[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 8774-8775]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 ETHIOPIA AND ERITREA: PROMOTING STABILITY, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 5, 2005

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, as chairman of 
the Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operation 
subcommittee, I convened a hearing on the precarious situation 
involving Ethiopia and Eritrea.
  Seven years ago this month, the East African nations of Eritrea and 
Ethiopia began a devastating two-year conflict that cost the lives of 
as many as 100,000 soldiers and civilians. The war, which largely took 
place on Eritrean territory, displaced a third of that country's 
population and caused massive destruction. The deprivation in both 
countries continues long after the war ended, and the suffering goes 
on.
  Eritrea's economy has been battered by four years of drought, which 
has further diminished this country's ability to feed its people. The 
U.S. Department of State estimates that large budget deficits have been 
caused by continued high defense spending. If not for remittances from 
Eritreans living abroad, the country's economy would be hard-pressed to 
sustain itself. In Ethiopia, the United Nations Children's Fund has 
identified 25 hot spots around the country where people are facing 
serious risk of malnutrition. This current crisis, according to UNICEF, 
is at least partly caused by delays in the start of the government's 
safety net program, and continued military spending will only further 
exacerbate the problems with an economy now surviving due to foreign 
assistance.
  Human rights and democracy also are diminished by the concentration 
of both governments on resolving the border issue.
  In the current U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human 
Rights Practices, Eritrea was cited for its poor human rights record:
  ``Citizens did not have the ability to change their government. 
Security forces were responsible for unlawful killings; however, there 
were no new reports of disappearances. There were numerous reports that 
security forces resorted to torture and physical beatings of prisoners, 
particularly during interrogations, and security forces severely 
mistreated army deserters and draft evaders. The Government generally 
did not permit prison visits by local or international groups, except 
the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Arbitrary arrests 
and detentions continued to be problems; an unknown number of persons 
were detained without charge because of political opinion.''
  Congress has been particularly interested in the case of Aster 
Yohannes, an Eritrean national who has been held incommunicado without 
due process since trying to visit her husband in jail in December 2003. 
A number of my colleagues and I sent a letter to Eritrean President 
Isaias (EE-SIGH-US) Afwerki (AF-WORK-EE) on January 6, 2004, concerning 
this matter:
  ``We respectfully urge you to release Aster Yohannes immediately and 
allow her to return to her family,'' the letter stated. ``Web will 
regard this as a first step toward restoring human rights in Eritrea. 
We look forward to resolving this and other important issues in the 
very near future.''
  I personally have met with Eritrean officials at the UN Human Rights 
Commission in Geneva and here in the United States specifically on this 
issue last year and only a few weeks ago. Yet, more than a year later, 
Mrs. Yohannes is still imprisoned with no trial in sight, as are two 
U.S. Embassy personnel held without trial since 2001.
  Eritrea's half Christian-half Muslim population has coexisted 
peacefully, but there are tensions that could lead to serious problems. 
There have been incidents of violence involving Muslim extremists and 
even violent incidents involving Coptics and other Christian groups. 
Government concern over the rapidly growing Pentecostal group has led 
to mistreatment of believers. On the whole, security issues seem to 
have put religious freedom aside in the priorities of the Eritrean 
government. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom was 
unable to be with us today, but they have submitted for the record a 
statement and report that details troubling limitations on religious 
freedom in Eritrea.
  For the first time last year, the Secretary of State designated 
Eritrea as a ``Country of Particular Concern'' under the International 
Religious Freedom Act for particularly severe violation of religious 
freedom.
  Finally, after a promising start to its democracy at independence, 
Eritrea cracked down on the political opposition in September 2001 and 
continues to seriously limit the ability of citizens to express 
themselves through the vote.
  The State Department human rights report noted improvements in 
Ethiopia's human rights record, but it continues to note serious 
remaining problems:
  ``Security forces committed a number of unlawful killings, including 
alleged political killings, and beat, tortured, and mistreated 
detainees. Prison conditions remained poor. The Government continued to 
arrest and detain persons arbitrarily, particularly those suspected of 
sympathizing with or being members of the OLF. Thousands of suspects 
remained in detention without charge, and lengthy pretrial detention 
continued to be a problem. The Government infringed on citizens' 
privacy rights, and the law regarding search warrants was often 
ignored. The Government restricted freedom of the press; however, 
compared with previous years, there were fewer reports that journalists 
were arrested, detained or punished for writing articles critical of 
the Government. Journalists continued to practice self

