Amanuel Biedemariam

President Obama undermined US diplomatic protocol, longstanding US diplomatic process and the State Department when he moved-up the UN Ambassadorship of Susan Rice to a cabinet level position. The move is a serious blunder that will undermine US diplomatic structures and processes and its negative effects to be felt for decades to come. There are many examples of these colossal failures.

Ambassador Rice has a horrific record as US point person of Africa during the Clinton Administration in which she stood by as a bystander and witnessed the Rwanda Holocaust unfold. And as a UN Ambassador, Susan Rice is doing serious damages to US political and moral high ground by undercutting US diplomatic leverages and, infringing upon American citizen’s rights by conspiring with some of the most atrocious human rights violators and genocidal tyrants of Africa.

Moreover, Ambassador Rice or President Obama are denying the American people congressional oversight by outsourcing US political agendas to international organizations like the Arab League, African Union and other regional organizations in Africa such as IGAD and ECOWAS. This is a convenient shortcut of pursuing US interests. It only requires pressuring tyrants and leaders of client states to echo US agendas. This approach gives Rice cover to push resolutions and decisions that have long-term implications with a lightning speed.

The problem with this approach is multi-pronged. Firstly, the process excludes the American people and congress. Secondly, and absent of informed public, US congressional representatives are less likely to be inquisitive and as a result not as invested as they should be. This approach avoids open discussions of US diplomatic endeavors and, in this interconnected global environment, to negate the American people and congress opportunities to meaningful understanding of world politics and engagement is serious abrogation of responsibilities.

In addition, the approach renders the State Department impotent at worst or, diminishes its influence greatly. Because regardless, of the communications that take place between the State Department and the US Mission at the UN, the focus of world leaders will be UN and the UNSC. This empowers the UN greatly while diminishing US diplomatic upper hand globally and reduces the US State Department to a mere bureaucratic shell.

Case in point, the recent Sanction measure against Eritrea Resolution 2023 adopted by the UNSC December 5, that passed with thirteen “yes” votes and two abstentions Russia and China. A simple glance at the votes makes the sanction measure look successful. However, upon digging deeper we can uncover layers of disturbing patterns that ought to concern every American.

One of the basic tenets of the American way of life is the jurisprudence based on US constitution that observes certain inalienable rights such as the ability to defend oneself and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. While that is not-always forthcoming and apparent in foreign policy matters, there are certain precedents and protocols as well as rules the US is expected to follow. These norms, values and laws, even if they are not adhered-to as they should they are universally accepted principles. And for the US, the standards are higher.

However, in this case, everything was thrown out the window. Ambassador Rice failed to bring a credible case against Eritrea. Rice failed to embrace fairness and American values. Rice presented fabrications to the UNSC to make a case in order to pass sanction measures against Eritrea. She pressed the measure in unprecedented fashion to catch the members of UNSC by surprise into voting without deliberation at 5pm on Tuesday Nov 29, to be voted on the next morning shocking all. She usurped the UN process and gave the matter unwarranted urgency in order to pass the measure. She put the measure in Blue prematurely as if the situation is dire, of utmost urgency and importance.

The members reacted negatively and denied the vote with Russia threatening to veto the measure. China said that President Isaias Afwerki has requested to come and address the UNSC in October and, according to UN charter that is the right of every UN member-country and demanded President Isaias address the council. Of course she did not want President Isaias to appear in front of the council. Her remarks were unbecoming of a diplomat. It was a shameful act and display of utter arrogance that future generation American diplomats cannot model after. She disrespected the Eritrean people by saying I have met the Eritrean delegation in July, we do not want a “circus and is not to my taste.” Her comments are an example that the US needs to seriously reevaluate its diplomatic approaches. Because, Rice acted as if she is above a president and undermined the UN process by disregarding concerns of other members and abused the privileges of being a host nation by using the issuance of a visa as part of her maneuvers. The circus that followed was a must see TV for the whole world to laugh at.

Ambassador Rice went on a two day negotiation spree in which she was forced to say we are obligated to grant a visa to President Isaias and his delegation on Friday Dec 2, 48 hours before the measure was to be voted on. According to Rice, the visas were granted on Saturday and the vote was scheduled for Monday. The president was slated to address the council and make a case for his country in a matter that could determine the fate of his people on Monday morning December 5after travelling 16 hours from Africa.

On Christmas Eve in 2009, Ambassador Rice passed a similar measure in a stealthy manner and placed an arms embargo against Eritrea a nation at war with Ethiopia denying Eritrea a right to self-defense. This was based on fabrications by using Somalia and a border dispute with Djibouti while ignoring Ethiopia that is occupying Eritrean territories illegally. She called this an African initiative and used Africa to pressure China and Russia to pass a sanction measure.

