2012

Project Proposal for an Interactive ProblemSolving Dialogue Seminar in Bonn, Germany (20th to 23rd of September)

Ethio-Eritrea Dialogue Group Tel- +491632143837 Fax- +4922885073999 http://dialogue.ucoz.com/ Bonn, Germany
4/20/2012

1. Contents
1. Brief overview of the issue and the source of the problem ............ 2 1.1 The History of the relation between Ethiopia and Eritrea .................................... 2 1.2 The Ethio-Eritrea war (1998-2000) ...................................................................... 3 Dialogue EthioEthio-Eritrea Project ....................................................... ....................................................... 5 2.1 The Idea behind the Dialogue seminar project ..................................................... 5 Inception phase of the project: ...................................................... ...................................................... 6 3.1 The first Dialogue seminar at Roros, Norway (31st of January 11th of February, 2005) ............................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Outcomes of the Roros dialogue seminar .............................................................. 7 3.2 The Langano interactive dialogue seminar ............................................................... 8 3.2.1 Objective of the Project ......................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Outcome of the Langano Interactive seminar ...................................................... 10 4. The upup-coming Interactive Seminar in Bonn, Germany (20th-23rd

2.

3.

of September) ................................................................ .......................................................................................... .......................................................... 11 4.1 Location of the Interactive dialogue seminar ......................................................... 12 4.2 Participants and Moderators ................................................................................... 12 4.3 Schedule and seminar program ............................................................................... 13 4.4 Budget Detail .......................................................................................................... 14 5. Evaluation of the Dialogue seminar project .................................. .................................. 15

1. Brief overview of the issue and the source of the problem

Not long ago, Ethiopia and Eritrea were engaged in war for two years (19982000) that devastated peoples lives and deteriorated the economies of these countries. Despite the signing of the peace agreement that brought the situation to a stalemate, there are still possibilities that the conflicts may resume in the future as the conflict is not permanently resolved. Among others, the war affected the interpersonal relationship between peoples, which is very important for peace to prevail between the two nations in the future. In addition, it also eroded the remaining trust that had been in existence between the two nations. Besides the official efforts, there is a need to restore the people to people relations between the two nations if sustainable solutions must be found and peace is going to be ascertained. The two years war claimed tens of thousands of lives and devastated the economies of the two nations exposing the peoples of Ethiopia and Eritrea to ruthless drought and famine. Both countries cannot afford to engage in another war, a war that claimed their loved ones and propelled them deeper into poverty.

1.1 The History of the relation between Ethiopia and Eritrea

Ethiopia and Eritrea are located in the Horn of Africa, a region that is widely known for its instability and food insecurity. It is also categorized under the poorest regions of the world. Most of the predicaments are related to the long and tragic wars that were fought with in and/or among the states. This in turn has created a vast amount of migration of specially youth people to Europe and the rest of the world. Eritrea used to be an Italian colony for sixty years prior to its becoming united with Ethiopia in a federation. At the battle of Adowa in 1896, Ethiopians defeated Fascist Italys and stopped Italys expansion deep in to Ethiopian territories. It also persuaded the then European Powers to accept Ethiopia as an independent and recognized entity in the region. This condition provoked the necessity of defining border between colonies and the Ethiopian empire. Italy signed successive treaties in 1900, 1902 and 1908 with Ethiopia to clearly mark the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia. However, the term of those treaties did not define any precise line as the definitive boundary line. Also Eritreas annexation by Ethiopia in 1948 had muddied the demarcation of the border 2

since the colonial boundaries between the two were replaced by administrative boundaries within Ethiopia.1 The forced annexation of Eritrea by the Ethiopian emperor HaileSellasie has its own consequences. Eritrea waged a thirty years of attrition against Ethiopian dominance first against the Ethiopian emperor in 1962, and later against the brutal military dictator, which overthrew the feudalistic regime of the emperor in 1974. During the reign of the military dictator colonel Mengistu Hailemariam (1974-1991), the Ethiopian military forces were constantly sent for expedition in the Eritrean Mountains to engage the rebels that were mainly organized under the party called Eritrea people liberation front (EPLF).2 Lots of people died during the 30 years of war. Many were displaced and millions of dollars were spent to support the war. The soviet aided Mengistus militaristic regime was finally toppled by the forces of the Ethiopian Peoples Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which were fighting against the military dictator for 17 years. At first, EPLF and EPRDF were partners for the common interest of overthrowing Mengistus regime. In 1991 EPRDF controlled the capital Addis Ababa and EPLF forces brought the capital of Eritrea (Asmara) under their control. In a referendum held in April 1993, two years after the demise of the Dergue regime, Eritrea seceded from Ethiopia and got its independence. Although the borders were not defined clearly, for a while the two nations seemed to get along fairly well. 1.2 The Ethio-Eritrea war (1998-2000) The new governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea tried to focus on development endeavors within the first six years of their rule. However, the relation started to deteriorate by the end of the 1990s and the two countries found themselves in a battleground because of conflicting claims on a town bordering the two countries. As the border between Ethiopia and Eritrea were earlier not delineated, the resultant controversy over the delineation of the 620 mile common border exacerbated tensions as both states often made conflicting claims regarding where borders should run.3

