Ethiopian troops 'executed' aid workers in Tigray conflict, MSF official says
MSF said it was releasing its findings as the government had failed to provide a "credible account" of the deaths despite 20 face-to-face meetings over the last four years. Thirty-five-year-old Spaniard María Hernández Matas, along with 32-year-old Yohannes Halefom Reda and 31-year-old Tedros Gebremariam, were killed on 24 June 2021 while travelling in central Tigray to assess medical needs. "They were very professional and passionate," Ms Ayora told the BBC. She added that the three were fully identifiable in MSF vests and their vehicle had the charity's flag and logos on either side when they were shot."So, they [Ethiopian troops] knew that they were killing humanitarian aid workers," she said, adding that the team's travel route had also been shared in advance with fighting groups.The Tigray conflict broke out in 2020 following a massive fall-out between the regional and federal governments, with neighbouring Eritrea entering the war on the side of the Ethiopian National Defence Force (ENDF).The conflict ended two years later following a peace deal brokered by the African Union (AU). Its envoy, former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, put the number of people who died in the conflict at around 600,000.Researchers said the deaths were caused by fighting, starvation and a lack of health care.The killings took place at a time when the conflict was intensifying, and Ethiopian and Eritrean troops were becoming increasingly hostile towards aid workers in the region, MSF said in its report. Ms Matas had been working in Tigray since before the war and "was very much loved" by people in the region, Ms Ayora said.Her death has been particularly devastating for her mother as she was her only child, the MSF official added. Mr Tedros was killed soon after his wife had given birth to a baby girl. His widow named the baby Maria, after her father's killed Spanish colleague, Mr Ayora said.
The bodies of Ms Matas and Mr Yohannes were found between 100m (300ft) and 400m from the wreckage of their vehicle. The body of Mr Tedros, the driver, was found by the vehicle."In line with MSF travel policy, the driver stays close to the vehicle", Ms Ayora said.The vehicle was shot at multiple times and burned on the main road from the town of Abi Adi to Yech'illa, Ms Ayora said.Ms Matas and Mr Yohannes were walking when they were shot, she said, adding: "We don't know if they were called for interrogation or they decided to engage with the soldiers."MSF said it had relied on satellite images, witnesses and publicly available information on the Ethiopian military's movements at the time of the killings to draw its conclusions.Its investigation placed Ethiopian troops at the "precise location" where the killings occurred, the charity added. MSF's report quoted witnesses as saying they overhead an officer informing the local commander of an approaching white car and the commander giving an order to shoot. Moments later, the commander was allegedly informed that the soldiers had tried to shoot but that the car had turned towards Abi Adi and stopped, at which point the commander gave the order to "go and catch them" and "remove them", the report alleged.Ms Ayora told the BBC that officials from Ethiopia's Ministry of Justice had verbally informed MSF in mid-2022 that their preliminary investigation showed that government troops were not at the scene of the killing. However, the officials refused to give this in writing, and the charity kept engaging with the government in order to end "impunity" at a time when an increasing number of aid workers were being killed in conflicts around the world, Ms Ayora said.
More BBC stories on Tigray conflict:
'I lost my leg on the way home from school'How a massacre in the sacred city of Aksum unfoldedThe war is over but the rapes continue
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
41 minutes ago
- Sky News
Rwanda agrees to accept up to 250 migrants from the US
Rwanda has agreed to accept up to 250 migrants from the US in a deal agreed with President Donald Trump's administration. The decision makes Rwanda the third African country to agree to accept migrants as part of the United States 's strategy to relocate migrants to countries with which they have no affiliation, in order to remove them from its territory. The East African nation would be able "to approve each individual proposed for resettlement", Rwandan government spokesperson Yolande Makolo said in a statement on Tuesday. Makolo did not provide a timeline for any deportees to arrive in Rwanda and said details were still being worked out. Under the scheme, the deportees would be provided with work training, health care, and accommodation to start their lives in the new country, according to the Rwandan government. The State Department said the US "works with Rwanda on a range of mutual priorities" but did not provide further details on the deportation deal. Last month, the US sent 13 men it described as dangerous criminals who were in the US illegally to South Sudan and Eswatini, saying their home countries refused to take them back. Washington has said it is pursuing additional agreements with African nations. The US has already deported hundreds of Venezuelans and others to Costa Rica, Panama, and El Salvador as part of Donald Trump's efforts to remove people he says entered the country illegally. In March, invoking an 18th century wartime law, the US deported over 200 Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador, who were immediately sent to a large prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, which was originally designed to detain suspected gang members. Human rights groups say they have documented numerous deaths and cases of torture inside the facility. 6:13 Rwanda drew global attention and criticism in 2022 when it agreed to a similar deal with the UK. The controversial deal faced criticism from human rights groups and others, who deemed it unethical and impractical. It was eventually abandoned after the Labour government came into power in 2024. Britain's Supreme Court ruled the agreement illegal, stating Rwanda was not a safe third country for migrants. Rwanda, a relatively small nation with a population of around 15 million, has been notable in Africa for its recovery following the 1994 genocide that claimed over 800,000 lives. Under the leadership of longtime President Paul Kagame, the country has marketed itself as a model of stability and progress. However, human rights organisations accuse the government of harsh and sometimes lethal repression of any perceived opposition to Kagame, who has held power for 25 years. But the country's government has said it is welcoming the migrants from the US "in part because nearly every Rwandan family has experienced the hardships of displacement, and our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation".
