No Force Can Trample the Choice of the People
Accusation by Kenya were incorrect / Arms deliveries by air to Al Shabab did not take place
PRESS RELEASE |
|||
|
|||
The accusation by the Kenyan government alleging that “Eritrea sent three aircrafts carrying weapons to Baidoa” laid bare as utter lie Asmara, 12 January 2012 - The accusation against Eritrea by the Kenyan government alleging that “Eritrea sent three aircrafts carrying weapons to Baidoa” has been laid bare as utter lie, as well as the non-existence of such activities through the report sent by the Monitoring Group to the Security Council on December 2011. |
|||
ERI-TV |
|||
19 December 2011 On the 5th of this month, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2023 (2011) to impose expanded and intrusive sanctions against Eritrea. Through its most recent communications to the United Nations Security Council, Eritrea has underlined that this resolution is totally unfounded and has no legal basis. Eritrea has repeatedly highlighted the political and vindictive motives of the United States in ramming through this Resolution by ignoring all normative procedures and rules of the UN body. This was also the case with Resolution 1907 that the Security Council adopted in December 2009. In both instances, the United States used unfounded accusations against Eritrea that were primarily concocted by its own intelligence agencies and their surrogates while denying it, through transparent schemes, rudimentary rights to a fair hearing and proper legal defense in breach of the established principle of "equality of arms". The United States resorted to dilatory methods to effectively bloc the legitimate request of Eritrea's Head of State to address the UN Security Council. And when it f"mally relented at the last hour, it made sure that this would not happen through unacceptable ultimatums and arrangements. UN Security Council resolution 2023 (2011) will entail, at least in the short-term, negative consequences to Eritrea's tenacious pursuit of nation building rooted on the twin pillars of economic development and social justice. It will also aggravate regional polarization and further undermine regional peace and security. But the biggest casualty of this unwarranted Resolution is international justice and legality. The UN Security Council, which derives its legitimacy and moral authority on the trust placed upon it by the world community of nations to safeguard international peace and security, ought to honour its solemn obligations. And for the third time in half a century, Washington has been allowed to use its influence to unfairly punish a small people at the expense of justice and peace. The discomfort of many UN Security Council Members, including those who voted in support of the Resolution, at this state of affairs was indeed evident in their official statements as well as in their private commiserations to the Eritrean delegation to the UN. In this respect, Eritrea acknowledges, with due gratification, the efforts of many Security Council members, and especially those of the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China and the Republic of South Africa, to instill a sense of proportion and balance in the workings of the Security Council and for reason to prevail even though it believes that much more could have been done to scrap the resolution altogether. Through its various communications to the Security Council, Eritrea had demonstrated the procedural and substantive flaws of Resolution 1907 during and after its adoption in December 2009. Eritrea also provided comprehensive responses exposing the fallacy of the myriad and unfounded accusations heaped against it by the "Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group". Eritrea remains dismayed that its sincere explanations have not been accorded the serious considerations that they merit by the Security Council. Eritrea strongly deplores the dangerous precedent that is being set in which the fundamental rights of self-defense of a UN member State are not upheld and critical decisions by the UN Security Council, with far-reaching consequences on the livelihood and destiny of a people, are reduced to crude power and number games. While fundamentally disheartened by the prevailing trend and even as it does not harbour great hopes that this present letter will fare any better, Eritrea feels duty bound to describe its position and perspectives on Resolution 2023 (2011) and appeal again to UN Security Council Member States to redress the wrongs they have unjustly meted out to the people of Eritrea. In this spirit, Eritrea will highlight, in a condensed manner, the legal and factual fallacies embedded in key paragraphs of Resolution 2023. 1. Respect for Eritrea's sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independenceIn paragraph three of the Preamble of Resolution 2023 the Security Council: "reaffirm(s) its respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence and unity of Somalia, Djibouti and Eritrea, respectively, as well as that of all other States of the region". This is consistent with the general purposes and principles as well as Article 2 (1) of the UN Charter. But in the case of Eritrea, has this commitment been truly respected? Or, has it been inserted as a mere platitude while in reality it is at variance with the facts? Eritrea maintains that the latter is indeed the case for the following cogent reasons.
2. Eritrea's alleged support to armed opposition groupsIn paragraph seven of the preamble and Op. 1 of Resolution 2023, the Security Council expresses "grave concern at the findings of the Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group report" and "condemns Eritrea ... for providing continued support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and the region". As Eritrea has elucidated extensively in its Reply of 18 October 2011, the findings of the "Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group" cannot be taken by the Security Council at face value without rigorous verification and scrutiny. By its own admissions, the Monitoring Group has collated its reports from "foreign law enforcement agencies", "active Eritrean Government contacts ", "former military or diplomatic officials ", and, "Eritrean individuals directly involved in people smuggling operations". Again by its own admissions, its methodology of evidence collection and validation does not meet judicial standards. This is grossly compounded by the tacit and overt political interference of the United States. This much is indeed echoed in the statements of the Republic of South Africa and the Russian Federation, among others, which warn against the politicization of the work of the Monitoring Group and its rush and unfounded conclusions; critical themes that we shall revert to later. In as far as the true facts are concerned, Eritrea wishes to reiterate and emphasize the following salient points.
