Ever since the US closed the Eritrean consulate in California, the tensions between the two countries have steadily increased.
The fateful war of words that preceded the US-backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia earlier this year, is now taking place between US and Eritrea. The latest salvo was the US accusing Eritrea of harboring terrorists.
"We have tried our best to act with restraint with Eritrea," Frazer said. "We cannot tolerate ... their support for terror activity, particularly in Somalia."
Jendayi Frazer is the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs.
I like what Ali Abdu, Eritrea's information minister, said in response to Frazier:
"We are very, very grateful to Miss Jendayi Frazer [for] exposing her ill-will towards the Eritrean people."
Its worth noting that the exact same accusation (of supporting terror activities) was made against Somalia and the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) when they temporarily ran the country earlier this year.
I assume the terrorists Eritrea is harboring are the UIC leaders, who fled Somalia when Ethiopia invaded, and are currently holding "a 10-day congress in Eritrea to call for the withdrawal of Ethiopian troops from Somalia". Another case of legitimate insurgents being called terrorists – nicely bundled into the same group as Al-Qaeda. How convenient.
Speaking of convenient, the UN has called for Eritrea to stop arming the UIC insurgents in Somalia. Haven't we heard this rhetoric somewhere else? Ahh, yes – the US has accused Iran of arming the Iraqi insurgents. So nice to have the world turn out so symmetrical.
For those looking for more information on the history of ill-will between the two nations, check out this 35-point censure of US foreign policy against Eritrea released by the Eritrean Ministry of Information.
If you find the dossier too long, here are some points of interest:
31. The charges of “sponsoring terrorism” and “destabilizing the region” are the most preposterous allegations that belie the ulterior motives of the US State Department. Eritrea's position on Somalia has been spelled out unequivocally in various occasions and forums before; including at the IGAD and UN sessions. Equating Somalia's quest for national reconstitution after 16 years of mayhem with “Islamist terrorism” is either inexcusable ignorance or deliberate distortion of facts and events. As Eritrea has underlined repeatedly, the presumed presence of one or two alleged international terrorists cannot justify, by any stretch of imagination, the invasion of a sovereign country; and, the deaths of tens and thousands and displacement of almost half a million civilians.
32. The charge of regional destabilization is equally preposterous. Ethiopia has invaded Somalia in violation of UN Security Council Resolutions which were adjusted to “fit the new reality” because of the US support. Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia was long planned with the tacit encouragement and joint planning of the respective US agencies. Ethiopia is violating international law to occupy sovereign Eritrean territories and to spawn a permanent situation of regional tension and instability.
34. The spiral of hostility that characterizes US policy towards Eritrea boiled down to one overriding reason. This was true in the 1950s and it is also true today. It has nothing to do with principles of international law or with values of justice, democracy and human rights. The United States has all along believed that its perceived strategies in the region can be better served by Ethiopia; irrespective of the philosophical persuasions of the regime in power in Addis Abeba. This consistent and overriding policy was couched in Cold War terms in the 1950s. It has now been articulated in terms of the regional “Anchor States” as spelled out in the US National Security Strategy of 2002.
WAW
2 days ago
16 comments:
I totally disagree with your analysis.
In the early 90's after the civil war with Mengistu Ethipoia and Eritrea agreed to the two entity split. I traveled to both Addis and Asmara as a rep of the US Govt.
We did our best to get the two countries to work together and offered aid to both.
We established embassies in both countries.
War weariness caused the two revolutionary factions to create Eritrea otherwise there would have been continued civil war with Eritrea attempting to secede.
Ethiopia cultivated our assitance and Eritrea did not.
I have great respect for Eritrea and its people but they have decided to support radical Islamists as a tool against Ethiopia and that plays against us in the US as well.
I can honestly say that we offered a great deal of medical, agricultural, infrastructure aid to the Eritreans as we did to Addis.
At that time there was only the one mountain road into Asmara and just a few telephone lines into the capitol. The sea port was in need of total rebuilding.
