The Ethiopian regime continues to pursue its war of aggression against Eritrea, adamantly rejecting calls by the OAU, the UN Security Council, the European Union and several countries including the US, Russia, France, China, Japan, and Italy, among others, for an immediate cessation of hostilities.

As it may be recalled, the OAU High-Level Delegation had urged on March 1st "for an immediate end to the fighting given the acceptance by both parties" of the Framework Agreement. Similarly, the UN Security Council issued two statements in the past week alone calling for an immediate cease-fire and expressing its regret, especially in its communications of March 4, "that Ethiopia still continues its military actions."

But Ethiopia persists stubbornly in its war of aggression giving a deaf ear to all these calls. Pitched fighting continued throughout last week as Ethiopia launched, almost daily, attacks on the Mereb-Setit front in an attempt to seize Eritrean sovereign territory.

These acts of aggression have been accompanied by belligerent statements coming out from Addis Abeba:

• In a government statement of March 1, 1999, entitled "Ethiopia Is Looking for a Lasting Peace," the regime openly admits that its agenda extends "to overthrowing the government in Asmara" which has become "a threat to the region."

• Ethiopia's "Parliament" issued a vitriolic statement on March 2nd rejecting UN Security Council Resolution 1227 of February 10th. Ethiopia objected strongly to the cessation of hostilities and the embargo on the sale of arms to both countries. Oddly enough, the extraordinary session of the Parliament did not address the Security Council statement of February 27th calling on both sides to "halt hostilities now that the OAU Framework was accepted by both parties."

• A senior government officials told a public rally in Addis Abeba on March 2nd that "the war will continue until the Eritrean army is wiped out."

• Ethiopia's Speaker of Parliament, Dawit Yohannes, told a press conference in Paris on March 3 that his country "is not contemplating a cease-fire at this stage."

This is a complete lie and a deliberate distortion of the OAU Framework. Indeed, there is no ambiguity in the OAU Framework concerning global demilitarization. The OAU clarification on redeployment and demilitarization given to the Government of Eritrea further reads: "the redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town and its environs (defined as the areas surrounding the town). This should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

It must also be borne in mind that Ethiopia has always been refusing to submit the totality of its territorial claims in spite of the illegal map that it published officially in October 1997 carving out large chunks of Eritrean territory. The Government of Eritrea has time and again requested the OAU to demand that Ethiopia submit, in explicit geographic terms, the totality of its claims as this was imperative for defining the scope of the border conflict. But Ethiopia has invariably rejected these demands. And, in the clarifications that Eritrea sought from the OAU regarding this particular issue, the OAU's response reads: "Ethiopia had indicated that it will submit its claims when the issues of delimitation, demarcation and, if need be, arbitration are addressed."

Why is Ethiopia raising new issues now when it has refused to discuss its claims in the past eight months? Does Ethiopia want to revise the Framework Agreement which was endorsed by the Summit of the Central Organ?

Ethiopia has violated operative paragraph 1 of the Framework Agreement on the cessation of hostilities and the relevant Security Council resolutions when it launched the war against Eritrea on February 6, 1999. Despite its pronouncements to the contrary in the early days, Ethiopia does not deny now that this was a well-planned offensive complete with a code-name (Operation Sunset).

In the event, is Ethiopia now demanding a "reward" for an act of aggression that it has committed in contravention of the OAU and UN Security Council resolutions? Is this the reason why it is requesting, albeit in a round-about way, a new version of the OAU Framework?

Ethiopia goes further to accuse Eritrea of the violation of human rights and other norms of international law in an effort to justify continued war. Here again, the track record illustrates the reverse:

• It is Ethiopia that has expelled over 53,000 Eritreans and which has confiscated their life-long earnings;

• Ethiopia has detained more than 1,500 Eritrean youth as POWs in its concentration camps under the presumption that they are "potential soldiers";

• Ethiopia has employed about 200 mercenaries in its Air Force;

• Ethiopia continues to target population centers in its air raids (25 civilians have been killed and over 30 wounded in recent air bombings of Deda Lalai, Badme, Adi Qwala, villages in the Zalambesa and Tsorona areas, and Shambuqo).

Ethiopia is pursuing the war not because it has legitimate border claims. Ethiopia's agenda is territorial aggrandizement which it hopes to achieve by installing a puppet government in Eritrea. But this ambition is not tenable in terms of international law. It is also impossible to achieve in practice. It was this ambition that plunged the region into turmoil for thirty years in the past. The sad history should not be repeated now and the onus for preventing a similar disaster lies with the international community.

1. In an 8 p.m. broadcast on 8 March 1999, Radio Ethiopia reported that Prime Minister Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia had, in a meeting with African diplomats stationed in Addis Ababa, declared that Ethiopia viewed with great doubt the acceptance by Eritrea of the OAU Framework Agreement. The four reasons given as a basis for this doubt were the following:
   1. Official statements by Eritrean authorities have repeatedly stated that they are making preparations for a fresh invasion of Ethiopia.
   2. The Eritrean Government has not announced the decision to accept the OAU Framework Agreement to the Eritrean people on radio.
   3. Eritrean communication to various governments and international organizations regarding its acceptance of the Framework Agreement were concluded in confusing phases.
   4. The activities of the Eritrean Defense Forces in the war fronts are a reflection of a country intent on war."

   These ludicrous prevarications can only be attributed to the diplomacy of a government whose duplicity has run out of steam. It is now common knowledge that Eritrea had warned the world community of Ethiopia's impending aggression between 15 January and 15 February 1999. It is also common knowledge that it was Ethiopia that invaded Eritrea, broke the air moratorium and refuses all calls for a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities by the international community. It has been -- and continues to be -- condemned for all these acts by the UN, the US Government and other parties. In the event, it is hypocritical and mind-boggling newspeak to claim that "Eritrea is concerned with its defensive measures because it is intent on continuing the war."

2. I myself announced in an interview with Eritrean Television on 27 February 1999 that Eritrea has formally accepted the OAU Framework Agreement. This was repeated on Eritrean Radio the next morning in all Eritrean languages as well as in Amharic, English and Oromoffia. The message was clear and understood by the Eritrean people -- and almost certainly the majority of the Ethiopian people who listened to the broadcast. It must also be understood that it is none of Ethiopia's business how a sovereign state communicates with its people.
   That notwithstanding, however, it is elementary that it is Eritrea's communications to the peacebrokers, including the current Chairman of the OAU, the Secretary General of the OAU, the Secretary General of the UN and the President of the US, and the clarity of the message contained in the communications that is important for the initiation of peace making and the resolution of the conflict. All the parties have understood the message, congratulated Eritrea and requested Ethiopia to abide by its previous commitment. The Ethiopian Government is being denounced by all concerned for not heeding advice.
   The absurd claim that the Eritrean messages were not clear enough are repudiated by these denunciations of Ethiopia and the calls made to it by several parties that it should start to implement the Framework Agreement without delay. Needless to say, Eritrea's reiteration of its position and its creation of a committee to follow up implementation of the Framework Agreement to the OAU delegation that visited Asmara on 4-6 March 1999 should have cast away any doubt even with Ethiopian authorities.

3. It is clear that all this clumsy maneuvering is only part of a thinly veiled policy to renege from its oft-repeated "unconditional commitment" to the OAU Framework Agreement, and to continue its aggression with a view to achieving its ulterior motives beyond the border dispute.
   1. It is for this reason that the Prime Minister of Ethiopia had to tell an outright lie to the diplomats. His claim that the OAU High-Level Delegation had informed him that the withdrawal of Eritrean troops will include areas other than Badme and its environs is belied by the record. The Framework Agreement provides for withdrawal as follows:

      "In order to create conditions conducive to a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the conflict through the delimitation and demarcation of the border, the armed forces presently in Badme Town and its environs, should be redeployed to the positions they held before 6 May 1998 as a mark of goodwill and consideration for our continental Organization, it being understood that this redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the area concerned, which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation of the border and, if need be, through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration."

      Environs was defined as "the area surrounding Badme Town." The OAU clarification on redeployment and demilitarization given to the Government of Eritrea further reads: "the redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town and its environs (defined as the areas surrounding the town). This should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the re-deployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

   2. The Ethiopian Prime Minister vainly attempts to inject new elements consisting of Ethiopia's wild allegations into the Framework Agreement. These include acceptance of responsibility by the Eritrean Government for the alleged destruction of Badme, the cost of demining the area around Badme and the loss of life and destruction of property caused by the war. He seems to forget that it was his government that has been, for the best part of nine months, beating war drums and threatening the destruction of Eritrea; had amassed an army which included more than 200 foreign mercenaries, 13-year-old boy-soldiers and press-ganged youth (including some from neighboring countries) in preparation for an aggression; and actually committed aggression along three fronts since February 6, 1999.

4. It has now become evident that the conflict has ceased to be a border dispute. It is now an attempt to subvert a sovereign government in contravention of international law. It is because the UN Security Council seems to be an obstacle to the achievement of these objectives that it has now become the latest victim of Ethiopia's hate campaign.

5. Having refused to implement the Framework Agreement, the Ethiopian government is now feverishly finalizing preparations for a renewed offensive which may take place at any time. In spite of this, the Eritrean government reiterates its continued commitment to cease-fire and cessation of hostilities as well as the implementation of the Framework Agreement.

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

The Ethiopian Government is, under the pretext that it has grave doubts about the Government of Eritrea's acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, feverishly preparing for a new aggression against Eritrea. This is contrary to the provisions of the Framework Agreement and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions endorsing the Framework Agreement and is meant to achieve other political and military objectives. It is therefore manifestly clear now that the Ethiopian Government is violating the provisions of the Framework Agreement and creating obstacles to the peaceful resolution of the conflict.

The Eritrean Government therefore likes to clarify, without leaving any room for doubt, its position on the basic contents of the Framework Agreement, if only because Ethiopia is, by its prevarications and allegations, sowing confusion on the matter.

1. Eritrea has always been committed, and remains unequivocally committed, to cease-fire and immediate cessation of hostilities. Ethiopia has been consistent in its rejection of both a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities.

2. Eritrean troops have, since 27 February 1999, been redeployed from Badme and its environs which are presently occupied by Ethiopia.

3. Eritrea is ready to implement redeployment in "all other contested areas along the common border within the framework of demilitarization of the entire common border" and accepts the supervision of the demilitarization process by a Group of Military Observers as provided for in article 5 (a) and (b) of the Framework Agreement.

The fact that the Eritrean Government has created a Follow-Up Committee to determine the modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement is a mark of the sincerity of its commitments. The Follow-Up Committee awaits the call of the OAU High-Level Delegation to begin its work as provided for in article 9 (a) and (b) of the Framework Agreement.

Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, has informed the ambassadors accredited to his country on Monday, 8 March, that his government will launch another offensive against Eritrea "before the weekend." Ethiopia's declared decision to continue its war of aggression against Eritrea and to resort to large-scale military action:

1. is in contravention of the OAU Framework for a peaceful solution of the dispute which underlines that the war must come to an end as soon as it is accepted by both parties. Ethiopia has therefore no cause to resort to force as the Framework Agreement has been accepted by both parties;

2. is in violation and blatant contempt of UN Security Council Resolutions 1117, 1226 and 1227 and, in particular, the Statement of 4 March that called for "an immediate end to hostilities" while expressing "regret at Ethiopia's continuation of its military action";

3. poses a grave threat to regional peace and stability as this was indeed underlined in the Security Council Statement of 4 March.

• invading Eritrean territory in July 1997 and forcibly bringing the Eritrean Bada region under its administration;

• issuing unilaterally and illegal map in October 1977 redrawing Eritrea's international boundaries which is an act of aggression;

• attacking Eritrean units in the Badme area on 6 May 1998 and starting all out attacks against Eritrea throughout the common border including air attacks on the capital, Asmara;

• breaking the moratorium on air strikes that the United Nations has called on both sides to respect;

• targeting civilians and economic installations in its air raids;

• employing over 200 mercenaries in direct fighting against Eritrea; and

• cruelly deporting en masse and without due process of law over 53,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin while illegally detaining over 1,500 in Blatten and others in other concentration camps.

Ethiopia thus bears full responsibility for the war and its consequences. In light of Ethiopia's violations of international law and of UN Security Council Resolutions and its open contempt for them, and the danger that its avowed escalation poses to regional peace and stability, the Government of Eritrea calls on the UNSC to act without delay before it is too late. In this regard, the Government of Eritrea calls on the UNSC to:

• condemn Ethiopia for its war of aggression against Eritrea in flagrant violation of the UN Charter and UNSC Resolutions; and

• take, on the basis of the UN Charter, urgent and forceful measures against Ethiopia.

H.E. Mr. Qin Huasun
President of the Security Council
United Nations

Excellency,

I have the honour to transmit the attached document, entitled "Issues Raised by the Eritrean Side Requesting Clarification," that contains the written clarifications of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) High-Level Delegation at the Heads of State Level to the questions submitted by the State of Eritrea on the OAU "Proposals for a Framework Agreement for a Peaceful Settlement of the Dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia."

Eritrea submitted its questions for clarification to the OAU High-Level Delegation on 12 December 1998 prior to the meeting of the OAU Central Organ, and received these written clarifications on 26 January 1999. Eritrea was studying these clarifications to give its considered response to the OAU High-Level Delegation when the process was cut short by Ethiopia's launch of its all out offensive on 6 February 1999.

I wish to draw the attention of the Council to the clarity of the answers from the OAU regarding:

1. the question of what constitutes the "environs" of Badme under paragraph 1b;

2. OAU's answer to the Ethiopian interpretation of what Badme and "environs" means under paragraph 1c, and,

3. the issue of "re-deployment" throughout the remaining border under paragraph 2c.

   I understand, Your Excellency, that the Ethiopian government had, through its Permanent Representative to the United Nations, requested that this same document ("Issues Raised by the Eritrean Side Requesting Clarification") be circulated as a document of the Security Council about three weeks ago during the Presidency of Canada.

   As the Ethiopian government raised no questions about the clarifications then, such a measure would indicate that the Ethiopian government was in agreement with the clarifications provided in this document. In fact, that is the only way Ethiopia could be consistent with its alleged "full acceptance" of the OAU Framework. Ethiopia's attempts to misinterpret and revise the Framework now could only indicate its design to continue to use force against Eritrean sovereignty.

   I should be grateful if you would kindly circulate this letter and its annex as a document of the Security Council.

   Haile Menkerios
   Ambassador
   Permanent Representative
   Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the United Nations
   

   ---

   g_031499.html100655 127137 345 2506 6672753322 6275 Ethiopia Launches a Large-Scale Offensive on the Alitena-Mereb Front
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Sunday, 14 Mar 1999

   The Ethiopian regime has launched a large-scale offensive on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front today. The attack started at 8:00 a.m. this morning.

   As a prelude to today's large-scale offensive, the TPLF regime had carried out aerial bombing and heavy artillery shelling in the environs of these areas (Hazemo Plains) yesterday afternoon from 2:30 - 4:30 p.m.

   Today's offensive has been in the offing for days now. Ethiopia's Prime Minister had informed the ambassadors accredited to his country on Monday, March 8, that his government will launch another offensive against Eritrea "before the weekend."

   The Ethiopian regime has launched the attack today in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March urging Ethiopia to stop its continued military action. The Ethiopian regime has openly reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, putting forth new preconditions now so as to torpedo the peace process.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 14 March 1999

   g_0314992.html100655 127137 345 2266 6673033745 6363

   One MiG-23 Jet Fighter Shot Down
   Nineteen Tanks Destroyed and Two Captured
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Friday, 14 Mar 1999

   Press Release
   One MiG-23 Jet Fighter Shot Down;
   Nineteen Tanks Destroyed and Two Captured

   The large-scale offensive that the Ethiopian regime launched this morning on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front has been repulsed with the enemy suffering heavy human losses.

   The infantry and mechanized attacks were accompanied by heavy shelling and air bombardment with mercenary pilots.

   One MiG-23 jet fighter was shot down. Nineteen tanks were destroyed while two were captured.

   Ethiopia launched its war of aggression today in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March urging Ethiopia to stop its continued military action. The Ethiopian regime has openly reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, putting forth new preconditions now so as to torpedo the peace process.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 14 March 1999
   g_031699.html100655 127137 345 3521 6673446574 6306 Press Release
   Ethiopia's Large-Scale Offensive Totally Foiled
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Tuesday, 16 Mar 1999

   The large-scale offensive that the TPLF regime launched on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front on Sunday March 14th has been totally foiled around 9:00 a.m. today.

   Ethiopia launched repetitive attacks the whole day yesterday which continued throughout the night and until the morning hours today.

   It has not yet been possible to give an estimation of the huge human losses that the TPLF regime has sustained in the three days of fighting which can better be described as a slaughter. In what has become a standard pattern now, the TPLF regime employed human waves for successive assaults with little apparent concern for the massive losses that its army continued to sustain.

   Furthermore, the callous regime forcibly brought about 5,000 villagers to the battle areas yesterday and compelled them to carry ammunition on pack animals and their own backs thereby rendering them victims of the fighting.

   While thousands of its troops fell like leaves in the battlefront, the TPLF regime's hypocrisy and blatant lies reached its height as it first denied the existence of fighting and later tried to downplay its intensity.

   Ethiopia unleashed the war of aggression in defiance of UN Security Council calls of 4 March to "stop its continued military action." Ethiopia has in practice rejected the OAU Framework by putting forth new preconditions. These acts demonstrate that Ethiopia was never interested in peace and that its agenda transcends the border dispute.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 16 March 1999

   g_031799.html100655 127137 345 6025 6673726412 6301

   Ethiopia's Army Sustains Biggest Defeat
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 17 March 1999

   The large-scale offensive that the TPLF regime unleashed on the Tsorona flank of the Alitena-Mereb front was foiled yesterday about 9:00 a.m. with the Ethiopian army suffering its heaviest losses ever in a battle of three days. BBC and other journalists who visited the battle scene yesterday described the human carnage as "horrific."

   Four Ethiopian divisions were involved (one division is 11,000 to 12,000 strong) in the successive assaults with human waves that the TPLF regime launched without respite for three days. The regime further threw into battle about 5,000 villagers who were forced to carry ammunition on their backs and on pack animals. They were mingled with the attacking army to ensure a continuous supply of ammunition.

   "We were threatened with imprisonment of twenty years if we did not comply," said one of the poor farmers who was captured. "Those who were scared of the battle and tried to flee were machine-gunned by our own troops from behind," he added.

   Ethiopia had lost about 9,000 killed in the battles that raged from February 23rd to 26th on the Mereb-Setit front. But their losses on the Tsorona front in the past three days were several fold higher. Furthermore, a total of 57 enemy tanks were destroyed while six others were captured. One MiG-23 fighter plane was shot down.

   As the Ethiopian army continued to sustain its biggest losses ever, the TPLF regime continued to deny or downplay the fighting. But, when it had actually subsided yesterday morning and as foreign journalists spent the whole day yesterday on the battle scene, the regime's spokeswoman and TPLF radio told their domestic audience that "fighting continued throughout the day." The TPLF regime has designated the whole of Tigray "off limits" to local and international press barring any independent account of the war since the start of its offensives on February 6 last month.

   As a sign of its desperation and in an apparent retaliation for the staggering defeat that it has sustained on the Tsorona front, the TPLF regime yesterday bombed the small town of Kinafina in south-central Eritrea.

   Eight people were severely wounded in the senseless air raid. The TPLF regime has bombed the civilian centers of Deda Lalai, Shambuqo, Adi Qwala, and a cluster of villages in the Zalambesa area in the previous weeks killing 27 civilians and wounding 30 others.

   Ethiopia unleashed the war of aggression in defiance of UN Security Council calls urging it "to stop its continued military action." Ethiopia has moreover rejected the OAU Framework that it had earlier "accepted" by putting forth new preconditions. These acts illustrate that the TPLF regime was never interested in peace and that its agenda transcends the border dispute.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 17 March 1999 g_031899.html100655 127137 345 15052 6674170150 6313 How Long Will the International Community Put Up With the Lies of the TPLF Regime?
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Thursday, 18 Mar 1999

   Consider the following litany of lies:

   • Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, publicly declared in June last year that for his political party, the TPLF, the worst insult that it could ever tolerate was being called "anti-people" because "the welfare of the people was uppermost in its values." Yet, a few weeks later, the same Prime Minister publicly stated that Ethiopia could confiscate the life-time earnings of an innocent civilian and kick him out of the country within 24 hours if it "does not like the color of his eyes."

   • Ethiopia's Prime Minister ordered the first air attack against Asmara on June 5, 1998. He later denied this to claim that the attack was in retaliation to Eritrean bombing of Mekele. When he was confronted with incontrovertible evidence -- Ethiopia had forewarned some governments of its plan -- he recanted to claim that the attack was pre-emptive to avert a suspected Eritrean attack.

   • During the Summit of the Central Organ in Ouagadougou last December, Meles accused Eritrea of plotting to overthrow "a legitimate government in Khartoum." This, he said, "was against the fundamental tenets of the OAU Charter." The OAU should not tolerate "Eritrea's excesses." This was of course a pure lie. Meles' government was indeed at the forefront of the regional alliance to contain NIF designs of destabilizing the region. What is more preposterous is what Meles is doing and saying these days. He is conspiring with the Sudan to "change the government in Asmara." The TPLF is hosting what it calls "an Eritrean government in exile." The TPLF has prepared a Charter for the "transitional government."

   • The Ethiopian government announced at the early stages of its expulsion policy that those affected will be "elements that pose security risk to the country only." The banality of this excuse was soon exposed when octogenarians as well as small kids were expelled; often by separating them from their families. The magnitude of the expulsion itself -- 54,000 Eritreans deported so far -- soon illustrated that the motive was something different. The expulsion process was also designed in a manner that would create maximum pain -- separation of families being a standard pattern. Often the husband or wife together with one or two kids were expelled; the other members to be deported only after a couple of weeks.

   • When Ethiopia accused Eritrea of invading its "sovereign territory," it claimed that "Badme and Sheraro" were occupied. This was the false information given to its Parliament when it adopted the declaration of war on May 13, 1998. Ethiopia further distributed a map of the "occupied Yirga triangle" to diplomats in Addis Abeba and to its own domestic audience. The Badme riddle is too familiar today. Ethiopia produced a bogus map of Badme showing it inside Ethiopian territory while Sheraro was not the scene of any battle.

   • Ethiopia maintained this lie throughout the past nine months. To the OAU and others, it has been telling them that Badme has a population of 90,000 residents and there are members of Parliament elected from this district. The truth is Badme is a small town of 300 families. The population is Eritrean and they have no representative in Ethiopia's Parliament. And last week, when Ethiopia claimed that it has "reinstated the civilian administration" to the depopulated town, Ethiopian TV only showed a narrow picture of the Ethiopian flag being hoisted on a pole without any glimpse of Badme town and the "district with a constituency of 90,000."

   • Ethiopia's lie machine is again churning similar fabricated data on what it calls "occupied territories." It talks, for instance, about the Bada-Burie "occupied area." Burie in Eritrea is a mere customs post at the established border with no residential areas and that is where the Eritrean front line stops. Adi Murug in Bada is an Eritrean village which Ethiopia occupied forcibly in July 1997 and which was one of the causes for the current border dispute. The Bada-Burie terminology is otherwise meaningless as it designates the semi-arid strip of the Eritrean boundary in the Denkali region. This boundary is well defined by the Treaty of 1908 which has remained unaltered for the past ninety years.

   • The TPLF regime fabricated the bombing of Adi Grat by Eritrean fighter planes on February 5, 1999, as a transparent pretext to break the moratorium on air strikes and to launch the large-scale offensives it has been unleashing since February 6 this year. Ethiopia concocted this lie because the OAU Framework Agreement and UN Security Council resolutions were invariably calling on both sides to observe maximum restraint and to agree to a cessation of hostilities. The fiction of the bombing of Adi Grat was confirmed by independent sources including the US Government and independent press agencies.

   • As Ethiopia's army suffered its biggest defeat ever in the battles that raged from March 14-16, Ethiopia first denied that fighting was taking place at all. Later it attempted to qualify it as "skirmishes which developed into full-scale fighting." As the Tsorona battlefield remains littered with the ghastly scene of over 10,000 dead Ethiopian troops and 57 burning Ethiopian tanks, the TPLF regime continued to dismiss the horrible carnage "as a figment of imagination." Unfortunately for the TPLF regime, the biggest defeat that it has sustained to date was witnessed and indelible footage was taken by independent foreign journalists from the BBC, Der Spiegel, Deutche Welle, Swiss Radio and TV, Xinhua News Agency, Al Hayat, Al Sharq Al Awsat as well as local print media.

   But are people really buying these lies? Or is it because there are other forces at play? As one seasoned diplomat observed: "It is naive to think that the diplomatic community is not in the know. But nobody wants to see a larger Ethiopia under a very fragile government stagger under the weight of this crisis. That explains, to me, the deliberate nods and winks."

   This may well be the case. But the TPLF's lies are costing thousands of lives and it is time that the international community face up to its responsibilities.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 18 March 1999

   g_031999.html100655 127137 345 5336 6675433550 6307

   Press Release
   Ethiopia Sustains Heavy Losses on Mereb-Setit Front
   One MI-35 Helicopter Gunship Captured
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 19 March 1999

   The TPLF army has sustained considerable losses in the fighting on the Mereb-Setit front in the past two days. Ethiopia opened new attacks on this front on Wednesday in the aftermath of, and to cushion its devastating defeat at, the Tsorona front last Tuesday.

   In two days of fighting between March 17th and 18th on the Mereb-Setit front:

   • One MI-35 helicopter gunship was captured (yesterday);
   • Four Ethiopian tanks and three Ural vehicles carrying ZU-23 anti-aircraft guns were destroyed; and
   • Two tanks were captured intact.

   The TPLF army suffered a devastating defeat on the Tsorona front in the battles that it unleashed on Sunday, March 14, and that raged for three days until Tuesday mid-morning:

   • Over 10,000 Ethiopian soldiers were killed;
   • 57 tanks and scores of other military vehicles destroyed;
   • One MiG-23 fighter plane shot down; and
   • Six tanks captured.

   Yet, while thousands of its troops fell like leaves on the Tsorona battlefront, the callous TPLF regime denied at first that any fighting was taking place at all. This was later qualified as "routine shelling and skirmishes." When the battle ended on Tuesday, the TPLF regime continued to lie to its people. The TPLF regime continues to maintain this appalling lie, branding it as "a drama staged by Eritrea," even as its huge debacle has been witnessed now by journalists from the BBC, Swiss Radio and TV, Der Spiegel, Xinhua News Agency, Al Hayat, and Al Sharq Al Awsat among others and footage of the ghastly battle scene is being broadcast worldwide by major TV networks.

   The TPLF regime started the current battles on March 14th in defiance of UN Security Council calls urging it "to stop its continued military action." The Ethiopian regime has further reneged on its earlier acceptance of the OAU Framework, rejecting any cease-fire unless its new preconditions are met.

   Ethiopian Antonov bombers, MiG aircraft and helicopter gunships bombed the civilian districts of Molki and the environs of Shambiqo in the past two days in retaliation for the heavy defeat that the regime has sustained on the Tsorona front. Twenty eight civilians were killed and 42 others wounded in air raids carried out by the Ethiopian air force in Deda Lalai, Hazemo, Adi Qwala, Shambiqo and Kinafna in the past few weeks.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 19 March 1999 g_032299.html100655 127137 345 3624 6675433022 6271
   Press Release
   One MiG-23 Jet Fighter Shot Down
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 22 March 1999

   Fighting on the Mereb-Setit front continued during the weekend. An Ethiopian MiG-23 jet fighter aircraft was shot down yesterday while two tanks were destroyed on Saturday.

   In addition, an MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down with slight damage and captured by Eritrean Defense Forces last Friday.

   The Ethiopian regime launched the attacks on the Mereb-Setit front last Wednesday in an apparent attempt to overextend Eritrean Defense Forces which routed a huge Ethiopian attack on the Tsorona front employing four divisions. Ethiopian suffered a devastating defeat on the Tsorona front last Tuesday in which:

   • over 10,000 Ethiopian soldiers were killed;
   • 57 tanks and scores of other military vehicles were destroyed;
   • one MiG-23 fighter plane was shot down; and
   • six tanks were captured.

   In spite of these staggering losses, the TPLF regime continues to misinform the Ethiopian public by first denying the occurrence of the battles and then telling them after its defeat on Tuesday "that fighting was raging" on that front until Friday, March 19th.

   And, since last Saturday, the TPLF regime has begun to declare that fighting was taking place "in the vicinity of the Mereb River near Shambiko." Why is Ethiopia engaged in a battle near Shambiko? Shambiko is not "contested territory" and it is deep inside Eritrea. Is this an attempt to occupy territory that Ethiopia has incorporated in its illegal map of 1997, in violation of Eritrea's internationally recognized territory, which the TPLF regime has not officially rescinded to date?

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 22 March 1999

   g_0322992.html100655 127137 345 10006 6675444043 6370

   Press Release
   Eritrea Appeals to OAU Ministerial Session
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 22 March 1999

   Eritrea has appealed (through a letter to all member states yesterday) to the 69th OAU Session of the Council of Ministers convening in Addis Abeba today to take necessary measures as there may be to ensure that the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia is discussed at a neutral venue acceptable to both member States.

   The 69th Regular Session of the Ministerial Council is scheduled to discuss administrative and budgetary issues of the organization. However, Eritrea believes that the Council could well be seized of the raging conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia in view of its urgency and gravity. Be this as it may, Eritrean cannot possibly attend the session to argue its case in the capital of a country that has:

   1. currently unleashed a war of aggression against it by violating its inherited colonial boundaries;
   2. illegally redrawn Eritrea's international boundaries to carve out and incorporate large tracts of its territory;
   3. deported in the most inhumane manner over 54,000, out of a total population of 130,000) ethnic Eritreans residing in the country, by confiscating their life-long earnings and insulting them as "spies";
   4. declared Eritrea's permanent representative to the OAU as persona non grata, thus depriving a member state of its right of representation in the organization, and violating the immunity of the embassy residence by forcefully entering the premises in violation of the Vienna Conventions and the OAU headquarters agreement.

   The implementation of the OAU Framework remains blocked by Ethiopia's new preconditions which are completely outside the Framework Agreement that was clearly articulated by the High-Level Delegation and fully endorsed by the Central Organ in its Summit in Ouagadougou on December 17, 1998. Ethiopia is indeed insisting that it will not accept any cease-fire or delineation and demarcation of the border unless its new preconditions are met.

   As it is underlined in the clarifications provided to Eritrea by the High-Level Delegation through its letter of January 26, 1999:

   • the first step is for a binding cessation of hostilities which comes into effect immediately when both sides accept the Framework Agreement;
   • Eritrea is subsequently expected to "redeploy from Badme Town and its environs (where "environs refers to the areas surrounding Badme Town") as a gesture of goodwill;
   • "this should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along with entire border to positions to be determined subsequently as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

   It must further be recalled that when Ethiopia was requested to submit to the OAU the totality of its claims, its response was that "it will submit its claims when the issues of delimitation, demarcation or, if need be, arbitration are addressed."

   Ethiopia's preconditions are therefore new, in clear contradiction to the letter and spirit of the OAU Framework, and simply put forth in order to torpedo the peace process. Ethiopia's early pronouncement of "acceptance of the OAU framework" indeed appears to have been motivated by public relations and diplomatic games.

   In the face of Ethiopia's prevarication and distortion of the Framework Agreement, Eritrea has requested the High-Level Delegation, through a letter of President Isaias Afwerki to the Chairman on 19 March 1999, to "set the record straight in an unambiguous and public manner." Eritrea maintains that the Framework Agreement is not "an elastic framework susceptible to altering interpretations on the basis of perceived or real changes in the battlefield."

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 22 March 1999 g_0322993.html100655 127137 345 40636 6675543000 6376
   Statement by Eritrean Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae
   to the United Nations Security Council
   on the Conflict Between Eritrea and Ethiopia,
   
   New York, 22 March 1999

   Mr. Chairman, Excellencies,

   It is indeed an honor for me to be given the opportunity to brief the Council on the border conflict between my country and Ethiopia which has unnecessarily and irrationally escalated to full scale war leading to thousands of casualties and the suffering of so many. I say unnecessary because, as we, and I am sure Your Excellencies, have always believed, the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia could be solved through peaceful and legal means; and irrational because the use of force, as has been and is being attempted by the Ethiopian regime, can never lead to a solution.

   Let me say at the outset that Eritrea highly appreciates the deep concern of the Security Council and the rest of the international community about the conflict as well as the efforts that have been and are being made by different parties for its peaceful resolution.

   Excellencies,

   Allow me to present a synopsis of the genesis of the conflict, where we are now and what we believe needs to be done to curb Ethiopia's designs to continue its war of aggression and to move to the final settlement of the border on the basis of the OAU Framework.

   It is known to the Council that Ethiopia has so loudly and persistently announced its "full acceptance" of this Framework which Eritrea did also, after considering the necessary clarifications from the OAU High-Level Delegation and making compromises to pave the way for its implementation, full-heartedly accept.

   Eritrea has been consistent in its argument that the borders between Eritrea and Ethiopia were clearly delineated by duly signed treaties during the colonial period and remained unaltered until Ethiopia forcibly annexed Eritrea in 1962. Even after the illegal annexation, the borders of the annexed "province" of Eritrea remained the same during both the Haile Selassie and Mengistu regimes.

   Excellencies,

   It is the pattern of expansionist and aggressive behaviour of the Ethiopian regime that is the root cause of the existing conflict, and it is the proper understanding of the measures Ethiopia has taken that expose this behaviour, we strongly believe, that can lead to a correct, just and legal approach to end the conflict and settle the dispute peacefully.

   International law clearly states that every state has an obligation to respect the territorial integrity and sovereign independence of every other state. The United Nations Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, states that: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

   The actions that Ethiopia undertook prior to May 1998 to attempt to alter or undermine Eritrea's borders were illegal aggression, and illegal aggression cannot be the basis for acquisition of territory. Ethiopia's pattern of behaviour over recent years indeed shows a spiral of increasing disregard for Eritrea's inherited boundary. It presents a classic case of aggression under accepted definitions of international law.

   1. Ethiopia's attack in Bada

      In August 1997, Ethiopian troops illegally entered Adi Murug in the Bada area of Eritrea. That this was an illegal incursion was undeniable, and Ethiopia did not attempt to justify the incursion by denying Eritrean sovereignty over the area. Instead, Ethiopia explained that it had been pursuing rebel forces that fled Ethiopia and took refuge in Eritrea. Nonetheless, while present in Eritrea, the Ethiopian military dismantled Eritrea's governmental presence and administration in order to set up an administration of its own.

      Under the United Nations General Assembly's Definition of Aggression (1974), this incursion clearly constituted illegal aggression. Article 3 states:

      "Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:

      (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof."

      The Definition of Aggression not only identifies the Ethiopian behavior of 1997 as aggression, it also clearly provides that such aggressive activities cannot constitute the basis for any "territorial acquisition or special advantage" in the territory occupied. According to Article 3, "No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression shall be recognized as lawful."

      As with all of Ethiopia's other illegal military activities on Eritrean soil, Ethiopia cannot have obtained any vested rights in military incursions that were intrinsically illegal.

   2. Ethiopia's encroachment in Badme

      Starting in mid-1997, Ethiopia also directly initiated efforts to alter the international border on the ground in the Badme region. As is well known, Ethiopian officials operating in the area around Badme commenced a program of placement of piles of rocks in an effort to establish a new international border. In certain cases, Ethiopia was not satisfied with the scope of its initial incursion into Eritrean territory and came back a second or third time to move the rock markers to try to encroach even further into Eritrean territory.

      Such efforts clearly violate international law, which requires respect for the existing international boundaries of a state. The United Nations General Assembly's Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations states that "Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national integrity and political independence of the State or country," and that "the territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable."

   3. Ethiopia's unilateral issuance of maps incorporating Eritrean territory into Tigray

      In 1997, Ethiopia issued a map that purported to claim large portions of Eritrean territory. Entitled "Political Map of Tigray," it was prepared by the Planning and Economic Development Bureau, Physical Planning Department. The title of the newspaper article containing this map was "New Map of our Administrative Zone Prepared." According to the text of the article, "the map defines the new boundaries of Tigray with other countries and with Administrative Zones in Ethiopia." It was said to be the result of three years of research and to have been approved by the Central Mapping Authority in Addis Abeba. Comparison with standard administrative maps of Ethiopia shows that the changes effected by this new map were quite substantial.

      Ethiopia obviously knew that the map was a "new" one which altered the traditional borders, but it made no effort to justify or explain this unilateral incorporation of Eritrean territory. It did not state what facts or legal arguments turned up in the "three years of research" that might have led it to think that it had the power to unilaterally define "the new boundaries of Tigray with other countries" or to draw the line in the location that it did. To this day, it is simply unclear what Ethiopia thinks that it has a right to. Although asked many times, it refuses to say.

      While Ethiopia refuses to state the extent or the basis of its territorial claims, it can hardly be doubted that this map was intended to be an early step in a campaign to acquire portions of Eritrean territory. Such efforts to acquire territory on the other side of an existing international boundary are, as stated above in 2, illegal under international law.

   4. Ethiopia's attack on Eritrean officials in Badme on 6 May 1998

      Ethiopia's efforts to redraw the international boundary in Badme culminated in its attack of 6 May 1998. On that date, about sixty Ethiopian army troops completely encircled a group of ten Eritrean officers who were present in the Badme region and opened fire. Four were killed and three wounded. This initial attack further led to spiraling clashes in the subsequent days, with both sides bringing in reinforcements and a final showdown on 12 May 1998 in which Ethiopian troops were driven out of Badme.

      Eritrea's reaction to this completely unjustified attack presents a classic case of self-defense under international law. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter states clearly that every state has an "inherent" right of self-defense against armed attack. "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and Security."

   5. Ethiopia's declaration of war

      Ethiopia subsequently declared war on Eritrea on 13 May 1998. And, on 4 June, the Ethiopian Prime Minister ordered the Ethiopian Military to implement this declaration of war. The following morning, Ethiopian forces attacked Eritrea throughout the common border, and at 2:10 p.m. the same day the Ethiopia air force bombed the capital city of Eritrea.

      Eritrea's constant and consistent calls for cessation of hostilities, the demilitarization of the entire border, the deployment of neutral monitoring forces and the speedy demarcation of the border continued to be ignored by Ethiopia.

   6. Ethiopia's all out attack on 6 February 1999

      In early February 1999, Ethiopia launched an all out offensive against Eritrea. The supposed justification was an air raid that (according to Ethiopia) had taken place in AdiGrat on 5 February. Several independent sources confirmed Eritrea's official statement that no such air raid had ever taken place. However, Ethiopia continues to cite this supposed "air raid" as the rationalization for its all out war. In mounting this attack since 6 February, Ethiopia has violated the US brokered moratorium on air strikes and has bombed civilians fleeing northward into Eritrea from areas near the border. Eritrea has not violated the moratorium, even in the face of Ethiopia's illegal bombing of its territory.

      In the months leading up to the February attack, Ethiopia had engaged in full scale build up of troops and armaments at several places along the border. Ethiopia also issued continuous threats to Eritrea that it would "teach Eritrea a lesson," that it would replace or overthrow the current government of Eritrea, and so forth. Among its other violations of international law are its deportation of over fifty four thousand persons of Eritrean family origin, the internment without trial of unknown number of persons in Ethiopian prison camps, and the 9 February forced entry into, ransacking and continued occupation of the Eritrean Embassy residence in Addis Abeba.

   Excellencies,

   It is evident from the series of measures briefed above that the Ethiopian regime had violated Eritrean sovereignty and territorial integrity through illegal acts of aggression prior to 6 May 1998, not to mention its subsequent acts of aggression. From the start of discussions with the OAU, these developments, along with evidence of where the border lies and that we remained inside our territory, were brought before the OAU High-Level Delegation. We consistently argued, and rightly so, that illegal aggression cannot be the basis for acquisition of territory, and for this reason, any proposal that takes May 1998 as the relevant "status quo ante" rewards Ethiopia's illegal efforts to undermine the existing international border in place between Eritrea and the Tigray state of Ethiopia, and is a violation of international law. If measures taken on the ground needed to be reversed, they were the illegal, aggressive measures taken by the Ethiopian government to forcibly alter the established border between the two countries and not the legitimate measures taken by Eritrea to defend its sovereignty.

   When the OAU finally came up with its proposed Framework Agreement for a peaceful solution at the Summit of the High-Level Delegation in Ouagadougou in November last year, Eritrea expressed its positive stance considering the Framework as a basis for discussions that would lead to an agreement acceptable to both parties. In this spirit, Eritrea invited the OAU Secretary General for consultations to Asmara on 12 December, 1998, and submitted a list of queries on which it sought clarifications prior to its full acceptance of the Framework Agreement. Eritrea hoped that the clarifications would be given prior to the Summit of the Central Organ which was then scheduled for 17-18 December. Unfortunately, and for reasons that are better explained by the OAU High-Level Delegation, this did not happen as expected. While noting the respective positions of both countries, the Central Organ endorsed the Framework Agreement and called on both sides to cooperate with the High-Level Delegation.

   The written clarifications were provided to Eritrea on 26 January 1999. But before Eritrea could digest the clarifications to give its considered response, Ethiopia launched yet another offensive against Eritrea on 6 February 1999. This was in clear contravention of the OAU's repeated calls for both sides to observe maximum restraint and continue to uphold the de facto cessation of hostilities which was, indeed, a primary element in the Framework Agreement in order to pave the way for a final solution on the basis of the demarcation of the boundary.

   Excellencies,

   Eritrea accepted the proposed Framework as a compromise, as a measure of "goodwill," as requested by the OAU delegation, to stop further bloodshed and expedite the demarcation of the border. Eritrea did so because it was led to believe that the proposals and written clarifications that were provided by the OAU High-Level Delegation, which were known to Ethiopia, were "fully accepted" by Ethiopia as well. That, Your Excellencies, is what the OAU and the Security Council led us to believe Ethiopia had done and urged us to do likewise in the interest of peace. And that is what we did.

   How could these very bodies now fail to condemn the Ethiopian regime when it reverses its position and presents a new and totally unacceptable condition not only to ensure its illegal occupation of Eritrean territory, but also to provide itself a smoke screen to continue its war for wider agendas against Eritrean sovereignty? How far is Ethiopia to be appeased to move the goal post of its aggressive demands further and further as we are required to make unjustified compromises to accommodate its dictates?

   For us, Ethiopia's designs and tactics are clear. The Ethiopian regime has made no secret of it. It intends to maintain its illegal control and take more of Eritrean territory by force, defeat the Eritrean army completely and replace the Eritrean government by a puppet regime which will respond to its dictates. Your Excellencies, the Ethiopian regime has already formed such a "government in exile" from terrorist groups such as the Islamic Jihad in collaboration with the National Islamic Front government of the Sudan.

   Excellencies,

   I would like to conclude my remarks by reconfirming that Eritrea has always called for and is now ready for a cease-fire. It has likewise expressed its readiness for the immediate implementation of the OAU proposal which the Council has supported. Any attempt to revise that proposal which both have avowedly accepted would lead to a total nullification of that proposal, thus postponing the demarcation of the border which alone can definitively settle the conflict. To reiterate our firm position, Eritrea has accepted the proposal to withdraw from its own territory in Badme and its immediate environs only as a "goodwill measure" not because of any other justification. If the Ethiopian regime insists on new conditions to persist on its war path against Eritrean sovereignty, Eritrea has the responsibility, capacity and resolve to defend itself.

   I thank you.

   ---

   g_032399.html100655 127137 345 15173 6676242034 6316 Ethiopia: Strange Ways for "Setting the Record Straight"
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Thursday, 23 March 1999

   The Addis Abeba regime has done it again. A statement entitled "Setting the Record Straight" which it issued yesterday, March 22, 1999, is replete, in typical fashion, with distortions and pure fabrications.

   Consider the following Ethiopian allegations:

   1. "Eritrea invaded Ethiopian territories in May and June of 1998." The real facts are:
      • Ethiopia invaded the Bada region (Adi Murug) of Eritrea in July 1997 to dismantle by force the Eritrean administration. This prompted the Eritrean President to write a letter to Ethiopia's Prime Minister protesting the use of force to create facts on the ground. Eritrea subsequently suggested the formation of a Joint Border Commission at senior levels of both governments.

      • Ethiopia published an illegal map in October 1997 incorporating large tracts of Eritrean territory in the Badme, Tsorona and Bada areas. This was an act of aggression in violation of international law.

      • Ethiopia triggered the clashes that occurred in May when about sixty Ethiopian army troops completely encircled a group of ten Eritrean officers who were in the Badme area and opened fire. Four were killed and three wounded. This unprovoked attack led to spiraling clashes in the subsequent days, with both sides bringing reinforcements and a final showdown on 12 May 1998.

      • Ethiopia declared war (through its Parliament) on May 13, 1998, to subsequently unleash military action against Eritrea on the Burie and Zalambessa areas in late May and early June.

      Hence, it is Ethiopia which has violated international law to launch unprovoked attacks against Eritrea and to acquire by force territory of a sovereign neighboring State. That is why Eritrea insisted from the outset, and Ethiopia attempted to block unsuccessfully, on an investigation of all the incidents that led to the current crisis. This has now been incorporated in the OAU Framework Agreement as operative paragraph 7.

   2. "The OAU Framework Agreement for peace requires Eritrea to withdraw its troops from all occupied Ethiopian territories." Again, this is a pure lie. Ethiopia is obviously reading from a new script. Otherwise, the relevant paragraphs in the Framework Agreement and the written clarifications provided to Eritrea by the High-Level Delegation on January 26, 1999, read:
      • "Eritrean armed forces presently in Badme Town and its environs should be redeployed as a mark of goodwill and consideration for our continental organization; it being understood that this redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the areas concerned ...

      • Environs refers to the areas surrounding Badme Town

      • Eritrean redeployment from Badme Town and its environs should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

   3. "Ethiopia has only selectively deported those Eritreans posing a threat to its national security; it has not indiscriminately deported Eritreans."

      If Ethiopia can maintain that the inhuman deportation of over 54,000 ethnic Eritreans out of a total Eritrean community of 130,000 is selective and not indiscriminate, then obviously Ethiopia is not operating on the same wavelength with internationally accepted human rights conventions and norms. Moreover, deportations have not stopped (about 1,000 poor farmers long resident in Tigray were deported last week) although the tempo may have slowed down due to the resumption of hostilities. In any case, the UN Human Rights Commission, the OAU Ambassadorial Committee, Amnesty International and a host of other humanitarian organizations have found Ethiopia guilty of gross human rights violations and there is no point in pushing this issue further.

   4. "Ethiopia has no interest in Eritrean land. If Ethiopia had wanted to encroach on Eritrea's territory, it would have never fully supported the 1993 referendum."
      • Eritrea won its independence through a difficult struggle of 30 years and by making precious sacrifices. All the same, the EPRDF had morally supported Eritrea's legitimate right to independence. This position was right then and will remain untarnished so long as Ethiopia does not have second thoughts. But to put things in proper perspective, one must also recall that the EPRDF was able to enter Addis Abeba and defeat Mengistu's army with the pivotal support of Eritrea's mechanized divisions which stayed long in the capital to help stabilize the new government.

   Ethiopia talks a lot about "Eritrea's setback in Badme." Eritrea did not mince its words and it was the first to announce, on February 26th, to its public and the international community when it decided to withdraw after the Ethiopian army penetrated some of its positions at a very high human cost. In contrast, Ethiopia never disclosed to its people its huge losses in Badme which remains off limits to the local and international press. Moreover, Ethiopia continues to deny the devastating defeat that it has suffered on the Tsorona front last week, misinforming its people on the occurrence of the battles. The presence of 200 mercenaries who are serving as pilots and in the air defense units of the Ethiopian Air Force is sufficiently well documented to merit no further explanation.

   Ethiopia's propaganda campaign in the past ten months has been anchored on two pillars:

   1. ) recourse to the distortion and fabrication of facts and events so long as these appeared to serve its purpose; and
   2. ) attempts to render them credible through sheer repetition.

   This unscrupulous strategy may have worked initially. But, as a seasoned diplomat based in Addis Abeba observed recently, "the official lies, which are becoming increasingly transparent with time, are an embarrassment to the diplomatic community and, in the long run, damaging to Ethiopia itself."

   In the event, it is high time that the Ethiopian government heed these sentiments and get down to the real business of finding a peaceful solution to the conflict rather than embarrassing itself and its international audience through transparent lies.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 23 March 1999

   g_032499.html100655 127137 345 14623 6676161734 6325

   Ethiopia's Accusations : Add Insult to Injury
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 24 March 1999

   In a letter circulated to member states attending the 69th Session of the Council of Ministers, the Ethiopian Government alleges that the Eritrean Mission to Ethiopia and the Eritrean ambassador accredited to Ethiopia and the OAU:

   1. was "playing a leading and central role, inter alia, in organizing and coordinating clandestine network";

   2. that the mission was "used for all sorts of illegal activities ... including the hoarding of illegal arms and explosives that were destined for use in terrorist operations and for missions of destabilizing Ethiopia"; and

   3. that the Eritrean diplomatic mission was "engaged in printing counterfeit currency, money laundering and other illegal activities aimed at sabotaging the Ethiopian economy."

   The Government of Eritrea is not surprised by these preposterous lies. The Ethiopian Government indeed seems prepared to go to extreme lengths to achieve its objectives as illustrated by these two recent cases:

   • On February 5 last month, Ethiopia fabricated a story accusing Eritrea of "bombing the town of AdiGrat" in violation of the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States. This outrageous lie was fabricated in order to provide Ethiopia with an adequate pretext to unleash the offensive that it has been preparing for and which it launched the next day. Fortunately, the baseless nature of this lie was exposed by independent bodies including the US Government and Ethiopia was reprimanded for its violation.

   • As the Ethiopian army sustained its biggest defeat ever last week on the Tsorona front with more than 10,000 of its troops killed, Addis Abeba continued to lie to its people, first denying the occurrence of any battle and later dismissing its devastating defeat as "a public drama staged by Eritrea." Fortunately again, the presence of several journalists (BBC, Der Spiegel, Swiss Radio, Al Sharq Al Awset, etc.) exposed Ethiopia's blatant lie.

   In as far as the current groundless accusations are concerned, the Government of Eritrea has no wish to dignify Ethiopia's lies with an extensive response. But, by way of illustration, we cite the following:

   • The Eritrean mission in Addis Abeba was long reduced to a two man team consisting of the ambassador and his deputy. All diplomatic and technical staff were expelled in June last year. All local staff were similarly picked up from their homes and streets and deported as they happened to have Eritrean origins. The mission was thus incapacitated and prevented from fulfilling its diplomatic and consular functions as the ambassador did not even have a secretary.

   • The ambassador and his deputy were under round-the-clock surveillance by Ethiopia's security officials for 24 hours a day. The embassy premises and the residence were encircled by Ethiopian security 24 hours a day. No visitor of any nationality--with the exception of other embassies accredited to Ethiopia--was allowed to visit the embassy and the residence.

   • The ambassador and his deputy were routinely harassed and escorted by a fleet of seven Ethiopians security cars whenever and wherever they ventured out of the embassy premises. They were overshadowed with at least fifteen security men when meeting other embassy representatives at any public place.

   • The ambassador and his deputy were not allowed to visit the Blattien concentration camp where over 1,500 Eritreans are detained for no crime other than being Eritrean. Similarly, the ambassador was refused access to any of the 54,000 Eritreans who were deported inhumanely by the Addis Abeba regime.

   In view of these realities, it is mind-boggling how a single person and his deputy, harassed and watched as they were 24 hours a day by Ethiopia's security, could engage in clandestine or other illegal activities. More importantly, the Government of Eritrea does not engage in such illegal activities as a matter of policy.

   The Ethiopian regime has also deliberately misconstrued President Isaias Afwerki's interview. The president had told The Times of London in July last year that if Ethiopia continued to bomb the city of Asmara as it did on June 5, 1998, Eritrea has the deterrent capability to strike back at the heart of Ethiopia. This was in reference to Ethiopia's air attacks which escalated a simple border conflict presuming that it has absolute air superiority.

   In the same statement, Ethiopia harps a lot and accusing Eritrea of "extreme spite and arrogance towards our Continental Organizations."

   Eritrea may have expressed some dissatisfaction, from time to time, on the shortcomings of the OAU peace process. But this candid view emanates from its higher expectations. It remains otherwise fully and sincerely engaged in the OAU peace process. Moreover, Eritrea is an active participant in all the deliberations of the OAU meetings and it remains one of the twelve countries that pays their contribution regularly.

   On the other hand, one can plausibly argue that Ethiopia's much touted "respect to the OAU" is suspect and outwardly. In the first place, Ethiopia unleashed the offensive on February 6 last month in defiance of the OAU's repeated appeals to both sides to observe maximum restraint and to agree to a cessation of hostilities, and while the OAU peace process was in motion. Secondly, Ethiopia should have thought twice before violating the Headquarters Agreement with such heavy handedness. If Ethiopia has indeed evidence of the mission's illegal activities, then these should have been submitted to the OAU Secretary General before taking any action. This is standard practice by host countries which serve as venues for international bodies (the US Government relative to the UN in New York for instance) and there is no reason why the OAU should be treated with less respect by Ethiopia. Thirdly, the outrageous lies about the Eritrean mission which the Ethiopian Government circulated at the 69th Session of the Ministerial Council are another illustration of its condescending attitude as they are a clear insult to the intelligence of member states.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 24 March 1999

   ---

   g_032599.html100644 127137 345 14005 6676500006 6303

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 25 March 1999

   Press Release

   Is the ICRC Placing Its Own Neutrality and Impartiality At Risk?

   In its statement of March 22 (which we received yesterday), the ICRC "strongly deplores the public use - by Eritrea - of its information for propaganda purposes." In the first place, the Government of Eritrea has not used any information that was provided to it by the ICRC "for propaganda purposes." If it has mentioned the ICRC in its press statement of 18 March 1999 on the untimely death of one of its nationals in the Blaten concentration camp, it was only because it received the notification of his death from the ICRC.

   The ICRC further states that it "regularly visits prisoners of war and civilian internees in the Blaten camp and is therefore in a position to state that the allegations as to the death causes are unfounded." Apparently, this statement was meant to contradict our own assessment of the "poor living conditions, mental and physical torture and lack of medical attention" to which our citizens are subjected, and, in some cases, we believe are "the main causes of death."

   What are the realities?

   As far as we have been informed and in spite of our express requests:

   * The ICRC does not carry out an independent investigation of the causes of death.
   * In the majority of cases, the Ethiopian regime notifies the ICRC one month or even longer after the event. In those cases, we have not received from the ICRC any report of an independent post-mortem investigation.
   * The death certificates provided by a hospital which may be operating under government duress cannot be taken at face value without an independent investigation.

   Regarding the specific case of G. Negus Awalom (the subject in question and the eighth internee to die in the prison camp), the Ethiopian death certificate states:

   * "Diagnosis: dead on arrival
   * Recommendation of doctor: Case 7 AF1 810 severe malaria 40 Meningitis from Blaten. On external examination of the corpus, there is no pertinent finding to attribute for the cause of death."

   The statement above clearly indicates that:

   * the victim had not received any hospitalized treatment as he was reported dead on arrival; and,
   * the cause of death was only based on external examination of the corpse indicating no extensive post-mortem examination.

   More importantly, if an innocent person is incarcerated in a malaria-infested dungeon, contracts malaria and meningitis there, is emaciated and dies of diseases due to deprivation of proper medication, is this not death caused by an unacceptable health environment? As is well known, meningitis is caused by a bacterial and viral infection that is predisposed by crowding and unhygienic living conditions.

   The accounts of the 86 university students who were on an exchange programme to Ethiopia and imprisoned in Blaten camp for periods ranging from four to nine months further reveal that all the prisoners were subjected to physical and mental torture. They were daily subjected to political indoctrination by TPLF cadres to denounce their government as "undemocratic and dictatorial," accept that "Eritrea is an aggressor," and join a puppet political organization created by the TPLF as a condition for their release. Resistance to this political indoctrination invariably resulted in physical torture.

   In light of these facts, the ICRC's attempt to take issue with our own assessment is not well founded and can only put at risk its stated neutrality and impartiality as an intermediary. Ethiopia has indeed misconstrued the ICRC's statement and used it for its propaganda purposes to misinform its people through its mass media. In its radio broadcast yesterday, it even when to the extent of denying the occurrence of death at Blaten camp.

   We also recall with disappointment that in the early days of deportation of innocent Eritreans from Ethiopia, the Ethiopian regime had claimed that the deportation were carried out not only with the prior and full knowledge of the ICRC but also with its accompaniment. The ICRC, when asked about the situation, confirmed to the Eritrean Government that this was not the case. However, the ICRC declined to disclose this vital information publicly due to its stated "statutory limitations." In the event, the Eritrean Government would like to request the ICRC for clarification in respect to its press statement of March 18 whether this constitutes an amendment or a violation to its "statutory limitations"?

   The Government of Eritrea appreciates the role of the ICRC in the present circumstances and expects it to strictly adhere to its principles of neutrality and impartiality. And, as it is very well established, more than 90% of the 1,500 prisoners detained at Blaten concentration camp are not prisoners of war. They are civilian internees illegally detained because Ethiopian claims that they are "potential soldiers." This is unacceptable by any standard. The main issue that must be addressed by the ICRC is not therefore some marginal improvement of their treatment while in custody but rather their immediate and unconditional release.

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 25 March 1999

   ---

   Veronica Rentmeesters
   Information Officer
   Embassy of Eritrea
   1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA

   Tel: 202 588 7587 Fax: 202 319 1304
   E-mail: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
   

   g_033099.html100655 127137 345 5543 6700157310 6262
   Press Release
   Ethiopia's Habitual Lies
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 30 March 1999

   The Ethiopian regime has yesterday accused Eritrea of launching three successive attacks on Badme and unleashing "unusually heavy shelling on the Zalambesa front."

   The motive of this accusation is not clear. How can Ethiopia claim that Eritrea has launched a major attack on Monday when:

   • It had just published a statement a day earlier (Sunday, March 28th) claiming that it had "put out of action 45,000 Eritrean soldiers and captured 91 tanks";

   • Ethiopian radio quoted an army general in its broadcast at 1:00 p.m. yesterday "claiming triumphantly that Eritrea's fighting capability has been totally decimated!"

   • Ethiopia was claiming throughout last week that "fighting was taking place in the vicinity of Mereb River near Shembeko." This is deep inside Eritrean territory. Why is it suddenly hopping now to Badme?

   Obviously, there is no coherence in these contradictory statements which cannot all be true at the same time.

   But, of course, anything is possible for a regime that has sanctioned lying as an instrument of foreign policy.

   Indeed, the Ethiopian regime was on record for dismissing the occurrence of any major fighting on the Tsorona front from March 14th-16th, dubbing the horrific scene of its major defeat (in which over 10,000 Ethiopian troops were killed and 57 tanks destroyed and was witnessed by independent journalists) as a "PR drama staged by Eritrea." Ethiopia maintained this stance even as footage of its major defeat was broadcast worldwide.

   Now, in its "military report" of Sunday, the Ethiopian regime repackages Eritrea's accounts of the battle to claim that it "had killed or wounded over 9,000 Eritrean soldiers and destroyed 36 enemy tanks," in the Tsorona battle, the occurrence of which it had originally denied.

   As far as Ethiopia's accusations of yesterday are concerned:

   • It is Ethiopia which has been launching successive attacks on Eritrea since February 6 in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions and the recommendations of the OAU framework;

   • It is Ethiopia which continues to reject an immediate cessation of hostilities by obstructing the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement;

   • Ethiopia's Prime Minister has repeatedly told diplomats in Addis Abeba that his regime will continue to launch attacks on Eritrea.

   Ethiopia's unfounded accusations of yesterday, amid contradictory claims, can only be interpreted as a thinly veiled intention on its part to launch fresh offensives.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 30 March 1999

   ---

   g_033199.html100655 127137 345 3005 6700364762 6265 Press Release
   1000 Eritreans Missing in Ethiopia
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Wednesday, 31 March 1999

   The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has yesterday appealed to several humanitarian organizations to put pressure on Ethiopia to account for the whereabouts of 1,000 missing Eritreans and to ensure their immediate release if they are in detention.

   The list of the missing persons -- most of whom are young -- was compiled over a three month period from parents and other family members. The missing Eritreans had been permanently residing in Ethiopia. But, as they were picked up by Ethiopia's security officials from their homes and work places in Addis Abeba and several other Ethiopia towns, their subsequent whereabouts remain unknown. They have not been deported with the 55,000 of their compatriots who have been expelled so far. Neither have they been interned in the Blaten concentration camp. Family members fear that many of them might have been killed or they may be languishing in secret concentration camps somewhere in Ethiopia.

   The information compiled so far contains full individual details of the victims including the dates of disappearance.

   Over 1,500 other Eritrean youth remain in jail in the Blaten concentration camp for no crime other than their ethnicity.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 31 March 1999

   g_0331992.html100655 127137 345 3145 6700434260 6343

   Press Release
   Ethiopia Continues Deporting Eritreans; Air Strike on Civilian Targets
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 31 March 1999

   Press Release

   One thousand five hundred one Eritreans deported inhumanely from Ethiopia arrived in Eritrea on March 27 and 28. One thousand four hundred twenty three of the deported Eritreans, expelled through Gash-Barka Zone, arrived in Molqui subzone, and 78, deported through Southern Zone, arrived at Mai Mine.

   The deportees, consisting mainly of children and the elderly, were not accompanied by the ICRC. They had been detained for up to three months prior to their deportation.

   According to the deportees who left family members behind, they suffered from hunger and sickness and their properties were confiscated.

   To date, the Ethiopian regime has expelled 55,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia.

   In other news, the Ethiopian regime on March 28, 1999, at 11:30 a.m., deployed its fighter planes and bombarded the purely civilian area of Kofenko and Adi Keshi in Gash-Barka Zone. One man was killed and five people were wounded.

   These villages are very far away from the front lines. This is a continuation of the previous air strikes and heavy artillery bombardments which had been carried out against civilian targets.

   To date, 41 innocent Eritreans have been killed and 44 wounded in air strikes.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 31 March 1999

   ---

   g_040699.html100655 127137 345 6733 6702457136 6303
   Press Release
   Ethiopia: Lies As an Instrument of Policy
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 6 April 1999

   In its press statement of yesterday, April 5, 1999, Ethiopia accused the Eritrean government of "once again issuing a fabricated news release, alleging that the Ethiopian Speaker of the House recently called on the Islamic Republic of Iran to mediate a resolution of the Ethio-Eritrea conflict." This is patently false.