In July of 2011, the African Union (AU) rejected for lack of evidence, Ethiopia’s plea to send yet another bogus statement to the UNSC against Eritrea. The accusations came from Ethiopia and alleged that Eritrea was caught trying to bomb Addis Ababa during the AU gatherings. Ethiopia is at war with Eritrea and the accusations came from a country that is party to the conflict. Gabon, a country that has no connection to Eritrea, tabled the measure at the urging of the US to give it an African cover. The evidence provided to the UNSC is laughable. It is absurd that Rice tried to convince the UNSC, Eritrea, a nation that is capable to wage full scale wars and have successfully defeated Africa’s strongest army to gain independence, can resort to this joke of terrorist act fabricated by a genocidal regime that is using terrorism as a cover to quell decent and make money from the West.

The Russian Ambassador to the United Nations said as follows… “The text of the resolution contains a range of provisions that lack adequate foundation, and the role of the group of experts has been expanded beyond measure. In that respect, we refer in particular to the “planned terrorist attack” in Addis Ababa during the African Union summit there. The Russian Federation is categorically against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. However, in this case, the Security Council was not presented with convincing proof of Eritrea’s involvement in that incident. We have not seen the results of any investigation of that incident, if indeed there was one.”

This is diplo-speak that means the accusations are fabrications, in other words lies. The barrage of accusations and allegations Eritrea faced was designed to put maximum pressure on China and Russia to pass punitive measures by using Africans. Kenya accused Eritrea of flying arms to Al Shabab in Kisamyo South Somalia. All one has to do is observe the map of the Horn of Africa and observe in order to reach Kisamyou, Eritrea must fly through hostile air space of Ethiopia and above heavily monitored Indian Ocean Waters. The Djibouti case was also a farce since Djibouti has already agreed and signed to allow Qatar to mediate the “dispute.” Ambassador Rice created a circus by having the accusers address the UNSC from Addis via satellite in order to put more pressure and failed. By doing that, Rice empowered the UNSC over the US.

The reality, Djibouti is a client state of the US that hosts over 3,000 US soldiers stationed in Camp Lemonier Djibouti. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta just visited Djibouti to highlight the importance. Ethiopia and Kenya are in the same boat. The Transitional Government of Somalia is very dependent on the US and Ethiopian soldiers for its very survival. In other words, they are all parties to the conflict.

The US used The Somali Monitoring Group, a group formed by the US to give recommendations on Somalia related issues. In this case, the Monitoring Group presented to the UN everything Ethiopia gave them including names of Eritreans that support their birth country. These law-abiding Eritrean American citizens have resided in the US for decades. The Sanction recommendation the Monitoring Group gave targeted remittances these citizens send to their homeland. The monitoring group gave specific sanction measures to decapitate Eritrea from existence prompting the Russians to react and rightfully say…,

“We also have doubts with respect to the provision in the resolution that gives the Sanctions Committee a mandate to draft, with the support of the expert group, guiding principles for States on maintaining vigilance in their cooperation with Eritrea in the mining sector. When it comes to guiding United Nations Members, guidance should be provided by a resolution of the Security Council and not by the preliminary work of subsidiary bodies, as that can lead to various interpretations of resolutions that have been adopted.”

The monitoring group is not a legal body, an elected representation or a neutral and transparent investigative organ. It is political tool the US and Ethiopia use to further their agendas.

More than what is described above, the most disturbing aspect of Ambassador Rice’s adventures is what Wikileaks exposed. Ambassador Rice conspired with African leaders and discussed on how to impose restrictions on US citizens of Eritrean decent from sending remittances to their home country. Cables on May and August of 2009 reveal Rice talking to various Ethiopian officials in cable after another. This is what Ethiopian official recommended. Cable quote:

“ Tekeda said, cutting off the flow of money to Eritrea was essential. Particularly, remittances from the U.S. was a major source of funding for Eritrea, which used such funds for arms procurement and support for extremist elements.”

On August 17, 2009 Rice conferred with Ethiopian representative Tessema, cable quote:

“Ambassador Rice emphasized that any new sanctions Resolution should reflect the common ground between Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Somalia.”

This is a pattern that shows Rice conspiring against American citizens with leaders of other countries. The list and detail is abundant for all to research. Rice called Eritrean Americans, “The Diaspora” and decided to infringe upon the rights of American citizens that she calls “Diaspora” in order to get at the country of their origin.

