Eritrea

Allow me first to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-first session. I wish also to pay tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral of Portugal, who presided over the fiftieth regular session of the General Assembly. The Assembly will agree with me that present-day international relations are characterized by two contradictory trends. On the one hand, there is an overriding desire and wilful movement to enhance international cooperation through the expansion of trade and investment. This trend is inextricably linked to the pursuit and maintenance of peace and stability. However, parallel with and contradicting this positive trend, we see a proliferation of high- and low-intensity conflicts in various corners of the world triggered by different causes. The pursuit of viable mechanisms to reduce and seek a permanent solution to these conflicts in order to promote international cooperation for the welfare of mankind remains, therefore, the key challenge that the United Nations will continue to face in the coming years. The Horn of Africa region remains, likewise, in the grips of this dichotomy. On the positive side, the countries of the region are committed to promoting regional cooperation, and continue to make strenuous efforts to this end. This is indeed manifested by the substantial progress achieved to date to revitalize the Inter-Governmental Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD), the regional instrument for achieving this objective. At the same time, the region continues to bleed due to grave internal conflicts within some member States. The painful bloodletting that has destroyed the social fabric in Somalia continues unabated; the internal conflict in the Sudan and the climate of regional tension created by the activities of the National Islamic Front (NIF) regime continues to deteriorate. The pursuit of peace and stability, with the attendant opportunities that this provides for economic and social development, have special significance for peoples that have suffered the physical and psychological traumas of war. In this connection, as the Assembly is aware, my country has borne the brunt of a long war which has exacted enormous human sacrifices, leaving its economic and social infrastructure a shambles. Accordingly, peace is crucial to the young State of Eritrea to heal the scars of war, to recoup lost opportunity and to reconstruct what has been devastated. But my Government’s profound aspirations and commitment to the maintenance of peace continue to be threatened by the hostile and unprovoked acts of the NIF regime in the Sudan, whose antagonism and subversion against Eritrea began soon after it took power in 1989. I hardly need emphasize here that the acts of subversion and State-sponsored terrorism are not directed against Eritrea alone, but have in fact been adopted as an instrument of policy by the NIF in its attempts to destabilize its neighbours and export its expansionist designs through subversion and violence. In pursuit of these aims, the NIF regime has propped up and provided safe haven to assorted terrorists from various countries and facilitated their acts of sabotage and terror. Khartoum’s barely veiled hand is discernible from the litany of border incursions by mercenary groups in a number of countries in the region and acts of naked terror in the international arena. I must stress here that my Government has left no stone unturned in its efforts to reduce and stave off the climate of tension provoked by the acts of the NIF regime. As a matter of fact, for five long years my Government pursued a policy of constructive engagement, patiently and tirelessly, hoping against hope that the authorities in Khartoum would turn back from the dangerous alley that they are heading for. Unfortunately, the language of moderation and peace only whetted the NIF’s appetite to spread its subversive tentacles deeper and wider. In the event, Khartoum not only refused to heed these continuous appeals, but escalated its overt acts of terror and subversion beyond limits. Another grave matter I wish to bring to the attention of this Assembly is the maltreatment of Eritrean refugees at the hands of Sudanese authorities. The NIF regime not only is doing whatever it can to obstruct the organized repatriation of the refugees to their home country, but is engaged in reckless and deplorable acts to drive a wedge between the refugees and the people of the Sudan, who have offered commendable hospitality during the long years of war. And when this policy did not work, the NIF regime began subjecting the refugees to arbitrary imprisonment, torture, and banishment after confiscation of their property by its security authorities. Moreover, young refugees were forcibly conscripted and given military training to be deployed in subversive activities across the border. Organized repatriation of these refugees, the pilot phase of which has been successfully achieved, is impeded by the lame excuses the NIF fabricates. All these pressures have caused the refugees to return home spontaneously at high risk. All these acts of hostility perpetrated by the NIF regime to implement its designs of destabilizing neighbours should surely be of grave concern to this Assembly and the international community at large, given their wider regional security ramifications. Allow me further to recall the incident that erupted between Eritrea and the Republic of Yemen in December 1995, following the latter’s