   In the first place, the Government of Eritrea did not issue any official statement on the meeting between the Ethiopian Speaker of Parliament and the Iranian Ambassador to Ethiopia. An Eritrean Foreign Ministry official however gave his considered views when asked by the Eritrean News Agency to comment on the request by Ethiopia for Iranian mediation as reported by the Iranian News Agency on March 29.

   Secondly, if the Iranian News Agency had misquoted, which it did not, the Ethiopian official, this is evidently a matter between him and the agency. The appropriate disclaimer, if any, should come from the Iranian News Agency.

   Ethiopia further maintains that "such tactics of fabrication will be ... counterproductive," inhibiting "acts of good faith." Unfortunately, the fabrication of facts and events has been long employed by the Addis Abeba regime and remains an instrument of official policy in its diplomatic campaigns. If a few recent reminders are needed:

   • On February 5 this year, Ethiopia fabricated a story accusing Eritrea of bombing AdiGrat in order to justify the offensive that it launched the next day in violation of the moratorium on air strikes and UNSC resolutions on the cessation of hostilities;

   • After breaking into the residence of the Eritrean Ambassador accredited to Ethiopia and the OAU in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the Headquarters Agreement with the OAU, Ethiopia fabricated a story accusing Eritrea's two man mission of illicit activities including the "organization of clandestine activities and printing of counterfeit money";

   • Ethiopia denied the occurrence of any battle when it suffered a devastating defeat in the offensive that it launched in Tsorona from March 14-16 last month. However, it later claimed that it had "killed 9,000 Eritrean soldiers and destroyed 36 tanks" in a press statement it issued two weeks later on March 28.

   • TPLF radio falsely claimed during this past weekend that "36 tabots (holy tablets prescribed to individual churches) were returned to Badme." This is an outrageous lie. In the first place, Badme is a small town of 300 families with only one church (Saint Mary's), not 36 churches! Secondly, Badme remains depopulated as the residents have been displaced by the recent fighting. This lie was in fact concocted to bolster an earlier fabrication in which Ethiopia had portrayed Badme as a "district in the Yirga Triangle with a constituency of 90,000 people."

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 6 April 1999

   NOTE: The full text of the report of the Iranian News Agency (IRNA) appeared on the website
   www.irna.com/headlines/ehead.html
   on Monday March 29. In addition, BBC monitoring on line picked up the text from the Iranian News Agency on the same day.

   ---

   g_041599.html100655 127137 345 2651 6705407311 6267
   Press Release
   Ethiopian Jets Bomb Civilian Areas
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 15 April 1999

   Ethiopian fighter planes today bombed the town of Adi Kaieh, the environs of Mendefera and the village of Forto (western Eritrea). The successive bombings occurred from 12:30 to 1:00 p.m.

   Eight children were wounded--some of them critically--in the bombings that hit a school in Adi Kaieh where a nearby church was also partially demolished. There were no casualties in the other two air raids.

   The high altitude bombings were indiscriminate.

   The TPLF regime has carried out the air raids on these civilian targets only two days after the UN Security Council renewed its calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement which remains blocked by the TPLF.

   The town of Adi Quala, the environs of Zalambesa, Deda Lalai, Hazemo, Shabiqo, Kinafna and Molki were targets of previous bombings by Ethiopian Antonov and MiG aircraft and helicopter gunships since February 6 this year when the TPLF regime violated the moratorium on air strikes. Twenty seven civilians were killed and 42 others wounded in those bombings.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 15 April 1999

   ---

   g_041699.html100644 127137 345 5264 6705652025 6275

   Eritrean UN Mission Letter to the UN Security Council

   Today, 15 April 1999, Eritrea's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios, sent a letter, the text of which appears below, to the President of the UN Security Council.
   15 April 1999
   H.E. Mr. Alain Dejammet
   President of the Security Council, United Nations
   Excellency,
   I have the honor to forward to Your Excellency the attached Press Release issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the state of Eritrea today, 15 April 1999, on Ethiopian bombing of civilian centers in Eritrea.
   At a time when Eritrea and the entire World Community is calling for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and implementation of the OAU Framework, the Ethiopian regime continues to reject both, presenting new conditions, and thus bearing full responsibility for the continuing war.
   The Ethiopian regime has moreover intensified its criminal bombing of civilian centers in Eritrea including major towns, and continues as well its expropriation, detention and deportation of ethnic Eritreans with impunity. This is a slap in the face of the Security Council, and the international community at large, which just two days ago on April 13 reiterated its "call once again for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the implementation of the OAU Framework".
   The Security Council cannot be silent when the Ethiopian regime continues to become an obstacle to a peaceful solution in defiance of the Council's insistence "that the parties ... immediately and unconditionally agree to a cease fire" (February 24 1999 Statement), and also continues its bombing of civilian centers in Eritrean and its crimes against ethnic Eritreans in Ethiopia. Continuing to call or demand for cessation of hostilities by both parties when Eritrea has always called for and accepted it but Ethiopia continues to reject it, not acting when Ethiopia continues its bombing and other crimes against Eritrean civilians is encouraging the Ethiopian regime to persist in its war for wider agendas and its crimes against Eritrean civilians.
   Despite Eritrea's will and readiness to resolve the conflict peacefully, these circumstances leave Eritrea no option but to defend its sovereignty and the safety of its citizens by whatever means necessary.
   I should be grateful if you would have the present letter and its annex circulated as a document of the Security Council.
   Haile Menkerios
   Ambassador
   Permanent Representative
   Eritrean Mission to the United Nations
   g_0416992.html100655 127137 345 3604 6705652061 6355
   Press Release
   Eleven Civilians Wounded in Bombing of Adi Kaieh
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 16 April 1999

   The extent of Ethiopian air raids yesterday is now fully known. While the bombings in Forto and Mendefera resulted in no casualties, eleven civilians were seriously wounded and a church destroyed in Adi Kaieh. The bombings injured the following group of ten school children walking home for lunch in Adi Kaieh as well as an elderly man standing nearby:

   1. Luchea Hadgu, 14 years old, critically wounded
   2. Hagos Yemesghen, 53 years old, critically wounded
   3. Segazab Oqbahzghi, 14 years old, critically wounded
   4. Haile Abraha, 15 years old
   5. Zebib Hagos, 12 years old
   6. Zelalem Hagos, 14 years old
   7. Kidane Abraha, 16 years old
   8. Sewit Teshome, 16 years old
   9. Ephraim Tsegay, 14 years old
   10. Meles Tesfai, 4 years old
   11. Fortuna Berih, 4 years old

   TPLF claims that its forces had hit "carefully selected and strategic military targets" are simply false. As corroborated by international media who went to the scene of the bombings, a church and the group of school children were the so-called "carefully selected and strategic military targets."

   Yesterday's unprovoked bombings come in a week when the TPLF regime is coming under heavy international pressure to implement a cease-fire and the OAU Framework Agreement. The air raids also reflect the desperation of a regime that suffered huge losses in Badme last February and a devastating defeat in Tsorona subsequently in mid-March.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 16 April 1999

   ---

   g_041699_2.html100644 127137 345 5043 6705655007 6514

   Press Release

   Eleven Civilians Wounded in Bombing of Adi Kaieh

   The extent of Ethiopian air raids yesterday is now fully known. While the bombings in Forto and Mendefera resulted in no casualties, eleven civilians were seriously wounded and a church destroyed in Adi Kaieh. The bombings injured the following group of ten school children walking home for lunch in Adi Kaieh as well as an elderly man standing nearby:

   • Luchea Hadgu, 14 years old, critically wounded
   • Hagos Yemesghen, 53 years old, critically wounded
   • Segazab Oqbahzghi, 14 years old, critically wounded
   • Haile Abraha, 15 years old
   • Zebib Hagos, 12 years old
   • Zelalem Hagos, 14 years old
   • Kidane Abraha, 16 years old
   • Sewit Teshome, 16 years old
   • Ephraim Tsegay, 14 years old
   • Meles Tesfai, 4 years old
   • Fortuna Berih, 4 years old
   TPLF claims that its forces had hit "carefully selected and strategic military targets" are simply false. As corroborated by international media who went to the scene of the bombings, a church and the group of school children were the so-called "carefully selected and strategic military targets."

   Yesterday's unprovoked bombings come in a week when the TPLF regime is coming under heavy international pressure to implement a cease-fire and the OAU Framework Agreement. The air raids also reflect the desperation of a regime that suffered huge losses in Badme last February and a devastating defeat in Tsorona subsequently in mid-March.

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 16 April 1999

   ---

   Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
   Embassy of Eritrea to the US
   1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
   TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
   E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

   Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

   g_042099.html100655 127137 345 10464 6707152426 6312 Press Release
   Reuters Fumbles Again
   Embassy of Eritrea
   Rome, Italy
   Tuesday, 20 April,1999

   In a report titled "Eritrean Economic Growth Dealt Heavy Blow by War" (April 12, 1999) attributed to Alex Last, Reuters has misquoted Eritrean officials on facts about the Eritrean economy, made inferences that are not supported by the naked facts, and sensationalized a topic that otherwise deserves serious consideration. In so doing, Reuters not only abused and misused economic statistics but also did a great disservice to its readers. In this report which is replete with innuendoes and inept interpretation of statistics, Reuters resorts to cheap journalism by using sensational phrases such as "strangled economic growth," "suffered a severe blow," and "a buying spree of foreign weaponry and aircraft." This is nothing but sensational journalism that characterizes throw-away tabloids of the worst kind. The following are the relevant facts:

   1. Obviously, the reported GDP growth rate of 4% (1998) is not as spectacular as 8 percent (1997). It is, however, a relatively respectable rate that not too many countries enjoyed in the same year. The fact that the period 1992-1998 recorded a formidable average growth rate of 7% should not diminish the significance of 4 percent in real growth. It is worth noting that, according to the United Nations, Sub-Saharan countries recorded on the average only 2.4 percent growth in 1998. Without even minimum due diligence,

      Reuters describes an economy that recorded a 4 percent growth rate (1998) as "strangled" and dealt with a "heavy blow". This is simply a sham.

   2. Reuters also indicates that Eritrea's foreign currency reserves have been reduced from the equivalent of seven months of imports to that of three months. Again, little does the reporter know that, at present, few developing countries can boast reserves of 3 months of import equivalent, much less the 7 months that Eritrea enjoyed prior to 1997. We believe again that by African standards a reserve level equivalent to 3 months of imports is respectable while 7 months would be enviable. Obviously, there are reasons why reserves might decrease, but at no time did we mention the reasons why reserves declined. Without quoting, the reporter attributes the phrase ''buying spree of foreign weaponry and aircraft" to Abraham Kidane. This is false and deliberately misleading.

   3. Without enclosing in quotes, the reporter misrepresents Woldai Futur as having said that ''Eritrea had suffered a severe blow with loss of revenue from Assab after Ethiopia switched its shipping trade to Djibouti last year." This is, indeed, Reuters own conclusion. Again, at no time did Woldai Futur make such or similar statement to that effect. The simple truth is that of the two Eritrean ports, the port of Assab's business was mainly Ethiopian and, with the decision of the Ethiopian government not to utilize the port, Eritrea's revenues from that source have been reduced.

   4. Oscillations in economic statistics including those pertaining to reserves, general level of prices or trade are indeed frequent. One should not, however, conclude that every time those changes take place that devastation or doomsday are in the making. A more meaningful measure of well-being or economic viability are the continued availability of essential goods and services such as food, energy sources, health care, and transportation. In so far as the Eritrean economy is concerned, the availability or the prices of such important supplies have not been impacted significantly since the beginning of the conflict.

   Undeniably, the conflict between the two neighboring countries is impacting negatively the economies of both countries. It would be disingenuous if claims were to be made to the contrary. The problem arises when a news medium like Reuters ignores facts which are made available to it and misleads readers by deliberately misrepresenting them. The report attributed to Alex Last ignores the figures that were provided to it and makes conclusions that are untenable, serve no purpose or, even worse, insult the intelligence of the general public.

   ---

   Embassy of Eritrea,
   Rome, Italy
   20 April 1999

   g_042399.html100655 127137 345 15466 6710213766 6323

   Press Release
   Eritrea Calls for Respect of International Law
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Friday, 23 April,1999

   As the UN special envoy, Ambassador Sahnun, prepares to return to the region in pursuit of a peaceful resolution to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the regime in Addis Ababa is issuing a flurry of statements on the need not to "reward aggression". The TPLF regime attempts to portray itself as a "victim of Eritrean aggression" through the distortion of facts and omission of crucial events. It argues that the border conflict has its origins in early May of 1998 when "Eritrea suddenly attacked Ethiopia" in the Badme region; (even then the date is sometimes May 6 and at other times May 12).

   The moral high ground that the TPLF regime is attempting to straddle can not be taken seriously when one considers the true origins of the conflict and pattern of Ethiopian aggression.

   • Ethiopia refuses to talk about several events in the period prior to May 1998 in which the TPLF regime consistently violated basic tenets of international law and a sacrosanct principle of the OAU on the sanctity of colonial borders.

   • In August 1997, TPLF forces made an illegal incursion into undisputed Eritrean territory at Adi Murug in Bada. The regime then justified the incursion saying they were only pursuing resistance forces but proceeded to dismantle the local Eritrean administration and to forcibly establish Ethiopian "rule" over the area. President Isaias wrote to Prime Minister Meles in response to those disturbing events in hopes of resolving that aggression through bilateral talks. (He also suggested the formation of a Joint Border Commission at very high levels to resolve the conflict amicably and bilaterally). The invasion of Adi Murug is indeed aggression as underlined by Article 3 of the United Nation's Definition of Aggression which reads as: "the invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack...".

   • As far back as June 1997, the TPLF has begun a wide-scale program in the Badme region to re-establish borders on the ground through the placement of rock piles as markers. The Ethiopian encroachment on the Eritrean border in the Badme region, however ridiculous it may sound, was part of a systematic aggression and in stark violation of UN General Assembly Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States which reads: "every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of any other State or country".

   • In October 1997, the TPLF issued a new map which illegally incorporated large tracts of sovereign and undisputed Eritrean land. The new administrative map of Tigray was issued by the "Planning and Economic Development Bureau and had been approved by the Central Mapping Authority in Addis Ababa". The TPLF asserted that the map "defined the new boundaries of Tigray relative to other Administrative Zones in Ethiopia as well as other neighbouring States." Ethiopia's unilateral revision of Eritrea's established international borders was a flagrant transgression of the most fundamental provisions of international law. The UN Charter states, in one of its most basic tenets, that "the territorial integrity and political independence of the State are inviolable." Ethiopia's acts on the ground and agenda on paper also flout the most primary agreement between member States of the OAU which obliges nations to uphold the sanctity of colonial borders.

   • Ethiopia continued to use force to try and change facts on the ground in the subsequent period. In January 1998, TPLF Forces attempted to repeat the events of Adi Murug in Burie on the Assab road. This time, Eritrean forces were in place and the situation was resolved by a stand-off between troops on the border. Again, both the intent and the force behind the TPLF's actions was a blatant disregard for international law.

   • Ethiopia's efforts to redraw the international boundary in Badme culminated in its attack of 6 May 1998. On that day, about 60 Ethiopian army troops completely encircled a group of ten Eritrean army officers who were present in the Badme area and opened fire. Four were killed and three others wounded. This initial attack led to further spiraling clashes in the subsequent days with both sides bringing in reinforcements and a final showdown on May 12, 1998.

   • On May 13th, the Ethiopian Parliament declared war on Eritrea. Ethiopia deployed thousands of troops along the entire border in areas not even under any contention and initiated attacks along these fronts. All this, ostensibly, in response to the events in Badme. The TPLF's action showed a dangerous disregard for Article 1 of the Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.

   • Ethiopia's air strikes against Asmara on June 5th was also aimed, at escalating the conflict. This attack came in the middle of intensive efforts for peace and at a time when many in the international community were hoping some avenues for a resolution of the crisis were at hand. Ethiopia also refused, despite calls from the international community, to hold direct negotiations with Eritrea which could have created a conducive climate for the peace efforts underway.

   • On February 6th, 1999, the TPLF regime launched an all out offensive on Eritrea in violation of UNSC Resolutions and Operative paragraph 1 of the OAU Framework Agreement calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities. In the subsequent weeks and despite the massive losses that its military was sustaining, the government in Addis Ababa unleashed further attacks on other fronts far from any disputed territory. The regime employed the use of aircraft in violation of the moratorium on air strikes targeting civilian sites which resulted in tens of civilian deaths.

   Ethiopia has displayed a pattern of disregard for international law and accepted norms of State behaviour. The aggrieved picture it seeks to portray and the banner of righteousness it is waving at the world becomes satirical in the light of its aggressive acts which caused the conflict. The TPLF cannot speak about international principles unless it is willing to confess its blatant violation of them and come clean on the actions it undertook to force a war of aggression on Eritrea.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 23 April, 1999

   g_0423992.html100655 127137 345 17211 6710214477 6373

   Press Release
   ERITREAN ECONOMY MAINTAINS DEVEOPMENT MOMENTUM
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Friday, 23 April,1999

   The Eritrean Economy is well and growing. However, recently, there have been a few articles in the Western electronic mass media that presented mistaken views and conclusions about the performance and growth prospects of the Eritrean economy, The facts presented below should put the Eritrean economy's performance and future prospects in proper perspective.

   Those who followed Eritrea's long struggle for independence know that at liberation in 1991, Eritrea inherited a war-raged economy in ruins, with a devastated infrastructure, weak and corrupt institutions, defunct factor and product markets, and undeveloped and technologically backward productive sectors. As such, Eritrea's economic development efforts had to start from scratch with meager domestic resources and little or no external assistance.

   Over the past eight years since liberation, thanks to its sound economic policy and management, and the motivation, discipline and drive of its people, Eritrea made significant progress toward achieving its long-term economic growth potential. Its infrastructure (including power, transport, communications, water, etc.) has been rehabilitated and significantly expanded; its factor and product markets have been revived; its social and economic institutions have been revitalized, streamlined and strengthened; and its productive sectors have been expanded and improved. Additionally, Eritrea has been able to establish a clean system of governance of free of corruption and bureaucratic red-tape that are essential to ensure private sector confidence and economic growth.

   As a result, all sectors of the Eritrean economy posted remarkably high growth rates and its overall performance was much better than expected. Real GDP during 1992-1998 grew by over 6 percent while inflation was contained at below 7 percent. In spite of the increasing public expenditures that have been made to meet the emergency needs and critical investment required to resuscitate the productive and infrastructure base of the economy, overall government fiscal deficit (including grants) as a percentage of GDP at the end of 1997 was approximately 5.1. Gross foreign reserves increased from less than one month of imports in 1992 to about seven months of imports in mid 1998. Moreover, the growth during this period was accompanied by a faster job creation in all sectors than the growth in the labor force, thus resulting in the importation of large numbers of workers from Ethiopia and some Asian countries.

   In May 1998, Eritrea was poised to attain a fast and broad-based growth with macroeconomic stability and socioeconomic justice. In spite of the challenges posed by the border conflict with Ethiopia, Eritrea has been able to maintain growth and stability:

   • Real Output Growth: In 1998, real output growth by 4 percent. According to the United Nations, during the same period, sub-Saharan countries recorded on the average only 2.5 percent growth rate;

   • Price Stability: In spite of the increased public expenditure necessitated by the unfortunate border conflict with Ethiopia and the need to maintain the development momentum, prices remained relatively stable. The average inflation rate for 1998 was 5.0 percent. This Price stability resulted from the good harvest in agriculture that stabilized food prices, and the liberalized trade regime that helped to assure an ample supply of consumer goods and intermediate inputs;

   • Exchange Rate: Since the adoption of a free market exchange rate policy and the successful introduction of the Nakfa in November 1997, it has maintained its internal and external value. At the time of its introduction, the exchange rate of the Nakfa was ERN 7.2 per US dollar. After 16 months by end of March 1999, the rate of Nakfa has depreciated only to about 7.7 per US dollar;

   • Foreign Reserves: Eritrea holds a comfortable level of foreign reserves. This is made possible partly by increased remittance by Eritreans in the Diaspora. The border conflict has only increased the resolve and commitment of Eritreans overseas to increase private transfers and contributions for national defense;

   • Private Sector Development and Financial Intermediation: Eritrea's economic development strategy promotes the private sector to become the engine of growth. Accordingly, the policy framework pursued since liberation opens all sectors of the economy for private investment, both domestic and external. Domestic private savings and investment including by Eritreans in the Diaspora have grown unabated. For instance, from December 1997 to December 1998, bank deposits increased by approximately 13 percent while credit to the private sector for investment purposes increased by 61.1 percent;

   • Infrastructure Development: As a pre-requisite for accelerated growth and development, Eritrea continues to make significant investments in infrastructure. Substantial investments have been made in the areas of power generation and distribution, transport, telecommunications, and water. A network of national highways and feeder roads linking production centers and markets, power generation, air and sea port development, construction of urban and rural water supply systems are among the substantial public sector investments currently underway;

   • Human Capital Development: Human resources development is a core component of Eritrea's development strategy. Accordingly, the Government continues to allocate increasing amounts of resources to improve access to quality education and healthcare services. In 1998 alone, significant number of schools and healthcare facilities at all levels have been established and made operational. As of march 1999, a national adult literacy campaign and adult education program has been launched;

   • Rural and Agricultural Development: With the view of ensuring national food security and increasing surplus for exportations, in 1998, Eritrea embarked on an integrated rural and agricultural development program. This program entailed the expansion of cultivated areas and the introduction of modern agricultural practices and inputs. These efforts increased agricultural productions from 105,000 tons in 1997 to 450,000 tons in 1998. Efforts are also underway to redouble the total cultivated area and to further intensify agricultural production; and

   • Export Development: Eritrea is making a concerted effort to diversify and expand its exports and to penetrate new markets. Efforts have underway to increase exports of agricultural products (e.g. vegetables, fruits, flowers, and livestock), fish and fish products, salt and other marine products, and light manufactured goods, and to increase the competitiveness of Eritrean products in the international market. These efforts have begun to bear fruits already in 1999.

   In combination, all these economic performance indicators show the Eritrean economy's resilience in the face of adversity. Eritrea's growth comes from the shared vision, sound policies and management, ownership of policies and self-reliance, and motivation, drive and dedication of its people. The challenges of the border conflict with Ethiopia have only sharpened the focus and increased the commitment of the Eritrean People to maintain the development momentum and to defend the sovereignty of their country.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 23 April, 1999

   g_042699.html100655 127137 345 3331 6711125604 6264

   Press Release
   Eritrea Reaffirms Its Commitment and Readiness to the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 26 April 1999

   
   President Isaias Afwerki met this afternoon with Ambassador Mohamed Sahnoun, Special Envoy of the UN Secretary General. Ambassador Sahnoun delivered a message from the Secretary General of the UN, Mr. Kofi Annan, to President Isaias.
   

   Earlier in the day, Ambassador Sahnoun met with Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae who leads the Eritrean delegation that is mandated to deal with the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
   

   In the course of both discussions, Eritrea reaffirmed its strict adherence to the OAU Framework Agreement that was endorsed by the Summit of the Central Organ and expressed its commitment and readiness for its full implementation. In this context, the Eritrean Government further reiterated its readiness for redeployment as clearly stipulated by, and in the letter and spirit of, the Framework Agreement.
   

   Eritrea also informed Ambassador Sahnoun--indeed, as it had done so when the OAU delegation visited Asmara last month--that it has already designated a committee and that the Eritrean Government stands ready to play its role within the Follow-Up Committee to be established under the auspices of the OAU High Level Delegation, with the active participation and assistance of the United Nations.

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 26 April 1999

   ---

   g_042899.html100655 127137 345 4005 6711614065 6271 Is Ethiopia Interested in Peace?
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   April 28, 1999

   ---

   The government in Addis Ababa is, once again, reading from a new script and putting forth new preconditions with the apparent aim of blocking the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement. The TPLF regime insists that Eritrea "needs to officially declare that it will withdraw its troops from all Ethiopian land and agree to set a short timeframe ... only when the Eritrean authorities agree to these requirements can a cease-fire take place."

   In reality, the contents of the Framework Agreement--the substantive and sequential tenets of which are listed below--do not support Ethiopia's preconditions:

   • Formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by both parties;

   • Formal agreement on a total cessation of hostilities which must be enforceable through an appropriate international instrument;

   • Redeployment of Eritrean forces from Badme and environs as a matter of good will and reinstatement of Ethiopian administration to the area;

   • Demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the troops of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement;

   • Demarcation of the boundary between the two countries.

   The TPLF regime further claims that Eritrea "has accepted the cease-fire alone without agreeing to the full package." This is patently false. Eritrea has formally announced its acceptance of and adherence to the Framework Agreement in its entirety on several occasions before and has reiterated its readiness to implement the Framework Agreement in full to the UN Special Envoy Mohamed Sahnoun during his visit to Asmara this week.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 28 April 1999 g_0428992.html100655 127137 345 4213 6711613723 6354

   Ethiopia Launches Air Raid to Frustrate Sahnoun Visit
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   April 28, 1999

   ---

   At 11:00 a.m. this morning, two Ethiopian Antonov planes escorted by fighter planes violated Eritrean air space to bomb nomadic grazing areas along the Binbina-Kuluk road in western Eritrea. There were no casualties although a few heads of cattle were slaughtered in the bombing.

   The air raid today was deliberately timed to coincide with the visit of UN Special Envoy Ambassador Mohamed Sahnoun to the region. He left for Addis Abeba yesterday after holding talks with President Isaias Afwerki and the Foreign Minister here on Monday.

   During the talks in Asmara, the Government of Eritrea reiterated to Ambassador Sahnoun its continued adherence to the OAU Framework Agreement and its readiness to implement all its provisions. Ambassador Sahnoun expressed his satisfaction telling the international press on departure that "the talks went well and, at this stage, I am hopeful."

   The aim of Ethiopia's air raid today is therefore transparent. The TPLF regime is anxious that the efforts underway by the UN envoy and the persistent calls from the international community for the implementation of the OAU Framework will create an environment for lasting peace. Indeed, the OAU Chairman, President Compaore, is scheduled to visit the region in the next few days to accelerate the implementation of the agreement. Furthermore, the US State Department has urged both sides, in a press statement on Monday, to agree to "a cease-fire as a first priority" in accordance with the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement that has been consistently endorsed by the UN Security Council.

   In light of these developments, it is clear that Ethiopia's recourse to an air strike today has no rationale other than provoking retaliation in an effort to trigger a new round of hostilities so as to torpedo the peace process.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 28 April 1999 g_043099.html100655 127137 345 6533 6712340131 6261

   TPLF's Violations Are Not Replicated in Eritrea

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Friday April 30, 1999

   ---

   The TPLF regime continues to issue inflammatory statements about the state of Ethiopian citizens in Eritrea who, it alleges, are "randomly beat on the street and in their homes." The regime further contents that "hundreds of Ethiopians have been detained in prisons and the whereabouts of most of them are unknown."

   The TPLF's claims, however, are not borne out by the facts in Eritrea. Indeed, the timing of these accusations is geared to detract attention from the peace process and intensified international calls for the immediate implementation of the Framework Agreement.

   As far as the accusations are concerned: *

   • The ICRC has, in the past year, investigated and dismissed identical claims made by the Ethiopian government regarding their nationals in Eritrea. The ICRC continues to enjoy full, unlimited access to investigate 'new' accusations of unlawful detention. *

   • This is in stark contrast to the plight of Eritreans in Ethiopia who have been subject to the very policies Ethiopia wants the world to believe exist in Eritrea. But, while in Eritrea Ethiopian nationals continue to live and work protected by the June 26, 1998, parliamentary act which honors their rights, in Ethiopia Eritrean civilians have and continue to endure arbitrary arrest and detention in brutal camps where many have lost their lives. While Ethiopian nationals in Eritrea have been given the option to return to Ethiopia voluntarily in a program supervised by the ICRC, Eritreans in Ethiopia have been deported by force and en masse--to the tune of 56,000--after having property and all means of livelihood confiscated. *

   • Ethiopia can not, in earnest, claim that their nationals are prevented from entering the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara. Access to that embassy has never been restricted or denied. Neither has anyone attempting to visit the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara been "intimidated and harassed." This, again, is in stark contrast to the actions the TPLF has taken against Eritrea's diplomatic mission in Addis Abeba. TPLF soldiers stood guard outside the premise and placed a twenty four hour surveillance on the ambassador who himself was eventually deported. The TPLF has since broken into the embassy residence in direct contravention of the Vienna Convention.

   The TPLF regime seeks to give credence to its accusations by producing bogus 'lists' to undermine the legitimate appeals the Eritrean government has undertaken on behalf of missing Eritreans in Ethiopia. The regime in Addis Abeba also seeks to convince the world that Eritreans have become vindictive following "humiliating defeats." Is it not Ethiopia, as verified by international media, which has sustained massive loss of life on both the Badme and Tsorona fronts?

   Ethiopians in Eritrea, as everyone knows, have and will continue to enjoy their rights including the right to stay and work, or indeed the right to leave. The TPLF regime cannot continue to suggest that the policies they execute against Eritreans are being replicated in Eritrea.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 30 April 1999 g_0430992.html100655 127137 345 15103 6712571436 6372 A RESPONSE TO THE RT. HON. JOHN AUSTIN'S
   EARLY DAY MOTION ON CHILDREN IN ERITREA
   General Consulate of the State of Eritrea to UK
   . London.
   30/04/1999

   It is with great sadness that the General Consulate of the state of Eritrea to UK learned about the tabling of an Early Day Motion (EDM) No 576 under the heading Children In Eritrea, by the Rt. Hon. John Austin, MP. The motion refers to the African Conference on the Use of Children as soldiers held in Maputo, Mozambique, and expresses concern that the Government of Eritrea is forcibly conscripting children into the armed forces.

   The General Consulate of the State of Eritrea to the UK wishes to strongly repudiate the false remarks made in the EDM No 576 as no allegation was made against the Eritrean Government at the Maputo Conference. This reference was deliberately done to give credence to the unfounded accusation put forward in the EDM.

   The sources of these allegations can only be the TPLF leaders in Ethiopia. They would have done this in order to obscure their own gross abuses of the rights of children. As corroborated by independent witnesses, Ethiopia has been engaged in mass recruitment of students as young as 13 years old for combat duties. The stories of Dawit Adam and Tewelde Alem, two Ethiopian POWs who were interviewed by Lucy Hannon (ref. the Independent, 11/02/99), speak for themselves. Seventeen-year-old Dawit was playing football in Gondar High School, northern Ethiopia, when three government soldiers rounded up 60 boys and took them to a military training camp. Tewelde, who is from Tigray, was also forcibly recruited from his farm and taken to Kobo training camp in Tigray.

   Another sad story is that of 13 year old Demoz Admasu from Southern Gondar whose grade six student certificate and a letter from his mother were recovered from the pockets of his dead body. In the letter his mother wrote, that he should stealthily turn back to his village if he got an outlet. Suffice to say that it is the TPLF regime in Ethiopia that has been forcibly conscripting under age children in its armies and using them as cannon fodder. From the POWs own words, that officers in the back line shot many of the child soldiers as they attempted to retreat.

   Rt. Hon. John Austin selectively welcomed the adoption and ratification of the convention of the Rights of the Child by Ethiopia, ignoring the fact that Eritrea too has adopted and ratified the UN Convention on the Right of the Child. Unlike Ethiopia, however, Eritrea does honour the rights of its children.

   The National Service program in Eritrea as enshrined in the Eritrean Constitution, and fully abiding by the provisions of the international human rights instruments, in particular the CRC, is geared primarily towards the mobilisation of human resources towards national development. It is a legal and national obligation of every Eritrean citizen to participate in this programme. Observers believe that the national service programme has greatly contributed to the rapid progress Eritrea achieved since it won its independence in 1991.

   Mr Austin's EDM further calls on the Government of Eritrea to cease hostilities towards Ethiopia and withdraw its troops from all occupied Ethiopian territory in accordance with the Framework Agreement for peace drawn up by the OAU. The General Consulate wishes to express its dismay by Mr Austin's apparent lack of knowledge as regards the genesis of the conflict, and pattern of Ethiopian aggression, the OAU proposal and the current Ethiopian and Eritrean positions to it. At this juncture it is appropriate to put on record that: It is the Ethiopia that has violated Eritrea's international boarders and unashamedly produced maps that incorporate large tracts of Eritrean territory.

4. In violation of the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States, it is Ethiopia that keeps on carrying out unprovoked and indiscriminate air raids on Eritrean towns and villages killing 27 and wounding 53 innocent civilians including women and children. In one of the most recent high altitude bombings, which was directed at a school in the town of Adi-Keieh, 10 school children and an elderly man were wounded, three of them critically.

5. It is the TPLF regime that has inhumanely deported more than 56,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin from Ethiopia, that has been keeping 1500 Eritreans on detention and that has abducted 1000 young Eritreans whose whereabouts remains unknown.

6. In defiance to the UN Security Council Resolutions and recommendations of the OAU Framework Agreement, it is Ethiopia, which continues to reject an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities, etc., etc

   In contrast to Ethiopia's aggression and war posturing:

   • Eritrea has formally announced its acceptance of and adherence to the Framework Agreement for peace drawn by the OAU and expressed its commitment and readiness for its full implementation.

   • Eritrea has strictly upheld its pledge and duty to respect the rights of Ethiopians in Eritrea.

   • Eritrea has been respecting the moratorium on air strikes brokered by President Clinton.

   It is well known that Ethiopian propaganda campaign in the past eleven months has been anchored on two pillars: i) recourse to the distortion and fabrication of facts and events so long as these appeared to serve its purpose; and ii) attempts to render them credible through sheer repetition. EDM No 576 hosts these mechanisms efficiently.

   Although the Early Day Motion No 576, by virtue of its contents was not considered for debate as is the procedure in the House of Commons, the TPLF regime has already started propagating its lies. It has gone to the extent of presenting the contents of the motion as though they are the views of the House of Commons and the British Government.

   As International pressure on the TPLF regime to stop these horrendous violations mounts the EDM No 576 attempts to portray Ethiopia as a victim of Eritrean aggression is ludicrous and counter productive. The General Consulate of the State of Eritrea hopes that the distinguished British MPs did not mean to give Ethiopia the licence to conduct further aggression on Eritrea. The challenge for them is establishing the truth and, if they were to do that, there is no doubt they would want to amend the motion that they tabled.

   ---

   General Consulate of the State of Eritrea to UK. London. 30/04/1999 g_050399.html100655 127137 345 4662 6713346165 6301
   Press Release
   Eritrea-Sudan Agreement
   
   Doha, Qatar, 2 May 1999

   Agreement

   As part of the good offices being made by the state of Qatar to reach a solution for the existing differences between the State of Eritrea and the Republic of Sudan, and in keeping with the traditional ties and historical relations between the two neighboring peoples; and

   In response to the mediation by the State of Qatar aiming to establish security and stability in both countries and in the Horn of Africa, and in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the two countries in Doha on November 10th, 1998.

   A summit meeting was held in Doha on Sunday, May 2nd, 1999, between H.E. Issaias Afeworki, President of the State of Eritrea, H.E. Omar Hassan Al-Basheer, President of the Republic of the Sudan, and H.H. Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, Emir of the State of Qatar,

   Whereas they agreed to the following:

   1. Restoring diplomatic relations between the two countries.

   2. Respecting international laws and customs regulating peaceful coexistence and good neighborly relations among countries and peoples.

   3. Respecting the political choices of both countries and peoples, and refraining from adopting a policy of exporting ideologies and seeking to impose them.

   4. Refraining from hosting or organizing regional or international conferences that aim to adopt policies or coordinate tasks posing a threat to the security and stability of neighboring countries.

   5. Working to resolve the remaining differences between the two countries through peaceful means.

   6. Establishing joint committees between the two countries to examine the remaining issues, especially those related to security, and implement what has been agreed upon in this agreement.
   Signed in Doha, on 16/1/1420 H
   Corresponding to 2/5/1999 G

   ---

   President of the State of Eritrea Issaias Afeworki	President of the Republic of the Sudan Omar Hassan Al-Basheer
   Emir of the State of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani

   ---

   g_050499.html100655 127137 345 7510 6713577475 6307 Badme Was the Culmination of TPLF's Persistent Use of Force
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 4, 1999

   ---

   On May 6 last year, about sixty Ethiopian troops in the Badme area encircled a small Eritrean unit and opened fire killing some officers and wounding others. This unprovoked act of aggression triggered a series of spiraling clashes until May 12, with each side reinforcing its positions.

   The TPLF regime later distorted the origin of the clashes in Badme to claim that Eritrean "forces invaded Badme and Shiraro (?) one sunny morning"! Even the date for "this surprise attack" was doctored to suit its arguments; sometimes becoming May 6 and at other times May 12. Badme itself was portrayed differently to the outside world and even to its domestic audience. Whereas Badme is a small town of not more than 300 Eritrean families, it was depicted by the TPLF lie machine as "a constituency of 90,000 residents." Whereas its location is indisputably inside Eritrea, the TPLF dislocated it deceptively to claim "Badme is situated in the inverted V (Yirga Triangle) and together with Sheraro, both on the Ethiopian side, have always been under Ethiopia as indicated in the Addis Abeba Agreement of 1902."

   There was an underlying motive for this manipulation of facts and events. Badme was not in fact the origin of the border conflict. It was indeed the culmination of a series of violations of Eritrean sovereignty by the TPLF regime.

   The first serious violations occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopian troops crossed the border to dismantled the Eritrean administration in Bada. Parallel with these acts, villagers in the Badme area were uprooted by local Tigrean administrators who began to carry out unilateral marking of the border. The following letter, translated from the handwritten message of President Isaias Afwerki to Prime Minister Meles on 16 August 1997, underlines the origin of the conflict.

   "Greetings,

   I have been compelled to write to you today because of the preoccupying situation prevailing in the areas around Bada.

   It cannot be said that the border between our two countries is demarcated clearly although it is known traditionally. And we had not given the issue much attention in view of our present and future ties. Moreover, I do not believe that this will be a cause of much concern and controversy even in the future.

   Be this as it may, there have been intermittent disputes in the border areas arising from different and minor causes. Local officials have been striving to defuse and solve these problems amicably. However, the forcible occupation of Adi Murug by your army in the past few days is truly saddening.

   There was no justification for resorting to force as it would not have been at all difficult to settle the matter amicably even if it was deemed important and warranting immediate attention. It would also be possible to quietly and without haste demarcate the boundaries in case that this is felt to be necessary.

   I therefore urge you to personally take the necessary prudent action so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary conflict."

   Eritrea further suggested the formation of a Joint Border Commission at very high levels. In spite of this mechanism, the TPLF regime persisted in its acts of aggression to:

   • discreetly publish the new map of Tigray in October 1997;

   • repeat the Bada incident in the Burie area (although checked in time) in January 1998; and

   • provoke the incident in Badme on May 6, 1998.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 4 May 1999 g_051299.html100644 127137 345 5243 6716312262 6265

   Eritrea Calls for Implementation of Framework Agreement Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea May 12, 1999

   ---

   Press Release
    

   An OAU delegation led by the Foreign Minister of Burkina Faso, the special
   envoy of President Blaise Compaore, visited Asmara yesterday, Tuesday, May
   11, 1999, and held talks with President Isaias Afwerki. The delegation also
   met with Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae leading the Eritrean committee on
   the border conflict.

   The special envoy delivered a message from President Compaore to President
   Isaias.

   The Government of Eritrea reiterated to the delegation its adherence to the
   Framework Agreement as endorsed by the Summit of the OAU Central Organ and
   its readiness to implement its provisions fully. In this context, and with a
   view of expediting the implementation of the process, the Government of
   Eritrea called for the following practical measures:

   1.  A formal and binding agreement to be signed between the Government of
   Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia confirming the acceptance of the OAU
   Framework Agreement by both parties;

   2.  Formal agreements concerning the "mechanisms" and "technicalities" of
   implementation of the Framework Agreement be signed by both parties and that
   these be declared;

   3.  A formal agreement on a cease-fire be signed and declared so as to
   create a conducive climate for the implementation of the Framework
   Agreement.

   The Government of Eritrea further informed the OAU delegation that when
   these three points are agreed and signed, Eritrea will exhibit, in the
   process of implementation of the Framework Agreement, necessary flexibility
   and co-operation without compromising its claims over its sovereign
   territory. The Government of Eritrea urged the OAU delegation to ensure that
   Ethiopia's illegal expulsion of Eritrea's ambassador to the OAU is rectified
   and the Ambassador enabled to return to the OAU Headquarters to resume vital
   communication with the OAU Secretariat.

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 12 May 1999
    
    
    

     g_051399.html100644 127137 345 10772 6716613652 6320 Why the TPLF Loathes Independent Investigation Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea May 13, 1999

   ---

   The TPLF regime has been distorting key facts and events to portray Eritrea as the "aggressor" country and to demand "Eritrean withdrawal from occupied  territories" as a precondition to the implementation of the OAU FrameworkAgreement. Its transparent tactics appear to hinge on repetition ad nauseam of falsehoods in the hope of confusing public opinion.But what are the facts? Who is the aggressor? Are there areas contested by  Ethiopia or "sovereign Ethiopian territories" occupied by Eritrea?The current border crisis is rooted in the following, sequential violation of international law and the OAU's cardinal principle on the sanctity of  colonial boundaries perpetrated repeatedly by the TPLF regime:

   It used military force in July 1997 to occupy the Eritrean village of Adi Murug in Bada. At around the same time, TPLF administrators in Tigray

   used force to evict Eritrean villagers from the Badme area. These acts were acts of aggression and blatant violation of the sovereign rights of a neighbouring and friendly country;

   It unilaterally published a map of the Tigray Administrative Region in October 1997 that illegally incorporates large chunks of Eritrea territory. The TPLF regime has not rescinded this illegal map to date. Indeed, the areas it claims today as "sovereign Ethiopian territories occupied by Eritrea" broadly coincide with those incorporated in the illegal map. The TPLF regime has also refused to inform the OAU or submit the totality of its territorial claims on Eritrea;

   It provoked the clashes in the Badme area when its troops attacked a small Eritrean unit on May 6, 1998;

   It declared full scale war against Eritrea on May 13, 1998;

   It unleashed attacks on the Zalambesa area on May 31, 1998;

   It launched the first air strike against Eritrea with its air raids on Asmara on June 5, 1998;  While the OAU peace effort was in motion, the TPLF regime has been unleashing a series of large scale offensives against Eritrea since February 6 of this year. This is in violation of the first requirement of the OAU Framework Agreement and relevant UN Security Council resolutions calling for a cessation of hostilities.

   In regard to human rights violations, the TPLF regime:

   •  is pursuing a policy of ethnic cleansing to deport inhumanely more than 57,000 ethnic Eritreans from Ethiopia by confiscating their life long earnings;
   • has jailed about 1,500 Eritreans in the Blattien concentration camp "because they have done military service at one time";
   • refused to reveal the whereabouts of 1,000 others whose families have reported them as missing after abduction by the regime's securityforces;
   • repeatedly air bombed, in violation of the moratorium on air strikes, civilian centers, including Adi Kaieh, Adi Quala, villages in the Zalambesa area, Deda Lalai, Kinafna and Shambiqo, killing and maiming over70 innocent civilians;
   • caused the displacement of more than 250,000 civilians by its repeated air bombings and artillery shelling.

   The TPLF's pre-emptive discourse on "respect for international law and not rewarding aggression" is indeed hollow and resorted to in order to cover up its acts of aggression and violation of international law. As a matter of  fact, it was Eritrea which consistently pressed, from the outset, for an  independent investigation on the origins of the crisis and the identification of the aggressor party. This has now been included as operative paragraph 7 in the OAU Framework Agreement. Furthermore, Ethiopia  has been roundly condemned by the international community for its violation of human rights. As these acts continue to be committed by Ethiopia, Eritrea has requested the placement of observers from the UN Human Rights Commission.

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 13 May 1999

    
    

     g_051699.html100655 127137 345 1716 6720001367 6270 Ethiopian MiGs Bomb Civilian Targets in the Port City of Massawa
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 17, 1999

   ---

   Ethiopian MiG-23 jets bombed the port city of Massawa today. The bombing took place at 6:20 a.m. this morning.

   One person was killed and three others seriously wounded in the air raid. A commercial warehouse in the vicinity of the port was hit. Ethiopian MiG fighter planes also bombed the areas around Zalambesa yesterday but failed to hit any target.

   These provocative bombings come in the wake of intensified peace efforts by the OAU and other concerned parties. The TPLF regime continues to obstruct the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement by stipulating new preconditions.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 16 May 1999 g_051799.html100655 127137 345 14750 6720001337 6310

   Is the OAU Framework Agreement Ambiguous?
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 17, 1999

   ---

   1. As international pressure for the immediate implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement mounts, Ethiopia's preferred choice seems to impede the peace process by raising issues of "interpretation." But is the Framework Agreement really ambiguous? What are its basic provisions?

   2. The eleven-point Framework Agreement may be condensed into the following five sequential measures:
      • formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by both sides;
      • formal cessation of hostilities;
      • Eritrean forces to redeploy from Badme and environs as a mark of goodwill and consideration to the OAU;
      • demilitarization of the entire border through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement;
      • demarcation of the boundary within a period of six months.

   3. From the foregoing, it is clear that Eritrea was required to withdraw, as a gesture of goodwill to the OAU and after the formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement and the cessation of hostilities, from Badme town and its environs in accordance with operative paragraph 3 of the Framework Agreement. This is the component of Eritrean unilateral withdrawal. Afterwards, as operative paragraph 5 a) and the clarifications provided by the High Level Delegation to Eritrea through their letter of January 26, 1999, underline explicitly, "both sides are required to redeploy their troops--to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

   4. The OAU High Level Delegation defined environs of Badme town, in its written clarifications provided to Eritrea on January 26, 1999, as "the area surrounding Badme town." On the Ethiopian contention that "Badme and environs" meant "all Ethiopian border territories occupied by Eritrea since May 6, 1998," the clarification of January 26, 1999, reads "the High Level Delegation took note of the position of the Prime Minister Melles Zenawi. There was, however, no further discussion of the issue."

   5. This was consistent with the Terms of Reference that the High Level Delegation drew for the Committee of Ambassadors and which was communicated to the Foreign Ministers of both countries through the letter of the General Secretariat of the OAU on June 24, 1998. Operative paragraph 2 of the TOR (terms of reference) of the Ambassadorial Committee read "to collect, from the two Parties or any other appropriate International Organization and Agency, information which would make it possible to determine the authority which was administering Badme before 12 May, 1998."

   6. Eritrea objected to this restrictive mandate, arguing through its letter to the OAU Secretary General of June 25, 1998, "We fail to see the rationale of this task. It must be borne in mind that Badme is one of several Eritrean towns "contested" by Ethiopia, although we do not as yet know the totality of Ethiopian claims other than what can be inferred from the map of Tigray Administrative Region that carves out large swathes of Eritrean territory. For example, it would make equal sense for the Committee to collect information as to which Authority administered Adi Murug prior to July 1997. For the OAU to investigate into one without considering the other is making an unacceptable prejudgment. Moreover, administration by itself does not have any meaning if the process by which this administration was installed was illegal. What is of critical importance is where Badme, Adi Murug and other areas lie within the recognized boundary. We therefore request that point No. 2 be deleted from the tasks as it can be accommodated within task No. 1."

   7. As expressed in the OAU report (para. 13, p. 6), "the Committee decided to take note of the reservations of Eritrea." Does this mean that the Committee had accepted Eritrea's reservations? Not at all. Although it took note of Eritrea's position, the Committee nonetheless stuck to the original TOR that was formulated by the High Level Delegation.

   8. It should also be recalled here that Ethiopia had all along refused to submit the totality of its territorial claims when pressed to do so by the OAU at the request of Eritrea. The written clarification provided to Eritrea by the OAU High Level Delegation reads in this regard "Ethiopia has indicated that it will submit its claims when the issues of delimitation, demarcation and, if need be, arbitration are addressed."

   9. In view of the facts underlined above, the preconditions now put forth by the TPLF regime demanding that "the government of Eritrea needs to officially declare that it will withdraw its troops from all Ethiopian land and agree to set a short time frame in which the withdrawal will be implemented ... As long as Ethiopian territory remains under Eritrean occupation, it is impossible to discuss a cease-fire and negotiate a solution to the border conflict," are incompatible with the OAU Framework Agreement. Indeed, what the TPLF calls "occupied areas" are precisely those territories that it has illegally incorporated into its 1997 map of Tigray and a large tract of territory in the Dankali region of Eritrea.

   10. Obviously at the bidding of Ethiopia, some circles are known to be arguing for a "revision" of the Framework Agreement due to "a changed situation." This is untenable both morally and procedurally. The OAU Secretariat was against any amendment of the TOR of the Ambassadorial Committee arguing that its mandate was to implement the resolutions of the OAU Summit of Heads of State. What powers does it have now to revise a Framework endorsed by the Summit of the Central Organ? Moreover what "change" has occurred other than the use of military force by Ethiopia from February 6 this year, while the peace process was in motion, to occupy Eritrean territory in defiance of the persistent calls of the OAU and the UN Security Council to both sides not to resort to force? To revise the Framework Agreement because of changes on the ground is tantamount to condoning the use of force and to encouraging the parties to resort to a spiral of offensives and counter-offensives to improve their bargaining position.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 17 May 1999 g_051899.html100655 127137 345 3655 6721032402 6271

   No Ethiopian Prisoners in Hawashait
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 18, 1999

   ---

   The Ethiopian Government has, on 14 May 1999, made the absurd accusation that close to 2,000 Ethiopian nationals are being held as prisoners in Hawashait, Eritrea. This fabrication is a repetition of a similar accusation made by the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara on 12 May 1999 in a note sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and circulated to all Diplomatic Missions, Consulates and International Organizations in Asmara.

   These accusations are nothing but another futile propaganda attempt by the Addis Ababa regime to camouflage the heinous crimes it has been perpetrating against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin since its aggression on Eritrea over a year ago. By now, however, the international community is fully aware of Ethiopia's big lie technique and its various schemes to hoodwink world public opinion.

   The fact of the matter is that there are no Ethiopian prisoners in Hawashait or in any other place in Eritrea.

   This latest attempt by the Addis Ababa regime to bring the Eritrean Government down to its level of criminality will as usual expose its lies in a convincing way because the Eritrean Government, which follows an open door policy, has invited both the ICRC and members of an international media group which is currently touring Eritrea to visit Hawashait and any other place in Eritrea and verify for themselves that there are no Ethiopian prisoners in Hawashait.

   The Ethiopian regime must remember that no amount of lies will be able to cleanse it of the crimes it has committed against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin and it will be held accountable for the crimes it commits.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 18 May 1999 g_051999.html100655 127137 345 2132 6720555677 6306

   Ethiopia Deprives Eritreans of Right to Leave
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 19, 1999

   ---

   The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea has received conclusive evidence that the Addis Ababa regime has deprived about 10,000 Eritreans of their right to leave Ethiopia even though it has confiscated their property, frozen any bank accounts they may have had and otherwise deprived them of their right to a livelihood. This gross violation of the human rights of these Eritreans is yet one more example in a series of human rights crimes that have hitherto been committed by the Ethiopian regime against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin.

   The Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemns this criminal and barbaric act by the Addis Ababa regime and demands the unconditional and immediate departure of these Eritreans to any place they may wish to go.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 19 May 1999 g_052099.html100655 127137 345 10101 6721025776 6302

   Ethiopia Should Not Be Allowed to Keep the Peace Process Hostage
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 20, 1999

   ---

   As it may be recalled, the eleven-point OAU Framework Agreement was endorsed by the international community, including the UN Security Council, as "a viable and sound basis for the political settlement" of the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.

   From the outset, Eritrea had no doubts on the positive merits of the Framework Agreement and thus remained actively engaged in the process. In this spirit, it asked for clarifications on 12 December 1998, prior to declaring its definitive response, because it did not want to leave loose ends in an agreement that it felt must be meticulously implemented once it is accepted by both parties.

   Ethiopia, on the other hand, announced its earlier "acceptance" of the Framework Agreement. On January 27, 1999, Ethiopia's Prime Minister told African ambassadors: "... the OAU Conflict Resolution Mechanism, having listened to both sides made a very clear decision. First, it fully endorsed the proposal of the High Level Delegation and second, perhaps more, perhaps just as important as the first one, it called for the implementation of the proposal, not for further negotiation of the proposal. It called for the implementation of the proposal ... they were firmly rejecting any prevarication."

   Now, Ethiopia is prevaricating. Indeed, with hindsight, it is very clear that Ethiopia's early "acceptance" was a simple public relations and diplomatic game. The pretexts on "interpretation" that the TPLF regime is raising today, or the arguments of a "package" with no natural sequencing, are otherwise hollow.

   On the question of interpretation, the Framework Agreement and the written clarifications issued by the High Level Delegation on January 26, 1999, do not leave room for any ambiguity. Badme and its environs is certainly Badme and its surrounding areas. Eritrea was required to withdraw from Badme and environs unilaterally, not because this territory belongs to Ethiopia but, as operative paragraph 3 of the Agreement stipulated: "as a mark of goodwill and consideration for our continental organization. It being understood that this redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the area concerned which will be determined at the end of delimitation and demarcation of the border and, if need be, through an appropriate mechanism or arbitration."

   The Framework Agreement further stipulates (operative para. 5 a and its clarifications): "... this should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border to positions to be determined subsequently as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement."

   The Framework Agreement is certainly a package, its basic tenets being:

   • formal acceptance of the Framework by both sides;
   • formal cessation of hostilities;
   • Eritrean forces to redeploy unilaterally and as a mark of good will from Badme and its surrounding areas;
   • mutual disengagement of the forces of both parties from the rest of the boundary;
   • demarcation of the boundary within a period of six months.

   The Framework Agreement has a natural sequence, the first steps being:
   • solemn commitment to its provisions through formal signing of the Agreement; and,
   • cessation of hostilities to create a conducive climate for the implementation of the Agreement.

   Ethiopia's preconditions that are hampering immediate cease-fire, or shifting "interpretations" that have no basis in the Framework Agreement, are therefore flimsy pretexts meant to derail the peace process and promote its agenda of war. The international community should not tolerate Ethiopia's unjustified prevarication.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 20 May 1999 g_052599.html100644 127137 345 3256 6722523713 6275

   Eritrean Foreign Ministry: More Than 1,300 Ethiopian Soldiers Put Out of Action Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea May 25, 1999

   ---

   
   Press Release
   More Than 1,300 Ethiopian Soldiers Put Out of Action;  MI-35 Helicopter Gunship Shot Down

   An Ethiopian attack launched on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front was totally foiled with the TPLF regime suffering considerable casualties. Three hundred eighty Ethiopian soldiers were killed, 975 wounded while eleven others were captured.

   An MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down and its pilot killed as the TPLF regime attempted a last ditch effort yesterday morning to bolster its ground attack through air support. The attacks involved one Ethiopian division and
   had continued, with varying intensity, for four days.

   The TPLF regime had been boasting through its mass media that it would turn "the independence celebrations into mourning." The attack on the Mereb-Setit front this weekend seemed to have no purpose other than to disturb the nationwide celebrations for the eighth anniversary of independence.
   

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 25 May 1999 g_052799.html100655 127137 345 2453 6723265264 6304

   Over 2,500 Ethiopian Soldiers Routed
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 27, 1999

   ---

   The TPLF regime launched another futile attack on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front on May 25. The attack, which started in the latter afternoon hours continued until the morning hours the next day when TPLF forces were totally dispersed.

   Cumulative TPLF losses in the fighting which started on May 21 amount to:

   • 785 TPLF soldiers killed;
   • over 1,800 wounded; and
   • 15 taken prisoner.
   One MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down while large quantities of medium and light weapons have been captured. In the meantime, the number of deserters is growing. In the past five days alone, 22 Ethiopian soldiers with different ranks have surrendered to the Eritrean Defense Forces.

   The TPLF's repeated attacks occur at a time when there are increasing calls from the international community for an immediate cessation of hostilities. The Security Council has called for the full and immediate implementation of Resolution 1227 in its session last week.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 27 May 1999 g_052899.html100655 127137 345 15737 6723643505 6334

   Ethiopia's wanton acts of destabilization in Somalia
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 28, 1999

   ---

   In its letter of 14 May, 1999, addressed to the President of the Security Council, Ethiopia accused Eritrea for "embarking on a large-scale military activity of destabilization in Somalia". Ethiopia further states that Eritrea is guilty of "violating Security Council Resolution 733 (1992)" through its "shipment of arms to one of the warring factions".

   The audacity of the Ethiopian regime in leveling these hypocritical accusations against Eritrea is not surprising. Indeed, it has now become common practice for the leadership in Addis Ababa to flagrantly violate fundamental principles of international law - whether it is acts of brazen aggression, human rights violations or blatant incursions against neighboring countries - to then accuse its victims for the very transgressions that it is guilty of in a pre-emptive, if transparent, manner.

   What are the true facts as far as Somalia is concerned?

   Somalia has long become a victim of repeated Ethiopian incursions as well as the manipulative acts of training and arming different warring factions at different times. Indeed, violating the territorial sovereignty of Somalia under the pretext of containing "the threat from terrorist groups", the Addis Ababa regime continues to carry out periodic military aggression against Somalia. The real purpose is however, "to project power" so as to dictate events in Somalia.

   1. Since January this year alone, Ethiopia launched several major incursions into Somalia. The Addis Ababa regime conducted military operations in the areas of Luuq, Gedo and Dolo in January, and, carried out repeated incursions in the same areas in May as underlined by the letters of the Benadir Administration to the Security Council. In all these cases, the aim was to bolster factions that Ethiopia supports.

   2. The Ethiopian regime established a military training camp in Bulahow inside Somalia early last year to train "favoured" factions. This represented the institutionalization of a training programme that had been going on for the previous two years in different parts of Somalia. Again, these acts were aimed at exacerbating factional in-fighting in Somalia.

   3. Ethiopia has since long violated UN Security Council Resolution 733 (1992) calling for an arms embargo to the Somali factions. In 1997, Ethiopia supplied several shipment of arms and training to the SNF group as a "counterweight" to other groups. In 1998, Ethiopia again supplied several shipment of arms both through the port of Bosaso as well as by land to Somali factions under its tutelage provoking repeated protests from "Somali-land", the Benadir Administration and other major factions. On 3 April this year, Association Press reported that "several lorries of assorted weapons were delivered by Ethiopia to Hussein Haji Bod". On May 5, BBC and Reuters reported: "Ethiopia has supplied arms and ammunition in military planes to the port of Kismayo to forces opposed to Aideed. Ethiopia had previously trucked arms to other anti-Aideed forces at the town of Belet Uen". In similar vein, the leader of Somali-land, Mr. Egal, lamented to the Standing Committee in Somalia that visited Hargeisa in December last year that "whether the Committee refuses to accept of not, aircraft loaded with arms and ammunitions are landing regularly in Kalkayo in Kismayo and in several airports of central Shebelle area". This was a clear reference to Ethiopia's duplicity as the areas in question are areas controlled by factions supported by Addis Abeba.

   Ethiopia has been doggedly pursuing these patters on intermittent incursions into Somalis and continuous supply of arms to different factions at different times in order to achieve the following overriding policy aim. The TPLF regime does not want any central authority to emerge in Somalia. Its pronounced policy is the creation of clan-based mini-States so as manipulate a weak and divided Somalia.

   This obsession has compromised its neutrality and the mandate that Ethiopia was entrusted to by IGAD to promote national reconciliation and peace in Somalia. The Sodere Conference, which excluded some of the key players in Somalia, was a disappointment to IGAD. Ethiopia's failure to redress this mistake in the subsequent period, giving rise to a proliferation of initiatives that were not co-ordinated, finally impelled some IGAD member States to recommend, in the Summit in Djibouti in March 1998, that the initiative be carried out under the auspices of the Chairman and the Secretariat of IGAD.

   Ethiopia's pretext that its actions in Somalia are dictated by its security needs of containing "terrorist incursions" and its accusation that "Eritrea is working hand-in-glove with terrorist groups" is preposterous and a pure fabrication. Indeed, Eritrea has been and continues to be, at the fore-front in the regional efforts to combat terrorism emanating from fundamentalist and extremist groups. Eritrea has not, in fact, compromised its principled position to dally with and accommodate terrorist groups or their sponsors for tactical and short-terms gains as has sadly been the case with Ethiopia.

   At any rate, Eritrea believes that regional terrorism can only be contained and combated through concerted action by the countries in the region. In this spirit, it has not spared any effort to promote regional co-operation towards that end.

   In conclusion, Eritrea's track record establishes without doubt that it has no vested interest to destabilize Somalia. On the contrary, Eritrea has been consistently working to promote national reconciliation of the Somalis without partiality or preference to selected factions on the basis of narrow self-interest.

   Similarly, Eritrea has no desire or sinister design to use Somalia as a battle ground for "a proxy war" with Ethiopia. Eritrea firmly believes that the Somali problem is one of the fundamental security problems in the region. Its solution rests primarily on the Somali people themselves although it will undoubtedly be enhanced and accelerated by the concerted and constructive efforts of all the countries of the region. Thus, even if Ethiopia has a long border with Somalia, this cannot be used as a pretext to give it a "free-hand" to aggravate the conflict in Somalia which will have obvious consequences for the stability of the Horn of Africa region.

   In the circumstances. the right course of action for Ethiopia is to refrain from its continuous acts of destabilization of Somalia in pursuit of its narrow interests that are contrary to the interests and aspirations of the region as well as in contravention of international law and the relevant resolutions of the Security Council.

   ---

   Haile Haile Weldensae
   Minister of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, 28 May 1999 g_0528992.html100655 127137 345 6635 6723646261 6375

   The TPLF's "Rosy Picture" of war
   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   May 28, 1999

   ---

   The TPLF war-propaganda has gone beyond limits. In a statement issued from Addis Ababa yesterday, we are told the following: "...Unlike in Eritrea, there is no military conscription in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Defense Force is made up of volunteers who come from all parts of the country and represent Ethiopia's diverse nationalities...they all spoke of the comradery and friendship that exist among them...military officers and leaders fight side by side with their soldiers...the soldiers are happy to be fighting to protect these interests."

