The Ethiopian foreign ministry has clearly stated that it views the issues of a ceasefire and an Eritrean withdrawal as inextricably linked. A ceasefire is only possible once the Eritrean military occupation is reversed and the pre-existing civil administration is restored.

The UN Security Council, has incorporated this crucial point by reference. In Resolution 1226, the Security Council endorsed the OAU Peace Plan and strongly urged Eritrea to accept it without delay. A fundamental plank in the OAU Peace Plan is the requirement of an Eritrean withdrawal from the areas it invaded, and a restoration of the pre-existing civilian administration.

The linkage of a ceasefire with a restoration of the status quo is entirely consistent with prior UN Security Council resolutions and with principles of international law. It has been demonstrated time and again as a fundamental element in conflict mediation.

The Falklands Example:

A good example is the Argentina-UK dispute over the Falklands Islands in 1982. The Falkland Islands were at the time disputed territory claimed by both countries. However, they were being peacefully administered by Britain.

In this case, the Security Council passed Resolution 502 on April 3, 1982, demanding both an immediate Argentine withdrawal, and an immediate cessation of hostilities.

Argentina endorsed the cessation of hostilities but refused to withdraw. Britian rejected the demand for a cessation of hostilities unless Argentina implemented the entire Security Council Resolution - specifically the demand for an Argentine withdrawal.

After waiting less than one month, Britian launched a counteroffensive on May 2, 1982, with the purpose of restoring the previous British administration in the islands.

Ethiopia has now waited nine months for diplomacy to succeed. It has fully accepted the US-Rwanda and OAU peace plans.

By contrast Eritrea has rejected all the internationally-mediated peace plans. It has attacked the participation of mediators that it itself invited to mediate (Rwanda, Djibouti, the US and the OAU). To its disgrace, it has launched a smear campaign against individual mediators such as Susan Rice, Hassan Gouled and Anthony Lake.

International Law:

The OAU has already declared that Badime was under Ethiopian civilian administration prior to its occupation by Eritrea on May 12, 1998. Therefore Eritrea's military occupation of Badime is a violation of international law. Eritrea's troops must withdraw.

The US-Rwanda peace plan called for an Eritrean withdrawal and the restoration of the pre-existing civil administration. The OAU peace plan similarily called for an Eritrean withdrawal and the restoration of the pre-existing civil administration. The UN Security Council strongly urged Eritrea to accept the OAU Peace Plan without delay, and noted that its requests for clarification had been answered already.

Eritrea rejected these calls. Eritrea demanded that the OAU peace plan be amended to remove the basic clause requiring withdrawal and restoration of the civil administration.

This will never happen. The OAU has declared that what happened in Badime on May 12 was "a fundamental element of the crisis."

Conclusion:

- Dagmawi

3. Calls on the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to seek a diplomatic solution to their differences and to respect fully the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.