Ethiopia requested clarification and submitted "Questions to the Technical arrangement" to the OAU. Although the OAU in cooperation with experts from the UN and US gave clarifications, Ethiopia has not accepted the peace proposal. The reason is very clear - they were not looking for clarifications. People who have been following up Ethiopian politics can easily pick up the intentions of the "clarification" requests. This writer will try to interpret what the questions mean to those who are lucky enough not have borders with Ethiopia. On this part, I will attempt to address the first question that was posed, on the Technical arrangements, by Ethiopia:

What is the reason for this omission of "colonial treaties and applicable international law"? Does this omission have any implications for delimitation and demarcation of the boundary?

The third sub-paragraph of paragraph 11 clearly states that "the delimitation and demarcation process will be done on the basis of pertinent colonial treaties and applicable international law".

The clarifications have given the Ethiopian government the guideline, level of seriousness of the mediators and scope of their (Ethiopian) influence towards the output. Based on their reading, here is their potential game plan:

1. The first strategy is to try to attune the colonial treaties to one their existing fabricated maps or will assemble another if necessary. They will try that, based on erroneous renditions and claim of ambiguity within the colonial treaties. If they can interpret "Badme and environs" to include Buri, nothing else is unattainable in their primer.

2. If that doesn't work, the alternate contrivance is to dispute the validity of [some] colonial treaties. There is a lot of background grumbling within the Ethiopian media that the Italian invasion nullified the treaties. As a result, they may claim the treaties are null and void.

3. There is also an analogous gestation in "respect for the borders existing at independence, as stated in Resolution AHG/Res 16(I) adopted by the OAU Summit in Cairo in 1964". Although it may sound repugnant to some, the government is supposedly preparing a defense based on an interpretation that "at independence" means at the independence of Eritrea from Ethiopia. Thus, since Ethiopia was administering the disputed area at the time of Eritrea's independence, it has a legitimate claim over it based on Resolutions AHG/Res 16(I).