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

Africa becomes area of global competition

Published

on

The widespread view of Africa as one huge problem point on the planet’s body characterized by pandemics, hunger, poverty and wars – the so-called “Afropessimism” – has now been replaced with an approach which was launched  by global powers as they compete for economic and political presence on the continent. After a lull, Russia has joined the race as well.

According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, “African states are steadily gaining political and economic weight, asserting themselves as major pillars of the global multi-polar system and enjoying ever more say in making decisions on the most critical issues of the regional and global agenda.” Significantly, Africa accounts for about one third of the votes in the UN.

After Russia made an impressive “comeback” in the Middle East, Moscow became attractive for states seeking alternatives to the old political and economic ties. The first African country to do that was the war-torn Central African Republic, and the next to follow was Sudan, a country facing a similar challenge. Then more countries did the same. At present, more than 30 African countries have reached agreements with Russia which envisage the development of geo-resources, the supply of produce of the military-industrial complex, and the training of army personnel and law enforcement forces. Among the most significant contractors are Algeria, Egypt, Angola, Uganda and Nigeria.

The consistent and rarely publicized efforts of the Russian diplomacy resulted in the first Russia-Africa summit, which was held in Sochi on October 23-24. The day earlier, the Russian-African Economic Forum opened in Sochi too. Of the 62 African legal entities officially recognized by the UN, the Russian forum was attended by heads of state of 43 countries while another 11 participated at minister and ambassador level. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi represented both Egypt and the African Union.

During the Sochi forum, Russia and African countries signed more than 500 agreements worth about 800 billion rubles. Considering the low solvency of African partners, the participants came to agreement to set up a $ 5 billion trade support fund. The success of the forum prompted the decision to hold it regularly, every two years.

China seems to be Russia’s top economic competitor on the Black Continent. Beijing offers African countries big but easy loans and builds social infrastructure facilities on a gratuitous basis. China attaches great importance to “soft power” by promoting cultural and scientific contacts in an attempt to form loyal national elites. Every year thousands of Africans are granted scholarships to study at Chinese universities. As a result, ten years ago, China snatched from the United States its leadership as Africa’s trade and economic partner thereby becoming one of the major investors and donors to African countries.

Since the beginning of the century, the China-Africa Cooperation Forum has been held regularly, with nearly four dozen African countries joining the One Belt One Road mega-project.

And finally, (as investments have to be protected) in 2017, a Chinese military base appeared in Djibouti, the first beyond the bounds of the PRC.

Simultaneously, Africa’s growing dependence on Chinese financing may become one of Russia’s competitive advantages as the continent starts to look for alternative partners.

The United States has unintentionally been contributing to this, by criticizing the policies of Moscow and Beijing in Africa. Washington has become seriously concerned with measures to repulse the “expansion” of China and Russia. In December 2018, the Trump administration presented a new strategy for Africa, or in fact, a plan to counteract the activity of Russia and China on the continent. There have been numerous official statements to this effect. “These countries are expanding their financial and political influence to Africa by applying “aggressive” practices and acting for their own benefit, which poses a threat to US national security,” – the then adviser to the American president, John Bolton, said, as he unveiled the program. It turns out that the United States is acting in Africa to the detriment of its own interests?

China bore the brunt of criticism. Bolton, as usual, lashed at Beijing for many things, but above all, for using loans to enslave the Black Continent. Last summer, during the US-Africa business summit in Maputo, the United States launched the Prosperous Africa Economic Program. The Program’s ultimate goal is the same – to contain the growing influence of Russia and China by expanding trade with  countries of the continent, by promoting American technology and by boosting  assistance in the anti-terrorism campaign. According to Bolton, the new approaches will allow African countries “to remain independent in reality, not in theory”. But for the rhetoric, there is little new in the American approach.

Europe boasts traditionally strong positions on the African continent. After they gained independence, the authorities in many former French colonies’ capitals installed monuments to Charles de Gaulle. African countries are interested in cooperating with the European Union in three interrelated areas: peacekeeping, which is so critical for the Black Continent, receiving economic and humanitarian aid, and assistance in the anti-epidemic effort.

