One sometimes wonders if the Southern African Development Community (SADC) should not simply give up the time-consuming and unrewarding business of trying to resolve political crises in its member states.
In Zimbabwe, after five years of intensive SADC mediation first led by then President Thabo Mbeki and thereafter by President Jacob Zuma, what have we got? Parliamentary and presidential elections that will be held on 31 July under essentially the same conditions as the violent and almost certainly rigged elections of March 2008 which prompted SADC's intervention.
Maybe President Robert Mugabe will tone down the violence because he thinks he doesn't need as much to beat the rather hapless Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Morgan Tsvangirai this time. But if so, that will be no thanks to SADC. Mugabe still has full control of all the 'hard power' in Zimbabwe, all of the security apparatus. And that apparatus is still fully partisan to Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union - Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF).
Likewise the public media - and that means essentially all the broadcast media and most of the papers - are also still fully and unashamedly biased towards ZANU-PF. The Zimbabwe Election Commission (ZEC) ostensibly has one or two independent commissioners. But ZANU-PF partisans outnumber them and the actual ZEC officials who will be conducting the election are pretty much the same as they were in 2008. That is assuming the ZEC does in fact conduct the election. The deep suspicion is that it will really be run behind the scenes by the army, as before, apparently.
Tsvangirai is fighting this election with both hands tied behind his back and his legs hobbled. Zuma raised hopes of meaningful change when he took over the job from Mbeki of mediating the Zimbabwe negotiations for SADC. He - and particularly his no-nonsense foreign policy adviser Lindiwe Zulu - talked straight to Mugabe and insisted on real reforms to level the political playing field. But in the end, one fears, they succeeded mainly in just irritating Mugabe. Last month, at Zuma and Zulu's insistence, SADC leaders asked the Zimbabwe Constitutional Court - clearly just another Mugabe instrument - to postpone the poll to allow time for the many necessary reforms. It predictably rejected what was no more than a polite request.
SADC could do nothing about this humiliating rebuff because it is not prepared to really confront Mugabe and make him pay for his behaviour. It is showing the same reluctance to confront Madagascar's de facto leader Andry Rajoelina. From 2009 when he ousted Marc Ravalomanana, SADC should have simply insisted that Rajoelina give up power. But it let him stay on as transitional leader. It issued firm declarations that he should allow Ravalomanana to return from exile in South Africa to fight the next elections. Yet it also inserted a mealy-mouthed escape clause respecting Madagascar's judicial sovereignty, telling Rajoelina in effect he could arrest and imprison Ravalomanana if he returned, as he had been convicted and sentenced in absentia for alleged complicity in the shooting of protesters.
Since it could not muster the courage or conviction to do the right thing - which was to force Rajoelina not to run for office (in violation of SADC and African Union rules) and to allow Ravalomanana to do so - SADC then resorted to the so-called 'ni-ni' option. Ni-ni meant that neither of the two bitter rivals would run for office. In December and January they both accepted the ni-ni deal and the problem, from SADC's perspective, seemed to be solved.
But then Ravalomanana put up his wife Lalao as a candidate for his political movement. And this prompted Rajoelina to renege on the ni-ni deal and to enter the presidential race too. And so did former president Didier Ratsiraka - along with about 40 other candidates. The trouble was that Lalao Ravalomanana and Ratsiraka had not met the legal requirement of at least six months of residence in Madagascar before the election. And Rajoelina also broke the law by missing the deadline for submitting his candidacy. But the electoral court accepted all three of them as candidates anyway.
Now SADC, and the African Union (AU) are demanding that the three candidates withdraw from the election and have vowed they will not recognise any of them if they are elected. They and the international community are also refusing to fund the poll and are even threatening to slap personal travel and financial sanctions against them if they don't withdraw - something SADC and the AU never contemplated against Mugabe for all his greater sins.
Last week the International Contact Group on Madagascar, led by AU peace and security commissioner Ramtane Lamamra and SADC's medidator Joaquim Chissano, visited Madagascar to try to persuade the three controversial candidates to withdraw from the elections. They evidently had a heated meeting with Lalao Ravalomanana and her supporters who refused to back down. Evidently the other two also refused. According to the Ravalomanana people, Chissano frankly told them that they really wanted Rajoelina to withdraw from the presidential race - and that Lalao Ravalomanana had to be 'sacrificed' to this objective.
