South Africa

The Council on Foreign Relations has a fantastic interactive map of Africa’s conflict zones and areas of UN/African Union intervention past and presence, as well as an option to see the contours of former colonial rule and influence. This is a first-rate resource for those who want to understand Africa’s divisions, particularly for students.

Rwanda has joined much of the international community in a call for the end of the death penalty. It’s a pretty compelling argument, all in all: If the Rwandan government can end capital punishment with countless perpetrators of genocide still to be punished, there are not a lot of countries in the world with a compelling argument to continue killing even the most malicious criminals.

(Meanwhile, Josh Ruxin, an Africa expert who contributes to Nicholas Kristof’s blog at The New York Times, is generally optimistic about the direction of Rwanda.)

Well, earlier in the week I predicted it, not because I am especially perspicacious, but because it was so predictable: “Prepare for rhetorical brickbats to come from Zim’s wily tyrant.” And brickbats we have gotten. In his Wednesday address before the United Nations, Mugabe had a field day. His material tends not to vary all that much — accusations of imperialism, neo-colonialism, hypocrisy. He lashed out at President Bush (whose utter mishandling of Iraq and other foreign policy ventures makes him a logical target) and Gordon Brown. Mugabe even savvily praised Thabo Mbeki for Mbeki’s mediation in Zimbabwe. It was atypical Mugabe performance, largely unhinged, not without its rhetorical merits, but largely obfuscatory of the real issues.  The man is certainly a world class demagogue.

The UN recently called for a rare summit on Africa and predictably, promises were made, agendas were set, ideas proposed. While it is good to see Africa on the global agenda in such a visible way, many Africans are rightly skeptical:

“Africa’s agenda will increasingly be defined by the African Union,” said AU chairman Alpha Oumar Konare. “We hope to move beyond words, to move beyond promises because too many promises have already been made to Africa.”

One does, however, wonder if Konare is not whistling past the graveyard. Naturally Africans should set their agenda. But so far, the AU, for example, has shown little capacity for effectiveness in Sudan. So far, SADC has proved loath to intervene in Zimbabwe. Perhaps it is still right that Africa choose to address and not to address these issues. But it seems that if the world wants to help, Africans ought to welcome that help, as long as African leaders make clear that they set the agenda and they provide the leadership and they create the structures in which Europeans, Americans and others might operate. In other words, African solutions for African problems, but with whatever help the West is willing to provide in a subordinate capacity.

Western involvement does not have to mean neocolonialism, though as Thabo Mbeki argued before the General Assembly yesterday, the very structure of that organization does favor rich nations over poor ones. Mbeki further asserted that even with their augmented status, developed nations are failing the developing world.  Perhaps the west is listening (now look who is whistling past the graveyard!) and can come to the conclusion that western help under African control might pave a new road for African relations with Europe, the United States, and elsewhere.

Gordon Brown remains steadfast in his refusal to attend any Europe-Africa summit in which Robert Mugabe is allowed to participate. At least a few African leaders are rallying around Mugabe, who is on his way to New York where he will attend the meeting of the General Assembly. Prepare for rhetorical brickbats to come from Zim’s wily tyrant. Already his sycophants in the press have gone after Brown, with political columnist Nathaniel Manheru writing in Harare’s government mouthpiece The Herald: “Mugabe stands very tall and black. Brown stands white and colonial.”

But keep in mind as the verbs and adjectives fly that not only is Brown on the right side in this debate, but that his view reflects that of masses in Zimbabwe who have been victims of Mugabe’s betrayal of his people for the sake of his own power and aggrandizement. Mugabe will use his bully pulpit. We know this to be true. But the words he speaks will be bitter but empty, sound and fury signifying nothing except his scorn for human rights, democratic processes, and his own people.

The sometimes problematic nature of China’s relationship with Africa is nowhere more stark than in Beijing’s engagement with Sudan (see also here, here, here, here, and here). Over at The New Republic Eric Reeves, one of the foremost authorities on the crisis in Darfur, has a piece telling us to be wary of China’s support for UN Resolution 1769, in which the United Nations Security Council authorized a joint UN-African Union (AU) force to intervene in Darfur.