   Does this rosy picture conform to actual reality? What are the real stories from the Battlefield? Excerpts follow:

   • Lt. Tazera Haile who had served in the Ethiopian Military for 18 years including ten years under the Derg regime said, "in all my years of military service, I have never been witness to such horrific scenes. Our soldiers were falling like leaves and no one was stopping to help wounded comrades." Lt. Haile added, "Although there is a preponderance of Oromos and Amharas in the army, the Tigrayans continue to control the command structure at every level."
   • TPLF officials forcibly conscripted youth from inside Sudanese border towns. James Lual Makocha, one such youth told Eritrean media that TPLF officials apprehended him and several friends on their way to school before separating them and sending them to Mekele to be registered in the army. Makocha said, "I wanted to retreat when I saw soldiers in front of me walking into bullets and bombs but since officers were shooting those who ran back I just hid."
   • Eritrean Defense Forces discovered, on one corpse, papers revealing that the soldier was in fact a thirteen-year old student. His pockets revealed seventh grade entry papers and a letter from his mother pleading with him to leave the army by "any means possible."
   • In February, a leading Moscow newspaper confirmed that "Russian General Yakim Yanakov is leading a team of Russian mercenary pilots and anti-aircraft gunners to Ethiopia."
   • The TPLF regime initially denied, despite worldwide attention, the failed Ethiopian offensive at Tserona in which over ten thousand Ethiopian troops were killed in three days of fighting. When foreign media who visited that area verified reports about staggering Ethiopian casualties there the TPLF declared "that, indeed, the smell of rotting corpses could not be proven to be Ethiopia."
   • New Accounts of the situation on the Ethiopian from growing deserters reveal that the TPLF has given platoon leaders authority to shoot deserters on sight. Those who surrender to Eritrean forces successfully say it has not deterred huge numbers of soldiers from trying.

   These are the grim facts. To glorify war by denying reality is a grave folly for which the TPLF regime is squarely accountable. Indeed, it is high time that the leaders in Addis Ababa reconcile themselves with reality, recognize the horrors of war and the futility of military solution and give the quest for peace the seriousness and sincerity that it deserves.

   ---

   Ministry of Foreign Affairs
   Asmara, Eritrea
   Friday, May 28, 1999

   ---

   g_060899.html100644 127137 345 12671 6727265010 6316

   Ethiopia's inexorable drive towards full-scale war Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 5, 1999

   ---

   
    Press Statement
    
    Ethiopia's inexorable drive towards full-scale war
    
    Exactly one year ago at approximately 2:20 p.m., Ethiopian Mig fighter jets bombed Asmara, Eritrea's capital, in what was the first use of
    aircraft and a major escalation of what, until then, had been a localize border conflict.
    
    The bombing of Asmara occurred on the morrow of a public announcement by Ethiopia's Prime Minister who told his domestic audience through the local
    TV and radio that "the Ethiopian armed forces have been given orders today to take all necessary measures to repulse Eritrea's Aggression".  The
    Ethiopian Prime Minister gave the orders for escalating the war in spite of Addis Abeba's parallel announcement the same day that it "had accepted
    the US-Rwanda recommendations".

    Forced to react, the Eritrean Air Force bombed the military airport in Mekele destroying several fighter aircraft.  In the retaliatory strikes,
    stray bombs caused damage to a school resulting in unfortunate casualties. The Government of Eritrea promptly apologized for the unintentional loss
    of human life.
    
    Ethiopia again used its air force to bomb Asmara the following day stopping only after two of its planes were shot down by Eritrean
    air-defense.
    
    The United States brokered a moratorium on air strikes on June 14, although Ethiopia rejected Eritrean proposals for a total ban on air
    strikes as a first step towards a comprehensive cessation of hostilities.
    
    The introduction of air strikes by Ethiopia a full year ago takes on a disturbing significance now.  In retrospect, the Ethiopian air strikes on
   June fifth must be seen as a significant reflection of the regime's decision to pursue war, not peace with Eritrea.
    
   In February this year, after several months of intensive efforts by the OAU and other concerned parties, Ethiopia jumped the gun once again in a
    clear move to thwart peace.  This time, however, the offensives unleashed by Ethiopia had all the  characteristics of a total war.  This occurred
    despite the OAU peace process that was in motion and a contravention of international calls (OAU, UN Security Council) for "both sides to observe
    maximum restraint".
    
    Ethiopia's bogus pretext for launching its attack in February were fictitious claims of an "Eritrean air strikes on Adi-Grat".  Again, the
    timing of the attack reveals a considered decision to impede peace with continued fighting.
    
    This second phase of the TPLF's offensive became the venue for an Ethiopian air campaign that selected  civilian targets deep in Eritrea and
    far from disputed territories.  The decision to again resort to air attacks in this period was in contravention of the moratorium on air
    strikes.  Ethiopia's random air raids in the past three months included:

   • February 7th, residential quarter in Adi Qualla
   • February 8th, residential quarter in Adi Qualla
   • February 9th, displacement camps in Deda Lalai
   • February 6th-9th, villages in Zalambessa and environs
   • February 21st, villages of Menka'ka and Adin (Assab)
   • February 22nd, town of Tsorona
   • March 3rd, Hazemo and environs
   • March 16th, town centre in Kinafina
   • March 18-19th, central market in Shambuko
   • March 29th, Adi Keshi and Koferenko
   • April 15th, church in Adi Keieh and Mendefera
   • April 28th, Bimbina
   • May 15th, Zalambessa
   
   May 16th, warehouse in Massawa
   Around 80 Eritrean civilians were either killed or maimed as a result of these strikes.  Whole villages (Shambuko), residential quarters, a church,
    food storage and warehouses were destroyed.

    The year since Ethiopia bombed Asmara has illustrated the scale of Ethiopia's intentions and the means by which the TPLF regime is prepared
    to continually escalate the conflict to deter peace.  In one year, Ethiopia has carried out th

   e expulsion of close to 60,000 Eritrean
    civilians.  In one year, Ethiopia has used its mercenary-led Air force to attack innocent civilians throughout Eritrea.  In one year, Ethiopia has
    consistently rejected a cease-fire.  In one year, Ethiopia has repeatedly,  and actively, thwarted efforts for peace.  And yet, the border crisis was
    easily solvable from the outset and remains solvable if the TPLF regime was serious about peace.
    
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    Asmara, 5 June 1999 g_060899_2.html100644 127137 345 6156 6727267606 6535

   No amount of fiction can clear the TPLF's record Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 8, 1999

   ---

   
    Press Statement
    
    No amount of fiction can clear the TPLF's record
    
    The TPLF regime has again, produced a string of accusations against Eritrea regarding Ethiopians living here.  In an 'umpteenth' statement of
    its kind, the regime in Addis Ababa claims that Ethiopians are being "abducted of the streets...severely beaten...thrown in the streets and
    left for dead."  The idea is very clear.  The government in Addis Ababa is hoping that a smear campaign on Eritrea will deter attention from a year
    of unprecedented human rights violation by the government in Addis Ababa. But will it ever be possible for Ethiopia to hide the truth about what has
    happened to Eritreans in Ethiopia?  To date the regime in Addis Ababa has:
   • Arrested, jailed and deported over 60,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean descent from Ethiopia after taking all their personal property, valuables and any means of livelihood.  Thousands of families have been split up and countless children separated from their parents as a result of the arbitrary abductions and deportations.
   • Refused to release 1500 Eritrean civilians being imprisoned because of their ethnicity in Blatte prison camp.  Several civilians have died while in these brutal camps.
   • Barred 10,000 Eritreans from leaving Ethiopia after revoking their business licenses, refusing them employment papers and driving them tosell all their property thus, rendering them destitute.
   • Disappeared' over 1,000 Eritreans from Addis Ababa and various towns.  Eritrea's lodging of a formal complaint prompted this latest round of similar list-bearing statements from Addis Ababa.
    These are all facts. The United Nations, the US Congress, Amnesty  International and other concerned groups and governments have all  expressed dismay at what has been happening to Eritreans in Ethiopia.  Can  the regime in Addis Ababa seriously hope to veil its own record by simply  leveling fictitious accusations at Eritrea?  The Government of Eritrea has  invited the ICRC and other monitoring groups to verify the claims being  made by Ethiopia regarding civilians in Eritrea.  The international  community must check Ethiopia's claim and determine for themselves where the truth lies.  This duplicity can not be allowed to go uncondemned.
    
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    Asmara, June 8, 1999 g_060999.html100644 127137 345 6273 6727537207 6312 TPLF issues contradictory claims Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 9, 1999

   ---

   
    Press Statement
     TPLF issues contradictory claims

    For the past two months, Ethiopia has been launching an intensive campaign aimed at persuading the international community that Eritrea is violating
    the rights of Ethiopians in Eritrea.  Aside from accusations of torture, mass imprisonment and public persecution being leveled at the Eritrean
    government by the regime in Addis Ababa, the TPLF has now made the suggestion that Eritrea is preventing Ethiopians from returning to their
    country.  A June 8th Statement from the Office of the Ethiopian spokesperson states:
    

7.       "The Eritrean Government, however...has told Ethiopian nationals that while they are welcome to go home, their government is unwilling to

 accept them. Not only is this a blatant lie, but is also incredibly inhumane to tell individuals that they are unwanted and unwelcome in their
 own country when their government is eagerly expecting their arrival.  In conjunction with the ICRC, the government has made preparations to accept
 its returning citizens through the border post at Humera."
8.      "Early this year, Eritrea in violation of international law deported over 2,500 Ethiopians without first notifying the ICR, which in turn, was

 unable to inform Ethiopia of the pending deportation."
 
 Now consider the content of the following letter sent to the Eritrean government on March 25th 1999:
 
9.       "The ICRC has taken note of the Eritrean authorities intention to organize on 26th and 27th March 1999 the return of approx. 2000 Ethiopian

 civilians to their home country across the border at Mereb.  In this regard, the Ethiopian Government has today informed the ICRC that they
 consider the whole border as a war zone and therefore security cannot be guaranteed.  Since the requisite security guarantees cannot be obtained,
 the ICRC considers the proposed operation to be hazardous."
 
 On the one hand, Ethiopia privately informs the ICRC that they will not accept Ethiopians wishing to return home then turns around and proclaims
 to the world that the Eritrea government is preventing them from returning.  Where will the deceit end? When will the international
 community come out and condemn what has turned into a dangerous farce by the regime in Addis Ababa.
 
 Ministry of Foreign Affairs
 Asmara, 9 June 1999 g_061099.html100655 127137 345 6227 6727776165 6313 Ethiopia's pattern of using force Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 10, 1999

---

Ethiopia's approach for curtailing intelligent discourse on the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia has rested on disinformation and name-calling. In this respect, Ethiopia's favourite buzzword constitutes of accusing Eritrea for "attacking first and talking later" .

To use its own hyperbole, it is in fact Ethiopia which has been resorting to a pattern of "attacking first and crying first" as these sequence of events illustrate.

Indeed, in violation of international law and the Charters and Resolutions of the UN and the OAU, Ethiopia:

• invaded Eritrea in July 1997 by forcefully occupying the Bada region and areas in Badme;
• unilaterally published a new map in October 1997 that re-draws Eritrea's recognized international boundary to incorporate large chunks of Eritrean territory;
• deployed its army to occupy the Burrie region in January 1998;
• attacked Eritrean units in the Badme area on May 6, 1998, thereby triggering the current conflict;
• declared full-scale war against Eritrea on May 13, 1998, thereby escalating a localized conflict to an all-out war;
• unleashed unprovoked attacks on the Zelambesa area on June 3, 1998;
• launched the first air attack on Eritrea's capital on June 5, 1998;
• fabricated the "bombing of Adi Grat" on February 5 this year so as to create a pretext to violate the moratorium on air-strikes brokered by the US Government on June 14, 1998; and,
• unleashed large-scale offensives against Eritrea since February 6, 1999 in contravention of UN Security Council Resolutions and OAU calls for a cessation of hostilities.

It was therefore Ethiopia which first abused the trust and good will of its neighbour to occupy sovereign territory. Ethiopia was also the first to cry "foul" and declare war on its unsuspecting neighbour.

Moreover, Ethiopia is guilty of the following excesses:

• the deportation, in the most inhumane manner, of around 60,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean descent on the basis of their ethnicity and by confiscating their life-long earnings;
• the detention of 1,500 innocent Eritreans in the Blatten concentration camp without due process of law;
• the disappearance of over 1,000 Eritreans form Addis Ababa and various towns;
• the senseless bombing of civilian targets in various Eritrean towns, including a church in Adi Kaieh; and,
• breaking in of the residence of Eritrea's Ambassador in violation of the Vienna Convention and the OAU Headquarters Agreement.

Ethiopia is, furthermore, guilty of repeated acts of regional destabilization and aggression as demonstrated by its current invasion of Somalia, and intermittent incursions into Kenya and Somalia in the past years.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
10 June 1999 g_061198.html100644 127137 345 26467 6540054073 6315

Our hope is that the facilitation process continues:

President Isaias Afwerki Last week, June 6, President Isaias gave an interview to the National Television regarding the Eritro-Ethiopian border dispute. Excerpts follow: On the four peace proposals: It should be known that the four points are not new but have developed within the facilitation process. Again it would be important to bear in mind that the contents of the proposals which are being made public at present have already been expressed as the stand of the government of Eritrea.

To start with, our policy has been and still is that the current crisis be resolved not through the logic of force but through legal and peaceful means.

It has been our belief right from the beginning that the recognition of and adherence to the colonial borders would lead to a lasting solution of the crisis. If we are talking about borders and wish to solve the border problems, then we should, both of us, be ready to accept the border demarcations officially recognized by International law and the charters of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity, or the principles that govern border demarcations. This should be followed by the creation of a demilitarized zone in order to defuse the tension along the border.

If we are to talk about the implementation of these basic principles, it should be borne in mind that the borderlines should be delineated and landmarks put on. On our part, we propose the UN cartographic unit, which has a vast experience in this field or anyone with up-to-date and professional skill to participate in the task. On our part, we want this process to take as short a time as possible. As to the demilitarization of the entire border, it should be done in the presence of international observers and within a limited period of time.

All along this process, all details and particulars should be exhausted and agreed upon one by one. The question of temporary administration in the disputed area can only be technical. And during the interim period, the people living in the area may be moved elsewhere to be resettled once the demarcation of the border is completed.

And anticipating further misunderstanding that may crop up through the exploitation of loopholes in the agreements, the details of the implementation process should be exhausted. By so doing, we can save time and the final agreement can have full guarantee and assurance.

However, what we have witnessed recently was a readiness from the Ethiopian government to accept the proposals as if they have been presented to them by the facilitators and then creating pretexts and excuses for declaring war against us. Such a sudden action could come only as a climax to a growing unhealthy internal motives.

On the ambivalent moves of the Ethiopian government:

The notion entertained by the Ethiopian government that accepting the proposals stipulated the acceptance of its precondition is without base. They are simply trying to justify their wrong decisions taken in haste. But, in such a situation the justification may sometimes prove worse than the blunder.

First, they said that unless we pulled out of their ëoccupied territoryí they would use force. This was officialized as if it were a big legal decision by their parliament. Finding themselves in an impasse after making a hasty and faulty decision, they had somehow to find a befitting excuse. Thatís why the facilitation process is lagging behind. More excuses are created in order to justify their war of aggression. They are simply moving from one blunder to the next and are swirling in a spiral of endless blunders. The recent bombing raid in Asmara is a logical process of this endless circle of blunders.

On the efforts made by facilitators:

According to the statement issued by the government of Eritrea, the facilitation process cannot be said to have been exhausted. There is a lot to be developed in the general principles concerning details of implementation. Anyway, the facilitation process, in itself, is not a simple contribution. Not only US and Rwanda but the General-Secretary of OAU, the General-Secretary of UN, President Hassan Guled Aptidon, Chairman of IGAAD, the Organization of Sahel- Sahara, but various other organizations have one and all counseled for the a legal and peaceful alternative as a solution to the crisis. On our part, we will continue supplying information to these organizations and efforts will not cease until a solution is found.

On the worsening of the situation:

Ethiopia has taken unilateral actions of ordering the closure of Eritrean Embassy in Addis and consulates in Tirgray and Affar administrative regions. While they keep on preaching peace in words on the contrary they seem to stand firm on their previous policy of using force to solve the problem. Looking at their actions of violations and belligerence, one can deduce that their intention is to continue the war and whatever they say is a cover-up.

On the situation on the grounds:

They have already proclaimed their intention. Their stratagem is resorting to false accusations and counter-accusations. They seem to have fully developed the habit of attacking first and accusing the victim of having attacked first. However, we have clear proofs of who struck first and when and where. All their actions testify to the fact that they still want to solve the problem through the logic of force. We have all the relevant documents which may be revealed in due time.

None of their attacks have been accidental. They are logical developments of their aggressive policies. All the various border attacks including that of Alitena and Zelambessa, have been started by them.

At this juncture, I would like to make it clear that all these attacks have not taken place in empty places. We have those who were in the battle fields to stand as witnesses. We have very clear and detailed information as to who ordered the war, who outlined the strategies, when and where it was discussed, etc.

Preparations for war had been going on for quite a long time by supplying false and erroneous information to the people to the effect that the Eritrean fighting force has been weakened following demobilization and rehabilitation and that the real army composed of national service trainees is insignificant and unwilling to fight. This is cheap propaganda.

On my part, I consider such misleading propaganda as pure crime. In brief, those who are at present resorting to force as a final solution to the crisis have only sullied spirits. Their desire to want to do everything by force is now becoming clear to every thinking person.

Hand in hand with this goes their habit of posing themselves as victims all the time. For example, this afternoon ( June 5 ) at 2:10 pm they conducted an air raid in Asmara. At 2:30 our planes took off and probably at 3:00 they retaliated by bombing defined military targets in Mekele. This being so, they came up with their fabricated story that they had struck only after they had been bombed. How do you explain such a flagrant twisting of events? Donít they know that their own people may be looking down on them?

Nevertheless, whatever they might say and dream cannot in any way change what is happening on the ground. Their actions are the result of continuous despair and frustration which only help to worsen the situation.

On the other hand, it is very unwise to misjudge oneís own people. The people of Ethiopia and especially the people of Tigray know full well what is exactly happening. It is futile to try and cheat them. Nothing can remain permanently hidden from them. They are getting more and more conscious regarding the situation in general. This rising of consciousness is affecting their army as well. And finally, the measures which are being taken by Ethiopia to solve the problem thorough the use of force is also becoming more evident among the international community.

There is a feeling that the logic of force may continue for some time. On our side, we desire to see an end to the current situation whatever stage the military clashes may reach. We believe that eventually peace may come only through legal means. The problem is that we cannot tell exactly when the other side is going to accept this logic. However, with the facilitators making tremendous efforts and the deep concern shown by the international community, a lasting solution may be found for the present crisis.

On ulterior motives for the present crisis:

It seems to me very inappropriate for anyone to speculate and analyze and look out for possible motives just because a new situation happens to be created in front of one. The notion that the war is proclaimed with the intention of overthrowing the present government in Eritrea is simply the effect of daydreaming. The present crisis is simply the result of wrong decisions and the inability of correcting the same decisions in time. I find it difficult to see any ulterior motive whatsoever.

On the situation on the ground:

It has never been part of our military tradition to speak of war exploits and heroism. It is again unwise and inappropriate to underestimate oneís enemy and to look down on it as spineless and insignificant. One can talk to his heartís desire about politics because that is an open field, but when it comes to war, one has to be more serious.

Whatever the case, the Ethiopian side know very well what is happening regarding their successive attacks on the battle fronts. They may say whatever they want to say, but in our case we deem it inappropriate to talk about victories and heroism at present. Such information can only help to heat up the situation.

On peace:

One thing should be clear and that is peace can come only through efforts being made by Eritrea, Ethiopia and other concerned countries. There is nothing to despair about.

The other side is clamoring for war, but what exactly is going on on the ground? We know that the people of Tigray more than any one wants good relations with Eritrea. It seems that those who are urging for war are those who intend to gain from it. We are however of the mind that the people of Tigray will never shun peace and let themselves be led to war by people of narrow and selfish sentiments. This in itself is a positive force capable of bringing about peace.

On word to the people:

As I have said repeatedly, the people of Eritrea know what is required of them and what they should do in time of war and in self-defense. What is of paramount importance however is taking things with calm and judging events without bringing undue sentiments to the fore. We should always be looking ahead and we should be assured that we are not alone, we have all the peace-loving people of the world behind us.

g_061199.html100644 127137 345 5066 6730545046 6274

TPLF unleashes new offensive Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 11, 1999

---


TPLF unleashes new offensive

 The TPLF regime has, again, unleashed new offensives against Eritrea. After a lull in fighting of almost two weeks, fighting resumed on
 Wednesday when Ethiopian Forces opened an offensive on the Burie front, 70 kilometers west of Assab.  The TPLF offensive in Burie was, however, of  low intensity. 50 Ethiopian soldiers were killed and around 100 wounded in what was, apparently, a diversionary attack.
 Yesterday the TPLF unleashed a larger offensive along the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front line.  Two full Ethiopian divisions were employed to attack Eritrean positions along the front.  Yesterday's attack was repulsed but continued fighting was confirmed this morning. What is very clear is that the TPLF has decided not to abandon its all out war against Eritrea.  The facts speak for themselves:

•  In June of last year, Ethiopia deployed troops to far reaching fronts as part of its plan to extend the scope and intensity of the border conflict.
•  Ethiopia unilaterally employed, and continues to use air force against civilian targets as a main component of its military campaign against Eritrea.
•  Ethiopia launched massive offensives in February of this year using human waves to attack Eritrean positions in Badme and Tserona. The result of this reckless campaign were horrific.
 Now, as the TPLF leads us into a third phase of fighting, the signs are very clear.  The TPLF does not appear to be interested in peace.  The regime in Addis Ababa is satisfied that it has successfully thwarted any chance for peace through the introduction of its 11th hour preconditions and seeks to continue a war of aggression against Eritrea.  But war cannot and will not be the answer.  The TPLF must abandon use of force to resolve the crisis and must sincerely join in the search for peace.
 

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
11 June 1999 g_061299.html100644 127137 345 3113 6730543463 6265

Eritrean Foreign Ministry: About 7,000 Ethiopian soldiers put out of action one MI-35 Helicopter Gunship shot down Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea June 12, 1999

---

 Press Release
 

About 7,000 Ethiopian soldiers put out of action
One MI-35 Helicopter gunship shot down 

 Pitched fighting continued on the central flank of the Mereb- Setit front for the second day yesterday. Ethiopian losses on Thursday, June 10,  amounted to over 2,300    soldiers killed, 4,200 wounded, and over 80 soldiers taken prisoner.
 
 Three tanks were destroyed and one MI-35 Helicopter gunship shot down in yesterday's fighting.  Full reports on human losses for yesterday were not yet available.  Fighting also resumed this morning.
 
The Ethiopian regime had launched a diversionary attack on the Burie front last Wednesday as a prelude to its large-scale attack on the Mereb-Setit front on Thursday, 10 June 1999.
 
 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
12 June 1999
 
  g_061299_2.html100644 127137 345 10264 6730607577 6542

President Isaias  Meets with returend Peace Corps Volunteers
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 12, 1999

---


 

 Press Statement

 
 President Isaias  Meets with returend Peace Corps Volunteers
 
 
 President Isias Afwerki today met a team of returned Peace Corps volunteers who are on a peace mission to Eritrea and Ethiopia.
 
 President isaias thanked the members of the team for undertaking the peace mission at this crucial moment and expressed the hope that this informal initiative from people with sentimental attachment to both countries will have significant contribution to the peace endeavours underway.
 
 In regad to Eritrea's readiness for peace, President Isaias underlined to the team that:
 

10.     Eritrea's position from outset was for the renunciation of the  use of force to solvea a border dispute.  In this spirit, Eritrea has consistently called for thecessation of hostilities in the different forums and is willing to observe an immidiate cease-fire as stipulated by the resolutions of the UN Security coucil, the OAU and the international community at large.  Eritrea has in fact gone beyond this when it publicly stated in January of this year that "it will not fire the first bullet" although it reserves the legimate right of self-defence when and if

attacked;
 
11.     Eritrea has accepted the OAU Framework and remains ready to impliment all its provisions in good faith;

 
12.     Ethiopia's obstruction of peace either through the introduction of new preconditions or arguments of  "the restoration of status quo ante that exissted before May 6, 1998" are not tenable.  The status quo constitutes, and cannnot be other than, the respect of colonial treaties and associated boundaries.  As such, the status quo ante refers to the reality that existed before any violation of the colonial boundaries. This is in fact duly addressed in the OAU Framework as operative paragraph

 7 has provisions for investigating all the events and violations that led
 to the current crisis;
 
13.       The issue of administration cannot, likewise, be a bone of contention as administration cannot, in the legal sense, be divorced from sovereignty. In any case, the Framework Agreement has provisions for all these issues and ambiguities were clarified through the written statement

 of the OAU High-Level Delegation to Eritrea on January 26, 1999;
 
14.      Eritrea is prepared to redeploy from the entire boundary in accordance with the provisions of the Framework Agreement;

 
15.      Eritrea is prepared to cooperate in any way it can to promote the peace process.  In this spirit, Eritrea welcomes direct talks at any

 level.
 
 The Peace Corps team members expressed their faith in the potential of both countries and the Horn of Africa region as a whole.  In this regard, they stressed that peace was a pre-requisite for development and increased investment.  The members of the team stressed that they will do their
 utmost to give an impetus to the peace process.
 
 The team is composed of Judge William Cabny, Mr. Mike McCaskey, Mr. John Garamendi, Mr. Charles Dambach and Mr. Melvin Foote.  The team will leave Asmara tomorrow for Addis Ababa.
 
 
 Ministry of Foreign Affairs
 Asmara
 11 June 1999
  g_061499.html100644 127137 345 3236 6731202004 6255 Two Ethiopian MiG-23 Fighter Planes Shot Down
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 14, 1999

---


 Press Release
TPLF Army Suffers Huge Losses;
Two MiG-23 Fighter Planes Shot Down

Heavy fighting continued for the fourth successive day yesterday on the
central flank of the Mereb-Setit front. By yesterday, the TPLF regime had
thrown five divisions--in turns--to the battlefront. All of them were badly
mauled.

Two MiG-23 fighter planes were shot down yesterday morning around 9:00 a.m.
One MI-35 helicopter gunship was shot down on Friday, June 11, 1999. Five
tanks were also destroyed on Friday and Saturday.

Ethiopia's human losses were the heaviest yesterday although the exact
figures were not yet available at press time.

Ethiopian cumulative losses for Thursday, Friday and Saturday amounted to
over 12,210 soldiers killed and wounded. Over 80 Ethiopian soldiers were
taken prisoner on Thursday alone.

The Burie and Alitena-Mereb fronts were relatively quiet apart from
diversionary shelling and small scale Ethiopian attacks that were quickly
crushed. But fighting on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front resumed
early this morning.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 14 June 1999
  g_061598.html100644 127137 345 4345 6541225476 6300

Eritrean Statement on Air Strike Ban Agreement

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement on the Agreement for a Total Ban on Air Strikes

The Government of Eritrea has accepted the proposal put forward by the United States Government yesterday, June 14, 1998, on a total ban of air strikes by both sides. The agreement provides for Eritrea and Ethiopia to "halt immediately the further use of air strikes and the threat of air strikes in their present conflict." The moratorium "will continue indefinitely or until such time as either party concludes that any prospect for a peace process has come to an end and provides a formal, advance notice to the United States Government that it will no longer respect this moratorium."

The Government of Eritrea has consistently been calling for the
cessation of hostilities and the demilitarization of the entire boundary to allow for a peaceful resolution of the dispute with Ethiopia. The border conflict was exacerbated by Addis Abeba's recourse to air-raids when the Ethiopian Air Force launched the first air-strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998. Eritrea's subsequent deterrent actions against military targets were simply in retaliation and legitimate self-defense. As the Government of Eritrea does not see any sense in the on-going confrontation in general and the air-war in particular, it welcomes this agreement with Ethiopia on a partial cessation of hostilities as a positive and first step towards ending the war and resolving the conflict through peace and legality.

The Government of Eritrea wishes to avail itself of this occasion to
express its gratitude to the Governments of the United States and Italy for their endeavors in this regard.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, June 15, 1998

g_061598_2.html100644 127137 345 5263 6541314724 6514

Eritrean UN Mission Message to UN Under Secretary General for Human Affairs

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Today, June 15, 1998, Eritrea's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios sent the following message regarding the maltreatment of Eritreans in Ethiopia to the United Nations Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mr. Sergio Vieiro de Mello.

15 June 1998


Dear Mr. de Mello,


Allow me to raise a matter of utmost urgency and gravity concerning the fate of Eritrean civilians being rounded up by the Ethiopian authorities throughout the country and being exposed to all kinds of abuses including threats to their lives.
Besides detaining hundreds, the Ethiopian government is rounding up thousands of Eritrean civilians from different parts of the country. After herding them in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopians are ferrying them by road to be dumped at the border between the two countries.
Leaving aside all the other abuses of the human rights of these civilians, the most urgent is the fact that those herded are being transported by road through more than 1,000 kms of hostile territory, right through the zone of conflict. With emotions so heightened by persistent propaganda and the consequences of the fighting around the border, they will not only be subjected to harassment, but there is also a great danger to their lives.
We urge the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs to do its utmost urgently to save these defenseless civilians from the ordeals they are being subjected to, from expectable threats to their lives. We request that they be transported to Eritrea by air ensuring their safety. for those that have already started the journey by road, we request that they be accompanied by an appropriate independent humanitarian body.
It is also important to mention that those being detained and expelled have been snatched from their homes and places of work leaving their families and property behind. We request that the safety and well being of those left behind if attended to by the responsible UN humanitarian agency.

Sincerely,


Haile Menkerios,

Ambassador, Permanent Representative

g_061599.html100655 127137 345 2322 6731477536 6303

Over 6,000 Ethiopian Troops Put Out of Action in Two Days of Heavy Fighting
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 15, 1999

Press Release, 8:00 a.m. LT

Over 6,000 Ethiopian Troops Put Out of Action in Two Days of Heavy Fighting

Fighting continued unabated for the fifth consecutive day yesterday on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front.

Two thousand sixty Ethiopian soldiers were killed and 4,050 wounded in the battles of Sunday and yesterday, bringing the total number of Ethiopian troops put out of action in five days of intense fighting to over 18,000.

Ethiopia has also lost two MiG-23 jet fighters, one MI-35 helicopter gunship and five tanks destroyed in the previous days of fighting.

The Ethiopian regime has employed five divisions to date which were thrown into battle in turns. Ethiopian attempts to gain new ground have all been repulsed.

Fighting also resumed this morning.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 15 June 1999 g_061799.html100644 127137 345 2717 6732217706 6303 Two Ethiopian MiG-23 Fighter Aircraft Shot Down
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 17, 1999

Press Release, 7:30 a.m. LT
Two Ethiopian MiG-23 Fighter Aircraft Shot Down

Two Ethiopian MiG-23 fighter planes were shot down around 2:00 p.m.
yesterday, June 16, 1999, on the Mereb-Setit front. This brings to five the
number of Ethiopian fighter aircraft (four MiG-23 planes and one helicopter
gunship) shot down since the resumption of fighting last week.

The two aircraft were hit at high altitude as they encroached on Eritrean
airspace and fell behind Ethiopian front lines. Both pilots are presumed to
be dead.

Meanwhile, ground fighting on the Mereb-Setit front, which continued with
less intensity in the past two days, has resumed this morning. Although
figures for the last two days were not yet available, Ethiopian cumulative
losses were over 18,000 killed and wounded in the intense battles that took
place from 10-14 June, 1999.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 17 June 1999 g_061998.html100644 127137 345 21525 6542517444 6323

Eritrean Statement on Ethiopian Violation of Air Strike Ban, Background & Proposal for Solution

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement on the Violation by Ethiopia of the Moratorium on Air Strikes

The Government of Eritrea had accepted on Sunday, June 14, 1998, the
proposal put forward by President Clinton on the total ban of the use and threat of use of air strikes by both sides. The Government of Eritrea had accepted this proposal, which it saw as "a positive first step towards ending the war," because it did not start the air-war in the first place and all the actions that it had taken were in legitimate self-defense and as a means of deterrence.

The Government of Ethiopia has however violated this agreement both
through its official belligerent pronouncements and its communications to commercial airlines and shipping lines. Through these threats to use air strikes in violation of its expressed commitment to the US Government, the Government of Ethiopia is effectively maintaining the illegal blockade that it had imposed on international flights and shipping.

The efforts to de-escalate the conflict have thus been frustrated as the Government of Ethiopia continues to escalate the tension.

The Government of Eritrea has communicated these violations to the US
Government. The Government of Eritrea will await a positive response. If all efforts to persuade the Government of Ethiopia to honour its commitments on the total ban of air strikes fail and the blockade continues, however, the Government of Eritrea will have no option but to take appropriate deterrent measures.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

19 June 1998, Asmara

Background to the Current Border Dispute Between Eritrea and Ethiopia


1. The crisis between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in the violation by the Government of Ethiopia of Eritrea's colonial boundaries, and to willfully claim, as well as physically occupy, large swathes of Eritrean territory in the southwestern, southern and southeastern parts of the country. This violation is made manifest in the official map issued in
1997 as well as the map of Ethiopia embossed in the new currency notes of the country that came into circulation in November 1997.

2. Ethiopia went further than laying claims on paper to create a de
facto situation on the ground. The first forcible act of creating facts on the ground occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopia, under the pretext of fighting the Afar opposition, brought two battalions to Bada (Adi Murug) in southwestern Eritrea to occupy the village and dismantle the Eritrean administration there. This unexpected development was a cause of much concern to the Government of Eritrea. Eritrea's Head of State subsequently sent a letter to the Ethiopian Prime Minister on August 16,
1997, reminding him that "the forcible occupation of Adi Murug" was
"truly saddening." He further urged him to "personally take the necessary prudent action so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary conflict." A week later, on August 25, 1997, the Eritrean Head of State again wrote to the Prime Minister stressing that measures similar to those in Bada were taken in the Badme (southwestern Eritrea) area and suggesting that a Joint Commission be set up to help check further deterioration and create a mechanism to resolve the problem.

3. Unfortunately, Eritrean efforts to solve the problem amicably and
bilaterally failed as the Government of Ethiopia continued to bring under its occupation the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its map. Our worst fears were to be realized when on May 6, 1998, on the eve of the second meeting of the Joint Border Commission, the Ethiopian army launched an unexpected attack on Eritrean armed patrols in the Badme area claiming that they had transgressed on areas that Ethiopia had newly brought under its control. This incident led to a series of clashes which, coupled with the hostile measures that were taken by the Government of Ethiopia, resulted in the present state of war between the two countries.

4. Ethiopia's unilateral re-drawing of the colonial boundary and
flagrant acts of creating facts on the ground are the essential causes of the current crisis. In light of these facts, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression are obviously false and meant to deceive the international community. Indeed, Ethiopia to this day occupied Eritrean territories in the Setit area in the southwestern part of the country.

5. Ethiopia's blatant act of aggression is clearly in violation of the OAU Charter and Resolution AHG/RES 16(1) of the First Assembly of the Heads of State and Government held in Cairo in 1964. Unless rectified without equivocation, Ethiopia's refusal to abide by the OAU Charter and decisions, and its continued occupation of undisputed Eritrean territory will open a Pandora's box and create a cycle of instability in the region. The acceptance of Ethiopia's logic will not only affect all African States but will indeed backfire against Ethiopia itself, since its sovereignty over much of its territory, including on the Ogaden, is based on the same principles of international law.

6. A simple border dispute has assumed this level of conflict because of Ethiopia's continued escalation of its hostile and provocative acts. Among these are:
* the declaration of war by Ethiopia's Parliament on May 13, 1998;
* the launching of an air-strike by Ethiopia on June 5, 1998, on Asmara;
* the imposition of an air blockade and maritime access blockade to Eritrean ports through the threat of incessant and indiscriminate air bombing;
* the mass expulsion and indiscriminate arrests of thousands of Eritreans from Ethiopia.

7. In spite of all these, Eritrea has been restrained and committed to a peaceful solution of the dispute. In this vein, it has already presented constructive proposals (attached). The proposals center on: i) the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries on the basis of borders established by colonial treaties; ii) the demilitarization of the entire border area pending demarcation; and,
iii) the establishment of appropriate ad hoc arrangements for civil administration in populated demilitarized areas in the interim period.

In addition, considering the state of war that exists between the two
countries, the Government of Eritrea has been calling--and continues to call--for:
i) an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities; and, ii) the start of direct talks between the two parties in the presence of mediators.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, June 19, 1998

Attachment:

Proposal for a Solution Submitted by the Government of Eritrea

1. PRINCIPLES


The Government of Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia agree that they will resolve the present crisis and any other dispute between them through peaceful and legal means. Both sides reject solutions that are imposed by force.

Both sides agree to respect the clearly defined colonial boundaries
between them. In this respect, both sides further agree that the actual demarcation of the borders will be carried out by a mutually acceptable technical team. In the event that there is some controversy on delineation, both sides agree to resolve the matter through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration.

The demarcation of the borders shall be effected speedily and within an agreed time frame.

Both sides agree to be bound by this agreement.


2. IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES


2.1 The UN Cartographic Unit, or any other body with the appropriate
expertise, shall be charged with the task of demarcating the boundary in accordance with existing colonial border treaties.

2.2 The time frame for the demarcation of the boundary shall be six
months. This time frame may be shortened or prolonged subject to justifiable technical reasons. This requisite time frame shall be designated as AN INTERIM PERIOD.

2.3 The demarcated boundary shall be accepted and adhered to by both
sides.

2.4 If there are segments in the boundary whose delineation is under
controversy, the matter shall be resolved through an appropriate mechanism of ARBITRATION.

g_061998_2.html100644 127137 345 26610 6543466704 6547

Eritrean Statement on Ethiopian Violation of Air Strike Ban, Background & Proposal for Solution

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement on the Violation by Ethiopia of the Moratorium on Air Strikes

The Government of Eritrea had accepted on Sunday, June 14, 1998, the
proposal put forward by President Clinton on the total ban of the use and threat of use of air strikes by both sides. The Government of Eritrea had accepted this proposal, which it saw as "a positive first step towards ending the war," because it did not start the air-war in the first place and all the actions that it had taken were in legitimate self-defense and as a means of deterrence.

The Government of Ethiopia has however violated this agreement both
through its official belligerent pronouncements and its communications to commercial airlines and shipping lines. Through these threats to use air strikes in violation of its expressed commitment to the US Government, the Government of Ethiopia is effectively maintaining the illegal blockade that it had imposed on international flights and shipping.

The efforts to de-escalate the conflict have thus been frustrated as the Government of Ethiopia continues to escalate the tension.

The Government of Eritrea has communicated these violations to the US
Government. The Government of Eritrea will await a positive response. If all efforts to persuade the Government of Ethiopia to honour its commitments on the total ban of air strikes fail and the blockade continues, however, the Government of Eritrea will have no option but to take appropriate deterrent measures.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

19 June 1998, Asmara

Background to the Current Border Dispute Between Eritrea and Ethiopia


1. The crisis between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in the violation by the Government of Ethiopia of Eritrea's colonial boundaries, and to willfully claim, as well as physically occupy, large swathes of Eritrean territory in the southwestern, southern and southeastern parts of the country. This violation is made manifest in the official map issued in
1997 as well as the map of Ethiopia embossed in the new currency notes of the country that came into circulation in November 1997.

2. Ethiopia went further than laying claims on paper to create a de
facto situation on the ground. The first forcible act of creating facts on the ground occurred in July 1997 when Ethiopia, under the pretext of fighting the Afar opposition, brought two battalions to Bada (Adi Murug) in southwestern Eritrea to occupy the village and dismantle the Eritrean administration there. This unexpected development was a cause of much concern to the Government of Eritrea. Eritrea's Head of State subsequently sent a letter to the Ethiopian Prime Minister on August 16,
1997, reminding him that "the forcible occupation of Adi Murug" was
"truly saddening." He further urged him to "personally take the necessary prudent action so that the measure that has been taken will not trigger unnecessary conflict." A week later, on August 25, 1997, the Eritrean Head of State again wrote to the Prime Minister stressing that measures similar to those in Bada were taken in the Badme (southwestern Eritrea) area and suggesting that a Joint Commission be set up to help check further deterioration and create a mechanism to resolve the problem.

3. Unfortunately, Eritrean efforts to solve the problem amicably and
bilaterally failed as the Government of Ethiopia continued to bring under its occupation the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its map. Our worst fears were to be realized when on May 6, 1998, on the eve of the second meeting of the Joint Border Commission, the Ethiopian army launched an unexpected attack on Eritrean armed patrols in the Badme area claiming that they had transgressed on areas that Ethiopia had newly brought under its control. This incident led to a series of clashes which, coupled with the hostile measures that were taken by the Government of Ethiopia, resulted in the present state of war between the two countries.

4. Ethiopia's unilateral re-drawing of the colonial boundary and
flagrant acts of creating facts on the ground are the essential causes of the current crisis. In light of these facts, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression are obviously false and meant to deceive the international community. Indeed, Ethiopia to this day occupied Eritrean territories in the Setit area in the southwestern part of the country.

5. Ethiopia's blatant act of aggression is clearly in violation of the OAU Charter and Resolution AHG/RES 16(1) of the First Assembly of the Heads of State and Government held in Cairo in 1964. Unless rectified without equivocation, Ethiopia's refusal to abide by the OAU Charter and decisions, and its continued occupation of undisputed Eritrean territory will open a Pandora's box and create a cycle of instability in the region. The acceptance of Ethiopia's logic will not only affect all African States but will indeed backfire against Ethiopia itself, since its sovereignty over much of its territory, including on the Ogaden, is based on the same principles of international law.

6. A simple border dispute has assumed this level of conflict because of Ethiopia's continued escalation of its hostile and provocative acts. Among these are:
* the declaration of war by Ethiopia's Parliament on May 13, 1998;
* the launching of an air-strike by Ethiopia on June 5, 1998, on Asmara;
* the imposition of an air blockade and maritime access blockade to Eritrean ports through the threat of incessant and indiscriminate air bombing;
* the mass expulsion and indiscriminate arrests of thousands of Eritreans from Ethiopia.

7. In spite of all these, Eritrea has been restrained and committed to a peaceful solution of the dispute. In this vein, it has already presented constructive proposals (attached). The proposals center on: i) the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries on the basis of borders established by colonial treaties; ii) the demilitarization of the entire border area pending demarcation; and,
iii) the establishment of appropriate ad hoc arrangements for civil administration in populated demilitarized areas in the interim period.

In addition, considering the state of war that exists between the two
countries, the Government of Eritrea has been calling--and continues to call--for:
i) an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities; and, ii) the start of direct talks between the two parties in the presence of mediators.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, June 19, 1998

Attachment:



Proposal for a Solution Submitted by the Government of Eritrea

 

1. PRINCIPLES

 

The Government of Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia agree that they

will resolve the present crisis and any other dispute between them

through peaceful and legal means. Both sides reject solutions that are

imposed by force.

 

Both sides agree to respect the clearly defined colonial boundaries

between them. In this respect, both sides further agree that the actual

demarcation of the borders will be carried out by a mutually acceptable

technical team. In the event that there is some controversy on

delineation, both sides agree to resolve the matter through an

appropriate mechanism of arbitration.

 

The demarcation of the borders shall be effected speedily and within an

agreed time frame.

 

Both sides agree to be bound by this agreement.

 

2. IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES

 

2.1 The UN Cartographic Unit, or any other body with the appropriate

expertise, shall be charged with the task of demarcating the boundary in

accordance with existing colonial border treaties.

 

2.2 The time frame for the demarcation of the boundary shall be six

months. This time frame may be shortened or prolonged subject to

justifiable technical reasons. This requisite time frame shall be

designated as AN INTERIM PERIOD.

 

2.3 The demarcated boundary shall be accepted and adhered to by both

sides.

 

2.4 If there are segments in the boundary whose delineation is under

controversy, the matter shall be resolved through an appropriate

mechanism of ARBITRATION.

 

2.5 The technical details relevant to the practical implementation of

the DEMARCATION process shall be annexed to the agreement.

 

3. DEMILITARIZATION as a measure for defusing the crisis and expediting

the demarcation of the borders so as to ensure a lasting solution shall

be accepted and adhered to by both sides.

 

3.1 DEMILITARIZATION shall begin by the Mereb-Setit segment; proceed

next to the Bada area and be implemented throughout the entire boundary

in accordance with this phased pattern.

 

3.2 DEMILITARIZATION shall be implemented through the involvement and

monitoring of observers. The team of observers shall be composed of the

forces and commanders from the facilitators as well as representatives

of both sides.

 

3.3 DEMILITARIZATION shall be completed within the time frame of one

month.

 

3.4 The issue of civil administration in populated demilitarized areas

shall be addressed through appropriate ad hoc arrangements that will be

put in place for the interim period.

 

3.5 When the INTERIM period comes to an end following the completion of

the demarcation of the entire boundary between the two countries, the

LEGITIMATE AUTHORITIES shall regain full jurisdiction over their

respective SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES.

 

3.6 The details regarding DEMILITARIZATION and its implementation

modalities shall be included in the main agreement as an annex.

 

4.0 A full INVESTIGATION of the incident of May 6, 1998, shall be

conducted in tandem with the demilitarization process.

 

5.0 This COMPREHENSIVE agreement, signed by both parties, shall be

deposited in the UN and OAU as a legal agreement so as to ensure its

binding nature.

 

 

g_062099.html100655 127137 345 3370 6733432465 6275

OAU Framework Agreement Cannot Be Adulterated
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 20, 1999

Press Release, 8:00 a.m. LT

There were reports in the international press yesterday referring to the contents of a letter from the OAU Chairman to the Eritrean President.

The Eritrean Government had indeed dispatched a prompt response on the same day, May 11, 1999, to the letter of President Campaore through the same envoys composed of the Foreign Minister of Burkina Faso and members of the OAU Secretariat.

The main contents of the response of Eritrea were:

1. A formal and binding agreement to be signed between the Government of Eritrea and the Government of Ethiopia confirming the acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement by both parties; and
2. A formal agreement on an unconditional cease-fire be signed and declared so as to create a conducive climate for the implementation of the Framework Agreement.

The letter further noted that Eritrea has not occupied Ethiopian territory.

The Government of Eritrea wishes to underline at this juncture--indeed as it has stressed on several occasions before--any tampering with the OAU Framework Agreement will bear no fruit other than throttling the Agreement itself and bring the OAU initiative to a dead end.

In the event, the Government of Eritrea strongly urges the OAU to work for the implementation of the Framework Agreement and not to open the door for another round of fruitless wrangling.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 20 June 1999 g_062299.html100655 127137 345 22520 6734147753 6321

Letter From the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Eritrea
Addressed to the President of the Security Council
(Dated 17 June 1999)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 22, 1999

With my respects to you and the other members of the Security Council, and our appreciation of the Council's concern to settle peacefully the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, I wish to set the record straight and clarify the facts concerning the peaceful process outlined in the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Framework and reaffirm Eritrea's commitment to that process.

In a letter dated 14 June 1999 to the President of the Security Council (S/1999/679), Ethiopia's Foreign Minister accuses Eritrea of "obstructing peace and the implementation of the OAU Framework." The Ethiopian Foreign Minister further claims that the OAU High Level Delegation has pronounced a "new clarification" on "Badme and environs" that is consonant with Ethiopia's "interpretation."

As you will recall, Eritrea had submitted to the Security Council, in its letter of 12 March 1999 (S/1999/274), the written clarification that the OAU High Level Delegation provided it with on January 26, 1999. The clarification was unequivocal on several points. Thus, "Environs refers to the area surrounding Badme Town." In regard to redeployment, the clarification reads, "The redeployment is of Eritrean troops from Badme Town and its environs. This should be immediately followed by the demilitarization of the entire border, through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border, to positions to be determined subsequently, as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement." Indeed, it was on the basis of the clarifications provided to it in writing that Eritrea accepted in good faith the OAU Framework Agreement.

The eleven-point Framework Agreement is unambiguous and its most essential contents may be condensed into the following five, sequential, measures:

• Formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by both sides;
• Formal cessation of hostilities;
• Eritrean forces to redeploy from Badme and environs as a mark of good will and consideration to the OAU;
• The demilitarization of the entire border through the redeployment of the forces of both parties along the entire border as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement; and
• Demarcation of the boundary within a period of six months.

Eritrea officially announced its formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by its letters of 27 February to the Current Chairman of the OAU and the United Nations Secretary General. Eritrea has again reiterated its full commitment to the Agreement, and readiness to implement all its provisions, by its public pronouncement as well as letters of President Isaias to President Blaise Compaore when the envoy of President Compaore and the envoy of the Secretary General visited Asmara towards the end of April.

In the event, the Framework Agreement remains blocked and peace is being kept hostage only because Ethiopia has reneged on its earlier commitment by putting forth new preconditions.

Ethiopia's Foreign Minister has once again only restated Ethiopia's preconditions when he stated in his letter, "... The bottom line for Ethiopia is that Eritrea should and must withdraw from all occupied Ethiopian territories and that the Ethiopian administration--forcefully uprooted--should be restored. That is what the OAU Framework requires of Eritrea ... Any interpretation of the OAU Framework Agreement that suggests that Eritrea would withdraw from territories it occupied in May but retain those it occupied in June cannot be taken seriously."

Ethiopia's Foreign Minister is clearly reading from a new script. The OAU Framework Agreement was endorsed by the Central Organ in December 1998 and has therefore covered the clashes of May and June of that year. Moreover, the Framework Agreement is not only unambiguous in terms of redeployment of troops but operative paragraph 7 provides for the determination of the origin of the crisis "through an investigation that will be carried out on the incidents of 6 May 1998 and on any other incident prior to that date ... including the incidents of July-August 1997."

Ethiopia's underlying motive in pursuing this approach is transparent. Ethiopia wants to be exonerated from the acts of aggression that it has perpetrated in the preceding years and to legitimize the Eritrean territories that it has occupied in the process.

Indeed, Ethiopia has persistently violated Eritrean sovereignty, international law and covenants to which it is a signatory by:

• Invading the sovereign Eritrean territories of Bada and areas in Badme in July 1997;
• Issuing unilaterally an illegal map in October 1997 redrawing Eritrea's international boundaries;
• Attacking Eritrean units in the Badme area on 6 May 1998 and starting all out attacks against Eritrea throughout the common border including air attacks on the capital, Asmara;
• Declaring war on Eritrea through a declaration of its Parliament on 13 May 1998.

Ethiopia's selective approach is not only untenable in terms of international law. It also defies common sense. With regard to international law, the status quo in Africa is anchored in the respect of the boundaries inherited from colonial rule. This is the sacrosanct OAU principle governing the behaviour of neighbouring countries. In the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the restoration of the status quo ante refers to redressing of any and all territorial violations that Ethiopia has perpetrated by violating this fundamental OAU principle. Ethiopia's arguments are thus nothing but an effort to gloss over its violations prior to 6 May 1998. In fact, it is tantamount to the logic of a serial killer who, when caught in the act of murdering his fifth victim, argues that he must not be held responsible for the four previous crimes since he was not caught red-handed.

In a classic case of the perversion of truth, Ethiopia's Foreign Minister accuses the international community of "appeasing Eritrea" and urges the Security Council "to give Eritrea a clear signal that we are governed by international law and that aggression cannot pay. The time to do so may be long overdue, but it is better later than never."

If anything, the Security Council has been tolerant of Ethiopia. The Foreign Minister has finally admitted, in his present letter, that Ethiopia has unleashed the large scale offensives since 6 February this year, which have claimed, and continue to claim, tens of thousands of lives. (Ethiopia had earlier denied this and even fabricated the fictitious bombing of Adi Grat by Eritrea on 5 February.) Ethiopia has perpetrated this act of aggression--and presently occupies new areas in Eritrea--in contravention of UN Security Council resolutions calling on both sides to observe a cessation of hostilities. Ethiopia has further violated the moratorium on air strikes brokered by the United States Government in June last year to target civilian areas in Eritrea.

Additionally, Ethiopia has deported about 60,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin in the most inhuman manner and confiscated their life-long earnings. The international community has taken forcible measures to punish such abhorrent acts of ethnic cleansing elsewhere. On the other hand, Ethiopia's leaders have not even been reprimanded--let alone faced stern measures--for the identical crimes that they have committed and still continue to commit.

Then too, the international community remained silent when Ethiopia expelled Eritrea's Ambassador to the OAU and ransacked his residence in violation of the Vienna Conventions and the OAU Headquarters Agreement. This Ethiopian act has been tolerated even as Eritrea requires unhindered access to the OAU while the latter is still seized of the conflict.

It is therefore Ethiopia which has been allowed to get away with acts of aggression and a catalogue full of other grave human rights violations.

The issues of the occupation of territory and aggression are not and cannot be determined solely by the declarations of one or the other party to a dispute but by the determination of the fact by impartial third parties on the basis of objective, relevant documents. Eritrea has been committed to any such fair determination while it rejects any attempt, direct or indirect, to make it renounce its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Finally, Eritrea is unequivocally committed to the implementation of the Framework Agreement as clarified by the OAU on 26 January, 1999. Any other attempt to interpret the Framework Agreement differently will violate the integrity of the document and will endanger peace and security in the region. In this respect, it is incumbent on the Security Council, which is ultimately responsible for the maintenance of peace and security, to ensure that its calls for a cease-fire, cessation of hostilities and the peaceful settlement of the dispute are observed by the implementation of an unadulterated OAU Framework Agreement.

---


Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 22, 1999 g_062498.html100644 127137 345 3404 6544256017 6271

Eritrea - Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

The TPLF government in Ethiopia continues to disseminate false and pretentious information at a time when efforts for peace are underway and the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community as a whole are getting a more clearer insight of the causes of the conflict.

In the past few days, the Government has stated that it has "huge resources" which it will employ to "teach the Eritreans a lesson" in a prolonged war. We find this arrogance surprising.

As it is widely known, the military adventures that Ethiopia had launched in the first phase had failed miserably. Its subsequent efforts to prod the Ethiopian people into war through misinformation has not been successful either. Nonetheless, it continues to purchase weapons and conscript young people forcibly.

There cannot be any doubt that the TPLF government will be weakened if it pursues this dangerous path. The people and Government of Eritrea will persist in their search for peace without let-up. But it must also be known that they have the capability to frustrate and deter any bluffs and attempts.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, June 24, 1998

g_062499.html100655 127137 345 4241 6734444172 6276

Eritrea's Position regarding the Recent Security Council Statement


Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
June 24, 1999

---

The UN Security Council issued a statement yesterday, 23 June 1999, demanding, interalia, that "both parties immediately and unconditionally agree to a cease-fire." The Security Council statement further calls upon both parties "to cooperate fully and constructively with the high level delegation of the OAU to implement the framework agreement."

While the Government of Eritrea welcomes these recommendations, it cannot but emphasize the following points:

1. It is well known that Eritrea did not initiate the hostilities. Moreover, Eritrea has not only publicly committed itself not to shoot the first bullet but it has incessantly been calling for the renunciation of the use of force to resolve the border problem and for a comprehensive cessation of hostilities. Clearly, this measure, which constitutes the first paragraph of the Framework Agreement, is vital to pave the way for the full implementation of the multi-faceted provisions of the Agreement. The only reason that it remains blocked is due to Ethiopia's adamant rejection. Only recently, Ethiopia's Prime Minister has told his domestic audience in a lengthy interview on Ethiopian TV and Radio that the "impending offensive will neither be brought forward or delayed by a day. It will be launched at the most appropriate time. Time 'lost' is simply to ensure full preparations." The Security Council must therefore address the request to Ethiopia rather than blaming both parties without distinction.

2. Eritrea has repeatedly announced its readiness to implement the OAU Framework Agreement in good faith. Again, the obstacle remains Ethiopia which has been forwarding ever-changing preconditions. Eritrea objects to these preconditions and vehemently calls for the implementation of the Framework Agreement without any alternation to appease Ethiopia's unacceptable preconditions and new demands.

   ---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 24 June 1999 g_062599.html100655 127137 345 15417 6740403133 6313

Eritrea Remains Committed to the OAU Framework Agreement Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea July 5, 1999

---


                In the past year or so, TPLF propaganda has been hinged on one ploy: repeat any falsehood
                ad nauseam in the hope that sheer repetition will confuse public opinion.

                This is why the TPLF continues to falsely claim that the "OAU Framework Agreement calls for
                the withdrawal of Eritrean troops from all the Ethiopian territories that they have occupied
                since May 6, 1998, and for the full restoration of the Ethiopian civil administration of those
                areas."

                In the first place, it is Ethiopia which continues to occupy sovereign Eritrean territory. As a
                matter of fact, it is Ethiopia which unilaterally re-drew the established boundary between the
                two countries to incorporate large tracts of sovereign Eritrean territory into its illegal map of 19
                October 1997. Indeed, it is now clear in retrospect that Ethiopia’s acts of aggression in the
                Bada and Badme areas in July 1997, and the Bure area in January 1998, were motivated by
                the desire to create facts on the ground so as to put under its control, albeit in a piecemeal
                manner, the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its illicit map. This was why Eritrea
                emphatically insisted for an investigation of all the incident prior to May 6, 1998; inserted now
                as operative paragraph 7 the Framework Agreement.

                Secondly, there is no ambiguity in the 11 - point OAU Framework whose main contents
                include the following five, sequential, measures:

• formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by both sides;
• formal cessation of hostilities;
• Eritrean forces to redeploy from Badme and environs as a mark of goodwill and consideration to the OAU;
• the demilitarization of the entire border through the re-deployment of the forces of both   parties along the entire border as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement;
• demarcation of the boundary within a period of six months.
                The OAU Framework, and the 41-page report of the Secretariat, does not contain a single
                paragraph to support Ethiopia’s new preconditions. The written clarification that the OAU
                High Level Delegation provided Eritrea on January 26 this year are clear. "Badme and
                environs" refers to Badme and the surrounding areas as the logic and meaning of the word
                imply. It does not, by any stretch of imagination, mean Badme and any coveted area in the
                1,300km long common boundary as Ethiopia now claims unabashedly.

                As the clarification again underline, Ethiopia has all along refused to submit the totality of its
                claims, arguing that these will be submitted "when the issues of delimitation and, if need be,
                arbitration are addressed". The OAU has not, thus, been in a position to determine the scope
                of the conflict and the extent of the "contested areas", if there are any, let alone give a verdict
                on "occupied areas".

                Finally, the TPLF regime is now alluding to private letter of the OAU Chairman to give
                legitimacy to its unacceptable preconditions. These letters-which have contradictory
                content-cannot obviously override the official clarifications that the OAU High Level
                Delegation provided Eritrea on 26 January 1999.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 05 July 1999 g_062698.html100644 127137 345 5206 6545027326 6275 By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

The Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the United Nations sent the following urgent appeal regarding the incarceration of Eritreans in detention camps in Ethiopia to the United Nations Under Secretary General for Human Affairs, Mr. Sergio Vivero de Mello, today, June 26, 1998.

The text reads:
26 June 1998
Mr. Sergio Vivero de Mello
Under Secretary General for Human Affairs
United Nations
New York NY 10017
Excellency,
I am sending an independent press confirmation of the condition of Eritrean detainees in Ethiopia. We have consistently informed your office of the existence of many such detention camps in different parts of the country. Although we don't have exact numbers, we get information from independent sources in Ethiopia that thousands are taken from their homes and places of work--even from the street--and detained in camps. Many family members report the disappearance of relatives and they don't know their whereabouts--and we know they haven't reached Eritrea.
I can not understand the silence from the UN or the international community concerning this inhuman treatment at such a massive level. What is being done to stop it is even less than what deserves mention. Issuing neutral statements, calling on both countries to refrain from mistreating civilians is indeed lame and unacceptable when it can easily be independently verified as to who is doing what--and we have called for that verification. Ethiopians, I repeat what I confirmed to you yesterday, are being humanely treated in Eritrea. On the contrary, the Ethiopian Government hasn't even denied that it is firing, expelling and detaining Eritrean civilians resident in Ethiopia.
Given the fact that it is an avowed position of the Ethiopian Government, shouldn't there be an open condemnation, or at least denouncement of this action of inhuman treatment of civilians? I can not but emphasize that silence and no tangible action in the face of such inhumanity makes a mockery of the high ideals of human rights that the UN stands for.

With my highest respect,

Sincerely,

Haile Menkerios

Ambassador, Permanent Representative

Permanent Mission of Eritrea to the UN

g_062699.html100655 127137 345 2307 6735701731 6277 Ethiopian Cowardly Air Raid Around Assab


Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release
Asmara, Eritrea
June 26, 1999

---

Ethiopian fighter aircraft today bombed the environs of Assab airport at 9:55 a.m. The high altitude air raid did not hit any target. Thus, there were no human casualties or damage of any kind.

The senseless bombing seemed to be prompted by the TPLF's apparent desire to give the impression of a military edge just prior to the forthcoming OAU Summit in Algiers.

The TPLF was heavily battered in the offensive it launched from June 10-16 this month in which it suffered more than 18,000 soldiers killed or wounded while four MiG-23 fighter aircraft and a MI-35 helicopter gunship were destroyed.

In spite of these heavy losses and in a bid to reverse the trend, the TPLF opened a new attack yesterday on the right flank of the Mereb-Setit front which was quickly foiled.

Today's cowardly and fruitless air bombing can be seen as a psychological attempt to make up for TPLF's increasing ground defeats.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 26 June 1999 g_062798.html100644 127137 345 30032 6545232205 6303

Statement of the 11th Session of the National Assembly of Eritrea

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement of the 11th Session of the National Assembly of Eritrea

The National Assembly of Eritrea has held its eleventh session in Asmara today, June 26, 1998. The Assembly addressed two important issues in its session today, namely, the conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and the programmes of economic and social development. In this respect, it passed the following resolutions and recommendations after reviewing in greater detail:
- the developments of the past six weeks;
- the policies that the government of Eritrea has been pursuing in this regard; and,
- the endeavours set in motion to bring about peace.

A. The Cause of the Conflict Between Eritrea and Ethiopia


1. The National Assembly asserted that the root cause of the conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia is the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty, as well as the naked aggression, perpetrated on Eritrea by the Ethiopian government that is currently controlled by the Tigray People's Liberation Front. The Assembly further noted that the Ethiopian government has issued an official map that incorporates large swathes of Eritrean territory, and embossed this map on its currency. Moreover, the Ethiopian government has been systematically employing its army to physically occupy the lands that it had incorporated on its map. It has thus put large areas under its control by destroying Eritrean homes and crops, dislodging the indigenous population and dismantling Eritrean administrations. It has even changed the names of Eritrean villages. The Assembly also noted that the TPLF authorities have carried out ruthless repression and committed many crimes against the population in the areas that they had forcibly occupied.

