YouSaid · the spoken record

Haile Weldensae

lines on the record: 89
first: 1997-09-24
most recent: 2000-09-24
sittings or episodes: 4
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“In this connection, I wish to draw the attention of the Security Council to the urgent necessity of deploying the peacekeeping force authorized by its resolution 1320 (2000) as quickly as possible in order to forestall any avoidable obstacles that may threaten, or even destroy, the gains that have been achieved at great cost and much effort by so many.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“We also extend our appreciation to the international community, including the Government of the United States of America and the European Union, as well as other African governments, for their tireless efforts towards the achievement of a peaceful resolution and for the positive contribution they made to ensure the signing of the Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities in Algiers on 18 June 2000. We request them to persist in their noble endeavour until a genuine and just peace is really achieved. Finally, the Government of the State of Eritrea notes with great appreciation the effort that has been exerted, and the commitments made, by the United Nations to ensure an early, comprehensive settlement of the conflict.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“We invite all concerned to join Eritrea in extending full cooperation to the OAU Facilitators, in making a genuine and unequivocal commitment to the OAU peace process and in being faithful to the letter and spirit of the provisions of the OAU peace documents, in particular the Framework Agreement and the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement. At this juncture, I wish to seize this opportunity to renew our appreciation and gratitude to His Excellency President Abdelaziz Bouteflika for his unwavering commitment to the peaceful resolution of the conflict, and to his personal envoy, His Excellency Ahmed Ouyahia, for the wisdom and skill with which he led the indirect talks.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Yet, the fate of peace hinges on three critical factors. First, the search for peace is a shared responsibility. It cannot be left to only one of the parties. Secondly, peace can be made certain only when it is anchored on the values, ideals and principles of the Charter, which have been emphatically reconfirmed by the Millennium Declaration. Among these is respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States. Thirdly, peace can be achieved only with the faithful implementation of agreements accepted by parties to a conflict.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It is a clear manifestation of its commitment to peace and the rule of law that Eritrea still remains committed to a peaceful resolution of the conflict, notwithstanding the occupation of large tracts of its territory, the displacement of hundreds of thousands of its people, the continued brutalization and terrorization of the people in occupied territory and the feverish war preparations for yet another attempt against its territorial integrity. It has already taken bold measures, shown flexibility and made important concessions, however unpalatable they may have been, in the hope of achieving a just peace and in spite of the attempts that are being made to destroy the OAU peace proposals. Again, Eritrea pledges that it will continue to do its utmost to reach a comprehensive and conclusive agreement peacefully.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“However, the attempt exacted its cost: the systematic and wilful destruction of much of the economic and social infrastructure of the country and the deliberate, brutal violation of the human rights of Eritreans, including the terrorizing and brutalizing of the population in the occupied territories. Eritrea is convinced that there is no alternative to the solution of conflicts by peaceful means and on the basis of the Charters of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the existing principles of international law. From the beginning of the conflict, Eritrea has repeatedly declared that war can never be an option to resolve conflicts, that neither of the parties can settle the conflict by imposing its will and creating facts on the ground and then hope to achieve durable and meaningful peace.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Yet throughout this time, Eritrea has never wavered in its commitment to the peaceful resolution of the disputes. Indeed, it has solved two of its problems peacefully on a bilateral basis and a third through international arbitration. It was perhaps during the last two years that Eritrea's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity were most severely tested. What was labelled a border dispute proved to be a serious attempt to reverse history and to recolonize Eritrea — or, failing that, to truncate it, to Finlandize it, and to turn it into a satellite State. This attempt was thwarted by the united 19 effort of Eritreans at home and abroad.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“In spite of all its commitments and goodwill, however, Eritrea has, during its brief seven years of formal independence, been tested by and had to defend itself against political pressures, threats and actual attempts which endangered not only its sovereignty and territorial integrity, but also its hard-won independence. True, Eritrea may not be the only new country in history that has been so tested. Yet it must be the only Member of the United Nations whose territorial integrity — indeed, its very existence as a sovereign, independent State — has been threatened and is still being threatened at the beginning of the twenty-first century. It goes without saying that this struggle to preserve its independence has been detrimental to the nation-building and development efforts of the new State.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It established good relations with all its neighbours on the basis of the United Nations and Organization of African Unity Charters and the principle of good- neighbourliness. It assumed that there would not be any territorial disputes with its neighbours, since its colonial borders were clearly defined and recognized and had been accepted at independence by all its neighbours. It had no reason to assume that its independence would be threatened by any State, near or far, any more than it had any reason to assume that it had the right to use force to expand at the expense of its neighbours. Its sole ambition as a new member of the international community was to make up for lost time in development.