In turn, the EU is more set on measures to thwart illegal migration from the African continent, which is its top priority for now. Simultaneously, the EU is trying to be realistic about the economic and political potential of African partners. As far back as in April 2000, Cairo hosted the first EU-Africa summit, attended by heads of state and government. Seven years later, the Strategic Partnership Agreement for Trade and Democracy was signed in Lisbon, designed to boost economic and political ties and calling for “genuine cooperation” and partner equality.

Nevertheless, the number of Europeans present on the continent has been dwindling. Even the French who until recently affected the political situation in Francophone Africa have become fewer in number. According to the authoritative French weekly Le Point, Paris “is losing ground here,” and should thus “come to its senses”, as its influence and economic weight on the continent are steadily declining.

Incidentally, Ankara embarked on cooperation with the continent years ago. The first summit on Turkey’s cooperation with African countries (mainly Muslim) was held in 2008. This year the third summit took place. Since 2010, the government has been following the so-called “African Strategy.” The Turkish Foreign Ministry has proudly reported on its website that the two parties have been demonstrating mutual interest in bilateral ties, which becomes clear from the following figures: while in 2009 there were only 12 Turkish representative missions on the Black Continent, today their number totals 39. And African countries have increased the number of their diplomatic missions in Ankara threefold – from 10 to 33 – over the same period.

Speaking of the prospects for cooperation between Russia and Africa, we can say first of all that Russia is one of the top ten exporters of food products to African markets. Secondly, Moscow is one of the major suppliers of military produce to the continent – the value of military contracts in 2019 is expected to exceed $ 4 billion. Thirdly, local consumers are quite satisfied with the price-quality ratio of many Russian-made products. And the contractors can pay for these goods: Africa accounts for up to one third of the developed mineral reserves, and given that surveys were not always carried out at the appropriate level and did not cover all resources-rich areas, there are more. So, the fourth area of Russia-Africa cooperation is geological prospecting work.

Addressing the Sochi forum, President Putin made it clear to African guests that Russia had no intention to repeat the mistakes of the USSR, which was determined to multiply the number of political pseudo-allies at the expense of economic feasibility. The United States and the EU have also reiterated the mutually beneficial nature of trade and economic relations. Moreover, all actors regularly write off Africa’s debts, and Moscow is no exception.

And finally, it is necessary to point out that Western countries invariably make this cooperation conditional on the “right”, from their point of view,  foreign and domestic policies of their contractors. Russia has a clear edge here as it does not seek to force its opinion on anyone, be it Europe or the African continent. 

From our partner International Affairs

Continue Reading

Africa

Moscow’s Institute for African Studies Marks its 60th Year

Kester Kenn Klomegah

Published

on

The Institute for African Studies under the Russian Academy of Sciences was founded 60 years ago, precisely in 1959. Since then it has undergone various changes and carried out huge scientific research on Africa.

Professor Dmitri Bondarenko, the deputy director, discusses some aspects of its most current achievements, challenges and the future. Here are excerpts from the interview conducted by Kester Kenn Klomegah:

 Institute for African Studies marks its 60th year. Can we look at its performance, at least, during the past five years? What are the landmarked activities during the past half a decade?

The 60th anniversary is a good reason for looking both back at the results to date and ahead. If I could speak further about the achievements of the most recent years, I would mention first and formost, we try our best to organize fieldwork in Africa, although we are limited in our possibilities rather rigidly.

The landmark activities during the last five years in the academic sphere are as follows: the 13th and 14th conferences of Africanists (2014, 2017) – this is the Institute’s “brand conference”. Every time, it brings together about 500 participants from all over the world, including many African countries. The next, 15th, conference will take place in May 2020; 48 panels with about 10 presentations in each are included into its preliminary program.

In the last five years, several important conferences were organized together with foreign partners – from Slovenia, Portugal and, what is especially important, from Tanzania. The conference took place in Dar es Salaam in March 2019 and brought together scholars from 13 states. The next conference in Tanzania is scheduled for November 2020.

Several dozen books have been published in the last five years, among probably the most important of which are: Federalism in Africa: Problems and Prospects (in Russian and English), edited by Igho O. Natufe and Khristina M. Turyinskaya (2015), Tropical Africa: Evolution of Political Leadership (in Russian) by Tatiana S. Denisova (2016), Islam, Global Governance and the New World Order (in Russian) by Leonid L. Fituni and Irina O. Abramova (2018).

