Ethio-Eritrean Boundary Delimitation: The Irob Case 

Irob Community In North America 
P.O.Box 5533 
Arlington, VA 22205 

We, members of the Irob Community in North America, have studied the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission’s report announced on April 13, 2002 and present to the Ethiopian people, the Irob community and the Commission our observations and conclusions about the implications of the decision with regards to the affected communities and the territorial integrity of the Irob region and Ethiopia. 

The Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Ethiopia quickly declared and announced to the Ethiopian people that Ethiopia gained all territories it had claimed, implying that this meant the territories and the communities that historically, legally and by actual jurisdictional record belong to Ethiopia. According to the records released by the Boundary Commission, both Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and Foreign Minister Seyoum Mesfin have misguided the Ethiopian people. Many people have been shocked by the misinformation.  

Both the Ethiopian and Eritrean governments claim to be completely ‘satisfied’ with the border ruling. The Ethiopian government stated: “The decision of the Boundary Commission has awarded Ethiopia all the contested areas it had claimed.” However, the Commission’s documents reveal that Ethiopia has lost many territories to Eritrea. Because of our limited knowledge of other areas, we will concentrate on the area we know well, i.e. the Irob region. Irob is divided into three subdivisions: Adgadi-Are, Buknaiti’Are and Hasabala, of which the entire Adgadi-Are and parts of Buknaiti-Are are now ceded  

Based on the Boundary Commission’s report and the related map (Map 11), many Irob territories and communities that constitute part of the core of Ethiopian history and civilization have been handed over to Eritrea. In the interest of the Irob community and the Ethiopian public at large, we will attempt to clarify the issue by highlighting some of the relevant paragraphs and statements submitted by the Ethiopian government and the Boundary Commission. 

According to Map 11, a fabricated river named Muna (now renamed with another fictitious name “Berbero Gado”) has been made the basis for the delimitation. The delimiting line passes down this river eastwards starting south of Zalamessa (Point 20) until it meets the confluence of the river depicted on the document as “Enda Dashim”(Point 21). By the way, Enda Dashim is actually located just near where the locality Barachit is written on the map and not at Point 21. By arbitrarily running the delimitation line from Point 20 to Point 21, a huge territory that encompasses many fertile villages of Guolomakeda such as Arka-Tirque, Midiriba, Simaz, Mikhimas, etc., and Western Irob Villages such as Agarale, Lamma Arato, Quolomishela, Dire, Islamtoda (Engal), Kuora, Boholo, Homarab, Tinkeito, etc., have been ceded to Eritrea. These territories have been an integral part of the Tigray province since time immemorial and have never been part of the Eritrean colony, province, or state at any given time. 

The next phase of the delimitation on the map gives the whole Northern Irob (Adgadi’Are) to Eritrea. At Point 21 the line turns to the northwest to Point 22, then turns northwards to meet Point 23 and then turns northeastwards to Point 24, all along following small rivers. After Point 24, the line takes a short overland pass to Point 25 and suddenly turns eastwards to meet the Endeli River at Point 26. This portion of the delimitation comprises a huge chunk of land. We will not try to list the hundreds of villages located in this section, but will point out some important centers in the area. Densely populated villages such as Makata, Auda, Macheea, Hiddo, Haidille, Hierra, Adonago, Adagena, Gafanat, Ayiha, Mugulay, Aburta, etc are located in this section of Irobland. Mostly grazing lands such as Angara, Armoda, Denaye, Abohis, Aftih, Dadoh, Lamma Sua, Serekle, Yunga, etc. are located in this ceded area as well. The region is also home to many churches and religious centers some of which, like Saint Giorgis’ Church in Hiddo, are centuries old. Some of the prominent Ethiopians who played key roles in the defense and modernization of the country were born and raised in this part of Irob: Bilaten-Geta Fessuh Woldegiorgis, chief adviser to Shum Agame Woldu and Dej. Subagadis; Dej. Ayele Sebhat, renowned patriot and diplomat; his brother Lij Gebrezgi Sebhat, who was martyred while fighting the fascist invaders; Abba Tesfaselassie Wodegherima, who translated the Fetha-Negest to French, etc.  

Hence, the EPRDF authorities’ statement that “Ethiopia has been awarded all the territory it has claimed in its dispute with Eritrea” is wrong according to the Boundary Commission’s document and the attached maps. If the authorities had claimed only what they received, that would be even worse. 

