– Circumstances for a return of [terrorist] TPLF to Nat’l power no longer exist
BY STAFF REPORTER
Ambassador David H. Shinn served as the US Ambassador to Ethiopia from 1996 to 1999. He is Adjunct Professor, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University. The Ethiopian Herald held interview with him on email and he responded to the email on September 17, 2022.
The US is on record that it puts the TPLF as the aggressor back in 2020. Why is the US soft on the aggressor and engaging in “bothsidesism”?
First, thank you for asking me to address these important issues. Second, let me make clear that I speak only for myself; my responses do not necessarily represent the views of the US government.
The US did acknowledge that the conflict began with the attack by [terrorist] TPLF on Ethiopia’s Northern Command in Mekele on 3 November 2020. Since then, however, there have been numerous terrible abuses by all sides involved in this civil war. Since 2020, the US has been critical of whatever side it believed was responsible for the abuse or atrocity. For the most part, it has tried not to take sides, but to weigh each situation on its own merit. It may not always have come up with the most appropriate response, but the goal was to evaluate the evidence and then respond, not to take sides.
The government’s truce after getting the upper hand in the war and even ultimatums during the war seem to have been widely known. But the group is accused of taking advantage of these to invade neighboring regions, Amhara and Afar. Still the US administration is not seen and heard condemning the acts. What’s your take on this?
The United States clearly condemned the advance of [terrorist] TPLF into Amhara and Afar Regions in 2021. The US State Department issued a press statement on 30 October 2021 that expressed grave concern about the expansion of combat in northern Ethiopia. It reiterated the US “call for the [terrorist] TPLF to withdraw from the Amhara and Afar regions, including halting its advances in and around the cities of Dessie and Kombolcha.” In remarks on 1 November 2021, then Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa, Jeffrey Feltman, said: “We watched the fighting around Dessie and Kombolcha in horror, as thousands more civilians were forced to flee their homes. Some critics of U.S. policy claim the United States has an inherent bias toward the TPLF. We have consistently condemned the TPLF’s expansion of the war outside Tigray and continue to call on the TPLF to withdraw from Afar and Amhara.”
It is not clear to me, and perhaps not to the U.S. government, who started the resumption of conflict in late August 2022 in the Kobo area of Amhara Region […]. Until the facts are well established, it would be inappropriate to condemn one side or the other.
Some say the US wants the TPLF as an instrument to advance its geopolitical interest in the Horn. What do you comment?
This strikes me as a specious argument. While it is true that the [terrorist] TPLF was the principal party in the ruling EPRDF from 1991 until the creation of the Prosperity Party, the circumstances for a return of the TPLF to national power no longer exist. The TPLF seems destined to be a regional party, which is not in a position to protect the geopolitical interests of the United States or any other country. The United States will most effectively protect its geopolitical interests in the Horn by encouraging peace and stability of all parties in all countries.
The TPLF is widely accused of using child soldiers. But the Biden administration never issued a statement denouncing the acts. Why an influencing power like the US is tight lipped on this?
Before denouncing the use of child soldiers in any situation, the United States requires hard evidence. Accusations alone are not hard evidence.
Many criticize the US for intervening in the affairs of Ethiopia in various ways including using the UNSC as an instrument. What’s your take on this?
Someone, somewhere blames the United States for just about every negative development in the world. This seems to be the price a great power must pay. In the case of Ethiopia, all parties have over the past two years criticized some policy or decision of the United States. It goes with the territory. When I served in Ethiopia during the Ethiopia-Eritrea war, the Meles government routinely criticized Washington for taking the side of Eritrea. In turn, the Isaias government routinely criticized Washington for taking the side of Ethiopia.
The Ethiopian Herald will, of course, come to its own conclusion about the role of the United States in the affairs of Ethiopia. But as Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently stated: “The United States supports Ethiopia’s unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity and wants to return to a strong partnership.”
As for the AU-led peace talks materializing, I am encouraged that the TPLF recently made clear it will accept a mediation effort led by the African Union. It is not clear, however, if the four preconditions for the resumption of talks specified earlier by the TPLF are still in effect. More importantly, both sides seem to lack trust in the other side; this does not bode well for the resumption of peace talks.
There are also accusations that the TPLF pretends to accept peace options to buy time. What’s your comment on this?
I have no way of knowing what the TPLF is thinking or what is behind its strategy. It would not be unusual for contending parties on all sides of the conflict to buy time. Then the question becomes: what does the TPLF or any other side gain by buying time? It seems to me that every side loses by not moving forward expeditiously with peace talks.
WHO Chief Dr. Tedros usually tweets on issues related to “Tigray,” but he ignores clear humanitarian violations in Amhara and Afar. Doesn’t this abuse power and doesn’t it demonstrate a double standard, voicing for one side only?
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director General of the World Health Organization, finds himself in a difficult situation. A Tigrayan himself, he obviously is concerned about the atrocities that have occurred in Tigray Region over the past two years. On several occasions, he has spoken critically of actions by the Ethiopian government, even on matters that are not directly related to the WHO. As an international civil servant, he would be well advised to avoid making statements on matters that are not within the purview of the WHO. On those issues, including atrocities, in Ethiopia that are within the jurisdiction of the WHO, it is important that he pursue a balanced approach.
Ed.’s note: Amb. Shinn responded to questions The Ethiopian Herald emailed to him on 17 September 2022.
The Ethiopian Herald 24 September 2022
