Eritrea and the Responsibility to Project
19 December, 2011 | Edward Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"From the standpoint of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean
people must receive consideration. Nevertheless, the strategic
interest of the United States in the Red Sea basin and
considerations of security and world peace make it necessary
that the country has to be linked with our ally, Ethiopia."
~John Foster Dulles, 1950.
comprehensive climate deal in Durban, the latest round of sanctions
imposed by the United Nations Security Council upon Eritirea
threatens the national sovereignty of one of Africa’s poorest countries.
The Sanctions
The primary factor driving these sanctions has been the persistent
security situation in Somalia and Asmara’s alleged support to Al
Shabaab militants that control the Southern regions of Somalia, as well
as other groups in Djibouti, Ethiopia and the Sudan. A July 2011
report from the Security Council’s Monitoring Group in Somalia and
Eritrea details support for armed opposition groups by “a small but
efficient team of officers from the National Security Office, the
Eritrean military and the PFDJ [the People’s Front for Democracy
and Justice] leadership under direct supervision of the President’s
Office, ” in violation of the arms embargo imposed by a previous
sanctions.
Resolution 2023 passed 13-0 (with Russia and China abstaining, as
they did during successive rounds of sanctions against Libya) on 5
December and serves as a reminder more than anything else.
Following on from Resolutions 1844 (2008) and 1907 (Christmas
eve, 2009) that prohibit the supply of arms or other military hardware
to Eritrea and prohibit Eritrea from supporting armed groups in the
region, this resolution compels countries to “undertake appropriate
measures to promote the exercise of vigilance” over individuals and
corporations engaging in business in Eritrea.
Penned by Gabon, these measures have been watered-down from
those originally proposed that would have strangled the nascent mining
industry of investment. The vast majority of Eritreans are engaged
agriculture, and, despite the government exercising options to
purchase stakes in the mining projects, there is virtually no trickle-
down effect and it is thought that much of the national budget goes
towards military expenditure (the government of Eritrea does not
publish budget statements).
The world’s mining giants have begun to sinking their teeth into the
resource rich country, with Canadian gold producer Nevsun
Resources expecting to pull 1.14 million ounces of gold, 11.9 million
ounces of silver, 821 million pounds of copper and over a billion
pounds of zinc out of the enormous Bisha Project, where commercial
production began in February 2011. Australia’s Chalice Gold Mines
was also recently granted two new exploration licences close to
Bisha. As well as Eritrean minerals, the Horn of Africa is also seen as
a key chokepoint for the world economy, since 30% of the oil
supplied to the West must sail past its shores.
Drought Patrol
Eritrean nationals are beset on all sides by persistent poverty and
threats to their safety. Postcolonial independence was frustrated in the
wake of World War II and the region was entrusted to the tutelage of
Ethiopia in 1952; under Ethiopian sovereignty Eritreans enjoyed little
formal recognition. The Eritrean War of Independence (estimated to
have claimed the lives of two or three members of every Eritrean
family) lasted for 30 years from 1961, and as the Cold War thawed
the US brokered peace talks. A UN-administered referendum
established Eritrea’s independence and recognition of their formal
sovereignty commenced on 28 May 1993. The paternal legacy of
colonialism and continuing interference has lent Eritrea’s ruling regime
a deep distrust of its neighbours, especially along the still-disputed
Ethiopian borders, where continuing conflict claimed 70,000
casualties between 1998 and 2000.
While the government of Isias Afwerki continues to adhere to its
dogma of self-reliance and vehemently refuses international aid,
drought and famine remain omnipresent threats in the region. Two
consecutive poor raining seasons, increasing demand for land and
water for commercial agribusiness (especially in Ethiopia) and aid
practices oriented around market-friendly but water-hungry cash
crops, have made 2011 a very difficult year for the Horn of Africa.
When coupled with soaring commodity prices on international
markets, the result of financial speculation by the world’s biggest
banks and hedge funds, famine, malnourishment and infant mortality
has become commonplace throughout East Africa.
It is unclear what the impact of this drought has been on Eritrea. The
Eritrean government has protested that the humanitarian situation there
has not deteriorated and they are largely immune to the drought’s
impacts due to a bumper crop earlier in the year. Still, we must remain
very careful about the information that comes out of Eritrea, given the
government’s reputation for arresting foreign journalists (recently
outranking North Korea in journalist imprisonment in a Report by the
Committee to Protect Journalists) and the nationwide ban on foreign
media that has earned Eritrea the lowest national press freedom
ranking of any country (Reporters without Borders). Some
international agencies have even accused Eritrea of hiding the victims
of the drought, however little information appears to permeate outside
national borders.