http://www.electionworld.org/history/eritrea.htm http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Africa/EthiopiaEritrea.asp 3 John prendergast, U.S leadership in Resolving African Conflict: the case of Ethiopia and Eritrea U.S institute of peace, 2001.
2

The two years border war claimed a staggering toll in human life and suffering. It precipitated violation of human rights and humanitarian law on both sides. Although both sides didnt report their own loses and exaggerated the loses of their adversary, many estimate a staggering 100,0004 people might have died in the two years border conflict. The conduct of the war devastated economies of the two countries contributing greatly to the great 2003 draught that followed. This unfortunate circumstance has displaced millions and led to deportation of tens of thousands from their place of residence.

Despite its surprise, the international community reacted quickly to the war. A US team led by the then assistant secretary of state Susan Rice and a Rwandan team led by the then vice president Paul Kagame was invited by both parties to assist in preventing further escalation. This effort failed to resolve the conflict, as both parties to the war did not accept it. Consequently, a US team led by national security advisor Anthony Lake as a special envoy collaborated with the then Organization of African Unity to continue with the effort of US-Rwandan peace proposal. Algeria played a significant role in bringing the two countries in to a round table discussion to refrain themselves from the devastating war they were engaged in. On the 18th of June 2000, the two parties finally signed the Algiers agreement on cessation of hostilities. The parties reaffirmed their acceptance of the OAUs framework agreement and modalities for both parties to return to their original position they controlled before the breaking out of the war. A 25 km wide buffer zone was established for the deployment of a UN peacekeeping force to operate and prevent further escalation of war. According to the Algiers agreement the two countries took their border claims to the international border commission. The boundary commission delivered its ruling on the delimitation of the border on the 13th of April, 2002. Both governments declared their acceptance, with each claiming that it was in their favor. However, the source of confusion was the decision itself, which did not identify coordinates for the village of Badme.5 The commission clarified on March 28, 2003, that the area known as Badme was inside Eritrea. The Algiers agreement spelled out that the decision of the commission would be final and binding. Even if it was hard for the Ethiopian side to accept the decision of the commission, it was bought in front of the parliament and Ethiopia accepted the decision in principle. This was taken as a great step
4 5

According to BBC News Africa Confidential, Vo.44, No. 15, 25 July 2003, p.1

towards the peaceful resolution of the dispute between the two nations, although, the decision is not still implemented and the conflict is not completely resolved. It is still believed that the perplexing war between Ethiopia and Eritrea is now in a stalemate. The tension is still present and the escalation of yet another border conflict between the two countries is imminent.

2. Dialogue Ethio-Eritrea Project

In light of this devastating conflict, the dialogue group of Ethiopia and Eritrea aims to facilitate communication and interaction between the youth of Ethiopia and Eritrea and create a space for initiating dialogue. This effort is in line with concept of Multi-track diplomacy that promotes system based approach to peace-building through communication between community members of conflicting parties. It facilitates the transformation of deep-rooted social conflict through education, conflict resolution training and communication. Our project objective is to create a stage for the youth to dialogue, educate and train themselves in the different skills of conflict resolution and communication. This process is expected to make a generational difference and help participants to view the different dimensions of the conflict.

2.1 The Idea behind the Dialogue seminar project As future leaders of their communities, students stand as important parts of the society. Bringing students from both Ethiopia and Eritrea together and organizing a stage where they can exchange thoughts and share their feelings about the conflict will pave the way for a better understanding of the war and among themselves. It also helps ease the trauma of war and the feeling of hatred that could be carried on through generations. In his book, the bridge over the Drina, the Yugoslav Nobel prize-winning novelist Andri (1945/1994) described that violence and hate take a generational cycle and unless this vicious circle is broken new rounds of violence is just a matter of time.6 Students can play significant role in breaking this vicious circle of violence. All we need is to have the

Andri , I.(1994). The bridge over the Drina. London: Harvill/Harper Collins.

appropriate tools to deal with conflicts and ways to transform them into something constructive. Currently, the dialogue group is engaged in organizing consecutive and sustained interactive dialogue seminars to bring the youth together to discuss conflict and how to resolve them constructively. It is also networking students via social network mediums. This communications involve wide range of individuals and cover different geographical locations. Consequently, the dialogue group has managed to establish internet virtual international forums in different platforms such as the organizations own website, Facebook and yahoo groups. Additionally the dialogue group website has other features such as Pages, to create links with donors, partner organizations and interested nonstudent individuals Forums, news, archives and different publications And possible People search, to bring together broken families residing at different sides of the conflict.

