The recent resignation of Mauritania's new military leader has given some analysts hope that this could be a vital first step to restoring democratic rule in the country.
General Ould Abdel Aziz's announcement one month ahead of the upcoming presidential polls is also designed to show the ruling junta's resolve to stand aside as a civilian government takes shape.
However, observers of Mauritania's unpredictable political scene say that what the country needs most is a negotiated settlement of its year old political crisis between the military government and opposition groups.
In August 2008, Abdel Aziz lead a military coup against Sidi Ould Sheikh Abdallahi, the first democratically-elected president, after 48 ministers from the ruling party resigned. Abdallahi remained under house arrest until December.
Seeking stability
Many Mauritanians say that the June 6 elections, which have been organised by the military without consultation with opposition parties, will only rush a country that has been nose-diving to the bottom instead of bringing it back to normality.
Observers believe the days ahead of the elections will be a ferocious showdown between the opposition and the current military government.
The military insists on holding the elections on time, a move that could legitimise last year's coup and their grip on power.
But the opposition has mobilised its cadres to near-daily protests on the streets of Nouakchott, the capital, amid fears that there could be an outbreak of violence.
On April 24, three cars owned by high-profile government officials were set on fire and security forces blamed an unknown opposition group for masterminding the attacks.
Opposition forces say it is ill-advised to hold elections until political adversaries can chart a course of reconciliation which allows the country to heal the political rifts created by last year's coup. This view is largely shared by the international community.
Polarised positions
However, the much needed solution for digging the country out of its political mess lies somewhere between these two polarised positions.
If allowed to shape the political debate, both defenders and detractors of the military advocate irreconcilable approaches which can only drive them further apart instead of setting the terms for a road map to chart a new course and steer the country clear of political paralysis.
A road map has to embrace the status quo and recognise the new military leaders. Calls for "return to the constitutional order" by the international community and the parties supporting the deposed president have been overtaken by facts on the ground.
The new military leadership succeeded in rallying popular support and is making headways in its attempt to get international recognition. France has already expressed understanding of the new realities on the ground and press leaks spoke of a French initiative to effect a breakthrough in the political standoff.
The same goes for Algeria, Morocco and Senegal, neighbours who have either received the junta leader or initiated mediation efforts to try to defuse the crisis. Abdel Aziz, along with a ministerial delegation, has been welcomed twice to Doha to take part in Arab summits in the Qatari capital.
Majority support
With the overwhelming majority of Mauritanians behind them and major regional and international players poised to deal with them, the military will not feel enough heat to cave in to voices calling for it to leave power and allow for the return of the deposed president.
In the event the African Union and the EU fail to take notice of these developments and decide to go ahead with sanctions, the only party which will bear the full brunt of this measure is the people who completely rely on foreign aid for their survival.
What the international community should not do is repeat the mistakes of the past when it refused to recognise the 2005 coup which removed the government of Ould Taya and established a promising political process that culminated in Abdallahi's election.
This will only widen the gulf between political rivals in Mauritania and prevent the international community from having leverage over the current military leaders.
Had the international community decided to engage the military it would have been able to influence their policies to include political adversaries and prepare for a genuine democratic transition.
Call off boycott
What the international community should do instead is work with the general to prevent his transformation into a full-fledged dictator.
This can be done by calling on opposition parties to revoke their decision to boycott the next ballot and join the political process to shape the future of the country. International monitors should also oversee the election and report on any violations that may jeopardise its outcome.
But the real challenges are those which have to do with post-election questions of good governance, political and institutional reforms, development projects and fighting poverty.
The world should provide the country's fledgling democracy with support that extends beyond the electoral process and the legitimate concerns of having an elected government in power.
The failure of the international community to provide much-needed economic help and oversight during Abdullahi's brief one-year tenure served as a catalyst which hastened his demise.
Though major international players, especially the US and France, were quick to laud the 2007 polls as a model for the rest of the Arab world, they did little if anything to reinforce democratic rule under the new elected government.
This accounts for the failure of the president, albeit fairly and democratically-elected, to effect a genuine break with bad governance and do away with the corrupt political class which is responsible for stalling progress.
The result was a series of violent events which rocked the new government and culminated in the army taking matters into its own hand and overthrowing the president.
A similar scenario can be prevented from happening again if the international community engages the military leadership and tries to shape the future of the country instead of taking a hands-off position.
The latter choice will only serve to turn the general into a dictator and leave the door wide open for more coups and more political instability.
Versions of this article have been published on Aljazeera English website and Taquadoumy electronic newspaper on the following links respectively:
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/04/200941345837267182.html
http://www.taqadoumy.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=633&Itemid=27
mom
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Friday, August 22, 2008
The Flip Side Of Mauritanian Coup: When The Army Saves Democracy Yet Again
Over the span of just three years, Mauritania, a Northern African country straddling the Great Sahara and the Atlantic, hit international headlines twice, albeit for apparently different reasons. Back in 2005, the country caught world attention following a much acclaimed military coup which toppled the dictatorial regime of Mouaya Ould Sidi Ahmed Ould Taya and promised to usher in a new era of democratic rule. They organized legislative and general polls and oversaw a two-year transition which lead to peaceful handover of power to a civilian government. Yet again, last week, the same military crop of generals stormed the palace, arrested the president and his prime minister and again took matters into their own hands. The question now running on the minds of many is what went wrong with Mauritania’s fledgling democratic exercise? What has gone amiss in the relationship between the president and the military that led to this dangerous development?
Mauritania has a long history of military coups, but the most remarkable of them all is the 2005 military coup which put an end to two decades of dictatorial rule by the former president Ould Taya and laid the groundwork for a successful democratic transition. Of all the six coups which have rocked the country, the military this time came as makers of democracy not usurpers of power and were able from the get-go to ditch long-standing public fear and mistrust of the men in uniform.
This shift in attitude is also spurred by the military being the only viable and functioning institution in the country which had what it takes to survive the calamitous policies of previous governments. Two-decades of dictatorship under the regime of Ould Taya left civil institutions, such as political parties and NGOs as well as state apparatus in complete disarray and people have no other anchor to look up to than the army.
The deposed president Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdallahi seemed to be out of touch with this new reality, and his decision to turn the heat on the army was costly for him and for the country's democracy. He miscalculated that his legitimacy as the democratically elected president will be enough to tip the scales in his favor in any face-off with them. He got it wrong because he failed to properly weigh the public standing of his opponents and when he set upon a rebranding mission as the strongman at the helm he was soon given a reality check.
To make matters worse, he was widely tipped to have been backed by the two generals he sought to get rid of and that he relied on their influence in the run up to his election to the office. In an interview with Aljazeera channel, few days before the coup, he tried to shrug off any embarrassment vis a vis this relationship, but he could not hide his intent to lay to rest the general perception that he was handpicked by the army, and too weak to be in charge on his own. Along the course of his attempted makeover, the deposed president not only misread the public support of the army but also made a host of other missteps which saw him limping on all the way long.
If history is any guide, presidents in unstable democracies stand no chance to run counter to the army if they don't enjoy strong public backing. And in the case of Ould Cheikh Abdallahi, this equation can not be more true. Judging by the record of his first year stint as president, he is by all accounts the most unpopular fist year president in the history of the country.
It's true that not much can be achieved in a year and few months in the office. But the president raised expectations sky high and promised to push through sweeping reforms, stem corruption and restore the credibility of public administration. During his campaign trail, he pledged to enact these reforms at once, insisting that only an immediate implementation of his reform policy will change the life of the people for the better. Yet three months from taking the office, he is nowhere to be seen.
The demons of economic crises, which ranged from soaring fuel and food prices, unemployment, etc. kept hitting hard on a population which already can not make ends meet. It took the capital city, Nouakchott, to be gripped by repeated blackouts and severe water shortages for the president to be jolted awake from his slumber.
