“Many people tell me, ‘never again,’ but still, again and again”: the case of Sudan and the Central African Republic

These words were uttered by a survivor in Darfur, a region where populations are still prey to human rights abuses committed by the Janjaweed militias backed by the government of Sudan. The genocide of 2003, which claimed the lives of 400,000 people, already constitutes a textbook case of the international community’s failure to intervene but the violence also continues to be largely overlooked. The UN/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) fails to fulfill its mandate but this is largely ignored by the Security Council. Not only do violence and human rights violations persist in Darfur, Abyei and South Kordofan but those displaced by conflicts also still lack food, water and shelter.

On Wednesday, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) accused the UN Security Council of prolonging the conflict in Sudan by failing to arrest Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, who is under an arrest warrant since 2009. Rightfully so, Fatou Bensouda criticized the Security Council for turning its back on Sudan, thereby allowing Al-Bashir and other alleged perpetrators of human rights violations to remain at large and commit more crimes. Since 2005, Al-Bashir has been allowed to travel to several countries without being arrested. Bensouda sees the inaction of the Security Council on Sudan as “a serious indictment on this council” and as an “insult to the plight of Darfur’s victims.”

U.N. Ambassador Gerard Araud, the current Security Council president, argued that the “the council is blocked, by some countries.” Particularly under the radar is China, which continues to block any council action. China has repeatedly said that pressing war crimes charges against the Sudanese president would have disastrous effects in Sudan and invited Al-Bashir to China in 2011. China has also long been Sudan’s biggest arms supplier (25% in 2010) and has major economic investments and interests in the country. China purchases more than half of Sudanese oil output!

Further south west on the African continent is the Central African Republic, another country where the UN’s inaction attracted biting criticism this week.

Looking at the gravity of the conflict in the Central African Republic (CAR), it is clear that most of the world remains indifferent to the plight of CAR’s population. In the past week alone, sectarian violence has killed 600 people and since the beginning of the crisis, tens of thousands of people have had to flee their homes, according to Unicef. Not only has the UN Security Council failed to take preventive actions against foreseeable violence, but the UN humanitarian aid system has failed as well. On Friday, international humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) addressed an open letter to the UN Under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs denouncing “the unacceptable performance of the United Nations humanitarian system” in CAR.  This scathing critique is largely justified. Since July NGOs such as MSF have repeatedly urged the UN to provide adequate humanitarian action and resources but food, water, shelter and hygiene technologies still fail to meet minimum standards.

The failure of the UN system to fulfill its responsibilities towards civilians appears even graver in the case of CAR. Although challenging, humanitarian assistance is supposed to be impartial and neutral. Thus, the general expectation is that humanitarian agencies will deliver aid solely based on the needs of populations, whatever the circumstances. With few exceptions, this has not been the case of UN agencies in CAR. If MSF and other NGOs have been able to deliver, why not UN agencies?

The UN Security Council’s inaction in Sudan and Syria already discredited and delegitimized the international community. Now humanitarian inaction of the UN is having the same result.

Bearing witness in the Central African Republic

If we needed another example of the power of the social media during protests and conflicts, the current conflict in the Central African Republic is yet another proof. Violence was particularly dramatic over the weekend, leading to the death of at 400 people.

We have seen social media being used during the Arab Spring and other anti-government protests around the world. This time, reporters and humanitarians working on the ground used Twitter to inform the world about on-going human rights violations, the impact on civilians and the arrival of the French troops to Bangui and Bossangoa. Among them are Alex Thompson and Stuart Web (Channel 4), Laura Jepson (IMC), Peter Bouckaert (Human Rights Watch), Tristan Redman (Al Jazeera English), Marcus Bleasdale (National Geographic Photographer), Mark Kaye and Justin Forsyth (Save the Children). They took pictures of Bangui airport filled with fleeing civilians, recorded videos of abuses, and reported live from discussions with Seleka. Here are a few examples:

Peter Bouckaert: @bouckap: At #Seleka base we found a Peuhl boy no older than 14 among soldiers, told us whole family had been murdered by anti-balaka, no place 2 go.

@bouckap Just finished briefing French captain in #Bossangoa on our research and recommendations for action. Very attentive and proactive audience.

Alex Thompson: @alextomo: #c4news #CARcrisis. Man with wheelbarrow with coffins of 2 brothers beaten to death by Seleka militia says F soldiers not in hotspots

@alextomo: #c4news #CARcrisis Quartier Combatants, Bangui – gangs with daggers and machetes looking for Muslims to kill. Finding them.

Marcus Bleasdale: @marcusbleasdale We met a 14 year old boy in the #Seleka military camp today. All his family was killed so he wants to be a soldier. Wrong.  #CARcrisis @hrw

Stuart Webb : ‪@Worldwidewebb1 #CARcrisis an all to common sight on the streets of Bangui this week-no doubt they’ll be more tomorrow…

 

Justin Forsyth: ‪@justinforsyth Hard to tell how many people sheltering in grounds of Catholic mission – over 7000 #CAR

Without these testimonies, how much would we really known? This is exactly what we mean by the “power of witness.”

In 2009, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said about the power of social media: “You cannot have Rwanda again because information would come out far more quickly about what is actually going on and the public opinion would grow to the point where action would need to be taken.”

While the international community continues to tip toe and hesitate on when, how, if they should intervene, journalists and humanitarian workers on the ground can, with a cellphone only, put pressure on world leaders by bearing witness. As pictures are taken and real-time events reported, perpetrators can be held accountable for their crimes and bystanders for their inaction. They can’t say they didn’t know?

 

Image by Marcus Bleasdale

Lessons learned from Nelson Mandela

As eulogies about Nelson Mandela abound, one thing  they all seem to have in common is the need to remember the great man’s ideals and to learn lessons. But as antagonisms, conflicts and violence continue in several regions of the world, some of these tributes appear meaningless and hypocritical when uttered by individuals who fail to uphold Mandela’s principles in their own country. There are many lessons we should learn from Madiba, I have only selected a few.

 Perseverance

`I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.” – Defence statement during the Rivonia Trial, 1964

Perseverance. This one of the lessons we must learn from Mandela. You do what you can do must but do it. At the beginning of his life, he had more losses than victories. He was an ambitious man who was born in system that confined black South Africans to certain roles and areas. On multiple occasions he could have given up to fate and despair. But trapped between four prison walls, dispossessed of almost everything he owned except his freedom to think, he refused to give up on his ideal. He succeeded thanks to his sense of conviction and ambition.

