mr. Fisaye G/libanos, farmer, Asmara
31. Mr. G/tsadik Kidane, tea house owner, Asmara
32. Mr. Haregot Desta, welder, Asmara
Annex 2 - Claimed Detainees
1. Mr. Anania G/egzibr, merchant, Asmara
2. Mr. Iyob G/medhin, artist, Asmara
3. Mr. Hailesilassie Haile, TDA vice chairman, Asmara
4. Mr. G/meskel Girmay, cashier, Asmara
5. Mr. Gebaerhiwot Nigussie, driver, Mendefera
6. Ms. Yalem Zerhun, waitress, Ginda
7. Mr. Hagos G/tinsay, student, Ala
8. Mr. Tesfay Mehari, student, Ala
9. Mr. Tekeste Tesfaye, merchant, Asmara
10. Ms. Tieba Abera, waitress, Ginda
11. Mr. Kiros Hadish, student, Asmara
12. Mr. Akelom Berhe, merchant, Ginda
13. Ms. Mamit Mesfin, bar owner, Massawa
14. Ms. Brutukan Assefa, waitress, Ginda
15. Mr. Kahsai Beyene, day laborer, Ginda
16. Ms. Legessie Gebru, day laborer, Ginda
17. Mr. Tesfalem Giday, receptionist, Ginda
18. Mr. Kidane G/silassie, driver, Massawa
19. Mr. Gebregzher Tamirat, day laborer, Massawa
20. Mr. Solomon G/egziebher, day laborer, Massawa
21. Mr. Kidane Hidru, cashier, Ginda
22. Mr. Berhane Aregawi, laborer, Ginda
Annex 3 - Detainees
1. Mr. Tedros Tamyalew, Ethcom, Asmara
2. Mr. Amanuel Yohannes, receptionist, Asmara
3. Ms. Goai Tesfu, hotel owner, Asmara
4. Mr. Beyene Berhane, goldsmith, Asmara
5. Mr. Wolday Amare, day laborer, Asmara
6. Mr. Wolday G/hiwet, day laborer, Asmara
7. Mr. Peteros Fishaye, counsul guard, Asmara
8. Mr. Ghebremeskel Girmay, butcher, Asmara
9. Mr. Kiflom G/hiwot, restaurant owner, Asmara
10. Mr. Woldu hagos, merchant, Dekemare
11. Mr. Haile G/zgiher, merchant, Dekemare
12. Mr. Zemichael G/sadik, Asmara
Annex 4 - Tried and Sentenced to Prison
1. Mr. Amanuel Haile, student, Asmara
2. Mr. Alebachew Zenebe, day laborer, Massawa
3. Mr. Berhane Girmay, goldsmith, Asmara
4. Mr. Selomen Gh/slasie, merchant, Keren
5. Mr. Selemun Girmay, merchant, Ginda
6. Mr. Gebremedhin G/hiwot, cashier, Ginda
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_081898.html 100644 127137 345 135555 6566401653 6355
United Nations Development Programme
Asmara- Eritrea
FACSIMILE
Date: 22 July 1998 Re: PRO/300/OCHA
To: Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello
Under secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, New York
CC: Mr. Thierry Delbreuve, HAO, CECAP, OCHA, Geneva
Fax: 212 963 1312 Country/City: USA, New York
(41 22) 788 6389/87 Switzerland, Geneva
From: Martyn Ngwenya
[signed]
UN Designated Official and
UN Resident Coordinator
Subject: Update on Deportees: 12-19 July 1998
I. Background
On 15 July 1998, I received a telephone call from a Government official who informed me that about 400 deportees had arrived in Assab after walking four kilometers from "no man’s" land between the borders. He invited me to join Government officials and others who were scheduled to travel to Assab on 16 July. In accepting the invitation, I requested that Heads of UN Agencies should accompany me to observe the situation for themselves.
I accordingly convened a meeting which was attended by the following:
Mr. Martyn Ngwenya, Designated Official and UN Resident Coordinator
Ms. Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative
Ms. Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative
Mr. Emmanuel Ablo, World Bank Resident Representative
Mr. Sergio Rizzo, OIC, WHO
We brainstormed the purpose of traveling to Assab including the pros and cons of such a mission at this juncture. With regard to the main objective of inviting the UN Agencies, an official of Government confirmed by telephone that Government wanted the UN to observe and assess the conditions for itself. Issues of security clearance to visit Assab (which is under phase four), the safety of staff flying from Asmara to Assab and the necessity of the visit were discussed. The meeting was informed of the expected functions of essential staff and measures taken by Government to minimize all risks of travel to Assab. With regard tot he necessity of the mission, the UN Resident Coordinator/ Designated Official emphasized the fact that the visit was on voluntary basis. Only those willing to participate in this observation mission may travel.
Accordingly, the following traveled to Assab on 16 July 1998:
Mr. Martyn Ngwenya, Designated Official and UN Resident Coordinator
Ms. Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative
Ms. Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative
Mr. Firouz Sobhani, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative
Mr. Temesghen Araia, National Officer, UNFPA
Also traveling to Assab were the following:
Two Government officials (Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Information)
Two from the ICRC and Eritrean National Red Cross
Five from the media including the Voice of America and the Voice of Germany
The Mission departed Asmara at 8:30 a.m. and arrived in Assab at 10:15 a.m. on 17 July 1998.
II. Situation of Deportees in Assab
The UN team was informed that there were about 400 deportees who had arrived in Assab. The UN team met and interviewed deportees at two hotels where they were temporarily accommodated awaiting completion of arrangements to relocate them in some places of their choice in the highlands.
Their stories are the same: they were picked; taken to the police station; not allowed to advise their families about their fate; children were refused to accompany mothers or fathers; some were forced to say in buses for two days awaiting the arrival of other deportees; water and food were inadequate; etc. there were no reports on excessive violations of human rights.
The deplorable and dehumanizing conditions caused the death of one man whose daughter was snatched away by Ethiopian authorities when the deportees were dropped off between the border posts of the two countries. He cried to no avail and went into a serious depression and never recovered. His colleagues put him to rest in Assab.
The UN Team also met with Ethiopians who reside in Assab. Teachers want to go home (Ethiopia) since the Ethiopian Community School is now closed. These are Ethiopian teachers employed by the Ethiopian Government to each at an Ethiopian School in Assab. The other Ethiopians complained of lack of employment opportunities since their livelihoods depended on arrival of ships. "When ships arrive, Assab is our new York city" recalled one sad casual worker with a wishful smile. As to the Ethiopians with permanent employment, they confirmed that they have been receiving their salaries as usual. The people we met did not cite violations of human rights. However, the UN Tea did not know how these people were identified and brought to the meeting place.
The UN team noted the needs of these deportees which are, by and large, similar to those of other deportees and displaced persons. Some of their needs include:
- shelter (including blankets, mats and clothing)
- food, health care, water
- relocation to the highlands
- re-unification of families
- agricultural implements and inputs for those opting to be peasant farmers
Please see Annex A for a detailed account of the situation of deportees in Assab titled "UN Field Visit to Assab 16-17 July 1998" by Ms. Pamela Delargy.
On my return from Assab on 17 July 1998, the Commissioner for ERREC asked me to accompany her team to Mendefera and Adi Quala on Saturday 17 July 1998. During the period 12-18 July 1998, 2340 deportees arrived through Mareb.
The number of both displaced and deported Eritreans has increased to 166,091 displaced and 10,195 deported. A detailed report by Mr. Ghebremikael Tesfaselasse, UNDP Programme Coordinator is attached as Annex B.
IV. Observations
The shear number of displaced and deported Eritreans and the magnitude of the diversified needs, require concerted efforts of the international community. The needs go beyond what the Government of Eritrea and its civil society can meet. The world is faced with a situation characterized by:
- lack of shelter;
- serious shortages of water;
- lack of clothing, blankets and mats;
- lack of kitchen utensils;
- disconnected families;
- lack of land and farming inputs for peasants, etc.
In response to this situation, the Government has opted to provide cash to families as follows:
(Please note that the UN exchange rate is US$ 1= 7.35 Nakfa).
This option was selected by Government because of the difficulties of providing the needs outlined above. The deportees can be divided into two categories as follows:
- those who live in urban or semi-urban areas; and
- those who live in the rural areas.
The Government’s international appeal for assistance has addressed these issues.
ANNEX A:
UN Field Visit to Assab, July 16-17, 1998
Team members: Martyn Ngwenya, UN Resident Coordinator and Designated Official
Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative
Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative
Temesghen Araia, National Officer, UNFPA
Firouz Sobhani, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative
Upon invitation of Government, five UN staff traveled to Assab on July 16 in order to observe and document the status of 382 deportees from Ethiopia who had arrived at the Eritrean-Ethiopian border on July. The group was accompanied by one person from the Foreign Ministry and one from the Ministry of Information. Also on the trip were a member of the ICRC and the Director of the Eritrean Red Cross.
Upon arrival (by plane) in Assab, the group visited groups of deportees who had been housed in two hotels- the Zerai Deres Hotel and the Kamal International Hotel. The UN staff spoke with the deportees both in a group and individually. The delegation also met with a group of Ethiopian permanent residents of Assab and representatives of the 50 Ethiopian teachers from the Ethiopian Community School who were waiting for means of transport back to Ethiopia. This report summarizes the information gathered from these three groups:
Deportees from Ethiopia:
The delegation spoke to two groups of deportees (total about 250) and also to many individual deportees. All had arrived in the early morning of 15 July. Deportees included men, women and children, but it was reported that the majority (perhaps two-thirds) were men. They were from many areas of Ethiopia, the largest number being from Arba Minch. Others were from Nazreth, Debre Zeit, Dire Dawa, Asebe Teferi, Sheshamene, and Awassa and towns in Sidamo and Bale.
Of the men, many were over 60 and retired either from private business or from the Ethiopian civil service. Among the younger men, there were teachers, mechanics, shop owners, and managers. There were also lecturers from Alemayu University and Arba Minch College. There was one young (34 yrs) physician from a rural in Bale. There were also two Catholic priests from Dire Dawa. Most of the men reported having left their wives and children behind. Many had pleaded to bring their children but had been refused. One man was able to bring his 6 year old son because the boy’s mother was dead, but he had other children left behind. Over half of those interviewed reported that their wives were not of Eritrean ethnicity and thus, they did not know whether they would be allowed to leave Ethiopia to reunify the family. Many of the men, especially the younger ones, had been born in Ethiopia and had never been to Eritrea. They did not speak Tigrinya and had to be interviewed in Amharic. Many had voted in the Eritrean referendum in 1993; some had not. All reported having voted in the last Ethiopian elections. All reported being Ethiopian citizens.
Of the women, there were a number of elderly, who reported living in Ethiopia their whole lives. For example, one woman aged 64 was a cleaner in a school in Asebe Teferi and had been born and lived her life in Ethiopia. She had no husband or children and reported no connections of family in Eritrea; her father had been ethnically Eritrean but had died long ago. She does not speak Tigrinya. There were a few mothers with young children who had been allowed to bring the children- mainly those who were single parents. Some reported having left young children behind, either with their (non-Eritrean) husbands or with maids or neighbors. At least five reported having been arrested on the street and not being able to inform their children, who were left at home alone (no relatives or other parent with them). Most of the women were housewives; a few had owned small shops or been cleaners. There were no pregnant or lactating women.
There were very few children in the group- perhaps only about 11. They seemed to be all school aged. The deportees reported that the Ethiopian Authorities did not want to have children on the buses and those few who came were from single parent families where the parent had convinced the authorities to let them accompany. It seemed that the decision about whether to let children accompany was arbitrary and depended on the attitudes of local officials, some of whom were more lenient than others. Although many mothers reported that the trip and the walk had been difficult for the children, there were no reports of serious illness among the children now in Assab.
The delegation found no intact families among the deportees. Almost all adults who were married or had children had been separated from their spouses and children. Assuming at least 200 were married and had families, this means that there are the same number of spouses remaining in Ethiopia, with from 200 to 1200 or so children having lost a parent to the deportation. As mentioned above, at least five women reported having left their children (numbering from two to five) alone or with only a maid. These are women the group specifically talked to; there may have been more.
Conditions of deportation: The deportees had been placed on buses in the towns from which they came and the buses had come together in Banda, a small town near the border. Some of the deportees reported having been taken from their homes during the night; some reported being picked up at work. Some were held in detention for a few days; others reported having been in detention for up to 36 days before the deportation. Very few were able to bring with them anything at all- neither clothes or money or personal documents. In some cases, where they had been able to get their documents (passports, diplomas, certificates, ID’s) these were taken from them. A few people reported having their personal jewelry (wedding rings or crosses) taken from them. There were no reports of purposeful bodily harm inflicted by authorities. Most deportees stated that their neighbors and other in their communities were very upset at their treatment and were very sympathetic. Sometimes even local police were sympathetic but told them that they were following orders.
The group traveled in nine buses. The deportees report that at one point, the buses were stopped and held in a quarry-like place where the authorities did not allow the bus windows to be opened, causing the heat to build up inside the buses to a point where people were having difficulty breathing. During this period no water or food was provided. (Note: the temperatures in the region are currently reaching 42 degrees). During the overall trip, the group reported, they received a once a day ration of bread and water and either slept on the buses o in crude shelters at night. Many of the deportees reported that the people in the Oromo, Amhara and Afar communities they passed through offered tea, food and water but that many times the guards refused to let them receive this assistance.
The group in the first bus reported another difficulty upon reaching Banda. The firs bus, with 56 persons mostly from Arba Minch, arrived two and a half days prior to the other buses. The local authorities had not been given any instructions concerning their disposition and had the deportees remain on the bus at all times, except for toilet visits. As the outside temperature was up to 41 degrees and the bus was overcrowded, this was both extremely uncomfortable and potentially dangerous for the group. Upon arrival of the eight additional buses, all of the buses traveled onward to the border area and the deportees were then told to walk the remaining 4.5 km distance to the Eritrean checkpoint. Since it was approximately 3 a.m. and dark, the deportees were afraid of walking through this heavily militarized area for fear of being attacked. They were sighted by an Eritrean scout who told them to wait until daylight and then began to walk to the checkpoint. As the weather was very hot and the area very desolate (rock desert), many older people had to be assisted by the healthier. It is reported that three members of the group suffered exhaustion/heatstroke and collapsed during the walk. Upon arrival at the checkpoint and transport to Assab Hospital, one 56 old former teacher (male) died. He was buried on 16 July.
The local authorities, upon hearing from the military that there were deportees at the checkpoint, sent transport and brought the group the 50 km to Assab town, where they were housed in local hotels and registered. There are discussions underway concerning their transport to other places in Eritrea since Assab has little resources to maintain them and the heat is a problem for the highland dwellers.
Most of the deportees the group met with were in fairly good condition; they had good housing (with ventilators and air coolers) and access to food. A number of adults reported having health conditions which were problematic- mostly diabetes, high blood pressure, or forms of arthritis. The time spent in the high temperatures at the border and the walk to the checkpoint had been difficult for many elderly and for the children. There were reports that some elderly were bedridden upon arrival and had needed medical attention. As mentioned above, two were hospitalized and one had died. By and large, most of the people met seemed very bewildered; they were perplexed as to why they had been singled out, especially since so many had been born and grew up in Ethiopia and had little or no Eritrean connection.
Ethiopian permanent residents:
The group met with approximately 25 Ethiopians who were permanent residents in Assab, some having lived there over 50 years. Many were port workers or day labourers. Those who were permanent port staff reported having been put on paid annual leave in late May. The daily labourers were having little income due to the lack of work in Assab since the border closed and expressed serious concern for themselves and their families. Many said that they had no money with which to buy food. When asked if they would like to go to Ethiopia, the people in the group declined, saying that Assab was their home and that they had no place in Ethiopia to return to. None of the group reported having been mistreated by others and they told the delegation that they had other problem than of getting work to feed their families. They reported that the local authorities had begun registration for food provision the day before but had suspended because there were so many people to register that the scene became chaotic; they were told that registration would begin again during the week.