The president's lack of action came to haunt him when violent protests broke out in the eastern part of the country, his electoral base, and spread nationwide. It was the first time that the country has seen such violent protests which left one person dead and many injured.
The president's handling of the crisis proved to many that the much desired change is still put on the backburner. With no end in sight to the growing public anger, it became clear the president's popularity has slumped and that his lame duck attitude is not helping to fix it. It was at the point that the cracks began to show in the power structure which supported him, i.e. the army, the ruling coalition and the MPs of the presidential majority. He sacked his own government of technocrats and formed a new political one without consultation with the ruling coalition and its MPs. Worse, the new government featured notorious figures from the former regime of Taya who are known for their corruption and mismanagement of public wealth.
The new team tried to sugarcoat the President's change of heart towards the figures from the former regime of Taya as indicative of his determination to be his own man. It hoped to refurbish the image of an isolated leader by misleadingly portraying the collapse of his power base as a calculated move to counterbalance the influence of the detractors form within his camp and outside it. And as the president rushes toward making enemies left and right, matters started to spin out of control with the massive walkouts from his ruling coalition and the emergence of what has been dubbed "the breakaway parliaments". It became clear that the president's fall from grace becomes a matter of time as his own supporters turned against him, spearheaded by the furious MPs' attempt to try, convict and impeach him. Both upper and lower houses of parliament were for some time sites of tireless efforts to bring the president to task, charging him and his spouse of corruption and mismanagement.
The brief tenure of the deposed president is certainly a successful story abroad. The international community, keen to see democracy alive and kicking in the unstable, war-torn sub-region, was quick to embrace Mauritania as a role model, hoping that the rest of Arab countries will learn from it and follow in its footsteps. But the trappings of democracy which the world saw were a far cry from the reality inside the country as the failure of the president to adroitly manipulate the levers of power sent the country into an economic, legislative and power crisis his departure was the only way to fix it. Thus, the army stepped in to put an end to a dictator in the making as it did in 2005 when it put an end to a full fledged dictator.
mom
Mauritania has a long history of military coups, but the most remarkable of them all is the 2005 military coup which put an end to two decades of dictatorial rule by the former president Ould Taya and laid the groundwork for a successful democratic transition. Of all the six coups which have rocked the country, the military this time came as makers of democracy not usurpers of power and were able from the get-go to ditch long-standing public fear and mistrust of the men in uniform.
This shift in attitude is also spurred by the military being the only viable and functioning institution in the country which had what it takes to survive the calamitous policies of previous governments. Two-decades of dictatorship under the regime of Ould Taya left civil institutions, such as political parties and NGOs as well as state apparatus in complete disarray and people have no other anchor to look up to than the army.
The deposed president Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdallahi seemed to be out of touch with this new reality, and his decision to turn the heat on the army was costly for him and for the country's democracy. He miscalculated that his legitimacy as the democratically elected president will be enough to tip the scales in his favor in any face-off with them. He got it wrong because he failed to properly weigh the public standing of his opponents and when he set upon a rebranding mission as the strongman at the helm he was soon given a reality check.
To make matters worse, he was widely tipped to have been backed by the two generals he sought to get rid of and that he relied on their influence in the run up to his election to the office. In an interview with Aljazeera channel, few days before the coup, he tried to shrug off any embarrassment vis a vis this relationship, but he could not hide his intent to lay to rest the general perception that he was handpicked by the army, and too weak to be in charge on his own. Along the course of his attempted makeover, the deposed president not only misread the public support of the army but also made a host of other missteps which saw him limping on all the way long.
If history is any guide, presidents in unstable democracies stand no chance to run counter to the army if they don't enjoy strong public backing. And in the case of Ould Cheikh Abdallahi, this equation can not be more true. Judging by the record of his first year stint as president, he is by all accounts the most unpopular fist year president in the history of the country.
It's true that not much can be achieved in a year and few months in the office. But the president raised expectations sky high and promised to push through sweeping reforms, stem corruption and restore the credibility of public administration. During his campaign trail, he pledged to enact these reforms at once, insisting that only an immediate implementation of his reform policy will change the life of the people for the better. Yet three months from taking the office, he is nowhere to be seen.
The demons of economic crises, which ranged from soaring fuel and food prices, unemployment, etc. kept hitting hard on a population which already can not make ends meet. It took the capital city, Nouakchott, to be gripped by repeated blackouts and severe water shortages for the president to be jolted awake from his slumber.
The president's lack of action came to haunt him when violent protests broke out in the eastern part of the country, his electoral base, and spread nationwide. It was the first time that the country has seen such violent protests which left one person dead and many injured.
The president's handling of the crisis proved to many that the much desired change is still put on the backburner. With no end in sight to the growing public anger, it became clear the president's popularity has slumped and that his lame duck attitude is not helping to fix it. It was at the point that the cracks began to show in the power structure which supported him, i.e. the army, the ruling coalition and the MPs of the presidential majority. He sacked his own government of technocrats and formed a new political one without consultation with the ruling coalition and its MPs. Worse, the new government featured notorious figures from the former regime of Taya who are known for their corruption and mismanagement of public wealth.
The new team tried to sugarcoat the President's change of heart towards the figures from the former regime of Taya as indicative of his determination to be his own man. It hoped to refurbish the image of an isolated leader by misleadingly portraying the collapse of his power base as a calculated move to counterbalance the influence of the detractors form within his camp and outside it. And as the president rushes toward making enemies left and right, matters started to spin out of control with the massive walkouts from his ruling coalition and the emergence of what has been dubbed "the breakaway parliaments". It became clear that the president's fall from grace becomes a matter of time as his own supporters turned against him, spearheaded by the furious MPs' attempt to try, convict and impeach him. Both upper and lower houses of parliament were for some time sites of tireless efforts to bring the president to task, charging him and his spouse of corruption and mismanagement.
The brief tenure of the deposed president is certainly a successful story abroad. The international community, keen to see democracy alive and kicking in the unstable, war-torn sub-region, was quick to embrace Mauritania as a role model, hoping that the rest of Arab countries will learn from it and follow in its footsteps. But the trappings of democracy which the world saw were a far cry from the reality inside the country as the failure of the president to adroitly manipulate the levers of power sent the country into an economic, legislative and power crisis his departure was the only way to fix it. Thus, the army stepped in to put an end to a dictator in the making as it did in 2005 when it put an end to a full fledged dictator.
mom
Saturday, December 8, 2007
After Paris, the Road Ahead For ZZ
When the Prime minister upped his sticks and flew to Paris to take part in the International donor conference about the country, he above anyone else knew the high stakes involved in the outcome of the meeting. It was not only because he has a lot to loose if his mission went bad but also because he has a lot to win if it went well. The two day international get-together of the country's development partners couldn't have come at a better time for the current PM's team. The few months it has been in power has plunged the novice team of technocrats into a string of troubles and triggered calls for its resignation. The skeptics assume that the team would have been long gone had it not been for the support and trust of the president. Weak and isolated, the PM staked his future and that of his cabinet on Paris conference, hoping to win enough foreign investment from it to pick himself up from the floor and restore the credibility of his cabinet. He knows better than anyone else that the support of his boss will be short-lived if he does not do something to turn the tide and address the host of crises which rocked his government and the many other crises which are still in store for him. At some point down the road, the president will have to do without him if he remains to be a political burden which draws constant fire from a bullish opposition and an outraged public. Under these exceptional circumstances, the PM headed to Paris, counting his lucky stars that a light has finally shone in the tunnel of his troubles and that if he does well he will be able to mend the fences back home.
It turned out he did well and emerged out victorious from Paris. After two days of difficult talks, he was able to persuade the international donors to support his development programme, in which he laid out plans to implement economic reforms and reduce poverty over the period from 2008 to 2010. The result was a promise to donate $2.104 billion, way above what he was expecting.
