Category: Politics

Mr. President,

Eritrea is taking the floor in explanation of vote after the vote on the draft resolution A/ES-11/L1

• Eritrea firmly believes that respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence, as enshrined in the United Nations Charter, are sacrosanct principles and should be respected by everyone, at all times, for the attainment of sustainable world peace.

• Eritrea’s vote is a demonstration of its uncompromising stand for peace. Its position is against internationalizing, incessant rhetoric, and impositions of unilateral sanctions, which regrettably further polarize international relations and escalate the situation with enormous implications for civilians. Instead, we have consistently opted for world regions to be given the needed space and solidarity to address political problems.

• The situation between Russia and Ukraine raises serious concern with political, economic and security ramifications for Europe and the rest of the world. It requires immediate resolution by giving more chances to diplomacy. We hope that the ongoing talks between the two parties on the Belarusian border yield a quick and acceptable agreement to stop the war and pave a foundation for peace in the region.

• Eritrea opposes all forms of unilateral sanction as illegal and counterproductive. Eritrea, as a country that has been subjected to such measures by the West for two decades, including new sets of unilateral measures, understands that sanctions do not resolve problems of peace and security. On the contrary, they only hurt innocent people and undermine the road to peace.

• It will be remiss if I don’t address disturbing reports that African citizens living in Ukraine are facing difficulties to cross the borders. We call on all countries to facilitate safe passages to people fleeing for safety regardless of their racial identity.

• Let me conclude by reiterating that Eritrea would like to see that the windows for diplomacy remain open. We are confident of the ability of the parties to resolve their differences and reach an outcome that meets the interests and concerns of all. We hope that the international community constructively supports the parties in their search for sustainable peace.

I thank you!

Source: Ministry of Information Eritrea

WASHINGTON — Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, long friendly with Moscow, took pains Thursday to explain to his ruling party and government why his administration joined dozens of other countries in co-sponsoring this week’s U.N. resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“We do not support the use of force and readiness to use force or the threatened use of force,” he said in an audio message that also expressed the hope that Russia would “understand” his decision.

He said that Cambodia could not remain silent as Russia countered the Southeast Asian nation’s own policies and “the situation in Ukraine worsens,” according to a transcript of the message released to the public by the office of the spokesperson of the Royal Government of Cambodia on Thursday night.

Hun Sen also said his government was working to address the crisis within the framework of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, of which Cambodia is chair this year.

“We are in discussions with other ASEAN members to issue a statement calling for a cease-fire, because without a cease-fire, human life and property will continue to die and be destroyed, making negotiations impossible,” he said. “We must, therefore, decide to call for a cease-fire, which is desirable for negotiations to find a solution. This is on behalf of ASEAN.”

Hun Sen said that Cambodia needed to act within the framework of Cambodia’s own policies, as well as those of ASEAN.

Nearly 100 countries co-sponsored the resolution, which was introduced in the General Assembly after Russia vetoed a similar motion at the U.N. Security Council last week.

Of the 193 U.N. member states, 181 countries voted on the resolution Wednesday. Among them, 141 countries supported the resolution condemning Moscow. Five countries — Russia and its allies Belarus, Syria, North Korea and Eritrea — opposed it. Thirty-five countries abstained, including China, a close ally of Cambodia’s; India; and ASEAN members Vietnam and Laos.

Russian troops invaded Ukraine on February 24, bringing the capital, Kyiv, and other cities under siege. More than 1 million Ukrainians have fled to neighboring countries, and if the conflict does not end soon, millions more will be forced to flee Ukraine, according to Filippo Grandi, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees.

Hun Sen, who has been prime minister since 1985, said that many countries were condemning the war in Ukraine, and Cambodia needed to take a clear position. He added that at the request of Japan, France, Germany and the United States, Cambodia decided to co-sponsor the resolution with other countries as a matter of necessity.

Hun Sen added that while he understood the move would anger Russia, Cambodia, as a sovereign state, has the right to act and must “protect the truth.” It also has a responsibility as a U.N. member.

“Hopefully, our Russian friend will understand, because what has been done in the past is contrary to our Cambodian policy on foreign policy, in which we do not support the separation of a state. This is the first point,” Hun Sen said. “Second, we do not support the use of force and readiness to use force or the threatened use of force.”

The U.S. Embassy in Phnom Penh welcomed the statement. “The United States is pleased to see Cambodia and Singapore join us and other nations in co-sponsoring a resolution deploring Russian aggression and demanding an end to its unprovoked war against Ukraine,” it said.

“The resolution was supported by most ASEAN nations. The world is taking action to hold Russia accountable.”

Singaporean Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan on Monday imposed rare unilateral sanctions on Russia, describing the attack on Ukraine as “an unprovoked military invasion of a sovereign state.” Singapore is also an ASEAN member.

The Cambodia National Rescue Party, the exiled opposition party, also condemned the Russian aggression.

“I believe that whenever we see one country invading another, we cannot take a middle position,” CNRP acting President Sam Rainsy told VOA Khmer late Wednesday. “We must condemn the country that invaded” and “help protect” the affected country if possible.

Sam Rainsy also called on democratic countries to stand up for the protection of democracy. He praised the spirit of the Ukrainian people fighting to protect the freedom and sovereignty of the country.

Source: Voice of America

I was hoping to have a nice break. You get tired yelling into a hurricane.

