Life goes on after border ruling

For merchant Zenaw Debella it was business as usual. As the dust settled over the crucial border ruling between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the squabbling over who had won began, he was opening his market stall like he does every day. “We just want to go about our work and try and make our lives a little better,” he said on Monday morning from his stall in Addis Ababa's Merkato – Africa’s largest market. “For us the war is over and the border issue is now settled. We just want to see everything get back to normal, like it used to be.” His fellow stallholders nod in agreement. “War does not help anyone. In peacetime we prosper,” one said. “Let’s put it behind us now and work as friends.” Two days earlier, both countries had been on tenterhooks, awaiting the critical decision of the Boundary Commission at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) – an independent panel made up of five judges based in The Hague. Both sides claim victory Ethiopia's ruling coalition, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), was quick to react and claim victory after Saturday's announcement. The Eritrean government's reaction, later in the day, was more muted, but also claimed victory. Eritrea's position, a government statement said, had been vindicated and the peoples of both countries were the winners although "it is the Eritrean people who have emerged most victorious". Both sides claim to have been awarded the controversial area of Badme, where a border dispute in May 1998 turned into a full-scale war that lasted for two years. The results were catastrophic. Around 80,000 people were killed, more than a million were forced from their homes and both countries – two of the poorest on earth – lost millions of dollars in aid. The ruling from the Boundary Commission is aimed at bringing a lasting peace to the region. Both countries have stated their acceptance of the verdict which, as stated in the Algiers peace accord of 2000, is final and binding. But as the judgement was passed, the Ethiopian government did not appear too keen to reconcile with Eritrea under its current president. “Transparency and stability are fundamental for the normalisation of relations,” Ethiopian Foreign Minister Seyoum Mesfin said. “These two fundamental factors do not prevail in Eritrea today. That is why Ethiopia wanted to defer this issue of normalisation of relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea.” “The people of Eritrea were dragged into this war by an irresponsible and dictatorial regime in Asmara against their will," he claimed. “So Eritrea lost the war with Ethiopia and again Eritrea also lost its case." Eritrea meanwhile blamed Ethiopia for declaring war and accused it of “verbal acrobatics” in claiming victory after the hearing. The Eritrean government statement said the ruling "has reaffirmed what was clear four years ago and has vindicated Eritrea". “In the final analysis, the end of the war on the basis of a legal determination is a victory for both the Eritrean and Ethiopian peoples," it said. Ruling "appears fair" Due to the complexities of the ruling it will be some time before it is clear if there are winners and losers. The commission has already said there are certain areas that need further clarification. But regional observers point out that the ruling appears to be fair, with both sides gaining some territory and losing other land. Eritrea appears to have had its claim largely met in the western sector, while Ethiopia has made some gains in parts of the central and eastern sectors of the border. Both governments are putting forward diametrically opposed views of the ruling to convince their citizens that the sacrifices and loss of life have not been in vain, regional observers told IRIN. The observers say it is still too early to judge whether the verdict will lead to any serious political fallout in either country but the mistrust that pervades both governments means it could be years before any kind of normalisation exists between the two. Humanitarian workers are also concerned about any population movements forced by the new boundary changes and are unclear who will ensure their safety. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has said it is his “fervent hope” that movements will be peaceful and orderly. The PCA is also looking at compensations claims – to be addressed in June - by either country. Pressure at home Both countries face additional pressures at home. In Eritrea a number of journalists from the private press have been jailed and are now on hunger strike until they are brought to trial. Eleven government dissidents are still being detained. Land-locked Ethiopia faces the nagging question of access to the sea. The government says this was not a factor considered by the Boundary Commission and was decided when Eritrea voted for independence in 1993. Yet the main opposition party in the country, the Ethiopian Democratic Party (EDP), argues that this is why the Algiers Peace Agreement should never have been signed in the first place. Hailu Araaya, deputy chairman of the EDP insisted: “Anything that is built on this agreement is flawed." "It is flawed because the agreement and therefore border delimitation was based on colonial treaties," he told IRIN. "These were treaties entered into under duress. They were made by force.” But the claims and counter claims of victory by either government are lost on 34 year-old Zenaw at his clothes stall. “It is the politicians who decide who won and who lost," he says. "For me I have my family to feed. That is the important thing. Nobody wants to fight another war.” Click here for maps of new border