If that is true, it would epitomise the disingenuous and frankly cowardly approach of SADC, confirming that it cannot confront the real problem, Rajoelina, as it has failed ultimately to confront the real problem in Zimbabwe, namely Mugabe. Threatening sanctions against the three erring candidates in Madagascar looks superficially to be a good thing, a sign that SADC and the AU are at last baring their teeth to enforce their decisions. But this tougher resolve is misdirected in Madagascar. If the three candidates pull out now, there will be no one to represent the Ravalomanana political movement in the election. Perhaps the same would be true of Rajoelina's movement, although there are suspicions it has at least one other secret candidate in the race. Having failed to remove Rajoelina directly, SADC should back down, accepting Rajoelina, Lalao Ravalomanana and Ratsiraka as candidates.
This arrangement, though unsatisfactory, seems to be an acceptable compromise to the main rival camps; more particularly to Marc Ravalomanana who is the most aggrieved party.
The infringements by the three candidates are technicalities that SADC, the AU and the international community can surely afford to ignore - having condoned much greater violations by Rajoelina. It's time for SADC to admit its impotence and let the Malagasy go ahead with an election most of them seem to want.
Peter Fabricius, Foreign Editor, Independent Newspapers, South Africa
Comments Post a comment
SADC needs to declare victory and go home
But wait. SADC still has methods for dealing with the Madagascar crisis. Threats and extortion. It worked in March 2009 when the pro-Rajoelina military took over the downtown presidential palace "to hasten Ravalomanana's departure"1 and the insurrectional justice minister threatened him with arrest. After he was ousted, the international community insisted that Marc Ravalomanana “really did resign!”, later acknowledging that the coup d’état included the “threats and pressures that pushed Ravalomanana to do what he did.”2
So now SADC is doing the same thing, threatening Lalao Ravalomanana and her family with as-yet-unspecified sanctions unless she withdraws her candidacy. It is classic extortion: “unless you do as we say, we will do xxx to you, your family, your associates, and your business partners.”
If she yields to the threats, it will be said that she withdrew “voluntarily” to quote from the International Contact Groups’s 7 point plan3, just as they still say that her husband “resigned”4 after he yielded to the threats against him.
On 27 July 2012 Rajoelina’s security forces kicked Lalao Ravalomanana out of Madagascar ensuring that she would not meet the 6-month residency requirement before the filing date for candidates for president. The international community and people like Peter Fabricius apparently consider forced exile as a perfectly acceptable means to make Lalao Ravalomanana’s candidacy illegal.
It is no wonder that people keep doing coups d’état in Africa: the international community is ready to condone coups as a legitimate means to get an elected president to “resign”. In the same way, threats and extortion may work to get candidates that France doesn’t like (France was first to object to Lalao Ravalomanana’s candidacy on 6 May5 and first to announce sanctions against her on 10 June6) to withdraw their candidacies.
SADC may be down but it is not out. Threats and extortion could still carry the day.
1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7947381.stm 2. http://razafimahazo.free.fr/Descendants/ReporterMdvv_Arch2010/Arcmdvv100606 .htm 3.http://www.tananews.com/asides/communique-plan-en-sept-points-pour-sortir -le-processus-electoral-a-madagascar-de-limpasse/ 4. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/world-leaders-1/world-leaders-m/ma dagascar.html 5. http://appablog.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/madagascar-candidatures-a-lelectio n-presidentielle/ 6. http://www.voanews.com/content/france-will-not-recognize-madagascar-candida tes/1678686.html
A Grand Conspiracy Involving France and SADC
Tanzanian President Kikwete met with French President Hollande in Paris on 21 January 2013 to discuss the Madagascar crisis including the return of Marc Ravalomanana. President Hollande is quoted as saying that he and President Kikwete have "a complete convergence of views" with respect to the Madagascar crisis1. Then, on 23 January 2013, French ambassador Goldblatt announced French opposition to Marc Ravalomanana's return to Madagascar prior to elections2. The logic is that this was agreed upon by Presidents Kikwete and Hollande two days prior. France thus impeded full application of the SADC Roadmap because Article 20 says “The High Transition Authorities (HTA) shall allow all Malagasy citizens in exile for political reasons to return to the country unconditionally, including Mr Marc Ravalomanana.”