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It has also played a major role in the transformation of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) from a simple natural disaster-control mechanism to a vibrant regional organization which will promote peace and cooperation among its member States, as well as advance economic and social cooperation for development. The recent meeting of the ever- expanding Community of Sahelo-Saharan States, in Asmara, our capital, is a testimony to Eritrea's commitment to the consolidation of the unity of and the broadening and deepening of cooperative relations between African countries. This commitment will for ever be firm. In spite of its victimization, Eritrea had decided to forget the past and to start with a clean slate as it evolved a vision, and set its priorities, for the future.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“By its membership, it had also hoped to play an active role in promoting the principle of the universality of membership in the United Nations and in promoting the achievement of fair and equitable regional and international orders. Eritrea is also fully aware of its responsibilities as a littoral State of a strategic international thoroughfare and has committed itself to contributing its share to the stability and security of the region, as well as to the creation of a zone of peace and cooperation in the region. To this end, it has made every effort to foster an atmosphere that will enhance cooperation among the littoral States of both sides of the Red Sea and promote development and mutual prosperity.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“To this end, Eritrean foreign policy has been premised on the assumption that the threat or use of force can never be an instrument of foreign policy, and that even in a clear case self-defence it must be used only after all available methods of peacefully resolving disputes have been exhausted — and then only with extreme caution. It is for this reason — and because Eritrea has suffered from the non-application by the United Nations itself of the principles of its own Charter and the decisions of the General Assembly — that, upon independence, Eritrea decided to make the ideals, values, purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter the cornerstone of its foreign policy.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Having made supreme sacrifices and paid dearly, during a 30-year struggle for independence and membership in the international community, Eritreans appreciate how essential the United Nations and its Charter are to their well-being and prosperity. Having fully experienced the horrors of a long war and the benefits of a short peace, they recognize the need for the peaceful and just settlement of disputes and for cooperation for mutual benefit in the long human struggle to create an international order based on justice and equality.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It reminds us that each State has a responsibility to act not only by itself, but also within a regional system, to give the loyalty that is due to these values, goals, purposes and principles. In this connection, I wish to join others before me who have reminded us of the urgent need to reform the United Nations, including in particular the Security Council and the General Assembly, with a view to enabling the Organization to reflect the realities of the times and to empower it to meet effectively and efficiently the challenges of the day and the future. I wish to reaffirm the commitment of the people and the Government of the State of Eritrea to the noble ideals and values, as well as the purposes and 18 principles, of the United Nations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Secondly, it reminds us that the lofty principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter require us to continuously strengthen the United Nations and to make the necessary adjustments and changes to enable it to meet the challenges of justice, peace and security, poverty and disease, socio-economic development, the inequities of the global economy and the protection of the environment. Thirdly, respect for the ideals and observance of the purposes and principles of the United Nations remain the essential keys to the creation of a peaceful, prosperous and humane new world order. To this end, the Declaration enjoins us to be loyal to these common ideals, goals, values and principles.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“We shall not forget to express our thanks and appreciation to our Secretary-General, not only for his tireless efforts to ensure respect for the values, purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, but also for his far-sighted and thought-provoking millennium report. The fifty-fifth session of the General Assembly is meeting in the wake of the Millennium Summit, whose Declaration embodies three fundamental messages. First, it reaffirms that the ideals and goals of the United Nations are still sacred to humanity and that the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter are as valid today as they were in the past.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“At the outset, I wish to extend my congratulations to Mr. Holkeri on his unanimous election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session. I am confident that, under his able and wise guidance, this session will successfully accomplish its tasks. I would also like to express appreciation and thanks to his predecessor, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Namibia, for the effectiveness with which he directed the work of the last session. I also take this opportunity to extend congratulations to the Republic of Tuvalu on becoming the latest Member of the United Nations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Therefore, the Government of Eritrea calls upon the United Nations and the international community to: first, condemn Ethiopia’s commitment to the use and threat of force; secondly, establish a short time-frame within which Ethiopia must definitively respond to the peace package; thirdly, take timely and appropriate measures for the immediate and unconditional implementation of the OAU peace plan in its entirety; and, fourthly, immediately deploy an observer mission to identify the aggression in the event of renewed conflict.