More East African Chaos Can Cause Problems For Wider Middle East.

*** Syria Agrees That Israel Has Pulled Out Of South Lebanon, Hinting At Its Readiness For A Deal As Well

*** Sensing The Possibility Of A Serious Rift Among The Leaders In Khartoum, The Southern Rebels Have Suspended Peace Talks With The Govt.

*** The Latest Indications Are That Up To 10 Million People Will Be Affected By Famine In Ethiopia

CAIRO - With the two-year war between Ethiopia and Eritrea coming to a close, at least for the time being, the question of whether stability or chaos will follow is being asked within Egyptian government circles. There is a possibility that, with Algerian mediation, the two countries might be able to reach some kind of permanent settlement. But expectations are mixed, as the leaders of Ethiopia and Eritrea - Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and President Issaias Afeworki, respectively - have personal and domestic political compulsions which may make it necessary for them to resume hostilities, even if they reach an agreement which calms things down in the short-term.

As a result, APS sources feel that the latest ceasefire in the war between these two countries is not likely to last very long. They note that Ethiopia currently holds territory claimed by Eritrea, and unless Algeria is able to broker a settlement that would definitively mark the 1,000-km frontier between the two countries, another upsurge of border violence is likely sooner rather than later. Eritrea in late May accused Ethiopian troops of taking over land 25 km inside previously undisputed Eritrean territory.

Eritrean forces have withdrawn from regions they occupied in May 1998, including the border town of Zalambessa, which is now in ruins. Since mid-May, the Ethiopian army has taken control of a huge section of western Eritrea. But it has indicated that its main objective was to recapture the territory around the towns of Zalambessa and Alitena, 100 km south of Eritrean capital Asmara and on the central front, which had been under the control of Eritrea during the past two years. On May 31, Ethiopia signaled that it would pull its troops out of previously undisputed territory in western Eritrea.

So far, the sources say, the chaotic situation in East Africa has been less damaging to the interests of regional powers than thought in the early 1990s, when the entire region imploded following the cold war. While Somalia continues to be in a state of limbo, controlled by warlords and with no central authority, Sudan is in the midst of a power struggle between the Islamist leader Hassan Al Turabi and President Omar Hassan Al Bashir, who has succeeded in outmanoeuvring the former over the past year. But Turabi, who is being stripped of his official positions one by one, recently warned that "any possibility exists, including an armed confrontation" with Bashir and his supporters.

Egyptian officials are concerned that the implications of continuing instability in East Africa will be worse than what it was in the 1990s as it will provide the ideal situation for Islamic militancy to spread into Eritrea and Ethiopia from Sudan. Both Ethiopia and Eritrea have considerably large Muslim populations, and they are not satisfied with the current internal set-up. For its part, Khartoum itself will feel the pressure of a refugee influx at a time when it can barely feed its own population - with both Ethiopia and Sudan facing famine conditions in various parts.

The sources are equally concerned about the prospects of yet another humanitarian catastrophe in the area. While Eritrea and Ethiopia are estimated to have spent about $1 billion on defence purchases over the past two years, both countries are in the midst of serious economic crises. In addition to defence spending, the costs of the war in terms of destruction and deaths have been huge; it is said that the fighting since 1998 has claimed 100,000 lives in total.

In this context, it is important to note that the war has an economic dimension. Eritrea, which has virtually no natural resources, has been saying that it wants to copy the example of Singapore, i.e. to turn the country into an export-processing zone. This caused concern in Ethiopia, which has been landlocked since Eritrea gained independence in 1993. Addis Ababa was worried that it would be limited to being a supplier of cheap labour to Eritrea. In turn, Eritrea was angered when Ethiopia insisted in 1997 that interstate transactions should be carried out in dollars.

In many ways, the relationship between the two countries is an unequal one. If a conventional war continues, Ethiopia with far larger natural resources and a population of 60 million compared to 3.5 million in Eritrea, could be expected to prevail. Yet there has been a general perception in the West that Eritrea has largely been responsible for the situation that it faces today.

Western governments have become irritated by what some call Eritrean President Afeworki's "arrogant nature". Strongly nationalistic, he has laid a heavy emphasis on self-sufficiency and refuses to accept Western advice on economic matters. He has established a highly centralised and tightly-controlled state compared to Ethiopia which has shown itself to be sensitive to ethnic divisions and has set up a diversified federal structure (though central control remains strong) with a number of political parties. More importantly, Afeworki has acquired a reputation for aggressive tactics, having engaged in hostilities since 1993 with Yemen, Ethiopia and even with tiny Djibouti. This may explain why the West has tended to lean in favour of Ethiopian explanations for the latest round of fighting between the two countries. But there is no indication that Afeworki will change his approach.

Sudan Developments: Meanwhile, in Sudan Bashir is consolidating his power. Observers say he may be proceeding too rapidly, to the extent that Turabi could find enough people who may decide to challenge the way things are changing. On May 6, in his latest move, Bashir stripped Turabi of his position as the secretary general of the ruling National Congress. Bashir hit back subsequently, saying on May 8 that: "Bashir is a military dictator who wants absolute power. He passed a law to maintain himself as an officer, as commander of the army as well as president of the republic".

Turabi added that the National Congress could stage a revolt against Bashir, noting: "It will be a process of mobilisation and after that the elected party's leaders will decide whether they will address the public or take any action they deem appropriate". But Bashir is moving to completely sideline Turabi by appointing a new party general-secretary after elections set to be held next October. New regional party officials are also to be appointed, which would further undermine the power base of Turabi's Islamist supporters. Turabi has been getting virtually no positive exposure in the official Sudanese media over the past two months. Yet his ideology still retains considerable influence within universities and among fellow Islamists.

If the Bashir-Turabi rivalry results in civil strife, Sudan could resume its position as a haven for radical Islamists from across the Islamic World. Under strong Western and Egyptian pressure, Bashir had over the past year tried to curb some of the militants' activities - which Turabi had encouraged throughout the 1990s. For its part, Egypt can be expected to throw its weight behind Bashir's attempts to marginalise Turabi on the Sudanese political scene and to bring Sudan back to the mainstream. Bashir has made it possible for many opposition leaders to return home from exile. As such, it is in Egypt's interest that Bashir remains in control.