1 July 2009
(Page 2 of 3)
We have provided arms and munitions to allow the TFG to push back al-Shabaab in order to gain the stability which is absolutely essential for that country to be able to begin to deliver services to people. I would love nothing better than to be able to say to you that the situation on the ground in southern Somalia is such that we have been able to put money into schools, into educational material, into the reestablishment of clinics and hospitals and to the training of nurses and to the reestablishment of electricity and water services. This is what the goal is. Our goal is to find a way to stabilize the situation and then encourage the TFG to begin that process of state building and delivery of services to its population.
You have said that you are willing to engage Eritrea in a dialogue.
Is that happening?
Absolutely. After I took over as the assistant secretary, the Eritrean ambassador came to my office and indicated to me that it was the first time he had been into the office of the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs since he had come to Washington.
I told him that the United States clearly wanted to see if we could return to a more normal relationship and that I was prepared to go out to speak with [Eritrean] President Isaias to begin such a dialogue. But I also made it very clear that, in order to move forward, there would have to be some understanding and some cooperation on key issues that affect the Horn of Africa today and that it is absolutely important that there be no support for the al-Shabaab coming out of Eritrea.
What's the next step in that dialogue?
The next step in that dialogue is really up to the Eritreans.
What contribution does the long-standing border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia make to rising tensions in the Horn?
The major problem in the region continues to emanate from instability in southern Somalia. There is no question that the number one issue that divides Eritrea and Ethiopia is lack of final resolution on the border dispute. There can and should be a way to resolve that issue, but it can only be done if both parties recognize it is in their fundamental interest to resolve this and not be developing military preparations along the border but developing social and economic opportunities for their people.
It is incomprehensible that some five million people have died in eastern Congo over the past few years. Fighting winds on and on, with no end in sight. What can the United States do to address this huge tragedy?
This deserves attention it does not get, and we are going to spend more time trying to resolve conflict in eastern Congo. We would encourage greater collaboration between the governments of President [Joseph] Kabila in the Congo and President [Paul] Kagame in Rwanda. It is essential that both of those countries work together.
We have to find effective ways to ensure that Monuc [the United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo] have the forces that are required to help Congo deal with security problems. We have to work with the government of the Congo to improve the military - which has largely been under-trained, underpaid, and under-equipped - so they can effectively be protectors of people, and not be used against people. We also have to find ways to get the government of Congo to deliver services, creating stability as well as opportunity for people to live normal lives.
The Secretary of State is very much aware of the situation in the eastern Congo and is particularly concerned about the issues of gender-based violence there. We are going to engage much more intensely with both the government in Kinshasa, which bears responsibility for ensuring the safety of the people, and the government in Rwanda to make sure their security concerns are addressed.
On Sudan, following the multi-party talks last week in Washington, convened by President Obama's special envoy for Sudan, Scott Gration, how has the administration decided to engage with the government headed by President Omar al-Bashir, who faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) - but also is key to resolving the crisis in Darfur and the north-south conflict?
I look at it as engaging with the government broadly to achieve important objectives that we share with many in Sudan, both north and south, and with many across Africa and the international community. We think that it is absolutely critical that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), signed in January 2005, be fully implemented, and that the people of southern Sudan have a right, in 2011, to hold a referendum which will determine their future.
We think it is also important that the issues of the boundary between the north and south be resolved. One of the more positive things to come out of this very successful conference is a commitment on both sides to accept the arbitration ruling on the border of Abyei. Every part of the CPA agreement should be fully implemented.
Gen. Gration has been trying to stop the humanitarian nightmare that has existed in Darfur for far too long and to help to bring about a long-term political settlement in the Darfur crisis. We should use our diplomatic power as effectively as we can to help bring a solution to each of these problems. There's no question that we're going to have to work with the government of Sudan. It is both a part of the problem and part of the solution. Notwithstanding all of this, an arrest warrant has been issued for Bashir by the ICC for war crimes in Darfur. He should do the right thing and face those charges.