It’s no big secret that the Movement, if we can call it that, has splintered for the moment over how much or how little Abiy’s government is doing to support and protect Afar and Amhara, who are still besieged by terrorists and psychopaths (how severe the disagreements may be is for others to say, and I would humbly suggest we keep our eye on the ball, driving Evil back to its cave, but that’s me). And then there’s the bizarre support by some in our camp of a Russian dictator invading an innocent country. Well, I’ve made a few arguments over that on Twitter and in my speech to the Ethiopian Association of Toronto, but I’m not getting through, and I’ll just say this will come back and bite you in the ass. I promise. And we’ll leave it at that. For now.

I thought, Okay, I’ll shut up for a while because sometimes that’s what good friends do while still being supportive. I’ll go back to working on books, including a new history of Ethiopia, but no… There are idiots popping up again. Happy morons who write and yet don’t seem to read. I have a lot of dome but I can only slap my palm into my forehead so far and so many times. Ugh.

So let’s do this, please, and then I can go back to the Zagwe Dynasty and combing through footnotes and occasionally drooling over my nice new copy of Ethiopia: The Living Churches of an Ancient Kingdom, which my gawd, is so gorgeous and chock full of cool facts, and everybody should get a copy. I will “retire” for a little while. But this —

Can’t let this nonsense pass.

First, let’s talk about the appalling insult and unethical practice of using Jemal Countess’s photo of the TPLF destruction at the museum in Dessie. Yes, it uses Jemal’s caption but nowhere in the article will you find any discussion at all of this incident, which by the way was appalling, and I was there with Jemal and reported on the extensive damage.

The entire article is focused on alleged looting of artifacts from Tigray — for which we still don’t see any compelling evidence of this being a serious problem.

In fact, when a diaspora researcher at the University of Hamburg tried to claim there were photos of alleged plundered antiquities, folks quickly noticed the “antiquities” looked suspiciously like the kind of bric-a-brac stuff you can pick up in ordinary markets or at the airport gift shops.

And where is discussion of how TPLF soldiers parked their artillery near the great churches of Lalibela? The priests there, as Jemal and I discovered, were highly concerned that the concussive booms could have damaged the structural integrity of the buildings, which by the way, make up a UNESCO World Heritage site in its own right.

Where was this concern for heritage when the TPLF threatened Gondar? Once the seat of the Ethiopian empire in the medieval period and home to stunning castle complexes? Or are we supposed to believe that history just stops at the edge of Tigray?

But what drove me to write is the appalling ignorance over Tigray itself in the article, and it seems to be willful ignorance at that, as if the writer Lenin Ndebele took on faith whatever he was told from others and couldn’t bust his ass to do the simplest historical fact checks. He wrote this: “Tigray has a rich footprint of ancient history. It is regarded as one of the earliest ancient world civilisations, the Aksumite Kingdom, which stretched from Tigray to the Middle East around the third and fourth century.”

First of all, No, it is ridiculous to conflate Tigray with Aksum. While yes, Aksum is in what is now modern Tigray, that doesn’t mean the people were Tigrayans. And in fact, the Aksumite Kingdom extended into southern Sudan, Eritrea, a good portion of northern Ethiopia, and all the way to the coast of Djibouti. So to imply that only Tigrayans are the descendants of the Aksumites or have a stake or claim in this ancient culture should be hugely offensive to other Ethiopians and Eritreans.

No, the empire didn’t stretch into the Middle East, which implies conquest, and this is disingenuous to say the least, as the empire’s relationship with most of the Middle East was mainly through trade; what it did conquer was a portion of Yemen. And then there’s this ludicrous line, that Tigray “is regarded as one of the earliest ancient world civilisations” — except it isn’t, because it can’t possibly be.

Because if you’re going to conflate Tigray with Aksum then you should learn that people who actually know what the hell they’re talking about put the real rise of the empire at around 100 BCE. By then, ancient Egypt was thousands of years old. The Assyrians had their ancient empire. Then we can talk about the Greeks, who already had Alexander the Great go up against the Persians a couple of centuries before.

So this statement is incredibly dumb, because the real flourishing of the Aksumites a couple of centuries later made them contemporaries and rivals of Rome. The article can’t even hint at the true zenith or end of the Aksumite empire, casually referring with little apparent reason behind it to the “third or fourth century.”

Aksum, however, went on for centuries after that. One of the most inspiring episodes in Aksumite history comes from the seventh century when King Armah took in the refugee followers of Muhammad, fleeing persecution of Muslims back in Arabia. When the bad guys showed up, trying to persuade him to hand over the Prophet’s group, Armah replied, “If you were to offer me a mountain of gold, I would not give up these people who have taken refuge with me.”

Muhammad was so impressed that even after Armah died, he offered prayers for the king’s soul, and he ordered his followers, “Leave the Ethiopians in peace.”

Note that he referred to them as Ethiopians.

So much for the BS that Aksumites were forerunners of only Tigrayans.

Now there is much to appreciate in the Aksumite culture, and another one of the painfully ignorant statements in that article is this: “Reverential monuments like giant obelisks (also found in Egypt), tombs of various kings, musical notes and literature are found alongside the historical traditions of Tigray.” Again, not the historical traditions of Tigray but of Ethiopia. And to make a fleeting comparison to stelae in Egypt is just downright inaccurate to the point of callous lack of appreciation for what’s right in front of you.

Paul Henze put it this way in Layers of Time:

“Early travelers related the stelae to Egyptian obelisks, but there is no affinity. They have been related to South Arabian architectural styles — e.g. the great mud-brick buildings of the Hadhramawt which rise to eight and ten stories — but there is little real similarity and high mud-brick buildings were not constructed in northern Ethiopia. Stone was too plentiful. The carved stelae are unique [emphasis added].”

