Dear

I am writing to you as my representative in parliament to bring to your attention a patently unjust UN Security Council resolution 1907(2006) in the drafting of which the British representative Sir John Sawers played a lead role. Resolution 1907(2009) was passed on the basis two accusation: 1) That Eritrea offers support to elements that oppose the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia 2) That Eritrea has failed to comply with security council requests to engage with Djibouti to resolve a border dispute.

On the first accusation, there was no evidence provided by the UNSC or the UN monitoring group. Further 1) Central elements of previous claims by the same monitoring group have been proven to be completely false and 2) Eritrea’s persistent request for the evidence to be made public have remained unheeded 3) the United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Somalia is on record admitting to the media that there was no evidence to support the group’s claims.

On the Djibouti issue, Eritrea’s stated position is that there should be bilateral efforts at clarifying and solving any issues. On failure of bilateral efforts, Eritrea has clearly expressed a willingness to resolve any outstanding matter legally. Considering failure of the UN Security Council, the US and Britain as a member of the EU to shoulder their legal responsibilities as guarantors of the Algiers agreement and the legally binding and final Eritrea-Ethiopia border commission ruling which was passed nearly a decade ago and according to which Ethiopia is in occupation of sovereign Eritrean territory, a UN member state, and considering further that the Eritrean-Ethiopian border issue is the single most destabilizing factor in the region and that the guarantors have in practice chosen to facilitate Ethiopian intransigence it is not surprising that Eritrea’s faith in the goodwill or offices of third parties, who have no clear mandate, is exhausted and that it should prefer a legal process as a last resort. Such a stance is a clear and just commitment to peaceful co-existence and cannot possibly merit sanctions by any stretch of the imagination short of one that undermines basic justice.

Additionally, the UN Somalia Sanctions Committee and the South African UN representative Mr Dumisani Kumalo has said that "80% percent of ammunition available at the Somali arms markets was supplied by TFG and Ethiopian troops." The sanctions will not in any way serve the declared intention, which is the stability of the region generally and Somalia in particular. The duplicity of the resolution is further underlined by the fact that despite 1) the daylight invasion of Somalia by Ethiopian government forces in direct contravention of UN resolution 1725(2006) and 2)the occupation by the same country of Eritrean territory in contravention of its legal commitment under Algiers and UN membership obligations and various UN resolutions, the US and British representatives have instead opted to punish Eritrea without any evidence.

The implications of undermining the rule of law, justice and fair-play as the basis for international relations has far reaching and profoundly negative implications which no country can escape. It is a sad occasion when our representative in the UNSC takes the lead in engineering and sanctioning such a manifestly unjust resolution against a small poor country that is struggling to survive. Such disposition is against what I expect from a British politician and apart from the infinitely more serious matter of justice it also undermines the image of our country abroad.

I would also like to bring to your attention that in a meeting on the 23rd of December 2009 with representatives of various Eritrean communities, a foreign office official stated that Mr. Sawers supported the resolution mainly on the basis of intelligence that members of the Eritrean secret service had transferred funds to al-shabab in Somalia. He was unable to offer any supporting evidence citing security concerns. Asked if the UNSC was aware of the allegation he cited the same security reasons for not sharing the intelligence with the council. According to the official neither was the evidence or allegation presented to a high level Eritrean delegation that visited the office days before for the same security reasons. Equally worrying, the official was unable to mention a single British member of parliament who was aware of the evidence either. The whole affair not only puts in question the motives behind resolution 1907(2009) and our role in its support but also undermines democratic accountability at home.

Finally the claim that calls by IGAD and the AU for sanctions was a significant factor in our support for 1907(2009) conveniently fails to mention that the Ethiopian foreign and prime ministers chaired the meetings at IGAD and the AU respectively that called for sanctions. Libya, as a member of the UNSC opposed resolution 1907(2009).

As my representative in parliament, I kindly ask you to raise the issue with the relevant persons in the foreign office and let me know of your findings. It is of utmost importance as the security and lives of many people depend on reversing the calls of resolution 1907(2009).

With kind regards