One of the most disturbing aspects of these developments is to know how easy it is to infringe upon US citizen rights without any congressional oversight and the citizenry finding out what is really taking place. Moreover, today, it is Eritrean Americans, who is next? It may be easy for the average American to overlook these developments because it is happening to obscure unfamiliar communities. However, these are outstanding law abiding American citizens most of whom arrived in the early to mid-80s. Their kids represent a first generation of Eritrean Americans that are brilliant excelling in many areas. There are many Eritrean doctors, engineers, army officials, athletes and successful exemplary Eritrean American citizens. It is criminal and libelous for Rice to incriminate entire communities of American citizens for foreign policy agendas in order to pass a flowed resolution based on fabrications.

Concluding Remarks

Over the years, the US has showed the world the ways and, meanings of diplomacy in good and bad times. American diplomats epitomized patriotism and international legal savvy. Most importantly they knew the importance of keeping the political upper hand while retaining the moral high grounds. Above all, they placed the rights of American citizens above everything. They accorded it the dignity that it deserves. Howard Baker, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger to mention some. They always knew how to keep their eyes on the ball while keeping the long and short term goals of the nation intact.

Ambassador Rice is a departure from that. She represents street diplomacy of thug like bullying underhanded mischief; petty shortcut diplomacy, fabrications, obvious-threats and intimidation. Her approaches are gifts to Russia and China because due to her belligerence they are looking like saints. In this latest debacle, China and Russia came out with moral high ground because they were talking transparency and following the UN rules and laws. Susan Rice on the other hand, was always on the defensive and looked petty. Her tactics were a reach by any standard; the strategy she applied was flawed giving Russia and China opportunities to play her like a child.

The people of Africa are suffering terribly due to the incompetence of foreign officials Such as Susan Rice. This episode is likely to lead to more wars and bloodshed. Examples are aplenty. Susan Rice’s name is synonymous to The Genocide of Rwanda. The irony is, after a failure of that magnitude, her incompetence was rewarded by promotion to a much higher and significant position of high impact.

Susan Rice believes that she has picked a soft target to bully, misrepresent, fabricate harass and undermine the rights of Eritrean American citizens in order to pursue her feeble agendas. Certainly, Susan Rice will not try the same strategy on other American groups such as the Armenian or Jewish communities. She felt that Eritrean Americans are soft targets to stigmatize. This Eritrean American will not sit idle and watch American rights stripped brazenly.

All Eritreans and concerned citizens need to call for the firing of Susan Rice and hold her legally accountable for conspiring against American citizens with foreign nationals and governments.

Awetnayu@hotmail.com

IGAD: A communiqué devoid of any legality

The IGAD Council of Ministers has issued a communiqué on Somalia and Eritrea following a meeting convened in Ethiopia this weekend. Apart from its ill-advised content which can only exacerbate the crisis in Somalia and hamper the objectives of peace and security in the Horn of Africa, the IGAD Communique is devoid of any legality for the following procedural and substantive reasons:

i) Four members of IGAD, namely Ethiopia, Kenya, Djibouti and Uganda are direct protagonists in the conflict in Somalia in one form or another. Ethiopia is culpable for a flagrant invasion of Somalia in December 2006 under the instigation of the United States and the intermittent incursions thereafter. The other countries have not only endorsed Ethiopia’s invasion of an IGAD Member State but have also sent troops to Mogadishu in contravention of UN Security Council resolution 1725(2006) that barred neighboring countries from involvement in any eventual peacekeeping force in Somalia.

ii) Somalia’s seat in IGAD had remained vacant for most of the 19 years since the country was sadly embroiled in the crisis that continues without let up. It appears that the TFG has now been accorded a seat in IGAD. But in view of the political realities in Somalia(the entities in Puntland, Somaliland etc and the situation in Mogadishu), this short-sighted decision does not only provoke issues of legality but does not augur well for a healthy process of nation reconciliation in Somalia.

iii) As communicated to the government of Eritrea by Dr. Mustafa Osman Ismail, the Special Advisor to the President, the government of Sudan does not support UN Security Council Resolution 1907 imposing sanction on Eritrea.

iv) Eritrea suspended its membership in IGAD in early 2007 in the wake of Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia and the moral failure of IGAD to condemn the acts of aggression against a fellow Member State.

v) As is well known, Ethiopia continues to occupy sovereign Eritrean territories in violation of international law and its treaty obligations.

vi) In light of these facts, any decision of those States in respect of Somalia does not have validity, as they cannot cast their votes as impartial or neutral parties. In the same breadth, these countries cannot indict Eritrea on account of events in Somalia. These countries, which shoulder primary responsibility for the cause and exacerbation of the crisis in Somalia do not indeed have moral, political or legal authority to indict or punish Eritrea.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Asmara

3 February 2010

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi received and held talks here Thursday with the visiting United States Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Africa, Vicki Huddleston, touching mainly on existing Ethiopia-US relations and issues of common interest.