Now, PM zz is back and we can bet that the people who were in their thousands ready to finish him before Paris are now sparing nothing to be onboard with him after it. In spite of all the talk about democracy and rule of law, we still fear and revere powerful leaders and go out of our way to prove loyalty to them. Now, zz is a reborn PM whose success in Paris will play down very well among ordinary Mauritanians and will, therefore, do a lot to change power balance with his opponents. We can expect him to step out of the shadow of the president, be more assertive and assume a more prominent role in the running of his government and the wider public interest. There is no doubt that this will be a long and tedious rebranding road which will see some of his friends turning into enemies, but if he’s going to use the Paris success to improve his popular standing he needs to be more aggressive, talk more to the media and does what it takes to run the show. It goes without saying, however, that zz may choose not to be his own man and hand over the success to Sidioca. If he does, he will be dealing a fatal blow to his future political career and will go down in history as a low-profile and subservient public servant.
Common sense has it that if ZZ decides to play hardball and capitalize on his achievement in Paris, he will risk antagonizing his immediate entourage, starting with influential political figures from the pro- government majority and ending with the president himself. There’re top and power-wielding political figures who want to keep zz weak in order to maintain their influence, and to be able to pull the strings of the show from backstage. But the major threat will come from the president himself who will not tolerate a strong and popular PM who has run against him in the last election and will very likely stand in the next one. Sidioca will be very quick to cut zz’s wings before he stretches them, even if the cost is the failure of the government and its reform plan.
As to the opposition, its strategy is too obvious to be stated. It plays weak when faced with a strong PM and the other way around, bullish if the government is confused and undecided.
The question, then, is which way ZZ will be going, to be strong and face the music or weak and keep his post. The answer to this question is anyone’s guess as only zz knows what on zz’s mind. The question for us bears on the impact of this abrupt twist of national politics on the development of the country and the smooth work of the state.
Without much guessing, I think a mix of strong and weak zz is exactly what is need to steer the country away from the political and economic brink on which it’s perched now. A strong PM who is aware of the stakes for himself and for the nation will not succumb to pressure from Rumuz alfasad and will push his reform agenda forward. He knows that a repeat of Taya’s style of government will ruin his political future and damage his credibility. Yet a weak PM is a safe guard against political infighting in the cabinet and will also facilitate the work of the government. The least we need now is a divided leadership which is torn apart by political rivalry and unable to put its differences aside. A smooth running of the country will create confidence inside and outside and generate a suitable environment for development.
I have the impression that some mix of the sort is already underway in the government. With Sidioca in charge of the broad line of governance zz is left to take care of the do's and don'ts of his reform program. He will be overseeing the launch of the anti-corruption national day tomorrow. Hope he will prove me true, lol.
mom
It turned out he did well and emerged out victorious from Paris. After two days of difficult talks, he was able to persuade the international donors to support his development programme, in which he laid out plans to implement economic reforms and reduce poverty over the period from 2008 to 2010. The result was a promise to donate $2.104 billion, way above what he was expecting.
Now, PM zz is back and we can bet that the people who were in their thousands ready to finish him before Paris are now sparing nothing to be onboard with him after it. In spite of all the talk about democracy and rule of law, we still fear and revere powerful leaders and go out of our way to prove loyalty to them. Now, zz is a reborn PM whose success in Paris will play down very well among ordinary Mauritanians and will, therefore, do a lot to change power balance with his opponents. We can expect him to step out of the shadow of the president, be more assertive and assume a more prominent role in the running of his government and the wider public interest. There is no doubt that this will be a long and tedious rebranding road which will see some of his friends turning into enemies, but if he’s going to use the Paris success to improve his popular standing he needs to be more aggressive, talk more to the media and does what it takes to run the show. It goes without saying, however, that zz may choose not to be his own man and hand over the success to Sidioca. If he does, he will be dealing a fatal blow to his future political career and will go down in history as a low-profile and subservient public servant.
Common sense has it that if ZZ decides to play hardball and capitalize on his achievement in Paris, he will risk antagonizing his immediate entourage, starting with influential political figures from the pro- government majority and ending with the president himself. There’re top and power-wielding political figures who want to keep zz weak in order to maintain their influence, and to be able to pull the strings of the show from backstage. But the major threat will come from the president himself who will not tolerate a strong and popular PM who has run against him in the last election and will very likely stand in the next one. Sidioca will be very quick to cut zz’s wings before he stretches them, even if the cost is the failure of the government and its reform plan.
As to the opposition, its strategy is too obvious to be stated. It plays weak when faced with a strong PM and the other way around, bullish if the government is confused and undecided.
The question, then, is which way ZZ will be going, to be strong and face the music or weak and keep his post. The answer to this question is anyone’s guess as only zz knows what on zz’s mind. The question for us bears on the impact of this abrupt twist of national politics on the development of the country and the smooth work of the state.
Without much guessing, I think a mix of strong and weak zz is exactly what is need to steer the country away from the political and economic brink on which it’s perched now. A strong PM who is aware of the stakes for himself and for the nation will not succumb to pressure from Rumuz alfasad and will push his reform agenda forward. He knows that a repeat of Taya’s style of government will ruin his political future and damage his credibility. Yet a weak PM is a safe guard against political infighting in the cabinet and will also facilitate the work of the government. The least we need now is a divided leadership which is torn apart by political rivalry and unable to put its differences aside. A smooth running of the country will create confidence inside and outside and generate a suitable environment for development.
I have the impression that some mix of the sort is already underway in the government. With Sidioca in charge of the broad line of governance zz is left to take care of the do's and don'ts of his reform program. He will be overseeing the launch of the anti-corruption national day tomorrow. Hope he will prove me true, lol.
mom
Friday, November 23, 2007
When The Poor Take Matters In Their Owen Hands
A great merit of democracy is that it sets a viable and credible mechanism for peaceful accession to power. When, in a country, people decide to take matters in their own hands and chose their government through ballot boxes and elections in stead of military takeovers and violent social revolts, the result will be no less than a strong bond of trust between the governing leadership and the masses. Trust is key because without it governments tend to be isolated from their people and the more they feel isolated the more likely they grow into dictatorships, clumping down on dissent to stay in power. Until recently we had been on the wrong side of history exactly because of this unhealthy relationship of mistrust and the corrupt crop of leaderships it gave rise to. But for a while we thought that with the fall of the last of the dictators, the country will get back on track as it has been left with nowhere to go but the democratic way. There were fair elections which were fiercely fought by contenders from all the walks of our political life. All Mauritanians put their hands together for the triumphant winner, even his opponent gave him a big hand. It was a successful denouement for our young democratic story and all sides did everything to boost the general feeling of euphoria and satisfaction which swept the whole country. The transition to democracy was so genuinely felt and widely celebrated that Arab vanguard elite begun to sell the Mauritanian model of democracy as the sole way forward for the rest of Arab countries. Even Bush mentioned Mauritania among the nations which boast of true democracies in his address to the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the organization’s sixtieth anniversary. Democracy did not only make us go regional but global as well, and in a country which hardly exports anything, at all, democracy can do a lot to paint our image abroad in the most beautiful of colors. So, what more do we want? Doesn’t it suffice that we have lifted the democratic bar high and were able to measure up? Well, the answer is not very far to seek. True, we set an example of healthy democratic exercise but we want to keep the momentum on so as to prevent any possible setbacks. The only way to keep alive the democratic pulse and to turn the page of political instability forever is for the government to deliver and for the people to hold it to account if it fails to do so. Such was the case with regard to the recent political upheavals, the shockwaves of which still felt nationwide.