3. Arms Embargo on EritreaOp. 8 of Resolution 2023 "calls upon all States, in particular States of the region, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraph 5 and 6 of resolution 1907 (1009), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airport, in accordance with the National authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, all cargo bound to or from Eritrea, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 5 or 6 of resolution 1907 (1009) ... ".etc. In the first place, such ambiguous language which confers much discretionary authority to hostile parties does not augur well for regional harmony and stability. In so doing, Resolution 2023 in fact introduces new elements and sows the seeds of potential regional friction and conflict. On a more substantive level, the potential regional imbalance that it purports to create through its asymmetric approach is legally untenable and practically fraught with exacerbating rather than abetting potential conflicts. For reasons better known to it, the United States has contributed to a greater militarization of the Horn of Africa region through its recent actions. In addition to its military base in Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, Washington has established a new Air Force base for its drones in Ethiopia in the past months. In exchange for these and other related programmes, US military assistance to many countries in the region has increased significantly in recent years. In the case of Ethiopia, in particular, the regime is currently engaged in a military shopping spree with recent purchases of tanks and other armory. This is greatly subsidized by the billions of dollars that the World Bank, the European Union and other donors are extending to the country, largely through US prodding, on an annual basis in direct budgetary or other fungible assistance. As it may be recalled, the United States had even gone to the extent of waiving its arms embargo against North Korea to allow, on an exceptional basis, a consignment of arms to Ethiopia in 2007. So what is the rationale behind this obsession against Eritrea's "potential purchase of arms" for its own self-defense in the context of a regional environment of heightened militarization? Eritrea wishes to highlight this dimension of the equation not because it has an appetite for militarization but simply in order to expose the designs of the architects of Resolution 2023. Eritrea also wishes to re-iterate that in legal terms, it is entitled to acquire weapons of self-defense in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. The Security Council cannot have it both ways: tolerate the illegal occupation, with tacit US support, of sovereign Eritrean territory by a belligerent neighbor on the one hand while at the same time imposing a one-sided arms embargo on Eritrea. 4. Prevention of Diaspora TaxThe levying of various taxes is surely the prerogative and sovereign right of any country and an exclusive matter that concerns its citizens alone. Ops. 10 and 11 of Resolution 2023 do not only contravene these norms but are replete with such offensive language and gross factual errors that Eritrea is dumbfounded to figure out why this rather ordinary and innocuous practice is seen as an object of hate and fear by the United States and Ethiopia in the first place. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the Clinton Administration was seriously exploring ways and means of curbing the Diaspora tax and remittances through unilateral measures as early as 1999 during the border war between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Eritrea has never used the Diaspora tax to "destabilize the Horn of Africa region or .... for purposes such as procuring arms and related material for transfer to armed opposition groups ... "etc. as Op. 10 of Resolution 2023 presumes. Curiously enough, the limited revenues that accrue from this provision have been mystified and exaggerated beyond proportion. But irrespective of the actual amount, it must be underlined that the legality of the tax is robust and beyond any reproach. The domestic legislation that created the tax is noncontroversial; the social objective noble; and, standing at 2%, the amount is not onerous by any standards. As the proceeds of this tax are funneled towards providing social cushion for the dependents of martyrs of war and/or for national reconstruction and development, the individual contributions ought to be eligible for tax-deduction in the host countries that allow similar provisions for charitable purposes. In any case, it should not constitute a cause for official scorn or witch-hunting. And least of all, the United States cannot be hypocritical to cry foul and prevent Eritrea from collecting any tax from its citizens. The United States in fact levies full income tax from its citizens abroad. To this end, it routinely utilizes unorthodox means including divulgence by foreign banks of accounts held by US nationals via the Qualified Intermediary Programme; court summons issued by the US Department of Justice to foreign banks; international conventions that support the issuance of administrative subpoenas upon wealthy Americans; and, bilateral agreements with individual countries to solicit their assistance in both criminal and civil tax investigations by the IRS, to assess and ascertain the amount of collectable individual income tax. Eritrea does not use "extortion, threats of violence, fraud and other illicit means to collect taxes" from the Diaspora as Op. 11 asserts mendaciously on the basis of the false report of the "Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group". All Governments pursue appropriate and legally specified enforcement measures to regulate tax evasion. By the same token, Eritrea has put in place explicit enforcement measures relating to domestic legal services such as real estate property entitlements, etc. that are withheld from those who fail to meet their fiscal obligations. These measures cannot be misconstrued as extra-judicial by any stretch of imagination, and Eritrea has never tried to implement them extra-territorially. It is therefore sad that the Security Council credulously accepts the distorted version of the Monitoring Group without a modicum of validation. Op. 11 further threatens law-abiding Eritrean citizens who reside in various countries with arbitrary legal action by the host countries "for acting, officially or unofficially, on behalf of the Eritrean government or the PFDJ contrary to the prohibitions imposed in this paragraph and the laws of the States concerned". This is witch-hunting in its crudest form. Eritrean nationals residing abroad are not involved in collecting the Diaspora tax as agents of the Eritrean Government. The PFDJ has no statutory authority and has never collected Diaspora tax on behalf of the Government. The Report of the "Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group" that speculates on these alleged practices has based its conclusions on innuendos and false information deliberately peddled by Eritrea's arch-enemies. The US and Eritrea's other detractors know full well that this is not the case. But all their efforts to drive a political wedge between the Government of Eritrea and the Diaspora; all their relentless attempts in the past to wean them over and recruit them as "opposition" have failed miserably. They are now resorting to this witch-hunting as a tool of retribution; to intimidate them into submission. The United States has in fact started to introduce, through the backdoor, illegal restrictions on Eritreans to obstruct remittances. Under instructions from the State Department, certain banks in the US have severed their correspondent banking ties with Eritrean banks. These actions cannot be rationalized by Resolution 2023 and constitute gross violations of the rights of these citizens in disposing their income freely without official encumbrance of any sort. Almost all domestic investment laws as well as international investment protection agreements and conventions allow the unrestricted repatriation of profits for corporate bodies and remittances for foreign workers for investment purposes in their home country and/or to support their dependents. US emerging practices thus constitute a gross violation of these universal rights and practices. 5. Disruption of investments and financial transactionsOps. 