It should be noted that the Ethiopians were brought to one place to meet with the delegation and were not just randomly chosen from the streets to interview so they may not represent the views of other Ethiopians in Assab. Some members of the groups spoke to a few Ethiopians who were working in a restaurant- these did not report any harassment and hope to remain in Assab as they had lived there for many years.
Ethiopian teachers awaiting transport to home country:
The delegation also met with five teachers from the Ethiopian Community School who were waiting transport to Ethiopian through Djibouti. They reported that there were 50 teachers stranded in Assab since the border closed. They are Ethiopian government employees and had not been paid in four months. They expressed concern about their subsistence and that of their families (a few had families locally). They had received exit visas from the Eritrean government (at a cost of 150 Nakfa) and were now waiting for a boat to arrive from Djibouti. They reported that the cost of transport for the boat was 290 nakfa and that many of them did not have any funds to purchase the tickets. They asked whether the UN could help them with this problem. The teachers did not report any problems of harassment by either the authorities or the local people. They said that the local people (other Ethiopians, perhaps) were feeding them. They were very anxious to return to their homes in Ethiopia, however. They did not know how they would proceed upon arrival in Djibouti but expected that the Ethiopian embassy there could assist. The teachers in the group were from various parts of Ethiopia, including Wollo, Tigray and Sidamo.
General situation in Assab
Assab, normally a bustling port city with up to 700 trucks a day arriving/departing to transport goods from the port, is dramatically changed due to the closing of the Ethiopian border. The port is virtually deserted, with very few ships arriving with any goods. The refinery was recently closed, as well. As these two were the main employers, there is a serious problem of unemployment. The service establishments which catered to the thousands of drivers and sailors are also suffering. Contract workers and daily labourers have been out of work for almost two months and have depleted any savings they had. Many in the local population have no more means to buy food or other provisions. What food there is relatively expensive (except for fish). Vegetables and fruits are unavailable; these previously came from Ethiopia- now they must be shipped from Massawa. there are no telephone connections to the rest of Eritrea since the lines previously went though Ethiopia and these connections have been cut. Thus, communication is only by radio or by satellite telephone (available at the Port Authority Office).
Although there is excellent shelter for deportees in Assab since they are able to use the local hotels (which have no business now), they must be moved to other parts of Eritrea quickly. Due to the very difficult economic conditions, as well as its relative isolation and proximity to a heavily militarized area, Assab is just not an appropriate place to maintain deportees for any significant period of time. In addition, the high temperatures can pose health risks for those not used to such a climate.
(It should be pointed out that air transport to Assab has improved considerably. There are up to five flights a week (this varies) from Asmara and some from Djibouti on Daallo Airlines.)
Issues requiring action:
Transport of deportees out of Assab and placement with any relatives in Eritrea
Continued shelter, food and health care for deportees
Investigation of the conditions of children left unaccompanied in Ethiopia
Investigation of family unification possibilities
Transport of Ethiopian teachers to Djibouti (finances)
Monitoring of conditions of Ethiopian population in Assab
ANNEX B
ERITREANS EXPELLED FROM ETHIOPIA: MEREB GATE
Eritreans are being deported from Ethiopia by the Ethiopian Government en masse. On Friday 17 July 1998 thirty-five buses carrying 1,987 Eritreans arrived about 4 km inside Tigray via the Mereb gate. The deportees had to walk the 4 km on foot to cross to the Eritrean side; 511 of the deportees were children under the age of eighteen. From the random interviews we had with these people, we noted that they come from al walks of life: business people, garage owners, traders, civil servants, retirees, farmers, priests etc. These deportees were rounded up from various cities, towns and villages of Ethiopia such as Addis Ababa, Debreberhan, Nazareth, Gima, Kobo, Karaquorie, Komisie, Bati, Harbo, Kombelcia, Dessie, Waldia, Goder, Rama, Axum, Debrezeit, Leketmti etc, etc. They were picked form their residences, and/or workplaces in the evenings, nights or during the day, and were not allowed to pick anything with them nor were they allowed to meet their families who were left behind in Ethiopia. Some of them were detained in Ethiopian prisons ranging from two days to two or more months before their expulsion.
The deportees were made to travel through the hostile terrain of Tigray. They reported to us that in Mekele, the capital of Tigray and in Adwa, another Tigris town, they were forced to stay one night and one day without food and water. In both these towns they were harassed, abused and threatened by the Woyane cadres. The Tigray Administration even took some of the deportees under the pretext of further interrogation and their whereabouts is not known; these are people like Mr. Daud Messud with his two children picked in Addis Ababa and taken from his co-deportees in Adwa; so was Mr. Said Abdu, Secondary School teacher from Dessie also forced to stay in Adwa.
Each one of the deportees had horrifying stories to tell:
Mrs. Alganesh said that she was forced to leave Ethiopia leaving behind a paralyzed husband, Mr. Yemene Kahsai, in Addis Ababa with no one to look after him.
Mr. Alazar Asfaha is another victim. He lived in Ethiopia for 38 years. his property was nationalized first by the Derg Regime and now he fears his property will be taken by the current Ethiopian Government. He said he was locked in prison while in Addis and was beaten. He does not know what the fate of his family is.
Keshi Hadgu Kidane is a priest of the Orthodox church who was residing in the vicinity of Axum as a farmer. He was picked by night leaving his wife and seven children behind. He also left 25 cattle, 40 goats, 10 sheep, a house and all his farm materials and farm products.
Keshi Tesfamariam Goitanazghi, another priest of the Orthodox church. He was a businessman in Addis Ababa. he also left his wife and seven children behind. He owns a house worth birr 400,000.00 in the vicinity of Bole International Airport road and furniture worth about birr 50,000.00.
Mr. Mesfun Berhe is a limousine owner and driver. He is 72 years old and he lived in Ethiopia for 52 years. he said he was picked at 4:00 a.m. He left his wife and his four children behind. All the deportees have different and sad story to tell about their ordeal.
As mentioned in my previous reports, the causes of their deportation are:
The number of deportees as of 18 July 1998 is:
Through Badme area up to 15 July 1998 5,574 all rural dwellers from Tigray
Through Um-Hager up to 15 July 1998 1,398 mostly urban dwellers
Through Mereb up to 19 July 1998 2,802 mostly urban dwellers
Through Assab up to 15 July 1998 421 mostly urban dwellers
Grand Total 10,195
As previously reported, there are also about 166,091 (this figure does not include any war displaced Eritreans along the Assab area) displaced Eritreans due tot he border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
Thus, as of to-day 18 July 1998 the total number of Eritreans who needed assistance is:
Deported from Ethiopia 10,195
Displaced due to border conflict 166,091
Grand Total 176,286
Report on arrival of deportees - 19/7/98- Mareb
Pam DeLargy, UNFPA
While in Adi Quala on Sunday morning, we were informed at 11:30 by the local administration that he had just received information on a group of deportees just arriving and crossing the Mareb. We traveled to the border and found the group of 102 people who had just crossed into Eritrea and were sitting by the side of the road and waiting for someone to arrive with transport to Adi Quala. The deportees had walked about 2 kms to cross the border and were met by a few military guards.
While waiting for the trucks to arrive to take the group to AQ, we were able to count them and to talk to many of them about their experiences. Among the 102, there were 11 people over 60, including one 81 year old man; seven children, aged six months to eight years; and about twenty five women. Deportees were from Addis, Dessie, Dire Dawa and other towns. There were shopkeepers, teachers, mechanics, housewives, and managers. There was one retired UN official who had worked from ECA and whose last posting was in Mogadishu.
There was one married couple with two children; otherwise, all had left their spouses behind (most spouses were not Eritrean). Many reported that they had tried hard to convince the authorities to let them take at least some of their children but had been refused. A number reported that they had heard on Ethiopian radio while waiting in the transit camp in Adwa that the government had announced that children with one Ethiopian (non-Eritrean) parent would be considered Ethiopian and by no means allowed to depart Ethiopia. Many of the men interviewed expressed concern about his new policy, stating that their wives and families would not be able to survive without their salaries.
This particular group had originally traveled with the previous buses but had been detained in Adwa three days more while many were questioned. Some seemed to think that there was uncertainly among the authorities about whether some in the group were supposed to be deported. They reported that a few people had been left behind. They also reported that while the other buses were in Adwa, the authorities had attempted to separate the men and women and children and place them on different buses. The group seems to have protested vehemently and some people were reported to have been arrested and detained.
One 47 year old women from Addis (the owner of a pharmacy,, an import-export business and a factory) who was suffering from diabetes and circulatory problems was unable to walk and had to be carried. She had recently returned to Addis from the US after surgery. Two women reported having been taken from a hospital (in Makele?). One businessman from Addis, who was just about to travel broad, reported that his Ethiopian passport, which included visas to Germany and the US, was taken when he was arrested. One women, who was a Jehovah’s Witness, was extremely upset and worried about being in Eritrea since she had heard that the government mistreated Witnesses. Some shop owners and mechanics from Dessie reported being taken from their place. Upon arrival of the trucks, the deportees (except one, whose sister came to pick her at the border) were then taken to Aid Quala and then Mendefera where they were given shelter and registered.
Additional information:
In Adi Quala, we stayed for about two hours and interviewed a number of individuals who were in the camp at the high school complex, including many children. We found one young boy, aged 12, who was from Dessie and who had been deported alone. His mother was Eritrean and he said she lived n a village near Mendefera - but he had lived all his life with his father in Dessie until his father died and he then stayed with his uncle. The uncle had recently died, as well, so the boy was alone and the authorities had put him on the bus saying he should go back to Eritrea and find his mother. He seemed bewildered but the ERREC staff had registered him and were going to try to locate his mother.
In Mendefera camp, we stayed another two hours and spoke with many of the deportees from Tigray who had come earlier in the week. There were more children in that group and more intact families deported than in the groups from other parts of Ethiopia.
UNICEF-ERITREA
28 July 1998
Dear Ato Tesfamariam,
As discussed, please find enclosed copies of my report on field trips undertaken by UNICEF Eritrea to Assab and Mendeferra to access the situation of the deportees. I hope you will find the material useful especially with regard to the situation of children left behind.
With best regards.
Sincerely Yours,
[signed]
Ruth Hayward
UNICEF Representative
Ato Tesfamariam Tekeste
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
SUMMARY OF FIELD TRIP FINDINGS ABOUT
DEPORTEES’ CHILDREN LEFET BEHIND
(Mendefera & Adi Quala reception centres), 20 July 1998
1. Number of deportees Contacted: 165
Those who left children behind: 105
2. Total number of
Female: 135 46.4%
Male: 156 53.6%
3. Age distribution:
4. Type of care-takers by number of children left behind
Mothers = 191 65.6%
Fathers = 211 7.2%
Sister/brother = 17 5.8%
Relative = 5 1.7%
Maid = 1 0.3%
Neighbours = 13 4.5%
None = 43 14.8%
Total 291 99.9%
Addis Ababa 227 78%
Adwa 3 1%
Adi Grat 19 6.5%
Alamata 19 6.5%
Gondar 2 0.7%
Korem 4 1.4%
Maichew 15 5.2%
Mekele 2 0.7%
Total 291 100%
DEPORTEES THROUGH MEREB
Concern for children left behind
Conditions faced by women and children deportees en route to Mereb
Additional observations
Deportees Through Assab
ETHIOPIANS IN ASSAB
OTHER
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
August 17, 1998 H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan Secretary General United Nations New York NY 10017 RE: Expulsion of United Nations Employees in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Excellency,We would like to bring to your attention the Ethiopian government's violation of the rights of Eritrean UN employees in blatant disregard for international conventions. In line with its policy of indiscriminate mass detention and deportation of Eritreans, the government of Ethiopia has also targeted UN employees who are Eritrean citizens for expulsion. In addition, it has served notices of expulsion to Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin. We have confirmed reports that out of the two Eritrean citizens employed by the ECA in Addis Ababa, one was expelled and the second is awaiting deportation. In addition to these two Eritrean citizens, twenty eight Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin who are employees of UNHCR, ECA and the ILO have been served notice to leave the country. Three more have already been deported. All have been accused of espionage and of being "security threats" to Ethiopia. Those to be deported have been told to leave Ethiopia within a period of one month, and they will be forced to leave their property and in most cases family members behind. We appeal to your Excellency to take immediate steps to halt this violation of the United Nations convention granting immunity to its officials. This recent action of the Ethiopian government contravenes Article VI of the Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Ethiopia signed on June 18, 1958, in Addis Ababa. We call upon you to defend the rights of these UN officials and to take cognizance of the alarming precedent being set by the Ethiopian government's continued disregard for the UN Charter. This matter requires your urgent attention also in light of the impact that such violations can have on the security and morale of UN employees and the credibility of the organization. Silence or delay of the appropriate response to such a wanton action will only lead to further victimization of innocent people who look up to the United Nations to be the defender of their human rights. Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
H.E. Haile Menkerios Ambassador, Permanent Representative List of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean Origin Working with UN Institutions Expelled or Served Expulsion Notice by the Ethiopian Government A. Eritreans 1. Ghirmai Zerai, ECA (already expelled) 2. Belai Ghiorghis, ECA (served notice of expulsion) B. Ethiopians of Eritrean Origin Already Expelled 1. Mesfin Tesfa Selassie, ECA 2. Birhane Hadish, ILO 3. Fisseha Belachew, ECA To Be Expelled 4. Matewos Beraki, UNHCR 5. Tadesse Tesfay, UNHCR 6. Girmai Gebre Yohannes, UNHCR 7. Yemane Gebremariam, UNHCR 8. Samson Aregahegn, UNHCR 9. Ruth Hailemichael, UNHCR 10. Yosef Tekle, UNHCR 11. Asmera Ghebregziabher, UNHCR 12. Tesfa Michael Ghebre Meskel, UNHCR 13. Rissom Tesfamichael, ECA 14. Abeba Kifle, ECA 15. Lula Solomon, ECA 16. Ahmed Abdulrazaq, ECA 17. Letensae Berhe, ECA 18. Senait Gebremicael, ECA 19. Frewoine Tekle, ECA 20. Tesfamariam Tsegay, ECA 21. Michael Abraham, ECA 22. Ketema Kidane, ECA 23. Abraham Andemariam, ECA 24. Asghedom Tesfazion, ECA 25. Issac Ghebregziabher, ECA 26. Tekie Samuel, ECA 27. Eden Goitom, ECA 28. Ghirmai Mail, ECA 29. Semainesh Tiku, ECA 30. Kahsay Negasi, ECA 31. Hirity Tedla, ECA
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_081998.html 100644 127137 345 12645 6566652764 6343
According to information obtained from European Union (EU) sources in
Brussels, Belgium, the following report on Ethiopian allegations of detention, mistreatment and expulsion of Ethiopian residents in Eritrea was submitted by European ambassadors in Asmara, Eritrea, to the EU on July 29, 1998.
"During the last weeks heads of mission in Asmara intensely looked into the matter of Ethiopian allegations of mistreatment, harassment and deportation of Ethiopians residing in Eritrea and as well treatment of Eritreans in Ethiopia.
Heads of mission can confirm that allegations of mistreatment of
Ethiopians in Eritrea have not come to their knowledge. Neither true is information of parading of prisoners of war in Asmara, except briefly for Ethiopian Air Force officer Bezabih Petros after the downing of his plane. Through intensive interviews with Ethiopian citizens in Asmara and elsewhere it can be confirmed that they are treated mostly in no way other then before the conflict between the two states. Eritreans have even been warned by the government not to harass Ethiopians and to treat them in a respectful manner.
To the best knowledge of the heads of mission there have not been mass deportations, arbitrary arrests or anything else regarding the Ethiopians. Those who wanted to leave Eritrea were not hindered with the exception of 177 Ethiopians who were sent back for no obvious reasons to their embassy in Asmara a few days ago. The Eritrean government has openly declared that these people are free to leave. The ICRC is allowed to look into this matter.
The heads of mission are not aware of detentions of Ethiopians for the only reason of being Ethiopians. There might have been arrests of few Ethiopians but--as the government declares--for reasons of criminal acts, etc. The ICRC will also look into this matter next week.
