To Whom Does Gambella Oil in Ethiopia Belong: An OromoPerspectiveBy Idris Shaankkore“… history amply illustrates that the once oppressedwill eventually be emancipated from the grips of theoppressors and become antagonists of those whoempowered the oppressors.”In the late 19th Century, whenever the Abyssiniancolonizers from Northern Ethiopia, extended theirterritory, Abyssinian settlers took Oromo and Southernlands by force, the crops, livelihoods and veryexistence of indigenous populations were endangered.Like the Oromos and the other Southern Peoples ofEthiopia, during the periods of conquest andcolonization, the indigenous people of Gambella weredispossessed of their entire livelihoods by theAbyssinian colonizers, especially their indigenouslands, murdered, and sold into slavery. The direpoverty of the Gambella peoples, formerly pejorativelyreferred to as "Shankella" is a legacy of Abyssiniancolonial history and exploitation, and sinisterschemes under the Feudal, the Mengistu Haile Mariamand the present EPRDF Governments to settle NorthernEthiopians in the fertile ancestoral lands of theindigenous population. Many of the indigenous Peoplesof Gambella are internally displaced people and manyindeed reside in refugee camps in their own land andin neighboring Eastern Sudan.The crimes suffered on the Gambella by the Abyssiniancolonizers and the and subsequent Ethiopian regimes isnothing short of acts genocide and dispossession ofthese peoples for the benefit of Abyssinian settlers,who received protection and assistance from theEthiopian State. The indigenous people of Gambellahave often sought, since the birth of the EthiopianState, to preserve their identity and their land. InGambella, the agriculturist Anuak minority (also knownas Anywaa or Anywak) number over 100,000 people inEthiopia and Sudan. Anuaks are the predominantlandholders in the region of southwest Ethiopia.Anuaks have a long history of sharing the land withthe pastoralist Nuer people, even though theirrelationship has been intermittently problematic.Multinational corporations have now set their sightson the natural resources of the Gambella region.Petroleum (oil & gas), water, tungsten, platinum andgold are the principal resources in the Gambellaregion that are of interest to international financialand extraction corporations. Ethiopian governmentauthorities thus have powerful economic incentives toseek control of these resources. The Anuak situation has grown markedly worse since oilwas discovered under Anuak lands by the GambellaPetroleum Corp, a subsidiary of Pinewood ResourcesLtd. of Canada, which signed a concession agreementwith the Ethiopian government in 2001. In May 2001,however, Pinewood relinquished all rights to theGambella oil concession and pulled out of Ethiopia andon June 13, 2003, Malaysia’s state-owned petroleumcorporation, Petronas, which has been exploring anddeveloping oil fields in Sudan announced the signingof an exclusive 25-year oil exploration and productionsharing agreement with the EPRDF Government to exploitthe Ogaden Basin and the “Gambella Block”. The Gambella concession, which stretches across a19,600 sq. km of land is an extension of the Melutbasin, located in south Sudan, and is known for itshuge amount of oil reserve. On February 17, 2004, theEthiopian Minister of Mines announced that theMalaysian company will launch a natural gasexploration project in the Gambella region. On March7, 2006, a Chinese petroleum company, ZhongyuanPetroleum Exploration Bureau (ZPEB), which wascontracted by Petronas, to undertake drilling worksstarted drilling the first exploration well in theGambella basin, to be finalized within three months.*The Malaysian company seeks to profit at the expenseof the indigenous population without regard for powerdisparities of indigenous communities, the high stakesrevenue sharing/distribution issues, and environmentalimpacts, potentially igniting "vertical” and"horizontal conflicts" in the Region (among and withincommunities, between communities and the local ornational government and at times leading tocross-border conflicts). In addition, disaffectedgroups will “challenge” the governments in hopes ofwinning a share of the lucrative oil revenues.Environmental damage by oil extraction sparks protestmovements and deadly violence, which are frequentlymet by government repression. Boundary disputesbetween states over oil reserves represent yet anotherlink between oil and violence. To this writer’s knowledge, the indigenous people ofGambella were neither consulted nor informed aboutthese resource extractions nor were the distributionsor sharing of revenues negotiated with the indigenouspopulation by Petronas or the EPRDF Government. Yet,the array of burdens, ranging from the expropriationof land, displacement and resettlements, environmentaland economic refugees, disruption of traditional waysof life, environmental devastation, increased foodinsecurity and social maladies, will be borne by thelocal populations. "The notion that the oil-bearing areas provide therevenue of the country, and yet be denied a propershare of that revenue ... is unjust, immoral,unnatural and ungodly. Why should the people onoil-bearing land be tortured?" - Ken Saro-Wiwa. Thefundamental question "to whom does the resourcebelong” raises a very intricate question, whichinvolved many years of study and deliberation anddebate by philosophers, political scientists,historians, and international lawyers. Deliberationsand writings eventually culminated in the developmentand acceptance of certain doctrines and principles toserve as the foundation for the present internationalnorms.The premise in support of or againstself-determination