Assess the importance of its research, in form of consultancy, for government institutions and private both in Russia and Africa?

This importance is definitely growing, especially in the most recent years. State institutions and business companies seek the Institute’s consultancy services more and more often nowadays. In particular, the Institute played an important role in the preparation of the Russia-Africa summit in October 2019.

As we are a research institution, my firm belief is that just academic research should be our primary task. The situation has been changing during the last few years. Today the importance of Africa for Russia in different respects, including political and economic, is recognized by the state, and the Russian Foreign Ministry and other state institutions dealing with the Russian-African relations in various spheres, not just purely political, ask us for our expert advice on different points quite often.

What are the current challenges and hindrances to research Africa these years? Do you have any suggestions here on how to improvement the situation?

The situation now is much better for African studies than for a long time before. In particular, today there are much more opportunities for doing fieldwork in Africa. Russian Africanists and their work are becoming better known in the global Africanist community. Quite a lot of junior researchers join the academy nowadays. In my assessment, African studies in Russia are on the right road.

The challenges our African Studies are facing now are the same as the whole Russian Academy are facing, and they are mainly related to the bureaucratic pressure on research institutions.

How about academic cooperation with similar institutions inside Africa? Do you exchange researchers and share reports with African colleagues?

At the moment, the Institute has Agreements on Cooperation or Memorandums of Understanding with 18 universities and research institutes from 12 African states and currently there are negotiations with two more institutions from one more country.

As noted above, many African scholars come to our conferences, and we had and will have jointly organized conferences with particularly Tanzanian partners. Our partners help organize the Institute researchers’ fieldwork in their countries the outcome of which, besides other points, are joint publications (for example, with our colleagues from Tanzania and Zambia).

It is important to say that African colleagues regularly publish their articles in “The Journal of the Institute for African Studies”. We also have book exchange programs with some of our African partners. However, we do not have well-established exchange of researchers with our African partners, especially because of financial difficulties from both sides.

Besides, I must say that not all African partners, even those with whom we have official Memorandums of Understanding or Agreements on Cooperation, are really active in supporting ties with us, some of them do not initiate any joint projects and remain passive when we propose something. Nevertheless, we do have good and diversified ties with many African partners.

And the future vision for the IAS? How would you like the IAS transform, or say, diversify its activities especially now the Kremlin prioritizes Africa?

As I see it, the Institute’s forseeable future will be based on two main developments. On the one hand, it will more and more become a “think tank” for the state and business, and most probably, this development will dominate.

On the other hand, I hope the Institute will remain as a research institution where fundamental studies into different aspects of African and African diaspora’s past and present are done. The Institute for African Studies has the potential and capacity for combining both trends at a high level and far into the future.

As it becomes clearer from the discussion, I see the prospects for the Institute’s further development, in attracting more young researchers with their energy and new visions and approaches, in extending fieldwork in Africa, and in broadening international cooperation with Africanists worldwide.

Continue Reading

Africa

We Should Exempt Africa from the Russia–UK Geopolitical Confrontation

Dr. Andrey KORTUNOV

Published

on

Today neither Russia nor the United Kingdom can claim a leadership role in Africa. London reached the peak of its influence here between World War I and World War II, when the British Empire had a larger part of the continent under its direct control. Moscow’s heyday in Africa goes back to the 1960s – 1970s, with the Soviet Union having played the role of the main overseas supporter of various national liberation movements. The odds are that in the XXI Century African countries’ destinies will depend more on the logic of the emerging US – China global competition than on any decisions taken in the Kremlin or at Downing Street, 10.

Moreover, today both Russia and the UK have limited economic, political and strategic interests in Africa, compared to some other parts of the world — e.g. Europe or the Middle East. Arguably, this is the main reason why Africa does not look as toxic for Russia–UK relations as some other regions do. However, we cannot rule out potential clashes between the two powers in various present or future crises and conflicts in Africa. We should avoid underestimating the likely benefits of Russia–UK cooperation, even if it remains quite limited.

