From: eretrawi@yahoo.com
Date: Tue Feb 03 2009 - 14:19:39 EST
Selam Dehai,
amaret@ymail.com wrote:
<< To bestow such an accolade to a government that moved, with reckless haste, to war with Ethiopia, Yemen, and now with Djibouti is laughable and an ultimate hyperbolizing.>>
Can you present us with factual evidence in the three cases -- Ethiopia, Djibouti, Yemen -- that it was Eritrea which moved "with reckless haste, to war" with the said countries?
Revisiting the so-called border war with Ethiopia from May 1998 up to the signing of the Algiers peace agreement in December 2000, are you saying it was Eritrea which was the warmonger, refusing the peaceful solution at all stages of the so-called "peace process" and it was Ethiopia who was the peacemaker, ruling out the military option at all times and opting for peaceful legal solution?
With the "final and binding" ruling of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC), was it Eritrea or Ethiopia who accepted the rule of law rendered by international court at arbitration at The Hague? Is it Eritrea or Ethiopia that is continuing to create the obstacles to the full implementation of the demarcation on the ground according to the EEBC's verdict?
amaret@ymail.com quotes Barack Obama's inaugural speech:
"To those leaders around the globe who seek to saw conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West -- know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you can destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of DISSENT, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to UNCLENCH your fist."
I admire Obama's rhetorical skills and his ability to inspire millions not only in America, but around the globe. But, I would remind both Obama and amaret@ymail.com of these wise words by one of the greatest Americans of the 20th century: "America is now the greatest purveyor of violence in the world!" These words were spoken by none other than Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1967. Sadly, 40 years later, America's appetite and capacity for violence and destruction has been increased by leaps and bounds. It has yet to UNCLENCH its fist, and to cease from violently suppressing even the mildest DISSENT of those people who yearn to be free around the world. I only need to mention one word which is of recent memory: GAZA!
So amaret@ymail.com, I would urge you to heed your own advice, "un-bury your head from under the sand" and stop your "blame-Eritrea-first" tired song. The West, led by the US, has a lot to account for in its long history of sowing conflicts, wars, and violence and causing untold destruction and genocide around the world, including in our part of the world. I was merely trying to point out their sorry history of violence and warfare, those who would laugh at us in the war they instigated between Eritrea and Ethiopia, by referring to us as "two bald men fighting over a comb." That's how they have always been paying it in Africa -- ignite the wars, and then hypocritically appear in the scene to admonish Africans to stop the war and solve their problems diplomatically, all the while making sure that we are embroiled in an endless "peace process". So, in my last pot, I was merely trying to point out (with some irony) that what's happening in the Arctic is not
an anomaly, but a continuation of centuries-long of war culture of the white man, and may very well ignite World War III. I guess the irony escaped you, as in your eyes, the masters of war in Europe and America can do no wrong -- it's only us poor Africans who are perennial screw-ups and need saving from ourselves.
If you want to be an apologist for European/American violent history (past and present) and demonize Eritrea, that's your choice. Go ahead, be my guest "and bury your head in the sand". The likes of the shameless political prostitute, Bereket Habte Selassie, with one leg already in the grave, may want us to engage in these kind of games, in order to drag the entire nation of Eritrea with them to the grave. But don't expect me to join you in your sordid "Blame Eritrea at all costs" politics. If, however, you will persist in such dirty games, we have one word for you here in Dehai: YRDA'EKA!
Berhan Sium
========================
[DEHAI] Re: The Arctic in NATO's Crosshair......
From: Amare T (amaret@ymail.com)
Date: Mon Feb 02 2009 - 00:25:56 EST
Dear Berhan, For to long, I have enjoyed your contribution in Dehai tremendously . Of late, however, and particularly your most recent input re: the war of words in the Arctic has me wondering if this was a " ..or is it Memorex" moment. I could not fathom whether it was meant for comic relief or to ridicule. If so, who is the butt of your joke? Extolling the Eritrean government for its track record of resorting to diplomacy and the rule of law to resolve disagreements with its neighbors is an outlandish a statement as they come. To bestow such an accolade to a government that moved, with reckless haste, to war with Ethiopia, Yemen, and now with Djibouti is laughable and an ultimate hyperbolizing. In a recent posting a certain Michael Abraham courageously admonished Dehair's to bring into accord with reason the myth that the West is the only culprit in the blame game. Instead of rushing to construct a halo around the head of the GoE, we should exercise
introspection and apportion blame evenly, because there is enough blame to go around. It is just silly to absolve the GoE from any fault and blame only external actors for Eritrea's predicament.
"To those leaders around the globe who seek to saw conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West -- know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you can destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of DISSENT, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to UNCLENCH your fist."
