RECOMMENDATIONS: SECURING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF WOMEN AND CIVIL SOCIETY

Alemayehu Fentaw was Fellow of Session 455, "Peace-Making and Peace-Building: Securing the Contributions of Women and Civil Society," which was organized by the Salzburg Global Seminar from 7-12 September 2008, at Schloss Leopoldskron, Salzburg, Austria. Below is the full-text of the recommendations made by the participants with a view to securing equal contributions of women and civil society in peace processes.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

PEACE-MAKING AND PEACE-BUILDING:

SECURING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF WOMEN AND CIVIL SOCIETY

SEPTEMBER 2008

The Salzburg Global Seminar, in collaboration with the Initiative for Inclusive Security, gathered more than 60 leading thinkers from policy, practice and research to identify actions to be taken by key stakeholders to enact inclusive peace-building processes. The participants, from more than 30 countries, representing the UN system, additional
multilateral institutions, non-governmental organizations, academia and the private sector
met to identify critical gaps in policy and implementation related to the full and equal
participation of women and civil society in peace processes and to articulate strategies to
close those gaps.

Participants examined progress in implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution (SCR) 1325 and in securing the contributions of civil society as a whole in peace building processes. They recognized that parties to the resolution have depended for too long on “calls to action”, many of which have been ignored, without sufficient attention to “action itself”.

Many of the recommendations are, therefore, focused on how all the actors, from the highest levels of the United Nations to the grassroots, can design and implement concrete mechanisms and actions to give life to SCR 1325 and related resolutions. Recommendations are aimed at the UN system and other key international organizations; at governments, whether donors or countries affected by crisis, or in their capacity as member states of the UN; at non-governmental organizations, both local and international, working individually or in networks as well as other non-governmental entities such as media and the private sector. The recommendations are also relevant to conflict prevention.

As a concerned and engaged stakeholder, we urge you to review the recommendations and
help put them into action.

General Recommendations to all Parties:

1. Adopt the 40-40 approach, under which men and women are guaranteed a minimum of 40 percent representation in all peace making and peace building decision-making fora.

2. Activate and update data banks of qualified women for senior decision-making posts
and professional specialties related to peace processes, including peace accord implementation.

3. Draw on civil society expertise on the conflict and/or country(ies) in question during peace processes and when seeking to prevent conflict.To the United Nations System:

To the UN Security Council, UN Secretary General, and Heads of Operational

Departments:

1. Include in the next “Report of the Secretary General on Women, Peace, and Security”,
proposals for specific mechanisms, including financing, to ensure full implementation of
the recommendations of SCR 1325 and SCR 1820, and the putting in place of national action plans and compliance from governments. Following receipt of the next “Report of the Secretary General on Women, Peace, and Security”, issue a follow-on resolution to SCR1325, comparable to SCRs 1379 and 1612 on Children and Armed Conflict, which provide mechanisms for follow-up, funding, and the option of sanctions.

To Member States:

2. Provide greater numbers of female troops and police, including commanders. Troop
contributing countries must train their troops prior to deployment to prevent proliferation
of sexual exploitation and abuse, and promote understanding of SCR 1325.

To the UN Secretary General, Heads of Operational Departments, and Member States:

3. Implement the recommendation of SCR 1325 to appoint women Special Representatives
to the Secretary General and special envoys and continue to appoint senior women to UN
Secretariat positions and to senior peace and security positions. Establish quotas for balanced representation of women in UN-mediated negotiations and peace-making processes.

4. Consider the needs of women associated with armed groups while designing, planning,
and implementing UN-supervised disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration
programs, including recognition of their positions in armed groups, their need for training,
including nontraditional training, and their special reintegration needs.

To National Governments, Non-Governmental Organizations, and Inter-Governmental Organizations:

1. Develop national action plans or similar strategies for implementation of SCR 1325 that
identify activities, timelines, and benchmarks involving all levels of government and all
sectors of society.

2. Increase the number of women professionals in ministries and security institutions
through targeted recruitment, and feeder programs consistent with the 40-40 approach.

3. Create formal venues for linking government, civil society, and women’s organizations,
particularly building on existing professional associations in order to increase inter-sector dialogue.

4. Provide to local women’s organisations and their partners adequate human and financial
resources to ensure full implementation of 1325 and hold them accountable for results.

Donor funding of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) and security and concerns. Create facilities and conditions that enable both women and men to participate in peace operations, including the implementation of codes and conduct and oversight mechanisms.