2. The National Assembly affirmed that it is the logic of force pursued by the Ethiopian government which has transformed a minor problem of border dispute, that should have been easily amenable to a legal and peaceful solution, into a war pitting two neighbouring countries which had enjoyed very close ties. The Assembly noted that when the Ethiopian government dismantled Eritrean administrations in several areas by force in July last year, the Eritrean government had expressly requested, through the letters of President Isaias to Prime Minister Melles on August 16th and 25th respectively, for the rescinding of these illegal measures. But these requests were not heeded. And as a continuation of its acts of aggression, the Ethiopian government caused the simmering tension to flare up when its army contingents unleashed an unprovoked attack against Eritrean army officers and soldiers on May 6 this year. Moreover, instead of handling the issue with the requisite calmness, it convened a session of the Parliament on an issue that was never discussed before and hastily adopted a resolution that called for the declaration of war. The sea, air and telecommunications links with Eritrea were severed. On June 5, presuming that it had absolute superiority in the air, it escalated the war by launching an air attack on Asmara with the aim of sowing terror. The Assembly also noted that the Ethiopian government is conducting a campaign of mass arrests, expulsion, repression and senseless killing of law-abiding Eritreans living in Ethiopia merely on the basis of their national origin.

3. The National Assembly noted that the Ethiopian government is not
prepared to correct past mistakes but continues to brace for war. Its main focus has become the inflammation of hatred and animosity between both peoples. It is beating the war drums incessantly and forcibly conscripting young people, though with limited success. Although its ambitions and threats are boundless, the clashes that have occurred so far have demonstrated that it does not have the capability to achieve its goals. It has thus chosen to prepare for a prolonged and destructive war.

B. Eritrea's Stance on Peace


1. The National Assembly asserted that sole responsibility for the
conflict that has erupted between Eritrea and Ethiopia, and for the destruction that has ensued, rests on the Ethiopian government which has violated Eritrea's sovereignty, invaded its territory and that is pushing for a violent solution by rejecting a peaceful path. The Assembly demanded that the Ethiopian army withdraw from Eritrean territory that it is still occupying. It also affirmed that Eritrea does not harbour claims, and nor has it occupied any part, of Ethiopian territory.

2. The National Assembly affirmed that this conflict between Eritrea
and Ethiopian cannot be solved through force; but only through peace and legality. The Assembly further noted that the Ethiopian government does not have the power to implement its expansionist objectives although it persists in its sabre rattling and repetitive bluffs to deceive the Ethiopian people and the international community.

C. Endeavours for a Peaceful Solution


1. The National Assembly asserts that the peace efforts undertaken in the past and those underway in the present have made positive contributions laying the basis for a peaceful solution. The main stumbling bloc has been the unacceptable and rigid precondition that the Ethiopian government has placed insisting that "it will not negotiate unless the government of Eritrea withdraws" from its own territory. This is designed to cover its act of aggression and to blame responsibility on the Eritrean government. The National Assembly has asserted that the government and people of Eritrea will not accept this precondition under any circumstances whatsoever. The National Assembly thus urges all facilitators and interested parties to frustrate the attempts of the Ethiopian government to achieve its expansionist objectives through intimidation and deceit when it has failed to do so through force.

2. The National Assembly examined the efforts made and proposals
forwarded by the government of Eritrea for a peaceful and legal resolution of the conflict. In addition to endorsing these proposals, the Assembly has underlined the centrality of the following points:

a) The boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia must be fully demarcated
both in order to bring about a comprehensive resolution to the current conflict and so as to guarantee that future generations will live within secure and recognized boundaries.

b) Although Eritrea's inherited boundaries are unambiguous,
controversies that may arise are to be resolved through arbitration.

c) In order to prevent any military confrontation and reduce tension
until the demarcation of the borders is fully carried out, the entire boundary is to be demilitarized.

In addition, and taking into account the state of war that exists
between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the blood that is being spilled, and the resources wasted,

d) As the government of Eritrea did not opt for or start the war in the first place, it calls for its immediate and unconditional cessation. The air war should be stopped not only through a temporary moratorium but permanently. Similarly, fighting on the ground and other hostilities should be stopped.

e) Direct talks should begin between the governments of Eritrea and
Ethiopia.

3. The National Assembly believes that this peace proposal is
constructive, fair and enjoys wide support. It has therefore charged the government of Eritrea to work vigorously to promote it.

D. Enhancement of National Security


1. The National Assembly asserts that the government and people of
Eritrea will not recoil from their commitment to a peaceful and legal solution. However, the National Assembly has endorsed the decision to take all the necessary measures to guarantee the defence of the country as long as the invasion and threat of aggression by the government of Ethiopia persist. It commended the heroic performance of the country's armed forces to defend national sovereignty and the safety of the population. It praised the prompt readiness that the demobilized soldiers and members of the national military service have displayed to combat the invasion. It equally commended the substantial contributions that Eritreans inside the country and abroad are making with an intensity and promptness that was never exhibited even during the most dynamic phase of our liberation struggle, by creating the "Fund for National Defence." The National Assembly called for its sustainability until the threat is thwarted altogether.

2. The National Assembly confirmed that the economic activities and
growth achieved in the past seven years through the policy of self-reliance and wide popular participation can cushion the adverse effects that the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia may entail in some sectors of our economy. In this vein, it urged a prudent prioritization of our programmes and effective utilization of our human and material resources so as to maintain the steady annual growth that our economy has been registering.

3. The National Assembly has discussed in depth the crimes perpetrated by the Ethiopian government on Eritreans living in Ethiopia in violation of basic human rights and international law. It noted that the government of Ethiopia is kidnapping Eritrean youth in various Ethiopian towns; arresting thousands; expelling many thousands more; separating families and confiscating their properties. The National Assembly strongly condemns these practices which dwarf the crimes committed by the previous regime at its darkest hour. It has charged the government of Eritrea to take all necessary measures to protect their rights and assist the rehabilitation of those who have been expelled. In addition, the National Assembly has reminded governments and international organizations to shoulder their responsibility so as to ensure that:
- the kidnapping of Eritrean youth in Ethiopia is stopped;
- the thousands of young people who are jailed without any crime under the false pretext that "they pose a security threat" are released; and that others are spared from this witch-hunt;
- the families of those who have been expelled are made to join them;
- the property of Eritreans is protected by law;
- the expelled Eritreans and their families are given the necessary assistance.

The National Assembly has asserted that in contrast to the inhuman
policy of the Ethiopian government, the Eritrean government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree.

4. In conclusion, the National Assembly noted that the relationship
that was cultivated with the EPLF and the government of Eritrea over 22 years has been severely damaged by invasion, terrorism and gross crimes perpetrated by the TPLF against the Eritrean people. The ties with the people of Tigray, and more broadly the Ethiopian people, will not be affected by this development. The National Assembly thus calls on the Ethiopian people to contribute their part for a constructive peace and a solid relationship between Eritrea and Ethiopia.

National Assembly of Eritrea

Asmara, June 26, 1998

g_062799.html100655 127137 345 3132 6735701363 6276

Around 4,000 Ethiopian Soldiers Put Out of Action


Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release (9:30 a.m LT)
Asmara, Eritrea
June 27, 1999

---

The TPLF launched an attack on the right (west) flank of the Mereb-Setit front on Friday which was quickly repulsed. Yesterday, the TPLF opened small scale attacks on the central and right flanks of the same front.

Aggregate Ethiopian losses in the two day fighting were 850 Ethiopian soldiers killed, 3,100 wounded and thirteen taken prisoner.

The TPLF attacks appear to be motivated by a bid to reverse the serious defeats that its army has suffered on the central flank of the Mereb-Setit front in recent battles (May 22-26 and June 10-16 respectively). Especially in the last round of fighting, the Ethiopian army suffered huge losses with over 18,000 soldiers killed, and four MiG-23 fighter aircraft and an MI-35 helicopter gunship destroyed. The TPLF regime was compelled to deny these defeats and publish imaginary figures of presumed Eritrean casualties days later.

The TPLF army has bombed the outskirts of Assab yesterday and this morning in an apparent attempt to divert attention from the heavy defeats that its infantry are suffering on the ground. There were no human casualties or damage to property in either of the bombings which seemed to target the civilian airport of Assab.

Fighting had resumed on the right flank of the Mereb-Setit front at press time.


---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 27 June 1999 g_063098.html100644 127137 345 32315 6546164100 6302 Compiled by Amanuel Sahle for Eritrea Profile

Ethiopia couldn't define its borders: President Isaias


Last week President Isaias Afwerki answered questions from foreign journalists regarding the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Excerpts:

On results of OAU mission:


It is very unrealistic to expect dramatic changes overnight. The discussions we had with OAU delegation was very fruitful because it was a test case for them. If the OAU has to be useful in solving the problem, it has to grasp the causes of the crisis. The discussions were on demarcating the border including the background to the conflict taking into consideration colonial treaties. We proposed a cessation of hostilities, by way of defusing the tension, and direct talks of any form because evading direct talks and raising secondary and marginal issues to confuse the real issues at stake would not be useful in finding peaceful solution to the crisis. It was not appropriate for the delegation to talk to us concerning the details of the discussion they had with the Ethiopian side and definitely they are playing the role of a broker and we would like to see their mediation to continue. However, there was no any useful information which was provided from the Ethiopian side. The question of withdrawal from Badme was raised. Again I had to ask a very important question and the delegation could have done that earlier. Where on earth is exactly Badme? Is it on the moon, the sky or in the heavens? No one seems to know. That should have been clearly defined from the Ethiopian side. But it was not done. Let us give the OAU a chance. However, this is also a responsibility of the OAU. The charter and the resolution that was adopted in 1964 regarding colonial boundaries is a sacrosanct principle as far as the OAU is concerned. That's why I say that this is a test case for the OAU. That principle should be upheld. On the other hand, heads of states alone cannot be fully occupied to solve this problem. There has to be a mechanism. I have suggested to the delegation that it would be practical for them to use the OAU as an umbrella and consolidate whatever initiatives there are that may be contributed by various organs and come up with a mechanism that would initiate a process. That would be a practical way of moving ahead.

On differences of principles:


First, to this day Ethiopians have not officially produced any map. In order to find a solution to the problem the cause to the dispute should be made clear. The government of Eritrea is talking about treaties and colonial boundaries. The Ethiopian government is also saying that it would recognize and respect colonial boundaries. The maps from the two countries should come and if there is an overlapping area in the claims of the two countries we will have a clear definition of the dispute. This has not been made possible because Ethiopia has not to-date come up with the definition of borders. Secondly, there has been talks about Badme. This place has to be put on the map and we have to find out where this place lies exactly. Is it on the Eritrean or on the Ethiopian border? Then we have to come up with hard facts on the ground. Talking about incidents does not make any sense at all. We have presented the OAU delegation with fresh information and documents about the dispute including hand-written letters corresponded between Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and myself in 1997 concerning the present crisis and that will clearly define the problem at hand and will make it clear as to who is claiming what on the ground so that the dispute will be clearly presented for proposing a solution to the problem. This will be followed by employing a technical team. UN cartographic unit or any expertise can demarcate the border on the ground which is very simple. If there is a controversy on the colonial boundaries and treaties, it will have to be dealt with by legal experts. This is not a political issue. We believe that these boundaries are the most well-defined in Africa. Let us give our Ethiopian brothers the benefit of doubt to come up with a claim on the boundaries, but the final verdict has to come as a result of due process.

On expelling Eritreans:


This was raised by the OAU delegation. They told us that they reminded the Ethiopian government to stop harassing Eritreans living in Ethiopia and hopefully the position of the OAU will add strength and will contribute to the consolidation of the opinions of the international community regarding the misbehavior of the Ethiopian government. The international community has been very responsive and positive regarding this. I can assure you that this misbehavior on the part of Ethiopia could be somehow checked because of intervention of the international community. Many Eritreans have been missing in rural Ethiopia where communication is impossible. We have information about detainees and we have already contacted international agencies to find ways and means of protecting our citizens and safeguarding their rights in Ethiopia.

On cessation of air-strikes:


I have already made it clear to the public that we have abided by the agreement, if you can call it an agreement, and we have accepted the proposal of President Clinton that this could be a way for de-escalating the conflict. It could be a new phase in finding an environment conducive to a peaceful solution to the problem. We made it clear to the US government and other interested parties that we have no intention of using air-strikes as a way of imposing a solution. We would like to see this as a starter to fully de-escalate the tension on the ground and probably demilitarize the conflict areas. Unfortunately, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister made it clear that they will not abide by this agreement and today I got report from the civil aviation and other Airline companies that the Ethiopian authorities have issued instructions to all commercial flight that they need to report to Addis Abeba before entering Eritrean air space 10 minutes ahead. Meaning that the blockade is effective. This is a violation of the commitment made to the international community and in particular to the US government. We will be committed to self-restraint and we would like to hear a positive response from the US. If that does not materialize, we would take any appropriate action to defend our national security. I cannot speculate now what the US response will be.

On diversion from the real issue:


What the Ethiopians are doing is a deliberate diversion from the real issue and a deliberate attempt to confuse the whole case. I have made it clear to the OAU delegation, and through a letter to Prime Minister Meles after the incident, I proposed the demilitarization of the area in dispute. He accepted the proposal although he evaded the issue under the pretext that it was inside our territory. I did mention to him that the issue concerning Bada and Badme has to be sorted out by the joint commission. Ethiopians should not make a big issue of Badme because if they think Badme is within Ethiopian territory, they have only to prove it. When the Ethiopian parliament made decisions on this matter, no member of parliament asked where Badme is situated. A decision was made on false information. The continuation of campaign for withdrawal from Badme will have to be clearly defined. Where exactly is Badme? Is it part of Ethiopia? This can be proved by facts. If they were administering the area, for how long and why did they administer it? Why is administration being brought as an issue? It is really a weak argument. Administering an area does not bias colonial boundaries. And colonial boundaries should be left to legal experts.

On expansionist policies:


Talking about Ethiopia's internal political issues is not my business, but I will tell you one thing. We tried to solve the problem in an amicable manner. However, there is a trend of expansionist policy on the Ethiopian side. The idea of creating a Greater Tigray has always been there. I can take you back to the mid-70s when the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front ( TPLF ) had a clearly defined geographical area of what was Tigray at the time. According to a map of 1976, it included not only areas inhabited by Tigrinya speakers but other nationalities as well. We knew this right from the beginning. If you look at Tigray now and compare it with the Tigray of the period of Haile Selassie and Mengistu, you will find that it has completely changed. This is a problem of aggrandizement manifested by only one of the regions of Ethiopia. We know who has the political clout in Ethiopia. This trend for aggrandizement is supported by clear proofs. We tried to contain this for a long time, but it was in vain. Finally, we fell victim of this dream of expansion.

On economic motives:


I have always been reactive to this problem. It is a problem of culture. The question of economic problem behind this crisis does not make any sense at all because there are no sound economic bases in both countries. We are so underdeveloped, both of us, that we cannot talk of expansion because of economic reasons. It just doesn't make sense. We are only beginning to build our economy and to rehabilitate a completely demolished infrastructure. It is unimaginable to talk about economic interest involved in this. We don't have substantial resources which may incite conflict. It is only speculation that results from being unable to find a logical motive to the problem. There is no reason why we should go to war when there are possibilities of solving the problem peacefully. No one can find a good explanation for using force to impose a solution to a problem. Hence, people are inventing reasons to the crisis. It is a speculation influenced by foreign culture where every conflict should involve money and where every problem does involve resources. That is not the case in this part of the world.

On Ethiopians residing in Eritrea:


This is a very open society. We have a clear policy. Our security officials called on some Ethiopians residing here for interrogation and then released them. It is purely security precaution. It is not the policy of this government to detain or expel any Ethiopian from this country. There are an estimated 100,000 Ethiopians in Eritrea and we would like them to live comfortably with all the privileges, and we would like to protect them as citizens who would one day play a role in the future relations between the two countries. The Ethiopian authorities would like us to follow their example of expulsion. We will not. And if there are Ethiopians detained here or expelled from this country, it has to be reported officially. Let the international community examine if there is any violation. What is being said from the Ethiopian side is pure fabrication aimed at justifying their actions. It is true that some Ethiopians, especially Tigreans, have left when the conflict erupted. But it was on their own free choice. No one has forced them to leave this country.

On war and belligerence:


War is bullshit. Anyone talking about war these days is bluffing. We may have skirmishes here and there, but that will not bring a solution. Anything we do on our part is for self-defense and deterrence. Trying to blow up the issue out of all proportion is bluffing. Even the recent threat of not abiding by the commitment entered to stop air-raids is a bluff. It might do damage on international commercial flight and shipping for some time, but it wont go beyond that. The Ethiopian government is talking about legitimate action. We will wait and see. We have always been on the defensive. All talk about a great war in the tradition of the mother of all wars will not take place. It is simply bluffing.

On Ethiopia's political shift:


It is amazing these days to see political developments turning 180 degrees. The last seven years and before, we worked together with the TPLF and EPRDF to see to it that the political process of transition in Ethiopia went smoothly. We have always been told that there were subversive and chauvinistic elements in Ethiopia, remnants of the Haile Selassie and Mengistu regimes who wanted to destabilize the country with dreams of expansion. We Eritreans have contributed a lot to the stability of Ethiopia. At present, warmongering is going on and the Ethiopian authorities went as far as welcoming from all parts of the world old enemies whom they considered threat to the unity and stability of Ethiopia at one time, and they are recruiting them to join their camp. This may prove very dangerous in the future. This will surely affect the political reality of Ethiopia. That's why we are saying let us solve the present crisis legally and amicably.

Compiled by Amanuel Sahle for Eritrea Profile

g_070399.html100644 127137 345 6076 6740411107 6267

Eritrean Foreign Ministry: TPLF's Untenable Diplomatic Conduct Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea July 3, 1999

---


Press Statement
TPLF's Untenable Diplomatic Conduct

It is to be recalled that, in flagrant violation of the letter and spirit of  the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and the various  agreements between the Organization of African Unity and Ethiopia as host  country, Ethiopia has carried out the following:

•        Expelled all Eritrean diplomatic and technical staff in June 1998;
•       Picked up all local staff from their homes and off the streets and deported them
•       Encircled the embassy premises and residence with round the clock 'security' watch;
•       Prevented visitors, with the exception of other accredited ambassadors, from entering the premises;
•       Denied the Eritrean ambassador and his deputy freedom of movement;
•       Declared Eritrea's Permanent Representative to the OAU persona non
grata and ordered him to leave the country within 24 hours. Upon his  departure, security forces searched the ambassador and his briefcase at Bole  Airport and confiscated documents of the mission;
•  On 11 February 1999, armed agents of the government of Ethiopia
forcibly entered the residence of the ambassador. They ransacked the place  and took away employees of the embassy.

Now, after perpetrating all these crimes, the Ethiopian government has  alleged in a press statement dated July 1, 1999, that the Eritrean  government has seized Ethiopian Embassy property by "confiscating documents  sent in a pouch by the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the  Embassy."

The TPLF's intentions are again thinly veiled. One week away from the OAU  Summit in Algiers at which Eritrea's legitimate grievances regarding  Ethiopia's violations will be discussed, the TPLF is throwing in another  decoy. The government of Eritrea has never in any way hampered the Ethiopian  Embassy or infringed on any of its inherent rights, whereas in Ethiopia,  Eritreans have been denied any consular rights or protection.

Addis Ababa is issuing these claims to further "muddy the waters." No one  should be misled. Ethiopia's violations must receive the unfettered and  direct attention they merit.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 3 July 1999

---

g_070599.html100644 127137 345 15372 6740403461 6314 Eritrea Remains Committed to the OAU Framework Agreement Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea July 5, 1999

---


                In the past year or so, TPLF propaganda has been hinged on one ploy: repeat any falsehood
                ad nauseam in the hope that sheer repetition will confuse public opinion.

                This is why the TPLF continues to falsely claim that the "OAU Framework Agreement calls for
                the withdrawal of Eritrean troops from all the Ethiopian territories that they have occupied
                since May 6, 1998, and for the full restoration of the Ethiopian civil administration of those
                areas."

                In the first place, it is Ethiopia which continues to occupy sovereign Eritrean territory. As a
                matter of fact, it is Ethiopia which unilaterally re-drew the established boundary between the
                two countries to incorporate large tracts of sovereign Eritrean territory into its illegal map of 19
                October 1997. Indeed, it is now clear in retrospect that Ethiopia’s acts of aggression in the
                Bada and Badme areas in July 1997, and the Bure area in January 1998, were motivated by
                the desire to create facts on the ground so as to put under its control, albeit in a piecemeal
                manner, the Eritrean territories that it had incorporated into its illicit map. This was why Eritrea
                emphatically insisted for an investigation of all the incident prior to May 6, 1998; inserted now
                as operative paragraph 7 the Framework Agreement.

                Secondly, there is no ambiguity in the 11 - point OAU Framework whose main contents
                include the following five, sequential, measures:

• formal acceptance of the Framework Agreement by both sides;
• formal cessation of hostilities;
• Eritrean forces to redeploy from Badme and environs as a mark of goodwill and consideration to the OAU;
• the demilitarization of the entire border through the re-deployment of the forces of both   parties along the entire border as part of the implementation process of the Framework Agreement;
• demarcation of the boundary within a period of six months.
                The OAU Framework, and the 41-page report of the Secretariat, does not contain a single
                paragraph to support Ethiopia’s new preconditions. The written clarification that the OAU
                High Level Delegation provided Eritrea on January 26 this year are clear. "Badme and
                environs" refers to Badme and the surrounding areas as the logic and meaning of the word
                imply. It does not, by any stretch of imagination, mean Badme and any coveted area in the
                1,300km long common boundary as Ethiopia now claims unabashedly.

                As the clarification again underline, Ethiopia has all along refused to submit the totality of its
                claims, arguing that these will be submitted "when the issues of delimitation and, if need be,
                arbitration are addressed". The OAU has not, thus, been in a position to determine the scope
                of the conflict and the extent of the "contested areas", if there are any, let alone give a verdict
                on "occupied areas".

                Finally, the TPLF regime is now alluding to private letter of the OAU Chairman to give
                legitimacy to its unacceptable preconditions. These letters-which have contradictory
                content-cannot obviously override the official clarifications that the OAU High Level
                Delegation provided Eritrea on 26 January 1999.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 05 July 1999 g_070698.html100644 127137 345 22476 6550751750 6325 By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Ethiopia's Gross Violations of the Human Rights
of Eritreans Living in Ethiopia

1. In mid-May 1998, Ethiopia unleashed a war of aggression against Eritrea. Almost immediately thereafter, the Ethiopian Government started to systematically violate the human rights of peaceful Eritrean civilians living in Ethiopia in contravention of the basic provisions of all international agreements, conventions and declarations on human rights and in total disregard of the basic precepts of civilized international behavior. These acts are continuing.

2. It has thus become incumbent on the Government of Eritrea to draw the attention of the international community to the plight of most Eritreans living in Ethiopia and the danger posed by these unwarranted and inhuman acts by the Ethiopian Government to stability and security in our region. The Eritrean Government wishes in particular to bring to the attention of the world the following flagrant human rights violations that are being routinely committed by the Ethiopian government.

A. Expulsion

3. All states are required to respect and to ensure to all individuals including aliens living in their territories and subject to their jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments. Most of these instruments prohibit the collective expulsion of aliens.

4. Yes, the Government of Ethiopia has embarked upon a policy of mass expulsion of Eritreans in total disregard of its international obligations. To date, it has collectively expelled bout six thousand Eritreans and there seems no indication that it will discontinue its policy in the near future.

5. These deportees did not have any chance to contact members of their families or friends since they were suddenly and unexpectedly apprehended from mosques, schools, offices and the streets without any warrant and hauled to detention centers with only the clothes they were wearing. They were then crammed in ill-fitted buses without toilets where they spent more than three days and nights, without water and much-needed medical attention.

6. Most of the deportees are elderly. Seventy percent (70%) are fifty (50) years or older. Several are septuagenarians and octogenarians. Sixty percent (60%) had lived in Ethiopia from twenty-five (25) to (60) years. Some were born in Ethiopia. Some were of mixed (Ethiopian-Eritrean) parentage. fifteen percent (15%) are women. Fifty percent (50%) were professionals who had served Ethiopia and its people in both the public and private sectors. A few were single parents who had been forced to leave behind babies and other minors without making any arrangements for their care. None of these people could, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered as a threat to the security of the Ethiopian state.

B. Arbitrary Arrests and Imprisonment

7. It is a basic principle of international law and practice that no one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or imprisonment. Once a person is deprived of his liberty, the law requires that he/she shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person and that be/she shall not be subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment or torture.

8. Yet, the Ethiopian Government is indiscriminately arresting Eritreans, including school children, all over Ethiopia, without any declaration of a state of emergency or notification of its actions to either the OAU or the UN as it is required to do by international conventions it has signed. These Eritreans are languishing in wretched and unhealthy detention centers in all part of Ethiopia, including Addis Ababa, Fiche, Humera and Mekele. In the Fiche camp only, there are at least 1,000 Eritrean youth, including about eighty (80) students enrolled at Addis Ababa University on an educational exchange program.

9. Most of the detention centers are concentration camps. In Humera, fifty (50) to sixty (60) detainees are crammed in dark containers (which are about twenty (20) cubic meters) or in equally small and unlighted cells. They are denied food and water and basic sanitation needs, including any visit to toilets. They have been denied any communication either with relatives or legal representatives who may not know their whereabouts. Some have been tortured or subjected to inhuman treatment which violated their physical, mental and moral integrity.

C. Internal Refugees (Displaced Persons)

10. The violence and destruction inflicted upon the Eritrean people by the Ethiopian Government has not been limited to those residing in Ethiopia only. Ethiopian aggression has also displaced tens of thousands of Eritreans from their villages and other domiciles, thereby causing extensive social disruption and economic damage. They need urgent food and medical assistance. Their need for shelter, food and medicine has already strained government resources.

11. There is no denial that any state can, under certain circumstances, impose restrictions in the political activities of aliens so long as the measures it takes do not violate international law or practice. It is also acceptable that any country which is at war or in imminent danger threatening its independence or security may declare a state of emergency and may thus take measures derogating from its obligations under international conventions it has adhered to as long as they are limited to actions necessitated by the exigencies of the situation. Even then, it is under legal obligation to follow universally accepted and strictly applied procedures and to make sure that its actions are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law. Surely, Ethiopia's actions are not covered by these provisions since no derogation is permitted from, inter alia, respect for the right to life, security of person and recognition as a person before the law.

12. It is also recognized that any person whose rights or freedoms are protected by international conventions and agreements shall have an effective remedy as well as an enforceable right to compensation, notwithstanding that the violations have been committed by persons in an official capacity.

13. Finally, the Government of Eritrea is convinced that it is the duty of all states to contribute to the respect, promotion and protection of these essential rights of human beings by raising their voice, and by acting with commitment, when they are systematically subverted by any members of the community of nations. Accordingly, it requests members of the international community to, inter alia: * denounce Ethiopia's gross violation of the basic human rights of the Eritrean people under its jurisdiction and to emphatically call for the immediate cessation of its hostile and unlawful acts; * demand the unconditional release of all detainees; * arrange for the early reunion of divided Eritrean families and to evacuate them by the safest means of transport possible, including airlifts; * ensure the protection of Eritrean property and means of livelihood in Ethiopia and/or to secure commensurate compensation for expropriated property and means of livelihood; and * provide adequate assistance to Eritrean detainees, deportees and displaced persons.

14. It is to be noted that the Eritrean Government had, since the beginning of the dispute, scrupulously respected the human rights of Ethiopian citizens living in Eritrea. It will continue to do so. It has not and will not put civilian Ethiopians living in Eritrea in detention camps. It has not deported them. It has not taken action that will violate their physical, mental and moral integrity. It shall allow them to live in Eritrea as peaceably as they had done so in the past. The Eritrean Government makes this undertaking to the world.

In this connection, the National Assembly of Eritrea, meeting in its eleventh session on 26 June, 1998, declared that "the Eritrean Government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed upon under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full right of redress."

To this end, the Government of Eritrea invites all interested governments and organizations to visit Eritrea and to independently verify for themselves the situation in which Ethiopians living in Eritrea find themselves.

15. The Government of Eritrea also seizes this opportunity to reaffirm to the international community its firm commitment to the peaceful and legal resolution of the conflict and to the restoration of the amicable and harmonious relations that existed between the people of the two countries prior to the outbreak of hostilities.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, July 3, 1998

g_070699.html100644 127137 345 4763 6740410560 6275

Eritrean Foreign Ministry: TPLF Regime Resumes Mass Deportation of Eritreans Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea July 6, 1999

---

Press Release
TPLF Regime Resumes Mass Deportation of Eritreans

One thousand four hundred ten Eritrean civilians deported from Addis Ababa arrived at the port city of Assab early yesterday morning. The Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin were expelled through the Burie front line, 70 kilometers west of Assab. The deportees included expectant mothers, children and several handicapped and gravely ill people. A large number of the
deportees had lived their entire life in Ethiopia and carried Ethiopian passports. They said they had been arrested and detained for periods ranging from three days to ten months prior to their deportation.

Reliable sources in Addis Ababa are reporting that the TPLF regime is commencing another round of arbitrary arrest and deportation of Eritreans. This group of Eritreans is thought to be only the first batch of some 15,000 Eritreans who remain destitute in Addis Ababa and who will be deported in
the coming days.

Many of the expelled Eritreans had been separated from family members who had been deported earlier and said they had become virtually destitute having been denied employment and, in many cases, thrown out of their homes. They said the situation remains desperate for many Eritreans who have lost all means of income but have been prevented from leaving Ethiopia.

Local journalists in Assab reported that seven of the deportees are currently in Assab Hospital recovering from heat exhaustion, dehydration and other conditions associated with the difficult journey.

Yesterday's arrivals bring the two day total to 3,000. Thirty one Eritreans were also expelled from Tigray between June 23 and July 3 after having their property confiscated. To date, the TPLF regime has deported 60,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia based on their ethnicity.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 6 July 1999

---

g_070899.html100644 127137 345 7175 6741155725 6311 Eritrea Rejects Any Tampering with the OAU Framework Agreement Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, Eritrea July 7, 1999

---


 

Press Release
Eritrea Rejects Any Tampering with the OAU Framework Agreement

Ethiopia has yesterday published the private letters that the OAU Chairman sent to the Eritrean President on May 11 and May 20 respectively. How Ethiopia obtained copies of these private letters remains a mystery. The fact is that Ethiopia appears to have an inside track to the workings and documents of the High Level Delegation. Indeed, this is not the first time; Ethiopia also received the full report of the OAU Ambassadorial committee last year while Eritrea remained in the dark.

In regard to the letters, what is obvious is their contradictory content although they were written within a space of nine days. The first letter speaks about Eritrean redeployment from "Ethiopian territories occupied after May 6." The second letter retracts the grave error qualifying it as "our clear and renewed understanding is that this redeployment will not prejudge in any manner the claims held by either party regarding these areas." So are we talking about "occupied territories or contested territories?" What is the location of these areas relative to the established boundary between the two countries? The truth is that all these areas fall within Eritrea's recognized boundary although they appear to be incorporated in Ethiopia's new and illicit map of 1997.

Moreover, the letter are in complete contradiction with the official clarifications that the High Level Delegation provided to Eritrea on January 26, 1999, requesting, inter alia, "the redeployment of the troops of both parties from the entire boundary" with the exception of Badme from which Eritrea was expected to make a unilateral withdrawal as "a mark of good will" to the OAU.

They are also in complete contradiction with the Terms of Reference of the OAU Ambassadorial Committee of last June which was confined to the "collection from the two Parties and any other appropriate International Organization and Agency, information which would make it possible to determine the authority which was administering Badme before 12 May, 1998." Eritrea then sought, in vain, to extend the mandate of the Committee to include all areas under dispute. But the OAU High Level Delegation declined
the request insisting that its mandate was confined "to ascertaining the situation in Badme." How come these letters now appear to grapple with issues that the High Level Delegation has consistently refused to investigate?

It must be borne in mind that the OAU Secretariat remains inaccessible to Eritrea as Eritrea's Ambassador to the organization was expelled illegally by Ethiopia in violation of the Vienna Convention and the Headquarters Agreement. Yet, these letters and "new recommendations" on the conflict continue to be drafted in Addis Ababa by people with little or no access to the second party.

These appalling acts sadden Eritrea. In the event, Eritrea wishes to underline once more that it will not accept any tampering with the Framework Agreement under any guise.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 7 July 1998


---

g_071398.html100644 127137 345 7771 6552650063 6301 Ethiopian Government Unleashes a Campaign of Mass Expulsions of Eritreans
The Ethiopian government has begun a second round of massive arrests of Eritrean residents in the country. In the past three days alone, 1,400 Eritreans have been arrested in Addis Abeba. Another 420 people are reported to have been detained and expelled from Tigray. There are ominous reports that Eritrean residents in smaller towns that are not accessible to members of the international community are being subjected to more inhumane treatment. Families and relatives have not been able to trace and know their whereabouts as telephone calls are not being returned.
The International Red Cross has requested access to those arrested in Addis Abeba. The Ethiopian government has rejected this request claiming belatedly that "they are already on their way" to Eritrea.
Among the 1,400 arrested in Addis Abeba are families of the 1,500 businessmen and professionals expelled in the past three weeks. The Ethiopian government is expelling them today despite an empty promise to give them time "to mortgage their properties and leave." All along the expropriation of Eritrean property has been one of the motives behind this mass expulsion.
The Ethiopian government is trying to justify its expulsion orders under the spurious pretext that "these are rank and file members of the EPLF who have reorganized themselves in the past three weeks after the ringleaders were evicted." Many of those expelled in the first round of expulsions are not even members of the EPLF in the first place as confirmed by an OAU investigating team, UN agencies, the diplomatic community in Eritrea, as well as other independent bodies.
On the other hand, many Eritreans residing in Addis Abeba have been card-carrying members of the EPLF since 1991, paying nominal membership fees of 3.00 Ethiopian birr (fifty US cents) per month. This is perfectly legal and carried out with the permission and prior knowledge of the authorities in Addis Abeba. It is this lawful act which is now being portrayed as "posing a threat to Ethiopia's security." Ethiopians residing in Eritrea have the same reciprocal rights and they have organizations and branches supporting the TPLF and EPRDF in Asmara and all other Eritrean towns where they live.
The expulsion of Eritreans by the Ethiopian government is being pursued with sinister objectives. The Ethiopian regime has been carrying out an intensive hate campaign since the eruption of the border crisis with the sole aim of fomenting hatred among both peoples. In a bid to justify these acts, the Ethiopian Prime Minister has stated on Ethiopian TV on Thursday, July 9, 1998, "Any foreigner, whether Eritrean, Japanese, etc., lives in Ethiopia because of the goodwill of the Ethiopian government. If the Ethiopian government says 'Go, because we don't like the colour of your eyes' they have to leave ... the US government is throwing out Mexicans who slipped into the country simply because they are unwanted!"
In the circumstances, the Government of Eritrea renews its calls to the international community to: i) strongly condemn Ethiopia for these gross violations of basic human rights; ii) ensure that those being expelled are not mistreated but enabled to return to their country in a dignified manner; iii) guarantee that those expelled are able to retrieve their property.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 13 July 1998
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_071499.html100655 127137 345 12534 6743240121 6306 Press Release Eritrea Accepts OAU Modalities for Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement

Today, 14 July 1999, the Eritrean government announced its acceptance of the OAU's "Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement ..." proposed at the 35th OAU Summit in Algeria.

The full text of the Modalities, as well as President Isaias Afwerki's remarks, follow.

Embassy of Eritrea
Washington DC,
14 July 1999

---

Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement on the Settlement of the Dispute Between Ethiopia and Eritrea

The two Parties reaffirm their commitment to the principle of the non-use of force to settle disputes.

The two Parties reaffirm their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and commit themselves to implement it in good faith.

There shall be a return to positions held prior to 6 May 1998.

On the basis of these principles, the two Parties agree on the following modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement:

1. The Eritrean Government commits itself to redeploy its forces outside the territories they occupied after 6 May 1998.

2. The Ethiopian Government commits itself to redeploy, thereafter, its forces from positions take after 6 February 1999 and which were not under Ethiopian administration before May 6, 1998.

3. The two Parties agree to put an end to all military activities and all forms of expression likely to sustain and exacerbate the climate of hostility and thus compromise the implementation of the Framework Agreement.

4. The redeployment of troops shall commence immediately after the cessation of hostilities. This redeployment shall not, in any way, prejudice the final status of the territories concerned, it being understood that this status will be determined at the end of the border delimitation and demarcation.

5. The modalities for the re-establishment of the civilian Administration and population in the concerned territories shall be worked out after the cessation of hostilities.

6. The two Parties accept the deployment of Military Observers by the OAU in cooperation with the United Nations. The Group of Military Observers will supervise the redeployment of troops as stipulated in the present modalities and carry out all other duties that are entrusted to it, in conformity with the relevant provisions of the Framework Agreement.

7. The two Parties commit themselves to sign a formal Ceasefire Agreement which provides for the detailed modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement.

Done in ............................ on ........................ 1999

---

President Isaias Afwerki's Remarks Regarding the OAU Modalities, 14 July 1999

Mr. Chairman, Your Excellencies,

It is Eritrea's understanding of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities presented to us that:

1. The principle of non-acquisition by force applies equally to both sides and to all territories seized since the conflict started;

2. Redeployment and interim arrangements do not prejudge the status of the territories concerned;

3. Undoing the damage done by the conflict does not only require redeployment but, more importantly, addressing the humanitarian dimensions of the conflict. In this regard, it is imperative to fully compensate the deportees, if not for the irreparable harm done to them, at least for expropriated property; and

4. Demarcation will be carried out expeditiously in order to bring the dispute to a quick end.

On the basis of this understanding and in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea but, may I add, also to the people of Ethiopia and our continent as a whole, and as mark of goodwill to the OAU, Eritrea has decided to accept the "Modalities for the Implementation of the Framework Agreement" presented to us by the High Level Delegation. In accepting the Framework and Modalities, Eritrea hopes to make its small contribution to the realization of the lofty objective proposed by the newly elected President of Africa's giant, Nigeria, General Obasanjo, and I believe endorsed by this Summit -- to make the year 2000 "The Year of Peace and Security" in Africa.

Your Excellencies,

Eritrea knows the bitterness of war and also the taste of the fruits of peace. It has absolutely no interest, and sees no advantage, in war. Our Ethiopian neighbours may pride themselves on the size of their country and population. But the experience of Algeria, which inspired us when we were launching our own liberation struggle, as indeed the whole lesson of the decolonization of our continent including Eritrea's own liberation, point eloquently to the pitfalls of that thinking. More importantly, here in Africa, leave alone the poorer among us, the richest in our midst can ill afford war.

So let us endeavor to put this sad chapter behind us and work for peace. This will be no easy task. There will be problems and pitfalls along the way. But with determination and the support of Africa and the world at large, there is no reason we cannot succeed. Let me assure Your Excellencies that Eritrea will work indefatigably for peace.

Thank you.

---

g_071599.html100655 127137 345 5437 6743362175 6311 Press Release Eritrea Formally Accepts OAU Peace Formula

---

Eritrea has yesterday formally accepted the "Modalities for the Implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement" that was proposed by the High Level Delegation to both parties and endorsed by the 35th Summit of Heads of State and Government held in Algiers from 12-14 July 1999.

At the closing session of the Summit, Eritrea's President Isaias Afwerki announced Eritrea's official acceptance of the Modalities for Implementation. President Isaias underlined that this was done "in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea but also, if I may add, to the people of Ethiopia, and our continent as a whole, and as a mark of goodwill to the OAU." Eritrea further deposited its formal acceptance of the peace formula through a letter to the Current Chairman of the OAU.

The Modalities of Implementation calls for the two parties to reaffirm:

• "their commitment to the principle of the non-use of force to settle disputes"

• their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and commit themselves to implement it in good faith.

It further provides for "a return to positions held prior to 6 May 1998." In this spirit, Eritrea shall redeploy its forces from positions taken after 6 May 1998 while Ethiopia will do likewise from positions taken after 6 February 1999. "This redeployment shall not in any way prejudice the final status of the territories concerned, it being understood that the status will be determined at the end of the border delimitation and demarcation ... The modalities for the re-establishment of the civilian administration and population in the concerned territories shall be worked out after the cessation of hostilities."

In accepting the Modalities for Implementation, Eritrea observed that:

1. "The principle of non-acquisition of territory by force applies equally to both sides and to all territories seized since the conflict started;

2. Redeployment and interim arrangements do not prejudge the status the territories concerned;

3. Undoing the damage done by the conflict does not only require redeployment but, more importantly, addressing the humanitarian dimensions of the conflict. In this regard, it is imperative to fully compensate the deportees, if not for the irreparable harm done to them, at least for expropriated property; and,

4. Demarcation will be carried out expeditiously in order to bring the dispute to a quick end."

Ethiopia did not make its position clear to the Summit while indulging, in characteristic fashion, in strident and invective language against Eritrea.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 15 July 1999 g_071699.html100655 127137 345 3267 6745656027 6315

---

Ethiopia Has Yet to Say Yes to OAU Peace Plan
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 July 1999

---

The Ethiopian regime continues to refuse to publicly state whether it has accepted or rejected the Modalities of Implementation endorsed by the OAU Summit in Algiers on Wednesday, 14 July 1999.

At the Summit, Ethiopia's Prime Minister evaded stating Ethiopia's position on the Modalities. Instead he astounded his audience by indulging in his usual dose of invective against Eritrea. The Prime Minister continued to give mixed signals on arrival in Addis Abeba, telling journalists that his government "will seek clarifications" and arguing that certain aspects of the proposal "will have to be examined by relevant government institutions." The long statement issued by Ethiopia's Foreign Ministry yesterday simply rehashes the Prime Minister's evasion.

Ethiopia thus has yet to accept the OAU Modalities, without mincing its words, and make this clear to its own public, the OAU and the international community at large.

In contrast, Eritrea has confirmed its acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation to the Summit and deposited its formal letter of acceptance through a letter of President Isaias Afwerki to the Current Chairman of the OAU.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 16 July 1999
g_072299.html100655 127137 345 5644 6745656074 6315

---

Press Release
The TPLF Regime Continues to Beat the War Drum
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 22 July 1999

---

Ethiopia's Council of Ministers issued a statement yesterday which, unfortunately, is conspicuous for its inflammatory rhetoric and war mongering rather than the sobered language of peace. True, the statement contains a feeble "acceptance" of the Modalities of Implementation (MOI) endorsed by the 35th Summit of the OAU in Algiers on July 14, 1999. But this is blighted by a distorted presentation of the peace formula and the TPLF's siren call for war. The Council's "appeal" for Ethiopia's "Defense Forces" to pursue further its war of aggression was in fact accentuated by a more strident call for continued war issued by the EPRDF--Ethiopia's ruling party--yesterday evening.

Whereas the MOI provide for both sides to redeploy, as an interim measure, from positions moved into after fighting, the Council of Ministers tried to disinform public opinion by insinuating that the peace formula hinges on Eritrean unilateral withdrawal from "sovereign Ethiopian territory." To this end, it glosses over Article 4 of the MOI which reads, "The redeployment of troops shall commence after the cessation of hostilities. This redeployment shall not, in any way, prejudice the final status of the territories concerned, it being understood that this status will be determined at the end of the border delimitation and demarcation."

The Council of Ministers also appears to read from its own script as far as interim administration of these areas is concerned. In this regard, Article 5 read, "The modalities for the re-establishment of the civilian administration and population in the concerned territories shall be worked out after the cessation of hostilities."

More importantly, the TPLF regime seems to have missed the kernel of the MOI and the Framework Agreement itself. Both documents, as a package, are designed to ensure and expedite the demarcation of the boundary so as to settle the border problem legally. This will have reversed Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's established colonial boundary through the issuance of an illicit map in October 1997 and acts of piecemeal occupation of Eritrean territories thereby triggering the current conflict.

This is indeed the reason why the TPLF regime has been obstructing the implementation of the OAU Framework in the past months and was reluctant to accept the MOI at the OAU Summit in Algiers. If it claims to have "accepted" the MOI now, it is only because it is finding it difficult to ward off intense international as well as growing domestic pressure. The TPLF's agenda of war remains, otherwise, transparent.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 22 July 1999 g_072398.html100644 127137 345 13164 6555677102 6321

National Union of Eritrean Women Appeals to International Community

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org
Eritrean Women's Appeal to the International Community, Humanitarian and Women's Organizations

Since the outbreak of the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea in May 1998, the Ethiopian government has been committing gross human rights violations against ethnic Eritreans in Ethiopia. In mass expulsions to date, over 11,000 Eritreans have suddenly been taken from their homes, schools, offices and farms, hauled to detention centres and then crammed into buses to be dumped on the Eritrean-Ethiopian border from where they had to walk several kilometres to reach Eritrea. In these indiscriminate arrests and expulsions, many have been forcibly separated from family members, with some mothers forced to leave behind infants and underage children. Even school children are being detained in concentration camps and underage children have been deported from Ethiopia without the knowledge of their parents. Among the 2,037 latest deportees, 510 are underage children. Over 1,000 Eritreans, including 85 university students have been detained in one concentration camp, Fiche, 150 kilometres northwest of Addis Abeba.

Women and children, left behind in Ethiopia when their menfolk were illegally deported, have been denied rightful access to their family's businesses, bank accounts and other sources of income. Children whose parents have been expelled have been left behind without any arrangements for their care. This forced exodus of Eritreans from Ethiopia continues with an estimated number of fifty people reaching Eritrea every day. On the other hand, Eritreans are denied voluntary departures and access to safe and normal transport.

Meanwhile, thousands of families inside Eritrea have also been displaced from their villages due to the war of aggression unleashed by the Ethiopian government in the border areas. These families, most of whom are farmers, have been forced to move out of their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs and will not be able to farm this rainy season. A UN fact-finding team has confirmed that the number of displaced is 170,000 people.

The National Union of Eritrean Women (NUEW) is deeply outraged by the gross violations of human rights being committed by the Ethiopian government against innocent Eritreans, especially women and children who are the most vulnerable victims in any conflict situation. Eritreans who, after thirty years of war liberated their country from Ethiopian military occupation, treasure their hard won peace and freedom. Since independence, Eritrea has worked hard to build friendly relations with Ethiopia based on mutual cooperation and mutual benefit. A border dispute between previously friendly nations should not be allowed to escalate into a generalized war or degenerate into an ethnic cleansing campaign. NUEW believes that the border conflict can be resolved, as proposed by the Eritrean government from the onset of the dispute, through peaceful negotiations, demarcation of the border region, and if necessary through international arbitration.

NUEW welcomes the statement of concern made by the UN High Commissioner from Human Rights in which it confirms that the expulsion of Eritreans from Ethiopia is a "serious violation of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Ethiopia is a party ... and calls upon the Government of Ethiopia to respect the rights of non-discrimination and freedom of movement and to meet its obligations under the international covenants and other human rights treaties it has ratified."

NUEW calls upon the international community, humanitarian and women's organizations to take urgent measures to avert further violations of human rights of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia, prevent the escalation of hostilities and support the peaceful resolution of the conflict by:

1. Condemning the Ethiopian government's gross violation of human rights of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia.

2. Calling for the immediate cessation of all mass detention and expulsion of Eritreans; demanding the immediate release of all Eritreans who have been unlawfully detained in prisons and concentration camps; and calling for the protection of the lives and properties of Eritrean deportees and those still residing in Ethiopia.

3. Assisting in the reunification of separated Eritrean families, including arrangement of early and safe transport.

4. Providing emergency support to Eritrean deportees and displaced people.

5. Calling for the immediate cessation of hostilities and for the peaceful resolution of the border conflict.

National Union of Eritrean Women
21 July 1998, Asmara, Eritrea

For further information on how you can assist, please contact:
National Union of Eritrean Women, PO Box 239, Asmara, Eritrea Tel: ++291-1-115271, Fax: ++292-1-119122

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_072398_2.html100644 127137 345 21532 6555741201 6530

University of Asmara Appeal for Release of University Students

By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

University of Asmara Appeals on Behalf of Detained Exchange Students

The president of the University of Asmara, Dr. WoldeAb Yisak, has appealed to UNESCO, the International Association of Universities, and the Association of African Universities to obtain the release of University of Asmara students who were on a student exchange program at the University of Addis Abeba and who now find themselves in custody at Fiche military camp outside Addis Abeba.

Dr. WoldeAb Yisak is also making a more general call for assistance to all concerned individuals. He says, "I would like to appeal to all of you to use your good offices in whatever possible way, such as through your governments, through your national or European universities associations, to put pressure on the Ethiopian authorities to release these innocent students unconditionally. Such acts, in my opinion, must be condemned because, if they pass unchallenged, they will probably place the whole student exchange programme at a much greater risk than has been witnessed before."

In his July 7, 1998, letter to UNESCO, the IAU and the AAU, the president of the University of Asmara provided the following background information:

"In 1994/95 the Governments of Eritrea and Ethiopia signed a bilateral agreement on cultural and educational affairs ... On the basis of this agreement during the past three academic years (1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98) each party had been entitled to send thirty students per year to each other's undergraduate academic programmes. To date we have 85 Eritrean students who have been studying at the University of Addis Ababa while the Ethiopians had only 46 students who had been studying at the University of Asmara.

In spite of the current political tensions between the two countries, the University of Asmara has persisted in meeting its international academic obligations by ensuring the safety and comfort of the Ethiopian students. It has allowed the students to complete their courses and exams for the current academic year. It further has provided the students with their summer stipends and travel allowances so that their departure home can be facilitated. However, when their scheduled departure was delayed by about three weeks by the Ethiopian authorities..., the University allowed all the students the use of its dormitory facilities free of charge during the waiting period ... the normal expected services and facilities had been extended to our foreign students even during periods of political tension. I am now pleased to indicate that the 46 Ethiopian students had safely flown to Ethiopia on Friday, July 3, 1998.

On the other hand, we have been unable to obtain official information about the 85 University of Asmara students from the University nor from the government authorities in Ethiopia. We have received information from our Embassy in Addis Ababa which was independently confirmed by members of the International Committee of the Red Cross that all of our students, with the exception of three female students, are under custody in a military camp at Fiche ... These students have been denied the right to sit for their final examinations and worse still have been stripped of their basic human rights since they are locked in prison for no crime other than being Eritrean nations. It is a tragic state of affairs when political tensions overflow to victimize peaceful students who are guests of the academic institution
.. Such acts, which are morally, ethically and legally wrong, should not be tolerated ..."

A full list of the detained students, with their field and year, follows:

Abdulhamid Musanur Abrar, Statistics, 3rd

Abraham Fesehaye Gebresadik, History, 4th
Adimaseghed Mesfun Belay, Geology, 4th
Amanuel Okube Haile, Library Science, 3rd
Andom Kubrom Tesfaghabir, Geology, 4th
Asmerom Teclezghi T/Berhan, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Awet Tewelde Woldemichael, History, 4th
Bahlbi Andemariam Abraha, Medical Technology, 2nd
Bereket Adha Habteselassie, Medicine, 4th
Bereket Chimar Amaha, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Bereket Kiflay Adhanom, Educational Psychology, 3rd
Binega Adhanom Markos, Medical Technology, 2nd
Biniam Berhe Tewolde, Political Science, 3rd
Biniam Fessehaye T/Tsion, Pharmacy, 2nd
Biniam Kefela O/Michael, Engineering, 4th
Biniam Ogbamichael Gebreab, Engineering, 4th
Brook Tesfay Debas, History, 3rd
Btesfa Yikeallo Habteselassie, Pharmacy, 2nd
Butsuamlak Hadish Tekeste, Computer Science, 2nd
Danile Ghebremichael Tecle, Medicine, 4th
Deglel Habti Aibu, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Efreim Ghebreleul Hailu, Educational Administration, 3rd
Essayas Sahlezghi Kifle, Computer Science, 3rd
Estifanos Haile Ghebremichael, Geology, 4th
Feseha Yohannes Habtesion, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Filmon Tsighe Tesfaselassie, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Fitsum Mebrahtu Kahsai, Electrical Engineering, 2nd
Frezghi Dawit Kidane, History, 3rd
Ghebrekidan Zecarias Teklemariam, Statistics, 3rd
Ghebriele Ghebrebrhan Zerizghi, Education, 4th
Ghirmay Kiros Gebretinsae, Geography, 3rd
Habtom Tecle Tesfu, Library Science, 3rd
Habtom Tesfaghebriel, Medicine, 2nd
Hagos Ghebremicael Tecle, Education, 4th
Hebret Haileab Bokru, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Henok Russom Fessahaye, Geology, 4th
Hisham Zein El Abdir Yasin, Medicine, 4th
Kaleab Sebhat Menker, Health Science (Jimma), 2nd
Kibrom Gebrehiwot Weldegabriel, Computer Science, 2nd
Medhanie Asrat Medhin, Statistics, 3rd
Mehari Sium Frezghi, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Merdia Mohammed Abdereshid, Medicine, 4th
Merhatinsae G/Mariam G/Yesus, Medicine, 4th
Michael Berhane Tesfatsion, Education, 4th
Michael Berhe Sahle, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Michael Tewoldemedhin Gebreselasie, Geography, 3rd
Muluberhan Fitwi Zeresenay, Geography, 3rd
Mulugheta Tsehaye Mirach, Political Science, 3rd
Mussie Beraki Demoz, Medicine, 2nd
Mussie Ghirmai Habte, Medical Technology, 2nd
Neamen Yohannes Teclebrhan, Environmental Health Technology, 2nd
Negash Habte Debas, Library Science, 3rd
Paulos Zekarias Ghebreselassie, Education, 4th
Saba Tesfayohannes Kidane, Political Science, 3rd
Samson Tesfu Tekle, Engineering, 4th
Seare Haile Rezenom, Engineering, 4th
Simon Tesfamichael Tombosa, Pharmacy, 2nd
Simret Tecle Ghebremichael, Pharmacy, 3rd
Tedros Yosief Andemichael, Engineering, 4th
Tekesteberhan Mehreteab Kidane, Agricultural Engineering, 2nd
Teklehaimanot Tewelde Beraki, Architecture, 2nd
Teklit Keleta Oankay, Agricultural Engineering, 2nd
Temesgen Kibrom Weldeab, Political Science, 3rd
Temesgen Shibabaw Belew, Library Science, 2nd
Tesfaldet Kiflemariam Yohannes, Mechanical Engineering, 2nd
Tesfalem Kesete Ghebreab, Computer Science, 3rd
Tesfalem Tekleab Araia, History, 3rd
Tesfamariam Amare Mehari, Pharmacy, 3rd
Tesfay Teame Gebretsadik, Library Science, 3rd
Tesfazghi Gernet Tecle, Agricultural Engineering, 4th
Thomas Fitwi Adagish, Electrical Engineering, 2nd
Tsegay Bein Habtemariam, Chemical Engineering, 2nd
Weldesilase Hidray Ghebreyesus, Statistics, 3rd
Woldekidan Zekarias Teclamariam, Computer Science, 2nd
Yohannes Tecleab Habtemichael, Mechanical Engineering, 2nd
Yonas Tekie Idris, History, 3rd
Yonas Tesfazghi Weldeslasie, Computer Science, 3rd
Yonas Yemane Weldemichael, Educational Administration, 3rd
Yonatan Tecle Berhe, Library Science, 2nd
Yosief Solomon Marcos, Chemical Engineering, 2nd
Yosief Weldeghiorghis Kesete, Mechanical Engineering, 3rd
Yosief Woldu Araya, Medicine, 2nd
Zerabruk Tesamariam Kidane, Health Science (Jimma), 2nd

For further information, contact:

University of Asmara, PO Box 1220, Asmara, Eritrea Tel: ++291-1-161926, Fax: ++291-1-162236
July 23, 1998

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_072498_1.html100644 127137 345 10755 6556215717 6546 By veronica @embassyeritrea.org

Statement on Ethiopia's Gross Violations of Basic Human Rights

In an affront to the international community which has been interceding with the Ethiopian government to stop the massive and illegal arrest of Eritreans residing in Ethiopia, the Addis Ababa authorities have started a third wave of arrests in preparation for more deportations. There are ominous reports of fresh and widespread arrests, especially in Addis Ababa in the past three days.

More than 11,000 Eritreans were rounded up and deported in the most inhumane way in two previous rounds from major centres in the country and villages in the border areas. People were dragged from their homes in the middle of the night; families cruelly separated from their underage children; and even suckling babies left behind. Property has been looted after the families were deported and dispersed.

The Ethiopian authorities have also arrested thousands of young Eritreans under the ridiculous claim that their enrollment in the national service, the summer school campaign or previous role in the liberation war renders them "a potential threat to the security of Ethiopia." More than 1,000 Eritrean youth thus remain held as
"prisoners of war" in a detention camp at Fiche. Eighty university students are included among these hostages. Many innocent Eritreans are also held in prisons in other parts of the country and particularly in Makelle and Adi Grat. Two Eritrean Catholic nuns were recently arrested in Adi Grat while five other priests who were running schools in southeastern Ethiopia were deported.

Eritreans who hold nationality of other countries are similarly being arrested and deported although some have been rescued due to the protests of their respective embassies.

Many governments, international agencies, and human rights groups have been interceding with the Ethiopian authorities to stop this gross violation of human rights. But "quiet diplomacy" has not delivered tangible results. The authorities in Addis Ababa continue to trample on basic human rights and pursue with impunity the arbitrary arrest and mass deportation of Eritreans in total contempt of the concerns of the international community. The Ethiopian Prime Minister had even the temerity to publicly state that "Ethiopia has an unlimited right to expel any foreigner if it did not like the colour of his/her eyes."

Addis Ababa is moreover resorting to the most base practice of fabricating lies to accuse the Eritrean government of similar violation of human rights. To this end, it has revived the "Morale Boosting Department" which the Mengistu regime had established with the help of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) to concoct and spread lies to disinform the domestic and international community. Among the outrageous lies that this Department has fabricated this week include wild allegations of "group rapes by Eritrean fighters,"
"burning of seven Ethiopians in Alla," "the wanton shooting of Ethiopians who wanted to return to their country in Adi Quala," "the public beating of Ethiopian civilians in Asmara and the parading of prisoners of war," etc. The banality of these allegations have been verified by a BBC correspondent in Eritrea, the ICRC and members of the diplomatic community in Asmara. But the international press continues to pick up these allegations at face value without necessary verification.

The Government of Eritrea finds the silence in the face of Ethiopia's gross violation of human rights and the inflammatory campaign of disinformation shocking and unacceptable. The international community should no longer confine its reactions to mute diplomatic protests. These excesses must be condemned publicly and unequivocally.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara, July 24, 1998

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_072699.html100644 127137 345 7203 6747465536 6313

---

OAU Press Release No. 64/99
On the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict
Issued by the OAU Information Division
Addis Ababa and Algiers, Monday, 26 July 1999


---


For the public's information, we are reproducing below the full text of a
press release on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict issued today, 26 July 1999,
by the OAU Information Division.

Embassy of Eritrea
Washington DC, 26 July 1999

---

Organization of African Unity
Issued by the OAU Information Division
Press Release No. 64/99

As part of the efforts to ensure the speedy implementation of the OAU
Framework Agreement for the Resolution of the Dispute between Ethiopia and
Eritrea and the implementation Modalities adopted by the Algiers Summit and
in consultation with the OAU Secretary General, H.E. Mr. Abdelaziz
Bouteflika, President of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria and
Current Chairman of the OAU, dispatched to Addis Ababa and to Asmara a
delegation led by his Special Envoy, Mr. Ahmed Ouyahia.

The OAU Delegation held talks with H.E. Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister of the
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia on 23 and 24 July 1999 and with H.E.
Isaias Afwerki, President of the State of Eritrea on 23 and 25 July 1999.

The OAU Delegation welcomed the confirmation by Ethiopia and Eritrea of
their acceptance of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities for its
implementation.

The OAU Delegation also noted the clear disposition of Ethiopia and Eritrea
to contribute to the speedy implementation of the Framework Agreement and
the Modalities. In that regard the two Parties indicated that they were
looking forward to the OAU submitting to them the practical arrangements
specifying the details of the implementation of the Framework Agreement and
the Modalities.

On its part and with reference to the relevant provisions of the Framework
Agreement and the Modalities, the OAU Delegation called upon Ethiopia and
Eritrea to contribute to the preservation of the situation of calm obtaining
on the ground and to refrain from any action and statement which could
complicate matters and jeopardize the establishment of the atmosphere of
serenity which is required for the implementation of the Framework Agreement
and the Modalities. The OAU Delegation was encouraged by the reaction of the
two Parties which expressed their will to act in that direction to
facilitate the on-going efforts of the OAU.

Furthermore, the Delegation pointed out to the two Parties that the OAU, in
cooperation with the UN and other partners, would submit, as soon as
possible, the necessary technical arrangements for the full implementation
of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities adopted by the OAU and
accepted by the two Parties. In this context, the two Parties agreed to send
to Algiers their respective delegations in order to finalize the technical
arrangements that would facilitate the commencement of the implementation of
the Framework Agreement and the Modalities.
 

---

Addis Ababa and Algiers, Monday, 26 July 1999 g_072898.html100644 127137 345 15361 6557343221 6321

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea sent the following letter to Amnesty International on July 26, 1998.

Asmara, July 26, 1998


Amnesty International
London

We are receiving letters from your members which express concern on two issues:

i) humane treatment of Ethiopian detainees in Eritrea; and,
ii) deportation through open and fair court proceedings.

We are indignant that these allegations are being leveled at the Government of Eritrea by Amnesty International without independently checking their veracity simply because the Government of Ethiopia is fabricating outrageous accusations to cover up the gross violations of human rights that it is perpetrating in Ethiopia. In as far the true facts are concerned:

I. Political detainees


The Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has falsely accused the Government of Eritrea for detaining "600 Ethiopian civilians who were paraded in the streets of Asmara." That this accusation is without basis has been established by various independent sources including: the Ethiopian Embassy, the diplomatic community and UN agencies in Asmara; and, the Committee of African Ambassadors charged with finding a peaceful solution to the border conflict between the two countries. The Ethiopian government has now revised the allegations to submit a list of 77 people allegedly detained in Eritrea without a cause. The Government of Eritrea has invited the ICRC to look into the matter.

