Here is more proof that Eritrea's stance and policy towards Somalia is not merely out of self-preservation but rather out of genuine concern and good will towards the Somali people. The articles below have come directly from the Eritrean Foreign Ministry (shabait.com). Eritrea continues to take international heat for speaking the truth about whats going on in Somalia when nobody else in the world will.
Nothing can stop the just cause of the Somali resistance!
--------------------------------------
Press Release: IGAD: an irresponsible resolution by an inept organization
By Ministry of Foreign Affairs
May 22, 2009, 14:59
In its "Extraordinary Session of the Council of Ministers" held in Addis Abeba on 20th May, IGAD heaped groundless accusations against Eritrea and "called upon the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to impose sanctions on the Government of Eritrea without any further delay". This is an irresponsible resolution by an inept organization which bears primary responsibility for the current mayhem and crisis in Somalia.
Indeed, as it may be recalled, Eritrea had suspended its membership from this organization in April 2007 precisely for those cogent reasons. At the time, Ethiopia had invaded Somalia to subvert a healthy internal process of national reconciliation that was set in motion under the auspices of the broad coalition of the Union of Islamic Courts. Relative peace and order was restored in Somalia after more than a decade of chaos and turmoil. And while genuine efforts were underway to buttress and consolidate this nascent process to bring about an enduring peace and reconciliation in Somalia, the regime in Ethiopia chose, in collusion with other external powers and raising the spurious specter of "Islamic terrorism", to roll back the promising developments in Somalia and to plunge the country in another, more intractable, cycle of chaos and conflict.
Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia was in breach of fundamental principles of international law and agreed ground rules that governed the conduct of IGAD Member States in relation to peace-building efforts in Somalia. In the first place, there was consensus within IGAD that Somalia's immediate neighbors would not contribute to any peacekeeping force, when and if that force was deployed in Somalia within the framework and after the formulation of a viable and comprehensive peace agreement. The reasons for this prudent approach were varied but principally revolved around the acute historical animosities that exist between Somalia and its immediate neighbors, and especially Ethiopia (the two countries had gone to war twice in the past decades) due to unsettled territorial claims against each other.
In was against this backdrop that Ethiopia invaded Somalia, for the third time in the past decades, in December 2006. As it will be recalled, Ethiopia's first explanation was couched in "pre-emptive terms". At the time, Ethiopia's Prime Minister announced that the invasion was prompted by the "exigencies of thwarting the threat to its national security from fundamentalist terrorism". Soon after, Ethiopia's Prime Minister recanted to claim that the invasion was carried out on the invitation of an illegitimate "Transitional Federal Government" of Somalia. What was morally more reprehensible than Ethiopia's invasion was the "endorsement" of this flagrant breach of international law and the Charter of IGAD by several Member States of this defunct organization. The sad fact is IGAD has degenerated into a mere instrument for advancing Ethiopia's perilous strategies in the region and especially its hostility against Eritrea.
The debacle of Ethiopia's invasion, the magnitude of the humanitarian suffering that it has inculcated on the Somali people is too well known to be repeated here. Eritrea had opposed Ethiopia's invasion on well-founded grounds of international law; the agreed ground rules for the conduct of IGAD Member States that were prevalent at the time; the interests of regional peace and stability; and above all, in order to promote the welfare of the Somalia people. Eritrea had never recognized the so-called Transitional Governments that were often established outside Somalia by circumventing or subverting inclusive and genuine processes of national reconciliation and peace building.
Eritrea had not recognized in the past the "Transitional Government of Mr. Abdulqasm Salad... or, the Transitional Government led by Mr. Abdullahi Yusuf...". For the same reason, it does not recognize today the Transitional Government formed by Mr. Sherif Sheikh Ahmed. Eritrea firmly believes that the road to durable peace in Somalia does not lie in ostracizing some political groups while anointing others as the "sole, legitimate, government". This path has only led to more conflict and suffering in the past. As we have underlined before, the Somali people deserve to be treated better. They cannot be guinea pigs for costly "political experiments" or remain as the theatre for the strategic games of Ethiopia and other powers that wish to balkanize and keep Somalia weak and perpetuate the suffering of its population.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
22 May 2009
-----------------------------------
Press Release: UN Security Council Must Reconsider its Stance
By Ministry of Foreign Affairs
May 14, 2009, 13:36
The United Nations Security Council continues to doggedly condone ephemeral trends in Somalia as given and legitimate; and, to endorse illicit and externally imposed "transitional governments" that do not represent neighborhoods in Mogadiscio let alone the entire Somali people. The UN Security Council has further condoned acts of external invasion against Somalia. It is clear that these misguided positions contravene the independence, sovereignty as well as unity of Somalia and constitute a grave breach of the Charter of the United Nations and international law.