To Non-Governmental Organizations, Corporations, Academia, and Media Organizations:

1. Engage in coalition building. Local non-governmental organizations should reach out
to relevant partners, including media, private sector, trade unions, and political parties.

2. Initiate the creation of a contextually-appropriate group that will assist in decision making for progressive actions in the community. Local actors might approach or establish a neutral and respected “council of elders” to support and assist women’s organizations as well as other civil society organizations and their partners in peace making, peacekeeping,and peace building.

3. Support and fund local initiatives of existing civil society organizations and women’s
groups to develop women’s charters and other tools pre-negotiations, during the conflict,
throughout the peace process, and post-conflict.

4. Establish and promote economic reintegration programs to the benefit of women,
including micro-finance, which supports refugees, returnees, those who stayed behind, ex-combatants, service providers, and all families and others affected by conflict.

Note: The above stated recommendations are the result of multiple days of debate and discussion concerning many complex and nuanced issues. A report from the program, Peace-making and Peace-building: Securing the Contributions of Women and Civil Society, held September 7 – 12, 2008 in Salzburg, Austria, providing additional context, provocative ideas and more complete description of key points will be disseminated and made available through the organizing institutions web sites (indicated below).

The Salzburg Global Seminar is a unique international institution, a place dedicated to candid dialogue, fresh thinking and the search for solutions to global issues. Founded in 1947, the
organization has brought more than 25,000 participants from 150 countries and regions to its
programs. The Salzburg Global Seminar challenges current and future leaders to develop creative ideas for solving global problems. It is an institution focused on global change – a place where innovative ideas lead to practical solutions. www.SalzburgGlobal.org

The Initiative for Inclusive Security advocates for the full participation of all stakeholders,
especially women, in peace processes. Since 1999, Inclusive Security has connected more than
800 women experts with over 5,000 policy shapers to collaborate on fresh, workable solutions to long-standing conflicts across the globe. www.HuntAlternatives.org

Ethiopia: Assault on academic freedom corners young family

Editor's note - Before he left for Austria on a scholarship, Alemayehu Fentaw was a lecturer at the Law Faculty of Jimma University. A few days prior to his departure, Alemayehu was interviewed by the Reporter newspaper on such issues, among other things, like federalism, regional governments, multi-party democracy. While elaborating, Alemayehu said that opposition parties may never seize power in Ethiopia unless the army stages a coup and removes the regime. The Reporter made that remark the headline of the story. Trouble began to haunt Mr. Alemayehu and family. His wife and a baby were supposed to survive on Alemayehu's salary. When she couldn't receive a penny for five months, the young mother travelled to Addis and became dependent on her poor grandmother. The fight for survival continued for eight months by which time the academic vice president had taken a series of measures that stripped Alemayehu of even his right to get a job at any higher learning institution in the country. Because of this injustice, the dean of the university, a Nigerian national, submitted his resignation, and left. From Austria, the young scholar sent the following letter about the assault he and his family suffered because his words didn't fall in line with the policies of the one-man dictatorship that has been in power since 1991, and has turned Ethiopia into a failed state.


http://www.ethiomedia.com/accent/8270.html

Ethiopia: The Assault on Academic Freedom Continued

Alemayehu Fentaw
I had been teaching law at the Law Faculty of Jimma University for two years and half until I was given a scholarship and a study leave from Jimma University, Ethiopia to pursue my Advanced MA in Peace and Conflict Resolution at the European University for Peace Studies in Austria. However, Jimma University has grossly failed to discharge its obligations from the moment I set foot in Europe, as it refused to pay out my salary to my family, albeit, I on my part, have discharged my duties. I have returned everything that belongs to the University and have also submitted student grades. The Academic Vice President of Jimma University, however, refused to sign on my clearance sheets, though all the rest officials of the University have signed on them on the alleged ground that there are complaints as regards the grades he submitted by few Law III students. This all happens after I left home and on different occasions I received an e-mail from the then Vice Dean and Dean of the Faculty requesting me to send them the student papers on which I cannot lay hand, as I was already in Europe. I directed them to where they may find exam papers at my home in Addis Ababa. The papers could not be found as my family had already moved from Jimma to Addis Ababa following my departure. I was not given a chance to check my roaster and correct mistakes, if any, unlike the tradition. They did not send me a list of students whose grades have not been reported or whatever their case may be.