On Zimbabwe, it would appear that after Prime Minister Tsvangirai's visit to Washington, there is a willingness by the administration to provide a certain amount of aid, while keeping sanctions in place. How would you describe the United States' policy on Zimbabwe at this time?
We are deeply concerned about what is happening in Zimbabwe and what has happened over the last decade. We believe that the visit by Morgan Tsvangirai gave us an opportunity to hear first hand how the global agreement [between President Robert Mugabe's ruling Zanu-PF and the Movement for Democratic Change led by Tsvangirai] is being implemented and how his relations with Zanu-PF and Mugabe are taking shape. It also gave the administration a chance to share its views with the prime minister and to reaffirm number of things:
The United States supports the forces of democracy in Zimbabwe, and the U.S. supports the people of Zimbabwe. The U.S. supports what the MDC has been trying to do to bring a return to democracy, and we support Morgan Tsvangirai and encourage him to continue to do his work. Equally, we encourage Zanu-PF to play their part. They have an important part to play.
We reaffirmed to Prime Minister Tsvangirai that we would continue to provide assistance in the area of health care. We have done a lot in providing support on HIV/Aids, cholera and child survival. We also affirmed we would be providing assistance in promoting democracy. Both the President and the Secretary of State said they would support additional resources for education - providing learning materials, and for agriculture - providing seeds, fertilizer, and instruments in rural areas.
Without lifting sanctions?
There is no talk about lifting sanctions right now, until we see progress - irreversible progress - in the implementation of the global political agreement. President Mugabe can and should do a number of things to bolster full democracy and show that he is absolutely, unequivocally committed to implementing the agreement.
He can allow the foreign media to come back in. He can lift censorship and restrictions on the local media. He can end political harassment of civil society leaders. He can end political harassment of MDC officials.
He can swear in all of the MDC ministers, including deputy minister of agriculture Roy Bennett. He can end the emergency security laws that have been put in place.
He can reaffirm publicly that he will allow the next elections, due in approximately 18 months, to be monitored by international groups, including the Commonwealth, EU [European Union], and organizations like the Carter Center, IFES [International Foundation for Electoral Systems] and IRI [International Republican Institute].
Read comments. Write your own.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
I can't believe the U.S. government still supports the transitional government in Somalia. That is such a joke. Somalia's government was the most stable it had been in years before we went in there on trumped up charges and created chaos with the Ethiopians. Also, Carson is on the wrong side of Nigeria as well. When oil workers in the Delta are making less than a dollar a day while Exxon-Mobile profits in the tens of billions of dollars, it is damned hard not to root for the underdog. I can't believe he didn't address the gripping poverty and corruption which has caused this mess. I won't buy a drop of gasoline from any American oil company because of their usufruction of the Delta.
Sorry to say but I don't if your boycott of Exxon-Mobile makes a huge difference! Americans drive HUGE gas guzzling SUV's and we STILL drive ALOT even when the price of oil goes up...so trust me..EXXon's profit probably comes primarily from the USA alone! No if Americans STOP driving so much then they WOULD listen!
This post was deleted because it contravenes AllAfrica's commenting guidelines.
i would like to take this opportunity to welcome barack and michelle to africa. welcome home!
In a symphony.
In the light of a symphony there's a charming intention, and also that fortune; there's a little desire and the sound of a beautiful noise....
Francesco Sinibaldi
http://www.afghanistanonlineforums.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1249765272
This article by Mr. Cobbs sounds like a good article, which focuse on human rights.But, in Africa this single handed approach has not worked. Typically aid is cut off and a lot of sanction imposed. What is improving good governance in Africa seems to be economic development and trade. That is the new modern way to improve good governance. Other wise, it just becomes an endless debate about human rights, and actually this single approach has worsened human rights in Africa. Where the Chinese have invested heavily in Africa, typically human rights have improved also.
Look at Sudan where the focus has entirely been n human rights,no improvements have been seen. The African Union saw his and oppossed the international community on impossing additional sanctions and prosecution. The approach being suggested, actually does not improve human rights. The Punishment on Zimbabwe did nothing to promote human rights or good governance.
See all comments (11).
Active Discussions: Obama's Africa Policies