Many current trends suggest the role of Africa in the international system will continue to grow over time — both in terms of global challenges that the continent is likely to generate and in terms of global opportunities that it is going to offer. If everybody’s attention seems to be focused on the Middle East today, tomorrow it might well shift to Africa. Russian and UK stakes on the continent are likely to grow, while the price of an uncontrolled confrontation is expected to increase.

Moscow and London have to start working on how to contain risks and cut costs of this confrontation. Ideally — on how to exempt Africa from their geopolitical confrontation altogether. The first important step might be to try to agree on an appropriate ‘code of conduct’ on the continent, which could be applied not only to Russia and the United Kingdom, but also to external players in general. Africa may well be an ideal place to test new ideas about such controversial notions as responsibility to protect, failed state, hybrid war or regime change. London and Moscow are more likely to reach an agreement on many African crises than on more sensitive matters like Ukraine or Syria. At the same time, with an understanding on ‘rules of engagement’ in Africa in hand, it would be easier to approach highly divisive cases in Europe or in the Middle East.

Another area for potential Russia–UK collaboration or, at least, for coordination in Africa could be the area of ‘African commons’. The continent is in desperate need of essential public goods, the demand for them is huge and our two nations could do better avoiding old-fashioned competition and increasing the efficiency of their respective assistance projects in Africa. Take, for instance, the domain of general and higher education and human capital development in Africa, where both the UK and Russia have considerable experience and overlapping comparative advantages. Another area for potential cooperation is public health, which will require substantial investment, as well as personnel training and emergency management. Joint projects in infrastructure development, including private-public partnerships, constitute yet another opportunity.

In the security domain, Russia and the United Kingdom could explore options for more intense interaction in fighting international terrorism coming from Africa or targeting African countries. At the same time, Moscow and London could consider enhancing their respective roles in the UN led peacekeeping operations in Africa and demonstrating more appetite for consorted votes within the UN Security Council. They can work together in fighting piracy in the dangerous waters of the Gulf of Guinea, and so on.

It is evident that any Russia–UK interaction in Africa or about Africa cannot and will not be completely separated from the rest of their bilateral relations. If we fail to settle the core problems dividing Moscow and London today, this divisive agenda will continue to limit opportunities for cooperation in Africa as well. However, the Africa of today and especially the Africa of tomorrow will be too important for the world at large to approach it only as an extension of the ongoing Russia–UK confrontation. It is one of the most apparent cases, in which an exemption would not be a manifestation of weakness or cynicism, but rather a demonstration of political wisdom and a strategic foresight.

From our partner RIAC

Continue Reading

Latest

Green Planet2 mins ago

Consequences of U.S. formal exit from Paris climate pact: More isolation globally

The U.S. has formally begun to exit the Paris climate agreement. Regardless of whether or not the Paris Agreement is...

Intelligence2 hours ago

Lesson to be Learn from Monsanto’s Involvement in the Vietnamese War: The Agent Orange

Monsanto is an American multinational company founded in 1901 by John Francis Queeny, a thirty-year pharmaceutical veteran married to Olga...

Middle East5 hours ago

Gulf soccer suggests that “The Times They Are a-Changin”

Gulf soccer may be giving Bob Dylan’s 1964 hit, ‘The Times They Are a-Changin,’ a new lease on life. Qatar...

Russia7 hours ago

Sergey Lavrov: Violations of journalistic rights and discrimination against media are increasingly evident

Restrictions imposed by legislative and executive authorities may negatively impact the work done by journalists in Russia. The OSCE Representative...

Middle East13 hours ago

Beyond the dire needs of Iraq’s demonstration: National renaissance and a new challenge to Iran

For many, Iraqis have long been gone into hibernation to hold the politicians accountable for corruption in OPEC’s second-largest oil...

Eastern Europe15 hours ago

The Black Sea of Economic Cooperation

Since the Ukraine crisis of 2014 the security situation in the Black Sea region has significantly deteriorated. The annexation of...

Eastern Europe17 hours ago

Lithuania strongly condemns France for drift to think of itself

Since the restoration of independence, new politicians have come to power in Lithuania. For the most part they are active...

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy