The lack of co-ordination among international actors can wreak havoc on efforts at peacemaking. The UN Secretary-General’s recent report on conflict in Africa states clearly that peacemaking efforts need to be well co-ordinated and prepared. He warns that "the failure of the major external actors to maintain a common political approach to an erupting or ongoing crisis is one of the principal impediments to progress towards a solution", adding that "it is critically important that international actors avoid the temptation to undertake rival or competing efforts." The escalation of the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia and the flurry of seemingly unco-ordinated international efforts at mediation are clear illustrations of what the report was trying to prevent.

According to Annan, "Where a peace process is needed, it is the role of the United Nations, with the Organisation of African Unity, to help create one." While the UN has so far abstained from involvement in the Horn, the OAU has had little option but to respond. However, its response was pre-empted by energetic American diplomacy.

Two days after initial skirmishes had escalated into heavy battles, Eritrea suggested international mediation. It has used this technique of military action followed by calls for international mediation in its aggressive assertion of border claims with Sudan, Yemen and Djibouti in the past. In the case of Ethiopia, Washington reacted swiftly. The US Assistant Secretary for State for African Affairs arrived in Asmara to launch a mediation effort which involves the Rwandan Vice-President, Paul Kagame.

A few days later, the OAU Secretary General offered to help in settling the border dispute. He offered to "facilitate the search for a peaceful solution", saying that he had already sought the assistance of several African leaders. Djibouti’s President Hassan Gouled Aptidon, currently chairperson of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), has been engaged as a peacemaker. To add more spice to the diplomatic pie, the Italian government has apparently indicated its willingness to mediate in the dispute (Italy was the colonial power of Eritrea from 1890 until 1941).

In late May, the US-Rwandan facilitators presented a four point plan to both parties, which involves the withdrawal of Ethiopian and Eritrean troops from the disputed territory, the deployment of a neutral observer force, the return of civilian administration to disputed areas, and an investigation into the ‘roots’ of the conflict.

In early June, Libyan leader, Colonel Moammar Ghadaffi offered to send troops from the six-nation Sahelian-Saharan Group to the disputed area. Currently chaired by Ghadaffi, the group, comprising Libya, Chad, Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso and Sudan, was established in Tripoli in 1997. Ghadaffi apparently assigned the organisation’s assistant Secretary-General, Adam Togoe, to submit the proposal to the Ethiopian Prime Minister and Eritrean President. Togoe subsequently visited Addis Ababa and Asmara to deliver the plan. It is not clear whether Ghadaffi’s plan was linked to the US-Rwandan initiative for a neutral observer force, but it is unlikely that the US would have consulted with Tripoli on the idea or vice versa.

This scramble to be the ‘peacemaker’ in the Horn proves that, if the UN does not act quickly by spelling out exactly what is to be done and by whom, there are a host of other eager actors waiting. The danger is that the result will be a muddle of recommendations and suggestions with no clear means of resolving the conflict itself.