They can't drink oil

      The collapse of the oil price has several major implications. It is an economic tsunami. For the oil-producing developing countries, in Africa and elsewhere, it means an extraordinary loss of revenue. That’s the case for Nigeria, Angola, Congo, South Sudan, Algeria, Libya, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, and so on. It adds fuel to social instability in those countries. It brings, at least, a new level of poverty and hardship to their populations. For the developed countries, it carries serious capital losses for the pension funds and other sovereign funds that were heavily invested in oil corporations and all the other companies that deal with bits and pieces of the oil industry. For all of us, it discourages new investments in renewable sources of energy. The bottom rock oil price makes any renewable too expensive to contemplate at this stage. 

The oil consumption is at present very low, because of the lockdowns that are implemented all over. But also, because the United States has continued to pump vast amounts of oil. They are now the largest producer, with 12.3 million barrels per day. President Trump could have compelled the industry to reduce daily production. There was a recommendation to cut it by 2 million barrels per day. He decided not to act because he saw this branch of the economy as a key pillar of his political basis. There are 10 million oil and gas sector jobs in the US, plus many billionaires that inject money in the Republican camp.   Now, he is promising them billions of dollars in subsidies. Public money being wasted when the solution was to reduce exploitation. His political choice has a huge impact on the domestic taxpayers’ money and on the world economy. It is inexcusable.

They say that misfortunes never come alone. Indeed.

We should feel deeply challenged

Syria has become the most visible and most dramatic example of the UN Security Council´s failures. It patently shows that the Council´s arrangement is about the Permanent Members ‘interests, and not about international peace and security. And it is also a most shocking reminder that it is time to find a better arrangement to protect civilians and civilisation. To accept without profound indignation what is going on in Aleppo and elsewhere should be out of question.

However, it is not just about Syria or its vicinity. It is also the suffering in South Sudan, Myanmar and some other parts of the world. And the extreme poverty many face on a daily basis. All that is just a reminder of the incapacity of the Council to properly address the major crises and challenges that put so many lives at stake.

It is also a call to think differently about the future and a new international order.  

Reforming Peacekeeping

There are several areas of the UN´s work that call for reform. Today, I would mention the Protection of Civilians in relation with the mandates of peacekeeping operations. The reason I raise this issue derives from the report the Center for Civilians in Conflict, a Washington based NGO, just published on the recent dramatic events in South Sudan. Basically, the report states that the UN Blue Helmets did not move out of their barracks and therefore neglected to protect the humanitarian workers. Several of these workers became then victims of extreme violence at the hands of the national soldiers, governmental and rebels alike.

These facts are accurate. The truth of the matter is however much more complex. The UN troops had no means to confront the heavily armed South Sudanese fighters. The UN weapons disadvantage was a crying one. And the fighters were simply determined to shoot and kill the UN Blue Helmets, in case the latter would become too visible on the streets.

These raises a very good number of fundamental questions about deploying a UN peacekeeping force where there is no peace to keep. Should the UN be there? Was the Security Council right when approving the mandate for the South Sudan mission? Should we envisage an international fighting force first, for an initial intervention? How should we put together such a combat mission?

There are indeed many questions just on this issue. And this just one of the many issues that call for serious rethinking.

We decided to ignore South Sudan

South Sudan has now joined the list of the forgotten crises.

The country was the darling of the international community three or four years ago. In the meantime, it experienced a very serious civil war, hundreds of thousands of displacements and a plunge into political chaos. In many ways, such violent crisis could have been prevented if the UN and the key partners of the country had played a more courageous supporting role.

Now, South Sudan is trying to move out of violence. The needs are huge. Including, to start with, the ones related to basic humanitarian assistance. But the donors are not responding. The UN Humanitarian Coordinator has just revealed that the humanitarian appeal for South Sudan remains outside the radar screen, nobody is paying attention to it. Indeed, he stated that only 2% of the required humanitarian funds have been raised so far.

It is time to be a bit louder about South Sudan again.

Little minds

There are so many new headlines from Gaza to Ukraine, from the planes that crash here and there, and then the Summer recess, that we just forget that the Nigerian school girls have not yet been freed, after several months in the hands of Boko Haram, and the Central African Republic is still the murderous chaos it was a few weeks back. And that the elections in Afghanistan are yet to be sorted out, long after the polling day. Not to mention Iraq, Libya, South Sudan, and so on...

Keep the eyes on the ball

The Football World Cup started today in São Paulo. The TV screens will be full of soccer news during the next few weeks. At a time when the crises in South Sudan, the Central African Republic, Mali, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Pakistan and other places keep deepening, people´s attention will be busy and focused on the ball. As they say, keep the eyes on the ball, we will take care of the rest…

The UN in South Sudan needs teeth

John Kerry, who was visiting Luanda today, has shown he is deeply concerned with the crisis situation in South Sudan. The civil war is going on. It is even getting more violent, now that talks about talks between the two main opposing parties are being aired. For the Americans, South Sudan is important. The country has a large interest group in the US, particularly amongst the Christian fundamentalists. That´s politically relevant.

