The Government of the United States (may I say �God�) has �spoken� on 21 January 2004 what amounts to be �an order� to the Ethiopian Government and the Sovereign People of Ethiopia. The press statement by Adam Ereli, the Deputy Spokesman, from the United States Department of State is a blatant threat and an affront to the sovereignty and dignity of the Ethiopian People. [See Press Statement reproduced in this Website]

The Government of the United States ought to realize that it is not managing �plantations� or �reservations� when it is dealing with sovereign nations like Ethiopia, the cradle of mankind, a nation that is ten times older than the United States, a contemporary and equal of Sais, Babylon, Peloponnesus and Rome and other ancient civilizations, a founding member of the United Nations et cetera, et cetera. The arrogant and one-sided statement coming out of the State Department is both alarming and highly inflammatory. The Government of the United States has bulldozed long-standing tradition, history, international law and practices in its support of Isaias Afeworki and his associates. The United States Government is attempting to dismantle and destroy Ethiopia by land locking over seventy million people depriving them their historic and natural coastal territories. At the same time while making its draconian demand on Ethiopia, the United States Government proclaims its friendship to Ethiopia. This is not an action of a friend. What else an enemy can do to Ethiopia and Ethiopians beyond destroying them thus?

Over the last ten years hundred of thousands Ethiopians both in Ethiopia and abroad have demonstrated and petitioned governments all over the world trying to show the anti-Ethiopia nature of the current Ethiopian leadership and that it was simply an extension of the �Eritrean� independence movement. Since four years ago to date, several Ethiopians and friends of Ethiopia (scholars, political scientists, historians) have pointed out clearly in numerous essays that the Algiers Agreement (12 December 2000) and the decisions of the Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Commission have no validity on several legitimate grounds. They have challenged and shown the illegality of the independence of �Eritrea� under international law and practices. They have pointed out that the West in general and the United States in particular have been used by Ethiopia�s historic enemies such as Egypt, the Sudan, and the fragmented remains of the old Ottoman Empire such as Syria, Iraq et cetera to carry out their long standing plan to destroy the only Christian/Moslem nation with religious freedom from over a thousand years. They have pointed out that land-locked Ethiopia means destabilization and war all over East Africa.

There is no reason whatsoever for the type of course the United States Government is taking. �Eritrea� is a historically and demographically part of Ethiopia. If that historic and demographic relationship is rejected by a �liberation front� that is now in control, it does not in any way vitiate that historic fact. Historically Ethiopia has a legitimate sovereignty on every inch of its province of Eritrea and the coastal territory of Afar and the many islands in the Red Sea. If there is any independent state to be acknowledged as an �Eritrea� it must be done through negotiation, and even that is not to be done on the basis of any defunct and long dead Colonial �treaties� and �instruments,� but on mutual understanding and self-respect of the people of the region, taking into account their best interest, their aspiration, and their long term political and economic development.

II. Reject the Algiers Agreement and the Boundary Commission

Ten main points out of several for the rejection of both the Algiers Agreement and the decisions of the Boundary Commission:

1. The Government of Meles Zenawi is neither a legitimate nor representative government of Ethiopia, and thus cannot bind Ethiopia to any international treaty or agreement nor encumbers future generations of Ethiopians with any international obligations. The independence of Eritrea was achieved by deceit and by force, and neither method is legitimate under international law and practices. Thus, any agreement entered by the two leaders or their agents is invalid with no legal consequences on anybody.

2. Prime Minister Meles Zenawi (Ethiopia) and President Isaias Afeworki (Eritrea) are leaders of liberation fronts who had a standing understanding/agreement while they were in the bush, i.e., before they took over the Government of Ethiopia in 1991. The independence of Eritrea was a result of such prior agreed upon scheme during the years the two leaders and their organizations launched a guerrilla war against the legitimate governments of Ethiopia. The same bush-agreement was later used as the basis of the Algiers Agreement. There was no disclosure to the Ethiopian people of such prior understanding or agreement. Thus, there has never been at-arms-length negotiated agreement at Algiers. The Algiers Agreement is a result of collusion thus fraudulent. It does not bind Ethiopian and Ethiopians to any obligation.

3. The Algiers Agreement resurrected long defunct, dead, terminated, invalidated treaty and annex (1900, 1902) and questionable international legal instrument (1908) from a hundred years ago. There is no precedent in the history of international bilateral or multilateral treaties where such long defunct, dead, terminated, invalidated treaties to have ever been resurrected to a new life. Thus, the validity of the Algiers Agreement is a highly suspect occurrence that should be rejected outright.

