Connect with us

Africa

Western Sahara Chess Game: UN Kohler’s lose Who’s the next

Published

on

In recent scenario to its routine duty of controlling the political balance in the Western Sahara dispute and its persistent look for a answer that pleased all the parties involved, the Trump administration will enter on new responsibilities imposed by the resignation of UN envoy Horst Kohler, particularly the seek for a successor to the former German president who emerged from the “Through which he imposed his “maneuver” on the parties ” to the case of Western Sahara .

During unexpected surprise of his resignation to all involved parties, the Special Envoy to the Western Sahara dispute was under serious pressure to come up with an urgent solution to the well-known issue for more than 40 years, especially by the United States, which plays a significant role in diplomatically and political decision-making process within the Security Council. So far “Kohler has been hit by the curse of the Western Sahara case and has not successfully ended his mission as expected by the Security Council,” many Western Sahara experts in the field of international relations and North African studies pointed out: Western Sahara File and withdraw from it to its position and complexity image was a significant turning point in the history of the UN failure in dealing with Western Sahara dispute as one of international security issues .

This is quite superficial with regards to Kohler special UN envoy that he did not learn international relations academically, but his diplomatic outstanding proficiency and skill has made his task stand out from the methodology he followed to solve each party’s contract and call the conflictual parties to set a meeting in a negotiated atmosphere. The Western Sahara dispute represents the three countries: The Kingdom of Morocco, Algeria, and Mauritania, before Morocco and the Polisario, Which has been referred to by Morocco from the beginning, “highlighting the full Algerian involvement in the conflict, explained that “Kohler handled to put the Sahara dispute in the right direction, a negotiated political solution, but he was fenced by four contradictions were currently disrupting his work, through reducing the scope of maneuvering. ” Among these contradictions, the call for the full referendum to be organized by the Polisario Front (SADR) and the states backing segregation like Algeria and South Africa, which are opposed to the decisions of the Security Council and bring the process of resolutions back to nothing.

In the sense of these demands and requirements, Kohler’s endeavors appeared to be in a wicked circle. Instead of working on the last resolution, the Polisario Front (SADR) should be convinced to stand by the Security Council’s decisions and committed involvement in the settlement process, because the outcome of more than 28 years of diplomatic negotiations walked in the empty circle. which means that Western Sahara would return to the era of pre-December 1991.

Additionally, The other contradiction appeared in the Western Sahara case is the United States squeeze on the task of the UN bodies and waving the use of the arms embargo or sanctions against the bodies that do not give a profit on the abuse of the Western Sahara file, which is highlighted by the US administration to limit the duration of UN mission “MINURSO” to Sahara from one year to six months, and the rise of differences between the forces France, which does not accept with satisfaction the United States actions worked to make the UN duty determined in a year as a stable framework to discuss the sphere of the final solution.

The last contradiction, according to UN moves is the emergence of a strategy of shifting the status quo or pushing the Polisario Front (SADR) into the sphere of the Moroccan Sahara to carry out provocative and challenging acts that cannot be analyzed by political measures that can be led into the negotiations process. therefore, To the outbreak of war in the Sahara region would be made Algeria undermine Morocco’s foreign policy by using the Polisario Front (SADR) as an essential tool over Sahara dispute.

As noted, Kohler’s resignation sets him on the file of the shortest UN personal envoys in dealing with UN mission resolution overseas which not passing two years in a reason or speculation that his health condition ineligible to allow him carry on his work especially on Western Sahara case, and also there is no any details available  from the UN who can take the lead in continuing to find a final settlement to  Western Sahara file process .

Now, the big the questions raised here why did Kohler call his resignation? Is health really the reason? If so, why was this decision postponed until its day? Or did Kohler, the religious person who had the perceptions of the refugee experience and the proof of the pain of war, mobilized the real suffering before touching the position of head of state, preferred to resign from the Sahara file instead of declaring failure?