The UN mission in South Sudan – UNMISS – has been politically weak. And it has also lacked the strength and the will to have a more robust security role. It is time for the Americans to raise that matter with the UN Secretary-General. And to help the SG to find the right response to the weaknesses. It is not good for the UN´s image and work in the region to been seen as unable to have a stronger and clearer stance on the South Sudanese crisis. 

Critical peace issues

I had a long discussion today about the current impact of the UN missions on peace and security. It all started with a silent crisis, Guinea-Bissau. Nobody talks about that country and the lasting disaster that has been around for so long. That is a DPA-led mission, meaning, the UN department of Political Affairs has the responsibility to guide the UN presence on the ground and report to the Security Council on a regular basis. Then, we looked at Cote d´Ivoire, where we have had a peacekeeping operation for quite some time. There is very little progress, I would say in a very diplomatic language, as far as domestic reconciliation is concerned. Next to it there is a UN peacekeeping presence in Liberia. The country has been struggling to rebuild itself, after many years of civil war and wanton destruction. There are now some serious issues of governance. Are we addressing them?

And we moved on, to the Central African Republic, South Sudan and Mali, not to mention the work of the UN missions in Libya and elsewhere. And the same question came out a number of times? Are we addressing the key issues?

The point is very simple. In all these situations, conflicts can come back, sooner or later, if we are not able to deal with the critical causes of instability. And in some cases, it is even worse. We are simply not able to help the countries to move out of the swamp. 

Kiir should take a bold political initiative

Salva Kiir, the President of South Sudan, has managed to collect the support of the regional leaders. But the crisis is deepening. The ceasefire discussions in Addis Ababa are not making any visible progress. The humanitarian situation is worsening.

In this deteriorating context,  the international community should tell President Kiir that the support he is getting from the region should encourage him to seek a political solution. Because of the backing he is receiving from his neighbours he is more than anybody else in a stronger position when it comes to taking the political initiative. He should understand that the region and the international community can only see an all-inclusive political agreement as the way forward for sustainable peace and nation building in South Sudan. Anything else, including the military option, is just a recipe for further collapse and human misery. 

Central African Republic: the forgotten crisis

When it comes to political decisions, the Central African Republic remains outside the main radar screens, notwithstanding all the dramatic news about the civil unrest in the country. France is on it alone, playing a complex role that has more to do with gendarmerie and police tasks than with military assignments. But what is on the ground is a military expeditionary force. That is feeling more and more frustrated by the type of challenges they have to face in Bangui, and also because they are so stuck in the capital city that they can´t respond to the problems elsewhere in the country.

This French force should be rapidly complemented by a comprehensive peacekeeping operation, under the overall leadership of the UN. That is not going to happen any time soon. The African Union is very reluctant when it comes to accepting a UN force. They are still convinced, I want to believe, that they will be able to deploy an AU mission and take care of the security situation. It is unrealistic as an approach. The African Union is no measure to put together the required integrated force. They should be confronted with such truth. And they should also cease to play along the interests of the Chadian President, Idriss Déby, who seems to be the key African opponent to a UN presence.

The US is also against a UN mission in CAR. They base their position on the fact that such mission would carry additional financial costs to Washington. And they do not want to put more money, at this stage, on UN peacekeeping operations. OK, I can understand the costs issue. That could be sorted out by drawing down the missions in Haiti, Cote d´Ivoire and Liberia at a much faster pace. These are missions that have long ago achieved their key goals and should only be continued with a much smaller field presence.

By the way, the approval of additional forces in South Sudan, which has a very high budget tag, was accepted by Washington in a matter of hours…

That´s why I say that CAR is the forgotten crisis. It has always been like that. 

The men in Addis Ababa

The Sheraton Hotel in Addis Ababa houses one the best Indian restaurants in East Africa. But its name is not necessarily associated with the quality of that excellent eating place. The hotel is above all known for its luxury environment and high cost accommodation.

Today the world could see some TV images taken at the hotel entrance, as the delegates that will negotiate the South Sudan´s peace agreement gathered for a marathon of discussions. These were tough men in soft set-up. Men of power in a setting of wealth and indulgence.

After that, we could watch a series of dramatic pictures taken outside Bor. The contrast could not be wider. These images gave us a quick synopsis of the suffering the people are going through. In this case, it was soft people, powerless men, women and children, in a setting of great dispossession. Their future is being played at the Addis Sheraton. But can we trust the players?

Sudan and South Sudan

For those who know well the key political players in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, it is difficult to believe those leaders are not playing some games in South Sudan. It is difficult to imagine they are keeping themselves at a prudent distance and not trying to strike some deals with Riek Machar, the head of the rebellion in the South.

The opposite is more likely.

For many reasons, of course, but above all for two main motives.

First, Khartoum is in the middle of a dramatic economic environment. There is very little foreign currency left, serious shortages of basic goods such as wheat, high unemployment and uncontrollable inflation. They need the oil revenues to keep flowing. And the wells are in the regions of South where Machar´s fighters are stronger. For Khartoum it makes then a lot of sense to be on Machar´s side.