occupation of the Eritrean archipelago of Hanish-Zuqar, at the southern entrance to the Red Sea. Perhaps due to its sensitivity, the incident aroused immediate international concern and mediation endeavours. The Government of Eritrea, which all along had sought international arbitration to the dispute, promptly accepted, with full appreciation, the mediation initiatives of the Ethiopian and Egyptian Governments, and later that of the United Nations Secretary-General, which greatly helped to defuse tensions and paved the way for the peaceful handling of the dispute. When facilitation by the French Government was proposed, the Eritrean Government accepted it wholeheartedly. These decisions were taken by the Eritrean Government against a background of mendacious accusations and irresponsible campaigns by the Yemeni authorities to escalate the situation. The incident was also fanned by those in certain quarters who sought to serve their vested interests in the troubled waters. However, genuine desires and a sincere political will prevailed. Ultimately, restraint and careful handling of the issue, in addition to positive and constructive regional and international intervention, culminated in the Agreement on Principles, signed by both parties on 21 May 1996 in Paris. In this Agreement, both the State of Eritrea and the Republic of Yemen unequivocally expressed their desire to settle their dispute over the Hanish-Zuqar archipelago by the verdict of a court of arbitration. Developments since the signing of the document could be considered generally positive and encouraging. However, allegations were made by the Republic of Yemen that Eritrean forces occupied the island of Lesser Hanish on 10 August 1996, and the matter was hastily referred to the Security Council. The fact of the matter was that units of the Eritrean forces were on that island both before and after the signing of the Agreement on Principles on 21 May 1996. Despite this truth, the Eritrean Government withdrew its forces as a gesture of goodwill and in the 2 interest of the smooth progress of the arbitration process and to preserve and promote the peace of the region. The Eritrean Government has time and again affirmed its adherence to the Agreement on Principles of 21 May 1996, and expressed its commitment to abide by the decisions of the court of arbitration. I am pleased to underline that the subsidiary agreement reached between the two sides in Paris last week, on 3 October, will now allow for the proceedings of the court of arbitration to start early next year. The agonizing and intractable reality in Somalia cannot but impel the international community to search for ways and means of expediting an end to this long, drawn- out tragedy. The complexity of the situation is too apparent to require more elaboration here. But it is clear that no amount of well-meaning external support will succeed in restoring normalcy to Somalia unless the Somalis themselves take stock of the senseless bloodshed that has torn the country apart and produce what it takes to forge peace and national reconciliation. Admittedly, the countries of the region could have played a more catalytic part in this multi-pronged effort. The lack of a consistent and coordinated regional and international initiative, however, may entail more preoccupying negative developments. Indeed, there are indications these days of a growing involvement of various external actors that seem bent on exploiting the vacuum to promote their hidden agendas. Somalia is in fact drifting towards becoming fertile ground for extremist groups. For the sake of the Somalis, and in the interest of regional peace and stability, it is vital that these trends be checked before it is too late and that the regional initiative be resuscitated. The recent developments in the Middle East which appear to have cast some shadows on the Oslo agreement are naturally a matter of preoccupation to all those who wish to see an enduring settlement to the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Whatever the shortcomings of the agreement, there can be no alternative to the peace process. My Government therefore appeals to both sides to persevere in the process of dialogue and negotiations so that a lasting peace that ensures the well-being of all the peoples of the region will be assured. In conclusion, we share the views of many Member States on the imperative of restructuring the decision- making bodies of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council. The Security Council continues to play a vitally important role in the maintenance of international peace and security. It is my delegation’s belief that now is the opportune moment to revitalize it, make it more democratic and improve its value, effectiveness and legitimacy so as to make it reflect the universal character of the Organization. Powerful and convincing arguments have been made by many speakers to the effect that, at present, the Security Council is neither equitable nor representative. The circumstances of international politics have altered so fundamentally that there are compelling reasons for change. In spite of the broadly shared wish for reform, discussions so far have not really come close to the general agreement needed. It is our firm belief that flexibility and compromise will be necessary. There are a number of interesting elements in the proposals, to which thorough attention should be given so that we can try to bring about the necessary change.