There is only one world: local is global

Although Mandela fought against an apartheid regime specific to South Africa, his movement and ideas are transnational in nature. Fought by local actors against a local system of racism, his struggle was nonetheless about the universalization of basic rights and the recognition that all human being deserve to be treated as equals. Mandela’s fight for freedom, peace and democracy went well beyond South Africa’s borders and could be applied to Canada’s relationship with its Native communities which remains thorny to this day. Because of its timeless and borderless nature, Mandela’s struggle continues to resonate today.

One’s freedom is dependent on the freedom of the other

“A man who takes away another man’s freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness. I am not truly free if I am taking away someone else’s freedom, just as surely as I am not free when my freedom is taken from me. The oppressed and the oppressor alike are robbed of their humanity.” – The Long Walk to Freedom, 1994

Mandela’s political philosophy and view of humanity is something that should be pondered on as wars, hatred and hostility continue to divide people and peoples. Humanity and freedom are rights that every human being should enjoy and that the other has the duty to respect. For Mandela, the apartheid system did not only deprive black South Africans of their humanity, but the oppressor himself, blinded by hatred, was dispossessed of his humanity. But nobody was born hating the other, he said. We are all dependent on one another and as long as walls exists between peoples, cultures, religions and societies, we will not thrive. As Mandela stated “Great anger and violence can never build a nation.” He therefore worked with his oppressors and made them allies in order to avoid more tragedy in South Africa. As the Israeli and Palestinian press eulogizes Mandela, perhaps their people and leaders would do best to remember him by reaching out to each other.

Leadership and responsibility

“I stand here before you not as a prophet but as a humble servant of you, the people.” On release from prison, February 11, 1990

Mandela’s death occurred on the eve of the “Africa-France Summit” where nearly 40 African leaders gathered to discuss peace and security. As French President François Hollande said in his introductory speech is symbolic and “it also means that we have to face up to our responsibilities.” Overshadowed by the violence and French intervention in the Central African Republic, the summit suddenly acquired a new message.

With dictatorships and despotic, demagogic leaders still going strong in several parts of the world, Mandela’s idea of responsible leadership is something that many head of states should reflect on. A true leader is someone who understands that he has a responsibility work for and protect his people. In his eulogy of Mandela, former Prime Minister of Canada Brian Mulroney writes: “As we watch communities in Africa and the Middle East struggle to free themselves from decades of despotic leadership, let us hope that their next generation’s leaders are moved by the passion, the dignity and the grace of Nelson Mandela (…).”

African leaders now praising Mandela’s life should perhaps take a look at their own path and the legacy they want to leave behind. South African President Zuma called on his people “to build a united, non-racial, non-sexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa” but he should focus on the state of the ANC party leadership first. In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe may have freed his people from an oppressive white minority but he has become a brutal leader unable to give up power. Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, once a freedom fighter like Mandela, has been in power for 27 years. They failed as liberation heroes.

As world leaders, state representatives and people from across the globe gather in South Africa, they should not simply remember Mandela’s legacy and ideals. They should also implement them. Or else they will remain just that: ideals.

Central African Republic and the French Intervention – No longer a Bystander

 A year ago, when then President François Bozizé appealed to the US and “French cousins” to help repel Seleka’s advances on Bangui both countries refused. Angry crowds attacked the French embassy and criticized France’s passivity, especially since the former colonial power has a military presence in the former colony since 2003. When French President François Hollande visited Central African Republic (CAR) in late December he made it clear that he would not mingle in internal affairs, insisting that these days were over. Hollande knows the dangers of renewing its ties with its colonial past.

A year later, the CAR is on the brink of collapse. UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, warned that the country is at risk of genocide if nothing is done. Similarly, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said that the country is “on the verge of genocide”.

After ousting Bosizé, Seleka leader Michel Djotodia proclaimed himself President. In September, he dissolved Seleka and only integrated some of them into the army, leaving the others unattended to. Since then the country has plunged into chaos as undisciplined rebels commit widespread looting and abuses against those they consider as Bosizé supporters. The deep climate of insecurity has led to the creation of anti-balaka forces (self-defense groups) who have taken up arms against ex-Seleka fighters. The most worrying aspect of the crisis is the rise of sectarian violence between religious communities. Indeed, the majority of the Central Africans is Christian while Séleka fighters are predominantly Muslim, many of them from Chad and Sudan.

So who is going to act now?

In view the gravity of the situation, France has decided to send an additional 800 soldiers to help the 3,600-strong African Union force restore order. France’s decision led an Algerian journalist to state that it signifies a return of “Françafrique” since this new operation comes only ten months after the French intervention in Mali. The debate over France’s reason for intervening is always raised.

Why is France intervening after standing by in March 2013? The main reason cited by Paris is a humanitarian one. The situation is deteriorating badly and grave human rights violations are being committed, including rape and massacres. The self-defense groups are just as bad as Séléka and 460,000 people have already fled. Djotodia is unable to restore order and appears completely lost. For Hollande intervening has now become a question of responsibility. Whether there are real risks of genocide or not, Rwanda still haunts the French political class.

Beyond humanitarian reasons, there are of course security concerns and geo-strategic interests. This is not another Mali where soldiers are dealing with organized jihadists who have taken over a territory. What we are seeing in CAR is a complex social conflagration with, on one side, 15.000 to 20.000 violent Seleka rebels and on the other anti-balaka groups ready to commit massacres against the Muslim population. Nonetheless, there are real concerns that if nothing in done, jihadists who fled Mali and Libya may find refuge in CAR. There are also risks of spillovers and contagion into the two Sudans, the Congo and Chad, none of which are really stable.

Will the belated intervention bring stability to CAR? 1,200 French soldiers are unlikely to restore long-term stability, especially in a country bigger than France. However they will at least support the ill-equipped MISCA in an attempt to restore order. The French also hope that the UN will send additional peacekeepers as quickly as possible. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon recommended 6,000 to 9,000 men.

But what CAR needs is a political solution and France made it clear that it is the role of Central Africans to settle these problems. Since its independence, CAR has never established a strong political structure or arena. Djotodia is clearly unable to deal with the situation. Just a couple of days ago, he denied assertions that the country is at risk of genocide and accused the international community of manipulating public opinion. “For me, there is nothing to show that we can even talk of what is going on as genocide. This is simply vengeance. A regime committed abuses, it is now gone. Its victims are taking revenge, that is all.” “That is all”? Graver still he criticized displaced Christians in the north: “He who wants to drown his dog, accuses it of having rabies, that’s all. Our situation is no less dramatic than that in other countries but it is portrayed as such. It is unfair.” The self-proclaimed President is either blind to the populations’ suffering or he is unwilling to prevent violence.

 As the International Crisis Group states, it’s “better late than never.” The current situation could have been prevented if regional and international organizations had acted early instead of being bystanders. Nobody moved a finger when Seleka staged a coup but the consequences should have been anticipated. The political situation will clearly not be settled through a military intervention but at least some seem to move beyond the bystander role.

