 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 25 - 31 March 1999 Issue No. 422 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
 |
 |
|
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 25 - 31 March 1999 Issue No. 422
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
|
|
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Focus Profile Features Travel Living Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Fighting the framework
By Mohamed KhaledAfter a period of relative calm, the Ethiopian-Eritrean war reached unprecedented levels of intensity last week in a fierce round of fighting which has resulted in thousands of causalities. Recent events are best described as a "terrible slaughter". According to reporters on the front lines, Ethiopia has lost thousands of its troops and a considerable number of tanks and other equipment. The Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the reason behind the huge number of casualties is that Ethiopia unleashed a series of 'human waves'.
Eritrea's withdrawal from the disputed Badme area, and their acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement on 27 February 1999, were widely considered a serious military setback. The recent round of fighting is seen by many observers as having shifted the balance in favour of Eritrea. At the same time, the renewal of hostilities has only further decreased any hope of a peaceful settlement in the near future.
Fighting on the battle field has always been combined with a war of words between the two sides. From their verbal comments, it appeared that each side understood the Framework Agreement proposed by the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in a very different way from the other. Eritrean claims of a hidden Ethiopian agenda have also been given more substance by recent events.
Ethiopia has repeatedly accused Eritrea of being insincere in its acceptance of the OAU Framework. "It should now be clear that the step taken by Eritrea when it informed the Security Council that it had accepted the Framework Agreement was only a decoy move," said Salome Tadesse, Ethiopian government spokesperson. According to Tadesse, the Eritrean acceptance was simply a tactical decision to "buy time". But the Eritreans also blame Ethiopia for complicating the situation: "The natural action on Ethiopia's part, following our withdrawal from Badme and declaration of acceptance of the OAU Framework Agreement, would have been to stop its attacks and give the mediators a chance to proceed with mapping territories and other practical measures. But unfortunately, Ethiopia chose instead to escalate the situation, which has produced more complications," Mohamed Omer, the Eritrean ambassador to Cairo, told Al-Ahram Weekly. "This has made their hidden agenda clearer, " he added.
"If Eritrea were truly committed to implementing the OAU Framework Agreement, it would have withdrawn from the Ethiopian territories it is currently occupying," said Tadesse. "But not only has Eritrea failed to withdraw from the regions of Zalambessa-Aiga, Bada-Bure and Egala which it invaded and occupied ten month ago, but the Eritrean forces are reinforcing their positions in these areas," he added. However, the Eritreans seem to be confident that they have done their part to make the implementation of the OAU Framework Agreement possible. "We have already withdrawn from the area identified in the OAU framework, Badme, but Ethiopia is demanding our withdrawal from other territories which are not included in the framework," said Omer. The Ethiopian reading of the framework is different: they insist that the said areas are included. "A withdrawal is what they were required to make ten month ago and it is what they still need to do today," said Tadesse.
Thus the exact understanding of the framework has become one of the major sources of conflict. "We never rejected the OAU framework. We asked for a clarification that contained 29 questions. Our aim was to avoid the framework being understood by the two parties to the conflict each in its own way," said Omer. "Regardless of whether the answers we received were convincing or not, we announced our acceptance of the OAU framework once we had the answers," he added. Ethiopia, for its part, claims it declared its acceptance of the framework from the very beginning without reservation, not because it was to its liking, but because it was a "comprehensive package" which the Security Council described as 'fair and balanced', and "because it did not reward aggression, and it did not ask for the humiliation of Ethiopia as Eritrea wanted," according to Tadesse.
Nevertheless, it would appear that things have now reached an impasse, as misconceptions and "hidden agendas" proliferate. What is needed now is a breakthrough that can get things moving again in the direction of a peaceful settlement. As for the problem of alleged misunderstandings of the framework, perhaps the parties involved should just go back to the document's authors and ask them what they meant: "The OAU is the reference, since they are the sponsors of the framework. They should provide the necessary explanations for both parties," said Omer.
Other efforts are underway, but as yet there have been no significant developments. The United Nations Security Council has made another appeal for a cessation of hostilities, and for Secretary-General Kofi Annan to renew his efforts to seek a negotiated solution. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) launched an urgent appeal for the belligerents to respect humanitarian laws. But the most powerful potential mediator is still the OAU, whose good will is weighed down by many constraints, among them Eritrea's decision to boycott the recent meeting of the OAU Ministerial Council in Addis Ababa. "We didn't take part in the recent meeting, because we believe Addis is not the right place in light of the ongoing war between the two countries. We cannot even guarantee the safety of our delegation. For these reasons we boycotted the meeting, but we sent a memorandum to the OAU secretary general to explain our stand," said Omer. Eritrea has also expressed dissatisfaction with the 'inefficiency' of the OAU. "Unfortunately, the OAU is not serious enough in its handling of the conflict. It should be taking practical steps, but so far there have been none," said Omer.
He also blamed the OAU for being slow to act. "We forwarded our queries regarding the framework in mid-December 1998, but did not receive the explanation till the end of January," he told the Weekly.