To walk near these obelisks, to note their amazing, sculpted doors and windows, is yes, to understand that here was a culture of fascinating ingenuity, but if you’re going to try to shoehorn it into the revisionist propaganda of a terrorist group, try being less lazy about its actual background.

Especially when works are still available on the real deal: scholarship by Henze, Pankhurst, and while the most seminal book on Aksum is now uber-expensive and hard to get, even a bootleg PDF of Stuart Munro-Hay’s Aksum: An African Civilisation of Late Antiquity is floating around (and note the term “late antiquity”).

The problem is this is par for the course. We have idiots online still pushing the fiction that the Battle of Adwa was only a Tigrayan achievement, that it was all the work of Ras Alula and I guess we’ll just forget that Makonnen Wolde Mikael, Haile Selassie’s father, was there, fighting furiously and earning his own legend — because that wouldn’t fit. Never mind all the lying about Menelik, even though we know his movements during the battle almost down to the hour. It’s just easier to spout bullshit than pick up a book.

Robbie Corey-Boulet, with typical malice, tweeted on Wednesday what reads like a peculiar accusation: “Russian flag spotted at this morning’s ceremony commemorating the 1896 Battle of Adwa, in which Ethiopia defeated Italian would-be colonizers.”

Well, one guy with a flag is… what, exactly?

And my support for Ukrainians aside, it would be perfectly natural for a Russian flag to be waved at any Adwa commemorations. Menelik had secured Russian weapons for the battle (and weapons from other countries, including the Italians — “D’oh!”). There were Russian medical missions and the Russian Red Cross in Ethiopia, attending to wounded Ethiopian soldiers. Raymond Jonas points out in his landmark history that the Ethiopians were appalled, in fact, that they wouldn’t take care of the Italians. As Menelik’s minister of justice put it, “Aren’t you whites all brothers?”

So if any nation has earned its right to have its flag next to the tricolor during Adwa celebrations, it’s Russia. All of this could have prompted Corey-Boulet to think twice, but then again, sigh, probably not.

Mere days before, a guy named Paul Massaro, an advisor to Congress, tweeted, “I’m racking my brain for a historical parallel to the courage and fighting spirit of the Ukrainians and coming up empty. How many peoples have ever stood their ground against an aggressor like this? It’s legendary.”

Face palm time again. Instead of racking his brain, he could have used his eyes. On pages. In books. The responses to him were deliciously withering, and yes, someone put in Adwa near the top.

But it’s also depressing. I used to find it demoralizing though understandable that folks had given up on watching or reading the news. But if you give up reading physical books — and reading many books to get multiple viewpoints, instead of quoting just one — and if you only resort to the occasionally toxic teat of the Internet for your understanding of how the world used to be, you’re in big trouble.

I’ve written how historians and journalists have failed Ethiopia through their biases and personal agendas, but my gawd, we have politicians and journalists who can be weaponized by terrorists just through their appalling ignorance.

There is only one way to fight that. Read when the idiots won’t, read what the idiots won’t read, read even more when you think you know enough.

Idiots aren’t humble. And you can only have curiosity if you’re humble, if you realize you don’t know everything. Reading is an active choice. Books offer an empire of knowledge far greater than the mythological realm of “Tigray-Aksum” pushed by a terrorist group, but if you want to enter it, you’ve got to pass through the gates — they’re called covers. You lift the first one and begin.

Source: Dehai Eritrea Online

CAPE TOWN — South Africa chose to abstain Wednesday when the United Nations General Assembly voted on a resolution calling on its BRICS partner, Russia, to withdraw its military forces from Ukraine. South Africa’s U.N. ambassador defended the move, but some South Africans were unhappy with the decision.

South Africa was one of 17 African nations that abstained.

In a statement, South Africa’s U.N. Ambassador Mathu Joyini objected to the phrasing of the resolution, saying it “does not create an environment conducive for diplomacy, dialogue and mediation.”

Political science professor Bheki Mngomezulu said South Africa is also influenced by its historical ties to the former Soviet Union.

“There are a number of South Africans, most of whom are now in government, who trained both in Russia and Ukraine. So, they do have relations with Ukraine. And the majority of the people are of the view that the liberation struggle was supported solely by Russia in terms of these two countries, but the reality of the matter is all the countries that were part of the USSR participated in terms of assisting the liberation struggle not only in South Africa but in Africa in general,” Mngomezulu said.

The main opposition party in South Africa, the Democratic Alliance, released a statement condemning the country’s stance. The party’s shadow minister for international relations Darren Bergman said the party is shocked that South Africa could abstain from such a vote.

“This was an opportune time for South Africa to take a stand and to assert itself on the international stage,” Bergman said.

He said considering how hard South Africans fought to end the racially oppressive system of apartheid and get the right to vote, and how the international community helped them win their fight, they should’ve repaid the favor.

“An abstention or voting for Russia is pretty much the same language. It’s a vote against Ukraine. It’s a vote against peace, and it’s a condonation of the violence that’s currently taking place in Ukraine,” Bergman said.

Other South Africans added their voices to the chorus of disappointment, including analyst Mngomezulu.

“Of course, it doesn’t paint the country in a positive light, more especially because part of South Africa’s foreign policy agenda is to respect human rights, and in this case it’s clear that the human rights of the Ukrainians [have] been affected,” Mngomezulu.