In the mean time, my wife went to Jimma to demand payment of my salary to her. The Academic Vice President did not only tell her that she is not going to get any salary, but also that he is going to get cancelled my scholarship. Having exhausted the University administrative hierarchy, my wife filed her complaint with the Ethiopian Institution of Ombudsman, since Jimma University failed to pay her my salary for no reason without any administrative or judicial decision for about five months. Although the University was demanded by telephone to submit a formal explanation, or decision, as to why it withheld my salary, it did not do so. In the mean time, the University Administration , particularly its Academic Vice President indulged himself in the act of intimidating the Faculty Dean and other instructors to make them pass a decision against me and my scholarship. As he more often than not encountered strong resistance and criticism from the Faculty, he resorted to the wanton use of his authority to blackmail the Dean, Barrister Shipi M. Gowok. He asked him to fire me in absentia and cancel my scholarship if he wants to have letters of support to be written for his planned official travel to the USA, for the Jessup Moot Court Competition and to the University of Pretoria. Consequently, the Dean submitted his letter of resignation to the University President and left Ethiopia for good. The Vice President found it easier to dictate his whims to the newly-appointed all-too-young and naive Dean and his newly constituted members of the Academic Commission. In the mean time, the Ethiopian Institution of Ombudsman sent to the University Administration a formal letter demanding any decision on my case within fifteen days, as I also made an online complaint using the website of the Institution. Although, it has already been more than 8 months since my salary has been withheld by JU without any administrative and judicial decision , the University Administration finally sent its decision on my case to the Ethiopian Institution of Ombudsman. As I was told by my wife, the University has decided to dismiss me from my job and has also written a letter to the Ministry of Education requesting it to deny me any future teaching opportunities at any Ethiopian institution of higher learning.

Although the Ethiopian Institution of Ombudsman sent me an e-mail acknowledging receipt of my wife's complaint, it has refused to forward a copy of the decision to me nor to my wife.

In order to grasp the crux of the matter, it is important to look at what The government owned Ethiopian Airlines did to me. Before, I left home, Ethiopian Airlines refused to take me on board after I went through all the check-in process on the alleged ground that I need to have a transit visa to enter Germany, though the Austrian and German embassies in Addis Ababa confirmed to me that the visa issued to me by the Austrian embassy is a valid visa (Schengen Type D) and I need not any transit visa. Even if I talked to the flight supervisors, they insisted on my getting another visa to Germany. The German embassy refused frequently to grant me a transit visa saying that the type of visa I already have is sufficient to warrant me entry into Germany. Finally, after they received a support letter from my Austrian school and after I explained my situation the embassy granted me the transit visa. Even after I went to Ethiopian Airlines after both visas I had to pass through harassment before I flew. As you may know, the Airlines is owned and operated by the Ethiopian government. When I wonder why this all is happening to me, it is because, as was surmised to me by a few well-intentioned staff members of the Airlines and other friends of mine, it is because of my critical attitude towards the government and more particularly because of the interview that The Reporter, an Amharic Weekly, made with me a few weeks prior to my flight. The Interview was taken as seditious and inciting the Army to topple the government down by force. The decision is nothing but an attempt to silence political dissidence as well as an outrageous violation of academic freedom pure and simple.


Please find attached herewith (1) a support letter written for me by the Academic Vice President before the Reporter Interview, (2) the contract I have concluded with Jimma University obliging me to serve the University for two more years upon completion of my graduate studies or to repay the costs in full, (3) The Reporter Interview with me.

Peace,

Alemayehu Fentaw
Stadtschlaining,
Austria

• Letter by University of Jimma
• Interview by The Reporter

CAMBRIDGE, MA MAYOR RECOGNIZES ETHIOPIAN NEW YEAR

September 25, 2008

Cambridge, MA, United States – During a colorful Ethiopian New Year event on Saturday, September 13, Cambridge Mayor E. Denise Simmons presented Ethiopian American Youth Initiative founder Samuel Gebru with a resolution formally recognizing the Ethiopian New Year of 2001. The event was held at Saint Paul’s A.M.E. Church on Bishop Allen Drive, and was hosted by the Ethiopian Community Mutual Assistance Association. The resolution was passed unanimously during the Cambridge City Council meeting on Monday, September 8, 2008

The City Council resolution recognizes the Ethiopian New Year, and acknowledges the numerous political, social and economic contributions of Ethiopians to the city. The Ethiopian New Year falls on September 11 of the Gregorian (“Western”) Calendar. As Cambridge is home to the largest concentration of Ethiopians in Massachusetts, the passing of the resolution was a natural show of support for part of the community.