Meles and the visiting US official held fruitful discussions on political and security issues and on how to fight terrorism in the Horn of Africa region, according a senior government official who attended the discussions.

During the discussions, Meles expressed Ethiopia’s keen interest to scale up existing Ethiopia-US relations to a higher level in the years ahead. He also re-affirmed Ethiopia’s willingness to work with the US in efforts to resolve the crisis in Somalia and in Darfur in western Sudan.

After the meeting, Huddleston told journalists that she and the prime minister held valuable discussions on how to bolster co-operation between the two countries.

Huddleston, who had once served as Charge d’Affaires at the US Embassy in Ethiopia, also said the two sides agreed to work together to resolve the crisis in Somalia and the Sudan.

In his discussions with Huddleston, Foreign Minister Seyoum Mesfin urged the US to continue its support for efforts by the Inter-Governtal Authority on Development (IGAD), the Horn of Africa regional grouping, to ensure peace and stability in the sub-region.

Seyoum briefed Huddleston on efforts to ensure peace and stability in the region. Ethiopia is the current Chair of IGAD.

Seyoum said US support for IGAD would have great importance to effectively discharge its mission in the region.

The two officials also discussed political and security issues and how to work together in the region, according to an official who attended the meeting.

Huddleston told journalists later that she commended Ethiopia’s efforts to ensure peace and stability in the Horn of Africa. The US government also acknowledged the high economic growth which Ethiopia had registered in the last few years.

She also expressed her belief that the agreement among political parties in Ethiopia on an election code of conduct was a sign that the upcoming election process would be carried out in a good sprit. Source: (NNN-ENA)

Fiji Islands

Last Thursday, a U.N. Security Council draft called for sanctions including an arms embargo against Eritrea. The alleged sanction in the name of “aiding Islamist insurgents in Somalia” targets at travel bans and asset freezes for government officials and military leaders.

However, there are also claims that the call for sanctions against Eritrea touches on trade barriers for protecting its domestic market. U.N. diplomats said that the resolution was drafted by temporary Security Council member Uganda and has been circulated to other members of the 15-nation panel.

IGAD is supporting the sanction strongly. IGAD member States include – Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda. The accusation against Eritrea claims supplying al Shabaab rebels with money and weapons to Islamist insurgents in Somalia.

The draft includes the ban of all sales of weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts  to Asmara. Besides, it is targeting technical assistance, training, financial and other assistance, related to the military activities.”

Eritrea denies supporting al Shabaab and has said that the threat of U.N. sanctions is of “no concern at all’’. However, the Security Council, African Union (AU) and United States insist that Eritrea is destabilizing Somalia. They accuse Asmara of sending plane- and boatloads of munitions to Somali rebels, as well as providing them with logistical support.

Yet it is not clear when the council would vote on the resolution. Nevertheless, diplomats call for the need to revise the case to avoid a veto from China and Russia, which are not pro-sanctions.

Reuters reports that ‘’the resolution would authorize U.N. member states to inspect “all cargo to and from Somalia and Eritrea” via land and sea if there were grounds to suspect that the cargo included banned items.’’

However, the draft is not clear and lacks substance. First of all, the council has yet not provided any evidence on ground regarding the case to the public. Besides, the accusations should not include the issue of trade barriers. The US by itself protects its farmers through subsidies and the same goes to the European Union killing many subsistence farmers in the third world who do not have the capability to compete.

It is very tempting to draw the line between “smart sanctions” and “smart bombs”.  The new “smart bomb”, which helps to shape new geo-political and economic realities, is called “smart sanction” and can hit a specific target like a precision guided munition. They call it modern warfare and it’s like star wars.

Some analyst caution that the widespread belief targeted sanctions could not hurt the ordinary population could be misleading.

Perhaps sanctions are not smart at all as the example of a small island nation in the South Pacific Ocean comprising of an archipelago of about 322 islands and a population of 849,000 shows.

The state is called Fiji and is ranked number 40 in the list of the world’s smallest countries next to Qatar and Cyprus.

Sugar exports and a strong tourism sector were the backbones of the national economy providing major income from foreign exchange and a strong growth in GDP. In 1999, Australia and New Zealand used to have close ties with Fiji because of business interests in tourism, natural resources and fisheries.

In 2006 a military commander of the armed forces staged a military takeover accusing the prime minister of promoting corruption in the government. It has to be mentioned that there had been two military coups earlier in 1987 and 2000. Nevertheless, as a consequence of the coup in 2006 Australia, New Zealand, Europe, the United States followed by the international community implemented the so called “smart sanctions” against the tiny island state.