Ronnie Gotkin, who was out for an afternoon stroll in the summer sunshine, said he was outraged.

“I think it’s pretty appalling. It’s not taking a moral stance. I understand that in the real world there are politics and allies, but sometimes morality should trump out,” Gotkin said.

In all, 141 nations voted in favor of the resolution, five nations, including Russia, voted no, and 35 abstained.

Eritrea was the only African nation to vote with Russia.

Source: Voice of America

The humanitarian situation in Ethiopia’s northern region of Tigray is nothing short of abysmal. Atrocities amounting to war crimes have led to the forced displacement of nearly 2.5 million people inside Ethiopia and into neighboring states. The Ethiopian government has blocked virtually all food and medical shipments into Tigray, using food as a weapon of war. With starvation deaths mounting each day and as many as 900,000 people in famine conditions, there are fears that the current situation in Ethiopia will mirror the Great Famine of the 1980s, where over 1 million people starved to death.

Humanitarian actors, desperate to deliver life-saving aid, are unable to access those most in need. Ethiopian authorities are enforcing a communications blackout, and Ethiopian soldiers and rebels are targeting aid workers. Across three regions in Ethiopia, the UN now estimates some 9 million people need food assistance.

The entire population of Tigray and many parts of neighboring Amhara and Afar are suffering greatly. Among these, one vulnerable group is getting lost. Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia have received little attention or assistance despite facing unique risks. They fled one of the worst human rights situations in the world and are now being targeted, killed, kidnapped, tortured, subjected to discrimination, and otherwise abused in Ethiopia. Like Tigrayans, Eritrean refugees are also suffering from the food and medicine blockade.

Neither the Ethiopian state nor any other armed group are protecting Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia. The UN has been unable to guarantee their safety. Indeed, in early 2021, Eritrean troops destroyed two Eritrean refugee camps in Tigray, dispersing approximately 20,000 Eritrean refugees. In January 2022, refugees were killed by airstrikes that hit refugee camps. The UN and other aid actors have routinely been unable to reach the camps for weeks or even months at a time. Put simply, Ethiopia is no longer a safe country for Eritrean refugees.

Broadly speaking, all parties to the conflict need to participate in an inclusive peace process, and the humanitarian blockade of Tigray must be lifted immediately. Neighboring states, the African Union, financing institutions like the World Bank, and other states, including the United States, Turkey, China, and the United Arab Emirates, must push for an immediate ceasefire, full aid access, peace talks, and the respect of human rights for all inside Ethiopia. Fighting groups should never target civilians, including refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs).

Specific to Eritrean refugees, pressure must be brought to bear on Ethiopia to meet its obligation to protect refugees on its territory. Ethiopia should demand that Eritrean troops withdraw from the conflict and not have contact with or attack Eritrean refugees, and the Human Rights Council should investigate human rights abuses and kidnappings of refugees by Eritrean troops and other armed groups.

For its part, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) should reconsider moving refugees to newly erected camps within easy reach of active conflict zones, instead focusing its efforts on helping Eritrean refugees find areas of refuge that provide greater safety, as well as durable solutions to their displacement. Indeed, it should work with donor states like the United States to offer resettlement as quickly as possible to those Eritrean refugees who are of greatest vulnerability and who may be interested in resettlement options. For Eritrean refugees who wish to stay in Ethiopia, UNHCR and Ethiopia should work with all relevant stakeholders to provide safe passage out of conflict zones to other parts of the country, including Addis Ababa. The UN should also work with neighboring states like Sudan and Kenya to prepare to welcome Eritrean refugees trying to leave Ethiopia and unable to find refuge elsewhere.

The tragedy in Ethiopia, and the famine in Tigray in particular, over the last year was described by the UN’s Martin Griffiths as a “stain on our conscience.” Overlooking the needs of some of the most vulnerable caught up in the crisis must not add insult to injury, especially as it is clear that Ethiopia is no longer an adequate refuge for those fleeing Eritrea.

• Context

•Overview of the Conflict and Humanitarian Situation

In November 2020, rising tensions between Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy and Tigrayan regional leadership culminated in an attack by Tigrayan forces on at military base in Tigray. Prime Minister Abiy responded with a military offensive on Tigray, and fighting quickly spiraled to include Tigray’s armed forces, the Ethiopian army, Amharan militia, and Eritrean forces. The fighting remained largely in Tigray, and was accompanied by massacres, torture, kidnapping, widespread rape as a weapon, and the destruction of medical facilities and infrastructure. Banking and telecommunications were blocked, farms destroyed, livestock slaughtered, and a range of other human rights violations occurred over the next eight months. In addition, widespread looting continues to prevent people from receiving desperately needed food and medicine, and a mix of indiscriminate attacks and targeted violence by all parties has led to the deaths of some 25 aid workers over the last year.

In June of 2021, Tigrayan forces recaptured much of Tigray, and then pressed into Amhara and toward Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa. Toward the end of 2021, Ethiopia regained territory with the help of drones from other states, including Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran. Tigrayan forces, perhaps responding to international pressure or in order to regroup, abruptly returned to Tigray and called for immediate humanitarian access. To date, the fighting continues, and Ethiopian forces continue to block access to those in need.