On 11 March, President Kikwete and Andry Rajoelina placed conditions on Lalao Ravalomanana’s return to Madagascar including that she not organize political rallies and saying that the length of her stay in her country was contingent on the health of her mother3 thus violating her right to free speech and Article 20 of the SADC Roadmap.
The evening of 3 May, the day that Rajoelina’s candidacy was approved by the Special Electoral Court, he received a red-carpet reception4 and photo-op session5 with President Kikwete in Dar es Salaam.
The international community has announced upcoming sanctions against Malagasy people who impede the application of the SADC Roadmap6, but there will not be sanctions for France and President Kikwete who have impeded the application of Article 20 of the SADC Roadmap. Instead the international community is calling for sanctions against Lalao Ravalomanana (France has already announced that sanctions are in effect7), saying her candicacy is illegal8, because she was not in her country when she should have been because she was kicked out (on 27 July 20129).
Marc Ravalomanana was blocked from returning to Madagascar on 3 July because “the Malagasy authorities, notably the current transitional president Andry Rajoelina, are still opposed to his return.”10
The international community is now threatening sanctions against Lalao Ravalomanana, her family, associates, and business partners unless she withdraws her candidacy by 31 July11. If she gives in to the threats against her, the international community will say that Lalao Ravalomanana withdrew voluntarily12 similar to the way the international community insisted that Marc Ravalomanana “resigned” when he gave in to the threats that forced him from the presidency in the context of a coup d’état (see above).
From the evidence above, it looks like France and SADC are involved in a conspiracy to prevent a Ravalomanana from being a candidate for president of Madagascar.
This is extortion (“if you don’t do what we want, we will do xxx to you and your family”). It is slander (saying Lalao Ravalomanana’s candidacy is illegal without presenting any evidence as to how her candidacy violates any law). It is despicable. It is counter to democracy. It will not help Madagascar get out of the crisis.
1 http://www.malango-actualite.fr/article/tanzanie__france-rencontre_hollande _kikwete-9366.htm 2 http://www.tananews.com/phrases/le-retour-de-marc-ravalomanana-ne-devrait-p as-avoir-lieu-avant-les-elections/ 3 http://www.madagate.com/politique-madagascar/dossier/3220-lalao-ravalomanan a-tel-mari-telle-epouse-a-la-maniere-de-dakar-i-et-ii.html 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjSL8D5YJfU 5 http://www.madagate.com/politique-madagascar/dossier/3227-dar-es-salaam-and ry-rajoelina-recu-par-jakaya-kikwete.html 6 http://africanbrains.net/2013/07/01/7th-meeting-of-the-international-contac t-group-on-madagascar/ 7 http://www.voanews.com/content/france-will-not-recognize-madagascar-candida tes/1678686.html 8 http://africanbrains.net/2013/07/01/7th-meeting-of-the-international-contac t-group-on-madagascar/ 9 http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2012/af/204137.htm 10 http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20130703-madagascar-presidentielle-ravalomanana-r etour-pays 11 http://www.jeuneafrique.com/actu/20130713T163340Z20130713T163309Z/madagasca r-le-mediateur-donne-jusqu-a-la-fin-de-mois-aux-candidats-controverses.html 12 http://www.tananews.com/asides/communique-plan-en-sept-points-pour-sortir-l e-processus-electoral-a-madagascar-de-limpasse/
SADC IS ABSOLUTELY DOING WHAT IS PERFECTLY RIGHT BY ANY ORDINARY AFRICANS AND THE AFRICAN UNION STANDARDS. AS USUAL, ALL THAT OTHERS WANT TO SEE IS DESTRUCTION AND CIVIL WARS AMONG AFRICANS SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE IT AN PORTRAY THE SAME BAD IMAGES THAT THEY USUALLY DO ABOUT AFRICA AND AFRICANS BESIDES MENTIONING THE EXCESS GAIN FROM SUCH NEGATIVITIES PORTRAY ABOUT AFRICA AND AFRICANS. YESTERDAYS WAS WORST; BUT AFRICA AND AFRICANS ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE TODAY AS WORST AS YESTERDAYS - AND THAT YOU MUST BELIEF IN. WE "AFRICA AND AFRICANS" MUST LEFT ALONE BY THESE NEGATIVITIES INDIVIDUALS WHO FEED ON US "AFRICANS AND AFRICA" AND LET'S DECIDED OUR FUTURE.