Yes, The heads of state cannot accept any failure except towards illness or other things. Kohler profiling personality is a person of complex persuasion. He endured from the lack of a clearer vision of the United Nations in the Western Sahara case, which remained in its hallways as other unsolved cases such as Yemen and Libya. and also suffered because of contradictory visions between the Moroccan political and Algerian military.

Algeria, for instance, was not a state until after independence, and when it gained independence, power was moved to the army, and the legal administrative became a way of military rule, while the political system in the Kingdom of Morocco was distant, set up on open monarchy. In the 1960s and 1970s, The Kingdom of Morocco built up a modern country with its institutions and political administrations, from the monarchy to the constitution of 1962 and the 1970 constitution, to the establishment of political units and the building of constitutional institutions, political, civil, cultural, and military, which may be determined but basically state institutions  before the conflict.

Due to this, It clears that Kohler became aware of these complexities, but he acknowledged better that Mauritania and the Polisario Front (SADR) acted a limited role in this uneven dialogue and negotiation process, so he had to move the negotiations wheel out of the multilateral sphere of “The Kingdom of Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania and the Polisario Front (SADR)” to the direct bilateral sphere “The Kingdom of Morocco and Algeria” On the speech of dialogue and interaction among citizens in The Kingdom of Morocco and the military in Algeria.

To a certain extent, The Algerian government and politicians are truly creative and innovative in making the so-called “Polisario Front (SADR)” in dealing with the Western Sahara issue as a military mindset to sever and quest its geopolitical interests especially finding a way to reach the Atlantic Ocean via Moroccan Western Sahara. Accordingly, Mauritania has been floating in a position to be the mediator between Algeria and Morocco to end the conflict.

Over the past decade or so, the Kingdom of Morocco has continued to deal with Western Sahara case as National concern, the issue of Western Sahara for Morocco and Moroccans is the source of their identity and loyalty to the Moroccan sovereignty and also deals with it as key issue in promoting economic, stability, security and institutional development to the North African region as well Arab Maghreb region.

Algeria so far finds Western Sahara case a fruitful area to launch its hegemony and rivalry in order to weaken Morocco’s position and sized its geopolitical strength and undermine Morocco’s foreign policies with its African partners diplomatically and politically.

To sum up, you come upon that all the UN international mediators or special Envoys have misused a lot of time just to understand the Western Sahara conflict, and when they discover that it is a spurious conflict, they simply resign. Therefore, no matter how long the Western Sahara case is consumed, and the former UN mediators and others are not right, it will remain a fictional case. In contrary the Kingdom of Morocco is on the right path, has its historical and geographical facts, unlike those who believe in spurious facts of political plans but with a military mentality.

Jamal Ait Laadam, Specialist in and North African Studies and Western Sahara Issue, a Ph.D. fellow in Jilin University School of Public Affairs

Continue Reading
Comments

Africa

Water Diplomacy: Creating Spaces for Nile Cooperation

Abraham Telar Kuc

Published

on

The Nile River is the longest river on the earth, with eleven nation states sharing it and over 487 million people or about 20% of the African population living in the basin countries and they depend partly or fully on the Nile for their daily water use, foods and other economic benefits. The river drains 10 % of the African continent or an area greater than 3,176,541 km2, and its divided to ten different sub-basins with two main feeding sources’ the White Nile and the Blue Nile, which making it one of the worlds largest and complicated international trans-boundary river basins.

It’s very clear that the long and current regional disputes over the Nile’s waters between the upstream and downstream countries specially Uganda, Ethiopia and other upstream nations who are been the forehead leading the campaign for the lifting of colonial era treaties regarding Nile waters allocutions, governance, management, economic use and other Nile related issues and they been demanding renegotiating Nile river basin for fair shares and equal benefits and which they did in 2010 by reaching and signing of (Cooperative Framework Agreement or Entebbe agreement) to replace all the European colonial agreements, meanwhile the two downstream countries Egypt and Sudan in the other sides refusing to renegotiate or sign the Entebbe treaty and insists on maintaining the colonial era treaties  or what they called “the historical rights” which gave the lion’s share of the Nile waters and the absolute veto to only two Nile countries and ignored the rights of other Nile’s nations.