The World Food Program recently reported that its operations would grind to a halt as fuel, funding, and stock are running out. They also report a record 9.4 million people in need of humanitarian food assistance in Ethiopia. Starvation deaths are now being reported with somewhere between 425 and 1,201 people dying of hunger each day. Some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) report that the population–children in particular–are too malnourished to receive vaccines. Other reports depict displaced people eating leaves to survive. And a recent UN report noted an all-time low for food distribution in Tigray: supply stock, including therapeutic nutrition supplies to treat severe acute malnutrition, and fuel have almost entirely been depleted.

Thus far, international actors have been unable to stop the conflict or convince the government of Ethiopia to lift the blockade. For their parts, United Nations and African Union peacemaking efforts have gained little traction, and the United States, EU, and other donor states continue to push for peace talks. Other influential states, like China, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates may also have opportunities to push Ethiopia to end the conflict.

•Eritrean Refugees in Ethiopia

Eritrean refugees are among the most vulnerable populations affected by the atrocities, displacement, and deteriorating humanitarian situation in northern Ethiopia. Hundreds of thousands of Eritreans have sought refuge in Ethiopia in recent decades, and the country currently has some 149,000 Eritrean refugees. They have fled some of the worst human rights conditions in the world. For example, Eritrea ranks even lower than North Korea in the World Press Freedom Index of 2021. Freedom of worship, widespread persecution, forced military conscription, and other widespread rights violations are common. Those who speak out or are even suspected of opposition to government policy have been jailed for years, tortured, executed, and disappeared.

Eritreans who have fled to Ethiopia face similar challenges to refugees from other countries, like South Sudan, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen. Ethiopia hosts 800,000 refugees, one of the largest refugee populations in the world. Most refugees are required to live in the camps, which are jointly run by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and Ethiopia’s Refugee and Returnees Services (RSS) (formerly known as, ARRA, or the Agency for Refugee and Returnee Affairs). Until 2020, very few refugees had the legal right to work.

Before the war, many Eritreans in Ethiopia would migrate to Sudan, and some would travel onward with hopes of reaching Europe via Libya and across the Mediterranean Sea. On these routes, many have been trafficked, tortured, and/or sold into slavery. Of those who remained in Ethiopia, most resided in Tigray, largely due to geography (Tigray borders Eritrea) and cultural and linguistic similarities. Nearly all Eritrean refugees in Tigray were clustered in four camps: Hitsats, Shimelba, Mai Aini, and Adi Harush.

• The Needs of Eritreans Still Inside Tigray and Amhara

•Nowhere to Run

Since the start of the conflict, both Eritrean forces and Tigrayans have targeted Eritrean refugees—the former targeting Eritrean refugees as vengeance for having fled their native country (in many cases to avoid conscription), and the latter as vengeance for the atrocities Eritrean forces have committed against Tigrayans. As Human Rights Watch’s Laetitia Bader indicates, “Eritrean refugees have been attacked both by the very forces they fled back home and by Tigrayan fighters….The horrific killings, rapes, and looting against Eritrean refugees in Tigray are evident war crimes.” Eritrean refugees have also been scapegoated by Tigrayans who have suffered abuses by Eritrean soldiers. And they have been targeted by those wanting to attack Tigrayans, as many speak Tigrinya and may easily be mistaken for Tigrayan Ethiopians.

Some of the fiercest attacks have been carried out by Eritrean troops who crossed into Ethiopia to join the fight. In January 2021, satellite images revealed that Eritrean troops had destroyed the two northern Eritrean camps of Hitsats and Shimelba. These camps were home to approximately 20,000 Eritrean refugees. It was difficult to confirm the state of these camps for weeks and even months, as telecommunications were cut in Tigray, misinformation was common, and the conflict was raging.

The UN was finally able to gain access in March 2021, and confirmed that the camps were completely destroyed, with all occupants “scattered” and all humanitarian facilities “looted and vandalised.” Human Rights Watch reported that these camps were directly targeted by “belligerent Eritrean and Tigrayan forces” who occupied the camps and committed abuses. Most residents are believed to have fled, but some Eritrean refugees were killed, and many more – potentially thousands – were kidnapped back into Eritrea.

Cross-border attacks on camps are not unheard of in many refugee situations, particularly along porous borders with tense security situations and ongoing conflict. However, the wholesale destruction of camps and the large-scale kidnapping from a country of asylum back into the country of origin is quite rare, and certainly cause for alarm. Indeed, Eritrea has taken advantage of the conflict in Ethiopia to settle old scores—and Ethiopia has permitted it. A recent Reuters report describes one kidnapping instance where soldiers detained a group of refugee leaders, pinning their elbows behind their backs and holding them for days in a church. They were then taken away in trucks and have not been heard from since.

• Multiple Displacements, Unsafe Encampment, Lack of Assistance and Protection

Since the destruction of the northern camps of Hitsats and Shimelba that displaced 20,000 Eritrean refugees early in the conflict, and attacks on Eritrean refugees and the civilian population elsewhere in Tigray, thousands more Eritrean refugees have been repeatedly displaced. Some have moved multiple times in Tigray. Others have sought safety in Addis Ababa. In one instance in December 2020, Eritrean refugees who had reached Addis Ababa, were forcibly escorted back to Tigray. To date, aid groups are unclear of what has happened to many of the 20,000 Eritrean refugees who left Hitsats and Shimelba.

Some Eritrean refugees managed to reach other camps. Approximately 5,000 made their way to Mai Aini and Adi Harush camps as of February 2021. However, their situation in these camps remains precarious. Since June 2021, UNHCR and other aid agencies have routinely been cut off from these camps, blocked from delivering food, medicine, and other assistance for weeks or even months at a time. In January 2022, UNHCR issued a statement indicating that its staff had been unable to reach Mai Aini or Adi Harush for three weeks. When UN staff finally reached the camps, they found “refugees scared and struggling to get enough to eat, lacking medicine and with little or no access to clean water.” They highlighted more than 20 preventable deaths due to the lack of medicine and health services.