Mayor Simmons expressed her support for the resolution by stating, “Ethiopia is Africa’s oldest, independent and continuously surviving nation. Cambridge is graced with the presence of a large population of people of Ethiopian descent. They add to the rich cultural diversity in our City, and they link us to our friends in Africa. We passed this resolution in a show of support and friendship for our Ethiopian friends in Cambridge, in Africa, and worldwide.”

Mr. Gebru, who resides in Cambridge, thanked Mayor Simmons for her support of the Ethiopian community in the city.

“To my knowledge, there has not been a proclamation acknowledging the Ethiopian New Year in the past in Cambridge, nor has there been one recognizing the Ethiopian community’s contributions to the city’s multicultural identity,” said Gebru. “I would like to commend Mayor Simmons for her support of the Ethiopian community in Cambridge. I would also like to commend my organization, the Ethiopian American Youth Initiative, for initiating this endeavor which resulted in a proclamation for our new year.” The proclamation, included with this press release, is the result of an ongoing partnership between the Ethiopian American Youth Initiative, Mayor Simmons, and the City of Cambridge.

For more information on the City of Cambridge, visit www.cambridgema.gov.
For more information on the Ethiopian American Youth Initiative, visit www.ethusa.org.

The challenge of humanitarian aid

A Week in the Horn

26 September 2008

Addis Ababa

It is no secret that Ethiopia has once again been affected by drought and consequent food shortages, as have most of the countries in our region. In the last few months, Ethiopian Government institutions, donor governments and international institutions, government or non-government alike, have redoubled efforts to assist those in need. Efforts are continuing and a number of governments have donated extra assistance for those suffering from drought and rising food and energy prices. Reports indicate the situation is beginning to stabilize in some of the originally affected areas and the main maize harvest is due to start soon in the south, but with different agro-climatic zones and a variable time-frame for rains there are still areas of serious need. The Ethiopian government and people are eternally grateful to a multitude of institutions and selfless individuals for making it possible for Ethiopians in need to be cared for at this most difficult and trying time. These institutions and individuals know that the victims of natural vicissitudes are not to blame for the calamity they face. But the charitable convictions of such institutions and individuals are now being overshadowed by increasing attempts to politicize humanitarian aid. This is an emerging, indeed a disquieting, phenomenon and one worth scrutinizing.

Humanitarian assistance, for people affected by natural disasters and the sort of complex emergencies from which Ethiopia is currently suffering, has a long history. Originally, the organizations devoted to humanitarian assistance were limited in their numbers and capacities. They generally adhered to principles of independence, impartiality and neutrality, and scrupulously complied with these in human catastrophes of any magnitude. Any divergence was rapidly denounced by the organizations themselves. It was these principles that constituted the link between the organizations, the state authorities and those in need. Over the years, however, the numbers of organizations providing humanitarian assistance, and the amount of money they manage, have increased exponentially, largely due to the almost biblical proportions of new humanitarian challenges. Many of these new bodies were no longer prepared to provide food aid or medicine. Their members were also political activists, focused not just on the catastrophes that required aid and assistance but on other issues. They were no longer neutral, independent and impartial, operating out of moral conviction, but political actors in their own right, lobbyists for their cause and important constituents of a political elite. They can and do sway votes in national elections, and have political roles in their own countries while using their humanitarian organizations. Parallel to this, the attention and coverage of the international media has also been transformed, and these organizations and the media happily feed off each other. The media publicizes the work of the humanitarian agencies and the organizations benefit from the outpouring of public sympathy for their actions and assistance for the victims of disaster. This in turn propels politicians in the aid-sourcing countries to take their opportunity, and respond to the concerns of their constituencies. Recipient countries and direct beneficiaries all-too-often become no more than the objects of patronizing hand-outs and providers of graphic, often obscene, pictures for prime-time television and newspapers. This, in turn, encourages involvement of state actors and further politicizes humanitarian work. They feed upon each other rather than impact usefully on the supposed objects of their charity. Inevitably, growing numbers of non-governmental groups in any one geographical area have consequences for increased politicization, resource mobilization and expenditure.