[[Page 8775]]

censorship. The Government at times restricted freedom of assembly, 
particularly for members of opposition political parties; security 
forces at times used excessive force to disperse demonstrations.''
  In Ethiopia, Human Rights Watch has documented incidents of murder, 
rape and torture committed by the Ethiopian military against the Anuak 
(ANN-YOU-AK) people in the southwestern region of Gambella. As our 
witness will detail in his testimony, hundreds of Anuak villagers have 
been killed in a series of attacks by soldiers and civilian mobs since 
December 2003. Beatings and torture of Anuaks have become all too 
commonplace in Ethiopia under a government whose attention is not 
focused on such egregious human rights violations.
  Concerns over a repeat of the irregularities surrounding Ethiopia's 
2000 and 2001 elections prompted some of my colleagues to introduce 
H.R. 935 to urge the Government of Ethiopia to ensure free and fair 
elections on May 15th. I commend the sponsors of this legislation and 
support the call for orderly, peaceful, free and fair elections in 
Ethiopia.
  The short time remaining may limit the impact of this important piece 
of legislation, which is aimed specifically at the upcoming elections. 
Therefore, I would like to work with the cosponsors of this bill on 
legislation soon after the elections in Ethiopia that would allow us to 
be more comprehensive and develop a legislative response that is 
consistent with the importance of this country in America's overall 
Africa policy.
  Today, a number of colleagues joined me in sending a letter to 
Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, urging him to rescind the 
expulsion of three American NGOs helping to build democracy--the 
International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute 
and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems. For the sake of 
continuing democratic progress in Ethiopia, we hope the Prime Minister 
will respond positively to our request.
  Again, Eritrea and Ethiopia are concentrating on building their 
military forces, and they are neglecting the very pressing needs of 
their people. Now their mutual militaries seem poised to renew open 
warfare due to unresolved issues involving their common border.
  Both nations have increased their deployment of troops on the 
security zone border. Ethiopia recently added 30,000 troops for an 
estimated total of 90,000 armed men, most said to be within 40 
kilometers of the frontier. While it is unclear exactly how many troops 
the Eritreans have deployed, they feel empowered to threaten military 
action if the current stalemate concerning the international border 
commission's ruling is not accepted fully by the Ethiopian government.
  As recently as Tuesday of this week, Eritrean President Isaias 
announced at his ruling party conference that war with Ethiopia is 
imminent. President Isaias said his upcoming budget would be planned 
with war in mind. Presumably that budget will include funding for the 
arms the Eritreans agreed last month to buy from Russia.
  If the war resumes, Ethiopia's Tekeze dam and Eritrea's port of Assab 
will be prime targets, which will only make worse an already precarious 
state of development in both nations.
  It is difficult to understand why these formerly friendly nations 
would risk further devastation for territory not particularly blessed 
with natural resources. However, one must keep in mind that this border 
dispute actually dates back to the somewhat vague borders drawn by 
Italy, the former colonial power. So long as Eritrea and Ethiopia were 
united under colonial or dictatorial rule, the border issues were not 
pressing.
  The peace process that eventually ended the war was predicated on an 
international commission impartially ruling on the demarcation of the 
1000 kilometer border between the two countries. However, the decision 
of the commission has only been accepted ``in principle'' by the 
Ethiopians, who stand to lose their access to the Red Sea. The 
Ethiopian government is publicly complaining about loss of the town of 
Badme, hardly a strategic center. Meanwhile, the Eritreans refuse to 
even discuss the matter further.
  U.S. policy should be clear on the Eritrea-Ethiopia dispute, but it 
appears to have depended on the old paradigm. We are supportive of both 
Eritrea and Ethiopia; however, issues such as the fight against global 
terrorism and the effort to contain Sudan's hostile government have 
caused American policy to tread lightly on development, democracy and 
human rights issues in those countries. We should not have to choose 
between security and democracy and human rights. It is not an ``either-
or'' situation but ``both-and.'' We must find a new framework for U.S. 
policy in the Horn of Africa, and we called this hearing partly to see 
how the Administration is addressing the full range of our concerns in 
this region.
  Both Eritrea and Ethiopia make themselves more vulnerable to internal 
turmoil by their inability to address the many other vital issues they 
face even if there is a stalemate in the border dispute. This is 
neither in the short term interest of these two nations nor in the long 
term strategic interest of the United States. Identifying a more 
effective policy toward resolving the Eritrea-Ethiopia dispute was the 
focus of today's hearing.

                          ____________________