Although China did vote to support the resolution this year (last year they abstained so as not to breach Khartoum’s sovereignty, or so they would have had you believe) Reeves would not be so fast to heap praise on Beijing for coming around: “Winning China’s support came at a significant price. Khartoum’s staunchest ally voted for the resolution only after it had helped to secure the elimination of key provisions.” Reeves also shows that there is blame enough to go around among Western powers and not just China.

It will be seen if this resolution proves to be another half-measure that falls short in reality. One hopes that a demonstrable use of force — the threat of which really has been the only stick to which Khartoum has responded consistently — will set the stage for a long-term solution in Darfur. But until we are given reason to believe otherwise, skepticism will rule the day. Nonetheless, the authorization of troops and the willingness to use force signals a vital step forward if the troop presence comes to pass.

Privation connected to poverty and vulnerability to climate change is wreaking havoc throughout the continent. Lesotho continues to suffer from drought-fueled food shortages. The droughts have also affected Swaziland and South Africa. The economic crisis in Swaziland has led to increased sex trafficking among children as well as women. Informal settlements in Namibia are embody hell on earth. Climate change is leading to an increase in malaria cases in Kenya.

 The news of the increased UN-African Union peacekeeping presence has raised hopes of humanitarian relief for the people of Darfur. Sudan claims that it will support the troop presence. We;ll see how long Khartoum’s conciliatory attitude lasts. Some Sudanese, meanwhile, are looking to South Africa for a blueprint for peace.

At Foreign Policy Stephan Faris worries that the boomlet that parts of Africa appear to be enjoying might be chimerical, with oil fueling another manifestation of the resource curse. The Council for Foreign Relations explores the process of ”hunting for elusive peace.” Despite these real concerns, there also is real progress on parts of the continent, as Kofi Annan argues in the Mail & Guardian.

At The New Republic Eliza Griswold analyzes the Somalia crisis as “the other failed invasion,” which is problematic inasmuch as viewing Africa through the prism of Iraq manages to be both too Western-centric while at the same time allowing Iraq to disproportionately warp our views of other issues.

In order to address the mindboggling inflation rate in Zimbabwe (is it really possible that it could reach 100,000% by the end of the year?) the government has issued  a Z$200,000 note worth $1 US. Meanwhile, add water shortages to the daily sufferings of the people of Zim.  

On Sunday former United Nations Secretary general Kofi Annan gave the fifth annual Nelson Mandela lecture at Madiba’s foundation. In his talk Annan entreated African leaders to promote democracy and good governance and to disavow tyranny.

It turns out that throughout much of the continent, Africans are already heeding the call for democracy and away from kleptocracy and dictatorship. In the newest issue of The Journal of Democracy Daniel N. Posner and Daniel J. Young have an article posing the argument that peaceful transitions of power may well already be underway, with force having given way to a general trend toward the rule of law.  In sum, that Africans are benefiting from the “institutionalization of political power.”

The United Nations Population Fund speculates that the urban population of Africa will more than double in the next quarter century. Obviously the ripple effects of this would be serious. It’s probably worth pointing out that dire population predictions have something of a mixed history, but the UNPF report indicates that 80% of the world’s population will live in the developing world by 2030 with huge ramificatioins for poerty, development, health, food supplies, and just about every other aspect of daily life.

Liberia’s former President, Charles Taylor, one of Africa’s most ruthless thugs (a bold claim, to be sure) will go on trial at a UN-backed Special Court at the Haguie next week. He will face war crimes charges stemming back to his years as Liberia’s Big Man. A couple of colorful quotations reveal the loathing that taylor inspires among Africans:

“This man called Charles Taylor is a monster.” — Sierra Leonean Adama Turay, whose son and daughter both had hands amputated by RUF rebels.

“I am very happy to see this man is at that court. He needs to be killed rather than fed each day.
Whatever a man soweth, so shall he reap …. Men acting on his order killed many people … That should tell you how wicked that man was.“  — Monrovia resident Rosetta Smith, whose husband was beaten to death by members of an Anti-Terrorist Unit operating under Taylor.

Not all are thrilled with the trial — some fear that it will become a circus, others believe that the trial represents a misallocation of resources, some fear that taylor will be acquitted. But on the whole I would argue that bringing taylor to justice sends the best possible message in light of the atrocities for which Taylor bears responsibility, whether direct or indirect.