12, 13 and 14 of Resolution 2023 emanate from spurious presumptions and stretch them to curb investments in Eritrea or otherwise introduce intrusive "oversights" by the Monitoring Group and hostile governments in order to harass Eritrea and derail it from its development drive. Indeed, barely as the maiden revenues from the mining sector have started to accrue to the Government in the third quarter of this year, Op. 12 of the Resolution recommends the imposition of restrictive measures on account of ludicrous presumptions. It thus reads: "Expressing concern at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as financial source to destabilize the Horn of Africa region ... calls on Entrea to show transparency in its including through cooperation with the Monitoring public finances, Group, in order to demonstrate that the proceeds of these mining activities are not being used to violate relevant resolutions ... ". In a twisted logic, the burden of proof is transferred from the plaintiff to the accused. Op. 13 further states: "the Security Council decides that States, in order to prevent funds derived the mining sector of Eritrea contributing to violations of resolutions 1844 (20080, 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) or this resolution, shall undertake appropriate measures to promote the exercise of vigilance by their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction that are doing business in this sector in Eritrea including through the issuance of due diligence guidelines, and requests in this regard the Committee, with the assistance of the Monitoring Group, to draft guidelines for the optional use of Member States". The shift of language is baffling. The presumption and concern on "potential use" intimated in Op. 12 of Resolution 2023 is instantly morphed into a categorical "statement of fact" in Op. 13 to elicit encumbrances on Eritrea's sovereign budgetary prerogatives. This is not, in fact, the main aim of the architects of the Resolution. The intent is to introduce elaborate obstacles to scare off existing and potential foreign investors in the mining sector. In this regard, the serious reservations expressed by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN on the modality and legality of this provision expose the true intentions of the architects of the Resolution which are not in consonance with the views of other members of the Security Council. It must be pointed out that Eritrea's record and achievements in the social sectors have been considerable indeed in spite of the expansive border war with Ethiopia between 1998 and 2000, and, numerous adversities and hostilities thereafter. School enrollment has increased by 400% in the past twenty years. Access to tertiary education has increased six fold in the last eight years with the opening of several new colleges spatially distributed to advance the Government's commitment to equitable regional development. Education, from kindergarten to tertiary schooling, remains free of all tuition fees with the Government further shouldering accommodation and other expenses in the higher institutions of learning. In the health sector, morbidity due to malaria was very high and annual mortality rates hovered around 18,000 deaths in the early years after independence. The Government's intensive programmes have now brought about a veritable turnaround with mortality rates from malaria reduced to single digits. Polio has been eradicated. Maternal and under five child mortality rates have been reduced to 51.3% and 53.7% respectively. In the past eight years, the Government has built five regional hospitals and a national referral hospital in the capital to supplement the extensive network of health stations and clinics. Delivery of health services, including in-patient treatment, remains largely subsidized in line with the fundamental principle of the right to life of all citizens. The Government continues to provide, free of charge, essential medications to vulnerable groups that are amicted by specific chronic malaises such as diabetes. The Government has been pursuing these programmes with the requisite vigour and commitment as they constitute part of its national developmental obligations and priorities. In regard to social safety nets, the Government continues to allocate a hefty amount of its annual budget, running to more than half a billion Nacfa, for the upkeep of the families of martyrs and the war disabled. In a society where the extended family system is still intact and social cohesion and solidarity deeply embedded in the national psyche, the Government has strived to maintain the income gap within the bounds of decency and reason. In the public sector, the wage differential stands at 1:8 between the lowest and highest salaries including the most senior government officials. (The Gini coefficient for Eritrea, although not computed accurately, remains one of the lowest in the region). Public expenditure has not been confined to the social sectors. In a country where the domestic private sector is not yet strong, the Government continues to shoulder the burden of investment in indispensable physical structure to lubricate the conditions for rapid economic growth. All these facts are well-known to Eritrea's detractors. Their main worry is not, indeed, a well-founded fear that increased revenues from mining will be used recklessly by an adventurous government to "destabilize the Horn". Their main objective is to cripple Eritrea's promising economic development and advance other hostile motives. Ops. 12, 13, and 14 of Resolution 2023, which extend the encumbrances in mining to financial and insurance services, are primarily designed to render the investment climate in Eritrea dysfunctional to precipitate an economic crisis in the country as a prelude to political instability and chaos. They are also designed to empower the "Eritrea Somalia Monitoring Group" with wide powers of intervention and intrusion in order to establish a case for further strengthening of the sanctions as we illustrate below. 6. Expanded mandate of the Monitoring GroupIn its Reply of 18 October this year, Eritrea has drawn attention to the obvious political bias and lack of professionalism, impartiality and objectivity of the Monitoring Group in discharging its duties. As Eritrea demonstrated with specific instances, the members of the Monitoring Group appeared to go to unprecedented lengths to wage a crusade against the Government of Eritrea, the People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ), respectable and law-abiding members of the Eritrean community in the Diaspora as well as foreign friends of Eritrea, including some Honorary Councils. Eritrea's reservations have in fact been acknowledged by important members of the UN Security Council. In his remarks before the vote, Ambassador Mashabane of the Republic of South Africa states: " ... We call on the Monitoring Group to execute its responsibilities and mandate emanating from resolution 1907 (2009) and from this resolution with professionalism, impartiality and objectivity. The Monitoring Group should never be influenced by political considerations outside its mandate. It is important for the Monitoring Group to closely guard its independence and professionalism in the work it does to assist the Security Council with the implementation of those measures. Equally, we call upon members of the Security Council to desist from any temptation to use the Monitoring Group for political ends". In the same vein, the Ambassador of the Russian Federation and rotating President of the Security Council lamented: " ... the text of the resolution contains a range of provisions that lack adequate foundation, and the role of the group has been expanded beyond measure. In that respect we refer in particular to the 'planned terrorist attack' in Addis Abeba during the African Union summit there. The Russian Federation is categorically against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. However, in this case, the Security Council was not presented with convincing proof of Eritrea 's involvement in that incident". The Monitoring Group's lack of objectivity, professionalism and political bias against Eritrea is not a recent phenomenon. As it may be recalled, the Monitoring Group had falsely asserted that Eritrea had deployed 2,000 troops in 2006 when its mandate was restricted to Somalia. In spite of Eritrea's repeated requests to the Monitoring Group to acknowledge the errors it had made, the Monitoring Group has to date refused to set the record