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Prince Harry attacks his former charity for invoking memory of Diana
The chairman of the Duke of Sussex's former charity has been accused of acting in the 'poorest possible taste' over a reference to his late mother. Sophie Chandauka vowed to honour the founding mission of the charity Sentebale in memory of Diana, Princess of Wales, after the Charity Commission ruled on Wednesday she could stay in post following a clash which forced the Duke and other trustees to resign. Allies of Prince Harry, who co-founded Sentebale in 2006, condemned her actions, saying his 'life's work' had been destroyed by her 'hostile takeover' of the charity, which they said had been her intention from the start. The Charity Commission issued a report on Wednesday into events at Sentebale, whose mission is to help children with HIV/Aids in Lesotho and Botswana. The Duke and other trustees, including co-founder Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, resigned en masse in March after accusing Ms Chandauka of mismanagement and calling on her to step down. She then claimed to have been a victim of bullying, harassment and misogynoir – discrimination against black women. On Wednesday, she said that the public spat had caused 'incalculable damage' to the charity and laid the blame on 'the unexpected adverse media campaign that was launched by those who resigned'.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
If Trump is finally ‘done' with Putin, a new dimension of uncertainty opens up
In a remarkably calm and candid interview with the BBC's Gary O'Donoghue a few weeks ago, Donald Trump was asked if he was 'done' with Vladimir Putin. The president replied directly: 'I'm not done with him, but I'm disappointed in him.' A week later, as if to prove the point, President Trump announced a 50-day deadline for Mr Putin to end the war. Last week, with zero response from the Kremlin and continued attacks on Ukrainian civilians, that deadline was brought forward to the end of this week, and Mr Trump sent his personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, to Moscow. There is no immediate sign that Mr Witkoff has achieved any kind of breakthrough with the Russian leader. Mr Trump's patience with the Russians, previously seeming irrationally inexhaustible, must be wearing extremely thin. It may be that, much against his intentions both in the campaign last year and in his diplomacy during his first term, President Trump may well be soon 'done' with Mr Putin. That opens up a whole new dimension of uncertainty. Having, in effect, made the US 'switch sides' in the war on Ukraine to the consternation of Nato allies, could it be that Mr Trump will come full circle and back President Zelensky, a man he roundly abused in that shameful incident in the Oval Office in February? With the capricious Mr Trump, it is hard to tell. It is unlikely that he'll change his view that the war is futile, that Ukraine cannot win, and that he does not want American money or, still less, personnel, committed to yet another 'forever war'. But that does not mean he is going to adopt a stance of neutrality. He has been willing to ship substantial quantities of armaments to Ukraine, albeit with European allies paying for them – and the minerals deal does give America some material stake in the survival of Ukraine. Moreover, Mr Trump – increasingly resentful about the Kremlin rebuffing his overtures and Mr Putin stringing him along – has threatened further sanctions on Russia, where once he was eager to drop them and build closer trade links with Russia (in a stark contrast with policy towards America's closest allies and the rest of the world). He is presently engaged in a trade war and war of words with the Indian government about its open willingness to buy Russian oil and, thus, fund Russia's war machine. This new pressure on third parties, including China, goes much further than President Biden's policy, and does indeed put America closer onside with what Kyiv wishes it to do. Tariffs are an offensive and self-defeating weapon in economic terms, but in the diplomatic context they can prove highly effective. Neither India nor China should want to lose access to the US market merely to prop up Mr Putin's stumbling economy. Some analysts think that, with increasing isolation, Russia could be bust within months. Should Mr Trump have a strategic purpose, it should be to stay out of the Ukraine conflict militarily but still to seek to bring the fighting to an end. That is easiest done by making the Russian war machine bankrupt. In such circumstances, President Putin will be much more willing to agree to a ceasefire and restart talks. Without such pressure, the rational thing for the Russians to do is to press on with their 'meat-grinder', making slow but gradual territorial gains, leveraging their advantage in manpower and the assistance of powers such as China, Iran and North Korea. It may not be a coincidence that Saudi Arabia led Opec in boosting fossil fuel production, lowering global prices and reducing the value of Russian exports – illicit or otherwise. President Trump may also soon subscribe to the European cap on the price of Russian oil purchases and take a more aggressive stance towards Russia's 'shadow fleet' of unregistered tankers that are used to ferry oil into international markets and avoid sanctions. They are hard to trace, but not invisible, and can be impounded. At any rate, his Ukraine policy has proved a failure for Mr Trump. CNN has counted 53 occasions, dating back to 2023, when Mr Trump claimed that he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours, or the like, and he has obviously not even begun to do so. More recently, he claimed that he meant it 'figuratively', as a deliberate, purposeful exaggeration. Some doubt that – but there is little prospect for any kind of peace unless Mr Trump decisively steps up the pressure on Mr Putin. 'Peace through strength' is another of Mr Trump's favourite sayings, but it has not always been lived up to. This time he needs to mean it.
