Reference:

Impromptu Reply to Eritrean Foreign Minister's Speech by Ambassador Fisseha Yimer During the 54th Session of the UN General Assembly

Mr. President, aggression, unfortunately, is a fact of international life.

As long as you have aggressors, there is aggression. Now, listening to the statement by the foreign minister of Eritrea this evening, it is interesting to discern some distinguishing characteristics of aggressors, whether big or small. In fact, it is intriguing because they display the same characteristics throughout history. They share the same features, whether big or small, as I said. There are several characteristics, but the most distinguishing characteristic of aggressors is that they play victim while their aggression continues.

Let me enumerate the main characteristics in order of importance:

• They play victim while their aggression continues. The statement by the Eritrean foreign minister and the representative who just spoke is clear testimony to that.

• Another distinguishing characteristic is that they are shrill; they make a lot of noise. Hitler used to do that; Mussolini used to do that more than the victims. The victims were quiet, the aggressors were shrill.

• They misrepresent the actual state of affairs. That is another characteristic of aggressors. That is their device. They like to hoodwink the international community.

• They claim to be champions of peace. They become converts overnight. This is another characteristic of aggressors. In fact, this is the most common - the latest example being Eritrea.

• Another characteristic is that they lecture the rest of the world on the virtues of peace. They are condescending. They are gratuitous.

• Finally, which is most regrettable, they underestimate the rest of the world, to the point of insulting the intelligence of the rest of the world.

It claims to have accepted the OAU peace proposals belatedly, very late. In fact, it is the very documents which it (Eritrea) has all along been dismissing - not in a normal language, not in a civilized manner, but with contempt and derision. Not only were the proposals treated with contempt, but also the organization which is the author of the proposals. This is a matter of record from their statements and their reactions to the various proposals over the last year and a half, before they converted to a "peace-loving state".

Why the sudden change full-circle now, and profess peaceful intentions? Surely, it is not a change of heart, since aggressors cannot undergo - using the biological science term - metamorphosis, and become peace-loving overnight. That would be contrary to their nature, and Eritrea cannot be an exception to that.

Rather, the turning-point was February 1999 when it (Eritrea) was driven out of the biggest chunk of Ethiopian territory it had occupied by force. No organization, no third party, has ever called upon Ethiopia to vacate, or withdraw, from Eritrean territory because we have never been there. On the contrary, in fact, the OAU has always called upon Eritrean troops to be redeployed from Ethiopian territory. No document exists to the contrary or a document calling upon us to withdraw from Eritrean territory because we never invaded Eritrea; we never committed aggression against Eritrea.

When they (Eritrean authorities) say they left Ethiopian territory in the interest of a peaceful resolution of the dispute, that is where they underestimate the international community to the point of, as I said, insulting its intelligence. That's outrageous. They try to make believe that they were not kicked out, evicted. They claim to have left Ethipian territory for the sake of peace, in the interest of peace. That is an insult to the OAU, never mind the rest of the international community. The current posture for peace, Mr. President, is more than a veneer, a sham which exposes Eritrea itself easily. Mr. President, a veneer is a thin layer. It is a superficial mask. It is a gloss. Once you scratch the surface, the real thing appears. It gives an attractive surface appearance, especially to conceal a defect of character under a superficial and a semblance of attractiveness.

This is the nature of the situation we are facing now, the posture we see as displayed by Eritrea is an artificial camouflage; that is why I say it is a veneer. Now, how do we scratch the veneer, the conduct of destabilization in the Horn, at this moment, while calling for peace with Ethiopia? The conduct of destabilization by Eritrea lays bare the true character of that regime.

Last week, the president of a state in the Horn of Africa said clearly,

"... We sincerely believe that Eritrea would gain more as an equal partner in the collective regional effort to fashion comprehensive peace, augment development and address the challenges of environmental degradation, but they are pursuing a senseless and reckless policy of confrontation and destabilization."

In the final analysis, Mr. President, it is a question of trust, whether trusting an aggressor is possible. And obviously, especially the victim like us, can't afford to trust the aggressor. Others, at least other than the victim, might trust the aggressors. They can afford to do that because their land is not occupied. But we have to ensure, Mr. President, that no loophole, however shrill the Eritrean professing of peace may be, no loophole is left to be taken advantage of by the aggressor. All we are saying is that there shouldn't be any departure from the basic, I said, the basic OAU document - namely the Framework Agreement. Eritrea's pretence of acceptance of the Framework Agreement can't be rewarded by departures from the basic document, in the subsequently means of implementing the document.

No incentive should be provided to aggressors to accept something which they should accept. Erosion of the fundamental principles in the Framework Agreement, Mr. President, would be no less than appeasement.

I thank you.