Earlier in the year malnourished Eritreans were reported to be
crossing the border at a rate of 900 a month and weather-mapping
technology indicates that Eritrea has suffered from similarly low rainfall
as other countries in the Horn. The USAID agency Famine Early
Warning Systems Network have estimated the need for emergency
relief at 1.9 million (out of a total population on 5.1 million), warning in
September that poor rainfall would likely soon result in a total failure
of long-cycle crops and below average harvest of short-cycle crops.
Other aid organizations have made different pronouncements, such as
the German Terra Tech which argues that Eritrea has avoided famine
thanks to the implementation climate-sensitive irrigation systems. Aid
worker Gordon Peters from the World Development Movement goes
further, claiming that Eritrea’s practice of self-sustainability has forced
it outside the officially sanctioned discourses of development. Given
USAID’s vested interest in seeing international aid projects enter
Eritrea, especially those sanctioned by the Bretton Woods institutions,
and Asmara’s hostility towards the West, it is difficult to know exactly
where the truth lies.
Constructing the Responsibility to Project
The pretext for a further round of sanctions has been, unpredictably,
the continuing threat of terrorism from radical Islamic extremist
groups. Critical readers will quickly see this as a window for the
projection of power, which, when coupled with the pressing moral
dilemmas of disaster relief, creates a compelling sense of responsibility
for intervention. Eritrea’s demonization has primarily stemmed from its
support for Al-Shabaab, the designated terrorist organization that has
gained increasing notoriety in light of its ban on Western aid groups
operating in territories under their control. Yet it is important to
understand the rise of al-Shabaab as a product of failed Western
policies in the Horn of Africa to defend its economic interests.
Somalia’s last stable government, led by Marxist despot Siad Barre,
crumbled under its own weight in 1991 and the country entered a
chaotic power vacuum and ongoing civil war, punctuated by the
infamous “Black Hawk Down” incident and the wholesale withdrawal
of Western influence from the region. Tribal warlords provided some
structure (if not stability), but it was the ascent of sharia-based Islamic
courts that filled this vacuum; initially settling disputes, they
subsequently developing other services such as healthcare, education
and localized policing. The courts became more respected by locals
and organized into the Islamic Courts Union, proving to be the most
stable arrangement in Somalia since Barre.
Despite an official policy of denial from the Eritrean government,
jurists and political leaders from the ICU admitted to receiving
assistance from Asmara. The warlords that controlled Mogadishu
united in reaction to the ICU’s growing power (forming the Alliance
for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism), but by mid-
2006 the ICU had claimed control of Mogadishu and surrounding
areas, cleaning up the streets and re-opening Mogadishu airport.
Most warlords had either fled or been captured.
As the ICU increasingly won popular support, the UN- and US-
sponsored Transitional Federal Government based in Baidoa
(northwest of Mogadishu) was established in 2004. Washington’s
opposition to the ICU’s rise was aimed at the ICU’s limited
connections with al-Qaeda and the protection it provided to three
individuals involved in the 1998 Embassy bombings in Kenya and
Tanzania. A JSOC Task Force of 900 was assigned to Camp
Lemonier in Djibouti, while many of the warlords that remained in
Somalia were progressively bought off by the West.
Through their East African fortress power Ethiopia (which receives
US$7 billion annually in aid from Washington), the US began a proxy
invasion of Somalia, sending Ethiopian troops into Somali territory
from mid-2006 onwards, with heavy fighting breaking out in
December with a force of 40,000-50,000 troops. US airpower gave
the Ethiopian forces a strong military advantage. It was a bloodbath
peppered with extrajudicial killings, as the Ethiopian troops were
determined to stop the spread of what they had been sold as a global
jihadist agenda. Skirmishes through the month led to the fall of
Mogadishu in December 28 and the withdrawal of the ICU to the
Jubba River area, while leaders vowed to continue their struggle
through guerilla tactics. While moderate members of the Union that
had fled to Eritrea and Djibouti reentered the fold as the TFG
assumed official control of the country, uncompromising Islamists
factions splintered off, of which al-Shabaab is the largest. As
investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill explains:
“Although there was certainly a small Al Qaeda presence in Somalia
before the United States launched its operations—and Islamic
militants did carry out assassinations, including the killing of four
foreign aid workers in the relatively peaceful Somaliland region in late
2003 and early 2004—the actions of [secular war-lord] Qanyare and
his fellow CIA-backed warlords gave the Islamic militants fodder for
an effective propaganda and recruitment campaign.”
al-Shabaab’s focus has been on the Southern and Western areas of
Somalia, and indeed their claim to territory is much greater than that of
the TFG (who really only hold Mogadishu). Their calls for jihad
against the Ethiopian invaders and the TFG began in early 2007, and
by August 2008 they had achieved a military victory over TFG forces
at Kismayo. They have claimed responsibility for a huge number of
atrocities throughout Somalia, as well as the 2010 Kampala attacks,
and have sought to expel all Western influence from the country,
including aid organizations sent to Somalia to deal with the drought, is
seen to encompass a double agenda.