straight and take the appropriate remedial action. That the Monitoring Group is in cahoots with US authorities is a well-known fact and reinforced by the statement of the US Ambassador to the UN when she states: "... The United States will work with the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea and the Sanctions Committee regarding Somalia and Eritrea to develop voluntary guidelines for companies from the United States and other Member States ". One also recalls that it was this same Ambassador who confided to Ethiopia's Prime Minister that she would be pushing for "a stand-alone sanctions resolution" against Eritrea, separate from Resolutions 1844 and 1862 on Somalia, in early 2009 (WikiLeaks documents). In view of these facts, Eritrea calls on UN Security Council to revamp the mandate, constitution and composition, and working methods of the Monitoring Group to ensure that its individual members operate within the bounds of legality, impartiality, objectivity and professional integrity. In Eritrea's view, considerations of objectivity and neutrality demand that members of the Monitoring Group should not have political or business affiliations with the principal countries that harbor hostile agendas against Eritrea. Even from the outset, a balanced composition of the Monitoring Group that draws members from countries outside the circle of plaintiffs would have enhanced its neutrality and credibility. In addition, the Monitoring Group's ground rules of information collection and verification require further scrutiny and clarity to ensure that truth does not become a casualty of political manipulation as has been largely the case with previous reports of the Monitoring Group. In the polarized regional environment and state of unremitting US hostility that Eritrea finds itself in, one can easily imagine the litany of unfounded allegations that will be taken as truth if the validation process constitutes of accusations from two or more sources that are corroborated by others in the same circle. This was, unfortunately, the case in the past with the Reports of the "Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group". Eritrea further notes that the majority of the countries that supported Resolution 2023 invoked the report of the Monitoring Group in rationalizing its act. The danger posed by this vicious circle is therefore crystal clear. Eritrea's appeal of course remain the full annulment of Resolutions 1907 and 2023 as they represent a political agenda of principally the United States and Ethiopia. In the case of Resolution 2023 in particular, the co-sponsors of the Resolution, Gabon and Nigeria, have openly admitted that they have no direct familiarity with the situation at hand and have only acted at the behest of IGAD, which unfortunately has been instrumentalised to serve exogenous interests, as well as the Report of the Monitoring Group. This can only raise serious questions of legal appropriateness and validity of the charges that Eritrea is accused of. Thus, as Eritrea calls for full redress, it emphasizes in the meantime that the expansion of the mandate of the Monitoring Group described in Op. 16 of Resolution 2023 will not serve the interests of justice and fairness unless and until all the points raised above are adequately addressed by the Security Council. The unhidden wishes of the architects of Resolution 2023 are in fact to create exacerbating conditions so that Eritrea would be entangled in a spiral of escalating sanctions. But the majority of UN Security Council members have warned, in their statements before the vote, against this apparent trend which is not fair and that does not serve the interests of regional peace and security. In this light, Eritrea urges the UN Security Council:
Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
|
|||
Open Letter to Dr. Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to UNDear Ambassador Susan Rice I am a British National of Eritrean origin, living and working in London. Allow me to first, wish you a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year. Your undesired Christmas present to the Eritrean people that you personally delivered on Christmas Eve of 2009 named UNSC Resolution 1907 angered the vast majority of Eritreans worldwide and their subsequent simultaneous global peaceful demonstrations were loud and clear expression of their anger towards the illegal and unjust sanctions that are based on fabricated allegations contained in the Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group's Report but with no objective evidence whatsoever. These simultaneous global peaceful demonstrations were more importantly a vote of confidence on the Government of Eritrea (GoE) by Eritreans in the Diaspora composed of people of all ages and calibre, working and living in the West. To add insult to injury and weeks before Christmas 2011, you have once again delivered the second undesired Christmas Present UNSC Resolution 2023 to the peace and God loving people and their principled leadership whose only crimes are the pursuit of their basic human right to self reliance, political and economic independence and the promotion of social justice, the Eritrea philosophy. In deed it was also in December of 1952 that The US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, made the following unforgettable remarks: ''From the point of view of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean people must receive consideration. Nevertheless the strategic interests of the United States in the Red Sea basin and considerations of security and world peace make it necessary that the country has to be linked with our ally, Ethiopia '' John Foster Dulles and his team laid the foundation of the misguided US foreign policy on Eritrea and the region as a whole instigating a protracted and bloody conflict between the two sisterly countries which dragged on for three decades. However, after heavy sacrifice, the rule of law prevailed and justice was delivered when Eritreans militarily achieved their independence in 1991, thanks to their gallant freedom fighters and heroic martyrs who paid the ultimate price. Also, Eritrea's independence was legally recognised by the international community in 1993 following a referendum, thanks to the wisdom of its principled and courageous leadership. Just seven years after the two sisterly countries enjoyed peaceful neighbourliness and cooperation in their nation building and healing of wounds inflicted by the three decades of conflict, the same misguided US foreign policy instigated a bloody conflict under the disguise of a border conflict, however, both the Eritrean and the Ethiopian people are well informed that the real issue was not border dispute over Badme but to undo Eritrea's political and economic independence through regime change. The regime in Ethiopia was promised the port of Assab and other economic, developmental and humanitarian handouts in return for subcontracting the war that would have led to regime change as was witnessed in December 2006 when the Ethiopian Army invaded Somalia and kicked out the Islamic Courts and destroyed the only hope the Somalis had in re-establishing a peaceful and united Somalia that could have lived in peace, harmony and cooperation with its neighbours and the international community. Eritrea is a small nation of 5 million people in a volatile region led by visionary people in pursuit of an alternative social, political and economic philosophy in Africa. A philosophy that in a short span of time and despite natural climatic challenges and manmade conspiracies has brought about miraculous development in human resources, capacity building, vital infrastructures, peace and security, food security and the promotion of social justice. Furthermore, in spite of the global economic uncertainties and recession Eritrea has achieved the fastest growing economy in the world not because of the booming mining industry but because of its industrious and productive human resources and selfless leadership. I believe that when the Almighty looks down on Eritrea, He smiles with delight because in spite of the persistent draught and poverty in the region and because of the hard work of the Eritrean people and their selfless leaders there are no people starving to death in Eritrea, no one is denied access to medical care because he/she is poor, no child is denied access to education because education is free up to university level, there are no homeless people