From: Biniam Haile \(SWE\) (eritrea.lave@comhem.se)
Date: Sat Jul 26 2008 - 19:14:26 EDT
Council on Foreign Relations
The Capital Interview: Envoy Seeks Support for Ethiopia, Aid for Somalia
Interviewee: Samuel Assefa, Ethiopia's ambassador to the United States
Interviewer: Robert McMahon, Deputy Editor
November 20, 2007
Ethiopia, an ally of the United States, faces U.S. congressional
sanctions over moves against its domestic opponents, as well as
criticism from rights monitors for its campaign to rid the Ogaden region
of separatist fighters. But Ethiopia's ambassador to the United States,
Samuel Assefa, says his country is committed to democratic reforms,
stressing that its survival depends on these efforts. He also urges
greater international support for Somalia's struggling peace process,
saying the tens of thousands of Ethiopian forces battling
al-Qaeda-linked militants in the region are essentially doing the
bidding of the international community, but are getting little
assistance. Assefa adds that Ethiopia continues to cope with the
spillover effects of the conflict in Ogaden.
Pending U.S. congressional legislation would connect some U.S. technical
aid to reforms in Ethiopia. Some members in Congress say the Ethiopian
government has come down too hard on the opposition and has not acted
enough to respond to reports of abuses in the post-election period of
2005. How do you respond to this criticism?
Clearly, undeniably, a huge, huge progress has been made over the past
few years in respect of democracy in particular. Very dramatic events
have taken place since 2005. In 2005, we had really the first
competitive, fiercely competitive, elections in the history of our
country. And it has been marred in its aftermath by very, very tragic
incidents, tragic violence, that has cost lives and this is a deep
source of sadness for all of us. But there is no doubt that it will be
remembered as a watershed. There is no going back. The democracy impulse
can no longer be contained and we are very proud of this achievement.
I'll be very happy to talk about what I think happened around the 2005
elections and the aftermath. The blame has been squarely put on our
government for the violence. Of course, the violence was not something
the government instigated at all. What happened, essentially, was that
the opposition at one point refused to accept the verdict of
constitutionally enshrined bodies, [the] Ethiopian National Election
Board. It refused to appeal these verdicts to the Supreme Court. It
refused to recognize, if you wish, the legitimacy of all
constitutionally enshrined institutions, and sought to reverse the
decision by other means, by going to the streets. It was very sad
because it marred a wonderful beginning, and it cost many lives.
After the House bill passed, your office issued a statement saying that
the legislation could undermine regional stability by jeopardizing vital
security cooperation between the United States and Ethiopia. Can you
explain this further?
First of all, I think we should see what [the legislation] does
internally because it is [labeled as] a bill to promote democracy and
accountability. What's inside the package is quite different. Let me
just give you one example. It says the bill will require, for example,
that the U.S. government provide funding for all political parties in
Ethiopia and it specifies that should there be any obstacle, by any
branch of the Ethiopian government, to implementation of these funding
programs for Ethiopian political parties, then non-essential aid may be
sanctioned-economic aid, health sector, and the like.
Now, our law rejects foreign funding of political parties. It is
illegal. Our government is supposed to be accountable to its people.
Representatives are supposed to be accountable to their constituents.
"Accountability" here [in the U.S. legislation] means accountability to
a foreign government, not to our own people.
What drives this legislation itself is not clear. This legislation comes
in the wake of a very bold decision by the Ethiopian government to issue
pardons to all members of the political opposition that had been charged
and convicted in connection with the violence that took place after the
2005 elections. Civil and political rights were restored fully and this
was meant to both encourage healing to occur in the society, and more
important to put the democratic momentum back, to reclaim it, to
reinvigorate it, so that political apathy would not set in.
Ethiopia is on a war footing in terms of a large deployment of troops in
Somalia, border frictions with Eritrea, actions in the Ogaden region,
and so forth. What kind of impact is that having on the government's
ability to push forward authentic reforms?
This country, its survival, national survival, depends upon
democratization. And this is taken by many to be a very extraordinary
remark because ours is very old country and because it has survived
under repressive regimes for millennia, under non-democratic regimes.
Why should now national survival depend on democracy?
What's more, even Westerners will comment, in fact democracy is a very
dangerous game sometimes. There are many sources of instability,
especially the initial efforts to democratize. And therefore, in this
region, in this most dangerous region of the world, is a vigorous
program of democratization a reasonable path for you? But this is a
really very firm opinion on the part of the government-to hold the
country together depends fundamentally on creating democratic
institutions, holding democratic competitive elections, and ensuring
that we do everything to nurture the growth of a culture of tolerance,
and a culture that sustains democratic institutions and a democratic way
of life.
Let's look at the Ogaden region. There are concerns about separatism and
terrorism. But there have been a lot of humanitarian concerns about the
population in that region.
First of all, it's absolutely right to point attention to the Ogaden as
really being the issue that is being raised nowadays. When people talk
about, even the [House] legislation, it's now not really about anything
else.
Troubles there started a while back with one organization, which we deem
terrorists. We are puzzled why it is not officially labeled terrorists
by others. It is the ONLF, the Ogaden National Liberation Front, which
has been active for many years in ways that cannot be characterized
other than with the label terrorism.