For whatever reason Asmara has decided to take the side of the radicals because it flys in the face of Ethiopia and we have no real 'other' option at this time.
As-Salaamu 'alaikum,
Further to what the previous anonymous commenter said, Eritrea is one of the most notoriously repressive countries in the world - even by African standards nowadays. Just because the information (or is it censorship or propaganda?) minister is called Ali Abdu, it doesn't make it a Muslim-friendly country (its president, Isaias Afewerki, is Christian). It picked two petty disputes with Yemen in the 1990s which were resolved in Yemen's favour before picking a fight with Ethiopia over a barren bit of land. I suspect that its support for the ICU in Somalia was motivated solely by enmity for Ethiopia. I wonder what his reaction would be if the ICU were to set up their courts in Eritrea.
Salaam Anon,
Thank you for your comments. I really appreciate your perspective.
Anon, I understand that international politics is an extremely ugly game. And I realize that border disputes rarely occur with two rational parties - both sides are often acting unjustly.
I can definitively say that is the case in the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan and India, where Pakistan is just as manipulative of the Kashmiris as India (if not more so, with their usage of Jihadis).
The same can be said with the Iran-Iraq war and the dozen or so other wars that have taken place in the past century between neighboring countries. And I'm sure, as you attest, that the Ethiopia-Eritrea affair is no different.
But that's doesn't absolve the US of its underhanded tactics to bypass international norms of justice (or in the case with the UN, to strongarm their way to justice) and do whatever it takes to gain its political goals in the region.
"but they have decided to support radical Islamists as a tool against Ethiopia and that plays against us in the US as well."
This is not about Eritrea and its political machinations. All nations are guilty of using alliances to support their interests. Pakistan is doing it in Kashmir. Iran is doing it in Iraq. And so on.
However, such meddling has been taken to such a higher degree by the West that it's actually backfiring and stoking the flames of anti-Americanism and the like.
None of this would have occurred if the US had not provoked Ethiopia to invade Somalia.
Radical Islamists in Somalia were the reason, you may counter. Hogwash.
As long as a regime is towing the US line (like Saddam was in the 80's and Musharraf since 2000), there is no problem, no matter how deplorable their human rights record or undemocratic their governance. Somalia did not in its support of the UIC and we saw what happened. Eritrea is now doing the same (their motivations aside) and we are seeing a similar result.
When will the US ever learn??
AA- Yusuf,
Good points. But your points are irrelevant to my post, if I may respectfully say so.
My post was less a defense of Eritrea as it was an indictment of the US and its stale tactics. Whether Eritrea is Muslim friendly or not isn't important (was Iraq Muslim friendly before the invasion?).
Its the demonization-at-all-costs, with-us-or-against-us tactic that the west employs in this war on terror that must be countered. This approach has proven to be counter productive to finding real long term solutions to the antagonism between Islam and the West.
Brnaeem,
All nations commit to alliances to better their position.
To do otherwise would be naive.
Eritrea and Ethiopia had a window of opportunity after the defeat of Mengistu to live peacefully together and the US was trying to facilitate that. That was our mission.
Somalia is a haven of clan warlords and religious fanatics that show little regard for the lives of anyone not connected with their clan or position.
The Islamist sect chose to harbor radical elements that we are at war with and allow them bases to opperate from simply because they were fellow Muslims.
The borders with Ethiopia have always been contentious and the Ethiopians wary of Somali mischief.
That attitude combined with the support of Eritrea for Somalia in this respect prompted that action.
Ethiopia did not need real prompting from anyone considering the political situation.
If you live in SA you should realize the expediancy of an external threat. I do remember the Saudis willingness to host the US when they feared Saddam.
The first anonymous says that :
"Eritrea and Ethiopia had a window of opportunity after the defeat of Mengistu to live peacefully together and the US was trying to facilitate that. That was our mission"
Yeah Right
As if the US establishment is an innocent honest broker .
They are bullies and liers of the first order.