All in all heads of mission in Asmara can confirm that to their
knowledge nearly all the allegations and accusations of the Ethiopian government are either grossly exaggerated or untrue.
Heads of mission visited several times deportees from Ethiopia (e.g.,
in Asmara, Mendefera, Badime, Zala Anbessa). They interviewed these people without any official interference of the Eritrean side.
Heads of mission are of the unanimous opinion that the statements made by the deported Eritreans that they have been harassed, mistreated, sometimes arrested, separated from their dependents and forced to forfeit their property for no other reason than being Eritreans or, albeit Ethiopian citizens, of Eritrean descent, are true and proved. A great number of the deportees do not understand until now the reasons for being treated in such manner by the Ethiopian authorities. This is especially true of the nomadic people living in border areas, where the concept of nationality has always been somewhat indefinite. The number of deportees has reached nearly 12,000.
Due to historical reasons which date back to the liberation struggle,
the Eritrean authorities were/are very reluctant to let ICRC or other humanitarian organization examine the situation in Eritrea.
As a result of the propaganda of the Ethiopians, Eritrea is now
willing to let ICRC and others look into this matter. ICRC will be allowed to open an office in Asmara: new staff will arrive soon. However, the ICRC has at yet not been allowed to meet the prisoners of war. Also four members of the Humanitarian Commission in Geneva will be allowed to visit the so-called "detainees," deportees and others. Thus, Eritrea hopes to set the record straight with respect to a world opinion misinformed by the Ethiopian propaganda.
Heads of mission will follow events as closely as possible and will
report again when new evidence asks for it.
In the meantime it can be clearly stated that Ethiopian propaganda
will allegations of deporting Ethiopians, arresting and keeping detainees, mistreating Ethiopians and so forth is to the moment unfounded.
The heads of mission consider that it would be justified for the EU to publicly state the facts, mentioning the arbitrary treatment of Eritrean residents by the Ethiopian authorities and the absence of retaliation by the Eritrean government on Ethiopian citizens. The EU could also appeal to both sides for allowing visits by the ICRC to all prisoners of war.
Any delay in so doing would strengthen the Eritrean feeling of a bias
against Eritrea in the international community. This may in turn nurture isolationist policies, dangerous in themselves and detrimental to the peace process."
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_082098.html 100644 127137 345 10154 6567045544 6315
To: the United Nations
the Organization of African Unity
all Diplomatic Corps in Eritrea
all International Organizations in Eritrea
We, the religious leaders, appeal to the above mentioned organizations and to the international community as well as to all people of goodwill to show their concern and solidarity with the suffering Eritrean people.
From the start of open hostilities between Ethiopia and Eritrea in May 1998, the Eritrean people living in Ethiopia have become victims of violations of fundamental human rights through the actions of the Ethiopian government.
Eritreans residing in Ethiopia are being indiscriminately and unjustly expelled from Ethiopia.
This has resulted in:
the separation of entire families. Many children are being left behind without anyone to care for them because their parents are being imprisoned and expelled.
Thousands more are mistreated and forced to leave Ethiopia without being able to gather their personal effects, or see that their domestic and business possessions and properties are suitably cared for and secure. In fact, we could say that their property has been confiscated in many cases.
Many innocent Eritreans, including the elderly and youth, are being detained and mistreated in internment camps under inhuman circumstances (e.g., without toilet or hygienic facilities). These youth also include many students who have been in Ethiopia on student exchange program.
Pregnant women and nursing mothers are harshly mistreated, taken away and forced to endure the very long and rough journey to Eritrea, at great risk to their lives.
Therefore:
With the mandate that God gave us to lead and serve our people, we are obliged to be united with God, to aid fully and sincerely in whomsoever is homeless, hungry, imprisoned, destitute, deprived of human rights, etc., quite apart from political, ethnic, religious or other differences.
We cannot rest until those innocent Eritreans residing in Ethiopia are helped to enjoy their God-given rights to live in peace and security.
We, the religious leaders of Eritrea, denounce the ruthless acts of the Ethiopian government which are against the will of God and the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the OAU Charter on Human and People's Rights.
In this spirit we call upon:
the United Nations,
the Organization of African Unity,
the Diplomatic Corps in the country,
the concerned international organizations residing in Eritrea, the international community at large:
to encourage and support the search for a peaceful solution to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia,
to play an advocacy role for these harshly mistreated Eritreans so that their God-given and international human rights are respected,
to present these realities to their respective governments, and request their solidarity with the Eritrean population residing in Ethiopia or unjustly expelled from Ethiopia.
Abune Philipos
Patriarch of the Orthodox Tewahdo Church
Sheik Alamin Osman
Mufti of Eritrea
Abune Zekarias Yohannes
Catholic Church of Eritrea
Rev. Yosieph Araia
President of the Evangelical Church of Eritrea
Asmara, August 14, 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_082098_2.html 100644 127137 345 5615 6567045555 6526
H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan
Secretary General
United Nations, New York
Excellency,
I attach for your information a copy of a letter we wrote to Madame Mary Robinson concerning the disappointing delay in sending human rights observers to Eritrea and Ethiopia. Ethiopian indiscriminate expulsion and detention of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin is continuing daily. Families are being separated; properties Eritreans worked their lifetime to acquire are confiscated reducing them to overnight destitutes. Their number has reached 20,000 to date and is rising by the day.
A report of the European Ambassadors resident in Eritrea fully exposes the gross lies of the Ethiopian government concerning Eritrean treatment of Ethiopians resident in Eritrea while attesting to Ethiopian crimes over Eritreans. This report, which is yet to be made public by the EU, is also attached. One wonders why there is international silence about this gross violation of human rights perpetrated by the Ethiopian government with impunity. The Eritrean people and government feel, as they did during their thirty year struggle for self-determination, that an injustice of international silence exists, that hypocrisy over human rights is the order of the day, and that they have to do what is necessary, even if undesirable, to defend their rights by themselves alone. I believe it is not difficult for you to understand the consequences of such disappointment.
I urge you once again, Excellency, to denounce and take the necessary measures to stop the continuation of the indiscriminate expulsions and detentions of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin by the Ethiopian government. Measures need also be taken to ensure the reunion of separated families and to guarantee the return of or compensation for the properties expelled Eritreans are forced to leave in Ethiopia.
Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_082198.html 100600 127137 345 4377 6567351724 6300
1. Religious leaders in Eritrea have called on the international community to demonstrate more concern for the plight of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia. In their appeal, leaders from the Christian and Islamic faiths urged the UN, the OAU, and other diplomatic missions and humanitarian organizations to intensify their efforts in solving the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict peacefully. The religious leaders asked the world community to sympathize with victims of the Ethiopian government's inhumane deportations and called upon the international community to work towards the restoration of the rights of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia.
2. The Ethiopian government has admitted it was aware of a violent ethnic clash in southern Ethiopia over a month ago, Reuters reports. The clash in the Oromiya region of southern Ethiopia was first revealed in a statement by the Southern Ethiopia's People's Democratic Coalition (SEPDC) published by the opposition newspaper Amaratch last week. The article accused the Ethiopian government of fueling the conflict through poor administration and attempting to conceal the clash from public knowledge. Ethiopia's confession comes only days after the article was published but weeks after the clash which the SEPDC says took the lives of some 3,000 Ethiopians and displaced over 100,000 more.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
1. Religious leaders in Eritrea have called on the international community to demonstrate more concern for the plight of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia. In their appeal, leaders from the Christian and Islamic faiths urged the UN, the OAU, and other diplomatic missions and humanitarian organizations to intensify their efforts in solving the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict peacefully. The religious leaders asked the world community to sympathize with victims of the Ethiopian government's inhumane deportations and called upon the international community to work towards the restoration of the rights of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia.
2. The Ethiopian government has admitted it was aware of a violent ethnic clash in southern Ethiopia over a month ago, Reuters reports. The clash in the Oromiya region of southern Ethiopia was first revealed in a statement by the Southern Ethiopia's People's Democratic Coalition (SEPDC) published by the opposition newspaper Amaratch last week. The article accused the Ethiopian government of fueling the conflict through poor administration and attempting to conceal the clash from public knowledge. Ethiopia's confession comes only days after the article was published but weeks after the clash which the SEPDC says took the lives of some 3,000 Ethiopians and displaced over 100,000 more.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Your Excellencies!
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I wish first of all to thank you for accepting my invitation to brief you on the visit to Eritrea by the Special Envoy of President Abdulazi Bouteflika, President of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria, Current Chairman of the OAU H.E. Ahmed Ouyahia.< p> As you all are aware the OAU Delegation headed by Mr. Ouyahia met yesterday 25th August 1999 with President Isaias Afwerki
The Algerian Special Envoy who on the spirit of transparency and fairness had strictly come to Eritrea to brief President Isaias on his meeting with the Ethiopian Officials on 23rd and 24th August 1999, in Addis Ababa, delivered the official document that clearly articulates the clarifications of the Organization of African Unity in response to the questions raised by Ethiopia relating to the Technical Arrangements.
In this meeting after expressing his appreciation to the current Chairman, the Special Envoy, the Secretary General of the OAU and the Secretariat of the OAU for the commendable job they did and continue to do, for the peaceful resolution of the Eritrean-Ethiopia conflict President Isaias reaffirmed and reiterated Eritrea's; acceptance of the Three OAU documents as a package.
As you all know Eritrea officially and unconditionally has accepted the Framework Agreement on 27 February, the Modalities of Implementation on 14 July and the Technical Arrangements on 7 August 1999.
On the other hand the TPLF regime which has been claiming to have "accepted" the OAU Framework Agreement and the Modalities that are the two basic political documents endorsed by African Heads of States which are the basis for the peace plan, has refused to accept the Third document. It is delaying the peace process by bringing new pre-condition and using different ploys. Nevertheless, today the TPLF's transparent ploys and pretension have reached a dead end. It is crystal clear to the entire International Community the Third OAU Document the Technical Arrangements have been worked out by experts from Algeria, OAU, the UN and United States Government, are merely an elaboration and technical details of the two political documents that are endorsed at the Summit level.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen!
The OAU has clearly stated that the three documents must be taken as a package and the document containing the Technical Arrangements is not open to any amendment or interpretation. It has also given clear and elaborate clarification to the queries requested by the Government of Ethiopia.
Therefore, I strongly feel that we have reached the stage where political and diplomatic maneuver by the Addis regime should not be tolerated.
There is no confusion and ambiguity to know who is for peace and who is for war. My Government has shown its commitment for peaceful resolution of the conflict in words and deeds. It is the regime in Addis which is stalling the peace process and holding the OAU peace plan hostage.
I therefore, once again, call upon the International Community to use all their efforts for the implementation of the OAU peace Plan.
Thank you
g_083199.html 100655 127137 345 10353 6763120517 6313
"The OAU and the United Nations will be the guarantors for the scrupulous implementation of all the provisions of the OAU Framework Agreement, the Modalities of Implementation of the Framework Agreement and the Technical Arrangements for the Implementation of the Framework Agreement and its Modalities."
The TPLF regime must therefore either say openly that it does not trust the international community or admit that it is not ready to embrace the peace formula, which is the case in reality.
It is also instructive to note that the TPLF regime has muzzled the domestic press, preventing it from covering recent progress in the peace talks. The visit of the OAU special envoy to Ethiopia and his meetings with the Prime Minister to deliver the OAU's clarifications thus were not reported by Ethiopia's state-owned media. The contents of the Technical Arrangements have not been explained to the Ethiopian public either. The motive is very clear. The TPLF is scared that the Ethiopian people might discover the truth and oppose its policy of war. The TPLF thus has to feed them false information by distorting the position of Eritrea and the contents of the OAU peace documents.
The TPLF regime today has accused Eritrean forces of attacking "Ethiopian positions at Chin Keren on the Zalambesa Front."
The recent accusation falls into the pattern of ridiculous allegations that the TPLF regime has been leveling against Eritrea throughout the last week. Indeed, apart from the occasional shelling invariably initiated by Ethiopia, there has not been any fighting on any of the fronts in the past two months since the start of the rains. The apparent purpose of Ethiopia's accusations is therefore to divert international attention from Ethiopia's reluctance to accept the OAU peace process.
Indeed, the fact remains that Eritrea has accepted the OAU peace process and expressed its readiness to implement all its provisions in good faith and without delay. The first requirement of the OAU peace package is the cessation of hostilities and the placement of OAU/UN observers to monitor compliance. This provision remains blocked because Ethiopia continues to refuse to sign on as it prepares for war.
The TPLF regime must not get away with its dual policy of frustrating the peace process on the one hand while alleging that Eritrea wants war on the other hand. The latter assertion is ridiculous as the following facts illustrate:
The TPLF regime has formally rejected, in a statement issued by its Foreign Ministry on Saturday, 4 September 1999, the Technical Arrangements worked out by the OAU, the UN, Algeria and the United States for the scrupulous implementation of the OAU peace package.
Ethiopia's statement is tantamount to a declaration of war. It does not, indeed, constitute a rejection of the Technical Arrangements alone but of the entire OAU peace package.
The present development--grave as it is--is not surprising to Eritrea. The truth is that the TPLF regime never accepted the Framework Agreement although it had professed to do so at the time for obvious, public relations reasons. It was evident from the outset that the TPLF regime could not possibly accept the peaceful resolution of the conflict through the demarcation of the boundary as it knows full well that it has no legal basis for its territorial "claims."
This was precisely why the TPLF balked at the implementation of the Framework Agreement, raising issues of "interpretation," when Eritrea announced its unequivocal acceptance of the Agreement. As Eritrea underlined repeatedly then, Ethiopia's pretexts were not genuine but rather a transparent ruse aimed at torpedoing the peace process. The Framework Agreement is otherwise unambiguous in its basic contents which call for:
The apparent impasse led to the formulation of a supplementary document--the Modalities for Implementation (MOI)--which was endorsed by the OAU Summit in Algiers last July.
The MOI extracted, in essence, more concessions from Eritrea. Indeed, although redeployment by either side is provisional without prejudice to the final status of the territories concerned, which will be determined only after demarcation, Eritrea was nonetheless expected to redeploy first from a number of areas not envisaged in the Framework Agreement. The sequencing of withdrawals was also worked out in a manner to satisfy the Ethiopian regime.
In spite of these reservations, Eritrea accepted the MOI, announcing its agreement at the Summit. President Isaias Afwerki's acceptance to the Summit itself included, "... in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea, but, may I add, also to the people of Ethiopia and our continent as a whole, and as a mark of good will to the OAU, Eritrea has decided to accept the Modalities of Implementation of the Framework Agreement. In accepting the Framework and Modalities, Eritrea hopes to make its small contribution to the realization of the lofty objective proposed by the newly elected President of Africa's giant, Nigeria, General Obasanjo--and I believe endorsed by this Summit--to make the year 2000 the year of Peace and Security in Africa."
The TPLF regime did not accept the MOI at the time although it promised that it would "make its position known soon" without any qualifications; without, in the Prime Minister's words, "ifs and buts." But, rather than accepting the MOI and making its own contributions to peace, it began to conduct a campaign of disinformation to "discredit" Eritrea's acceptance. When this maneuvering did not work and the TPLF was pressed to clarify its position, it nominally accepted the MOI.
The OAU special envoy, H.E. Ahmed Ouyahia, as well as the envoy of US President Clinton, Mr. Anthony Lake, subsequently visited both capitals from July 21-24. The purpose of the visits was to secure formal signature of the two documents by both sides so as to embark on the implementation of the peace formula. Eritrea notified both envoys that it was ready to sign the documents and to fully cooperate in their implementation with the requisite sincerity and seriousness. The TPLF regime, however, brought up another excuse arguing that it was not yet ready to sign the documents that it had formally accepted without first seeing the detailed implementation blueprint.
This was an obvious setback to the OAU and its partners in peace. But again, the path chosen was one of patience and perseverance. As a result, technical experts from the OAU, the United Nations, Algeria, and the United States were assembled in Algiers and, on the basis of inputs provided by both sides, worked out the Technical Arrangements which set out, in extensive detail, the procedures and time frames for redeployment, reinstitution of temporary administrations, demarcation as well as issues of compensation for deportees and other victims of war.