This contrasts starkly with the wide-spread arrests of Eritrean youth in Ethiopia. As you may know, the Government of Ethiopia is detaining more than 1,000 youth in a concentration camp in Fitche around 90 kms northwest of Addis Abeba. These people, most of whom are students, have been detained either because they were enrolled in the National Service at one stage during the past five years; or because they have contributed in the summer campaigns. Some are also demobilized soldiers who have been long integrated into civilian life. Eighty five of these were students at the Addis Abeba University who were barred from taking their exams and dumped in this camp. On the other hand, the 45 Ethiopian students who were in Asmara in accordance with the exchange programme were not only allowed to take their exams but enabled to return to their country safely. There are reports now that the Government of Ethiopia has moved the hostages in Fitche to another obscure camp in eastern Ethiopia. The ICRC, which was initially provided with access to these detainees, does not know their exact whereabouts as the measure was taken without their prior knowledge or consent.

II. Alleged expulsions


The Ethiopian government has accused the Government of Eritrea for expelling about 5,000 Ethiopians. There have also been accusations of willful redundancy of Ethiopians or refusal to give them permission to leave the country. All these accusations are false. Indeed:

1. Several hundred Ethiopians had left the country out of their free will immediately after the escalation of the conflict when Ethiopia launched the first air-strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998. This was a time when all foreigners were being evacuated by their respective embassies. In the circumstances, it was not surprising to find some Ethiopians wanting to leave the country.

2. The Government of Eritrea has time and again publicly reassured the more than 100,000 Ethiopians residing in Eritrea that their rights to live and work in the country would not be jeopardized due to the current conflict. In this regard, the resolution of the Eritrean National Assembly of June 26, 1998, reads: "The National Assembly has asserted that in contrast to the inhuman policy of the Ethiopian government, the Eritrean government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree."

The Government of Eritrea does not have therefore a policy of deporting Ethiopian residents in the country.

3. Ethiopians who want to go back to their country are not being prohibited from doing so in any way. But as the Ethiopian government has attempted to distort the facts and depict their willful repatriation as "forcible deportation" (only recently, 80 teachers in Assab who were assisted by the Administration through facilitation of sea transport were portrayed as having been expelled), the Eritrean government has announced that this process will henceforth be carried out through the ICRC or some independent international body.

4. The Government of Eritrea has requested that the UN Human Rights Commission field representatives to investigate into the allegations leveled by Ethiopia. Four representatives from this body are accordingly on their way to Eritrea. The ICRC have also been charged to look into these accusations. The Ethiopian government has however rejected the fielding of six UN Human Rights representatives in Ethiopia. The ICRC were not also allowed to register and accompany all those who have been expelled to date.

5. The Government of Ethiopia has to date expelled more than 11,000 Eritreans from Ethiopia in the most inhumane manner. Most of these people have been snatched from their homes at night or during early morning hours. Many were simply collected from the streets. Families have been cruelly separated; properties systematically appropriated and looted.

In conclusion, we urge Amnesty International to verify the true facts by consulting other independent observers or through other suitable means before apportioning equal blame to both sides. We also request that this letter be circulated to all members of the organization.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_072899.html100655 127137 345 10076 6747606754 6340

---

Ethiopia's Campaign of Slander Continues
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 July 1999

The TPLF regime has intensified its campaign of hate and slander in spite of a verbal commitment to the OAU "to refrain from any action and statement which could complicate matters and jeopardize the establishment of the atmosphere of serenity which is required for the implementation of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities."

Two days after the OAU had issued a statement on the acceptance of both parties of the Modalities of Implementation (MOI) and the Framework Agreement and on the outcome of the shuttle of the OAU envoy, Ethiopia's state-controlled media have yet to inform their domestic audience. Instead, the TPLF propaganda machine is busy heaping insults on Eritrea and fabricating groundless accusations to inflame public opinion.

To this end, the TPLF regime has accused Eritrea in the past two days of obstructing access to their embassy in Asmara and of detaining "1,500 Ethiopians in Awashait prison alone."

But the true facts are:

• It is Ethiopia which has not only expelled Eritrea's Ambassador to the OAU but also ransacked his residence in violation of the Vienna Conventions. Ethiopia also illegally detained, by breaking into the embassy premises, the guard of the Embassy in contravention of established diplomatic conventions and tortured him for five months.

• Eritreans in Ethiopia have been deprived of any consular protection for more than thirteen months now. Any Eritrean approaching the embassy for routine consular service is routinely detained. Even Eritrea's Ambassador was shadowed around the clock with five security cars. Eritrea has not resorted to these practices although it could do so on the basis of reciprocity.

• Over 1,500 Eritreans remain in jail--without any process of law--for almost a year now. These innocent Eritreans, who were detained either because they were former fighters, had done military service at some time, or simply because "they are of military age," were jailed at Fiche, and later the infamous, malaria-infested Blaten concentration camp. They were moved to a new concentration camp recently.

• Over 1,000 Eritreans remain missing with their whereabouts unknown.

• Over 15,000 Eritreans whose business licenses have been revoked and/or who have been fired from employment because of their ethnicity remain stranded in destitute conditions in Addis Abeba and elsewhere in Ethiopia because the TPLF regime refuses to let them go.

• Eritrea, to the contrary, does not have a policy of detaining Ethiopians of military age. The ICRC has unhindered access to investigate allegations of civilian detainees. There is no prison in Awashait and the ICRC have been invited to visit this or any other place of Ethiopia's wild allegations.

• Eritrea's policy of respecting the fundamental rights of Ethiopians in Eritrea is in fact enshrined in the Parliamentary Resolution of 26 June 1998 which reads, inter alia, "The National Assembly has asserted that in contrast to the inhuman policy of the Ethiopian government, the Eritrean government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflict of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree."

• Eritrea has no policy of obstructing the voluntary departure of Ethiopians nor of detaining them because they are "of military age." Ethiopians are free to leave Eritrea and this is done through registration with the ICRC to verify that departure is due to their own volition.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 28 July 1999

g_080598.html100644 127137 345 11520 6562164543 6312 OAU Ministerial Committee to Submit Recommendations


The OAU Ministerial Committee on the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia will submit its recommendations to the Heads of State of the three countries in the next few days. The Committee underlined that these recommendations "will be fair and take into account the legitimate concerns of the parties and the ideals of the OAU."

The Ministerial Committee, which is composed of Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and Djibouti, was convened in Ouagadougou from August 1-2, 1998, to review the findings of the Committee of Ambassadors that had visited Eritrea and Ethiopia earlier this month. Separate sessions with the Foreign Ministers of Eritrea and Ethiopia were also held to exchange views and explore avenues of a peaceful solution.

In its final communiqu^?, the Ministerial Committee welcomed "the disposition reiterated by both Parties to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute" and urged them "to continue their observance of the moratorium on air strikes and the present situation of no hostilities." The Government of Eritrea had expressed its readiness for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and the placement of African observers under the auspices of the United Nations pending a comprehensive peaceful solution to the conflict. But Ethiopia's Foreign Minister told the Ministers that Ethiopia did not accept the cessation of hostilities and the placement of an observer force.

In regard to the substantive aspects of the conflict, the Ministerial Committee acknowledged that the two parties continue to hold "divergent points of view both on the origin and evolution of the dispute and the issues which must be considered to resolve the crisis." But it added that this should not preclude "the spirit of compromise to prevail" which will make it possible to respond to the fundamental concerns of each of the parties while respecting the principles of the OAU.

The Government of Eritrea had all along maintained that the root cause of the dispute lay in Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's colonial boundaries. Focus on secondary issues will therefore be unhelpful and only derail the peace process. Ethiopia's insistence on ascertaining first "which authority was administering Badme prior to the clashes of May 6" was thus an obstructive posture mainly designed to divert the peace process. This glossed over Ethiopia's use of force earlier in July 1997 to occupy Adi Murug as well as to encroach on areas around Badme. Under these circumstances, "administration" in itself was not valid if the process by which that administration had been established was illegal. What is of paramount importance is to establish where Badme, Adi Murug and other areas were situated within the recognized boundaries.

The Ministerial Committee emphasized that it "understands the viewpoint of Eritrea on the origin of the conflict" and underlined its concerns "about the incidents which would have taken place at other places on the common border to July 1997." It noted that Badme town was administered by the Ethiopian authorities prior to the eruption of the recent round of clashes. But it acknowledged that this "does not obviously prejudge the final status of that area which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation process and, if necessary, through arbitration."

In regard to violation of human rights and treatment of nationals by both sides, the Ministerial Committee stated that "it could not establish the reality of a systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." But it expressed its deep concern on "the conditions in which the deportation of Eritreans was carried out by the Government of Ethiopia, the decision to extend those measures to the families of the deported persons and the fate of their properties."

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, August 5, 1998

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_080698.html100655 127137 345 6010 6562604421 6265

US State Dept. Statement on Ethiopia's Expulsion of Eritreans

U.S. Department of State
Office of the Spokesman

For Immediate Release

August 6, 1998

Statement by James B. Foley, Deputy Spokesman

Ethiopia: Expulsions of Eritreans

The United States Government is greatly concerned about the growingimpact on civilian populations of the continuing conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

The United States views with deep concern the detention and expulsion of ethnic Eritreans in and from Ethiopia. The Government of Ethiopia has a legitimate right to guarantee the safety and security of its people against potential threats. However, there are fundamental humanitarian and human rights concerns raised by the forcible separation of families, the undue hardships of those detained or expelled to Eritrea, and the financial losses caused by sudden expulsions. We urge the Government of Ethiopia to respect international human rights norms and standards and follow appropriate due process in handling its security concerns. We further urge the Government of Ethiopia to allow all those who were wrongfully expelled to return and to establish a compensation commission to investigate and recommend compensation for the claims resulting from undue financial loss and hardship as a result of rapid, forced expulsions.

We call on the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure full access to all detainees and P.O.W.s, to exchange P.O.W.s, to allow all students to repatriate, and to facilitate the return of nationals who wish to repatriate voluntarily. We welcome the decision by both governments to grant the ICRC access and urge full cooperation with the ICRC in accordance with its standard procedures. We call on both parties to receive missions from appropriate United Nations agencies. History has shown that deportations and detentions and the massive displacement of innocent civilians, wherever and whenever they occur, create hardships and bitternessfueling misunderstandings and lasting mistrust.

Ultimately, a durable peace is the best guarantee of the rights of each other's nationals in Eritrea and Ethiopia. The United States urges Ethiopia and Eritrea to redouble their efforts in seeking a peaceful resolution to the current border conflict, and we pledge our continued commitment to support such efforts.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW,
Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_080698_2.html100666 127137 345 11556 6562604343 6546 OAU Ministerial Committee to Submit Recommendations


The OAU Ministerial Committee on the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia will submit its recommendations to the Heads of State of the three countries in the next few days. The Committee underlined that these recommendations "will be fair and take into account the legitimate concerns of the parties and the ideals of the OAU."

The Ministerial Committee, which is composed of Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and Djibouti, was convened in Ouagadougou from August 1-2, 1998, to review the findings of the Committee of Ambassadors that had visited Eritrea and Ethiopia earlier this month. Separate sessions with the Foreign Ministers of Eritrea and Ethiopia were also held to exchange views and explore avenues of a peaceful solution.

In its final communiqu^?, the Ministerial Committee welcomed "the disposition reiterated by both Parties to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute" and urged them "to continue their observance of the moratorium on air strikes and the present situation of no hostilities." The Government of Eritrea had expressed its readiness for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and the placement of African observers under the auspices of the United Nations pending a comprehensive peaceful solution to the conflict. But Ethiopia's Foreign Minister told the Ministers that Ethiopia did not accept the cessation of hostilities and the placement of an observer force.

In regard to the substantive aspects of the conflict, the Ministerial Committee acknowledged that the two parties continue to hold "divergent points of view both on the origin and evolution of the dispute and the issues which must be considered to resolve the crisis." But it added that this should not preclude "the spirit of compromise to prevail" which will make it possible to respond to the fundamental concerns of each of the parties while respecting the principles of the OAU.

The Government of Eritrea had all along maintained that the root cause of the dispute lay in Ethiopia's violation of Eritrea's colonial boundaries. Focus on secondary issues will therefore be unhelpful and only derail the peace process. Ethiopia's insistence on ascertaining first "which authority was administering Badme prior to the clashes of May 6" was thus an obstructive posture mainly designed to divert the peace process. This glossed over Ethiopia's use of force earlier in July 1997 to occupy Adi Murug as well as to encroach on areas around Badme. Under these circumstances, "administration" in itself was not valid if the process by which that administration had been established was illegal. What is of paramount importance is to establish where Badme, Adi Murug and other areas were situated within the recognized boundaries.

The Ministerial Committee emphasized that it "understands the viewpoint of Eritrea on the origin of the conflict" and underlined its concerns "about the incidents which would have taken place at other places on the common border to July 1997." It noted that Badme town was administered by the Ethiopian authorities prior to the eruption of the recent round of clashes. But it acknowledged that this "does not obviously prejudge the final status of that area which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation process and, if necessary, through arbitration."

In regard to violation of human rights and treatment of nationals by both sides, the Ministerial Committee stated that "it could not establish the reality of a systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." But it expressed its deep concern on "the conditions in which the deportation of Eritreans was carried out by the Government of Ethiopia, the decision to extend those measures to the families of the deported persons and the fate of their properties."

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, August 5, 1998

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_080798.html100644 127137 345 107227 6562657723 6355

STATEMENT BY THE DELEGATION OF THE STATE OF ERITREA TO THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AGAINST ERITREANS IN ETHIOPIA


GENEVA, 4 AUGUST 1998

Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission

The Eritrean delegation would like to take this opportunity to present before you the facts of a great abuse of human rights in Ethiopia. It is with great sadness that I am obliged to present the evidence for what is without doubt a crime against humanity. For the last eight weeks, and continuing even as I speak before you today, the Government of Ethiopia is engaged in a systematic policy of expelling Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin, solely and purely on the basis of their national origin. Up to now, more than thirteen thousand (13,000) Eritreans and Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin, who have committed no crime, have been arbitrarily arrested, detained, made to disappear and summarily deported, often with great cruelty.
We bring you messages of anguish and pain from the victims of this outrage. It is a message from a recently-widowed twenty-three (23) year old mother who had just lost her sister and was taking care of her invalid mother but was taken away from her seven (7) month old baby screaming and begging. It is a message from a sixty-four (64) year old, illiterate, cleaning woman, an Ethiopian of Eritrean ancestry but who had neither acquired an Eritrean identity card nor voted in the Eritrean Referendum for independence. Nor was she a member of the governing party of Eritrea, nor indeed any Eritrean association. Nor, for that matter, could she speak any of Eritrea's languages fluently. It is the message from a fifty-six (56) year old man who was dumped in the desert on the Eritrean-Ethiopian border, separated from his daughter, who died after walking more than four (4) kilometers to the Eritrean side of the border in 44oc heat. It is a story of a businessman who spent his lifetime investing in Ethiopia, building up that country, most recently constructing the water and sewage system for Addis Ababa, who was arrested at dawn and dispossessed of his business, worth some tens of millions of dollars. It is the shameful story of a fifteen (15) year old girl who was taken away from her family simply because last year she went to Eritrea on vacation to participate in a tree-planting programme. It is the story of the thousands who were expelled with them--and the thousands who remain, fearful that security officers will break down their doors at 5 a.m. and drag them away from their homes and their families with nothing but the clothes that they are wearing.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
On 23rd May, at the closing session of an International Conference to establish the Human Rights Commission in Ethiopia, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi spoke of his government's commitment to the rule of law and respect for human rights. Seven weeks later Prime Minister Meles gave a television interview in which he claimed the right of his government to expel any foreigners it chose. He said, and I quote, "Any foreigner, whether Eritrean, Japanese, etc., lives in Ethiopia because of the goodwill of the Ethiopian Government. If the Ethiopian Government says, 'Go, because we do not like the colour of your eyes', they have to leave." He went on to compare the expulsions of Eritreans with the deportation of illegal immigrants from Mexico by the United States government.
This justification is simply absurd and an affront to the intelligence of the international community. Many of those expelled are Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin. All were legally resident in the country. By Prime Minister Meles' own admission, "We cannot expel a citizen of Ethiopia from Ethiopia." Yet that is precisely what his government is doing. A survey of more than three thousand (3,000) deportees from urban areas indicates that 264 had been born in Ethiopia, more than half had lived there for more than twenty (20) years, and 421 had lived there for more than forty (40) years. Some had not even visited Eritrea. Many have married Ethiopians. Among them are more than six hundred (600) businessmen and women, including owners of hotels, construction businesses, garages, transportation companies and shops. Many were government employees. There are lawyers, doctors, teachers, photographers, professional cartographers and even priests and nuns. One case we have is a former soldier who lost one arm and one leg fighting for Ethiopia against Somalia in the 1977 war. "What more can I give to Ethiopia than an arm and a leg?" he asks.
And of course we must not forget more than eight thousand (8,000) poor farmers and pastoralists, who have been deprived of their meager livelihoods, and whose cases are just as tragic. Many of these people have lived in Ethiopia for generations, where they own farms and herds of cattle. Overnight these people have been deprived of their livelihoods. Some of them were beaten up and locked in metal cargo containers before being transported to Eritrea.
Among those arrested for deportation are citizens of third countries, such as Italy and Canada, who are of Eritrean origin. Through the intervention of their embassies, a few of these have been saved from deportation. Some Eritreans holding foreign passports have had their passports stamped with the words "deported never to return".
The citizens who have been deported report that the Ethiopian security forces accused them of membership of the Eritrean Community Association or the People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ); of voting in the Eritrean Referendum; or, of contributing to fundraising campaigns. In many cases, this may be true. But, these associations are completely legal in Ethiopia. Fundraising for Eritrea and participating in development campaigns in Eritrea were completely legal. We find it puzzling that the Ethiopian Government should choose to describe the PFDJ as "a clandestine organization", for, like the other associations, the Ethiopian Government had permitted its activities and even provided premises for them. There was moreover a reciprocal arrangement with Ethiopia that allowed for Ethiopians in Eritrea and TPLF organizations in Eritrea to undertake similar activities with similar provisions. There can be no grounds for retro-actively declaring these activities illegal or citing them as grounds for deportation.
The discriminatory acts were undertaken without any due process of law and without any right of appeal.
There is no basis in the Ethiopian Constitution or penal code, nor in international human rights law for this systematic mass expulsion of these people. It is quite simply an illegal and arbitrary act of ethnic cleansing which has no justification in law whatsoever.
Although the Government of Ethiopia has made no official statement nor passed any law to this effect, it is clear that its aim also includes depriving deportees of Eritrean origin of their Ethiopian citizenship. Please, stop and ponder for a moment the implications of this act: a state has withdrawn citizenship from thousands of law-abiding citizens simply because of their ethnic or national origin. People have been rendered stateless without due process of law. Surely, this is a precedent that this Commission cannot allow to stand.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
Ethiopia claims that the Eritreans in Ethiopia are spies, infiltrators and saboteurs which threaten the security of the state. Ethiopia has indeed declared war on Eritrea and I am sure that the Ethiopian Government will argue that it can derogate from the human rights provisions in the Constitution and penal code in the name of national security. If that is the case, then Eritreans in Ethiopia should be considered "protected persons" under Article 4 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Let us have no doubt what the Geneva Conventions permit and what they prohibit. Article 5 of the Fourth Geneva Convention makes it crystal clear that any action against protected persons must be carried out on an individual, case-by-case basis. Article 41 says that the Government may take no action more severe than assigned residence or internment. Article 49 begins:
"Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of persons . . . are prohibited, regardless of their motive."
Article 147 lists "unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement" of protected persons among grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions--i.e. actions for which international law dictates there is individual criminal responsibility. In addition, Article 18 of the 1996 draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind lists five "crimes against humanity": among them "forcible transfer of population".
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
Let us recall that when the Geneva Conventions were written in 1949, Europe had just emerged from war and genocide of unparalleled scale. The memories of concentration camps, forced deportations of populations and the Holocaust were fresh in the minds of the men and women who established the foundations of international humanitarian law. Similarly, the memories of the Red Terror and the war crimes of successive Ethiopian regimes were fresh in the minds of the Ethiopian Government when they set up the office of the Special Prosecutor to bring officials of the former regime to trial. Just a few months ago, the memory of the Genocide in Rwanda moved Prime Minister Meles Zenawi to propose to the OAU a Panel of Eminent Personalities to investigate that crime. We supported both those initiatives. The people of Africa, including Eritreans and Ethiopians, have suffered too much already. We never thought that this Ethiopian Government, which came to power after years of struggle against tyranny, with the promise of peace and respect for human rights, would itself perpetrate a crime against humanity. Yet, the evidence I am presenting to you today compels us to conclude that the Government of Ethiopia is doing precisely that.
This gross crime against humanity is also an aggregation of many smaller, cruel crimes against individuals. The deportees describe how they were seized from their homes or places of work. Sometimes they were woken up in the middle of the night. Often they were told that they were just wanted for a quick registration, and would return home shortly. One mother locked the door of her house, leaving her small son sleeping inside, because the security officers said she would be back in a few minutes. Others have begged the policemen to be allowed to take their children, but have been herded onto buses without even having a chance to say good-bye. They have been insulted in police stations and sent on long and arduous bus journeys with virtually no food and water. Those deported to Assab had to walk for four kilometers in the scorching desert heat. Contrary to the claims of the Ethiopian Government, the deportees report no ICRC presence during their journeys.
A report from a joint mission to Assab by United Nations agencies confirms these facts. It also describes one particularly sad case, a 56-year old former teacher:
"The deplorable and dehumanizing conditions caused the death of one man whose daughter was snatched away by Ethiopian authorities when the deportees were dropped off between the border posts of the two countries. He cried to no avail and went into a serious depression and never recovered. His colleagues put him to rest in Assab."
The forcible separation of parents from their children is one of the most distressing aspects to the deportations. In some cases, even breastfeeding mothers have been wrenched away from their babies. A study by UNICEF Eritrea found that 165 deportees contacted had been forced to leave a total of 291 children behind, including nine (9) under one year and thirty seven (37) aged between one and five. Most were left with relatives and a few with neighbours, but forty three (43) had simply been left on their own. In many other cases men have been separated from their wives.
Some of the deportees were told to sign powers of attorney to relatives. Usually this just amounted to writing a name on a piece of paper and handing it to a policeman: it has no legal force. Many of those relatives have subsequently been arrested and deported. Others have been told to sell the property immediately. In some cases, children have been ordered to sell off complex businesses worth hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. The security officers who have carried out these operations have simply sealed businesses without even taking an inventory, let alone producing any legal documents. Houses, cars and trucks, shops, hotels and restaurants, factories and farms, have in essence simply been confiscated. Farms have been left newly-ploughed. Cattle have been abandoned wandering in the wilderness. A survey of 1400 deportees estimated that this group alone had left behind wealth estimated at 212 million US dollars.
We are thankful that many compassionate and law-abiding Ethiopian citizens, of all ethnicities, have given small acts of kindness to the deportees on their long journeys, and to their family members left behind. Many Ethiopians are caring for distressed children whose parents have been snatched away--perhaps they came home from school to find their houses sealed and their parents gone, and only a sympathetic neighbour to take care of them.
Such humanity appears to be contrary to the intent of the Government of Ethiopia. Since May, it has engaged in a propaganda campaign of quite extraordinary venom directed against Eritrea and Eritreans. Every day, Ethiopians who listen to the radio or watch television or read the newspapers or attend public meetings where government officials are speaking will hear invective aimed at Eritreans. Eritreans are accused of being fascists and chauvinists, of being belligerent and spiteful, neo-colonialist, anti-people, etc, etc.
The Ethiopian Government has broadcast many fabricated claims of Eritrean abuses. For example, the claim that seven Ethiopians were burned to death in Alla was clearly refuted by the BBC correspondent who visited the site and investigated for himself. Allegations such as "group rapes by Eritrean fighters", "the wanton shooting of Ethiopians who wanted to leave in Adi Quala" and "Sixty (60) Ethiopians died of asphyxiation in Assab after being locked in a container" are quite untrue and are clearly designed to incite anti-Eritrean feeling among the Ethiopian populace. Perhaps the most extreme allegation from the Ethiopian Foreign Ministry is the claim that "The Eritrean authorities have been detaining thousands of Ethiopians in the Sawa, Asmara and Assab concentration camps without access to their families, the ICRC and journalists." This is pure fiction not even worthy of a rebuttal before this distinguished audience. I could go on and on--just as the Ethiopian media goes on and on, hammering in its message day after day. It is a sad reality that the most outrageous propaganda, repeated often enough, will break down the resistance of even the most skeptical and humane citizen. Violence of the tongue precedes violence of the gun.
The international community is free to come to Eritrea and investigate these allegations for themselves. We have already extended an invitation to the UN Commission for Human Rights which, I am happy to report, has been accepted. Do not judge Eritrea by my words alone: the facts are there for the world to see.
Needless to say, Ethiopia's hate campaign not only is in violation of the provisions of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but is also irresponsible since it does not take into consideration the future relations between our two peoples.
This is a campaign of hatred that has no precedent in Ethiopian history even during the darkest days of the previous regime. In all civilized countries, inciting hatred on the basis of race, religion, nationality or ethnicity is a crime. When a government itself incites national hatred, we can only fear for the worst.
The Government of Ethiopia has also rounded up more than one thousand (1000) Eritreans and interned them in camps. The majority of these are civilians who were previously fighters with the EPLF or who formerly received military training in Eritrean national service. Although they are civilians, the Ethiopian Government has described them as "prisoners of war". There are also eighty five (85) university students, whose studies at Addis Ababa University were abruptly terminated by their collective arrest and detention. Ethiopia has no legal basis for detaining these students. The correct course of action would have been to allow them to return to Eritrea. At first, these people were detained in Fiche camp and then they were moved to Blatien, a location in the south of Ethiopia without the knowledge of the ICRC. The Geneva Conventions (Fourth Convention, articles 79 to 141) deal in great detail with conditions under which civilians may be interned, and how camps should be administered. We fear that those provisions have been violated. First, most of the internees have been detained illegally in violation of human rights and humanitarian law. Second, we have reason to fear that the conditions in the camps do not fulfill the legal obligations on the Ethiopian Government, so that it may be justified to call these camps "concentration camps" rather than just "internment camps".
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
The international community and the UN are free to come to Eritrea to investigate the record of the Eritrean Government for themselves. We are committed to transparency and and pursue an open door policy. Unlike Ethiopia, Eritrea is actively co-operating on these matters with the ICRC and the United Nations agencies in Eritrea as well as the diplomatic community.
The Government of Eritrea has not taken any illegal or abusive actions against Ethiopians residing in Eritrea. The Ethiopian charge d'affaires in Asmara told the visiting delegation from the OAU on 30 June that Eritrea held fifty seven (57) Ethiopians in detention on suspicion of being a threat to the security of the state. He admitted that this was probably an exaggeration as they were being released as their cases were examined. Shortly beforehand the Ethiopian Foreign Minister had accused Eritrea of imprisoning six hundred (600) Ethiopians and, as I have mentioned, the Foreign Ministry has also alleged that untold thousands are held in "concentration camps". Today, the reality is that we are holding just seventeen (17) Ethiopians on grounds of national security having individually investigated them. The ICRC has full access to them all.
Ethiopians who wish to stay in Eritrea are free to stay; and we are endeavouring to facilitate the departure of those who wish to leave through the offices of the ICRC. Eighty (80) Ethiopian teachers in Assab left freely to Djibouti with the assistance of the local administration, but on their arrival there the Ethiopian Government claimed they had been expelled. Forty five (45) Ethiopian students studying at the University of Asmara were permitted to remain, finish their studies and sit for their exams, and then return peacefully to Ethiopia. However, the Ethiopian Government has claimed that "The Eritrean forces have brutally expelled well over five thousand (5,000) Ethiopian citizens from Eritrea after depriving them of their property and subjecting many of them to beatings and torture." This is completely without any foundation in fact.
On 13 May the Ethiopian Government decided unilaterally to re-route all its shipping away from the Eritrean port of Assab to Djibouti, and to close the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia. This action by the Government of Ethiopia had the entirely predictable result that Ethiopian port workers in Assab had no work to do and Ethiopian cargo in the port was stranded. The charge by the Ethiopian Government that Eritrea has denied the right to work to Ethiopians in Assab and has confiscated Ethiopian cargo is therefore without foundation. United Nations agencies have confirmed that salaries are still being paid to Ethiopian employees in Assab, but that daily labourers are now without an income and need relief assistance.
On 26 June the Eritrean National Assembly resolved:
"In contrast to the inhuman policy of the Ethiopian Government, the Eritrean Government has not, and will not, take any hostile action against Ethiopians residing in the country. Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed upon under any circumstances or by any institution they have full rights of redress."
I need hardly draw the contrast between this public appeal for lawfulness and the campaign of national hate seen daily in the Ethiopian media.
But, I reiterate, we stand judged by our actions and not our words. Please come and see for yourself.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
The Government of Eritrea was distressed by the deaths of civilians, including some children, in an air attack on Mekelle air base on 5 June. The air raid was carried out at 3 p.m. in response to an air attack on Asmara airport launched from Mekelle air base at 2.10 p.m. earlier that day, in which 34 Eritrean civilians were either killed or wounded. The Ethiopian claim that their air raid was in "retaliation" was false, as confirmed by diplomats and journalists. Their claim that the deaths of civilians was the result of a "premeditated attack" is also quite untrue. Our air force is small and newly formed, and we never expected to have to use it against our former friends and allies in Ethiopia. But when we were attacked by the Ethiopian air force, we responded by striking against the Ethiopian air force base which had been established at Mekelle airport. I repeat, we did not target civilians intentionally although unfortunately some were caught in the cross-fire. Otherwise, the result at Makelle airport with several aircraft destroyed on the ground attests to the purely military nature of the mission of the Eritrean air force.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Commission
All member states of the UN have undertaken definite legal obligations towards persons living in their territories by the simple act of signing the UN Charter. Among these obligations are the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms as stated in the Charter of the UN, and elaborated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, and other relevant Human Rights instruments. No state can claim derogation from the essential obligations entailed therein on grounds of a state of emergency. In this respect, it would be necessary to note that this Commission has on 3 March 1995 adopted the Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards which specifically identifies the acts prohibited under Article 3 (2). Moreover, having declared war on Eritrea, Ethiopia is also bound by the Geneva Conventions which specifically prohibits forcible deportation of populations and even brands it as a "grave breach".
It is therefore the duty of the international community to act decisively when crimes are committed at such an alarming scale and in as a distinctively odious manner as is taking place in Ethiopia. At the very least, it should express its disapprobation of the act and its sympathy with the victims. In this regard, we greatly appreciate the objective and timely statement by Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, expressing her profound concern at the Ethiopian Government's violations.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
The crime committed by the Government of Ethiopia against Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin and Eritrean residents in Ethiopia outrages the conscience of mankind and endangers the foundations of freedom and justice as well as peace, stability and security in the region. It is for this reason that the Eritrean delegation requests this Commission to pass a resolution which would:
1. Deplore the Ethiopian Government's gross violation of the human rights of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean descent residing in Ethiopia.
2. Call for the immediate cessation of all mass detention and expulsion of Eritreans; demand the immediate release of all Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin who have been unlawfully detained in prisons and internment camps; and call for the protection of the lives, rights and properties of Eritrean and Ethiopian-Eritrean deportees and those still residing in Ethiopia, including their right to leave the country if they so desire.
3. Call for the immediate end of propaganda aimed at inciting racial hatred against Eritreans and instead call for the Ethiopian Government to make public statements calling for calmness and respect for Eritreans resident in Ethiopia and Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin.
4. Call for the reunification of separated Eritrean families, including arrangement of early and safe transport.
5. Call for the immediate return of confiscated property to Eritrean and Ethiopian-Eritrean deportees and the payment of compensation for any loss of property or income.
6. Appoint, as a matter of urgency, a fact-finding mission which would conduct an on-site investigation of the human rights conditions of Eritreans in Ethiopia, to supplement the mission already agreed for Eritrea.
7. Call upon the Government of Ethiopia to co-operate fully with the fact-finding mission by permitting it full and free access to establish contact with Eritreans in its territory.
8. In recognition that war is the greatest cause of human rights violations, call for the immediate cessation of hostilities and for the peaceful resolution of the border conflict.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
I wish I could give a rational explanation for the actions of the Ethiopian Government over the last three months. Just ninety days ago, the mass expulsion of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin was literally unthinkable. We pray that there is no more madness to come from those responsible for the protection of Ethiopian citizens and residents of whatever origin.
Eritrea has nothing to seek except the promotion of the lasting interests of the peoples of the two countries and the development of personal and cultural, socio-economic and political relations between them which will foster the profit and advantage of both and which shall not interfere with the peace and rights of either.
The Eritrean delegation thus solemnly pledges that the Government of Eritrea shall continue to scrupulously observe the human rights of Ethiopians living in Eritrea, fully co-operate with this Commission or any other international organization which wishes to conduct unrestricted investigation of the conditions of Ethiopians residing in Eritrea and shall remain committed to the truth, verifiable by impartial observers, and totally dedicated to the well-being and mutually beneficial future of the peoples of both countries.
It also reaffirms its opposition to any threats or use of force and any measures of political and economic coercion which attempt to violate the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and security of any state.
In the interest of peace and security and the welfare of their populations, the delegation of the State of Eritrea invites the delegation of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to join it in this earnest commitment to human rights and its commitment to, and search for, peace by solemnly making a similar pledge before this Commission.
Mr. Chairman
Members of the Sub-Commission
In conclusion, I wish to draw your attention to several documents annexed to this statement which throw much light on the issues in question.
Thank you.
Geneva, August 6, 1998
STATEMENT OF THE ERITREAN DELEGATION
IN EXERCISE OF ITS RIGHT OF REPLY (1)
Mr. Chairman,
Members of the Sub-Commission,
Yesterday, the Ethiopian Delegate savaged this Sub-Commission with a catalogue of lies. This does not come as a surprise to the Eritrean Delegation because Ethiopia has, since the beginning of the crisis, accompanied its threat of force by a litany of lies, distoritons, perversions and diplomatic subterfuges which, in an amazingly refined application of the Orwellian Principle, accused the Eritrean Government of precisely the outrages and atrocities it itself has been committing against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin.
We shall not dignify these wretched lies by repeating them now. We shall only invite you to check with the embassies and international organizations in Eritrea whether or not the lies leveled against Eritrea have really taken place or, better still, to come and make on-the-spot investigations yourselves. In this connection, my delegation wishes to express its satisfaction that a committee representing the UN Human Rights Commission is scheduled to visit Eritrea in the near future at the invitation of the Eritrean Government. I must also remind members of this Sub-Commission and others who have copies of my statement to refer to the annexes, particulary the reports of the UNDP, the letter of the ICRC, and the eye-witness accounts of the BBC and the VOA. A few illustrations are in order:
1. The Ethiopian Government lie that "114 Ethiopians working as gardeners were arrested by the military force at Alla and beaten persistently and violently" was soundly refuted by BBC corresponent Alex Last who went to the place and checked for himself.
2. The Ethiopian Statement claims that "over 600 Ethiopian civilians are detained in different dentention centers". Yet when asked for a list by the OAU delegation that visited Eritrea on 30 June, the Ethiopian Charge d'Affairs claimed that Eritrea held only 57 Ethiopians and admitted that even this number was an exaggeration. The reality is that only 17 are being held on an individual basis for security reasons; and, contrary to the lies of the Ethiopian statement, the ICRC has full access to them. It is up to this Sub-Commission to check with the ICRC.
3. The Ethiopian statement claims that, since June 9, 4,000 Ethiopian civilians have been expelled after the confiscation of their property. Again, this is a lie which can easily be verified with the ICRC and UN agencies. Ethiopians who wish to stay in Eritrea are free to say and those who wish to leave, like the 80 teachers from Assab and 45 students from the University of Asmara, are given full assistance with the collaboration of the ICRC. ICRC participation takes place at the insistence of the Eritrean Government to circumvent Ethiopian lies.
4. The Ethiopian statement alleges that, sine 14 July, 30,000 Ethiopians in the port city of Assab have been denied the right to work. This is also a blatant lie. UN agencies have confirmed that salaried Ethiopian personnel are receiving their monthly pay. If daily laborers have lost their means of livelihood, it is because the Ethiopian Government had, on 13 May, unilaterally decided to reroute all its shipping away from Assab. Thus, the daily labourers, its true are now without income and need relief assistance.
5. Has Zala Anbessa been razed? Has the population left the town? Is Eritrea terrorizing the Ethiopian population in Eritrea? Has Eritrea paraded Ethopian prisoners of war? Come visit the town and talk to its population; Come and investigate the condition of Ethiopians in Eritrea. Have we expelled 4,000 Ethiopian civilians? It is your right to ask for names and circumstances. We have a list of the first 3,000 Eritreans expelled from Ethiopia- and we continue to make compilations. Can the Ethiopian delegation present a similar, verfiable list? You will have to wait until hell freezes cold.
On the other hand, the Ethiopian Government cannot lie about:
- the mass expulsion of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean descent, the number of which has, to date, exceeded 13,000;
- the "depolrable and dehumanizing conditions" under which these victims of its atrocities were expelled or deported, as described by a report of a joint mission of UN agencies in Assab;
- the more than 1,000 Eritreans that have been interned in concentration-camp conditions, particularly the 85 university students who were studying in Ethiopian Universities on an exchange program.
Mr. Chairman,
Members of the Sub-Commission,
The Government of Eritrea was distressed by the death of civilians in an air attack on Mekelle Air base on 5 June. The air raid was carried out at 3:00 p.m. in response to an air attack on Asmara Airport launched from the Mekelle Air base at 2:10 p.m. earlier that day in which 34 Eritrean civilians were either killed or wounded. The Ethiopian claim that the air raid was only a retaliation is a lie refuted by diplomats and journalists alike. Their claim that the death of civilians was the result of premediated attack is also untrue. We did not target civilians intentionally and our record during the struggle is a good testimony of our commitment to the protection of civilians. The destruction of several military aircraft at Mekelle airport attests tot he purely military nature of the mission of our air force. The statement attributed to our President is probably the most hideous of lies for what he said in connection with the incident was that it was unfortunate that some civilians were caught in the cross fire. He of course lamented the loss of life and expressed his apologies to the families of the victims.
Mr. Chairman,
Members of the Sub-Commission,
Ethiopia's atrocities constitute a crime against humanity. It is therefore the duty of the Sub-Commission to act decisively when crimes are committed at such an alarming scale and in as distinctly odious a manner as it has been taken by Ethiopia against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean descent.
In this regard, we greatly appreciate the objective and timely statement by Mary Robinson, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, expressing her profound concern at the Ethiopian Government's violations.
In conclusion, I wish to reiterate that Eritrea is committed to transparency and an open door policy. Unlike Ethiopia, it is actively cooperating with the ICRC, the UN agencies and the diplomatic community. It is imperative that we be judged by our actions rather than by our words.
Thank You.
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_080899.html100655 127137 345 2513 6753305237 6301 Eritrea Accepts OAU Proposal on Technical Arrangements


Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Asmara 8 August 1999

---

Eritrea has officially accepted the OAU proposal on Technical Arrangements submitted to both parties at the end of this week. It has also "pledged its full co-operation with the OAU and the United Nations in implementing the three Agreements - the Framework Agreement, the Modalities and Technical Arrangements - as the sole basis for resolving the dispute". President Isaias informed the OAU delegation led by Algeria's special envoy, Ahmed Ouyahya, of Eritrea's acceptance in a meeting here yesterday evening. The Eritrean president and current chairman of the OAU, H.E. Abdelaziz Boutiflika.

The Technical Arrangements were worked out by technical experts from Algeria, the OAU, the United Nations, and the United States of America. The envisaged next steps are a formal signature of all three documents, a cessation of hostilities, redeployment, the instatement of civilian administration and demarcation within a specific time frames.

The OAU delegation left Asmara today for Addis Ababa.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara 8 August 1999 g_081099.html100655 127137 345 3467 6754045103 6275

Press Release
Ethiopia's Transparent Ploy of Blocking the Peace Process

---

At the 35th OAU Summit in Algiers last month, Ethiopia's Prime Minister tried in vain to cast doubt on Eritrea's acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation. And, in what he thought would be enticing bait, he promised that Ethiopia's response will be unequivocal. Thus, he pledged:

"... We will not engage in such a subterfuge. If we accept the package, Your Excellencies, we will tell you so. No ifs, no buts. If we don't accept the package, Your Excellencies, we will tell you so. But we will not insult your intelligence ... We shall not do that. We respect the OAU too much to do that."

As it happened, Ethiopia's belated acceptance of the Modalities of Implementation was a six page letter full of ifs and buts. What is more, Ethiopia has yesterday refused to accept the Technical Arrangements, requesting "clarifications." These Technical Arrangements are merely technical details of the Framework Agreement and the Modalities of Implementation and they have been carefully worked out by experts from the OAU, the United Nations and the United States Government.

Ethiopia's request for "clarifications" is but a transparent ploy for delaying the peace process. And, it betrays the game that the TPLF regime has been playing in the past. Indeed, the TPLF cannot plausibly raise now, at the eleventh hour, substantial issues in regard to the Technical Arrangements if it had really accepted the underlying agreements in good faith. That this was not the case is illustrated today, beyond any shred of doubt, by its refusal to proceed toward their implementation.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 10 August 1999 g_081398.html100644 127137 345 12134 6564654433 6317

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea has received the following letter from Amnesty International regarding a letter writing campaign about allegations of Ethiopians unjustly detained in Eritrea.


Amnesty International

TO: Mr. Haile Wolde-Tensae
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, Eritrea
FROM: Africa Program Director DATE: 5 August 1998

Dear Minister,

Thank you for the communication from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs dated 26 July 1998. This refers to letters from members of Amnesty International in various countries who had expressed concern about reports of Ethiopians detained in Eritrea without charge or trial or deported from Eritrea.

We welcome the assurance contained in your letter that the Government of Eritrea does not have a policy of deporting Ethiopian residents and that the latter will continue to have the right to live and work in Eritrea. We note the information about the return to Ethiopia of 46 students of the University of Asmara and 80 teachers from Assab.

It is encouraging to learn that the government has invited representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to Eritrea and has asked them to investigate the allegations of detentions. It will considerably reassure the international community if the ICRC is able to provide its range of services to the Government of Eritrea to ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions in connection with the current conflict with Ethiopia, and if it is granted access according to its mandate to prisoners of war and security detainees. Similarly the presence in Eritrea of officials of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights will be a positive step for protection of human rights in the region in the times ahead.

With regard to the situation of Eritreans in Ethiopia, many of whom had Ethiopian nationality, Amnesty International has been deeply concerned at the thousands of arbitrary detentions and deportations and ill-treatment of men, women and children of Eritrean origin. Since these serious human rights violations started in mid-June 1998, our members have been repeatedly protesting to the Ethiopian government about these arrests, particularly where Eritreans appear to be prisoners of conscience detained solely on account of their Eritrean origin and without any evidence that they have committed criminal offences. We have called for their immediate and unconditional release if they are not to be charged with a recognizably criminal offence. We have demanded respect for the basic human rights of detainees and for them to be humanely treated while in detention, including being given immediate access to relatives, lawyers and the ICRC. Furthermore we have appealed for deportations not to be carried out in violation of articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights prohibiting arbitrary exile or deprivation of nationality and affirming the right to freedom of movement. We call for them not to be deported without any clear or fair procedures, including the right to challenge the deportation order through open and fair court proceedings.

We would like to clarify that although these issues of detention and deportation in Eritrea and Ethiopia bear some similarity, the scale of proven abuses has been very different in terms of the numbers of people affected: the detentions in Ethiopia number some thousands and the deportations have apparently surpassed 12,000, whereas the allegations concerning Eritrea refer to a very much smaller number. The Ethiopian authorities have not replied to Amnesty International's appeals or halted the detentions and deportations. It does not appear that the ICRC has been given full access to the detainees.

We appreciate this prompt reply from the Government of Eritrea, which we are communicating to our members. In view of this positive response from the Government of Eritrea we are asking our members to discontinue their letter-writing to Eritrea at the present time. We will continue to investigate and where appropriate will bring allegations of arbitrary detention to the attention of the authorities. We trust that the Eritrean authorities will thoroughly investigate all allegations which are substantially based.

Yours sincerely,

Gill Nevins
Acting Africa Program Director
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org


> Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_081798.html100644 127137 345 15171 6566132161 6316 The Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent the following letter (with annexes) regarding Ethiopians detained in Eritrea to the International Committee of the Red Cross on August 14, 1998:

14 August 1998


International Committee of the Red Cross

Asmara

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea presents its compliments to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and has the honour to communicate to the latter regarding the baseless accusation labeled on the Eritrean government by the Ethiopian Embassy in Asmara on 10 July 1998 in which it accused saying that "Seventy two Ethiopian citizens living in Eritrea are detained arbitrarily by the Eritrean Government."

The Ministry wishes to inform the ICRC that there is no Ethiopian citizen detained arbitrarily. However, this doesn't mean that there are no Ethiopians who are arrested due to security, criminal and civil offenses and this makes the Embassy's accusation absolutely groundless.

The Ministry confirms that from the list which the Ethiopian Embassy annexed to its circular, of the 72 people it said were "arbitrarily" arrested:

a. 32 were released after the taking of the necessary investigation, that is before the Embassy notified of their detention (see Annex 1); b. 22 of them have never been detained anywhere in the country. We would like to inform you we do not have any kind of information on the first twelve listed in Annex 2. Those listed from number 13 to number 17 (same annex) are still living peacefully in Eritrea, while the last six have left to Ethiopia. c. 12 are still under the custody of the police, and their case is under investigation. (All of them were visited by your office recently.) (See Annex 3.) d. 6 were tried for the crime they had committed and are sentenced to be imprisoned. (See Annex 4.)

All this shows that the allegations made by the Ethiopian Embassy are pure fabrication and the Ministry calls the ICRC to react against the false allegations that the Ethiopian Government is conducting continuously.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the ICRC the assurance of its highest consideration.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Annex 1 - Detainees Already Released


1. Mr. Niftalem Kasa, goldsmith, Asmara

2. Mr. G/egzier Gebru, bakery owner, Asmara
3. Mr. Gebru Tesfai, student, Asmara
4. Mr. Tedros G/egziher, day laborer, Asmara
5. Mr. Arefaine Negere, E.C. chairman, Asmara
6. Mr. Nigussie Gebru, farmer, Asmara
7. Mr. Yemane Gebru, E.C. chairman, Massawa
8. Ms. Tiebe Mezgebo, housewife, Massawa
9. Mr. Shishay W/yohannes, merchant, Massawa
10. Mr. Haile Aregai, carpenter, Ginda
11. Mr. Alemitu Imuru, bar owner, Ginda
12. Mr. Ataklti G/yohannes, merchant, Mendefera
13. Mr. Aimro Yitbarek, bar owner, Asmara
14. Mr. Tedros Haile, merchant, Dekemare
15. Ms. Yordanos Haile, student, Dekemare
16. Mr. Filmon haile, student, Dekemare
17. Ms. Adiyam Kebede, day laborer, Dekemare
18. Mr. Debas G/giorgis, merchant, Massawa
19. Mr. Isaq G/kidane, merchant, Adi Quala
20. Mr. Abadi Abrha, cashier, Ginda
21. Mr. Kidane Abadi, day laborer, Ginda
22. Ms. Sesen Abreha, bar owner, Ginda
23. Mr. Haile Berhe, day laborer, Ginda
24. Mr. Bereket Haile, student, Dekemare
25. Mr. Kahsay Abreha, day laborer, Massawa
26. Ms. Teberih Meche, bar owner, Dekemare
27. Ms. Berhan Hadgu, housewife, Dekemare
28. Mr. Teklemariam Abreha, TDA chairman, Dekemare
29. Mr. Gebremeskel Mahamed, day laborer, Ginda
30. Mr. Fisaye G/libanos, farmer, Asmara
31. Mr. G/tsadik Kidane, tea house owner, Asmara
32. Mr. Haregot Desta, welder, Asmara

Annex 2 - Claimed Detainees


1. Mr. Anania G/egzibr, merchant, Asmara

2. Mr. Iyob G/medhin, artist, Asmara
3. Mr. Hailesilassie Haile, TDA vice chairman, Asmara
4. Mr. G/meskel Girmay, cashier, Asmara
5. Mr. Gebaerhiwot Nigussie, driver, Mendefera
6. Ms. Yalem Zerhun, waitress, Ginda
7. Mr. Hagos G/tinsay, student, Ala
8. Mr. Tesfay Mehari, student, Ala
9. Mr. Tekeste Tesfaye, merchant, Asmara
10. Ms. Tieba Abera, waitress, Ginda
11. Mr. Kiros Hadish, student, Asmara
12. Mr. Akelom Berhe, merchant, Ginda
13. Ms. Mamit Mesfin, bar owner, Massawa
14. Ms. Brutukan Assefa, waitress, Ginda
15. Mr. Kahsai Beyene, day laborer, Ginda
16. Ms. Legessie Gebru, day laborer, Ginda
17. Mr. Tesfalem Giday, receptionist, Ginda
18. Mr. Kidane G/silassie, driver, Massawa
19. Mr. Gebregzher Tamirat, day laborer, Massawa
20. Mr. Solomon G/egziebher, day laborer, Massawa
21. Mr. Kidane Hidru, cashier, Ginda
22. Mr. Berhane Aregawi, laborer, Ginda

Annex 3 - Detainees


1. Mr. Tedros Tamyalew, Ethcom, Asmara

2. Mr. Amanuel Yohannes, receptionist, Asmara
3. Ms. Goai Tesfu, hotel owner, Asmara
4. Mr. Beyene Berhane, goldsmith, Asmara
5. Mr. Wolday Amare, day laborer, Asmara
6. Mr. Wolday G/hiwet, day laborer, Asmara
7. Mr. Peteros Fishaye, counsul guard, Asmara
8. Mr. Ghebremeskel Girmay, butcher, Asmara
9. Mr. Kiflom G/hiwot, restaurant owner, Asmara
10. Mr. Woldu hagos, merchant, Dekemare
11. Mr. Haile G/zgiher, merchant, Dekemare
12. Mr. Zemichael G/sadik, Asmara

Annex 4 - Tried and Sentenced to Prison


1. Mr. Amanuel Haile, student, Asmara

2. Mr. Alebachew Zenebe, day laborer, Massawa
3. Mr. Berhane Girmay, goldsmith, Asmara
4. Mr. Selomen Gh/slasie, merchant, Keren
5. Mr. Selemun Girmay, merchant, Ginda
6. Mr. Gebremedhin G/hiwot, cashier, Ginda

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_081898.html100644 127137 345 135555 6566401653 6355

United Nations Development Programme

Asmara- Eritrea

FACSIMILE

 

Date: 22 July 1998 Re: PRO/300/OCHA

To: Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello

Under secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, New York

CC: Mr. Thierry Delbreuve, HAO, CECAP, OCHA, Geneva

Fax: 212 963 1312 Country/City: USA, New York

(41 22) 788 6389/87 Switzerland, Geneva

From: Martyn Ngwenya

[signed]

UN Designated Official and

UN Resident Coordinator

Subject: Update on Deportees: 12-19 July 1998

I. Background

On 15 July 1998, I received a telephone call from a Government official who informed me that about 400 deportees had arrived in Assab after walking four kilometers from "no man’s" land between the borders. He invited me to join Government officials and others who were scheduled to travel to Assab on 16 July. In accepting the invitation, I requested that Heads of UN Agencies should accompany me to observe the situation for themselves.

I accordingly convened a meeting which was attended by the following:

Mr. Martyn Ngwenya, Designated Official and UN Resident Coordinator

Ms. Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative

Ms. Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative

Mr. Emmanuel Ablo, World Bank Resident Representative

Mr. Sergio Rizzo, OIC, WHO

We brainstormed the purpose of traveling to Assab including the pros and cons of such a mission at this juncture. With regard to the main objective of inviting the UN Agencies, an official of Government confirmed by telephone that Government wanted the UN to observe and assess the conditions for itself. Issues of security clearance to visit Assab (which is under phase four), the safety of staff flying from Asmara to Assab and the necessity of the visit were discussed. The meeting was informed of the expected functions of essential staff and measures taken by Government to minimize all risks of travel to Assab. With regard tot he necessity of the mission, the UN Resident Coordinator/ Designated Official emphasized the fact that the visit was on voluntary basis. Only those willing to participate in this observation mission may travel.

Accordingly, the following traveled to Assab on 16 July 1998:

Mr. Martyn Ngwenya, Designated Official and UN Resident Coordinator

Ms. Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative

Ms. Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative

Mr. Firouz Sobhani, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative

Mr. Temesghen Araia, National Officer, UNFPA

Also traveling to Assab were the following:

Two Government officials (Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Information)

Two from the ICRC and Eritrean National Red Cross

Five from the media including the Voice of America and the Voice of Germany

The Mission departed Asmara at 8:30 a.m. and arrived in Assab at 10:15 a.m. on 17 July 1998.

II. Situation of Deportees in Assab

The UN team was informed that there were about 400 deportees who had arrived in Assab. The UN team met and interviewed deportees at two hotels where they were temporarily accommodated awaiting completion of arrangements to relocate them in some places of their choice in the highlands.

Their stories are the same: they were picked; taken to the police station; not allowed to advise their families about their fate; children were refused to accompany mothers or fathers; some were forced to say in buses for two days awaiting the arrival of other deportees; water and food were inadequate; etc. there were no reports on excessive violations of human rights.

The deplorable and dehumanizing conditions caused the death of one man whose daughter was snatched away by Ethiopian authorities when the deportees were dropped off between the border posts of the two countries. He cried to no avail and went into a serious depression and never recovered. His colleagues put him to rest in Assab.

The UN Team also met with Ethiopians who reside in Assab. Teachers want to go home (Ethiopia) since the Ethiopian Community School is now closed. These are Ethiopian teachers employed by the Ethiopian Government to each at an Ethiopian School in Assab. The other Ethiopians complained of lack of employment opportunities since their livelihoods depended on arrival of ships. "When ships arrive, Assab is our new York city" recalled one sad casual worker with a wishful smile. As to the Ethiopians with permanent employment, they confirmed that they have been receiving their salaries as usual. The people we met did not cite violations of human rights. However, the UN Tea did not know how these people were identified and brought to the meeting place.

The UN team noted the needs of these deportees which are, by and large, similar to those of other deportees and displaced persons. Some of their needs include:

- shelter (including blankets, mats and clothing)

- food, health care, water

- relocation to the highlands

- re-unification of families

- agricultural implements and inputs for those opting to be peasant farmers

Please see Annex A for a detailed account of the situation of deportees in Assab titled "UN Field Visit to Assab 16-17 July 1998" by Ms. Pamela Delargy.

3. Update on Eritrean Deportees: Mareb Gate

On my return from Assab on 17 July 1998, the Commissioner for ERREC asked me to accompany her team to Mendefera and Adi Quala on Saturday 17 July 1998. During the period 12-18 July 1998, 2340 deportees arrived through Mareb.

The number of both displaced and deported Eritreans has increased to 166,091 displaced and 10,195 deported. A detailed report by Mr. Ghebremikael Tesfaselasse, UNDP Programme Coordinator is attached as Annex B.

IV. Observations

The shear number of displaced and deported Eritreans and the magnitude of the diversified needs, require concerted efforts of the international community. The needs go beyond what the Government of Eritrea and its civil society can meet. The world is faced with a situation characterized by:

- lack of shelter;

- serious shortages of water;

- lack of clothing, blankets and mats;

- lack of kitchen utensils;

- disconnected families;

- lack of land and farming inputs for peasants, etc.

In response to this situation, the Government has opted to provide cash to families as follows:

1. 1,500 Nakfa as a one-time payment to each family
2. 65 Nakfa paid to each member of the family for six months July to December 1998.

(Please note that the UN exchange rate is US$ 1= 7.35 Nakfa).

This option was selected by Government because of the difficulties of providing the needs outlined above. The deportees can be divided into two categories as follows:

- those who live in urban or semi-urban areas; and

- those who live in the rural areas.

The Government’s international appeal for assistance has addressed these issues.

ANNEX A:

UN Field Visit to Assab, July 16-17, 1998

Team members: Martyn Ngwenya, UN Resident Coordinator and Designated Official

Pamela Delargy, UNFPA Representative

Ruth F. Hayward, UNICEF Representative

Temesghen Araia, National Officer, UNFPA

Firouz Sobhani, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative

Upon invitation of Government, five UN staff traveled to Assab on July 16 in order to observe and document the status of 382 deportees from Ethiopia who had arrived at the Eritrean-Ethiopian border on July. The group was accompanied by one person from the Foreign Ministry and one from the Ministry of Information. Also on the trip were a member of the ICRC and the Director of the Eritrean Red Cross.

Upon arrival (by plane) in Assab, the group visited groups of deportees who had been housed in two hotels- the Zerai Deres Hotel and the Kamal International Hotel. The UN staff spoke with the deportees both in a group and individually. The delegation also met with a group of Ethiopian permanent residents of Assab and representatives of the 50 Ethiopian teachers from the Ethiopian Community School who were waiting for means of transport back to Ethiopia. This report summarizes the information gathered from these three groups:

Deportees from Ethiopia:

The delegation spoke to two groups of deportees (total about 250) and also to many individual deportees. All had arrived in the early morning of 15 July. Deportees included men, women and children, but it was reported that the majority (perhaps two-thirds) were men. They were from many areas of Ethiopia, the largest number being from Arba Minch. Others were from Nazreth, Debre Zeit, Dire Dawa, Asebe Teferi, Sheshamene, and Awassa and towns in Sidamo and Bale.

Of the men, many were over 60 and retired either from private business or from the Ethiopian civil service. Among the younger men, there were teachers, mechanics, shop owners, and managers. There were also lecturers from Alemayu University and Arba Minch College. There was one young (34 yrs) physician from a rural in Bale. There were also two Catholic priests from Dire Dawa. Most of the men reported having left their wives and children behind. Many had pleaded to bring their children but had been refused. One man was able to bring his 6 year old son because the boy’s mother was dead, but he had other children left behind. Over half of those interviewed reported that their wives were not of Eritrean ethnicity and thus, they did not know whether they would be allowed to leave Ethiopia to reunify the family. Many of the men, especially the younger ones, had been born in Ethiopia and had never been to Eritrea. They did not speak Tigrinya and had to be interviewed in Amharic. Many had voted in the Eritrean referendum in 1993; some had not. All reported having voted in the last Ethiopian elections. All reported being Ethiopian citizens.

Of the women, there were a number of elderly, who reported living in Ethiopia their whole lives. For example, one woman aged 64 was a cleaner in a school in Asebe Teferi and had been born and lived her life in Ethiopia. She had no husband or children and reported no connections of family in Eritrea; her father had been ethnically Eritrean but had died long ago. She does not speak Tigrinya. There were a few mothers with young children who had been allowed to bring the children- mainly those who were single parents. Some reported having left young children behind, either with their (non-Eritrean) husbands or with maids or neighbors. At least five reported having been arrested on the street and not being able to inform their children, who were left at home alone (no relatives or other parent with them). Most of the women were housewives; a few had owned small shops or been cleaners. There were no pregnant or lactating women.

There were very few children in the group- perhaps only about 11. They seemed to be all school aged. The deportees reported that the Ethiopian Authorities did not want to have children on the buses and those few who came were from single parent families where the parent had convinced the authorities to let them accompany. It seemed that the decision about whether to let children accompany was arbitrary and depended on the attitudes of local officials, some of whom were more lenient than others. Although many mothers reported that the trip and the walk had been difficult for the children, there were no reports of serious illness among the children now in Assab.

The delegation found no intact families among the deportees. Almost all adults who were married or had children had been separated from their spouses and children. Assuming at least 200 were married and had families, this means that there are the same number of spouses remaining in Ethiopia, with from 200 to 1200 or so children having lost a parent to the deportation. As mentioned above, at least five women reported having left their children (numbering from two to five) alone or with only a maid. These are women the group specifically talked to; there may have been more.

Conditions of deportation: The deportees had been placed on buses in the towns from which they came and the buses had come together in Banda, a small town near the border. Some of the deportees reported having been taken from their homes during the night; some reported being picked up at work. Some were held in detention for a few days; others reported having been in detention for up to 36 days before the deportation. Very few were able to bring with them anything at all- neither clothes or money or personal documents. In some cases, where they had been able to get their documents (passports, diplomas, certificates, ID’s) these were taken from them. A few people reported having their personal jewelry (wedding rings or crosses) taken from them. There were no reports of purposeful bodily harm inflicted by authorities. Most deportees stated that their neighbors and other in their communities were very upset at their treatment and were very sympathetic. Sometimes even local police were sympathetic but told them that they were following orders.

The group traveled in nine buses. The deportees report that at one point, the buses were stopped and held in a quarry-like place where the authorities did not allow the bus windows to be opened, causing the heat to build up inside the buses to a point where people were having difficulty breathing. During this period no water or food was provided. (Note: the temperatures in the region are currently reaching 42 degrees). During the overall trip, the group reported, they received a once a day ration of bread and water and either slept on the buses o in crude shelters at night. Many of the deportees reported that the people in the Oromo, Amhara and Afar communities they passed through offered tea, food and water but that many times the guards refused to let them receive this assistance.

The group in the first bus reported another difficulty upon reaching Banda. The firs bus, with 56 persons mostly from Arba Minch, arrived two and a half days prior to the other buses. The local authorities had not been given any instructions concerning their disposition and had the deportees remain on the bus at all times, except for toilet visits. As the outside temperature was up to 41 degrees and the bus was overcrowded, this was both extremely uncomfortable and potentially dangerous for the group. Upon arrival of the eight additional buses, all of the buses traveled onward to the border area and the deportees were then told to walk the remaining 4.5 km distance to the Eritrean checkpoint. Since it was approximately 3 a.m. and dark, the deportees were afraid of walking through this heavily militarized area for fear of being attacked. They were sighted by an Eritrean scout who told them to wait until daylight and then began to walk to the checkpoint. As the weather was very hot and the area very desolate (rock desert), many older people had to be assisted by the healthier. It is reported that three members of the group suffered exhaustion/heatstroke and collapsed during the walk. Upon arrival at the checkpoint and transport to Assab Hospital, one 56 old former teacher (male) died. He was buried on 16 July.

The local authorities, upon hearing from the military that there were deportees at the checkpoint, sent transport and brought the group the 50 km to Assab town, where they were housed in local hotels and registered. There are discussions underway concerning their transport to other places in Eritrea since Assab has little resources to maintain them and the heat is a problem for the highland dwellers.