The protests which broke out a couple of weeks ago were a vivid example of what could happened when the government fails to live up to its promises and indulges instead into the rhetoric of political complacency. Since it’s swearing in few months back, the new government has been put to task on number of occasions and was given enough time to read the writing on the wall. Yet Sidiocazz failed to learn their lesson despite the host of crises they have been through. They chose to be in denial about the appalling economic conditions of ordinary citizens instead of addressing them and trying to come up with long tem solution to knock them into shape. You certainly still remember the president’s reaction to the water and electricity crisis when he went public on national TV just to tell angry and frustrated citizens that he has nothing to do and that the crisis will go on for three more years to come. You also remember Sidocazz’s firing Ould Leili for sounding the alarms of a certain famine in the country. And so on. To compound the misery of an already beleaguered population, the government kept saying that the skyrocketing prices of basic goods attest to the success of the country’s market-oriented economic policy. There were many times when senior government officers chose to focus on debating theories of economic stability rather than elaborating policies to alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable. The government spared no occasion to assure the public that everything is just fine and that there’s no reason to worry. To go about this PR campaign, cabinet members and leading politicians from the pro-government majority coalition missed no chance to allay public fear through long speeches in parliament, intensive TV appearances and countless press conferences. None seemed willing to look out from his ivory tower to see the overwhelming state of helplessness and despair gripping over people’s life. But when the government refuses to see the life on the streets, the streets brings that life them. No matters how they try to occlude it, the life of the poor and the disenfranchised will haunt them and soon. The normal course of events has irreversibly been leading to these protests, even though they came violently and by surprise.
All this happened at a time when calls for reforms seemed to be met with deaf ears, alienating even the moderate voices among the political elite. With more and more figures from the old regime being named by the government for high-profile positions in the public administration, one is left with the impression that all official talk about reform is mere political hype. And then, there came the motion to form the so-called “majority party” to crash any hope of moving forward. But the sugarcoating policy which the government has adopted all the way long proved ineffective in the face of growing public outrage and worsening life conditions around the country. At some point down the road things were doomed to spin out of control and it was just a matter of time.
After this sketchy attempt to tell the muffled story of government’s incompetence behind the bloody riots which took place two weeks ago further deep in the southeast of the country, I’ll just say few words about these unprecedented events. But before that let me remind you that the government’s plan to address the issue reveals our leadership’s failure to catch up with the amazing development on the ground. The package of measures which the cabinet announced does not provide along term policy to fight poverty and create wealth through a modern, competitive, productive and transparent economic system. It’s just an emergency plan based on charity handouts to the poor in the rural areas and it keeps silent on the core issues of corruption, favoritism, incompetence which plague our public administration and concentrate money in the hands of the privileged few. Once again, Sidiocazz fail to accurately know the stakes and fathom out the gravity of the situation.
Just to proceed to give this events a lick and a promise, I think that these protests will be remembered for the following:
- They were the first violent riots in the histroy of the country in which protesters were killed and injured by excessive use of force by police.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country in which popular backlash against deteriorating life conditions comes from outside major metropolitan cities like NKTT and NDB.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country which erupts from rural areas, usually unaffected by government policies.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country, and this is the most important, which take place in the southeast region, known as a historical stronghold for successive government since 1978 coup against Moukhtar Ould Dadaha.
All these elements render these riots exceptional and explain why they came as a shock for all parties, government and opposition alike.
In all self-respecting societies, the memory of those who give their lives so that others can live in dignity and peace are kept alive. There are several ways to do it, by building a memorial or setting a day to commemorate them. Since I don’t have the means or the authority to do either, I chose to honor them by telling their story and urge you all to keep their story alive.
mom
The protests which broke out a couple of weeks ago were a vivid example of what could happened when the government fails to live up to its promises and indulges instead into the rhetoric of political complacency. Since it’s swearing in few months back, the new government has been put to task on number of occasions and was given enough time to read the writing on the wall. Yet Sidiocazz failed to learn their lesson despite the host of crises they have been through. They chose to be in denial about the appalling economic conditions of ordinary citizens instead of addressing them and trying to come up with long tem solution to knock them into shape. You certainly still remember the president’s reaction to the water and electricity crisis when he went public on national TV just to tell angry and frustrated citizens that he has nothing to do and that the crisis will go on for three more years to come. You also remember Sidocazz’s firing Ould Leili for sounding the alarms of a certain famine in the country. And so on. To compound the misery of an already beleaguered population, the government kept saying that the skyrocketing prices of basic goods attest to the success of the country’s market-oriented economic policy. There were many times when senior government officers chose to focus on debating theories of economic stability rather than elaborating policies to alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable. The government spared no occasion to assure the public that everything is just fine and that there’s no reason to worry. To go about this PR campaign, cabinet members and leading politicians from the pro-government majority coalition missed no chance to allay public fear through long speeches in parliament, intensive TV appearances and countless press conferences. None seemed willing to look out from his ivory tower to see the overwhelming state of helplessness and despair gripping over people’s life. But when the government refuses to see the life on the streets, the streets brings that life them. No matters how they try to occlude it, the life of the poor and the disenfranchised will haunt them and soon. The normal course of events has irreversibly been leading to these protests, even though they came violently and by surprise.
All this happened at a time when calls for reforms seemed to be met with deaf ears, alienating even the moderate voices among the political elite. With more and more figures from the old regime being named by the government for high-profile positions in the public administration, one is left with the impression that all official talk about reform is mere political hype. And then, there came the motion to form the so-called “majority party” to crash any hope of moving forward. But the sugarcoating policy which the government has adopted all the way long proved ineffective in the face of growing public outrage and worsening life conditions around the country. At some point down the road things were doomed to spin out of control and it was just a matter of time.
After this sketchy attempt to tell the muffled story of government’s incompetence behind the bloody riots which took place two weeks ago further deep in the southeast of the country, I’ll just say few words about these unprecedented events. But before that let me remind you that the government’s plan to address the issue reveals our leadership’s failure to catch up with the amazing development on the ground. The package of measures which the cabinet announced does not provide along term policy to fight poverty and create wealth through a modern, competitive, productive and transparent economic system. It’s just an emergency plan based on charity handouts to the poor in the rural areas and it keeps silent on the core issues of corruption, favoritism, incompetence which plague our public administration and concentrate money in the hands of the privileged few. Once again, Sidiocazz fail to accurately know the stakes and fathom out the gravity of the situation.
Just to proceed to give this events a lick and a promise, I think that these protests will be remembered for the following:
- They were the first violent riots in the histroy of the country in which protesters were killed and injured by excessive use of force by police.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country in which popular backlash against deteriorating life conditions comes from outside major metropolitan cities like NKTT and NDB.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country which erupts from rural areas, usually unaffected by government policies.
- They were the first riots in the history of the country, and this is the most important, which take place in the southeast region, known as a historical stronghold for successive government since 1978 coup against Moukhtar Ould Dadaha.
All these elements render these riots exceptional and explain why they came as a shock for all parties, government and opposition alike.
In all self-respecting societies, the memory of those who give their lives so that others can live in dignity and peace are kept alive. There are several ways to do it, by building a memorial or setting a day to commemorate them. Since I don’t have the means or the authority to do either, I chose to honor them by telling their story and urge you all to keep their story alive.
mom
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Meimona, The Everywoman
It has been two years since I noticed that there was definitely something wrong with Meimouna. She has been our neighbor for about seven years, living three blocs away from my parents’ house. Ever since I knew her, many things have happened to us and to the country. Meimona broke up with her husband the same day the country broke up with TAYA ) (lol). I remember standing confused not able to tell my feelings. I was in the cloud nine about the news of tanks rolling around the streets of NKTT in what appeared to be a bloodless coup against the vicious dictator. This euphoria was marred by the sad face of my mother telling me that Meimouna is divorced. Although our relationship never got beyond formal and quick exchange of Salamoualeikoum, her frequent visits to the family and her shy and conservative manner made her one of those women who are likely to win your respect easily and then your affection. So, always with a head-down attitude when saying hello, she gained my respect and admiration as I started to see her as a member of the family. Small wonder then that the news of her divorce overshadowed my excitement about and celebration of Taya’s departure.