The Technical Arrangements were provided to both sides in the first week of August. Again, Eritrea accepted the Technical Arrangements promptly, also realizing that these were essentially implementation details worked out by international experts in the field.
But the TPLF regime continued to keep the peace process hostage through various subterfuges. First it asked for "clarifications." The OAU subsequently provided the TPLF regime with an exhaustive response to its lengthy queries. Then it declined to make its position clear through various pretexts. It is against this backdrop of excessive tolerance and pampering by the international community that the Ethiopian regime has today rejected the three OAU peace formulas which must be taken as a package. The laxity with which the international community has dealt with the TPLF's acts of aggression and excesses of war and especially the massive deportation and detention of ethnic Eritreans has no doubt encouraged the regime to believe that it can defy fundamental principles of international law with impunity.
The timing of Ethiopia's explicit rejection of the OAU peace package further exposes its underlying motive. The regime has been resorting to dilatory tactics in order to gain time as it prepares to launch another round of offensives. Indeed, Ethiopia's Prime Minister had publicly stated last June that "the offensive will be launched at the right time when our preparations are completed. It will not be brought forward by one day or delayed by another day." Ethiopia's current statement indicates, without any shred of doubt, that it is about to unleash its war of aggression.
Eritrea remains convinced that another round of military confrontations will only entail more destruction and unnecessary human loss. The ultimate solution of the conflict will otherwise be through demarcation and on the negotiating table. The TPLF's military adventures will thus serve no purpose other than destabilizing the region and entailing unnecessary human suffering.
In the circumstances, Eritrea urges all those interested in the maintenance of peace and security in the region to:
Evidently, Eritrea will have no choice but to resort to legitimate acts of self-defense. The TPLF regime shall bear all responsibilities for the consequences that may ensue.
by Gebremichael Mengistu
Since the eruption of the border conflict, Ethiopia has been making incredible claims regarding the economic relationship that existed between the two countries in the past seven years.
Ethiopia's assertions and allegations include, inter alia:
- Eritrea had unfair economic advantages in its relationship with Ethiopia;
- Eritrea had been economically bleeding Ethiopia and had the sinister design to continue to do so;
- Ethiopia paid Birr 1.2 billion per annum to Eritrea in port dues and fees;
- Eritrean ports had been more expensive to Ethiopia than Djibouti;
- Eritrea closed Assab to Ethiopian cargo;
- Eritrea repurchased Ethiopian crude oil imports in Birr despite frequently insisting on payment for Eritrean port services in US dollars; and
- By re-exporting the coffee it imported from Ethiopia for its home market, Eritrea had been listed as the 13th major coffee exporting country.
These most startling assertions and allegations would make one question if the cooperation agreements were really between two sovereign states. They would make one wonder why a government like that of Ethiopia that boasts of being fiercely independent and that would not under any circumstances compromise or sacrifice the interests of its people would succumb to the pressure of the government of the State of Eritrea and enter into such one-sided arrangements.
The intended message of Ethiopia's outrageous claims is clear: that the Eritrean economy is an appendage of the Ethiopian economy, that Ethiopia subsidized that Eritrean economy, and that it cannot survive independent of the Ethiopian economy.
Only the uncritical and the uninformed can be taken in by these assertions and allegations. To the people of Eritrea and those that have good knowledge of the recent history of Eritrea, these claims are very familiar. They are reminiscent of the claims made by Emperor Haile Selassie and his cohorts at the United Nations in the late 1940s: that an independent Eritrea "cannot be economically feasible."
Is there any evidence to corroborate the Ethiopian claims? To see if there is any basis to these assertions and allegations, we will take, as an example, an agreement signed between Eritrea and Ethiopia on transit and port services.
The Transit and Port Services Agreement
On September 29, 1993, a transit and port services agreement was signed between the government of the State of Eritrea and the then Transitional Government of Ethiopia. The highlights of the agreement can be summarized as follows:
- Assab and Massawa to serve as transit ports for Ethiopia, speedy movement of goods in transit to be expedited and transit documentation and procedures to be simplified and harmonized;
- Ethiopian goods transiting through Assab and Massawa to be free of taxes and customs duties;
- Eritrea to provide all necessary port handling and agency services to ships owned by and cargo destined to and/or originating from Ethiopia;
- Eritrea to have the right to inspect transiting goods;
- payments for services rendered to Ethiopian ships and cargo to be effected in Birr except where the handling costs were paid for by shipper or consignee in hard currency;
- payment for Eritrean freight cargo boarded on Ethiopian ships to be effected in Birr and the rate of payment to be according to the agreed governing international freight rate;
- food aid cargoes and emergency relief aid to be free of port dues and storage penalty charges.
The above are the main features of the said agreement. In what follows an attempt will be made to briefly examine the contents of the agreement and its implementation and the realities thereof.
Implementation of Agreement: Following the outbreak of hostilities, Ethiopia has been making critical comments about the quality of port services and payments in port dues and fees. Lamenting the supposedly unsound decision and missed opportunity, they make assertions that now they have been able to get better services at lower cost in other neighboring ports.
Regarding payments in port dues and fees, they assert that huge benefits had been accruing to Eritrea at the expense of Ethiopia. They unabashedly claim that Ethiopia's payment in port dues and fees alone constituted over 25% of Eritrea's gross domestic product and contributed about 60% to the country's revenue!
But do these claims tally with the realities and the facts and figures? Let the facts and figures speak for themselves.
Consistent with its policy of promoting mutual cooperation, the government of Eritrea in the implementation of the transit and port services agreement had scrupulously adhered to the spirit and letter of the agreement.
At the port of Assab, Ethiopia had active and full participation in the processing of transit cargoes. As an integral part of this arrangement, Ethiopian Maritime and Transit Services Enterprises (MTSE), Ethiopian Customs Authority and Ethiopian Shipping Lines (ESL) had branch offices in Assab. ESL, in addition to a branch office "for the day to day follow up of activities," also maintained warehouses "for the keeping up of dunnage and used spare parts" at the port of Assab.
To oversee the implementation of the cooperation agreements and to periodically review, in light of experiences and developments, the agreements themselves, joint ministerial commissions for the different sectors and areas of cooperation were formed, following the signing of agreements.
As cargo handling destined to or originating from Ethiopia was the joint responsibility of MTSE and the Eritrean Shipping and Transit Agency Services (ERSTAS), MTSE was represented in the daily operational planning staff meeting.
Customs inspection of all goods in transit was carried out in Assab by Ethiopian Customs Authority. Although this procedure was causing delays in the movement of transit cargoes and creating congestion at the port, it was tolerated until the end of 1997.
At the port of Assab, adequate services were also provided to Ethiopian ships. To foster a harmonious relationship, Eritrea, after it formally became an independent and sovereign state, without adhering to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) and the UN Convention on Registration of Ships (1986), allowed Ethiopian ships to make Assab their home port and to continue to register in the port of Assab and sail under the Ethiopian flag.
In some ways, the transit and port services agreement favored Ethiopia. For instance, in most cases, the dwelling time for transit goods rarely exceeds 30 days. In the ports of Djibouti, Mombassa and Dar Es Salaam, the grace period for transit cargoes is 60 days, 15 days and 15 days respectively, whereas, in the ports of Assab and Massawa it was 180 days.
Port Tariff: As it is in their best interest, Eritrean ports aim at providing efficient services at competitive rates to their customers.
Since 1991 port tariff rates have been revised three times with a view to making the port competitive. Every time some improvement had been made. Except for the last time, the first two revisions were carried out with the full participation of the concerned Ethiopian authorities.
The introduction of the new tariff rates in January 1998 was made with two objectives in mind: first, to offer competitive and fair rates, and second, to provide efficient services.
As can be seen from Table 1, the new tariff rates are relatively more attractive than the old ones. Except for one item, substantial reduction was made in all the tariff heads. In operational terms, the new tariff rates are also much more simplified.
Table 1:
ERITREAN PORTS TARIFF RATES OVER THE YEARS IN US DOLLARS
OLD NEW
TARIFF HEAD TARIFF RATE TARIFF RATE
Conservancy per Grt/call 0.1400 0.0950 (-32.0%)
Pilotage, towing and
mooring/unmooring per Grt/operation 0.1180 0.1140 (-3.0%)
Dockage and bouyage
per Grt/hour 0.0019 0.0017 (-10.5%)
Stevedoring per ton 8.1600 6.5600 (-20.0%)
Shorehandling per ton 8.7300 8.7600 (0.3%)
Ports use different basis/factors in formulating tariff. It is thus not easy to make comparative analysis. However, as Tables 2 and 3 show, by and large, Eritrean tariff rates are more attractive than those in neighboring ports.
The competitiveness of a port depends on many factors. For the export and import of goods and commodities, one of the most important factors that has to be taken into consideration is the cost of land transportation, as it constitutes a major cost component. In relation to Ethiopia, from the cost of land transportation point of view, the Eritrean ports are on the whole more cost effective. It is true that for some parts of Ethiopia some neighboring ports may, other things being equal, compete with Eritrean ports.
The cost effectiveness of Eritrean ports has been attested to by Ethiopia itself just months before the current crisis. The general manager of MTSE in an interview with the Reporter stated that the port of Djibouti was "at least 400% to 500% more expensive than Assab." Similar views were also expressed by Ethiopian import-export agencies.
Table 2:
CONTAINER TARIFF RATES
ERITREA, DJIBOUTI AND KENYA IN US DOLLARS
TARIFF HEAD ERITREA DJIBOUTI KENYA
Stevedoring
20' 71 115 (62.0%) 120 (68.0%)
40' 123 143 (16.3%) 144 (17.0%)
Shorehandling
20' 67 197 (194.0%) 150 (123.9%)
40' 117 395 (237.6%) 180 (53.8%)
Table 3:
DRY CARGO TARIFF RATES
ERITREA AND KENYA IN US DOLLARS
TARIFF HEAD ERITREA KENYA
Conservancy per Grt/call 0.095 0.130 (36.8%)
Pilotage, towing & mooring/
unmooring per Grt/operation 0.114 0.118 (3.5%)
Dockage & buoyage per
meter/hour 0.100 0.160 (60%)
Stevedoring per ton 6.56 8.000 (22.0%)
Shorehandling per ton 8.760 12.000 (37.0%)
Port Services: Various yardsticks are used in assessing port services and their efficiency: tariff, cost of transportation, time, capacity, security, etc.
With respect to port services, it can be said that the two Eritrean ports had been providing sufficiently efficient services to Ethiopia during the period under consideration. Expressing satisfaction at the quality of services Ethiopia was getting from the Assab port administration, the general manager of Ethiopian MTSE said, "We are getting all the services that we would have gotten if we had our own port." "This," he remarked, "makes us happy." Similar views were expressed about the efficient services provided by the Massawa port administration by Ethiopian import and export agencies. At the port of Massawa, transit cargoes were processed within three to four days and transported to the border.
The port of Assab, unlike other ports in the region, basically serves Ethiopia (about 90%). This enables the Assab port administration to better satisfy the needs and requirements of Ethiopia, a fact that had been appreciated and attested to by the general manager of Ethiopian Shipping Lines. Moreover, the fact that Assab is better equipped for handling general cargo makes it more attractive to Ethiopia for the bulk of Ethiopia's imports and exports are conventional cargo.
Other factors, such as familiarity with port rules and procedures, language, etc., also give the Eritrean ports competitive edge over other ports in the region.
In comparative terms, although it is not possible to make, with the available data, detailed productivity/efficiency analysis, taking all factors into consideration and from the above brief assessment, a safe claim can be made that the Eritrean ports are as efficient as most neighboring ports.
It would be foolhardy, however, to claim that the Assab and Massawa port administrations had been providing optimal services to their customers. Not at all. Undoubtedly, due to subjective and objective factors there were deficiencies in port services.
Constraints on the ports' efficiency included inadequacy of facilities, shortage of equipment and machinery, provisions in the transit and port services agreement (the 180 days dwelling time, the exemption of food aid cargo from storage penalty charge), lack of know-how, and inappropriate procedures (complete customs inspection of all transit goods at Assab port, MTSE's monopolistic position in the clearing and forwarding business). Endeavors have been made by the Government of Eritrea to enhance the ports' efficiency by minimizing, if possible by removing, these constraining factors, and to date significant work has been accomplished.
While some of the problems can be attributed to the Eritrean side, most have to be imputed to the Ethiopian side. If we take for example the inadequacy of facilities, and the shortage of equipment and of machinery, who is to be blamed? Certainly, Eritrea cannot and should not be blamed. The blame falls squarely on Ethiopia, especially in the case of Massawa for it was Ethiopia that administered the two ports for forty years (1952-1991). The federal arrangement gave Ethiopia the right to administer the two ports and to collect port dues and fees. It was during this period, due to willful neglect and wanton acts of bombardment, that the port of Massawa deteriorated from one of the major ports in the Red Sea area to become what it was at liberation -- a completely dilapidated place.
The provisions in the transit and port services agreement and the inappropriate procedures mentioned above were the cause of congestion at the ports, and were also constraints on the efficiency of the ports. All attempts at corrective measures were blocked by Ethiopia. For instance, to increase efficiency at the port of Assab, Eritrea had advocated, on different occasions, for the privatization of clearing and forwarding businesses. But, as this was completely unacceptable to Ethiopia, nothing came out of that effort.
Revenues Collected from Port Dues and Fees: From Table 4 it is clear that the total revenue that Eritrea collected from transit cargoes in port dues and fees and transit fees in the past seven years was always under Birr 200 million per year. Thus, Ethiopia's claim that it paid Eritrea Birr 1.2 billion per annum in port dues and fees is pure fabrication; even the total amount over the seven year period does not add up to that staggering figure.
This stupendous claim deserves special comments: first, it goes to show concretely how unscrupulous the Weyane regime is in its misrepresentation of facts; and second, it is unconscious admission of the magnitude of benefits that accrued to Ethiopia from Eritrea during its forty years rule of the country.
Table 4:
PORT REVENUES IN THOUSANDS OF BIRR
YEAR PORT
ASSAB MASSAWA TOTAL
1992 118,904 - 118, 904
1993 179,535 - 179,535
1994 151,781 - 151,781
1995 154,723 4,501 159,224
1996 194,513 5,051 199,564
1997 163,218 5,015 168,233
to 5/1998 73,556 - 73,556
TOTAL 1,036,230 14,567 1,050,797
NB. The data for the Port of Massawa are incomplete and include only revenue collected from transit fees. The Assab Port revenue are from port dues and fees.
Official Assessment of Agreement: The Ethio-Eritrean economic agreements were periodically reviewed by the joint review committee and the joint ministerial commission. In these review meetings each side raised issues of concern to it.
In the joint review committee that dealt with the transit and port services agreement, Ethiopia had not registered any major complaints regarding the contents of the agreement and its implementation. With respect to the transit and port services agreement problems raised by the Ethiopian side worth mentioning include: a) the issue of port liability for pilferage and damage, and b) the 1.5% transit fee on Ethiopian transit goods passing through Massawa.
The Eritrean law and regulation inherited from Ethiopia with respect to port operation did not make the port liable for pilferage and/or damage. Cargoes in port premises were kept at the risk and responsibility of the ship or the owner. This practice continued after the liberation of Eritrea in 1991. But when Ethiopia raised the issue and requested that the port accept liability and responsibility in connection with handling and storage of goods, Eritrea, after carrying out appropriate study, agreed that on proven negligence on the part of the port to accept liability for loss of and damage to cargo in the ports of Assab and Massawa.
Regarding the 1.5% transit fee levied on transit goods passing through Massawa, Eritrea had expressed its readiness to address the issue in a new trade agreement. It should be noted here that the money collected from the 1.5% transit fee, which was only about Birr 25 million, was used to rehabilitate the port city of Massawa in general, and to improve/upgrade the port's facilities, equipment and machinery in particular. Given the extent of the damage that the port sustained during the forty year rule of Ethiopia, and the magnitude of resources required to rehabilitate it, the Ethiopian side should have had the scruples not to raise it.