Most of the deportees the group met with were in fairly good condition; they had good housing (with ventilators and air coolers) and access to food. A number of adults reported having health conditions which were problematic- mostly diabetes, high blood pressure, or forms of arthritis. The time spent in the high temperatures at the border and the walk to the checkpoint had been difficult for many elderly and for the children. There were reports that some elderly were bedridden upon arrival and had needed medical attention. As mentioned above, two were hospitalized and one had died. By and large, most of the people met seemed very bewildered; they were perplexed as to why they had been singled out, especially since so many had been born and grew up in Ethiopia and had little or no Eritrean connection.

Ethiopian permanent residents:

The group met with approximately 25 Ethiopians who were permanent residents in Assab, some having lived there over 50 years. Many were port workers or day labourers. Those who were permanent port staff reported having been put on paid annual leave in late May. The daily labourers were having little income due to the lack of work in Assab since the border closed and expressed serious concern for themselves and their families. Many said that they had no money with which to buy food. When asked if they would like to go to Ethiopia, the people in the group declined, saying that Assab was their home and that they had no place in Ethiopia to return to. None of the group reported having been mistreated by others and they told the delegation that they had other problem than of getting work to feed their families. They reported that the local authorities had begun registration for food provision the day before but had suspended because there were so many people to register that the scene became chaotic; they were told that registration would begin again during the week.

It should be noted that the Ethiopians were brought to one place to meet with the delegation and were not just randomly chosen from the streets to interview so they may not represent the views of other Ethiopians in Assab. Some members of the groups spoke to a few Ethiopians who were working in a restaurant- these did not report any harassment and hope to remain in Assab as they had lived there for many years.

Ethiopian teachers awaiting transport to home country:

The delegation also met with five teachers from the Ethiopian Community School who were waiting transport to Ethiopian through Djibouti. They reported that there were 50 teachers stranded in Assab since the border closed. They are Ethiopian government employees and had not been paid in four months. They expressed concern about their subsistence and that of their families (a few had families locally). They had received exit visas from the Eritrean government (at a cost of 150 Nakfa) and were now waiting for a boat to arrive from Djibouti. They reported that the cost of transport for the boat was 290 nakfa and that many of them did not have any funds to purchase the tickets. They asked whether the UN could help them with this problem. The teachers did not report any problems of harassment by either the authorities or the local people. They said that the local people (other Ethiopians, perhaps) were feeding them. They were very anxious to return to their homes in Ethiopia, however. They did not know how they would proceed upon arrival in Djibouti but expected that the Ethiopian embassy there could assist. The teachers in the group were from various parts of Ethiopia, including Wollo, Tigray and Sidamo.

General situation in Assab

Assab, normally a bustling port city with up to 700 trucks a day arriving/departing to transport goods from the port, is dramatically changed due to the closing of the Ethiopian border. The port is virtually deserted, with very few ships arriving with any goods. The refinery was recently closed, as well. As these two were the main employers, there is a serious problem of unemployment. The service establishments which catered to the thousands of drivers and sailors are also suffering. Contract workers and daily labourers have been out of work for almost two months and have depleted any savings they had. Many in the local population have no more means to buy food or other provisions. What food there is relatively expensive (except for fish). Vegetables and fruits are unavailable; these previously came from Ethiopia- now they must be shipped from Massawa. there are no telephone connections to the rest of Eritrea since the lines previously went though Ethiopia and these connections have been cut. Thus, communication is only by radio or by satellite telephone (available at the Port Authority Office).

Although there is excellent shelter for deportees in Assab since they are able to use the local hotels (which have no business now), they must be moved to other parts of Eritrea quickly. Due to the very difficult economic conditions, as well as its relative isolation and proximity to a heavily militarized area, Assab is just not an appropriate place to maintain deportees for any significant period of time. In addition, the high temperatures can pose health risks for those not used to such a climate.

(It should be pointed out that air transport to Assab has improved considerably. There are up to five flights a week (this varies) from Asmara and some from Djibouti on Daallo Airlines.)

Issues requiring action:

Transport of deportees out of Assab and placement with any relatives in Eritrea

Continued shelter, food and health care for deportees

Investigation of the conditions of children left unaccompanied in Ethiopia

Investigation of family unification possibilities

Transport of Ethiopian teachers to Djibouti (finances)

Monitoring of conditions of Ethiopian population in Assab

ANNEX B

ERITREANS EXPELLED FROM ETHIOPIA: MEREB GATE

Eritreans are being deported from Ethiopia by the Ethiopian Government en masse. On Friday 17 July 1998 thirty-five buses carrying 1,987 Eritreans arrived about 4 km inside Tigray via the Mereb gate. The deportees had to walk the 4 km on foot to cross to the Eritrean side; 511 of the deportees were children under the age of eighteen. From the random interviews we had with these people, we noted that they come from al walks of life: business people, garage owners, traders, civil servants, retirees, farmers, priests etc. These deportees were rounded up from various cities, towns and villages of Ethiopia such as Addis Ababa, Debreberhan, Nazareth, Gima, Kobo, Karaquorie, Komisie, Bati, Harbo, Kombelcia, Dessie, Waldia, Goder, Rama, Axum, Debrezeit, Leketmti etc, etc. They were picked form their residences, and/or workplaces in the evenings, nights or during the day, and were not allowed to pick anything with them nor were they allowed to meet their families who were left behind in Ethiopia. Some of them were detained in Ethiopian prisons ranging from two days to two or more months before their expulsion.

The deportees were made to travel through the hostile terrain of Tigray. They reported to us that in Mekele, the capital of Tigray and in Adwa, another Tigris town, they were forced to stay one night and one day without food and water. In both these towns they were harassed, abused and threatened by the Woyane cadres. The Tigray Administration even took some of the deportees under the pretext of further interrogation and their whereabouts is not known; these are people like Mr. Daud Messud with his two children picked in Addis Ababa and taken from his co-deportees in Adwa; so was Mr. Said Abdu, Secondary School teacher from Dessie also forced to stay in Adwa.

Each one of the deportees had horrifying stories to tell:

Mrs. Alganesh said that she was forced to leave Ethiopia leaving behind a paralyzed husband, Mr. Yemene Kahsai, in Addis Ababa with no one to look after him.

Mr. Alazar Asfaha is another victim. He lived in Ethiopia for 38 years. his property was nationalized first by the Derg Regime and now he fears his property will be taken by the current Ethiopian Government. He said he was locked in prison while in Addis and was beaten. He does not know what the fate of his family is.

Keshi Hadgu Kidane is a priest of the Orthodox church who was residing in the vicinity of Axum as a farmer. He was picked by night leaving his wife and seven children behind. He also left 25 cattle, 40 goats, 10 sheep, a house and all his farm materials and farm products.

Keshi Tesfamariam Goitanazghi, another priest of the Orthodox church. He was a businessman in Addis Ababa. he also left his wife and seven children behind. He owns a house worth birr 400,000.00 in the vicinity of Bole International Airport road and furniture worth about birr 50,000.00.

Mr. Mesfun Berhe is a limousine owner and driver. He is 72 years old and he lived in Ethiopia for 52 years. he said he was picked at 4:00 a.m. He left his wife and his four children behind. All the deportees have different and sad story to tell about their ordeal.

As mentioned in my previous reports, the causes of their deportation are:

1. Eritrean citizenship
2. Voting during the referendum for Eritrean independence in April 1993
3. Member of the Eritrean Communities in Ethiopia
4. Membership of PFDJ (Popular Front for Democracy and Justice), the Eritrean political organization
5. Monetary contribution for Eritrean Development Progammes

The number of deportees as of 18 July 1998 is:

Through Badme area up to 15 July 1998 5,574 all rural dwellers from Tigray

Through Um-Hager up to 15 July 1998 1,398 mostly urban dwellers

Through Mereb up to 19 July 1998 2,802 mostly urban dwellers

Through Assab up to 15 July 1998 421 mostly urban dwellers

Grand Total 10,195

As previously reported, there are also about 166,091 (this figure does not include any war displaced Eritreans along the Assab area) displaced Eritreans due tot he border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.

Thus, as of to-day 18 July 1998 the total number of Eritreans who needed assistance is:

Deported from Ethiopia 10,195

Displaced due to border conflict 166,091

Grand Total 176,286

Report on arrival of deportees - 19/7/98- Mareb

Pam DeLargy, UNFPA

While in Adi Quala on Sunday morning, we were informed at 11:30 by the local administration that he had just received information on a group of deportees just arriving and crossing the Mareb. We traveled to the border and found the group of 102 people who had just crossed into Eritrea and were sitting by the side of the road and waiting for someone to arrive with transport to Adi Quala. The deportees had walked about 2 kms to cross the border and were met by a few military guards.

While waiting for the trucks to arrive to take the group to AQ, we were able to count them and to talk to many of them about their experiences. Among the 102, there were 11 people over 60, including one 81 year old man; seven children, aged six months to eight years; and about twenty five women. Deportees were from Addis, Dessie, Dire Dawa and other towns. There were shopkeepers, teachers, mechanics, housewives, and managers. There was one retired UN official who had worked from ECA and whose last posting was in Mogadishu.

There was one married couple with two children; otherwise, all had left their spouses behind (most spouses were not Eritrean). Many reported that they had tried hard to convince the authorities to let them take at least some of their children but had been refused. A number reported that they had heard on Ethiopian radio while waiting in the transit camp in Adwa that the government had announced that children with one Ethiopian (non-Eritrean) parent would be considered Ethiopian and by no means allowed to depart Ethiopia. Many of the men interviewed expressed concern about his new policy, stating that their wives and families would not be able to survive without their salaries.

This particular group had originally traveled with the previous buses but had been detained in Adwa three days more while many were questioned. Some seemed to think that there was uncertainly among the authorities about whether some in the group were supposed to be deported. They reported that a few people had been left behind. They also reported that while the other buses were in Adwa, the authorities had attempted to separate the men and women and children and place them on different buses. The group seems to have protested vehemently and some people were reported to have been arrested and detained.

One 47 year old women from Addis (the owner of a pharmacy,, an import-export business and a factory) who was suffering from diabetes and circulatory problems was unable to walk and had to be carried. She had recently returned to Addis from the US after surgery. Two women reported having been taken from a hospital (in Makele?). One businessman from Addis, who was just about to travel broad, reported that his Ethiopian passport, which included visas to Germany and the US, was taken when he was arrested. One women, who was a Jehovah’s Witness, was extremely upset and worried about being in Eritrea since she had heard that the government mistreated Witnesses. Some shop owners and mechanics from Dessie reported being taken from their place. Upon arrival of the trucks, the deportees (except one, whose sister came to pick her at the border) were then taken to Aid Quala and then Mendefera where they were given shelter and registered.

Additional information:

In Adi Quala, we stayed for about two hours and interviewed a number of individuals who were in the camp at the high school complex, including many children. We found one young boy, aged 12, who was from Dessie and who had been deported alone. His mother was Eritrean and he said she lived n a village near Mendefera - but he had lived all his life with his father in Dessie until his father died and he then stayed with his uncle. The uncle had recently died, as well, so the boy was alone and the authorities had put him on the bus saying he should go back to Eritrea and find his mother. He seemed bewildered but the ERREC staff had registered him and were going to try to locate his mother.

In Mendefera camp, we stayed another two hours and spoke with many of the deportees from Tigray who had come earlier in the week. There were more children in that group and more intact families deported than in the groups from other parts of Ethiopia.

 

UNICEF-ERITREA

 

28 July 1998

Dear Ato Tesfamariam,

As discussed, please find enclosed copies of my report on field trips undertaken by UNICEF Eritrea to Assab and Mendeferra to access the situation of the deportees. I hope you will find the material useful especially with regard to the situation of children left behind.

With best regards.

Sincerely Yours,

[signed]

Ruth Hayward

UNICEF Representative

Ato Tesfamariam Tekeste

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara

 

SUMMARY OF FIELD TRIP FINDINGS ABOUT

DEPORTEES’ CHILDREN LEFET BEHIND

(Mendefera & Adi Quala reception centres), 20 July 1998

 

 

1. Number of deportees Contacted: 165

Those who left children behind: 105

• Female: 49
• Male: 56

2. Total number of

---

children left behind: 291

Female: 135 46.4%

Male: 156 53.6%

3. Age distribution:

---

0-1 3.1%

---

2-5 12.7%

---

6-10 27.1%

---

11-15 32.%

---

16-18 25.1%

4. Type of care-takers by number of children left behind

Mothers = 191 65.6%

Fathers = 211 7.2%

Sister/brother = 17 5.8%

Relative = 5 1.7%

Maid = 1 0.3%

Neighbours = 13 4.5%

None = 43 14.8%

Total 291 99.9%

5. Location and Number of Children Left Behind

Addis Ababa 227 78%

Adwa 3 1%

Adi Grat 19 6.5%

Alamata 19 6.5%

Gondar 2 0.7%

Korem 4 1.4%

Maichew 15 5.2%

Mekele 2 0.7%

Total 291 100%

DEPORTEES THROUGH MEREB

Concern for children left behind

• Some 35 bus loads of deportees from Ethiopia crossed the Ethiopian-Eritrean border at Mereb on July 16th. There were 2,498 deportees including 1,987 adults and 511 children. On July 18th and 19th a group of 5 UNICEF Eritrea staff members contacted and interviewed a portion of this group of detainees. The UNFPA Eritrea Representative also travelled to the area on Sunday July 19th and made additional observation.

• Some 165 adult deportees, of approximately 1,987 were contacted. From the 165 there were 105 who said that their children under 18 years of age had been left behind. The total number of children reported left behind by the 105 interviewees is 291. (see details attached)

• As only a small availability sample was interviewed, the total number of children left behind would clearly be far greater than indicated above, possibly as many as 3, 504.

• 43 (14.8%) of the children reported in the sample as still in Ethiopia, are said to be without any caretakers at all. Another 14 (4.8%) of the children, were left with neighbours or the maid.

• 125 (42.9%) of the children from the sample are said to be age 10 or under.

• Of the remaining children said by the interviewees to have been left behind, 191 (65.6%) are said to be with their mothers; however, since fathers are normally the bread winners, it is not clear what economic support there will be for these children and women.

• In addition, deportees report worries about what will happen to their properties. Some who called their former residences were told that someone else has been assigned the houses. They are concerned about the whereabouts of their family members and how they will be supported.

• Deportees interviewed indicated that many of them had pleaded to bring their children with them but without success. However, some interviewees, said that they did not bring their children because they had heard that deportations had started through Assab, where children would be exposed to dangers while walking from the drop off point to the border. They were also told that they would have to walk a long distance before crossing the Eritrean border through Tigray Province.

• Although most of the children left behind by those interviewed are said to be in Addis Ababa, about ¼ are in other locations (see attached for details).

Conditions faced by women and children deportees en route to Mereb

• The deportees included some 500 children.

• At least one child, a 12 year old boy, travelled alone.

• Women and children were said to have been particularly crowded in the buses, all of which travelled at night. Buses were driven without headlights. (In some flashlights were used to see the way). Some sections of the roads are precarious even under normal circumstances.

• This travel, which was only done at night, as well as the rounding up of deportees at night, is believed by some deportees to have been done to avoid observation of these activities by local Ethiopians and others.

• It is said that at the transit camp in Adwa, after crossing into Tigray province, an effort was made by officials to separate children and women from men deportees- which frightened the deportees, who resisted.

nbsp;

• Deportees observed some differences between those officials in Addis accompanying the group and the local authorities in Tigray. In some cases the officials from Addis were told by the local to leave the deportees in their hands and return to Addis. For the most part, this was resisted. It was reported that some discussions were so heated that deportees feared shots might be fired.

• 3 deportees- including a 70 year old women- were said to have detained by the Tigray authorities in Adwa when they protested about being left without an escort from Addis.

• Some of the deportees pointed out that their Ethiopian neighbours were very much sympathetic to them, even crying because of their situation and giving them water or food en route.

Additional observations

• Deportees were gathered from centres outside of as well as in Addis. (see attached for details)

• Some children had been detained along with their parents.

• Very few deportees mentioned having had any contact with ICRC. There is an impression that access to only a few detention centres has been given to international observers.

• Deportees continue to come through Mereb; 102 deportees crossed the border on 19th July including 9 children and 11 people over 60 years of age, including an 81 year old man. This group had set out with the others but was detained in Adwa where the deportees said they were interrogated. The arrival of this group of deportees was filmed by an independent film maker accompanied by the UNFPA Eritrea Representative. Once footage is available we can share a copy if you so wish. (see attached report of UNFPA Representative on the arrival of this group)

Deportees Through Assab

• A UN team in which we participated visited Assab on Thursday 16th July with Government officials and members of the press. Some 400 deportees were reported to have just arrived from Ethiopia. The team met with 2 groups of deportees- some 240 in total- as well as a group of Ethiopian citizens.

• The deportees we met included about 110 women, about 10 children and about 120 men.

• Well over half of the deportees indicated by a show of hands that they had had to leave children behind despite protest and pleas to take them along.

• We saw less than ten children in the groups we met. One woman, a mother of 7 children said she had pleaded to bring all of them but was allowed to bring only 1, a boy about 10 years of age. Another woman who lived on her own, was very distraught because authorities had not permitted her to bring her 3 children. She said that she did not even get to see them after she was picked up by police on her way home from church.

• Deportees to Assab reported that the Ethiopian officials made them leave the buses before reaching the actual Ethiopian-Eritrean border at 3:00 AM in the morning. They feared walking through the "no man’s land" between the trenches in the dark. They might have been shot mistakenly had it not been for Eritrean scouts who made sure that the deportees waited until sunrise when the scouts guided them to the check point and arranged transport to town (some 70 kilometres away).

• The group included 2 priests as well as several elderly people, as well as the few children already mentioned. Most of the deportees appeared completely drained, both physically and psychologically.

• At least 3 people had collapsed during their walk. A 56 year old former teacher died upon arrival I Assab hospital.

• Indeed your complaint that deportation through Assab is inhumane is a timely and appropriate message.

ETHIOPIANS IN ASSAB

• Among the 30 some Ethiopians we met in Assab, there were port workers, clerical employees, and teachers. The former said they were suffering economically due to lack of work. The women clerical workers were still employed. The teachers seemed particularly distraught because they did not have funds for tickets home although they had exit visas. (They said they had not received salaries from the Ethiopian Government for 4 months).

• The Ethiopians we met had no complaints other than mentioned above. It can be noted that Assab is a town of about 40,000 people, is predominantly Amharic speaking with a sizable community from Ethiopia.

OTHER

• As we just visited the Ethiopian Embassy here, where 189 people are staying, in our next report we will include more information about the Ethiopians here.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_081898_2.html100644 127137 345 11632 6566401671 6543 On August 17, 1998, the Permanent Representative of Eritrea to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios sent a letter to UN Secretary General, Mr. Kofi Annan, about the illegal expulsion of UN employees in Ethiopia who are Eritreans or Ethiopians of Eritrean ancestry. The full text of the letter follows.

August 17, 1998

H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan
Secretary General
United Nations
New York NY 10017

RE:  Expulsion of United Nations Employees in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Excellency,

We would like to bring to your attention the Ethiopian government's violation of the rights of Eritrean UN employees in blatant disregard for international conventions. In line with its policy of indiscriminate mass detention and deportation of Eritreans, the government of Ethiopia has also targeted UN employees who are Eritrean citizens for expulsion. In addition, it has served notices of expulsion to Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin.
We have confirmed reports that out of the two Eritrean citizens employed by the ECA in Addis Ababa, one was expelled and the second is awaiting deportation. In addition to these two Eritrean citizens, twenty eight Ethiopian citizens of Eritrean origin who are employees of UNHCR, ECA and the ILO have been served notice to leave the country. Three more have already been deported. All have been accused of espionage and of being "security threats" to Ethiopia. Those to be deported have been told to leave Ethiopia within a period of one month, and they will be forced to leave their property and in most cases family members behind.
We appeal to your Excellency to take immediate steps to halt this violation of the United Nations convention granting immunity to its officials. This recent action of the Ethiopian government contravenes Article VI of the Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Ethiopia signed on June 18, 1958, in Addis Ababa.
We call upon you to defend the rights of these UN officials and to take cognizance of the alarming precedent being set by the Ethiopian government's continued disregard for the UN Charter. This matter requires your urgent attention also in light of the impact that such violations can have on the security and morale of UN employees and the credibility of the organization. Silence or delay of the appropriate response to such a wanton action will only lead to further victimization of innocent people who look up to the United Nations to be the defender of their human rights.
Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

H.E. Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative


List of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean Origin Working with UN
Institutions Expelled or Served Expulsion Notice by the Ethiopian
Government

A.  	Eritreans
	1.	Ghirmai Zerai, ECA (already expelled)
	2.	Belai Ghiorghis, ECA (served notice of expulsion)

B.	Ethiopians of Eritrean Origin
	Already Expelled
	1.	Mesfin Tesfa Selassie, ECA
	2.	Birhane Hadish, ILO
	3.	Fisseha Belachew, ECA

	To Be Expelled
	4.	Matewos Beraki, UNHCR
	5.	Tadesse Tesfay, UNHCR
	6.	Girmai Gebre Yohannes, UNHCR
	7.	Yemane Gebremariam, UNHCR
	8.	Samson Aregahegn, UNHCR
	9.	Ruth Hailemichael, UNHCR
	10.	Yosef Tekle, UNHCR
	11.	Asmera Ghebregziabher, UNHCR
	12.	Tesfa Michael Ghebre Meskel, UNHCR
	13.	Rissom Tesfamichael, ECA
	14.	Abeba Kifle, ECA
	15.	Lula Solomon, ECA
	16.	Ahmed Abdulrazaq, ECA
	17.	Letensae Berhe, ECA
	18.	Senait Gebremicael, ECA
	19.	Frewoine Tekle, ECA
	20.	Tesfamariam Tsegay, ECA
	21.	Michael Abraham, ECA
	22.	Ketema Kidane, ECA
	23.	Abraham Andemariam, ECA
	24.	Asghedom Tesfazion, ECA
	25.	Issac Ghebregziabher, ECA
	26.	Tekie Samuel, ECA
	27.	Eden Goitom, ECA
	28.	Ghirmai Mail, ECA
	29.	Semainesh Tiku, ECA
	30.	Kahsay Negasi, ECA
	31.	Hirity Tedla, ECA

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer Embassy of Eritrea to the US 1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304 E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_081998.html100644 127137 345 12645 6566652764 6343

According to information obtained from European Union (EU) sources in
Brussels, Belgium, the following report on Ethiopian allegations of detention, mistreatment and expulsion of Ethiopian residents in Eritrea was submitted by European ambassadors in Asmara, Eritrea, to the EU on July 29, 1998.

"During the last weeks heads of mission in Asmara intensely looked into the matter of Ethiopian allegations of mistreatment, harassment and deportation of Ethiopians residing in Eritrea and as well treatment of Eritreans in Ethiopia.

Heads of mission can confirm that allegations of mistreatment of
Ethiopians in Eritrea have not come to their knowledge. Neither true is information of parading of prisoners of war in Asmara, except briefly for Ethiopian Air Force officer Bezabih Petros after the downing of his plane. Through intensive interviews with Ethiopian citizens in Asmara and elsewhere it can be confirmed that they are treated mostly in no way other then before the conflict between the two states. Eritreans have even been warned by the government not to harass Ethiopians and to treat them in a respectful manner.

To the best knowledge of the heads of mission there have not been mass deportations, arbitrary arrests or anything else regarding the Ethiopians. Those who wanted to leave Eritrea were not hindered with the exception of 177 Ethiopians who were sent back for no obvious reasons to their embassy in Asmara a few days ago. The Eritrean government has openly declared that these people are free to leave. The ICRC is allowed to look into this matter.

The heads of mission are not aware of detentions of Ethiopians for the only reason of being Ethiopians. There might have been arrests of few Ethiopians but--as the government declares--for reasons of criminal acts, etc. The ICRC will also look into this matter next week.

All in all heads of mission in Asmara can confirm that to their
knowledge nearly all the allegations and accusations of the Ethiopian government are either grossly exaggerated or untrue.

Heads of mission visited several times deportees from Ethiopia (e.g.,
in Asmara, Mendefera, Badime, Zala Anbessa). They interviewed these people without any official interference of the Eritrean side.

Heads of mission are of the unanimous opinion that the statements made by the deported Eritreans that they have been harassed, mistreated, sometimes arrested, separated from their dependents and forced to forfeit their property for no other reason than being Eritreans or, albeit Ethiopian citizens, of Eritrean descent, are true and proved. A great number of the deportees do not understand until now the reasons for being treated in such manner by the Ethiopian authorities. This is especially true of the nomadic people living in border areas, where the concept of nationality has always been somewhat indefinite. The number of deportees has reached nearly 12,000.

Due to historical reasons which date back to the liberation struggle,
the Eritrean authorities were/are very reluctant to let ICRC or other humanitarian organization examine the situation in Eritrea.

As a result of the propaganda of the Ethiopians, Eritrea is now
willing to let ICRC and others look into this matter. ICRC will be allowed to open an office in Asmara: new staff will arrive soon. However, the ICRC has at yet not been allowed to meet the prisoners of war. Also four members of the Humanitarian Commission in Geneva will be allowed to visit the so-called "detainees," deportees and others. Thus, Eritrea hopes to set the record straight with respect to a world opinion misinformed by the Ethiopian propaganda.

Heads of mission will follow events as closely as possible and will
report again when new evidence asks for it.

In the meantime it can be clearly stated that Ethiopian propaganda
will allegations of deporting Ethiopians, arresting and keeping detainees, mistreating Ethiopians and so forth is to the moment unfounded.

The heads of mission consider that it would be justified for the EU to publicly state the facts, mentioning the arbitrary treatment of Eritrean residents by the Ethiopian authorities and the absence of retaliation by the Eritrean government on Ethiopian citizens. The EU could also appeal to both sides for allowing visits by the ICRC to all prisoners of war.

Any delay in so doing would strengthen the Eritrean feeling of a bias
against Eritrea in the international community. This may in turn nurture isolationist policies, dangerous in themselves and detrimental to the peace process."

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org


Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_082098.html100644 127137 345 10154 6567045544 6315 An Appeal by the Religious Leaders of Eritrea

To: the United Nations

the Organization of African Unity
all Diplomatic Corps in Eritrea
all International Organizations in Eritrea

We, the religious leaders, appeal to the above mentioned organizations and to the international community as well as to all people of goodwill to show their concern and solidarity with the suffering Eritrean people.

From the start of open hostilities between Ethiopia and Eritrea in May 1998, the Eritrean people living in Ethiopia have become victims of violations of fundamental human rights through the actions of the Ethiopian government.

Eritreans residing in Ethiopia are being indiscriminately and unjustly expelled from Ethiopia.

This has resulted in:

the separation of entire families. Many children are being left behind without anyone to care for them because their parents are being imprisoned and expelled.

Thousands more are mistreated and forced to leave Ethiopia without being able to gather their personal effects, or see that their domestic and business possessions and properties are suitably cared for and secure. In fact, we could say that their property has been confiscated in many cases.

Many innocent Eritreans, including the elderly and youth, are being detained and mistreated in internment camps under inhuman circumstances (e.g., without toilet or hygienic facilities). These youth also include many students who have been in Ethiopia on student exchange program.

Pregnant women and nursing mothers are harshly mistreated, taken away and forced to endure the very long and rough journey to Eritrea, at great risk to their lives.

Therefore:


With the mandate that God gave us to lead and serve our people, we are obliged to be united with God, to aid fully and sincerely in whomsoever is homeless, hungry, imprisoned, destitute, deprived of human rights, etc., quite apart from political, ethnic, religious or other differences.

We cannot rest until those innocent Eritreans residing in Ethiopia are helped to enjoy their God-given rights to live in peace and security.

We, the religious leaders of Eritrea, denounce the ruthless acts of the Ethiopian government which are against the will of God and the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the OAU Charter on Human and People's Rights.

In this spirit we call upon:
the United Nations,
the Organization of African Unity,
the Diplomatic Corps in the country,
the concerned international organizations residing in Eritrea, the international community at large:

to encourage and support the search for a peaceful solution to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia,

to play an advocacy role for these harshly mistreated Eritreans so that their God-given and international human rights are respected,

to present these realities to their respective governments, and request their solidarity with the Eritrean population residing in Ethiopia or unjustly expelled from Ethiopia.

Abune Philipos

Patriarch of the Orthodox Tewahdo Church

Sheik Alamin Osman

Mufti of Eritrea

Abune Zekarias Yohannes

Catholic Church of Eritrea

Rev. Yosieph Araia

President of the Evangelical Church of Eritrea

Asmara, August 14, 1998


Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_082098_2.html100644 127137 345 5615 6567045555 6526 19 August 1998


H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan

Secretary General
United Nations, New York

Excellency,


I attach for your information a copy of a letter we wrote to Madame Mary Robinson concerning the disappointing delay in sending human rights observers to Eritrea and Ethiopia. Ethiopian indiscriminate expulsion and detention of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin is continuing daily. Families are being separated; properties Eritreans worked their lifetime to acquire are confiscated reducing them to overnight destitutes. Their number has reached 20,000 to date and is rising by the day.

A report of the European Ambassadors resident in Eritrea fully exposes the gross lies of the Ethiopian government concerning Eritrean treatment of Ethiopians resident in Eritrea while attesting to Ethiopian crimes over Eritreans. This report, which is yet to be made public by the EU, is also attached. One wonders why there is international silence about this gross violation of human rights perpetrated by the Ethiopian government with impunity. The Eritrean people and government feel, as they did during their thirty year struggle for self-determination, that an injustice of international silence exists, that hypocrisy over human rights is the order of the day, and that they have to do what is necessary, even if undesirable, to defend their rights by themselves alone. I believe it is not difficult for you to understand the consequences of such disappointment.

I urge you once again, Excellency, to denounce and take the necessary measures to stop the continuation of the indiscriminate expulsions and detentions of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin by the Ethiopian government. Measures need also be taken to ensure the reunion of separated families and to guarantee the return of or compensation for the properties expelled Eritreans are forced to leave in Ethiopia.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_082198.html100600 127137 345 4377 6567351724 6300 ERINA Update

(Eritrean News Agency,
Tel: ++291-1-117627, Fax: 127385)
Thursday, August 20, 1998

1. Religious leaders in Eritrea have called on the international community to demonstrate more concern for the plight of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia. In their appeal, leaders from the Christian and Islamic faiths urged the UN, the OAU, and other diplomatic missions and humanitarian organizations to intensify their efforts in solving the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict peacefully. The religious leaders asked the world community to sympathize with victims of the Ethiopian government's inhumane deportations and called upon the international community to work towards the restoration of the rights of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia.

2. The Ethiopian government has admitted it was aware of a violent ethnic clash in southern Ethiopia over a month ago, Reuters reports. The clash in the Oromiya region of southern Ethiopia was first revealed in a statement by the Southern Ethiopia's People's Democratic Coalition (SEPDC) published by the opposition newspaper Amaratch last week. The article accused the Ethiopian government of fueling the conflict through poor administration and attempting to conceal the clash from public knowledge. Ethiopia's confession comes only days after the article was published but weeks after the clash which the SEPDC says took the lives of some 3,000 Ethiopians and displaced over 100,000 more.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage ERINA Update

(Eritrean News Agency,
Tel: ++291-1-117627, Fax: 127385)
Thursday, August 20, 1998

1. Religious leaders in Eritrea have called on the international community to demonstrate more concern for the plight of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia. In their appeal, leaders from the Christian and Islamic faiths urged the UN, the OAU, and other diplomatic missions and humanitarian organizations to intensify their efforts in solving the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict peacefully. The religious leaders asked the world community to sympathize with victims of the Ethiopian government's inhumane deportations and called upon the international community to work towards the restoration of the rights of Eritreans deported from Ethiopia.

2. The Ethiopian government has admitted it was aware of a violent ethnic clash in southern Ethiopia over a month ago, Reuters reports. The clash in the Oromiya region of southern Ethiopia was first revealed in a statement by the Southern Ethiopia's People's Democratic Coalition (SEPDC) published by the opposition newspaper Amaratch last week. The article accused the Ethiopian government of fueling the conflict through poor administration and attempting to conceal the clash from public knowledge. Ethiopia's confession comes only days after the article was published but weeks after the clash which the SEPDC says took the lives of some 3,000 Ethiopians and displaced over 100,000 more.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronicX@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

STATEMENT PRESENTED TO THE DIPLOMATIC COMMUNITY
BY Mr. HAILE WELDENSAE, MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ASMARA, August 26, 1999

---

Your Excellencies! Ladies and Gentlemen:


I wish first of all to thank you for accepting my invitation to brief you on the visit to Eritrea by the Special Envoy of President Abdulazi Bouteflika, President of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria, Current Chairman of the OAU H.E. Ahmed Ouyahia.< p> As you all are aware the OAU Delegation headed by Mr. Ouyahia met yesterday 25^th August 1999 with President Isaias Afwerki

The Algerian Special Envoy who on the spirit of transparency and fairness had strictly come to Eritrea to brief President Isaias on his meeting with the Ethiopian Officials on 23^rd and 24^th August 1999, in Addis Ababa, delivered the official document that clearly articulates the clarifications of the Organization of African Unity in response to the questions raised by Ethiopia relating to the Technical Arrangements.

In this meeting after expressing his appreciation to the current Chairman, the Special Envoy, the Secretary General of the OAU and the Secretariat of the OAU for the commendable job they did and continue to do, for the peaceful resolution of the Eritrean-Ethiopia conflict President Isaias reaffirmed and reiterated Eritrea's; acceptance of the Three OAU documents as a package.

As you all know Eritrea officially and unconditionally has accepted the Framework Agreement on 27 February, the Modalities of Implementation on 14 July and the Technical Arrangements on 7 August 1999.

On the other hand the TPLF regime which has been claiming to have "accepted" the OAU Framework Agreement and the Modalities that are the two basic political documents endorsed by African Heads of States which are the basis for the peace plan, has refused to accept the Third document. It is delaying the peace process by bringing new pre-condition and using different ploys. Nevertheless, today the TPLF's transparent ploys and pretension have reached a dead end. It is crystal clear to the entire International Community the Third OAU Document the Technical Arrangements have been worked out by experts from Algeria, OAU, the UN and United States Government, are merely an elaboration and technical details of the two political documents that are endorsed at the Summit level.

Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen!

The OAU has clearly stated that the three documents must be taken as a package and the document containing the Technical Arrangements is not open to any amendment or interpretation. It has also given clear and elaborate clarification to the queries requested by the Government of Ethiopia.

Therefore, I strongly feel that we have reached the stage where political and diplomatic maneuver by the Addis regime should not be tolerated.

There is no confusion and ambiguity to know who is for peace and who is for war. My Government has shown its commitment for peaceful resolution of the conflict in words and deeds. It is the regime in Addis which is stalling the peace process and holding the OAU peace plan hostage.

I therefore, once again, call upon the International Community to use all their efforts for the implementation of the OAU peace Plan.

Thank you

g_083199.html100655 127137 345 10353 6763120517 6313 Press Release
Ethiopia Fabricating Pretexts to Launch War
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 31 August 1999

---

On February 5 this year, the TPLF regime falsely accused Eritrea of "bombing the town of AdiGrat." The accusation was fabricated in order to justify Ethiopia's intentions of violating the US-brokered moratorium on air strikes and launching a large scale offensive--which it unleashed the next day, February 6, 1999. This occurred despite the fact that residents of AdiGrat as well as foreign embassies based in Addis Abeba had verified, on the same day, that no such bombing ever took place. Now, as the international community is earnestly expecting Ethiopia to accept the Technical Arrangements to pave the way for the implementation of the OAU peace package, the TPLF regime is resorting to the same pattern of lies, apparently in preparation for another round of offensives. To this end:

• The TPLF has accused Eritrea of supporting OLF and Al Ithad extremists "in order to topple the government in Addis Abeba." These accusations are evidently preposterous. In the first place, it is well known that Eritrea has been, and remains, in the forefront in combating fundamentalism in the region. There is thus no conceivable way that it can prop up the extremist Al Ithad group. On the other hand, the OLF has been operating in Ethiopia since 1980. It was a coalition partner of the TPLF regime until they fell out with each other in 1992. The crisis prompted the OLF to resume its military activities in Ethiopia which clearly predate the recent border dispute between the two countries. Moreover, Eritrea has consistently maintained that the present conflict is a border dispute which is solvable through peaceful means. The TPLF regime, on the other hand, is on record as stating that it wants to "degrade the Eritrean army and topple the Asmara government." To this end, it brought together, in collaboration with the Sudanese government, an assortment of ten Eritrean groups, baptized them as the "National Democratic Alliance," and even prepared what it calls the "Transitional Charter" for this group last February. Thus it is the TPLF regime which is engaged in the business of changing the Eritrean government and not vice versa.

• The TPLF harps daily that Eritrea cannot be "trusted" and that "its acceptance of the peace package cannot be taken seriously." To this end, the TPLF regime daily fabricates inflammatory propaganda--such as "bulldozing of Zalambesa," "the detention of Ethiopian civilians in Hawashait," etc.--to give credence to its accusations. The fallacy of these accusations can be easily ascertained on the ground. But the important issue is that it is the OAU and the United Nations which are the guarantors of the three peace documents. The Technical Arrangements indeed make this clear when it states in Article 17:

  "The OAU and the United Nations will be the guarantors for the scrupulous implementation of all the provisions of the OAU Framework Agreement, the Modalities of Implementation of the Framework Agreement and the Technical Arrangements for the Implementation of the Framework Agreement and its Modalities."

  The TPLF regime must therefore either say openly that it does not trust the international community or admit that it is not ready to embrace the peace formula, which is the case in reality.

It is also instructive to note that the TPLF regime has muzzled the domestic press, preventing it from covering recent progress in the peace talks. The visit of the OAU special envoy to Ethiopia and his meetings with the Prime Minister to deliver the OAU's clarifications thus were not reported by Ethiopia's state-owned media. The contents of the Technical Arrangements have not been explained to the Ethiopian public either. The motive is very clear. The TPLF is scared that the Ethiopian people might discover the truth and oppose its policy of war. The TPLF thus has to feed them false information by distorting the position of Eritrea and the contents of the OAU peace documents.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 31 August 1999 g_090299.html100655 127137 345 3717 6763542403 6302 Press Release
Ethiopia's Transparent Preparations to Launch War
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, September 2, 1999

---

The TPLF regime today has accused Eritrean forces of attacking "Ethiopian positions at Chin Keren on the Zalambesa Front."

The recent accusation falls into the pattern of ridiculous allegations that the TPLF regime has been leveling against Eritrea throughout the last week. Indeed, apart from the occasional shelling invariably initiated by Ethiopia, there has not been any fighting on any of the fronts in the past two months since the start of the rains. The apparent purpose of Ethiopia's accusations is therefore to divert international attention from Ethiopia's reluctance to accept the OAU peace process.

Indeed, the fact remains that Eritrea has accepted the OAU peace process and expressed its readiness to implement all its provisions in good faith and without delay. The first requirement of the OAU peace package is the cessation of hostilities and the placement of OAU/UN observers to monitor compliance. This provision remains blocked because Ethiopia continues to refuse to sign on as it prepares for war.

The TPLF regime must not get away with its dual policy of frustrating the peace process on the one hand while alleging that Eritrea wants war on the other hand. The latter assertion is ridiculous as the following facts illustrate:

• Eritrea has accepted the three OAU peace documents.
• Eritrea stands to gain nothing by initiating hostilities in areas slated for redeployment.
• Eritrea has said on record, on several occasions, that it will continue to exercise maximum restraint and not shoot the first bullet.
• Eritrea continues to observe the request by the OAU Summit in Algiers for both sides to refrain from inflammatory propaganda.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 2 September 1999 g_090699.html100655 127137 345 17301 6765077524 6331 Press Release
TPLF Regime Rejects OAU Peace Package
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 6 September 1999

---

The TPLF regime has formally rejected, in a statement issued by its Foreign Ministry on Saturday, 4 September 1999, the Technical Arrangements worked out by the OAU, the UN, Algeria and the United States for the scrupulous implementation of the OAU peace package.

Ethiopia's statement is tantamount to a declaration of war. It does not, indeed, constitute a rejection of the Technical Arrangements alone but of the entire OAU peace package.

The present development--grave as it is--is not surprising to Eritrea. The truth is that the TPLF regime never accepted the Framework Agreement although it had professed to do so at the time for obvious, public relations reasons. It was evident from the outset that the TPLF regime could not possibly accept the peaceful resolution of the conflict through the demarcation of the boundary as it knows full well that it has no legal basis for its territorial "claims."

This was precisely why the TPLF balked at the implementation of the Framework Agreement, raising issues of "interpretation," when Eritrea announced its unequivocal acceptance of the Agreement. As Eritrea underlined repeatedly then, Ethiopia's pretexts were not genuine but rather a transparent ruse aimed at torpedoing the peace process. The Framework Agreement is otherwise unambiguous in its basic contents which call for:

1. cessation of hostilities;
2. Eritrean withdrawal from Badme and environs as a sign of good will;
3. mutual withdrawal of both sides from the rest of the boundary;
4. demarcation of the borders.

The apparent impasse led to the formulation of a supplementary document--the Modalities for Implementation (MOI)--which was endorsed by the OAU Summit in Algiers last July.

The MOI extracted, in essence, more concessions from Eritrea. Indeed, although redeployment by either side is provisional without prejudice to the final status of the territories concerned, which will be determined only after demarcation, Eritrea was nonetheless expected to redeploy first from a number of areas not envisaged in the Framework Agreement. The sequencing of withdrawals was also worked out in a manner to satisfy the Ethiopian regime.

In spite of these reservations, Eritrea accepted the MOI, announcing its agreement at the Summit. President Isaias Afwerki's acceptance to the Summit itself included, "... in the interests of peace, which we owe not only to the people of Eritrea, but, may I add, also to the people of Ethiopia and our continent as a whole, and as a mark of good will to the OAU, Eritrea has decided to accept the Modalities of Implementation of the Framework Agreement. In accepting the Framework and Modalities, Eritrea hopes to make its small contribution to the realization of the lofty objective proposed by the newly elected President of Africa's giant, Nigeria, General Obasanjo--and I believe endorsed by this Summit--to make the year 2000 the year of Peace and Security in Africa."

The TPLF regime did not accept the MOI at the time although it promised that it would "make its position known soon" without any qualifications; without, in the Prime Minister's words, "ifs and buts." But, rather than accepting the MOI and making its own contributions to peace, it began to conduct a campaign of disinformation to "discredit" Eritrea's acceptance. When this maneuvering did not work and the TPLF was pressed to clarify its position, it nominally accepted the MOI.

The OAU special envoy, H.E. Ahmed Ouyahia, as well as the envoy of US President Clinton, Mr. Anthony Lake, subsequently visited both capitals from July 21-24. The purpose of the visits was to secure formal signature of the two documents by both sides so as to embark on the implementation of the peace formula. Eritrea notified both envoys that it was ready to sign the documents and to fully cooperate in their implementation with the requisite sincerity and seriousness. The TPLF regime, however, brought up another excuse arguing that it was not yet ready to sign the documents that it had formally accepted without first seeing the detailed implementation blueprint.

This was an obvious setback to the OAU and its partners in peace. But again, the path chosen was one of patience and perseverance. As a result, technical experts from the OAU, the United Nations, Algeria, and the United States were assembled in Algiers and, on the basis of inputs provided by both sides, worked out the Technical Arrangements which set out, in extensive detail, the procedures and time frames for redeployment, reinstitution of temporary administrations, demarcation as well as issues of compensation for deportees and other victims of war.

The Technical Arrangements were provided to both sides in the first week of August. Again, Eritrea accepted the Technical Arrangements promptly, also realizing that these were essentially implementation details worked out by international experts in the field.

But the TPLF regime continued to keep the peace process hostage through various subterfuges. First it asked for "clarifications." The OAU subsequently provided the TPLF regime with an exhaustive response to its lengthy queries. Then it declined to make its position clear through various pretexts. It is against this backdrop of excessive tolerance and pampering by the international community that the Ethiopian regime has today rejected the three OAU peace formulas which must be taken as a package. The laxity with which the international community has dealt with the TPLF's acts of aggression and excesses of war and especially the massive deportation and detention of ethnic Eritreans has no doubt encouraged the regime to believe that it can defy fundamental principles of international law with impunity.

The timing of Ethiopia's explicit rejection of the OAU peace package further exposes its underlying motive. The regime has been resorting to dilatory tactics in order to gain time as it prepares to launch another round of offensives. Indeed, Ethiopia's Prime Minister had publicly stated last June that "the offensive will be launched at the right time when our preparations are completed. It will not be brought forward by one day or delayed by another day." Ethiopia's current statement indicates, without any shred of doubt, that it is about to unleash its war of aggression.

Eritrea remains convinced that another round of military confrontations will only entail more destruction and unnecessary human loss. The ultimate solution of the conflict will otherwise be through demarcation and on the negotiating table. The TPLF's military adventures will thus serve no purpose other than destabilizing the region and entailing unnecessary human suffering.

In the circumstances, Eritrea urges all those interested in the maintenance of peace and security in the region to:

1. strongly condemn the TPLF's declaration of war against Eritrea;
2. demand that the TPLF regime accept and implement in good faith the OAU peace package that has been endorsed by the international community;
3. impose punitive measures as there may be against the TPLF regime for its acts of aggression against a sovereign State in violation of fundamental principles of international law.

Evidently, Eritrea will have no choice but to resort to legitimate acts of self-defense. The TPLF regime shall bear all responsibilities for the consequences that may ensue.

---

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 6 September 1999 g_091798.html100644 127137 345 73452 6600300112 6303 Do Ethiopia's Recent Claims and Allegations on the Economic Relationship That Existed
Between Eritrea and Ethiopia Hold Water?

by Gebremichael Mengistu


Since the eruption of the border conflict, Ethiopia has been making incredible claims regarding the economic relationship that existed between the two countries in the past seven years.

Ethiopia's assertions and allegations include, inter alia:

- Eritrea had unfair economic advantages in its relationship with Ethiopia;
- Eritrea had been economically bleeding Ethiopia and had the sinister design to continue to do so;
- Ethiopia paid Birr 1.2 billion per annum to Eritrea in port dues and fees;
- Eritrean ports had been more expensive to Ethiopia than Djibouti;
- Eritrea closed Assab to Ethiopian cargo;
- Eritrea repurchased Ethiopian crude oil imports in Birr despite frequently insisting on payment for Eritrean port services in US dollars; and
- By re-exporting the coffee it imported from Ethiopia for its home market, Eritrea had been listed as the 13th major coffee exporting country.

These most startling assertions and allegations would make one question if the cooperation agreements were really between two sovereign states. They would make one wonder why a government like that of Ethiopia that boasts of being fiercely independent and that would not under any circumstances compromise or sacrifice the interests of its people would succumb to the pressure of the government of the State of Eritrea and enter into such one-sided arrangements.

The intended message of Ethiopia's outrageous claims is clear: that the Eritrean economy is an appendage of the Ethiopian economy, that Ethiopia subsidized that Eritrean economy, and that it cannot survive independent of the Ethiopian economy.

Only the uncritical and the uninformed can be taken in by these assertions and allegations. To the people of Eritrea and those that have good knowledge of the recent history of Eritrea, these claims are very familiar. They are reminiscent of the claims made by Emperor Haile Selassie and his cohorts at the United Nations in the late 1940s: that an independent Eritrea "cannot be economically feasible."

Is there any evidence to corroborate the Ethiopian claims? To see if there is any basis to these assertions and allegations, we will take, as an example, an agreement signed between Eritrea and Ethiopia on transit and port services.

The Transit and Port Services Agreement


On September 29, 1993, a transit and port services agreement was signed between the government of the State of Eritrea and the then Transitional Government of Ethiopia. The highlights of the agreement can be summarized as follows:

- Assab and Massawa to serve as transit ports for Ethiopia, speedy movement of goods in transit to be expedited and transit documentation and procedures to be simplified and harmonized;
- Ethiopian goods transiting through Assab and Massawa to be free of taxes and customs duties;
- Eritrea to provide all necessary port handling and agency services to ships owned by and cargo destined to and/or originating from Ethiopia;
- Eritrea to have the right to inspect transiting goods;
- payments for services rendered to Ethiopian ships and cargo to be effected in Birr except where the handling costs were paid for by shipper or consignee in hard currency;
- payment for Eritrean freight cargo boarded on Ethiopian ships to be effected in Birr and the rate of payment to be according to the agreed governing international freight rate;
- food aid cargoes and emergency relief aid to be free of port dues and storage penalty charges.

The above are the main features of the said agreement. In what follows an attempt will be made to briefly examine the contents of the agreement and its implementation and the realities thereof.

Implementation of Agreement: Following the outbreak of hostilities, Ethiopia has been making critical comments about the quality of port services and payments in port dues and fees. Lamenting the supposedly unsound decision and missed opportunity, they make assertions that now they have been able to get better services at lower cost in other neighboring ports.

Regarding payments in port dues and fees, they assert that huge benefits had been accruing to Eritrea at the expense of Ethiopia. They unabashedly claim that Ethiopia's payment in port dues and fees alone constituted over 25% of Eritrea's gross domestic product and contributed about 60% to the country's revenue!

But do these claims tally with the realities and the facts and figures? Let the facts and figures speak for themselves.

Consistent with its policy of promoting mutual cooperation, the government of Eritrea in the implementation of the transit and port services agreement had scrupulously adhered to the spirit and letter of the agreement.

At the port of Assab, Ethiopia had active and full participation in the processing of transit cargoes. As an integral part of this arrangement, Ethiopian Maritime and Transit Services Enterprises (MTSE), Ethiopian Customs Authority and Ethiopian Shipping Lines (ESL) had branch offices in Assab. ESL, in addition to a branch office "for the day to day follow up of activities," also maintained warehouses "for the keeping up of dunnage and used spare parts" at the port of Assab.

To oversee the implementation of the cooperation agreements and to periodically review, in light of experiences and developments, the agreements themselves, joint ministerial commissions for the different sectors and areas of cooperation were formed, following the signing of agreements.

As cargo handling destined to or originating from Ethiopia was the joint responsibility of MTSE and the Eritrean Shipping and Transit Agency Services (ERSTAS), MTSE was represented in the daily operational planning staff meeting.

Customs inspection of all goods in transit was carried out in Assab by Ethiopian Customs Authority. Although this procedure was causing delays in the movement of transit cargoes and creating congestion at the port, it was tolerated until the end of 1997.

At the port of Assab, adequate services were also provided to Ethiopian ships. To foster a harmonious relationship, Eritrea, after it formally became an independent and sovereign state, without adhering to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) and the UN Convention on Registration of Ships (1986), allowed Ethiopian ships to make Assab their home port and to continue to register in the port of Assab and sail under the Ethiopian flag.

In some ways, the transit and port services agreement favored Ethiopia. For instance, in most cases, the dwelling time for transit goods rarely exceeds 30 days. In the ports of Djibouti, Mombassa and Dar Es Salaam, the grace period for transit cargoes is 60 days, 15 days and 15 days respectively, whereas, in the ports of Assab and Massawa it was 180 days.

Port Tariff: As it is in their best interest, Eritrean ports aim at providing efficient services at competitive rates to their customers.

Since 1991 port tariff rates have been revised three times with a view to making the port competitive. Every time some improvement had been made. Except for the last time, the first two revisions were carried out with the full participation of the concerned Ethiopian authorities.

The introduction of the new tariff rates in January 1998 was made with two objectives in mind: first, to offer competitive and fair rates, and second, to provide efficient services.

As can be seen from Table 1, the new tariff rates are relatively more attractive than the old ones. Except for one item, substantial reduction was made in all the tariff heads. In operational terms, the new tariff rates are also much more simplified.

Table 1:
ERITREAN PORTS TARIFF RATES OVER THE YEARS IN US DOLLARS

OLD NEW
TARIFF HEAD TARIFF RATE TARIFF RATE

Conservancy per Grt/call 0.1400 0.0950 (-32.0%)


Pilotage, towing and
mooring/unmooring per Grt/operation 0.1180 0.1140 (-3.0%)

Dockage and bouyage
per Grt/hour 0.0019 0.0017 (-10.5%)

Stevedoring per ton 8.1600 6.5600 (-20.0%)


Shorehandling per ton 8.7300 8.7600 (0.3%)


Ports use different basis/factors in formulating tariff. It is thus not easy to make comparative analysis. However, as Tables 2 and 3 show, by and large, Eritrean tariff rates are more attractive than those in neighboring ports.

The competitiveness of a port depends on many factors. For the export and import of goods and commodities, one of the most important factors that has to be taken into consideration is the cost of land transportation, as it constitutes a major cost component. In relation to Ethiopia, from the cost of land transportation point of view, the Eritrean ports are on the whole more cost effective. It is true that for some parts of Ethiopia some neighboring ports may, other things being equal, compete with Eritrean ports.

The cost effectiveness of Eritrean ports has been attested to by Ethiopia itself just months before the current crisis. The general manager of MTSE in an interview with the Reporter stated that the port of Djibouti was "at least 400% to 500% more expensive than Assab." Similar views were also expressed by Ethiopian import-export agencies.

Table 2:
CONTAINER TARIFF RATES
ERITREA, DJIBOUTI AND KENYA IN US DOLLARS

TARIFF HEAD ERITREA DJIBOUTI KENYA


Stevedoring

20' 71 115 (62.0%) 120 (68.0%)

40' 123 143 (16.3%) 144 (17.0%)


Shorehandling

20' 67 197 (194.0%) 150 (123.9%)

40' 117 395 (237.6%) 180 (53.8%)


Table 3:
DRY CARGO TARIFF RATES
ERITREA AND KENYA IN US DOLLARS

TARIFF HEAD ERITREA KENYA


Conservancy per Grt/call 0.095 0.130 (36.8%)


Pilotage, towing & mooring/

unmooring per Grt/operation 0.114 0.118 (3.5%)

Dockage & buoyage per

meter/hour 0.100 0.160 (60%)

Stevedoring per ton 6.56 8.000 (22.0%)


Shorehandling per ton 8.760 12.000 (37.0%)


Port Services: Various yardsticks are used in assessing port services and their efficiency: tariff, cost of transportation, time, capacity, security, etc.

With respect to port services, it can be said that the two Eritrean ports had been providing sufficiently efficient services to Ethiopia during the period under consideration. Expressing satisfaction at the quality of services Ethiopia was getting from the Assab port administration, the general manager of Ethiopian MTSE said, "We are getting all the services that we would have gotten if we had our own port." "This," he remarked, "makes us happy." Similar views were expressed about the efficient services provided by the Massawa port administration by Ethiopian import and export agencies. At the port of Massawa, transit cargoes were processed within three to four days and transported to the border.

The port of Assab, unlike other ports in the region, basically serves Ethiopia (about 90%). This enables the Assab port administration to better satisfy the needs and requirements of Ethiopia, a fact that had been appreciated and attested to by the general manager of Ethiopian Shipping Lines. Moreover, the fact that Assab is better equipped for handling general cargo makes it more attractive to Ethiopia for the bulk of Ethiopia's imports and exports are conventional cargo.

Other factors, such as familiarity with port rules and procedures, language, etc., also give the Eritrean ports competitive edge over other ports in the region.

In comparative terms, although it is not possible to make, with the available data, detailed productivity/efficiency analysis, taking all factors into consideration and from the above brief assessment, a safe claim can be made that the Eritrean ports are as efficient as most neighboring ports.

It would be foolhardy, however, to claim that the Assab and Massawa port administrations had been providing optimal services to their customers. Not at all. Undoubtedly, due to subjective and objective factors there were deficiencies in port services.

Constraints on the ports' efficiency included inadequacy of facilities, shortage of equipment and machinery, provisions in the transit and port services agreement (the 180 days dwelling time, the exemption of food aid cargo from storage penalty charge), lack of know-how, and inappropriate procedures (complete customs inspection of all transit goods at Assab port, MTSE's monopolistic position in the clearing and forwarding business). Endeavors have been made by the Government of Eritrea to enhance the ports' efficiency by minimizing, if possible by removing, these constraining factors, and to date significant work has been accomplished.

While some of the problems can be attributed to the Eritrean side, most have to be imputed to the Ethiopian side. If we take for example the inadequacy of facilities, and the shortage of equipment and of machinery, who is to be blamed? Certainly, Eritrea cannot and should not be blamed. The blame falls squarely on Ethiopia, especially in the case of Massawa for it was Ethiopia that administered the two ports for forty years (1952-1991). The federal arrangement gave Ethiopia the right to administer the two ports and to collect port dues and fees. It was during this period, due to willful neglect and wanton acts of bombardment, that the port of Massawa deteriorated from one of the major ports in the Red Sea area to become what it was at liberation -- a completely dilapidated place.

The provisions in the transit and port services agreement and the inappropriate procedures mentioned above were the cause of congestion at the ports, and were also constraints on the efficiency of the ports. All attempts at corrective measures were blocked by Ethiopia. For instance, to increase efficiency at the port of Assab, Eritrea had advocated, on different occasions, for the privatization of clearing and forwarding businesses. But, as this was completely unacceptable to Ethiopia, nothing came out of that effort.

Revenues Collected from Port Dues and Fees: From Table 4 it is clear that the total revenue that Eritrea collected from transit cargoes in port dues and fees and transit fees in the past seven years was always under Birr 200 million per year. Thus, Ethiopia's claim that it paid Eritrea Birr 1.2 billion per annum in port dues and fees is pure fabrication; even the total amount over the seven year period does not add up to that staggering figure.

This stupendous claim deserves special comments: first, it goes to show concretely how unscrupulous the Weyane regime is in its misrepresentation of facts; and second, it is unconscious admission of the magnitude of benefits that accrued to Ethiopia from Eritrea during its forty years rule of the country.

Table 4:
PORT REVENUES IN THOUSANDS OF BIRR

YEAR PORT

ASSAB MASSAWA TOTAL

1992 118,904 - 118, 904

1993 179,535 - 179,535
1994 151,781 - 151,781
1995 154,723 4,501 159,224
1996 194,513 5,051 199,564
1997 163,218 5,015 168,233
to 5/1998 73,556 - 73,556

TOTAL 1,036,230 14,567 1,050,797


NB. The data for the Port of Massawa are incomplete and include only revenue collected from transit fees. The Assab Port revenue are from port dues and fees.

Official Assessment of Agreement: The Ethio-Eritrean economic agreements were periodically reviewed by the joint review committee and the joint ministerial commission. In these review meetings each side raised issues of concern to it.

In the joint review committee that dealt with the transit and port services agreement, Ethiopia had not registered any major complaints regarding the contents of the agreement and its implementation. With respect to the transit and port services agreement problems raised by the Ethiopian side worth mentioning include: a) the issue of port liability for pilferage and damage, and b) the 1.5% transit fee on Ethiopian transit goods passing through Massawa.

The Eritrean law and regulation inherited from Ethiopia with respect to port operation did not make the port liable for pilferage and/or damage. Cargoes in port premises were kept at the risk and responsibility of the ship or the owner. This practice continued after the liberation of Eritrea in 1991. But when Ethiopia raised the issue and requested that the port accept liability and responsibility in connection with handling and storage of goods, Eritrea, after carrying out appropriate study, agreed that on proven negligence on the part of the port to accept liability for loss of and damage to cargo in the ports of Assab and Massawa.

Regarding the 1.5% transit fee levied on transit goods passing through Massawa, Eritrea had expressed its readiness to address the issue in a new trade agreement. It should be noted here that the money collected from the 1.5% transit fee, which was only about Birr 25 million, was used to rehabilitate the port city of Massawa in general, and to improve/upgrade the port's facilities, equipment and machinery in particular. Given the extent of the damage that the port sustained during the forty year rule of Ethiopia, and the magnitude of resources required to rehabilitate it, the Ethiopian side should have had the scruples not to raise it.

From the foregoing discussion on the implementation of the agreement, it can be stated that Ethiopia did not at any time have reservations worth mentioning about the contents of the agreement, and that it was satisfied with its implementation. The conclusion of the joint review committee does not differ from ours. In its final report of January
1997, it stated that "on the whole, it can be concluded the agreement in the port and transit area has largely been implemented."

Ethiopia's Allegation on the Closure of Assab: Lately, Ethiopia is accusing Eritrea of closing the port of Assab to Ethiopian cargo. In its hate campaign aimed at fostering animosity between the two peoples, it is raising hue and cry about Eritrea trying to strangle the country. But nothing is further from the truth.

It was Ethiopia that decided to boycott the Eritrean ports immediately after the outbreak of hostilities. In a circular of May 12, 1998, the management of MTSE urged all shipowners to divert all Ethiopian bound cargo to Djibouti. In the said circular it stated that "it has been decided that with immediate effect all import cargo destined to Ethiopia via Assab and Massawa ports must be diverted and discharged at Djibouti port." In a similar circular of 16 May, 1998, Ethiopian Shipping Lines management instructed all its vessels to "call only Djibouti." The circular stated, among other things, "Due to force majeure ESL vessels will not be calling Assab and Massawa until further instruction to the contrary."

Findings: From the above brief account of the contents of the agreement and its implementation, it is no exaggeration to say that there is no shred of evidence to support Ethiopia's outrageous claims, and that the economic cooperation that existed between the two countries was based on mutuality of interests and benefits. More specifically it can be stated that:

- the economic cooperation arrangements did not give Eritrea unfair advantages;
- the economic cooperation agreement did not violate internationally accepted principles and norms;
- at no time did Ethiopia pay Eritrea 1.2 billion Birr per annum in port dues and fees; as a matter of fact, the total revenue collected from port dues and fees over the seven years was less than 1.2 billion Birr;
- that Eritrea did not close Assab to Ethiopian cargo; it was Ethiopia that decided to boycott the Eritrean ports;
- Eritrea was insisting on payment in hard currency for cargo service only when such costs were paid by the shipper or consignee in hard currency, as stipulated in the agreement; and
- that under the prevailing condition there is no port in the region that can provide better services at lower cost to Ethiopia than the two Eritrean ports.

Because Ethiopia's assertions and allegations do not tally with hard facts, and because they are completely at variance with views expressed on the cooperation arrangement by Ethiopian officials on different occasions prior to the eruption of the conflict, Girma Birru, Ethiopia's Minister for Economic Development and Cooperation, in an interview with various papers in the first week of August, 1998, was forced, despite his insinuating remarks, to reluctantly admit that the cooperation agreements concluded between Eritrea and Ethiopia were based on the principle of mutual benefits and ensured the national interests of the two countries. He stated that "the various agreements signed between the two countries stemmed from the principle of safeguarding the common national interests of the two countries." He went on to point out that
"the agreements were in the best interests of the country [Ethiopia]."