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is for this reason that Eritrea believes that this Assembly has the duty to uphold the decision of the OAU, which has already been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council, and calls upon the Assembly to denounce Ethiopia’s renewed preparation for war against Eritrea and to demand that it accept and implement the OAU peace package. Surely, if there is any lesson that must have been learned in the last 16 months, it is that nothing can be gained, and everything may be lost, by continued warfare.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is incumbent on those who love freedom and justice and respect the equality of peoples, who are committed to peace and cherish the norms and principles of the United Nations, to ensure that law and moral principles prevail against international lawlessness and immorality. Ethiopia’s threatened aggression must be a source of deep concern to the international community and particularly to the OAU and the United Nations which have consistently urged both parties to restrain themselves 31 from the use or threat of force and to solve the conflict by peaceful means. To this end, the international community must insist that both parties recognize and respect each other’s right to live in peace within secure and recognized borders.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Yet Eritrea has hitherto preferred to react with equanimity to the gross and violent violations of the human rights of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin in the hope of securing a peaceful resolution of the conflict. However, there are limits to the misdoings that any respectable State must tolerate. It would be unacceptable for any Government worthy of the trust of its people not to defend the State and the people it represents against aggression. It would be an unthinkable calamity for a people which had fought for so long, endured unimaginable hardship and won its independence against all odds to lose its rights as a people and a nation to an aggressor.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“We seek no territorial expansion, and we have no plan to commit aggression against any other State. We seek to live in peaceful cooperation with all our neighbours. Yet if war is imposed on us we must — and will — fight to safeguard the sovereignty of our country and to preserve our dignity as a people. In this connection, Eritrea solemnly declares in this Assembly that the responsibility for any new military engagement will lie with the Addis Ababa regime. We have exercised prudence and patience in the face of aggression, provocation and crimes committed by the Government of Ethiopia against our nationals in Ethiopia and Eritrea. A State has the duty to protect its nationals from injury caused by the Government of any State.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“A perfunctory analysis of the media — particularly the broadcast media — of both countries will also reveal which of the parties is fanning the flames of ethnic hatred and is actively engaged in propaganda and in preparation for a new war, thereby committing a crime against peace. In short, it is very easy to identify which of the parties is committed to peace and which is committed to war and aggression. Once again, war clouds are looming ominously over our region. It is now self-evident that the Ethiopian Government is still determined to pursue a policy predicated on violent aggression. By its shrill war hysteria, the Government of Ethiopia is making it clear that it is poised to invade our country yet again. It is not our wish to fight. The bitter experience of a long war of independence has taught us to dread war.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Ethiopia has also claimed that its decision to use force to control contested areas was taken in self-defence. Such a notion relegates the concept of self-defence to the realm of self- help. It is not difficult to conclude which party to the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict has undertaken to fulfil in good faith its obligations under the OAU peace package and which party is determined to undermine, by direct or indirect aggression, the Charters of the United Nations and the OAU, thereby endangering peace, security, stability and peaceful development in our region. It is not difficult to determine which of the parties is resolved to bring about territorial changes, in clear violation of the OAU and United Nations Charters, by aggression, coercion, infiltration and subterfuge.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“However quixotic and unjustifiable it may be, the Ethiopian Government has declared that it will not accept the technical arrangements until it receives from the OAU a firm assurance of Ethiopian sovereignty over the disputed areas. Obviously, this is a direct contradiction of, and a frontal assault on, the Framework Agreement, whose provisions clearly declare that the “redeployment will not prejudge the final status of the area concerned, which will be determined at the end of the delimitation and demarcation of the border and, if need be, through an appropriate mechanism of arbitration”. (S/1998/1223, annex, p. 25) Surely, the proposition that a State must a priori be awarded full sovereignty over contested territory before the determination of ownership must distort the norms of international law and international relations.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is also to be recalled that the OAU had decided, and both parties had accepted, that any interpretation of the documents would be made solely by the OAU and its 30 current Chairman. The OAU and the United Nations have also agreed to become guarantors of the scrupulous implementation of all the provisions of the OAU peace package. Ethiopia’s latest threat of war and its consequent repudiation of its commitment to the OAU peace process, which is inflexible about the peaceful resolution of the conflict, are thus in contempt of the OAU, the United Nations and the international community. Ethiopia’s refusal to accept the technical arrangements until its new set of preconditions are met is holding the peace process hostage in spite of the clamour of the international community for the acceptance and quick implementation of the peace plan.