Pinboard: News round-up

Central African Republic

Religious violence between Christians and Muslim is worsening in the Central African Republic. NGOs, aid workers, policymakers (such as French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius) and UN representatives have issue warning of the violence spiralling into genocide. Amnesty International said war crimes and possible crimes against humanity may have been committed – people have been killed, raped and kidnapped. A clear sign that the conflict is escalating is the increasing number of child soldiers, now estimated at 6,000.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon first urged the Security Council to authorise the deployment of 6,000 blue berets but now says that another 3,000 should be on standby in case things get worse. “This cycle, if not addressed now, threatens to degenerate into a country-wide religious and ethnic divide, with the potential to spiral into an uncontrollable situation, including atrocity crimes, with serious national and regional implications,” he said. According to the UN’s Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, Christians and Muslim will end up killing each other if nothing is done now. He did not exclude the possibility of genocide occurring. In an extensive article titled “Unspeakable horrors in a country on the verge of genocide” David Smith asks “What needs to happen before the world intervenes?” This question is certainly legitimate once again.

The problem is that UN peacekeeping forces are slow to deploy. I have also seen very little political will, at least in the West, to prevent an escalation of the conflict in a decisive manner. The only country that has stepped forward is France, who backed a UN resolution in October. The Central African Republic may be a big country but in terms of international attention, it gets very little from world leaders, policymakers or the general public.

Evan P. Cinq-Mars, who works at the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, wrote a good op-ed in The Ottawa Citizen in which he argues that while warnings have been issued the situation resonates with what happened in Rwanda and Darfur. Words and lots of tip toeing but no action. There is no genocide yet but if nothing is done, that we may be heading in that direction. 

Thierry Vircoulon, Africa expert at the International Crisis Group, wrote this piece in which he underlines (as many think tanks and activists often do) that “prevention of a crisis is much better than a cure — and much cheaper.” While CAR has a long history of conflict, the current escalation of violence could have been avoided if regional bodies such as ECCAS and the AU had agreed on a political solution to the crisis, put more pressure on the transitional “government” to protect civilians, and if the AU’s peacekeeping force had more resources and support. Now refugees are fleeing to neighbouring countries and there is a real risk of spill-over. CAR could also become a safe haven for terrorists groups such as Boko Haram. Consequently, it would be wise for the international community to act.

 

 

Myanmar: no citizenship for the Rohingya

On Tuesday, the UN asked the government of Myanmar to grant citizenship to the Rohingya, a stateless minority group that I have previously written about. A government spokesperson replied that “”We cannot give citizenship rights to those who are not in accord with the law, whatever the pressure. That is our sovereign right.”

Considered as illegal immigrants and “Bengalis” (a pejorative term) by Burmese authorities as well as the Burmese citizen, the Rohingya have long been persecuted and violence, including pogrom-like attacks, against them has increased since Myanmar embarked on a reform drive.

The authorities’ refusal to recognize the Rohingya is a clear sign that they are being discriminated against.

Nyan Win, a spokesman for the National League for Democracy party of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, agreed with the government’s position and added that “the Rohingya do not exist under Myanmar’s law.”

 

Lord’s Resistance Army: Little hope to catch Kony despite rumors of talks

Last week a spokesperson for the President of the Central African Republic, Michael Djotodia, claimed that the president is currently in talks with world-known LRA rebel leader Joseph Kony, and that the latter may surrender. President Djotodia reportedly said: “Joseph Kony wants to come out of the bush. We are negotiating with him.”

What to make of these claims and the possibility of  surrender? Very little. While the LRA has been weakened in recent years and probably feels under pressure, many remain sceptical, including Ugandans. We’ve heard to story before. The US State Department, which has backed efforts to hunt down the LRA, does not give much weigh to the claims either, arguing that Kony and his top men use this tactic “to rest, regroup, and rearm (…).” Similarly the AU’s special envoy on the LRA said that Kony may be trying “his time-tested tricks of buying time by duping the CAR authorities into negotiations”.

We also have to consider where this is coming from. Michel Djotodia became president after ousting President Bozizé with the help Seleka, a rebel coalition that is committing widespread abuses in CAR. By now the country has pretty much become a “failed state.”

Nonetheless, Joseph Kony has been weakened. In the end perhaps, continued military pressure may “bring him out of the bush” but since we are aware of his bluffing tactics, that kind of pressure should continue in order to prevent his men from reorganizing.

 

Conflict Diamonds and the efficiency of the Kimberley Process

A new map of the eastern DRC reveals that artisanal mine sites controlled by armed groups (200) or by the Congolese army (265). It shows the location of 800 mining site, cases of illegal taxation by armed groups or the army Researchers at the International Peace Information Service (IPIS) found that gold is the number one conflict mineral in the region. The rise as the first conflict mineral is both the result of the high value of gold and stricter anti-conflict minerals legislation, gold being easier to smuggle than tin, tungsten and tantalum.

Although there have been significant efforts to guarantee conflict-free mineral, there are loopholes in the supply chain, a clear lack of monitoring and due diligence. Governments in the region are clearly not imposing sanctions on those who buy minerals from armed groups.

There has been quite a lot of debate on the need to reform the Kimberley Process (KPSC), a mineral certification process founded in 2003. Delegates from 81 KPCS member countries called for stricter sanctions. One of the biggest criticisms made by NGOs is the weak definition of conflict diamonds. Described as “rough diamonds used by rebel movements or their allies to finance conflict aimed at undermining legitimate governments”, they do not include state entities (ex: Zimbabwe in 2008). Times Live looks at the double-standards of the diamond industry.

 

The Justice vs. Peace Conundrum

“What place should the international community give to justice and accountability in its response to conflicts involving mass atrocities? Under what circumstances does the effort to pursue justice help or alternatively complicate the effort to bring atrocities to an end? Is it better to set a benchmark for justice by referring active conflicts to the International Criminal Court, or should efforts to seek justice be deferred until a peace deal is being discussed?” These are the questions raised by the European Council on Foreign Relations project on International Justice and mass atrocities. The goal? Examine the effects of international justice mechanisms on conflict resolution, the relationship between bringing violence to an end and holding perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes accountable: “How far are those two objectives mutually reinforcing, and how far are they in tension?” The debate over “peace vs. justice” is not new but the project takes a refreshing look at the debate thanks to the variety of case studies it examines as well as the impressive quality of scholars/experts Anthony Dworkin and the ECFR managed to gather. The ECFR commissioned 12 case studies in order to look at the variety of approaches and their consequences: Afghanistan, Bosnia, the DRC, Israel and Palestine, Kosovo, Liberia Libya, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Syria, Uganda and Yemen. The case studies are short and concise.