3. Inception phase of the project:

3.1 The first Dialogue seminar at Roros, Norway (31st of January 11th of February, 2005)

The first Dialogue Groups Seminar took place in a remote mountainous area called Roros in Norway. The seminar was held from the 31st of January to the 11th of February 2005 in a small cabin up in the mountains of Roros. Roros is a historical old mining town in Norway registered among UNESCOs great world heritages. The Dialogue Groups Seminar 2005 was part of the International Student Festival in Trondheim (ISFiT). ISFiT is one of the biggest international student festivals around the globe. Every two years, ISFiT organizes a festival where approximately 450 students from almost 100 countries meet together to discuss about important issues.

As part of the ISFiT program, the Dialogue Groups Seminar invites students from different conflicting countries to engage them with dialogue hence they can create understanding among themselves and work together in bringing sustainable peace and stability in their areas.

In 2005, the Dialogue Groups Seminar invited students from six different countries. These students were grouped in to three. And the Ethio-Eritrea group was one of it. The dialogue organized by ISFiT brought us, students, to talk about these conflicts and work on future possibilities for sustainable peace between nations. We came to the understanding that for the two countries themselves, a prompt and permanent settlement of peace will bring huge benefits. Both Ethiopia and Eritrea will be able, instead, to combat famine and poverty, which are currently plaguing the two nations. Peace and security brings with it economic growth and development, better harvests and more rational utilization of resources.

3.1.1 Outcomes of the Roros dialogue seminar

One of the issues we raised during the discussion was how we students can contribute our share to the peace-building endeavor thats going on between the two countries. We believe that there is a lot that can be done by students of Ethiopia and Eritrea. One of the things that students can do is to establish a network. Through this network it is possible to arrange a platform where students of both countries can meet to discuss on hot issues that really concern them. And by creating or seizing already existing opportunities, students can have a dialogue where they can build understanding and good 7

faith among themselves. We are in the 21st Century and it is indubitable that the future leaders of our world will come from schools and higher institutions. And if we can create a good relationship among students of our todays world then we can be sure that tomorrows leaders of the planet earth will have a better understanding of each other. Students may have different opinions on different issues. And its not wrong to have differences of opinions but what is dangerous is to use those differences as causes for violent conflicts that will lead to confrontation. We can work on our similarities and shared ideas while retaining our differences. Our aim is to see a developed Ethiopia and Eritrea. But witnessing development presupposes peace. And peace in turn necessitates understanding others point of view and acknowledging that it can be different from once own. Thats why we said that we have to first establish a network of understanding between the students of the two countries. The other point we raised during the Dialogue Groups Seminar is to work down at a grassroots level and convince our societies that the two nations can have peace if they (the societies) can avoid hostilities that they show to one another. Although the immediate cause of the conflict is the border dispute, we do not believe that solving the border conflict alone will ensure a long lasting and sustainable peace between the two countries, unless the entrenched feeling of hatred is dismantled. Otherwise, only causes will differ but there will definitely be another conflict at some time T. So enrolling the society at large in the peace building and maintaining process is imperative. And in this endeavor too, there is a lot that students and the youth can do once they mobilize themselves. 3.2 The Langano interactive dialogue seminar (May 16th to May 19th 2006)

3.2.1 Objective of the Project

The Langano interactive dialogue seminar took place in Langano, Ethiopia from March 16th till March 19th 2006. It aimed at providing a stage for students and youth to find out creative ways of problem solving. The seminar was held in the form of interactive workshop that involves social activities and role-playing. The seminar is not similar to the traditional lecture type meetings rather its in the form collaborative, discussion type and problem solving approach. The seminar was held in an isolated and 8

relaxed environment, which serves as means to bring about a more open and relaxed state of mind where new ideas and behavior can find place.

The dialogue seminar initiated ideals that revolved around: Fostering friendships, between the students of Ethiopia and Eritrea through seminars, forums, exchange programs. Finding ways to restore the trust they had between each other before the breaking out of war. Facilitate a stage where students from the two nations could come together and look for possible solutions for the current predicament.

