Urge to Demarcate the Eritrea–Ethiopia Boundary
By: Gebre Hiwet Tesfagiorgis
February 13, 2006
Demarcation in accordance with the delimitation decision of the independent
Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) is the only just and lasting solution
to the boundary dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
In 1998, the world witnessed with sadness the eruption of war between Eritrea
and Ethiopia over a border dispute, which resulted in the loss of precious human
lives and diversion of scarce resources to wasteful war efforts. When the two
countries signed an agreement in Algiers in December 2000 to peacefully settle
the border dispute, the peoples of the two countries and all peace-loving people
rejoiced. The Algiers Agreement called for the establishment of a neutral Boundary
Commission, and stipulated that the dispute will be resolved on the basis of
pertinent colonial treaties and applicable international law. Eritrea and Ethiopia
agreed that the decision of the Commission was to be final and binding on them.
The Agreement was hailed as the best process for securing a lasting peace between
the brotherly peoples of the two countries and ensuring stability of the Horn
region of Africa.
The Boundary Commission was duly composed of five internationally known, honorable
jurists with impeccable legal credentials. The Commission announced its delimitation
decision in April 2002, reiterating that the parties had agreed that its decision
“shall be final and binding." The decision was reached following principles
of customary international law, properly granting the two parties their “day
in court” in an adversary proceeding, and soundly applying the terms and conditions
outlined in the Algiers Agreement. The United Nations Security Council and African
Union rightly endorsed the decision. The two parties themselves, Eritrea and
Ethiopia, announced their acceptance of the delimitation decision and expressed
their readiness to cooperate with the Commission to demarcate the border. The
peace process had all the signs of becoming an exemplary process for settling
future border disputes in Africa and elsewhere. Following the decision announcement,
the peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia had high hopes that peace was finally at
hand. Unfortunately, Ethiopia's later pronouncements proved otherwise.
Ethiopia's later repudiation of its initial acceptance of the decision, and
its current continued refusal to demarcation, is as puzzling as it is dangerous.
Logic, international law, and normal conduct of international relations would
have required compliance with the terms and conditions of the Algiers Agreement
to which the parties entered willingly and in good faith. Regrettably, Ethiopia
continues to defy international law and world opinion.
Equally regrettable is the ineptness of the international community, in the
face of Ethiopia’s defiance of international law, especially the guarantors
of the Peace Agreement, namely, the United Nations, the African Union, the European
Union, and the United States of America. National and geopolitical interests,
rather than rule of law and justice, seem to be guiding their policies. And
this is not the first time Eritrea has been a victim of such policies. History
is indeed repeating itself.
Lasting peace between Eritrea and Ethiopia can be achieved only through the
implementation of the Boundary Commission’s decision in its entirety. Justice
and international law requires that the United States and the said international
and regional organizations exert full pressure, including threats of sanctions
on the non-compliant party, Ethiopia, to unconditionally accept the Commission’s
decision and immediately cooperate to demarcate of the boundary. At stake is
the peace and security of the whole Horn region of Africa.