Tag: Africa

  • United States Hedging Rhetoric on Egypt Protests

    My television has been tuned to CNN for the past 24 hours, and the footage that the network has been broadcasting (thanks to Al Jazeera and those brave Egyptians with cell phones) is nothing short of extraordinary. Young and middle aged Egyptian citizens from all walks of life are holding hands and shouting in unison, “down down with Mubarak.” The Egyptian government has issued a citywide curfew for Cairo, Alexandria and Suez in an attempt to regain some hold over the situation. Yet the protesters have thus far been undeterred.

    As is expected, the situation inside Egypt is very fluid, a term that was used by the American State Department two nights ago during a press conference. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, through the Sunday talk show circuit, has urged the Egyptian government and the protesters to refrain from further violence, a standard neutral response from an administration that isn’t exactly sure how to proceed. (more…)

  • Tunisia at Crossroads

    The worst of the protests in Tunisia may be over, and the man that most Tunisians otherwise refer to as a tyrant and a criminal may be gone, but the aftermath of the popular revolt is just starting to solidify in the country’s politics.

    The security situation in Tunisia remains hostile in some areas of the country, particularly in areas of Tunis, the capital, where the headquarters of Ben Ali’s regime are located. Protesters, young and old, are continuing to ransack government property. Some private businesses that were tied to the president’s family have been destroyed and merchandise has been stolen as well. Yet when one considers the enormous wealth and graft that Ben Ali and his kin surrounded themselves with, often in stark contrast to the typical unemployed Tunisian, reporters and analysts should have seen this sign of displeasure coming.

    Reports are even circulating that the Tunisian military is battling militias loyal to Ben Ali in some areas of the capital. The interior minister, one of the most powerful figures in the country only a week ago, was arrested by police on charges of inciting violence on the streets after Ben Ali’s departure.

    The scenes on the street may still be chaotic, but this is not stopping Tunisia from taking the first step toward forming a new government and quelling the remaining demonstrations. After negotiations with three of Tunisia’s opposition parties, Prime Minister Mohamed Ghannouchi has announced the formation of a new interim government.

    From Ghannouchi’s point of view, the announcement is both strategic and practical. On the practical side, Tunisia was operating without an effective government since Ben Ali’s departure, so the prime minister needed to take action to at least assert a minimal degree of control (with the help of the army). But at the strategic level, the new coalition government could have been a ploy by Ghannouchi, a top ally of Ben Ali’s, to preserve some of the former regime’s influence during the transition. Indeed, Ghannounchi has a personal stake in this entire process — he has been prime minister since 1999, so it would be safe to assume that he is opposed to giving up the perks that come with being a Tunisian official.

    The Tunisian people may already have called Ghannouchi’s bluff. In interviews with the The New York Times, ordinary Tunisians and members of the opposition are wary of accepting this new government. Some fear that it is simply a continuation of the old regime with a few new faces. In some cases, they are right: the ministers of interior, finance, foreign affairs and defense are all still held by members of Ben Ali’s former ruling party. There have been a few posts given to oppositional factions, but they are minor ones at best. Ahmed Najib Chebbi of the Progressive Democratic Party, for instance, has been granted the post of secretary for regional economic development. That will hardly placate the thousands of Tunisians who are more than willing to return to the streets.

    This is a critical time for Tunisia as a country. The post-Ben Ali era could either see the emergence of a truly democratic system in the Arab world, or it could form into another case of autocracy. Ben Ali’s party has made some promising rhetorical steps — lifting media censorship, investigating abuses by the security services, pledging economic reform — but true change will only come when all legitimate constituencies (including Islamists) are included.

  • A Revolution in Tunisia

    If you follow CNN, Fox News or MSNBC to catch up on what’s happening in the world, you may have been surprised to learn that Tunisia, a small Arab state wedged between Algeria and Libya, is experiencing an internal revolution. Despite a month-long period of domestic unrest, which has included both peaceful anti-government protests and violent spats between civilians and security forces, the mainstream media in the United States is just starting to pick up the story. As Marc Lynch wrote at Foreign Policy, this comes in stark contrast to a similar set of demonstrations that rocked the Iranian government in the summer of 2009. Democracy advocates and American lawmakers were heavily interested in that episode yet the Tunisian revolution hasn’t received nearly the same amount of airtime.