Now it has been two years since Mauritania conducted her course without Taya and Meimouna faced her fate without her husband. What became of the country is what I’ve been trying to tell you since I launched the blog. What became of Meimouna is another story, which I’ll try to tell you today.
But first, why the feeling that there’s something wrong about Meimouna?
I was walking through the corridor which lead to the living room, when I saw my mother with other women. They were talking, laughing and drinking tea. This is a familiar sight which I used to meet with a hasty hello, hurrying my way to the living room at the end of the hallway. Not now! There was Meimouna among these women, looking like nothing I’ would have expected. I was stunned when she looked at me straight in the face and asked half-speaking and half-laughing if I still know her “matleit taarafna”. I have faced this not- quite-innocent question many times and had answered it in a variety of ways, but from her it came as a shock which rendered me speechless. She was there, ten years younger than her age, confident, defiant, well dressed and casting her net wide on me. With the heavy make-up, the expensive mobile she kept brandishing and the French perfume filling the air, Meimouna fitted not in my image of a mother of five who had been left to the vagaries of the cold world after her husband abandoned her. Back to consciousness, I heard her answering a question from one of the women “hamda el moulana elli ouveit menou, houa ‘el ai eeg”.
With this note of relief and freedom from Meimouna in mind, I started to ask whether divorce is a curse or a blessing and if divorced women in our society have any regrets at all about losing the sacred bond of marital commitment and partnership. Whether a woman in our rapidly changing society has anything to loose from divorce. And If her loss, if any, is comparable to her gain.
We are probably the only society on earth which celebrates divorce and allows divorced men and women a clean bill of health when they try to marry again, and again. I'm sure the scene of divorced women being cheerlead in fancy procession cars to their parents is a sight too common for us to beg contemplation. We don't even ask whether it's a wedding or a break-up celebration, we have become so used to it that we are no more excited by the event of marriage than we're saddened by the eventuality of divorce. And by the same token that marriage has been stripped of its moral and emotional significance as a mutual partnership for life, divorce also has been purged of all its negative connotations.
We all know that divorce is the sad end of a failed marriage. In some other social contexts, divorce offers an important second chance in life for couples who couldn't get along together anymore as wife and husband. It's a chance given by society to start over without absolving the couples of their social responsibility toward the children. Society, through mechanism of behavior control, like courts and others, makes sure that we don't tamper with the value of the family which is the basis of society and the sole guarantee of its continuity. This is why state institutions, law, religion, etc are part of a network of moral vehicles cultivated and used by society to make sure that marriage is respected and that divorce is discredited. In some societies, divorced husbands can't afford to make ends meet because ninety percent of their income goes to the children. So after divorce, they find themselves confined to a life of celibacy till this end. These may be extreme measures, but they show how much societies want to preserve themselves and their continuity by making marriage sacred and by protecting the family.
I'm no Dr. Phil (lol) but this is the truth, if a society fails to monitor the behavior of individuals, the result will be a sate of anarchy where anything goes. And the laws against divorce and the social stigma attached to it worldwide are just an expression of this collective will to avoid a life of chaos and lawlessness.
But do Mauritanians think twice before they embark upon "abkadou al halai"? The answer is no. In fact they don't think at all when they take the decision. Everyone of you has certainly a member of the family who has divorced his wife, remarried and divorced her again for no reason at all. Some of you also may have close relatives who were obliged to use a third party to marry his wife , divorced for the third time, before he can claim her back "ala sounati allahi wa rassouli " (lol). If you try to figure out why both sexes are quick to resort to divorce as a handy solution for their problems, you'll be amazed to find out there need be no reason at all. Divorced men and women in our society are just relishing their rights granted to them by a culture which gives precedence to divorce over marriage. We're a society of divorcees because ours is a culture of divorce. Full stop. This explains how divorce doesn't have to do with the social background, regional origin, professional success or level of education. In Nouakchott, we're all actual or potential second-hand husbands and wives. It's amazing that as much as you're jealous, fellow Mauritanian, you don't realize that your wife today will be someone else's wife tomorrow after you would have abandoned her. So, on a deeper level of observation, we're not only a nation of divorcees but also of cuckolds (lol). Poor Mauritanians!
This may explain a bit why my neighbor looked jubilant and rebranded after the poor "garay" left her. From a wretched mother of five who bore the brunt of NKTT's life every day, she becomes now the owner of a two-story house which people started to use as an address to tell their way in the maze of our neighborhood. Last night, I had an encounter with her. I was driving past her gorgeous villa when she shouted my name asking me to pull over. She came along with a group of women whom I haven't seen in the neighborhood before and can tell form their dress, cigarettes and easy going manner they don't dwell here. She didn't say anything particular but her attitude spoke volumes.
As I started the engine, a thought crossed my mind that maybe life in our society is about attitudes. The thought kept running through my mind that if society gave Meimouna no third choice between being married and heart-broken and being divorced and happy, the blame is not hers alone if she chooses to be happy. The blame is on our culture of divorce.
mom
Now it has been two years since Mauritania conducted her course without Taya and Meimouna faced her fate without her husband. What became of the country is what I’ve been trying to tell you since I launched the blog. What became of Meimouna is another story, which I’ll try to tell you today.
But first, why the feeling that there’s something wrong about Meimouna?
I was walking through the corridor which lead to the living room, when I saw my mother with other women. They were talking, laughing and drinking tea. This is a familiar sight which I used to meet with a hasty hello, hurrying my way to the living room at the end of the hallway. Not now! There was Meimouna among these women, looking like nothing I’ would have expected. I was stunned when she looked at me straight in the face and asked half-speaking and half-laughing if I still know her “matleit taarafna”. I have faced this not- quite-innocent question many times and had answered it in a variety of ways, but from her it came as a shock which rendered me speechless. She was there, ten years younger than her age, confident, defiant, well dressed and casting her net wide on me. With the heavy make-up, the expensive mobile she kept brandishing and the French perfume filling the air, Meimouna fitted not in my image of a mother of five who had been left to the vagaries of the cold world after her husband abandoned her. Back to consciousness, I heard her answering a question from one of the women “hamda el moulana elli ouveit menou, houa ‘el ai eeg”.
With this note of relief and freedom from Meimouna in mind, I started to ask whether divorce is a curse or a blessing and if divorced women in our society have any regrets at all about losing the sacred bond of marital commitment and partnership. Whether a woman in our rapidly changing society has anything to loose from divorce. And If her loss, if any, is comparable to her gain.
We are probably the only society on earth which celebrates divorce and allows divorced men and women a clean bill of health when they try to marry again, and again. I'm sure the scene of divorced women being cheerlead in fancy procession cars to their parents is a sight too common for us to beg contemplation. We don't even ask whether it's a wedding or a break-up celebration, we have become so used to it that we are no more excited by the event of marriage than we're saddened by the eventuality of divorce. And by the same token that marriage has been stripped of its moral and emotional significance as a mutual partnership for life, divorce also has been purged of all its negative connotations.
We all know that divorce is the sad end of a failed marriage. In some other social contexts, divorce offers an important second chance in life for couples who couldn't get along together anymore as wife and husband. It's a chance given by society to start over without absolving the couples of their social responsibility toward the children. Society, through mechanism of behavior control, like courts and others, makes sure that we don't tamper with the value of the family which is the basis of society and the sole guarantee of its continuity. This is why state institutions, law, religion, etc are part of a network of moral vehicles cultivated and used by society to make sure that marriage is respected and that divorce is discredited. In some societies, divorced husbands can't afford to make ends meet because ninety percent of their income goes to the children. So after divorce, they find themselves confined to a life of celibacy till this end. These may be extreme measures, but they show how much societies want to preserve themselves and their continuity by making marriage sacred and by protecting the family.
I'm no Dr. Phil (lol) but this is the truth, if a society fails to monitor the behavior of individuals, the result will be a sate of anarchy where anything goes. And the laws against divorce and the social stigma attached to it worldwide are just an expression of this collective will to avoid a life of chaos and lawlessness.
