Thinking about The Hague Commission's recent Decision
By Dr, Teodros Kiros

Reflecting about the decision at The Hague continues to give me heartache. The issue is important and daunting, and since it was issued, I have been reflecting about what to do, how to respond, and what I truly think. I had once actually decided not to say anything, worried that whatever I say is going to displease everyone. There are so many positions, a plethora of subjectivities, each of which are marred by the language of pride, and by intense nationalism.  Hence my hesitation to write. I have now, for good or bad, decided to share my thoughts, and my positionalites for whatever they are worth.

The arguments

What has given me the highest pleasure when I recently began navigating the literature on the issue is the impressive concatenation of intricate legal, historical, sociological analyses of the boarder issue by some of the most able Ethiopians. A long line of master writers, such as Dr. Ghelawdewos Araia,  Mebbrahtu Teseggai and Dr. Tekola Hagos were humbling readings. I remain grateful to them.
Once again I am proud to be an Ethiopian. Pride could be dangerous sometimes, particularly when our country is at a historical crossroads in determining where it goes next.  It has just emerged from a costly war that took the lives of so many Ethiopians and Eritreans over the classic question of territory, the territory that has given us what I have repeatedly called in the pages of the Ethiopian Reporter, Bens News Page, and Tigrai net, Classical Ethiopian Personality.
Celebrating the Classical Ethiopian Personality, I wrote,
Our history has endowed us with a rich self-understanding, deeply inscribed in our Ethiopian personality. The awareness that our homeland is the birthplace of humanity, that it is the cradle of human civilization, is embedded in our consciousness. It is through this consciousness that the modern Ethiopian State is forged. When this consciousness is activated, all Ethiopians present themselves to the world free from the divisiveness of negative ethnicity and narrow minded nationalism. All Ethiopians are raised with an acute awareness that we are historical people. Our ancestors built wondrous civilizations at Aksum and Gondar; carved beautiful churches and monasteries out of stone; heroically fought at the battle of Adwa to preserve Ethiopian sovereignty; and our spiritual father, Zara Yacob left us a master text called Hatata, which stands leg to leg with the founders of Modern Philosophy. Ethiopian personality is graced by a wondrous past. An awareness of the past has created a powerful Ethiopian personality. This pride has given Ethiopians a sense of being, a firm belonging. It is this historicity that insulated the cultural fortresses of Ethiopia from devastation by imperialistic and colonial penetration, unlike our unfortunate brothers and sisters in other parts of Africa.(The Reporter, No250, 6/21/01)
This acute historical sense and legal sharpness motivate the justified angers of our writers below. To these writers what is at issue, and correctly so, is the meaning of Ethipianity and the territorial contours of its spatial presence in Africa and beyond.
DR Ghelawdewos, Ato Mebrahtu and Dr. Tekola are convinced, and they have convinced me that Ethiopian sovereignty has been compromised in the recent decision. There is no need to revisit their masterly historical and legal argumentation. I will only highlight a few.
(1) Dr. Ghelawdwos, Ato Mebrhatu and Dr. Tekola are one in their carefully thought out studies of the Commissions document that Ethiopia has definitely lost land and its sovereignty has been dangerously compromised, as Mebrahtu put the matter, Eritrea has taken all our territories and maritime outlets thanks to EPRDF (Miscarriage of Justice in Algiers=Miscarriage of Justice in The Hague, Bens News Page, May 9,2002)
(1)Reinforcing the (1) Dr. Ghelawdewos forcefully argues, As testified by the Border Commission, by Ethiopias own admission, Tsorona and Fort Cordona in the Belesa Projection were lost to Eritrea. By the same token, the Endeli projection, despite the commissions findings to the contrary, was also awarded to Eritrea. In this entire theatrical debacle, the most heinous crime committed against the Ethiopian people is the stolen areas of Gulomekda and Irob. Compromising Bure was not really the commissions decision. It was decided by the secret dealings of the EPLF and the EPRDF in July 1944. ( Genealogy of Heroes and Contradictions in Ethiopian Politics, Bens News Page, May 9, 2002)
(2)     Again Dr. Ghelawdwos and Mebrahtu are in full agreement with the (2) and specifically addressing the maritime outlet of Assab agree that The fact that EPLF annexed Assab with the help of EPRDF does not mean that Assab is not Ethiopian…However the annexation is null as far as Ethiopians are concerned wrote Mebrahtu in the same article on the miscarriage of justice in the Hague and Algiers.
(3)     All three scholars, guided by the path breaking articles in  Professor Takolas page, agree that the Commission was entirely mistaken to base its decions on null and void colonial treaties of 1900, 1902 and 1908; these were treaties which were imposed on Ethiopia by force. Legal discourses imposed by force are outside the circle of discussions guided by the reasonableness of the concept of law, which if it is to be binding, must be freed from domination. This  is the spirit of the scholars arguments.
These insights are the core of their long, carefully studied arguments. These arguments are models of scholarly acuity and legal seriousness. They make far-reaching claims that cannot be simply dismissed as products of hair-splitting academics whom are inciting the public and manufacturing facts. The EPRDF should immediately convene a major conference, invite these public intellectuals to present their cases to the party. Let the EPRDF and the acclaimed jurists who argued for Ethiopia present their cases, and we the members of the public will have been treated democratically if we are given an opportunity to be enlightened. Enlightenment is our right, and changing our minds is a function of our moral intelligence. We should not be denied what is rightly ours as members of a burgeoning democracy. We must instead by hailed for vigilantly attending to the actions of our government, and behaving responsibly and passionately. These are the attributes of a democratic people. Only sleepy and insecure regimes are afraid of alert people. I do not think that this regime needs to have sleepless nights. Much that the public admires is also part of this regime's ongoing history.
The regime does not have anything to fear. If it is determined that it  negotiated inadequately, we can appeal to the commission to listen to better arguments. In the end, in genuine democracies, reason and the better argument do sometimes win. Let us give the arguments a chance.


Our leaders may be genuinely concerned that contentious topics such as Assab may incur an Eritrean wrath and that it may be a bit late now that Eritrea is - a sovereign state with the ownership of Assab, to provoke it again. This is an important concern, but ignoring the equally important bitterness and pain of those who believe that the Ethiopian government has not negotiated intelligently and fairly will not give peace loving Ethiopians a moment of peace, a modicum of tranquillity. But the promising development projects that the EPRDF is engaging cannot hold ground when the public is unhappy, when the public is disloyal and disheartened.
But both Ethiopians and Eritreans deserve a better treatment. Let the issues that these able scholars have so diligently studied be publicly debated, without name calling, without intimidation. We have in the past credited this regime for creating a tolerant ambiance. It should not take it away now. The regime that preceded it ruled by terror, death squads and pulverizing, we expect this regime to stay on a democratic path.

    Back to main page!