Ethiopia has been one of the areas most affected by these developments in humanitarian aid. Before the fall of the military regime, most such organizations were kept out. Subsequently, Ethiopia has hosted a significant number of non-governmental organizations claiming to provide humanitarian assistance or undertake development projects. Many have complemented government developmental efforts and assisted in the provision of aid to people in need, making up one element of government strategy. In the long run, of course, it is economic development, investment and democratization which will ensure the well-being of those affected, for example, by drought. As part of its efforts to mitigate the effects of such problems, the Government put in place an early warning system for the prevention of natural disasters, working closely with international agencies. The agency involved has recently been restructured, enlarging its responsibilities to meet the challenges that such emergencies represent more effectively. The Government will continue to strengthen the institutional and legal structures responsible for identifying and providing lasting solutions to such humanitarian crises.

One critical aspect of these efforts is the empowerment of local communities to participate in finding lasting solutions in the design and implementation of development polices. In fact, the decentralization of decision making to local level will eventually make widespread inroads in tackling some of the existing structural problems. The current process of enacting legislation for charities and societies is part of the Government's effort to create an enabling environment for the operation of the still increasing number of non-government organizations and actors. This will ensure transparent and predictable processes for accreditation, and allow such bodies to carry out their mandates in full compliance with Ethiopian law. The draft legislation is a work in progress. It has involved extensive consultations with stakeholders and external partners, and the draft is now undergoing its third revision. The institution of a modern legal framework, drawing on the best practices from around the world, together with the efforts to restructure Government agencies providing for early warning, prevention and response to emergencies, is meant to guarantee that no fatalities will be caused by a lack of the necessary structures. The Government is determined to do its utmost to ensure all those in need receive care. It is a major priority. Certainly, in the long run, the socio-economic development of the country is the only way to provide a sustainable response. In the meantime, however, it is necessary to address these challenges, of provision of assistance at need and of providing an acceptable framework in which all non-governmental organizations can operate in accordance with acceptable norms of humanitarian assistance and respect for the minimum standards of objectivity, independence and impartiality. Indeed, it might be argued that it is now time for the United Nations and other forums to deliberate on suitable solutions to restore integrity and confidence in the real ideals of humanitarian aid.

Supporting Senator Obama shouldn't mean vilification of Ethiopia

A Week in the Horn

26 September 2008

Addis Ababa

Last week, US Congressman, Representative Donald Payne (Democrat, New Jersey) addressed a gathering of Ethiopians in Washington, D.C. The apparent purpose was to urge the community to support the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, in his bid to become the next President of the United States. We do not, of course, have any intent to be involved in the domestic politics of another state, even of a close friend. However, when a US Congressman uses a domestic political campaign event to vilify Ethiopia, it does raise some questions why he goes to such lengths to try to tarnish Ethiopia’s image and damage the good relations between Ethiopia and the United States.

In his address to the meeting, Representative Payne claimed he was particularly concerned by political and human rights conditions in Ethiopia. He cited a litany of unsubstantiated allegations of violations. Ethiopia, of course, does not claim to have a perfect record in its efforts to build a strong democratic society, but it is, nevertheless, a country that has regular free multi-party elections, a thriving free press, a constitution and mechanisms to address human rights issues including a Human Rights Commission and an Ombudsman's Office. Is there room for improvement? Certainly. That is why both government and people continue efforts to strengthen the judicial and political institutions necessary to achieve and sustain improved performances in all areas of democratization including the protection of human rights.

If Representative Payne is really genuine in his frequently stated concern for human rights and democracy, it is surprising that he has made so little of Eritrea, a country he visited early this year. Eritrea, after all, has no constitution, refuses to hold elections, only allows one political party, the ruling Peoples Front for Democracy and Justice, does not allow any independent media, has been designated as a country of particular concern for severe violations of religious freedom for the last four years,and has been roundly criticized by Reporters Without Borders and by all Eritrean Human Rights organizations, all of which are obliged to operate from exile. Mr. Payne is also no doubt aware of the eleven ministers and senior officials, and a number of journalists, rounded up by the Eritrean government on September 18, 2001. Held incommunicado, without charge or trial, for seven years, nothing has been heard of them. Thousands more are detained indefinitely, again without charge or trial, many for attempting to escape national conscription which for tens of thousands has lasted for more more than a decade. Representative Payne's reluctance to comment on Eritrea's appalling record on human rights while continuing to vilify Ethiopia, suggests he is driven less by any concern for human rights than by his own personal anti-Ethiopian agenda.