From the foregoing discussion on the implementation of the agreement, it can be stated that Ethiopia did not at any time have reservations worth mentioning about the contents of the agreement, and that it was satisfied with its implementation. The conclusion of the joint review committee does not differ from ours. In its final report of January
1997, it stated that "on the whole, it can be concluded the agreement in the port and transit area has largely been implemented."
Ethiopia's Allegation on the Closure of Assab: Lately, Ethiopia is accusing Eritrea of closing the port of Assab to Ethiopian cargo. In its hate campaign aimed at fostering animosity between the two peoples, it is raising hue and cry about Eritrea trying to strangle the country. But nothing is further from the truth.
It was Ethiopia that decided to boycott the Eritrean ports immediately after the outbreak of hostilities. In a circular of May 12, 1998, the management of MTSE urged all shipowners to divert all Ethiopian bound cargo to Djibouti. In the said circular it stated that "it has been decided that with immediate effect all import cargo destined to Ethiopia via Assab and Massawa ports must be diverted and discharged at Djibouti port." In a similar circular of 16 May, 1998, Ethiopian Shipping Lines management instructed all its vessels to "call only Djibouti." The circular stated, among other things, "Due to force majeure ESL vessels will not be calling Assab and Massawa until further instruction to the contrary."
Findings: From the above brief account of the contents of the agreement and its implementation, it is no exaggeration to say that there is no shred of evidence to support Ethiopia's outrageous claims, and that the economic cooperation that existed between the two countries was based on mutuality of interests and benefits. More specifically it can be stated that:
- the economic cooperation arrangements did not give Eritrea unfair advantages;
- the economic cooperation agreement did not violate internationally accepted principles and norms;
- at no time did Ethiopia pay Eritrea 1.2 billion Birr per annum in port dues and fees; as a matter of fact, the total revenue collected from port dues and fees over the seven years was less than 1.2 billion Birr;
- that Eritrea did not close Assab to Ethiopian cargo; it was Ethiopia that decided to boycott the Eritrean ports;
- Eritrea was insisting on payment in hard currency for cargo service only when such costs were paid by the shipper or consignee in hard currency, as stipulated in the agreement; and
- that under the prevailing condition there is no port in the region that can provide better services at lower cost to Ethiopia than the two Eritrean ports.
Because Ethiopia's assertions and allegations do not tally with hard facts, and because they are completely at variance with views expressed on the cooperation arrangement by Ethiopian officials on different occasions prior to the eruption of the conflict, Girma Birru, Ethiopia's Minister for Economic Development and Cooperation, in an interview with various papers in the first week of August, 1998, was forced, despite his insinuating remarks, to reluctantly admit that the cooperation agreements concluded between Eritrea and Ethiopia were based on the principle of mutual benefits and ensured the national interests of the two countries. He stated that "the various agreements signed between the two countries stemmed from the principle of safeguarding the common national interests of the two countries." He went on to point out that
"the agreements were in the best interests of the country [Ethiopia]."
Basis of the Cooperation Agreement
Eritrea never had any plan to develop its economy at the expense of Ethiopia, as the Ethiopian Government and the chauvinist elements have been claiming. All along, Eritrea wanted to have a relationship and cooperation with Ethiopia on the basis of genuine partnership, its guiding principle.
The economic cooperation agreements signed between Eritrea and Ethiopia were formulated and negotiated by joint high level committees, and were designed to promote a closer relationship that would be of mutual benefit to the two economies.
Eritrea's desire to have close links with Ethiopia stems from two objective realities. First, due to history, proximity and culture, Eritrea and Ethiopia have special ties.
Eritrea was under Ethiopia for forty years. During this period, the two economies were integrated and interdependence was created. Eritrea believes that this historical link, and the resulting economic integration and interdependence can be used as a building block to forge deeper ties with Ethiopia.
Second, in this increasingly interdependent world the search for closer cooperation among countries, especially developing countries like Eritrea and Ethiopia, is self-evident. That is, the need to create larger markets through sub-regional and regional integration has become a policy imperative in the present day reality of globalization of production and trade liberalization.
As pointed out earlier, the Ethiopian Government, as partner and actor in the whole process, knows full well the basis and intention of and the background to the cooperation agreements. Why is it then making these incredible assertions and allegations at this juncture?
It is true that chauvinist elements who harbor deep-seated hatred against Eritrea, and who are intent on driving a wedge between the two peoples, were making similar claims in the past. At that time, the Ethiopian Government was not only characterizing the chauvinists' assertions and allegations as baseless and malicious, and dismissing them as such, but was also trying to present the cooperation agreements between Eritrea and Ethiopia to the Ethiopian people in their true light.
At the time of the signing of the agreements, Seyoum Mesfin, Ethiopia's Foreign Minister, said that "the basis and objective of the agreements" are "to safeguard the interests of the two peoples." He went on to state that the cooperation agreements have opened a "new chapter of cooperation" and "will contribute to the laying of a foundation to the eventual socio-economic integration of the neighboring peoples."
Tamrat Layne, then Ethiopia's Prime Minister, also expressed similar views. "For us Ethiopians," he said, "the most important aspect of the agreements we just signed is the provision that permits free movement of people." "In the economic field," he further stated, "we have concluded cooperation agreements that would enable us to jointly develop our economies and to find solutions to problems facing the people."
Moreover, in its final report of January 1997, the joint review committee expressed its belief that "the economies of both countries have benefited from the implementation of the agreements."
Reasons for a Turn About
But why a complete turn about now, and stooping so low?
The whole thrust of the Ethiopian Government's unfounded and base propaganda is to confuse the real issue involved in the present Ethio-Eritrean conflict: that the crisis is about a border dispute.
By complete misrepresentation of the facts regarding the economic cooperation that existed between the two countries in the past seven years, the Ethiopian Government is trying:
- to make the world believe that the underlying cause for the current crisis is not the border dispute, but economic. With the introduction of the Nakfa (Eritrea's currency), the Ethiopian Government's theoreticians purport, Eritrea has lost all the economic benefits accruing to it from the "unfair" economic relationship it had with Ethiopia in the past. The loss, they assert, has resulted in serious socio-economic problems in Eritrea, forcing the Government of Eritrea to start the current crisis to cover up the real problems presently facing the country, and to divert the attention of the people away from them.
- to win over world public opinion. By making such patently false claims as 'Eritrea closed the port of Assab to Ethiopian cargo,' 'Eritrea is trying to strangle Ethiopia,' etc., it hopes to gain the sympathy of the international community.
- to use the economic issue as a red herring. In the wake of the border conflict, a major crisis is looming over Ethiopia. By allowing its propaganda machine to churn out the most startling assertions about the socio-economic situation in Eritrea, the government hopes that the Ethiopian people can take comfort from such propaganda as to make them forget about the economic and other problems they presently face. In other words, it is trying to use the economic issue to divert the attention of the Ethiopian people from a dark cloud that hangs over the country.
- to mobilize the Ethiopian people in its war against Eritrea. By preaching venomous and hateful messages to the Ethiopian people, it is trying to create enmity between the Eritrean and Ethiopian peoples, and
- to drum up, through appeasement, political support from chauvinist elements in the Ethiopian body politic.
These deceptive maneuvers are, therefore, concocted to confuse the real issues. But such cheap propaganda will not and cannot take them anywhere. They should recognize before it is too late that the only way out from the predicament they are in is to come to their senses and accept the basic facts: that economic issues have no bearing on the crisis, that the conflict is about a border dispute, and that they should try to seek a corresponding solution to the problem at hand.
References
"Assab or Djibouti? Or Both?," Reporter (Amharic edition), December 1990 E.C. (December 1997)
"Interview with Bedru Adem, member of the Ethiopian Parliament," Voice of America (Amharic program)
"Transit and Port Services Agreement Between the Transitional Government of Ethiopia and the Government of the State of Eritrea," 29 September
1993
Djibouti, Port Autonome International Djibouti, Port of Djibouti Port Tariff
Eritrea, Department of Maritime Transport, Eritrean Ports Tariff, January 1998
Eritrean Shipping and Transit Agency Services, "Business Tour Report of Mombassa and Dar Es Salaam Ports (9-27 April 1997)"
Girma Birru, Ethiopian Minister of Economic Development and Cooperation, Press Conference, 1 August 1998
Joint Review Committee, Final Report of the Joint Review Committee on the Implementation of the Ethio-Eritrean Economic Agreements, January
1997
Kenya, Kenya Ports Authority, Tariff, 1995
Radio Woyane (Tigrinya program), "What is the underlying cause for the aggression committed against us by the government of Sha'ebia?," 6 August 1998
The author, Gebremichael Mengistu, is an economist working for the Eritrean Government. During Eritrea's independence struggle, he was an official of the Eritrean Relief Association. He has served as Eritrea's ambassador to the European Community and several European countries.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 319 1991 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronic-@embassyeritrea.org
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_091898.html 100644 127137 345 3602 6600552740 6272
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092398.html 100644 127137 345 21534 6602222614 6306
President Isaias Afwerki was interviewed by National TV on new developments regarding the Eritrean-Ethiopian border dispute on Thursday, 17 September. The following are excerpts.
"Now as before, the only solution is through peaceful and legal means."
Q: The Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) government has, on New Year's Eve [Note: Ethiopian Orthodox calendar], announced that it is ready to launch the war. What is the view of the government of Eritrea on this?
This is a very astounding statement. Why such loud noise? What could be the motive behind it? Is it psychological warfare? Could it be that by making loud noises they are trying to solicit the attention of those who may stand on their side? On my part, I can only say that this is an empty kettle making much noise. If the idea is to intimidate the Eritrean people, it is not going to work. If the whole propaganda of intimidation and threats is meant for foreign consumption, we have heard four months of such threats. No provocation is going to derail us from the peaceful course we have taken and are still taking.
Q: The border issue remains the real question. Why does the Ethiopian government continue to side step the real issue?
The TPLF government has committed an act of aggression. Their desire for territorial expansion brought up the conflict. We believe that the borders, which have been accepted through international treaties, were not controversial and that the conflict could be resolved peacefully by demarcating the borders, a purely technical job.
They, however, did not want the border dispute to be solved in this way. Their oft-repeated precondition that Eritrea has to pull out of Badme first before any discussions could go on remains a stumbling block to the peace process. We tried to put the case in its proper perspective by focusing on the border dispute, but the TPLF authorities did their best to divert the issue by stressing side issues and irrelevant questions going as far as expelling Eritreans residing in Ethiopia. For our part, even though we are deeply saddened by the atrocities perpetrated by the TPLF on peaceful and innocent Eritreans, we would like to see the expulsions and the border issues separately.
The TPLF government is following this line in order to confuse the people because it is difficult for it to come to the real issue and discuss it in a truthful and genuine way before the public.
Q: The Ethiopian mass media is talking a lot about new fighter planes. What is your comment?
All this is mainly designed to try and intimidate us, give morale to their fighting forces and confuse the public. Can these change the situation on the ground? The war, if it comes, will only be decided on the ground.
Q: How about the agreement made with Israel concerning the repairing of Ethiopian fighter planes?
There is nothing secret about this. This statement that it would take a year to repair or remodel the planes and that by that time things could change may fool the credulous. We know what is going on behind the scene.
Q: Isn't Israel taking a stand?
That is their choice. We cannot tell the Israelis not to take a stand. We should not be too worried about it.
Q: Which direction is the peace process conducted under the Organization of African Unity, the Organization of Sahel-Sahara and various heads of state going? Is there any possibility for finding a final solution to the crisis?
The solution to the problem depends on the goodwill of the two parties. A good intention or move from one party alone can in no way bring peaceful solution to the crisis if the concerned parties do not agree. Outside help may speed up or may create the proper atmosphere, but the solution can come only if the two sides agree on demarcating the border on the ground and, if need be, through international mediation.
Unfortunately the Americans were not free from the blame of complicating the issue right from the beginning. We know now that the Ethiopian Parliament was not alone in taking its bellicose decision; it was goaded by some quarters to take the move.
Even before the Ouagadougou Conference, the American team had been told by TPLF authorities about the bombing of Asmara. It was then that the team, instead of trying to prevent the bombing at a time when the peace process was going on, asked for a day or two in order to evacuate its citizens.
Some American authorities were for a quick fix and bombing Asmara into submission was not overruled.
In brief, the idea was to force the medicine down the throat. We did not accept such treatment right from the beginning. Later, the facilitating process reached a point where no room could be found for flexibility. We tried to put the issue in the right perspective but our pleas fell onto deaf ears. After we had been bombed, they put the blame on both sides. In the final analysis, those who encouraged the TPLF are responsible for complicating the issue right from the beginning.
Whatever the case, what the TPLF are doing at present, namely beating the war drum and making loud noises and threats, is not going to make matters easier.
However, as far as we are concerned, we stand by the principle that the only way to come to a solution is, now as before, through legal and peaceful means and we will not flinch an inch from this principle.
We know that the OAU now knows the root cause of the problem and its solution, but it is in a dilemma inasmuch as the TPLF government seems to be adamant in not accepting any legal solution to the problem.
Q: At the beginning, the problem between Eritrea and Ethiopia was about Badme, but at present the issue seems different. What exactly is the Ethiopian government seeking?
They say they hate the government of Eritrea and that they want to topple it. If that is their aim, will they really drop their claim to our land if there were to be a change of government here? The government of Eritrea is not an everlasting government. It is an institution of the people that will change with the passage of time. The main issue is not about the government. If their aim is to take Eritrea's land by forcing a change in government, they are deluding themselves. Even if the Eritrean people were to accept a new government forcibly, it is unthinkable that they would ever give their land to someone else.
The unfortunate experience we gain from this situation is something that should not be undermined. What will happen tomorrow or after that is something we must wait to see. As long as the TPLF authorities continue war-mongering, we must remain prepared for unfortunate results. Be that as it may, we are working hard to minimize the problem and we shall continue to seek a peaceful resolution.
Q: Would you like to pass a message to the people of Ethiopia and especially to the people of Tigray as well as to the Eritrean fighting forces?
I can only say this: We are not going to join the war dance, although our army is ready for any eventuality.
As for the Eritrean fighting forces, they do not need words of encouragement.
We will continue to show our goodwill to the people of Ethiopia living in Eritrea, especially to the people of Tigray. This will all be a thing of the past and we must make provisions for good neighborliness in the future.
We will not be provoked into an unwanted war by TPLF's threats and intimidation.
I would like to reiterate the fact that the people of Ethiopia and the people of Tigray in particular will not benefit from war. If ever war erupts it is the immediate areas that are going to bear the brunt of the war, and of these areas, the Tigray region is going to suffer the most.
There is nothing more perfidious than sending people to war under the false notion that one is going to win for sure. That is what the TPLF government is doing.
I only hope the people of Tigray choose the path of peace and join Eritrea in trying to solve the problem in a peaceful and legal way.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092498.html 100644 127137 345 23476 6602451054 6320
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092598.html 100644 127137 345 10604 6602747125 6315
Embassy of Eritrea, USA
Press Release, 25 September 1998
False Report by Reuters
On 22 September 1998, Reuters wire service issued a report falsely stating that the Eritrean government "admits to a few thousand expulsions of Ethiopians."
Eritrea, in contrast to Ethiopia, views the detention and expulsion of innocent civilians as a gross violation of basic human rights. Eritrea has explicitly stated on numerous occasions that it will not expel Ethiopians residing in Eritrea. This policy was reaffirmed by the Eritrean National Assembly, the highest body of the Eritrean government, in its resolution of 26 June 1998. The National Assembly further noted that for Ethiopian residents of Eritrea "Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree."
Like the nationals of many other countries who left Eritrea after Ethiopia escalated the conflict by initiating air bombardment, there were and are Ethiopians who seek to leave. They were allowed to do so. Ethiopia attempted to make propaganda portraying these voluntary departures as "expulsions." For this reason, the Eritrean government no longer permits Ethiopians to leave Eritrea on their own. Ethiopians are still free to leave if they so desire but the departure process must be closely observed by representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross or the foreign diplomatic community who will ascertain that the departure is voluntary.