But something big happened months ago, if you recall, at an oil
exploration installation [in Ogaden]. Eight Chinese and sixty-some
Ethiopian workers, all civilians, were executed. It gave us suddenly an
international dimension to the issue.
At this stage, do you consider the region stable enough that you will
allow more aid into it?
There is every effort being made. More effort is also being made in
collaboration with all concerned entities, responsible entities
internationally, donor countries, and the like. All I'm trying to say is
first of all, you have to see this against this backdrop of this
organization, which has operated in that region for a very long time,
and the activities of which increased in intensity with the fall of the
Islamic Courts Union in Somalia.
Does the government see a danger in providing access to some
humanitarian groups in terms of them perhaps assisting the rebel
movements there?
Primarily we will need to understand that it is a war zone of a special
kind. This [conflict] is supported by Eritrea. It is now supported by
the Islamic Courts Union. So it is in a way a response also to the
defeat that the hardliners suffered in Somalia, that the activity of the
ONLF within Ethiopia was suddenly intensified. Now, it is in this
context, of course, that the issue of the humanitarian needs of the
population is addressed, it has to be addressed. It is a very vulnerable
population.
What are the obstacles then? Well, I think the humanitarian aid is
moving well even to remoter parts of the country. There are now
forty-some sites that have been selected where the UN is present and
food delivery is being coordinated actively between our own Disaster
Prevention and Preparedness Commission-the so-called DPPC-and various UN
agencies and this includes WFP, OCHA, UNICEF, UNHCR to some extent might
also have a role, where there are refugees. I think this work is
proceeding well.
There are also issues that are often mentioned in connection with
commercial traffic. A lot of people have talked about disruption of
commercial traffic [to Ogaden]. To talk about commercial traffic in that
part of the country is to talk about contraband. Contraband now means in
this context also weapons and explosives coming-it is a very porous
region, a 2000-kilometer border [with Somalia], very porous border and
[contraband] comes in through many, many different points and this is
the concern with commercial traffic.
I want to expand the issue to Somalia. The battle of Mogadishu seems to
be going on. What is Ethiopia's game plan there? Is it bogged down, as
some people are saying?
Ethiopian policy in Somalia is not different than African Union policy
in respect to Somalia which, incidentally, is no different from U.S.
policy. There is a four-point plan and there is a universal agreement I
think on that four-point plan also that has been issued by the State
Department here. I think there is no one who will contest that in
Ethiopia, the transitional government in Somalia itself, and AU, the
first point is basically the African Union force should come in,
according to the Security Council resolution (PDF) that was passed in
December of last year. To date, we have had too few taking up that role.
Well, it's a peacekeeping role and there's not much of a peace to keep
right now. I guess that's the problem.
But there's a great deal of peace to keep. Of course there is. But we
need that force to come in. Everyone supports this. Moreover, every
effort should be made for the transitional government to reach out, to
be more inclusive, and to ensure that there are no marginalized
communities. Try to reach out to the marginalized community because the
best safeguard against insurgencies and the like is inclusion, the
politics of inclusion, and you want to be as inclusive as possible. And
to the extent that there are barriers on inclusion, it should be very
publicly justifiable reasons such as al-Qaeda-related individuals and
the like.
As far as our own forces are concerned, we want them out sooner than
anybody else. And we wholeheartedly agree with those who say the sooner
the better. The difficulty is when we tried to, in fact, move out as
quickly as we had planned to, there was a great deal of clamor, saying
"no you can't do that now. You have to stay until the AU forces come
in."
Is that 'clamor' coming from the U.S. as well?
It's a clamor coming from everybody. Even the most vocal opponents of
the Ethiopian presence suddenly will be very, very loud voices in favor
of staying there until something else comes into the picture. And
frankly we can't shoulder the burden by ourselves. We wanted to help the
transitional government, [an] internationally recognized government,
when it called upon us to avert a very, very, very grave danger, which
is the collapse of that government. And the international community
would have had no leg to stand on.
Is there more U.S. support, logistical or otherwise, anticipated in that
area?
I think the commitments are there but I think it needs to be reaffirmed
in every way possible. There is a great deal more talk about
humanitarian crisis than there is a readiness to assist. The amount of
money that is put up for Somalia, if you think of it, is not very
impressive.
The Security Council has registered its concern about the situation
between Ethiopia and Eritrea developing into conflict. Your foreign
ministry came out with a statement saying Ethiopia is committed to
peaceful resolution of the conflict. What happens next then between
Ethiopia and Eritrea?
The expectation of resumption of war on our part, we think, is wrong. We
don't expect it. Of course, we can't rule it out completely, because
it's not something that is simply up to us. But on our part, restraint
will be maximal as it has been over the past years. And we shall not be
provoked into anything like that. We shall not allow ourselves to be
dragged into anything like that. Of course, on the Eritrean side,
anything can happen, but the major deterrent to it has been Eritrea's
own assessment of the balance of the forces, so to speak. That hasn't
changed, and to the extent that one can use the rational actor model to
predict the behavior of the other party, we think the likelihood of
anything flaring up around the border is low.
I don't believe the grounds that have been given for why they expect
something to flare up are really compelling. I don't believe that. Of
course, the peace has eluded us and we have to worked towards the peace,
and [there is] no change in terms of Ethiopian position, no dramatic
movements away from any prior commitment at all, none whatsoever.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14839/
Samuel Assefa
<http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/images/assefa.jpg>
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----