sleeping on the pavements and streets because they are poor or mentally ill. This wonderful God loving and God fearing people love each other and it is after all in the scriptures that if you do not love your neighbour you cannot claim to love God. This is the foundation of rich traditions and cultures that nurtured the people and their leaders. Nevertheless, and in accordance with human nature, as Jesus Christ had Judas, Eritrea has its share and as the Romans persecuted the Christians, the US is using you and the UNSC to persecute Eritreans, but as Christianity spread worldwide and eventually converted the Roman King to Christianity, the Eritrean philosophy of self reliance, political and economic independence and promotion of social justice will inevitably spread throughout Africa and the globe. Eventually, as the Roman King was converted to Christianity, a US president will embrace this basic human decency and the Eritrean philosophy of self reliance, equality, independence and the promotion of social justice. I hope President Obama would be the one who would embrace this philosophy. This has its foundation in the faith of the word of the New Testament that was severely persecuted by the hegemonic Roman Empire for fear of losing its grip on human beings owned as slaves. Similarly, the Eritrean philosophy of self reliance and political and economic independence is being persecuted by the US using you and the UNSC to sabotage Eritrea in its efforts to achieve the aforementioned goals. However, as the Roman Empire arrogance crumbled against the peaceful but undeterred faith of the Word and the Good prevailed over evil, so will the Eritrean peaceful philosophy prevail against all odds. Eritreans and their friends are well informed that this philosophy is perceived as a threat to the interests of the US and its allies as prophesised by an Australian author, Thomas Kennelly in his book titled ''Towards Asmara'' which he published after visiting EPLF librated areas few years before independence. "Do you know what the emergency really is? You want to hear about the really big emergency? The emergency is that if you guys [Eritreans] succeed [using your principle of self-reliance], you'll be an embarrassment to Africa. Who wants a setup like yours? There aren't many governments on this continent that do. There aren't many governments in Europe. Coloured folk who can look after themselves? It isn't viable. It upsets the world picture. Don't you know the West has to believe famine's an act of God? If they believe that, they only have to make a donation. But if they believe it's an act of bloody politics, they have to really do something, and that's too, too complicated. So what is the story? The story is you guys will fall on your own f---ing swords, because you've got this crazy idea that the world will allow you to be perfect!" As you may be aware, Eritreans are very civilized people who have very admirable cultures and traditions based on equality, tolerance, respect, self reliance, social justice, human decency and above all fear of God. Eritrea is a country where the rich supports the poor not with arrogance but with humility to become self reliant, where the strong helps the weak not with pity but with compassion, and where disputes between individuals and villages are settled peacefully not in deceitful manner but in wisdom and justice. A country where a whole village gets together to build a newly married couple their first house and gives them plots of land to grow their food and cash crops so the new family is also self reliant. A country where David literally killed Goliath in defence of his people, a country where the youth are literally moving mountains to make ways for roads and dams to achieve food security, holistic development and promote social justice. It is a country where, in accordance with the scriptures, the people pray for their leaders so they may live in peace. Also, Eritrea is a country where violence, greed, deceit and selfishness are condemned by the vast majority. Therefore, Eritreans and those who know them would tell you that the accusations against Eritrea must be fabricated especially in the absence of hard evidence. Let alone the Eritrean government, even the EPLF did not resort to terrorism during the darkest hours of the 30 years of the armed struggle, because terrorism goes against everything Eritreans believe in. Therefore, it would be an insult to our intelligence if you expect us to believe that
Dear Ambassador Susan Rice, I decided to write this open letter to you during this festive occasion so you can reflect because I believe that deep down in your heart, you recognise the fact that Eritrea is innocent of the alleged crimes and that the accusations have been fabricated in order to justify the hot pursuit of the misguided US foreign policy that has failed to deliver for over 60 years. Please be informed that past US foreign policy failed to:
The same misguided foreign policy is also doomed to fail in sabotaging Eritrea's social, political and economic development and self reliance. At this juncture of your career, there is a golden opportunity for you to be different to your predecessors and think outside the box. Also, you ought to intellectually challenge those who want to blindly pursue these policies that have failed to deliver and I trust that you have the courage to engage with the GoE in a constructive and persistent dialogue to politically address the conflicts of this region with professionalism, impartiality and in accordance with international law for the benefit of the peoples of the region and the international community. Yours faithfully, Kidane Eyob London UK kidaneyob@yahoo.co.uk
|
1. Linking To Ethiopia 2. Linking To Terrorism 3. what´s next...? Linking to Hell...? The Princess of Darkness, USA´s Dr. Susan Rice has missed its second chance linking us to Ethiopia, Game over! Is the United State a real partner for Liberty, Independence, Democracy and Justice? Is USA really partner of The Eritrean People? Is USA really partner of progress or only interested in Change? Change of Colours? |
| From Foster Dulles to Susan Rice, USA's policy has never changed when it came to Peaceful Eritrea. |
In 1952 |
 US Ambassador to the UN, John Foster Dulles, said, "From the point of view of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean people must receive consideration. Nevertheless the strategic interest of the United States in the Red Sea basin and the considerations of security and world peace make it necessary that the country has to be linked with our ally Ethiopia." |
In 2011 |
Ambassador Rice
on Passage of
|
For the Record:FAILED U.S. ENDEAVOURS Friday, 10 December 2011
Ms. Rice has shown scant decency or diplomacy in her communication with SC members during the weeks leading up to the decision on whether to go ahead with applying tougher sanctions on Eritrea as many members questioned the legitimacy of her proposals. Ms. Rice has no intention of fostering peace and stability in the Horn of Africa, but rather in creating regional hegemonic collaborators in crime. She has at times demonstrated adolescent tantrums and at other times a vehement attitude of vendetta, as commonly displayed by a jilted lover. Judging from the flurry of her dramatic teeter-tottering, one cannot help wondering what it was all about. Surely the world’s most powerful ruler need only present a fair, just and full proof evidence of its proposals for the rest of the permanent and revolving members to accept. That was, however, not the case. In her heart of hearts she, the SC, SEMG, AU, IGAD, and others know very well that Eritrea cannot truly be contributing to the unrest in Somalia to the level that it currently finds itself in. They also know exactly who is perpetrating the crimes and then crying wolf. To cover their own failures they sought to find an innocent victim. They fail to see that there will come a day when the table will be turned on them too. Ms. Rice and her foot soldiers that have slavishly fallen for her contrived and twisted plans may be feeling triumphant today in their sick minds, but they have underestimated the Eritrean unbending determination in doing what is right in the face of all adversity. It is a proven fact that nothing, not even the might of the most powerful, will come between the people of Eritrea and their country. It is however a crying shame for the UN to have failed to demonstrate its corporate integrity by succumbing to POWER.
