This Ugandan story about the alleged Uganda-TPLF military tie-up/training program contains a significant amount of new detail related to diplomatic discussions of the matter between Ethiopia and Uganda during may and June. monitor.co.ug/uganda/news/na…
In his BBC interview the @UPDFspokesperson repeatedly says the Govts of Ethiopia and Uganda had a meeting "three months ago" to discuss the rumours - but at that point their were no rumours. Widespread rumours only started on May 4th when the Zehabesha covered it on @Youtube.
For this to make more sense (i.e. April meetings) it is possible that he is actually referring to @mkainerugaba's tweets about Tigray, rather than the allegations about training camps based in Uganda.
@mkainerugaba An alternative interpretation- that Ethiopia-Uganda were discussing the training camp allegations in April- would seemingly confirm that there was something to discuss, i.e. confirm the substance of the report.
However this is far from clear on the plain words.
@mkainerugaba The extensive information in The Monitor's report is sigificantly more helpful in expanding our knowledge of what may have happened here. [Link >> monitor.co.ug/uganda/news/na…]
@mkainerugaba Any assistance on explaining/decoding/understanding some of these references would be very welcome.
"An alleged leaked intelligence report dubbed; First Forward xxx2xxx" << dubbed where? I wonder if this is a reference to a search identifier in social media channels?
This reference is interesting. It seems to refer to @mkainerugaba's tweets. I was unaware that an USG of the @UN, Ms @Winnie_Byanyima had said anything about any of this. And wonder if this is a reference to something . I can't find anything in twitter.
I had assumed this crucial top level Ethiopia-Uganda diplomatic meeting on May 13th about this matter (the only report of which was here >> plusnews.ug/details-uganda… [A denial of the rumours which were by then circulating]) had taken place in Uganda. But no, it was in Ethiopia.
This is important as it suggests that the Govt. of Ethiopia's concerns about the document were serious enough to warrant asking the Ugandan Minister of Defence to come to Ethiopia to discuss them.
[A reference to this Press Release online would be helpful.]
And here we learn that there were two more meetings in this time frame with Ethiopia's Field Marshal Birhanu Jula. The First on May 17th (with FM Jula's counterpart), & a 2nd meeting on or about May 31st, again in Ethiopia - this time with Ugandan Intel and Legal officials.
So what can we read into all this.
1. We can make some assumptions about the likely source of this additional startling information.
a) It must have come from official sources in the GoE or the GoU.
b) Three meetings would not have been held about a "rumour" or a fake document.
On their face this confirms that there is some substance - albeit it is unclear as yet what that substance is - to the allegations made in the mystery document which I published on Friday July 1st.
2. Read together with the @UPDFspokespersn's statements to @BBCWorldService it is apparent that there is a degree of confusion and disarray in Kampala over the report. The spokesperson talks repeatedly about a meeting three months ago.
But this report confirms that three meetings were held in Addis Ababa, seemingly meetings called by the Govt. of Ethiopia to discss the allegations on May 13th, May 17th and or around May 31st by the most senior officials in security matters of both countries.
In conclusion: Whilst we cannot confirm the contents of the "alleged leaked intelligence report i.e. "Mystery Document" (dubbed "First Forward xxx2xxx") and published in full on Friday 1st July - we can confirm that it was being taken very seriously in May.
And given that we now have three public denials of the allegations in the document by @UPDFSpokesperson, May 13th (press release), Sunday July 3 (tweet) and Monday July 4th (BBC radio IV) we can see the story is not going away.
So far 3 other govt's implicated in the leaked intelligence document - Egypt, the United States and South Sudan - have made no statements themselves.
But the Govt. of Uganda denied July 3rd the allegation that South Sudan's spy chief was coordinating the operation.
After @BorisJohnson's resignation there were smiles all around. @BethRigby even eulogised him. His concession to "Political Gravity" was welcomed - but its not clear that everyone understands the full implications of that gravity.
@BorisJohnson@BethRigby For starters @BorisJohnson was far from contrite, no apology, no mention of why he was booted. Instead he criticised his caucus, accusing them of succumbing to "herd" instinct.
@BorisJohnson@BethRigby We are now being told by worthies that there is no provision in the @Conservatives Constitution for caretakers - even though this idea seemed to be top of mind hours earlier.
"He needs to go. He can't cling on. It's obvious he is unfit to be Prime Minister.... I do not think anything will unite the Tory Party they are tearing themselves apart. If they do not remove him we will bring a vote of confidence....."
The @Conservatives Minister for the Cabinet officer is answering an urgent question. He says that "It is true that the PM [@BorisJohnson] will shortly make an important statement."
He says that the Govt. is still functioning, not withstanding that half of it has now resigned.
Delusional is definitely the word for this latest wrinkle in this most undignified exit. It's hard to say this but I will welcome @DominicRaab as a caretaker PM.
I have changed my mind on @DominicRaab... yes he would be better than Boris, but he's not up to the job and the UK is a) at war and b) facing an economic crisis, the worst since the 1980s.
They are truly awful. Voters have turned against him. The politics of removing Boris are not ambiguous.
@BorisJohnson The latest news via @grantshapps is that Boris has proposed some kind of timetable to depart. As has the 1922 commitee. Monday.
When before the Liason Cmtte. He was clearly unwilling to give up on the only leverage he has left (or thinks he has left)....
@BorisJohnson@grantshapps ... namely the ability to dissolve Parliament, and call an election. Whilst Sir Bernard Jenkins thought he had got Boris to agree that he would not do so. What he actually got was an agreement not to do so if he lost a vote of confidence.