Support for al Shabaab is not the only limb of the agenda to discredit
the Eritrean regime and establish the responsibility to project
American power, and a recent wikileaks cable has shed some light on
one of the more sinister elements. Recently released US State
Department cables have shed more light on the secret campaign the
US and Ethiopia have embarked on together to discredit al-Shabaab
and the Eritrean state. There an embassy source revealed that a
September 2006 bombing in Addis Ababa that was publicly credited
to the Oromo Liberation Front and the the assistance of the Eritrean
government, “may have in fact been the work of the GoE
[Government of Ethiopia] security forces.”
The latest round of sanctions exists largely to reinforce the proposed
threat from the Eritrean regime. And while many criticisms can be
leveled at the Eritrean government, our responses to these must be
couched in a manner that does not hand the country and its people
over to international agribusiness and mining firms whose only interests
lie in extractive endeavours, with scant regard for the Eritreans
themselves who suffer at the hands of both an oppressive government
and an oppressive international response.
Courtesy
19 December, 2011 | Edward Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"From the standpoint of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean
people must receive consideration. Nevertheless, the strategic
interest of the United States in the Red Sea basin and
considerations of security and world peace make it necessary
that the country has to be linked with our ally, Ethiopia."
~John Foster Dulles, 1950.
- The chronic drought that has
engulfed the Horn of Africa this year
is a perfect storm of climate change,
failed economic policies and financial
speculation, with enormous national
security implications. While the
world watches developed countries
comprehensive climate deal in Durban, the latest round of sanctions
imposed by the United Nations Security Council upon Eritirea
threatens the national sovereignty of one of Africa’s poorest countries.
The Sanctions
The primary factor driving these sanctions has been the persistent
security situation in Somalia and Asmara’s alleged support to Al
Shabaab militants that control the Southern regions of Somalia, as well
as other groups in Djibouti, Ethiopia and the Sudan. A July 2011
report from the Security Council’s Monitoring Group in Somalia and
Eritrea details support for armed opposition groups by “a small but
efficient team of officers from the National Security Office, the
Eritrean military and the PFDJ [the People’s Front for Democracy
and Justice] leadership under direct supervision of the President’s
Office, ” in violation of the arms embargo imposed by a previous
sanctions.
Resolution 2023 passed 13-0 (with Russia and China abstaining, as
they did during successive rounds of sanctions against Libya) on 5
December and serves as a reminder more than anything else.
Following on from Resolutions 1844 (2008) and 1907 (Christmas
eve, 2009) that prohibit the supply of arms or other military hardware
to Eritrea and prohibit Eritrea from supporting armed groups in the
region, this resolution compels countries to “undertake appropriate
measures to promote the exercise of vigilance” over individuals and
corporations engaging in business in Eritrea.
Penned by Gabon, these measures have been watered-down from
those originally proposed that would have strangled the nascent mining
industry of investment. The vast majority of Eritreans are engaged
agriculture, and, despite the government exercising options to
purchase stakes in the mining projects, there is virtually no trickle-
down effect and it is thought that much of the national budget goes
towards military expenditure (the government of Eritrea does not
publish budget statements).
The world’s mining giants have begun to sinking their teeth into the
resource rich country, with Canadian gold producer Nevsun
Resources expecting to pull 1.14 million ounces of gold, 11.9 million
ounces of silver, 821 million pounds of copper and over a billion
pounds of zinc out of the enormous Bisha Project, where commercial
production began in February 2011. Australia’s Chalice Gold Mines
was also recently granted two new exploration licences close to
Bisha. As well as Eritrean minerals, the Horn of Africa is also seen as
a key chokepoint for the world economy, since 30% of the oil
supplied to the West must sail past its shores.
