[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 93 (Thursday, July 11, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H4524-H4525]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT BETWEEN ETHIOPIA AND ERITREA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to discuss an 
important issue in the Horn of Africa, a final and binding resolution 
of the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.
  The Horn of Africa is one of the poorest regions in the world but 
also one of the most strategic. It is a region plagued by years of war 
and conflict, some of which were caused by colonial legacies, the Cold 
War, and border disputes, but now with the help of the international 
community, the nations of Eritrea and Ethiopia sit at the cusp of 
permanently breaking a cycle of conflict.
  One of my top priorities when I came to this House was to help end 
conflict on the continent of Africa by serving as a member on the 
Subcommittee on Africa. There have been many wars in Africa. Some were 
just wars where African peoples fought to overthrow the yokes of 
colonialism and systems of racism. However, other wars in Africa fall 
into the category of unjust or senseless wars.

                              {time}  1345

  In the category of senseless wars in Africa, very few would top the 
2-year border war between Eritrea and Ethiopia, two former brothers-in-
arms who once fought together for over 30 years against dictatorships 
and for the right to self-determination.
  The conflict that erupted in 1998 between the two countries was the 
result of a dispute over land in a barren, roadless area of shrubs and 
desert, and subsequent claims of military incursions. Two years of 
fighting left tens of thousands of people dead and more than a million 
refugees on both sides of the border displaced. What made this war even 
more destructive was that these nations, two of the poorest nations in 
the world and dependent upon foreign aid, were able to spend $3 billion 
to purchase weapons to wage this war.
  Mr. Speaker, during the war, I always kept my doors open to officials 
from both nations. The only side I ever chose during the conflict was 
to stand on the side of all Ethiopians and all Eritreans who were 
committed to peace and who opposed the voices of militarism on either 
side.
  On December 12, 2000, the two countries signed a United Nations-
backed peace treaty, resulting in the end of hostilities and the 
creation of an independent commission to study and demarcate the 
disputed border area. According to the treaty, the border demarcation 
by the Hague Commission was to be final and binding. At the time, both 
countries stated their commitment to peace by vowing to fully implement 
the commission's ruling no matter what the outcome.
  Mr. Speaker, on April 13 of this year, the Hague Commission released 
its decision on the demarcation of the Eritrean and Ethiopian border. 
Their decision reiterated the senselessness of the war by leaving the 
border substantially unaltered. Hence, what was this war about? Why did 
thousands of Ethiopians and Eritrean men and women have to die to 
resolve a border dispute?
  Following the decision by the Hague Commission on May 13, 2002, the 
Ethiopian Government requested an interpretation of the commission's 
decision and order to implement the border demarcation process. While 
the original peace agreement gave no room for appeals by either party, 
the Hague Commission decided to accept the request by Ethiopia and 
pledged to provide a response within 30 days. This is why I wanted to 
speak on this issue today.
  On June 24, the Hague Commission released its clarification report in 
response to Ethiopia's request. While the commission reviewed each of 
the points in Ethiopia's clarification request, it concluded by saying, 
``The Ethiopian request for clarification and interpretation appears to 
be founded on a misapprehension regarding the scope and effect of the 
Boundary Commission's Rules of Procedure. The commission does not find 
in any of the items that appear in section 2, 3 or 4 of the Ethiopian 
request anything that identifies an uncertainty in the commission's 
decision that could be resolved by interpretation at this time. 
Accordingly, the commission concludes that the Ethiopian request is 
inadmissible and no further action will be taken upon it.''
  With this decision, it is high time for a newly created African 
Union, the United States, and the entire international community to 
emphasize the following points to the leaders of both Eritrea and 
Ethiopia:
  One, that the Hague Commission's decision and reply to Ethiopia's 
clarification request must be adopted by both parties as the final 
decision, once and for all; that both countries must abide by the Hague 
Commission's ruling, and the international community should offer 
support to both nations to fully implement the decision.
  Two, both societies should learn the lessons of the history of this 
war so that its causes are not repeated in the future. Conflicts over 
boundaries using extreme forms of nationalism or ethnic exaggerations 
are senseless struggles.
  Finally, I would like to urge the leaders of both nations to have the 
courage to place the will of their citizens over the interests of their 
power and outdated ideas about security.
  Neither society won anything from the war and both sides lost. 
Previous progress was set back and both Ethiopia and Eritrea wasted 
human and financial resources. The only winners in unjust wars, are 
international arms sellers and traders.
  I am confident that the peoples of both nations are tired of war. It 
is up to the leadership of both nations to serve the will of their 
citizens and demonstrate the vision to chart an irreversible course 
towards a permanent peace. I would like to challenge the leaders of 
both nations to understand that real power comes from leading a strong 
and prosperous society in a nation that is respected and able to assume 
its rightful place and responsibilities in the global community.
  More importantly, real security and sustainable processes of peace 
are not attainable simply by having defined borders and territorial 
integrity. In this era of globalization, well defined borders and 
territorial integrity do not and can not always guarantee security.
  Yes borders and territorial integrity are important, but they can't 
prevent instability and insecurity in any nation whose citizens face 
poverty, health crises and other forms of violence. Real security for 
any nation or society in the 21st century is linked to the degree of 
the political, social and economic conditions, rights, and 
opportunities of its citizens.
  So I say to the Governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea: Accept the 
principle contained in OAU's framework for peace agreement which calls 
for both sides to: ``Reject the use of force as a means of proposing 
solutions to disputes.'' Recognize that it is in your national security 
interests to accept the ruling as final and binding. Recognize that it 
is in your national strategic interests to put a senseless

[[Page H4525]]

war behind you once and for all, because you have real wars to wage.
  A war against poverty and HIV-AIDS which demand that both governments 
shift the focus of your energies and your scarce resources to not only 
to rebuild your economies to help those hurt most by the war, your 
citizens. But to also face the challenges of transforming the public 
and private institutions and structures in the economy for the 
development of your societies in the 21st century.
  These are the wars which must be waged if the vision of a strong and 
vibrant African Union is going be realized. An African Union which 
needs the Horn of Africa to be stable. I will work in this Congress to 
support new forms of broad based US engagement with both nations, as 
long as both nations demonstrate their commitment to fighting for 
peace, development, health care, education and democracy.

                          ____________________