|
| OEA Statement December 10, 2011 Security Council beats its own shameful record of injustice against the Eritrean peopleThe UN Security Council on Monday beat its own shameful record of injustice against the Eritrean people who have been victimized for more than 60 years by actions taken by this world body in the interest of an aggressive, expansionist neighbor: Ethiopia. The Organization of Eritrean Americans (OEA) strongly deplores this latest Security Council action against the Eritrean people because it is both unjust and extremely reckless. The OEA urges the members to not use the power of this body to victimize the vulnerable nations and peoples of the globe. The latest measure of unwarranted sanctions, as the one passed on Christmas Eve in 2009, are based on charges manufactured, orchestrated and pushed by Ethiopia. This one is based on bogus charges which allege that this young nation “planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa.” This is a pure Ethiopian fabrication the so-called U.N. Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group lifted as is from Addis Ababa’s bag of “reports” produced by its many in-house or hired dirty trick artists. As the Permanent Representatives to the United Nations of the Russian Federation, H. E. Vitaly Churkin, put it, “the UN Security Council was not provided convincing evidence of Eritrea’s involvement.” The sentiments of the South African Permanent Representative were the same. The monitoring group using Ethiopian script reported an Eritrean intelligence officer “Gemtchu Ayana” was behind the attempt, when in fact Gemetchu Ayana is an Ethiopian. It is the same monitoring group that conjured up 2000 phantom Eritrean troops in Somalia in an attempt to cover up Ethiopia’s 2006 invasion of Somalia as a proxy war between Eritrea and Ethiopia. These sanctions are also a manifestation of Washington’s one-sided and unfair policy for the region; parading IGAD members that accused Eritrea soon after the resolution was approved also exposes the unevenness and recklessness of this policy. Furthermore, this resolution, as the ones before it, is not likely to bring peace to Somalia or the rest of the region; in fact, it is bound to exacerbate the already tense relationship between the nations, leading to more conflicts in this war-ravaged region. The Organization of Eritrean American urges all peace loving peoples and nations of the world to denounce the UN action and fight to reverse these unjust and extremely reckless resolutions, 1907(2009) and 2023 (2011). The peoples of the Horn of Africa deserve better from the United Nations and the United States. Enough is enough! As Americans of Eritrean origin, we have a vested interest in seeing peace, stability and security returned to this region. Organization of Eritrean Americans (OEA) Organization of Eritrean Americans,
|
December 9, 2011
More UN Eritrea Sanctionsby Thomas C. Mountain In the bizarre world of the UN inSecurity Council, the Monday, December 5th, passage of further "sanctions" against Africa's fastest growing economy, targeting Eritrea in the Horn of Africa with its projected 5 years of double digit growth rate, should come as no surprise. By a vote of 13 to 0, with China and Russia abstaining, the UNSC passed a second round of sanctions against Eritrea, the first being almost exactly two years ago. Of note was the USA's Susan "Doctor" Rice, once Bill Clinton's black sergeant at arms in Africa and today the first US Ambassador to the UN to hold a White House cabinet seat doing every thing she could to successfully prevent Eritrean President Issias Aferworki from appearing in front of the inSecurity Council (even the BBC was forced to note such). A promise is a promise and Susan Rice had "promised" (one of those she meant to keep) that new sanctions against Eritrea would be passed and they were. Even the Brazilians, Indians and South Africans raised their hands at Susan Rice's demand. Such slavish kowtowing in support of Pax Americana has long lost its novelty, putting a lie once again to any claim to principles in the leadership of the developing world. The "sanctions" passed against Eritrea on Monday are all bark and no bite, less even then the first batch. The first version of this latest round of sanctions, (that even the Europeans vetoed) would have crippled Eritrea's emerging mining industry, one of the main drivers of its new found economic engine and blocked Eritreans abroad from paying their 2% income tax, which has long been the basis for Eritrea's very survival. Why is the Obama White House so hell bent on destroying Africa's fastest growing economy? According to the Obama White House Eritrea supports terrorism in the Horn of Africa, that is to say in providing arms to the Al Shabab Somali resistance. Of course the Obama-mafia didn't invent these charges, that was done back in the Bush Administration in 2007. Now, thanks to Wikileaks, we know that the senior US diplomat in the Horn of Africa, US Ambassador to Ethiopia, Donald Yamamoto, told his bosses in Washington D.C. in 2007 that the Eritrean involvement in Somalia was "insignificant" as in very small or trivial. Before Wikileaks, we had the UN General Assembly's Special Committee on Somalia Report in 2009 under South Africa's Ambassador, Dumusani Khumalo, which exonerated Eritrea and placed the blame for the influx of arms into Somalia squarely on Ethiopia and the UN funded Ugandan and Burundian "peacekeepers" occupying Somalia's former capital of Mogadishu. The first round of UN inSecurity Council sanctions against Eritrea which were passed in a closed door Christmas Eve vote in 2009, and included an arms embargo, which hurt. Ethiopia invaded Eritrea in 2000 and still has Africa's largest and best equipped army with some 500,000 of them on Eritrea's borders and even occupying Eritrean territory. Enforcing an arms embargo on Eritrea under existing conditions is a violation of Eritrea's right to self defense and a violation of the UN Charter itself. The December 5, the UN inSecurity Council "sanctions" were really just recommendations, calling on the parent countries of the mining companies, today just Canada, to harass Eritrea at any and every opportunity. It also calls for countries where Eritrean citizens in the diaspora pay their 2% income tax to the Eritrean government to do their utmost to harass said Eritreans in the process. All bark and no bite, so why the fuss and insistence by Doctor Rice on some semblance of punishment being unanimously passed by the UN inSecurity Council? The last time sanctions against Eritrea were passed the day before Christmas in 2009, it turned out they were targeting the nascent Eritrean mining industry and successfully derailed the bank based funding of $170 million for a small, once nearly bankrupt Canadian mining company Nevsun Resources had arranged for its Bisha mine. Nevsun had the foresight to arrange alternative securities market financing before-hand, just in case, and today Eritrea's first gold mine is pumping out $2 million a day in gold and getting ready to produce twice that amount in copper and zinc. Eritrea's second gold mine is scheduled to start construction in 2012 and is in the midst of trying to arrange the $80 million it needs to get up and pouring gold (Eritrea has already exercised its right to purchase 30% of the company, $32 million making Eritrea's total investment and royalty stake 40%). A second successful gold mine could easily kick start the mining industry into high gear in Eritrea and see the proposed $750 million potash mine succeed in Eritrea's Danakil Depression. With a planned output of up to 10,000 tons a day of potash and a life span estimated at 150 years, Eritrea stands to share in tens of billions of dollars in mining profits. This is a far cry from the likes of the Anglo-Americans world's largest gold mine in Tanzania which pays the standard 5% royalty. So, 40% for Eritrea for their gold versus 5% for Tanzania? It isn't to hard to see why the USA wants so badly to see Eritrea's upstart mining industry fail. Unfortunately for the Obama White