The quote above as delivered in his inaugural address poignantly epitomizes President Obama's foreign police and will serve as an unequivocal response to the incoherent gibberish courtesy of Messrs. Zeyhilel and H. Abraham. Some personalities PIA undiplomatically belittled in years past are back on the scene, front and center, to haunt him. In response to the resolution passed by the Security Council a few weeks ago, I am surprised France has not been singled out as the "enemy of the week." as has been the case with Ethiopia, the US, the Brits, the UN-SC and the "tiny poodle" as Mr. Abraham referred to Djibouti. Pretty soon Eritrea will run out of enemies. If we really love our country and care for our people we should demand of our government the immediate implementation of the constitution and the rule of law. So that you know, I am not writing anything novel here but to urge you to unburden yourself and un-bury your head from under the sand and not
to resist the temptation to acknowledge that this is an issue millions of Eritreans passionately hash over in the privacy of their living rooms. Regards, Amare
=========================
Re: [DEHAI] The Arctic in NATO's Crosshairs -- A bund of bald white men fighting over a comb?
Friday, January 30, 2009 3:38 PM
From: "Berhan Sium" <eretrawi@yahoo.com>
To: dehai@dehai.org
Selam Dehai,
This is nothing but a bunch of greedy bald white men fighting over a useless comb in the arid snow desert of the Arctic! When are these white men going to learn civilized behavior of settling their border disputes in a legal peaceful manner? What good is the International Court of Justice, which is based at the heart of Europe in The Hague, if not to settle disputes like this in a civilized manner? Perhaps Eritrea can share its experience with the Europeans, Russians, Canadians and Americans about how to settle border disputes legally and peacefully without resorting to violent barbaric behavior.
For once, this Africa finds it morally gratifying to lecture these boringly sanctimonious white people about civilized norms and rule of law :-) I hope the African Union, under the wise leadership of the Great Brother Leader, Mu'ammar Al Gaddafi, will soon issue a stern statement of warning to the Europeans, Americans, Canadians, and Russians, not to let things get out of hand over the Arctic, and to exercise maximum restraint and refrain from any resort to their habitual violent nature of settling disputes! Hopefully, the AU will also send a delegation of wise African elder statesmen for a shuttle diplomacy to the capitals of the North, lest Europe once again goes crazy over this useless arid desert snowland and ignites yet another senseless and genocidal World War.
Berhan Sium
============================
[DEHAI] The Arctic in NATO's Crosshairs
From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Thu Jan 29 2009 - 19:51:18 EST
The Arctic in NATO's Crosshairs
By David Brian
Global Research, January 26, 2009
The Voice of Russia
The endless desert of snow and ice has always been a subject for dispute among politicians, diplomats and scientists. The Arctic territory has now become a subject of a military dispute.
NATO has declared it a strategically important region. The announcement was made by NATO spokesman James Appathurai who also said a meeting with the participation of high-ranking NATO officials is to take place January 28-29 in Reykjavik, Iceland.
The list of participants leaves no doubt about NATO's real goals in the region. The decision of the Western defense alliance to declare the northern territories as strategically important will create a tense international situation in the region. The struggle for the Arctic is becoming the subject of long-term military games. Chances are very high, therefore, that they will send military units to the Arctic sooner or later.
Those, who keep an eye on the developments around the Arctic territories, will hardly fail to see that Mr. Appathurai's remarks come hard on the heels of the initiatives outlined in the US national security directive. The document says that Washington has fundamental national interests in the Arctic region. These interests are crystal clear: missile defense, strategic deterrence, marine security operations. There are no references to terrorists or pirates, who obviously feel themselves way more comfortable in the warm waters off the coast of Somali than among the polar bears of the Far North.
The US, Canada and NATO make no secret of why they need a military group deployed in the Arctic region. Their ice-breakers will arrive in the region to defend national interests of those members of the alliance who claim their right to the natural wealth of this part of the planet. The Arctic contains about 90 billion barrels of unexplored crude and enormous reserves of natural gas, which could be comparable to those of Russia making up about 30 percent of global gas reserves. Experts say that by 2030 Russia will be using many of its Arctic gas deposits to extract about 50 percent of its natural gas. For example, the Shtokman deposit in the Barents Sea contains 4 trillion cubic meters of gas.
Fully aware of the Arctic's strategic importance, Russia is ready to respond adequately to NATO's claims. That is why NATO is in such a rush to stake out these claims in the region. Russia's marine doctrine, which was signed during Vladimir Putin's presidency, singles out the Arctic territory as one of the major directions of the country's naval policy. Russia's Security Council is to unveil a new strategy of Arctic development at the end of January. The key message of the document will be as follows: "Russia is not going to give the Arctic away." Moscow also wants to considerably intensify the freight traffic activity along the Northern Seaway during the upcoming years and plans to build for this purpose six new powerful nuclear icebreakers before 2020.
About a year from now Russia will submit to the UN documents substantiating its claim to the Arctic shelf. Five countries of the Arctic Ocean -- Russia, Canada, the US, Norway and Denmark -- made a reasonable decision last year to carve up the Arctic region on the basis of existent conventions only.
However, NATO's plans to add a military dimension to the Arctic dialogue may lead to drastic changes in the approach to the current issues. All this may result in a new flare point of tension on the global map.