Ethiopia, 2006

Allow me to

extend to you, Madam President, our sincere

congratulations on your assumption of the Presidency

of the General Assembly at its sixty-first session and to

express our full confidence in your ability to guide the

session successfully.

Let me also express our appreciation to your

predecessor, Mr. Jan Eliasson, for his leadership during

the sixtieth session.

My delegation’s appreciation also goes to the

Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, for his selfless

15 06-53958

commitment and devotion to the objectives of the

United Nations, in general, and for his contributions,

through various initiatives, to the efforts of reforming

our Organization and for his dedication to their

practical implementation, in particular.

In our view, one of the key accomplishments of

the international community in recent years is the

agreement on the Millennium Development Goals

(MDGs). It is imperative that we all commit to

building stronger partnerships to achieve these noble

goals and targets. In this regard, we are cognizant of

the fact that each country is responsible for its

development. It should also be equally recognized that,

for those countries at the early stage of economic

development, there is a need for stronger support from

the international community if they are to meet the

MDGs.

For low-income countries, there is nothing more

important than a partnership that is predictable,

consistent and based on mutual obligations defined in

advance. The long-awaited opening up of international

trade, especially through the elimination of agricultural

subsidies, should also be expedited.

On our part, we have intensified our efforts to

improve the socio-economic conditions of Ethiopia.

Today, in the decade and a half since the dictatorship

was swept out of our country, our socio-economic

progress has been substantial. We have succeeded in

channelling our limited resources into capacity-

building and infrastructure programmes serving the

entire country. We have opened up new universities

and technical institutions of higher learning, expanded

primary health-care services and built roads, airports,

power plants, transmission and telecommunication

facilities and services, among others. As attractive

opportunities have become more apparent, domestic

and foreign investment has grown.

In this regard, I would like to highlight some of

the achievements recorded so far. In the past three

fiscal years, the Ethiopian economy has grown by an

average of 9.5 per cent annually. Over the same period,

our export trade has grown by 28.5 per cent per annum.

Our primary school enrolment ratio has increased to 89

per cent from a mere 30 per cent in the early 1990s. In

order to strengthen our capacity for development, we

are building 13 public universities. In two to three

years, when these universities are fully operational, the

total annual intake of public universities would

increase from the current 30,000 to 150,000 students.

Similar results have also been achieved in the health

sector, where the Government is equally determined to

enable rural people in Ethiopia to have adequate access

to basic health care by 2010.

Benefiting from the encouraging results of the

first five year plan and the experience gained in its

implementation, the second five year plan, namely, the

Programme for Accelerated and Sustained

Development to End Poverty, was drawn up on a much

wider and enhanced scale. The main objective of this

latest plan is to alleviate poverty by ensuring food

security and meeting the MDGs.

As it carries out its development agenda, Ethiopia

strongly believes that the prevalence of peace and

security in the country and its region is an absolute

necessity. For this reason, Ethiopia will not allow its

dispute with Eritrea to distract it from its focus on

development, although that has been the main objective

of Eritrea since the conflict began eight years ago. For

the last four years, Eritrea has been blaming Ethiopia

for its own aggression against us and for the current

stalemate in the peace and demarcation process. In

fact, now, the whole world is being blamed for

Eritrea’s own failure and for its inability to behave like

a normal State.

For the benefit of this Assembly, it would be

fitting to place the conflict in the proper context and

perspective for a better appreciation of the current

impasse in the peace process. It should be recalled that

Eritrea launched an unprovoked attack against Ethiopia

in May 1998 in blatant disregard of international law,

thereby igniting the war and leading to the present

crisis. In this respect, I wish to draw the Assembly’s

attention to the decision of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims

Commission regarding issues of liability in the war

between the two countries.

In its decision, the Commission set forth, inter

alia, the following conclusions. First, Eritrea is liable

for committing unprovoked aggression against

Ethiopia. The Commission stated that Eritrea violated

Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United

Nations on 12 May 1998 and the days immediately

following when it resorted to armed force in attacking

and occupying areas peacefully administered by

Ethiopia. Secondly, Eritrea is liable to compensate

Ethiopia for the damages caused by that violation of

international law. Thirdly, the Commission rejected

06-53958 16

Eritrea’s argument that its recourse to force was

justified, because some of the territory question was

territory to which Eritrea had a claim.

The Commission’s decision shows not only

Eritrea’s warped understanding of international law but

unambiguously confirms that Eritrea’s illegal act

constituted aggression.

Before Eritrea launched its aggression and during

the war and after, Ethiopia has shown its strong desire

and willingness to resolve the conflict with Eritrea by

peaceful means. It should be recalled that, in order to

create conditions for a sustainable peace and in order

to re-establish all-around cooperation between the two

countries, Ethiopia presented a five-point peace plan,

which the international community, including the

Security Council, had welcomed. However, the

proposal was flatly rejected by Eritrea.

We have also cooperated fully with the Secretary-

General’s Special Envoy. Furthermore, Ethiopia has

welcomed the peace initiative presented by the

Witnesses to the Algiers Agreement, which is

supported by the Security Council and made the

following proposals. The current impasse should be

resolved with the assistance of a neutral facilitator in

the demarcation process. Freedom of operations by the

United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea

(UNMEE) should be restored, together with the

sanctity of the Temporary Security Zone. The threat or

use of force should be eliminated. There should be

normalization of relations between the two countries.

