MASLAND: What prompted the fighting between Ethiopia and Eritrea? GHEBREAB: The history of Ethiopia always has been of one ethnic group dominating the rest. So the hope was that Ethiopia would come to peace with itself at the end of this sad chapter in its history, that for the first time there would be an inclusive government in which all the major groups would have a say. That vision has become dimmer and dimmer. Ethiopia continues to have a minority government. The TPLF [Tigrean People’s Liberation Front], which essentially runs the country, has insisted on an ethnic arrangement in the country. The Tigrean ethnic group represents less than 5 percent of the Ethiopian population. I think this is essentially the source of the conflict we now have.
How does this explain the war with Eritrea? Ever since 1991 there has been a minority of people in Ethiopia, a minority elite, who have refused to reconcile themselves to the fact that Eritrea is now an independent state. They have always thought of subjugating Eritrea again. And the government has relapsed into that old mentality of dominating Eritrea. Many people have found it very difficult to understand what has happened. Many seek, in my view, very simplistic answers. In American history, there was 1776 and then 1812. After winning the War of Independence against Britain, America had to fight for its independence again. So in some ways what Eritrea is facing today is another war, another conflict, another struggle to ensure its independence.
Some people suggested that the decision of Eritrea last year to create its own currency was a contributing factor. That’s another attempt to seek a simplistic cause to the conflict. The original vision was that even if Eritrea became independent, there was no need to break up the economies, which had been integrated over many years. Eritrea set out to avoid the mistakes of many African governments … And from the start, we said we should not have a protectionist, import-substitution [economic] policy. But Ethiopia took a much more regulated, controlled approach to economic problems. There were also differences in terms of monetary and fiscal policies, trade policies. We talked about harmonizing these policies for a number of years. And once that was not possible it almost became inevitable that Eritrea would have to have its own currency. It has poisoned the atmosphere somehow, but I don’t think it’s the reason for the conflict.
Eritrea accused Ethiopia of using mercenary pilots in the fighting. Who are these pilots you speak of? These pilots, who are flying Ethiopian MiGs and helicopter gunships, are citizens of the former Soviet-bloc countries. It’s an open secret.
Some people see the presidents of Ethiopia and Eritrea as part of a new breed of African leader, sparking an economic and cultural revival on the continent. How does that square with warfare on the Horn of Africa? I think the same people who made that very simplistic analysis of developments in Africa are now those same people dismissing Africa’s potential. This is a transitional stage in Africa. Transitions are complicated, they are messy. We’ll overcome this. There is still much that is very positive. This is not a savage war.
Why is your view of the outside mediators, who have been trying to end the war? From the very start there was a lot of good will in the U.S. and in Africa and elsewhere. [But] they thought that this was about some small piece of land and that they could find a very easy way out. I think the initial efforts faltered because of that. The fact the proposals were prematurely made public complicated the situation. I believe now there is a much more nuanced understanding of this conflict.
