The Bad News Over Badme: Why Ethiopia Won’t Back Down on The Eritrean Border

Read Mike Woldemariam’s, assistant professor at Boston University, new post at African Arguments about the origins of the simmering conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Mike argues that the conflict between the fraternal parties ruling in Ethiopia and Eritrea traces its origins to the sense of betrayal felt by each party, as well as, differing recollections of the ways in which Eritrea’s partition was won.

http://africanarguments.org/2012/05/23/the-bad-news-over-badme-why-ethiopia-won%E2%80%99t-back-down-on-eritrean-border-by-michael-woldemariam/

For several years, combat along the tense Eritrean-Ethiopian frontier has been entirely rhetorical. This changed on March 16th, 2012 when the Ethiopian government boldly announced that it had crossed into Eritrean territory in an attack on three military installations. Citing Asmara’s role in the January death and abduction of European tourists in Ethiopia’s Afar region, Ethiopia’s retaliation  represented the first direct military confrontation between Eritrea and Ethiopia since the 1998-2000 border war.

Coincidentally, these events came one month before the 10th anniversary of the delimitation decision of the Eritrean Ethiopian Boundary Commission. The EEBC was the product of the Algiers Accord, which formally ended the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by referring the border dispute to arbitration. The EEBC’s findings should have been the final chapter in the bloody border row between the two countries, but instead, gave the dispute new momentum.  The crux of the problem was that Ethiopia rejected the EEBC’s decision when it realized that Badme, the small piece of disputed territory that triggered the border war, and which it had acquired at a high human cost, had been awarded to Eritrea. Addis later accepted the decision “in principle,” but demanded negotiations on the normalization of relations before it would permit the disputed border to be demarcated (and return Badme to Eritrea).

Bluster or War: Interpreting the Escalating Sudan-South Sudan Conflict

By Alden Young

Looking at events since January 2012, it has at times been hard to tell if we are witnessing a simple pricing dispute or a total divorce between the newest neighbors in northeast Africa.

There is some truth to Alex De Waal’s recent statement at the Royal Africa Society that “it all looked so good just over a year ago.”[1] A year ago there was a euphoria of independence, but few hard decisions had been made about the future relationship of the Republic of Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan. Omar al-Bashir, and a cadre of his close associates within the National Congress Party, surely believed that they would be rewarded with a peace dividend for their decision to allow the South to progress smoothly towards independence; while, the leaders and people of South Sudan, nestled securely within the warm glow of international applause celebrating the victory of their liberation struggle, undoubtedly believed that the exercise of sovereignty was the first step on a long journey towards a better standard of living and national self-respect. Continue reading

What Does UNSC 2023 Mean for Eritrea?

In early December of last year, the UN Security Council passed a resolution strengthening existing sanctions on the State of Eritrea. UNSC 2023, which passed by a vote of 13-0 with two abstentions, was the direct outcome of a scathing report published by the UN’s Somalia Monitoring Group in July of 2011. The report chronicled, in some detail, the full gambit of Eritrea’s destabilizing activity in the Horn of Africa, including Eritrea’s material assistance to Somalia’s Al-Shabaab.

Critics of the resolution have focused their attention on the veracity of the SMG’s claims, and by extension, the fairness of the UNSC 2023. While the truth of Eritrea’s activity in the HOA remains difficult to discern, it is clear that the UNSC resolution was somewhat arbitrary: Al-Shabaab has a number of external supporters, of whom Eritrea is likely the most marginal. But the discussion of “fairness” is beside the point, as such principles, though often invoked in international politics, are rarely of consequence. Power matters on the international stage, and for Eritrea, it is a commodity in short supply. Continue reading

Qatar increases its role as a pivotal investor in Sudan

Qatar has signed new trade and investment deals with the Sudanese government in a wide variety of fields. Qatari investors have shown a particular interest in the real estate sector, mineral/mining sectors, agricultural sector and infrastructure construction. Qatari investment in Sudan currently stands at approximately $ 1 billion dollars, but the World Bank estimates that this investment may soon rise to nearly $ 4 billion dollars. Rising Qatari investment will be particularly decisive in the Sudanese manufacturing and agricultural sectors.

ولم يستبعد الطيب ارتفاع حجم الاستثمارات القطرية إلى نحو 4 مليارات دولار أميركي، متوقعا في الوقت ذاته أن تلعب استثمارات قطر دورا محوريا خاصة في قطاعات الزراعة والصناعة

http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F2C87B28-1E96-46B8-9B74-49DF6AFD2E45.htm?GoogleStatID=9

Qatar in the Horn of Africa: What Type of Regional Power is the Emirate?

Can a statelet be a regional power? Does size or population matter if a state possesses wealth? And if not at the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century, what are the sources of power and authority in the international system? Have we entered a world where even a lonely city-state can leverage the resources necessary to shape regional or global events?

The strange rise of Qatar as a regional actor has restored to center stage questions about the types of power that different kinds of actors can marshal within the international system.

Continue reading