"The Islamist sect chose to harbor radical elements that we are at war with and allow them bases to opperate from simply because they were fellow Muslims."
And we have to believe your lies why ? Every muslim is radical unless he/she tows your line.
All they want is a line of people who say yes massah at every command of the US.
"The borders with Ethiopia have always been contentious and the Ethiopians wary of Somali mischief."
The Somalis are vary of Ethopian and US mischief as proven by the long and sordid history of the US.
Anon1,
"Eritrea and Ethiopia had a window of opportunity after the defeat of Mengistu to live peacefully together and the US was trying to facilitate that."
Define 'live peacefully'. The US diplomat would define that as 'align your foreign policy with ours or else get the sh*t beat out of you'.
"Ethiopia did not need real prompting from anyone considering the political situation."
Surely you aren't so naïve as to assume that Ethiopia acted independently in their invasion of Somalia. Can you say US proxy war?
Finally, you seem to be avoiding the crux of my post and comments: The US has got to learn that their meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations, especially when doing so is against the will of the majority always results in an extreme counter-reaction.
That's happening in Afghanistan with the Taliban resurgence and it happened in Somalia with the creation of the UIC as a response to the US backed Transitional Federal Government in 2004.
If peace was the goal in the region, the US would have backed the UIC, who had actually brought a semblance of order after years of chaos, and engaged them in a constructive manner.
Sadly, such thinking is sorely lacking in the US right now.
Please understand that this is NOT about Eritrea or Somalia, as no one cares about them and their people. Not America. Not Ethiopia. Not the UN.
This is ALL about the US and its blatant lies and hypocritical tactics in waging its war on terror. That was made clear in Afghanistan and Iraq and its happening again in the Horn of Africa.
As-salaamu Alaikum Naeem!!
This kind of topic is a little bit over my head still, but I wanted to tell you that I thought this was a really interesting post and informative post, followed up with fiery comments and I can say I actually learned something. Since I'm studying US Foreign Policy now, that made the topic even more interesting. I might add that 35-point censure to the class website and suggest others read it.
You said the crux of your argument is thus: The US has got to learn that their meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations, especially when doing so is against the will of the majority always results in an extreme counter-reaction.
I don't think the US has learned this in 50 years, but views small periphery nations as a playing field to execute their larger political/ideological "crusade" for lack of a better word.
The sovereignty and will of a such a nation's people matter very little to the US, I think, which only perceives its own interests as relevant to dealings with other nations.
AA! Since I'm Somali, I'd like to weigh in. Contrary to popular belief, which has been mostly promulgated by the U.S. of A. and reitirated by Mr. Anonymous here, Somalia is NOT "a haven of clan warlords and religious fanatics that show little regard for the lives of anyone not connected with their clan or position." They are mostly former civilians who had their lives turned topsy turvy by lunatics who thought they had something to gain by wreaking havoc on their own people, which obviously backfired.
The VAST majority of Somalis are normal people who just want to live in peace.
Ironically, no one wants to leave them alone to nation-build and experiment with what will work and will not work for their people. Every time they begin to come together, BIG BROTHER, in the form of Ethiopia, U.S.A., Radical Elements that come from who knows where, always interfere and put a damper on things.
So I say to MR. ANONYMOUS SMARTY PANTS KNOW IT ALL CUZ I USED TO WORK FOR THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (and to borrow a slightly modified phrase from our beloved Prophet Aaron/Haroon): LET MY PEOPLE ALONE!
ps: I agree with second anonymous! RIGHT ON, BRA! Even when I was a wee little one in Somalia, those derned Ethiopians wouldn't leave our nation in peace!
If the world left Somalia alone to it's own devices it would implode.
Without the UN, NGO's and western aid Somalia would have continued to have starvation forced genocide.
I did meet good people in Somalia when I got away from Mogadishu and it's craziness but the lack of law and any semblance of order permeates the society.
To say that clan warfare and warlords have not destroyed the country is to basically lie.
