Following the publication of my two articles on Dagmawi's website, July 31 and August 6,00, I keep on noticing Walta's contributors referring to me in relation to the debate on Asseb. I claim no particular unique insights into this fundamental issue. My two short commentaries were about defending Dagmawi's freedom of expression and any references to Asseb were in an indirect way.

I reiterate that I fully support the OAU'S peace plan as indicated in my first article. At this stage of the debate, for the record, I would like to register my personal views on Asseb.

I think the issue of Asseb should be considered from a pragmatic stand-point. This would mean questioning the rationale behind the Ethiopian government's refusal to entertain the issue of Asseb as part of its negotiation with the Government of Eritrea.

In this regard, I outline four principles around which the discussions of Asseb seem centered, to date, and the weaknesses of these principles:

1. The principle of 'responsible governance' and of 'a fair trade off':

The current Ethiopian Government seems to argue that as 'a responsible government' it had committed itself to respecting agreement reached with Eritrea when the latter was allowed to go independent and that the war was simply a side issue on a different ground from the issue of Asseb.

The Government has a point,but only to a degree! Why? When Eritrea became independent,the assumption was that future relationships between Ethiopia and Eritrea would be that of ''mutual respect and understanding'. Asseb and Massawa were to be used by Ethiopia as per prior agreement between the two nations.

This condition no longer exists and should be renegotiated following the war. Ethiopia needs to have 'a trade off' agreement with the state of Eritrea as to where the understanding of using ports are at after the war.

This means that the Ethiopian government should face up to the fact that the job is not finished yet.

2. The principle of the 'Retainer's' ownership rights - "Be Yirga Yebalebetnet Mebit Merhe" (in Amharic):

One argument advanced to consolidate Eritrea's ownership right over Asseb is that for most part of its existence the Asseb port remained within what was understood to be the 'Eritrean territory'. By extension this is an argument about the 'Retainer's' right by 'proximity and precedence!'

This argument holds only to the extent that 'Ethiopia' on her part has the same level of 'retainer's' right over Asseb if what counts is certain jurisdiction at some point in the past. By logic, the two opposite rights cancel each other out! Hence,we are back to square one or zero, whatever the initial point of embarkation was,ie,we need to negotiate over Asseb!

3. The principle of self-determination:

It is argued that Eritreans went their way through self-determination which gave them the leverage to independence and that this is rightly so as no one else should decide for Eritreans, but Eritreans themselves!

Right! Fine! Nobody is advocating to 'undo Eritrean independence'. The point is though, any determination of the 'self' is always subject to influences and persuasions to make sure that one's rights are not the abuse of other group/s' rights at the same time!

In this context, we are talking about Asseb negatively impacting on Ethiopia whilst welcoming Eritreans' right to self-determination. The extreme form of this assumption is to accept one's rights regardless of the consequent impact on other affected parties. The TPLF/current Ethiopian regime has no basis or a moral high ground to advocate a unique right for Eritrea while same is being denied to other Ethiopians where a quest for even a milder version of one's rights has been an issue of controversy. I do not wish to elaborate on this at this particular time as my focus is on Asseb.

This is to note that the argument about a right to self-determination is not good enough to use as an excuse to not negotiate over Asseb.

4. The principle of general well-being of Eritreans and Ethiopians:

Were the Port of Asseb to be left to die out as no one other than Ethiopia uses it,it is beneficial neither to Ethiopia nor Eritrea.

Then, what kind of a leadership contemplates this tragic outcome ?

Hence, I argue that this is another reason why Asseb should be a part of the negotiation between Eritrea and Ethiopia.

My humble suggestion is that let there be a 'dual sovereignty' over Asseb, shared between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Asseb could be left nominally as an 'entity' within Eritrean State's jurisdiction while Ethiopia retains an exclusive right of the port's use.

What this means is that Asseb becomes useful to both nations and indirectly serves as the symbol of continuity and the bridge of hope between the brotherly and sisterly people of Eritrea and Ethiopia.

Finally, having established as to why I think Ethiopia has not finished with Asseb, I take this opportunity to appeal to the Prime Minister Meles Zenawi to see beyond party line advantages and to genuinely negotiate over Asseb.

As Oromo proverb goes: "Harkan Hadirat Jiraa Kabilaw Siraa" ("Even at the peak of our religious trance, we still manage a hand of friendship!") - this is the hope of Ethiopians after paying with their lives for the 'sovereignty' of their country.

I hope this is a meaningful contribution to the debate over Asseb!

Tolossa Gofta Kassane