On the same, subject Al Jazeera presenter Mike Hanna sat down with the former President of South Africa to discuss the problem of peace and conflict, especially at time when many African leaders are rising against the ICC. Should justice trump peace?

 

DRC: one down but many others left

I have seen some optimism in Congolese and international media about the situation in the DRC. However, while the M23 may been militarily defeated there are other armed groups the DRC must still deal with. As this article by Ida Sawyer rightly argues, “it is by no means the end of Congo’s brutal story.” The M23 leaders and many of the rebels have found refuge in Uganda and Rwanda, who refuse to hand them over. No political solution has been found either so the cycle of conflict may continue. Foreign (the FDLR for example) and Congolese militia groups (self-defense groups such as the Mai Mai Sheka and Raia Mutomboki who are fighting the FDLR) are still very much present, especially in the eastern DRC, and continue to commit abuses against civilians. Similarly, in “An elusive peace” on The Economist’s Baobab blogger emphasizes the importance of a political deal with the M23 – the absence of a deal, considering the presence of M23 rebels in Rwanda and Uganda, is an “accident waiting to happen.” But the blogger also emphasizes on the need to track down the FDLR since Rwanda is unlikely to stop interfering in the DRC as long as these rebels are present in the Congo.

While the government and the UN may have won the fight against the M23, as Sawyer concludes “the road toward peace will remain as long as ever.” And this is without taking into consideration all other challenges, such as good governance and corruption, justice, reconciliation, and security sector reform. Amani Itakuya – Peace will come has published a list of articles written by journalists, academics, activists, and practitioners on the challenges and opportunities of peace building in the Congo and the Great Lakes region. This collection of articles allows us to get different views and arguments on a variety of subject linked to challenges in the region: conflict minerals, justice, the FDLR and the M23, the role of regional tensions and international intervention, security sector reform, ethnic conflict, and reconciliation.

 

Technology: Twiplomacy study

 Since the rise of social media, world leaders, policymakers, and international and regional organizations have embraced these new digital media to communicate and increase their impact. A new Burson-Marsteller Twiplomacy study looks at the way international organizations use Twitter and what we can learn from it. While some people may think of Twitter as something obsolete, they must realize that it has opened new communication channels. A lot of diplomacy occurs in the Twittersphere. These days important news, events or statements are tweeted before they appear on websites and certainly in traditional media. Statements, and judgments are made, debates and protests occur, and individual leaders also use Twitter to chat with their followers, thereby opening new communication channels. Imagine, combined, all organizations studied here have sent 770,547 tweets!

The Twiplomacy study focuses on 223 accounts from 101 international organizations, 51 personal accounts of these organizations’ leaders and 75 accounts in other languages. The research analyses each organization’s Twitter profiles and their recent tweet history based on 50 variables, including followers, retweets, replies and hashtags.

UNICEF is the most followed international organization. To measure an organization’s effectiveness, the research took into account the number of retweets (RT). The European Organization for Nuclear  (CERN) comes first, followed by UNICEF and the UN. To measure popularity, the study also looked at the number of times an account appears on Twitter lists. Here the UN comes first, followed by CERN, UNICEF, Greenpeace and WHO. You can also have a look at the most followed and the most conversational leaders

 

Using Tech to Fight Mass Atrocities

As part of the Digital Mass Atrocity Prevention Lab (DMAPLab), MIGS hosted an online panel discussion on the use of social media and other technologies to detect and prevent mass atrocity crimes.
The panel titled “Using Tech to Fight Atrocities?” includes speakers Christopher Tuckwood (The Sentinel Project), Akshaya Kumar (The Enough Project), Nathaniel Raymond (Signal Program on Human Security and Technology at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative), and will be moderated by Kyle Matthews (Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies.

“People Never Talk”: Imposed silences and narratives – the challenges of reconciliation in post-genocide Rwanda

In the field of conflict and peace studies, Rwanda often stands out. Not only was the hundred-day genocide extremely bloody and destructive but José Kagabo describes the massacres as a “genocide of proximity” because perpetrators, including ordinary citizens, turned against friends, neighbours, colleagues, and even family members. Today, both groups live in close quarters and this does not come as a choice. As one Rwandan explained, the reality of life on the hills demands coexistence: “(…) we don’t have any choice. If we don’t live together the genocide will start again.”[1]

 

            Almost twenty years after the 1994 genocide that killed almost one million Tutsis (and Hutu moderates), how strong are the divisions between the two communities? Would you be able to live next the man or woman who killed your family members?  In post-conflict countries, dealing with broken relationships between antagonistic parties is a central challenge. But it has been also described by conflict resolution scholar Bar-Siman-Tov as “probably the most significant condition” for sustainable and stable peace. The Rwandan government, now led by President Paul Kagame and the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), has taken a multifaceted approach to solve ethnic divisions and achieve sustainable peace. The singularity of the Rwandan approach is an interesting case of state intervention in post-conflict reconciliation. But what does reconciliation mean after genocide? To rebuild mutual ties, how does one deal with the contentious past and ethnic divisions, and address human rights violations? Obviously, reconciliation is context-dependent – there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all peace-building mechanism. It entails not simply tensions and setbacks, but certain reconciliation practices can also have contradictory effects.

            In terms of economic growth, the Rwandan government has made important progress: with an average annual growth rate of 7.7% in 2012, the country is embracing various development plans and investing in new technologies as it seeks to become the “Singapore of Africa”. International donors and foreign affairs analysts describe the country’s reconstruction as a “success story” and see the RPF-led government “as one of the more efficient and honest ones in Africa.” Yet is economic development sufficient? War continues in the minds of individuals long after formal and structural arrangements have been instituted. The 2010 presidential elections were marred by repressive government measures and several cases of violence committed by a rising number of dissenters. While it is too early to make concrete conclusions about the country’s future, several pre-genocide trends and tensions seem to be perpetuating in post-genocide Rwanda.