    Yet this complaint is miniscule when compared to what is actually happening on the ground in Tunisia. The story is the top rated issue in the Arab media and millions of Arabs remain glued to their television sets to witness whether a new historical period is in the making.

    Everything in Tunisia is happening quickly, so it’s confusing to sketch out where the country is standing as this entry is written. One new development is often replaced by another in a matter of hours. But as it stands right now, the 23-year ruler of Tunisia, autocratic Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, has been driven out of the country by widespread protests. 5- to 6,000Tunisian protesters have gathered in force and converged inside the capital, demonstrating against the corruption and lack of opportunity that has plagued Tunisian society for years.

    It’s difficult to fathom that a couple thousand angry civilians can end the reign of a dictator, let alone a dictator that has ruled for over two decades. Indeed, similar protests and unrest against Arab regimes in the past have done nothing to weaken, let alone depose those governments. The casual observer (and perhaps the United States government) probably considered the Tunisian demonstrations as nothing but a minor nuisance until a few days ago.

    Instead, the collective rage of young and educated Tunisians, many of whom are struggling to find full-time employment (despite completing college) have terminated the authority of one of the most repressive figures in Arab political life. Tunisian Prime Minister Mohamed Ghannouchi has already taken over the government from Ben Ali on an interim basis, promising that new elections will be held in a matter of months.

    As someone who has no knowledge of Tunisia whatsoever, I cannot analyze this event too deeply. But what is interesting is the Arab reaction to the popular movement in Tunisia. Many Arabs hold the same grievances against their own governments — the lack of political freedom, media censorship, economic disparity — so civil society groups in Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Syria may be tempted to use Tunisia as a blueprint for their own internal revolutions.

    Whether or not this is the beginning of a new “Arab Spring” is open for discussion. The last time a similar popular movement brought down a government (Lebanon in 2005), analysts in the United States were predicting that the region was entering a magical new democratic renaissance. That prediction turned out to be wrong, with Lebanon’s “Cedar Revolution” being the exception of Arab reform rather than the rule.

    Still, what is happening in Tunisia is still very exciting, even if Egyptians, Jordanians or Iranians fail to implement their own internal political revolutions.


    Update: Christopher Alexander of Davidson College makes a great point: who is going to lead Tunisia after this crisis is over? When elections are scheduled, no one really knows the types of candidates that will win. The Islamist opposition has been beaten back to the point of oblivion; secular democrats are unorganized while the main political organizations that are operating inside the country haven’t done much during this entire crisis. When elections are scheduled, Tunisia may see a lot of new faces.


    Update 2: Remember when I said that the Tunisia crisis was unfolding quickly? Well, apparently, the interim rule of Prime Minister Ghannouchi is already over. The speaker of parliament, Fouad Mebaza, is now the acting president until new elections can be scheduled.

  • WikiLeaks Should Target Conflict Minerals

    WikiLeaks has successfully created a public online forum that broadcasts normally secretive communications to an enormous audience. Its most recent attacks on the American government and military have brought widespread condemnation from officials, diplomats and civilian experts. It remains to be seen whether this public shaming will create more transparent government or just encourage diplomats to be increasingly secretive. But there is one industry that deserves transparency, and could benefit from a good calling out — manufacturing that depends on conflict minerals, especially those mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    After the release of 250,000 classified State Department cables, WikiLeaks has been under attack from all quarters — from Amazon, Visa, and PayPal to the Swedish, British, and American governments. Many believe the charges against the public face of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, are part of an American led campaign to silence his embarrassing whistleblowing activities.

    But Assange’s tactics have created a new atmosphere of wariness in government, international business and the military. Diplomats and executives alike are realizing their secrets might leak out to global condemnation.

    This is not quite the case for those who operate in the murky business of conflict minerals like coltan, cobalt, tantalum, tin, even gold. The original source of these minerals, as well as the horrifying working conditions for miners, often goes unpublished and unpunished. Some international businesses are engaged in this system, intentionally or unintentionally. Others are part of a trend to increase transparency in the supply chain. Despite this, shady businessmen and militia leaders in the Congo, Rwanda and Burundi disguise the source of many resources extracted from the eastern part of the country. They have been doing this for many years. The profits almost always find their way to the pockets of warlords and militia leaders, exacerbating conflict and human rights abuses. Once in the market, consumers and retailers are unable (or unwilling) to trace the source of the materials in their products.