Attacks have also targeted refugees in the camps. Some faced vengeance attacks by Tigrayans. In a recent airstrike by Ethiopian force, three refugees in Mai Aini – two of whom were children – were killed. Even last July, UNHCR raised the alarm about the safety of Eritreans in camps in Tigray, citing concern that 24,000 Eritrean refugees in Mai Aini and Adi Harush faced intimidation, harassment and were cut off from assistance. And in February 2022, thousands of Eritrean refugees fled Barahle Camp in Afar region after the camp was attacked and refugees killed and kidnapped.

Despite these dangers, UNHCR is working with the Ethiopian government to build new shelter and camps for Eritrean refugees near Dabat and Alemwach in the Amhara region. Some refugees approve of this relocation, if only because they are desperate to get out of harm’s way. However, many others do not feel they will be safe anywhere in Ethiopia, let alone in these camps. Eritrean refugees are commonly mistaken for or associated with Tigrayans, who face threats and discrimination across Ethiopia. Or they are associated by vengeful Tigrayans with Eritrean soldiers, who have been implicated in massacres, mass rape, and other abuses in Tigray. Host Tigrayan communities that had lived peacefully with Eritrean refugees for years now fear that Eritrean refugees cannot be trusted.

• The Needs of Eritreans in Sudan

While most Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia are believed to have remained in the country since the violence began in November 2020, some have fled to Sudan, joining a larger, older caseload of Eritrean refugees there. The newly arrived Eritrean refugees are among some 55,000 Ethiopian refugees who made their way into Sudan in the early months of the conflict. Over 2021, the border between Ethiopia and Sudan became increasingly difficult and dangerous to cross and rising tensions stemming from longstanding grievances between Ethiopia and Sudan make it dangerous for refugees to flee to safety. In addition, Sudan’s coup in October 2021 and its aftermath have added financial and political strains, with potential impacts on its overall capacity to assist refugees.

In the early months of the conflict, Sudan received praise for its relative openness, despite already hosting a protracted refugee population of some 1 million people from various countries in the region. However, by June 2021, donors were raising concerns about the response by international organizations, taking the rare step of sending a letter to UNHCR to express frustration over a “lack of leadership and failing to act on prior donor warnings about gaps and delays in providing aid.”[1] They cited a range of concerns for newly arriving refugees in Sudan, including risks of trafficking, armed recruitment, and sexual violence. The New Humanitarian Africa Correspondent and Editor

Philip Kleinfeld’s exclusive reporting on the matter cited senior aid officials in the camps as decrying a response that was “…the worst they had seen in their careers.”

Some of the concerns related to hasty efforts to find suitable sites for camps – a common struggle in any emergency displacement setting. The sites of Sudan’s more recently established camps, particularly Um Rakuba and Tunaydbah, are prone to weather risks, including severe storms, flooding, windstorms, and other hazards. A Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) report highlights that one camp was built on “black cotton” soil that is hard and cracks during the dry season and becomes wet, sticky, and muddy during the rainy season.

Many have chosen to seek a life elsewhere, rather than languish in camps. One refugee, discussing others he knew who left for Libya stated, “They know the danger. I tried to tell them many times, but we cannot blame them. Look at this place—they go out of pure despair.” Indeed, many risk the dangers of smugglers and traffickers who are well-known to eastern Sudan, and profit heavily from desperate migrants and refugees trying to get to northern African and Europe. Reports indicate a threefold increase in smuggling since the start of the war. Eritrean refugees and others smuggled and trafficked have long been subjected to rape, torture, extortion, enslavement and detention, and in recent years reports of kidnapping refugees and trafficking them have been reported by the UN and rights groups. And among those that do reach northern Africa, many die trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea in attempts to get to Europe.

Some of those who are smuggled or trafficked, including Eritrean refugees, are children who were separated during the conflict. Many still do not know what has happened to family members they lost during the fighting. While aid agencies have conducted family reunification where possible, unaccompanied minors are particularly vulnerable to trafficking and smuggling. Indeed, the trafficking route from eastern Sudan to northern Africa is a common and dangerous pathway for Sub-Saharan Africans trying to reach Europe.

• Conclusion

True protection of civilians, including refugees in Ethiopia, will come only with the cessation of hostilities, lifting of barriers to humanitarian aid, and engagement in meaningful and inclusive dialogue. Any sustainable peace will also need to include measures of accountability for atrocities that have taken place. States with influence, including those in the region, as well as the United Arab Emirates, China, Turkey, the European Union, and the United States must press Ethiopia to pursue that path to peace. In the meantime, these actors, working with UNHCR, must take steps to ensure that those among the most vulnerable, including Eritrean refugees, have some path to safety. Ethiopia’s allowance of Eritrean troops to operate in Ethiopia, direct attacks on refugees, and blocking of humanitarian assistance to refugee camps makes Ethiopia an unsuitable place for Eritrean refugees to access their rights, seek refuge, and find durable solutions to their displacement.

Recommendations

The Government of Ethiopia must:

• Cease committing atrocities, end its humanitarian blockade, and uphold its obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law.

• Provide protection and assistance to refugees on its territory, in accordance with its domestic law and international laws and never target refugees, IDPs, or other civilians during conflict.