Drought Patrol
Eritrean nationals are beset on all sides by persistent poverty and
threats to their safety. Postcolonial independence was frustrated in the
wake of World War II and the region was entrusted to the tutelage of
Ethiopia in 1952; under Ethiopian sovereignty Eritreans enjoyed little
formal recognition. The Eritrean War of Independence (estimated to
have claimed the lives of two or three members of every Eritrean
family) lasted for 30 years from 1961, and as the Cold War thawed
the US brokered peace talks. A UN-administered referendum
established Eritrea’s independence and recognition of their formal
sovereignty commenced on 28 May 1993. The paternal legacy of
colonialism and continuing interference has lent Eritrea’s ruling regime
a deep distrust of its neighbours, especially along the still-disputed
Ethiopian borders, where continuing conflict claimed 70,000
casualties between 1998 and 2000.
While the government of Isias Afwerki continues to adhere to its
dogma of self-reliance and vehemently refuses international aid,
drought and famine remain omnipresent threats in the region. Two
consecutive poor raining seasons, increasing demand for land and
water for commercial agribusiness (especially in Ethiopia) and aid
practices oriented around market-friendly but water-hungry cash
crops, have made 2011 a very difficult year for the Horn of Africa.
When coupled with soaring commodity prices on international
markets, the result of financial speculation by the world’s biggest
banks and hedge funds, famine, malnourishment and infant mortality
has become commonplace throughout East Africa.
It is unclear what the impact of this drought has been on Eritrea. The
Eritrean government has protested that the humanitarian situation there
has not deteriorated and they are largely immune to the drought’s
impacts due to a bumper crop earlier in the year. Still, we must remain
very careful about the information that comes out of Eritrea, given the
government’s reputation for arresting foreign journalists (recently
outranking North Korea in journalist imprisonment in a Report by the
Committee to Protect Journalists) and the nationwide ban on foreign
media that has earned Eritrea the lowest national press freedom
ranking of any country (Reporters without Borders). Some
international agencies have even accused Eritrea of hiding the victims
of the drought, however little information appears to permeate outside
national borders.
Earlier in the year malnourished Eritreans were reported to be
crossing the border at a rate of 900 a month and weather-mapping
technology indicates that Eritrea has suffered from similarly low rainfall
as other countries in the Horn. The USAID agency Famine Early
Warning Systems Network have estimated the need for emergency
relief at 1.9 million (out of a total population on 5.1 million), warning in
September that poor rainfall would likely soon result in a total failure
of long-cycle crops and below average harvest of short-cycle crops.
Other aid organizations have made different pronouncements, such as
the German Terra Tech which argues that Eritrea has avoided famine
thanks to the implementation climate-sensitive irrigation systems. Aid
worker Gordon Peters from the World Development Movement goes
further, claiming that Eritrea’s practice of self-sustainability has forced
it outside the officially sanctioned discourses of development. Given
USAID’s vested interest in seeing international aid projects enter
Eritrea, especially those sanctioned by the Bretton Woods institutions,
and Asmara’s hostility towards the West, it is difficult to know exactly
where the truth lies.
Constructing the Responsibility to Project
The pretext for a further round of sanctions has been, unpredictably,
the continuing threat of terrorism from radical Islamic extremist
groups. Critical readers will quickly see this as a window for the
projection of power, which, when coupled with the pressing moral
dilemmas of disaster relief, creates a compelling sense of responsibility
for intervention. Eritrea’s demonization has primarily stemmed from its
support for Al-Shabaab, the designated terrorist organization that has
gained increasing notoriety in light of its ban on Western aid groups
operating in territories under their control. Yet it is important to
understand the rise of al-Shabaab as a product of failed Western
policies in the Horn of Africa to defend its economic interests.
Somalia’s last stable government, led by Marxist despot Siad Barre,
crumbled under its own weight in 1991 and the country entered a
chaotic power vacuum and ongoing civil war, punctuated by the
infamous “Black Hawk Down” incident and the wholesale withdrawal
of Western influence from the region. Tribal warlords provided some
structure (if not stability), but it was the ascent of sharia-based Islamic
courts that filled this vacuum; initially settling disputes, they
subsequently developing other services such as healthcare, education
and localized policing. The courts became more respected by locals
and organized into the Islamic Courts Union, proving to be the most
stable arrangement in Somalia since Barre.
Despite an official policy of denial from the Eritrean government,
jurists and political leaders from the ICU admitted to receiving
assistance from Asmara. The warlords that controlled Mogadishu
united in reaction to the ICU’s growing power (forming the Alliance
for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism), but by mid-
2006 the ICU had claimed control of Mogadishu and surrounding
areas, cleaning up the streets and re-opening Mogadishu airport.
Most warlords had either fled or been captured.