Egypt and Sudan for years been using what they called “the historical rights” guaranteed by the colonial era agreements and their diplomatic influence to block international development funds and loans a policy which its aims only to prevent the upstream nations from establishing or constructing any developmental or economical projects on the Nile River, while Egypt is warring about the potential impacts which could effect its water security level as a result of any construction on the Nile river, the other Nile Basin nations said they are addressing the undergoing  social, economic and environmental changes plus the population in the region is growing rapidly which will need more access to Nile basin resources in aim to provide water, food and energy to their people.

The looming conflict in the Nile Basin region over water recourses governance, allocutions and economic use has been a major security threat to the regional and international peace and stability, the risks of militarizing the Nile water dispute among the basin countries has been a growing serious security threat to the basin region as a result of lacking of middle point agreement on how to share, mange and benefit from the longest river fairly and equally.

In past years the downstream nations had already unilaterally constructed dams, used Nile waters for irrigation, industrial and other projects and with the upstream nations complaining about those unilateral projects done by the downstream nations and the none cooperative method and approach of Egypt and Sudan and as an outcome of years of disagreement over the Nile water issues and unilaterally decisions and actions taken by the individual countries claiming the Nile River waters and only favoring their own benefits over other Nile nations. The Entebbe Agreement came in to escalate the none cooperation situation more by geo-politically shifting the control of Nile basin waters away from the downstream nations and gave the upstream countries a legal frame to construct dams, establish different projects and increase their water use for different propos.

With some countries see themselves as victims of other Nile countries who had taken an advantage of certain period of time or situation that they were in, which let some of them to see no benefit now in been cooperative with the others concerning the Nile related issues and looks only at their national interests, but still the diplomatic dialogue and inclusive negotiations between the Nile basin nations is the only way forward to build confidence, trust and cooperation for sustainable future of the Nile and mutual and shared benefits for basin members countries. A positive engagement between the Nile basin members now can be observed in some steps taken by the countries were technical dialogue and diplomatic approach has increased the sharing of technical and hydrological data between the basin members countries, capacity building workshops and inter-nations trainings and seminars for technicians, policy and decision makers, government officials, diplomats, scientists, researchers, journalists, local and global think-tank institutions, NGOs, regional and other international stakeholders had really helped in easing the interstate political tensions and putting concord foundation for more regional cooperation which will contribute to a better understanding, enhancing the diplomatic relations  and cooperation among the basin nations.

To have a sustainable Nile Basin with equal benefits, comprehensive cooperation, joint management, and effective partnership the diplomatic approach and inclusive negotiations is the only solution to overcome years of mistrust and standoff in the Nile Basin region.

Continue Reading

Africa

Russia, Africa and the SPIEF’19

Kester Kenn Klomegah

Published

on

In 2019, four African countries – Côte d’Ivoire, Lesotho Niger and Somalia – for the first time attend the St Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF’19) held on June 6-8 under theme “Creating a Sustainable Development Agenda” in Saint Petersburg, Russia.

The Forum brought together a record-breaking number of participants: over 19,000 people from 145 countries, with 1,300 guests representing heads of companies. The sheer number of business community participants, variety of thematic events, and level of representation on both national and international levels underscore the status of SPIEF as a truly global economic forum.

Over the years, SPIEF has become an open platform to exchange best practices and key competences in the interest of providing sustainable development.

The main event was the plenary session, with the participation of President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping, President of the Republic of Bulgaria Rumen Radev, Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic Peter Pellegrini, and Secretary-General of the United Nations António Guterres.

During his address to the participants of the Forum, Vladimir Putin talked about the tasks the country is facing, as well as about the importance of national projects as a driver of economic growth in Russia.

The overall budget for the implementation of proposed development projects of Russia is about US$400 billion. The priorities are healthcare, education, research and development, and support for entrepreneurship. And, considerable funds will also be allocated to develop major infrastructure, transport and the energy industry.

