Business is booming.

A Decade of Legitimate Resistance Vis-À-Vis the Rule of the Jungle (Part VIII)

Sluggishness of the United Nations

Documentation of the tentative and comprehensive Algiers Peace Agreement that was signed in June and December of 2000 to settle the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia is well-de¬fined and has no room whatso¬ever for misconstrue. The United Nations, as the paramount signa¬tory body, assumed responsibility on behalf of the international com¬munity for the enforcement of the Algiers Peace Agreement. The rul¬ing of the Boundary Commission that underpins these accords is, by virtue of the Agreement, final and binding, whose guarantee of implementation principally banks on this same guarantor. Besides, terms of the Algiers Peace Agreement un¬equivocally stipulate that punitive action be taken against the contest¬ing party as per Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

Contrary to the fact stated above, a chaotic state of affairs, which has prolonged the plight of the Eritrean and Ethiopian peoples for the past ten years and has disrupted peace and stability of the Horn of Africa, now prevails due to the United Nations’ failure in dis¬charging its duty and obligations. It is to be noted that in September 2003, Ethiopia’s Premier filed an officially incongruous letter of refutation to the UN Security Council against the final and binding Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission, EEBC award, to which he him¬self remains signatory, rebuking it “illegal, unjust and irresponsible”. This statement grossly contravenes the terms of Article 4 (15) of the Al¬giers Agreement which reads: “The parties agree that the delimitation and demarcation determinations of the Commission shall be final and binding. Each party shall respect the border so determined, as well as the territorial integrity and sov¬ereignty of the other party.”

The UN Security Council, however, favored silent clemency towards Ethiopia’s of¬ficially announced breaches of the rule of law. It is also to be recalled that by the time the TPLF regime began in July 2002 to implement, in flagrant violation of the Algiers Peace Agreement and the UN Charter, an illicit resettlement program inside sovereign Eritrean territory, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1430 proscrib¬ing Ethiopia to undo its plan of action within thirty days. The UN Security Council, nevertheless, failed to live up to its mandate in taking punitive measure against the encroaching party that was already authorized to do so by its lords. The UN Security Council once again opted not to have its say whatso¬ever by the time the TPLF clique recalled its liaison officer intent on impeding the operations of the Boundary Commission and when the regime desisted from bearing ¬due disbursement to the Commis¬sion as prescribed in the Algiers Peace Agreement.

Although the Boundary Com¬mission was established as per the terms of the Algiers Peace Agree¬ment to operate under the aegis of the United Nations, when it of¬ficially notified the UN Security Council in March 2005 that it was compelled to close its offices in Ethiopia and Eritrea subsequent to the hindrances the TPLF clique posed and the reluctance of the UN Security Council, this paramount body fell short of creating an opti¬mal environment to sustain the op¬erations of the Commission. Hav¬ing remained remiss in the duties and obligations provisions of the Algiers Agreement shouldered to it, the UN Security Council served as a facilitator when the U.S. Ad¬ministration deferred the legitima¬cy of the Boundary Commission’s operations to the illegal task of ap¬pointing illegitimate bodies such as ‘special envoy’ and ‘intermediary group’.

The UN Security Council per¬versely vouched for reversal of the case towards negotiation by shelving due process of law and attempts resorting to supersede the Boundary Commission in its responsibilities under the mantle of facilitating delimitation of the borders. Despite the TPLF clique’s evident breach of the Agreement and obstruction of demarcation, the UN Security Council, setting the issue at stake aside over the past decade, has in all the meetings been passing and issuing reproving reso¬lutions and statements that treat the law-abiding and obstinate par¬ties on equal footing on account of diversionary matters. It is also a matter of historical record that the Security Council in 2006 hashed out to adopt sanctions resolution against Eritrea, the sole party that challenged respect of the rule of law and territorial integrity, on account of ramifications pertinent to the United Nations Mission in Eritrea and Ethiopia, UNMEE.

The Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission, EEBC, thus ful¬filled its mandate under exacting circumstances subsequent to the betrayals by its own umbrella: the UN Security Council. Irrespective of diversionary resorts and the pa¬ralysis of the UN Security Council, the Boundary Commission suc¬cessfully finalized its mission in November 2007 upon reaching a legal conclusion over the disputed case, as well as virtually demarcat¬ing the borders with grid points and coordinates for the pillar em¬placement process. The fact that the Administration in Washington authored the TPLF clique’s failure to meet its obligation sunder the Algiers Agreement is worth high¬lighting in this article. The Security Council has failed to discharge its duty and responsibility. That the Security Council has remained ‘remiss in its duties’ is but a refer¬ence made to the acts of hostilities the United States committed in the name of this same UN organ. In a nutshell, the perpetrator, accuser and adjudicator in the matter is but the U.S. Administration.

As a result of the aforemen¬tioned impediments and a surplus of hurdles yet to be stated, as well as the endeavors and ingenuity of the Boundary Commission to overcome the challenges, the bor¬ders between Eritrea and Ethiopia have, with relevant details and legal documentation, ultimately proven the most crystal-clear on a plan¬etary scale. The greatest empiri¬cal lesson the Eritrean people has drawn throughout its history is that truth eventually triumphs. As stat¬ed in the opening articles of this is¬sue in series, the border dispute be¬tween Eritrea and Ethiopia is now a concluded chapter counting on the verdict decided ten years ago on April 13, 2002 and the virtual demarcation of 2007. Having dealt a blowing defeat to military adven¬turism and foiled the resulting fu¬tile attempts, all acts of hostilities bound for stalling Eritrea’s bright future are now rendered abortive.

Frustration of enemy quarters has ever been on the rise with the increasing accomplishments the Eritrean people has been scoring against all odds. After the Eritrean people prevailed over every fire ¬power and the brute force, enemy quarters resorted to enter into the third stage of subduing the country. The third phase of acts of hostility and vicious cycle of conspiracy fo¬cuses on the following points:

1. The campaign of demon¬izing Eritrea’s President, its terri¬tory and people;
2. Gathering trivial circum¬stantial evidences to file trumped-up charges against Eritrea; and,
3. Tightening sanctions and sowing discord among the ranks.
Forthcoming articles will ad¬dress the later vicious and unjust attempts.


This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More