is no longer open to argument orpersuasion on philosophical or political grounds andis firmly rooted in international law. The right ofself-determination of the Gambella people is a rightaccruing to the claimant independent of the rights,wishes, concerns, or strategic and political interestsof others. The right of self-determination or theright of self-determination of “peoples” is not aclaim under the constitution of a country, rather, itis a fundamental principle and right underinternational law. This right is embodied in theCharter of the United Nations plus the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights and theInternational Covenant on Economic, Social andCultural Rights. Common Article 1 of these Covenantsprovides that: “1. All peoples have the right ofself-determination. By virtue of that right theyfreely determine their political status and freelypursue their economic, social and culturaldevelopment. 2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freelydispose of their natural wealth and resources withoutprejudice to any obligations arising out ofinternational economic co-operation, based upon theprinciple of mutual benefits, and international law.In no case may a people be deprived of its own meansof subsistence. 3. The States Parties to the present Covenant,including those having responsibility for theadministration of Non-Self-Governing and TrustTerritories, shall promote the realization of theright of self-determination, and shall respect thatright, in conformity with the provisions of theCharter of the United Nations.”The right of self-determination has also beenrecognized in many other international and regionalhuman rights instruments, such as Part VII of theHelsinki Final Act 1975 and Article 20 of the AfricanCharter of Human and Peoples’ Rights as well as theDeclaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Territories and Peoples1. It has beenendorsed by the International Court of Justice.Furthermore, the scope and content of the right ofself- determination has been elaborated upon by theUnited Nations Human Rights Committee and the UnitedNations Committee on the Elimination of RacialDiscrimination.Secondly, in addition to being a right underinternational law, peoples’ right ofself-determination is regarded by some internationallaw scholars as Jus cogens - a peremptory norm ofgeneral international law from which no derogation ispermitted and which can be modified only by asubsequent norm of general international law of thesame nature.The economic or resource dimension of the right ofself-determination is emphasized in common paragraph 2of Article 1 of the Covenants: “All peoples may, for their own ends, freelydispose of their natural wealth and resources withoutprejudice to any obligations arising out of internationaleconomic cooperation,Land is central to the life of indigenous people andis the core of their heritage and their existence. Therelationship between indigenous peoples and their landembodies fundamental rights that are simultaneouslylegal, economic and social in nature and form part andparcel of their identity. The issue of land andresource rights is the most important question for themajority of the world’s indigenous peoples. Just likeOromos, the Gambella people regard their land andresources rights as being an integral part of theirright of self-determination. In fact, the dispute over natural resources is at theheart of some of the most intractable conflicts aroundthe world, including in Africa today, from Sudan toCongo to Nigeria. Even amid international efforts tobring greater transparency to the continent's resourceexploration, the recent strife in Sudan, Nigeria, andCongo is a microcosm of conflict, widespread theft andmismanagement, which observers attribute to acombination of colonial-era intervention, corruptgovernments, and cynical behavior by Westernpolicymakers and multinationals. Numerous investigations and studies have alsodemonstrated that "Black gold" uniquely often bringshardship and misery to the indigenous societies whereit is found and petroleum-producing countries areplagued by corrupt and authoritarian governments, andunsustainable economic development and violentconflict. Studies have documented how foreign powersand their huge multinational oil companies oftenmaneuver for control of indigenous lands throughclandestine operations, bribery, or outright militaryintervention. If the fundamental right to self-determination of allpeoples and the right to their indigenous economicresources is firmly established in international law,should these rights not be honored, applied, andenforced equally and universally by all nations,particularly, by the Western framers and advocates ofthe covenants? It is this writers contention thatnations which perpetuate the violations ofinternational norms by oppressive regimes in order topromote their self interest, will in the long termsuffer the resentment and anger of the oppressed whowill manifest their hostility by means which will becharacterized as terrorism. Furthermore, history amplyillustrates that the once oppressed will eventually beemancipated from the grips of the oppressors andbecome antagonists of those rogue regimes likeMalaysia and China who empowered the oppressors.
* Petronas and the China National PetroleumCorporation are currently operating in Sudan, where,according to a report by Human Rights Watch, the twoAsian oil giants have allegedly provided cover fortheir respective governments to ship arms and militaryequipment to Sudan in exchange for oil concessionsgranted by Khartoum.
Idris Shaankkore is a resident of Addis Ababa,Ethiopia. Shaankkore@yahoo.com