Putin also stressed to the guests and participants for their friendly attitude to Russia, their willingness for joint work and business cooperation based on pragmatism, understanding of mutual interests and, of course, trust, frankness and clear-cut positions. That global inequality between countries and regions is the main source of instability. It is not just about the level of income or financial inequality, but fundamental differences in opportunities for people.

More than 800 million people around the world do not have basic access to drinking water, and about 11 percent of the world’s population is undernourished. A system based on ever-increasing injustice will never be stable or balanced.

As a first step, necessary to conduct a kind of demilitarisation of the key areas of the global economy and trade, that also includes utilities and energy, which help reduce the impact on the environment and climate. This concerns areas that are crucial for the life and health of millions, one might even say, billions of people on the entire planet.

Russia has embarked on implementing long-term strategic programmes, many of which are global in nature, it is important to hear each other and pool efforts for resolving common goals. Russia is ready for these challenges and changes.

During the four days of the Forum, over 1,300 speakers and moderators, including Russian and international experts, took part in discussions. They shared their knowledge, experiences and best practices with the participants of the Forum. There was special zone of the area that hosted interviews with politicians, government officials, representatives of big business.

On the sidelines, there were business dialogues between Russia and other countries, for example Russia–Africa, were very popular this year. President of the Senate of the Parliament of the Republic of Zimbabwe, Mabel Chinomona, was one of the African participants. State officials came from Botswana, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Côte d’Ivoire, Lesotho, Mauritius, Niger, Sierra Leone and Uganda.

The Russia-Africa session featured Mikhail Bogdanov, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; Special Presidential Representative for the Middle East and Africa; Amani Abou-Zeid, Commissioner for Infrastructure and Energy, African Union Commission and Tatyana Valovaya, Member of the Board – Minister in Charge of Integration and Macroeconomics, Eurasian Economic Commission.

Isabel Jose dos Santos, Chairman, Unitel SA; Daniel Kablan Duncan, Vice President of the Republic of Cote d’Ivoire; Dmitry Konyaev, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Directors, URALCHEM JSC and Benedict Okey Oramah, President, Chairman of the Board of Director, The African Export Import Bank.

Sylvie Baipo-Temon, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Central Africans Abroad of the Central African Republic; Nikita Gusakov, General Director, EXIAR; Boris Ivanov

Managing Director, GPB Global Resources and Nataliya Zaiser, Chair of the Board, Africa Business Initiative UNION; Executive Secretary, Russian National Committee, World Energy Council (WEC).

The participants noted that 2019 should be a historic year in the development of Russian-African relations. The summit of heads of state in October should take place amidst record growth in Russian exports to Africa. Russia is interested in new markets and international alliances more than ever before, while Africa has solidified its position as one of the centres of global economic growth in recent years.

In this context, the countries need to rethink the approaches, mechanisms, and tools they use for cooperation in order to take their relations to the next level as their significance grows in the new conditions of world politics and economics. What steps are needed to give a new impetus to bilateral economic relations? What are the key initiatives and competencies that can create a deeper strategic partnership between Russia and African states?

These are among the key questions on the meeting agenda for the upcoming Russia-Africa Summit planned for October in Sochi under the co-chairmanship of President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and President of the Arab Republic of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Chairperson of the African Union.

Continue Reading

Africa

Russia joins Gulf states in coaching Sudan’s military

Dr. James M. Dorsey

Published

on

Russia has emerged as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates’ silent partner in assisting the Sudanese military’s efforts to weaken, if not defeat a months-long popular revolt that has already toppled president Omar al-Bashir.

Documents leaked to The Guardian and MHK Media, a Russian-language news website, by the London-based Dossier Centre, an investigative group funded by exiled Russian businessman Mikhail Khodorkovsky, disclosed Russia’s hitherto behind-the-scenes role in Sudan.

Laying out plans to bolster Russia’s position across Africa by building relations with rulers, striking military deals, and grooming a new generation of leaders and undercover agents, the documents included details of a campaign to smear anti-government protesters in Sudan.

The plan for the campaign appeared to have been copy-pasted from proposals to counter opposition in Russia to president Vladimir Putin with references to Russia mistakenly not having been replaced with Sudan in one document.

