In his letter to the United Nations Secretary General on September 19, 2003, the Ethiopian Prime Minister has formally and unequivocally announced his regime will not be bound by the rule of law and that Ethiopia threatens to unleash war again, should there be any failures in introducing alternative mechanism and wholesale change of the border decisions.

In maligning the decisions as totally illegal, unjust and irresponsible, the premier attempted to unjustifiably blame the neutral Boundary Commission for the war the regime in Ethiopia plans to unleash. The regime has vividly expressed its hostile stand, indicating that it sees no other option but to pursue its adventurism if the regime's demands are not met and the boundary commission does not entirely change its verdict.

Parties, that were not familiar with the degree of intensive care and incessant leniency of the international community, which eventually spoiled the regime beyond limits, probably perceived the regime's reluctance towards the implementation of the border delimitation as a temporary sign of dissatisfaction on the part of Ethiopia. It was based on the belief that the Ethiopian regime would sooner or later be bound by the international decision that the world community optimistically exerted efforts and made expenditures to facilitate the peace process and the border delimitation.

This is why the international community could be transfixed with shock to discover the regime's scornful attitude towards principles and regulations honored by the international community. For the government and people of Eritrea, who are totally acquainted with the regime's disturbed mentality and its evil nature, however, such a revelation does not come as a surprise.

The regime lacked any solid reason for launching its offensives against Eritrea in the first place. The people and government of Eritrea had been fully aware from the onset that neither Badme nor any border issue had been the root cause for the regime's malevolence. Neither did the people of Ethiopia, who bore the brunt of war for almost an eternity pressure the regime to invade Eritrea and retrieve Badme. Nor was the case presented before an international court because of the Ethiopian regime's good will towards arbitration. On the contrary, it was the people of Eritrea's stiff resistance that compelled the regime's leaders to bow down to peace.

Like President Isaias Afwerki said, "the TPLF's singular objective was to inflict military humiliation on the Eritrean people and dehumanize them, frustrate their efforts for economic development and prosperity, and reduce them to a third/fourth-class people and country. Such a 'heroic and pompous' achievement would, the TPLF presumed, further bolster its status and monopoly of power in Ethiopia and permanently secure its dominance of the country."

Contrary to the aspirations of the regime, the war it unleashed under the pretext of a border dispute resulted in nothing except huge massacres and losses, in an experience that has tremendously shocked the world. It was after coming to comprehend that its all-out offensives against Eritrea were no good in weakening the Eritrean people that the regime realized it has no other option but to sign the arbitration agreement and accept the final and binding decision. It had already been clear, however, that the regime's decision to bow down to the agreement was simply to buy time. The psychopathic nature that the regime developed with the announcement of the final and binding decision has its roots in the regime's foiled ploys of expansion under the pretext of a border issue.

The Algiers Peace Agreement has no loopholes that can be exploited to dilute the "final and binding" nature of the court ruling. The Algiers Agreement towards arbitration explicitly states that the international court's decision would be final and binding. The United Nations, which was a witness in the signature of the Agreement in Algiers and represented by the Secretary General, or any other party, has no legal or moral authority to change the boundary decision. That is why even after engaging in intense diplomatic campaign carrying out briefings worldwide to undermine the decision, the regime had yet failed to succeed in accomplishing its sinister plans. It is after all these futile maneuvers and ploys that the regime's Prime Minister gave a final answer over recent days. Through the premier's message, the regime in Ethiopia is basically telling the world that it is the highest judicial body, higher than the international court, the United Nations and guarantors of the peace process.

A display of good will on the part of the people and government of Eritrea in faithfully respecting its commitments by cooperating with the Boundary Commission springs solely from the fact that Eritreans are peace-loving people, and not because Eritrea entertained even for a moment false and unattainable hopes that the regime in Ethiopia might actually respect its part of the agreement. That is also why the Ethiopian prime minister's message did not come as something out of the expected for the Eritrean people. The choice of whether another fresh rounds of offensives will take shape or not, however, would be left for the aggressors to decide. Alongside ongoing processes of development and political reconstruction, the people and government of Eritrea, on the other hand, will continue to remain vigilant and ready to safeguard national interests against any aggressor that wants to violate its territorial sovereignty and integrity.