3.2.2 Organization and planning

The Langano dialogue seminar was organized by four students from Ethiopia and Norway. This also symbolizes the Euro-African partnership in an attempt to bring about sustainable peace and stability that benefits both the communities in Europe and Africa. As the seminar was a continuation to the Roros dialogue seminar and aims to address similar issue we used comparable arrangements and group of facilitators. The two Norwegian facilitators were also leaders of the Ethio-Eritrean sub group at the Roros dialogue seminar. The Norwegian facilitators used their networks to acquire sufficient funds and raise money for the dialogue seminar. They also arranged practical support for the Langano seminar from their place of residence, Norway.

The other two facilitators from Ethiopia were also participants at the Roros seminar in the Ethio-Eritrean sub group. Practical arrangements and coordination for the 9

Langano seminar was a responsibility for the two Ethiopian facilitators. Practical issues such as planning and arranging suitable location, selecting and inviting participants and arranging transportation and accommodation was done by the two Ethiopian participants. Coordinating the Langano interactive dialogue seminar required intensive communication, careful planning and execution on the part of the facilitators. E-mails needed to be exchanged back and forth for details that ought to be carefully considered both in Norway and Ethiopia. On March 11th 2006, two of the facilitators from Norway arrived in Addis. Starting from the next day further detailed planning and practice went on according to the program schedule and exercises. The days starting from March 11th to 15th were partly a training session for Ethiopian facilitators to build their capacity in facilitating the dialogue seminar. Those days also witnessed final preparations and integrating missing components that made the Langano seminar more colorful and enjoyable.

3.2.3 Outcome of the Langano Interactive seminar

The main outcome of the Langano Interactive Dialogue was a creation of network of students in Ethiopia that have genuine interest in building peace and erecting a bridge between the youth of Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Interactive seminar was successful in achieving its goal of deliberating on verities of skills and methods in which conflict will be resolved and transformed in non-violent ways. In the first three days we worked on creative and fun ways of get acquainted to each other and building a trust and understanding among ourselves. This was done through different forms of animations and role playing. We then moved on developing our skills of active listening and communication. Furthermore, awareness was created on how stereotyping, prejudice and misconceptions can be a barrier to effective communication and dialogue. On the third day, we moved on to identifying signs of peace and basic needs of individuals. We had a very constructive and interesting discussion on this very basic question and found out that the basics were not as simple as we mostly regard them to be.

On the last day of the interactive problem solving dialogue seminar we actually began to discuss about the real conflict and found out that the way we noticed a 10

difference in how we dealt with the conflict. We have also agreed that students and the youth have things to contribute for the successful resolution of conflicts in our region and they should be part of the effort to bring peace in war prone Horn of Africa. We the youth are the major bearers of the disadvantages associated with violent conflicts and we should be one of the major stakeholders in its sustainable resolution. The dialogue seminar was finalized by setting out practical action plans for the coming years to increase the interaction of the youth of Ethiopia and Eritrea. As physical barriers exist between us to meet face to face and discuss, we agreed to have our interactions and communications virtually via internet and social network sites. This will help us overcome barriers relate to time and space that actually needed to be overcome. We have also confirmed that we will exploit future possibilities to organize yet another interactive dialoged seminar on a third state to set up neutral grounds for both Ethiopian and Eritrean students to come face to face and work on the current predicament that existed between the two great nations.

4. The up-coming Interactive Seminar in Bonn, Germany (20th-23rd of September)

The Bonn Interactive dialogue seminar is the result of the promise that was made in the Langano interactive dialogue seminar. It will attempt to bring participants from Ethiopia and Eritrea to work for peace. The Seminar will take place between 20th and 23rd of September 2012 in the city of Bonn, Germany. Students and youth from Ethiopia and Eritrea will be invited to live together for few days and to interact and get to know the other sides point of view and at the same time we will look at the conflict, its dimensions and if there are ways to resolve it constructively. This process will also constitute a research in dealing with conflicts in a multi-track fashion. The hope is that these youngsters will be inspired enough to deal with the conflict resolution and view the predicament that exists between these nations in a different way. They might develop to view the other persons ideas are not so different from theirs and the main obstacle (enemy) is the misunderstanding or lack of dialogue.

11

4.1 Location of the Interactive dialogue seminar The Interactive dialogue seminar will take place in a green and natural area in Bonn, Germany that is also used as a hostel by the youth that came from different parts of the world. The Hostel is located in Venusberg and it is a quiet and refreshing place for young students who want to reflect on their perceptions and thoughts. The Hostel has accommodations and conference areas and restaurant. It is also in close proximity to the city, the main train station and Kln/Bonn airport.