Reuters is an independent news agency with an obligation to accurately report the facts to its readers. Its representatives have received copies of the Eritrean government's various statements of its policy on Ethiopians residing in Eritrea. It cannot claim that it is unaware of this policy.
Reuters also has a responsibility to attempt to independently confirm the veracity of Ethiopian government statem contacted the ICRC office in Eritrea to check whether Ethiopians ents. It could have departing Eritrea are leaving voluntarily or being expelled. It could have checked the reports of the European Union Committee of Ambassadors or the various United Nations agencies in Eritrea which investigated this issue. It could have examined the statement of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the question of expulsions. It could have contacted Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch for information about what is actually going on. Reuters did none of these things.
In addition, in its report, Reuters uncritically accepts the Ethiopian government spokesperson's statement that the expulsion of another 2,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin this week is a "family reunion" with the expellees having been given the opportunity to "dispose of their properties and arrange their affairs" before expulsion. Is this effort to portray Ethiopia's inhumane expulsion program as a magnanimous and charitable policy of the Ethiopian government meant to be some cruel and thoughtless "joke," made at the expense of the over 20,000 people who have been expelled from Ethiopia? The Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin who are being expelled are not being allowed to access their bank accounts and take their savings with them; to sell their homes and businesses; etc.
We ask that Reuters make the effort to investigate this issue and verify the truth before issuing more false reports.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092598_2.html 100644 127137 345 10653 6602764767 6555
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092998_1.html 100644 127137 345 16266 6604205647 6553
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_092998_2.html 100644 127137 345 2727 6604205661 6525
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_100298.html 100644 127137 345 53126 6606200432 6273
Mr. President,
Mr. Secretary General,
Distinguished Delegates,
I wish to join the other distinguished delegates who have spoken before me, Mr. President, in congratulating you on your assumption of the Presidency of the Fifty-third Session of the UN General Assembly. Your vast experience and skill assures us that you will guide the deliberations of this Assembly to a successful end. I assure you of the full support of my delegation in carrying out your important mandate.
Let me also take this opportunity to pay tribute to your distinguished predecessor, H.E. Hennadiy Udevenko of Ukraine, for his outstanding leadership during his tenure last session.
Our Secretary General, H.E. Kofi Annan, deserves appreciation for his commendable efforts and the effective leadership he provided to ensure the realization of the ideals of our organization by making the United Nations more effective and better able to serve its members.
Mr. President,
The end of the Cold War had, even if only briefly, raised hopes and expectations and sent tidings of a more peaceful, safer, just and fair world, safeguarded from conflict and tension, hunger and disease. Such hopes and expectations were to be frustrated rather early as the world was plunged in numerous inter and intra-state conflicts, ethnic violence and hatred, terrorism, gross violations of human rights, racism and xenophobia as well as mass starvation and increase in the number of refugees and displaced persons.
The international community cannot dismiss, or even ignore, this human condition which, in some cases, has caused the commission of serious international crimes, not only because it is generally the innocent and the weak--i.e., women, children and the elderly--which become the first victims but also because this condition, which now seems to be limited to certain regions, may soon engulf wider areas of the world. In the face of these harsh realities, it is incumbent on the UN and the international community to search for fresh, innovative approaches with a view to eliminating the root causes of this condition, to ensure respect for the basic principles of the Charter, the safety of the innocent from the scourge of terrorism and the human and civil rights of ethnic minorities. If they fail to do so, it will not only prolong the agony of the victims but will, in fact, sooner or later, threaten regional as well as international peace and security.
Mr. President,
The Founding Fathers of our Organization had recognized economic development as one of humanity's inalienable rights and had set as one of the goals of the UN the promotion of "social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom." I am certain that all developing countries will, in no uncertain terms, declare that this goal has so far been unattainable.
Mr. President,
The situation in Africa raises great concern. In spite of the great effort exerted by regional and sub-regional organizations and agencies, situations in many parts of the continent are deteriorating and become more dangerous by the day.
The tragic bloodshed and suffering that Africans have witnessed during the recent past in various parts of the continent are too horrible to recite. They must not recur and, where they continue to exist, must be stopped.
In the Great Lakes region, conflicts are assuming much wider ramifications, in spite of their seemingly regional containment, and pose grave threats to peace and security as they may soon involve extra-regional powers. It is hoped that the ongoing regional initiatives will be able to formulate just and mutually acceptable solutions. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, Africans and the rest of the world have been forced to witness the disheartening spectacle of an African country which had barely emerged from the cruel destruction of a rapacious dictatorship being once again ravaged by multifaceted fighting. It has also divided the broad African coalition which had contributed to the promotion of peace and security in the country. This sad state of affairs must be quickly reversed on the basis of:
1. the full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the DRC and the recognition that the internal political process is the sole prerogative of the Congolese peoples; and
2. the realization of the need for a regional framework of cooperation to address the security concerns of the countries of the region.
Somalia and the Sudan continue to be sources of anguish and sorrow for Africa because there is still a lack of progress in the effort to resolve the crises that ensued in both countries. The frustration of the international community at the lack of progress in peace-making in both countries is understandable. It must be noted, however, that genuine efforts continue to be made by the IGAD countries, and the international community must not despair or give up but must contribute to the efforts of these countries if they are to be successful. In this connection, my delegation upholds the view that with regard to the Sudan conflict IGAD's Declaration of Principles and consequent resolutions remain the sound basis for a just and lasting solution to the conflict.
Mr. President,
In my statement last year, I had declared that Eritrea's foreign policy rested on two basic tenets. The first was the deep conviction that, where there is goodwill, all disputes can be resolved through peaceful negotiations and methods without recourse to violence. The second tenet was the unswerving devotion of Eritrea to justice and equality. I also declared that these two have underscored our search for friendship and cooperation with our neighbors as well as with other states. This statement is valid today as it was last year.
The commitment of the Government of Eritrea to these two tenets has helped to defuse conflict with the Republic of Yemen and to arrive at a mutual understanding to resolve the dispute over the Eritrean Archipelago of Hanish-Zuqar in the Red Sea by peaceful means through arbitration.
Today too, the Government of Eritrea insists that the road to peace with Ethiopia is a strict application and enforcement of the principles of the Charters of the United Nations and the OAU, as well as the OAU decision on colonial borders. Once again, Eritrea calls upon the international community, particularly the UN and the OAU, to ensure respect of these principles and the decision.
Mr. President,
Eritrea was surprised and disturbed by the eruption of conflict with Ethiopia because, in spite of disagreements on the issue of boundaries dating back to the days of armed struggle, the Eritrean Government had assumed--and hoped--that it was, in view of the close relations between the two, possible to arrive at an amicable and enduring solution.
The responsibility for the escalation of the dispute rests solely with the Government of Ethiopia which has, during a long period of time, consistently violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Eritrea resulting in the occupation of large tracts of Eritrean territory, followed by the forcible displacement of Eritrean peasants and the replacement of Eritrean administrative structures by Ethiopian institutions. It reached a climax on 6 May only as a result of the further unprovoked incursions by members of the Ethiopian armed forces which attacked Eritrean troops in the Badme region, in southwestern Eritrea. These incursions were premeditated and meticulously planned. This is the root cause of the dispute.
For a long time, Eritreans had opted for patient and quiet diplomacy. They had hoped against hope that the periodic incursions were only the petty acts of some miscreant and ill-advised regional officials. It was only at a very late stage, and particularly after the publication in
1997 of an official map of the Tigray Administrative Zone, incorporating additional indisputably Eritrean territory and particularly after the issuance of the new Ethiopian currency note depicting the same map, that they realized the full meaning of the Ethiopian adventure.
Yet, even in the aftermath of the fighting that was triggered by the unprovoked Ethiopian incursion and attacks on Eritrean troops, Eritrea never crossed its internationally recognized border; but Ethiopia still controls other Eritrean territory in southwestern and southeastern Eritrea.
In spite of all this evidence of its aggressive deeds, the Ethiopian Government is conducting an absurd propaganda campaign to portray Eritrea as a warmongering nation which had committed aggression against, and occupies, Ethiopian territory. Nothing could be further from the truth. At no time have Eritrean troops crossed Eritrea's internationally recognized borders and it is there for everybody to see. On the contrary, it was Ethiopian troops that invaded Eritrea after Prime Minister Meles Zenawi's declaration of war on 13 May 1998. They were repulsed. In fact, it is important to note that the Deputy Foreign Minister of Ethiopia, Dr. Tekeda Alemu, had articulated Ethiopia's expansionist designs by publicly declaring in a speech to members of the Ethiopian community in the US that Ethiopia would occupy the Eritrean port of Assab within a short time. In light of the above, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression and will not negotiate unless Eritrea withdraws from "its territory" are obviously false and only meant to hoodwink the international community and to cover its own acts of aggression.
Even today, Ethiopia is threatening war unless Eritrea withdraws unconditionally from territories which are fully within its internationally recognized borders. Today, virtually the whole of the Ethiopian army has taken positions along the Eritrean border and almost all of the highest leaders of Ethiopia, including the President, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, the President of the Tigray Region and a Senior Official of the TPLF have only in the past few weeks publicly declared that Ethiopia has finalized war preparations and will soon teach Eritreans lessons they will never forget.
It is regrettable therefore that all the good will and efforts of the Eritrean Government, consisting of several consecutive proposals, to bring about a peaceful and legal settlement to the present border dispute with Ethiopia on the basis of the OAU resolution on colonial borders have been consistently rejected by the Ethiopian Government which obdurately pursues a policy which is committed to the settlement of matter by military means. The Ethiopian Government has also rejected all overtures by third parties for peaceful solution of the dispute and all calls made by the international community to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute.
Mr. President,
This expansionist and aggressive policy is underscored by the use or threat of force, as well as a massive and malicious propaganda campaign, against Eritrea. The propaganda campaign accents ethnic hatred, vituperation against, and slander of, the Eritrean people and members of the Eritrean government. It also calls upon the Eritrean people to rise against their government.
At the same time, the Ethiopian government has been systematically and willfully violating the most sacred and cherished provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two International Covenants and several other international human rights instruments as well as the principles enshrined in the UN and OAU charters by:
* deporting or expelling more than twenty thousand (20,000) Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin under extremely unhealthy conditions or dumping them in very dangerous places;
* deliberately separating family members;
* exposing them to inhuman, cruel and degrading treatment; and
* confiscating their property.
These acts have been well documented by third parties including members of UN agencies, heads of mission of member states of the European Union as well as several NGOs.
Yet, the Ethiopian Government, in an amazingly refined application of the Orwellian principle, accuses the Eritrean Government of precisely the outrages and atrocities it itself has been committing against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin. The truth is that the Eritrean Government has not detained, expelled or deported, or otherwise violated the rights, human or otherwise, of Ethiopians living in Eritrea. This has been verified by legitimate third parties like the representatives of the European Union, the UN agencies, and the International Committee of the Red Cross. As usual, the Ethiopian Government has called all of them liars. We have hitherto extended to all interested parties invitations to make an on the spot verification of the human rights conditions in both Eritrea and Ethiopia. We now extend this invitation to you. We also would like you to receive a similar invitation from the Ethiopian Government.
Mr. President,
This dispute is about borders, pure and simple. Any effort to transmute it into anything else must be viewed as only a vain and brazen attempt by the Ethiopian Government to camouflage its aggression and its expansionist policies.
In this connection, it must be made clear that it was the Ethiopian Government which willfully violated Eritrea's colonial boundaries and forcefully occupied those areas that it had incorporated into its new map of Tigray. It was the Ethiopian Government which subverted all Eritrean efforts to defuse the crisis and to find a peaceful bilateral solution through their Joint Border Commission by unleashing unprovoked military attacks on Eritrea from May 6-12. It was the Ethiopian Government which declared war on Eritrea by a resolution of its parliament on 13 May. It was the Government of Ethiopia which invaded Eritrea along several points on their common border. It was the Government of Ethiopia which launched an air strike on Asmara, the Eritrean capital, on 5 June 1998. It was the Ethiopian Government which imposed an air and sea blockade by threatening indiscriminate air bombing of Eritrea.
Yet, Ethiopia has falsely portrayed Eritrea as an aggressor country by claiming that Eritrean forces invaded Ethiopian territory on 12 May. However, it is not claims and counterclaims that matter. There is incontrovertible material evidence which establishes that Ethiopia has deliberately used force and carried out military incursions in Eritrea since July 1997 with a view to covertly changing the reality on the ground. In this connection, I wish to bring to your attention the fact that the Eritrean Government has repeatedly called for an independent investigation of the incidents that triggered the conflict.
Mr. President,
This border dispute should not have existed in the first place considering that boundaries between the two states are some of the most clearly defined in Africa and were made by explicit and detailed provisions of international treaties. They were then confirmed by the UN when it created the ill-fated Eritrean-Ethiopian federation and again clearly defined in the constitution that the UN gave to Eritrea.
True, the borders may not have been demarcated; but they are not the only undemarcated borders in Africa, and the non-demarcation of boundaries has not prevented most African--and indeed other--states from living in peace with their neighbors and from solving their problems peacefully.
Eritrea is committed to a peaceful and legal solution of this dispute on the basis of the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of states which are enshrined in the charters of both the UN and the OAU as well as decisions and declarations of the OAU and the NAM. Prior to and since the onset of the crisis, Eritrea has attempted to initiate numerous bilateral discussions with Ethiopia with a view to addressing all outstanding issues related to their common borders. In this connection, it must be mentioned that:
* The Eritrean Cabinet and National Assembly had issued, on 14 and 20 May 1998 and 18 June 1998 respectively, calls for the temporary demilitarization of the areas of dispute;
* The Eritrean President had sent two letters to the Prime Minister of Ethiopia requesting him to join him in defusing the dispute and settling the border issue peaceful and legally on a bilateral basis;
* The Eritrean Government presented to the Committee of OAU Ambassadors a proposal containing the principles of respect of colonial boundaries and non-violation of these borders, respect of the Charters of the OAU and the UN, commitment not to use force to impose a solution, commitment to peaceful and legal means to solve the dispute, readiness to stop all hostilities and readiness to enter into direct talks without preconditions.
Unfortunately, all our efforts failed because of negative responses from Ethiopia. On the other hand, Ethiopia has yet to offer a single plan or peace proposal. It has only threatened war unless Eritrea withdraws from territories which are within the internationally recognized borders of Eritrea. In this connection, it must be mentioned that the Eritrean Government has time and again requested the Ethiopian Government to publicly announce to the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community the territories that it claims and to designate them on a political map with clear geographical coordinates.
Mr. President,
It is for these reasons that the Government of Eritrea yet again offers the following as a basis for the solution of the dispute:
1. The comprehensive solution of the problem through a technical demarcation on the basis of the established colonial treaties that clearly define the boundary between the two countries.
2. A possible resort to arbitration on the basis of the sanctity of colonial borders in the event that this is demanded by the other party.
3. Pending a lasting, legal solution, an immediate cessation of all hostilities and a cease-fire to be monitored by an observer force under the auspices of the UN.
It is a matter of satisfaction to the people and Government of Eritrea that numerous governmental institutions, international and regional organizations and NGOs, including the House of Representatives of the US Congress, the European Union and the Non-Aligned Movement have, in welcoming the Eritrean initiative, called upon both Eritrea and Ethiopia to avoid the use of force at all costs and to resolve their disputes peacefully.
I wish to declare here and now, in loud and clear terms, that the Government of Eritrea welcomes, and is ready to make an undertaking to implement, a decision by this august Assembly which provides without any preconditions for the cessation of hostilities, a cease-fire agreement and a peaceful resolution of the dispute by any method as the only acceptable solution.
Mr. President,
In Africa, conflicts such as the present Eritrean-Ethiopian border dispute have taken place several times in the past. Each one of these conflicts was addressed on the basis of the hallowed principles and decisions of the OAU, including, in particular, respect for colonial borders, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states and the non-use of force or threat of force.