4. The Algiers Agreement preemptively benefits one party and negates the rights of the second party without the benefit of negotiation or presentations because it is based on the Colonial treaties and annex that favored the colonial power ambition and does not reflect the reality on the ground. It is absolutely clear, even to a child; the only party benefiting from the resurrection of long dead and defunct treaties is done with a single beneficiary in mind--the interest and claims of �Eritrea,� as a successor nation to Italy�s colonial administration, and Isaias Afeworki. Such succession itself is questionable, and the approach of preemptively awarding all the benefits derived from a treaty against a second party is against public policy and against long established international law and practices.

5. The Algiers Agreement authorized a subordinate organ, the Boundary Commission, with power and authority that far exceeds its own: violations of the principle of Jus Cogens.

6. The Boundary Commission established under the Algiers Agreement is invalid since it is based on an illegal and invalid agreement, the Algiers Agreement.

7. The Boundary Commission decision shows inconsistency in its treatment of issues it claims to be within its discretion where it claims it was not deciding ex aequo et bono. The technical assistance provided by the United Nations on the determination of sites from maps is unscientific, confused, and irresponsible to be of any use in any demarcation or delimitation of a boundary between �Eritrea� and Ethiopia.

8. The Boundary Commission based all of its decision without ever visiting a single area under dispute. It is unrealistic and unjust to decide a very important and complex problem in dispute without considering the unreliability of hearsay and basing a decision on the basis of old maps and statements by individual�s self serving dairies or travel logs, individuals who were not familiar with local languages, understanding of villagizations, nomadic life of pasturing and watering traditions et cetera.

9. The Boundary Commission was unduly influenced by the international political structure of the United Nations Security Council. The replacement of the bipolar power structure of the Cold War era has given way to a single-power dictation of international relations by the United States. Ethiopia as a weak nation is treated as a dispensable pawn on a political chessboard. Ethiopians should reject such degradation and being subjected to decisions by political expediency rather than principles of law.

10. The Chairman of the Boundary Commission, Elihu Lauterpacht must be disqualified for breach of professional ethics (conflict of interest). As a result, the decision of the Boundary Commission is tainted and must be declared null and void. The Chairman of the Commission was retained as a lawyer by the United States in its case against Mexico. The United States is an interested party that has repeatedly expressed its preference of the �Eritrean� claims; at the same time Lauterpacht was working as Chairman of the Commission he was also being paid by the United States Government. If this is not a conflict of interest, show me what is? [See ICJ case Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America). And Article 23 of the 1899 basic document that created the Permanent Court of Arbitration [Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Dispute] holds that �each Signatory Power shall select four persons...of known competency in questions of international law, of the highest moral reputation, and disposed to accept the duties of Arbitrators.�]

The above ten points relate to the most glaring and flagrant violations of international law and practices, violations of one of the most important public policies (Jus Cogens), and violations of professional responsibilities (conflict of interest) that renders any demand, coercion, threat by the United States Government against Ethiopia/Ethiopians unconscionable and ill advised.

If one could judge from the non-activity of Ethiopia�s Ambassador here in Washington DC, indeed, Ethiopia is very poorly represented here. A good diplomat, even if not a patriotic one, would have tried to mobilize support through all kinds of conferences and meetings with Ethiopians and supporters around here. Imagine for a moment Haile Selassie�s diplomats such as Belaten Geta Lorrenzo or Prime Minister Aklilu Habtewold, or Blata Efrem Tewolde Medhin et cetera they would have turned this city inside out with their great strategy and lobbying. Here we have in their place ersatzes who hardly venture out or do anything worthwhile to protect the interest of Ethiopia. It is a tragedy that we are surrounded not only by mediocre but also treasonous third-rate Ethiopian diplomats and civil servants.

There is no real lobbying of influential Americans (business leaders, political and religious leaders, Senators and Representatives et cetera)in order to generate support for Ethiopia and influence American public opinion on behalf of Ethiopia. If there is any, it ought to be loud and wide where everybody would know all about. In fact, I (we) wonder at times whether there is even an Ethiopian Ambassador here in Washington DC. In this horrible time of pending destruction of Ethiopia, I (we) want to know what Meles Zenawi and his agents are doing? I do not hear any Mehale Sefari complaining about the current dormant Ethiopian Ambassador here. The Mehale Sefaries and others who used to complain against the far more dynamic previous Ambassador Berhane, compared to the current one, where is their voice now? I am not surprised about their silence; what matters to them is having someone in the power structure, such as an ambassador, as long as such a person is from their group or locality even if such a person is a total idiot. Shame on you all!