In this connection, I would like to assure the

international community that we shall continue to

persevere in our search for a lasting peace.

Ethiopia has on various occasions expressed its

readiness to demarcate the boundary, through dialogue,

in accordance with the decision of the Boundary

Commission, and has attended in good faith the

meetings convened by the Commission. It has also

reaffirmed its readiness to normalize its relations with

Eritrea. Ethiopia has done so not because it is desperate

for closer relations with Eritrea, but rather because

normalization is critical for durable peace. But Eritrea

will have none of this. Why? Because Eritrea’s

strategic goal is neither peace nor a peaceful common

boundary. What it wants is interminable boundary

problems with Ethiopia.

The latest report of the Secretary-General on

Ethiopia and Eritrea, of 19 September (S/2006/749),

and the report of the Boundary Commission annexed to

it clearly indicate that the Commission’s June and

August meetings were cancelled because Eritrea

refused to attend. Eritrea has also issued ultimatums as

a condition for its cooperation with the Boundary

Commission. I wish to underline here that Eritrea has

no reason to be frustrated by the lack of the speedy

implementation of demarcation. Eritrea is the reason

why the boundary between the two countries has still

not been demarcated.

Eritrea’s illegal and anti-peace stance is not

limited to issuing ultimatums. It has blatantly violated

the Algiers Agreement by threatening the use of force

and has violated the integrity of the Temporary

Security Zone by deploying its armed forces there. It

has tightened its blatant restrictions on the United

Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) and

its personnel. The Secretary-General has reported time

and again that Eritrea has not only prohibited the

Mission from carrying out its mandated tasks, but also

engaged in a series of arrests and detentions of its

personnel. Those are naked violations of the Algiers

Agreement, Security Council resolutions and the

Charter.

The way forward to break the current impasse in

the peace process is very clear. Eritrea needs to abide

by the relevant Security Council resolutions and the

Algiers Agreement, withdraw its armed forces from the

Temporary Security Zone and restore the Zone’s

integrity and UNMEE’s freedom of operation. It must

demonstrate its compliance with article 1 of the

December 2000 Agreement by renouncing the use of

force to resolve the dispute between the two countries.

It should cooperate with the international community

in its efforts aimed at resolving the dispute peacefully

and through dialogue. Only when Eritrea decides to

cooperate with those legal measures will we be able to

begin to resolve the dispute in accordance with

international law.

Eritrea should behave as a responsible State and

resolve any dispute through diplomatic means. Eritrea

must understand that that is its only option. Its

continued, dangerous tactic of using brinkmanship

against many actors in the international community is

not acceptable.

Ethiopia shares a border of more than 2,000

kilometres with neighbouring Somalia and is home to

about 3.5 million Ethiopian Somalis. It is in the

17 06-53958

interests of Ethiopia that peace, stability and national

harmony prevail in that country. It is precisely for that

reason that we have spared no effort over the past 15

years — working together with partners in the Inter-

Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and

the African Union (AU) — to help the Somalis to

achieve peace and national reconciliation.

The Transitional Federal Government of Somalia

is the product of the efforts made by Somalis

themselves, with the support of IGAD countries, the

AU and the international community in general. That

Government is now facing a major challenge from

those who have ambitions that have nothing to do with

Somalia but everything to do with chaos, instability

and terror. The international community would do itself

a great disservice if it failed to appreciate the

implications of what is currently happening in Somalia

and did not respond in an appropriate manner.

Somalia is being dragged into the abyss by those

who are using religion as a cover to deny the people of

Somalia peace and the opportunity to revive a nation

that has been in a state of collapse for 15 years now,

making it possible for those who have no interest in

peace and stability to thrive. The latest opportunistic

move in this regard was made by Eritrea, but it is

bound to fail. IGAD and the AU are asking for political

and diplomatic support so that the Transitional Federal

Government can be in a position to contain those who

are the agents not of love, but of disharmony — not of

peace, but of war. That is not too much to ask of the

international community.

Only when the Transitional Federal Government

is in a position to protect itself from the internal and

external enemies of peace will dialogue provide a

solution to the crisis in Somalia — a crisis that the

extremists within the Islamic Courts Union hope will

engulf the whole region. It is precisely for that reason

that the partial lifting of the arms embargo is so

critical. There are those who want to wish away the

danger in Somalia. There are, on the other hand, those

who want to benefit from the danger. It is obvious that

the latter group, to which Eritrea belongs, is taking

advantage of the naivety of the former.

There should be no doubt that Ethiopia will

continue to be a pillar of peace and stability in the

Horn of Africa. That is Ethiopia’s vocation, whether

with respect to the problem in Somalia or in connection

with the difficulty we have in ensuring that Eritrea

chooses the peaceful path. Resort to force is never a

basis for sustainable peace. That is the philosophy that

underpins our policy towards Eritrea and towards the

crisis in Somalia. There is no better guarantee for

peace and stability than the nurturing of mutual

confidence and trust, regardless of differences in

outlook or in political or other values. This also

explains Ethiopia’s legendary commitment to the

United Nations and to its principles and purposes. As I

conclude, therefore, I would like to reaffirm Ethiopia’s

devotion to the United Nations and to the values of

interdependence, which the Organization embodies.