Why is it that so many Somalis come to live in the US?
If it is such a terrible Crusader country why come here, go elsewhere.
Immigrants that come to our country, accept welfare and Govt. assistance and then badmouth the hand that feeds them are the most cynical and undeserving of people.
Who is the prophet Aaron/Haroon?
The Prophet Aaron (Harun) is the brother of Moses (Musa).
Anon,
"If the world left Somalia alone to it's own devices it would implode."
That is debatable. Did not the UIC bring some sense of peace and order that the Transitional Government failed to establish?
"To say that clan warfare and warlords have not destroyed the country is to basically lie."
I don't think anyone is denying that (right Sahra?). The point is that if left to their own, an eventual steady state would have been achieved where the people would have accepted the new status quo. As in Afghanistan where the Taliban had established peace and order, the UIC had done the same in Somalia.
I'll avoid discussing the theological differences that I and the majority of the Muslim world have with the Taliban's and UIC's version of Islam. However, the results of their efforts cannot be denied.
As we are currently seeing in Iraq, people will choose peace and order under a tyrannical ruler over 'freedom' and 'democracy' in the face of daily carnage and chaos.
I'm not saying that we should support tyrannical rulers (Taliban, UIC, or Saddam), but we must realize the basic necessities of human beings and democracy is not one of them, especially as imposed by the US.
"Why is it that so many Somalis come to live in the US?"
I'm sorry to see such a response from you Anon. I expected much better from you. I will address this in a separate post.
Naeem, you are right. Our people do have issues putting clanship on such a pedestal. All I'm saying is that despite our "political" parties, we are all mostly good people that want the same things from life that Americans and Europeans and every other human being wants, namely peace, justice and the pursuit of happiness.
How can we be expected to accomplish the great feat of being a productive and thriving sovereign nation when folks from far off lands keep budding in. Frankly , my people are very hostile towards them because they don't bring good news, just treachery most of the time.
People like Mr. Anonymous 1 here think that we are subhuman and are very disdainful of us. They can't stand the fact that we want to be our own people and would rather die then be ruled by them. They are angry and slander us when they don't get their way. To quote Wesley from the Princess Bride "Get used to dissapoint".
As for why we come to the U.S. and not elsewhere it is because we want to have access to opportunity and education and to make our lives better and to hopefully give back to the WORLD community in a positive way. That doesn't mean that we have to agree with U.S. Foreign Policy with all its arrogance, greed, pride, hyprocrisy and ignnorance.
By the way, most of Somalia (with the exception of a tiny part - the North) DOES NOT RECEIVE ANY TYPE OF AID from ANYONE and least of all the U.S. And most of what is provided are from NGOs that are not even U.S. based.
As for who Prophet Aaron is, I suppose you've watched the Ten Commandments once too many times and thought that Moses, peace be upon him, said those words. Well, don't lose sleep over it, it's a common misconception among most Americans. DUH!
Sahra,
It was the Haroon part that thru me off and we can have a discussion of the legitimacy/corruption of the Bible/Qur'an another time.
I do not think Somali's to be subhuman and never indicated any such thing. I do think they've blindly supported their clans to their own detriment and have seen the results first hand.
True, if left alone they would do something in one fashion or another.
At the time of the UN intervention the international community was screaming 'do something' because of the mass starvation. So something was done but it didn't fit into the warlords ideas of what should be done as it didn't reinforce their individual control and in many cases they used food as a weapon against other clans.
I believe if you look at the amount of foregn aid in food stuffs as reported by the UN you will find an astonishing amount of aid per capita based upon the population. How much of that aid was rerouted into clan warehouse to be sold/ used as political leverage cannot be known (i.e. the people never got it)
I agree that there is no political linkage to coming to the US. People come for many reasons.
Still, at a gut level, there is something extremely self serving in going to a place to reap it's advantages while disparaging it's past. Rather like a dour relative that comes to visit, eats heartily, makes a take away plate of food, and then complains about the table setting.
Post a Comment