Second, there are many in Sudan´s political establishment that have never accepted the independence of South Sudan. For them, Salva Kiir and his group in Juba are living reminders of the humiliation the North suffered. Whatever can be done to make them in South Sudan pay for such humiliation of the “Arabs” in the Sudan should not be missed. Creating havoc in the South is a good way of paying back.

Revenge is a way of life and a leading political approach in this part of world. 

Nairobi communiqué on South Sudan is biaised

It is clear that the crisis in South Sudan can only be resolved through political negotiations between the President´s camp and Riek Machar´s supporters. It cannot be imposed by communiqué, even if the communiqué is signed by a number of the region´s heads of state. In this context, today´s outcome of the Nairobi summit is a bit of a disappointment. And it is certainly not good enough in terms of the peace process. We need a different, more balanced and less formalist approach. 

South Sudan in an unstable region

The role being played by Ethiopia and Kenya in South Sudan deserves appreciation. The leaders of both countries have understood that the Sudanese crisis could rapidly unravel out of control and destroy the country´s fragile unity. It would also have a wider impact as it would contribute to destabilise some of the neighbouring countries as well.

Last year I wrote an essay on the impact of South Sudan´s emergency as a new unstable country on the region: Security and Stability. Reflections on the Impact of South Sudan on Regional Political Dynamics.

I think it is time to read it again. It is available on the NUPI website, the Norwegian Institute for International Relations, with the following link:
http://english.nupi.no/content/download/308614/1068211/version/1/file/NUPI+Report-SIP-7-Angelo-McGuinness.pdf

South Sudan calls for urgent political engagement

The UN Security Council approved an additional deployment of 6,000 troops to augment the peacekeeping presence of the mission in South Sudan, known by its initials as UNMISS.

This is basically a symbolic gesture with no immediate impact at a time of great urgency. The new soldiers are not available. The Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, has tried to re-deploy some of the peacekeepers actually employed in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), as well as in Liberia and Cote d´Ivoire. He has not been successful so far. It will be difficult to get that re-deployment as the Troop Contributing Countries will not approve such a move. Troops have been sent to country A and to transfer them to country B is always a lengthy process, and it is normally bound to fail.

The grave situation in South Sudan does require a different approach. It calls for political engagement with the leaders of the factions at war. That engagement has to be robust and bring together high level UN and bilateral envoys. It needs to be very impartial to be accepted by all the parties. And it has to happen now, it cannot wait.

That´s what we would expect the Security Council to decide. 

Crisis in South Sudan

South Sudan is in a mess. The crisis is deeper than many had thought. It has very strong tribal roots and that is the worst case scenario in a new country like South Sudan. The combatants are used to fight and it will very difficult to convince them that they have more to gain from a ceasefire and a political agreement than from being in charge of their part of the country. 

But the only way forward is to negotiate and to restore peace. A political arrangement is required. President Salva Kiir and Riek Machar, the two leaders that matter in this crisis, need to compromise. They have to be told so and in very clear terms.

The UN mission needs to work closely with the neighbouring countries ‘governments in order to contribute to a political solution. It cannot accept to be side-lined. And it cannot run away from its political responsibilities.

  

Central Africa

The Central African Republic (CAR) is now a failed state.

The capital city, Bangui, is controlled by armed groups of uncertain origin. They are most likely dominated by warlords from Southern Darfur and Eastern Chad. They have little to do with CAR’s main ethnic groups but they are allied to Central Africans from the North-Eastern border areas. These are Muslims in a country that is largely Christian.

Besides the capital, there are other armed groups and several “self-defence” committees. But there is no central authority, no law and order, no administration and no modern economy. It is just chaos and extreme hardship.

The situation can easily spill over into some of neighbouring countries. They are also very fragile. They could become the next prey of the roaming armed men.  

The African Union has pledged to send a peacekeeping force to the country. It will be difficult for the AU to be able to mobilise the force and the resources required. It will also be a very delicate mission because of the religious divide that is now taking place, for the first time in the history of CAR.

The international community should understand that the country needs, urgently, not at the pace the AU can mobilise itself, a very robust international force, with full executive powers.

It is the survival of CAR’s population that is, first and foremost, at stake. But not only. It is an entire region. A region that is already the least stable of Africa. 

The African Ellipse of Instability

I was asked by the media a number of questions about the recent developments in the Central African Republic (CAR). I have advised them to read the research paper I published last year, under the sponsorship of NUPI – the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs –about the instability in that region of Africa. I mentioned, in particular, the “ellipse of instability”, an expression I coined to describe the security risks that exist in a vast no-man’s land along the borders of Chad, Sudan, CAR, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The paper is available at the following link:

http://english.nupi.no/content/download/308614/1068211/version/1/file/NUPI+Report-SIP-7-Angelo-McGuinness.pdf

I suggest the reader to have a look at it.