|
08 May
2007
Excellency,
Please, Excellency,
allow me to make a few comments on your Progress Report on Ethiopia
and Eritrea (S/2007/250) of 30 April 2007. The intent of this letter
is not to go into detail of the progress report but simply to stress
the most cardinal issues that need to be clarified. The progress
report attempts to frame the lack of progress in the peace process
between Eritrea and Ethiopia as an "impasse" or "stalemate" created by
both parties. This is at variance with the facts. It would have been
very helpful for the report to clearly state the problem that is
holding the peace process hostage. Unless it does that, the needed
focus on the core issue would be wasted as the last five years have
amply demonstrated.
There is no impasse or
stalemate. There is only Ethiopia's illegal rejection of the final
and binding EEBC decision. Ethiopia has gone further to evict the EEBC
from the area; it has withheld its financial contribution to the EEBC;
and it has obstructed the work of the EEBC through all diversionary
means. In these circumstances, to appropriate blame to both parties
is unfair and unacceptable.
The Government of
Ethiopia has made it a habit of making statements that are hollow and
contradictory. At one time it informed the international community
that it has accepted the Boundary Commission delimitation decision "in
principle". Now, as stated in the report: "Ethiopia has stressed that
it has accepted the Delimitation Decision, while maintaining that the
problems that may arise from the border demarcation can be resolved
only through dialogue with Eritrea." The report further states:
“Ethiopia’s position regarding cooperation with the Boundary
Commission in the implementation of the Decisions remains a major
factor for the current impasse…” It must be recalled that the EEBC
was formed in accordance with Article 4.2 of the Algiers Peace
Agreement that stipulated: "The parties agree that a neutral Boundary
Commission composed of five members shall be established with the
mandate to delimit and demarcate the colonial treaty border based on
pertinent colonial treaties (1900, 1902, and 1908) and applicable
international law. The Commission shall not have the power to make
decisions ex aequo et bono".
H.E. Mr. Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary General United Nations,
New York, NY 10017
The salient provisions
of the Algiers Agreement are also unambiguous both in respect to legal
finality and in terms of remedial instruments of enforcement. These
unequivocal legal provisions notwithstanding, the demarcation process
that could have been completed in a matter of months, was initially
obstructed and subsequently blatantly prevented by Ethiopia with
impunity. Ethiopia has, and continues to occupy, sovereign Eritrean
territories in flagrant violation of the Algiers Agreement, the EEBC
decision and the UN Charter. Ethiopia even went further to install
new population settlements in sovereign Eritrean territories and
ignored the Security Council Resolution adopted in September 2002,
requesting it to rescind the illegal measure within 30 days.
It should be stressed
that it is not up-to Ethiopia to layout the demarcation directives and
procedures. The demarcation directives and procedures are already
formulated by the EEBC with the agreement of the two parties. The
technical problems that may arise during demarcation are also clearly
addressed in the demarcation directives.
Ethiopia's brazen
violation of international law and, its illegal occupation of
sovereign territories of the UN member State, Eritrea, is undoubtedly
the cause of tension and insecurity in the region. It could also
precipitate another round of hostilities with dire consequences for
regional peace and stability.
It is a known fact that
Eritrea has fulfilled its share of the agreement without any
precondition. In fact, Eritrea has maintained its firm commitment,
for five solid years, to the authority and decision of the
Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission. It is sad and unforgivable to
observe the UN injustice and partiality that began in 1952 over
Eritrea continues even to this modern era.
While I welcome your decision to appoint a new Special Representative
for UNMEE to assume the responsibility that was held by Ambassador
Legwaila, let me take this opportunity to reiterate my delegation’s
concern about the reference made to the "Acting Special
Representative" in the report who has been illegally operating as of
November 2006 from Addis Ababa against repeated protests of my
government. Eritrea rejected the above mentioned "SRSG" or "Acting
SRSG" to head UNMEE from anywhere, since it is inconsistent with the
agreement signed between the parties and the United Nations.
Please accept,
Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration and I should be
grateful if the present letter would be circulated as a document of
the Security Council of the United Nations.
Araya Desta
Ambassador, Permanent Representative |