But do Mauritanians think twice before they embark upon "abkadou al halai"? The answer is no. In fact they don't think at all when they take the decision. Everyone of you has certainly a member of the family who has divorced his wife, remarried and divorced her again for no reason at all. Some of you also may have close relatives who were obliged to use a third party to marry his wife , divorced for the third time, before he can claim her back "ala sounati allahi wa rassouli " (lol). If you try to figure out why both sexes are quick to resort to divorce as a handy solution for their problems, you'll be amazed to find out there need be no reason at all. Divorced men and women in our society are just relishing their rights granted to them by a culture which gives precedence to divorce over marriage. We're a society of divorcees because ours is a culture of divorce. Full stop. This explains how divorce doesn't have to do with the social background, regional origin, professional success or level of education. In Nouakchott, we're all actual or potential second-hand husbands and wives. It's amazing that as much as you're jealous, fellow Mauritanian, you don't realize that your wife today will be someone else's wife tomorrow after you would have abandoned her. So, on a deeper level of observation, we're not only a nation of divorcees but also of cuckolds (lol). Poor Mauritanians!
This may explain a bit why my neighbor looked jubilant and rebranded after the poor "garay" left her. From a wretched mother of five who bore the brunt of NKTT's life every day, she becomes now the owner of a two-story house which people started to use as an address to tell their way in the maze of our neighborhood. Last night, I had an encounter with her. I was driving past her gorgeous villa when she shouted my name asking me to pull over. She came along with a group of women whom I haven't seen in the neighborhood before and can tell form their dress, cigarettes and easy going manner they don't dwell here. She didn't say anything particular but her attitude spoke volumes.
As I started the engine, a thought crossed my mind that maybe life in our society is about attitudes. The thought kept running through my mind that if society gave Meimouna no third choice between being married and heart-broken and being divorced and happy, the blame is not hers alone if she chooses to be happy. The blame is on our culture of divorce.
mom
Monday, July 2, 2007
The Future Of The Country Still In The Balance After Two Months of Sidioca’s Rule
The 3rd of August 2005 could have been just another day in the tumultuous history of this struggling nation at the tip of the Sahara, had it meant nothing more than just another power struggle among the ruling military elite which had ruled over the country for the last three decades. Luckily for us it hadn’t. The junta which toppled the authoritarian regime of Taya pledged to put the country back on track and hand power over to an elected civilian government, winning a wary and skeptical international community and a reluctant albeit sympathetic national opinion. The new leaders went even further by taking tangible measures towards achieving these goals and involving world and national players in the processes and policies aimed at setting the groundwork for real change in the country. The military was able to ride out the storm it created by picking up the right issues and making the right promises which matter internationally and domestically, building trust and bolstering its legitimacy. It promised a new era of democracy and transparency to counter international worries about the possible instability in the country and its spill over on regional peace. It goes without saying that the last thing the US and Europe would want is the prospect of another failed state which will easily fall for al-Qaida branches already active and operating in the region as well as being a safe passage for illegal immigration and drugs trafficking. By defending its case on a democratic platform the military succeeded not only in allaying fears about its being a force of instability but also in painting itself as promoting a democratic model which could be replicated in the rest of the Arab world.
Courting the favor of the national opinion on the other hand was by far an easier ride. The population which has lost hope for the future was waiting in the wings to see the back of Taya. So when the time came and Taya was overthrown peacefully in a bloodless coup, Mauritanians were ready to close ranks around the new crop of leaders and express support for them. The following democratic pledge was for many a foregone denouement of a national awakening story that kicked off with the fall of the dictator. This alone accounts for the national consensus which marked the two-year-long transition and the willingness to condone the at-times grievous blunders committed by the CMJD and the civil government. Dissent was viewed with mistrust as everybody was keen to make the transition smooth and successful, even though success has meant on many occasions turning a blind eye to pitfalls in the run up to the elections and the transfer of power. It appeared as if there was a tacit trade off between the general public and the CMJD whereby the latter relinquishes power and can get away with its mistakes in return, a win-win deal which both sides have honored.
The question on everyone’s mind now is whether the newly elected government will be able to follow in the lead of the CMJD, drumming international and domestic support for its democratic pledges, without delivering on the urgent issues of genuine reform. Although the answer is clearly “no”, the government looks set to make a repeat of the transition’s recipe of failure, mindless that the consequences of failure this time will be grievous and far reaching.
Indeed Sidiocazz may miscalculate that political openness alone will tip the scales in their favor, sparing them the trouble of combating rampant corruption and effecting a tangible improvement in the standards of living. This strategy which helped the CMJD steer clear of troubles would only plunge the current leadership into more crises, as more and more people are fed up with the democratic talk without any change in their lives.
The enduring culture of corruption can not be reversed with the traditional brand of administrators in charge. A new and clean generation of administrators has to take matters in hand and restore credibility to the public administration and the state. This belief, shared by the opposition as well as the ruling majority, was behind the president's choice of a new-look government line-up which boasts of featuring none of those close to the former regime. But this move, intended to send a potent message about the president's will for change, soon backfired. Made up of mostly novice low-profile administrators, the new government couldn't catch up with the daunting challenges facing it. To make matters worse, the new government was not only lacking in terms of experience but also had no plan to deal with various crisis which rocked it from day one. Right after it assumed authority, the Pandora's box of water and power shortages and prices increase broke open. Shanty districts, and even some up-market neighborhoods, of the capital suffered a severe water crisis which lasted for a month. Water shortage, which can be chalked up to a variety of reasons chief among which are the absence of long-term national policy of water and dysfunction of corruption infested Sonelck, was left to take its toll on the residents of Nouakchott as government officials remained in denial about the crisis. The same goes for the recurrent blackouts which hit Nouackchott almost daily. The new government was not only confused and incompetent but also showed it had not let go of obsolete practices of authoritarian regime. What we have seen is a bunch of ministers whose primary concern is to defend the sanctity of the state instead of facing the crises gripping the country head on, leading to the conviction that the government has undergone a change in style but not in substance.
So people's hopes for far-reaching reform are dashed by the government's failure to reinvent itself as a force spearheading change, stoking fears that the prospects of uprooting corruption in the public administration are still out of reach. This bleak outlook is further consolidated by a host of other measures which belie the new leadership's ambivalence about a complete break with the past. Every now and then new appointments to sensitive positions in the administration are announced, benefiting prominent members of the former regime. These appointments include the key positions of general secretaries of ministries, diplomatic sector and other facets of the administration. The aim behind this dangerous policy is two fold: to secure popular support by appointing a new breed of ministers, though inefficient ones, and bring the old generation through the back door and let them run the show. This is the least that can be said about an administration which allows a strong come back of Taya's cronies like Mohamed Vall Ould Ballal and Sidi Mohamed Ould Bubakar, among many others.
The president and his PM could have enjoyed the benefit of the doubt had it been a question of failing to have the right picks for the ministerial portfolios. People could always understand that twenty one years of methodic corruption under Taya made it extremely difficult to find picks with the double merit of being clean and competent. But what they couldn't understand is the leadership's open door policy toward including the remnants of the former regime in the running of the country. At a time hopes are at a high about the government adopting a zero-tolerance stance vis a vis corruption, the public opinion is shocked by what appears to be a premeditated plan to hold the country ransom one again to the corrupt class of the old regime. The appointment of one of the president's family members to the key post of deputy governor of the central bank is only another case of corruption which does not help refurbish the damaged image of this government.
