Eritrea, 1993

Let me begin by congratulating

you, Sir, upon your election to the presidency of the forty-

eighth session of the General Assembly.

I feel particularly privileged and honoured to address

the General Assembly on behalf of a people that struggled

for half a century to regain its fundamental human and

national rights and that, despite the outright military victory

it won, took the unprecedented step of organizing a free and

fair referendum so as to join the community of independent

States on the basis of its freely expressed wish and on solid

legal grounds.

As I speak here today, I cannot help but remember the

appeals we sent year in and out to the General Assembly

and the States Members of the United Nations, describing

the plight of our people and asking for legitimate sympathy,

support and recognition. We appealed to the United Nations

not only in its capacity as a representative of the

international community, but also because of its special

responsibility to Eritrea. For it was the United Nations that

decided in 1950, at the beginning of the cold war, to deny

the colonized people of Eritrea their right to

self-determination, thereby sacrificing their national and

human rights on the altar of the strategic interests of the

super-Powers.

In adopting that resolution, the United Nations affirmed

that it remained an international instrument which the

General Assembly could be seized of at any time. But for

the next 41 years, as a brutal war of aggression was

conducted against the Eritrean people, initially with the

active support of the United States and later with a much

worse and massive involvement of the Soviet Union, and

despite the repeated appeals of the Eritrean people, the

United Nations refused to raise its voice in the defence of a

people whose future it had unjustly decided and whom it had

pledged to protect. Not once in 41 years did Eritrea, scene

of the longest war in Africa, and victim of some of the

grossest violations of human rights, figure in the agenda of

the United Nations.

This deafening silence pained our people. It also gave

a free hand to the aggressors, thereby prolonging our

suffering and increasing the sacrifices we had to make. But

it neither shook our resolve nor undermined our belief in the

justness of our cause and the inevitability of our victory. As

an Eritrean proverb says: "The rod of truth may become

thinner but it cannot be broken." Indeed, justice has finally

prevailed. This is a source of hope and happiness not only

for the Eritrean people, but for all those who cherish justice

and peace.

While we rejoice at the peace and freedom that have

been attained and the promising prospects that lie ahead, we

are confronted with the reality of a devastated country and

population. The extent of the physical and economic

destruction visited on our country, in terms of infrastructure,

industry, agriculture, education and health services, as well

as the more painful human losses - the death of over

150,000 people, the exile of a quarter of the population,

Forty-eighth session - 30 September l993 9

massive displacement, and over 100,000 disabled and

orphaned - are appalling by any standard, especially when

measured against the meagre resources and small size of our

population.

Formidable as our problems are, we are confident that

we can and will rebuild our devastated country and provide

a decent life for ourselves. It is our firm conviction that

outside assistance, no matter how generous, cannot of itself

solve our problems. Ultimately, deliverance will depend on

our own efforts, on the mobilization and efficient utilization

of our resources. But as we start to clear the rubble and

pick up the pieces after three decades of war and destruction,

we find that our resources are too limited for the awesome

task of rehabilitation and jump-starting our economy. We

cannot help but ask: Will the United Nations and the

international community come to our assistance this time or

will our pleas once again go unheeded?

At this critical juncture of its history, Eritrea needs and

deserves international support and assistance, not only

because the United Nations and the international community

bear special responsibility for Eritrea, but also because it is

a test case for the United Nations "Agenda for Peace" and

the whole concept of peace-building. Eritrea has not only

secured peace and stability; it has made the rare achievement

of establishing warm relations of cooperation with its former

enemy, Ethiopia. And it is tackling the task of

reconstruction with popular support and participation, with

commitment and determination, with sound and flexible

policies, with prudent and efficient utilization of limited

resources, and with a demonstrated readiness to promote

regional understanding and cooperation.

Unfortunately, the response of the United Nations and

the international community so far has not been encouraging.

Though the active involvement of the United Nations in the

referendum was generally commendable, United Nations

contributions to the Eritrean referendum - one of the most

successful electoral processes in which the United Nations

has ever been involved - was less than $2 million, a meagre

sum compared to the tens of millions of dollars devoted to

similar exercises, many of which were dismal failures.

Similarly, the response of the international community to the

programme for the repatriation of half a million Eritrean

refugees from the Sudan fell far short of reasonable

expectations, and the Government has found no alternative

but to start the programme regardless of funds and expected

problems. Eritrea has also embarked on a crucial

demobilization programme - it has demobilized close to one

third of its 90,000-man army in the first phase - without

United Nations or other contribution. It had to cut back

some of its rehabilitation and development projects and

borrow money to finance this first phase.

In our efforts at mobilizing international resources, we

have repeatedly been met with such excuses as "a lack of

funds", "competing demands", "more pressing priorities" and

"donor fatigue". There well may be some truth in all of this.

And we are appreciative of the constraints and commendable

efforts of some donors. But, I believe, we cannot and

should not hesitate to acknowledge that, by and large, the

international aid programme is deeply flawed, unfair, unjust

and ill-structured to respond to the vital needs of recipient

communities. Assistance and the amounts of assistance

appear to be decided, not on the basis of need or the

capacity to put the assistance to good use, but - even after

the proclamation of the end of the cold war - on the basis of

the interests and agendas of donors. Moreover, the

international community tends to be more responsive to

putting out fires than to preventing them, and once the fires

are put out it often turns its back on the smouldering

combustible remains.