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Finally, Ethiopia issued a statement on 4 September 1999 which was tantamount to a rejection of the technical arrangements, which are only a procedure for implementing the Framework Agreement and the modalities, on the untenable grounds that it contained elements which were not part of the previous two documents. One week later, on the eve of the Ethiopian new year, in a reiteration of Ethiopia’s previous declaration of war, its President publicly announced that Ethiopia would use force to impose its will over disputed territory. That was a blatant repudiation of the OAU effort, all of whose documents had been endorsed by the United Nations and other concerned organizations and Governments. The OAU has given Ethiopia clear and unambiguous clarifications in response to its queries and concerns.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“On 6 February 1999, it launched an invasion along several sectors of our common boundary, even while peace facilitators from the United Nations and the United States were engaged in shuttle diplomacy to bring the conflict to an end. Sadly, tens of thousands of Ethiopians and many Eritreans perished or were wounded during that aggression. When Eritrea accepted the Framework Agreement, Ethiopia came out with new preconditions based solely on its own interpretation of the Agreement, rather than joining Eritrea in the implementation of the peace plan. Yet Ethiopia was to accept the modalities — which were actually formulated to satisfy its unfair, unjust and unwarranted demands — only after much prevarication and procrastination.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Implementation would determine the exact borders between the two countries. Eritrea is enthusiastic about this. Eritrea is certain that the international community too is just as eager and enthusiastic about finding the final truth on all these and other related matters. On the other hand, the Ethiopian Government was determined to achieve its territorial ambitions by all means, fair or foul. To this end, in 1997 and 1998, members of the armed forces and militia of the Ethiopian Government systematically used brute force to expel Eritreans from Eritrean lands and to incorporate southern and south-eastern Eritrean territories into Ethiopia. That Government then rejected all Eritrean overtures on direct peace talks and continued feverishly to prepare for new aggression even as it paid lip service to the Framework Agreement.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Finally, Eritrea also accepted without any delay the technical arrangements for the implementation of the Framework Agreement and modalities which were submitted to both parties on 23 August 1999. Implementation of the provisions of the Framework Agreement would entail, inter alia, the following: it would require a cessation of hostilities, the redeployment of the troops of both sides from disputed territories and the deployment of peacekeeping forces in those areas. Eritrea is fully committed to this. It would require investigation of the sequence of events to determine the origins of the conflict. Eritrea welcomes this since it would conclusively identify the real aggressor. The Framework Agreement envisages the investigation of human rights abuses. Eritrea awaits the results eagerly.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“After the Organization of African Unity (OAU) was seized of the matter, Eritrea accepted, despite its grave reservations, the Framework Agreement submitted to both parties following the Ouagadougou summit of June 1998, after it had received the clarifications it had sought on several critical issues. Eritrea also readily and unequivocally accepted, at the Algiers OAU summit in July 1999, the modalities for the implementation of the Framework Agreement. The modalities were in fact drawn up to satisfy the unjust, unfair and unwarranted new preconditions made by Ethiopia on the basis of its own unilateral interpretation of the Framework Agreement. Eritrea declared that it was accepting the modalities only in the interests of peace and of the good of both the Ethiopian and the Eritrean peoples.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“From the beginning of the conflict, Eritrea has consistently pursued a policy of peaceful resolution of the border problem even in the face of provocation, creeping annexation of its territory and outright aggression. To that end, it had attempted, before the eruption of the conflict, to engage the Ethiopian Government in peaceful dialogue to amicably resolve all existing problems and controversies related to their common border. Even after the start of the conflict, Eritrea on several occasions requested the Ethiopian side to agree to accept bilateral negotiations. When this was rejected by Ethiopia, Eritrea unilaterally issued a proposal which contained detailed modalities for the peaceful resolution of the conflict. That too was rejected by the Ethiopian regime.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“While these are valid factors, it must never be forgotten that territorial expansionism, both within and outside the State, and the determination to achieve it by the use or threat of military force and by political and economic coercion against the territorial integrity and independence of neighbouring countries, has been the major cause of conflict and the disturbance of peace in 29 the Horn of Africa. Eritrea, the victim of Ethiopia’s territorial ambitions and its policy of aggression, is one example of this. It has now been 16 months since the eruption of the conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the root cause of which is Ethiopia’s avowedly ethnic-based policy of territorial aggrandizement and its systematic annexation of large areas of Eritrean territory.