Eritrea’s Information Minister has “no comment” on the Agreement with Djibouti
We have been commenting on the nature and implications of the deal Eritrea and Djibouti struck earlier this month to end their two-year border dispute. It was a move that caught most analysts by surprise because it was out of character for Eritrea to submit to a negotiated settlement of disputes, resorting instead, as it often had, to belligerent posturing. We have also been remarking that the enthusiasm with which the news of Eritrea’s renewed good faith was received by the international community was perhaps a little too optimistic. The lack of transparency with respect to the manner of the negotiations and the deafening silence of Eritrean officials regarding the agreement were sources of scepticism, not to mention the fact that Eritrea has yet to commit itself to addressing the other two components of Resolution 1907.
It was clear that any decision by the international community to give Eritrea a clean bill of health must first take stock of the very issues that necessitated the resolutions in the first place. Eritrea must show unequivocally that it stands alongside the elements of peace in Somalia, not with extremists. It has to stop all its support to the likes of Al Shabab in their campaign of terror and destruction against the government and peoples of Somalia. At the very minimum, this would require that Eritrea recognize the TFG as the legitimate government of Somalia. Equally important, Eritrea has to stop all its destabilizing activities throughout the region. It was clear from the very nature of the regime that the mere signing of an agreement does not necessarily guarantee that Eritrea will desist from its destabilizing activities including against Djibouti.
UN Secretary General Ban Kin Moon, who is mandated to submit a report on the status of the implementation of the resolution soon, has recently made a statement with regard to the agreement in which he praised Eritrea for “taking steps in the right direction” while at the same time indicating that “Eritrea needs to do more” in order to fully satisfy the demands of the resolution. The Secretary General is right in insisting that Eritrea do more, but he should also emphasize that all the components of the resolution be fully met before sanctions are eased. In this regard, his remarks that Eritrea’s participation in the Istanbul conference amounted to a change of attitude towards the TFG and of readiness to play a constructive role in the region is naïve at best.
In fact, Eritrea has made it clear that was never its intention. A letter the Eritrean permanent representative to the UN wrote in response to the Secretary General’s report, has made it clear that Eritrea has not changed its position with regard to the legitimacy of the TFG or the peace process in the country, laying to rest whatever optimism people may have had in this regard. While he is at it, the Eritrean official also denied that his country had ever invaded Djibouti though ironically he confirms once again that his country signed the agreement with the facilitation of the government of Qatar, whose good offices, according to the official, “were first requested by Djibouti.” The subtext is all too clear: Eritrea did not ask for it. After all, the government still denies it ever invaded Djibouti territory. It is not at all clear if the government in Asmara sincerely believes the agreement means anything at all. Eritrea’s Information Minister’s response to queries from the Reuters news agency to say a word on the agreement was very telling: “no comment”. So much for Eritrea’s renewed good faith.