The TPLF Aggression Against Eritrea – a Rejoinder to Reinhardt Jacobsen’s Article

Opinions News
TPLF Aggression
To Reinhardt Jacobsen: The first step in solving any problem is to recognizing there is one. The unresolved border demarcation, the occupation of sovereign Eritrean territory and the imposition of illegal sanctions are and none requires the redeployment of UN peacekeepers to get resolved.

By H.H. Gaber,

First and foremost this thoughtless and naked aggression by the minority regime of Ethiopia should be condemned by all peace loving and conscientious people all over the world. Causing loss of life and destruction wilfully and contemptuously is an act that should be condemned in the strongest possible terms by all. But, this voice should come even more so louder and clearer from those who are engaged in saving the lives of millions of Ethiopians suffering from perpetual hunger and malnutrition.

The minority regime in Ethiopia asks for food assistance for its starving citizens, but has the luxury to shop around for weapons worth millions to create havoc and destruction in the region. Is it not ridiculousness of immeasurable magnitude that lifesaving work is in the hands of NGO’s whereas the minority regime diverts resources to execute its wicked agenda and destroy the lives of people on both sides of the border? What can be more sordid than waging war against a peaceful neighbour while one’s country is a hotbed of hunger? The behaviour of this group defies every imaginable logic.

Even though the sabre- rattling and warmongering rhetoric of the prime minister of the thuggish and brutal minority regime of Ethiopia is in fact a prelude to this aggression, it has been carried out at a time to coincide with hearing in the coming week of the equally abhorrent report of the COIE. The minority regime thought this was the time to pull the rug out. This, the scallywag minority regime believes, will augment its futile regime change agenda. It is this sinister dream and objective that drives the regime to attack peaceful and courageous Eritrea.

Let me now turn to the Mr. Jacobsen’s contribution.

To begin with, Mr. Jacobsen associates the incident with the report of COIE as I have done so above. But what is disconcerting about his report is that it subtly points the finger at Eritrea as a culprit by glazing it with the views of Mirjam van Reisen who goes on harping up her claim that 5,000 Eritreans continue to flee the country every month. This lady is known for her antagonistic views on the government of Eritrea and cannot be taken as an expert witness without bias and with rigorous ethical professional standard as far as Eritrea is concerned. Her contextualization of the illegal migration does not provide meaningful and proper background. As usual it is meant to denigrate the Eritrean government.

Expert witnesses carry the obligation to be fair, truthful and detached so as to provide to the public correct information without any semblance of hidden motive. In simple arithmetic, according to her assertion that if 5,000 people flee every month, it would mean 60,000 a year and more than 1.2 million people may have fled the country since this mystic figure came to light. Stating this made up magical figure is not for nothing. It is a hidden message meant to show Eritrea in bad light and use it as disingenuous decoy to escape from addressing the core issue. Genuine Eritreans know fully well her position on this.

Mr Jacobsen adds selected incriminating lies from the COIE report to make the case for his hidden presumption that the Eritrean government is responsible and therefore the incident is a precursor. His report gives the impression that because of the COIE report, the Eritrean government hatched this border clash as diversionary and distraction tactic vis-à-vis the COIE report hearing. This is a clear assumption on his part that Eritrea is to blame. And this is unethical and woeful journalism to say the least. The bias and impartiality is manifestly clear.

On the contrary, any reference to the minority regime’s attempt of distraction is conspicuously avoided. Virtually there is nothing said in respect of TPLF’s thinking despite the glaring domestic and external problems engulfing the regime. What can be more impartial and biased reporting than this. One can clearly discern the dearth of neutral, objective reporting and a clear violation of the principles and ethics of journalism.

Notwithstanding his selection of the negative and falsified narration from the COIE report, Mr. Jacobsen writes about the unresolved border between the two countries and the work of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission. He is absolutely right to bring this and relate it to the current incident even if nebulously.

However, either by deliberate choice or negligence, Mr. Jacobsen refrains from pointing out the rejection by the minority TPLF regime to unconditionally implement the demarcation process and bring to closure the border dispute as unequivocally framed in the final and binding verdict of the commission and withdraw its forces from sovereign Eritrean territory including the flashpoint town of Badme. There is nothing of this sort none what so ever.

In truth, this unresolved problem held hostage by the TPLF minority regime hidden agenda and its designs has been and continues to be the curse of the region. This is what a genuine and professional journalist and those who claim to be “experts” on the region should have taken and highlight it as the primary cause for the antagonistic relationship between the two countries. Mr. Jacobsen simply glosses over the work of the commission without clearly and objectively bringing out its findings and final and binding verdict. He dwells entirely on the mandate of the commission and remarkably ignores its findings. I do not understand why the gentleman dare not mention the verdict of the commission and its final binding adjudication and recommendations and the subsequent development.

One would conclude from his article that he implies that both countries are guilty for not resolving the border issue whereas in point of fact it is the minority TPLF regime that refused to comply with the requirements of the arbitration. To treat the victim and the perpetrator as equally guilt is beyond comprehension.

Equally, the issue of illegal migration cannot be separated from this unresolved and destabilizing border conflict. Under normal conditions of development, there would have minimum illegal migration and a greater socioeconomic progress would have been achieved to forestall this suicidal illegal migration for which our sorrow is beyond measure.

The illegal migration of Eritreans is greatly predicated on this unresolved border conflict to say the least. Given the prevailing “no war no peace” situation perpetuated by minority TPLF regime and as exemplified by the latest TPLF aggression along the Tserona front, any reasonable person would understand and appreciate that Eritrea has a legitimate national security concern and has no other option but maintain constant vigilance which has required the service of its citizens on exceptional fashion. This prolonged service may drive some to opt for leaving which is economic rather than political as the enemies would want us to believe.

However, more than anything else, the deliberate enticement by those forces that harbour malice and evil intention to weaken Eritrea is at the heart of the illegal migration. In addition to the above unconducive environment, the illegal, falsified and punitive sanction imposed upon the country has been and continues to be a burden preventing her from carrying out its ambitious development objectives.

To conclude, Mr. Jacobsen could have raised the issue of the unresolved border demarcation and the occupation of sovereign Eritrean territory and the imposition of the illegal sanction as critical factors that should be addressed and resolved. The redeployment of the so called UN Peace keeping forces, which Mr. Jacobsen mentions, is a bad idea and would only perpetuate the current stalemate. A legally delineated border does not require exacerbating mechanism which inadvertently prolongs the resolution of the invented problem.