The outcome of the last polls was very revealing about the choice of Mauritanians and offered a good lesson for next leadership. The fact that the results of the ballot was decided in a second round with a very narrow win by the incumbent is indicative that the consensus which marked the transition is over. It highlighted a divided community which is not speaking with one voice about who would be its next leader. Sidioca's lesson would have been to crack down on corruption and pursue reform aggressively in order to unite the nation behind him. What he did is the opposite. He took public support for granted, unaware that he can not enjoy the impunity of the CMJD because circumstances as well as expectations have changed. People rallied behind the CMJD because they relieved the country of Taya but most importantly because people wanted the military to go after their mandate is over. With Sidioca it is the other way around. People believe they have given him power and they are itching for their due. So "deliver" is the name for their bond with the president, who still has a lot of catching up to do to grasp this new reality.
mom
Courting the favor of the national opinion on the other hand was by far an easier ride. The population which has lost hope for the future was waiting in the wings to see the back of Taya. So when the time came and Taya was overthrown peacefully in a bloodless coup, Mauritanians were ready to close ranks around the new crop of leaders and express support for them. The following democratic pledge was for many a foregone denouement of a national awakening story that kicked off with the fall of the dictator. This alone accounts for the national consensus which marked the two-year-long transition and the willingness to condone the at-times grievous blunders committed by the CMJD and the civil government. Dissent was viewed with mistrust as everybody was keen to make the transition smooth and successful, even though success has meant on many occasions turning a blind eye to pitfalls in the run up to the elections and the transfer of power. It appeared as if there was a tacit trade off between the general public and the CMJD whereby the latter relinquishes power and can get away with its mistakes in return, a win-win deal which both sides have honored.
The question on everyone’s mind now is whether the newly elected government will be able to follow in the lead of the CMJD, drumming international and domestic support for its democratic pledges, without delivering on the urgent issues of genuine reform. Although the answer is clearly “no”, the government looks set to make a repeat of the transition’s recipe of failure, mindless that the consequences of failure this time will be grievous and far reaching.
Indeed Sidiocazz may miscalculate that political openness alone will tip the scales in their favor, sparing them the trouble of combating rampant corruption and effecting a tangible improvement in the standards of living. This strategy which helped the CMJD steer clear of troubles would only plunge the current leadership into more crises, as more and more people are fed up with the democratic talk without any change in their lives.
The enduring culture of corruption can not be reversed with the traditional brand of administrators in charge. A new and clean generation of administrators has to take matters in hand and restore credibility to the public administration and the state. This belief, shared by the opposition as well as the ruling majority, was behind the president's choice of a new-look government line-up which boasts of featuring none of those close to the former regime. But this move, intended to send a potent message about the president's will for change, soon backfired. Made up of mostly novice low-profile administrators, the new government couldn't catch up with the daunting challenges facing it. To make matters worse, the new government was not only lacking in terms of experience but also had no plan to deal with various crisis which rocked it from day one. Right after it assumed authority, the Pandora's box of water and power shortages and prices increase broke open. Shanty districts, and even some up-market neighborhoods, of the capital suffered a severe water crisis which lasted for a month. Water shortage, which can be chalked up to a variety of reasons chief among which are the absence of long-term national policy of water and dysfunction of corruption infested Sonelck, was left to take its toll on the residents of Nouakchott as government officials remained in denial about the crisis. The same goes for the recurrent blackouts which hit Nouackchott almost daily. The new government was not only confused and incompetent but also showed it had not let go of obsolete practices of authoritarian regime. What we have seen is a bunch of ministers whose primary concern is to defend the sanctity of the state instead of facing the crises gripping the country head on, leading to the conviction that the government has undergone a change in style but not in substance.
So people's hopes for far-reaching reform are dashed by the government's failure to reinvent itself as a force spearheading change, stoking fears that the prospects of uprooting corruption in the public administration are still out of reach. This bleak outlook is further consolidated by a host of other measures which belie the new leadership's ambivalence about a complete break with the past. Every now and then new appointments to sensitive positions in the administration are announced, benefiting prominent members of the former regime. These appointments include the key positions of general secretaries of ministries, diplomatic sector and other facets of the administration. The aim behind this dangerous policy is two fold: to secure popular support by appointing a new breed of ministers, though inefficient ones, and bring the old generation through the back door and let them run the show. This is the least that can be said about an administration which allows a strong come back of Taya's cronies like Mohamed Vall Ould Ballal and Sidi Mohamed Ould Bubakar, among many others.
The president and his PM could have enjoyed the benefit of the doubt had it been a question of failing to have the right picks for the ministerial portfolios. People could always understand that twenty one years of methodic corruption under Taya made it extremely difficult to find picks with the double merit of being clean and competent. But what they couldn't understand is the leadership's open door policy toward including the remnants of the former regime in the running of the country. At a time hopes are at a high about the government adopting a zero-tolerance stance vis a vis corruption, the public opinion is shocked by what appears to be a premeditated plan to hold the country ransom one again to the corrupt class of the old regime. The appointment of one of the president's family members to the key post of deputy governor of the central bank is only another case of corruption which does not help refurbish the damaged image of this government.
The outcome of the last polls was very revealing about the choice of Mauritanians and offered a good lesson for next leadership. The fact that the results of the ballot was decided in a second round with a very narrow win by the incumbent is indicative that the consensus which marked the transition is over. It highlighted a divided community which is not speaking with one voice about who would be its next leader. Sidioca's lesson would have been to crack down on corruption and pursue reform aggressively in order to unite the nation behind him. What he did is the opposite. He took public support for granted, unaware that he can not enjoy the impunity of the CMJD because circumstances as well as expectations have changed. People rallied behind the CMJD because they relieved the country of Taya but most importantly because people wanted the military to go after their mandate is over. With Sidioca it is the other way around. People believe they have given him power and they are itching for their due. So "deliver" is the name for their bond with the president, who still has a lot of catching up to do to grasp this new reality.
mom
Friday, May 11, 2007
A Nation On Tenterhooks About The Outcome of NDB’s Drug Scandal
The unfolding drug saga is by all odds the longest and most spectacular criminal plot to take place in the country. Ten days on and the information trickling from the police investigation continue to fuel doubts the case won't be closed any time soon, especially with the leading suspects still at large. The plot which consisted of an attempt to traffic millions of euros worth of drug aboard a private jet from the airport of Nouadhibou, the country's second largest city, had been foiled by the police. Media and security sources reported that the police acted on a tip off that a plane suspected of carrying drug was bound to NDB from Venezuela and subsequently waited at the airport for the plane to touch down before they swooped down on it, but somehow the criminals managed to escape leaving the drug and the police behind (lol). Soon an investigation was launched leading to the arrest of several suspects, including well known political figures, policemen, civilians and foreigners. Police which had previously denied rumors of two more small planes being involved in the plot, came and confirmed the information.
This is a brief and sketchy summery of the findings of the ongoing investigation in an what is widely seen as the most dangerous and elaborate crime to rock the country to date. Just how the unraveling of this intricate criminal plot will go down in the public opinion is what everyone is holding his breath to see. Although this might be a distraction from more pressing issues like reviving the economy and addressing the national unity question, the government's handling of this case will determine its standing in the public opinion. Success in conducting proper and timely investigation which will see all the criminals behind bars will undoubtedly sky-rocket government's standing, while failure will nosedive its popularity beyond redemption- note the use of diction related to aviation (lol).
Hoping that the government has seriously taken matters in hand and is conscious of the political and security-related stakes involved in the case, I’ll try to take them to task on the basis of what we already know about the case and on the information released by the national security forces.
