President Isaias outlines background to border dispute

Asmara, Eritrea
Source: Eritrea Profile

Last Thursday, the President gave an interview to the National Television concerning the misunderstanding           caused by the recent developments in connection with the Eritrean-Ethiopian border. Excerpts:


Due to the sudden eruption of the issue, it would be difficult to pinpoint

the various factors that led to the present situation. After struggling

side by side for a long period we never thought that border problems would

arise in the end, for after 1991 our thoughts for both of us was focused

only on our future years. Our mutual relations have always been positive on

many domains and border issues were taken lightly as isolated local problems.

But over the last year things started to assume larger dimensions

especially in the environs of Badme where people were beaten and forced to

flee their villages. This resulted in continuous complaints by the people

as to the lack of response from the government.

On our part we deemed it wise to handle the case carefully and restrained

ourselves knowing full well that our people were suffering.

Similar problems have also occurred in the Zoba Debubawi Keyih Bahri where

certain administrative offices were forced to move. Still we preferred to

look at the problem as local border problem and did not want to take it as

intra-national issue.

Next, another misunderstanding occurred. Our border administrative post was

asked to move further inside and it did. After this incident we decided to

find a lasting solution to the problem and formed a joint committee to

study the case. Although at first the meeting was decided to be between

EPLF and EPRDF it was later agreed to include the government and hence a

committee was formed which included the Minister of Defence, Sebhat Ephrem

and two other members. Similar action was taken by the Ethiopian government

and the dialogue started. But, even then the dialogue did not continue in a

very serious way as the members still considered the matter a local one and

no serious on-the-spot studies of the case was envisaged.

Finally, as the Ethiopian government decided to handle the case at a

national level, the structure of the committee was changed. However, on our

part we did not see the motive for changing the structure and we continued

as before. Nevertheless, the committee could come up with nothing serious

other than fixing appointments for further meetings.

As things continued their course without any visible change, a new

development took place around Badme during the last two or three months.

People started to put up piles of stones here and there for border

demarcation and this was accompanied by threats to those who moved around

the place with their sheep and goats.

The case was reaching a critical stage and we decided to hold an urgent

meeting in order to stop the crisis before it went out of control. About

two weeks ago a committee was sent to Ethiopia.

But, hardly had the committee set out on its trip, it was reported that an

incident occurred where a certain unit posted there opened fire and killed

and wounded some of the members of the army.

Nevertheless, the committee which was on its way to Addis continued its

mission with the aim of arriving at an understanding with the authorities

in Addis.

Unfortunately, things went out of control and led to the amassing of forces

and violence on the part of Ethiopia.

This may be stated as a background for the present so-called border crisis.



On the clarity of the border demarcations:



The border demarcation is doubtless very clear. It should also be borne in

mind that we, Eritrea and Ethiopia, did not demarcate the border on our

own. It was there already. But, what is astounding is the fact that the

border in question is demarcated by a straight line and gives no room for

confusion ( passing through coordinates ). This may confuse local people

but should not baffle government authorities. And in addition, we have

official maps to consult.

According to measurements conducted lately, it is clear that Badme is

inside Eritrea and Shiraro inside Ethiopia. Hence, if we have crossed

border, as is claimed, where along the demarcation did we cross inside

Ethiopian territory? This is a question that we would like to put.

When the Ethiopian government claims, as it is doing at present, that

Eritrean forces have crossed border and is announcing it to its people and

to the world, it should be able to say where exactly. Or else it should

claim to know a special map other than the one commonly used and then it

should make it known to us as well. On our part, no army of ours has

crossed border into Ethiopia.

The real area of the crossing should be clearly identified so that

witnesses may come and examine it.

Radio Ethiopia in its evening broadcast stated that Eritrean forces are

around Shiraro. Let alone crossing, we know that no one came as much as

near the border.

It is therefore very dangerous to talk about things that do not exist.

