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:
i) was "playing a leading and central role, inter alia, in organizing and coordinating clandestine network";
ii) that the mission was "used for all sorts of illegal activities ... including the hoarding of illegal arms and explosives that were destined for use in terrorist operations and for missions of destabilizing Ethiopia"; and
iii) that the Eritrean diplomatic mission was "engaged in printing counterfeit currency, money laundering and other illegal activities aimed at sabotaging the Ethiopian economy."

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:
* On February 5 last month, Ethiopia fabricated a story accusing Eritrea of "bombing the town of AdiGrat" in violation of the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States. This outrageous lie was fabricated in order to provide Ethiopia with an adequate pretext to unleash the offensive that it has been preparing for and which it launched the next day. Fortunately, the baseless nature of this lie was exposed by independent bodies including the US Government and Ethiopia was reprimanded for its violation.
* As the Ethiopian army sustained its biggest defeat ever last week on the Tsorona front with more than 10,000 of its troops killed, Addis Abeba continued to lie to its people, first denying the occurrence of any battle and later dismissing its devastating defeat as "a public drama staged by Eritrea." Fortunately again, the presence of several journalists (BBC, Der Spiegel, Swiss Radio, Al Sharq Al Awset, etc.) exposed Ethiopia's blatant lie.

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:

-- The Eritrean mission in Addis Abeba was long reduced to a two man team consisting of the ambassador and his deputy. All diplomatic and technical staff were expelled in June last year. All local staff were similarly picked up from their homes and streets and deported as they happened to have Eritrean origins. The mission was thus incapacitated and prevented from fulfilling its diplomatic and consular functions as the ambassador did not even have a secretary.

-- The ambassador and his deputy were under round-the-clock surveillance by Ethiopia's security officials for 24 hours a day. The embassy premises and the residence were encircled by Ethiopian security 24 hours a day. No visitor of any nationality--with the exception of other embassies accredited to Ethiopia--was allowed to visit the embassy and the residence.

-- The ambassador and his deputy were routinely harassed and escorted by a fleet of seven Ethiopians security cars whenever and wherever they ventured out of the embassy premises. They were overshadowed with at least fifteen security men when meeting other embassy representatives at any public place.

-- The ambassador and his deputy were not allowed to visit the Blattien concentration camp where over 1,500 Eritreans are detained for no crime other than being Eritrean. Similarly, the ambassador was refused access to any of the 54,000 Eritreans who were deported inhumanely by the Addis Abeba regime.

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, 24 March 1999