Up to now national security forces have displayed a great deal of incompetence and lack of preparedness in dealing with the case. It appears, to their credit, that intelligence information was available about the itinerary of the plane and the time of its arrival, which explained the presence of security elements at the airport. And while availability of intelligence is crucial in such operations worldwide, Mauritanian police somehow screwed up in spite of its prior knowledge of the entire plan. So what went wrong? Why the police failed to capture the crew of the plane and the purportedly prime suspect who was present at the airport and who has bought kerosene for the plane to refuel, according to the security sources. Why the police failed to capture the crew when the plane run out of fuel and grounded 100 kms away from Nouadhibou? And what was behind the police’s silence on the other two jets. These failures and others more get me thinking along with thousands of other Mauritanians that the police was in the know but chose to let the traffickers escape from the hands of justice. This can happen only if security elements are infiltrated by the drug mafia and at high levels, an eventuality which sounds more convincing given the way the crime was dealth with in the last week or so. Today the director of Judicial Police, Mohamed Abadallahi Ould Taleb Abeidi was on the popular talk-show “Bisaraha”. In spite of his excellent Arabic and apparent determination to reassure the public of the security measures in place, he failed to make the case for his comrades’ inability to arrest the plane crew and the major suspect who was waiting for them at the airport.
It is this possibility which stokes the fears of the national public and which represents the real test for our largely untested government. It’s true that the government has a lot of catching up to do to win back the confidence of the people, who have a long history with police’s miserable record in establishing order and fighting off crime. To the public eyes, the police has always been an instrument of insecurity rather than security, taking full advantage of rampant lawlessness and lack of accountability in the country to loot, abuse and act above the law. Some people go even as far as saying that most of crimes committed in NKTT and NDB are shepherded by police and security elements. Now, for the government to turn things around and to make up for these failures it has to ensure a thorough and fair investigation and to bring the perpetrators to justice, now matter who they are and regardless of their social or professional status. But this has always been easier said than done, because it takes a lot more than just a security clamp down. The bottom line here is no less than a large-scale overhaul of the security and judicial bodies which are reeling from decades of spectacular corruption and professional incompetence. Whether the new-look government will be willing to crack the whip and kick start an anti-corruption campaign to purge state institutions of mafias and rings of criminals is yet to be seen. But as much as this case provides a golden opportunity for Sidiocazz (Californian ente mnein) to push through reforms and keep up their pledges of rehabilitating public administration, it also presents a daunting challenge for their will to break up with the past. There is a strong feeling that the government is presented with a make or break situation here, either to grab this case as its chance to right the mistakes of the past or turn a blind eye and see its credibility hitting rock bottom. We pray that they see the writing on the wall and take heed of it.
It’s secret to no one that NDB is a city infested with all sorts of illegal activities, ranging from drug trafficking to arms and immigrants smuggling. It is a costly price the coastal city is paying for its geographical location but also for the complete state of anarchy and lawlessness thanks to which Taya’s cronies were able to sustain their power for two decades. A hotbed for minor crimes, NKTT has seen less exposure to this underworld of criminality as the ringleaders used the city to spend their wealth and boost their political and social influence. The trend then was to do politics in NKTT and do business, which always meant crime, in NDB. The extent to which state institutions were entangled in the world of criminality was evident in 1996 when the Interpol turned the heat on Taya’s government to curb the flow of drug trafficking into Europe and the US through Mauritania. The international police provided the government with a list of suspects, most of whom where from the security forces. But instead of letting justice have its way, Taya was too savvy to condemn his security and set a precedent which could see high-ranking officials from his regime behind bars. He staged a mock trial and freed the suspects.
Now that Taya is gone and we have a democratic government voted into power on a reform ticket, let’s hope that the transparency which marked the government’s dealing with this spectacular crime is a signal of its determination to dig the demons of the underworld up in the open in order to put them to rest. Amin.
mom
This is a brief and sketchy summery of the findings of the ongoing investigation in an what is widely seen as the most dangerous and elaborate crime to rock the country to date. Just how the unraveling of this intricate criminal plot will go down in the public opinion is what everyone is holding his breath to see. Although this might be a distraction from more pressing issues like reviving the economy and addressing the national unity question, the government's handling of this case will determine its standing in the public opinion. Success in conducting proper and timely investigation which will see all the criminals behind bars will undoubtedly sky-rocket government's standing, while failure will nosedive its popularity beyond redemption- note the use of diction related to aviation (lol).
Hoping that the government has seriously taken matters in hand and is conscious of the political and security-related stakes involved in the case, I’ll try to take them to task on the basis of what we already know about the case and on the information released by the national security forces.
Up to now national security forces have displayed a great deal of incompetence and lack of preparedness in dealing with the case. It appears, to their credit, that intelligence information was available about the itinerary of the plane and the time of its arrival, which explained the presence of security elements at the airport. And while availability of intelligence is crucial in such operations worldwide, Mauritanian police somehow screwed up in spite of its prior knowledge of the entire plan. So what went wrong? Why the police failed to capture the crew of the plane and the purportedly prime suspect who was present at the airport and who has bought kerosene for the plane to refuel, according to the security sources. Why the police failed to capture the crew when the plane run out of fuel and grounded 100 kms away from Nouadhibou? And what was behind the police’s silence on the other two jets. These failures and others more get me thinking along with thousands of other Mauritanians that the police was in the know but chose to let the traffickers escape from the hands of justice. This can happen only if security elements are infiltrated by the drug mafia and at high levels, an eventuality which sounds more convincing given the way the crime was dealth with in the last week or so. Today the director of Judicial Police, Mohamed Abadallahi Ould Taleb Abeidi was on the popular talk-show “Bisaraha”. In spite of his excellent Arabic and apparent determination to reassure the public of the security measures in place, he failed to make the case for his comrades’ inability to arrest the plane crew and the major suspect who was waiting for them at the airport.
It is this possibility which stokes the fears of the national public and which represents the real test for our largely untested government. It’s true that the government has a lot of catching up to do to win back the confidence of the people, who have a long history with police’s miserable record in establishing order and fighting off crime. To the public eyes, the police has always been an instrument of insecurity rather than security, taking full advantage of rampant lawlessness and lack of accountability in the country to loot, abuse and act above the law. Some people go even as far as saying that most of crimes committed in NKTT and NDB are shepherded by police and security elements. Now, for the government to turn things around and to make up for these failures it has to ensure a thorough and fair investigation and to bring the perpetrators to justice, now matter who they are and regardless of their social or professional status. But this has always been easier said than done, because it takes a lot more than just a security clamp down. The bottom line here is no less than a large-scale overhaul of the security and judicial bodies which are reeling from decades of spectacular corruption and professional incompetence. Whether the new-look government will be willing to crack the whip and kick start an anti-corruption campaign to purge state institutions of mafias and rings of criminals is yet to be seen. But as much as this case provides a golden opportunity for Sidiocazz (Californian ente mnein) to push through reforms and keep up their pledges of rehabilitating public administration, it also presents a daunting challenge for their will to break up with the past. There is a strong feeling that the government is presented with a make or break situation here, either to grab this case as its chance to right the mistakes of the past or turn a blind eye and see its credibility hitting rock bottom. We pray that they see the writing on the wall and take heed of it.
It’s secret to no one that NDB is a city infested with all sorts of illegal activities, ranging from drug trafficking to arms and immigrants smuggling. It is a costly price the coastal city is paying for its geographical location but also for the complete state of anarchy and lawlessness thanks to which Taya’s cronies were able to sustain their power for two decades. A hotbed for minor crimes, NKTT has seen less exposure to this underworld of criminality as the ringleaders used the city to spend their wealth and boost their political and social influence. The trend then was to do politics in NKTT and do business, which always meant crime, in NDB. The extent to which state institutions were entangled in the world of criminality was evident in 1996 when the Interpol turned the heat on Taya’s government to curb the flow of drug trafficking into Europe and the US through Mauritania. The international police provided the government with a list of suspects, most of whom where from the security forces. But instead of letting justice have its way, Taya was too savvy to condemn his security and set a precedent which could see high-ranking officials from his regime behind bars. He staged a mock trial and freed the suspects.
Now that Taya is gone and we have a democratic government voted into power on a reform ticket, let’s hope that the transparency which marked the government’s dealing with this spectacular crime is a signal of its determination to dig the demons of the underworld up in the open in order to put them to rest. Amin.
mom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)