Stating that Eritrean forces have crossed the border should not be taken

lightly. It is tantamount to inciting the people to war.

In general, unless this accusation has ulterior motives, it is without

foundation as it is. With this in mind the Cabinet of Ministers held a

meeting and came up with a statement concerning the recent developments.

We, as leaders should do better than plunging our peoples into a

unprofitable conflict. We should instead work for a tighter relations

between our peoples. It is an unpardonable crime to want to excite feelings

of war. This situation has to stop.



On Ethiopian claims:



When the committee left for Ethiopia, they were asked to wait for two

months on the pretext that the other committee had not finished studying

the case thoroughly. On our part, we were of the mind that the case be

solved as soon as possible as people were dying. I sent a letter to Prime

Minister Meles Zenawi to that effect. He was favorable to the suggestion

and agreed on the renewed meeting of the joint-committee.

Last Saturday we were told that the prearranged committee meeting had been

stopped as the conflict had flared once more. We wanted to know what

happened and the answer was that we had led an attack inside Ethiopia and

that we had to pull out before resuming talks. Much as we tried to speed up

the peace process we were unable to continue due to Ethiopia's claim that

we had crossed into its territory. They told us that we had amassed an army

along the border, but after an initial conflict it is natural on our part

as well as on theirs to place forces there. The clash on Saturday had its

origin in such unstable situation.

The main point is that the committees meet and discuss the matter seriously

instead of plunging into continuous altercation. The answer we got was that

we had to pull out of Ethiopian territory. But the question as to where

along the border our forces .crossed into Ethiopia has still not gotten a

satisfactory answer.

Next, on the pretext of various meetings by the EPRDF executive committee,

cabinet of ministers, and then the parliament, the joint-committee could

not reach at any substantial agreement and was finally overtaken by the new

developments.



On the continuity of the joint-committee:



The strange thing is that all this is happening when we are focusing on

national developing campaigns. We never thought of divulging the incident

as we intended to handle the case with prudence.

When I came to learn ( I was on a visit to Saudi Arabia during the radio

statement by the Ethiopian government ) that they made threatening remarks

and wanted us to pull out of their territory or else, my stand was that we

could, both of us, leave the area in order to bring the situation under

control even though the idea of claiming lands is liable to compromise our

national sovereignty. But if the offer is that we should pull out

unilaterally, by what logic are we going to accept it. The only solution is

for both of us to pull out of the so-called disputed area and invite a

third party as an observer.

As I said earlier, the first person I met by telephone after my arrival

from Saudi Arabia was Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. We still stood by our

previous commitment that we should handle the case through peaceful means.

When he informed me that he would make a statement to the public I told him

that he should wait a little lest such action produce an unnecessary

result. He agreed. And then we agreed on demilitarizing the area until such

time that the issue get settled through reconciliation or other

alternatives and that we work in a responsible manner and restrain

ourselves from taking actions that may arouse tension.

After coming to such an understanding I heard that the Ethiopian radio made

statement to the effect that we have crossed border and attacked their

forces. I was greatly surprised by such a statement. But, even then I never

despaired and held telephonic conversation with Prime Minister Meles Zenawi

and agreed to lead the case towards a profitable direction.

For me it remains a big question mark why the Ethiopian government decided

to issue such statement in the first place. What does one profit by it?

What has happened recently is a bg loss to both of us. If there had been

death or destruction, it is a loss for both of us. If anyone thinks that he

has gained by it, he has only made a double loss.

Everyone has heard the statement issued by the Ethiopian government and we

on our part have issued a statement based on objective realities and far

from various sentiments. We don't intend to use the issue for propaganda

purposes. Our aim is to orient the issue in such a way that the situation

is not worsened nor emotions enflamed.





On whether the introduction of Nakfa has anything to do with

the present development:



I by nature do not like to talk through speculation. It doesn't seem proper

to me for anyone to try and find possible causes of certain issues basing

oneself on certain hypothesis and by creating scenarios in order to

justify one's explanation. Such sort of analysis could be dangerous

specially in the present situation.