These illegal and unconstructive positions of the Security Council have exacerbated the political vacuum that has enveloped Somalia; aggravated piracy and lawlessness; and, compounded the suffering of the Somali people. These acts have further accentuated the prevalent instability in the Horn of Africa.
In the event, the Government of Eritrea urges the UN Security Council to take remedial action by taking stock of these violations and the deleterious consequences that they have entailed.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
14 May 2009
----------------------
Press Release: Daily Telegraph: Journalism at its Lowest Ebb of Integrity
By Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Apr 24, 2009, 14:50
Reporting on Eritrea for the Daily Telegraph of the United Kingdom, Damien McElory, manifested the art of distortion and deceit by trying to align Eritrea with al-Shebab.
President Isaias Afwerki and the Delegation led by Andrew Mitchell, the British Shadow Foreign Secretary, discussed a wide variety of issues; amongst them, Somalia, bilateral cooperation and the role of NGOs. Mr. Andrew Mitchell expressed his appreciation of the President's deep knowledge of the situation in Somalia and referred the analysis as compelling. Furthermore, Lord Ashcroft, part of the delegation and present at the meeting, clearly entertained the views of the President on the role of NGOs.
Although the journalist was not privy to the meeting, President Isaias had summarized to him the gist of the discussions during his brief interview that lasted above five minutes. But Mr. Damien chose to ignore the briefing and to write something else because, it seems, he had come to Eritrea with an already drafted story. Indeed, his article starts with an alleged statement by an unidentified diplomatic source who claims that the Obama Administration had recently "warned Eritrea". This was a blatant lie hinged on an incident that never took place and to which Eritrea could not be associated by any stretch of imagination.
Eritrea's stance on Somalia has been repeatedly echoed by the Government of Eritrea on several occasions. It is also borne out by the facts on the ground which clearly demonstrate that the meddling of external forces has only exasperated the situation in Somalia. Eritrea has no other agenda except the maintenance of peace and stability in our region. Eritrea's argument originates from the full knowledge of the Somali society and the prevailing realities on the ground. Ignoring the complexities and intricacies of the cultures and experiences of any given society, is the beginning of a failed endeavor.
The most amazing aspect of the Somalia situation is that, initially, the external actors vigorously searched for pretexts to justify their intent of intervention, and claimed the presence of 2000 Eritrean forces in Somalia. Consequently, the Western Media called it a proxy war between Eritrea and Ethiopia. The U.S. backed invasion of Somalia was initiated with pompous fanfare and statements of arrogance. At the time, Eritrea warned of the possible consequences. After two years, the pretentious statements of Ethiopia were nowhere to find. They "graciously" accepted a humiliating defeat and hit the road back home with tens of thousands of their dead soldiers left behind. Now, the perpetrators of this fiasco are looking for a scapegoat for their failed policy in Somalia. In this regard, Eritrea has become the target again.
Eritrea has been consistently calling for a comprehensive peace process in which all Somalis have a say in the installation of a lawful and legitimate government. What is more noble than calling for the widest possible participation of the people of Somalia? Eritrea never aligned itself with one group of actors in Somalia. Damien McElory's inference that Eritrea is courting al-Shabab is a plain fabrication, to say the least. No one group is a solution, but only part of a solution in Somalia or elsewhere, for that matter. Contrary to what Damien McElory insinuates, Eritrea champions the Somali people at large. And at no time has Eritrea claimed to have aligned itself with any isolated group.
Piracy is a disease that was able to mushroom because of the anarchic situation in Somalia and, is indeed, a threat to be reckoned with. But how do you go about curing this disease without addressing the fundamental problem? It is Eritrea's genuine belief that once the Somalis engage in and complete the reconstitution of their country, piracy will disappear.
The Delegation and the "journalist" had a half day visit to a village in the peripheries of Asmara, with a successful Water and Sanitation Project of which Andrew Mitchell expressed his delight with the appropriate application of Britain's tax payers money. Not a word was mentioned of this success story in the Daily Telegraph. Instead, the "journalist" chose to disseminate fabricated and deceitful stories about Eritrea and tried to appear as if he has researched his story extensively.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara
23 April 2009
-----------------
Press Release: Focus on Somalia
By Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Feb 24, 2009, 14:44
The lofty objective of the Somali people at the moment is the reconstitution of their country above any other issue.