Academics at the department of economics at the University of the South Pacific warned the international community to be mindful regarding sanctions as they could be counterproductive and hurt Fiji as a whole. They were referring to developments such as the announcement by the Government of New Zealand to exclude Fiji from a guest worker scheme for seasonal workers and stop issuing scholarships to Fiji students.

The danger of “smart sanctions” becomes also evident in the example of how the European Union dealt with the blurry and distorted definitions of targeted sanctions. For example in 2007 the European Union froze funds used to subsidize sugar farmers in Fiji categorizing them as non-humanitarian aid.

It was the experience made in Fiji that generic travel bans on all citizens serving on government or quasi government boards only seemed to undermine governance and social stability. In a recent statement the Australia Fiji Business Council called the international community to lift travel bans because it limits the ability of both the public and private sector from recruiting and training the best available talents.

The fact is that the public and private business sector heavily depends on the freedom of movement of public servants, government officials and local authorities especially in small countries such as Fiji or Eritrea. “Smart sanctions” do not translate into practice in general, not for citizens in Fiji or in any other country of this world.

As a result of the “smart sanction” Fiji’s sugar exporting industry has been harmed and brought to a still stand, tourism arrivals were down by 6% in 2007. The tourism industry is damaged and facing uncertain recovery time. The fact is that “smart sanctions” target the GDP of a country which is basically the same as targeting the population of a nation.

In 2007 the GDP of Fiji dropped by 7% hurting directly the people of Fiji. In the list of countries ranked by their GDP Fiji dropped by 16 places from number 137 in 2005 to 153 in 2008. The problems between the current Fiji government and the international community have not improved and constructive dialogue has been replaced by tension and mistrust. The latest development is that Fiji is turning its back on the West looking for new allies such as China, which has strategic interests in the Pacific region.

Fact is there is no such thing as “smart sanctions” and isolating Eritrea might make things worse for Eritreans. The good news is there is hope that the permanent UN Security Council member states China and Russia might block any resolution to put sanction against Eritrea in place.

The question is does it make a difference or not? Just recently a student holding an Eritrean passport in Europe told me, “I have been one of the best performer at my University and was competing for a scholarship at my faculty due to a lack of funds. They refused to support me because today it can make a big difference, whether you are Eritrean or Kenyan. There was a time not too long ago you could get scholarships from Universities in places such as Canada, USA, England, Netherlands and Sweden without any problem. This has changed! We are singled out!”

* Steps include arms embargo, asset freezes, travel bans

* Russia, China will have problems with draft – diplomats

By Louis Charbonneau

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 19 (Reuters) – A draft U.N. Security Council resolution calls for an arms embargo against Eritrea and travel bans and asset freezes for members of its government and military for aiding Islamist insurgents in Somalia.

The resolution, obtained by Reuters on Thursday, was drafted by temporary Security Council member Uganda and has been circulated to other members of the 15-nation panel, U.N. diplomats said.

The United States and other council members accuse Eritrea of supplying al Shabaab rebels with money and weapons as they fight to topple the fragile U.N.-backed transitional government of Somali President Sheikh Sharif Ahmed, the official leader of the virtually lawless Horn of Africa nation.

The fighting in Somalia has killed nearly 19,000 civilians since the start of 2007 and driven 1.5 million from their homes.

Among the measures called for in the draft is a ban on all sales to Asmara of “weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts.”

The draft also calls for a ban on providing Eritrea with “technical assistance, training, financial and other assistance, related to the military activities.”

The Security Council, African Union (AU) and United States have all warned Asmara against destabilizing Somalia. Eritrea denies supporting al Shabaab and has said that the threat of U.N. sanctions is of “no concern at all.”

A U.N. arms monitoring body — which was set up to record violations of a 1992 arms embargo on Somalia — has said Asmara was sending plane- and boatloads of munitions to Somali rebels, as well as providing them with logistical support.

It was not clear when the council would vote on the resolution. Diplomats said it would need to be revised if it was to avoid a veto from China and Russia, which dislike sanctions in general.

The resolution would authorize U.N. member states to inspect “all cargo to and from Somalia and Eritrea” via land and sea if there were grounds to suspect that the cargo included banned items.

It would also impose a travel ban and freeze the assets of the “Eritrean political and military leadership” and other Eritrean individuals and firms suspected of supporting the hard-line Islamist rebels.

Somalia has been mired in chaos for nearly two decades and there is little sign the latest attempt to establish central government is proving any more successful than the 14 previous efforts since a dictator was ousted in 1991. (Editing by David Storey)