            To achieve unity and reconciliation between Tutsi and Hutus, the post-genocide Rwandan government has not only insisted on holding perpetrators accountable, but has sought to change the way Rwandans perceive themselves, the past and the causes of the genocide. Rwanda’s history has long been manipulated by those in power in order to create divisions. It is therefore now argued that a truthful history will benefit justice and reconciliation. To do so the state has sought to control narratives around Rwandan identity and ethnicity, as well as the history and memory of the genocide. The state has imposed a canonical narrative, an official “truthful” account of Rwandan history in order to undermine dualistic ethnic identities and forge a collective Rwandan consciousness. The regime portrays pre-colonial Rwanda as a harmonious society shattered by Western intruders (colonizers) and divisive national politics and discourses (Hutu leaders). In the end, the RPF intervened to stop the genocide when no one else would. In a way, the state is re-educating Rwandans about their past. While there is truth in the way the regime portrays Rwanda’s past, as Catherine and David Newbury rightly argue, “it is politics that makes ethnicity important (…)”.[2] While Rwanda’s attempt to move beyond ethnic identities is highly welcomed, I would argue that the regime’s the history as told by the government remains subjective. This meticulous narrative management and selective remembering based on practices of imposed silences, actually tend to perpetuate ethnic categories by creating ethnicized, dichotomous categories of victims and perpetrators. It also prevents the emergence of constructive dialogue essential to reconciliation. By silencing alternative voices, power also remains in the hands of a small government and military elite. Eventually, this can have risky effects on ethnic consciousness and reconciliation. While security concerns justify restricted civil rights in democratizing post-conflict societies, as institutions and leaders shape public discourse and identities, power-sharing, representation and social justice are nonetheless crucial to reconciliation.

             Furthermore, while the official discourse promotes unity, in practice, other government narratives and practices have silenced critics and alternative experiences deemed threatening. The government’s claim to reveal the truth should be questioned as post-genocide judicial mechanisms (including the traditions Gacaca courts), the genocide ideology and divisionism laws, as well as memorials and commemorations have been manipulated and politicized to control what is officially remembered and forgotten. For example, many reconciliation policies focus only the genocide committed by Hutus against Tutsis, thus blotting out from national memory human rights violations committed by the RPF against genocide suspects, Hutu civilians during the genocide while defending Tutsis, and contemporary abuses committed against legitimate critics.  In Rwanda, the perceived lack of social justice combined with feelings of exclusion, victimhood and fear of being accused – wrongly or justly – perpetuate mistrust between communities and prevent a reassessment of identities. These government practices as well as surveys conducted among Rwandans, show that ethnic consciousness and tensions remain present. The heavy-handed control over public debate has led one Rwandan to state that “it is the fear that stays in people’s head.”[3] Another one stated “keeping quiet over an existing problem does not provide a solution.”[4] Authoritarian, top-down practices and rigid control over public debate and discourse can be detrimental to reconciliation as dialogue around ethnicity and the genocide is repressed. This could make the ground rife for renewed conflict. My aim here is to say that there is a discrepancy between the government’s original strategy/discourse of unity and what it does in practice.

              Reconciliation is a long-term process – it is too early to say whether the country will relapse into conflict. Yet, one Rwandan recently asserted that “[…] people never talk because it brings back bad memories and problems. We pretend in does not exist.”[5] Such a statement seems enough ground for concern and, as Rwanda tries to break away with its violent past, a new and participatory approach should be endorsed. It may be time of to talk instead of silencing, or peace on Rwanda’s hills will remain pretended.

 

---

[1] Buckley-Zistel (2008), ‘We are pretending peace: Local Memory and the Absence of Social Transformation and Reconciliation in Rwanda’, in Phil Clark and Zachary D. Kaufman, eds., After Genocide Transitional Justice, Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Reconciliation in Rwanda and Beyond (London: Hurst Publishers), p.138

[2] Newbury, Catherine and David (1995), ‘Identity, Genocide, and Reconstruction in Rwanda’, Paper prepared for the Conference on Les Racines de la Violence dans la Region des Grands Lacs, Parlement Europeen, Bruxelles, 12-13 Janvier 1995, pg. 16

[3] Longman, Timothy and Rutagengwa, Théoneste (2004), ‘Memory, identity and community in Rwanda’, in Eric Stover and Harvey M. Weinstein, eds., My Neighbor, My Enemy. Justice and Community in the Aftermath of Mass Atrocity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

p.175

[4] Freedman, Sarah Warshauer, Deo Kambanda, Beth Lewis Samuelson, Innocent Mugisha, Immaculee Mukashema, Evode Mukama, Jean Mutabaruka, Harvey M. Weinstein and Timothy Longman (2004), ‘Confronting the past in Rwandan schools’, in Eric Stover and Harvey M. Weinstein, eds., My Neighbor, My Enemy. Justice and Community in the Aftermath of Mass Atrocity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)p.258

[5] Buckley-Zistel, Susanne (2006b), ‘Remembering to forget: chosen amnesia as a strategy for local coexistence in post-genocide Rwanda’, Africa, 76 (2), p.141

Reading list of the week

A number of great articles and long-reads

– New Technology and the Prevention of Violence and Conflict

How can international actors, government and NGOs use new technologies to prevent conflict and violence. According to this research “the context should inform what kind of technology is needed and what kind of approach will work next.” As with any other program or approach, there is not one-size-fit-all solution and a failure to acknowledge the side-effects and risks of the technology can worsen the situation. The “do-no harm” theory works here as well. The technology must be integrated into existing civil society initiatives. “The increased horizontal spread of new technologies across societies has the potential to revolutionize these traditional systems by making more information available to more people”

 

– Central African Republic: U.N. Is Warned About Genocide Threat

There is been very little attention to the conflict in the Central African Republic but the UN office on the prevention of genocide that the country is at risks of genocide. In this now lawless and pretty much state-less country, armed groups incite Christians and Muslims to turn against each other – interreligious and inter-communal attacks have very much increased. According to a coalition of NGOs, new militias are forming in order to defend communities and counter-attack. What makes this even worse is the dire humanitarian situation caused by massive displacement and food shortages. Adama Dieng, the United Nations’ special adviser on the prevention of genocide, called for action on Friday.

 

– Syria

In Syria: What Chance to Stop the Slaughter? Kenneth Roth reflects on the impact of the chemical weapons deal, arguing that it should not be belittled, even though the Assad regime continues to kill people with conventional weapons (“(…) as Assad showed, chemical weapons are also different because of the extraordinary civilian toll they can exact”). The greatest impact, according to Roth, is a diplomatic one. From the beginning Russia and China used their veto power at the UN Security Council to “obstruct any significant effort to address the Syrian slaughter (…)”). The chemical weapons deal ended the stalemate and opened the door to focus on bringing humanitarian help to Syrians, an opportunity that the UN should urgently grab the opportunity now.

Roth then considers several ways to prevent further mass atrocities: the Geneva Talks II? The ICC? More condemnation of Russia? What is certain is that things can get worth. The responsibility to take action not only lies on the shoulders of the five permanent members of the Security Council but also on emerging or middle powers such as India, Brazil, and South Africa. “The chemical weapons deal represents the best opportunity since the war began to forge a unified international front to stop the slaughter in Syria. But that will happen only with a much more focused and consistent international effort—by both the West and others—to press Russia to live up to its responsibility to protect the people of Syria.”