    Enter WikiLeaks. Assange may have set out to bring down “big government” but his project could also serve to bring accountability into a different opaque system. WikiLeaks is the perfect forum for investigating and publicizing the international trade in conflict minerals.

    They have the world’s attention. The governments of the Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, the European Union, as well as companies including Tradamet and Traxys in Belgium, Afrimex and Amalgamated Metal Corporation in England and the Thailand Smelting and Refining Corporation, are all at fault. WikiLeaks should call them out.

    As the transparency organization Global Witness said in a 2008 report (PDF), “Economic actors are turning a blind eye to the impact of their trade. They continue to plead ignorance as to the origin of their supplies and hide behind a multitude of other excuses” for failing to stem the flow of conflict minerals. Other organizations, like Human Rights Watch and the Natural Resources Defense Council, are also engaged in this kind of research. However, their reports generate little enthusiasm for increased regulation on a global scale. Profits from conflict minerals continue to fuel atrocities in the Congo and elsewhere.

    A report (PDF) in April by the dispute resolution organization RESOLVE highlights the hurdles faced by responsible companies and governments to stop the militarization of mining in the Congo.

    Minerals originating in conflict regions can end up in electronics and many other products such as jewelry, airplanes, and automobiles. […] Companies face significant challenges due to a lack of transparency and complex structure and relationships in particular metals supply chains.

    But still, the report asserts, “Companies, nongovernmental organizations, and agencies are working to address environmental impacts, labor rights, health and safety, displacement and resettlement, and other social and sustainability issues throughout the supply chain.”

    This is undoubtedly true, and can be seen in the cooperation of a huge number of governments, international businesses and civil organizations at the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. But the success of WikiLeaks in drawing global attention to vast amounts of secretive communication presents an opportunity for finally ending the trade of conflict minerals. The threat of public shaming has already led to (small) changes in the way the United States conduct diplomacy abroad. What if that happened to the intricate and secretive supply chain of conflict minerals?

    The problem is that the global trade in conflict minerals is more difficult to uncover than a few American diplomatic cables. Warlords from the Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Rwanda and the Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (also known as the Conglolese National Army), as well as their business associates in Rwanda and Burundi, likely avoid paper trails and deal off the books precisely to avoid attention that might disrupt their operations. But international companies like the ones above are sure to have records on the source of their minerals — if not the actual mine then perhaps one of the comptoirs, the minerals trading houses in Goma and Bukavu in the eastern Congo. Perhaps one of their employees is unhappy with the moral standards of his company and has access to a thumb drive.

    The United States government recently introduced legislation aimed at stemming the flow of conflict minerals from the Congo to the international market. The EU is considering a similar law. But the new whistleblowing culture founded by WikiLeaks can do more. A very public and very embarrassing information dump that links international companies based in Europe, Asia or the United States to conflict minerals coming out of the Congo would go a long way toward pushing through effective, globally enforceable legislation. And it would even brighten WikiLeaks’ image.

  • The Middle East’s Sham Democracy

    Egypt is one of Americas closest and most dependable allies in the Middle East. Yet its openness to political reform and dedication to democracy are anything but genuine.

    Ever since Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1981, the country has been ruled by a single strongman, buffeted by an expansive, brutal and loyal security service. Human rights violations, particularly against political opponents, are commonplace with thousands of protesters thrown into prison on the most frivolous of charges. 

    Egypt’s army and police force is given an enormous amount of leeway and jurisdiction when it comes to arresting and detaining “criminals”. After Sadat’s killing, an “Emergency Law” was put into effect that provided the armed forces with unlimited power. Most public officials in the Egyptian government are cronies that depend on handouts and other “goodies” from the regime itself. And as might be expected in any autocracy, civil society groups and political parties must first receive the state’s permission before competing in the electoral process.

    Taking all of this into consideration, perhaps it isn’t surprising that Egyptian citizens have not at all been excited about their parliamentary elections Sunday. Many of the poor and most in the middle class brush the elections away as if they are a facade, or a tool used to boost the legitimacy of a unpopular regime.

    In many ways, they are right. Human rights organizations and the small political parties that compete with the regime are under the heavy hand of the state during the entire process. The United States are even getting around to the same conclusion. The Obama Administration has expressed its frustrations and reservations to Hosni Mubarak on his lack of political reform, unfortunately to no avail. President George W. Bush was perhaps the most vocal in his criticism, which eventually paved the way for a semi-accountable parliamentary contest in 2005.