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“In all those cases, conflicts have caused serious setbacks in development plans and negatively impacted on the living conditions of the people. In almost all cases, conflict has been the intrinsic cause of famine and serious violations of human rights and other humanitarian crises. The international community cannot afford complacency in the face of such threats to international peace and security, if it is to be believed that peace is indivisible and that what happens in one region will have an impact on others. Various reasons, including ethnic and religious hatred, economic and political grievances and unemployment, have been advanced as the root causes of conflict.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is no surprise, therefore, that some donor States and international financial institutions have rightly denounced the state of affairs and have informed a few of those States that they would be better advised to feed their hungry millions and better manage their economies than squander countless millions to finance ill-advised military adventures. In his report on Africa, Secretary-General Kofi Annan made it amply clear that economic stagnation and poverty are a direct function of conflict. However, this is as evident elsewhere as it is in Africa. Thus, the situations in East Timor, Afghanistan, Kosovo or Bosnia and Herzegovina are no different from those in the Horn of Africa, Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Angola.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“About one third of the 52 members of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), all of them in sub-Saharan Africa, have been worse off economically in 1999 than they were in the previous year. Almost 20 countries have been afflicted by armed civil conflict or inter-State war. It is not surprising that almost all of the countries that have suffered economic relapse are the ones that are embroiled in conflict. Among those 20, the worst are to be found in the Horn of Africa. More than two thirds of their people are living in abject misery. Most have little or no food. They are ridden with disease. The economies of most of those countries are in shambles. The region is politically unstable and racked by conflict.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is a matter of deep concern that this year is witnessing the continuation of conflicts and the emergence of new sources of conflict. In particular, it is disturbing to note the growing tendency to resort to the use or threat of force. This has become a grave danger to the independence and unity of States as well as to regional and international peace and security. This year has recorded some of the bloodiest inter-State and intra-State conflicts, in Africa, Asia and Europe. Sub-Saharan African has been the part of the world that has suffered most from those conflicts. Sub-Saharan Africa’s economic performance and political stability have, in fact, taken a turn for the worse in 1999.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Allow me at the outset to join with others who have spoken before me in congratulating you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth session. I am certain that your experience and skills, as well as your dedication to freedom and justice, make you qualified to lead the United Nations as it searches for peace in Africa and elsewhere in the coming year. I also take this opportunity to pay tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Didier Opertti, for the effective manner in which he guided the work of the previous session. I extend my gratitude to the Secretary-General for his dedicated and exemplary contributions to the cause of peace. Permit me also to welcome the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga as new Members of our Organization.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Eritrea is in a race against the clock of development and cannot afford to lose the time, energy and resources which must be used in the war against underdevelopment. To date, Eritrea has restrained itself against extreme provocation, and it will continue to do so unless it is forced to defend itself. If aggression is committed against their country, however, Eritreans will have no choice but to defend their hard-won independence and sovereignty as well as every inch of their territory with whatever is at their disposal.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“As the OAU prepares itself to enter the twenty-first century, it is imperative that its member States rededicate themselves to the sublime principles and resolutions that have hitherto served our continent. These principles and decisions, which have successfully fostered peace and stability, solved conflicts and defused tension in our continent in the past, will be as valid in the future as they have been since they were first articulated. Only through their proper application will it be possible to defuse tension and eliminate conflict. Eritrea reiterates its commitment to peace, harmony and the rule of law in international relations, however painful this tragedy may be. Eritrea seeks peace for itself and for all of its neighbours. Eritrea will continue to seek good relations with all its neighbours.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“I wish to declare here and now, in loud and clear terms, that the Government of Eritrea welcomes, and is ready to undertake to implement, a decision by the Assembly which provides without any preconditions for the cessation of hostilities, a ceasefire agreement and a 25 peaceful resolution of the dispute by any method as the only acceptable solution. In Africa, conflicts such as the present Eritrean- Ethiopian border dispute have taken place several times in the past. Each one of these conflicts was addressed on the basis of the hallowed principles and decisions of the OAU, including in particular respect for colonial borders, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States and the non- use of force or threat of force.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Pending a lasting, legal solution, an immediate cessation of all hostilities and a ceasefire to be monitored by an observer force under the auspices of the United Nations. It is a matter of satisfaction to the people and Government of Eritrea that numerous governmental institutions, international and regional organizations and non-governmental organizations, including the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, the European Union and the Non-Aligned Movement, have, in welcoming the Eritrean initiative, called upon both Eritrea and Ethiopia to avoid the use of force at all costs and to resolve their disputes peacefully.