Feature - Help for border communities as peace process drags on

Along the contested and war-torn border separating Ethiopia and Eritrea the lives of once shattered communities are gradually being restored. The US-funded Border Development Programme (BDP), sponsoring small schemes to the tune of US $4.6 million, is boosting “border recovery and local peace efforts”, US officials say. Houses destroyed during the sporadic and bitter two-year conflict have been rebuilt, credit facilities opened up to re-encourage small enterprise, and teachers trained. Eventually, it is hoped the scheme will encourage cross border trade and boost the local small-scale economies of rural villages that snake the 1,000 km frontier. DEMARCATION PROBLEMS But despite the good work, the fragile Ethio-Eritrea peace process appears to be at a stalemate. The deep freeze that marks relations between both governments has not even begun to thaw in the three years since the end of the war. Now all eyes are firmly focused on October when the first pillars marking out the new border are due to be laid. Yet concerns still exist that demarcation, which aims to finally quell tensions between both countries, may not meet the completion date of June 2004. Congressmen in the US are proposing that development and military aid be curtailed if the current impasse is not resolved and demarcation is held up for a third time. Although a US embassy spokesman in Addis Ababa said he was unable to reveal the size of the spiralling bill, the US does foot a large part of the peacekeeping costs – more than US $500 million. Ironically the congressmen’s plans would mean the end of small projects like the Border Development Programme and the confidence it is trying to encourage along the frontier. Analysts say the increasing number of minor incidents on the border is a clear indication of growing frustrations of both governments as demarcation draws near. The Eritrean government is urging that greater pressure be applied on its former foe to implement the current and contested border ruling drawn up by the independent Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC) – a commission set up under the Algiers peace deal in December 2000 and agreed to by both countries. And Ethiopia is seeking support from both the UN and the international community at large for changes to the ruling. It is particularly unhappy that Badme – where the border flared up - has been awarded to Eritrea. UNMEE CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE The UN’s Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) and its 4,200 peacekeepers, inevitably, are caught in the middle. "Witness the effective closure of their two popular outreach centres in Eritrea – now off-limits to local communities," says one neutral observer. "Police stand outside checking identity papers." Eritrea maintains the centres are "unnecessary" and says it does not approve of some of the reading materials. Incursions into the Temporary Security Zone (TSZ) from Ethiopian cattlemen are also at a high – although that may be more related to the drought than increasing border tensions. And a recent incursion by Ethiopian troops to play games of football in the off-limits TSZ, sparking another row with UNMEE, also smacks of frustration. Nor is either side is prepared to give ground on the issue of direct flights between the capitals – which has added US $2.5 million to the mounting bill and provides additional logistical headaches for the peacekeepers. The ghost of another Kashmir or Cyprus is raised by observers and analysts to describe the prospects of a long, volatile stalemate. Legwaila Joseph Legwaila, the Special Representative to the Secretary General (SRSG) and head of the peacekeeping mission, has acknowledged that countries such as the US could help foster greater relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea, rather than UNMEE who are mere peacekeepers. “It is a very restrictive mandate that UNMEE has and an expensive one at that,” a senior diplomat close to the peace process told IRIN. “There is little UNMEE can do within its mandate to encourage the two sides. They just don’t have a mandate to make peace or facilitate talks." “Pretty much all UNMEE can do is demining, and making preparations for demarcation but until they have a clear statement from both parties who agree that they can go ahead, there is little they can do other than keep both sides apart," the diplomat noted. “I don’t think anyone actually anticipated there would be this stalemate given that both parties said whatever the EEBC decides we will implement it," he added. “And that is UNMEE’s problem because they are highly visible in all this but they are constrained and until they are given a different mandate they are stuck in the middle.” ELUSIVE POLITICAL DIALOGUE A key ingredient for constructive solutions - namely political dialogue between the parties - has remained elusive. It has been left to the guarantors of the Algiers Agreement, of which the US is one, to explore possibilities for a rapprochement. Legwaila states that there is no need for the UNMEE mandate to be strengthened or changed to overcome current obstacles. He argues that more needs to be done by guarantors and friends of the peace process to encourage a return to normal relations. But some observers believe that an opportunity may have been missed to convert UNMEE from a classical peacekeeping mission to a peace building mission. Mandate changes at this stage, say analysts, are unlikely. But Legwaila acknowledges it is only right that the Security Council start questioning the lengthy delays in demarcation. “I don't want to second guess the Security Council, but all I want to say is that the Security Council wants the peace process to be successful and if the peace process is not successful the Security Council will start asking why are we spending US $200 million when there is nothing going on?” he told journalists recently. The Security Council is due to meet in New York later this month to extend UNMEE’s mandate for an additional six months.