4.2 Participants and Moderators

The participants for the Seminar will be selected among the youth from Ethiopia and Eritrea. The seminar will be inclusive in a sense that everyone with a genuine interest in peace and dialogue will be considered. It will also take into consideration diversity in gender, background and other factors. Our wish will be to include all the youth from the two countries to have such an interactive dialogue but due to our limitations we will be forced to select. We hope the participants will continue to be agents of dialogue and even initiate similar dialogue projects of their own. These participants will also form the broader network of youth that will be better equipped to deal with conflicts. This in turn will in our opinion transform the cycle of conflict in the region to a more constructive and non-violent Endeavour. We can use this conflict in order to build a stronger relation between the people of Horn of Africa and turn it to our advantage. It will in long and short term also bring benefits to Europes security and Euro-African relations. Like the man said crisis is a terrible thing to waste. The moderators will get training by the former ISFiT (The International Student festival in Trondheim) facilitators that organized the first Dialogue seminar in Norway. 12

4.4 Budget Detail

Remarks: -

All expenses are estimates calculated in Euro. Most of the participants in the interactive seminar will be Students. Therefore, costs for basic requirements during the seminar are covered from the funds we acquire from different sources. The project fund will cover expenses for facilitators and guests to the seminar. There will not be salaries paid to facilitators or guests. Their involvement is out of volunteer contribution for the success of the initiative. Administering expenses and financial auditing will be done by a group of people consisting of event organizers and representatives from the funding organization.

ESTIMATED BUDGET - ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENT Average unit rate () # of participa nts Estimate d budget ()

Payments 1. Per diems 1 1.1 Hotel expenses (nights x unit rate x participants) 1.2 Lunches (lunches x unit rate x participants) 1.3 Dinners (dinners x unit rate x participants) 1.4 Coffee breaks (breaks x unit rate x participants) Subtotal Per diems 2. Travel 2.1 National participants (return trip x unit rate x participants)

Unit

# of units

Per night Per lunch Per dinner Per break

5 5 2

5 5 2

75 75 30

920 300 225 240 1685

Per trip

80

150

2250

5500 14

2.2 Local transport (coach hire) 2.3 Local transport (taxi) (trips x unit rate x participants) Subtotal Travel 3. Rent of hall, interpretation and translation 3.1 Rent of hall (days x unit rate) 3.2 Rent of interpretation equipment (days x unit rate) 3.3 Interpretation services (days x unit rate x interpreters) 3.4 Translation (pages x unit rate) Subtotal Rent of hall, interpretation and translation 4. Publications and printed material 4.1 Publications (editing) (item x unit rate) 4.2 Publications (printing) (item x unit rate x copies) Subtotal Publications and printed material 5. Other (specify) 5.1 specify 5.2 specify Subtotal Other 6. Administrative fees 6.1 Stationery supplies 6.2 Other services (tel/fax, mail, copies) Subtotal Administrative fees Total project costs (1-6)

Per day Per trip

500

6000

Per day Per day Per day Per page

Per item Per item 100 100

Specify Specify

Per event Per event

170 120 290 8,075

* Of the above stated estimate of the project expenditure the North-South Centre (Council of Europe) funding will cover part of the travel expenses of participants in amount of 1,000 Euro.

5. Evaluation of the Dialogue seminar project

Monitoring and evaluation activities are integral part of the overall project. It is important because it gives us clues as to the quality and sustainability of the activities performed. Constant monitoring helps us identify variances if indeed they exist and it makes it easer to come up with possible recommendations. We believe this way it gives 15

us opportunity to take timely measures and to draw lessons that will give us support in developing and implementing upcoming events.

Monitoring and evaluation are mirror images and reflection of our actual implementation. Its proper application confirms us economic use of our resources that are allotted for the specific activity. It is beneficial to conduct monitoring and evaluation processes in a scheduled manner and we need to put in action its findings. The dialogue seminar will have two types of monitoring and evaluation schedules. The first type of evaluation is conducted at the end of every seminar day. Facilitators and participants will have time at the end of every seminar day to evaluate all the activities performed throughout the day. The second type of evaluation is scheduled at the final day of the dialogue seminar. Participants and facilitators will discuss about the overall activities of the dialogue seminar. We expect to get feedbacks from the participants at this last day and facilitators will deliver their reports on how the dialogue seminar went on and how effective it was. Participants also need to come up with action proposals for their future activities. These activities are expected to revolve around organizing members of their communities who share visions similar to ours.

16