 Insight: Starvation in Syria: a war tactic: The first sentence pretty much sums it all: “One Syrian security official called it the “Starvation Until Submission Campaign”, blocking food and medicine from entering and people from leaving besieged areas of Syria.” Aid deliveries are being blocked in several besieged areas and over one million refugees are affected, according to the UN. Furthermore, according to civilians, “farmers are targeted as they try to harvest their crop in an open field.” Deliberate starvation is a war crime, according to international law and there is been international pressure on the Syrian authorities to let aid agencies have access to these areas. However, Russia and China have vetoed condemnations of Assad and therefore referral of the case to the ICC. According to the journalist, “hunger has become so endemic that locals say they eat leaves and grass.” It is one thing to get a chemical weapons deal but deliberate starvation is a conventional, old-aged and easily used weapon of war as well.

It was also officially announced last week that polio had broken out in Syria, the polio outbreak in the country in 14 years.  Humanitarian access is poor or inexistent in many areas, especially those under military blockade. The shortage of food and medicine will make the situation even worse. According to experts, and to the Assad regime, the disease may have transmitted by foreign jihadists. In order to prevent an epidemic, the UN must focus on humanitarian aid (“36% of the aid for Syrians inside the country has been collected”). But the Assad regime must also understand that restricting access to humanitarian aid in rebel-controlled neighborhoods will not prevent infectious diseases from spreading to other areas. Epidemics don’t make a difference between friends and enemies.

Radicalization in Syria poses growing threat to Europe, says Turkish leader: In this interview Turkish President Abdullah Gul reflects on the consequences of the conflict in Syria beyond the country’s borders, including in Turkey. Not only is he worried about the spread of violence and the number of refugees (500,000 right now in Turkey alone), but also about the spread of infectious diseases such as polio and TB. One of the main arguments of why we should prevent or halt conflicts and mass atrocities even in “far away” countries is exactly that: we live in a global world where conflicts will have consequences beyond borders. If the moral argument doesn’t (which rarely does), then think about the consequences for your own people.

Gul also raises the right questions about Assad’s use of chemical weapons: “But was it just the chemical weapons? Do we reduce the whole thing to chemical weapons?” He is heavily critical of the international community’s failure in regard to Syria and described the UN Security’s performance as a “disgrace”. Finally he is pessimistic about Syria’s future “The country is destroyed … There really isn’t in my opinion much that can be done now.”

 

– Preventing Mass Atrocities: Resilient Societies, State Capacity, and Structural Reform

At the 54th Annual Strategy for Peace Conference (October 16–18), the Stanley Foundation brought together 30 diplomats, mass-atrocity experts, and international civil society representatives to achieve resilience to mass atrocities. They concluded that preventive actions are not only the responsibility of the state but also that of the international community, which must support a country’s efforts to develop its capacities to prevent violence.

Based on the discussions, here are the main guidelines for preventive action against mass atrocities:

• International actors should identify opportunities for common collaboration with local groups and build from there.

• Preventive action is dynamic, not static: To adapt to the quick evolution of mass  violence, international actors should integrate preventive action across varied sectors and  throughout different stages of mass violence.

• Anticipate unintended consequences: International actors should be aware that in some cases they will work with and alongside former perpetrators to build preventive resilience. To mitigate hazards, preventive action should define clear boundaries between positive incentives and unconditional support.

 

–  Louise Arbour on conflict and peace: Doctrine derailed?

The International Crisis Group’s President & CEO Louise Arbour spoke at the opening of the Global Briefing 2013 (Video) She reflected at the past, present and future of internationalism by looking at the state of international criminal justice, peacekeeping missions, the Responsibility to Protect, and the international promotion of the Rule of Law. She gives a realistic and rather “pessimistic” view of the current state conflict management and mass atrocity prevention. Nonetheless, Arbour underlines that “ (…) it is only by acknowledging the inadequacies of our approaches that we have any chance of improving them” and therefore to advance peace and security

 

– New report on Piracy: a sophisticated financial system

“Pirate Trails: Tracking the Illicit Financial Flows from Piracy off the Horn of Africa” is reveals how profits are used to fund terrorism. After interviewing current and former pirates, middlemen, financial backers and government official the World Bank, the UN and Interpol is a comprehensive research put together this comprehensive report on the dangerous, murky but sophisticated world of piracy. Kenya, Djibouti and the United Arab Emirates are the main transit points and final destinations. Most worryingly, a third of pirate financiers use profit made from piracy to gain political influence, set up militias or help religious extremists, including Al-Shabab and Al-Qaida.

“It is estimated that  more than  US$400 million was claimed in ransoms for pirate acts between April 2005 and December 2012 and  179 ships were hijacked off the coast of Somalia and the Horn of Africa during that time.”

 

– How good are Goodwill Ambassadors?

The article offers a balanced view of the debates around good will ambassadors, often referred to as “celebrity humanitarianism.” While many may cringe at the view of people like Madonna, Bono, Ben Affleck and Angelina Jolie visiting a refugee camps in “khaki-clad” entire, they sure bring a lot of attention to a country or a cause from those who do not usually look that way. The article highlights the benefits for humanitarian agencies and NGOs but also shows that using celebrities to draw attention to complex issues contains numerous risks: misrepresentation, simplification and condescendence (West must safe Africa). UN agencies and NGOs now understand the issues better and rely on “star-power” only when they know that it will be long-term and deep investment. Move aside Christina Aguilera and Miley, met George Clooney (The Sentinel Project) and Angelina Jolie (UNHCR) to the job.

 

Reading list – News round up

United Nations

–  Trends in Uniformed Contributions to UN Peacekeeping: A New Dataset, 1991–2012

A very interesting project by the International Peace Institute. Since the creation of the United Nations, peace operations have been one of the body’s integral components: sixty-seven operations in forty-two countries. Thanks to UN members’ investment in human capital and resources, there is evidence that peacekeeping operations have had a positive impact on the prevention or resumption of conflict. However, not a lot of data has been made available to researchers. In order to fill this gap, the International Peace Institute has therefore developed a Peacekeeping Database. One the focus of the database is to analyze the factors that encourage or discourage states from contributing to UN peacekeeping operations and to look at contribution patterns among regions (such as number and type of personnel), and over certain periods. The IPI wants to disseminate the results of the research and data based in order to improve the capacity of troop- and police-contributing countries. The database will be updated on a monthly basis. What is interesting to look at is geographic disaggregation over the years and whether personnel contributions are being shared more equally or less equally.

