[ad_1]
In accordance with legal norms, the entry into force of an agreement takes place after having been legally drafted and the consent of all parties concerned, hence the validity and applicability of the 1902 Agreement, delimiting the boundaries between the Sudan and Ethiopia, concluded between the British government and the Ethiopian Emperor Menelik II, came into effect after the latter was formally handed over to King Edward of Great Britain’s notification of approval on October 28, 1902.
Since then, there is no indication that the Ethiopian government has ever officially contested this established line of common borders; on the contrary, it affirmed its commitment to him in July-August 1955, June 1957 and July 1972 respectively. Accordingly, here comes the importance of Ethiopia’s commitment to international law, having regard to the principle of good faith in the implementation of international obligations, in accordance with the provisions of the Vienna Agreement on the Law of international treaties of 1969.
In fact, until 2013, the only outstanding task was the resumption of the demarcation and establishment of the boundary markers, which continued to be disrupted by Addis Ababa under one pretext or another; Sometimes citing his inability to meet his share of the financial costs of the mission and on other occasions, torpedoing the mission by referring to the adverse circumstances of its internal political landscape.
Having mentioned Ethiopia’s internal political landscape, there shouldn’t be any mistake; any attempt to fully understand the drivers of this elusiveness, regardless of the complex transformations underway that are shaping Ethiopia’s political landscape in particular, will certainly prove to be insufficient thinking and rather myopic.
Already known, Ethiopia unlike most countries in Africa, is not a centralized state: the new constitution of 1995, however, divided Ethiopia into nine states, on the basis of ethnic federalism.
Regardless of the ups and downs of such a possibly unprecedented political experiment in Africa, which is a matter ultimately left to the discretion of the Ethiopian people alone, however, the experience was to have a ripple effect in the region.
In particular, attention should be drawn to the multiplicity of military and security services; by virtue of the said Constitution, each state has its own army, police and internal security apparatus. The state of Al-Amhara, neighboring Sudan, was no exception.
Thus, during the conflict in Al-fashaqa, the Sudanese army fought the federal armed forces and not just a group of bandits or outlaws, as Addis Ababa repeatedly portrays in its occasional statements.
As the modern world should know, the chauvinists in the midst of the Amhara ethnic group, driven by the same territorial designs on Sudan, refuse to recognize official and international maps, and instead use their own, mostly based on very outdated claims of ancestors. land. Ironically, their expansionist ambitions in Sudan are not limited to the present Sudanese region of Al-fashaqa, but extend even further to the Al-Gazira region in central Sudan.
As a result, what has made the issue of common borders between Khartoum and Addis Ababa even more complicated to resolve is that it is now part of Ethiopia’s internal political negotiations and manipulation.
For example, in the context of their political rivalry with the center, militants in Amhara state used to exert a lot of pressure on the government of the late Meles Zenawi, accusing the latter of ceding their land (historical ) in the Sudan, under secret agreements. with Khartoum.
For his part, in order to put a definitive end to this escalation and political blackmail, the late Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, expressly declared in an official speech to the Ethiopian Federal Parliament in November 2008 that the region of Al-Fashaqa is Sudanese territory, reminding MPs that the Ethiopian government recognizes the validity and enforceability of Major Gwen’s border line.
this complexity was also evident in the crisis with Eritrea, when the Tabby ethnic group refused to recognize the official cards and the subsequent results of international arbitration. The Tigray ethnic group continued to consider the neighboring region of Badme as part of their homeland (ancestral). in other words, as an integral part of their dreams of the (great Tigray) according to the Eritrean story.
This stalemate automatically resulted in two years of a devastating war with Eritrea, followed by a Cold War and antagonism between the two neighbors that lasted for more than twenty years.
There should be no mistakes, insisting on clinging to the ancestral borders of ancient kingdoms and turning a blind eye to the international realities of the 21st century and the modern world, not only reflects political naivety and utter nonsense, but it is also a clear violation and contempt for international law. In addition to, perhaps more importantly, Addis Ababa’s binding obligations to African Union resolutions (1964). In particular, Ethiopia is the host country for the AU headquarters.
To this end, let us recall that Article 4 (1) of the agreement between the same Ethiopian government and the same Eritrean State, under the auspices of the African Union, held in Algiers. Algeria from July 12 to 14, 1999, reads as follows: “… the parties reaffirm the principle of respect for the borders existing at independence, as indicated in resolution AHG / res. 16 (1) adopted by the OAU Summit in Cairo in 1964 and, in this regard, that they will be determined on the basis of the relevant colonial treaties and applicable international law. ”
Based on what is said, great caution must be exercised on the part of the Ethiopian; allowing certain segments of the Ethiopian people to rely heavily on or present ancestral lands as title deeds, could in itself be a double-edged sword and open a Pandora’s Box of counterclaims from similar cases, and ultimately l Ethiopia could also be stung.
For the sake of argument, the rich region of Benishangul, which today stretches along eastern and southern Ethiopia, and on its soil the controversial Renaissance Dam is under construction, was entirely a Sudanese region in terms of history, geography, population and borders.
Let those who continue to challenge the validity of colonial boundaries come to their senses and heed the voice of reason; It was nobody other than the same British colonialists, who were at the origin of the annexation of this rich Sudanese region (Benishangul) to Ethiopia, Sudan was never part of it!
Still, the impact of could be even deeper, considering that some areas that existed on the fringes of Ethiopia today were incorporated into the Imperial Ethiopian State. These regions were occupied by groups with cultures very different from those in the center.
Strictly speaking, Al-Fashaqa is not a contested territory with Ethiopia; it is Sudanese territory duly recognized by the international community and in accordance with international law. Therefore, the only way to an amicable solution lies in the return of all the usurped Sudanese lands to their original owners. This is exactly what SAF is currently doing, without making any foray into Ethiopian territories.
The President of the Sovereignty Council, Lieutenant-General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, as well as the Ethiopian Prime Minister stressed that the border issue can be settled through negotiation and that there is ample room to resolve the crisis by diplomatic means.
It is high time for Sudan and Ethiopia to focus on a bright future; in the footsteps of the European Union, Africa has already launched a continental free trade area which, if successful, will unite 1.3 billion people, create an economic bloc of 3.4 trillion dollars and open up the door to a new era of development. It will help unlock Africa’s economic potential by supporting intra-trade, strengthening supply chains and disseminating expertise.
The Sudanese people still have the hope that PM Abiy Ahmed will make the just and courageous political gesture, in a manner similar to his surprising withdrawal from the town of Badme and other controversial border areas with Eritrea, in its entirety. . implementation of the Algiers provisions of 2002, ending decades of disputes by respecting the promise of “zero conflict with neighbors” which certainly qualified him later to receive the prestigious Nobel Prize.
Mubarak Mahgoub Musa
Former Ambassador
Source link