The fact of the matter is that Meles is still playing a treasonous game with Ethiopia�s existence. He is fighting for his own political survival dismantling further the old-TPLF loyalists and old guards. In order to satisfy his hunger for power, he is creating a new breed of sycophants whose only source of privilege and power is Meles Zenawi. He has destroyed the infrastructure of Ethiopia�s military, its civil response structure, and the Ethiopian spirit. He has effectively neutered the so-called �Tygrean� hold on power. And to the great delight of many Addis Ababians and their counterparts elsewhere in the Diaspora, Meles has replaced �Tygreans� by the dreaded Mehale Sefaries. Here is our current tragedy: we are witnessing all over again the last days of Mengistu when he had liquidated the more representative Derg by the Mehale Sefaries and was finally left with a very tiny group of old-guards and a whole lot of new breed of sycophants.

The first effort is to replace Meles and his associates with a nationalist leadership--even a military takeover for a brief time is better than the existing debilitating limbo under the thumb of a treasonous leader and his opportunist associates. Even worse is a situation where the Mehale Sefaries end up in total control of the Ethiopian government or remain within the power structure. They are as groups go the most polarizing groups of people who breed disagreement, discontent, exploitation and ultimate destruction of Ethiopia who have been the single overwhelming problem for over one hundred years. The only way to save Ethiopia is to control such destructive groups from unleashing another round of destruction by moving power away from their control or vicinity.

The Ethiopian Military is in a position to make history. What is most important is to keep the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ethiopia. This may require a degree of delaminating between the Ethiopian political structure and the military structure. Let those who hunger for political power fight for it on their own. The Ethiopian military forces must keep away from such skirmish and possibly from being used as an agent of politicians to carry out the violence ordered against other political groups. The good soldiers of Ethiopia are better off choosing their most trusted commanders and structuring the Ethiopian military forces away from the control of politicians.

For the United States Government to require Ethiopia to agree to and abide under the illegal Algiers Agreement, a �treaty� that resurrected long dead colonial treaties and instruments, while being fully aware of the desperate situation Ethiopia is under a very unpopular, dictatorial, and treasonous leader is unbelievably unjust. And to demand that Ethiopia honor the decision of the corrupted and compromised Boundary Commission, which was created under an illegal treaty to begin with, violates long standing international law and practices. No nation should be blackmailed by any other nation into accepting any treaty or decision of any tribunal that is totally illegal.

The United States and Ethiopia just celebrated their anniversary of one hundred years of friendship. Ethiopia has been a true friend to the United States sending its brave sons to fight by the side of the United States in Korea. Ethiopia has hosted American military base for decades when the United States needed a friend�s help in the region. It has been a trading partner and a true friend for about a century. Are nations held to a different or lower standard of honor that allows lies and deceit?

Now, I (we) want to know, how could the United States Government takes up the cause of a �liberation� movement that took money and training from leaders such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar el-Qaddafi et cetera against a legitimate Sovereign Nation of Ethiopia, a one-hundred years friend of the United States? I shout betrayal because it is precisely what the press statement from the State Department is all about: a death sentence pronouncement on a friend of one hundred years. Shame! Shame!

Our Website urges all Ethiopians to consolidate their unity and stand against the misguided foreign policy of the Government of the United States as stated in its 21 January 2004 Press Statement. It is time to come out in droves and march on Washington DC and show the resolve of the great people of Ethiopia in keeping their territorial integrity and Sovereignty. It is a crucial time to inform the people of the United States that their Government is destroying their friends of a hundred years, the people of Ethiopia, by being an instrument of Ethiopia�s historic enemies. Land locking of Ethiopia by depriving it of its natural and historic Coastal Ethiopian Afar territories and its territorial waters and islands in the Red Sea is an act of war on the people of Ethiopia. And such undeclared act of war by the Executive Branch of the United States Government does not reflect the will of the honorable people of the United States.

Tecola W. Hagos, Editor

22 January 2004

Washington DC