As the ICU increasingly won popular support, the UN- and US-
sponsored Transitional Federal Government based in Baidoa
(northwest of Mogadishu) was established in 2004. Washington’s
opposition to the ICU’s rise was aimed at the ICU’s limited
connections with al-Qaeda and the protection it provided to three
individuals involved in the 1998 Embassy bombings in Kenya and
Tanzania. A JSOC Task Force of 900 was assigned to Camp
Lemonier in Djibouti, while many of the warlords that remained in
Somalia were progressively bought off by the West.
Through their East African fortress power Ethiopia (which receives
US$7 billion annually in aid from Washington), the US began a proxy
invasion of Somalia, sending Ethiopian troops into Somali territory
from mid-2006 onwards, with heavy fighting breaking out in
December with a force of 40,000-50,000 troops. US airpower gave
the Ethiopian forces a strong military advantage. It was a bloodbath
peppered with extrajudicial killings, as the Ethiopian troops were
determined to stop the spread of what they had been sold as a global
jihadist agenda. Skirmishes through the month led to the fall of
Mogadishu in December 28 and the withdrawal of the ICU to the
Jubba River area, while leaders vowed to continue their struggle
through guerilla tactics. While moderate members of the Union that
had fled to Eritrea and Djibouti reentered the fold as the TFG
assumed official control of the country, uncompromising Islamists
factions splintered off, of which al-Shabaab is the largest. As
investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill explains:
“Although there was certainly a small Al Qaeda presence in Somalia
before the United States launched its operations—and Islamic
militants did carry out assassinations, including the killing of four
foreign aid workers in the relatively peaceful Somaliland region in late
2003 and early 2004—the actions of [secular war-lord] Qanyare and
his fellow CIA-backed warlords gave the Islamic militants fodder for
an effective propaganda and recruitment campaign.”
al-Shabaab’s focus has been on the Southern and Western areas of
Somalia, and indeed their claim to territory is much greater than that of
the TFG (who really only hold Mogadishu). Their calls for jihad
against the Ethiopian invaders and the TFG began in early 2007, and
by August 2008 they had achieved a military victory over TFG forces
at Kismayo. They have claimed responsibility for a huge number of
atrocities throughout Somalia, as well as the 2010 Kampala attacks,
and have sought to expel all Western influence from the country,
including aid organizations sent to Somalia to deal with the drought, is
seen to encompass a double agenda.
Support for al Shabaab is not the only limb of the agenda to discredit
the Eritrean regime and establish the responsibility to project
American power, and a recent wikileaks cable has shed some light on
one of the more sinister elements. Recently released US State
Department cables have shed more light on the secret campaign the
US and Ethiopia have embarked on together to discredit al-Shabaab
and the Eritrean state. There an embassy source revealed that a
September 2006 bombing in Addis Ababa that was publicly credited
to the Oromo Liberation Front and the the assistance of the Eritrean
government, “may have in fact been the work of the GoE
[Government of Ethiopia] security forces.”
The latest round of sanctions exists largely to reinforce the proposed
threat from the Eritrean regime. And while many criticisms can be
leveled at the Eritrean government, our responses to these must be
couched in a manner that does not hand the country and its people
over to international agribusiness and mining firms whose only interests
lie in extractive endeavours, with scant regard for the Eritreans
themselves who suffer at the hands of both an oppressive government
and an oppressive international response.
Courtesy
| All rights reserved. |
| Ethio Quest News Together We Can Make It! |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Zersenay Tadese " He became the first person in Eritrean sporting history to win an Olympic medal.. More |
| Eritrea |
| Perpetuating Tyranny Under Mantel of Youth Festival "...Latest one out of such arsenals that tyrant Afawerki deploys in order to draw gullible youth to his indoctrination camp (aka Sawa) is the annual pilgrimage to SAWA" More |
| Refugee voices: Looking for hope in Ethiopia "...I don't want to take any chances. They took our property before. How can we believe that they will... More |
| U.N. slams Eritrea for Islamic militant support (CBS News) The Absent Recipient and a Betrayed Revolution (Middle East North Africa Financial Network) Where Soccer Has Been a One-Way Ticket Out James Montague (New York Times) Analysis: Eritrea: Bondage in the Horn of Africa Lee Mwiti (Daily Nation) Calls for tougher Eritrea 'terror' sanctions at UN AFP The bad boy of the Horn of Africa: How Eritrea’s strongman uses Kenya as a terror finance hub By Christine Mungai (The East African) ERITREA-ETHIOPIA: "Silent crisis" as more Eritreans flee IRIN Eritrea behind AU summit attack plot - U.N. report By David Clarke (Reuters) |
| Eritrean Independence: Is It Worth All the Sacrifice? (1) by Yosief Ghebrehiwet |
| Related Stories |
| Previous Stories |
