The Foreign Minister of Ethiopia attempts to convey, throughout the document, that Ethiopia has been committed to "scrupulous observance" of the treaty. Ethiopia also has outlined what it feels are Eritrea's transgressions against this same treaty. From a brief review of the news however, it is more than clear that this is simply not the case!

    * Ethiopia's readiness to demarcate the boundary on the basis of the delimitation decision of the EEBC.
          o "There is no crisis, terminal or otherwise, that cannot be cured by Ethiopia's compliance with its obligation under the Algiers Agreement, in particular its obligation to treat the Commission's delimitation determination as 'final and binding' and to cooperate with the Commission, its experts and other staff in all respects during the process of demarcation." -Chairman (Eritrean Ethiopian Boundary Commission) BBC link
    * Eritrea has made repeated public threats against Ethiopia.
          o "Eritrea will do every possible thing to avoid war..." -Ali Abdu (Information Minister of Eritrea) Reuters link
    * It [Eritrea] has imposed severe restrictions on UNMEE.
          o "A source at the meeting said Eritrea had accepted four conditions set out by the independent commission, including lifting restrictions on a U.N. peacekeeping mission and withdrawing from a buffer zone." Reuters link
          o " Ethiopia stated that, even if Eritrea did everything that the Commission specified, it was not prepared to move forward," Reuters link

Apparently the Foreign Minister of Ethiopia, Seyoum Mesfin, has missed the mark with this document. Rather, he should likely replace the noun "Eritrea" with "Ethiopia" and vice versa. I have noticed from numerous Ethiopian websites, that this is a frequent mistake, but of course we are to hold the Foreign Minister of Ethiopia to a much higher standard should we not. Granted, this does imply serious transgressions on the part of Ethiopia, and should of course carry justification.

    * Eritrea's readiness to demarcate the boundary on the basis of the delimitation decision of the EEBC.
          o "Provided the implementation of the ruling is carried out in its legality, there would be no issue for new crisis between the two countries," Isaias Afewerki (President of Eritrea) AFP link
    * It [Ethiopia] has imposed severe restrictions on UNMEE.
          o But the blind alley of Ethiopia's refusal to accept the boundary ruling carried a significant financial tag for the UN. Demarcation was the completion point of the UNMEE mission. Without it there was no exit strategy. -Martin Plaut (analyst & journalist) Chatham House link   

No matter how many times the charges are leveled from one to another, it bears little consequence if it is untrue. The statements of "fact" posed in this document from the Foreign Minister of Ethiopia to the Foreign Minister of Eritrea are little more than an attempt to imply that Eritrea is violating the Algiers Agreement while Ethiopia is not. Unfortunately for the Minister Seyoum, this is simply not the case, and is in fact on record as not being the case. But in this conflict of words, the Information Minister of Eritrea stated with eloquence, "they always say might is right but we say right is might!"

Perhaps Eritrea can now take this opportunity to remind Ethiopia of its responsibilities under the Algiers Agreements, including:

1. allowing the United Nations to raise the pillars demarcating the boundary
2. removing settlers from sovereign Eritrean territories
3. withdrawing its military from Eritrean territories

Finally, to quote the Foreign Ministry (of Ethiopia) statement, "[remove] barriers to normal relations pursuant to the Algiers Agreements and to that end to cooperate with the Witnesses to the Algiers Agreements and other members of the international community," to demarcate the border.

---