by user Dannyjnorman
Eritrean Information Minister Ali Abdu warned that the presence of the Ugandan peacekeeping force in Somalia could lead to a war that spills out of Somalia to other parts of Africa.
Eritrea, who has its fair share of rivals in the area, most notably Ethiopia, is concerned about the presence of foreign African troops in a chaotic Somalia.
The question is what is the angle?
Does Eritrea benefit from a chaotic Somalia? Or is Eritrea truly concerned that the fighting in Somalia could spill into other countries.
Ever since the Korean War, and probably even before, wars in an enclosed arena have been problematic. In Somalia's case is Eritrea worried that warlords from Somalia will seek refuge in Eritrea? And if so will Ugandan forces follow into Eritrea?
Similarly, Chad has prevented UN peacekeeping forces from protecting the Sudanese refugees from the Darfur region of Sudan that have relocated to eastern Chad. And like Eritrea, the reason for Chad's reluctance is not fully understood.
The Afghanistan allied forces are facing the same dilemma on the Pakistan border. Since the allied forces are allowed only to conduct operations within the confines of Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda forces find refuge across the border in Pakistan.
This prompted US Vice President Dick Cheney to travel to Pakistan to deliver a warning to Pakistan President Musharraf that unless Pakistan could pull its weight in the Global War on Terror (GWOT) and block the Taliban and al Qaeda from seeking refuge in Pakistan, the US congress might cut off GWOT funds.
In modern day warfare if the borders are not closed and if the superior forces cannot pursue the enemy into the foreign lands, there are a couple characteristics that will probably endure. Wars will continue for an artificially long time because the weaker forces cannot be defeated. Wars will have the threat of engulfing other states in the region. And wars will wreak havoc on vast sums of civilian populations.