As the OAU prepares itself to enter the 21st century, it is imperative that its member states rededicate themselves to the sublime principles and resolutions that have hitherto served our continent. These principles and decisions which have successfully fostered peace and stability, solved conflicts and defused tension in our continent in the past will be as valid in the future as they have been since they were first articulated. Only through their proper application would it be possible to defuse tension and eliminate conflict.
Mr. President,
Eritrea reiterates its commitment to peace, harmony and the rule of law in international relations, however painful this tragedy may be. Eritrea seeks peace for itself and for all its neighbors. Eritrea will continue to seek good relations with all its neighbors.
Eritrea is in a race against the clock of development and cannot afford to lose the time, energy and resources which must be used in the war against underdevelopment.
To date, Eritrea has restrained itself against extreme provocation--and it shall continue to do so unless it is forced to defend itself. If aggression is committed against their country, however, Eritreans shall have no choice but to defend their hard won independence and sovereignty as well as every inch of their territory with whatever is at their disposal.
I thank you.
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_100598.html 100644 127137 345 15377 6606200545 6311
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_100998.html 100644 127137 345 3253 6607477722 6301
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_101498.html 100644 127137 345 11224 6611172150 6270
Press Release Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Statement on Ethiopia's new Map
Ethiopia's New Map:
Deliberate Confusion or Surreptitious Retraction?
Ethiopia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs is circulating a map to the diplomatic community in Addis Abeba. The map has also been widely distributed in schools and other government institutions.
The new map conforms with the international boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia. In that sense, it may be a step in the right direction as the Ethiopian government will have rescinded, albeit indirectly, the Tigray Administrative Map that it issued in October 1997 which carves out, illegally, large chunks of Eritrean territory. Territorial encroachment by Ethiopian troops in July 1997 to occupy Bada and install a new Ethiopian administration there and incessant border markings in the Badme area for the rest of the year were prompted by the desire to create on the ground what was unilaterally delimited in the illegal map of the Tigray Administrative Region.
But there is a curious snag in the "latest" map too. Badme village is inexplicably displaced and "located" at the centre of "the Yirga triangle" inside Ethiopia which is shaded as "occupied territory."
That Badme village lies inside Eritrea--about 15 kms westward from the boundary segment between the Mareb and Setit rivers--was not contested by Ethiopia before. Indeed, the regime in Addis Abeba has been evoking tenuous arguments of "administrative presence" to justify its claims on the territory. At any rate, the accurate location of Badme village can be easily verified on the spot with appropriate equipment. Moreover, Eritrea has never occupied, and does not have any claims on, what is termed now as "the Yirga triangle." This too can be verified easily by an independent investigation.
Ever since the eruption of the crisis, Eritrea has been insisting that Ethiopia declare--fully and clearly--the totality of its territorial claims. The statement issued by the Cabinet of Ministers of the Government of Eritrea on May 14, just one day after Ethiopia's Parliament declared war on Eritrea, called for "each party to publicly announce to the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community the territories it claims--if any--and designate them on the political map with clear geographical coordinates. Each party shall also accept that the dispute cannot, and should not, be resolved by force but through peaceful negotiations."
Ethiopia has balked from doing so in the past. It refused to submit the totality of its territorial claims to the OAU in order to enable the latter to define the scope of the dispute. It refused either to publicly acknowledge or rescind the map that illegally incorporates many parts of Eritrean territory. But now, it has fabricated a different map which purportedly establishes Eritrean "invasion" of Ethiopia.
This muddle is deliberate and designed to obscure the cause of the conflict. But the Ethiopian regime cannot get away with this act of transparent duplicity. It must unequivocally and officially rescind the map of the Tigray Administrative Region that was published by the Mapping Authority of the central government and express in clear terms that it respects Eritrea's international boundaries that were established in accordance with the colonial treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908 respectively. For its part, Eritrea asserts categorically that it has not occupied and does not have any claims on "the Yirga triangle" which can be verified by independent inspection.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 14 October 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea
Online / Dehai Homepage
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_102198.html 100644 127137 345 3510 6613372175 6260
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_102798.html 100644 127137 345 10557 6615407544 6320
Press Release
The following article appeared in the October 24, 1998, issue of
Eritrea Profile, an Eritrean government newspaper. It discusses
Ethiopia's issuance of contradicting maps, a fundamental question to be
resolved in a peaceful settlement of the present conflict between the
two countries.
Embassy of Eritrea Washington DC, October 27, 1998
Note: As the maps cannot be sent in text format, you can find them at
the following web site: www.dehai.org The embassy thanks the Dehai
Community for making the maps available on the internet.
Ethiopia's Cartographic Amnesia
Ethiopia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has denied issuing a "new
map recently" stating that "the copy under reference was
merely made available to the diplomatic community last May" after
the eruption of the conflict. The Foreign Ministry further asserted, in
a statement issued on October 19, that the "copy was based on maps
used in Ethiopia for decades." But this evasive approach raises
more questions rather than answering the existing discrepancies in
Ethiopia's territorial claims. Let us not squabble about timing, for
the moment, as this is of marginal importance. The issue remains that
Ethiopia has published two separate and distinct maps.
1. Last year, on October 19, the Ethiopian Government openly published
a new map
of Tigray (Map 1) which appeared in the weekly edition of
"Woyin," the official newspaper of the TPLF, Ethiopia's
ruling party. This map, which includes large chunks of Eritrea's
territory as part of Ethiopia, was described in the paper as "the
product of four years work in conjunction with the Central Mapping
Authority in Addis Ababa." The paper further contended that
"the new map defines the boundaries of Tigray with neighbouring
states as well as contiguous Administrative Regions within
Ethiopia." Ethiopia's occupation of Adi Murug in July 1997 and
continuous encroachment on the Badme area coincided with the release of
this new map. This was a clear violation of Eritrean sovereignty, both
in intent and practice.
2. Now, without rescinding this map, Ethiopia has "made available" a separate map (Map II) which apparently conforms to Eritrea's recognized colonial boundaries. But even here, Badme village has been deliberately relocated so that its coordinates fall inside Ethiopia's uncontested territory. Furthermore, the town of Sheraro lies, in this map, outside the territory that Ethiopia claimed "is occupied by Eritrea." It may be recalled that Ethiopia's Parliament passed the resolution to declare war on the pretext that Badme and Sheraro were invaded and occupied by Eritrea.
Under these circumstances, the Ethiopian government must be made to
answer the following fundamental questions with some degree of
coherence and consistency:
i) Does Ethiopia respect Eritrea's colonial boundaries? If the answer
is yes, why does not Addis Ababa officially acknowledge that the
October 1997 map is illegal?
ii) Is Ethiopia prepared to allow independent cartographers to
ascertain the true location of Badme village?
iii) How about Sheraro? Ethiopia's Parliament asserted that the town
was invaded and occupied by Eritrea on May 12 while the map distributed
by the Foreign Ministry to "illustrate the areas occupied by
Eritrea" put the town outside the shaded "occupied
area."
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_110698.html 100644 127137 345 43755 6620634034 6314
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_110998.html 100644 127137 345 7447 6621701436 6277
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_111098.html 100644 127137 345 15516 6622144176 6306
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_111198.html 100644 127137 345 6526 6622424336 6267
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_111298.html 100644 127137 345 6563 6623041730 6263
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_111998_1.html 100644 127137 345 5103 6625127610 6503
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_111998_2.html 100644 127137 345 4452 6625127621 6514
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_112098_1.html 100644 127137 345 4236 6626316774 6515
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_112098_2.html 100644 127137 345 23511 6626317012 6515
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_112098_3.html 100644 127137 345 14635 6626317023 6527
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_112598.html 100644 127137 345 7725 6627073403 6276
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
g_121198.html 100644 127137 345 5246 6634254167 6274
Press Release
Ethiopia's Predictable Sabre-Rattling on the Eve of Peace Talks
As efforts intensify to find a peaceful settlement to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the Addis Ababa regime is once again beating the war drums and issuing threats to use force. Ethiopia's Foreign Minister said this week that "if the conflict is not resolved peacefully soon, it will not be long before the government and leadership of Shabia [EPLF] are buried in the holes that they themselves have dug." Ethiopia's President has also vowed that "Ethiopia shall emerge victorious in the struggle against Eritrea."
Taking their cue from the authorities, the Ethiopian mass media have intensified their war propaganda.
This latest campaign fits into a pattern often reverted to by Ethiopia in the past months of creating a war scare on the eve of all peace initiatives. The purported aim is to put pressure on the third parties working to bring about peace so that they may placate Ethiopia for not re-starting the war. It is no coincidence that Ethiopia's latest bellicose statements come as the OAU prepares to consider the Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict next week in Burkina Faso.
Eritrea rejects Ethiopia's attempts to create obstacles for peace initiatives through the threat of imminent war. It reaffirms its commitment to find a peaceful solution to the conflict, realizing full well that neither side can impose a solution through war. Eritrea further believes that an immediate cessation of hostilities is vital for creating a conducive climate for peace. Ethiopia, on the other hand, has rebuffed all attempts to broker a cease-fire as a means of paving the way for a peaceful settlement.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 11 December 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Statement by H.E. Haile Woldensae, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea, to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to Eritrea, Asmara,
21 December 1998
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Allow me first to thank you for honouring our invitation to attend this briefing on the Summit of the Central Organ of the OAU that was convened in Ouagadougou on Thursday, December 17, 1998.
For Eritrea, the Summit of the Central Organ was important in giving us the forum and opportunity to explain in detail the origin and nature of the border conflict, the constructive proposals for peace that Eritrea has been advocating with consistency since the eruption of the crisis as well as Ethiopia's intransigence and periodic recourse to the language of force to preclude meaningful discussion to achieve peace.
Ethiopia's presentation to the Summit, best summarized by the Aide Memoir that it distributed on the previous day, was replete with deliberate omissions, distortions, and outright lies. The Ethiopian regime shied from talking about the substance of the conflict: its use of force in Bada in July 1997, the illegal map that it has issued or the incidents between May 6 and May 12 this year that precipitated the crisis. Instead it tried to portray Eritrea as a country that "worships force" and is "bent on intimidating its neighbours." The Ethiopian Prime Minister in fact tried hard to sanitize the NIF regime in Khartoum accusing Eritrea "for violating the OAU Charter" in its relations with Sudan. And, although Ethiopia had considered the Hanish Islands as part and parcel of its sovereign territory following the federation and subsequent annexation of Eritrea, the Ethiopian Prime Minister had the audacity to accuse Eritrea for claiming territory "with little cause and justification."
But few could be taken in by these lies and transparent ploys. If anything, Ethiopia's presentation only underscored the hollowness of its accusations, casting serious doubts on the integrity of the regime.
Excellencies,
I do not wish to take your time to sum up Eritrea's position on the conflict as these are well known to you and since the speech of President Isaias to the Summit has already been circulated to you.
You will also recall--indeed as I had briefed you in this same room at the time--that Eritrea had given its preliminary opinion to the High-Level Delegation during the Summit in Ouagadougou on November 8, 1998. The gist of our initial opinion then was that:
* The High-Level Delegation cannot give judgement prior to conducting an investigation of all the incidents that led to the current crisis as stipulated in paragraph 7 of the Framework Agreement; and
* Administration could not be divorced from the issue of sovereignty.
Since both sides were expected to submit their full opinion prior to, or at, the Summit of the Central Organ, Eritrea had requested a meeting with the OAU Secretary General to ask clarification on vital components of the Framework Agreement and the report of the OAU Ambassadorial Committee which was never given to Eritrea in full, although references from this report were incorporated in that document.
The Secretary General visited Asmara on December 12. The Government of Eritrea subsequently raised a number of questions--full copy has been circulated to you--concerning the location of Badme, the justification for "reinstated civilian administration" if the area under consideration is Eritrean with an Eritrean population, as well as the purpose of conducting an investigation if it has no bearing at all on the terms of settlement of the dispute.
The OAU Secretary was not in a position to give clarification to these queries explaining that, both on grounds of procedure and competence, these will have to be considered by the full meeting of the Committee prior to the Summit.
While the answers to these queries were clearly vital for Eritrea's full response which can only be predicated on the clarification it receives, we nonetheless submitted our written opinion on December 15 to the High-Level Delegation to underscore our commitment to the peace process. This letter has been circulated to you and let me read the main paragraphs:
"In the section on principles, Eritrea subscribes to the three cardinal principles, namely peaceful resolution of disputes, rejection of the use of force and respect for colonial borders. In regard to the last principle, however, I wish to bring to the attention of Your Excellency and the OAU High-Level Delegation that Eritrea requests that this principle be formulated in precise, legal language that does not brook any ambiguity and does not lend itself to differing interpretations, thereby impeding the technical work of demarcation. It is also Eritrea's opinion that the time-frame for demarcation should not be left open-ended, but must be limited to a maximum of six months, which is more than enough time to finish the technical work of demarcation.
In the section on recommendations, Eritrea has the following opinion.
On the issue of redeployment and demilitarization, Eritrea holds that with a formal cease-fire in place and military observers on the ground, demarcation can be done expeditiously without the complicated and time consuming disengagement of hundreds of thousands of troops. Eritrea, however, has no objection in principle to redeployment in the framework of mutual demilitarization. It, therefore, requests a reformulation of Recommendation 3 to read: "In order to create conditions conducive to a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the conflict, the armed forces of both parties in the Mareb-Setit segment should be redeployed, it being understood that this redeployment will not prejudice the final status of the area concerned."
On the issue of administration, Eritrea has repeatedly stated that, like all sovereign nations, it cannot countenance alien rule of its own territory. Indeed, the question of administration cannot be separated from the issue of inherited colonial borders. Therefore, for reasons of principle and the interest of not complicating and prolonging the conflict and practicality, the suggestion of administration (i.e., the second sentence of Recommendation 4) should be dropped and focus placed on an expedited demarcation of the border, which will automatically solve the question of administration. In fact, Eritrea is convinced that, if it were not for the preconditions and obstructions of Ethiopia, we could have moved, with a cease-fire in place, directly to demarcation and would have solved the problem by now, even without redeployment.
On the humanitarian issue, as the Report that has been submitted to this Summit of the Central Organ makes clear that it is only Ethiopia that has committed gross violation of the human rights of Eritrean nationals in Ethiopia; while, on Eritrea's part, there is no "systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea," Recommendation 8 must read to reflect this fact by dropping the clause "put an end to measures directed against the civilian population" and in 8 b) the word compensate must be added so that the last few words read "to compensate those persons who have been deported."
The remaining recommendations are positive and acceptable to Eritrea."
Excellencies,
The Summit of the Central Organ had listened to the presentations of both parties and seen the report of the High-Level Delegation. I cannot say that the discussions were exhaustive, limited as they were by the brevity of time and the fact that the Summit had to grapple with five other conflict situations in the continent. Apart from the Sudan which openly colluded with Ethiopia, the balance of comments recognized the progress that has been made as well as the need for continued work to bridge the gap between the two sides. Let me note here that, as the report that was presented by the High-Level Delegation to the Summit makes clear, Ethiopia has not accepted the Framework Agreement but its own amended version.
At the end of its brief deliberations, the Summit adopted the High-Level Delegation's Framework for an Agreement while at the same time noting the differing positions of the two sides. It further urged both sides to cooperate with the OAU in order to create the necessary conditions for the implementation of the framework.
Eritrea has subsequently notified the High-Level Delegation that it is earnestly awaiting a satisfactory response to the opinions and queries that it has submitted so that it will be in a position to cooperate to create the necessary conditions for the implementation of the Framework.
Thank you.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
President Isaias Afwerki's Speech to the OAU Central Organ Meeting,
Ouagadougou, 17 December 1998
Mr. Chairman
Your Excellencies
Allow me to begin by thanking President Blaise Compaore and the Government and people of Burkina Faso for the warm welcome and hospitality they have given us. I wish also to express Eritrea's deep appreciation of President Compaore and the members of the OAU High-Level Delegation as well as members of the ministerial and ambassadorial committees for their tireless work for peace between Eritrea and Ethiopia. May I also express my gratitude to Your Excellencies, Heads of State and Government and Ministers, for your commitment and for making time to come here to Ouagadougou, to contribute to the peaceful resolution of Africa's numerous conflicts.