One of the most disquieting features of the present

international situation is the marginalization of the entire

continent of Africa. Every indicator shows that Africa is

sliding back and being left behind, which results in

intolerable poverty, suffering and desperation for millions of

its people. There is no denying that the onus of the

responsibility for these problems falls first and foremost on

us Africans. But, I believe, the international community

must squarely face the fact that it also bears responsibility

for Africa’s plight. Many of the dictators who have sown so

much havoc and suffering were in fact brought to power and

sustained during the years of the cold war by sections of the

international community. Perhaps more significant is the

fact that the now discredited economic policies and failed

projects were generally designed and approved by

international donors and implemented under the direction of

an army of foreign experts and advisers.

In our present highly interlinked world, Africa’s

marginalization, the poverty and desperation of its people, of

its youth, cannot be walled in within the continent’s

boundaries. They are bound to threaten global prosperity

and stability. The frustration and resentment that continue

to swell and may well explode must be defused in time.

Once again Africa must seize its own destiny. Its people

and leaders must tap deep into their human and material

resources and come up with the wisdom, strategy and

commitment to lift Africa from the mire. But as they set out

on this difficult road the international community needs to

come to their assistance, not with hand-outs that only

10 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session

increase dependency, not with the familiar packages and

projects that have gone down the drain, not with

preconceived formulas and attitudes of "We know what is

best", but in a spirit of partnership dedicated to helping

Africa to stand on its own feet and contribute to the

enrichment of human life and the protection of the

environment.

Of course, not everything in Africa has been bleak.

Just as gross human failure is not limited to Africa - witness

events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Soviet Union

and elsewhere - Africa has its share of positive and uplifting

developments and successes. We are following with much

interest the determined and promising efforts of several

African countries, both at the individual country level and

within a regional context. Despite the neglect and inequities

of the international community, many African peoples are

making a determined assault on poverty and social injustice.

In our part of the continent, Eritrea and Ethiopia have

already started mutually beneficial economic cooperation,

and, together with the other countries of the Horn, are

working to set up a regional mechanism to foster peace and

cooperation. We strongly believe all of the many positive

developments in Africa should be duly recognized.

In view of the positive developments in the Horn of

Africa, the tragedy that has gripped Somalia has been

profoundly disturbing. As the bloodletting among our

Somali brothers assumed harrowing proportions, and at a

time when many were hesitating, we strongly advocated the

constructive intervention of the international community,

under the umbrella of the United Nations, to save lives and

help extricate Somalia from the destruction it was heading

for. Despite our opposition in principle to external military

intervention, we realized early on that the extraordinary

situation in Somalia demanded extraordinary measures.

It was therefore with great relief that we welcomed the

decision of the United States Administration to intervene in

Somalia. Encouraged, we sought - individually and in

conjunction with our regional partners - to ensure that the

intervention would be guided by clear and comprehensive

security, and humanitarian and political objectives. And we

did not hesitate to share our views on the size, type and

length of stay of the intervention force needed for the

success of the mission. But unfortunately our views were

not heeded, although we were, and still are, better placed to

understand and work in the realities of neighbouring

Somalia.

Be that as it may, we recognize and appreciate the

achievements of the international intervention in Somalia.

The improvement of the humanitarian situation and the

March 1993 Addis Ababa Accords on national reconciliation

are major steps forward. At the same time, the worsening

security situation in Mogadishu and the increasing toll in

human lives, including women and children, have cast a long

shadow on the intervention in Somalia. Repeated mistakes

in handling the situation have led some people openly to call

for an immediate end to the intervention.

It is our conviction that a precipitate withdrawal of

United States troops - which we strongly warned against

from the beginning - would not only signal a lack of United

States commitment to the intervention, but would eventually

make the position of the United Nations Operation in

Somalia (UNOSOM II) untenable. This would plunge

Somalia into a catastrophe much worse than the anarchy that

prompted the intervention in the first place. We therefore

urge the United States and the international community at

large to stay the course in Somalia and to shoulder their

responsibility to the Somali people in the hour of their

greatest need. We also urge them to review, frankly and

dispassionately, the intervention to date, build on the

successes and achievements and, more importantly, admit

and correct mistakes.

We sincerely believe that the countries of the region,

whose role has so far been deliberately or otherwise

neglected, can make a constructive contribution to the

international effort. Consulting them informally every once

in a while, as has been the case in the past, is clearly not

enough. They need to become part of the process in a more

meaningful and formalized way, as it concerns and affects

them directly and more than anyone outside the region.

The advent of the new State of Eritrea happily

coincided with the end of the cold war, that era of

super-Power rivalry that caused so much human misery and

led to the virtual paralysis of the United Nations. Like the

rest of humanity, we place much hope on the new era, on

the prospects of an enhanced role for the United Nations, a

role that would make it truly representative of "We, the

peoples of the world". And yet we have no illusions that a

new, just and equitable world order has dawned. We see too

many old habits and practices - inside the United Nations

and outside it - to entertain any illusions. Although we hope

for successes, we see that the failures of United Nations

initiatives far outnumber any of its successes. Injustice

endures within nations and between nations.

We are awed by the challenges that continue to face

humanity and are deeply aware of our minuscule capabilities.

Still, Eritrea is determined to make its own small

Forty-eighth session - 30 September l993 11

contribution to the betterment of human life in its own

corner of the world.