And even if the right to self-determination is legitimate in principle, it cannot be realized in non-existing Somalia through force, confusion or shortcut. What's more, raising the issue as a primary topic is but an empty ploy for getting engaged in diversionary schemes.
It is not also logical to talk about a future Somali political system on a priority basis short of the reconstitution of Somalia as a sovereign nation. And as such, any government established unilaterally at this juncture cannot at all have the legality to represent the entire Somali people. Any government formed on behalf of the Somali people under different names, be it on the part of regional and international organizations or goodwill parties, can never constitute legal representation of the people of Somalia.
Hence, putting an end to invasion and external interference is a precondition for the realization of the Somali people's aspirations to reconstitute their nation. It is equally imperative to get rid of any force deployed in Somalia under the pretext of 'peacekeeping mission.'
Moreover, any futile attempts or conspiracies resorted to under the guise of 'reconciliation' between the forces that waged resolute resistance involving huge sacrifices against invasion and external interference and those political balloons put in place to serve foreign agendas should be unequivocally denounced, as they are essentially designed to crush the Somali people's struggle for the reconstitution of their country.
Likewise, any attempts made to subvert the Somali people's struggle for national reconstitution through weaving various conspiracies aimed at fomenting ethnic and tribal division, and extending bribe or concocting allegations of terrorism and intimidation are tantamount to committing invasion and intervention.
It is worth emphasizing at this juncture that all justice-loving parties are obliged to extend the necessary support to the entire Somali people, including all the patriotic forces that are struggling for the reconstitution of their homeland.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
23 February 2009
Asmara
-----------------------
Press Release: Developments in Somalia
By Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Feb 2, 2009, 13:40
In the past few days, seemingly new developments regarding the situation in Somalia have attracted international limelight.
The current perceptions and sentiments notwithstanding, the events require an objective evaluation so as to present a sound understanding of the issue, and to direct the efforts of those who seek a genuine solution to the crisis and wish for a stable Somalia in the right direction.
The positive development is the fact that the struggle of the Somali people against aggression has increasingly gained momentum to the extent that the invaders have been vanquished and forced to “pull out”. The sheer significance of this development obviates the need for concretely verifying the “pull out” or the “withdrawal.”
As opposed to the declaration of the withdrawal, the opportunities that have been lost over a two-year period as a result of the invasion, the destruction and massacre wrought on the Somali people and holding those responsible to account, carries greater currency. In due time, the causes and consequences of the invasion will beg a justification.
The issue at hand is the “new government” established in Djibouti.
Ever since Somalia was designated as a “failed state”, this “government” will be the third that has been formed outside the county. Apart from the fact that the “government” has been set up outside Somalia, its “legitimization” with the blessing of the UN and the AU attracts attention.
The choice of an external venue instead of an internal one for establishing the government does not require much clarification or analysis. Moreover, there is the question as to who is represented in Somalia and how in its capacity as “transitional government”. And who can bring or send representatives? These are not issues that can be neglected.
Another controversial issue is the legal basis or authority with which the UN or the AU can form a government. Not only the Somali people, but any other people for that matter, would not and cannot accept a government established abroad and imposed by the UN. In practical terms, two previous attempts have failed and this third trial raises questions as to where all this is heading?
Is the “transitional” government truly representative of Somalia? Does it pertain to Mogadishu or Baidoa? If it is Somalia’s, then where do “Somaliland” “Puntland” or the other “lands” fit in? If it is exclusively Mogadishu’s or Baidoa’s, then how is it Somalia’s? How does the Somali political drama and “transitional government” executed by proxy of the UN or AU represent Somalia and its flag, whose sovereignty and unity these organizations claim to recognize? Has the AU or the UN officially recognized “Somaliland”, “Puntland” or the other “lands”? If not, all the blessings on the basis of which legality or logic? These timely and practical questions deserve answer, rather than philosophy or analysis.
Why then all these nonsensical dramas? And does this in practice ensure Somalia’s sovereignty and national unity, as well as bring about normalcy through relieving the Somali people from the crisis they have been facing over the past 17 years? Still more, would it contribute to the stability of the Horn region that has been adversely affected by the Somali crisis? Or it is simply the continuation of the endless crisis and suffering of the Somali people with all its dire consequences?
The first question for all Somalis and concerned parties is not whether the drama was appealing or which party has benefited and which has lost. A lasting solution to the problem and a return to normalcy and stabilization of the region can be ensured only after the Somalis engage in a free and participatory election of their own that would lead to a re-constitution of Somalia, without any invasion or external interference and intervention or “advice”. That being said, any self-proclaimed interested party should only help in bringing about this condition, rather than attempting to substitute the Somali people.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
2 February 2009
Asmara
