HE West African subregion
was once again threatened with renewed cross-country wars and general
instability with the break-down of law and order in Cote d’Ivoire two weeks ago.
This recent flare up which cost scores of lives and property, threatened an
all-out war between forces loyal to President Laurent Gbagbo in the South and
Northern based rebels opposed to him.
Prior to the latest mayhem, a form of peace had been
maintained and monitored by both the U.N and French peace-keepers since 2002
when President Gbagbo’s electoral victory was challenged by opposition forces as
being non-inclusive.
The challenge led to a two-year war in which the country was
practically divided on North-South lines with rebel forces controlling the North
while, from Abidjan, President Gbagbo ruled in the South.
A French-brokered peace deal in 2003 had finally got
President Gbagbo to agree to address the concerns of the rebels. These included
the renegotiation of citizen’s rights, land rights and other official
instruments that effectively disenfranchised millions of Ivorians from the north
said to have migrated from neighbouring countries by barring them from vying for
the presidency.
The cease-fire was meant to give time for the agreements to
be implemented. A buffer zone dividing the country virtually into two has been
supervised by UN and French forces.
However, the hopes of the various peace-makers in Cote
d’Ivoire that the implementation of the 2003 agreements would yield to an
all-inclusive election next year, was dashed November 4th, when government
forces broke the cease-fire agreements by attacking northern rebel strong-holds
and in the process killing 9 French troops.
Bad as the situation already was, the French response in
wiping out the Ivorian air-force and capability must be seen as being
over-compensatory, and unbecoming of a responsible world-power like France
which, as an impartial broker could have behaved more in accordance with
international norms. By destroying Ivorian tax-payers’ aircrafts, instead of
targeting those who used them, France betrayed prejudice against international
law. The unrest which led to the evacuation of foreigners was due to this French
failure.
What makes the Ivorian situation potentially dreadful is the
spill-over effects that an all-out implosion of that country would have on a
West Africa still nursing the wounds of Sierra Leone and Liberia.
Reputed to be West Africa’s second-biggest economy, Cote
d’Ivoire is home to a multiplicity of peoples and religions numbering about 16
million and having links with neighbouring countries economically.
It is therefore gratifying that a modicum of normalcy has
returned to Abidjan in the past week with the pull back of French troops from
the capital and airport and the quelling of thousands of supporters of President
Gbagbo who had besieged and forced many foreigners out in reaction against the
French.
The November 15th vote to impose an arms embargo on all
parties in Cote d’Ivoire by the U.N Security Council which was supported by
African leaders under the African Union (AU) signifies global sensitivity
towards intensified Ivorian crisis.
But with the facts on the ground, it is hard to see how
France could still be relevant in pushing reconciliation forward in her former
colony following the bad faith it showed as a mediator.
More than that, however, the parties in the Ivorian crisis
are honour and duty-bound to adhere to their own sides of the peace bargain.
But against the alleged reluctance of President Gbagbo to
pursue reconciliation with the northern rebels by working towards an
all-inclusive election next year, chances of a workable solution in this
Franco-phone African nation are slim.
African leaders in conjunction with world bodies must ensure that the parties
in the crisis adhere to the agreements each had freely signed. The alternative,
as Sierra-Leone and Liberia next door shows, is civil war that may take decades
to bring under control. Cote d’Ivoire must be saved for us all.