As we consistently have informed the Ethiopian public and other concerned parties, both on the community and individual levels, there is no justification for compromising the Irobland. Irob is protected even from the defunct treaties that have been capriciously used for the delimitation. The Irob case had been solved when the Ethiopian and Italian border commissions agreed, during their unfinished demarcation endeavor, to leave the entire Irob district to Ethiopia in 1904, thanks to the determination of Irob and other Agame leaders of the time. The Ethio-Eritrean Boundary Commission is aware of this fact. Note, for example, page 39, Sec. 4.29 of the Commission’s document among others:

“Ethiopia also draws attention to persistent confusion after 1900 over the location of the river designated “Muna.” Thus Ethiopia notes that: (i) Ciccodicola, the principal Italian negotiator, recorded in 1903 that “the Endeli, a tributary of the Muna, [had been] designated to him [i.e., Emperor Menelik] as waters of the Muna,” and that it was on that basis that the Emperor had signed the 1900 Treaty; (ii) in January 1904 the Italian Governor of Eritrea noted in his diary that “[o]ur mistake is to have confused it [the Muna] with the Endeli,” a confusion which Ethiopia suggests shows that the Parties intended the boundary to follow the northernmost branch of the Endeli system, thereby leaving the Irob district to Ethiopia; (iii) the Italian Boundary Commission of 1904 (the “1904 Commission”) was unable to find a river clearly identified as the “Muna,” observing that it was referred to by many other names – but not including “Muna” – in various stretches along its course, and expressed considerable uncertainty in its attempt to identify the Berbero Gado as the river corresponding to the “Muna”; and (iv) an Italian writer, Captain Mulazzini, in “Geography of the Colony of Eritrea,” in 1904 described the boundary (going westwards) as following the upper Endeli to just short of Senafe and then turning sharply southeast down to “the Mai Muna, also known as the Ruba Enda Dascin, which it crosses and then continues towards the Belesa and the Mareb – thus identifying a line broadly consistent with this part of Ethiopia’s claim line. Indeed, Ethiopia even argues that at the time of the Treaty, there was no river in the area known as the Muna” (emphasis ours).

We selected the above-cited passage not because it is the best, and by no means the only one, to demonstrate the incontestability of Irob; but because it is in the Commission’s report. In fact, there are so many other evidences that prove that the Irobland and people can never be part of Eritrea, historically or legally, and that there is no coherent logic to the current delimitation.

Why then did the Commission decide to delimit the boundary of that area using the river that flows eastwards starting south of Zalambessa despite the fact that the Italian writer of the time identifies the so-called Muna with Ruba Enda Dascin (Dashim)? On what basis did they determined the Muna to be the stream south of Zalambessa instead of Enda Dashim River, which starts around Barachit? By the way, one of the tributaries of Enda Dascim River is called Guna-Guna. Mulazzini said: “the Mai Muna, also known as the Ruba Enda Dascin…” Here, it looks like Mulazzini throws light onto which river could have been confused with the so-called Muna. Thus, the pseudonym “Muna” may have arisen because of mispronunciation or misspelling by exchanging the letter G with M. Would it not be more logical to go with Guna than going all the way south of Zalambessa to rename another stream by the pseudonym if they had to? On what basis did they offer the entire northern part of Irob to Eritrea by creating an inappropriate, unjustified and illogical line from Point 23 to Point 26, while their finding clearly states that the parties during the colonial time agreed that the Irob district remains Ethiopian and that its border goes up to the upper end of the Endeli River to just short of Senafe?

We are astonished to find out that the justification to hand over Northern and Western Irob to Eritrea was based on the Ethiopian government’s inability to present its case. The Commission’s report reads: “…the impact of Ethiopian administrative activity has been weaker, and the impact of Eritrean activity stronger, in Northern and Western fringes of the Endeli projection¹, and that therefore Ethiopia has not established its effective sovereignty to the required degree over those areas. The treaty line should therefore be varied so as to place only the more southerly and easterly parts of the Endeli projections in Ethiopia” (Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission Decision, p. 54).

What happened to the tax revenue, census, and the names of local authorities that administered the area that had been kept in Mekelle and other administrative centers that have been available even to individual researchers? Is the Ethiopian government really unable to demonstrate Ethiopia’s sovereignty over the Irob region? It is unbelievable! If true, how ridiculous! It is the area were the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) itself, which is the main component of current government, had bases and was very active when it was waging guerilla war against the military regime. After it came to power in 1991, it ruled the area till the time of the Eritrean invasion and the following two-year occupation. It also continued to administer the region after the Eritrean Army had been expelled, thanks to the Ethiopian heroic defense forces. Is the Commission referring to that period when it says “…the impact of Eritrean activity [was] stronger…?” Is it then approving the invasion and condoning the changing of the border by force? Give us a break! Otherwise, no Eritrean movements or authority had ever been active in the area before or after that period. On the contrary, all main Ethiopian opposition groups like EPRP, which had its main base there and EDU, besides the TPLF, were all active in the region.