– Defying the UN Security Council: Last week, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Lithuania, Chad and Chile were elected to nonpermanent seats at the UN Security Council. However, in a astonishing diplomatic move Saudi Arabia declined the offer, citing the UN’s failure to face its responsibilities, especially in Syria and Palestine: “Work mechanisms and double-standards on the Security Council prevent it from carrying out its duties and assuming its responsibilities in keeping world peace”. Saudi Arabia’s Civil Disobedience at the United Nations analyzes and speculates on the short-term and long-term implications for the UN. The author suggests that, in the future, this kind of diplomatic move may be used by member states who want to put pressure on the UN to reform the structure of the Security Council

 

Syria

Three interesting analyses of the current situation in Syria. “The Four Things We Know About How Civil Wars End (and What This Tells Us About Syria)” analyzes the war from a theoretical point of view, or rather from our experiences of civil wars in general, and concludes that the chances of a negotiated agreement are null.

“The Syrian War in three capitals” end on a more positive note and looks at the war from three different angles (four even if you count Damascus): Teheran, Washington, Moscow. Looking at the interests and strategies of these three capitals, Marc Pierini argues that their best option is the diplomatic avenue.

Syria’ s entry into the chemical weapon conventions and the regime’s agreement to remove chemical weapons has allowed Assad to stay in power – at least for now. In Tracking the “Arab Spring”: Syria and the Future of Authoritarianism Steve Heydemann of Georgetown and the U.S. Institute of Peace analyze the regime’s capacity to adapt to the challenges, including by crushing protest from the start (unlike Egypt and Tunisia). According to the authors, Assad regime had to “reconfigure its social base, tighten its dependency on global authoritarian networks, adapt is modes of economic governance, and restructure its military and security apparatus.” More grimly, they state that “What seems more plausible is that the repressive and corrupt authoritarian regime that entered civil war in 2011 will emerge from it as an even more brutal, narrowly sectarian, and militarized version of its former self,” he writes. The article goes further by analyzing the way other governments in the region have responded to the Arab Spring or the threat of uprisings.

 

Somalia

The World Peace Foundation is going to run a number of article on patterns of violence in Somalia. In “Clan Cleansing in Somalia: The Ruinous Turn of 1991 (2013)” , Lidwien Kapteijns looks at the divisive policies of the Barre regime and the resulting clan-based violence against civilians between 1978-1992, and identifies 1991 as a key shift in the history of Somalia . For the first time, politico-military leaders purposely incited civilians to become perpetrators which had the effect to make clan-affiliation much stronger. According to Kapteijns, clan cleansing is widely denied, which undermines state building. As she rightly states “recent work in the fields of new genocide studies and the anthropology of violence have shown that silences, misrepresentations, and denials have been an integral part of acts and campaigns of genocide and ethnic cleansing.” The solution, Kapteijns argues, is to engage with the past and encourage a dialog on the clan cleansing violence.

 

Advancing the Responsibility to Protect

The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect and the Cardozo School of Law s-worked together on a report that seeks to advance the Responsibility to Protect. “A Common Standard for Applying the Responsibility to Protect”

– Addresses the need to systematically develop a common standard against which relevant actors can assess information in relation to potential mass atrocities and R2P;

– Develops guiding principles for the application of the standard;

– Assesses the benefits of, and challenges to, adopting a common standard.

 

The dilemma of engaging with armed group

Engaging armed groups: challenging preconceptions and expanding options

“You can’t make peace without talking to those doing the fighting” but engaging with non-state armed groups is complex. The parties in the conflict have contradictory motives and objectives. The article is based on the premise that governments often lack expertise and tools on how to engage with armed groups. When it comes to choosing options, governments need to look at conflict dynamics, potential obstacles, at the objectives of armed groups, and the role outside local and international actors could play.  Teresa Dumasy offers a balanced reflection on the complexity of engaging with armed groups and the need to broaden the range of options available. More importantly I think, Dumasy also underlines the need for good practice guide.

 

Gender and Conflict

The World Peace Foundation will release occasional paper on Gender, Conflict, and Peace. In the first paper, Dyan Mazurana and Keith Proctor provide a useful summary of the literature on the subject. More specifically they focus on five major themes:

– Culturally-inscribed notions of gender as an analytical framework for understanding conflict-related violence 

– How experiences of conflict and levels of vulnerability vary according to gender.

– Gender and non-violent resistance

– Looking at gender and peace in order to understand how local groups can influence national agendas and to promote a bottom-up approach to peace.

– Gender and transitional justice: transitional justice programs consistently fail to incorporate women and girls’ specific needs.

 On the same subject, Women Under Siege suggests “10 must-read books on sexualized violence in war”. You’ll find case studies (the Balkans, Vietnam, Romania, Nanking), analyses of the causes, consequences, and responses to sexualized violence in wartime, and policy recommendations. I would also add “Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War? Perceptions, Prescriptions, Problems in the Congo and Beyond” by Maria Eriksson Baaz and Maria Stern.

Sectarian violence on the rise

Recent violent attacks on religious communities have highlighted the fact that sectarian violence and religious strife is on the rise. Christians have been targeted in Kenya, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, Zanzibar, in Northern Mali following a military coup in 2012 and even in the Central African Republic where Muslim and Christians had been living side by side peacefully. In Myanmar, Buddhists monks are attacking Muslim minorities, often under the eyes of security forces who fail to prevent these human rights violations. Extremist Islamic terrorist groups are targeting moderate Muslim, including in Pakistan and Nigeria The Bahai’s have long been persecuted in Iran, especially under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I could go on.

In many of these countries, Somalia and Nigeria in particular, weak governments are unable to take effective measures against extremist groups. In other cases such as Myanmar and perhaps Pakistan, the state has been accused of failing to prevent violence against Muslim minorities or failing to prosecute perpetrators.

Groups such as Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab, who share similarities to AQIMI, are now moving beyond borders and attacking neighbouring countries. They recruit fighters among young, impoverished and unemployed youths not only locally but also in the diaspora. One of the most disturbing aspects is the presence of foreign fighters from North America and Europe, young people who seem to see no future for themselves and vanish abroad to fight for what they see as bigger cause. In the case of Al-Shabab, some observers say the flow of recruits from the diaspora is bound to decline because the group is a lost legitimacy. Nonetheless, every time there is a large-scale attack such as in Kenya in September or in Algeria last January, foreign fighters are among the attackers. So one can only wonder whether extremists will continue to successfully attract global fighters.

