allAfrica.com: Eritrea: President Says Border Issues 'Must Be Resolved' (Page 1 of 2)

IRIN interviewed President Isaias Afewerki in Asmara, on 1 October. Eritrea and the Horn of Africa in general remain chronically vulnerable in humanitarian terms due to drought, conflict and poverty.

A process to resolve the border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea remains stalled after numerous attempts at resolution over the past seven years. The 1998-2000 war cost tens of thousands of lives and displaced thousands of civilians. In 2002, a Boundary Commission ruled on a new border between the two countries. However, demarcation of the border has not begun.

The stalemate continues, raising fears of renewed conflict. Eritrea accuses the international community of insufficient action in compelling Ethiopia to comply. Eritrea stands accused of backing rebellion in Ethiopia and Somalia. In Eritrea itself, the government's relations with the UN, aid agencies and donors have been chequered and Eritrea has shown reluctance to accept international aid.

Isaias reviews some of these issues in the interview.

Mr President, the peace process with Ethiopia is at a stalemate; what is the way forward?

Well, I think the way forward is very clear. Legally, the decision was made almost five-and-a-half years ago, which charted the way forward. It was final and binding. The implementation [of the decision] is what is missing and it is blocked by the regime in Addis Ababa in collaboration with the administration in Washington. Demarcation [of the border] should have taken place a long time ago. Details and the technicalities for demarcation have been worked out but unfortunately the way forward has been blocked.

There is no illusion or unclarity as to the way forward. It is very clear legally and technically. The possibility and the only option for going forward would be to demarcate the border and for the international community, particularly the [UN] Security Council, to take its responsibility and obligation as far as the treaty [Algiers agreement] is concerned and the decision [of the Boundary Commission] is concerned and enforce that decision.

Ethiopia recently accused Eritrea of being in breach of the Algiers agreement. How do you react to that?

I think this was very theatrical - it is theatrical to me - because all the evidence is there. The Algiers agreement is very clear. In fact, one of the advantages of the agreement, which was anticipated probably by the wise men who drafted the document, was very detailed and very clear, and the binding and final nature of the decision [the ruling on the border] is part of the agreement. And the decision given, as I indicated earlier, was also very clear. Eritrea accepted the decision and that is the cardinal issue as far as the Algiers agreement is concerned. [It] was meant to resolve the border conflict by the establishment of a commission and also making it clear that the decision of the Boundary Commission will be final and binding. Ethiopia has not to date accepted and has violated the agreement.

Eritrea has also been accused of supporting armed groups in Ethiopia and Somalia, including direct involvement. What is your response to that?

Sometimes people do not even remember what happened yesterday and pretend to forget their own history. This government in office now in Addis Ababa forgets when it was fighting Mengistu's government and when so many Ethiopians, marginalised Ethiopians, including Tigreans, fought for self-determination in Ethiopia, not to fight an occupation force, but to change the government. Armed struggle was one of their means of fighting that regime for so many years. Doesn't it apply to them? If today's fighters, anyone, the Oromos, Somalis, Tigreans, the Amharas and what have you in Ethiopia are fighting for their rights inside Ethiopia, isn't that also what the TPLF [Tigray People's Liberation Front, senior member of Ethiopian ruling coalition party] did during Mengistu's times? How can one who lived through that process point a finger at Somalis fighting for the reconstitution of their land and for the freedom of the Somalis and categorise them as terrorists? This is an empty accusation in my opinion. It is meant to benefit from the political environment that came after 9/11 and categorising every opposition and every freedom fighter as a terrorist.

We stood by the TPLF all those years, we supported the right to resist and fight the Mengistu regime or even the previous regime. We stood on the side of all Ethiopians without distinction - the Oromos, Amharas, Somalis, Afars, Tigreans - for a new Ethiopia. If these people now believe this government is not representative and this government is leading Ethiopia to the unknown, they fight for their rights. If the Somalis who today see their land occupied fight this occupation; isn't it legitimate for anyone, any peace-loving [person] to support their cause?

Is your government concerned that the current situation may lead to direct military confrontation?

You mean between Eritrea and Ethiopia, well we don't need any confrontation. We have our right to self-defence. We have been committed to our legal obligations as far as the border is concerned. As I indicated earlier, we will abide by the letter and spirit of the agreement. We have politically and legally struggled to see implementation of the decision through demarcation. Unfortunately that has not been the case. We continue to struggle on that line.

web allafrica.com	Enter your search terms	Submit search form
OR subscribers use AllAfrica's premium search engine


Use our pull-down menus to find more stories

Today's Most Active Stories