• Work with international humanitarian organizations to undertake concerted efforts to find and offer protection to Eritrean refugees who may be missing within Ethiopia.

• Work with UNHCR and IOM to provide for Eritreans who wish to stay in Ethiopia safe passage out of conflict zones to other parts of the country, including Addis Ababa.

• Acknowledge the ongoing presence of Eritrean troops and demand that Eritrean troops withdraw from the conflict and Ethiopian territory.

> The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) should:

• Make a concerted effort to find and offer protection to missing Eritrean refugees.

• Work with the Ethiopian government to avoid establishing camps where there is no reasonable expectation that they will offer acceptable levels of safety and protection. Consult more widely with refugees on their views on safety and the building of new camps and solicit guarantees from the Ethiopian government that camps will not be targeted.

• Focus its efforts on helping Eritrean refugees find other durable solutions to their displacement, including working with other countries to quickly pursue resettlement options for those in Ethiopia who are most vulnerable.

• Work with Ethiopia and all relevant stakeholders to provide for Eritreans who wish to stay in Ethiopia safe passage out of conflict zones to other parts of the country, including Addis Ababa.

> The United States government should:

• Work with the UN and other states to demand a halt to violence and the humanitarian blockade, supporting national dialogue and the provision of aid to all regions, including Tigray, Amhara, and Afar.

• Support accountability for grave human rights abuses by Ethiopia, Eritrea, and armed groups in Tigray and other regions, including through a Human Rights Council’s investigations of kidnappings of refugees by Eritrean troops and armed groups and through a public U.S. atrocity determination.

• Include Eritrean refugees among its priority groups for urgent processing and resettlement, and resettle a significant and substantial number of Eritrean refugees.

> Neighboring states such as Sudan and Kenya should:

• Prepare to welcome Eritrean refugees who are trying to leave Ethiopia and are unable to find refuge elsewhere, abiding by domestic and international obligations to provide protection to refugees.

•Establish coordination bodies between civil society, the UN, NGOs, and local and national government officials in Sudan to work to prevent human trafficking of refugees (Eritreans and others) and other vulnerable groups in eastern Sudan.

While the world hopes for peace, the conflict in Ethiopia rages on, threatening to tear the country apart. Widespread displacement, ongoing human rights violations, and a humanitarian blockade has resulted in one of the today’s worst humanitarian crises. Within this crisis, Eritrean refugees have been left with nowhere to run inside Ethiopia. They have been targeted and starved alongside their hosts and remain vulnerable to additional attacks from all of those party to the conflict. Put simply, Eritrean refugees are no longer safe in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian government must immediately work with the UN, donors, NGOs, and Eritrean refugees themselves to ensure that these refugees can find greater safety within Ethiopia, more secure refuge in neighboring countries, and the durable solution of resettlement.

[1] Donors who signed the letter included ambassadors from Canada, Germany, Norway and Switzerland, and officials from the UK, US, and EU. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/2021/07/07/exclusive-donors-accuse-un-mismanaging-tigray-refugee-response

Source: Dehai Eritrea Online

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Wednesday and called for its troops to immediately and completely withdraw, as Moscow’s military bore down on several Ukrainian cities with airstrikes and troops.

Of the 193 member states, 181 participated in the vote. Of those, 141 countries supported the resolution condemning Moscow and five were against it – including Russia and a tiny group of its allies — Belarus, Syria, North Korea and Eritrea. Thirty-five countries abstained, but their numbers do not affect the two-thirds majority needed for adoption.

“The vote is a powerful message to the Russian Federation,” Ukraine’s U.N. Ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya told reporters.

Nearly 100 countries co-sponsored the measure, which mimics in tone the one that Russia vetoed in the Security Council last Friday, prompting the move to the General Assembly.

“The message of the General Assembly is loud and clear,” U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told reporters. “End hostilities in Ukraine — now. Silence the guns — now. Open the door to dialogue and diplomacy — now.”

The European Union has worked hard to unify its 27 members and the rest of the international community against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression.

“The Russian government stands increasingly alone. The world has stated that it must immediately stop the aggression, withdraw its troops, and abide by the rules of the U.N. Charter,” European Union Ambassador Olaf Skoog said after the vote. “Russia has chosen aggression. The world has chosen peace.”

From Kyiv, Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskyy welcomed the vote on Twitter, thanking those who voted in support of Ukraine and saying that they chose “the right side of history.”

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield appealed to nations ahead of the vote.

“Now, at more than any other point in recent history, the United Nations is being challenged,” Thomas-Greenfield said. “If the United Nations has any purpose, it is to prevent war, it is to condemn war, to stop war. That is our job here today. It is the job you were sent here to do — not just by your capitals, but by all of humanity.”

The resolution “condemns” the February 24 declaration by Russia of a “special military operation” in Ukraine, and “deplores in the strongest terms” Moscow’s violation of Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter which says members shall refrain from “the threat or use of force against territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”

Kyslytsya told the international community that his country is fighting for its life against Russia’s military machine.

“They have come to the Ukrainian soil not only to kill some of us, not only to shift our cause and priorities, they have come to deprive Ukraine of the very right to exist,” he told the assembly.

Russia intensifies offensive

It appeared unlikely the international condemnation would do much to change Moscow’s calculus, as its offensive intensified Wednesday and civilians continued to flee to the borders seeking safety. The U.N. refugee agency estimates more than 874,000 people have fled Ukraine this week and says it is contingency planning for up to 4 million refugees.