– Nigeria – Boko Haram

A “monster” seems to have emerged in Nigeria: Boko Haram. Created twelve years ago, this religious sect used to protest against the establishment. But the movement has grown more violent, more political and more radical. Last week, Boko Haram attacked a college in Yobe State, brutally killing more than 50 students, a lot of them Muslim. Between July 2009 and February 2011, the terrorist group claimed responsibility for 164 suicide attacks, executions and raids against security forces, the UN, prisons and banks. More than 900 people have died, a majority of them Muslim. Amnesty International says Boko Haram, which means “Western education is a sin”, is now targeting schools, killing teachers and students. One consequence of these attacks is that in parts of northern Nigeria “as many as 80% of the students have stopped attending classes and more than a thousand teachers have fled the region.” Parents have been told to send their children to Islamic schools.

Boko Haram wants to set up an Islamic State in North-eastern Nigeria. Last May, the government declared a state of emergency in the three northern states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe, but Amnesty International argues that the government is not doing enough to stop the attacks. The army has conducted a number of offensive against the extremist group but it only seems to lead the rebels to intimidate and commit reprisal attacks against innocent civilians. It raises questions about the capacity and efficiency of Nigeria’s security forces.

There is a real danger that Nigeria will break apart. One of the most urgent needs is for the government 1) raise the capacity of the security and counter-terrorism forces 2) address the inequalities and poverty in the North considering that the country’s northern states are the least developed. In a region where more than 60% of the population lives under the poverty line and where the central government is seen by many as elitist and corrupted, the population is vulnerable to Boko Haram’s negative influence.

– Al-Shabab 

By attacking the Westgate mall on 21 September, Al-Shabab came in the world’s collimator once and for all. According to witnesses the attackers were specifically targeting Christians and telling Muslims to get out of the way. In view of this bloody massacre, analysts wonder whether the group, is getting weaker or stronger, and what ties it has to Al-Qaeda. Al-Shabab (“The Youth” in Arabic) emerged in south-central Somalia, a country that has been stateless for more than two decades, and won the control of most Somalia’s capital in 2006. They were recently ousted from the city by a United Nations-backed force from the African Union but remain in control of rural areas where they have imposed the Sharia law.

Al-Shabaab officially formed an alliance with Al-Qaeda in 2012. But Somali-American journalist Abdi Aynte says that jihadists had already been congregating in Somalia before 2012. Considered by many as a failed state, Somalia had basically become “the best theatre of operations for al-Qaeda.” The raid in Nairobi shows that the alliance leads Al-Shabab not simply to focus on controlling Somalia, but also to move beyond their borders and to attack on symbols of prosperity such as the Westgate Mall. With the internationalization on Al-Shabab, such attacks could happen again.

Washington is very worried. Not only has it given millions to the UN-backed African force but last weekend, the U.S. carried out a raid on the home of a senior leader of al-Shabab in Somalia (and failed to capture him). Just hours later a similar operation was carried out in Libya against the al-Qaida leader Anas al-Libi, this time with positive results. The rarity of such dangerous operations shows a regain of determination following the massacre in Kenya. “Those members of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations literally can run but they can’t hide.” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

Again, one of the main problems here is rampant poverty, unemployment and a long history of corrupt or non-existent governments. As analyst Richard Dowden states “Al Qaeda feeds on despair rather than hope.”  The current Somali government is only on-year old and it will take years for the country to reconstruct – if the transitional regime is willing to take its responsibilities.

– Pakistan

On September 22 a militant group called Jundullah (Soldiers of God) claimed responsibility for an attack on the All Saints Church in Peshawar, which killed 85 worshippers. This is not the first attack on Pakistan’s Christian community but it is certainly the worst. Jundullah is believed to be one of about 150 semi-linked militant groups currently active in Pakistan. Motives for these attacks seem to vary depending on the attacker but they are often linked to grievances against the West, including the war in neighboring Afghanistan, deadly US drone strikes attacks in Pakistan, the withdrawal of the army from their tribal areas, and/or the application of Islamic a radical version of Islamic law.

The Paskistani Christian communities has called for protection but the government is suspected doing little to hold perpetrators of attacks accountable. Not unlike other minorities in Pakistan, Christians have long been discriminated against and are seen as second-class citizens. Cecil Shane Chaudhry, the executive director of the National Commission for Justice and Peace, says the attack “is a new dimension, a new direction to attack the Christian community at large.” But Muslim are being persecuted as well.  Sunni militant groups Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan have attacked Shiite Muslims. In 2012 close to 400 Pakistanis died in sectarian violence, many of them Shiite Muslims. In 2013, 300 have already died in three major attacks. Again the government has done little to investigate the killings, leading analysts to accuse it not only of incompetence but also of complicity.

– Burma/Myanmar

I have previously mentioned the plight of Muslim minorities in Burma.  The Rohingya in Rakhine state, who are considered by many as illegal migrants from Bangladesh (even tough many of them have been there for decades), have been the target of assaults for more than a year. Deadly riots have already killed 200 people since June 2012. Extremist Buddhist monks have been attacking Muslim homes and shops, burning them to the ground. The ultra-nationalist 969 Movement is responsible for inciting violence but the government has also been unwilling to prevent the violence from growing fiercer. President Thein Sein visited Rakhine at the beginning of the month but stayed mostly silent about what some human rights groups have described as ethnic cleansing. Worse, in the past Thein Sein has been know to call for the removal of the Rohingya. Last week the speaker of the Lower house praised ethnic Rakhine people for safeguarding Myanmar’s “national sovereignty, territorial integrity, culture, traditions, customs and religion.” Violence is now spreading to other regions such as Mandalay region, Kachin and Shan state, and the pattern is often similar: a trigger event, armed organizers wearing red-color headbands and inciting violence, angry mobs, security services standing by. In the past Burma has engaged in democratic reform and Francis Wade suggests that anti-Muslim violence may be a tactic used by the military elite and/or politicians to reassert control: “help manufacture a threat, and jump in to save the day.”

– Zanzibar

This is a lesser-known case. The Christian minority of semi-autonomous and largely Muslim Zanzibar (1%) used to live in peace but in recent months several churches have been set on fire and attacks against Christians have increased. In February, Father Evarist Mushi was gunned down, two teenage Britons volunteering at a nursery school had acid thrown at them in August and last month Reverend Joseph Anselmo Mwagambwa was badly hurt in an acid attack. The Christian community blames a local religious social movement called Uamsho (Awakening, in Swahili), which promotes Islam on the archipelago and recently acquired a new political focus. Like other radical Islamist movement such as Boko Haram, MUJAO and Al-Shabab, Uamsho has expressed dissent to western-style government and society. The relationship between Christians and Muslim also started to crumble when the government engaged in a process of constitutional review and the emergence of new demands for independence from Tanzania. Like other extremist movements, Uamsho finds recruits among the impoverished and unemployed youths of Zanzibar. The group is certainly one to watch out for: a raid in Tanzania led to the arrest of 11 suspects who are allegedly linked to Al-Shabab – this would be the first a link is established between the two movements.