Representative Payne also told his audience that under an Obama administration, “we will not turn a blind eye to abuses just because some governments pretend to be allies in the war on terror.” This is obviously an allusion to Ethiopia which the United States certainly considers a friend. We have no knowledge whether Mr. Payne is accurate in his view of Senator Obama's possible policies. However, his effort to raise support for Senator Obama among members of the more extreme Ethiopian opposition elements in the Diaspora, by promising hostility to the present government of Ethiopia, is scarcely a friendly act. It is also perhaps unfair to the Presidential candidate himself who appears far too statesmanlike to associate himself with such disgraceful activity. We would recall that Representative Payne was the main architect of HR 2003, a much criticized bill which he claimed would support human rights and democracy in Ethiopia. The bill failed to materialize in part because it was seen as ill-conceived and hardly conducive to good US/Ethiopian relations, nor, we might add, to US/African relations either. In his speech last week, Representative Payne made clear his regret for the failure, claiming that the Government of Ethiopia had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to kill it. The Government did not: it had no need to.

Eritrea’s fixation on 'third parties'

A Week in the Horn

26 September 2008

Addis Ababa

It has become something of a trademark of Eritrea’s foreign policy to launch violent attacks on any third party that fails to sympathize with its belligerent stance in its relations with its neighbours. At various times the United Nations, the African Union and, increasingly in recent months, the United States have been vilified for failing to force Ethiopia to succumb to Eritrea’s views on the settlement of disputes between the two countries. The United Nations has been attacked for failing to impose mechanical demarcation of the boundary on Ethiopia. Despite its own violations of the Algiers Agreements, Eritrea wanted the United Nations to act as enforcer for its own position. Rebuffed by the UN, Eritrea has displayed characteristic outrage at being refused its demands, accusing the Security Council of abdicating its legal responsibilities and claiming Security Council resolutions had no legal substance. The African Union has long been vilified by Eritrea as an “ineffective” regional body. The reason is clear. The AU, like the OAU before it, has consistently refused to applaud Eritrea’s adventurism in the region and the rest of Africa. In 1998, the then OAU requested Eritrea to withdraw its invading forces from Ethiopian territories it had illegally occupied. It also played a critical part of facilitating the negotiations which led to the signing of the Algiers Agreements and was one of the Witnesses to the Agreement. The AU has been similarly critical of Eritrea’s latest adventure in invading Djibouti.

Now the increasing focus of Eritrea’s criticisms has shifted to the United States, with almost daily, and increasingly virulent, attacks. It is worth noticing that these scurrilous attacks against the US and other western countries, do not indicate any genuine oppostioin based on principle, as Eritrea would like to pretend. Eritrea’s record provides clear evidence to the contrary. Indeed it was only a year or two ago, that Eritrea was offering “blanket flyover rights, the use of Eritrea’s two major ports and the use of the new airport near the port of Massawa that is able to accommodate all types of aircraft”, to the United States. Eritrean authorities were stressing that Eritrea’s strategic location in the Horn of Africa, with more than 600 miles of coastline along the Red Sea, located just across from Saudi Arabia and Yemen, provided a unique resource for US use. However, when the US failed to see that “the time has come for the US to capitalize on this unique opportunity”, Eritrea’s attitude changed sharply. The US became responsible for concocting “endless diversionary ploys and schemes.” It had misused its “leverage” in the Security Council to paralyze implementation of border demarcation. Earlier this year, President Issayas even wrote the President of the Security Council calling on the council to examine “the acts of destabilization that the US Administration is fomenting day and night in our region”. All this apparently because, in Eritrea’s view, the US refused to put the necessary pressure on Ethiopia to accept Eritrea’s position on border demarcation.

The Week in the Horn cannot pretend to speak for the US, nor for the UN nor the AU, but it is clear the real focus of these attacks on third parties is certainly Ethiopia. This is the kind of mentality that effectively blocks progress towards peace in this region. Solutions cannot be imposed by one side or the other, or by third parties. Eritrea knows well that no government in Ethiopia would accept the sort of imposed solution of which it has been dreaming. That is why some of the unfriendly proposals on Ethiopia and Eritrea, coming from the US Congress, are so dangerous; they feed the delusions of Eritrea. This is why Eritrea still refuses to make any move towards dialogue and negotiation. Eritrea should realize that solutions for the boundary or any other dispute can only be found by the two parties working together in a peaceful and legal manner. Vituperation will not get either of us anywhere.