Your Excellencies,
It is now six months since the unfortunate conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia came out into the open. Over this period there has developed a better understanding about the facts of, and issues surrounding, this conflict. Today, the OAU has a clearer picture of the conflict than when it met here in Ouagadougou. Let me briefly touch on four of these main issues.
The Cause of the Conflict
The conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in a border dispute. It has arisen because Ethiopia, in contravention of the OAU Charter and its sacrosanct principle of respecting boundaries inherited from colonialism, has flagrantly violated Eritrea's inherited Italian colonial borders. Ethiopia's aggression against Eritrea is manifested in an official Ethiopian map issued in July 1997, which Ethiopia has not yet rescinded, incorporating vast areas of Eritrea into Ethiopia. More ominously, Ethiopia has repeatedly used military force to bring under its occupation the areas in Eritrea that it coveted.
A lasting peaceful solution, therefore, requires that Ethiopia rescind its illegal claims on Eritrea, and declare without equivocation that it respects the colonial boundaries between the two countries that were delimited in accordance with the treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908. It is these same boundaries that have constituted Eritrea's frontiers since then. Although Ethiopia has paid lip service to respecting Eritrea's borders, it has shown no intention of accepting and respecting them in practice. Towards this end, it has been pushing for a vague and ambiguous formulation, knowing full well that without a clear and unequivocal formulation the whole issue will be open to controversy and endless delay. This will mean that the technical work of demarcation, which is predicated on an unequivocal formulation, cannot be carried out expeditiously.
The OAU has been steadfast in its insistence on the wisdom of not tampering with the borders inherited from colonialism and this principle has been included in the "Elements for a Framework Agreement Submitted for Consideration of the Two Parties" that has been submitted to us. In light of Ethiopia's intentions, however, I wish to bring to the attention of Your Excellencies that Eritrea is requesting of the OAU precise, legal language that will require the opinion of legal experts and ensure a speedy resolution, instead of leading to differing interpretations and endless controversy.
The Use of Force
While Ethiopia has remained silent on the fundamental issue of colonial borders, it has been deafeningly noisy on the issue of the use of force. Not only has it accused Eritrea of aggression and of using force to create facts on the ground, it has gone as far as accusing Eritrea of "worshipping the gun," "having a fixation with the gun" and being obsessed with its "invincibility." In the Aide Memoir that was sent by Ethiopia to Your Excellencies and from which I quoted the previous phrases, they also accuse Eritrea of a "peculiar mentality," a "malady," "disdain of the OAU and international law" and "contempt for civilized behavior and civility," all in language that, to say the least, is far from civil.
Not content with misrepresenting the facts about the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict, Ethiopia has also accused Eritrea of being a "source of tension and inter-state misunderstanding," citing as proof Eritrea's relations with its neighbours. But as everyone knows, Eritrea's relations with Sudan have not been different in any significant way from that of Ethiopia and others in the region. As far as the dispute with Yemen was concerned, Ethiopia, prior to Eritrea's independence, considered the Hanish Islands as part and parcel of its sovereign territory. Indeed the evidence presented by Eritrea to the arbitration tribunal relied to a large measure on documents provided by the current Ethiopian government, including the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over acts committed on the islands, regulation of oil exploration activities, and, even, a video tape of an inspection tour by the former President of Ethiopia, Colonel Mengistu, aboard the flagship 'Ethiopia.' The current government's 180 degree turn is not surprising as it fits the pattern of covering the weakness of its case by resorting to a smear campaign.
Your Excellencies,
Ethiopia's shrill and offensive language is designed to drown the facts in a sea of accusations. It is the classical case of a thief crying "thief!" at the top of his voice. Otherwise, the facts speak for themselves. Thanks in part to the work of the High-Level Delegation, it has now become clear that the conflict did not erupt from the blue on May 12, 1998. It goes back at least ten months earlier, to July 12, 1997, when Ethiopia sent two battalions of its army and occupied the Adi Murug area of Eritrea, dismantled the administration there and set up a new administration, thereby creating facts on the ground by force. On the same day, but in an area hundreds of kilometers away, it intensified its incursions in the Badme area. These incursions involved evicting Eritreans from their villages by terrorizing them, destroying their houses and burning their crops and bringing Ethiopian settlers to inhabit those villages.
If we were "gun worshippers," as our Ethiopian colleagues who were our closest allies for 22 years have suddenly discovered, then we would have resorted to force to reverse the Ethiopian aggression. Instead, I wrote to the Ethiopian Prime Minister, whom I addressed as Comrade Meles in light of the closeness of our relationship and thinking, asking him to right the wrong and suggesting that we set up a Joint Border Commission to solve any border controversy bilaterally and amicably.
Ethiopia's behavior was markedly different. Encouraged by Eritrea's restraint, which it mistook for weakness, it continued its aggression by bringing more land under its control and displacing more and more people. Finally on May 6, 1998, it escalated its aggression by attacking an Eritrean unit. Ethiopia's continued attacks over the next few days triggered a series of spiraling clashes until May 12 with both sides bringing reinforcements.
Ethiopia's subsequent action was much worse. Unlike Eritrea, which for ten months patiently searched for a peaceful solution, Ethiopia, believing in its might as a big country and choosing the use of force, declared war on Eritrea on the morrow of the fighting. Concurrently, it stopped using Eritrean ports, cut air and telecommunication links, and deployed almost all its army along the Eritrean borders, including in areas where there were no border incidents. Two weeks later, it launched the ground war and, on June 5, it further escalated the border conflict by bombing the Eritrean capital Asmara. Once again, Eritrea was compelled to exercise its right of self-defense.
Even with the benefit of hindsight and Ethiopia's subsequent actions, Eritrea does not regret the restrained and peaceful course of action that it took between July 1997 and May 1998. At the same time, it believes that Ethiopia should not be rewarded, by accepting its preconditions, for fomenting a crisis by, first, launching an attack, and, when this failed, for publicly declaring war and then waging war on Eritrea.
Your Excellencies,
I realize that in the face of opposing versions of events leading to the crisis, it might be difficult to pass judgement. That is why Eritrea has been calling from the outset for an independent investigation into those events, a position that has now been supported by the OAU High-Level Delegation. Regrettably, however, such an investigation has not been done and has not figured in the OAU's framework.
Even without an investigation, however, one fact is beyond dispute--Ethiopia's continued refusal to renounce the use of force. Indeed Ethiopia has mastered the use of the threat of force and warnings of imminent war in order to pressure the OAU and other concerned parties to impose its dictates on Eritrea. The pronouncement by Ethiopian officials on the eve of this Summit that unless a peaceful resolution is found soon, they will "bury Eritrea's leaders in the holes that they themselves have dug" fits into that pattern.
Deportation of Eritreans and Confiscation of Their Property
Even more than Ethiopia's aggression and its repeated use of force and continued threat to use force, what has done most damage to the relations between the two countries and threatens to poison them for many years to come is Ethiopia's decision to uproot the Eritrean population in Ethiopia. So far many have been killed, thousands languish in detention camps, more than 1,500 of them in one camp near Awassa. Over 42,000 have been deported with their property estimated in hundreds of millions of dollars confiscated. The remainder of the Eritrean community lives terrorized, waiting for the moment when Ethiopian soldiers will knock at their doors in the middle of the night or pick them up from the streets, their workplaces or churches and mosques prior to deportation. Those deported include Eritreans working in the OAU, the UN office in Addis Ababa as well as for many African embassies.
As with other issues, so too in this humanitarian problem, Ethiopia has resorted to loud accusations and fabricated stories to hide that it only is carrying out the massive detention and deportation of civilians on account of their nationality. It has also attempted to justify its gross violation of our people's human rights by branding them "spies." But here at least, Ethiopia cannot get away with empty accusations as the OAU High-Level Delegation has made it clear that there is no "systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." I have asked that this fact be reflected in the OAU framework.
Redeployment and Administration
I am sure Your Excellencies will agree with me that the issues of redeployment and administration are closely linked with the location of the areas under consideration, whether they are in Eritrea or Ethiopia; and also with the causes of the conflict, that is, who used force, where and when. Since these vital questions have not been determined by an investigation, which Eritrea has been requesting for the past six months, any proposals for redeployment and administration need to take that fact into account.
In regard to redeployment, Eritrea holds that, with a cease-fire in place and military observers on the ground, demarcation can be done expeditiously without the complicated and time consuming disengagement of hundreds of thousands of troops. Eritrea, however, has no objection in principle to redeployment in the framework of demilitarization.
On the question of administration, Eritrea has repeatedly stated that, like all sovereign nations, it cannot countenance alien administration of its own territory and over its own population. Indeed, the question of administration cannot be separated from the issue of inherited colonial borders. Therefore for reasons of principle and the interest of not complicating and prolonging the conflict and practicality (since we are talking about a short period of six months), the suggestion of administration should be dropped altogether and focus placed on an expedited demarcation of the border, which will automatically solve the question of administration. In fact, Eritrea is convinced that, were it not for the preconditions and obstructions of Ethiopia, we could have moved, with a cease-fire in place, directly to demarcation and would have solved the problem by now, even without demilitarization.
Your Excellencies,
Even at the risk of taking too much of your time, I have spoken rather in length because so much confusion has been sown by Ethiopia. Last month here in Ouagadougou, I had given Eritrea's initial, but considered opinion on the OAU's "Elements of a Framework Agreement Submitted for the Consideration of the Two Parties." Since then we have been studying those elements in detail. As we needed clarification on a number of issues, some of which we have been seeking answers for since the start of the OAU peace effort, we asked the OAU Secretary General, H.E. Dr. Salim, to visit Asmara for consultations and submitted to him our queries. Yesterday, I presented our opinion to H.E. Blaise Compaore, which is predicated on the fact that clarification on some of the pertinent issues that I mentioned earlier is not yet available.
Your Excellencies,
In the opinion I presented, Eritrea has reaffirmed its commitment to the three cardinal principles that will be the basis of a peaceful solution. On the fundamental issue of borders, we have requested precise, legal language, which we believe should pose no problem if there is a genuine commitment to respect colonial boundaries. We have asked that the paragraph on humanitarian issues be given substance and reflect the fact that it is only one party, Ethiopia, that is culpable. We have asked for reasons of principle and the interests of not prolonging and complicating the problem, that the sentence on administration be dropped. And, although we believe, given a cessation of hostilities, that demarcation can be done expeditiously, we have expressed our readiness to redeploy our forces within the context of mutual demilitarization.
Your Excellencies,
As expressed in its Aide Memoir and the Prime Minister's letter that prefaced it, Ethiopia's intention is to browbeat the OAU into imposing its dictates on Eritrea. It is threatening dire consequences unless it gets its way. It has openly stated that failure to accept Ethiopia's viewpoint would amount to "an abdication of responsibility by the Organization of African Unity." It has gone even to the extent of asserting that "not only the credibility of the OAU but that its very future is on the line." At a time when the OAU is grappling with a number of conflicts, to suggest that not taking a partisan course of action in regard to one of them will take it down the drain is, I believe, a measure of the pretensions of the Ethiopian government.
With its futile attempts at intimidation, Ethiopia is trying to forestall meaningful and exhaustive discussion. Its transparent hope is not that progress is made in this Summit towards peace, but that the OAU's effort comes to a dead-end. I am confident that the OAU, which through the tireless efforts of President Compaore and his colleagues in the High-Level Delegation has come closer than any other party to bridging the gap between the parties, will stay the course and help us achieve peace.
I thank you.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
For the public's information, we are distributing the statement of the OAU Central Organ on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict following their consideration of the issue at their meeting in Ouagadougou, held 17-18 December 1998.
Dispute Between Ethiopia and Eritrea Statement of the OAU Central
Organ,
Ouagadougou, 17-18 December 1998
The Central Organ considered the Report of the High Level Delegation of the OAU on the dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It congratulated the Delegation for the commendable efforts it had made in order to promote a peaceful and comprehensive solution to the dispute.
The Central Organ took note of the respective positions of the two Parties on the proposals of the High Level Delegation.
The Central Organ endorsed the proposals for a Framework Agreement submitted by the OAU High Level Delegation to the two Parties which constitute an appropriate framework for the resolution of the dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea.
The Central Organ wishes to commend the two Parties for the confidence which they have placed in the OAU and for the cooperation they have extended to the OAU High Level Delegation in the performance of its mandate and for the restraint that they have shown.
The Central Organ urges the OAU High Level Delegation to remain seized with the dispute and calls on the two Parties to continue to cooperate with the Delegation with a view to creating the necessary conditions for
the speedy implementation of the Framework Agreement. The Central Organ further urges both Parties to continue to exercise restraint.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
Eritreans Still Dying in the Detention Camps in Ethiopia
Once again the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has informed the Government of Eritrea about the untimely deaths of two young civilian Eritreans in a detention camp in Ethiopia. The two young Eritreans, Mohammed Said Abdulbeker Idris and Mohamedzeyen Said Kahsay, had been in detention for months and died there because of inhumane treatment and lack of proper medical attention. Like other Eritrean civilian detainees in concentration camps in Ethiopia, the two young Eritreans were detained illegally and without due process of law.
It is to be recalled that the death of three other young Eritreans, including a university student who was studying in Ethiopia on an exchange program, was reported by ICRC in November 1998.
Many other Eritrean civilians are also dying in other concentration camps, particularly in Tigrai, who are unaccounted for by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Yemane Gebreselassie Shardai, aged 62, is one of the recent victims. He died in the concentration camp of Azha in Tigrai on 6 December 1998.
The Government of Eritrea condemns the deaths of its nationals under illegal and inhumane detention in Ethiopia and calls for an independent investigation into the causes of, and circumstances surrounding, their deaths. It also calls for the immediate release of all Eritrean civilians, including 37 university exchange students, who have been detained by the Ethiopian government en masse, illegally and without due process of law, from detention in Ethiopia.
The Government of Eritrea once again calls on the international community to ensure that Ethiopia respects the international laws, covenants and charters on human rights to which it is a signatory and to release all Eritrean civilians in detention immediately.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 29 December 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
US State Dept. Statement on Ethiopia's Expulsion of Eritreans
U.S. Department of State
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
August 6, 1998
Statement by James B. Foley, Deputy Spokesman
Ethiopia: Expulsions of Eritreans
The United States Government is greatly concerned about the growingimpact on civilian populations of the continuing conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.
The United States views with deep concern the detention and expulsion of ethnic Eritreans in and from Ethiopia. The Government of Ethiopia has a legitimate right to guarantee the safety and security of its people against potential threats. However, there are fundamental humanitarian and human rights concerns raised by the forcible separation of families, the undue hardships of those detained or expelled to Eritrea, and the financial losses caused by sudden expulsions. We urge the Government of Ethiopia to respect international human rights norms and standards and follow appropriate due process in handling its security concerns. We further urge the Government of Ethiopia to allow all those who were wrongfully expelled to return and to establish a compensation commission to investigate and recommend compensation for the claims resulting from undue financial loss and hardship as a result of rapid, forced expulsions.
We call on the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure full access to all detainees and P.O.W.s, to exchange P.O.W.s, to allow all students to repatriate, and to facilitate the return of nationals who wish to repatriate voluntarily. We welcome the decision by both governments to grant the ICRC access and urge full cooperation with the ICRC in accordance with its standard procedures. We call on both parties to receive missions from appropriate United Nations agencies. History has shown that deportations and detentions and the massive displacement of innocent civilians, wherever and whenever they occur, create hardships and bitternessfueling misunderstandings and lasting mistrust.
Ultimately, a durable peace is the best guarantee of the rights of each other's nationals in Eritrea and Ethiopia. The United States urges Ethiopia and Eritrea to redouble their efforts in seeking a peaceful resolution to the current border conflict, and we pledge our continued commitment to support such efforts.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW,
Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage
/user/e/ephrem/public_html 120711 127137 345 0 6765106660 15155 2/var/http/e/ep/ephrem 