Russia advised the Sudanese military to use fake news and videos to portray demonstrators as anti-Islamic, pro-Israeli and pro-LGBT. The plan also suggested increasing the price of newsprint to make it harder for critics to get their message out and to discover “foreigners” at anti-government rallies.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, a St. Petersburg-based businessman and close associate of Mr. Putin, complained in a letter to Mr. Bashir before he was overthrown that the president was not following his advice.

Mr. Prigozhin, who was indicted by US special counsel Robert Mueller for operating a troll factory that ran an extensive social media campaign that favoured of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, was according to the documents a key player in efforts to enhance Russian influence in Africa.

Mr. Prigozhin accused Mr. Bashir and his government of not being active enough and adopting an “extremely cautious position.”

If a visit this week to Sudan by foreign journalists at the invitation of the military to show them medical facilities that had allegedly been ransacked by protesters and demonstrate that hospitals that had been attacked by notorious paramilitary forces associated with Sudanese army were returning to normal, is anything to go by, Mr. Prigozhin’s criticism may have merit.

“It must have seemed like a good idea to somebody, although I cannot imagine why. The plan was to show us how terribly the protesters had behaved. If the world could see what they were really like they would understand that the regime had no choice but to send in the militia. Except from the moment we arrived at the first medical facility things started to go wrong,” said the BBC’s Africa editor, Fergal Keane.

To Mr. Keane, the omnipresence of paramilitaries of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) made the paramilitary headed by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo aka Hemedti, believed to be a Saudi and UAE favourite because his troops fought in Yemen and his reputation for ruthlessness, look “more like an army of occupation than an internal security force.”

Widely viewed as ambitious and power hungry, General Dagalo resembles in the eyes of protesters Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the autocratic general-turned-president who in 2013 staged a Saudi-UAE-backed military coup that toppled Egypt’s first and only democratically elected president.

Defending the UAE’s contacts with the military council, Emirati minister of state for foreign affairs Anwar Gargash said his country’s “credibility is our means to contribute to enhancing peaceful transition in a way that preserves the state and its institutions.”

Human Rights Watch this week called on the United Nations Security Council to halt the withdrawal of peacekeepers from Darfur, noting that the Rapid Support Forces “have a long track record of abuse. They carried out highly abusive counter-insurgency campaigns in Darfur, and the Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile regions over the past five years, in which they attacked villages, killed and raped civilians, and burned and looted homes.”

Witnesses outside a medical facility and a hospital that Mr. Keane visited countered the military’s tale, describing how troops stormed the buildings and looted and destroyed facilities. “”The international community has to intervene. There is no peace here in Sudan. People are suffering a lot… I am frightened for my country,” said a man as he drove by Omdurman Hospital.

The failed public relations tour, the crackdown, the Russian guidance and stalled talks between protesters and the military fits a Saudi-UAE promoted pattern that has evolved across the Middle East and North Africa since the 2011 popular Arab revolts. It’s a pattern that aims to defeat popular protest at whatever cost.

The Sudanese protest movement has emerged from the crackdown that doctors said killed at least 118 people and efforts to delegitimize it battered, divided and potentially weakened but still standing.

A general strike declared at the beginning of this week initially paralyzed the capital Khartoum but within a day or two appeared to be weakening.

Ethiopian mediator Mahmoud Dirir said on Tuesday that the protesters had agreed to end the strike while the governing Transitional Military Council (TMC), headed by officers with close ties to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, was ready to release political prisoners, one of several key demands of the protesters.

Mr. Dirir said the two sides had also agreed to “soon” resume talks to resolve the crisis even if they were nowhere near narrowing differences of returning Sudan to civilian rule. It was not clear what soon meant.

“Negotiation – even if it happens soon – will circle back to the same issue: will the military cede power to a civilian government? Nothing about the generals’ actions has indicated that this is an imminent possibility. The fear is that they will use any negotiations to try to divide the opposition while security pressure is maintained on the streets,” Mr. Keane said.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy