Who now keeps the peace between Eritrea and Ethiopia?

Mulugeta Alemu
21 February 2008

Eritrea’s blatant restrictions on the United Nations Mission in Eritrea and Ethiopia (UNMEE) not only imperilled the mandate and operation of the force, but has also put the security of the peacekeepers, in the words of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in grave danger. The fuel embargo imposed by the Eritrean government has crippled UNMEE’s operation. Its troops have now run out of ration and other supplies.

The crisis should not come as surprise. Eritrea’s latest aggressive posturing is just the most recent one in a series of its unlawful measures which it had been taking as far back as 2005. These measures which effectively excluded UNMEE from undertaking certain reconnaissance flight and patrol were so pervasive that they had already mortally diminished the significance of UNMEE’s mandate. UNMEE had simply failed to implement its mandated under the 2000 peace accord between the two countries. The response of the UN to the crisis was painfully timid.

There are few precedents to UN’s humiliation in Eritrea. Many of its peacekeeping missions marred in scandal and being unable to solve protracted conflicts in other parts of the globe, the world body unsuccessfully tried to market its forces station in the Horn of Africa as one of its most successful missions. But it is in Eritrea that the most challenging resistance to UN peace keeping mission is unravelled. When the UN is struggling to be a relevant institution in averting genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, the stakes are high in failing in traditional peacekeeping missions.

Despite the enormous commitment the world community has displayed in sustaining an expensive peacekeeping mission in this part of the world, few attribute the lull in fighting between Eritrea and Ethiopia to UNMEE. This is particularly important given the fact that the force has, for a considerable period of time now, is not doing what it is expected to do─keeping peace. The troops were not freely patrolling the long border and most of their previous check-points are already been disband.

The crisis between the UN and Eritrea has now reached its natural peak. Eritrea has just exhumed its last remaining bargaining chip against the UN. But its approach has been patently unwise, bullish and counter-productive. An angered Security Council, in its emergency meeting held to deliberate upon Eritrea’s mistreatment of its peace troops, openly condemned Eritrea’s action and threatened to take ‘appropriate action’ against Eritrea. But many including (most importantly) the Eritrean government know too well that this is not the first time the Council threatened action which it later failed to implement. It is unlikely that the Security Council will take any specific measure or sanction against Eritrea. Even if it was to take such steps, it is far less likely that such course of action will encourage or force the Eritrean government to change its course.

The international community in general and the UN in particular now should address the Ethiopia-Eritrea dispute in a manner which ensures lasting peace between the two countries. Now both the boundary commission and UNMEE, which have never seriously influenced developments on the ground, are in serious jeopardy leaving the two parties where they have always been. Ethiopia and Eritrea are the only genuine peacekeepers and dialogue is the only reasonable course of action. By showing an outrageously fierce rigidity to the implementation of the border ruling and by violating the operation of UNMEE, Eritrea has unwillingly pushed itself into a route which finally brings it to face dialogue as solution. Isn’t that what Eritrea has rejected from the beginning? Statecraft and good diplomacy requires that Eritrea is not reminded of that fact.