Basis of the Cooperation Agreement


Eritrea never had any plan to develop its economy at the expense of Ethiopia, as the Ethiopian Government and the chauvinist elements have been claiming. All along, Eritrea wanted to have a relationship and cooperation with Ethiopia on the basis of genuine partnership, its guiding principle.

The economic cooperation agreements signed between Eritrea and Ethiopia were formulated and negotiated by joint high level committees, and were designed to promote a closer relationship that would be of mutual benefit to the two economies.

Eritrea's desire to have close links with Ethiopia stems from two objective realities. First, due to history, proximity and culture, Eritrea and Ethiopia have special ties.

Eritrea was under Ethiopia for forty years. During this period, the two economies were integrated and interdependence was created. Eritrea believes that this historical link, and the resulting economic integration and interdependence can be used as a building block to forge deeper ties with Ethiopia.

Second, in this increasingly interdependent world the search for closer cooperation among countries, especially developing countries like Eritrea and Ethiopia, is self-evident. That is, the need to create larger markets through sub-regional and regional integration has become a policy imperative in the present day reality of globalization of production and trade liberalization.

As pointed out earlier, the Ethiopian Government, as partner and actor in the whole process, knows full well the basis and intention of and the background to the cooperation agreements. Why is it then making these incredible assertions and allegations at this juncture?

It is true that chauvinist elements who harbor deep-seated hatred against Eritrea, and who are intent on driving a wedge between the two peoples, were making similar claims in the past. At that time, the Ethiopian Government was not only characterizing the chauvinists' assertions and allegations as baseless and malicious, and dismissing them as such, but was also trying to present the cooperation agreements between Eritrea and Ethiopia to the Ethiopian people in their true light.

At the time of the signing of the agreements, Seyoum Mesfin, Ethiopia's Foreign Minister, said that "the basis and objective of the agreements" are "to safeguard the interests of the two peoples." He went on to state that the cooperation agreements have opened a "new chapter of cooperation" and "will contribute to the laying of a foundation to the eventual socio-economic integration of the neighboring peoples."

Tamrat Layne, then Ethiopia's Prime Minister, also expressed similar views. "For us Ethiopians," he said, "the most important aspect of the agreements we just signed is the provision that permits free movement of people." "In the economic field," he further stated, "we have concluded cooperation agreements that would enable us to jointly develop our economies and to find solutions to problems facing the people."

Moreover, in its final report of January 1997, the joint review committee expressed its belief that "the economies of both countries have benefited from the implementation of the agreements."

Reasons for a Turn About


But why a complete turn about now, and stooping so low?

The whole thrust of the Ethiopian Government's unfounded and base propaganda is to confuse the real issue involved in the present Ethio-Eritrean conflict: that the crisis is about a border dispute.

By complete misrepresentation of the facts regarding the economic cooperation that existed between the two countries in the past seven years, the Ethiopian Government is trying:

- to make the world believe that the underlying cause for the current crisis is not the border dispute, but economic. With the introduction of the Nakfa (Eritrea's currency), the Ethiopian Government's theoreticians purport, Eritrea has lost all the economic benefits accruing to it from the "unfair" economic relationship it had with Ethiopia in the past. The loss, they assert, has resulted in serious socio-economic problems in Eritrea, forcing the Government of Eritrea to start the current crisis to cover up the real problems presently facing the country, and to divert the attention of the people away from them.

- to win over world public opinion. By making such patently false claims as 'Eritrea closed the port of Assab to Ethiopian cargo,' 'Eritrea is trying to strangle Ethiopia,' etc., it hopes to gain the sympathy of the international community.

- to use the economic issue as a red herring. In the wake of the border conflict, a major crisis is looming over Ethiopia. By allowing its propaganda machine to churn out the most startling assertions about the socio-economic situation in Eritrea, the government hopes that the Ethiopian people can take comfort from such propaganda as to make them forget about the economic and other problems they presently face. In other words, it is trying to use the economic issue to divert the attention of the Ethiopian people from a dark cloud that hangs over the country.

- to mobilize the Ethiopian people in its war against Eritrea. By preaching venomous and hateful messages to the Ethiopian people, it is trying to create enmity between the Eritrean and Ethiopian peoples, and

- to drum up, through appeasement, political support from chauvinist elements in the Ethiopian body politic.

These deceptive maneuvers are, therefore, concocted to confuse the real issues. But such cheap propaganda will not and cannot take them anywhere. They should recognize before it is too late that the only way out from the predicament they are in is to come to their senses and accept the basic facts: that economic issues have no bearing on the crisis, that the conflict is about a border dispute, and that they should try to seek a corresponding solution to the problem at hand.

References


"Assab or Djibouti? Or Both?," Reporter (Amharic edition), December 1990 E.C. (December 1997)

"Interview with Bedru Adem, member of the Ethiopian Parliament," Voice of America (Amharic program)

"Transit and Port Services Agreement Between the Transitional Government of Ethiopia and the Government of the State of Eritrea," 29 September
1993

Djibouti, Port Autonome International Djibouti, Port of Djibouti Port Tariff

Eritrea, Department of Maritime Transport, Eritrean Ports Tariff, January 1998

Eritrean Shipping and Transit Agency Services, "Business Tour Report of Mombassa and Dar Es Salaam Ports (9-27 April 1997)"

Girma Birru, Ethiopian Minister of Economic Development and Cooperation, Press Conference, 1 August 1998

Joint Review Committee, Final Report of the Joint Review Committee on the Implementation of the Ethio-Eritrean Economic Agreements, January
1997

Kenya, Kenya Ports Authority, Tariff, 1995


Radio Woyane (Tigrinya program), "What is the underlying cause for the aggression committed against us by the government of Sha'ebia?," 6 August 1998

The author, Gebremichael Mengistu, is an economist working for the Eritrean Government. During Eritrea's independence struggle, he was an official of the Eritrean Relief Association. He has served as Eritrea's ambassador to the European Community and several European countries.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer

Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 319 1991 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronic-@embassyeritrea.org

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_091898.html100644 127137 345 3602 6600552740 6272 Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Release
Friday, September 18, 1998
Press Release

As it may be recalled, the prospects of an early and peaceful solution to the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia were curtailed due to the interference of the US team that was entrusted with the task of facilitating communication between the two parties. Continued and unwarranted interference of these officials, through the Secretary General of the OAU, in the subsequent period has further contributed to negatively influence the OAU initiative underway and to limit its positive contribution.
The US Government has now stated, through personal communication made by the National Security Advisor to the Eritrean President on Wednesday, 16 September 1998, its desire to launch a new initiative. This will be led by Mr. Anthony Lake, the former National Security Advisor, who is expected to visit Asmara and Addis Ababa.
President Isaias has underlined the reservations of the Eritrean Government while expressing its readiness to receive the US envoy.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 18 September 1998
Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092398.html100644 127137 345 21534 6602222614 6306 Interview with President Isaias Afwerki

Eritrean National TV Thursday, September 17, 1998

President Isaias Afwerki was interviewed by National TV on new developments regarding the Eritrean-Ethiopian border dispute on Thursday, 17 September. The following are excerpts.

"Now as before, the only solution is through peaceful and legal means."

Q: The Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) government has, on New Year's Eve [Note: Ethiopian Orthodox calendar], announced that it is ready to launch the war. What is the view of the government of Eritrea on this?

This is a very astounding statement. Why such loud noise? What could be the motive behind it? Is it psychological warfare? Could it be that by making loud noises they are trying to solicit the attention of those who may stand on their side? On my part, I can only say that this is an empty kettle making much noise. If the idea is to intimidate the Eritrean people, it is not going to work. If the whole propaganda of intimidation and threats is meant for foreign consumption, we have heard four months of such threats. No provocation is going to derail us from the peaceful course we have taken and are still taking.

Q: The border issue remains the real question. Why does the Ethiopian government continue to side step the real issue?

The TPLF government has committed an act of aggression. Their desire for territorial expansion brought up the conflict. We believe that the borders, which have been accepted through international treaties, were not controversial and that the conflict could be resolved peacefully by demarcating the borders, a purely technical job.

They, however, did not want the border dispute to be solved in this way. Their oft-repeated precondition that Eritrea has to pull out of Badme first before any discussions could go on remains a stumbling block to the peace process. We tried to put the case in its proper perspective by focusing on the border dispute, but the TPLF authorities did their best to divert the issue by stressing side issues and irrelevant questions going as far as expelling Eritreans residing in Ethiopia. For our part, even though we are deeply saddened by the atrocities perpetrated by the TPLF on peaceful and innocent Eritreans, we would like to see the expulsions and the border issues separately.

The TPLF government is following this line in order to confuse the people because it is difficult for it to come to the real issue and discuss it in a truthful and genuine way before the public.

Q: The Ethiopian mass media is talking a lot about new fighter planes. What is your comment?

All this is mainly designed to try and intimidate us, give morale to their fighting forces and confuse the public. Can these change the situation on the ground? The war, if it comes, will only be decided on the ground.

Q: How about the agreement made with Israel concerning the repairing of Ethiopian fighter planes?

There is nothing secret about this. This statement that it would take a year to repair or remodel the planes and that by that time things could change may fool the credulous. We know what is going on behind the scene.

Q: Isn't Israel taking a stand?


That is their choice. We cannot tell the Israelis not to take a stand. We should not be too worried about it.

Q: Which direction is the peace process conducted under the Organization of African Unity, the Organization of Sahel-Sahara and various heads of state going? Is there any possibility for finding a final solution to the crisis?

The solution to the problem depends on the goodwill of the two parties. A good intention or move from one party alone can in no way bring peaceful solution to the crisis if the concerned parties do not agree. Outside help may speed up or may create the proper atmosphere, but the solution can come only if the two sides agree on demarcating the border on the ground and, if need be, through international mediation.

Unfortunately the Americans were not free from the blame of complicating the issue right from the beginning. We know now that the Ethiopian Parliament was not alone in taking its bellicose decision; it was goaded by some quarters to take the move.

Even before the Ouagadougou Conference, the American team had been told by TPLF authorities about the bombing of Asmara. It was then that the team, instead of trying to prevent the bombing at a time when the peace process was going on, asked for a day or two in order to evacuate its citizens.

Some American authorities were for a quick fix and bombing Asmara into submission was not overruled.

In brief, the idea was to force the medicine down the throat. We did not accept such treatment right from the beginning. Later, the facilitating process reached a point where no room could be found for flexibility. We tried to put the issue in the right perspective but our pleas fell onto deaf ears. After we had been bombed, they put the blame on both sides. In the final analysis, those who encouraged the TPLF are responsible for complicating the issue right from the beginning.

Whatever the case, what the TPLF are doing at present, namely beating the war drum and making loud noises and threats, is not going to make matters easier.

However, as far as we are concerned, we stand by the principle that the only way to come to a solution is, now as before, through legal and peaceful means and we will not flinch an inch from this principle.

We know that the OAU now knows the root cause of the problem and its solution, but it is in a dilemma inasmuch as the TPLF government seems to be adamant in not accepting any legal solution to the problem.

Q: At the beginning, the problem between Eritrea and Ethiopia was about Badme, but at present the issue seems different. What exactly is the Ethiopian government seeking?

They say they hate the government of Eritrea and that they want to topple it. If that is their aim, will they really drop their claim to our land if there were to be a change of government here? The government of Eritrea is not an everlasting government. It is an institution of the people that will change with the passage of time. The main issue is not about the government. If their aim is to take Eritrea's land by forcing a change in government, they are deluding themselves. Even if the Eritrean people were to accept a new government forcibly, it is unthinkable that they would ever give their land to someone else.

The unfortunate experience we gain from this situation is something that should not be undermined. What will happen tomorrow or after that is something we must wait to see. As long as the TPLF authorities continue war-mongering, we must remain prepared for unfortunate results. Be that as it may, we are working hard to minimize the problem and we shall continue to seek a peaceful resolution.

Q: Would you like to pass a message to the people of Ethiopia and especially to the people of Tigray as well as to the Eritrean fighting forces?

I can only say this: We are not going to join the war dance, although our army is ready for any eventuality.

As for the Eritrean fighting forces, they do not need words of encouragement.

We will continue to show our goodwill to the people of Ethiopia living in Eritrea, especially to the people of Tigray. This will all be a thing of the past and we must make provisions for good neighborliness in the future.

We will not be provoked into an unwanted war by TPLF's threats and intimidation.

I would like to reiterate the fact that the people of Ethiopia and the people of Tigray in particular will not benefit from war. If ever war erupts it is the immediate areas that are going to bear the brunt of the war, and of these areas, the Tigray region is going to suffer the most.

There is nothing more perfidious than sending people to war under the false notion that one is going to win for sure. That is what the TPLF government is doing.

I only hope the people of Tigray choose the path of peace and join Eritrea in trying to solve the problem in a peaceful and legal way.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092498.html100644 127137 345 23476 6602451054 6320 Letter of the Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs
to the Union of African Parliaments

During its conference held 18-20 August 1998, in Niamey, Niger, the Union of African Parliaments passed a resolution on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict based solely on information received from the Ethiopian Government. On 2 September 1998, the Eritrean Foreign Minister sent a letter to the Secretary General of the Union about this one-sided resolution. Both the letter and the UAP resolution are reproduced below.
Asmara, 2 September 1998
MFA/A1/086/98
The Secretary General
Union of African Parliaments
BP 1381
Abidjan 01
Cote d'Ivoire
Fax: 22-20-87
Mr. Secretary General,
It is with great disbelief that the Government of Eritrea read the resolution adopted by the 35th session of the Executive Committee and the 21st Conference of the Union of African Parliaments which held its meeting in Niamey, Niger, from 18-20 August 1998.
The Government of the State of Eritrea takes it for granted that any responsible pan-African organization which is committed to the cause of conflict resolution and the promotion and fostering of peace in our continent, as well as the welfare of Africans, will address the issues surrounding any conflict with seriousness, objectivity and impartiality. It also assumes that any decisions and recommendations made will be reached on the basis of the principles of the charter as well as the decisions of, and precedents established by, the Organization of African Unity. Thirdly, the Government of Eritrea holds the view that the Conference should have independently verified the facts surrounding the conflict rather than depending on the submissions made by only one party to the conflict before making a determination or issuing a resolution. This could have easily been done by contacting the Government of Eritrea or any of its representatives abroad.
The Government of the State of Eritrea is convinced that, by limiting itself to information supplied, and interpretations given to the various OAU, UN and ACP-EU documents, by one of the parties to the conflict, the Conference has not been able to acquire an accurate picture of the conflict or the full thrust, purposes and meaning of the various recommendations. It was in fact misled to reach wrong conclusions.
The Conference was, for example, not fully appraised of the fact that the root cause of the conflict has been the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Eritrea by Ethiopia; that, in spite of this, Eritrea was determined, and to this day remains determined, to solve the conflict peacefully on the basis of OAU resolution AHG/RES 16(2) which sanctifies colonial boundaries while Ethiopia has rejected that and has adamantly refused to accept complete and unconditional cessation of hostilities. Additionally, the Conference needed to know that Ethiopia had declared war on Eritrea on 13 May 1998, imposed an air blockade and blockade of maritime access to Eritrean ports, and is conducting mass expulsion, indiscriminate arrest and arbitrary detentions of Eritreans.
The Government of Eritrea is also convinced that the Conference had not been properly and honestly apprised of the several issues that relate to the conflict. The following points provide compelling evidence:
1. Operative paragraph 2 of the resolution refers to the "findings" of the OAU Ministerial Committee. It will have been to the Conference's advantage if it had known that the OAU Ministerial Committee has not yet issued any "findings" since, in the words of the Introductory Note Presented by the Chairman, On Behalf of the OAU Ministerial Committee, to the Eritrean and Ethiopian Ministers on the Occasion of the Consultations Held Separately with the Two Delegations on 1 August 1998 in Ouagadougou, "the Committee of Ministers is at present endeavoring to prepare a set of recommendations which it hopes will contribute to the search for a peaceful, just and lasting solution ..." The document also stresses that the Committee "shall wholeheartedly endeavour to prepare recommendations which we deem to be fair ..."
This is conclusive and compelling evidence that the Committee had not yet, definitely at the time of the Conference, made any determination. In this connection, it must be pointed out that the Ministerial Committee is a body created by the Committee of the Heads of State and Government and consequently its sole mandate is to submit a report, albeit containing a set of recommendations, to that Committee.
2. The mandate of the facilitators was to submit to the parties concerned a framework for the resolution of the conflict which would be acceptable to both parties and not to make recommendations. This too had been made clear by the Eritrean Government on several occasions, including at the OAU Summit at Ouagadougou. The Eritrean reservation to this effect had been accepted by the summit.
3. A careful reading of the resolution of the Security Council on 26 June 1998 will indicate that it does not in fact endorse "the recommendation of the facilitators."
It is thus erroneous and misleading to suggest that any of these documents warrant the adoption by the Conference of such a partial and arbitrary resolution.
Even worse, the Conference seems to have found it proper to issue a call to the international community on the basis of an allegation included in the resolution of the House of People's Representatives of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia. Without giving the allegation the importance it does not deserve, the Eritrean Government wishes to emphatically state that such an action by the Conference is not only myopic and irresponsible but also jeopardizes the cause of peace. It also casts a grave doubt on the credibility of the Conference and your organization.
The Government of Eritrea is not worried by the possible investigation of war crimes. It will stand on its own record and I hope that you will agree that Ethiopia too would have to stand on its record and be answerable to this and other charges. On the other hand, the Government of Eritrea cannot believe that your organization was unaware of the horrendous human rights violations by the Ethiopian Government, including arbitrary arrests, detention, deportations and expulsions as well as cruel, degrading, humiliating and inhuman treatment of more than 20,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin. That would have singled you out as an exceptionally uninformed member of the international community. That you did not endeavour to balance the resolution by making reference to the several violations of international law provisions by the Ethiopian government leads the Eritrean Government to question your impartiality.
Mr. Secretary General,
This is only a fragment of the critical information relevant to the conflict that the Conference needed to possess before rushing to judgment. The Government of Eritrea thus believes that the passing of such a resolution is counterproductive to the promotion of peace that the conference had hoped to contribute to and regrets to inform you that such decisions will only encourage Ethiopia to pursue its aggressive policies and to continue to violate the human rights of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin.
The Government of Eritrea takes this opportunity to invite you and other representatives of the African Parliamentary Union to visit both Eritrea and Ethiopia to verify the truth for future purposes.
I should appreciate it if you would kindly bring this letter to the attention of the participants of the Conference.
Accept, Mr. Secretary General, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Haile Weldensae
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Resolution on the Eritrean/Ethiopian Conflict Issued by the 35th Session of the Executive Committee and the 21st Conference of the Union of African Parliaments Held in Niamey, Niger from 18-20 August 1998
1. Calls upon the continued search for a peaceful solution of the border conflict with the active support of IGAD, OAU and Security Council of the United Nations;
2. Calls upon Eritrea to respect the findings of the OAU Ministerial Committee dealing with the crisis, which has conclusively affirmed that Ethiopian administered territories have been occupied by Eritrean armed forces;
3. Affirms that the said occupation constituted a fundamental element of the crisis that has to be addressed by the Government of Eritrea;
4. Calls upon the Government of Eritrea to withdraw its forces to the point where it was prior to developments of May 6, 1998 as recommended by the Facilitators, the OAU and the Security Council;
5. Calls upon the international community, particularly African Parliament, to facilitate the investigation regarding the occurrence of war crimes in the conflict as alleged by the resolution of the House of Peoples' Representatives of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092598.html100644 127137 345 10604 6602747125 6315

Embassy of Eritrea, USA

Press Release, 25 September 1998

False Report by Reuters


On 22 September 1998, Reuters wire service issued a report falsely stating that the Eritrean government "admits to a few thousand expulsions of Ethiopians."

Eritrea, in contrast to Ethiopia, views the detention and expulsion of innocent civilians as a gross violation of basic human rights. Eritrea has explicitly stated on numerous occasions that it will not expel Ethiopians residing in Eritrea. This policy was reaffirmed by the Eritrean National Assembly, the highest body of the Eritrean government, in its resolution of 26 June 1998. The National Assembly further noted that for Ethiopian residents of Eritrea "Their right to live and work in peace is guaranteed. If this right is infringed under any circumstances or by any institution, they have the full rights of redress. This policy that can see a horizon beyond the conflicts of today will not change even if the current crisis deteriorates to any degree."

Like the nationals of many other countries who left Eritrea after Ethiopia escalated the conflict by initiating air bombardment, there were and are Ethiopians who seek to leave. They were allowed to do so. Ethiopia attempted to make propaganda portraying these voluntary departures as "expulsions." For this reason, the Eritrean government no longer permits Ethiopians to leave Eritrea on their own. Ethiopians are still free to leave if they so desire but the departure process must be closely observed by representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross or the foreign diplomatic community who will ascertain that the departure is voluntary.

Reuters is an independent news agency with an obligation to accurately report the facts to its readers. Its representatives have received copies of the Eritrean government's various statements of its policy on Ethiopians residing in Eritrea. It cannot claim that it is unaware of this policy.

Reuters also has a responsibility to attempt to independently confirm the veracity of Ethiopian government statem contacted the ICRC office in Eritrea to check whether Ethiopians ents. It could have departing Eritrea are leaving voluntarily or being expelled. It could have checked the reports of the European Union Committee of Ambassadors or the various United Nations agencies in Eritrea which investigated this issue. It could have examined the statement of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the question of expulsions. It could have contacted Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch for information about what is actually going on. Reuters did none of these things.

In addition, in its report, Reuters uncritically accepts the Ethiopian government spokesperson's statement that the expulsion of another 2,000 Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin this week is a "family reunion" with the expellees having been given the opportunity to "dispose of their properties and arrange their affairs" before expulsion. Is this effort to portray Ethiopia's inhumane expulsion program as a magnanimous and charitable policy of the Ethiopian government meant to be some cruel and thoughtless "joke," made at the expense of the over 20,000 people who have been expelled from Ethiopia? The Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin who are being expelled are not being allowed to access their bank accounts and take their savings with them; to sell their homes and businesses; etc.

We ask that Reuters make the effort to investigate this issue and verify the truth before issuing more false reports.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092598_2.html100644 127137 345 10653 6602764767 6555 Eritrean Foreign Affairs Ministry Press Release on Policy Toward Ethiopians in Eritrea

Press Release

---

CORRECTION: An error was made in the number of Ethiopians who have left Eritrea in the Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Release issued earlier today. The correct figure is 6,600. A corrected version of the press release follows.

---

The Ethiopian Government has alleged, in a press statement dated September 24, 1998, that the Eritrean Government has expelled over 24,000 Ethiopians. This is pure fabrication as the following facts illustrate.
The Eritrean Government has no policy of expulsion of Ethiopian nationals living in Eritrea. The policy of the Eritrean Government, as pronounced in its National Assembly resolution and decisions of its Council of Ministers, is that all Ethiopian nationals who have been living in Eritrea prior to the conflict are welcome to continue living and working in Eritrea and that legal action will be taken against anyone who harasses them.
Six thousand, six hundred Ethiopian nationals have left Eritrea for a number of reasons, but it must be stressed that those who left had left of their own free will and not because they were asked to or compelled in any way by the Eritrean Government.
1. Many left during the early stages of the conflict as they were afraid of Ethiopian air bombing on Eritrea. For that matter, many other foreign nationals have also left. It must be remembered that Ethiopia had threatened to bomb Eritrea and had done so.
2. Some left from Assab as there were no jobs for them. Most of the Ethiopians who lived in Assab were dock workers. Ethiopia's decisions to boycott the use of the port of Assab and to blockade the port made those Ethiopians working in Assab redundant and therefore victims of their own government's policy.
The Eritrean Government has waived immigration requirements and immigration fees in an effort to speed up the voluntary return to Ethiopia of Ethiopian nationals living in Eritrea.
Eritrea has called and continues to call for an independent inquiry into the allegations of maltreatment of Ethiopian nationals in Eritrea and to verify its policy of humane treatment of Ethiopian nationals residing in Eritrea. This is despite the fact that reports written by the UNDP, WHO, EC and other international bodies indicate neither any maltreatment by Eritrea or expulsion of Ethiopian nationals from Eritrea. On the other hand, it is the Government of Ethiopia which has negatively responded to the proposal for an independent inquiry to look into the conditions of Eritreans living in Ethiopia.
No one should be surprised by Ethiopian lies, exaggerations and creation of facts to confuse international public opinion and to divert attention from the real issues of the border conflict and its gross abuse of the human rights of Ethiopians of Eritrean origin and Eritreans living in Ethiopia; those who are still languishing in Ethiopian prisons, those who were and continue to be arbitrarily expelled and their property expropriated. No one should also be surprised at the Ethiopian Government's capability of creating camps and calling camp residents "expelled from Eritrea."
The Eritrean Government would like to inform the international community and all Ethiopian citizens of its firm belief that the border dispute can only be settled through negotiations and legal means, that war and war-mongering can only aggravate the situation, and that it affirms its commitment to do all within its power to find a just and lasting solution to the conflict.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asmara, 25 September 1998

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092998_1.html100644 127137 345 16266 6604205647 6553 Will the International Community Foot the Bill for Ethiopia's Reckless Military Adventure?

Will the International Community Foot the Bill
for Ethiopia's Reckless Military Adventure?
There is a perverted logic coming out from Addis Ababa these days. Ethiopia's leaders are unabashedly telling their people that the "international community will support the military offensive" that they intend to unleash against Eritrea. What is more, they are falsely claiming that "Ethiopia will obtain substantial external assistance to rebuild what may be destroyed in the war."
This sickening argument first appeared in the September 1998 issue of the EPRDF [Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democracy Front] weekly paper, Revolutionary Democracy. But the TPLF [Tigray People's Liberation Front] ideologue and Politbureau member, Abaye Tsehaye, has repeated the same convoluted logic in an interview with Radio Tigray on Wednesday this past week. In his words, "We have made all the necessary preparations, military and otherwise. I have no doubts whatsoever that our aim of teaching Eritrea an unforgettable lesson, of annihilating the enemy, will be fully accomplished ... Tigray is in the front-line and the war may entail physical destruction to our factories. But we shall solicit assistance for reconstructing what may be destroyed ..."
Ethiopia's intransigence is pushing a border conflict that is so easily amenable to a peaceful and legal solution to the brink of a full-scale war. In the first place, the skirmishes that occurred between May 6 and 12 in the Badme area were triggered by the unprovoked attack of Ethiopian army contingents on Eritrean patrol units. It was also Ethiopia that launched the first air strike against Asmara on June 5, 1998. And, it has been weeks now since Ethiopia's leaders--from senior EPRDF leaders including President Negaso Gidada down to all the army generals--have been bragging about their full and meticulous preparations "now well-known to friend and foe alike" to launch a full-scale war against Eritrea.
Apparently, Ethiopia's leaders have a delusion of their military might. They seem to have contracted a fatal fixation of "teaching Eritrea a lesson" and, in the words of Abaye Tsehaye, "installing a new government in Asmara" that will be at the beck and call of Addis Ababa. This pipe dream has made them oblivious to the loss of human life and immense material destruction that any war between the two countries is bound to entail.
But what is galling is their audacity to portray their adventure as something endorsed by the international community. They are resorting to this inexcusable fabrication with the sole and debased aim of pushing innocent civilians to support the war in the belief that its disastrous consequences would be cushioned by a sympathetic international community.
Otherwise, the writing on the wall is crystal clear. Ethiopia has been told, time and again, by all concerned governments and international bodies to seek a peaceful and legal resolution to the conflict. The resolutions adopted by the OAU, the UN Security Council, the Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement, all speak the same language: to avert an escalation of the conflict by ensuring an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities. The resolution (see box) adopted this week in Brussels by the ACP-EU Joint Assembly (which brings together 15 European and 71 Afro-Caribbean and Pacific countries) sums up succinctly the stance of the international community on this unfortunate and avoidable conflict.

---

As regards the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, ACP-EU
1. Urges the Governments of Eritrea and Ethiopia to abandon the use of force and to fully commit themselves to peaceful and legal means of resolving the border dispute; calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the beginning of negotiations with mediators;
2. Believes that it is instrumental that a solution involve independent and neutral mediation, and, subsequently, the demarcation of borders under the auspices of the United Nations; urges Eritrea and Ethiopia to immediately agree to such a process;
3. As called for by the [UN] High Commissioner for Human Rights, urges the Government of Ethiopia to respect international human rights norms in relation to ethnic Eritreans in Ethiopia.

---

But in their frenzy to impose a military solution, Ethiopia's leaders are quite capable of misreading the world. When the conflict was about to be discussed in the UN Security Council last June, Ethiopia's impetuous Deputy Foreign Minister, Tekeda Alemu, had boasted, "... the US Government and the international community are on our side and we are certain that the UN Security Council resolution will be supportive of Ethiopia. This will allow us to take any action we want on the Eritrean leader as he will have been portrayed as Saddam Hussein and on Eritrea. The port of Assab will fall into our hands in the next few days." Mr. Tekeda had to chew his words when Security Council members told him, through Resolution 1177/1998, that his crazy ideas do not find currency in such august bodies.
The international community is not only opposed to an escalation of the conflict but several governments have warned Ethiopia, in the strongest possible terms, that the substantial development assistance that it gets will be terminated if it resorts to war. And Ethiopia depends heavily on external assistance. The World Bank's resident representative in Addis Abeba, Mr. Omar Faez, acknowledged early this month that "Ethiopia is not only the largest client of the Bank in Africa but also among its largest clients world-wide ... Up to this fiscal year which ended in June 1998, the Bank has financed projects worth 669 million dollars in the country." Similarly, Ethiopia is the largest recipient of European Union (EU) support both in programmable and non-programmable resources, ahead of any other ACP state, receiving 265 million ECU from Lome IV alone.
In light of these circumstances, the dire implications of war have been sternly conveyed to Ethiopia's envoys when they toured several European capitals last month. If they have misread this message or wish to disregard it, it will only be to their peril. The Ethiopian people too will not be hoodwinked by their transparent deceit.
Anonymous, 28 September 1998


Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_092998_2.html100644 127137 345 2727 6604205661 6525 Eritrean Foreign Ministry Press Release on Sudan's Baseless Allegations

Press Release
Sudan's Baseless Allegations
The NIF [National Islamic Front] regime in the Sudan has accused the Governments of Eritrea, Uganda and Rwanda "for fighting with the SPLA [Sudan People's Liberation Army] in southern Sudan."
This accusation is not new. Indeed, Khartoum has a well known pattern of behaviour of apportioning blame to neighbouring countries for acts carried out by Sudanese opposition forces.
The Government of Eritrea accordingly rejects this mendacious accusation that has no basis whatsoever.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 29 September 1998

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_100298.html100644 127137 345 53126 6606200432 6273 Statement by H.E. Mr. Haile Weldensae,

Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea at the 53rd Session of the UN General Assembly
New York, 2 October 1998

Mr. President,
Mr. Secretary General,
Distinguished Delegates,

I wish to join the other distinguished delegates who have spoken before me, Mr. President, in congratulating you on your assumption of the Presidency of the Fifty-third Session of the UN General Assembly. Your vast experience and skill assures us that you will guide the deliberations of this Assembly to a successful end. I assure you of the full support of my delegation in carrying out your important mandate.

Let me also take this opportunity to pay tribute to your distinguished predecessor, H.E. Hennadiy Udevenko of Ukraine, for his outstanding leadership during his tenure last session.

Our Secretary General, H.E. Kofi Annan, deserves appreciation for his commendable efforts and the effective leadership he provided to ensure the realization of the ideals of our organization by making the United Nations more effective and better able to serve its members.

Mr. President,
The end of the Cold War had, even if only briefly, raised hopes and expectations and sent tidings of a more peaceful, safer, just and fair world, safeguarded from conflict and tension, hunger and disease. Such hopes and expectations were to be frustrated rather early as the world was plunged in numerous inter and intra-state conflicts, ethnic violence and hatred, terrorism, gross violations of human rights, racism and xenophobia as well as mass starvation and increase in the number of refugees and displaced persons.

The international community cannot dismiss, or even ignore, this human condition which, in some cases, has caused the commission of serious international crimes, not only because it is generally the innocent and the weak--i.e., women, children and the elderly--which become the first victims but also because this condition, which now seems to be limited to certain regions, may soon engulf wider areas of the world. In the face of these harsh realities, it is incumbent on the UN and the international community to search for fresh, innovative approaches with a view to eliminating the root causes of this condition, to ensure respect for the basic principles of the Charter, the safety of the innocent from the scourge of terrorism and the human and civil rights of ethnic minorities. If they fail to do so, it will not only prolong the agony of the victims but will, in fact, sooner or later, threaten regional as well as international peace and security.

Mr. President,
The Founding Fathers of our Organization had recognized economic development as one of humanity's inalienable rights and had set as one of the goals of the UN the promotion of "social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom." I am certain that all developing countries will, in no uncertain terms, declare that this goal has so far been unattainable.

Mr. President,
The situation in Africa raises great concern. In spite of the great effort exerted by regional and sub-regional organizations and agencies, situations in many parts of the continent are deteriorating and become more dangerous by the day.

The tragic bloodshed and suffering that Africans have witnessed during the recent past in various parts of the continent are too horrible to recite. They must not recur and, where they continue to exist, must be stopped.

In the Great Lakes region, conflicts are assuming much wider ramifications, in spite of their seemingly regional containment, and pose grave threats to peace and security as they may soon involve extra-regional powers. It is hoped that the ongoing regional initiatives will be able to formulate just and mutually acceptable solutions. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, Africans and the rest of the world have been forced to witness the disheartening spectacle of an African country which had barely emerged from the cruel destruction of a rapacious dictatorship being once again ravaged by multifaceted fighting. It has also divided the broad African coalition which had contributed to the promotion of peace and security in the country. This sad state of affairs must be quickly reversed on the basis of:

1. the full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the DRC and the recognition that the internal political process is the sole prerogative of the Congolese peoples; and
2. the realization of the need for a regional framework of cooperation to address the security concerns of the countries of the region.

Somalia and the Sudan continue to be sources of anguish and sorrow for Africa because there is still a lack of progress in the effort to resolve the crises that ensued in both countries. The frustration of the international community at the lack of progress in peace-making in both countries is understandable. It must be noted, however, that genuine efforts continue to be made by the IGAD countries, and the international community must not despair or give up but must contribute to the efforts of these countries if they are to be successful. In this connection, my delegation upholds the view that with regard to the Sudan conflict IGAD's Declaration of Principles and consequent resolutions remain the sound basis for a just and lasting solution to the conflict.

Mr. President,
In my statement last year, I had declared that Eritrea's foreign policy rested on two basic tenets. The first was the deep conviction that, where there is goodwill, all disputes can be resolved through peaceful negotiations and methods without recourse to violence. The second tenet was the unswerving devotion of Eritrea to justice and equality. I also declared that these two have underscored our search for friendship and cooperation with our neighbors as well as with other states. This statement is valid today as it was last year.

The commitment of the Government of Eritrea to these two tenets has helped to defuse conflict with the Republic of Yemen and to arrive at a mutual understanding to resolve the dispute over the Eritrean Archipelago of Hanish-Zuqar in the Red Sea by peaceful means through arbitration.

Today too, the Government of Eritrea insists that the road to peace with Ethiopia is a strict application and enforcement of the principles of the Charters of the United Nations and the OAU, as well as the OAU decision on colonial borders. Once again, Eritrea calls upon the international community, particularly the UN and the OAU, to ensure respect of these principles and the decision.

Mr. President,
Eritrea was surprised and disturbed by the eruption of conflict with Ethiopia because, in spite of disagreements on the issue of boundaries dating back to the days of armed struggle, the Eritrean Government had assumed--and hoped--that it was, in view of the close relations between the two, possible to arrive at an amicable and enduring solution.

The responsibility for the escalation of the dispute rests solely with the Government of Ethiopia which has, during a long period of time, consistently violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Eritrea resulting in the occupation of large tracts of Eritrean territory, followed by the forcible displacement of Eritrean peasants and the replacement of Eritrean administrative structures by Ethiopian institutions. It reached a climax on 6 May only as a result of the further unprovoked incursions by members of the Ethiopian armed forces which attacked Eritrean troops in the Badme region, in southwestern Eritrea. These incursions were premeditated and meticulously planned. This is the root cause of the dispute.

For a long time, Eritreans had opted for patient and quiet diplomacy. They had hoped against hope that the periodic incursions were only the petty acts of some miscreant and ill-advised regional officials. It was only at a very late stage, and particularly after the publication in
1997 of an official map of the Tigray Administrative Zone, incorporating additional indisputably Eritrean territory and particularly after the issuance of the new Ethiopian currency note depicting the same map, that they realized the full meaning of the Ethiopian adventure.

Yet, even in the aftermath of the fighting that was triggered by the unprovoked Ethiopian incursion and attacks on Eritrean troops, Eritrea never crossed its internationally recognized border; but Ethiopia still controls other Eritrean territory in southwestern and southeastern Eritrea.

In spite of all this evidence of its aggressive deeds, the Ethiopian Government is conducting an absurd propaganda campaign to portray Eritrea as a warmongering nation which had committed aggression against, and occupies, Ethiopian territory. Nothing could be further from the truth. At no time have Eritrean troops crossed Eritrea's internationally recognized borders and it is there for everybody to see. On the contrary, it was Ethiopian troops that invaded Eritrea after Prime Minister Meles Zenawi's declaration of war on 13 May 1998. They were repulsed. In fact, it is important to note that the Deputy Foreign Minister of Ethiopia, Dr. Tekeda Alemu, had articulated Ethiopia's expansionist designs by publicly declaring in a speech to members of the Ethiopian community in the US that Ethiopia would occupy the Eritrean port of Assab within a short time. In light of the above, Ethiopia's claims that it is the victim of aggression and will not negotiate unless Eritrea withdraws from "its territory" are obviously false and only meant to hoodwink the international community and to cover its own acts of aggression.

Even today, Ethiopia is threatening war unless Eritrea withdraws unconditionally from territories which are fully within its internationally recognized borders. Today, virtually the whole of the Ethiopian army has taken positions along the Eritrean border and almost all of the highest leaders of Ethiopia, including the President, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, the President of the Tigray Region and a Senior Official of the TPLF have only in the past few weeks publicly declared that Ethiopia has finalized war preparations and will soon teach Eritreans lessons they will never forget.

It is regrettable therefore that all the good will and efforts of the Eritrean Government, consisting of several consecutive proposals, to bring about a peaceful and legal settlement to the present border dispute with Ethiopia on the basis of the OAU resolution on colonial borders have been consistently rejected by the Ethiopian Government which obdurately pursues a policy which is committed to the settlement of matter by military means. The Ethiopian Government has also rejected all overtures by third parties for peaceful solution of the dispute and all calls made by the international community to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute.

Mr. President,
This expansionist and aggressive policy is underscored by the use or threat of force, as well as a massive and malicious propaganda campaign, against Eritrea. The propaganda campaign accents ethnic hatred, vituperation against, and slander of, the Eritrean people and members of the Eritrean government. It also calls upon the Eritrean people to rise against their government.

At the same time, the Ethiopian government has been systematically and willfully violating the most sacred and cherished provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two International Covenants and several other international human rights instruments as well as the principles enshrined in the UN and OAU charters by:
* deporting or expelling more than twenty thousand (20,000) Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin under extremely unhealthy conditions or dumping them in very dangerous places;
* deliberately separating family members;
* exposing them to inhuman, cruel and degrading treatment; and
* confiscating their property.
These acts have been well documented by third parties including members of UN agencies, heads of mission of member states of the European Union as well as several NGOs.

Yet, the Ethiopian Government, in an amazingly refined application of the Orwellian principle, accuses the Eritrean Government of precisely the outrages and atrocities it itself has been committing against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin. The truth is that the Eritrean Government has not detained, expelled or deported, or otherwise violated the rights, human or otherwise, of Ethiopians living in Eritrea. This has been verified by legitimate third parties like the representatives of the European Union, the UN agencies, and the International Committee of the Red Cross. As usual, the Ethiopian Government has called all of them liars. We have hitherto extended to all interested parties invitations to make an on the spot verification of the human rights conditions in both Eritrea and Ethiopia. We now extend this invitation to you. We also would like you to receive a similar invitation from the Ethiopian Government.

Mr. President,
This dispute is about borders, pure and simple. Any effort to transmute it into anything else must be viewed as only a vain and brazen attempt by the Ethiopian Government to camouflage its aggression and its expansionist policies.

In this connection, it must be made clear that it was the Ethiopian Government which willfully violated Eritrea's colonial boundaries and forcefully occupied those areas that it had incorporated into its new map of Tigray. It was the Ethiopian Government which subverted all Eritrean efforts to defuse the crisis and to find a peaceful bilateral solution through their Joint Border Commission by unleashing unprovoked military attacks on Eritrea from May 6-12. It was the Ethiopian Government which declared war on Eritrea by a resolution of its parliament on 13 May. It was the Government of Ethiopia which invaded Eritrea along several points on their common border. It was the Government of Ethiopia which launched an air strike on Asmara, the Eritrean capital, on 5 June 1998. It was the Ethiopian Government which imposed an air and sea blockade by threatening indiscriminate air bombing of Eritrea.

Yet, Ethiopia has falsely portrayed Eritrea as an aggressor country by claiming that Eritrean forces invaded Ethiopian territory on 12 May. However, it is not claims and counterclaims that matter. There is incontrovertible material evidence which establishes that Ethiopia has deliberately used force and carried out military incursions in Eritrea since July 1997 with a view to covertly changing the reality on the ground. In this connection, I wish to bring to your attention the fact that the Eritrean Government has repeatedly called for an independent investigation of the incidents that triggered the conflict.

Mr. President,
This border dispute should not have existed in the first place considering that boundaries between the two states are some of the most clearly defined in Africa and were made by explicit and detailed provisions of international treaties. They were then confirmed by the UN when it created the ill-fated Eritrean-Ethiopian federation and again clearly defined in the constitution that the UN gave to Eritrea.

True, the borders may not have been demarcated; but they are not the only undemarcated borders in Africa, and the non-demarcation of boundaries has not prevented most African--and indeed other--states from living in peace with their neighbors and from solving their problems peacefully.

Eritrea is committed to a peaceful and legal solution of this dispute on the basis of the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of states which are enshrined in the charters of both the UN and the OAU as well as decisions and declarations of the OAU and the NAM. Prior to and since the onset of the crisis, Eritrea has attempted to initiate numerous bilateral discussions with Ethiopia with a view to addressing all outstanding issues related to their common borders. In this connection, it must be mentioned that:
* The Eritrean Cabinet and National Assembly had issued, on 14 and 20 May 1998 and 18 June 1998 respectively, calls for the temporary demilitarization of the areas of dispute;
* The Eritrean President had sent two letters to the Prime Minister of Ethiopia requesting him to join him in defusing the dispute and settling the border issue peaceful and legally on a bilateral basis;
* The Eritrean Government presented to the Committee of OAU Ambassadors a proposal containing the principles of respect of colonial boundaries and non-violation of these borders, respect of the Charters of the OAU and the UN, commitment not to use force to impose a solution, commitment to peaceful and legal means to solve the dispute, readiness to stop all hostilities and readiness to enter into direct talks without preconditions.

Unfortunately, all our efforts failed because of negative responses from Ethiopia. On the other hand, Ethiopia has yet to offer a single plan or peace proposal. It has only threatened war unless Eritrea withdraws from territories which are within the internationally recognized borders of Eritrea. In this connection, it must be mentioned that the Eritrean Government has time and again requested the Ethiopian Government to publicly announce to the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community the territories that it claims and to designate them on a political map with clear geographical coordinates.

Mr. President,
It is for these reasons that the Government of Eritrea yet again offers the following as a basis for the solution of the dispute:
1. The comprehensive solution of the problem through a technical demarcation on the basis of the established colonial treaties that clearly define the boundary between the two countries.
2. A possible resort to arbitration on the basis of the sanctity of colonial borders in the event that this is demanded by the other party.
3. Pending a lasting, legal solution, an immediate cessation of all hostilities and a cease-fire to be monitored by an observer force under the auspices of the UN.

It is a matter of satisfaction to the people and Government of Eritrea that numerous governmental institutions, international and regional organizations and NGOs, including the House of Representatives of the US Congress, the European Union and the Non-Aligned Movement have, in welcoming the Eritrean initiative, called upon both Eritrea and Ethiopia to avoid the use of force at all costs and to resolve their disputes peacefully.

I wish to declare here and now, in loud and clear terms, that the Government of Eritrea welcomes, and is ready to make an undertaking to implement, a decision by this august Assembly which provides without any preconditions for the cessation of hostilities, a cease-fire agreement and a peaceful resolution of the dispute by any method as the only acceptable solution.

Mr. President,
In Africa, conflicts such as the present Eritrean-Ethiopian border dispute have taken place several times in the past. Each one of these conflicts was addressed on the basis of the hallowed principles and decisions of the OAU, including, in particular, respect for colonial borders, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states and the non-use of force or threat of force.

As the OAU prepares itself to enter the 21st century, it is imperative that its member states rededicate themselves to the sublime principles and resolutions that have hitherto served our continent. These principles and decisions which have successfully fostered peace and stability, solved conflicts and defused tension in our continent in the past will be as valid in the future as they have been since they were first articulated. Only through their proper application would it be possible to defuse tension and eliminate conflict.

Mr. President,
Eritrea reiterates its commitment to peace, harmony and the rule of law in international relations, however painful this tragedy may be. Eritrea seeks peace for itself and for all its neighbors. Eritrea will continue to seek good relations with all its neighbors.

Eritrea is in a race against the clock of development and cannot afford to lose the time, energy and resources which must be used in the war against underdevelopment.

To date, Eritrea has restrained itself against extreme provocation--and it shall continue to do so unless it is forced to defend itself. If aggression is committed against their country, however, Eritreans shall have no choice but to defend their hard won independence and sovereignty as well as every inch of their territory with whatever is at their disposal.

I thank you.


---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_100598.html100644 127137 345 15377 6606200545 6311 The New US Peace Initiative: A Fresh Start or Old Wine in New Bottles? by Abraham Tesfai


US presidential envoy and former National Security Adviser Anthony Lake is due to arrive in Asmara on Tuesday, October 6, for new shuttle diplomacy between the two capitals. Mr. Anthony Lake was scheduled to embark on this difficult job last week when the plan was postponed at the last minute due to his sudden illness. But, in the end, timing will be immaterial if Mr. Lake can manage to pull off a breakthrough and bring the conflict to an end.
Observers of the region see fresh hope in the new endeavour. But the apparent optimism appears to hinge on the political weight and personal integrity of the envoy rather than on any intimate knowledge of what is envisaged.
The personal qualities of Mr. Lake are certainly vital and necessary for a serious engagement of the US administration. But they are not sufficient conditions in themselves. Success of the US initiative will be predicated on two crucial parameters: i) the readiness of the new team to disavow fully, and dissociate itself from, the botched-up job of the facilitators; and, ii) its degree of latitude to work out a viable arrangement at its own pace without the ominous threat of war.
The gravest mistake that the facilitators committed was their one-sided proposal requesting Eritrean forces to "redeploy" from Badme. This disastrous and unjustifiable error played, rather unwittingly, into the preconditions of the Ethiopian Parliament. Addis Abeba interpreted the inexcusable blunder of the facilitators as a tacit endorsement of its ultimatums. On the same day that Ethiopia claimed that it had "accepted" the recommendations, the Ethiopian Prime Minister declared on local television that he had "given orders to the Ethiopian Armed Forces to take all necessary measures against Eritrea." The next day, Friday, June 5, 1998, the Addis Abeba regime escalated the conflict by launching the first air strike against Eritrea.
In retrospect, some insiders within the facilitation team now attribute the apparent fiasco to the wrong assumptions that they entertained at the time. They are at pains to explain that they were "not judgmental" and that the recommendations did not endorse, tacitly or explicitly, Ethiopia's preconditions as they had no position either on the location of Badme or on who triggered the conflict on May 6. However, they had given credence to the notion, deliberately fanned in Addis Abeba, that Ethiopia's fragile government was torn "between hard-liners pushing for war and a minority moderate faction around the Prime Minister who were intent on avoiding a military conflict." Extraction of a unilateral concession from Eritrea, however unfair, was in this context deemed acceptable as a "face-saving formula for the moderates." Ethiopia's vague indication that it might then accept the fundamentals of a solution--demarcation, demilitarization and placement of observers--that were vigorously advocated by Eritrea from day one were seen as additional inducements.
The second, related, factor was the unfounded presumption that imminent war would not be averted unless some formula was hastily worked out to mollify Addis Abeba. The facilitators felt that time was against them. The Ethiopian regime had issued public ultimatums, "cornering itself into a box," and unless it was helped to climb down from this perilous cliff, "it would go to war." Any package acceptable to Ethiopia had therefore to be rammed through and imposed on Eritrea.
Other mistakes were made too, both at the time and later when the initiative had clearly faltered. The facilitation process was originally expected to offer a congenial framework for a speedy and amicable resolution to the conflict at its early days. Serious negotiations would be conducted without adverse publicity with the two friendly governments--the United States and Rwanda--serving as a convenient conduit for indirect communications between the two conflicting states. But this pact was breached by the facilitators who arrogated to themselves a new role without the acquiescence of the concerned parties. Thus, they called a press conference in Addis Abeba to announce their "recommendations" even before they had exhausted them with the Eritrean side; canvassed influential governments for endorsement and decided to go to the OAU Summit in Ouagadougou to solicit support.
This is history now. But the Ethiopian government is clearly trying to play the same tune this time around too. The ultimatums are back again--with higher frequency and through more belligerent statements from TPLF political leaders and army generals alike. Moreover, Addis Abeba has been barricading itself behind the "facilitators' recommendations" to obstruct all subsequent diplomatic efforts by interested parties. Ethiopia thus continues to ignore calls for the renunciation of force and appeals for cease-fire and the cessation of all hostilities made by the UN Security Council, the Non-Aligned Movement and the ACP-EU Joint Assembly among others.
For the new US initiative to succeed, it is vital that it takes full stock of these realities and avoids the minefields that trapped the previous endeavour. The contention that the Ethiopian government is divided between "hard-liners" and "moderates," and that the facilitators should take saving the latter as their mission must be laid to rest. Similarly, Ethiopia's bluff that it has refrained from "teaching Eritrea a lesson" in order to give the peace process a chance must be recognized for what it is. Indeed, Ethiopia has not yet launched an attack simply because it has lacked the capacity to do so. Thus, the US initiative must take a bold approach, tackling the key issues at stake without diversion by threats, conditionalities or tenuous presumptions. Above all, it must avoid fragile arrangements that only postpone the problem while complicating a durable solution.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_100998.html100644 127137 345 3253 6607477722 6301 Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Release

The arbitration tribunal set up to arbitrate the dispute between Eritrea and Yemen concerning islands in the Red Sea has announced its decision today, Friday, October 9, 1998, at The Hague.
The tribunal found the Mohabbabakah Islands, including Sayal Islet, Harbi Islet, Flat Islet and High Islet; the Haycock Islands; and Southwest Rocks Islands to be subject to the sovereignty of Eritrea; and the Zuquar-Hanish, Abu Ali, Jabal al-Tayr and Zubayr Islands to be subject to the sovereignty of Yemen. The tribunal subjected the sovereignty over the groups of islands awarded to Yemen to "the perpetuation of the traditional fishing regime in the region, including the free access and enjoyment for the fishermen of both Eritrea and Yemen."
The government of Eritrea, as it has stated consistently, will abide by the decision.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 9 October 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_101498.html100644 127137 345 11224 6611172150 6270


Press Release Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Statement on Ethiopia's new Map


Ethiopia's New Map:

Deliberate Confusion or Surreptitious Retraction?

Ethiopia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs is circulating a map to the diplomatic community in Addis Abeba. The map has also been widely distributed in schools and other government institutions.

The new map conforms with the international boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia. In that sense, it may be a step in the right direction as the Ethiopian government will have rescinded, albeit indirectly, the Tigray Administrative Map that it issued in October 1997 which carves out, illegally, large chunks of Eritrean territory. Territorial encroachment by Ethiopian troops in July 1997 to occupy Bada and install a new Ethiopian administration there and incessant border markings in the Badme area for the rest of the year were prompted by the desire to create on the ground what was unilaterally delimited in the illegal map of the Tigray Administrative Region.

But there is a curious snag in the "latest" map too. Badme village is inexplicably displaced and "located" at the centre of "the Yirga triangle" inside Ethiopia which is shaded as "occupied territory."

That Badme village lies inside Eritrea--about 15 kms westward from the boundary segment between the Mareb and Setit rivers--was not contested by Ethiopia before. Indeed, the regime in Addis Abeba has been evoking tenuous arguments of "administrative presence" to justify its claims on the territory. At any rate, the accurate location of Badme village can be easily verified on the spot with appropriate equipment. Moreover, Eritrea has never occupied, and does not have any claims on, what is termed now as "the Yirga triangle." This too can be verified easily by an independent investigation.

Ever since the eruption of the crisis, Eritrea has been insisting that Ethiopia declare--fully and clearly--the totality of its territorial claims. The statement issued by the Cabinet of Ministers of the Government of Eritrea on May 14, just one day after Ethiopia's Parliament declared war on Eritrea, called for "each party to publicly announce to the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community the territories it claims--if any--and designate them on the political map with clear geographical coordinates. Each party shall also accept that the dispute cannot, and should not, be resolved by force but through peaceful negotiations."

Ethiopia has balked from doing so in the past. It refused to submit the totality of its territorial claims to the OAU in order to enable the latter to define the scope of the dispute. It refused either to publicly acknowledge or rescind the map that illegally incorporates many parts of Eritrean territory. But now, it has fabricated a different map which purportedly establishes Eritrean "invasion" of Ethiopia.

This muddle is deliberate and designed to obscure the cause of the conflict. But the Ethiopian regime cannot get away with this act of transparent duplicity. It must unequivocally and officially rescind the map of the Tigray Administrative Region that was published by the Mapping Authority of the central government and express in clear terms that it respects Eritrea's international boundaries that were established in accordance with the colonial treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908 respectively. For its part, Eritrea asserts categorically that it has not occupied and does not have any claims on "the Yirga triangle" which can be verified by independent inspection.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 14 October 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_101598.html100644 127137 345 6212 6611451133 6253 Embassy of Eritrea Press Release on Eritrea-Yemen Relations

Eritrea-Yemen Relations Picking Up Fast
Soon after an arbitration tribunal announced its decision on 9 October 1998 concerning ownership of a group of Red Sea islands disputed by Eritrea and Yemen since December 1995, Eritrea expressed its readiness to abide by the decision. President Isaias Afwerki attested that Eritrea would live up to its commitment and implement the decision fully, despite certain reservations about the result. The panel divided the islands between the two countries and guaranteed Eritrea's traditional fishermen the right to fish in islands awarded to Yemen.
In a joint press conference with the Yemeni Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Mr. Abdul-qaddar Bajmal, in Asmara on 13 October, Eritrea's Foreign Minister, Mr. Haile Woldensae, noted, "To have any dispute would be natural, but to solve it peacefully, legally and in a civilized way is an important experience and lesson." Abdul-qaddar Bajmal, on his part, said, "We are building up the bridge for the future; we have agreed that we have to build this bridge with cooperation in all fields ... for the benefit of the two peoples." An Eritrean delegation, led by Trade and Industry Minister Ali Said Abdella and including Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae, left for Yemen the following day.
The day after the decision was announced, Mr. Marawon Noman, Yemen's ambassador to Ethiopia, expressed his country's happiness with the decision. He told Reuters news agency that "Yemen and Eritrea have saved resources and lives by accepting the arbitration" and that the decision of the two countries to resolve the dispute in this manner "had set a new precedent for the region that territorial disputes could be resolved in such a peaceful manner." He expressed his desire to see Ethiopia and Eritrea resolve their border dispute in a similar manner.
The international community also hailed the settlement of the dispute by peaceful means. A number of countries and international bodies--Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, China and the Arab League--welcomed the decision and expressed their appreciation for, in the words of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, "the spirit of wisdom and the peaceful approach adopted by the two neighbors" in solving the dispute through arbitration.
Embassy of Eritrea
Washington DC, 15 October 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_102198.html100644 127137 345 3510 6613372175 6260 Eritrean Foreign Affairs Ministry Press Release on New Expulsions from Ethiopia

Press Release
2,500 Eritreans Expelled Through Five Border Checkpoints
In a new upsurge of its inhuman expulsion of innocent Eritreans, the Ethiopian Government has this week expelled 2,500. The expellees--who are mostly women and children--are expected to arrive at five border points (Humera, Rama, Zalambesa, Tserona and Bore) today. The regime in Addis Ababa has not provided any reason for the dispersal of families or for dumping them at different border points.
The ICRC has not been allowed to accompany the expelled.
Ethiopia has to date expelled some 30,000 Eritreans. The Ethiopian regime is moreover detaining 1,316 Eritrean youth in a concentration camp at Blatien for the preposterous reason that "these people could be potential soldiers" in Eritrea. More than eighty of these are university students, many who were in Ethiopia on the basis of the exchange programme between Asmara University and Ethiopian universities.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 21 October 1998


---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_102798.html100644 127137 345 10557 6615407544 6320 <4KN5LTRW>

Press Release
The following article appeared in the October 24, 1998, issue of Eritrea Profile, an Eritrean government newspaper. It discusses Ethiopia's issuance of contradicting maps, a fundamental question to be resolved in a peaceful settlement of the present conflict between the two countries.

Embassy of Eritrea Washington DC, October 27, 1998

Note: As the maps cannot be sent in text format, you can find them at the following web site: www.dehai.org The embassy thanks the Dehai Community for making the maps available on the internet.

Ethiopia's Cartographic Amnesia

Ethiopia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has denied issuing a "new map recently" stating that "the copy under reference was merely made available to the diplomatic community last May" after the eruption of the conflict. The Foreign Ministry further asserted, in a statement issued on October 19, that the "copy was based on maps used in Ethiopia for decades." But this evasive approach raises more questions rather than answering the existing discrepancies in Ethiopia's territorial claims. Let us not squabble about timing, for the moment, as this is of marginal importance. The issue remains that Ethiopia has published two separate and distinct maps.

1. Last year, on October 19, the Ethiopian Government openly published a new map of Tigray (Map 1) which appeared in the weekly edition of "Woyin," the official newspaper of the TPLF, Ethiopia's ruling party. This map, which includes large chunks of Eritrea's territory as part of Ethiopia, was described in the paper as "the product of four years work in conjunction with the Central Mapping Authority in Addis Ababa." The paper further contended that "the new map defines the boundaries of Tigray with neighbouring states as well as contiguous Administrative Regions within Ethiopia." Ethiopia's occupation of Adi Murug in July 1997 and continuous encroachment on the Badme area coincided with the release of this new map. This was a clear violation of Eritrean sovereignty, both in intent and practice.

2. Now, without rescinding this map, Ethiopia has "made available" a separate map (Map II) which apparently conforms to Eritrea's recognized colonial boundaries. But even here, Badme village has been deliberately relocated so that its coordinates fall inside Ethiopia's uncontested territory. Furthermore, the town of Sheraro lies, in this map, outside the territory that Ethiopia claimed "is occupied by Eritrea." It may be recalled that Ethiopia's Parliament passed the resolution to declare war on the pretext that Badme and Sheraro were invaded and occupied by Eritrea.

Under these circumstances, the Ethiopian government must be made to answer the following fundamental questions with some degree of coherence and consistency:
i) Does Ethiopia respect Eritrea's colonial boundaries? If the answer is yes, why does not Addis Ababa officially acknowledge that the October 1997 map is illegal?
ii) Is Ethiopia prepared to allow independent cartographers to ascertain the true location of Badme village?
iii) How about Sheraro? Ethiopia's Parliament asserted that the town was invaded and occupied by Eritrea on May 12 while the map distributed by the Foreign Ministry to "illustrate the areas occupied by Eritrea" put the town outside the shaded "occupied area."