House, all its promises to help bring about "regime change" in Eritrea came to naught and all Doctor Rice could claim was a little face, for "sanctions" that were ultimately passed though their effect on the next Eritrean gold mines financing have yet to play out. In the mean time, the Al Shabab resistance in southern Somalia continues to buy black market arms stamped "made in the USA," sold to make up for embezzled salaries by the Ugandan and Burundian "peacekeepers" who oversee 30 square miles of shot and shell blasted Mogadishu, where once half a million Somalis flourished, now left to slowly starve in UN refugee camps. The war on the Somali People continues with Kenya now providing "peacekeepers" in a bid for UN funding, trying to deflect domestic anger from its failed invasion of Somalia and its promises to capture the Al Shabab controlled port city of Kismayo. Here in the Horn of Hunger the saying goes "up is down, black is white and wrong is right," where the UN inSecurity Council practices a bizarre, and dangerous form of "just-US," displaying for all those who care enough to see just how UN-just the world really is. Thomas C. Mountain is the only independent western journalist in the Horn of Africa, living and reporting from Eritrea since 2006. He will be speaking in London on the afternoon of Dec. 17, 2011 at the Friendshouse. Prepared for publication by: |
| The State of Eritrea Press Release Eritrea Condemns Denial of Its Right to Address Security CouncilEritrea has registered its strong objection to the attempt by the United States to deny it by subterfuge its reasonable and legitimate right to address the United Nations Security Council. Back in October, Eritrea requested the Security Council to grant an audience to President Isaias Afwerki to enable him to present pertinent facts and raise substantive issues affecting the Horn of Africa region. For the past five weeks, the United States obstinately obstructed Eritrea's request in order to prevent the intervention of President Isaias Afwerki from having any influence on the Council's deliberations. Having undertaken a campaign of pressure and disinformation throughout that time, it sought last Wednesday to impose a precipitate vote on the Security Council. When that failed due to the objection of some Security Council members who stated that the Council needed to first listen to the Eritrean president, the United States resorted to the crude tactic of making the President's intervention logistically impossible by forcing an unachievable deadline. It also rendered his presentation a mere formality and utterly meaningless, by insisting that the President's speech be immediately followed by a vote on sanctions. This action by the United States has made a mockery of the United Nations Security Council and turned its procedures into a charade. Eritrea calls on members of the Security Council to uphold their responsibility to defend the credibility of the Security Council and make it possible for Eritrea to meaningfully participate in its deliberations at the highest level. Once again Eritrea believes that there is absolutely no justification for rushing a sanctions resolution that is designed to inflict suffering on the Eritrean people and that will have grave consequences for the peoples of the Horn of Africa. Ministry of Foreign Affairs |
Following its recent activities in the Horn of Africa, the US has once again FAILED in its usurped role of supreme global leader of justice and guardian of human rights, fairness and democracy. I refer in particular to the bullish behaviour and total lack of presence of its Ambassador to the UN, Ms. Suzan Rice in her relentless efforts to block the economic and social development in Eritrea which have been rejected by those balanced members of the world body.
Biddho.com - The Rhythm of Resistance
America's violation of rights and declaration of war on an African country
By Daniel Berhane
Not many Americans are aware or have any idea that a very grave injustice is being committed in their name; as the USA has been working frantically and pulling strings aggressively to impose additional sanction on an African country, Eritrea, at the United Nation. This is being done without having to prove the allegations or provide any evidence.
The current injustice that is being committed on Eritrean people can not be viewed in isolation without looking at the role of the main players in the region, particularly the US and the Ethiopian regime - Why is Eritrea being punished? How is the US conducting itself in imposing additional sanction on Eritrea? Is Eritrea destabilizing force in the region as the US and Ethiopia allege? Who are the responsible parties for the untold suffering of the people of the region? How is the US viewed by the people of the region in relation to its role and possible consequences for future American generations?
For the Eritrean people and the people of the Horn Africa region at large, this act and the consequences of the policies of the US on the ground, are viewed as America's declaration of war on their very existence. What is puzzling is that the fact these policies, are not only resulting in the suffering of the people of the region but also compromising the interest of the US itself. This raises very serious questions not only about the policies and the competence the US officials, but also the US political system.
The Horn of Africa region - one of the most troubled regions in the world- has exposed America's double standards and contradictions in its values and policies to the maximum
The US, finds itself, engaged in imposing additional sanction on Eritrea; poor yet a very promising country that has been making rapid progress in education, basic health, life expectancy and economic growth according to international agencies and institutions. Why would then the US want to exterminate such progress?
While a revised draft resolution on Eritrea has been circulated in the name of Gabon, which is said to have been watered down from an earlier draft that banned companies from investing in mineral resources and prohibited the payment of a remittances tax; the US has still managed to add references to both targets, which it will be able to exploit at later times.
Furthermore, the content of the draft still remains very strong and has widened its scope. What started out as Eritrea's alleged support for Islamist rebels in Somalia and Eritrea-Djibouti border dispute - has now extended its focus to Eritrea's alleged role in destabilizing the Horn of Africa region.
This has demonstrated the central objective of US-Ethiopia sponsored sanction on Eritrea is not about concern for terrorism or the stability of the region; but to defend and allow the Ethiopian regime, the closest US allay, to have the upper hand in the ongoing problem between Eritrea and Ethiopia.
The US has not only brought its morality as low as it can ever get, by these acts, but also in the very dangerous way it has sought to accomplish its current mission to impose additional sanctions on Eritrea– violating the right of the country, using its influence, and breaching, exploiting and sidestepping regulations and procedures of the UN - thereby, reducing the United Nations to a tool for prosecuting nations without due process and fabrications in the name of the UN.
The different stages involved in the process of imposing the additional sanction has been riddled with lies, manipulation, bullying and denying Eritrea the chance to defend itself. The first stage was preparing the ground work – the UN sanction monitoring group that is supposedly "independent" produced a report making allegations that include Eritrean plot to bomb the African Union Summit in Ethiopia and Eritrea's alleged support for Islamist rebels in Somalia.
The main source for most of the allegations -in particular the alleged plot to attack the AU- solely came from Eritrea's arch-enemy, Ethiopia. Hence the quality of the report is closer to fiction. Not only has the US brought itself to the level of the Ethiopian regime, but it has also brought the UN down to the same level.
