Abstract from a debate held in the British House of Lords (On Eritrea -
Ethiopia)
By: Simon Marcos
February 26, 2004
Abstract From Debate Held in The British House of Lords
“My Lords, does the noble Baroness
agree that the reason why the Eritreans declined to accept a visit by Mr Lloyd
Axworthy is that it is not they who are responsible for incursions into the
temporary security zone; that it is not they who have failed to create the
necessary conditions for demarcation to proceed; and that it is not they who
have failed to co-operate fully and promptly with the boundary commission?
In view of the Ethiopians' continued non-compliance with the Security Council
resolution, does not she think that a threat to peace exists that should now
be referred to the Security Council under chapter 6 of the charter?”
Lord Avebury,
House of Lords, February 2004
Lord Rea asked Her
Majesty's Government:
What further steps can be taken by the United Nations Security Council to
persuade Ethiopia to accept the ruling of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Border Commission
to which Ethiopia agreed when it signed the comprehensive peace agreement
in Algiers in December 2000.
The Minister
of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean):
My Lords, the United Kingdom and other members
of the Security Council will continue to press Ethiopia and Eritrea to accept
the boundary commission decision and begin a political dialogue. We welcome
the appointment of the United Nations special envoy, Lloyd Axworthy, and urge
both parties to work with him on resolving their differences.
Lord Hylton: My Lords,
can the Minister say what progress has been made in demarcating the frontier
and whether this process also involved an element of arbitration in places
where the frontier was in dispute? Furthermore, can she give us any good news
about the return of prisoners and refugees by both sides which must surely
help to build trust and confidence?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I fear that the stand-off between the two
countries at the moment does not allow me to give the good news that the noble
Lord requests. I wish I could give him such news. I can only reiterate that
this is a highly unsatisfactory situation. The Ethiopians have refused to
accept the findings of the boundary commission. The United Nations has put
in an envoy whom we hope will be able to bring the two sides together, but
the Eritreans are currently refusing to deal with him. The boundary commission
found in favour of the Eritreans, as the noble Lord knows, but at the moment,
the area particularly around Badame—which is the area principally under dispute,
and where there are about a thousand people living—is in considerable difficulty.
I return to my main point—that the envoy has to be given the opportunity to
discuss the borders, the future of Badame and the important question that
the noble Lord has raised in relation to prisoner exchange.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, would the Minister agree that this dispute in the Badame region
goes back a long way, certainly to the time of Mussolini and probably before
that, and that there has been a long string of undertakings and agreements—the
US-Rwanda peace plan; UN Resolution 1226; as well as the Algiers agreement
that we are talking about? Would she accept that it is going to take a lot
to persuade the Ethiopians to come into line with the boundary commission,
but that it is worth while persisting very hard, because last time the matter
turned into violence with 100,000 lives being lost. We want no repeat of that.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Yes, my Lords; I agree that it has been a dispute
of very long-standing. Sadly, many disputes of long-standing duration become
intractable over a period of time. It is obvious
that both sides view the Badame area as part of their own country. We have
consistently stressed to the Ethiopians, at prime ministerial and ambassadorial
level both in Addis Ababa and in New York, that we believe that the decision
of the boundary commission is final and binding. However, it is now for the
Ethiopian Prime Minister to persuade his government, his party, and his people
that they must accept the boundary commission's findings. However, I am sure
that he will face an uphill task in doing so, as my noble friend Lord Rea
indicated in his initial supplementary.
The Duke of Montrose: My Lords, would it be wrong to presume that the Minister is familiar with
the concept of horse-trading? I wonder whether the Ethiopian Government is
taking up the position in the hope that they can gain some advantage, particularly
from third parties who are interested to see peace in the area. Have the Government
any idea what they might be looking for?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I used to be the general secretary of a
trade union. Therefore, I do know a little about horse-trading, one way or
another. I cannot read what the Ethiopian Government are looking for. Quite
often, in these sorts of border disputes, individuals think that by not coming
to an agreement they have more to gain as time goes on—for example, as more
and more Ethiopians come into the area in dispute, the idea is that their
claims will be strengthened by people on the ground. That may be some of the
thinking behind what has gone on, but that is speculation. We have to allow
Mr Axworthy to bring both sides together. It will not be an easy task, but
we must afford him the opportunity to try to fulfil the remit that he has
been given by the United Nations.