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_110698.html100644 127137 345 43755 6620634034 6314 Eritrean Foreign Affairs Ministry Press Release on New Expulsions from Ethiopia

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ERITREAN ECONOMY
AND
THE CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS FOR LONG-TERM GROWTH
Opening Remarks to the Meeting of Eritrea's Development Partners
Asmara, Eritrea , November 2, 1998
by
Isaias Afwerki
President of the State of Eritrea
Excellencies and Distinguished Guests,

Welcome to our development partners' meeting, which is being held for the first time in Asmara. Let me begin by expressing my gratitude to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the International Finance Corporation, the European Union, the UN family, and all our bilateral partners for attending; a particularly warm welcome to all our friends and colleagues who came from outside Eritrea. I hope that this meeting will serve as an effective forum for all of us to share experiences, expand knowledge of each other, and agree on the steps that need to be taken to further strengthen our development partnership. I hardly need to emphasize the importance that we attach to this forum of periodic consultations with our development partners by which we can exchange ideas with openness and frankness.
Before outlining our development policies and priorities, let me address first the current crisis between Eritrea and Ethiopia, which must be foremost in your minds. I wish to express in this regard our appreciation for the concern and anguish felt by our partners, who have the continued welfare of our peoples at heart, regarding the looming cloud of war and conflict. Nobody could have contemplated a year ago that the exemplary alliance that we had managed to cultivate with Ethiopia - forgiving and forgetting the past history of conflict and animosity - would collapse so abruptly and bring the two countries to the brink of war.
Perhaps due to the utmost trust that we had and the efforts that we had expended to cultivate the best of relations with Ethiopia, we were the last to suspect any ingrained desire for foul play from those whom we considered to be our closest allies. This was the reason why we did not over-react or take the necessary diplomatic measures or other legitimate acts of self-defense when regular Ethiopian troops crossed our border to dismantle our administration in Adi Murug last July with concurrent incursions in the Badme area. We tried to keep the dispute in-house; doing all we could to resolve quietly and speedily through bilateral talks what we thought were minor differences essentially emanating from low-level officials. But, realizing the potential problems that such provocative excesses could entail, I wrote to the Ethiopian Prime Minister two letters at the time, requesting him to intervene personally to check these unwarranted acts and suggesting that we form a Joint Border Commission at a sufficiently high level of authority from both sides with full powers to resolve on the spot the problems that were cropping up from time to time.
Now in retrospect, it is clear that these were not isolated incidents, but part of a well thought out territorial design against Eritrea. The map that the Tigray Administrative Region issued - though not officially circulated - in October 1997 not only incorporated the areas that the Ethiopian authorities have been attempting to seize under various pretexts but also illustrated that this work had been underway since 1994 with the involvement of the central government. In the meantime, the Joint Border Commission was paralyzed, meeting only once before May 1998 and unable even to agree on the ground rules for performing its job.
It was against this backdrop that Ethiopian army contingents attacked our patrol unit in the Badme area on May 6 and provoked a chain reaction of spiraling clashes until May 12. Rather than attempting to contain the problem, the Ethiopian Parliament passed a declaration of war on Eritrea on May 13, propelling the two countries toward unnecessary confrontation while effectively obstructing the prospects of early peace.
In spite of these ultimatums and threats of war, we have not to-date spared any effort to resolve this crisis peacefully. We have suggested - from day one of the conflict - that we expedite the process of demarcation, as this is the only solution to the border dispute. In the meantime, we have called for a cease-fire and the cessation of all hostilities. We have stated, repeatedly, that we are ready for a mutual disengagement in as much as this is necessary to prevent the eruption of a conflict and to facilitate the technical work of demarcation. I can firmly say that there is overall consensus that these parameters constitute the fundamental ingredients of a peaceful solution. Still, peace is being kept hostage by Ethiopia's preconditions. And the lack of resolve by the international community is only encouraging Ethiopia's intransigence, and to that extent postponing early peace while increasing the likelihood of military confrontation. These are the real facts, and I believe that we must recognize them for what they are in our endeavors to enhance the peace process.
One grave issue that I wish to further underline is the deliberate acts of permanent animosity that the Ethiopian government is trying to foment between the two brotherly peoples. This border conflict will pass and be resolved one way or the other. But creating a permanent hatred among the peoples is morally reprehensible and unacceptable. The international community must not, accordingly, tolerate the witch-hunt that the Addis Abeba government is perpetrating on Eritreans.
Economic Policy, Performance and Prospects
As you all know, Eritrea is a new nation that has emerged from the ruins of a long and costly struggle for independence. Upon liberation in mid - 1991, we found our infrastructure and productive capacity almost completely destroyed, the private sector decimated, and our people exiled and scattered all over the world. The challenges were immense, and our prospects seemed poor. Except for the Eritrean people themselves, very few others, if any, expected us to emerge so soon as a dynamic and enterprising nation in Sub-Saharan Africa.
In the short time that I have, I would first like to review for you briefly Eritrea's achievements during the last seven years and also share with you my own view of Eritrea's challenges and prospects. Secondly, I would like to highlight the areas of focus of our development program in the next three years, and invite you to continue to be partners in our efforts.
Economic Policy
Our economic development policy is anchored upon the establishment of a dynamic private sector-led, outward-looking market economy. Our commitment is to make the private sector the lead actor in the economic life of our country. We are limiting the role of the government to creating a conducive environment for development by maintaining law and order, sound macroeconomic policies, and by providing the social overhead capital that is necessary to facilitate development. It will undertake critical investments in strategic sectors of the economy only when private investors are either unwilling or unable to make the needed investments. Even in such sectors as infrastructure, the government encourages private sector involvement. Our policy position is that the creation of production capacities in all contestable markets will be left to the private sector - both domestic and foreign. I would like to emphasize here that our policy is to treat foreign investors exactly in the same manner as we treat domestic investors. Furthermore, we are committed to maintain macroeconomic stability by limiting budgetary deficits to levels that could be managed without inflation, and to provide the necessary political, legal and institutional framework and safeguards to promote investment. Promotion of competition through greater reliance on market forces in all segments of the economy is the hallmark of our economic development strategy. We are committed to adhere to this strategy because we believe this is critical for successfully embarking our economy on a growth path consistent with our growth potential.
Our trade and investment policies are liberal and forward-looking. We encourage free trade internally and across borders within the region. Through active membership in regional organizations such as the Intergovernmental Agency on Development (IGAD) and the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) we remain committed to expand the market for our exporters and importers. In the area of investment, all sectors of the economy are open to both domestic and foreign investors. Under Eritrean law, private property or investments are protected against nationalization or confiscation. In the event that there would be a compelling public interest that requires expropriation, the law provides for a fair and full compensation by the government. Eritrea is a member of bilateral and multilateral investment protection or guarantee treaties such as MIGA that provide further protection of foreign investors.
Economic Performance (1992-1997)
Since mid-1991, we have formulated and implemented policies and strategies that promote economic development. Steps have been taken to rehabilitate, upgrade and expand transport, communications, power, and water supply facilities. Significant progress has been made to improve the capacity of government and development institutions in such areas as health, finance, and education. We have restored the productive capacity of the economy, especially in agriculture and fisheries, tourism, construction, mining and manufacturing industries. We have adopted broad-based fiscal, monetary, and trade policy regimes aimed at maintaining macroeconomic stability, mobilizing government revenues, and facilitating efficient allocation and utilization of resources. Recognizing the crucial role that an efficient financial sector can play in our development, we have put in place appropriate laws that pave the way for the establishment of an independent central bank and the formulation of a sound monetary policy. Based on these, we successfully introduced our national currency.
Overall, in the last seven years, we have made real progress in all the areas pertaining to infrastructure development, production, employment, price stability, fiscal discipline, and accumulation of external reserves. During the period 1992-1997, real output growth averaged about seven percent, thus reflecting an improvement in per capita income. Along with this growth rate, significant employment opportunities were created. The annual average rate of inflation was maintained at less than five percent. In preparation for the introduction of our national currency, we made determined efforts to improve our fiscal position, and succeeded. We reduced expenditures and took concrete measures to enhance revenues. As a result, we reduced the deficit from over 16 percent in 1996 to 5.5 percent of GNP in 1997. To instill and maintain confidence in our currency, our commitment to maintain the deficit at sustainable levels remains firm. Since its introduction in November 1997, our currency has shown stability and acceptability that we are pleased with. Our gross reserves in months of import of goods and services increased to over six months in 1997.
In summary, in the period up to the unexpected encroachment on our territorial integrity by Ethiopia, we were able to gear our economy on to a sustainable growth path under a stable macroeconomic environment. Our economy was indeed poised to take-off, and we are determined to maintain that momentum. We strongly believe that the conflict with Ethiopia is only a temporary distraction. We want you to know that, because our development vision is clear and focussed and our commitment is firm, we are determined to pursue our development policies and achieve our targets in spite of the deliberate distractions imposed on us by Addis Abeba.
Growth Sectors
Now let me say a few words about the sectors where the prospects for growth are evident. Agriculture, fisheries and fish processing, general manufacturing, communications, banking, transport and tourism hold great promise. There are good prospects also for discovering economic deposits of gold, silver and copper, and energy resources that can be exploited to generate growth. However, our people are our most important development asset and source of growth.
Agriculture is the mainstay of the Eritrean economy and employs the large majority of the workforce. However, the sector operates at very low levels of technology and productivity. While Eritrea has plenty of arable land and significant water resources, it needs capital and modern agricultural technologies to increase existing crop yields, develop new crops and increase overall factor productivity. We believe that large productivity gains can be obtained from relatively modest investments in new farming methods. To realize the agricultural potential, we have embarked on an integrated agricultural development program using both traditional and modern inputs. In this context, foreign investors are especially encouraged to participate in establishing modern agricultural estates. We believe that fruits, vegetables, flowers and greenhouse plants, industrial crops, and livestock (dairy and meat) for both the domestic and export markets are particularly attractive for local and foreign investors. Incidentally, I would like to mention that this year we are fortunate to have bumper crops that have not been experienced in the recent past.
Fisheries is another area where there are unexploited potentials for development. Eritrea's coastal waters contain the most productive fishing grounds in the Red Sea. We are actively seeking joint-venture investments with foreign investors to develop modern fish processing, distribution and marketing facilities.
In manufacturing and industry, Eritrea has a long history and tradition which in large part is a legacy of its previous ties with Italy. While much of the sector is in need of substantial investment for rehabilitation and expansion, we are convinced that a vibrant industrial base can be re-established. Promising manufacturing opportunities can be found in textiles, leather products, general agro-processing, cement and other construction materials, and a wide range of chemical and mechanical manufacturing that can supply the domestic and regional markets.
Privatization is an important aspect of our government's strong commitment to private sector development and we are in the process of privatizing all state-owned enterprises. We believe that our privatization program offers attractive opportunities for those investors who are interested in acquiring established enterprises which, with further investment in modernization and capacity expansion, could become competitive suppliers in the export market. Our privatization program is driven by our strong conviction that commercial production of goods and services should be the domain of the private sector. We do not impose special conditions on buyers. For the government, the most important thing is to rehabilitate and develop the potential of privatized enterprises. Both local and foreign investors are welcome.
Tourism in Eritrea is in its infancy. The enormous potential has yet to be exploited. There are excellent prospects for both private and foreign investors. Our offshore islands in the Red Sea and parts of the mainland along the coast offer great promise for tourism development. Therefore, we are encouraging domestic and foreign investors to take advantage of these opportunities.
As I have indicated earlier, the infrastructure has been improved substantially. Nevertheless, more investment is needed over the next few years if economic growth is not to be constrained; and we would like to see the private sector involved in this. Most critically, there is a need for substantial investment in power generation, telecommunications and transportation, including continuous development and modernization of the ports of Assab and Massawa.
Finance plays a pivotal role in economic growth and private sector development. In Eritrea we recognize that much needs to be done to develop our banking system so that it can meet the financial needs of the private sector. Accordingly, as part of our modernization strategy, we have enacted a comprehensive "Bank and Financial Institutions Act." This permits the licensing of private financial institutions, including the establishment of foreign banks.
In closing, I would like to emphasize that in order to achieve our development objectives your support and active participation in our development efforts is critical. I will, therefore, appeal to you to support our development program and to work with us. All our ministers and policy makers will be with you to further clarify our macro and sector policies and programs and to answer questions that you might have.
I wish you success in your deliberations during the next two days. Have a pleasant stay in Eritrea.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_110998.html100644 127137 345 7447 6621701436 6277 Eritrean UN Mission's Letter to the UN Security Council on Ethiopian Shelling of Villages

The head of the Eritrean Mission to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios, sent the following letter to the President of the UN Security Council, H.E. Mr. Peter Burleigh, on November 6, 1998.
November 6, 1998
H.E. Mr. Peter Burleigh
President of the UN Security Council
Excellency,
I would like to bring to your attention and that of the Security Council a development of grave concern in the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
Amid Ethiopian threats of starting an all out attack against Eritrea, in the words of the Ethiopian Prime Minister "not only to regain territories that belong to us, but also to go on further and teach the Eritrean Government a lesson," the Ethiopian army has intensified in the past week its shelling of Eritrean villages and crop fields causing civilian deaths and losses of property. In heavy Ethiopian shelling on October 29, 1998, in southwestern Eritrea (Badme area), several villages were destroyed, more than a hundred crop fields burned, and a farmer and a child instantly killed (more could die from the many wounded). On the same day in the Senafe area, barrages of Ethiopian shelling similarly destroyed villages, burned crop fields and killed three peasants. There has been retaliation from our forces to stop Ethiopian shelling.
Such intensified Ethiopian attacks coming on the eve of the peace talks in Ouagadougou indeed attest to Ethiopia's lip service to a peaceful solution and intention for war. Indeed, continuous intimidation and the threat and use of force by the Ethiopian Government is threatening the peace efforts that are being made.
The Eritrean Government reiterates its commitment to peace and has and will continue to cooperate with the search for a peaceful and legal solution. It has not and shall not resort to force, but if the constant Ethiopian threats, intimidation and attacks that we are witnessing persist, it will defend itself and will not bear any responsibility for the consequences.
We ask the Security Council to take note of the prevailing situation and call upon it to demand that the Ethiopian Government ceases its intimidatory threat of an all-out war and its attacks on Eritrean villages, peasants and their property, and that it commits itself unconditionally and irreversibly to a peaceful solution. We have consistently called for an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities with a view to creating an enabling atmosphere in the search for a peaceful process acceptable to both sides. Ethiopia continues to refuse thus making out respective positions very clear. We call upon the Security Council to insist on an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities and thus enhance the chance of the ongoing OAU and other efforts to succeed.
I should be grateful if you would kindly circulate this letter as a document of the Security Council.
Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_111098.html100644 127137 345 15516 6622144176 6306 Eritrean Foreign Ministry Press Release on the OAU Meeting at Ouagadougou
November 9, 1998
OAU Meeting at Ouagadougou
The OAU Committee of Heads of State on the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia that met in Ouagadougou between November 7-8 has called on both sides to reflect on the talking points handed over to them. It announced that the problem would be further discussed at the next meeting of the OAU Central Organ which will be held next December.
The Committee took this decision because it could not sufficiently bridge the gap between the two sides. As always, the main stumbling block was Ethiopia's precondition of an unconditional Eritrean withdrawal from territory that is Eritrean. Eritrea's insistence that the meeting "should at least emerge with a signed agreement for the cessation of hostilities even if all outstanding issues could not be resolved at one go" could not materialize because of Ethiopia's outright rejection.
The OAU's talking points centered on: the cessation of hostilities; the demarcation of the boundaries within six months; an investigation of the incidents of July-August 1997 and May 6 in order to determine the origins of the conflict; and the demilitarization of the border areas and a commitment to address the impact of the crisis on the civilian population and particularly deportees. In addition, the Committee felt that "armed forces presently in Badme be redeployed as a mark of goodwill" and as a "cure for the humiliation" that Ethiopia laments it had suffered in the clashes that occurred in May.
Eritrea welcomed the OAU's ongoing peace efforts and regarded the Ouagadougou meeting as positive, providing a forum for a better understanding of all the pertinent issues. Its recognition that the conflict did not start in May 1998 but that it goes back to July 1997 and its call for an investigation into these events is significant since it has a bearing on the framework for a peaceful solution.
President Isaias Afwerki submitted the following points--which were further extensively discussed with the OAU Committee--that Eritrea felt should be incorporated to provide a sound basis for a lasting peaceful solution to the border conflict.
1. It has been Eritrea's consistent view that the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia is a border dispute that must be resolved by scrupulous respect of Eritrea's inherited Italian colonial boundaries. In this respect, I wish to emphasize that Ethiopia has flagrantly violated this cardinal principle by perpetrating an act of aggression at two levels: i) its issuance of a new map in October 1997 which illegally incorporated large areas of Eritrean territory; and ii) its military acts to create facts on the ground to incorporate the areas claimed on the illegal map; the first vivid precursor of these acts of aggression being the occupation of Adi Murug and incursions in the Badme area in July 1997.
Moreover, it has shown no intention of accepting and respecting Eritrea's colonial boundaries. A lasting peaceful solution, however, requires that Ethiopia rescind its illegal claims on Eritrea and declare, without equivocation, that it respects the colonial boundaries between the two countries that were delimited in accordance with the treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908. It is these same boundaries that have constituted Eritrea's frontiers since then. This unequivocal formulation, which is indeed a prerequisite for the technical work of demarcation of the boundary between the two countries that will have to be carried out expeditiously under the auspices of the UN Cartographic Unit, must be reflected clearly in the principles that underpin a peaceful resolution of the conflict. I urge Your Excellencies to ensure that this crucial element is given the weight that it deserves, as without it there cannot be a peaceful solution.
2. Another cardinal principle that both sides must commit themselves to is the rejection of the use of force to resolve the border dispute. In this regard, I must reiterate that it is Ethiopia which has repeatedly resorted to the use of force. This is not only true for the events of July 1997 but also for those of May 6, 1998. This is why Eritrea has been calling from the very beginning for an investigation into those events. Ethiopia, on the other hand, did not only commit those acts of aggression, but continues to publicly declare its desire to use force to impose a solution as illustrated by the resolution of its Parliament on May 13, 1998, and repeated pronouncements thereafter.
In this context, I wish to reaffirm to Your Excellencies Eritrea's commitment to a cessation of hostilities. I urge you to impress on the other side to make the same commitment. Even if we cannot resolve all the outstanding issues at one go in this Summit, we should at least emerge from this gathering with a signed agreement on the cessation of hostilities.
3. A cessation of hostilities is certainly a sufficient condition for the deployment of an observer force and for carrying out an expeditious demarcation. If it is accepted that "in order to determine the origins of the conflict" an investigation needs to be carried out into the incidents of July-August 1997 and 6 May 1998, then obviously any pronouncement that prejudges "the origins of the conflict" is not justifiable. If it is a matter of good will, then the onus must be on both parties. The same logic applies to the issue of "administration." Certainly, no sovereign nation can countenance the administration of its own territory by a foreign country. I urge Your Excellencies to ensure that these fundamental points are incorporated.
4. Although I do not wish to dwell on issues tangential to the border dispute, important as these are in their own right, I must nonetheless state that detention and deportation of innocent civilians on account of their nationality is being carried out solely by Ethiopia. Fairness demands that appeals by the Summit be directed only to the culpable party.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 9 November 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_111198.html100644 127137 345 6526 6622424336 6267 OAU Press Release on the Ouagadougou Meeting on the Eritrea-Ethiopia Conflict
November 8, 1998

For the public's information, we are reproducing here the full text of the OAU Information Division's press release of 8 November regarding the talks held on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict in Ouagadougou on 7-8 November 1998.
Organization of African Unity
Press Release Issued by the OAU Information Division
Press Release No: 68/98

The O.A.U. High-level Delegation on the Dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia met in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 7 and 8 November 1998, under the Chairmanship of H.E. Blaise COMPOAORE, President of Burkina Faso and Current Chairman of the O.A.U. H.E. Hassan Gouled Aptidon, President of the Republic of Djibouti and H.E. Robert Gabriel Mugabe, President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, participated in the meeting.
H.E. Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim, Secretary General of the Organization of African Unity, also participated in the meeting.
The UN Secretary General was represented by Ambassador Mohamed Sahnoun, as Observer.
The O.A.U. High-level Delegation considered and adopted a set of proposals constituting elements of a Framework Agreement for a Peaceful Settlement of the Dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea. These proposals were communicated to H.E. Isaias Afewerki, President of the State of Eritrea, and H.E. Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister of the Federal democratic Republic of Ethiopia, by the Current Chairman of the O.A.U., on behalf of the High-Level Delegation.
The two leaders were received separately by the O.A.U. High-Level Delegation which listened to their preliminary observations and provided clarification on some aspects of the proposals as requested by the Parties.
The O.A.U. High-Level Delegation reiterated to the two Parties its full disposition to pursue its efforts and urged them to communicate subsequently their definitive response to the proposals submitted to them.
In the meantime, the O.A.U. High-level Delegation reiterates its appeal to the two Parties to continue to exercise maximum restraint.
The O.A.U. High-Level Delegation expresses its high appreciation to the two Parties for the confidence they place in the O.A.U.
The O.A.U. High-Level Delegation will submit a report on its efforts to the Central Organ of the O.A.U. Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution at its next Session at Summit Level.
Ouagadougou,
8 November 1998
Note: Spelling and capitalization are as in the original release.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_111298.html100644 127137 345 6563 6623041730 6263 Eritrean UN Mission Letter to the Security Council

On 11 November, 1998, Eritrea's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Haile Menkerios, sent the following letter to the President of the UN Security Council, Peter Burleigh, regarding Ethiopian misrepresentation of the results of the 7-8 November meeting of the OAU High-level Delegation on the Eritrea-Ethiopia border conflict and Ethiopia's threats to restart the war.
November 11, 1998
H.E. Mr. Peter Burleigh
President of the UN Security Council
Excellency,
I have the honour to forward the attached statement and its annex from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea issued on November 9, 1998 concerning the November 7-8 meeting in Ouagadougou.
While the enclosed Press Release issued by the OAU on the outcome of the Ouagadougou meeting is clear, the Ethiopian Government has circulated a statement that is a clear misrepresentation of the facts. It is thus incumbent upon the Eritrean government to present to all concerned the facts as they are: the proposals that were presented by the Committee as talking points accompanied by Eritrea's initial views on them. Contrary to the allegation of the Ethiopian Government, no final conclusion was reached at the Ouagadougou meeting and this is clearly stated in the OAU Press Statement:
"The two leaders were received separately by the O.A.U. High-Level Delegation which listened to their preliminary observations and provided clarification on some aspects of the proposals as requested by the Parties.
The O.A.U. High-Level Delegation reiterated to the two Parties its full disposition to pursue its efforts and urged them to communicate subsequently their definitive response to the proposals submitted to them."
I would like to reiterate, Excellency, that Ethiopia's insistence to restart all-out fighting if it does not have its way continues to pose a grave threat to the search for a peaceful solution acceptable to both sides which concerned parties are trying to broker. Eritrea's proposal for a cessation of hostilities while differences are being ironed out with the help of third parties has been rejected by Ethiopia. We call upon the Security Council to take note of the matter and to exercise its responsibility to avert renewed all-out war initiated by Ethiopia.
I should be grateful if you would kindly circulate this letter and its annex as a document of the Security Council.
Sincerely,
Haile Menkerios Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Eritrean Mission to the United Nations
Annex: OAU Press Release

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_111998_1.html100644 127137 345 5103 6625127610 6503 Eritrean Foreign Ministry Statement on Djibouti's Decision to Sever Diplomatic Ties

Statement on Djibouti's Decision to Sever Diplomatic Ties with Eritrea
The Government of Eritrea has been repeatedly expressing to the Government of Djibouti its concern about the latter's unwarranted cooperation with Ethiopia in the war efforts against Eritrea. Eritrea's diplomatic protests were accompanied by incontrovertible material evidence. As the Government of Djibouti failed to heed these protests, Eritrea sent a high-level delegation led by the Foreign Minister on September 10, 1998, to convey a letter from President Isaias Afwerki to the Djibouti President. Eritrea also conveyed its concerns to the current Chairman of the OAU.
Against the backdrop of these developments, Eritrea requested that Djibouti not be part of the OAU High-Level Committee at the Ouagadougou meeting on November 7-8 as it could not be a party to the conflict and an honest broker at the same time. Eritrea further clarified at the meeting that it was willing to submit all the evidences at hand and requested the Government of Djibouti to allow an independent team to its country to verify the facts on the ground. The Government of Djibouti in fact admitted its involvement by its silence at the meeting and failure to respond positively to the request.
In the aftermath of the Ouagadougou meeting, the Government of Djibouti went out of its way to heap insult on Eritrea. And finally, on 18 November 1998, it announced that it has severed diplomatic ties with Eritrea requesting the closure of the Embassy in Djibouti within three days. The latest act of the Government of Djibouti only confirms the position it has taken against Eritrea in the border conflict with Ethiopia.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 19 November 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_111998_2.html100644 127137 345 4452 6625127621 6514 UN Security Council President's Statement on the Eritrea-Ethiopia Conflict

UN Security Council President's Statement on the Eritrea-Ethiopia Conflict
On 18 November 1998, Ambassador Burleigh, President of the UN Security Council, made the following points to the press following the Council's briefing on the status of the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia by UN Special Envoy Sahnoun.
"The Council:
• supports the OAU's efforts to resolve the dispute;
  
• commends the OAU's Proposals for a Framework Agreement for a Peaceful Settlement of the Dispute;
• encourages flexibility from both parties;
• insists upon restraint, and emphasizes that there is not a military solution to this dispute;
• demands that both sides guarantee the safety of NGOs and humanitarian assistance workers;
• calls on both countries to respect humanitarian law and human rights;
• calls on both countries to cease the deportation of each other's nationals;
• invites the SYG [UN Secretary General] to provide whatever assistance necessary to help bring about a peaceful solution, such as providing aerial monitors for a withdrawal from disputed territory; provisional administration in these areas; and demarcation of the border;
• endorses the initiative of UN Special Envoy Sahnoun and the ongoing mission of US Special Envoy Lake;
• looks forward to both sides agreeing to the OAU Framework Agreement; and
• will follow closely both sides' progress towards a peaceful settlement."

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_112098_1.html100644 127137 345 4236 6626316774 6515 National Union of Eritrean Youth and Students Call for Urgent Action
Call for Urgent Action
The National Union of Eritrean Youth and Students (NUEYS) received yesterday, 18 November 1998, the news of the deaths of three Eritrean youth--a university student under the exchange program, a civilian internee, and a prisoner of war--in the Ethiopian detention camps with great regret and deep concern. the worst of this event was that, while these three youth died on 7 and 13 October, their certificates of death were delivered to the ICRC on 17 November. This act clearly depicts the brutality that Eritreans in general and the youth in particular are facing in the detention camps of Ethiopia.
The ill treatment, intensive psychological pressure and denial of very basic medical treatment in the detention camps is common place. This is the outcome of it and it might be followed by a series of deaths in these detention camps.
Despite the clear practices of ethnic cleansing and violation of human rights against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin which continue, no serious action was taken to stop these brutal practices. Hereby, NUEYS is calling on all human-concerned organizations to take urgent action to stop the ever increasing ethnic cleansing activities and demand the release of Eritreans in detention camps.
Executive Committee
NUEYS
Asmara, 19 November 1998


---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_112098_2.html100644 127137 345 23511 6626317012 6515 University of Asmara President Appeals to UNESCO to Take Action
The President of the University of Asmara, Dr. Wolde-Ab Yisak, again appealed to the Director General of UNESCO to take action on previous appeals regarding university exchange students placed in detention camps by the Ethiopian government. The new appeal follows the death of one of the students held at the camp. The text of Dr. Wolde-Ab's letter to UNESCO follows:
17 November 1998
H.E. Dr. Federico Mayer
Director General, UNESCO
Your Excellency,
On July 7, 1998, I had reported to your office the tragic incidence of some 85 Eritrean university students who were studying in Ethiopia under a student exchange programme. These students were forcibly removed from their campuses, denied the right to sit for examinations and detained in military camps as a result of the present Eritrea-Ethiopian border conflict. I had at the time strongly appealed for your intervention to end such an illegal and immoral act by the Ethiopian authorities because such an act not only constitutes a gross violation of human rights but it also poses a serious threat to international academic cooperation. Although our appeal had received very little attention from UNESCO, a number of regional and international academic associations responded to our appeal and managed to place pressure on the Ethiopian authorities resulting in the release of 46 of our students. However we still have 38 of our students kept as political hostages in Blaten military detention camp (see attachment).
On October 5, 1998, while addressing the World Conference on Higher Education in Paris, and on October 9, 1998, in a letter I wrote to you, I had once again renewed my strong appeal for intervention by the world academic organizations but more specifically by your Office to intervene on behalf of the detained innocent students. These students have now suffered untold hardships in Ethiopian military detention camps for well over five months and, as I have stated in my earlier appeal, their continued detention poses a very serious threat to their safety.
Recognizing the precarious situation in which our students find themselves and considering that the poor responses our repeated appeals have received from your office may have emanated from confusing and/or conflicting information that may reach your office, we had suggested that a special envoy appointed by you be sent to the area. The envoy together with other UN agencies in the area should assess the situation with respect to the impact of the conflict on educational institutions and its beneficiaries resulting in a clearer identification of the victims. This we had hoped would provide you with more accurate and reliable information and serve as a sound basis for taking concrete and bold steps that would provide hope and protection to the unfortunate victims who rightfully and legitimately have been and are still seeking your support. Once again the lack of response from your office to all our appeals and suggestions has baffled us and continues to be a source of great disappointment.
On November 10, 1998, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Government of the State of Eritrea has received the sad and tragic news of the untimely death of one of our students who had been in the military detention camp at Blaten. The report came through a letter written by the International Committee of the Red Cross. The shock, sorrow, pain and deep anxiety that this sad news has brought not only on the bereaved parents but on all the parents of the 38 still imprisoned students and on the entire university community is beyond description. I hope that this tragic incident will be an issue of major concern also for you and for the entire academic community and hopefully a sufficient cause for UNESCO to act.
The late Mr. Ghebrekidan Zekarias Teklemariam was a 24-year-old third year distinction student in Statistics. He came from a very poor family that lived in refugee camps in the Sudan for many years during the war for liberation. He was his family's only hope and wealth and now they have been deprived of the only hope they have had.
As the Director General of a United Nations cultural and educational organization, the University of Asmara strongly believes that you have the mandate and responsibility of protecting and defending student rights and safety especially those that are on international student exchange programmes. Therefore I am making once again a strong and passionate plea to you to intervene without further delay, through the effective exercise of your moral and institutional authority, to prevent any further tragedy from occurring by mediating for the immediate and unconditional release of all the remaining University of Asmara students who are still under custody. By a copy of this letter I am also extending my plea to all academic associations, to all my fellow heads of academic institutions and to all student unions to support our appeal and place pressure on UNESCO and the Ethiopian authorities.
It is my sincere hope that you will give our appeal the serious attention that it deserves and that you will do everything in your power to avert any further unnecessary tragedy from occurring.
Accept Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Wolde-Ab Yisak, Ph.D.
President
University of Asmara
List of Eritrean University Exchange Students Still Under Military Detention in Ethiopia
• Michael Asmelash - Civil Engineering, Addis Ababa University (AAU), 4th year, held in Blaten Prison
• Fisseha Belay - Civil Engineering, AAU, 4th year, held in Blaten Prison
• Btsuamlak Hadish Tekeste - Computer Science, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Weldekidan Zekarias Teklemariam - Computer Science, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Yonas Tesfazghi Woldeslassie - Computer Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tesfa-Alem Kesete Ghebreab - Computer Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Yonas Yemane Weldemichael - Educational Administration, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Thomas Fitwi Adagish - Electrical Engineering, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Mulubrhan Fitwi Zerisenai - Geography, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Ghirmai Kiros Ghebretinsae - Geography, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Mussie Ghirmai Habte - Geology, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Yonas Tekie Idris - History, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tesfa-Alem Tekleab Araia - History, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Yonathan Tekle Berhe - Library Science, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Negash Habte Debas - Library Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Habtom Tekle Tesfu - Library Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tesfaldet Kiflemariam Yohannes - Mechanical Engineering, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Yosief Woldu Araia - Medicine, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Mussie Beraki Demoz - Medicine, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Btesfa Yikealo Habteselassie - Pharmacy, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Simon Tesfamichael Tombossa - Pharmacy, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tesfamariam Amare Mehari - Pharmacy, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Mulugheta Tsehaye Mirach - Political Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Temesghen Kubrom Woldeab - Political Science, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Bereket Kiflai Adhanom - Psychology, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Fiseha Yohannes Habtesion - Statistics, AAU, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Weldesilassie Hidrai Ghebreyesus - Statistics, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Medhanie Asrat Medhin - Statistics, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison * Ghebrekidan Zekarias Teklemariam - Statistics, AAU, 3rd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tekesteberhan Mihretab Kidane - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Teklit Keleta Oanquai - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Bereket Chimar Amha - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 4nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Michael Berhe Sahle - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 4nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Mehari Sium Frezghi - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 4nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Asmerom Teklezghi Teklebrhan - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 4nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Tesfazghi Ghetnet Tekle - Agricultural Engineering, Alemaya University, 4nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Neamen Yohannes Teklebrhan - Medicine, Univ. of Gonder, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
• Zerabruk Tesfamariam Kidane - Health Science, Jimma Health Science Institute, 2nd year, information not available
• Bahlbi Andemariam Abraha - Civil Engineering, Agricultural College of Mekele, 2nd year, held in Blaten Prison
* Deceased while under custody in Ethiopian military detention camp on October 4, 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_112098_3.html100644 127137 345 14635 6626317023 6527 Eritrean Mission to the UN Conveys Views on Peace Efforts to Security Council
Eritrean Mission to the UN Conveys Views on Peace Efforts to Security Council
Eritrea's ambassador to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Haile Menkerios, sent the following message to H.E. Mr. Peter Burleigh, the President of the Security Council, regarding the OAU's peace efforts in the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict.
November 19, 1998
H.E. Mr. Peter Burleigh
President of the UN Security Council
Excellency,
Subsequent to our previous communication of 11 November 1998 (S/1998/1060), I have the honour to forward to Your Excellency, as a sequel, the Briefing Statement presented to the diplomatic community in Asmara by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea on 12 November 1998 concerning Eritrea's initial reactions to the proposals presented by the OAU team in Ouagadougou.
I am further instructed to communicate to Your Excellency that, as described in our earlier communication of 11 November 1998, Eritrea welcomes the OAU's ongoing peace effort and regards the Ouagadougou meeting as positive in providing a forum for a better understanding of all the pertinent issues involved. Eritrea shall continue to participate positively in the process, and shall, as requested by the OAU team, present its detailed reaction to the points raised in the "Proposals for a Framework Agreement" in time to be considered in the forthcoming OAU discussions of the matter scheduled for December 1998.
I should be grateful if you would kindly circulate this letter and its annex as a document of the Security Council.
Sincerely,
Haile Menkerios
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Briefing Statement by Foreign Minister Haile Woldensae, Asmara, 12 November 1998
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I wish to thank you for accepting our invitation to attend this briefing session on the Ouagadougou meeting held last weekend under the auspices of the OAU.
You will have received the statement issued by our Ministry explaining our views on the talking points proposed by the OAU High-Level Committee. I have called this meeting for a deeper exchange of views with you and to highlight the most salient points in our Statement of November 9, 1998.
1. The OAU talking points contain some new and positive elements. The most important of these is the recognition that the border dispute did not start in May 1998 but that it goes back at least to July 1997. The OAU has called for an investigation into the incidents of July-August 1997 and 6 May 1998 "in order to determine the origins of the conflict." This investigation, which Eritrea has been calling for from the very beginning, will be helpful in exposing that it was Ethiopia which has provoked the current crisis by: i) using force to create facts on the ground through its occupation of Adi Murug in Bada and incursions in the Badme area in July 1997; ii) triggering the armed clashes through unleashing the first unprovoked attack against our units on May 6, 1998, in the Badme area. We believe that these investigations will be vital in illustrating which party has committed acts of aggression and should have a bearing on the framework of a solution.
2. The second, equally important point incorporated in the talking points is the recognition that the border dispute can only be resolved through demarcation on the basis of the colonial boundaries. Again, this is a fundamental point which the Eritrean government has been stressing from the beginning. Eritrea's boundaries with Ethiopia are unambiguous as they have been defined by the Treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908. But the crucial issue here is whether Ethiopia respects these boundaries. Ethiopia's issuance of the illegal map in October 1997 illustrates that this is not the case. Its actions since then also attest to this fact. Eritrea has therefore asked for explicit and unambiguous language that makes it clear that Eritrea's boundaries are precisely those that were inherited from Italian colonialism.
3. Eritrea is asked in the document to show "goodwill" and redeploy from Badme. Eritrea has reiterated its call that the OAU ascertain first the coordinates of Badme village in reference to Eritrea's colonial boundaries before pronouncing on "redeployment and interim administration." This is, incidentally, a simple task that can be performed within a day with modern equipment. The other related element is the issue of goodwill. Eritrea has underlined that good will has to be asked of both sides and cannot, at any rate, apply to relinquishing sovereignty--on however temporary a basis--to a foreign country.
4. Eritrea further emphasized that the call for a cessation of hostilities inserted as the first point in the document be implemented through an agreement signed by both parties at the Ouagadougou Summit. But this was rejected by the Ethiopian side.
These are the main points that Eritrea has requested to be incorporated for a viable framework of a peaceful solution. We have also asked that the record on deportation of civilians be put straight in as much as it is inserted in the talking points. At the end, the OAU High-Level Committee informed us that these issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Central Organ scheduled in December this year and asked both sides "to communicate [to it] subsequently their definitive response."
I hope that this brief overview is useful in giving you a picture of what transpired in Ouagadougou and what we can expect in the period ahead. I shall be pleased to answer questions that you may have.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_112598.html100644 127137 345 7725 6627073403 6276 Eritrean Foreign Ministry Press Release: Ethiopia's Crocodile Tears on Fires It Is Igniting
Ethiopia's Crocodile Tears on Fires It Is Igniting
The Ethiopian Government is spreading lies claiming that "Eritrea has stepped up artillery shelling of its positions in the Zalambesa and Badme frontlines in the past few days." Addis Ababa has further tried to misconstrue the facts and associate "the stepped up shelling" with the peace talks underway.
In the first place, it is the Eritrean Government which has been consistently calling for a cessation of hostilities as a measure of de-escalation and to create a more conducive climate for the peace talks. This express request was tabled by Eritrea at the Ministerial Meeting in Ouagadougou on August 2, 1998. It did not materialize because Ethiopia refused to countenance any arrangement of a formal cease-fire. Moreover, Eritrea fully embraced the draft resolution at the Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement in Durban, South Africa, in September that called on both sides to "agree to a cessation of hostilities." But this clause was omitted from the final resolution due to "vehement opposition from Ethiopia."
In the Ouagadougou meeting of the OAU High-Level Delegation on November 7-8, Eritrea again pressed for an agreement on a cessation of hostilities. But Ethiopia's invariable intransigence precluded any arrangement.
These are the true facts. Eritrea does not have any interest in an escalation of the conflict and all its efforts in the past five months have indeed been geared towards seeking ways and means of reducing the existing tension. But it does respond to artillery fire which is routinely provoked by Ethiopia whose Foreign Minister admitted as much last week when he stated that there were "exchanges on all fronts nearly every day."
Eritrea reiterates its call for an immediate cessation of all hostilities, which will bring an end to all artillery exchanges. It reaffirms that it will continue to exercise maximum restraint in the face of continued Ethiopian provocation. Eritrea further maintains that the placement of observers or independent monitors--to which Ethiopia has been objecting in the past--would help in averting these unnecessary exchanges or provide, at the minimum, independent verification of who is responsible for starting artillery exchanges.
The Government of Eritrea would like to stress, moreover, that the damage and danger from sporadic artillery exchanges, grave as it is, pales in significance to that caused by Ethiopia's continued massive, illegal and inhuman deportation of Eritreans from Ethiopia and the continued detention of thousands of Eritreans, including university exchange students, in concentration camps. The number of deportees is now over 36,000 and Ethiopia no longer cares to fabricate excuses for its expulsions. It is sad and telling that Ethiopia continues its gross violation of human rights with impunity. Although its appeals have, for the most part, fallen on deaf ears, Eritrea once again calls on the international community to publicly condemn and take urgent action to stop the uprooting of an entire community.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 24 November 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org
Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage g_121198.html100644 127137 345 5246 6634254167 6274

Press Release


Ethiopia's Predictable Sabre-Rattling on the Eve of Peace Talks

As efforts intensify to find a peaceful settlement to the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the Addis Ababa regime is once again beating the war drums and issuing threats to use force. Ethiopia's Foreign Minister said this week that "if the conflict is not resolved peacefully soon, it will not be long before the government and leadership of Shabia [EPLF] are buried in the holes that they themselves have dug." Ethiopia's President has also vowed that "Ethiopia shall emerge victorious in the struggle against Eritrea."

Taking their cue from the authorities, the Ethiopian mass media have intensified their war propaganda.

This latest campaign fits into a pattern often reverted to by Ethiopia in the past months of creating a war scare on the eve of all peace initiatives. The purported aim is to put pressure on the third parties working to bring about peace so that they may placate Ethiopia for not re-starting the war. It is no coincidence that Ethiopia's latest bellicose statements come as the OAU prepares to consider the Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict next week in Burkina Faso.

Eritrea rejects Ethiopia's attempts to create obstacles for peace initiatives through the threat of imminent war. It reaffirms its commitment to find a peaceful solution to the conflict, realizing full well that neither side can impose a solution through war. Eritrea further believes that an immediate cessation of hostilities is vital for creating a conducive climate for peace. Ethiopia, on the other hand, has rebuffed all attempts to broker a cease-fire as a means of paving the way for a peaceful settlement.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 11 December 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_122198_1.html100644 127137 345 23335 6637515461 6534

Statement by H.E. Haile Woldensae, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Eritrea, to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to Eritrea, Asmara,

21 December 1998

Your Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Allow me first to thank you for honouring our invitation to attend this briefing on the Summit of the Central Organ of the OAU that was convened in Ouagadougou on Thursday, December 17, 1998.

For Eritrea, the Summit of the Central Organ was important in giving us the forum and opportunity to explain in detail the origin and nature of the border conflict, the constructive proposals for peace that Eritrea has been advocating with consistency since the eruption of the crisis as well as Ethiopia's intransigence and periodic recourse to the language of force to preclude meaningful discussion to achieve peace.

Ethiopia's presentation to the Summit, best summarized by the Aide Memoir that it distributed on the previous day, was replete with deliberate omissions, distortions, and outright lies. The Ethiopian regime shied from talking about the substance of the conflict: its use of force in Bada in July 1997, the illegal map that it has issued or the incidents between May 6 and May 12 this year that precipitated the crisis. Instead it tried to portray Eritrea as a country that "worships force" and is "bent on intimidating its neighbours." The Ethiopian Prime Minister in fact tried hard to sanitize the NIF regime in Khartoum accusing Eritrea "for violating the OAU Charter" in its relations with Sudan. And, although Ethiopia had considered the Hanish Islands as part and parcel of its sovereign territory following the federation and subsequent annexation of Eritrea, the Ethiopian Prime Minister had the audacity to accuse Eritrea for claiming territory "with little cause and justification."

But few could be taken in by these lies and transparent ploys. If anything, Ethiopia's presentation only underscored the hollowness of its accusations, casting serious doubts on the integrity of the regime.

Excellencies,

I do not wish to take your time to sum up Eritrea's position on the conflict as these are well known to you and since the speech of President Isaias to the Summit has already been circulated to you.

You will also recall--indeed as I had briefed you in this same room at the time--that Eritrea had given its preliminary opinion to the High-Level Delegation during the Summit in Ouagadougou on November 8, 1998. The gist of our initial opinion then was that:

* The High-Level Delegation cannot give judgement prior to conducting an investigation of all the incidents that led to the current crisis as stipulated in paragraph 7 of the Framework Agreement; and

* Administration could not be divorced from the issue of sovereignty.

Since both sides were expected to submit their full opinion prior to, or at, the Summit of the Central Organ, Eritrea had requested a meeting with the OAU Secretary General to ask clarification on vital components of the Framework Agreement and the report of the OAU Ambassadorial Committee which was never given to Eritrea in full, although references from this report were incorporated in that document.

The Secretary General visited Asmara on December 12. The Government of Eritrea subsequently raised a number of questions--full copy has been circulated to you--concerning the location of Badme, the justification for "reinstated civilian administration" if the area under consideration is Eritrean with an Eritrean population, as well as the purpose of conducting an investigation if it has no bearing at all on the terms of settlement of the dispute.

The OAU Secretary was not in a position to give clarification to these queries explaining that, both on grounds of procedure and competence, these will have to be considered by the full meeting of the Committee prior to the Summit.

While the answers to these queries were clearly vital for Eritrea's full response which can only be predicated on the clarification it receives, we nonetheless submitted our written opinion on December 15 to the High-Level Delegation to underscore our commitment to the peace process. This letter has been circulated to you and let me read the main paragraphs:

"In the section on principles, Eritrea subscribes to the three cardinal principles, namely peaceful resolution of disputes, rejection of the use of force and respect for colonial borders. In regard to the last principle, however, I wish to bring to the attention of Your Excellency and the OAU High-Level Delegation that Eritrea requests that this principle be formulated in precise, legal language that does not brook any ambiguity and does not lend itself to differing interpretations, thereby impeding the technical work of demarcation. It is also Eritrea's opinion that the time-frame for demarcation should not be left open-ended, but must be limited to a maximum of six months, which is more than enough time to finish the technical work of demarcation.

In the section on recommendations, Eritrea has the following opinion.

On the issue of redeployment and demilitarization, Eritrea holds that with a formal cease-fire in place and military observers on the ground, demarcation can be done expeditiously without the complicated and time consuming disengagement of hundreds of thousands of troops. Eritrea, however, has no objection in principle to redeployment in the framework of mutual demilitarization. It, therefore, requests a reformulation of Recommendation 3 to read: "In order to create conditions conducive to a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the conflict, the armed forces of both parties in the Mareb-Setit segment should be redeployed, it being understood that this redeployment will not prejudice the final status of the area concerned."

On the issue of administration, Eritrea has repeatedly stated that, like all sovereign nations, it cannot countenance alien rule of its own territory. Indeed, the question of administration cannot be separated from the issue of inherited colonial borders. Therefore, for reasons of principle and the interest of not complicating and prolonging the conflict and practicality, the suggestion of administration (i.e., the second sentence of Recommendation 4) should be dropped and focus placed on an expedited demarcation of the border, which will automatically solve the question of administration. In fact, Eritrea is convinced that, if it were not for the preconditions and obstructions of Ethiopia, we could have moved, with a cease-fire in place, directly to demarcation and would have solved the problem by now, even without redeployment.

On the humanitarian issue, as the Report that has been submitted to this Summit of the Central Organ makes clear that it is only Ethiopia that has committed gross violation of the human rights of Eritrean nationals in Ethiopia; while, on Eritrea's part, there is no "systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea," Recommendation 8 must read to reflect this fact by dropping the clause "put an end to measures directed against the civilian population" and in 8 b) the word compensate must be added so that the last few words read "to compensate those persons who have been deported."

The remaining recommendations are positive and acceptable to Eritrea."

Excellencies,

The Summit of the Central Organ had listened to the presentations of both parties and seen the report of the High-Level Delegation. I cannot say that the discussions were exhaustive, limited as they were by the brevity of time and the fact that the Summit had to grapple with five other conflict situations in the continent. Apart from the Sudan which openly colluded with Ethiopia, the balance of comments recognized the progress that has been made as well as the need for continued work to bridge the gap between the two sides. Let me note here that, as the report that was presented by the High-Level Delegation to the Summit makes clear, Ethiopia has not accepted the Framework Agreement but its own amended version.

At the end of its brief deliberations, the Summit adopted the High-Level Delegation's Framework for an Agreement while at the same time noting the differing positions of the two sides. It further urged both sides to cooperate with the OAU in order to create the necessary conditions for the implementation of the framework.

Eritrea has subsequently notified the High-Level Delegation that it is earnestly awaiting a satisfactory response to the opinions and queries that it has submitted so that it will be in a position to cooperate to create the necessary conditions for the implementation of the Framework.

Thank you.


---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_122198_2.html100644 127137 345 41271 6637522570 6533

President Isaias Afwerki's Speech to the OAU Central Organ Meeting,
Ouagadougou, 17 December 1998

Mr. Chairman
Your Excellencies

Allow me to begin by thanking President Blaise Compaore and the Government and people of Burkina Faso for the warm welcome and hospitality they have given us. I wish also to express Eritrea's deep appreciation of President Compaore and the members of the OAU High-Level Delegation as well as members of the ministerial and ambassadorial committees for their tireless work for peace between Eritrea and Ethiopia. May I also express my gratitude to Your Excellencies, Heads of State and Government and Ministers, for your commitment and for making time to come here to Ouagadougou, to contribute to the peaceful resolution of Africa's numerous conflicts.

Your Excellencies,

It is now six months since the unfortunate conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia came out into the open. Over this period there has developed a better understanding about the facts of, and issues surrounding, this conflict. Today, the OAU has a clearer picture of the conflict than when it met here in Ouagadougou. Let me briefly touch on four of these main issues.

The Cause of the Conflict

The conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia is rooted in a border dispute. It has arisen because Ethiopia, in contravention of the OAU Charter and its sacrosanct principle of respecting boundaries inherited from colonialism, has flagrantly violated Eritrea's inherited Italian colonial borders. Ethiopia's aggression against Eritrea is manifested in an official Ethiopian map issued in July 1997, which Ethiopia has not yet rescinded, incorporating vast areas of Eritrea into Ethiopia. More ominously, Ethiopia has repeatedly used military force to bring under its occupation the areas in Eritrea that it coveted.

A lasting peaceful solution, therefore, requires that Ethiopia rescind its illegal claims on Eritrea, and declare without equivocation that it respects the colonial boundaries between the two countries that were delimited in accordance with the treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908. It is these same boundaries that have constituted Eritrea's frontiers since then. Although Ethiopia has paid lip service to respecting Eritrea's borders, it has shown no intention of accepting and respecting them in practice. Towards this end, it has been pushing for a vague and ambiguous formulation, knowing full well that without a clear and unequivocal formulation the whole issue will be open to controversy and endless delay. This will mean that the technical work of demarcation, which is predicated on an unequivocal formulation, cannot be carried out expeditiously.

The OAU has been steadfast in its insistence on the wisdom of not tampering with the borders inherited from colonialism and this principle has been included in the "Elements for a Framework Agreement Submitted for Consideration of the Two Parties" that has been submitted to us. In light of Ethiopia's intentions, however, I wish to bring to the attention of Your Excellencies that Eritrea is requesting of the OAU precise, legal language that will require the opinion of legal experts and ensure a speedy resolution, instead of leading to differing interpretations and endless controversy.

The Use of Force

While Ethiopia has remained silent on the fundamental issue of colonial borders, it has been deafeningly noisy on the issue of the use of force. Not only has it accused Eritrea of aggression and of using force to create facts on the ground, it has gone as far as accusing Eritrea of "worshipping the gun," "having a fixation with the gun" and being obsessed with its "invincibility." In the Aide Memoir that was sent by Ethiopia to Your Excellencies and from which I quoted the previous phrases, they also accuse Eritrea of a "peculiar mentality," a "malady," "disdain of the OAU and international law" and "contempt for civilized behavior and civility," all in language that, to say the least, is far from civil.

Not content with misrepresenting the facts about the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict, Ethiopia has also accused Eritrea of being a "source of tension and inter-state misunderstanding," citing as proof Eritrea's relations with its neighbours. But as everyone knows, Eritrea's relations with Sudan have not been different in any significant way from that of Ethiopia and others in the region. As far as the dispute with Yemen was concerned, Ethiopia, prior to Eritrea's independence, considered the Hanish Islands as part and parcel of its sovereign territory. Indeed the evidence presented by Eritrea to the arbitration tribunal relied to a large measure on documents provided by the current Ethiopian government, including the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over acts committed on the islands, regulation of oil exploration activities, and, even, a video tape of an inspection tour by the former President of Ethiopia, Colonel Mengistu, aboard the flagship 'Ethiopia.' The current government's 180 degree turn is not surprising as it fits the pattern of covering the weakness of its case by resorting to a smear campaign.

Your Excellencies,

Ethiopia's shrill and offensive language is designed to drown the facts in a sea of accusations. It is the classical case of a thief crying "thief!" at the top of his voice. Otherwise, the facts speak for themselves. Thanks in part to the work of the High-Level Delegation, it has now become clear that the conflict did not erupt from the blue on May 12, 1998. It goes back at least ten months earlier, to July 12, 1997, when Ethiopia sent two battalions of its army and occupied the Adi Murug area of Eritrea, dismantled the administration there and set up a new administration, thereby creating facts on the ground by force. On the same day, but in an area hundreds of kilometers away, it intensified its incursions in the Badme area. These incursions involved evicting Eritreans from their villages by terrorizing them, destroying their houses and burning their crops and bringing Ethiopian settlers to inhabit those villages.

If we were "gun worshippers," as our Ethiopian colleagues who were our closest allies for 22 years have suddenly discovered, then we would have resorted to force to reverse the Ethiopian aggression. Instead, I wrote to the Ethiopian Prime Minister, whom I addressed as Comrade Meles in light of the closeness of our relationship and thinking, asking him to right the wrong and suggesting that we set up a Joint Border Commission to solve any border controversy bilaterally and amicably.

Ethiopia's behavior was markedly different. Encouraged by Eritrea's restraint, which it mistook for weakness, it continued its aggression by bringing more land under its control and displacing more and more people. Finally on May 6, 1998, it escalated its aggression by attacking an Eritrean unit. Ethiopia's continued attacks over the next few days triggered a series of spiraling clashes until May 12 with both sides bringing reinforcements.

Ethiopia's subsequent action was much worse. Unlike Eritrea, which for ten months patiently searched for a peaceful solution, Ethiopia, believing in its might as a big country and choosing the use of force, declared war on Eritrea on the morrow of the fighting. Concurrently, it stopped using Eritrean ports, cut air and telecommunication links, and deployed almost all its army along the Eritrean borders, including in areas where there were no border incidents. Two weeks later, it launched the ground war and, on June 5, it further escalated the border conflict by bombing the Eritrean capital Asmara. Once again, Eritrea was compelled to exercise its right of self-defense.

Even with the benefit of hindsight and Ethiopia's subsequent actions, Eritrea does not regret the restrained and peaceful course of action that it took between July 1997 and May 1998. At the same time, it believes that Ethiopia should not be rewarded, by accepting its preconditions, for fomenting a crisis by, first, launching an attack, and, when this failed, for publicly declaring war and then waging war on Eritrea.

Your Excellencies,

I realize that in the face of opposing versions of events leading to the crisis, it might be difficult to pass judgement. That is why Eritrea has been calling from the outset for an independent investigation into those events, a position that has now been supported by the OAU High-Level Delegation. Regrettably, however, such an investigation has not been done and has not figured in the OAU's framework.

Even without an investigation, however, one fact is beyond dispute--Ethiopia's continued refusal to renounce the use of force. Indeed Ethiopia has mastered the use of the threat of force and warnings of imminent war in order to pressure the OAU and other concerned parties to impose its dictates on Eritrea. The pronouncement by Ethiopian officials on the eve of this Summit that unless a peaceful resolution is found soon, they will "bury Eritrea's leaders in the holes that they themselves have dug" fits into that pattern.

Deportation of Eritreans and Confiscation of Their Property

Even more than Ethiopia's aggression and its repeated use of force and continued threat to use force, what has done most damage to the relations between the two countries and threatens to poison them for many years to come is Ethiopia's decision to uproot the Eritrean population in Ethiopia. So far many have been killed, thousands languish in detention camps, more than 1,500 of them in one camp near Awassa. Over 42,000 have been deported with their property estimated in hundreds of millions of dollars confiscated. The remainder of the Eritrean community lives terrorized, waiting for the moment when Ethiopian soldiers will knock at their doors in the middle of the night or pick them up from the streets, their workplaces or churches and mosques prior to deportation. Those deported include Eritreans working in the OAU, the UN office in Addis Ababa as well as for many African embassies.

As with other issues, so too in this humanitarian problem, Ethiopia has resorted to loud accusations and fabricated stories to hide that it only is carrying out the massive detention and deportation of civilians on account of their nationality. It has also attempted to justify its gross violation of our people's human rights by branding them "spies." But here at least, Ethiopia cannot get away with empty accusations as the OAU High-Level Delegation has made it clear that there is no "systematic or official action directed against Ethiopians in Eritrea." I have asked that this fact be reflected in the OAU framework.

Redeployment and Administration

I am sure Your Excellencies will agree with me that the issues of redeployment and administration are closely linked with the location of the areas under consideration, whether they are in Eritrea or Ethiopia; and also with the causes of the conflict, that is, who used force, where and when. Since these vital questions have not been determined by an investigation, which Eritrea has been requesting for the past six months, any proposals for redeployment and administration need to take that fact into account.

In regard to redeployment, Eritrea holds that, with a cease-fire in place and military observers on the ground, demarcation can be done expeditiously without the complicated and time consuming disengagement of hundreds of thousands of troops. Eritrea, however, has no objection in principle to redeployment in the framework of demilitarization.

On the question of administration, Eritrea has repeatedly stated that, like all sovereign nations, it cannot countenance alien administration of its own territory and over its own population. Indeed, the question of administration cannot be separated from the issue of inherited colonial borders. Therefore for reasons of principle and the interest of not complicating and prolonging the conflict and practicality (since we are talking about a short period of six months), the suggestion of administration should be dropped altogether and focus placed on an expedited demarcation of the border, which will automatically solve the question of administration. In fact, Eritrea is convinced that, were it not for the preconditions and obstructions of Ethiopia, we could have moved, with a cease-fire in place, directly to demarcation and would have solved the problem by now, even without demilitarization.

Your Excellencies,

Even at the risk of taking too much of your time, I have spoken rather in length because so much confusion has been sown by Ethiopia. Last month here in Ouagadougou, I had given Eritrea's initial, but considered opinion on the OAU's "Elements of a Framework Agreement Submitted for the Consideration of the Two Parties." Since then we have been studying those elements in detail. As we needed clarification on a number of issues, some of which we have been seeking answers for since the start of the OAU peace effort, we asked the OAU Secretary General, H.E. Dr. Salim, to visit Asmara for consultations and submitted to him our queries. Yesterday, I presented our opinion to H.E. Blaise Compaore, which is predicated on the fact that clarification on some of the pertinent issues that I mentioned earlier is not yet available.

Your Excellencies,

In the opinion I presented, Eritrea has reaffirmed its commitment to the three cardinal principles that will be the basis of a peaceful solution. On the fundamental issue of borders, we have requested precise, legal language, which we believe should pose no problem if there is a genuine commitment to respect colonial boundaries. We have asked that the paragraph on humanitarian issues be given substance and reflect the fact that it is only one party, Ethiopia, that is culpable. We have asked for reasons of principle and the interests of not prolonging and complicating the problem, that the sentence on administration be dropped. And, although we believe, given a cessation of hostilities, that demarcation can be done expeditiously, we have expressed our readiness to redeploy our forces within the context of mutual demilitarization.

Your Excellencies,

As expressed in its Aide Memoir and the Prime Minister's letter that prefaced it, Ethiopia's intention is to browbeat the OAU into imposing its dictates on Eritrea. It is threatening dire consequences unless it gets its way. It has openly stated that failure to accept Ethiopia's viewpoint would amount to "an abdication of responsibility by the Organization of African Unity." It has gone even to the extent of asserting that "not only the credibility of the OAU but that its very future is on the line." At a time when the OAU is grappling with a number of conflicts, to suggest that not taking a partisan course of action in regard to one of them will take it down the drain is, I believe, a measure of the pretensions of the Ethiopian government.

With its futile attempts at intimidation, Ethiopia is trying to forestall meaningful and exhaustive discussion. Its transparent hope is not that progress is made in this Summit towards peace, but that the OAU's effort comes to a dead-end. I am confident that the OAU, which through the tireless efforts of President Compaore and his colleagues in the High-Level Delegation has come closer than any other party to bridging the gap between the parties, will stay the course and help us achieve peace.

I thank you.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_122198_3.html100644 127137 345 4677 6642615334 6522

For the public's information, we are distributing the statement of the OAU Central Organ on the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict following their consideration of the issue at their meeting in Ouagadougou, held 17-18 December 1998.

Dispute Between Ethiopia and Eritrea Statement of the OAU Central Organ,
Ouagadougou, 17-18 December 1998

The Central Organ considered the Report of the High Level Delegation of the OAU on the dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It congratulated the Delegation for the commendable efforts it had made in order to promote a peaceful and comprehensive solution to the dispute.

The Central Organ took note of the respective positions of the two Parties on the proposals of the High Level Delegation.

The Central Organ endorsed the proposals for a Framework Agreement submitted by the OAU High Level Delegation to the two Parties which constitute an appropriate framework for the resolution of the dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

The Central Organ wishes to commend the two Parties for the confidence which they have placed in the OAU and for the cooperation they have extended to the OAU High Level Delegation in the performance of its mandate and for the restraint that they have shown.

The Central Organ urges the OAU High Level Delegation to remain seized with the dispute and calls on the two Parties to continue to cooperate with the Delegation with a view to creating the necessary conditions for

the speedy implementation of the Framework Agreement. The Central Organ further urges both Parties to continue to exercise restraint.

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_122998.html100655 127137 345 5311 6642615460 6274 !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

Eritreans Still Dying in the Detention Camps in Ethiopia

Once again the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has informed the Government of Eritrea about the untimely deaths of two young civilian Eritreans in a detention camp in Ethiopia. The two young Eritreans, Mohammed Said Abdulbeker Idris and Mohamedzeyen Said Kahsay, had been in detention for months and died there because of inhumane treatment and lack of proper medical attention. Like other Eritrean civilian detainees in concentration camps in Ethiopia, the two young Eritreans were detained illegally and without due process of law.

It is to be recalled that the death of three other young Eritreans, including a university student who was studying in Ethiopia on an exchange program, was reported by ICRC in November 1998.

Many other Eritrean civilians are also dying in other concentration camps, particularly in Tigrai, who are unaccounted for by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Yemane Gebreselassie Shardai, aged 62, is one of the recent victims. He died in the concentration camp of Azha in Tigrai on 6 December 1998.

The Government of Eritrea condemns the deaths of its nationals under illegal and inhumane detention in Ethiopia and calls for an independent investigation into the causes of, and circumstances surrounding, their deaths. It also calls for the immediate release of all Eritrean civilians, including 37 university exchange students, who have been detained by the Ethiopian government en masse, illegally and without due process of law, from detention in Ethiopia.

The Government of Eritrea once again calls on the international community to ensure that Ethiopia respects the international laws, covenants and charters on human rights to which it is a signatory and to release all Eritrean civilians in detention immediately.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 29 December 1998

---

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW, Washington DC 20009, USA
TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319 1304
E-M: veronica@embassyeritrea.org

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage

g_8025.html100644 127137 345 5702 6562373723 6122

US State Dept. Statement on Ethiopia's Expulsion of Eritreans

U.S. Department of State
Office of the Spokesman

For Immediate Release

August 6, 1998

Statement by James B. Foley, Deputy Spokesman

Ethiopia: Expulsions of Eritreans

The United States Government is greatly concerned about the growingimpact on civilian populations of the continuing conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

The United States views with deep concern the detention and expulsion of ethnic Eritreans in and from Ethiopia. The Government of Ethiopia has a legitimate right to guarantee the safety and security of its people against potential threats. However, there are fundamental humanitarian and human rights concerns raised by the forcible separation of families, the undue hardships of those detained or expelled to Eritrea, and the financial losses caused by sudden expulsions. We urge the Government of Ethiopia to respect international human rights norms and standards and follow appropriate due process in handling its security concerns. We further urge the Government of Ethiopia to allow all those who were wrongfully expelled to return and to establish a compensation commission to investigate and recommend compensation for the claims resulting from undue financial loss and hardship as a result of rapid, forced expulsions.

We call on the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea to ensure full access to all detainees and P.O.W.s, to exchange P.O.W.s, to allow all students to repatriate, and to facilitate the return of nationals who wish to repatriate voluntarily. We welcome the decision by both governments to grant the ICRC access and urge full cooperation with the ICRC in accordance with its standard procedures. We call on both parties to receive missions from appropriate United Nations agencies. History has shown that deportations and detentions and the massive displacement of innocent civilians, wherever and whenever they occur, create hardships and bitternessfueling misunderstandings and lasting mistrust.

Ultimately, a durable peace is the best guarantee of the rights of each other's nationals in Eritrea and Ethiopia. The United States urges Ethiopia and Eritrea to redouble their efforts in seeking a peaceful resolution to the current border conflict, and we pledge our continued commitment to support such efforts.

Veronica Rentmeesters, Information Officer
Embassy of Eritrea to the US
1708 New Hampshire Ave NW,
Washington DC 20009, USA TEL: 202 588 7587 FAX: 202 319

Eritrea Online / Dehai Homepage /user/e/ephrem/public_html120711 127137 345 0 6765106660 15155 2/var/http/e/ep/ephrem