After all the Ethiopian regime, according to the leaked cables from the American embassy in Ethiopia confirmed the Ethiopian regime planted three bombs in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa: "An embassy source, as well as clandestine reporting, suggest that the bombing may have in fact been the work of the GoE security forces." The regime went on to blame Eritrea and Oromo Liberation Front, just as the monitoring group does about the plot of the AU.
This is the same group that produced several false allegations including the presence of "2000 fully equipped combat troops from Eritrea" in Somalia to justify the US backed invasion of Somalia by the Ethiopian regime. According to the wikileaks cables this information was also supplied by Ethiopia, yet, the group had not had to explain itself. On contrary, it has been allowed to make much wilder allegations with no evidence to support. Is this the justice the UN offers to the victims?
The next stages were getting a draft circulated in the name of African countries as the US did not want to be seeing committing injustice against a small African country and the final process for the voting to take place. However, in crucial periods in the process the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, has been playing a very aggressive game and leading from the front in getting the final draft and rushing the process without having Eritrea to defend itself and refusing to give enough time to experts.
One would hope Susan Rice would not take victimizing a small African country as heroic act or getting her own way as a big victory. This is no victory; it has only brought shame to the US in the eyes of the victims and people at large who are watching the historic injustice.
In the era of the information age, people of the region and the world at large are aware of who is doing what and the responsible bodies for the crisis, the region finds itself. Thus there is no need for any pretention or for the US to hide behind international organizations and name of African countries at its service.
Indeed, the US, as the most powerful country on earth – as it has – could impose sanctions on Eritrea; specially given Eritrea has no strong economic connections with the permanent members of Security Council that have the veto power. However, do the US current policies on the Horn region, benefit its national interest? Is Eritrea really the destabilizing force in the region?
The main focus of the US on the Horn of Africa region is said to be combating terrorism. The US has invested considerable amount of resources for this purpose. Somalia - a country that has not had a central government for two decades- has been the area where the greatest concerns are as far as terrorism is concerned.
However, a glimpse look into the development of the last six years shows that the US policies together with its closest allay Ethiopia, have been the main source of contributing factor for take over of the large part of the country by Somalia Islamist youth, Al-shabab. Therefore, Al-shabab is more or less a product of US policy.
The rise of Al-shabab came about as the US rashly determined to get rid of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) fairly moderate coalition of Sharia courts that emerged and managed to bring a relative peace and sense of hope in the country in 2006. To make matter worst, it was Ethiopia, a traditional enemy of Somalia that invaded the country.
The elder leaders of the Islamic Courts Union escaped the invasion and made their way to different countries, while the youth fought the Ethiopian occupation until it withdrew its troops. The leaders, who escaped, lost their credibility, while the Al-shabab, expanded its power base- controlling much of the country. The irony is the US now finds itself trying to install a government lead by the same leader of the Islamic Courts Union that it helped overthrew.
The US further missed a big window of opportunity after the Ethiopian regime withdrew its army from much of Somalia. This was an opportunity to start an inclusive dialog amongst all Somalia factions and the traditional leaders. Yet again, the US rushed and quickly formed the present Transitional Federal Government (TFG).
What is the other major problem the US has in the region? The US's partners including the TFG, the AU troops, Djibouti and Ethiopia are in the partnership for different reasons. The TFG is incompetent and most of the people involved in the structure are more interested in sharing the funds the US and the other Western countries provide. According to the recent US congressional hearing on Somalia, much of the funds provided could not be accounted for.
Ethiopia has the most divergent interest from the US. Fighting terrorism is not its agenda. It views the legitimate struggle of the Ogden people as terrorism. In the last two decades Ethiopian regime's main effort and intention have been ensuring Somalia remains disintegrated through armed incursions and disrupting peace initiatives.
The consequences of flawed US policy on the Horn of Africa combined with several blunders and incompetence of US officials including the former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer and the now US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice - have allowed the Ethiopian regime to have a greater say on the way the US conducted itself in the region and freely allowing the regime to destabilize the region, commit untold atrocities on Ethiopian people and the region at large, and illegally occupying Eritrea territory.
These have put the US in direct conflict with the struggles and aspirations of the people of the region and in undermining and violating the rights of nations and international laws. Sadly the United Nations has also failed to live up to its obligation by allowing the organization to be used and manipulated by the US.
The US is one of the witnesses and guarantors of the Agreement between Eritrea and Ethiopia. The US has not only failed to live up to the agreement on its part, but it has also been one the main obstacles in resolving the problem.
The US has gone as far as encouraging the Ethiopian regime to withdraw from the legal ruling - it agreed to abide by. This was revealed by the wikileaks in conversation the Ethiopian prime Minster and Jendayi E. Frazer, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs.
When Ethiopia's military adventure failed and legal concussion of the Eritrea-Ethiopia border problem was reached, the policy pursued, was to hold Eritrea hostage of the no-war-no-peace situation in a hope it would collapse from economic and political pressures. The US has not only favored Ethiopia, but it has actively been trying to weaken Eritrea for the last decade.
The US has worked tirelessly with the intention of speeding up the collapse the country - ensuring financial assistance for development from the western governments and institutions were withdrawn; discouraging any foreign investment, and efforts to isolate Eritrea diplomatically using its massive influence on many countries.
Hence, the current sanction and aggressions are only a continuation and are not new. Ethiopia and the US failed to defeat Eritrea through unilateral action and now have chosen to use the UN to achieve their objective.
Eritrea is not the destabilizing force in the region. On contrary, Eritrea has played a very constructive role in putting an end to armed conflict in Eastern Sudan, and the huge role it played in peace deal reached in South Sudan. Eritrea is being punished to give the Ethiopian regime an upper hand in the problem between the two countries and for advocating for the right and principled solution to the crisis in Somalia.
In concussion, US should evaluate its policies on the region at large. It must immediately stop pushing for additional sanction on Eritrea and review its relations with Ethiopia and correct the regime from the path of destruction. Sponsoring armed invasion and overthrowing governments or imposing one on countries in contradiction with the will of the people will only bring about short-term victories and tragic and devastating wars in the long-run. The US should seriously look at possible consequences of its current foreign policies on the future American generations.
Daniel Berhane