    Yet whatever accomplishments were made back then, today’s Egypt is returning to its old ways. In fact, Mubarak’s security forces have been much more assertive this year in preempting challengers. Free media, ranging from text messaging, satellite television, independent newspapers and radio broadcasts, has been curtailed to such a degree that it’s difficult to believe Egypt was once considered the center of gravity in the Arab world. The Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition bloc to Mubarak’s party, has witnessed over 1,000 of its members rounded up in the streets and thrown into jail. In addition to the arrests, the weeks long crackdown has had a tremendous psychological impact on the entire Brotherhood organization. A group that is usually strong and unified is now coming apart at the seams, with some members questioning why the Brotherhood decided to take part in the elections at all.

    Egypt has always been seen as an autocratic state. But this year’s repression is quite remarkable when compared to other cases. Speculation thus far has rested on the idea that the regime is simply trying to create a supportive environment for the next presidential election. Rumors are that the ailing Mubarak will soon give the reigns over to his son Gamal, a young and inexperienced politician who needs all the help he can get in solidifying control.

    But the motive may be more black and white than that. In the last parliamentary election, the Muslim Brotherhood shocked the world by capturing 20 percent of the parliament. The Mubarak regime never experienced that type of defeat before. While the ruling party still won the election, the gains that were made by the Brotherhood were quite embarrassing for the regime. The poor showing by the dominant party was both a direct referendum on its ability to govern and a punch to the ego of the Egyptian government. Mubarak doesn’t want this to happen again, and he will use all the power at his disposal to make sure this goal is met.

    In the end, Mubarak’s supporters will win Sunday’s elections, but the results will do nothing to improve the regime’s credibility with the Egyptian people. If the United States speak up and denounce the results, Cairo will look exceedingly bad. But if Washington stays silent, as they are projected to do, the average Egyptians will once again be the real losers.

  • Chinese Companies Defy United Nations Sanctions

    The Washington Post reports that the Obama Administration has gathered evidence of Chinese companies helping Iran develop its nuclear program and missile technology. One American official associated with the investigation said the companies may be acting without knowledge of the Chinese government.

    United Nations sanctions restrict international companies from investing in Iran’s nuclear and weapons programs. If the allegations are true, Chinese businesses are in violation of these sanctions but it is unclear how they might be punished.

    American officials provided a “significant list” of Chinese companies and banks still doing business in Iran during a visit to Beijing last month. Washington faces a serious challenge in persuading China to wind down investments in the Iranian energy sector. Along with India, it would seem that China is trying to work around the sanctions to continue to do business in Iran.

    To make matters worse, a special United Nations investigative panel presented a report on Darfur to the Security Council that shines light on a potentially illegal weapons trade between Beijing and Khartoum. The current round of sanctions prohibits the Sudanese government from importing weapons for its military campaign in the Darfur region. Recently, however, investigators discovered Chinese bullet casings at the sites of numerous attacks against international peacekeepers.

    Beijing vehemently denied allegations that its weapons are being used in Darfur and has insisted that the report be rewritten.

    Under the current sanctions regime, Sudan is permitted to import weapons as long as they are not employed in the Darfur campaign. As expected, the government in Khartoum has repeatedly skirted the rules.

    Investigators told the Security Council that Sudanese forces have used more than a dozen type of Chinese ammunition against rebels in Darfur. Unidentified assailants also used Chinese bullets during several recent attacks on peacekeepers. These munitions have fueled a bloody conflict in which over 300,000 people have been killed and almost three million driven from their homes.

  • India Catching Up with China in Africa

    While both China and India are attempting to extend their sphere of influence into Africa, Beijing is clearly ahead of New Delhi, not just because it’s economically superior rather because it has pursued an astute realpolitik in its foreign relations.

    Economically, China does have a significant edge with trade relations with different African countries set to top $100 billion this year compared with about a third of that between India and Africa in 2009.

    Part of the reason for India’s falling behind is its reactive nature to events unfolding nearby whereas China has been proactive abroad. Since 2000 China has attended regular summits of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation as have numerous African heads of state. India has tried to do the same thing but the only India-Africa Forum Summit to date, in April 2008, saw just fourteen African countries attend. (more…)