• 1902
– Boundary treaty in delimiting the Ethio-Sudan border was signed between the Government of Ethiopia and British Colonial administration of Sudan
– The treaty declared the establishment of a Joint Boundary Commission for the demarcation of the common boundary …
• 1903
– The representative of British (Major Gwynn) unilaterally carried out the demarcation process without the presence of the representative of Ethiopia or the authorization of the Ethiopian Government.
– As a result, the Gwynn demarcation particularly in the area North of Mount Dagleish remained controversial and disputed.
• 1972
– In order to solve the long overdue boundary dispute between the two countries, the Government of Ethiopia and the Sudan through their Foreign Ministers Exchange of Notes agreed:
- to proceed the re-demarcation process from Mount Dagleish southwards
- to study the problem resulting from settlements and cultivation by nationals of either nation in the territory of the other with a view to finding an amicable solution
– Two months after the signing of the Notes, the Foreign Minister of Sudan wrote a letter to Ethiopia informing the later that the government of the Sudan had written a letter to the then Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) informing that the conclusion of an agreement governing the longest frontier between the two African countries
– In addition to this, they informed Ethiopia that the government of the Sudan had ratified and deposited the 1972 Exchange of Notes in accordance with article 102 of United Nation Charter.
– As it is clearly envisaged under the 1972 Exchange of Notes, finding of an amicable solution for the problem resulting from cultivation and settlement is a prerequisite for the re-demarcation of the Gwynn Line north of Mount Daeglish
• 1974
– Immediately after the signing of the 1972 Exchange of Notes both countries set up a joint boundary commission to re-demarcate the boundary south of Mount Dagleish but due to change of government in 1974 in Ethiopia the agreed upon re-demarcation project did not materialize.
• 2000
– Both Ethiopia and the Sudan decided to implement the 1972 Exchange of Notes and establish a Joint Special Committee that was mandated to find an amicable solution for the problem resulting from settlement and cultivation in the area north of Mount Dagleish
– Moreover, both countries agreed and set up Joint Boundary Commission (JBC) and Joint Technical Boundary Committee (JTBC) to re-demarcate the boundary line between the two countries, based on the amicable solution of the Joint Special Committee, particularly for the boundary sector north of Mount Dagleish
– The Joint Special Committee, even though it held eight meetings, it did not complete its task given to it under the 1972 Exchange of Note and its Terms of Reference adopted by the agreement of our two countries
• 2005
– While negotiation was on going the two countries signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 2005 to give temporary solution to a specific challenge until a final agreement is reached on the amicable solution that the two countries will agree on
– It must be underlined that the MoU reasserted the status quo holdings of Ethiopian nationals by agreeing not to displace them and prohibited new penetration
– the 2005 MoU is a supplementary and temporary solution, which supports the 1972 Exchange of Notes. Therefore, it is by no means intended to replace the mandate entrusted to the Joint Special Committee by the 1972 Exchange of Notes
2. The way forward
• The Joint Special Committee which was formed according to the 1975 Exchange of notes shall be reactivated to reconvene its meeting and submit its final report recommending an amicable solution to the appropriate body. It is, therefore, essential that the finding of an amicable solution has to be accomplished prior to the re-demarcation of the Gwynn line in the sector north of Mount Dagleish.
• The boundary line should not be a point of separation wall, rather it is contact point that would enhance and cement cooperation and collaboration among nationals of both countries. It is an international norm and practices that boundary issues are resolved by negotiation and dialogue between the concerned parties.
• Any type of unilateral exercise is not helpful in finding a lasting solution. What the Sudan is doing at the moment is unprecedented and it did not reflect the interest of its people.
Source: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia (12 Jan.2021)
The Ethiopian Herald February 6/2021
