MALI: ALGERIA’S AGREEMENT PAVES THE WAY FOR MILITARY INTERVENTION

The last few months have seen numerous developments take place in the West African country of Mali. So numerous have these changes been that news outlets have struggled to keep apace with the rapidly transcending circumstances. This week, Algeria, said to be the only obstacle to an ECOWAS-led military intervention in Mali, approved an intervention, the consequences of which have the potential to spill into its territory.


ECOWAS’s (The Economic Community of West African States) aim, by way of the intended action is to wrestle back control from al Qaeda-backed militants of the northern part of the country which for several months, has been outside the control of the country’s government. Some reports now claim that Tuareg rebels, working in tandem with al Qaeda-supported Islamist militants now control two thirds of the country since army generals instigated a coup in March of this year.


Algeria’s agreement hasn’t been achieved without the usual diplomatic arm twisting. In this case, its colonial father France has been at the forefront of efforts to acquire Algeria’s approval prior to the intended intervention. It would now appear that France has been able to assuage the fears of Algeria, a country with growing influence in the region, of fears that the conflict would spill into its territory and further fears over the likely duration of the conflict. This latest development follows the recent U.N. Security Council resolution whose central proposal was its urging of African states and the United Nations for the production of an intervention plan in Mali.


In the same week the African Union (AU) lifted its suspension of Mali which was imposed on the country following the aforementioned coup d’etat which unseated President Amadou Toumani Toure earlier on in the year. The country’s Foreign Minister Tieman Coulibaly attributed the lifting of the sanctions to Mali’s “respect of signed agreements and the creation of a government of national union conforming to the demands of the international community.” One of the conditions for the intervention is rumoured to be that elections would have to be held within 12 months after the return to ‘constitutional order’.


It is worthwhile noting that international consensus has been achieved with regard to how the Malian situation should be addressed. Germany, by way of its Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle averred in the past week that the European Union must assist with the African-led Mali mission. France’s position is visibly clear having seized the reins in the drafting of an intervention centred U.N. resolution and selling the idea of intervention to a very reluctant Algeria.


The U.S., via its Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, highlighted the gains made by al Qaeda which has successfully exploited the power vacuum in the region and the need for the international community to work hand in hand in order to deal with the threats. Panetta stated: “We need to work with the nations in the region. They all agree that we are facing the same threat there from AQIM (said to be al Qaeda’s branch in North Africa). He continued: “Our goal right now is to try to do everything we can to bring those countries together in a common effort to go after AQIM.”


Even if the AU can produce the detailed plan for intervention requested by the U.N. Security Council within six weeks of October 12, uncertainty still pervades as to whether military action will commence in the immediate aftermath or after a further, and as yet unknown, time limit has elapsed. If last week’s statements by the Chairwoman of the AU, Nkosazana Dlamina-Zuma, are to be believed then the former might well be the case. To this end, Dlamina-Zuma stated, in the course of interviews with global news outlets: “We are working to finalise the joint planning for the early deployment of an African-led international military force to help Mali recover the occupied territories in the North.” At the same time she revealed that the AU was set to “leave the door of dialogue open to those Malian rebel groups willing to negotiate.”


Realists will acknowledge that the chances of resolution of the conflict at this late stage by way of dialogue are slim at best and negligible at worst. The AU and UN must pay heed to the fact that the slightest signs of failure of this most surreptitious of plans will inevitably lead to scribes reaching for their pens in order to draw parallels between the present scenario and Afghanistan.

MALI: U.N. PONDERS MALI GOVERNMENT’S REQUEST FOR MILITARY INTERVENTION

Last week’s news that the West African country has called on the United Nations (U.N.) to intervene militarily in order to reclaim parts of the country currently controlled by Islamist militants, though welcome, raised several eyebrows and subsequently questions amongst followers of the country’s recent fortunes. The most vital of the questions which have arisen are whether the call for intervention has come too late and secondly, whether the said intervention will achieve its desired aims if approved by the UN.


Recent History

Prior to the unfolding of the events of March of this year, Mali had been hailed by observers as one of the few democratic success stories in Africa. In March of this year however, and borrowing from the Nigerian author Chinua Achebe’s seminal masterpiece, things fell apart when a gang of soldiers initiated a coup d’etat which saw to the overthrow of the nation’s President. A combination of forces, namely Tuareg rebels who have always had an axe to grind with the government following decades of claims of marginalisation, together with various groups of Islamist militants acting jointly and severally launched an operation against the establishment which has resulted in the Northern region of the country being fully under their control. It is also reported that people in that region of the country are now subjected to Sharia law, which is the strictest form of Islam.


Call for Intervention

The call for intervention was said to have been made by way of a letter sent by the Malian government to the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the contents of which were revealed by the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. In calling for a U.N. resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, under which the U.N. can authorise military interventions, the Malian government stated that terrorists, drug dealers and criminals currently occupy areas of the country and as such it needed the support of an international force “to help the Malian army to reconquer the occupied areas of northern Mali.”

Mali’s request for intervention was met with a rather familiar obstacle in a divided United Nations. At a special summit arranged by the U.N. to address all things Mali-related and held against the background of the recent U.N. General Assembly, the Malian Prime Minister Cheick Modibo Diarra stated: “There is an urgency to act to end the suffering of the people of Mali and to prevent a similar situation that would be even more complicated in the Sahel and the rest of the world.” Diarra’s impassioned plea for assistance was supported by the country’s Colonial Father, France who’s President Francoise Hollande pledged his country’s support to the idea of a potential military action.



Reservations to Calls for Intervention

Whilst France had no reservations in throwing its hat in the ring in support of military intervention, the reverse was the case with the US who appear to be exhibiting more restraint than they have been associated with in recent times, perhaps an indication of their reduced influence in the global politics arena. Hilary Clinton, the country’s Secretary of State insisted that a legitimate government had to be put in place before such an action could be considered. In respect of what can only be described as the multi-dimensional nature of the problems currently facing Mali, Clinton stated: “This is not only a humanitarian crisis; it is a power keg that the international community cannot afford to ignore.” She continued “in the end, only a democratically elected government will have the legitimacy to achieve a negotiated political settlement in northern Mali, end the rebellion and restore the rule of law.”

Clinton’s stance has also received support from the U.N. Secretary General who has also raised reservations regarding the topic of military intervention on the ground that it may further exacerbate the already critical humanitarian crises in the region.


The Future

Although the American call for caution in respect of the potential for military action is comprehended, a legitimate question which then arises is how democratic elections can be held in a country where a sizeable area is controlled by Islamist militants who abhor the concept of democracy and accordingly the principles and ideals associated with it. Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clearer by the day that diplomacy may be futile in salvaging the situation. The July 5 Security Council sanctioned ECOWAS (The Economic Community of West African States) mission which was mandated to apply political means to resolve the conflict hardly made any notable gains despite its credible efforts. Its failure was no doubt significantly handicapped by the difficulty in identifying all the warring factions in order to commence any form of effective negotiations as Al-Qaeda is only but one of the several Islamist militant groups said to be operating in the northern region of Mali.


Sound-off

Whilst the U.N.’s sounds of caution are laudable its prevarication on the same subject has already contributed to the humanitarian crises facing the region and clearly lessons have not been learnt. A rational move at this point would be the authorisation of ECOWAS troops – who have indicated its preparedness to send troops at short notice – in order to quell the flames emanating from the nation’s combustion. Sooner rather than later the U.N.’s leadership will be forced to make the decision it has attempted to circumvent for some time which in sum amounts to whether the benefits of military intervention outweigh the potential of a worsening of the humanitarian crises which has resulted in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent Malians.