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“In this connection, it must be mentioned that the Eritrean Government has time and again requested the Ethiopian Government to publicly announce to the peoples of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the international community the territories that it claims and to designate them on a political map with clear geographical coordinates. It is for these reasons that the Government of Eritrea yet again offers the following as a basis for the solution of the dispute. First, the comprehensive solution of the problem through a technical demarcation on the basis of the established colonial treaties that clearly define the boundary between the two countries. Secondly, a possible resort to arbitration on the basis of the sanctity of colonial borders in the event that this is demanded by the other party.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Thirdly, the Eritrean Government presented to the OAU Committee of Ambassadors a proposal containing the principles of respect of colonial boundaries and non- violation of these borders; respect of the charters of the OAU and the United Nations; commitment not to use force to impose a solution; commitment to peaceful and legal means to solve the dispute; readiness to stop all hostilities; and readiness to enter into direct talks without preconditions. Unfortunately, all our efforts failed because of negative responses from Ethiopia. On the other hand, Ethiopia has yet to offer a single plan or peace proposal. It has only threatened war unless Eritrea withdraws from territories which are within the internationally recognized borders of Eritrea.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Since before the onset of the crisis, Eritrea has been attempting to initiate numerous bilateral discussions with Ethiopia with a view to addressing all outstanding issues related to their common borders. In this connection, the following must be mentioned. First, the Eritrean Cabinet and National Assembly issued orders, on 14 and 20 May 1998 and again on 18 June 1998, respectively, for the temporary demilitarization of the areas of dispute. Secondly, the Eritrean President sent two letters to the Prime Minister of Ethiopia requesting him to join him in defusing the dispute and settling the border issue peacefully and legally on a bilateral basis.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“They were then confirmed by the United Nations when it created the ill-fated Eritrean-Ethiopian federation, and again clearly defined in the Constitution that the United Nations gave to Eritrea. True, the borders may not have been demarcated; but they are not the only undemarcated borders in Africa, and the non-demarcation of boundaries has not prevented most African — and indeed other — States from living in peace with their neighbours and from solving their problems peacefully. Eritrea is committed to a peaceful and legal solution of this dispute on the basis of the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of States which are enshrined in the charters of both the United Nations and the OAU as well as the decisions and declarations of the OAU and the Non- Aligned Movement.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“There is incontrovertible material evidence which establishes that Ethiopia has deliberately used force and carried out military incursions in Eritrea since July 1997 with a view to covertly changing the reality on the ground. In this connection, I wish to bring to the Assembly’s attention that the Eritrean Government has repeatedly called for an independent investigation of the incidents that triggered the conflict. This border dispute should not have existed in the first place, considering that boundaries between the two States are some of the most clearly defined in Africa and were made by explicit and detailed provisions of international treaties.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“It was the Ethiopian Government which declared war on Eritrea by a resolution of its Parliament on 13 May. It was the Government of Ethiopia which invaded Eritrea along several points on their common border. It was the Government of Ethiopia which launched an air strike on Asmara, the Eritrean capital, on 5 June 1998. It was the Ethiopian Government which imposed an air and sea blockade by threatening indiscriminate air bombing of Eritrea. 24 Yet Ethiopia has falsely portrayed Eritrea as an aggressor country by claiming that Eritrean forces invaded Ethiopian territory on 12 May. However, it is not claims and counter-claims that matter.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“We now extend this invitation to members of the Assembly. We also would like them to receive a similar invitation from the Ethiopian Government. This dispute is about borders, pure and simple. Any effort to transmute it into anything else must be viewed as only a vain and brazen attempt by the Ethiopian Government to camouflage its aggression and its expansionist policies. In this connection, it must be made clear that it was the Ethiopian Government which wilfully violated Eritrea’s colonial boundaries and forcefully occupied those areas that it had incorporated into its new map of Tigray. It was the Ethiopian Government which subverted all Eritrean efforts to defuse the crisis and to find a peaceful bilateral solution through their Joint Border Commission by unleashing unprovoked military attacks on Eritrea from 6 to 12 May.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Yet the Ethiopian Government, in an amazingly refined application of the Orwellian principle, accuses the Eritrean Government of precisely the outrages and atrocities it itself has been committing against Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin. The truth is that the Eritrean Government has not detained, expelled, deported or otherwise violated the rights — human or otherwise — of Ethiopians living in Eritrea. This has been verified by legitimate third parties like representatives of the European Union, United Nations agencies and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). As usual, the Ethiopian Government has called all of them liars. We have hitherto extended an invitation to all interested parties to carry out an on-the-spot verification of the human rights conditions in both Eritrea and Ethiopia.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)