One should try to see different issues separately. Otherwise trying to

connect things which have no relation whatsoever between them may lead to

a wrong conclusion.



On future relations with Ethiopia:



Such situation as we are witnessing at present may create undue concern in

some people. It has a strong impact on the way people look at things and

cannot help one in getting a wider vision of one's surrounding.

In such a situation it is natural that people lose their orientation and

become irritable and tend to react. One has therefore to come out of such

narrow thinking and try to widen one's vision. This requires some effort.

Only then can one find solutions to problems.

I myself take this incident as a small and misplaced paragraph in the

history of the Eritro-Ethiopian relations. I try to see beyond the present

crisis and feel that I have to work for the future. It is an experience to

me. Although bad experience has often detrimental consequences, it has

however, positive influences of its own. It becomes a lesson for not making

future mistakes.

This seemingly big problem should be seen as minor issue by both of us for

only then can we find a lasting solution to it. Otherwise unleashing our

emotions after every new development becomes profitless.



On the role of a third party:



First the demarcation line has to be examined in order to clear doubts.

What we have stated in the statement issued by the cabinet of ministers is

in no way going to harm us. Although we are ready to make compromises, this

does not mean that our borders are going to continue undefined. In the

final analysis what they call theirs and what we claim to be ours is going

to overlap and it is this overlap that should be demilitarized. We are

ready to make short-term compromises in order to get a long-term solution.

But good will alone is not a guarantee by itself. A third party should be

invited. The role of the third party is not to judge between us and tell us

to take this or accept that, but to try to calm down the situation and

observe deliberations and discussions by the two sides and suggest the best

course of action.

The third party should base its views on historical truths and adjust

mistakes.

If the need arises that we should appeal to higher courts, I am willing to

concede.

As for selecting a third party, I don't think there is a problem. There are

a lot of friends of Eritrea and Ethiopia who could take the case. Eritrea

is ready to go anywhere in order to see the crisis solved.





On the suffering of the Eritrean people who live in the border area:



We have taken the course of endurance and patience in time of suffering and

injustice not because the suffering of people doesn't concern us but it is

our principle that we tend to look ahead and think of things that may

develop future relations. We know about the suffering of the people who

live in the border areas. But, it is better to try and find a comprehensive

and lasting solution than hadndling things piecemeal and aggravating

problems by taking hasty measures.

My philosophy is to let the offender talk to his heart's desire, for in the

final analysis the truth will come out. This has been long practiced in our

history. Such principle is not based on fear or because we don't have the

truth on our side. If we had issued inflammatory statements as has been

done at present by the other side, the issue would have worsened and the

long-term effect of such a move would have proved less profitable in the end.

It all means that those who keep on accusing others are sure to miss the

chance of looking for alternative solutions to the problems at hand. It is

as simple as that.





On the language of the statements:



The language of the Ethiopian statement is not the proper one to broadcast

and announce to the world. Such language impels one to find a motive behind

and a justification for the whole affair.

On the other hand, the statement issued by the Eritrean government is clear

and gives no room for wrong interpretation.

In conclusion, I would like to say that Eritreans should be free of

pessimistic thoughts and grudge and should always accept any sudden and

irritating situations with prudence. Likewise it is understood that the

people of Ethiopia get frenetic about the situation not knowing the real

issue. The statement issued lately is baseless and out of reality and

should not allow anyone to be confused by it. Instead people should watch

the present developments with patience and calm. One should never become

victim of baseless justifications. Everyone, who lives outsideEritrea and

Ethiopia should ask him/herself why such justifications are needed and

should try to have a clear understanding of the situation and at the same

time try to avert undesirable consequences that might possibly arise in the

future. As to the Eritrean government, let it be clear that it is not going

to take mistaken actions urged by the present statement under any condition.