“The aim of our special operation is announced on the basis of Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, and will be achieved,” Russia’s envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, said ahead of the vote. “However, we are not carrying out strikes on civilian facilities and civilians. Don’t believe fakes spread around the internet on this.”

Nations take a stance

The overwhelming majority of nations that took to the podium in the general assembly this week expressed support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. Many called for the reversal of Putin’s decision to recognize two pro-Russian breakaway regions of Ukraine as independent states, as well as outrage that he has placed Russia’s nuclear forces on alert.

“Russia’s war marks the dawn of a new era. It’s a watershed moment,” German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock told the meeting on Tuesday. “Yesterday’s certainties are gone. Today, we face a new reality that none of us chose. It is a reality that President Putin has forced upon us.”

A series of smaller countries from all parts of the world offered a chorus of support for the resolution and the Ukrainian people.

“Antigua and Barbuda fully support the resolution that is before the house and we call on all members, especially small island states, to recognize that this is protecting the principles of the [U.N.] Charter'” Ambassador Walton Webson said during Tuesday’s debate. “Might is not right.”

“This is not a peacekeeping mission, but a war of aggression,” Micronesia’s ambassador emphasized, referring to a claim by Russian officials. “It is clear beyond any doubt who is the aggressor and who is the victim.”

Ambassador Jane Chigiyal added that Micronesia has severed its diplomatic relations with Moscow.

“In the eternal and inspiring worlds of Bob Marley: Let us get up, stand up, stand up for the rights of all the people of Ukraine because today we are all Ukraine,” Jamaica’s envoy said.

Myanmar, which is still represented at the United Nations by the ambassador of the pre-military coup junta, expressed solidarity with the people of Ukraine. Russian arms sent to the Myanmar military are fueling that country’s instability and conflict.

“The people of Myanmar are facing similar suffering resulted from the inhumane acts, atrocities, crimes against humanity committed by the Myanmar military,” Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun said Wednesday.

Russian supporters scarce

Moscow could not even muster support from some of its closest allies like Serbia, which voted to condemn the military offensive.

Other countries that traditionally align with Moscow, including China, Iran, Nicaragua, Cuba and Pakistan, chose to abstain in the vote. But Russia did have a handful of supporters.

Belarus has aided Russia’s invasion, allowing it to amass troops in its territory and to launch missiles and forces from its territory into northern Ukraine.

“We categorically reject accusations against Belarus that we are involved in unlawful use of force against Ukraine,” Ambassador Valentyn Rybakov said.

He said his president, Alexander Lukashenko, is “sparing no efforts” to get the two sides to talk. Reports say a second round of talks is expected to take place Thursday in a Belarussian border town between Russian and Ukrainian delegations.

Moscow has given military support to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s regime and civil war since 2015. At the general assembly, the Syrian envoy said the draft resolution is a “flagrant political hypocrisy.”

Russia has also tried to get international sanctions on North Korea for its illicit nuclear program eased and lifted. Pyongyang reciprocated at the general assembly by blaming the Ukraine situation on the United States.

Uniting for peace resolution

The General Assembly met this week under what is known as the Uniting for Peace resolution. It allows special meetings of the entire membership to be called when the U.N. Security Council is deadlocked on an issue and cannot exercise its mandate to maintain or restore international peace and security — in this case, because of Russia’s veto last Friday of a similar resolution.

Although the council has historically been divided on many issues, Uniting for Peace has been invoked fewer than a dozen times since it was adopted in 1950, according to the Security Council Report, which tracks U.N. meetings. The last time was 40 years ago, in 1982, concerning Israel.

Source: Voice of America

Nationals residing in Italy contributed a total of 250 thousand 650 Euro to the Eritrean community resilience programs.

According to the Public and Community Affairs Office, nationals in Abruzzi contributed 5 thousand 550 Euro, nationals in Bologna 26 thousand 300 Euro, nationals in Bari 10 thousand 950 Euro, Nationals in Brescia 1 thousand 900 Euro, nationals in Firenze 21 thousand 800 Euro, nationals in Genoa 1 thousand 200 Euro, nationals in Catania 7 thousand 300 Euro, nationals in Milan 92 thousand 950 thousand, nationals in Napoli 10 thousand 100 Euro, nationals in Parma 6 thousand 350 Euro, nationals in Pisa 3 thousand 700 Euro, nationals in Pistoia 2 thousand 100 Euro, nationals in Palermo 3 thousand 200 Euro, nationals in Rome 45 thousand 350 Euro, nationals in Verona 4 thousand 700 Euro, and nationals in Torino contributed 7 thousand 200 Euro.

Likewise, the National Union of Eritrean Women branch in Italy conducted a virtual activity assessment meeting on 20 February in which heads branches and sub-branches from the Italian cities of Genoa, Milano, Brescia, Parma, Bologna, Pizza, Pistoia, Roma, Napoli, Teramo, Pescara, Catania and Firenze took part.

The participants of the meeting conducted extensive discussion on the reports presented and on charted out action plan for 2022.

At the meeting, the Ambassador of Eritrea to Italy Mr. Fessehatsion Petros gave extensive briefing on the objective situation in the homeland as well as on the developments unfolding in the prevailing new era.

The chairwoman of the National Union of Eritrean Women branch in Italy, Ms. Nigisti Tsegay on her part expressed the readiness of the members of the union in cooperation with national associations and organizations to reinforce participation in the national development and resilience programs as ever.

Source: Ministry of Information Eritrea