Another thing we would like to point out is that the Eritreans never claimed the area before they invaded it in 1998. None of the Irob people participated in the referendum of 1993 that made the Eritrean separation official.

We reiterate that the outdated colonial treaties that have been the basis for the Ethio-Eritrean crisis cannot affect the Irob thanks to our forefathers’ farsightedness. They urged the Ethiopian and the Italian border commissions of the time to settle the matter before it was too late: “The 1904 Italo-Ethiopian border commission (in which the Ethiopian delegation was headed by Dejach. Gebre Selassie) constituted to determine the position of the Irob had failed to satisfy the Italians who wanted to draw a border line bringing the Irob within their colony as part of Akleguzay. The Agame chiefs, including Ras Sebhat, protested that the Irob have always been part of Agame. The Irob thus remained inside Ethiopia…(emphasis ours)" (Ethiopian Review, April, 1995, p 26).

On what basis, then, did the Commission determined to place parts of the Irobland in Eritrea after the findings clearly demonstrate that the parties had agreed to “leave the Irob district to Ethiopia,” to use the Commission’s wordings? The Irobs have been Ethiopians since time immemorial, paid taxes to and litigated their court cases in Tigray since ancient times up to the present.

Hence, we request, as concerned citizens, that the Ethiopian government be candid and prove that the above-mentioned villages remain within the Ethiopian territory. We also call on the Commission to make inquiries into this matter and rectify its decision.

Before we conclude, we would like to point out that if the whole purpose of the Commission is to make peace between the Ethiopians and Eritreans, what has been decided now is worse than the colonial legacy that has become the cause of the Eritrean separation from its motherland and subsequent destructive war instigated by the Eritrean government in1998. In our opinion, the Ethiopians and the Eritreans inhabiting that area would more peacefully cohabitate if the Commission had approved the traditional borderlines that they are used to. In fact, they were living in harmony before the current debacle was provoked by the Eritrean Government’s invasion.

There cannot be peace in the region by ceding to Eritrea heavily populated ancient and historical Ethiopian territories with ancient religious centers. Simply, the people will never accept it. If Eritrea opted for separation from Ethiopia because the Eritrean people wanted it, if so, let it be. However, Eritrea has to go with what belongs to it and with those who want to be Eritreans. Leave alone those who have been always part of the rest of Ethiopia and consistently demonstrated their determination to remain Ethiopians.

The two governments and the Commission have not taken into consideration tens of thousands of the people inhabiting the so-called contested areas. Dealing on the land, totally ignoring the aspirations and future consequence of the people is a crime against humanity. Forcing people to change their identity and citizenship, or in the alternative, expelling an entire population from their land, making them leave behind everything they rely on for survival, is the most horrible criminal act. No one should have the right to dictate the citizenship or nationality of a people, or force them to be landless refugees by granting their land to others without any valid justification. The Irob militia and people, and tens of thousands of Ethiopian defense forces have paid heavy sacrifices to save their people and land that had been passed to them by the sacrifice and martyrdom of their ancestors. They did not pay these sacrifices in vain. The Irob people and the rest of the Ethiopian people will continue to fight for what is rightfully theirs, as they have done during the years of Eritrean occupation and through out history.

After four years of agony and destruction, the Irob, like all other Ethiopian victims of the invasion, were expecting justice from The Hague. Instead, they heard the horrid news of their fate from the Commission.

We hold responsible the EPRDF government for accepting such a decision and the Parliament for not practicing its right to override such an unpatriotic and unconstitutional imposition on the Ethiopian people. According to the Ethiopian Constitution, it is the government’s duty to “observe international agreements which insure for Ethiopia’s sovereignty and are not contrary to the interests of its people” ( Art. 86).

We request that the Ethiopian government protest the unfair decision before the thirty day time frame allotted to the parties by the Commission expires.

We call upon the Eritrea-Ethiopia Border Commission to rectify the unsubstantiated and illegal decision imposed on the Irob people before the upcoming demarcation begins.

Irob Community in North America 

¹ Endeli projection in the report stands for the Irob region.

Back to main page!