ETHIOPIAN FRUSTRATION WITH THE UNSC OVER THE BORDER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ADDIS ABABA 001285

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/13/2018
TAGS: KPKO PBTS PREL MARR ET ER
SUBJECT: ETHIOPIAN FRUSTRATION WITH THE UNSC OVER THE BORDER


Classified By: Ambassador Donald Yamamoto for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

SUMMARY
--------------


1. (C) Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles met with the UK, French
and U.S. Ambassadors May 9 to state that Ethiopia would
disengage and keep quiet on the Eritrea-Ethiopia border
dispute. Meles said the Ethiopian Government (GoE) had
developed a set of new proposals to break the impasse and
push forward on direct bilateral discussions with Eritrea on
resolution of overall problems and the demarcation of the
border. The UN Security Council (UNSC) meeting on Belgium's
proposals on May 8 so frustrated Meles that he said Ethiopia
had lost faith in the UNSC to act to restore and reaffirm the
Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and the Algiers Accord,
the fundamental agreements guiding the resolution of the
border dispute. Meles said the Belgian proposals allowed
Eritrea to "get away" with undercutting the two agreements
and eliminating the UNMEE Mission. Meles questioned whether
the international community is committed to the two
agreements. If the current situation is acceptable, then
Meles suggested that a new regime -- new agreements -- will
be necessary to resolve the border dispute specifically, and
overall Eritrean-Ethiopian bilateral relations in general.
Meles said he would remain receptive to the UNSC establishing
a military observer mission only in Ethiopia and promoting
normalization talks if the UNSC states clearly how it will
deal with Eritrea's actions forcing the marginalization of
the two agreements and the UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
(UNMEE). End Summary.

ETHIOPIA'S PEACE PROPOSALS
--------------


2. (C) Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles expressed deep
frustration that the UNSC discussed Belgium's proposals to
move the demarcation process forward at the UN on May 8 while
overlooking the two fundamental agreements which guide the
resolution of the problems between Ethiopia and Eritrea,
including the demarcation of the disputed border. Meles said
Ethiopia had developed a package of proposals to break the
impasse clearly based on the Cessation of Hostilities
Agreement and Algiers Accord. Meles noted that Ethiopia was
in favor of establishing a UN military observer mission only
on the Ethiopia side of the border, though Eritrea had
rejected such an idea. Meles also would push for
normalization talks, which was supported by the Witnesses to
the Algiers Accord in 2006. But discussions of the Belgian
proposals is viewed by Ethiopia, Meles argued, as "giving in"
to Eritrea's temper tantrum tactics to undercut and
marginalize the two agreements.


3. (C) Meles expressed deep frustration. He reviewed
Eritrea's unprecedented actions to restrict UN operations
without much criticism or consequences, which now sets a bad
precedent for other countries to restrict UN operations.
Eritrea's ability to throw out UNMEE peacekeepers from
specific countries (U.S., U.K., France, etc.) last year and
now finally throw out UNMEE was unacceptable. Eritrea's
recent incursion into Djiboutian territory, again without
criticism, will only encourage President Isaias to further
undercut the international community, Meles argued.


4. (C) Meles said Eritrea's actions of militarizing the
Temporary Security Zone (TSZ) along the border and taking
over the TSZ have now violated the Cessation of Hostilities
Agreement. He added that Eritrea's refusal to renounce the
use of force to resolve the border dispute adds tensions to
the region. Meles argued that it was Ethiopia that has been
most supportive of the U.N., hinting at Ethiopia's full
participation in peacekeeping operations in Liberia, Cote
d'Ivoire and Darfur. Meles stated that Ethiopia must now
table its package of proposals because without the UNSC
support, Eritrea would only view Ethiopia's actions as a sign
of weakness and President Isaias would not respond positively.

UNSC RESPONSIBILITIES
--------------


5. (C) Meles articulated that the UNSC must restore the
Cessation of Hostilities Agreement by making it clear that

ADDIS ABAB 00001285 002 OF 002


the TSZ must be neutral and that all forces must leave the
TSZ. Most important, violence and the use of force must be
renounced. The UNSC must restore commitment by Eritrea to
the Algiers Accord. Ultimately the parties themselves must
resolve their bilateral differences and implement the
demarcation process. This has been the basis of the two
agreements and numerous UNSC resolutions.


6. (C) Meles said Eritrea has succeeded in eliminating UNMEE.
The only way a UN military observer mission could operate
would be under a separate agreement. It could not be based
on the Algiers Accord, because the UN mission would be only
on one side of the border and the TSZ is now militarized by
Eritrea. Meles emphasized that the UNSC is not the
implementer of the Algiers Accord, but it had taken upon
itself to impose its will by supporting the EEBC. It is up
to the parties to implement the border demarcation decision,
not the UN, Meles stated. The UNSC is authorized to act to
enforce the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement, but the UNSC
has not chosen to enforce this agreement. As a result of the
frustration over the actions and lack of actions by the UNSC,
the GoE will remain quiet and not engage the UNSC on the
border issue, for now, Meles said.


7. (C) Meles cautioned the Ambassadors that Eritrean
President Isaias' recent incursion into Djibouti is very
dangerous if left unchecked. UNSC inaction, thus far, will
only encourage Isaias to push harder and increase tensions in
the region, Meles said. Meles opined that there will not be
war between Eritrea and Ethiopia, but that regional tensions
will increase as a result of Isaias' actions. Finally,
despite the frustration, Meles said Ethiopia still remains
supportive of a UN Military Observation mission to Ethiopia
and holding of normalization talks.

COMMENT
--------------


8. (C) Meles' question as to the international community's
commitment to the Algiers Accord and the Cessation of
Hostilities Agreement is disingenuous. Both Meles and Isaias
agreed to abide by whatever decision the EEBC made. While we
cautioned both parties to consider an appeals process into
the agreements, both refused. Meles has been pushing
dialogue as a means to change the EEBC's final demarcation
decision. We and the Witnesses fully support dialogue, but
only in the context of normalizing relations and discussing
the consequences of demarcation, not adjustment of the EEBC's
decision. Ultimately, any adjustment of the decision must be
made by the parties themselves as it will be up to the
parties to implement the decision.


9. (C) Meles' "package of proposals" echoes the confidence
building proposals that the United States tabled in 2005 to
both Meles and Isaias. At that time, Meles embraced the
proposals and Isaias wanted further discussions. Still, the
proposals can be a useful means to move the process forward,
but cannot -- and must not -- be used as a means to undercut
or revise the two basic agreements of 2000.


10. (C) It would be useful if the UNSC reiterates its support
for the Algiers Accord and Agreement on Cessation of
Hostilities, and emphasizes the parties' responsibilities and
commitments therein. We strongly recommend that Ethiopia not
propose a new "regime" or set of agreements to be negotiated
to determine how to settle the border and the problems
between Ethiopia and Eritrea. This would prove messy, would
raise questions on how we proceed with resolution of the
border, and would mean the end of the Algiers process. End
Comment.
YAMAMOTO